2 fascinating graphs i saw via fark... [Politics/Religion]

When I looked at the first graph I immediately heard the "which one of these things is not like the other" song in my head.  'Productivity' is a red herring in this regard.  Its not because we're working harder - its automation, technology, etc. that accounts for the large increases.  All these things cost a lot of money - so to include and compare productivity increases to wages, but leave out the investments that led to a large part of it... a trifle misleading eh?

And CEO pay closely follows the market because they are so heavily compensated with stock options, so thats a big 'like, duh' graph.

Now, corporate profits compared to compensation - thats probably (without understanding the sources) a fair graph.  Where's our trickle down you say?  Doesn't seem to be there does it?  At least not very significant.  So, thats not great.  But tell me, what is the party of 'look at the bad, bad republicans' going to do about it?

Frodownd.

Just kiddin' boys.  Interesting discussion which I will follow without participation as I have no farkin' clue.  All I know is I only buy rum in bottles smaller than 1.5L if they're on sale.

LOL.  I wrote that after your post addressing aske's OP and Spanky butted in line. 

Just farkin' about anyhoo. 

tricky hickses.   i dont think the 'dems can/will do anything either.  they're just as influenced by korprit lobbies.   my point was really we should vote for neither, or not even at all

Don't know who you're calling taller, I may only have an inch on UB, about a foot on you though.

I was just making a personal observation based on what I see at my work. And I don't work at a small company unless you consider Texas Instruments small. They are doing other things that help grow profits and those do affect jobs (as in the number here in the US). While I don't completely disagree with you I would have to say I do have a close feel for at least one Korprit Merica.

My company has essentially the SAME technology as in 2000.  We do much more work with fewer people than we had then.

Well poo, its not about a few of us - its about ALL of us (looking at worker productivity nationwide).  I wanted to avoid it, but since we're having fun sharing stories....

(full disclosure - the first company I was involved in was prior to the time frame graphed above, but its certainly been repeated ad nauseum since)

Company 1:
Upgraded the software that controls the robotics on a manufacturing line.  This allowed the line to be programmed faster and easier, as well as changed from one profile to another much faster.  Productivity increased - engineering time decreased.  The few workers watching the line did have shorter down times between runs - if ya wanna call that working harder.

Implemented a new robot that handled the same jobs with greater accuracy at twice the pace.  Productivity more than doubled, number of employees working harder = 0.

Company 2:
Replaced an aging communications network with a new one that had more bandwidth, less downtime, and was more easily managed.  Branch productivity increased, support of the network decreased (people were actually working LESS).  Now again, we're reducing employee wait time - so they are serving more clients faster, but not working harder to do it.  Kinda like moving from dial-up to cable Internet - you can visit more sites faster, but its not really more work.

Company 3:
Much the same as above - replaced a satellite communications network with a terrestrial one for better response times and increased upload speeds.  This allowed more robust applications to be delivered - increasing branch productivity significantly.  Branch head count did not increase, nor did the headcount and workload to support this new network and applications.

System replacement and the resulting downtime and support hassles reached a tipping point for a very important office product.  We're currently selecting a product to replace all of them with a newer, more stable, and more functional model.  Again, another tens of millions of dollars investment that will increase productivity without any increased workload (it should actually decrease it).  And none of these dollars will be included in any wage comparison.


All of these were significant investments for the companies - none of which are reflected in wage comparisons.  And of course, all of these people 'feel' like they are working harder to get more done, while all that was done was to decrease wait time/downtime, or eliminate support headaches (wasted time).  We're working smarter, not harder.

At a micro level, simple things like process improvements increase productivity - even with the same technology.  When I first started my most recent job, the higher level engineers (me) were not allowed the time they needed to look into new things - they were helping put out fires.  I/we did two things - implemented standards for repeatable tasks, and provided better training to the analysts dealing with support issues.  This led to faster issue resolution and faster implementations with less involvement from the engineers - who are now free to look into new things and test new products.  Productivity increased, head count and workload did not.  And no 'new' tools were required.  Examples of similar micro accomplishments are numerous.



Undoubtedly there are people working harder, I'm not saying thats a lie - particularly in the 2000-2002 years, the bubble burst and some people were laid off.  Those that stayed had to pick up the slack, and willingly did so to keep their jobs.  I'm sure we even have people working harder because of increased workloads that their company has not kept pace with workforce-wise.  All of this is going on, just not at a significant enough rate to explain the sizable productivity gains.  It has been a generally accepted position for many years that our increasing productivity is due in large part to working smarter (automation, technology, etc.) and less so because we're working harder.  Especially if you ask your parents, who will probably always hold true that they worked harder than we do today