Employment In The Disposable American, By Louis Uchitelle

In Louis Uchitelle’s book, The Disposable American, he explores the decline of job security and the concept of “lifetime employment” in the United States as well as the underlying shift in government involvement and public perception that accelerated mass layoffs of workers and precipitated the notion that workers must solely bare the full financial and emotional burden of their discharge rather than businesses or society. Chapter 6 and the discussion on government legislation in the late twentieth century also examines potential responses to unemployment from unions and other stakeholders. Uchitelle’s book is extremely beneficial to our studies because it demonstrates how there are additional parties besides policymakers, like organized labor,
He illustrates his claim by looking at the mid 1970s where the country was amidst of a deep economic recession and “unemployment rates reached 9 percent” (124). Uchitelle believed that these circumstances propelled the national debate over responses to unemployment and gave rise to the Humphrey-Hawkins Act, which would call for the federal government to “act as employer of last resort” (125). While Rep. Augustus Hawkins, one of the co-sponsors of the bill, believed that “job security was beyond any individual’s control” and the government help “should maintain it”, he faced significant challenges in Congress because many believed that wages would rise if the government began “offering jobs” and competing with the private sector (125). This debate and its impact on inflation rates eventually forced Senator Hubert Humphrey, another co-sponsor, to reduce his support of the bill. By then, Uchitelle noted that the economy had improved and “the moment was lost” because the final version of the bill was stripped of the “original provision calling for the government to create last resort jobs for the unemployed” (127). Furthermore, he believed that the 1970s marked the decline of communal action and inclusiveness where
However, I think there were other causes besides the shift in national sentiments (such as the need to appeal to moderate voters) that resulted in its failure. I believe that the Uchitelle’s argument would have been strengthen by addressing some of those causes along with providing more examples of other Congressional proposals from other time periods. Furthermore, I enjoyed how he acknowledged that there were several factors that helped accelerate the fall of job security and the range of examples that he employed. For example, he cites the layoff clause concession made by the union at the Saturn plant, which highlights the weakening of union power for workers. One argument that I found very interesting was the cyclical effect of layoffs. Many women entered into the workforce because “the extra paycheck became a means of accommodating their husband’s layoff” (145). However, this adds to the pool of available workers or the “industrial reserve army”, which increases risks of job insecurity. I also liked how he used the Harvard reunion to demonstrate the widespread effect of layoffs, which extended beyond the traditional blue-collar workers. Overall, I really enjoyed the reading because it gave me a historical perspective and the factors behind the decline of job security in our