I like Cecile Ouillet’s blog because I have learned that during the economic recession, reducing employer hours and laying people off may help to recover the economy in a long-term period. I agree with Cecile’s opinion that the recession helped to reconstruct companies and lower employment costs. As the essay indicates that “they could take a small severance package and collect unemployment or they could stay at truncated versions of their old jobs if they wished, but as part-timers with no benefits and no commissions”, which companies to pay less on labor salaries since there is no welfare such as house insurance anymore.

These strategies work well because companies can save a lot of money on labor costs. When there is an economic recession, prices of products may fall. Therefore, companies have to cut their costs as much as possible to remain the original profit level. However, the goal of reducing other costs, for example, raw material costs, and etc., are not easy to reach; Therefore, companies decide to recruit cheaper labor who are looking for part-time jobs. Cecile thought that labors have no incentive to work if they are part-timers because they get fewer stable jobs with lower salaries. Besides, these part-time jobs do not offer any benefit to them.

I think the idea of having too many part-time labors may lower production efficiencies. Well-trained labors bring companies more profits. It is necessary for some companies to provide customers with experienced employees. It said that, “her loyal clients return each season saying, ‘You know what I like. What have you got for me?’” If companies fire these old labors or turn them to part-timers, company owners will lose many customers. Just like what Cecile said, workers are important assets.

 

Reference：

Article: http://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/08/20/how-corporate-america-used-great-recession-turn-good-jobs-bad-ones

Image: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/08/great-recession-part-time-jobs