Blog Entries
The following area series of blog entries. Four books were read for this class. They wereNickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America by Barbara Ehrenreich, The Spirit Catches You and YouFallDown by Anne Fadiman, White Teacher by Vivian Gussin Paley, and The Shame of the Nation by Jonathan Kozol. Ithen chose questions each week to answer.
Nickel and Dimed
Title: Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America
Author: Barbara Ehenreich
Publishing: Holt Paperbacks; Reprint edition (June 24, 2008)
ISBN: 0805088385
1. Housing costs pose the greatest obstacle for low-wage workers. Why does our society seem to resist rectifying this situation? Do you believe that there are realistic solutions to the lack of affordable housing?
There is not enough affordable housing available for low income families. Just think of all of the places that were full in the book, forcing workers into less affordable housing. Plus, the prices were probably driven up by the sheer lack of housing available. High demand and low supply nearly always equal higher prices, though not necessarily wages. I think that the main reason that our society resists rectifying this problem is because there needs to be more affordable housing created. Yet, every time the idea of turning a building into affordable housing, building affordable housing, or zoning to allow trailers comes up, middle class citizens get in an uproar. Nobody wants it “in their back yard.” Sometimes, the unsightliness is an issue. Sometimes citizens worry about the value of their home going down. Both of these reasons can be understood, but they seem self-centered when you think of a mother and a child living in a car. Other times people site worry over crime rates.
To address the concern for crime rates, I tried doing some research. It didn’t go very well. Some articles were radical, claiming that corporations kill more people with pollution and such each year than murderers do. While I’ll believe that, it didn’t settle anything. Others suggested that while many people commit crimes, the poor are more likely to be caught and punished. Another article suggested that crime rates are higher among the poor. I didn’t find anything conclusive. I know that my mom worked at Wal-Mart. I also know that she has clean background checks and teaches first grade.
I think that there are realistic solutions. More housing could be constructed, or existing buildings could be renovated. Just think about all of the old abandoned schools standing empty! However, it is either going to take middle class citizens putting the impoverished first or people in power who are not afraid of them. It is also going to take some money for start up from people willing to accept lower rents. Is it possible? Yes. Will it happen? I don’t know. Humans have a strong sense of self-preservation that all too often turns into selfishness.
2. How does managers' scrutiny -- "time theft" crackdowns and drug testing -- affect workers' morale? How can American companies make the workplace environment safe and efficient without treating employees like suspected criminals?
The scrutiny has to negatively affect morale. The managers are saying “we don’t trust you.” I am surprised that more problems do not arise out of the scrutiny. After all, if they are not trusted anyway, why not walk out with something that is not yours? Why not take an extra break without punching out? What do you have to lose? You don’t have credibility, you don’t have respect, and you’re practically a criminal already. You’re just waiting to get caught.
When I was in school I had a certain job in a department somewhere. In our department, we were treated quite well. We could have something to drink or a snack if we weren’t busy. We could have our cell phones. We were trusted to do our work. As a result, we tried hard. We were happy with our jobs and with everyone above us, which was everyone for this position. In another department, employees weren’t even allowed to have water. They had all sorts of rules about who could do what. It was ridiculous. They also went through the employees, and the ones that stayed complained.
I’m not sure how to make the workplace safe and efficient without treating employees like suspected criminals. I know that every time drug testing teachers comes up, I get furious. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not on anything, I just don’t like being singled out in a group. I feel like all teachers are being accused of being on drugs and therefore putting children in jeopardy. I told my mom, if they test us because of the kids, they need to test every orthodontist, pediatrician, baseball coach, and ballet teacher. I figure that the employees in the book feel the same finger being pointed at them. They aren’t making enough money, so they must be on drugs. Maybe managers should try to have better relationships with their employees so that they know what is going on. That way their employees wouldn’t have to be monitored with time cards and tests. They might even want to perform better.
3.The workers in Nickel and Dimed receive almost no benefits -- no overtime pay, no retirement funds, and no health insurance. Is this fair? Do you think an increase in salary would redress the lack of benefits, or is this a completely separate problem?
This is absolutely not fair. The workers in Nickel and Dimed deserve overtime pay, retirement, and health insurance like every other working American. Without these " unskilled" labor positions, the American economy would collapse. They should be recognized as valuable parts of the companies that they represent, and not written off because they are considered to be " unskilled" workers.
An increase in salary is always a welcome idea, but it does not compensate for the fact that the employees in the book receive almost no benefits. Unless they are going to pay them significantly more, enough to buy private health insurance for their families and start their own retirement plans, a raise in wages would be insufficient. I sincerely doubt that the companies would ever pay their employees enough to afford these things, they barely pay them enough to live on, so benefits are made a separate issue. I find the lack of overtime pay extremely disturbing. I know that, more than likely, nobody was monitoring the companies anyway, but I had always thought that there was some sort of a law about overtime pay. I asked my husband, and he thought that there was a law requiring overtime pay for any work over 40 hours weekly in the U.S. My husband is a union millwright, and there would be major consequences if he didn't get his overtime pay. Then again, since these workers don't have unions, who would fight for them? Who is monitoring the companies?
From time to time we all hear stories about people who fraud the welfare system. They may, for instance, be legally divorced or separated but actually live together and consider themselves married. This is often to keep their food stamps or Medicare cards. I used to find this absolutely appalling, but after reading this book, I can understand it better. I mean, these were hard working people who could not afford to go to the doctor. They sometimes couldn’t afford groceries. Something has to be done to help these people. I really think that the government needs to step in and require that these workers be treated more fairly.
Note: After writing this, I confirmed our thoughts on overtime pay. The easiest to read resources were from lawyers who would like to help you file a lawsuit against your employer for unpaid wages. Working "off the clock," like Barbara did at the maids, was specifically mentioned on the site. Overtime pay is to be 1 and ½ times regular pay, and regular pay cannot be below minimum wage.
http://www.overtimelawonline.com/
The Spirit Catches You
Title: The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down:
Author: Anne Fadiman
Publishing: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 1 edition (September 28, 1998)
ISBN 10: 0374525641
1. Were you surprised at the quality of care and the love and affection given to Lia by her foster parents? How did Lia’s foster parents feel about Lia’s biological parents? Was foster care ultimately to Lia’s benefit or detriment?
I was surprised at the quality of care that Lia received. I’ve known of a few really excellent, loving, high-quality foster families, but not many. I’m always pleasantly surprised when I hear of good foster families. I think that Lia’s foster parents really went above and beyond the call with Lia. Her foster mother even let her nurse. That’s just amazing to me. They were very patient with her behaviors.
Lia’s foster parents liked her biological parents. They could tell that they cared for Lia. They could also see the effects that the medicine had on her, so I think that they could sympathize with her biological family. It spoke volumes that they let Foua watch their own child. I think it’s wonderful that both families would get together.
I think that it was wrong to take Lia from her family. A home health nurse should have been assigned to help with medications instead. Not only would she have been sure to get them that way, she would have gotten the correct medications and doses. Her schedule was as hectic and my grandparents’. They are native English speakers and they still struggle. Her family loved her, and they were really trying to take care of her. That being said, I think that the time with her foster family had some benefits. First, she finally had an advocate who spoke fluent English and could communicate with the doctors better. In addition, I have a feeling that the doctors took the foster family more seriously. If they would have complained that the medicine made her sicker, “drunk” they called it, the doctors might have listened. Secondly, the new hospital got a proper diagnosis. Once they had that, the condition should have been easier to treat. Unfortunately, it was a tough condition. Ultimately, I can't say if it was for Lia's benefit or detriment. While there was some medical progress made, I think that the psychological damage that it may have caused could outweigh that. I'm leaning towards detriment.
2. Dr. Neil Ernst said, “I felt it was important for these Hmongs to understand that there were certain elements of medicine that we understood better than they did and that there were certain rules they had to follow with their kids’ lives. I wanted the word to get out in the community that if they deviated from that, it was not acceptable behavior” (p. 79). Do you think the Hmong understood this message? Why or why not? What do you think of Neil and Peggy?
I do not think that the Hmong understood this message. Lia’s parents often told the author of the book different things from what the doctors told her. The difficulty communicating, both from linguistic and cultural differences, made it hard for anything to be understood. The doctors did not understand what the family was trying to do, and the family did not understand what the doctors were trying to do. Lia’s family thought that she had been taken away because the doctors were angry with them. They never really understood, though they did eventually give Lia the medicine.
I also think that, even if the Hmong understood that there were consequences for not conforming, they might continue on in their own way. They had already this with some of their sacrificing practices. They believed that they were doing what was best for their children. While Neil and Peggy believed that they understood more about certain elements of medicine, I think that the Hmong might disagree. Neil and Peggy treat bodies, not entire people. I couldn’t find the exact quote, but I once saw something that said that if western citizens were given an eastern IQ test, they would fail miserably. You can’t compare apples and orange. Who’s to say what is better or better understood?
Neil and Peggy are both very good at what they do, and I think that they really want what is best for their patients. I can see where Neil would have been frustrated at this point. Occasionally, parents will try to offer advice to teachers about how to teach. Teachers, having been trained, often feel that they know what they are doing and that the parents need to go with it, because it is what is best for their child’s development. Yet the parents feel that they know what they are doing because it is their child. It’s frustrating. You express concern at a conference only to be told, “Yeah, but a D is passing, right? He can go on with a D?” or “I really don’t think that is appropriate for my child to be expected to…” I understand Neil’s impulse to force the Hmong to comply, but he and Peggy also need to grow as physicians. They need to realize that other ways are not necessarily wrong, just different. I would also suggest, since they have so very many Hmong patients, looking into the culture. Maybe that would have made it easier to find some sort of middle ground where Lia was still getting her medicine and her parents were continuing their practices.
3. What was the "role loss" many adult Hmong faced when they came to the United States? What is the underlying root cause? How does this loss affect their adjustment to America?
I found the part of the book about role loss to be exceptionally startling. I think that it hit closer to home for me than any other part. I understood it better. Many adult Hmong faced "role loss," because they lost their status within their family. This seemed to be directly related to their ability to provide for their families. Traditionally, older males ranked highest and younger females ranked lowest. This is not to say that children were not greatly treasured. They were, but older men commanded the greatest amount of respect.