zlacker

> Those are unnecessarily emotionally charged definitions and implications of “resources” and “exploit”.

One, don’t attempt to invalidate my emotions. They are both entirely valid, given the concerted push from the C-suite to dehumanize their workforce, and entirely necessary. Necessary because our parents and grandparents lived better lives because they weren’t as dehumanized. Necessary because so few people in this community specifically see it that way and it *needs to be pointed out repeatedly*.

Perhaps it would resonate more if you, too, had heard a couple of C-suites & their chosen MBAs joking about this exact topic. Perhaps dehumanizing people would make your blood boil if you experienced it as casually and often as I have.

But perhaps not. One of the great things about the WTFC-era is that I can disregard your opinion utterly.

>>Henchm+(OP)
If your parents and grandparents were able to live better lives as labor sellers, it was because the ratio of supply of labor and demand for labor was more favorable for them. Not because HR used to be known as Personnel or people were inherently “better”.

There were more slaves before MBAs, and before MBAs joked about mistreating employees, factory/plantation owners/kings did.