Minimum Wage Barbara Ehrenreich Analysis

This article, written by Barbara Ehrenreich, describes her month-long experiment with living on only minimum wage in June of 1998, shortly before certain welfare programs were to be cut back. She intended to test the viability of living only on minimum-wage jobs, as well as the claim that “work will lift poor women out of poverty while simultaneously inflating their self-esteem, and hence their future value in the labor market.” Ehrenreich at first expects her privileges – such as her intelligence, race, health, and transportation – will allow her to easily find a job and survive off of it. Immediately, her expectations are dashed by the difficulty she faces in finding a job she would prefer. She eventually settles on being a waitress, and for a short period works two jobs at once. After a month of exhausting work, she finds she is unable to withstand the physical, emotional, and economical demands of minimum-wage labor any longer.

This article focuses mainly on the personal struggles of minimum-wage labor – the physical exhaustion, the

cruel treatment of manager, the impossibility of finding housing, the expense of necessities. Ehrenreich describes the lack of vegetables in her diet, the hours she spends standing up, the sorrow she feels for her co-workers, and the constant stress she experiences on and off the clock. She describes her occasional revisits to her former life as “exceedingly strange,” and she begins to perceive the common joys and expenses of her normal life as trivial and excessive. In short, she begins to gain more and more sympathy for the struggles of low-class laborers, and becomes ever more critical of those in her own class who presume to know what is best. She posits that the idea that reducing the help that welfare can provide will serve to enrich and uplift the poor is ridiculous, ignorant, and harmful.
This article seems to approach the issues at hand from both an interactionist and a conflict perspective. Interactionist perspective is a sociological theory that focuses on the interactions between individuals as well as different groups, and what those interactions mean for society. Conflict perspective is a sociological theory that focuses on the disparity between groups and the conflict that arises between them, especially when it comes to resources or power. The most important issues at hand are class disparity and poverty. Classes in society are groups of different economical position; poverty refers to the bottom of the economic pyramid within a society. Class disparities are the large differences between different classes and their ideas, needs, and ways of life.
The interactionist approach is apparent in the nature of Ehrenreich’s experiment – she interacts daily with the people whom she wishes to understand, sympathizes with their troubles, and feels real sorrow for them.

She uses these interactions, as well as the interactions between her coworkers and managers, to gather an understanding of and collect information on minimum-wage life. The conflict perspective is also clear in the interactions Ehrenreich has with the authorities in her experimental life – customers, managers, and sometimes coworkers. The hierarchies among those working in the restaurants at which she is employed, the treatment those laborers receive from their management, and the divide that is created between the workers and the customers clearly outline the scramble for resources, the division of authority, and the personal hostility that arises among individuals and groups as described by the conflict

perspective.
The issue of class, welfare, and the lives of laborers is one that is constantly relevant to sociological discussion. Over the centuries, countless ideas, methods, and philosophies have been formed in an effort to understand or even to solve the problem of poverty. These problems are diverse, and are vastly different from culture to culture, whether those cultures are divided by region or time period. In some cases, it may be said that those in poverty are simply not taking advantage of the opportunities they have, or are merely content with a life without hard labor. However, as this article shows, most of the time those in poverty face extreme pressure in their jobs, and the tiny compensation they receive for their efforts is barely enough to keep them alive. They are often unable to afford such “luxuries” as proper housing, medical care, or a balanced diet. The reasons that they must scrounge so miserably for wages are diverse – some are born into poverty; others are desperate for independence but lack the privilege of education or opportunity. Ehrenreich describes several who have immigrated from poor or war-torn countries to seek out a better life, only to be stuck in terrible conditions, living paycheck-to-paycheck, unable to afford simple necessities or comfortable housing conditions.
The common claims of the economically privileged, therefore, that economic security programs such as welfare make the lower-classes “lazy,” are “harmful to their self-esteem,” or simply serve to “keep them in poverty” show a fundamental misunderstanding of the daily lives of the poor. The “solutions” many in upper classes offer, such as buying food in bulk, are simply impossible for most minimum wage workers; this issue is directly addressed by Ehrenreich, as she describes a common situation of having no amenities, “only a hot plate” and having to survive off of “hot dogs and Styrofoam cups of soup.” The misunderstanding of the more economically privileged of the struggles of lower-class life can be seen in the tiny divide between managers and workers in the two restaurants in which Ehrenreich worked. In one restaurant, an employee meeting consisted mainly of a manager threatening to take away the breakroom, and prohibiting interaction between servers.. In another, the young Czech dishwasher George is penalized for apparently attempting to steal from the dry goods pantry – a nominal inconvenience for the restaurant becomes the destruction of George’s livelihood. This article highlights the conflict that exists between even the smallest class differences, the struggles these conflicts cause, and the fundamental lack of empathy many of those in higher positions seem to hold for those beneath them.