It is a common belief that people employed in various enterprises and institutions are paid for their WORK. The belief stems directly from one of the axioms, or theses, accepted without proof in both economics and other social sciences. Well, they accept without proof that the HUMAN LABOR necessary in the production of goods is a PRODUCTION FACTOR purchased on the market on the same basis as machinery, equipment, energy and other means of production. Thus, in this view, it is a specific COMMODITY, whose suppliers are households, and whose price is wages. The peculiarity of this commodity is that, as the only factor of production, it creates an surplus VALUE that exceeds its cost. As a result, the value of finished goods is higher than the production costs incurred by this additional value.
I will return to the problem of value another time. Here, however, let’s consider the problem of whether labor can be a commodity?
To address this, let’s start with the question: what do we pay a bricklayer, a lawyer, a legal advisor, a hairdresser, a courier company, a babysitter, an architect and many other people providing various services for? I don’t think anyone doubts that in each of the cases mentioned, it is about a specific EFFECT for which we buy a particular service. The effect of a bricklayer’s work is, of course, some building erected according to the design and the art of masonry. The effect of a hairdresser’s service – a haircut in accordance with the customer’s expectations. I think there is no need to give further examples, because everyone knows what effect is expected from a particular service provider. In some cases it is a tangible effect, such as a house project, in others – an intangible effect, such as representation in court. If this result does not meet our expectations, then in the best case for such a service provider we will not use his service next time, and in the worst case – we will refuse to pay, EVEN THAT THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE. Thus, with services strictly speaking, the matter is simple; the object of the purchase/sale transaction is always the EFFECT.
And how does it look in the case of the WORK of the director of an enterprise, the turner, engineer, foreman or accountant employed in that enterprise, and any other hired workers? I think that both those who employ workers on a permanent or ad hoc basis, as well as those who themselves work in any enterprise or institution will agree that if the EFFECT of an employee’s WORK does not satisfy the one who employs him, then such a person is quickly dismissed regardless of whether it is an accountant who does not prepare financial statements and tax returns on time, or a foreman who performs poorly with his subordinates, or a poor manager employed by the company. And yet there is no doubt that such people WORK and often even try very hard, only they do not always succeed. So, in a company or institution, is it all about the employees working, or is it about their work producing the EXPECTED EFFECTS? Are they paid FOR WORK, or for the EFFECTS OF THEIR WORK? And when some are fired, is it for the fact that they don’t work, or for the fact that the results of their work are not satisfactory to the one who hires them? So what does an entrepreneur buy from his employees, WORK, or THEIR SERVICES?
Here logic is still imposed. Labor is the performance of specific physical and mental activities aimed at achieving a DEFINED aim. It can, of course, be measured by some conventional unit of measurement, such as man-hours. You can use this measure to calculate a country’s average labor productivity by dividing the number of man-hours worked by the value of the output produced, or vice versa, and then compare this productivity internationally. All this can be done, and in certain situations it makes sense. However, this does not change the fact that in each case it is about the EFFECT OF WORK EXPERIENCED.
The object of purchase/sale transactions on the market can only be the EFFECTS OF WORK, which are either some tangible or intangible GOODS or SERVICES. There is no other possibility. The former pass, as a result of the transaction, to the OWNERSHIP of OTHER PEOPLE. While the latter may not be an object of ownership, they are always a SERVICE SENT TO OTHER PEOPLE – the recipients of the service. On the other hand, WORK, which IS an ACTIVITY, is always directed toward some tangible or intangible OBJECTIVE. And the OBJECTIVE IS NOT A PERSON but an EFFECT that a person wants to achieve.
Here logic is still imposed. Labor is the performance of specific physical and mental activities aimed at achieving a DEFINED END. It can, of course, be measured by some conventional unit of measurement, such as man-hours. You can use this measure to calculate a country’s average labor productivity by dividing the number of man-hours worked by the value of the output produced, or vice versa, and then compare this productivity internationally. All this can be done, and in certain situations it makes sense. However, this does not change the fact that in each case it is about the EFFECT OF WORK EXPERIENCED.
The object of purchase/sale transactions on the market can only be the EFFECTS OF LABOR, which are either some tangible or intangible GOODS or SERVICES. There is no other possibility. The former pass, as a result of the transaction, to the OWNERSHIP of OTHER PEOPLE. While the latter may not be an object of ownership, they are always a SERVICE AIMED AT OTHER PEOPLE – the recipients of the service. On the other hand, WORK, which IS an ACTIVITY, is always directed toward some tangible or intangible OBJECTIVE. And the OBJECTIVE IS NOT A PERSON but an EFFECT that a person wants to achieve.
In summary, without human labor, no good, either tangible or intangible, can be created. Without labor, no service can be rendered to others either. In short, WITHOUT LABOR, NOTHING USEFUL FOR MAN CAN BE CREATED. For even when he merely gathers what nature has given, he has just put some greater or lesser physical and mental effort into acquiring this good, that is, he WORKS. Thus, in this sense, human labor can be regarded as a so-called production factor. However, to conclude from this fact that LABOR is a commodity that is subject to purchase/sale transactions on the market is a reprehensible mistake with far-reaching consequences for social relations.