But Ms. Schor argues that both outcomes are functional for the employer. Hiring fewer workers cuts fringe costs, while a high general unemployment rate makes for grateful, docile and dependent employees willing to work for the going rate. The third factor in Ms. Schor's account is the slowdown in economic growth and the stagnation in living standards after 1973. In the last two decades, American workers have had to work longer hours just to stay even. Ms. Schor suggests a circular relationship between stagnating productivity and longer working time.
Industry keeps pumping out products that require buyers.
Advertising claims these products will create happiness. Households go into debt to buy products they don't really need, and then find themselves working longer than they really want in order to keep up with the payments. At moments, many people imagine a less materialistic way of life, but as wages lag behind the cost of living, and debts accumulate, people find it hard to extricate themselves from the cycle. When Ms. Schor switches from labor economist to cultural critic, one hears a familiar echo of John Kenneth Galbraith, Thorstein Veblen and Vance Packard, but in a new context of scarcity and stress rather than affluence. She cites numerous polls showing that most Americans would prefer more leisure, even at the price of reduced material living standards.