Servants - yes or no?

[zenzero]

Friend YmirGF,

If you mean "servants" as being some lower class muffin to service my every need, then, no. If you are meaning "staff" whom I pay according to their merit, then, most certainly.

Am not sure that can judge what is an individual's merit at what cost??
Can you??
Yes, personally use others services at the cost can afford which they are willing for which am grateful for their assistance.

Love & rgds

 

[Kathryn]

that may be pleasant from you but who tends to the cleaner's home and her children whilst she is busy looking after yours?

When I was working full time as a mom, no one seemed too concerned about who was tending to my home and my kids. It wasn't their business -it was my business. I determined that I needed to work outside the home, and I took care of my own family's needs - I didn't owe anyone an explanation and no one owed me anything but my paycheck.

Of course it is demeaning otherwise you would do it yourself.

When I was a bank manager, I might find myself, on any given day, cleaning out a toilet or a sink or a refrigerator drawer at work. I'm not too good to clean ANY toilet ANYWHERE. If the job needs to be done, I'll do it if I have the time.

Let's use another example. I don't want to paint my storage building. I CAN paint it. I know how. I just don't want to spend my free time doing it. Meanwhile, I know someone who would love to get paid to do it for me. So everyone wins.

ok, so when was the last time you did a full week's work cleaning other peoples' toilets?

Do you use a garbage service? In other words, do you put your garbage out on the curb, or drop it off somewhere at a dump, or what? Unless you burn your own garbage and recycle everything, someone else is taking care of your garbage. All week. Full time.

When was the last time you did a full week's work hauling and disposing of other people's garbage?

 

[Revoltingest]

so, if we start to relegate this form of behaviour to the history books, we can move forward as a society of equals.

Everyone will be equally poor & overworked doing things which they cannot legally hire others to do, eg, growing food,
preserving food, cleaning, home maintenance, dental work, tailoring, lawn mowing, snow plowing, delivering mail.....
I imagine that an old Chinese greeting from the famine days will again become popular....."Ni chi le?.....Have you eaten?"
Sorry, comrade...if your regime ever comes to pass, I'll be leading the violent coup against you. Lock & load, brethren & cistern!

 

[nnmartin]

let's just look at the status symbol concept for a minute.

We can question the idea of having a cleaner or maid for status only, ie: when they are not really needed. So the questions are as follows:

1. Should this be allowed

2. does it damage society

3. does it create a sense of unwarranted grandeur in the employer

4. does it demean the worker

5. why do people feel the need to have this

 

[Kathryn]

let's just look at the status symbol concept for a minute.

We can question the idea of having a cleaner or maid for status only, ie: When they are not really needed. So the questions are as follows:

1. Should this be allowed yes

2. Does it damage society no

3. Does it create a sense of unwarranted grandeur in the employer only if the employer has self esteem issues

4. Does it demean the worker only if the worker has self esteem issues

5. Why do people feel the need to have this because they are busy and this is a method of effective time management

sigh.

 

[Penumbra]

1. Should this be allowed

I think the opposite question should be asked. The default should be that something is allowed, and there should be a very good and specific for not allowing something.

Laws aren't based on a list of things they allow; they're primarily based on a list of things they don't allow. Because things that are not allowed are fewer.

2. does it damage society

Why would it?

3. does it create a sense of unwarranted grandeur in the employer

4. does it demean the worker

Not necessarily.

5. why do people feel the need to have this

It can save them money.

 

[nnmartin]

5. Why do people feel the need to have this

because they are busy and this is a method of effective time management
sigh.

Remember though, in this case I am talking about using maids as status symbols only. Time management does not apply here; I am thinking more of the upper-middle class housewife syndrome here.

so what do you think in that case?

 

[nnmartin]

Not necessarily.

so are you implying then that in some cases it could demean the worker of puff up the employer?

It can save them money.

how can it save money - the employer has to pay them to do a job they could easily do themselves?

 

[Penumbra]

so are you implying then that in some cases it could demean the worker of puff up the employer?

Some people do things for silly reasons, or make suboptimal judgments.

If people hire others for status symbols, I find that weird.

how can it save money - the employer has to pay them to do a job they could easily do themselves?

If a person can freelance for $200/hour, and it takes them X hours to do a task like clean, and they can pay someone less than 200X to get the job done, then it is in their financial interest to work on the other stuff and pay someone to do that task.

Jobs where the number of hours are worked is optional can result in increased income if certain tasks are delegated.

 

[nnmartin]

I was talking about situations in which time was not an issue. ie: the employer could easily do the cleaning themselves (ie: they are a housewife or husband) - but prefers to pay someone else to do it.

 

[Penumbra]

I was talking about situations in which time was not an issue. ie: the employer could easily do the cleaning themselves (ie: they are a housewife or husband) - but prefers to pay someone else to do it.

Actually, you've continually changed your goalposts as the validity of the assumptions have been repeatedly challenged.

And in this case anyway, it can still make sense to hire someone. If spending that time with your kids is more important to you than the money it takes someone to do a task for you, then it can be appropriate.

 

[Circle_One]

My mother has a friend who, 5 years ago, lost her job. She was unable to find another one, so the two decided that she would clean my mom's house once a week and my mother would pay her.

My mother is 65 years old and works almost 60 hours a week still. She never has the time to clean her own house, and when she did, she would either throw her back out, or would exhaust herself to the point of sickness.

Each is getting a service from the other: My mother doesn't have to work herself sick to keep a clean house, and Linda is getting paid to help a friend. Both are extremely happy.

Where's the harm in that?

 

[Kathryn]

Remember though, in this case I am talking about using maids as status symbols only. Time management does not apply here; I am thinking more of the upper-middle class housewife syndrome here.

so what do you think in that case?

I'm an upper middle class housewife. I have hired a maid several times before and may hire another one in the future.

What on earth makes you think that upper middle class housewives hire maids simply as status symbols?

 

[zenzero]

Friend Ss,

I have a friend who is self employed as a cleaning lady. She's got so much business, she has to turn down people who want to use her services. The only reason she cleans for me, apart from the money, is because we've been friends for years. She cleans, but she's certainly not my servant.__________________

Just curious.
She was your friend first before she became self employed as cleaner or since she started she became a friend??

Love & rgds

 

[nnmartin]

What on earth makes you think that upper middle class housewives hire maids simply as status symbols?

It is an observation I have made over the years.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is an observation I have made over the years.

How many upper class people with servants do you personally know?

 

[Kathryn]

It is an observation I have made over the years.

Oh, in other words, a personal opinion.

You haven't been observing me, or my friends. Which is a comforting thought, by the way.

 

[Chisti]

The op is interesting. Rich people on this forum say there is nothing wrong with this. No surprises there. But if they suddenly become poor and are reduced to the same status, then I am sure they'll sing a different tune. Goes on to show that our ideas keep changing according to circumstances.

 

[Kathryn]

The op is interesting. Rich people on this forum say there is nothing wrong with this. No surprises there. But if they suddenly become poor and are reduced to the same status, then I am sure they'll sing a different tune. Goes on to show that our ideas keep changing according to circumstances.

I'm wealthy. I haven't always been wealthy. When I wasn't wealthy, I cleaned houses for a living for awhile. I was glad to do it, and as far as work goes, it's a lot more enjoyable to me than, say, working in a factory all day. I actually enjoyed cleaning houses so much that a few decades later, I seriously considered opening my own house cleaning business or free lancing it. The benefits are that you can make your own schedule (take on as many or as few clients as you like), it's a great workout, minimal start up costs, and you can work at your own pace.

It's really a good job. And sometimes, you get to meet and get to know interesting people.

There are bad bosses everywhere. The great thing about cleaning houses for a living is that if you don't like someone you're working for, you just replace them with another client and then drop them. Believe me, they have more to lose than you do in that scenario!

If I ever need to earn money again, I will seriously consider cleaning houses for a living.

Ain't too proud. I know it can be a really good gig.

 

[nnmartin]

How many upper class people with servants do you personally know?

well, I know you and Kathryn for a start, so that's 2 people already