When we measure the labor market, we obsess over the unemployment rate and the average hourly wage. But these metrics miss the most important dimension of work: job quality. A job that pays $18 an hour but requires unpredictable scheduling, offers no benefits, and has a high risk of injury is fundamentally different from a job that pays $18 an hour with a steady schedule, health insurance, and a safe environment.
Job quality is multi-dimensional. It includes not just pay and benefits, but also predictability of hours, physical and psychological safety, autonomy, and the opportunity for advancement.
The decline in job quality is a major driver of the “labor shortage” narrative. Workers aren’t necessarily refusing to work; they are refusing to accept the poor conditions, unpredictable schedules, and lack of respect that characterize many low-wage jobs.
The structural barrier to improving job quality is the lack of worker power. When workers have no leverage to demand better conditions, employers have no incentive to improve them. The race to the bottom on labor costs inevitably degrades the quality of the work environment.
Measuring job quality requires moving beyond top-line wage data. It requires surveying workers about their actual experiences: Do they have a say in their schedules? Do they feel safe? Do they have a path to promotion?
When looking at local economic development or corporate incentives, demand that job quality metrics be included in the deal. Don’t just ask how many jobs will be created; ask what the average wage is, what the benefits package looks like, and what the turnover rate is. A high-turnover job is a low-quality job, and it shouldn’t be subsidized by public funds.