for thinking this is demeaning?

[baconandeggies]

The word 'menial', as in "He has a menial job"

It seems a bit loaded to me... Implies it's "less important" and can be looked down upon. Surely it comes from the same root as demeaning anyway?

There's nothing wrong with having a more 'manual' job..

Reminds me that a flatmate once exclaimed "I'd never marry a man who had a menial job, like a dustbin man, or a cleaner or something"

Why not just say 'manual' job, if you must describe it as anything other than the actual job title.

So does describing someone's job as 'menial' sound judgey, or AIBU?

why comment on how supposedly crap or non-prestigious a job is at all? I see no reason for the word to exist

OP - that is what you said. You want a word not to exist - and you don't think people should make 'value judgements' about what people do for a living. That is fine but you are still deciding how you want people to speak and even think.

A surgeon is inherently more useful as they could do the street sweeper's job, whereas it wouldn't work the other way around.

Menial is a word that has a value judgement attached. People judge. You judge people for judging people. Its just the way of the world.

And low skilled means it doesn't take many skills to perform it, or that the skills aren't very difficult.

Someone can be low or high skilled and still be crap at what they do

I see no reason for the word to exist

Isn't the same thing at all as heralding myself as the 'thought police', as you were accusing me of.

I see no reason for the word to exist - I choose not to use it - it doesn't mean that other people shouldn't. Everyone is different. I didn't say:-

"I don't think we should have this word in our lexicon as it's hurtful"

you don't think people should make 'value judgements' about what people do for a living.

Again - no I don't. People can say what they like. I'm well aware that it's human nature to judge. But I also have a right to judge people who use terminology that I consider to sound judgemental.

FerretFred - I think you'd find AlexaTwoAtT one of the most boring people in the world. However, she makes a valid point - a lot of people do think that someone's job defines them and a lot of people get a large part of their sense of self worth from their job. Doesn't that make it all the more important to challenge people when they are fairly dismissive of other people's jobs without having any apparent understanding of what the person actually does, or how well they do it, or whether they are proud of what they do? Why is it apparently better to be able to call yourself a doctor than a nurse or carer? In what way is a mediocre doctor better than an excellent nurse or carer? Why judge people by the title of their job? Why assume that low paid equates with low skilled? It's a bit reminiscent of a slave-owner mentality, TBH - you have to denigrate all low paid roles to justify to yourself why the pay is so shit.

Why assume that low paid equates with low skilled? It's a bit reminiscent of a slave-owner mentality, TBH - you have to denigrate all low paid roles to justify to yourself why the pay is so shit.

It's basic economics - the more/less replaceable you are, the less/more you are worth in the labour market. Obviously other factors can also come into play.

*other factors than required skills

Why assume low pay equates with low skilled?. Most people with a range of skills under their belt don't give it away for free, so to speak. Why would you work for minimum wage when you're capable of earning a healthy salary? So people tend to assume, rightly or wrongly, that what you're doing is the top of your game and you haven't really got what it takes to progress beyond that.
It isn't always correct; but it's a common perception.

I wonder if Mr or Ms Head of Corporate Hospitality, Advertising Exec, Premier Footballer or IT Consultant could do my job. Low paid or not.

I can't tell you exactly what I do because its identifying but it involves children and life limiting illness.

Personally I don't think there are many fields of work that are more important than peadatric palliative care.

My pay is below the national average. Some people do give their skills away cheap. If they feel the work is important enough.

There will be many MNers who do vital, skilled work but don't rake in the money. Because they are passionate about what they do and will make sacrifices to get it done.

Thank God for them.

It is an abomination that someone doing your job is under paid, NameChange; but then I doubt anyone would consider it menial either.

But it is low paid Flogging, as are many jobs that people will always do despite the wages. One of the reasons the wages are low is because people will often do this sort of thing on a volunteer basis.

Its how many agencies, charities etc have kept going for so long.

Its not menial. I have decades of varied experience. Its an honour to do it but its low paid. Its lower paid than my last job which was also specialist, important but only just above national average salary.

There are tons of people like me out there.

It's not basic economics, it's also history - if you have historically been in a prestigious, well paid sector, it takes years for reality to catch up and for your pay to drop comparatively. When we are short of teachers, doctors, dentists, nurses, midwives, hospital cleaners etc, we don't generally pay them more to attract the people we need. When we don't need any more bankers and they've messed up the world economy, we argue we should still be allowed to pay them colossal bonuses. When FTSE 100 directors add little value, they still get colossal pay packages. It's a mess, not economics. We don't value what we need and we over inflate the value of things that can be positively harmful. It's all about power and greed, not basic economics. You cannot work out someone's true worth mathematically - economics is more of an art than a science and is often proven to be wrong. Don't try to pretend that it's all about supply and demand. It's all about what you think you can get away with, which sometimes results in deliberately not supplying enough of what is demanded, or providing too much crap, or just generally being manipulative so that you can maintain all the power and control, whilst abusing the goodwill of nicer people.

Jobs that are seen as 'women's occupations' have always been lower paid than men's.

"Surely all skills are just different? Why the value judgement?"

No, not all skills are "just different". Some skills require a very high level of IQ that is scarce and therefore more valued and highly paid -- This is a fact, not judgment.

I do agree that "menial" is judgy (in the context you mean here)

But LiviaD is right -- your wishing that things/people are "just different", not better or worse, more valued or less, more skilled or less, etc. is the commonly accepted definition of a "thought police". Although I too understand that you are coming from a good place. But like John Lennon said, "Imagine..." because it's not reality and can never be.

"Floggingmolly

I'm aiming to become a manager some day.
The fact that you had to qualify what you do like that really does sound like this isn't my real job, of course. It's what I'm doing until I get a proper managerial position, OhhBetty, don't you think?
Slight touch of irony there..."

Indeed!

No wishing going on here misshelena - it's been interesting reading all the responses. I'm not imagining a utopian world... just thought it sounded judgey! People can say what they like. I'm not telling anyone what to do or wishing to create change. It's a AIBU not a crusade

roundabout Economics takes in human behaviour too.

Also, who is this 'we'? Don't you think some companies/institutions would like to have the budget to pay staff more to attract better, more loyal staff?

And where do you think rich companies get the money to pay the top earners?

Of course someone's worth in the labour market does not = their worth as a person

10 pages discussing menial.

google it.

only judgey if you interpret it as such

Thank God you swooped in there and put all of us sillies straight.

Economics is interpretation, not fact or pure maths or science, hence economists frequently being proven wrong in their opinions and different economists having entirely different opinions. Just claiming "it's supply and demand" as you did is hugely simplistic and does not remotely explain why some roles in society are substantially undervalued, resulting in inefficiencies and shortages. As for the "we", we almost all accept the status quo, through fear of the unknown and uncontrolled alternatives, even if we don't like it, so the "we" really is pretty much all of us... unless and until a revolution or world war in which everyone suffers one way or the other.

(Addressed to 60sname).

sigh

Or to put it another way, there might be a different equilibrium between supply and demand, and the quality of the supply might go up, to the benefit of the whole of society, if attitudes towards certain roles and skills weren't so dismissive and condescending. People are affected by societal attitudes when making choices.

Depends what way it is used. It can be used in a derogatory way which your flat mate obviously did. I don't think there are many situations where this word would be used in a non-derogatory way tbh, but that's partly due to society's opinion of low skilled manual work.