Does Every Job Have Its Dignity?

To answer this question we should start from the consideration that work cannot only be the means through which we earn a living but also the opportunity to make the most of our talents, to feel useful to others, to contribute together with others an efficient community. Work should always have meaning for those who carry it out, and generate self-esteem and deep satisfaction.

Unfortunately, these opportunities cannot always be seized, jobs are not always full of meaning and opportunities for growth. There are, in fact, workers who feel humiliated by the work they do, jobs that make them suffer, which produce “existential expropriation” in those who find themselves trapped in them.

The dignity of a job, and its profound meaning, derives from two connected but distinct dimensions:

The first is the very nature of work, its usefulness, its ability to mobilize creativity, skills, ingenuity, and relationships: the doctor who saves lives, the engineer who builds bridges made to last, the cleaner who makes liveable the environments in which they work and operate, the baker and the hairdresser who feed us and make us presentable.

Then there are jobs, such as, for example, those who design bombs that also seem like toys and, instead, are explosive devices that maim and kill. Or like those where chemistry is used in an extreme or careless manner causing damage to the health of consumers; or even those who produce slot machines that create dependencies.

And what about that public official who uses his discretion, even within the scope of legality, to grant favors rather than to protect rights?

These jobs certainly cannot be considered worthy in the same way as many others, by their very nature. Legal, yes, perhaps, but certainly not worthy.

The second aspect is that relating to the conditions in which each job is carried out. In general, in short, there are activities that are made more or less worthy in relation to the environment and the conditions in which they are carried out. Worthy work, made unworthy by external conditions.

A simple example: that of the teacher, which is perhaps the most beautiful profession in the world, but when the pact of trust with families is broken, and society questions the importance of culture and competence, then also the profession of The teacher loses meaning and dignity.

Admitting that not all jobs are equally worthy simply means asking that all jobs, especially the most humble ones, can at least be carried out in conditions that are respectful of the rights and intrinsic value of every human being.

No one should be forced to do a job they don’t want to do, to accept a job that is socially useless or even harmful to others.

The risk that can be glimpsed is that the narrative of “all jobs are worthy”, disguised as egalitarian humanitarianism and magnanimous liberality, does nothing but block social change, silence the just demands for basic rights, the requests for more humane conditions and delegitimize any possible attempt at reform.

Instead, stating forcefully that not all jobs are worthy provokes us and also forces us to ask ourselves through which mechanisms we end up doing one job rather than another.

We can ask ourselves whether certain jobs are devoid of meaning and dignity because they are generally carried out by marginalized individuals, with a lower social status, with little education and self-esteem; or, these jobs are carried out by certain people because it is the jobs that are intrinsically devoid of meaning and dignity.

And this question recalls another, that of the “rhetoric of meritocracy”, according to which those who “made it” are because they deserved it and those who, however, did not make it are because he hasn’t worked hard enough and must therefore be satisfied with unworthy jobs.

In this way, however, all we do is reproduce inequality, legitimize injustices, even giving them a moral justification.

Decent work for all means dignity in all areas of human activity, for those who have a formalized employment relationship. It means dignity at home and safety on the way to and from work; it means dignity in the countries of origin, transit, and destination. It also means freedom and liberation for people forced to work against their will and for children subjected to the harshest working conditions.

We could therefore agree on the fact that not all jobs are equal in their ability to promote well-being for oneself and others, to generate self-esteem and respect, and that this fact cannot be hidden by stating, instrumentally, that every job is equally worthy only because it allows you to make a living.

We cannot talk about dignity if working is only to survive, without perceiving a minimum purpose, an objective.

We can talk about dignity if humanity is a priority in the workplace if work is a real continuous encounter between rights and duties, a relationship of respect between those who work and those who offer work.