In general, working conditions in American industry were better than in Europe until after the 1840's. Why?
138123
Around that time trade unionism began to take hold in Europe.  It was some decades later that unionism became established in the US.  A big concern with unions has always been worker safety and well being.
3749
People are more greedy nowadays, and many have less of a work ethic. The American Dream isn't different, it's the things involved with the American Dream. Back then, the American Dream was too pretty much work hard and earn yourself a good living. Nowadays many people have a less work ethic, and the American Dream isn't too hard to achieve if you have some kind of special talent (Sports, music, etc.) You can also achieve the American Dream nowadays by becoming a good counterfeiter or becoming one of the main men in the drug trade. People have developed less of a work ethic and it shows. Thats how.
587836
it brought better technology \n+ railroads\nregulate economic systems
982583
Americans have been told for the last 20 years not to worry about manufacturing jobs leaving the US, they were being replaced by high tech and service jobs. When customer service and tech support jobs were contracted to S Asia, we were told these weren't really the kind of white collar jobs Americans wanted anyway. Now we have to leave the country to get professional services? Come, on, this is globalization for the sake of globalization, MBA's justifying their salaries and their business trips.
66921
France's workplace values are eroding, but they may be more realistic than those in the US.  In the US we give everything to the company (hours, loyalty, travel, anxiety) and the CEO bankrupts the company and walks off with the cash.  Or they sell the manufacturing off to China along with all of the jobs.  In France there are those who work for themselves or enjoy their jobs and they've generally got good values.  But it's hard for folks to not get cynical about working for the Man, and consolidation of businesses means that less folks are likely to have ownership of, or enjoy their work.
702093
This all grew out of the 19th century prohibition movements which themselves grew out of enormous alcohol abuse in the early part of the industrial revolution.   The IR made the production & transport of beer & spirits very cheap & allowed centarlized sales in bars & pubs.  Workingmen would often get off their mining or factory jobs & head straight for the local pub, spending their wages & staggering home drunk to beat their wives.  There was no welfare in those days:  If the wage earner spent the family funds, the family starved.  Prohibitionists & progressives supported closing hours to limit the problem.  WWI provided the perfect opportunity; Britain's Parliament cut day-time & evening hours, ostensibly to reduce absenteeism from defense factories & many US states did the same.  "Wartime prohibition," became popular even in Germany & in Russia where Vodka production was an important source of government revenue.  The US even made flat out prohibition the law from 1921 to 1932.  After the war & after prohibition ended in the US, most governments never went back to the old laissez-faire days.  These days,  the main argument for limiting hours is reduction of noise & crime & drunk driving, though many argue that mandatory closing times actually increase such problems.
836262
Nope. Americans have it good, and they can have it better by working.
861812
It's basically due to the unions and the sorriness of the American worker. It's really sad, but it's true....It's hard to find anything that is actually made in USA\n\nOur economy is indeed coasting on borrowed time.
1103367
it depends society always looks for wyas of making work easier, thus one would say improvment is the use of machines makeing manuel labor safer and easier, and reducing costs, but then one must decide if it is worth the pollution and look at america now, with little manuel labor we have become fatter, so either way there are cosats to which improves a country.
333492
Well that is complex. But to start off before the war. The north and the south differed greatly. The south was a farming area(mostly very labor intensive products like cotton) hence the need for slavery in the south's eyes. Where the north was mostly industrial compared to the south. So more machines and less hand labor. The reason this is important is because a factory can be rebuild. But farm land takes a lot of money to redo and a lot of time to start producing again. Well after the war the South lost its way of life and it lost it way of surviving. After the war the south was pretty well destroyed.  The farms and there crops were gone burned, destroyed, or used by the union forces. Also after the war the south was occupied by northern troops for many years to come. But southern people at the time also believed they were right on the issue of slavery. That is part of the reason the civil war happened. But basically it all of this combined as to why I believe the south is still hung up on the civil war.
102234
In absolute $ amount, the wages are higher in the US for the same job. But money has more buying power in India, for the time being. So, in that sense, one can argue that an engineer in India has a better life than an engineer in the US. It all depends on the individual case.
538609
that may be part of it but the main reason is because a LOT of rich business men who own big companies use cheap, immigrant workers rather than pay decent wages to American citizens.the same reason big business has moved to China,India,etc.
556165
I remember talking about this in business class. A higher motivator would be better working conditions. If you give them higher pay they still won't want to be there if the working conditions are bad. If the working conditions are good they are more likely to stay there and still have a small salary. With better working conditions the people are more willing to work overtime to get the extra money they need.
339968
Because American business's are greedy. Most pay and benefits were hard fought by unions and now that unions are in decline the prospective for any improvements look dim. I am hoping that the pendulum is about ready to swing the other way.
179285
It increased productivity and led to increased wealth eventually as GDP per capita rose. This created the conditions for the rise of the middle class such as more professional and management jobs. In turn, bourgeois and mercantile views became more powerful as opposed to that of the aristocracy. This led to reforms as the Reform Act of 1832 shifting representation to the industrialised areas.
165153
Many reasons.  There was oppression and famine in europe.  The US relaxed it's policy on immigration.  There were jobs to be had in the US.
1136621
Its Macroeconomics... its cheaper to produce goods/ services in Mexico as it is a less developed country. \n\n In Mexican a worker gets paid 50 cents per hour (example), whereas in the USA a worker gets $15 an hour and they both do the same job and the same work at the same standard of quality. \n\nLarge corporations in the USA that compete on a global level have to realise the loss of money they have in wages, they move to less developed countries to gain a competitive advantage, so they can produce more of their product for less and hopefully sell it cheaper (not always.... Economies of Scale).\n\n A real life example is General Motors sacking thousands of workers this year that work in their USA manufacturing departments and planning to build a new plant in China.\n\n Giddy Up!!