Trout 1 Kilgore Trout

Leslie Ralphe

Eng 121.1N1

27 May 2013

Summary of “Working at McDonald’s”

Writer Amitai Etzioni refutes the commonly­held opinion that low­wage fast food

restaurant employment is beneficial to teenagers in his essay, “Working at McDonald’s.” He

argues that such work does not teach skills of value to teens, and it can detract from the workers’

education. Teens learn to follow a series of predetermined steps rather than to think critically

and solve problems. Yes, it is true that teens who held such jobs in school were more likely than

their non­working counterparts to be employed four years later, but Etzioni speculates that this

statistic reflects their continued employment in low wage jobs rather than any improvement in

marketable skills. In fact, these jobs hire a disproportionate number of poor and minority

students, and may prevent these workers from improving their economic status. Students who

work have little time or energy left for studying, and may be sleep deprived during their school

hours. Etzioni concedes that such work may encourage teamwork building skills, but is more

likely to enforce blind obedience. Role models of any value are often off­site during teen work

hours. If the student is supported by his or her family, he or she is likely to develop a distorted

idea of the lifestyle such a job can support, and may spend earnings unwisely. In fact, Etzioni

believes that these jobs reinforce the idea of work as an unpleasant burden for which the only

reward is purchasing trendy clothes or technology. If teens are not taught otherwise, they may be

so distracted by the immediate gratification of spending that they don’t apply themselves for the

Trout 2 greater reward that an education can provide. While there may be some benefits to working

while in school, Etzioni concludes that teens’ priorities should be school, not work.

Paraphrase of Paragraph Eleven of “Working at McDonald’s”

In his essay, “Working at McDonald’s,” author Amitai Etzioni argues that working in fast

food restaurants does not generally benefit teenagers educationally, and in paragraph eleven he

presents fast food restaurant employment as a unique threat to socioeconomically deprived and

minority teens, undermining their education and paralyzing their social mobility. In fact, a

disproportionate number of minority teens fill these positions relative to their white counterparts.

While some might consider these jobs beneficial to students whose families have less money, in

fact these jobs reinforce and solidify the disadvantaged status of the teen worker by weakening

initiative, and emphasizing the idea of work as obedience and subservience. Impoverished teens

may become used to the idea of mindless, rote labor serving others with more money than they

have, and their initiative may be weakened by their inability to break free from poverty despite

working long hours with the best intentions. In fact, such work can be far more dangerous to

poor teens than to their middle class peers for whom it is assumed to be a temporary or optional

measure, because it may prevent them from excelling educationally and exploring ambitious

career options (such as unpaid internships with the possibility of long­term rewards). All the

factors that make fast food work dangerous to teenagers are magnified when the teenager needs

every dollar he can earn; the long­term benefits of education can’t compete with the short term

reward of feeding and clothing himself or his family, and it’s unreasonable to expect an

Trout 3 impoverished teenager to be immune from the temptations that influence his wealthier

counterparts.