[JTon]

I'm not following this at all. This narrative is at odds with the cut-throat capitalist narrative which is also popular to characterize businesses today. I.e. If business administrators could cut labour costs by reducing workforce, they would in a blind of an eye. For knowledge workers, I think the "idle capacity" model is more correct. Basically, demands for output are not constant, they ebb and flow. It's expensive to acquire and train staff, so they retain surplus capacity. It's inefficient, but it's more resilient.

[js8]

> If business administrators could cut labour costs by reducing workforce, they would in a blind of an eye.

But this assumes that they are smart enough to know how to eradicate those extra costs, but bullshit jobs might have co-evolved among labor as a defense mechanism against that sort of thing.