When I worked in those situations, it was never about "enslaving" the workers. It was a simple calculation made by the manager to make their lives easier.
First, scheduling was always hard. So they did everything they could to make it easier for themselves, including last-minute changes that they didn't even tell you about. You were expected to somehow check the physical schedule in the store right before the new week started, even if you weren't scheduled that day.
Second, they'd get sick of the complainers, so the worst complainers would get preferential treatment. The best workers ended up with the worst shifts, too, because they were less likely to just call in sick or quit.
I feel like there were more lessons I learned about scheduling back then, but it's been quite a while now. It was always all about the managers avoiding personal hardship, and very little about the company itself.
I think parent's point is that employees care. Employers probably don't care that they're paying employees minimum wage, but if other places pay higher than that the the employees (who do care) would switch to the other jobs.
>I suspect it's deliberate. If you can't plan your life, you are a slave to work.
Are you suggesting they're deliberately doing this so "you are a slave to work"? How does the employer benefit from this?
The workers can't do things like go to school or do anything productive, so they're stuck at that job for a much longer time than if they could better their circumstance.
It also gives the employers the ability to point towards any deviations from being available on short notice as a reason to legally fire people. You either give up your life to your low level job or you provide ammo for them to remove all of your legal protections because you aren't being fired for a legally protected reason, but because you violated policy or weren't flexible enough
I suspect it's deliberate. If you can't plan your life, you are a slave to work.