share
English Language & UsageWhat do you call a person who is easily replaced?
[+19] [14] Alain
[2011-09-21 17:55:02]
[ single-word-requests ]
[ https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/42776/what-do-you-call-a-person-who-is-easily-replaced ]

I was thinking "interchangeable", but isn't really used on people.

How do you describe someone who is easily replaced by another person. The implied connotation is that they have no inherent qualities that make them more suitable for the job than any of their peers, it is just a matter of selecting one of them at random to do it.

Example I wish to fill:

"I complained that I didn't want to be in the conference call so they had Joe do it. Feels awesome."

"Feels awesome to be [interchangeable]?"

(6) You might like this T shirt thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/generic/5b6f - Wudang
(4) @Wudang: or this one: thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/popculture/9722 - Martijn
(4) @Martijn this T-shirt suits the occasion, too: thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/frustrations/374d - Agos
A toy soldier. - Callithumpian
The term "cannon fodder" is sometimes used for expendable soldiers. This is closer to "expendable" than it is to "replaceable" or "interchangeable." - oosterwal
Interchangeable is sometimes used for people: c2.com/cgi/wiki?PlugCompatibleInterchangeableEngineers (Especially in technical fields.) - Sean McMillan
(1) We call them Managers... - Matthew Scouten
(1) Anything you like? - Jodrell
At Microsoft a person who is newly hired or is on a short term contract, gets an email address that has a dash in it. Other employees refer to them as "Dash trash." - Noah
(1) Feels awesome to be a cog? - GEdgar
What about "expendable"? - E.Groeg
[+83] [2011-09-21 17:58:57] check123

Expendable is a term that comes close though not exact. It implies that the object can be abandoned after use.

It is often used to refer to objects of little significance as in:

The servant was expendable, master had to be saved.

It can imply that the servant is replaceable. This [1] list notes replaceable as a synonym of expendable.

Substitutable can be another word with similar implications.

[1] http://thesaurus.com/browse/expendable

(4) I like this, I think it's the word I had in mind. - Alain
Good example. The one I had in mind was "I complained that I didn't want to do it so they sent Joe to do it. Feel awesome." "Feels awesome to be expendable?" Maybe it doesn't fit so well in that context though... - Alain
How about Feels awesome to be substituted - check123
(6) To me "expendable" is not the same as "replaceable" or "interchangable". Something that's expended might not be replaced if it's considered to be surplus (and being surplus might be the reason for it being expended). - FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
(4) This isn't a great word choice. "Expendable" tends to have the connotation that the person could die. Additionally, nobody is happy to be expendable. - jprete
(2) @jprete: As if someone is actually happy of being considered easily replaceable... - Gurzo
@Alain - Remember that if you feel that this is a better answer than the one you accepted yesterday, you can change your accepted answer. - Mark Booth
1
[+59] [2011-09-21 21:44:07] Ryan Haber

Dispensable is a great one. "Don't think you're indispensable. We can replace you."


(3) I believe this is a great alternative. +1 - Ignacio
Yeah, it's not an exact synonym because you can of course dispense with a thing without replacing it; but it seems to have something of the connotation sought, so I thought I'd put it up. - Ryan Haber
2
[+44] [2011-09-21 17:58:36] Dusty [ACCEPTED]

I feel like I'm missing something, but easily replaceable or just replaceable seems like the obvious answer. Certainly, people are frequently referred to as irreplaceable when they're not easily replaced.


Added a quote with the exact context to try and help things along. - Alain
(3) Much as I like "fungible", I think it's obvious that yours is the obvious answer. Anything else is either going to be obscure/metaphoric, or will unduly emphasise the unwarranted connotations of low-value, insignificance. - FumbleFingers
(3) "Feels awesome to be replaceable?" is perfectly acceptable and in current use. As obvious as it stands, this is the right answer. - ZJR
(1) This has to be the most "correct" answer - Jodrell
I agree, substituting each suggested word into the above sentence, this one fares best. - Alain
I prefer fungible and I've heard it used on more than one occasion for exactly this purpose - David Hayes
3
[+33] [2011-09-21 19:54:44] Tom Au

The word I might use is fungible.


(5) Another convert to the cause of fungibility! But so far I haven't gotten a single upvote for my attempt to introduce the word/concept to the wider world here at EL&U. I think it's a word ahead of its time! :) - FumbleFingers
(1) @FumbleFingers: I upvoted your use of the word. - Tom Au
(1) ... and I venture to suggest that any company lucky enough to have employees capable of using the word "fungible" in casual conversation would probably do well not to replace those people! - FumbleFingers
(3) @FumbleFingers:Please tell that to my boss. - Tom Au
This is an amazing word. I'm so glad to know it. I never could have used it in the conversation, because they wouldn't have known what it meant, but it's definitely the most suiting. Is this normally a word used on people, or just inanimate objects? - Alain
@Alain: Fungible has been around a long time in legal/commercial contexts. A pound coin, for example, is fungible in that if you lend one and the borrower gives you back a different one, it makes no meaningful difference. But David Deutsch co-opted it for the quantum "many worlds" context, to say that there are (effectively, infinitely many) copies of, for example, you and I out there in the multiverse. Any of whom might diverge from us "originals" at any time, if they don't do the same as us forever. - FumbleFingers
...in our dark history, one could for example claim that two plantation slaves were fungible, if you didn't get back the same one you lent (or thought you bought at auction). As long as they seemed capable of doing the same work, etc. So I suppose that's really treating them like inanimate objects. But that's what OP is talking about anyway, so I truly do think it's the right word, even if most people don't know it. - FumbleFingers
4
[+13] [2011-09-21 18:04:33] FrustratedWithFormsDesigner

In addition to the other suggestions, such people are sometimes referred to as "cogs" as in

I'm just another cog in this machine!

Where "machine" refers to some large impersonal organization that views its human resources as interchangeable components and that are individually replaceable.

This is because cogs in real machines are easily replaced and individual cogs (or other similar parts) really have no special inherent qualities that make them better than any other cog in the bag of spare parts.


(3) Cog primarily holds the connotation that the person is contributing only a small piece of a big picture. My impression is that a cog may or may not be someone who does something that there peers are incapable of doing - so not really synonymous with 'interchangeable'. - Alain
If peers are incapable of doing the same, the person in question is not replaceable. Remember that the bag of spare parts that holds the cogs extends far beyond the confines of a single team, department, or company. - corsiKa
5
[+13] [2011-09-21 18:59:14] Wudang

Cog would be my preferred word (and I voted it up) but I've also heard the word "drone" used for a generic worker with no unique features. Also "grunt" borrowed from US military slang.


6
[+7] [2011-09-21 21:20:00] James

I have often used the saying 'dime a dozen' to refer to things that are low in value and easily replaced.


(2) +1 Here in Britain we'd say 'ten-a-penny' ;) - immutabl
I always say "two-a-penny", but ten-a-penny works, and rhymes nicely, so I think I may have just been saying it wrong :/ - Carl Younger
7
[+7] [2011-09-22 06:04:05] monsto

I think, based on your example, the word I would recommend is commodity.

The classic definition as shown on dictionary.com doesn't really work. But it is one of those words whose definition is changing as we speak, like access used to be something you did-now it's something you have. The word commodity used to be directly related to grains, trading and futures. In this context it means "that which is so common and available as to be nearly disposable."

And I think you'll find that people will know exactly what you mean (especially when used in the context of employment) without having to explain.


8
[+5] [2011-09-22 13:33:05] Chris Cudmore

Redundant might be useful. It doesn't have the exact meaning you're looking for, but when applied to a worker it carries the meaning that there are others in the organization that can (and are) doing the job. Usually it's applied to a position, rather than a person.


This is actually really fitting for the context. - Alain
In the Queen's English, I think "redundant" is the most fitting word. In the American vernacular, I'd vote for "replaceable". - Timothy Lee Russell
9
[+4] [2011-09-24 05:38:52] Maxpm

For a darker twist, try disposable.


10
[+2] [2011-09-24 02:13:46] Matt Montag

A pawn! A peon! A grunt! A stooge! A tool! A commodity! Nameless! Faceless! Anonymous! Unappreciated! Irrelevant! Unnecessary! Undifferentiated!

But if you were writing a movie script and you wanted just the right sardonic bite you'd use replaceable.


11
[+1] [2011-09-22 09:19:07] Kris Jenkins

Another alternative is 'pawn', as in chess.

(Fungible's my favourite so far though...)


(1) Different connotation I would say... while a pawn is usually somebody low-ranking, the implication is that they are being used for political gain by somebody higher-ranking. There isn't really any suggestion that they're replaceable or interchangeable; certainly in the context of chess, when a pawn is gone, it's gone. - calum_b
True, true. It's a fair point. I was aiming to convey the sense of 'one of many otherwise identical units'. Perhaps 'drone' would be more appropriate? - Kris Jenkins
12
[+1] [2011-09-23 00:06:26] Tom Anderson

In the technology field, the term " plug-compatible [1]" is occasionally heard.

That originally [2] referred to products that were made as cheaper replacements for IBM mainframe parts (or whole machines); the connotation is that you can unplug the original, plug in the replacement, and have everything carry on working just the same, the two parts being completely equivalent as far as any interacting component can tell.

The term has been borrowed to describe people, as hackers are wont to do, or rather, to disparagingly refer to to the idea widely held by project managers and other suit-wearing troublemakers that technical people are just jumped-up bricklayers, and any one of them is just as able to lay some particular course of bricks as any other.

[1] http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PlugCompatibleInterchangeableEngineers
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug_compatible

13
[+1] [2011-09-23 03:42:36] Erik Funkenbusch

I'm a big fan of fungible, as others have mentioned. However, it is a bit obscure.

Words like dispensible or expendible are really more synonyms with disposable, meaning one-time usage.

The word I like to use is an indirect word; commodity. It's indirect because it's literal meaning is related to unprocessed goods, or something that is a 'product' rather than a service. The inference being that something is easily replaced because there are tons more just like it that can be easily acquired, like a McDonald's hamburger, or a box of kleenex.

It's usage would be Go ahead and quit, I don't care. You're a commodity to me.


"commodity" ... reminds me of the CIA's term "asset" to mean a native hired as an operative. - Hexagon Tiling
14