Ed,
The problem is that a 'worker' is perceived as a helpless pawn living at the behest of the capitalists. If he were to be a more independent individual able to pick and choose his direction (rather than being forced into it) perhaps fewer of Gail's points would be pertinent. I don't think that this can be achieved by making him a ward of the State, or the Union, rather than a ward of the Capitalists. Harry From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Weick Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 1:33 PM To: Gail Stewart; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Modernizing the market economy In this colour, Gail. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Gail Stewart <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 10:13 AM Subject: [Futurework] Modernizing the market economy The Future of Work Modernizing the Market Economy 1. Human relations Draft 1.0. Comments would be appreciated. 1. Our future is deeply uncertain: plausible possibilities -- environmental, social, economic, cultural -- range widely. Some of these are less certain than others, and we do have quite a lot of information about all of them that could make them considerably less uncertain. A major problem is our inability to act on the information we have. 2. In such circumstances, each of us, in preparing for future work, might best engage also in risk containment by acquiring and sustaining versatile capabilities including skills in teamwork. Teamwork seems to imply a perception of equality among team members. As a private citizen, I can feel equal to a Cabinet Minister or CEO (perhaps foolishly), but if I am working for them in their hierarchy, that can't be the case. 3. A major a society-wide initiative may be desirable however to address an existing risk -- the prevailing lag within the market economy in modernizing its structures of human relationships. IMHO, in work situations human relationships arise out of contractual relationships, which in turn are dependent on power relationships. The best working arrangement from the employees point of view is one in which he or she must be treated fairly and respectfully because a binding contract says so. With the decline of unions and the outsourcing of work the fair and respectful treatment of employees is becoming less and less necessary. 4. The structures of human relationships in the economy have not kept pace with the personal, social and political enfranchisement prevailing in the surrounding society. I believe relationships in the economy and surrounding society are going in the same direction, and it's not a good one. Employers do not have the same restrictions placed on them as they once had. In the surrounding society we continue to vote but, more and more, voting has become the process of giving power to a corporate entity known as a political party whose chief concern is gaining and maintaining power and its own continuity. 5. This failure not only affects the economy, heightening discontent within it, but adversely affects the broader matter of social and political stability and flexibility 6. The lag also adversely affects the health and productivity of participants at all levels in the economy and the productivity of the economy itself. 7. A major step toward the modernization of human relations was taken two hundred years ago by the abolition of slavery in Great Britain, thanks to William Wilberforce and others who led the campaign against the slave trade. That was one step, but I believe that the union movement which, if I recalled, gained much of its momentum during the latter part of the 19th century and the earlier part of the 20th was a huge factor. Unitionization became possible when large numbers of people were made to work in one place -- a factory -- and eventually recognized that they had the power to shut it down if they felt they were treated unfairly. 8. A similar major step toward a modernization of human relations is currently overdue: the abolition of employment, i.e., of situations where one person works "for" rather than "with" another, each freely self-governing as they already are in their capacity as citizens. If I'm working for Microsoft, I can pretend I'm working with Bill Gates, but the reality is that I'm working for him. 9. Many participants in the current market economy, perhaps as many as 25%, already work as independent contractors including senior executives who, almost universally, have already made this transition. I worked as a consultant for a number of years. While I could feel independent, two things always worried me: will the contractee be happy with the work I'm doing? and will I get another contract? I never felt I was working with someone, always for someone and without the protection that a regular employee has. 10. Such emancipation is however more difficult and costly to achieve at the individual personal or corporate level and might be more readily accomplished through mutual society-wide agreement that the employment of one person by another should end. A very scary thought to young people out there looking for jobs. 11. This suggests that a campaign against the employment trade, toward universal emancipation from employment, might be timely. 12. The abolition of employment could usefully be accompanied by public policies supportive of the new working conditions, increasing their benefit to the economy and to the participants involved. 13. The abolition of employment (and with it the roles of employer and employee) and the resulting greater flexibility and dignity in the world of work may be expected, over time, to change the perception of "work." 14. Commonly perceived today as a functional disutility, work may become a social and personal practice, a developmental element in the lives of each of us as we more entrepreneurially allocate our personal resources of time and energy and skills. The complexity of a society has a lot to do with it. In aboriginal societies work was simple; men hunted and women preserved the game they shot. It was all very cooperative because it didn't have to be different. In the bureaucracies and companies I've worked in, I did a small part of something, someone did another part of it, etc. etc. Some of the things for the Minister's consideration or signature moved up and down through the ranks several times. I don't see how much of the work we do could be organized non-hierachially. 15. Co-evolving within and among ourselves and with our social and natural environment with greater human dignity than is now involved in being either an "employer" or "employee" (both roles being now rather embarrassing, a sure sign of their passing, their growing decadence), we will also better enabled to develop our human capacities. Complex work seems naturally to lead to organizational complexity. Whether you stand out in that complexity depends on your ability to use it. I knew some people in the public service who used it very well, others who used it poorly. Though someone always stood in judgement of the work you did, I never saw him/her as an "employer" but as someone who had his or her own responsibilities to fulfill. 16. Similarly, our shared hopes may better prosper, for life, liberty and happiness, peace, order and good government, etc., and our capacities to function as citizens responsible for our own self-governance and for our governments. 17. Who will step up to become today's Wilberforces: it will not be easy, e.g., can the economy survive without employment, as it had to be argued it could survive without slavery? 19. The path will be strewn with misunderstandings but, as William James said, "First a new theory is attached as absurd; then it is admitted to be true, but obvious and insignificant; finally it is seen to be so important that its adversaries claim they themselves discovered it." 20. So it will be, I predict, with the notion of extending enfranchisement through abolishing the "employment trade," i.e., abolishing the employment of one person by another so that rather than being "worked for" or "working for" another person or persons, we may more consistently work "with" each other and have the personal and economic (and also environmental) benefits of doing so and of conceiving of our work in this way. Gail Stewart Ottawa August 20, 2007 I guess I'm not with you, Gail. The kinds of work we do requires complex, hierarchical organization. In such organizations, there have to be subordinates and superiors. This does not mean that they shouldn't treat each other politely and humanely, but they have to know what their part of the overall process is. I also think that how people will be treated at work will continue to be dependent on bargaining power. With globalization and the outsourcing of work, bargaining power will likely erode. Not a good thing. Ed _____ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
