Brad McCormick wrote,
>I think an even better "economic" argument can be made, that: Fatigue
>increases
>with the number of hours worked until a point is reached in which the
>increasing direct economic cost to the employer (in terns of mistakes
>made,
>etc.) outweighs the value of more pay. Of course, if the manager has an
>(to quote a former manager of mine:) "asses and elbows" mentality, (s)he
>may value the production of sweat over the production of goods, services
>and even profits. I believe a lot of what goes on at high levels in
>large corporations has less to do with making money for the stockholders
>than with little boys grown big playing puerile schoolground games in
>the Executive Suite (they don't call 'em "Prep Schools" for nothing!).
That's perhaps a better economic argument *from the point of view of the
employer*. However, the goal of a dynamic economic analysis is to view the
situation successively from the position of the employer, the employee and
society as a whole. The _same_ situation appears different from each of
these perspectives and those different impressions have an effect on the
decisions that people make.
Unions and chambers of commerce are equally adamant that if only everyone
else would see things as they see things everything would be o.k. Chambers
of commerce seem to have had the greatest successes recently in getting
government to see things as they do. They're wrong of course. Tunnel vision
is not "visionary".
Regards,
Tom Walker
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Know Ware Communications
Vancouver, B.C., CANADA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(604) 688-8296
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
