He writes for the Toronto Star, a Liberal party organ.
At 10:56 PM 13/01/99 -0400, Michael Gurstein wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 12:51:52 -0800
>From: Ed Deak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Bell: More corporate madness
>
>Dalton Camp could hardly be called a commie or pinko. A former advertising
>executive, he was once the President of the Progressive Conservative Party,
>who gave us the FTA under Mulroney. I got this without origins, but believe
>he writes for the Globe and Mail, basically another corporate front paper.
>
>Cheers, Ed (Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC, Canada)
>============================================================================
>===
>>> January 13, 1999
>>> Bell hanging up on operators for corporate greed
>>>
>>>Bell Canada is in the news again as just another corporation to put
>>>profit before people. I suppose this is like saying Vince Lombardi was
>>>just another coach who put winning first. Winning, you'll recall the
>>>coach saying, wasn't just the best thing, it was the only thing.
>>>
>>>This week, Bell sold its telephone-operator business - the big 0 and the
>>>vital 411 numbers on your phone - to the Americans. Doing so, the
>>>corporation sold out 2,400 of its own operators.
>>>
>>>The explanation was the incontestable, inarguable, familiar one:
>>>Employing the operators was costing Bell money its shareholders could
>>>ill afford. In the corporate game, profit is not the best thing, it's
>>>the only thing.
>>>
>>>We should not assume Bell's 2,400 operators will instantly be
>>>reconnected with their new employer, Excell Global Services. The result,
>>>it is feared, will be fewer jobs at less pay, and some employees will be
>>>obliged to relocate.
>>>
>>>But none of this matters. Bell claims the new owners of the operation
>>>are more competent in this line of work: No doubt Excell Global will
>>>turn a higher profit. That matters.
>>>
>>>In 1995, Bell's president announced his company would be firing 10,000
>>>of its employees over an ensuing three years. The president explained
>>>the company had made a profit of $720 million in 1994, but was looking
>>>at a profit of only $500 million the following year. He pleaded for
>>>understanding. ``If we don't change now,'' he said, ``we'll let down
>>>both our customers and our country.''
>>>
>>>How does not firing 10,000 men and women from their jobs imperil the
>>>country? Of course, if it is really true that Bell had 10,000 employees
>>>who had nothing better to do than hang about the water cooler - that's
>>>the size of an army division - it's the president who should be fired.
>>>
>>>I suppose one must try to be realistic about this. Reference should be
>>>made to previous editorials and speeches touching the subjects of
>>>competitiveness, the need for, and inefficiency, the dangers of, and the
>>>unwisdom of raising the subject of humanity, the lack of. Still, most
>>>who preach this new gospel have jobs, at least during the time of their
>>>greatest enthusiasm, so that direct empirical knowledge confirms the
>>>theory of the primacy of profitability.
>>>
>>>The social scientists have a different view of what we might call the
>>>Bell Syndrome. The view is at odds with that of the economist; there is
>>>another way of looking at the practice of trading people for profit.
>>>
>>>Richard Sennett, of the London School of Economics, has written an essay
>>>on the subject, not about Bell per se, but about the syndrome. It is
>>>called The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Consequences of Work in
>>>the New Capitalism.
>>>
>>>The title is amply descriptive of Sennett's thesis. What the professor
>>>means by the ``corrosion of character'' is the end result of a work
>>>career of instability and uncertainty.
>>>
>>>``A young American with at least two years of college,'' Sennett writes,
>>>``can expect to change jobs at least 11 times in the course of working,
>>>and change his or her skill base at least three times during 40 years of
>>>labour.''
>>>
>>>In the '60s, when Marshall McLuhan was our preferred guru, it was said,
>>>to the bemusement of some, that the average working career would involve
>>>changing jobs three or four times. That was then, this is now, and the
>>>magic number is now 11.
>>>
>>>The consequences should not be surprising. Working people today live in
>>>continuing states of career anxiety, often fearing ``they are losing
>>>control over their lives.'' Sennett believes the workplace is empty of
>>>the former values of loyalty, commitment, service, and trust. Those who
>>>wryly say, ``It's a jungle out there,'' are understating the reality of
>>>life in the modern corporation.
>>>
>>>The villain in all this trauma and tragedy is the ``blameless,''
>>>faceless corporation, trying only to make a buck and satisfy its
>>>shareholders. Sennett, however, identifies the problem more precisely.
>>>Downsizing has less to do with profit-mongering than with the private
>>>lusts of senior corporate executives.
>>>
>>>In fact, Sennett maintains, studies made of firms which have seriously
>>>reduced their payrolls show they also achieved ``lower profits and
>>>declining worker productivity.'' (For confirmation, check the career of
>>>``Chainsaw Al'' Dunlap, the avatar of downsizing, whose increasing
>>>exertions had made him a cult figure in corporate circles until he fell
>>>upon his own sword and was himself downsized.)
>>>
>>>So, why do they do it?
>>>
>>>Sennett points to the modern practice of paying corporate CEOs in stock
>>>options. By cutting payrolls and corners, the CEO maximizes profits in
>>>the short term, which inflates share values to allow him to exercise his
>>>options at maximum profit. He leaves when the fun is over, himself
>>>richer for the experience, the corporation poorer.
>>>
>>>As for the downsized, many become a charge to society as whole. There
>>>are serious costs, many of them not yet calculated. But society pays
>>>while the corporation downsizers profit, enjoying tax breaks in the
>>>bargain. If you think that's fair, I must have the wrong number.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>Dalton Camp is a political commentator. His column appears Sundays and
>>>Wednesdays.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>--
>For MAI-not (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
>links to other MAI sites please see http://mai.flora.org/
>
