|
Now, as to
occupations, we shall clearly not be able
to have the samedivision of labor in [our workplaces] as now: vicarious
servanting, sewer-emptying, butchering, letter carrying, boot -blacking, hair -dressing, and
therest of it, will have come to an end; weshall either make all these
occupationsagreeable to ourselves in some mood... or we shall have to let
them lapse altogether. A great many fidgety occupations will come to an end:
we shan't put a pattern on a cloth or atwiddle on a jug -handle to sell it,
but to make it prettier and to amuse ourselves and others.
-William Morris
The Society of the Future
"We therefore need
something more than councils to reduce hierarchy to 'possibly none at
all'."
"Parading through the
ghetto or slinking through the country club doesn't confer membership in
either."
|
Workplace Organization
Contemporary job
definitions foster hierarchy. Can different job definitions combat hierarchy?
Do we have to reject all divisions of labor if people are to have a
commensurate say in decisions that affect them at work? Or can we reduce
hierarchical structures until there are "possibly none at all" and
yet retain a practical and efficient organization?
Workers' Councils
One tool for eliminating workplace hierarchy
is "workers' councils" of all relevant workers. Small councils deal
with immediate problems confronting small work groups. Larger councils make
decisions for work teams encompassing a network of work groups, for example,
in a wing or on a floor. Still larger councils make decisions for a division,
a complex of divisions, or a plant, and federations of councils make
decisions for an industry. Every council and federation principally concerns
itself with affairs at its own level while contributing to decisions at
higher levels in proportion to how they are affected. Some decisions require
a majority of all members. Others, where the change has more drastic
implications, may require two -thirds. Nothing requires that every decision
must await every council's or worker's input. Personnel decisions are made
only by people directly concerned. Decisions
about breaks that affect a
whole floor would be made by
all involved on that floor. Plant decisions would be made by plant councils.
But while necessary, formally democratic councils
are not sufficient for
promoting workplace participatory democracy. Even if sweepers have a
council, representation in higher councils, and full voting rights in
plant decisions, they will never exert the same influence as managers
who develop budgets or design products. Despite equal rights, sweepers'
boring work will not challenge their intellectual capacities or provide
them with information about technological options or with skill at making
decisions. Work -induced attributes will push them to follow rather
than lead so that even in democratic councils people who
hold jobs conferring greater knowledge of work functions, greater time
for personal study, and greater self-confidence will dominate the decision
making. We therefore need something more than councils to reduce hierarchy
to "possibly none at all."
Job Rotation
One approach sometimes offered to overcome job
inequalities and the hierarchies they create is to rotate everyone through
diverse tasks -the engineer occasionally sweeps and so on. Can this succeed?
Rotation can create mutual
understanding, but the engineer
will inevitably view a temporary "janitorial" assignment
differently than the person for whom
sweeping is an occupation.
Parading through the ghetto or slinking through the country club doesn't
confer membership in either. Hierarchies of power will not be undone by
temporary shuffling. Something more is needed.
Moreover, doing one's "alternative
service" someplace other than where one does one's main work
would further negate the benefit of rotation. Rotation outside one's
workplace would leave the habits of mystification, deference, and
authoritarianism in each particular
workplace unchallenged. That my manager does a stint of manual labor every
other weekend in his neighborhood nursery will not diminish class division
between him and me in our shared workplace. Nor would it matter much if I
kept books part -time for a nursery in my
neighborhood. Moreover, the proportion of rote workers likely to excel at
creative involvements at home given their work -induced state of fatigue,
depression, and alienation is low. More likely, rote workers at home will
prefer unwinding in ways that do not generate skills that will make their
rote work still more difficult to endure. Becoming members of a democratic
council while maintaining present job definitions wouldn't resolve these
problems.
It follows that while rotation can introduce
variety and enrich people's understanding, it isn't sufficient. Participatory
production requires more than democratic councils plus simple rotation. What
do we do each day? Do we do one rote or
one conceptual task? Do we do a bunch of rote or a bunch of conceptual tasks? Or do we do a combination of rote
and conceptual tasks so that
everyone has a "job complex" roughly balanced vis-ą-vis
empowerment? The unavoidable conclusion is that only having comparably empowering work lives will
ensure that everyone participating in a council has sufficient confidence,
skill, knowledge, and energy to have equal opportunities to influence council
outcomes. Like it or not, only balanced job complexes are compatible with
reducing hierarchy till there is "possibly none at all."
|
