Carryfast:
I think Fordism is actually based on the idea that the more blood Dracula gives the more he’ll get back by creating lots more Vampires to feed from.
Fordism was based firstly on what we’d today call the principles of scientific management - i.e. production lines. That was massively more productive than the bespoke hand construction of the time, but also more capital intensive - there is a minimum volume of units that must be sold to offset the fixed costs of building and organising the line.
Secondly, it was indeed based on letting workers keep a little bit more of their own blood - and it could be afforded because they were producing so much more blood. This motivated workers vigorously, and it attracted and retained the best disciplined labour necessary for a production line to work efficiently and consistently.
Thirdly, and this would seem to have been the least obvious part of the jigsaw, Ford recognised that most of his workers were also potentially his customers. They were the key in this case to making up the scale of consumption necessary to achieve a return on a production line process (which has a much higher minimum quantity than the bespoke method). Mass production methods are only cheaper than bespoke production, if matched by mass consumption (and there must be an intersection between unit costs and wages).
On that note Unions can never be ‘too strong’ and wages can never be too high.
I would think wages can be too high, in the sense that they could eventually exceed productivity.
I keep saying it, if there was a driver shortage I’d have a job. I’m polite, wear proper trousers (not these tracky things ), have a years experience on different sorts of work and have my Cat CE.
There’s no driver shortage. There’s no chance they’ll put the money up. The only people left doing the job are those who can’t do anything else.
The crux is that there’s a shortage of class 1 drivers willing to work for the minimum wage which is what the Tories naturally strive for. For them it’s all about pushing us back to Victorian times where the rich get richer off the backs of the poor.
Rjan:
We can see this in the pride of Chicane about his sons being grafters. He doesn’t conceive of them as being the cheapest labour on the market, or as regrettably selling themselves shorter than anyone else because of high rates of unemployment.
That’s the thing though, one lad has left another line of work to drive because it pays better. My son because he can earn throughout the winter as well rather than relying on earning a year’s wage from contracting in the summer months. They also benefit from experience of both sides of the office/management table. Cheap? no not compared to many of the rates I’ve seen mentioned on here.
They could be paid twice the average wage, but if they do three times the average work, they’re still the cheapest on the market.
And that’s my key point. Grafters often seem to believe that working for the cheapest rate of pay is a virtue - something to brag about. It’s a pattern of thinking and behaving that is not just incongruous but can also be deeply harmful to the solidarity needed to alleviate the situation.
It’s equivalent would be an employer bragging at the Rotary club that his profits are the worst in the room, and that he’ll undercut anyone who tries to increase them - buying contracts if necessary. In unfortunate circumstances it might even be true, but good grief it’s not something to brag about amongst friends or fellow citizens. It might even make your enemies laugh, if the circumstances do not force them to declare war on you.
Because I don’t share that point of view, I do struggle to explain it any further to myself.
Rjan:
They could be paid twice the average wage, but if they do three times the average work, they’re still the cheapest on the market.
And that’s my key point. Grafters often seem to believe that working for the cheapest rate of pay is a virtue - something to brag about. It’s a pattern of thinking and behaving that is not just incongruous but can also be deeply harmful to the solidarity needed to alleviate the situation.
Because I don’t share that point of view, I do struggle to explain it any further to myself.
Why should a grafter be somebody who gets paid less, perhaps they just get on with the job instead of finding ways to string it out or skive off.
Rjan:
They could be paid twice the average wage, but if they do three times the average work, they’re still the cheapest on the market.
And that’s my key point. Grafters often seem to believe that working for the cheapest rate of pay is a virtue - something to brag about. It’s a pattern of thinking and behaving that is not just incongruous but can also be deeply harmful to the solidarity needed to alleviate the situation.
Because I don’t share that point of view, I do struggle to explain it any further to myself.
Why should a grafter be somebody who gets paid less, perhaps they just get on with the job instead of finding ways to string it out or skive off.
Thankyou. That is what I’m trying to get at, pride in doing a good job and being paid accordingly, well that and not throwing a hissy fit if asked to do something more than sitting on your @rse all day.
Rjan:
They could be paid twice the average wage, but if they do three times the average work, they’re still the cheapest on the market.
And that’s my key point. Grafters often seem to believe that working for the cheapest rate of pay is a virtue - something to brag about. It’s a pattern of thinking and behaving that is not just incongruous but can also be deeply harmful to the solidarity needed to alleviate the situation.
Because I don’t share that point of view, I do struggle to explain it any further to myself.
Why should a grafter be somebody who gets paid less, perhaps they just get on with the job instead of finding ways to string it out or skive off.
In the case you talk of, if your colleagues are being paid a rate which includes their stringing out and skiving off, effectively enjoying paid breaks, and you’re being paid the same rate but not enjoying those breaks, then you’re a much cheaper wage/work bargain for your employer. Without judgment on it, that’s what it is.
Also, a person who does an ordinary day’s work for a decent wage is rarely called a grafter - otherwise potentially most of us would be called grafters. To be a worker would also mean being a grafter.
I am speaking in generalities but, as I’ve said, there is in my experience a strong implication of subservience and compliance in being labelled a grafter - particularly if it comes from a person’s superiors rather than their peers, or if that person has adopted that label for themselves as a public badge of pride amongst their peers. That seems to be reflected in at least some ‘pro-grafter’ posts here.
There is also, in my experience, a failure to equate being a grafter with simply being cheaper. Because the two do equate, but nobody ever bragged that he works for the lowest rate in the market, so why would he brag that he’s a grafter?
As I say, if force of circumstances means you’re working cheap for the effort put in, that’s for guys themselves to decide whether it’s better than not working at all. But it’s nothing to brag about - it’s a poor situation that right-thinking people should resent whatever their choice.
If you’re working for the right amount of money for your effort, and you’re on your feet at work and not your knees, then as I say, in my experience you won’t be labelled a grafter in the first place.
Rjan:
Thirdly, and this would seem to have been the least obvious part of the jigsaw, Ford recognised that most of his workers were also potentially his customers. They were the key in this case to making up the scale of consumption necessary to achieve a return on a production line process (which has a much higher minimum quantity than the bespoke method). Mass production methods are only cheaper than bespoke production, if matched by mass consumption (and there must be an intersection between unit costs and wages).
I would think wages can be too high, in the sense that they could eventually exceed productivity.
I think that way under states the benefits of that ideal economic feed back system in addition to missing its fail safe mechanism.
The idea that the workers are also the customers of a modern developed economy is what I was referring to in that Dracula gives out more blood in wages but creates many more vampires to feed from in the process.
The fail safe being that increased wages without increasing productivety ‘per worker’ means more workers required pro rata to meet the increase in demand created by the higher wage environment who’ll then buy more product overall than fewer workers possibly can or would.IE economic growth ( more vampires = more blood overall for drac to feed from ) with the win win of decent civilised terms and conditions for workers.
Or to put it another way ultimate proof that the grafters are a liability to a modern developed industrial economy.In just the same way that robots don’t buy cars.
Rjan:
They could be paid twice the average wage, but if they do three times the average work, they’re still the cheapest on the market.
And that’s my key point. Grafters often seem to believe that working for the cheapest rate of pay is a virtue - something to brag about. It’s a pattern of thinking and behaving that is not just incongruous but can also be deeply harmful to the solidarity needed to alleviate the situation.
Because I don’t share that point of view, I do struggle to explain it any further to myself.
Why should a grafter be somebody who gets paid less, perhaps they just get on with the job instead of finding ways to string it out or skive off.
In the case you talk of, if your colleagues are being paid a rate which includes their stringing out and skiving off, effectively enjoying paid breaks, and you’re being paid the same rate but not enjoying those breaks, then you’re a much cheaper wage/work bargain for your employer. Without judgment on it, that’s what it is.
Also, a person who does an ordinary day’s work for a decent wage is rarely called a grafter - otherwise potentially most of us would be called grafters. To be a worker would also mean being a grafter.
I am speaking in generalities but, as I’ve said, there is in my experience a strong implication of subservience and compliance in being labelled a grafter - particularly if it comes from a person’s superiors rather than their peers, or if that person has adopted that label for themselves as a public badge of pride amongst their peers. That seems to be reflected in at least some ‘pro-grafter’ posts here.
There is also, in my experience, a failure to equate being a grafter with simply being cheaper. Because the two do equate, but nobody ever bragged that he works for the lowest rate in the market, so why would he brag that he’s a grafter?
As I say, if force of circumstances means you’re working cheap for the effort put in, that’s for guys themselves to decide whether it’s better than not working at all. But it’s nothing to brag about - it’s a poor situation that right-thinking people should resent whatever their choice.
If you’re working for the right amount of money for your effort, and you’re on your feet at work and not your knees, then as I say, in my experience you won’t be labelled a grafter in the first place.
So we should all take as many breaks as we can get away with, find as many skives in a days work as we can and then be so proud of it we should boast about it?
Rjan:
They could be paid twice the average wage, but if they do three times the average work, they’re still the cheapest on the market.
And that’s my key point. Grafters often seem to believe that working for the cheapest rate of pay is a virtue - something to brag about. It’s a pattern of thinking and behaving that is not just incongruous but can also be deeply harmful to the solidarity needed to alleviate the situation.
Because I don’t share that point of view, I do struggle to explain it any further to myself.
Why should a grafter be somebody who gets paid less, perhaps they just get on with the job instead of finding ways to string it out or skive off.
Thankyou. That is what I’m trying to get at, pride in doing a good job and being paid accordingly, well that and not throwing a hissy fit if asked to do something more than sitting on your @rse all day.
It depends. I take pride in my work. But if I’m being paid only the bare bones just for sitting, I might well throw a hissy fit when asked to do more, which obviously I wouldn’t if I was already being paid adequately for the extra.
muckles:
So we should all take as many breaks as we can get away with, find as many skives in a days work as we can and then be so proud of it we should boast about it?
I wouldn’t recommend that. But where I’ve seen it happen, the poor rate already reflects it. I just can’t think of an example where somebody was well-paid, looked after, and still went out of their way to work badly and wring the employer dry.
I’ll also give you an example of a “grafter”. I walked into this dive once, a real rundown outfit. I didn’t like the setup at all. I raised a few legitimate points about the vehicle, so another driver says to me mildly annoyed, “if you don’t drive it then I’m going to have to illegally”. This guy was earning a pittance I should add. That to me is an archetype of what we mean by “grafter”.
It’s barely related to the quantity of work. It’s not related to the quality of work. It’s doing as you’re told, it’s taking risks that you’re not paid to take, rendering effort without any just reward for it, and it’s generally doing whatever most people would have one reason or another not to do.
muckles:
So we should all take as many breaks as we can get away with, find as many skives in a days work as we can and then be so proud of it we should boast about it?
I wouldn’t recommend that. But where I’ve seen it happen, the poor rate already reflects it. I just can’t think of an example where somebody was well-paid, looked after, and still went out of their way to work badly and wring the employer dry.
I’ll also give you an example of a “grafter”. I walked into this dive once, a real rundown outfit. I didn’t like the setup at all. I raised a few legitimate points about the vehicle, so another driver says to me mildly annoyed, “if you don’t drive it then I’m going to have to illegally”. This guy was earning a pittance I should add. That to me is an archetype of what we mean by “grafter”.
It’s barely related to the quantity of work. It’s not related to the quality of work. It’s doing as you’re told, it’s taking risks that you’re not paid to take, rendering effort without any just reward for it, and it’s generally doing whatever most people would have one reason or another not to do.
You don’t have to run bent, get paid a pittance or put up with crap to be a Grafter, You just have to do a decent job and put some effort into it. Grafters don’t have to grovel to the boss because they can get work elsewhere, but they have a work ethic which means they’ll do a good job, maybe go beyond, but it doesn’t mean they’ll take any old crap thrown at them.
I’ve met plenty of brown nose types, who’ll do whatever the boss says, won’t complain or ask for a pay rise, some them are lazy [zb]'s, but they’re cunning enough to make the boss think they’re hard working and doing a decent job or they’re the first into the office to tell tales, so some bosses realise they’re lazy [zb]'s but find them useful.
They’re the people who’ll drop you in the ■■■■, to divert attention away from their mistakes and inadequacies.
Carryfast:
Or to put it another way ultimate proof that the grafters are a liability to a modern developed industrial economy.In just the same way that robots don’t buy cars.
If one didn’t know your posts better I’d say what you said has distinct communist leanings you do know your statement does not align with this Fordism you mentioned on the other thread don’t you? The essence of the hard working man was at the heart of the 1950s. The hard graft being necessary to provide the traction for everyone’s benefit.
"Rjan:
Or to put it another way ultimate proof that the grafters are a liability to a modern developed industrial economy.In just the same way that robots don’t buy cars.
If one didn’t know your posts better I’d say what you said has distinct communist leanings you do know your statement does not align with this Fordism you mentioned on the other thread don’t you? The essence of the hard working man was at the heart of the 1950s. The hard graft being necessary to provide the traction for everyone’s benefit.
[/quote]
[/quote]
The idea is all based on the good old fashioned aims of the workers to improve their terms and conditions by reducing workloads and hours required to earn a good wage.Thereby creating an environment in which more workers are employed to share the workload with the win win for the economy that more workers employed means more money spent in the economy and more tax revenues.All that more or less being the aims of that bastion of the Communist world the …US trade unions like the UAWU for example.
Bearing in mind as I said it’s better to employ enough workers to cover a 24/7 production operation,based on 3 shifts of 8 hours each,on a 4 days on 4 days off,32 hour week basis for example.Than only enough workers to cover 2 shifts of 12 hours each on a 5 days 60 hour week basis for example. IE the former idea will result in more overall productivety and more spending power in the economy.
muckles:
I’ve met plenty of brown nose types, who’ll do whatever the boss says, won’t complain or ask for a pay rise, some them are lazy [zb]'s, but they’re cunning enough to make the boss think they’re hard working and doing a decent job or they’re the first into the office to tell tales, so some bosses realise they’re lazy [zb]'s but find them useful.
They’re the people who’ll drop you in the [zb], to divert attention away from their mistakes and inadequacies.
OMG, I think you’ve worked where I am now!
I find it absolutely crazy that this has got as far as Parliament, as it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out that the wages on offer is the WHOLE reason why there MAY be a driver shortage in the future. There certainly isn’t one now, as firms obviously still feel confident that they can fill their vacancies with hourly rates not far off the minimum wage. But as we all know, the movers and shakers that influence the silver spoon politicians want a glut of labour in the market to keep their costs and employee issues to a minimum. They don’t want to have to consider how well they have to treat their drivers to keep them, they want to know they can keep them, no matter how badly they treat them…
muckles:
So we should all take as many breaks as we can get away with, find as many skives in a days work as we can and then be so proud of it we should boast about it?
I wouldn’t recommend that. But where I’ve seen it happen, the poor rate already reflects it. I just can’t think of an example where somebody was well-paid, looked after, and still went out of their way to work badly and wring the employer dry.
I’ll also give you an example of a “grafter”. I walked into this dive once, a real rundown outfit. I didn’t like the setup at all. I raised a few legitimate points about the vehicle, so another driver says to me mildly annoyed, “if you don’t drive it then I’m going to have to illegally”. This guy was earning a pittance I should add. That to me is an archetype of what we mean by “grafter”.
It’s barely related to the quantity of work. It’s not related to the quality of work. It’s doing as you’re told, it’s taking risks that you’re not paid to take, rendering effort without any just reward for it, and it’s generally doing whatever most people would have one reason or another not to do.
You don’t have to run bent, get paid a pittance or put up with crap to be a Grafter, You just have to do a decent job and put some effort into it. Grafters don’t have to grovel to the boss because they can get work elsewhere, but they have a work ethic which means they’ll do a good job, maybe go beyond, but it doesn’t mean they’ll take any old crap thrown at them.
I’ve met plenty of brown nose types, who’ll do whatever the boss says, won’t complain or ask for a pay rise, some them are lazy [zb]'s, but they’re cunning enough to make the boss think they’re hard working and doing a decent job or they’re the first into the office to tell tales, so some bosses realise they’re lazy [zb]'s but find them useful.
They’re the people who’ll drop you in the [zb], to divert attention away from their mistakes and inadequacies.
Everywhere I’ve ever worked has these types. They’ve been there for years, have their own little clique, and are all pally to your face, but don’t trust them as far as you can kick them. I’ve got no time for brown nosing, never ever been to a works do, if I can get through the day with next to no contact with the office I’m happy. That said if I get taken for a mug (especially when it comes to my wages) I will fight my own battle and move on if need be. I’m at that point now and have made my mind up its time to progress onto a new challenge.
"Rjan:
Or to put it another way ultimate proof that the grafters are a liability to a modern developed industrial economy.In just the same way that robots don’t buy cars.
If one didn’t know your posts better I’d say what you said has distinct communist leanings you do know your statement does not align with this Fordism you mentioned on the other thread don’t you? The essence of the hard working man was at the heart of the 1950s. The hard graft being necessary to provide the traction for everyone’s benefit.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Can I be clear that you’ve quoted Carryfast’s words under my name there!
), have a years experience on different sorts of work and have my Cat CE.
you do know your statement does not align with this Fordism you mentioned on the other thread don’t you? The essence of the hard working man was at the heart of the 1950s. The hard graft being necessary to provide the traction for everyone’s benefit.