|
..continued from previous
page
Work as it is,work as it
could
be.
All of this goes without saying, I think, and the direct connection to
workplace problems is equally clear. But even setting aside the impact
of profit chasing on the labour process, we are still left with the
fundamentally undemocratic workplace.
Those who own or control the means of production call the shots (and
pocket the profits), whether we are dealing with a small company, a
corporation,
or a state-owned enterprise. The workers, meanwhile, have no choice but
to work in the manner assigned to them. No matter how enjoyable the
work
itself might be, this lack of control over the labour process (not to
mention over hiring and firing decisions) contributes to the
dissatisfaction we experience at our
jobs.
Idle hands?
Considering the fact that the labour process is a
means
of generating profit for a minority class that directs that process, it
is no wonder that a certain gloom
hangs over workers on their morning commute. Those looking down on them
from the comfort of the executive boardroom might take it as proof of
the
inherent laziness of people--or at least of other people. This idea of
a slovenly human nature is ironically (or perhaps naturally) most
prevalent among the
"leisure class," who look to the pressure of competition to whip the
lazy workers into shape.
It should be obvious, though, that people are far from being lazy by
nature. Nearly everyone, except the most demoralized or pampered, is
eager to find
worthwhile work. And if we cannot find enjoyment or self-fulfilment in
the jobs we do to earn a living, we will try to find those qualities in
the activities we
pursue in our "free" time.
One reason we may underestimate the desire to work is that those
leisure time activities come under the category of "hobbies," even
though they do not always differ in substance from types of labour
performed for wages. What tends to make a hobby enjoyable and
fulfilling is precisely the qualities so often lacking in the jobs done
to earn a living. Instead of being a way to benefit others, performed
under their direction, a hobby is an activity pursued for its own sake
that can be a means of self-development and self-fulfilment.
The same thirst for and enjoyment of meaningful labour can also be seen
in our attitude towards the jobs we must do to earn a living. Despite
all of the
drawbacks that stem from the profit motive, as sketched above, our jobs
can still be a source of satisfaction and self-development and we can
find
ourselves engrossed in the work itself without always thinking about
the end of the working day or the upcoming paycheck.
Indeed, unless we had this capacity to enjoy work--and to seize on
those worthwhile aspects of our jobs--the bosses (who complain about
"lazy workers") would be very hard-pressed to obtain any work, and
hence profits, from their employees.
A social change
The aversion to work that is not uncommon today is
certainly not due to inherent human laziness or the general nature of
labour itself; it stems rather
from the problems arising from its function as a means of profit making
for a minority capitalist class. So as long as the current social
system remains in place,
we will be stuck with the problem of long working hours, tedium, and
high intensity.
The solution to those workplace problems, along with a whole string of
other problems, is thus a fundamental social change that establishes a
new form of society, where production is no longer subjected to the
logic and tyranny of capital. That is an unprecedented change,
certainly, which still seems impossible to
most people today, but socialists are convinced that it is both
possible and urgently necessary. I should note, though, that the
creation of a fundamentally
new society will not take us into the realm of science fiction, as
human beings will still be obliged to carry out labour in order to
produce the material wealth that
makes our continued existence possible. Socialism will not free us from
the need for productive activity, but rather alter the form and purpose
of that activity.
Simply put, production in a socialist society will become a means of
satisfying the various needs of the members of society as decided
democratically by
those members themselves
Work transformed
The fundamental reorientation of society following
a
socialist revolution will obviously have an enormous effect on the
labour process and the personal
experience of work. The first change that seems likely, for a number of
reasons, is a major reduction in the length of the working day. This
will be
possible, first of all, because production will only be intended to
satisfy the needs of society's members, as determined by them, so there
would be little incentive
to continue working beyond that point, thereby piling up unwanted goods
and squandering natural resources. Unlike today, any increase in the
productivity
of labour, so that more goods can be produced using less labour-time,
could immediately shorten the length of work for individuals. And
there would not be the terrible waste of labour we see today
under a system where goods are produced for a fickle market, rather
than to directly satisfy
needs, and may thus rot on store shelves or in warehouses if not
purchased (particularly at the outset of
an economic downturn).
Continue to next
page 10
|
|