Labour Process, Control and Resistance Work Organization   Labour Process, Control and Resistance Perspectives on Work and Organization Unitarist Pluralist Radical/Critical Relevant Reading Alan Fox, Beyond Contract H. Braverman, Labor and Monopoly Capital Paul Thompson, The Nature of Work, 2nd edition M. Burawoy, Manufacturing Consent D. Knights and H. Willmott, Labour Process Theory, introduction and chapters by Knights and Willmott D. Collinson, `Strategies of Resistance : Power, Knowledge and Subjectivity in the Workplace’ in J. Jermier, D. Knights and W. Nord (eds), Resistance and Power in Organizations Relevant sections of Knights/Willmott, Management Lives   Unitarist Conception of Work and Organization Shared objectives between stakeholders Owners/shareholders, managers, workers, etc Shared values and allegiances Exercise of power is neutral. Management as professionals who act in everyone’s interest Resistance is irrational; control is rational Most management theory - from `Scientific Management’ to `Excellence’ and `Organizational Learning’   Pluralist Conception of Work and Organization Divergent objectives between stakeholders Owners/shareholders, managers, workers, etc Conflicting but reconcilable values and allegiances Exercise of power is contested (Lukes’s 1st and 2nd `dimensions’ of power) Management as employees who manage conflict and pursue their own (e.g. careerist) agendas Resistance is normal; control is negotiated   Radical/critical Conception of Work and Organization   Cleavage of objectives between stakeholders Owners/shareholders v. workers Systematic exploitation of one class by another. Alienation Fundamentally irreconcilable values and allegiances Exercise of power is contested (1st and 2nd dimension) but conflict is latent (3rd dimension)as well as overt and covert Management as agents of owners/ shareholders Resistance is historical; control is oppressive Other perspectives – unitarist and pluralist – viewed as bourgeois ideology. The ruling ideas are those of the ruling class – hegemony, etc. Orthodox `labour process’ view   Revision of Radical/critical Conception of Work and Organization (1)   Structural cleavage mediated and moderated by other considerations Patriarchy State Identity / insecurity (fear of freedom). Consumption, etc. `Real interests’ problematised as `identity’ is multiple and fractured. `De-centred’ subjects Rejection of structuralist view of subjects as ciphers of class position Resistance is ubiquitous; control is self-defeating Influence of poststructuralism and posthumanism   Revision of Radical/critical Conception of Work and Organization (2)   Complex conception of work practice `workers’ – individually or collectively unified? `managers’ - ditto viable distinction between workers and managers? Self-managing work organization Degradation of managerial work Ethics – tensions between competing processes of self-formation e.g. `egotism’ v. `altruism’ vocationalism v. instrumentalism occupation v. gender Social diversity and mobility Ethos of individualism and self-advancement Commodification and the `having’ mode Freedom = market freedoms (labour, product and capital)   Remains of the Day – Dismissing the Maids (1)   `…you will appreciate I was not unperturbed at the prospect of telling Miss Kenton I was about to dismiss two of her maids…my every instinct opposed the idea of their dismissal' (pp 147-8)   What were the circumstances of their dismissal? Why was Stevens `not unperturbed'?

Why was Stevens so strongly opposed to their dismissal?

`My duty in this instance was quite clear, and as I saw it, there was nothing to be gained at all in irresponsibly displaying such personal doubts. It was a difficult task, but as such, one that demanded to be carried out with dignity'. …I finally raised the matter towards the end of our conversation that evening, I did so in as concise and businesslike a way as possible, concluding with the words:

‘I will speak to the two employees in my pantry tomorrow morning at ten thirty. I would be grateful then, Miss Kenton, if you would send them along. I leave it entirely to yourself whether or not you inform them beforehand as to the nature of what I am going to say to them.’ (p148)

Miss Kenton said: ‘Mr Stevens, I cannot quite believe my ears. Ruth and Sarah have been members of my staff for over six years now. I trust them absolutely and indeed they trust me. They have served this house excellently.’

‘I am sure that is so, Miss Kenton. However, we must not allow sentiment to creep into our judgement. Now really, I must bid you good night. .

‘Mr Stevens, I am outraged that you can sit there and utter what you have just done as though you were discussing orders for the larder. I simply cannot believe it. You are saying Ruth and Sarah are to be dismissed on the grounds that they are Jewish?’

‘Miss Kenton, I have just this moment explained the situation to you fully. His lordship has made his decision and there is nothing for you and I to debate over…Surely I don't have to remind you that our professional duty is not to our own foibles and sentiments, but to the wishes of our employer’ (pp 148-9)

What parallels might be drawn here between Stevens' manner of handling and justifying/legitimising the situation and mundane managerial practices?

What issues of inequality and insecurity were at stake here?

 

 

‘Just one point, Vic,’ says Bert Braddock, the Works Manager. ‘If we rationalize production like you say, will that mean redundancies?’

‘No,’ says Vic, looking Bert Braddock straight in the eye. ‘Rationalization will mean growth in sales. Eventually we’ll need more men, not fewer.’ Eventually perhaps, if everything goes according to plan, but Braddock knows as well as Vic that some redundancies are inevitable in the short term. The exchange is purely ritual in function, authorizing Bert Braddock to reassure anxious shop stewards if they start asking awkward questions. Nice Work, p. 80

What form of power is operating here?

What are the conditions of its successful operation?

 

‘Does he do the same thing all day?’ Robyn shouted to Wilcox, after they had watched one such man at work for some minutes. He nodded. ‘It seems terribly monotonous. Couldn’t it be done automatically?’

Wilcox led her to a slightly quieter part of the shop floor. ‘If we had the capital to invest in new machines, yes. And if we cut down the number of our operations — for the part he’s making it wouldn’t be worth automating. The quantities are too small.’

‘Couldn’t you move him to another job occasionally?’ ….

‘They don’t like being shunted about. You start moving men about from one job to another, and they start complaining, or demanding to be put on a higher grade. Not to mention the time lost changing over.

‘So it comes back to money again.’

‘Everything does, in my experience.’

‘Never mind what the men want?’

‘They prefer it this way, I’m telling you. They switch off, they daydream. If they were smart enough to get bored, they wouldn’t be doing a job like this in the first place’ Nice Work, p. 123-4

What lay theories are being voiced by Vic Wilcox?

How might Robyn challenge Vic’s views?

 

Inequality and Managerial Power (1)

It seems to me the whole set-up is racist,’ said Robyn.

‘Rubbish!’ said Wilcox angrily. He pronounced it ‘Roobish’ — it was a word in which his Rummidge accent was particularly noticeable. ‘The only race trouble we have is between the Indians and the Pakis, or the Hindus and the Sikhs…..

‘You just admitted blacks do all the worst jobs, the dirtiest, hardest jobs.’

‘Somebody’s got to do them. It’s supply and demand. If we were to advertise a job today — a labouring job in the foundry — I guarantee we’d have two hundred black and brown faces at the gates tomorrow morning, and maybe one white.’

‘And what if you advertised a skilled job?’

‘We have plenty of coloureds in skilled jobs. Foremen, too.

‘Any coloured managers?’ Robyn asked.

Wilcox fumbled for a cigarette, lit it, and exhaled smoke through his nostrils like an angry dragon. ‘Don’t ask me to solve society’s problems,’ he said.

 

‘Who is going to solve them, then,’ said Robyn, ‘if it isn’t people with power, like you?’

‘Who said I have power?’

‘I should have thought it was obvious,’ said Robyn with an airy gesture that embraced the room and its furnishings

‘Oh, I have a big office, and a secretary, and a company car. I can hire and, with a bit more difficulty, fire people I’m the biggest cog in this particular machine. But a small cog in a much bigger one — Midland Amalgamated. They can get rid of me whenever they like.’

Nice Work, pp134-5

How does Vic justify the inequalities at work?

What theory of power is Robyn deploying that is challenged by Robyn?

Collective forms of resistance :

Strikes, go-slows, withdrawal of cooperation

Individual forms of resistance

Sabotage

Indifference

Exit

`Economic’

Subsistence

Incentives

Piece-work, career, etc

`Political’

Law

Force

`Cultural’

Institutions, disciplines

Identifications

Responsibilities

‘Do I understand that you are proposing to pressure a man into making mistakes so that you can sack him?’

Wilcox stared at Robyn. There was a long silence…Not only did the other men not speak; they did not move. They did not appear even to breathe. Robyn herself was breathing rather fast, in short, shallow pants.

‘I don’t think it’s any of your business, Dr Penrose,’ said Wilcox at last.

‘Oh, but it is,’ said Robyn hotly. ‘It’s the business of anyone who cares for truth and justice. Don’t you see how wrong it is, to trick this man out of his job?’ she said, looking round the table. ‘How can you sit there, and say nothing?’ The men fiddled uneasily with their cigarettes and calculators, and avoided meeting her eye.

‘It’s a management matter in which you have no competence,’ said Wilcox.

‘It’s not a management matter, it’s a moral issue,’ said Robyn.

How is power operating here?

What identities are at stake?