Indignity of work

Posted: 12 December 2016 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

isweat-660x440

Like the conceptual equivalent of Gresham’s Law, bad ideas about work keep driving out good ones.

The latest example is from Noah Smith, who, like other mainstream economists before him (e.g., Brad DeLong), asserts that “jobs give people dignity and a sense of self-worth.”

That’s bad enough. But even worse is that Smith thinks he’s criticizing and improving on mainstream economic theory, according to which “a job isn’t treated as something inherently valuable — it’s just a conduit through which money flows from employer to employee.” So, he recommends mainstream economists look to sociology to affirm the dignity of labor.

The problem is, sociology—especially the sociology of work—is not going to give Smith what he wants.

A job is, of course, more than “a conduit through which money flows from employer to employee.” That’s just the beginning of the process, the exchange of the ability to work for a wage or salary. That’s already an enormous indignity—to be forced to have the freedom to sell one’s ability to work to a tiny group of employers who have access to the wealth to hire them. And, once the exchange is completed, people have to actually do the job—producing goods or services for their employers, who are able to appropriate the surplus workers create. Thus, in the realm of production, after having sold their ability to perform labor, workers are forced to submit to the control of employers and their hired supervisors, who subject them to whatever conditions are necessary to generate a profit. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be hired in the first place.

Whatever it takes: low wages, long hours, unsafe working conditions, little time off, constant surveillance, no say in what is produced or how it’s produced. And the list goes on.

Where’s the dignity in that?

And all Smith would have to do is read a little of the sociology of work (e.g., in Philip Hodgkiss’s essay on “The Origins of the Idea and Ideal of Dignity in the Sociology of Work and Employment,” in The SAGE Handbook of the Sociology of Work and Employment)—starting with the “classics” (Marx, Durkheim, and Weber) and continuing with the recent literature (including Harry Braverman,  Michael Burawoy, and Arlie Hoschschild).

That’s not to say there’s no place for dignity in and around work. When workers band together to form a union and collectively bargain with their employers, they manage to achieve a level of dignity. And when they eliminate discrimination or bargain to expand benefits. They achieve a different kind of dignity when they are able to participate in decision-making or establish their own firms—whether in the form of cooperatives or worker-owned enterprises.

21civilspan-1-articlelarge

So, yes, workers can achieve dignity—not by having jobs (as Smith and other mainstream economists assert) but by struggling over the conditions of those jobs. When they assert and affirm their dignity as human beings, not because of but in spite of the fact that, within current economic institutions, they’re forced to have the freedom to work for someone else. And, even more, when they reject those institutions and become their own bosses.

As Sharon Bolton explains,

There is general consensus, though originating from many different perspectives, that dignity is an essential core human characteristic. It is overwhelmingly presented as meaning people are worth something as human beings, that it is something that should be respected and not taken advantage of and that the maintenance of human dignity is a core contributor to a stable moral order in society. However, when entering the realms of work and the complexities of exchanging labour for a wage the definitions become much less clear. In selling one’s labour does one also relinquish autonomy, freedom, equality and, often, well-being—the very ingredients of life that have been most commonly associated with human dignity.

So, yes, Smith and other mainstream economists might want to spend more time reading in and around the sociology or work. But, once they do, they’re probably not going to experience a great deal of self-worth in relation to their blithe assertions concerning the dignity of work under capitalism.

Comments
  1. I don’t feel this way about my job at a medical equipment manufacturer. I feel it gives me dignity and the ability to contribute to the world. In fact when it doesn’t, when we get bogged down in internal politics or make-work and fail to produce improvements for doctors and patients, then I get depressed. Fundamentally I don’t see the firm as exploiting me, I see it as an association of mostly equals where we get together to realise a greater good. I suspect you enjoy your job at the university too.

    Now it helps that I’m a mid-level professional. Our firm employs mostly skilled first-world labour and I don’t get a sense of deep inequality there. So I don’t like the narrative that the capitalist is the evil boss that workers must fight. The problem is how often the capitalist *is* the evil boss that workers must fight, for the majority of industries and workers. Or to put it another way our mix of industries is skewed far to much towards exploitative ones, not that all industry is by definition exploitative.

  2. Carl Leinonen says:

    Are you really suggesting that self-employment is the only arrangement where an individual can realize ‘the dignity of work’? (“…when they reject those institutions and become their own boss”)

    My best to Lisa

    Carl Leinonen Global Organizing Service Employees Int’l Union +1.207.333.0416 / +49.177.9388.141

    >

    • David F. Ruccio says:

      It depends on the nature of self-employment, of course. I wrote about workers who “establish their own firms—whether in the form of cooperatives or worker-owned enterprises.” So, I’m referring to collective, not individual, self-employment. . .

  3. Blair Sandler says:

    Brilliant. thanks, David.

    ______________

    skype: dr.lapin

    > El 12 dic., 2016, a las 07:01, occasional links & commentary escribió: > >

  4. […] an argument I’ve dealt with before (e.g., here and here). As I see it, there’s nothing necessarily dignified about most people being forced to have […]

  5. […] an argument I’ve dealt with before (e.g., here and here). As I see it, there’s nothing necessarily dignified about most people being forced to have the […]

  6. […] have already dealt numerous times (e.g, here, here, and here) with the argument that participating in wage-labor is intrinsically dignified. But the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s