Worker Ownership For the 21st Century?

[Dodds]

Is society responsible for me going out and finding a job? Is society responsible for moving me to an area that has a job for me? Is society responsible for buying me a car, tv, house, dinning room table, couch, toilet paper, Pepsi, etc, etc etc?

In a way yes. Social pressures caused you to do these things.

I love the way you keep pointing out "right wing debate tactic"s, like wanting to know what your position is...such a horrible and useless tactic.

Just know that my position is likely to be the opposite of yours. Evidence based and logical with a greater focus on the collective rather than the individual.

At AC

How could it? Government aid only allows someone to take advantage of that ambition and drive who would otherwise not have the opportunity. I am where I am because of both government aid and the ambition/drive I already possessed. Government aid didn't make me say "hey, I should be an aerospace engineer".

This is how government creates ambition. By giving people the opportunity the government creates drive.

[Dodds]

Sure they did. We all know only the poor buy stuff,

Correct.

especially the high end stuff that made the fella's at BMW rich

This is so funny.

So... somewhere you answered my original question

The rich do not provide the things you listed. The poor however do provide the rich with wealth. There answered.

And what argument would that be? As I haven't offered one yet, I am left wondering.

I can tell where this is going. Its pretty obvious and won't be based in fact.

Indeed you have.

Perhaps if you answered my question, I would entertain yours.

I doubt it but on you go.

[keywish]

Your apparent lack of care for the proletariat disturbs me.




I'd like to know how that happened.

]
What I find disturbing is your lack of care for those people who actually do the work when you force link them to the lazy slobs who just hang out doing close to nothing. You seem to feel you should get everything you want just by the virtu of your existence.

How to the non productive workers fit into the paradigm of the capitalist system being oppressive with slave wages? I would feel much more oppressed If I was forced to work with some one who took advantage of my natural inclination to get work done while they dozed off and got payed.

And how many of these great new companies do you own where there is a completely equal distribution of pay throughout the company and no earned prfits by the company?

[Dan74]

What I find disturbing is your lack of care for those people who actually do the work when you force link them to the lazy slobs who just hang out doing close to nothing. You seem to feel you should get everything you want just by the virtu of your existence.

How to the non productive workers fit into the paradigm of the capitalist system being oppressive with slave wages? I would feel much more oppressed If I was forced to work with some one who took advantage of my natural inclination to get work done while they dozed off and got payed.

And how many of these great new companies do you own where there is a completely equal distribution of pay throughout the company and no earned prfits by the company?

You see, your entire argument is irrelevant, since I oppose the system of capitalism.

[Dieval]

In a way yes. Social pressures caused you to do these things.

You're really going to blame your job on "social pressures"? Seriously?

Just know that my position is likely to be the opposite of yours.

So you won't be clear on what your position actually is? "Social pressures" getting to you?

Evidence based and logical with a greater focus on the collective rather than the individual.

I've yet to see those in your posts.

[truthreality]

You see, your entire argument is irrelevant, since I oppose the system of capitalism.

You actually understood his argument? I was lost in all of his spelling and grammar mistakes.

Of course his argument is irrelevant. It's not really an argument. It's more of a series of whiny and grumpy remarks against freeloaders concluded by a totally unrelated question about equity theory.

I agree with you about the proletariat. The working class have always been part of the backbone of America.

[truthreality]

I think the union co-op model is an effective way to increase productivity. Such a model increases organizational commitment and satisfaction among employees which will increase motivation and hence, productivity. When workers have their core values being met by a corporation, they feel a certain level of respect and value which is important when motivating employees. Employees will embrace the new challenges and responsibility.

The worker ownership reform will set sort of a "checks and balance" system when it comes to power in the corporation. I believe that a strong demotivating factor for many employees is the abuse of power from their superiors due to dependency. The worker ownership model will decrease this sort of abuse.

Politics are also another issue that the worker ownership reform can fix. Employees hate the political games that upper management plays because of their power.

Intellectually it is a nice idea. The problem lies in implementing such a radically new system.

[truthreality]

It appears you ignore one crock to claim another.

We are all responsible for each other? Funny how that seems to only work in one direction.

What are the poor responsible to provide the rich if the rich are responsible to provide food, shelter, healthcare, etc? What must they provide to receive this charity? Are they to sit and receive, giving nothing in return?

No need to dodge the question. If we are all responsible for each other, than those who have will be the ones providing necessities for those who have not. What then will the have nots provide in return for what they receive?

Why do you preach against the teachings of Jesus Christ?

Jesus said to give without seeking to receive.

Jesus said love thy neighbor. Think hard about what love means.

Jesus said to take care of the poor.

It seems you do not understand the concept of a healthy society. This type of dissonance in America's society is affecting it's over all welfare.

Unhappy citizens, the poor, have an incredibly negative impact on our overall economy.

Your arguments rely on many false assumptions, such as the poor are by nature lazy and selfish and don't look to give back to society. In fact the previous three labels could be used on some of the rich in America.

Part of living in a society is that we look out for one another. If you don't want to be part of a society why don't you move to an island and establish your living arrangements there? Then you won't have to worry about the poor, maybe diseases and so on but it doesn't matter for you because you are against taking care of the needs of others so you can take care of your own needs without a hospital!

We are social beings completely dependent on one another. I depend on the labor and services of other and they depend on the labor and services of me. The poor compromise a group of people who bust their asses doing jobs that no one else wants to do but are necessary so that organizations and countries can function effectively.

Part of being on top includes giving back to society and those less fortunate. It's called compassion, a basic human trait. Even sports associations have programs set up to engage in such activity.

No one is advocating that we should encourage the poor to be nonproductive but rather we have a requirement as a society and group of social beings to take care of each others needs, even in the most basic sense. It's nearly impossible for a homeless person to hold down a steady job when he can't afford a suit to go to his interview in.

[minorwork]

I think the union co-op model is an effective way to increase productivity. Such a model increases organizational commitment and satisfaction among employees which will increase motivation and hence, productivity. When workers have their core values being met by a corporation, they feel a certain level of respect and value which is important when motivating employees. Employees will embrace the new challenges and responsibility.

The worker ownership reform will set sort of a "checks and balance" system when it comes to power in the corporation. I believe that a strong demotivating factor for many employees is the abuse of power from their superiors due to dependency. The worker ownership model will decrease this sort of abuse.

Politics are also another issue that the worker ownership reform can fix. Employees hate the political games that upper management plays because of their power.

Intellectually it is a nice idea. The problem lies in implementing such a radically new system.

I know such worker ownership type of shops can work. Just that so few people are qualified in the areas it takes to make such shops function as I think you envision. I have one example shop, though it is not owned by the workers it is certainly worker managed. If you have others I'd like to add them to my small list of one that I have now. http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/28/ge.html

A few hours ago I had the chance to hear, on Facebook, from one who had worked at the GE plant of the articles topic after I posted the same article to inspire a friend who is in pre-engineering. This guy was a friend of my friend.

"Me and eight other souls opened this plant in 1993. I worked there until my hands gave out, in 2007. I could tell you a LOT more about the place than you will find in ANY article. I was the lead technician for the high pressure turbine, build and balance as well as the lead technician for the low pressure turbine (which , btw, is over six feet in diameter on the GE90, the engine that opened the Durham Engine Facility.

Additionally, it almost impossible to get a job there. The hiring interview lasts for over eight hours and is the most thorough examination I've ever encountered. I helped build the hiring program and conducted hundreds of interviews over the years. Delta Airlines used to have one of the most rigorous hiring programs. -Well, it's a walk in the park, next to the program we devised for Durham."

Then after posting the next article the same worker responded that he had hired the son of the departed to work at Durham and who still works there. I sure would like to hear some stories from this guy. http://www.aviationpros.com/article/...ent-of-silence

[keywish]

I am asking about your system. I'm not concerned with what you oppose.

I'm talking about when you do away with capitalism and the so called oppressive slave wage system is no longer

And you have me shackled to workers who are anti productive.

Am I not now oppressed by the workers who refuse to pull their own weight yet gain an equal share just as I do? I sure am oppressed in that situation. I have no where to go. The is no advancement in your system and no reason why I should strive past the lazy slobs you want to force feed the business world with.


And even though you are stuck in this un fair and oppressive capitalist system you can still create the type of business you want. You can't create a "better business" and everyone will be treated "fair" in your eyes so it would obviously be a success. So you have or are planning a business like this?

Or are you just waiting for someone else to create one while you hold down the job of head complainer?

[Dodds]

You're really going to blame your job on "social pressures"? Seriously?

This has nothing to do with anything you said. You talk about me being unclear? You are about as likely to make a point as you are to back up baseless assertions.

So you won't be clear on what your position actually is? "Social pressures" getting to you?

My position is that most people are not responsible for their situation and that social pressures and environment are things that people cannot control. I can back up this position with actual data on Social mobility, what you do is just talk shit.

I've yet to see those in your posts.

Having trouble reading? No surprise.

[keywish]

I know such worker ownership type of shops can work. Just that so few people are qualified in the areas it takes to make such shops function as I think you envision. I have one example shop, though it is not owned by the workers it is certainly worker managed. If you have others I'd like to add them to my small list of one that I have now. http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/28/ge.html

[/URL]

That fast company article was a good read. I like how each individual team is responsible for dealing with the people who slack off. Sure hate to be the guy who works hard yet no one likes for what ever reason.

But this is nothing like a worker ownership business. Its not even close. There is a boss at the plant. and there is some one above her. And just because the individual teams make their own decisions doesn't really mean much. it isn't new. The no time clock and make your own schedule thing is an interesting idea.

Yet this "is rocket science". as the article explains. As system that utilizes the cream of the crop of high skilled workers is hardly a model for the lower levels of industry.

I can see a small grocery store operated like this in some instances where a small group of people pool their money and create a business and each takes on equal responsibility. But even then. these businesses don't seem to last very long. ITs an easy thing for them to fall apart.

If we all were rocket scientists then it would probably be a different world all together. unfortunately most everyone is just average or below average. I used to manage retail before I became self employed and if the different departments in the store were left to make their own decisions about how things would be done it would have fallen apart. And fast. Possibly with a fist fight or two.