The Capitalist Collective Farm?
 

From a pamphlet handed out to us at a meeting yesterday, heralding something they are calling, "The New *___ Way";

"Over the last few years, our business has grown tremendously as other businesses have suffered from the weak global economy. We are all very fortunate to have remained employed through these tough times. In the interest of continuing and growing this success, we will be rolling out an exciting and innovative new way of doing things. We call it, "The *___ Way"."

Sounds great, Huh?

Read on;

From the section entitled; "What is great about working here?" (And comments made by members of senior management.)

"...financial reward is not what's great about working here, the sense of accomplishment and being part of something bigger than myself is."

"We want coworkers who aren't hessitant to go above and beyond, even when there is no personal gain involved.

"Some people are only interested in working for a paycheck. They clock in, put in a days work, clock out and collect a paycheck. Not here! Here, we expect more from each other. Here, we expect everyone to strive for success and take great personal pride in growing the business, setting new records on a daily basis..............anyone who is only here to make a paycheck, won't be here for long."

"Everyone here is my customer, my goal is not merely selfish, personal reward, my goal is to make sure my customers are all completely satisfied with the product I provide them......."

On the surface, the points concerning work ethic don't bother me at all. The downplay of "financial reward", "....selfish, personal reward...", and demonizing the simple desire to trade a days work for a days pay coupled with the not-quite-so-veiled threat of unemployment does.

You're not supposed to be concerned with financial reward? Your only concern is "...what's good for the company and it's continued growth in the market place."?

I'm supposed to be ashamed of myself for expecting to get paid for my efforts and think only of the advancement of the group?

Welcome to the "New World Order", comrades. It's seems the we've figured out how to mix corporate capitalism with Soviet style collectivist brainwashing.

Perhaps, you might think I'm crazy, or stupid, I dunno. But, I watch what goes on around me.....and I don't envy the people coming behind me at all.

The future labor market seems to be morphing into an auction block for wage slavery every day.


What do you say?


Dave

*Company name omitted to protect the innocent. (Me.)

In my opinion this is a counterproductive way to increase productivity.

I personally would offer bonuses to shifts that increased productivity and reducing waste.

But not knowing the type business, or what is done there, I can't comment beyond that.

But it will surely be an inducement for the people their to Unionize.

Everyone works for financial reward, in one way or the other, even the rich.

Bill

We do have an incentive program. It's even based on bonuses according to individual performance and honestly, it's pretty generous too. I got $2,300. But, it has had no positive effect. Productivity in general hasn't changed a bit since they started it a year ago. I think that may be what prompted this nonsense.

Dave

If incentives do not work, perhaps your operating at 100% of the factories capabilities.

Like I said without being there, it is hard to know anything.

Perhaps he is looking at the other employees that are not receiving a bonus, therefore not doing as much as you, and others that are receiving bonuses are?

My best guess ?

Bill

As we get collectively stupider we'll see more of this.

Pete

No, we're not at 100%. Actually, probably closer to 60-65%. And, that's based on real data. For instance, a line that routinely ran ~16,000 to 18,000 cases in a ten hour shift three years ago, only averages about 10 to 12k in a twelve hour shift today. I was on the OEE team until it broke up last October, so I have a good idea what the numbers are.

Funny thing is, we still make a profit. And a healthy one at that. At least that's what we're told.

I dunno. It's so hard to tell what's real and what isn't anymore. Everybody lies and sugarcoats. It's crazy.

The biggest factor I see is the near total lack of experienced people on the night shifts. When they went to twelve hour shifts, they went by seniority. Of course nearly all of the senior and best people went to days. There is only one person on my line at night who has run it for more than two months----Me. And I've run all three high speed canning lines for eight years. The rest are all temps, who come and go. I get a crew trained and they either move them or let them go, and bring in more temps. It's aggravating as hell. Sometimes I just want to pack up my shit and walk off.

My Dad once told me, "Sometimes all you can do is keep clocking in until they tell you to stay home." At the time, I thought that was a pretty defeatist thing to say. But, now, I'm beginning to think he was right.

Dave

\


OMG! :eek:



This is insane.



Then pay for it!!!!!!!!!



[/QUOTE]

Dave
What can we say? This is some seriously insane stuff.

I would love to talk to the guys who come upo with this stuff at a social event is all I can say.

Is that $2,300 for the year, month or week?

Sounds like fuckery (nod to rob2.0) The next management demand is going to be wage cuts to save the bottom line. Sorry to hear that your employer has switched to the strychnine koolaid in it's mgmt. philosophy. Big egos at work there trying to convince the proles to work harder for less. HR seems to have hired a spin doctor. Greener pastures await, man. I would start searching if I were you. Just my take on it. When mgmt. uses the terms exciting and innovative you can bet it'll be neither.

Any clues as to why the monetary incentives weren't effective? I mean, we all agree, people want to be fairly compensated for their efforts, not fed a line of B.S. about loyalty, so why did it fail? Were the rewards not significant enough to entice a higher level of poductivity?
This kind of eats away at the whole theory that paying people better will improve things. Given these results, an employer might well decide to just keep more profit if all's the same.