EMPLOYER CONTROL AND
HIERARCHICAL COMMUNICATION IN THE WORKPLACE:
A HISTORICAL VIEW
Lavinia J. Mohr
B.A., University of California San Diego 1975
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE RGQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS (COMMUNICATION)
in the Department
Communication
a Lavinia J. Mohr
1981
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
January 1 9 8 1
All rights reserved. This thesis may not be
reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy
or other means, without permission of the author.
APPROVAL
Name :
~ a v i n i aJ. Mohr
Degree :
Master of A r t s (Communication Studies)
T i t l e of Thesis:
Employer Control and Hierarchical Comunication
l
i n t h e Workplace: A ~ i s t o r i c a View
Examining committee:
Chairperson:
R. S. Anderson, Ph.D.
D.W. Smythe
Professor Emeritus
Senior Supervisor
L. S a l t e r
A s s i s t a n t Professor
~e@le
Lecturer
Sociology/Anthropology
External Examiner
G.
Date Approved :
14 a~~c~ej
(qg\
PARTIAL COPYKlGHT
LICENSE
I hereby g r a n t t o Simon Fraser U n i v e r s i t y t h e r i g h t t o lend
my t h e s i s , p r o j e c t o r extended essay ( t h e t i t l e of which i s shown below)
t o users o f
the Simon Fraser UniversiPy L i b r a r y , and t o make p a r t i a l o r
s i n g l e copies o n l y f o r such users o r i n response t o a reqbest from t h e
l i b r a r y o f any o t h e r u n i v e r s i t y , o r o t h e r educational i n s t i t u t i o n , on
i t s own behalf o r f o r one o f i t s users.
I f u r t h e r agree t h a t permission
f o r r n u l t i p l e copying of t h i s work f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted
by me o r t h e Dean o f Graduate Studies.
I t i s understood t h a t copying
o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s work f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be allowed
w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n permission,
T i t l e o f Thesis/Project/Extended Essay
E i n p i ~ p rctonttoi and hierarchicai communication fn the work piace:
A historical View,
Author :
-
(signature)
Lavinia Mohr
( name
January 14th.1981.
(date)
iii
ABSTRACT
EMPLOYER CONTROL AND HIERARCHICAL COMMLTNICATION
IN THE WORKPLACE: A HISTORICAL VIEW
This thesis is concerned with discovering the way that the
particular needs of employers as employer in a profit-motivated economic
system have historically influenced the organization of work and workers
inside the plant or office, at the actual point of production, in large
workplaces in western industrial society. The organization of work is one
of the basic structures of everyday life, and as such constitutes an
important communication network in addition to its more immediate
economic purpose.
The approach taken is historical, using information taken for
the most part from secondary sources, and the methodology is essentially
historical materialist, looking at the results of the dynamic conflict
between the interests of employers and employees. The assumption is made
that the most light will be shed on the development of the modern western
organization of work during periods of industrial upheaval in the most
developed economies, or the most rapidly developing ones, and the intensified competition that is associated with those periods. Attention is
focused on the Industrial Revolution in England
and the turn of the
century in the United States.
The organization of work is seen as being composed of two elements:
the division of labour and technology. The relationship between the two
elements is seen to be one of mutual interdependence. Technology is not
viewed as a determining factor in the development of the modern organization
of work.
The impact of t h e s o c i a l , economic and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l p r i o r i t i e s
of employers on t h e development of t h e two i n t e r d e p e n d e n t e l e m e n t s of
t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s a n a l y z e d i n t h e two p e r i o d s of r a p i d economic
growth r e f e r r e d t o above.
I n b o t h p e r i o d s , major and expanding i n d u s t r i e s
a r e t a k e n as t h e primary example.
The impact of movements and i n i t i a t i v e s
of workers d u r i n g t h o s e p e r i o d s i s a l s o t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t .
Data i s p r e s e n t e d t o s u p p o r t t h e view t h a t d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l
R e v o l u t i o n , t h e need of employers t o c o n t r o l and make p r e d i c t a b l e t h e
b e h a v i o u r of w o r k e r s on t h e j o b was i n p a r t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e
a p p e a r a n c e and e x t e n s i o n of t h e c e n t r a l i z e d workplace
o f a n employer-enunciated
and t h e e l a b o r a t i o n
and e n f o r c e d d i s c i p l i n e i n t h e workplace.
Then i t
i s found t h a t t h e i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r , accomplished
t h r o u g h t h e decomposition and r e c o m b i n a t i o n of t h e p r o c e s s e s of p r o d u c t i o n ,
a s w e l l a s a c c e l e r a t e d i n n o v a t i o n and a p p l i c a t i o n of machinery,was p a r t
of t h e employers' s t r a t e g y
production process
t o expand t h e i r c o n t r o l o v e r workers and t h e
i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e a c t i o n s of workers t e n d i n g t o
l i m i t t h e o p e r a t i o n a l freedom of employers.
The e x p a n s i o n of employer
of r a p i d growth
control continued during the period
i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n t h e e a r l y y e a r s of t h i s c e n t u r y .
The a n a l y s i s , w i t h s u p p o r t i n g d a t a , of t h i s p e r i o d ' s d e ~ e ~ o p m e n ti sn t h e
i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of w o r k , i d e n t i f i e s t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of a l i m i t e d
form of w o r k e r s ' c o n t r o l i n s i d e t h e w o r k p l a c e , b a s e d on t h e p o s s e s s i o n
of c r a f t knowledge, s k i l l and t r a d i t i o n , and i t s
h i e r a r c h y e x p r e s s i n g employer c o n t r o l
r e p l a c e m e n t w i t h a new
a s being a s i g n i f i c a n t foundation
f o r t h e p r e s e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i n t h e i n d u s t r i a l i z e d West.
,
v
The developments in the organization of work that took place
during those two periods in response to the conflict between the
interests of employers and employees constituted the basis of the modern
organization of work in the western industrial world, and established
the basic structure of the workplace communication system.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
...........................
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LISTOFTABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPROVAL
ii
iii
vii
Chapter
.........................
TWO . DISSATISFACTIONWITHWORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Indications of dissatisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THREE . TECHNOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The ideology of technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology as a relationship rather than a thing . . . . .
FOUR . WORK AND WORKERS DURING THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION . . . . . .
ONE
.
INTRODUCTION
.......
....
.......
........................
.......................
The guild system and its division of labour
The putting-out system and its division of labour
Concentration: the centralized work location
Discipline
Control of the labour process: the minute division
of labour
Innovation: the introduction of machinery
FIVE
.
WORK AND WORKERS DURING THE PKOGRESSI-VEERA
........
.........
...............
..............
..................
..................
............
..................
..................
Changing economic conditions
The hierarchy of workers' control in the late
nineteenth century factory
The destruction of workers' control: the attack
on unions
The destruction of workers' control: scientific
management
The new hierarchy in the workplace
.....
....
.
........
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . .
SIX
CONCLUSION
1
13
15
28
33
40
40
45
49
53
56
60
76
88
106
146
146
151
158
166
1.78
189
197
vfi
LIST OF TABLES
.
2.
1
3
.
Absenteeism i n t h e U.S..
1967-75
Employed P e r s o n s by O c c u p a t i o n a l
Employed P e r s o n s by O c c u p a t i o n a l
................
Group i n t h e U.S. 1975 . . . .
Group i n Canada 1977 . . . . .
18
21
21
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Communication is the exchange of information. It does not
take place in a vacuum.
When we are talking about human communication,
we are immediately referring to a social organization of information
exchange. The way that it happens is not accidental; it is structured
by and can only be understood by reference to the distribution of power
in its social enviroment.
This is as true of small group interactions
as it is of mass communication. And it is as true of social institutions
0
which d n't have information.exchange as their primary purpose as it if
of those which do.
The last point is important because all components of social
organization are communicational in the broadest sense:
involve the exchange of information.
that is, they
Smythe is quite clear on this:
#Thesocial habits known as institutions are systematic
relationships of people. They have specialized agendas
for their own actions (the family for the nurture of
children, "work" organizations with "production" activities,
etc.) but they also embody in their actions and
incidentally propogate the ideological theory and practice
of the whole social system. Dependent on the application
of mass production techniques, the specialized institutions
for mass communications were late arrivals (printing since
the 16th and electronic since only the 19th). While other
institutions have as incidental to their specialized functions
the general function of legitimizing and directing the
development of the social system, the communications institutions have this as their specialized function.
...
shythe is here primarily concerned with advancing a way to interpret
the role of what he refers to as communications institutions. In doing
so, he recognizes that other parts of organized social reality also
2
have communicational significance.
We can study the meaning and significance of communication
whether it be located in the structure and content of mass communication, or in the structure and content of interpersonal communication.
We can also study the meaning and significance of the secondary
communication functions of institutions such as the family
organization which have other primary functions. The sturctures of
daily life are also communication network$, in addition to their
other and primary functions.
Smythe has used the concept of "setting the agenda" as a
way to view the specific role of the communications institutions:
The function of the mass media in the monopoly capitalist
context...is to set the a ends which best serves the interests
of the capitalist system.
3
He has aaid that other social institutions, in addition to having
their particular specialized functions and agendas, also have secondary
functions similar to those of the specialized communications institutions.
It follows to complete this line of reasoning that all modes
of communication, whether they be specifically for that purpose or
otherwise, have an agenda setting role. They focus attention on what is
to be recognized as a topic of discussion and action. As.wel1, they
establish what is to be presumed as a given or what is to be taken as
a foregone conclusion. They are sometimes said to be ideological to the
extent that they operate to maintain, create or justify the exercise of
power by one social group over another. They can do that directly or
indirectly,
Work is one of the primary activities in which most people engage
for a large part of their daily life, and which forms the day to day
3
c o n d i t i o n s of t h e i r e x i s t e n c e .
s o c i a l arrangements f o r l i v i n g .
I t i s one of t h e most b a s i c o f t h e
It p l a y s an agenda s e t t i n g r o l e by
f o c u s s i n g a t t e n t i o n on t h e assumptions about "human n a t u r e " and t h e
economic system which a r e i m p l i c i t i n t h e way i t i s o r g a n i z e d .
Work,
i n a d d i t i o n t o b e i n g p r o d u c t i v e a c t i v i t y , is a l s o a communication
institution.
But work i s n o t simply p r o d u c t i v e a c t i v i t y i n t h e a b s t r a c t .
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s t h e way t h a t a s o c i e t y a r r a n g e s i t s people
and i t s r e s o u r c e s t o produce i t s goods and s e r v i c e s .
I n any kind of
s o c i e t y , i t is a n e x p r e s s i o n of t h e way t h a t economic a c t i v i t y i s
c a r r i e d on.
I n a c a p i t a l i s t economy, work i s o r g a n i z e d a c c o r d i n g t o
t h e n e c e s s i t i e s of p r o f i t e f f i c i e n c y .
It i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by c e r t a i n
p a t t e r n s of i n t e r a c t i o n i n which messages c i r c u l a t e t h a t tend t o
r e i n f o r c e t h e c a p i t a l i s t l o g i c of how and why people work.
An examin-
a t i o n of t h e c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of work w i l l r e v e a l how one of
t h e most b a s i c of t h e s o c i a i ,jrr,lngements of l i v i n g has been a r r a n g e d
t o " i n c i d e n t a l l y propagate t h e i d e o l o g i c a l t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e of
t h e whole system."
The c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s a p r o d u c t i o n
c e n t r e f o r t h e formation and maintenance of a p a r t i c u l a r s o r t of "human
n a t u r e " through t h e s y s t e n l a t i c human r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t i t i n v o l v e s .
Those r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e p r e d i c a t e d on a c e r t a i n t y p e of human n a t u r e
which t h e y c a l l i n t o b e i n g and r e i n f o r c e .
The modern i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of work and i t s c o ~ m u n i c a t i o n a l a s p e c t c h a r a c t e r i z e d by c e r t a i n r u l e s and p a t t e r n s of i n t e r a c t i o n
1
i s ' n o t simply an immutable p r a c t i c a l l y r a t i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l l y e f f i c i e n t formation.
I t was and i s shaped under t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e
disharmony of i n t e r e s t between c a p i t a l and l a b o u r .
The p r e s e n t o r g a n i z -
4
a t i o n of work r e f l e c t s t h e c o n f l i c t between t h e h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t
of c a p i t a l i n s t r u c t u r i n g i t s o t h a t a s l i t t l e a s p o s s i b l e i s l e f t
t o t h e v o l u n t a r y d i s c r e t i o n of l a b o u r , and t h e h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t
of l a b o u r i n t h e o p p o s i t e .
I n contemporary e x p e r i e n c e , t h e workplace message system
(with some e x c e p t i o n s such a s some member-run co-operatives)
h i e r a r c h i c a l one and h a s been f o r q u i t e a l o n g time.
is a
Over t h e l a s t
two hundred y e a r s t h e s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e s of t h e workplace a s an
e x p r e s s i o n of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work have undergone many s i g n i f i c a n t
a l t e r a t i o n s , b u t always h i e r a r c h y i n one form o r a n o t h e r has remained.
That h i e r a r c h y i n i t s p r e s e n t form can b e t r a c e d t o t h e n e c e s s i t y of
c o n t r o l which comes from t h e r e l a t i o n s of c a p i t a l i s t production.
C a p i t a l buys l a b o u r power, o r t h e c a p a c i t y t o do work.
i s bought by t h e hour, by t h e week o r by t h e month.
fixed quantity.
That c a p a c i t y
But i t i s n o t a
Rather, i t depends on a number of f a c t o r s , s u c h a s t h e
t r a i n i n g and e x p e r i e n c e of t h e worker and t h e q u a l i t y of t h e t o o l s o r
equipment a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e worker t o use.
Not t h e l e a s t of t h e s e
f a c t o r s i s t h e s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e of t h e worker w i t h whom remains t h e
choice about how much d i l i g e n c e , c a r e and e f f o r t t o use.
This subject-
i v i t y can g r e a t l y a f f e c t t h e p r o f i t a b i l i t y of t h e purchase of l a b o u r
power t o t h e employer, who t h e r e f o r e becomes concerned t h a t t h e s u b j e c t i v i t y of h i r e d l a b o u r power embodied i n t h e worker b e made t o conform t o
h i s own
advantage.
I n a c a p i t a l i s t economy we a r e d e a l i n g w i t h a job s i t u a t i o n
which can g e n e r a l l y be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by saying t h a t employees can be
expected t o e x p e r i e n c e t h e requirements of t h e employer a s a l i e n o u t s i d e
demands.
They a r e s u b o r d i n a t i n g themselves t o a n a l i e n o u t s i d e w i l l by
s e l l i n g t h e i r t i m e , and would n o t n e c e s s a r i l y of t h e i r own a c c o r d f u l f i l l
t h e g o a l of c a p i t a l accumulation and p r o f i t f o r someone e l s e .
Some
s o r t of s o c i a l c o n t r o l must b e g e n e r a t e d t o e n s u r e t h a t employees w i l l
p a r t i c i p a t e t o t h e maximum e x t e n t p o s s i b l e i n t h e c r e a t i o n of p r o f i t .
There a r e many f a c e t s of t h e s o c i a l system which a c t i n c o n c e r t
t o e E f e c t t h i s , and they should n o t b e d i s c o u n t e d .
However, we a r e
h e r e concerned w i t h t h e power t h a t ownership of t h e p r o d u c t i v e a p p a r a t u s
c o n f e r s on c a p i t a l t o c o n s t r u c t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f work i t s e l f s o
t h a t i t c o n t a i n s arrangements f o r s o c i a l c o n t r o l e n s u r i n g t h e maximum
b e n e f i t t o c a p i t a l of t h e p u r c h a s e of l a b o u r power.
This t h e s i s w i l l
examine t h e way t h a t t h i s power h a s h i s t o r i c a l l y m a n i f e s t e d i t s e l f i n
s t r u c t u r i n g t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
It w i l l b e argued t h a t work h a s
been o r g a n i z e d t o i n c o r p o r a t e t h e n e c e s s i t y of c o n t r o l l i n g workers'
a c t i v i t i e s s o t h a t t h e y w i l l b e maximally p r o f i t a b l e , independent o f
whether t h e workers t h e m e l v e s s o d e s i r e .
The terms ' b r g a n i z a t i o n of work" and "labour process" a r e used
interchangeably here.
They r e f e r t o t h e way i n which t h e v a r i o u s s t e p s
involved i n producing a good o r s e r v i c e a r e a r r a n g e d and accomplished,
i n c l u d i n g t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r , t h e method of matching workers t o t h e
p a r t s of t h e p r o d u c t i v e p r o c e s s a s i t h a s been d i v i d e d , t h e method of
c o o r d i n a t i n g t h e e f f o r t s of a l l t h o s e i n v o l v e d , and t h e k i n d s of t o o l s
and t e c h n i c a l methods u t i l i z e d .
The approach t a k e n w i l l b e p r i m a r i l y h i s t o r i c a l , i n t h i s c a s e
historical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n based f o r t h e most p a r t on secondary s o u r c e s
and a l s o on some texts o r i g i n a t i n g from t h e p e r i o d s under c o n s i d e r a t i o n .
O r i g i n a l h i s t o r i c a l r e s e a r c h i n t h e s u b j e c t of t h i s t h e s i s would have
r e q u i r e d e x t e n s i v e t r a v e l and a s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o n g e r p e r i o d of t i m e t o
undertake.
The u s e of secondary s o u r c e s i n a work of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r -
p r e t a t i o n , however, does g i v e rise t o c e r t a i n p r o b l e ~ n s . It means t h a t t h e
work i s based on a c c o u n t s of h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s which a r e i n themselves works
of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , r e l y i n g on t h e s e l e c t i o n and judgements of t h e i r a u t h o r s .
Although t h e problem i s u n a v o i d a b l e i n t h e u s e of mainly secondary s o u r c e s ,
a d v e r s e e f f e c t s may b e reduced by making u s e of a number of d i f f e r e n t
sources.
The presumption h e r e i s t h a t t h e b i a s c o n t a i n e d i n a n i n d i v i d u a l
work of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n based on primary s o u r c e s may b e p a r t i a l l y
compensated f o r by t h e a d d i t i o n o f and comparison w i t h works by o t h e r
authors.
The p r e s e n t work h a s been done w i t h a n e f f o r t n o t t o depend
h e a v i l y upon any one secondary s o u r c e , b u t i n s t e a d h a s made u s e of works
by a number of a u t h o r s who a r e n o t always i n agreement.
Without making any c l a i m s f o r t h e f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n of h i s t o r i c a l
m a t e r i a l i s m a s a t h e o r y , t h i s work u s e s a h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l i s t approach.
A h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l i s t approach b e g i n s w i t h t h e assumption t h a t i n o r d e r
t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e p r e s e n t we have t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e p a s t , t h a t s o c i a l condit i o n s must be u n d e r s t o o d i n t h e c o n t e x t of t h e k r development.
It a t t e m p t s
t o e x p l a i n economic and s o c i a l f o r m a t i o n s by r o o t i n g c u r r e n t a n a l y s e s i n a
more g e n e r a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e m a t e r i a l c o n d i t i o n s and by viewing h i s t o r y
a s i t s e l f t h e p r o d u c t of t h e r e l a t i o n s and a c t i v i t i e s of men and women.
Thus h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l i s m demands t h a t any g i v e n p a t t e r n of s o c i a l o r
economic change o r development b e understood through a c o n c r e t e e m p i r i c a l
o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t i s based i n a s e a r c h f o r e x p l a n a t i o n i n t h e m a t e r i a l
c o n d i t i o n s of L i f e and i n t h e broad s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s developed i n conjunct i o n w i t R t h e economic arrangements of a s o c i e t y f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n of t h e
goods and s e r v i c e s t h a t s u s t a i n p a r t i c u l a r p a t t e r n s of l i f e and a c t i v i t y
7
in that social context.
This thesis sees the dynamic conflict between
the interests of employers, taken as a group, and employees, also taken as
a group, as the primary motivation for specific changes and developments
in the organization of work at the point of production.
While recognizing
that there is a school of thought in classical sociology, first elaborated
by Weber, that would seek to explain the modern organization of work as an
example of the general tendency for a burueaucratic form to develop over a
period of time in any kind of social organization that has outgrown a
personalistic method of control, the analysis that is being put forward here
attempts to explain the historical development of one of the structures of
everyday life through the specific conflict between one broad economic
group, or class, and another.
The approach taken by this thesis is similar to that of Harry
Braverman in his ground-breaking work, Labor and Monopoly CapitAl, in which
he identifies the logic of the changing crganization of work in this
century as being a continuous one of ever greater recreation in the interests of management.
Braverman, however, is largely concerned with
showing how the process of the degradation of work, as he called it, has
changed the composition of the working class.
The present work takes a
somewhat different approach in that the emphasis remains on the shopfloor
itself, and in that it presents a more detailed analysis of the early
beginnings of the modern organization of work just prior to and during
the Industrial Revolution.
In addition, whereas Braverman tends to
present his analysis as the story of th& initiatives taken by management in
their own interest, this work attempts to take more account of the role
played by the other half of the equation: the workers, their initiatives,
their organizations, traditional.and otherwise, and incipient workers'
8
control movements.
It is hoped that the present work will read as more
of an analysis of the modern organization of work as stemming from the
conflict between two opposing groups and of the contributions of both
parties to that conflict, than as an analysis of the actions of one group
taken against the other.
There were two major phases in the development of the modern
organization of work: the Industrial Revolution and the early years of the
twentieth century. During both periods there were important developments
in the organization of work.
In both periods those changes were associated
with firms that represented the most dynamic sectors and tendencies
in the economy.
It was during the Industrial Revolution that capitalism began
to assert its influence over the organization of work.
Prior to this time,
incipient capitalism as the ascendent mode of economic activity already
had a kind of formal control over work to the extent that labour had already
been commoditized and to the extent that the merchanL capitalist was the
dominant integrative force in controlling production for the market.
But
until the Industrial Revolution began, capital did not exert direct control
over the labour process.
It had simply used and modified the pre-industrial
organization of work that it inherited from earlier days.
With the advent
of the Industrial Revolution, capital began to restructure the labour
process dramatically accoring to its own needs.
The most significant
,
results were the appearance of a centralized work location in which
employees were subject to the strict discipline of their employers, and the
appearance of a minute division of labour with workers assigned to specific
detail tasks.
The analysis in this work is based on the Industrial Revolu-
tion as it took place in England.
The second s i g n i f i c a n t p e r i o d i n t h e development of t h e modern
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work was around t h e beginning of t h i s c e n t u r y , from
roughly 1885-1920.
T h i s t i m e t h e United S t a t e s r a t h e r t h a n England was
i n t h e f o r e f r o n t of e v e n t s .
The United S t a t e s e n t e r e d t h i s p e r i o d as
a predominantly r u r a l a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y and emerged a s t h e w o r l d ' s
l e a d i n g i n d u s t r i a l power.
It was a t i m e of i n t e n s e b u s i n e s s c o m p e t i t i o n
which l e d t o t h e f o r m a t i o n of huge i n d u s t r i a l combinations i n o i l , s t e e l
and chemicals a s w e l l a s o t h e r s e c t o r s of t h e economy.
The g i a n t f i r m s
m a r g i n a l i z e d , e l i m i n a t e d o r absorbed many of t h e s m a l l e r f i r m s of t h e
day, r e p l a c i n g s m a l l t i m e c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h monopoly c a p i t a l i s m a s t h e
most o u t s t a n d i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e economy.
I n t h i s c l i m a t e of
i n t e n s e c o m p e t i t i o n , s l o p p y management o f t e n meant a n n i h i l a t i o n .
One
of t h e ways t h a t t h e c o m p e t i t i o n f o r b u s i n e s s s u r v i v a l expressed i t s e l f
was i n t h e s u r g e of m a n a g e r i a l i n t e r e s t i n f i n d i n g ways of squeezing more
o u t of t h e i r workers.
There were renewed e f f o r t s t o t a k e more d i r e c t
c o n t r o l of p r o d u c t i o n through a more complete s e p a r a t i o n of mental from
manual l a b o u r and a s y s t e m a t i c a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r .
That p e r i o d saw t h e appearance of more s o p h i s t i c a t e d s t r a t e g i e s f o r
i n c r e a s i n g worker p r o d u c t i v i t y t h a t involved t e c h n i q u e s t h a t added new
f e a t u r e s t o t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work such a s t h e m a n i p u l a t i o n of wage
systems and i n t e r n a l l a b o u r markets ( j o b l a d d e r s and i n t e r n a l h i r i n g and
promotion schemes).
Every r e s t r i c t i o n on t h e freedom of employers t o
,
o p e r a t e t h e i r b u s i n e s s e s a s t h e y wished, i n c l u d i n g b o t h unions and t h e
t r a d i t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e o r g a n i a t i o n of work stemming from a l i m i t e d
form of workers' c o n t r o l , were c r u c i a l and could have meant t h e d i f f e r e n c e
between s u r v i v a l and bankruptcy.
Employers mounted an e n e r g e t i c a s s a u l t
P0
on both.
This period in the United States saw the emergence of a
managerial reorganization of work which attracted international
attention and imitation. The essential elements of that reorganization
survive to this day and constitute the foundation of the modern labour
process.
It will be seen that knowledge of the process of production gave
power to those who possessed it and had the ability to make use of it.
Much of what was being fought over, especially during the Progressive
Era, was the possession of knowledge on the job, and the power that
possession of such knowledge conferred on the possessor.
For a large number of theorists both within the discipline of
communication and outside it the organization of work is not a topic,
much less an issue. Within the field oi communication this is perhaps
explained by the fact that the area of study has not yet concluded the
process of defining for itself the scope of its domain. It has generally
concentrated on those areas which might be classified as having
communication as their primary purposes such as the media on one hand
and personal interactions on the other.
This thesis is taking the
position through its choice of topic that the study of communication
should be broad enough to include a recognition and analysis of the
communicational significance of the structures of everyday life, such as
the organization of work.
Their characteristics as a communication network
are determined by the social and economic influences that have defined
their primary purposes.
h his thesis is an examination of some of the social
and economic influences that have combined to define the structure of the
modern organization of work.
Chapter Two describes the modern organization of work and
11
examines some of the ways that workers perceive it and react to it.
Chapter Three discusses the two components of the organization of work,
the division of labour and technology, and theix relationship to each
other. Chapter Four traces the appearance of some of the most important
aspects of the modern organization of work that originated during the
Industrial Revolution in England. Chapter Five is concerned with the
development during the Progressive Era in the United States of much of
what can be seen as the fundamental features of the modern industrial
capitalist organization of work.
Chapter Six contains the conclusion.
It should be pointed out at the outset that this thesis does not
attempt to provide an extensive analysis of large scale market developments in the economy, although such developments are of course the background to the scenario under consideration. General expansion of national
and international markets of course has an impact on the scale of economic
operations and
0x1
the growth -In size of workplaces and number of workers
employed therein. That is taken as a given in t h e present work.
In any
event, the sheer growth in quantitative size of markets, factories and the
entire scale of economic activities does not in itself explain the
quantitative changes that created the modern industrial organization of
work.
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER ONE
1.
2.
Dallas W. Smythe, "The Role of the Mass Media and Popular
Culture in Defining Development,'' Paper presented to the
International Scientific Conference of Mass Communication and
Social Consciousness in a Changing World, Leipzig, 17-20 September 1974, p. 1-2.
Smythe, p. 9.
'
CHAPTER TWO
DISSATISFACTION WITH WORK
The last decade witnessed an upsurge of academic and managerial
interest in what might generally be termed alienation in the workplace.
Increasing notice was taken of indications of disenchantment with the
way that modern management deals with its lclbour force, especially
among younger workers.
Business and management magazines began
to
feature articles on the alienated worker. A great number of studies
were published on the extent of alienation and dissatisfaction among
workers, both white and blue collar. North America began to hear
about the experiments in work organization in Swedish industry.
This chapter summarizes the findings of some of those studies
done about the extent of dissatisfaction with work among employees.
The outstanding characteristics of work in the modern industrial
world are explored in an effort to understand what has prompted
the dissatisfaction that has been so much taken note of in the past
decade.
Before any sense can be made of the idea of dissatisfaction
with work, we must know what we mean by satisfaction with work.
Any
conception of what constitutes satisfying work must depend on prevailing
social attitudes about the meaning of work itself. The meaning of
14
work and the social expectations surrounding it are quite different
from what they were even two hundred years ago.
Consider what Blake, who was a trained craftsman, wrote
about the experience of work during the Industrial Revolution:
Then left the sons of Urizen the plow and harrow, the loom,
The hammer and the chisel and the rule and compasses...
And all the arts of life they chang'g into the arts of death.
The hour glass contemn'd because its simple workmanship
Was as the workmanship of the plowman and the water wheel
That raises water into Cisterns, broken and burn'd in fire
Because its workmanship was like the workmanship of the shepards
And in their stead intricate wheels invented, Wheel without wheel,
To perplex youth in their outgoings and to bind to labours
Of day and night the myriads of Eternity, that they might file
And polish brass and iron hour after hour, laborious workmanship,
Kept ignorant of the use that they might spend the days of wisdom
In sorrowful drudgery to obtain a scanty pittance of bread,
In ignorance to view a small portion and think that All,
And call it demonstration, blind to all the simple rules of life. 1
And the contemporary comments of a steelworker:
My attitude is that I don't get excited about my job. I do
my work but I don't say whoopee-doo. The day I get excited
about my job is the day I go to a head shrinker...
Why is it that the communists always say they're for
the workingman, and as soon as they set up a country, you
got guys singing to tractors? They're singing about how
they love the factory. That's where I couldn't buy communism.
It's the intellectual's utopia, not mine. I cannot picture
myself singing to a tractor, I just can't. (Laughs) Or
singing to steel. (Singsongs.) Oh whoop-dee-doo, I'm at
the bonderizer, oh how I love this heavy steel. No thanks.
Never happen.
Between the lament and the apathy lies a vast gulf. In the
first, the recasting of work is bemoaned.
In the second, there is no
sense of bereavement; quite the contrary, it has been accepted as
.
15
self-evident to any reasonable person that work is nothing to feel any
kind of concern about or commitment to.
They are connected only by
the nearly two hundred years of industrial society that stretch between
them, and which make possible the calculation of a trade-off.
The logic of the trade-off goes something like the following:
life and work were miserable during the birth of industrial society
(though arguably no more miserable than in earlier times).
there are a variety of reasons:
For this
it was a period of upheaval; of primi-
tive accumulation; of moral uncertainty. Whatever the reasons, work
has become less brutal perhaps, and certainly of shorter duration since
the power to deliver the unprecedented affluence of our age has steadily
grown.
The hours of work in everyone's life are the price we pay for the
affluence.
Therefore, the more efficient are the hours of work, the
better because that means fewer hours.
The cost of efficiency may be
that work is of such a character that most of us want to get through it
as fast as possible in order to enjoy the affluence at the end of the day
or week.
As this state of affairs is probably unavoidable, though unfort-
unate, it is not worth further consideration. Understanding this train
of thought makes it comprehensible that a sizeelworker would think that
only a pathetic pest would expect him to be committed to his work.
Indications of Dissatisfaction
In the majority (if not most) of job situations whether in
private industry or government or service operations, people find
themselves placed somewhere in a pyramidal shaped stratification of
responsibility, power, authority, skill, status and salary. Within
t h i s s t r u c t u r e i s an e l a b o r a t e system of s u p e r v i s i o n i n which a r e a s
of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a r e s h a r p l y d i v i d e d so t h a t one f i n d s t h e increments
of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y g r a d u a l l y i n c r e a s i n g as one reaches t h e top where
the overall integrating authority resides.
I n t h i s s t r u c t u r e many
people f i n d t h a t they a r e reduced t o r e p e t i t i v e l y performing a s e r i e s
of t a s k s over which they have l i t t l e o r no c o n t r o l .
Control
work p r o c e s s e s does n o t r e s t w i t h t h o s e who perform them.
of most
This i s
t r u e n o t o n l y of manual j o b s , b u t a l s o of a l a r g e number of whitec o l l a r jobs.
A r e p o r t r e l e a s e d by t h e U.S.
S e c r e t a r y of Health,
Education, and Welfare i n 1973 s t a t e s ,
The o f f i c e today, where work i s segmented and a u t h o r i t a r i a n ,
i s o f t e n a f a c t o r y . For a growing number j o b s , t h e r e i s l i t t l e
t o d i s t i n g u i s h them b u t t h e c o l o r of t h e worker's c o l l a r : comp u t e r keypunch o p e r a t i o n s and typing p o o l s s h a r e much i n common
with t h e automobile i n d u s t r y . 3
It appears t h a t a r i s i n g though f r e q u e n t l y p a s s i v e and i n d i v i d -
u a l i z e d r e s i s t a n c e t o meaningless and d i s s a t i s f y i n g jobs i s t a k i n g r o o t .
I n 1970, Fortune magazine surveyed c o r p o r a t e l e a d e r s from t h e Fortune
500 ( t h e 500 l a r g e s t c o r p o r a t i o n s ) .
They were asked, "Do you f e e l t h a t
h o u r l y p a i d workers i n your company a r e more c o n s c i e n t i o u s about t h e i r
work than they were a g e n e r a t i o n ago, l e s s c o n s c i e n t i o u s , o r j u s t about
t h e same?"
A s u b s t a n t i a l s i x t y t h r e e p e r c e n t f e l t t h a t t h e i r workers
were l e s s c o n s c i e n t i o u s .
This response was f a i r l y evenly d i s t r i b u t e d
through a l l s e c t o r s of i n d u s t r y , b u t n o t a b l y t h e l a r g e s t i n d u s t r i a l i s t s '
( s i x t y e i g h t p e r c e n t ) were more o f t e n convinced t h a t t h e i r workers were
l e s s conscientious.
These e x e c u t i v e s were then asked i n what ways t h e i r
workers were l e s s c o n s c i e n t i o u s .
The s i n g l e answer they most o f t e n g=ve
was worker slowness and laziness (thirty six percent).
Lack of interest,
pride, dedication, responsibility or loyalty to the company together
were mentioned by seventy one percent of the executives. Other reasons
were an unspecified unhealthy change in philosophy ( eleven percent) and
more coffee breaks and not working a full day (nine percent). Least cited
reasons were worker identification with the union instead of the company
(four percent) and the need for more supervision (three percent).
(More
than one response was permitted.) It is clear that these executives felt
there was something wrong with their workers' attitudes towards work.
4
Aside from the opinion of management, there are other indications
of something amiss in the world of work.
High turnover rates (as high
5
as thirty percent annually in some white-collar operations ) , industrial
sabotage, and lack of pride in the quality of work performed are widespread and on the rise. Absenteeism doubled at Ford and General Motors
in the ten years between 1960 and 1970. It became difficult to get the
assembly lines moving quickly after shift changes due to a high level of
tardiness. There were more complaints about quality, more complaints
about discipline and overtime, and more grievances. Turnover rates were
up yo 25.2 percent at Ford in 1969. "Some assembly-line workers are so
turned off, managers report with astonishment, that they just walk away
in mid-shift and don't even come back to get their pay for the time they
have worked.lt6 By September of 1976, between three percent and seven
p e r c e n t of t h e t o t a l US workforce w a s AWOL on any given workday.
A
spokesman f o r a l a r g e farm equipment maker, Deere and Co., h a s s a i d
t h a t they could l a y o f f e i g h t p e r c e n t of t h e i r employees i f everybody
they h i r e d would come t o work.
Recent e s t i m a t e s p l a c e t h e c o s t of
absenteeism t o t h e Canadian economy between $4 b i l l i o n and $5 b i l l i o n
annually
-
then times t h e c o s t of l a b o u r d i s p u t e s . 7
a r e more hard h i t by absenteeism t h a n o t h e r s .
Some i n d u s t r i e s
I n general, low-skill,
low-paying jobs show t h e h i g h e s t r a t e s of absenteeism.
It might have
been expected t h a t t h e r e c e s s i o n and h i g h unemployment r a t e s would
have t h e e f f e c t of lowering absenteeism.
T h i s h a s n o t happened.
In
f a c t US f i g u r e s i n t h e mid-seventies a r e s l i g h t l y h i g h e r than they
were i n t h e more prosperous s i x t i e s . '
(See Table 1 ) .
TABLE 1
ABSENTEEISM I N THE U.S.,
Year
1967-1975
Full-week absences p e r 100
workers i n an average week
Part-week absences p e r
100 workers i n an
average week
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s ,
U.S. Government
Handbook of Labor S t a t i s t i c s 1976, (Washington, D . C . :
P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1976), p. 301-8.
NOTE: Excludes domestic and a g r i c u l t u r a l workers.
Another n o t
q u i t e s o p a s s i v e i n d i c a t i o n of r e s i s t a n c e i s t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of work stoppages which a r e due t o i s s u e s r e l a t e d t o p l a n t
administration.
P l a n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n c l u d e s such m a t t e r s a s p h y s i c a l
f a c i l i t i e s and surroundings, s u p e r v i s i o n , s h i f t work, work assignment,
work l o a d , work r u l e s , overtime work and d i s c i p l i n e a s w e l l a s s a f e t y .
Both t h e p e r c e n t and a b s o l u t e number of work stoppages i n t h e US r e l a t e d
t o c o n f l i c t s over p l a n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n (as w e l l a s t h e t o t a l days l o s t
f o r a l l work stoppages) went up i n t h e y e a r s between 1967 and 1974 ( t h e
l a s t y e a r f o r which f i g u r e s could be found).
Within t h e a r e a of p l a n t
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , more work stoppages a r e r e l a t e d t o d i s c i p l i n a r y i s s u e s
than t o any o t h e r s i n g l e i s s u e . 9
The above f i g u r e s would seem t o i n d i c a t e some kind of n e g a t i v e
a t t i t u d e toward work.
discontent.
ing
&
However, i t i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o measure job
A s t a g g e r i n g number of s t u d i e s have been produced concern-
t o measure d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h work.
An even more s t a g g e r i n g
number have been w r i t t e n g i v i n g t h e r e s u l t s y i e l d e d by t h e u s e of v a r i o u s
methods.1•‹ It i s w e l l t o keep i n mind t h a t a good p e r c e n t a g e of t h e s e
works have been o r i e n t e d towards t h e management view.
The opening words
t o one, e n t i t l e d Where Have A l l t h e Robots Gone, provide an e n l i g h t e n i n g
illustration:
"Suddenly, i n t h e s e v e n t i e s , we a r e becoming c u r i o u s once
a g a i n about v a s t numbers of our f e l l o w c i t i z e n s whose l i v e s have been a
m a t t e r of i n d i f f e r e n c e t o u s f o r many years."
(emphasis added.)''
Regardless of t h e o r i e n t a t i o n of t h e many s t u d i e s of work d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n ,
i t i s s a f e t o make one g e n e r a l i z a t i o n :
conflicting results.
t h e r e s e a r c h has provided v a s t l y
The Gallup p o o l shows e i g h t y p e r c e n t t o n i n e t y p e r c e n t p o s i t i v e
responses t o the question,
"Is your work s a t i s f y i n g ? "
It should b e
noted however, t h a t t h e p e r c e n t a g e of p o s i t i v e responses has been d e c l i n i n g i n the l a s t t e n years.
N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h i s i s one of t h e h i g h e s t
ranges of job s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t can b e found i n any type of s t u d y .
Most
r e s e a r c h e r s , f o r r e a s o n s t h a t w i l l b e e x p l a i n e d below, do n o t b e l i e v e
t h i s means t h a t workers a r e r e a l l y s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r jobs.
12
The Survey Research Center of t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan, under
c o n t r a c t from t h e US Department of Labor's Employment Standards D i v i s i o n ,
d i d a survey i n t h e w i n t e r of 1969-70 of more t h a n 1500 US workers
from a l l o c c u p a t i o n a l l e v e l s .
drawn
T h e i r r e s u l t s concerning job s a t i s f a c t i o n
were somewhat l e s s o p t i m i s t i c than t h o s e of t h e Gallup p o l l .
Construction
workers and t h e self-employed appear t o have t h e b e s t chances f o r s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r work.
Only one o u t of twenty were n o t s a t i s f i e d .
Technical, p r o f e s s i o n a l and managerial workers were n e x t w i t h one o u t of
ten dissatisfied.
A t t h e bottom were s e r v i c e and w h o l e s a l e - r e t a i l indus-
t r y workers with one o u t of f o u r unhappy w i t h t h e i r job.
Workers i n
manufacturing had a s l i g h t l y h i g h e r showing of s a t i s f a c t i o n . 1 3
t h e t o t a l number of workers i n both s e r v i c e r e t a i l - w h o l e s a l e ,
Since
and man-
u f a c t u r i n g i s g r e a t e r than t h e t o t a l number of c o n s t r u c t i o n , self-employed,
t e c h n i c a l , p r o f e s s i o n a l and managerial workers ( s e e Tables 2 and 3 ) , t h e
Survey Research Center f i g u r e s would i n d i c a t e more widespread d i s c o n t e n t
than t h e Gallup p o o l f i g u r e s .
But even t h e s e f i g u r e s may be too low t o r e f l e c t t h e r e a l l e v e l
TABLE 2
EMPLOYED PERSONS BY OCCUPATIONAL GROUP I N THE U.S.
Group One
Professional andtechnical.
Managerial ( i n c l u d i n g s e l f employed)
Construction*
1975
(thousands)
........................... 12735.8
................... 8867.7
.......................................... 3493.9
T o t a l ............................................. 25097.4
Group Two
Wholesalelretail (sales)
Manufacturing ( i n c l u d i n g o p e r a t i v e s )
S e r v i c e ( i n c l u d i n g p r i v a t e household)
............................... 5458.1
................... 8291.3
.................. 11643
T o t a l ............................................. 25392.4
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s ,
Handbook of Labor S t a t i s t i c s 1976, (Washington, D . C . :
U.S. Government
P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1976), p . 65.
*Includes carpen;ers who may n o t be employed i n c o n s t r u c t i o n .
TABLE 3
EMPLOYED PERSONS BY OCCUPATIONAL GROUP I N CANADA 1977*
Group One
Technical, P r o f e s s i o n a l and Managerial
Self-employed**
Construction
(thousands)
2165
497
725
.................
.......................................
...........................................
Total.............................................
Group Two
Sales
Manufacturing
Service....
.
3387
..................................................
..........................................
............................................
1105
1648
1265
Total.............................................
4018
SOURCE: S t a t i s t i c s Canada, "The Labour Force", January, 1977, p.20
and S t a t i s t i c s Canada, P e r s p e c t i v e Canada: A Compendium of S o c i a l S t a t i s t i c s ,
(Ottawa: Information Canada, 1974), p. 125.
*The f i g u r e f o r self-employed i s from 1972 and should probably be
lower a s t h e r e h a s been a downward t r e n d i n t h i s a r e a .
**This f i g u r e i s n o t s t r i c t l y comparable t o t h e o t h e r s . It r e p r e s e n t s
a l l persons who worked f o r themselves w h i l e n o t h i r i n g o t h e r s . Therefore
people self-employed i n t h e occupations l i s t e d above may be counted
twice. This w i l l tend t o make t h e Group One t o t a l l a r g e r t h a n i t
should be.
of job d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n .
I t h a s been suggested by some r e s e a r c h e r s t h a t
self-esteem i s f a r t o o i n t i m a t e l y involved i n t h e i s s u e of s a t i s f a c t i o n
f o r honest answers t o d i r e c t q u e s t i o n s .
Given a choice between no work
and i n f e r i o r work,
...t h e
i n d i v i d u a l has no d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h e choice, he
chooses work, pronounces himself moderately s a t i s f i e d ,
and t e l l s u s more o n l y i f t h e q u e s t i o n s become more searching.
Then we l e a r n t h a t he...wants
h i s son t o be employed
d i f f e r e n t l y from h i m s e l f , and i f given a choice, would seek
a d i f f e r e n t occupation. 14
An i n t e r v i e w w i t h a b l u e - c o l l a r worker by s o c i o l o g i s t George S t r a u s s
p r o v i d e s an i l l u s t r a t i o n .
good job.''
The worker c a s u a l l y remarked, "I g o t a p r e t t y
When asked what made i t a good j o b , h e r e p l i e d ,
~ o n ' tg e t me wrong.
an O.K.
expect.
job--about
I d i d n ' t s a y i t i s a good job.
It's
a s good a job a s a guy l i k e me might
The foreman l e a v e s me a l o n e and i t pays w e l l .
But I would never c a l l i t a good job.
It d o e s n ' t amount
t o much, b u t i t ' s n o t bad.15
The a u t h o r s of Work i n America propose t h a t one of t h e most
u s e f u l i n d i r e c t measures of job d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n h a s been t h e d e s i r e o r
l a c k of i t t o change type of work i f given t h e chance.16
One study u s i n g
t h i s measure y i e l d s some i n f o r m a t i o n which shows t h e discrepancy between
i t s r e s u l t s and t h e r e s u l t s of simple "Are you s a t i s f i e d ? " q u e s t i o n s .
The r e s e a r c h e r s i n t e r v i e w e d 1 0 1 b l u e - c o l l a r workers i n Kalamazoo i n
1971.
They compared t h e responses t o two q u e s t i o n s :
one,
were t h e
workers d i s c o n t e n t e d w i t h t h e i r j o b s , and two, would they want t o
change t h e type of work, keep t h e same s o r t of job, o r r e t i r e i f they
were f r e e t o choose.
They found t h a t f i f t y f i v e p e r c e n t of t h e "con-
tented" workers would change t h e type of work they d'id.
Of t h o s e who
i n response t o a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t q u e s t i o n s a i d they would q u i t
t h e i r p r e s e n t job t o t a k e almost any o t h e r job t h a t p a i d a s w e l l , o r
i f they had anything e l s e t o do, s i x t y f i v e p e r c e n t had r e p o r t e d t h a t
17
These d i s c r e p a n c i e s
they were s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r p r e s e n t job.
f u r t h e r support t h e i d e a t h a t t h e impact of s e l f - e s t e e m on t h e l a c k
of c h o i c e p e r c e i v e d by many workers l e a d s them t o s a y t h a t they a r e
s a t i s f i e d b u t t h a t i n f a c t they a r e only r e l a t i v e l y s a t i s f i e d r a t h e r
t h a n r e a l l y s a t i s f i e d , o r t o p u t i t another way, they a r e s a t i s f i e d
under t h e u n f o r t u n a t e circumstances; "Of c o u r s e I ain s a t i s f i e d .
I
d o n ' t have any o t h e r choice."
A study of job s a t i s f a c t i o n which asked a sample of workers
from a wide range of o c c u p a t i o n s , "What t y p e of work would you t r y t o
g e t i n t o i f you could s t a r t a l l over again?" y i e l d e d i n t e r e s t i n g r e s ults.
Only f o r t y t h r e e p e r c e n t of a c r o s s s e c t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g profess-
i o n a l s ) of w h i t e - c o l l a r workers would choose t h e same type of job t h a t
they a l r e a d y had.
Twenty f o u r p e r c e n t of a c r o s s s e c t i o n of b l u e - c o l l a r
workers would choose t h e i r kind of work a g a i n .
I n c o n t r a s t , lawyers,
s c i e n t i s t s , and mathematicians a l l had a s i m i l a r work choice r a t e of
over e i g h t y p e r c e n t , w h i l e n i n e t y t h r e e p e r c e n t of urban u n i v e r s i t y
p r o f e s s o r s would choose t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a g a i n . 18
24
There a r e r e a s o n s t h a t have t o do w i t h something o t h e r t h a n s e l f
esteem f o r why workers would s a y t h e y a r e s a t i s f i e d w i t h a j o b t h e y would
a l s o l i k e t o change i f t h e y c o u l d .
These r e a s o n s concern g e n e r a l i z e d
s o c i a l e x p e c t a t i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g work.
S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h work i s obviously
r e l a t e d t o judgements about what a r e t h e p r o p e r purposes and f u n c t i o n s of
work.
A j o b s e r v e s t o s t r u c t u r e l i f e f o r many workers r e g a r d l e s s of whether
they a c t u a l l y l i k e t h e i r job i n a d i s t i n c t l y p o s i t i v e sense.
This is
i l l u s t r a t e d by one of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e Q u a l i t y of Employment Survey (an
updated v e r s i o n of t h e e a r l i e r Survey Research Center s t u d y ) .
The workers
were asked i f t h e y would c o n t i n u a working even i f t h e y had enough money
t o l i v e comfortably f o r t h e rest of t h e i r l i f e .
s a i d t h a t t h e y would.
Sixty s i x percent
These p e o p l e were t h e n asked why.
The t o p t h r e e
r e a s o n s were: 19
Keeps worker from b e i n g bored
Work s u p p l i e s d i r e c t i o n i n w o r k e r ' s l i f e
Worker e n j bys working
49.8%
16.2%
9.7%
This c a l l s a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t while only a very small percent
a c t u a l l y e n j o y t h e work t h e y a r e doing, a r a t h e r l a r g e number do f i n d
something v a l u a b l e a b o u t t h e a c t i v i t y of working.
T h i s i s undoubted1.y
r e f l e c t e d a s an upward infiluence on s t a t e d r a t e s of job s a t i s f a c t i o n
i n s t u d i e s t h a t do n o t probe v e r y d e e p l y .
The l a s t comments s u g g e s t t h a t a n ' " a d d i t i o n a l " e x p e c t a t i o n
of work t h a t i s e x t e r n a l t o t h e a c t u a l n a t u r e of t h e work i t s e l f could
a f f e c t job s a t i s f a c t i o n s t a t i s t i c s .
There a r e a l s o ways t h a t j o b
s a t i s f a c t i o n f i g u r e s c o u l d b e modified by an e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t i s
25
d i s p l a c e d from work t o something e l s e .
There i s f o r example a l o n g
h i s t o r y o f c e r t a i n r e l i g i o u s n o t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e r o l e of work i n
an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e .
The b e l i e f s of some of t h e P r o t e s t a n t s e c t s
have l e f t t h e i r mark.
These s e c t s b e l i e v e d a l t e r n a t e l y t h a t work
l e a d i n g t o s e c u l a r s u c c e s s was a n e c e s s a r y p r e c o n d i t i o n f o r s a l v a t i o n ,
o r t h a t work was a j o y l e s s burden which must b e endured s o t h a t l a t e r
s a l v a t i o n would come t o t h e s u f f e r e r .
I n any c a s e , t h e i d e a was t h a t
work i s n o t (and i n some s e c t s even could n o t b e , on p a i n of s i n n i n g )
a n i n t r i n s i c a l l y e n j o y a b l e a c t i v i t y , b u t something t o b e performed f o r
a l a t e r reward.
Delayed g r a t i f i c a t i o n means t h a t one n a t u r a l l y does
n o t e x p e c t any k i n d of immediate and s i g n i f i c a n t p e r s o n a l s a t i s f a c t i o n
from working.
I t t h e r e f o r e becomes p o s s i b l e t o c l a i m " s a t i s f a c t i o n "
w i t h i n t h e s e terms a t a v e r y low l e v e l of a c t i v e enjoyment.
Such b e l i e f s a r e no l o n g e r v e r y p r e v a l e n t i n t h e i r p u r e form.
Modern i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y h a s v a s t l y and i n g e n i o u s l y improved on
the original versions.
I n t h e new improved v e r s i o n , t h e emphasis i s
no l o n g e r on t h e s p i r i t u a l l i f e a f t e r d e a t h b u t on t h e moment a t
hand, on l i f e i t s e l f .
Delayed g r a t i f i c a t i o n , under s e v e r e a t t a c k
by t h e n o t i o n of i n s t a n t g r a t i f i c a t i o n , i s n o t t o be delayed v e r y
long.
The moment of s a l v a t i o n h a s become l e i s u r e time, o r what one
does when n o t a t work.
The enormous, o r g a n i z e d and growing commer-
c i a l i n v a s i o n and promotion of l e i s u r e time h i g h l i g h t s t h e c e n t r a l
r o l e i t p l a y s i n a l l o w i n g p e o p l e t o f e e l r e l . a t i v e l y s a t i s f i e d wi.th
26
jobs they don't l i k e .
One i s n o t supp0se.d t o f i n d work p l e a s u r a b l e
s i n c e t h e e x p e r i e n c e of p l e a s u r e b e l o n g s t o "off hours".
One
becomes s a t i s f i e s w i t h a g e n e r a l l y d e t e s t a b l e j o b a s long a s i t
pays enough t o f i n a n c e some k i n d of e n j o y a b l e l e i s u r e .
It i s
w i t h i n t h i s c o n t e x t t h a t consumerism h a s become t h e p o p u l a r e t h i c
of o u r times.
I n s t e a d of t h e i d e a t h a t b e i n g i s doing ( t o o d i r e c t l y
r e l a t e d t o working) s t a n d s t h e i d e a t h a t b e i n g i s having.
The
personal i d e n t i t y s t r u g g l e s t o be defined not during t h e hours of
work, b u t a f t e r and between them.
Althoug t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y q u e s t i o n
"What do you do?" h a s n o t d i s a p p e a r e d , i t s impact i s c o n s i d e r a b l y
m i t i g a t e d by t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of s u p e r c e d i n g t h e "doing" through
s u r r o u n d i n g o n e s e l f w i t h a n a p p r o p r i a t e c o l l e c t i o n of t h i n g s
consumed and, t o a l e s s e r e x t e n t , by t h e k i n d of a f t e r h o u r s a c t i v i t i e s
i n which one engages.
Here l i e s t h e meaning of a b s e n t e e i s m .
W e n creativity,
i m a g i n a t i o n and enjoyment have been r e l e g a t e d t o " t i m e o f f " i n a
r e l a t i v e l y a f f l u e n t a g e , and when t h i s s i d e of t h e dichotomy i s
w i d e l y a c c e p t e d a s t h e more v a l u a b l e , p e o p l e w i l l do w i t h t h e
lower t o t a l pay t h a t w i l l a l l o w them more t i m e of t h e i r own.
Workers r e f u s e t o a c c e p t completely t h e d i s t a s t e f u l boredom of
work even when t h e y a r e w e l l p a i d f o r i t .
There i s a widespread
o p p o s i t i o n t o compulsory o v e r t i m e , and q u i t e commonly a l s o r e f u s a l
t o t a k e i t v o l u n t a r i l y when i t i s o f f e r e d .
I n many companies
27
absenteeism
i s most rampant on Mondays and F r i d a y s ( a t General Motors
a b s e n t e e i s m on Monday and F r i d a y is d o u b l e t h e u s u a l r a t e ) and a t
c e r t a i n times o f t h e y e a r , s u c h a s t h e b e g i n n i n g of h u n t i n g s e a s o n .
Absenteeism i s a form of r e s i s t a n c e .
Explanations
Absenteeism a s w e l l a s o t h e r s i g n s of worker d i s c o n t e n t
pose t h e q u e s t i o n Q•’ what
i s being r e s i s t e d .
Why would a l a r g e
p e r c e n t o f workers i n t h e samples of t h e s t u d i e s r e f e r r e d t o above
s a y t h e y would l i k e t o change j o b s i f t h e y c o u l d ?
w r i t t e n on t h i s i s s u e .
Much h a s been
A thorough s t u d y of t h a t m a t t e r would b e
beyond t h e scope of t h i s t h e s i s .
However, a s i t i s c r u c i a l t o what
follows, i t w i l l be b r i e f l y discussed.
I n t h e 1973 Q u a l i t y of Employment Survey, t h e workers
were asked t o r a t e i n importance a number of p r e - s e l e c t e d a s p e c t s
of work.
I n o r d e r of importance, t h e t o p ones were..20
i n t e r e s t i n g work
enough i n f o r m a t i o n t o g e t t h e j o b done
ca-workers, f r i e n d l y and h e l p f u l
enough h e l p and equipment t o g e t t h e j o b done
o p p o r t u n i t y t o develop s p e c i a l s k i l l s
enough a u t h o r i t y t o g e t t h e j o b done
good Pay
s u p e r v i s o r i s competent
s e e i n g t h e r e s u l t s of o n e ' s work
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s clearly defined
good j o b s e c u r i t y
It i s n o t a b l e t h a t seven of t h e t o p e l e v e n a s p e c t s ( l e a v i n g a s i d e
t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of co-workers and s u p e r v i s o r s ) a r e concerned
w i t h t h e c o n t e n t of work.
It is a l s o n o t a b l e t h a t t h e economic
a s p e c t s ranked remarkably low.
Pay waa n o t f i r s t b u t s e v e n t h .
Higher p a i d workers do t e n d t o b e more s a t i s f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h i s
s t u d y , b u t i t was p o i n t e d o u t t h a t h i g h e r p a i d workers u s u a l l y have
more i n t e r e s t i n g j o b s .
The Survey Research C e n t e r ' s l i s t i s o n l y a beginning.
It
seems t o u n d e r s c o r e t h e importance of having a d e q u a t e r e s o u r c e s
t o g e t t h e j o b done.
But t h i s i s n o t a l l t h a t workers want and
i s n o t , i n f a c t , what d i s s a f f e c t e d workers complain about.
A r e l a t i v e l y p r i v i l e g e d w h i t e c o l l a r woman worker who i s a
s t a f f w r i t e r f o r an i n s t i t u t i o n p u b l i s h i n g h e a l t h c a r e l i t e r a t u r e
d e s c r i b e s her p o s i t i o n i n a n interview with Studs Terkel:
I have my own o f f i c e . I have a s e c r e t a r y . T f I
want a book c a s e , I g e t a book c a s e . I f I want
a f i l e , I g e t a f i l e . I f I want t o s t a y home, I
s t a y home. I f I want t o go shopping, I go shopping.
T h i s i s t h e f i r s t comfortable job I ' v e e v e r had
i n my l i f e and i t i s a b s o l u t e l y d e s p i c a b l e .
Her comments a b o u t h e r job a r e worth q u o t i n g a t l e n g t h .
J o b s a r e n o t b i g enough f o r people. I t ' s
n o t j u s t t h e assembly l i n e worker whose
j o b i s t o o s m a l l f o r h i s s p i r i t , you know?
A j o b l i k e mine, i f you r e a l l y p u t your
s p i r i t i n t o i t , you would s a b o t a g e immedi a t e l y . You d o n ' t d a r e . So you a b s e n t
your s p i r i t from i t . My mind h a s been s o
d i v o r c e d from my j o b e x c e p t a s a s o u r c e of
income, i t ' s r e a l l y absurd...Here, of a l l
p l a c e s , where I had expected t o p u t t h e
energy and enthusiasm and t h e g i f t s t h a t
I may have t o work--it i s n ' t happening.
They e x p e c t l e s s t h a n you c a n o f f e r . Token
l a b o r . What w r i t i n g you do i s w r i t i n g t o
o r d e r . When I go f o r a j o b interview--I
must l e a v e t h i s place!--I s a y , "Sure, I
can b r i n g you samples, b u t t h e ones I ' m
proud of are t h e ones t h e I n s t i t u t i o n
never published. "
I t ' s s o demeaning t o b e t h e r e and
not be challenged. It's humiliation,
because I f e e l I ' m b e i n g f o r c e d i n t o
d o i n g something I would n e v e r do of my
own f r e e will--which i s simply w a s t e
i t s e l f . It's r e a l l y not a Puritan
hang-up.
I t ' s n o t t h a t I want t o b e
p e r s e c u t e d . I t ' s simply t h a t I know
I ' m v e g e t a t i n g and b e i n g p a i d t o do
e x a c t l y t h a t . I t ' s p o s s i b l e f o r me t o
s i t h e r e and r e a d my books. But t h e n
you walk o u t w i t h no s e n s e of l e g i t i m a c y !
I ' m b e i n g had. Somebody h a s bought t h e
r i g h t t o you f o r e i g h t hours a day. The
manner i n which they u s e you i s completely
a t their discretion...
You r e c o g n i z e y o u r s e l f a s a m a r g i n a l
person. A s a p e r s o n who can g i v e o n l y
minimal a s s e n t t o a n y t h i n g t h a t i s going
on i n t h i s s o c i e t y : " I ' m g l a d t h e e l e c t r i c i t y works." T h a t ' s about i t , 2 1
Two t h i n g s s t a n d o u t immediately.
The f i r s t i s t h e absence
of e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l o v e r what w i l l b e done d u r i n g t h e working day,
even though i n t h i s c a s e t h e r e i s a semblance of such c o n t r o l .
The second i s t h e f r a g m e n t a t i o n of working a c t i v i t y i n t o narrow
l i t t l e t,asks which a r e n o t c h a l l e n g i n g .
3U
This is far from being an isolated complaint. The labour of most
workers, particularly in larger sized enterprises, has been
molded into a highly standardized series of compartmentalized tasks
or operations which are planned, coordinated and supervised by
someone else who is at least a step up
on a ladder of authority.
The way that this affects the organization of work is dramatically
illustrated by a hypothetical reconstruction of a game of bowling
made over into a job.
Hiding the pins from the bowler by hanging a
drape halfway down the alley Having a "supervisor" give the bowler an opinion of how well
he is doing--along with some "constructive
criticism"...Changing the rules of the game
and standards of performance--without involving
the bowler in the change process, or even
telling him why the canges were made... Preventing social interaction among bowlers...
Giving most of the credit and recognition
to the supervisor for performance of the
bowlers under his supervision Keeping
bowlers on the job by threat of loss of job
security or by paying them enough money
to make their "time" in the bowling alley
worth their while. 22
...
...
For greater accuracy, it should be added that the bowler be
made to confrom to detailed instructions on how to perform each
step of getting the ball rolling down the alley.
At this point is should be emphasized once more that
the kind of labour process being described is not restricted to
blue collar workers, though it is true that it once was.
Now
31
w h i t e c o l l a r work h a s been s u b j e c t e d t o t h e same l o g i c o f o r g a n i z a t i o n .
It h a s been e s t i m a t e d f o r example t h a t a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e
w h i t e c o l l a r workers employed i n manufacturing e n t e r p r i s e s f o l l o w
a s t r i c t l y d e f i n e d p r o c e d u r e of r e p e a t i n g pre-determined t a s k s : i n
administration, eighty
percent; i n s a l e s s i x t y percent,
23
A woman who worked f o r t h e New York Telephone Company a s a
customer s e r v i c e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e h a s s u p p l i e d a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e way
h e r j o b was s t r u c t u r e d .
i n small b i t s .
24
The a u t h o r i t y i s e l a b o r a t e l y p a r c e l l e d o u t
There i s a s u p e r v i s o r f o r e v e r y f i v e women.
a manager f o r e v e r y f o u r s u p e r v i s o r s .
f o r e v e r y t h r e e managers.
There i s
There i s a D i s t r i c t S u p e r v i s o r
The Chief of t h e S o u t h e r n D i v i s i o n super-
v i s e s f i v e D i s t r i c t Supervisors.
There i s a n army of d i v i s i o n c h i e f s
f o r t h e New York C i t y a r e a a l o n e .
The t r a i n i n g c o u r s e i s programmed.
The t e a c h e r f o l l o w s a book
which f u r n i s h e s e v e r y t h i n g down t o t h e examples t o b e used. The
g u i d i n g p r i n c i p l e b o t h i n t h e t r a i n i n g c o u r s e and t h h d a i l y j o b f o r
which one i s b e i n g t r a i n e d i s t o f r a c t u r e e v e r y o p e r a t i o n i n t o
d i s c r e t e p a r t s f o r which t h e r e i s a p r e s c r i b e d p r o c e d u r e .
Any n a t u r a l
r e s p o n s e t o a customer must b e a o d i f i e d i n t o a p r o c e d u r e .
The customer
s e r v i c e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e must f i l l o u t t h e paperwork (which i s huge)
r e q u i r e d t o p r o c e s s t h e customer r e q u e s t w h i l e s p e a k i n g t o t h e customer.
\
Whatever may b e l e f t when t h e customer c o n t a c t Is o v e r must be
32
completed l a t e r d u r i n g t h e ' k l o s e d " t i m e when t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
i s no l o n g e r r e c e i v i n g c a l l s .
This f r u s t r a t e s t h e n a t u r a l i n c l i n a t i o n
t o c a r r y a n a c t through t o i t s l o g i c a l c o n c l u s i o n , and i n t h i s way c r e a t e s
a c o n s t a n t low l e v e l p a n i c .
The women l e a r n under t h e p r e s s u r e t o
h a t e t h e u n u s u a l o r complex customer r e q u e s t and l o o k forward t o t h e
s i m p l e and r o u t i n e .
They t r y t o a l l e v i a t e t h e p r e s s u r e by t r a n s f e r r i n g
as many j u r i s d i c t i o n a l b o r d e r l i n e c a l l s t o a n o t h e r department a s t h e y
can.
F i n a l l y , i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e s e women d e f i n e d
themselves f a r more by t h e i r consumerism t h e n by t h e i r work, "as i f t h e y
were compensating f o r t h e i r e x p l o i t a t i o n a s workers by a d e s p e r a t e
a t t e m p t t o e x p r e s s t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l i t y as consumers. ,125
They were
encouraged i n t h i s by t h e company which g i v e s every employee on
s e v e r a l p r e - s p e c i f i e d o c c a s i o n s each y e a r a p r e - s e l e c t e d ,
ated l i t t l e p r e s e n t b e a r i n g a company mesaage.
pre-fabric-
The company a l s o r u n s
a r e c r u i t i n g c o n t e s t which g i v e s employees who h e l p t o r e c r u i t new
employees a number of p o i n t s t h a t add up t o
c i r c u l a t e d catalogue.
m e r i t g i f t s from a w e l l
Remedies
Can a n y t h i n g b e done about j o b s l i k e t h a t a,nd t h e d i s s a t i s faction
t h e y seem t o engender?
There have been i n t h e l a s t f i f t e e n
y e a r s some e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o j e c t s i n v o l v i n g t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e
labour process.
Work i n America i s , i n f a c t , an argument t h a t more
experiments s h o u l d b e implemented as a n a t i o n a l p o l i c y f o r t h e United
States.
The f i n a l pages of t h e book d e s c r i b e t h i r t y t h r e e c a s e s t u d i e s
i n t h e "humanization of work" drawn from around t h e world.
Despite
t h i s p l e a , most of t h e e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n t h a t h a s t a k e n p l a c e h a s
o c c u r r e d i n small e n t e r p r i s e s , and many of t h e most s u c c e s s f u l experiments i n terms of p r o d u c t i v i t y have been a b o l i s h e d o r reduced.
P o l a r o i d is a c a s e i n p o i n t .
Some y e a r s ago t h e y scrapped a remarkably
s u c c e s s f u l p r o j e c t i n t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
Ray F e r r i s e x p l a i n e d why.
Training d i r e c t o r
26
I t was t o o s u c c e s s f u l . What were we going t o
do w i t h t h e s u p e r v i s o r s - - t h e managers? We
d i d n ' t need them anymore. Management decided
t h a t i t j u s t d i d n ' t want o p e r a t o r s t h a t
The employees' newly r e v e a l e d
qualified
a b i l i t y t o c a r r y more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was t o o
g r e a t a t h r e a t t o t h e e s t a b l i s h e d way of doing
t h i n g s and t o e s t a b l i s h e d power p a t t e r n s .
...
And i n Sweden which h a s been t h e f o c u s of s o much i n t e r e s t
r e g a r d i n g "job enrichment" i n r e c e n t y e a r s , a s t u d y by a n o f f i c i a l
of t h e Swedish government's Commission on I n d u s t r i a l Democracy
r e i t e r a t e s one r e a s o n why e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n h a s n o t become widely
accepted:
Both Norwegian and Swedish e x p e r i e n c e p o i n t t o t h e f a c t
t h a t d e s p i t e t h e proven s u p e r i o r i t y of workers' management on t h e shop f l o o r l e v e l (both i n p r o d u c t i v i t y and
work s a t i s f a c t i o n ) t h i s form of o r g a n i z a t i o n s e r i o u s l y
t h r e a t e n s t h e e s t a b l i s h e d o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e and
managerial e t h i c s . . . T h e g o a l s of p r e s e r v i n g t h e e x i s t i n g
d i f f e r e n c e s i n power, s t a t u s and incomes by f a r a r e more
important v a l u e s than t h e o v e r a l l e f f i c i e n c y of t h e firm. 27
A d d i t i o n a l l y , i t h a s been r e p o r t e d t h a t a p o l l of French employers
r e v e a l e d t h a t seventy f i v e p e r c e n t were h o s t i l e t o t h e concept of work
enrichment. 2 8
The above i s n o t meant t o imply t h a t n o t h i n g p o s i t i v e h a s
r e s u l t e d from any a t t e m p t a t job enrichment o r work humanization.
q u e s t i o n i s too complex f o r a simple assessment such a s that,*'
beyond t h e scope of t h i s t h e s i s .
The
and is
What needs t o be p o i n t e d o u t i s t h a t
work humanization h a s met w i t h n e i t h e r t h e widespread acceptance nor
s u c c e s s s u f f i c i e n t t o j u s t i f y approaching i t a s t h e s o l u t i o n t o a l l
problems of work o r g a n i z a t i o n .
The preceding
s t a t e m e n t s by an o f f i c i a l of i n d u s t r y and of
government s u g g e s t t h a t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s i s n o t
(and furthermore i s n o t s e e n by some key p r a c t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s a s ) a
response t o p u r e l y e f f i c i e n c y - o r i e n t e d i n d u s t r i a l motives.
In fact,
a c e r t a i n o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s can c o n t r a d i c t t h e l o g i c
of e f f i c i e n c y .
It would appear t h a t something more i s involved.
This
t h e s i s w i l l argue t h a t , c o n t r a r y t o what i s commonly accepted, t h e org a n i z a t i o n of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s i s a p o l i t i c a l p r o j e c t .
It i s p o l i t i c a l
i n t h e s e n s e t h a t i t has been formed a s p a r t of a b a t t l e between c o n f l i c t ing i n t e r e s t s :
labor.
employee v s . employer, o r more g e n e r a l l y , c a p i t a l v s .
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e , l a b o r p r o c e s s r e f l e c t s i n i t s s t r u c t u r e
35
a contest for ascendency of control between workers and those for whom
they work.
That contest for ascendency is part of the quest for hegemony
that the business system has been pursuing on all fronts for the
past few hundred years. The quest for hegemony extends beyond control
of the labour process to ideological hegemony and to control of the
state as well as the education system and the process of research and
development.
The establishment of control over the labour process has
been one political victory in that quest.
It is commonly accepted, especially in North America, that work
is unavoidably and inevitably unpleasant, except for the lucky few.
David Jenkins, in his study of workplace democracy, summarizes that
attitude succinctly:
What, then should be done about work? The most obvious
answer and the most popular is: nothing.30
'
To most people it seems unfortunate perhaps, but natural, that work will
be unpleasant and alienating, as Jenkins points out:
That work could be, or should be, something other than
mere punishment or drudgery is not a possibility that
most workers have ever been confronted with, even on
the theoretical level. It would thus hardly ever occur
to the av rage worker to question the natural painfulness
of work.3 f
David Riesman in his widely read The Lonely Crowd theorized that attempts
to improve the meaningfulness of work were hopeless and that the condition
of work is so without remedy that workers should seek life's meaning
in leisure.32
Although he himself bas since re~onsidered,~~
this attitude
remains quite prevalent.
If the organization of work is regarded as fundamentally
predetermined by incontrovertible realities of economic efficiency alone,
then any ambition of changing i t i s a f u t i l e one which could only b e
utopian o r romantically reactionary a t b e s t .
However, i f i t were seen
t h a t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s i n some way p o l i t i c a l l y r e s p o n s i v e
r a t h e r t h a n o b j e c t i v e l y f i x e d , t h e n t h e r e would b e a t l e a s t t h e possib i l i t y of r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t work need n o t n e c e s s a r i l y b e c o n s t i t u t e d a s i t
p r e s e n t l y i s , w i t h only minor m o d i f i c a t i o n s .
It i s beyond t h e scope of t h i s t h e s i s t o d i s c u s s ways i n which work
could b e p o s s i b l y b e reorganized i n view of t h e p o l i t i c a l i n f l u e n c e s
on i t .
T h i s t h e s i s i s concerned r a t h e r t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e modern
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work has been marked by a l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l c o n t e s t
f o r ascendency by t h e b u s i n e s s system, and t o examine t h e way t h a t
t h e s t r u g g l e f o r c o n t r o l of t h e workplace (which i s p a r t of t h a t l a r g e r
p o l i t i c a l c o n t e s t ) has shaped t h e formation of t h e l a b o u r p r o c e s s d u r i n g
two c r u c i a l p e r i o d s .
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER TWO
Quoted i n E. P. Thompson, The Making of t h e E n g l i s h Working
C l a s s (New York: Random House, 1963), p. 446.
Studs T e r k e l , Working (New York: Avon Books, 19751, P. 2, 5-6.
S p e c i a l Task Force t o t h e U.S. S e c r e t a r y of H e a l t h , Education,
and Welfare, Work i n America (Cambridge: M.I.T. P r e s s , 1973),
p. 38.
~ o b e r tS
p. 73.
. Diamond,
"What Business ~ h i n k s ,
" Fortune, J u l y 1970,
Judson Gooding, "Blue C o l l a r Blues on t h e Assembly Line",
Fortune., J u l y 1970, p. 70.
Judson Gooding, "The Fraying White C o l l a r " , Fortune, December
1970, p. 79.
" ~ o s tJobs Could Be Done By Morons", Vancouver Sun, 21 3uly
1980, p. AS.
George E. Cruikshank, "No-Shows a t Work: High-Priced Headache,"
N a t i o n ' s Business, September 1976, p. 37-8.
Cruikshank, p. 38.
See t h e summary given i n Robert L. Kahn, "The Meaning of Work:
I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and P r o p o s a l s f o r Measurement," i n The Human
Meaning of S o c i a l Change, Angus Campbell and P h i l i p E. Converse,
eds., (New York: R u s s e l l Sage Foundation, 1972), p. 193-5.
Harold L. Sheppard and Neal Q . H e r r i c k , Where Have A 1 1 t h e Robots
Gone?: Worker D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e ' 7 0 ' s (New York: Free P r e s s ,
Macmillan Co., 1972) , p. v.
Work i n America, p. 14.
Neal H e r r i c k , "Who's Unhappy a t Work and Why," Manpower 4
(January, 1972).
Kahn, p. 179.
George S t r a u s s , "Is There a Blue C o l l a r Revolt Against Work?"
i n Work and t h e Q u a l i t y of L i f e : Resource P a p e r s f o r "Work i n
America", James OIToole, e d . ,
(Cambridge: M . I . T . P r e s s , 1974)
p. 55.
Work i n America, p. 15.
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER TWO CONTINUED
Sheppard and B e r r i c k , p . 31.
Kahn, p. 182.
Robert P. Quinn and L i n d a J. Sheppard, The 1972-3 Q u a l i t y of
Employment Survey: Report t o t h e Employment S t a n d a r d s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
U.S. Department of Labor, (Ann Arbor: Survey R e s e a r c h C e n t e r of
t h e I n s t i t u t e f o r S o c i a l R e s e a r c h , U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan, 1974),
p. 225-6.
Quinn and Sheppard, p. 68-9.
T e r k e l , p. 675-9.
M. S c o t t Myers, Every Employee a Manager (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1970) , p. 48.
"Technicians and t h e C a p i l a l i s t D i v i s i o n of Labor," anon. group
of I t a l i a n employees, t e c h n i c i a n s and p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i s t s ,
S o c i a l i s t R e v o l u t i o n (May-June, 1972): 69.
E l i n o r Langer, " I n s i d e t h e New York Telephone Company," i n Women
a t Work, W i l l i a m L. O I N e i l l , e d , (Chicago: Q u a d r a n g l e Books,
l 9 7 2 ) , p. 307-60.
Langer, p. 339-40.
David J e n k i n s , J o b Power: Blue and White C o l l a r Democracy (Garden
C i t y : Doubleday and Co., 1973), p. 314-5.
L a r s K a r l s s o n , "Experiences i n Employee P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Sweden,
1969-72," unpub. p a p e r , Program on P a r t i c i p a t i o n and Labor-Managed
Ssytems, C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y , 1973, p. 51.
Michel Bosquet, "The F a c t o r y ~ r i s o n s , . " New L e f t Review 73 (MayJ u n e 1972): 32.
For a good a n a l y s i s of j o b e n r i c h m e n t , s e e Andrew Z i m b a l i s t , "The
L i m i t s of Work Humanization," Review o f R a d i c a l P o l i t i c a l Economics
7:2 (Summer, 1975).
J e n k i n s , p . 57.
J e n k i n s , p. 53.
David Riesman, The Lonely Crowd (New York: Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ,
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER TWO CONTINUED
33.
David Riesman, "Leisure and Work i n P o s t - I n d u s t r i a l Society" i n Mass
L e i s u r e , E r i c Larrabee and R. Meyersohn, e d s . , (Glencoe, Ill.: F r e e
P r e s s , 1958), p. 368-85.
CHAPTER THREE
TECHNOLOGY
The Ideology of Technology
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of work
i s t h e way t h a t a s o c i e t y a r r a n g e s
people and t h e i r t o o l s a t t h e p o i n t of p r o d u c t i o n t o produce i t s goods
and s e r v i c e s .
It comprises two c l o s e l y r e l a t e d elements:
of l a b o u r and technology.
the division
T h e i r development and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p t o
each o t h e r w i l l be t r a c e d through two key p e r i o d s i n modern times i n
t h e two c h a p t e r s f o l l o w i n g t h i s one i n an a t t e m p t t o show t h a t t h e conv e n t i o n a l ways of conceiving of t h e i r meaning a r e improper and inadequate.
Before doing t h a t , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o c l a r i f y our t h i n k i n g about one of
t h e two elements of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work:
technology.
The word "technology" c o n t a i n s images of machines, tooks, hardware, and sometimes t h e manual, t e c h n i c a l , and p r o f e s s i o n a l s k i l l s
r e q u i r e d f o r t h e use of t h e machines.
The d i f f i c u l t y h e r e i s t h a t an
important r e l a t i o n s h i p i s being obscured.
This d i f f i c u l t y r e s i d e s i n
a category problem.
I n o r d e r t o t a l k about t h e o p e r a t i o n of any complex formation,
i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o i n t r o d u c e some methodological boundaries s o t h a t i t
i s p o s s i b l e t o i d e n t i f y a s m a l l e r p a r t i n d i s t i n c t i o n from t h e overwhelming complexity of t h e whole.
c e s s of boundary c r e a t i o n .
Language must p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e pro-
I f t h e words a r e t o r e f e r t o something, t h i s
something must be marked o f f from t h e continuous n a t u r e of r e a l i t y i n
which t h e r e a r e no beginning p o i n t s o r end p o i n t s .
These must be i n t r o -
duced c o n c e p t u a l l y i f we a r e going t o t a l k about something, s i n c e w e
cannot, and u s u a l l y do n o t want t o , t a l k about e v e r y t h i n g a t once.
Doing t h i s p r e s e n t s no problam s o long a s , f i r s t , i t i s remembered
t h a t we a r e d i v i d i n g r e a l i t y w h i l e r e a l i t y i t s e l f i s n o t d i v i d e d , and
second, t h a t w e do i t i n a way which i s n o t obscuring important r e l a t i o n ships.
When r e a l i t y i s broken up i n t o conceptual beginnings and ends
which obscure important r e l a t i o n s h i p s , a category problem h a s a r i s e n .
When we have a c a t e g o r y problem, t h e c a t e g o r y i s i d e o l o g i c a l
i n t h e s e n s e t h a t i s i t b o t h t r u e and n o t t r u e .
b u t i n a d i s t o r t e d and incomplete way.
It e x p l a i n s something,
It d e s c r i b e s t h e p a s t , p r e s e n t
and probable f u t u r e i n a m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l way t h a t g i v e s r i s e t o misconceptions when t h e c a t e g o r y t r a n s l a t e s i n t o a c t i o n .
I1
The term
technology" p r e s e n t s a category problem.
Technology is commonly thought of a s meaning t h e s c i e n t i f i c a l l y
based o r s y s t e m a t i c a p p l i c a t i o n of mechanical, chemical, o r e l e c t r o n i c
methods of g e t t i n g t h i n g s done.
It seems t o c o n s i s t of such t h i n g s a s
motor c a r s , b l a s t f u r n a c e s , washing machines, t e l e v i s i o n t r a n s m i t t e r s ,
dictaphones, e t c .
But t h i s conception i s too narrow because i t excludes
t h e n e c e s s a r y manual/mental s k i l l s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e u s e of t h e hardware.
Dictaphones tend t o be found w i t h d i c t a - t y p i s t s
(word p r o c e s s o r s ) and
d i c t a t o r s (word o r i g i n a t o r s ) .
Here we f i n d a t once a d i v i s i o n of l a b o r
which i s more t h a n t e c h n i c a l .
It i s a s o c i a l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
vision transmitters require receivers.
t o transmit.
Tele-
They do n o t a l l o w t h e r e c e i v e r s
They engender a s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , t h i s time between
i s o l a t e d p a s s i v e r e c e i v e r s and a c e n t r a l i z e d unapproachable s o u r c e
of a u t h o r i t y .
These a r e only two examples of t h e way i n which a p a r t -
i c u l a r kind of hardware cannot be s e e n i n s e p a r a t i o n from i t s s o c i a l
It i s t r u e of any technology.
context.
The common meaning of technology w i t h i t s c o n s t e l l a t i o n of
images of machines, t o o l s , e t c . does n o t t a k e t h i s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n .
The machines and t o o l s and t e c h n i c a l p r o c e s s e s a r e s e p a r a t e d a r t i f i c i a l l y from t h e s o c i a l forms w i t h i n which they a r e employed, s e p a r a t e d
i n e f f e c t from t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of human a c t i v i t i e s .
N a t u r a l l y , once
t h i s t a k e s p l a c e , "technology" seems t o t a k e on a l i f e of i t s own, an
i n t e r n a l l o g i c of development independent of p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l constraints.
It seems t o determine u n a l t e r a b l y many of t h e c o n d i t i o n s
of l i f e , i n c l u d i n g t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
It i s a deeply r o o t e d
n o t i o n t h a t many of t h e unpleasant a s p e c t s of work a r e i r r e v o c a b l y
w i t h us f o r b e t t e r o r worse because they simply a r e determined by
technological r a t i o n a l i t y .
To s e e technology a s having a l i f e of i t s own removes from
c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
of capitalist s o c i e t y i s involved i n any primary way i n . t h e form of
the labor process.
W e can s e e t h i s q u i t e c l e a r l y i n t h e words of
Jacques E l l u l , t h e l e a d e r of t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l p e s s i m i s t s :
It is u s e l e s s t o r a i l against capitalism.
C a p i t a l i s m d i d n o t c r e a t e our world. The
machine d i d . 1
And'a s l i g h t l y l e s s r i g i d view i s a l s o r e v e a l i n g l y f a m i l i a r :
Is t h e r e a h i s t o r y of technology i n i t s e l f ? Yes
and no. I n o u r day, t h e answer i s y e s , t o a cert a i n e x t e n t : technology i s l i n k e d w i t h s c i e n c e
and i s t r y i n g t o t a k e a v e r t h e world.
Technology h a s become n o t only t h e s y n t a c t i c a l s u b j e c t of t h e s e n t e n c e ,
b u t a l s o t h e d e p o l i t i c i z e d s u b j e c t of h i s t o r y .
It i s spoken of a s i f i t
had i n t e n t i o n s and g o a l s , a conscious monster e x t r i n s i c t o human concerns
and s o c i a l c o n t r o l .
A double o p e r a t i o n is n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e c r e a t i o n of such a n illusion.
F i r s t , c e r t a i n human a c t i v i t i e s must be c o l l e c t e d i n t o a s i n g l e
word "technology" s o t h a t they become an o b j e c t ; t h e n t h a t o b j e c t must
be animated s o t h a t i t may become a s u b j e c t .
This r e s u l t s i n technol-
o g i c a l determinism which, a s Jacques E l l u l s o a b l y i l l u s t r a t e s , exone r a t e s capitalism.
It h a s s u c c e s s f u l l y been made t o appear t h a t many
f a c e t s of s o c i a l l i f e a r e merely r a t i o n a l and n e c e s s a r y d e r i v a t i v e s of
t h e advance of s c i e n c e and technology i n a l i n e a r e v o l u t i o n of i n e v i t a b l y
and u n i v e r s a l l y s u c c e s s i v e s t a g e s .
While i t i s t r u e t h a t c e r t a i n k i n d s of hardware (technology)
and work o r g a n i z a t i o n mutually r e q u i r e o r exclude each o t h e r , t h i s
does n o t i n i t s e l f c o n s t i t u t e proof of t e c h n o l o g i c a l c a u s a l i t y .
It
i s o n l y p o s s i b l e t o r e a c h t h e conclusion of t e c h n o l o g i c a l determinism
i f technology a s a c a t e g o r y i s c o n s t r u c t e d and used t o exclude t h e
s o c i a l conditions t h a t contain it.
Here we f i n d t h e f o u n d a t i o n of t h e d e b a t e over " t h e impact of
Technology on s o c i e t y " --whether
i t i s good o r evil--and
more s p e c i f -
i c a l l y f o r t h e concerns of t h i s paper, t h e impact on t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
of work.
But t h e d e b a t e (over f o r example whether machines caused
f a c t o r i e s ) i n most c a s e s completely misses t h e p o i n t t h a t t h e soc a l l e d e f f e c t s of technology a r e fundamentally t h e r e s u l t s of a
s o c i a l system t h a t s t r u c t u r a l l y allows, encourages, and p r o h i b i t s
p a r t i c u l a r ways of producing what i t needs.
The compartmentalization
between technique on one hand and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s on t h e o t h e r i s t o o
sharp.
I n r e a l i t y t h e two cannot be s e p a r a t e d .
Social organization
i s t h e c o n t e x t i n which a l l technique i s produced and i n t r o d u c e d .
All
technique b e a r s t h e marks of t h e form of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n which i s
its prerequisite.
A given technique may have r e t r o a c t i v e e f f e c t s on
t h e s o c i e t y which developed i t .
But t h e e f f e c t s , good o r bad, a s w e l l
as t h e technique a r e t o l e r a t e d by s o c i e t y , o r n o t , according t o how
power i s d i s t r i b u t e d and t o t h e i n t e r e s t s of t h o s e who have power.
To m a i n t a i n t h a t technology i s autonomous i s merely a c l e v e r way of
d i s g u i s i n g t h e f a c t t h a t a power s t r u c t u r e e x i s t s , i n our c a s e i n
f a v o r of t h e owners of c a p i t a l .
F i n a l l y , t h e assumption t h a t technol-
ogy i s autonomous and determining i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a kind of dogged
narrow-visioned empiricism which h a s i t s f a c e s o c l o s e t o t h e ground
t h a t i t has no i d e a of what l i e s beneath t h e s u r f a c e .
To u s e t h e c a t e g o r y "technology" t o e x p l a i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
of work i s v a s t l y inadequate.
The t r a n s i t i o n , f o r example, from t h e
g u i l d system t o manufacture ( i n t h e o r i g i n a l s e n s e of hand work)
involved no s i g n i f i c a n t t e c h n i c a l change.
The l i b r a r y of a n c i e n t
Alexandria i s known t o have c o n t a i n e d a p e r f e c t l y working model of a
kind of steam engine which w a s never used b u t allowed t o c o l l e c t d u s t .
T h i s c o n t r i v a n c e had no p l a c e i n t h e work o r g a n i z a t i o n of Egyptian
slave society.
These two seemingly u n r e l a t e d f a c t s t o g e t h e r a r e
examples o f , on t h e one hand, a profound t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n t h e organi z a t i o n of work t h a t w a s n o t t e c h n o l o g i c a l i n o r i g i n , and on t h e o t h e r
hand, t h e f a i l u r e of t h e p r o t o t y p e of a supposedly r e v o l u t i o n a r y machine
t o have any e f f e c t on t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
The underlying r e l a -
t i o n s governing t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work must be sohght elsewhere
than i n technological r a t i o n a l i t y .
Technology as a R e l a t i o n s h i p Rather t h a n a Thing
S a h l i n s i n Stone Age Economics makes t h e important p o i n t t h a t
technology i s n o t j u s t a c o l l e c t i o n of t h i n g s , b u t r a t h e r i n v o l v e s
t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between "man/tool".
Technical development i n t h e
h i s t o r y of c u l t u r a l e v o l u t i o n h a s n o t been a simple accumulation of
i n g e n u i t y s o much a s i t h a s been a development along a d i f f e r e n t a x i s
of t h e man/tool r e l a t i o n s h i p .
w a s on t h e s i d e of t h e u s e r ;
skill.
I n p r i m i t i v e technology, t h e b a l a n c e
the t o o l delivered
human energy and
I n modern technology, t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s reversed.
p a s s e s over t o t h e t o o l when i t becomes a machine.
Skill
In a s t r i c t l y
formal s e n s e , t h e i n s t r u m e n t s of labour come t o employ t h e u s e r ,
r a t h e r t h a n t h e o t h e r way around.
To a p p r e c i a t e t h e f u l l s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e i d e a of technology
a s a r e l a t i o n s h i p i n s t e a d of a t h i n g , it i s n e c e s s a r y t o move beyond
t h e i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l of t h e man/tool r e l a t i o n s h i p .
That i n d i v i d u a l
r e l a f i o n s h i p is p a r t of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of s o c i e t y , whether we a r e
speaking of modern s o c i e t y o r " p r i m i t i v e " s o c i e t y .
S a h l i n ' s study of
" p r i m i t i v e " s o c i e t i e s provides a well-argued and c l e a r demonstration
of t h e connection.
Sahlins i n t e r p r e t s
a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l economics a s being based
on what he c a l l s t h e domestic mode of p r o d u c t i o n , organized through t h e
k i n s h i p l i n e s of t h e extended family.
The domestic mode of production
c o n s i s t s of t h r e e s y s t e m a t i c a l l y r e l a t e d components:
a small labour
f o r c e d i f f e r e n t i a t e d mainly by sex; a simple technology; and f i n i t e
production g o a l s .
4
A simple technology i s one which can l a r g e l y be made and used
by one person who can a l o n e perform t h e e n t i r e p r o c e s s .
It t y p i c a l l y
does n o t r e l y on o r presuppose a complex d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
A t the
most, i t r e q u i r e s t h e c o o p e r a t i o n of a household group a s , f o r example,
i n t h e making of a canoe o r i n some o t h e r l a r g e s c a l e o p e r a t i o n .
It
can be s e e n immediately t h a t t h i s s o r t of technology i s admirably s u i t e d
t o a c u l t u r e i n which one man and one woman t o g e t h e r r e p r e s e n t n e a r l y
t h e e n t i r e s o c i a l breakdown of p r o d u c t i v e t a s k s .
S a h l i n s h a s s a i d t h a t each of t h e t h r e e components.of t h e dome s t i c mode of p r o d u c t i o n i s adapted and bonded t o t h e o t h e r s .
of t h e s e t h r e e b e i n g s t o develop s i g n i f i c a n t changes,
incompatible w i t h t h e o t h e r two.
it w i l l
I f one
become
Together, t h e t h r e e tend t o be a
b u i l t - i n hindrance t o t h e s o r t of runaway growth which i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c '
of i n d u s t r i a l i z e d s o c i e t y .
...t h e norm of
domestic l i v e l i h o o d t e n d s t o be
i n e r t . I t cannot move above a c e r t a i n l e v e l witho u t t e s t i n g t h e c a p a c i t i e s of t h e domestic l a b o r
f o r c e , e i t h e r d i r e c t l y o r through t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l
change r e q u i r e d f o r a h i g h e r output. The s t a n d a r d
of l i v e l i h o o d does n o t s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n c r e a s e w i t h o u t
p u t t i n g i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e e x i s t i n g family o r g a n i z a t i o n .
And i t h a s a n u l t i m a t e c e i l i n g set by t h e p o s s i b i l i t y
of any household t o p r o v i d e adequate f o r c e s and r e l a t i o n s of production.5
Normally ( u n t i l t h e e x t e r n a l i t i e s of f o r e i g n p e n e t r a t i o n a r e i n t r o d u c e d ) ,
any s i g n i f i c a n t change i n one of t h e t h r e e elements of t h e domestic
mode
of p r o d u c t i o n w i l l be c o n s t r a i n e d by n e g a t i v e feedback from t h e o t h e r two.
S a h l i n s ' a n a l y s i s i s u s e f u l f o r showing how t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
r e p r e s e n t e d by technology i s i n t i m a t e l y connected t o t h e s o c i a l organi z a t i o n which c o n t a i n s i t .
of l a b o r .
The l o c u s of t h e connection i s t h e d i v i s i o n
The form of t h e s o c i a l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r demands c e r t a i n c o r r -
esponding forms of technology.
For t h i s reason t h e i d e a of tech-
nology a s a c o l l e c t i o n of t h i n g s i s improper.
And t h e i d e a t h a t technol-
ogy determines s o c i a l development, and i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of
work, i s a l s o improper.
This c h a p t e r has argued t h a t technology cannot be s e e n a s an
i d e n t i f i a b l y s e p a r a t e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d determining f a c t o r i n t h e development and h i s t o r y of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
The n e x t c h a p t e r w i l l
begin t o examine how t h e c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of work developed,
s t a r t i n g from t h e p u t t i n g o u t system which w a s widespread b e f o r e t h e
I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, and t r a c i n g i t s development through t h e e a r l y
p a r t of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution.
The subsequent c h a p t e r w i l l do t h e
same f o r t h e n e x t important p e r i o d i n t h i s p r o c e s s , t h e end of t h e ninet e e n t h and t h e beginning of t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y .
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER THREE
1.
Jacques E l l u l , The Technological S o c i e t y , (New York:
House, 1964), p. 5.
2.
F. Braudel, C a p i t a l i s m and M a t e r i a l L i f e 1400-1800,
Harper and Row, 1973, p. 321.
3.
Marshall S a h l i n s , Stone Age Economics (Chicago:
1972), p. 79-81.
4.
S a h l i n s , p. 87.
5.
S a h l i n s , p . 87.
Random
(New York:
Aldine-Atherton,
CHAPTER FOUR
WORK AND WORKERS DURING THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION
Many authors who have written about the impact of capitalism
on the modern organization of work.have taken the end of the nineteenth
century as their starting point. Although it is true that major changes
occurred at that time, it was not the beginning of the capitalist organization of work.
Capitalism as the predominant system of economic
activity came into ascendency long before.
It came into what might be
called its classic period starting about 1775 in England when the Industrial Revolution began.
That is when Adam Smith's statement of classic
capitalist economics was written. And it is also when capitalism began to
exert its influence on the organization of work.
This is when we begin
to see such simple and basic elements of the modern organization of work
as the centralized work location under the control and discipline of the
employer, and the detail division of labour with specific tasks assigned
to detail workers.
Prior to this time, the organization of work did not
include such simple features that are so taken for granted in today's
workplace. This chapter will look at the ways that these fundamental
developments were an expression of capital's need for control over the
activities of workers, a need generated and easily explained by the
competition for profit.
People have always worked.
This much is true.
But work has not
always meant what i t now means.
i t now is.
Work h a s n o t always been organized a s
Some of t h e languages of n o n - i n d u s t r i a l
s o c i e t i e s do n o t have a word f o r work.
(anthropological)
Work h a s n o t conceived of by
them a s a s e p a r a t e s p e c i a l kind of a c t i v i t y d i f f e r e n t from a l l t h e o t h e r
a c t i v i t i e s of l i f e .
Many s c h o l a r s have r a t h e r a u t o m a t i c a l l y i n t e r p r e t e d
t h i s t o mean t h a t l i v i n g w a s a c t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l w i t h working.
One w a s born, one worked, one d i e d .
nothing b u t t o i l .
L i f e was
Despite t h e f a c t
t h a t some convincing r e s e a r c h has been done showing t h a t people i n c e r t a i n
of t h e s t i l l s u r v i v i n g " p r i m i t i v e " s o c i e t i e s only work from 2 t o 5 hours
a day t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e i r needs ,'
b u t continuous t o i l .
which goes l i k e t h i s :
t h e i d e a p e r s i s t s t h a t l i f e was n o t h i n g
This i d e a i s t h e b a s i s f o r a l i n e of reasoning
l i f e w a s hard and s h o r t f o r a l l humanity u n t i l
t h e b r i l l i a n t i n v e n t i o n of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r . 2
H i s t o r y began w i t h
t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r , which h a s been e v o l v i n g towards e v e r g r e a t e r comp l e x i t y and p e r f e c t i o n e v e r s i n c e , and c i v i l i z a t i o n w i t h i t .
W e owe our
p r e s e n t s t a t e of unprecedented p r o s p e r i t y u l t i m a t e l y t o our h i g h l y
advanced a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e p r i n c i p l e of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r which h a s
allowed t h e accumulation of t e c h n i c a l s k i l l necessary f o r t h e modern
s t a n d a r d of l i v i n g .
T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n , o r some v a r i a n t of i t , may be
found i n many of t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l textbooks used f o r c i v i c s and s o c i a l
studies classes.
I t i s n o t confined t o t h e realm of s c h o l a r l y specula-
-
tion.
Such an argument c o n t a i n s t h e assumption t h a t t h e p r e s e n t d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r amounts t o n o t h i n g more t h a n a q u a n t i t a t i v e improvement over
o l d e r forms.
A s t h i s t h e s i s w i l l a t t e m p t t o show, t h i s i s n o t t r u e .
51
The difference is not one of degree, but of kind. The question of
what kind and why is crucial to an understanding of the present
organization of work as other than objectively inevitable.
The qualitative change in question occurred during the Industrial Revolution. This chapter examines how and why that happened,
based on the English experience of the Industrial Revolution.
It begins
by looking at the pre-industrial organization of work in the guild
system. Then the rise of the putting-out system is discussed. The
influence of the merchants who wanted more freedom to exercise control
over their supply of product is seen as important in the beginning of the
putting-out system. The putting-out system arose when production processes
were removed from guild control because the control of the guilds was too
restrictive for the merchants.
The division of labour in the putting-out
system closely resembled the previous division of labour in the guild
system. But the putting-out system was an important preliminary step in
the move to the industrial organization of work.
The next major development was the appearance of the centralized
workplace.
Workers began to be concentrated under their employer's roof.
With certain exceptions, this was a novel procedure in Western Europe.
It was the major step between domestic and factory organization of work.
It involved no significant technological changes. In fact, it occurred
before mechanization.
The advantages of centralization were at first
largely managerial rather than technical. These advantages will be
analyzed in some detail. At first the actual division of labour was not
substantially different from the domestic division of labour: the same
processes were carried out in the same way under the master's roof.
It w a s a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t w e s e e t h e beginning of t h e implem-
e n t a t i o n of what is known as " f a c t o r y " d i s c i p l i n e .
This d i s c i p l i n e
i s o f t e n e x p l a i n e d as a f e a t u r e of t h e modern mechanized f a c t o r y ,
n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e smooth running of production.
However, we w i l l s e e t h a t
i t w a s imposed independent of and p r i o r t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of mach-
inery-
Some examples a r e given i n t h i s c h a p t e r , and some reasons
f o r i t a r e proposed.
Up u n t i l t h i s p o i n t i n t h e e a r l y I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, c a p i t a l ,
through i t s ownership of m a t e r i a l s and means of p r o d u c t i o n and marketi n g , had only formal c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r process.
That i s t o say t h a t
i t had succeeded i n removing t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s from t h e domain of t h e
g u i l d a r t i s a n s and s u b o r d i n a t i n g i t t o i t s e l f .
T h i s i s what t h e t r a n s -
formation from t h e g u i l d system through t h e domestic system t o t h e
c e n t r a l i z e d workshop amounts to.
But t h e s e were only t h e p r e l i m i n a r i e s
t o t h e change t o t h e i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
They r e s u l t e d i n
a p u r e l y formal c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s , although i t was n o t h i n g
of t h e kind w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e workers i n t h e s o c i a l
system.
C a p i t a l had n o t y e t decomposed, r e c o n s t r u c t e d , and reorganized
i n i t s own i n t e r e s t t h e way t h e a c t u a l d e t a i l s of work i t s e l f were performed.
This i s what came next:
t h e e x t e n s i o n of r e a l c o n t r o l .
t h i s happened p r i o r t o widespread mechanization.
Again,
I n many c a s e s , t h e
i n t r o d u c t i o n of machinery was s o l e l y and e x p l i c i t e l y accomplished a s
p a r t of t h e e x t e n s i o n of r e a l c o n t r o l o v e r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
The. essence of t h e change t o r e a l c o n t r o l w a s t h e move t o t h e d e t a i l o r
minute d i v i s i o n of l a b o r a s opposed t o t h e s o c i a l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
The p o t t e r i e s of Wedgewood w i l l s e r v e a s t h e main c a s e study.
The
p a r t i c u l a r advantages t o management of t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r
w i l l b e a s s e s s e d , i n p a r t through t h e w r i t i n g s of some of t h e r e s p e c t e d
a u t h o r i t i e s of t h e time i n c l u d i n g Adam Smith, Charles Babbage, and
Andrew Ure.
The l a s t p a r t of Chapter Three w i l l f o c u s on t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
of machinery.
This w a s t h e l a s t s t a g e i n t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t o t h e
i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
The i n t r o d u c t i o n of machinery w a s
n o t simply a t e c h n i c a l l y l o g i c a l p r o c e s s .
It w a s o f t e n used a s a
l e v e r t o a d j u s t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c a p i t a l and l a b o r .
In this
connection i t i s p e r t i n e n t t o look a t t h e r e s i s t a n c e of workers, especi a l l y t h e Luddites, t o machinery and t h e way i n which i t was used.
The L u d d i t e s have been much maligned a s i g n o r a n t r e a c t i o n a r y o b s t a c l e s
t o t h e advance of i n d u s t r i a l e f f i c i e n c y .
But what they were f i g h t i n g
over w a s more t h a n simply mechanization.
They were very much involved
i n b a t t l e w i t h high s t a k e s o v e r c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s a t a time
when i t w a s undergoing c r u c i a l changes.
The Guild System and i t s D i v i s i o n of Labor
Long b e f o r e t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, b e f o r e even t h e emergence of c a p i t a l i s m , t h e e s s e n t i a l f i g u r e i n t h e d a i l y p r o v i s i o n of
goods and s e r v i c e s w a s t h e i n d i v i d u a l s k i l l e d a r t i s a n .
These c r a f t s -
men belonged t o g u i l d s , o r a s s o c i a t i o n s of t h o s e occupied i n t h e i r
trade.
The f u n c t i o n of t h e s e g u i l d s h a s been d e s c r i b e d a s :
...
to regulate a l l a c t i v i t i e s related t o their craft
o r c r a f t s i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r town, i n c l u d i n g superv i s i o n of s t a n d a r d s of workmanship, c o n t r o l of admis s i o n s of freemen t o t h e g u i l d , c o n d i t i o n s of
a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , and r e g u l a t i o n of t h e t r a d e i n raw
m a t e r i a l s and manufactured products. 3
I n a d d i t i o n , g u i l d s s p e c i f i e d t h e methods of p r o d u c t i o n i n c l u d i n g
amount and type of raw m a t e r i a l s used.
Guild members s t a r t e d by serv-
i n g an a p p r e n t i c e s h i p during which they l e a r n e d t h e t r a d e .
a p p r e n t i c e s h i p w a s completed they were journeymen o r people
t o work i n t h e t r a d e .
When t h e
*
qualified
A journeyman t h e n worked f o r a master o r became
one h i m s e l f , an employer of h i s journeyman and a p p r e n t i c e , and h e s o l d
what he and h i s journeyman and a p p r e n t i c e made.
Every journeyman had
a r e a s o n a b l e hope of r i s i n g t o become a master.
A t t h i s p e r i o d of prod-
u c t i o n o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e a c t u a l producer s o l d n o t l a b o r but t h e product
of l a b o r .
The producer owned both t o o l s and raw m a t e r i a l s .
"Thus t h e
s p i n n e r s bought t h e wool and s o l d t h e y a r n ; t h e weaver bought t h e yarn
and s o l d t h e c l o t h ; e t c . 115
The d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i n t h e g u i l d system i s of i n t e r e s t .
Each
worker could perform t h e e n t i r e p r o c e s s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n of
a p a r t i c u l a r product o r s e r v i c e .
No person w a s r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e per-
formance of a s p e c i a l i z e d fragmentary t a s k .
There was "no d i v i s i o n of
l a b o u r by p r o c e s s i n v o l v i n g a c e n t r a l o r g a n i z i n g f i g u r e
..."6
For
example, i n a shoemaker's shop, one person would n o t be found day i n
and day out c u t t i n g t h e l e a t h e r w h i l e a second c o n s t a n t l y sewed one
p a r t of t h e shoe and a t h i r d sewed a d i f f e r e n t p a r t .
It may have
*Women were r e p r e s e n t e d i n numerous t r a d e s d ~ r i n and
' ~ after the
p e r i o d of t h e g u i l d system. I n t h e wool t r a d e , they were involved
i n every branch of t h e i n d u s t r y and were a p p r e n t i c e d and admitted
i n t o t h e c r a f t and g u i l d . 7
happened t h a t one p e r s o n would c u t t h e l e a t h e r f o r s e v e r a l s h o e s one
a f t e r t h e o t h e r , and t h e n sew s e v e r a l s h o e s one a f t e r t h e o t h e r , b u t
t h a t i s a d i f f e r e n t matter.
It may seem on f i r s t s i g h t t h a t t h e r e
i s l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e between the two methods of g e t t i n g work done.
T h e r e i s , however, a c r u c i a l d i f f e r e n c e which is t h a t t h e former
i n v o l v e s s p e c i a l i z a t i o n of f u n c t i o n o f t h e worker, w h i l e t h e l a t t e r
does n o t .
A worker i n t h e f o r m e r method would n o t b e a s k i l l e d c r a f t s -
man w h i l e t h e l a t t e r would b e .
The f i r s t would know o n l y how t o c u t
l e a t h e r ; t h e second would know how t o make s h o e s .
G u i l d s p r o t e c t e d t h e c r a f t and t h e c r a f t s m a n ' s c o n t r o l o v e r t h e
craft.
But g r a d u a l l y a f t e r a b o u t 1500, t h e s t r e n g t h and p r o t e c t i o n of
t h e g u i l d s d e c l i n e d s o t h a t by t h e end o f t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y , t h o s e
g u i l d s which remained were no l o n g e r i m p o r t a n t o r s t r o n g .
8
For o u r
p u r p o s e s t h e r e were, d i s r e g a r d i n g t h e v i c i s s i t u d e s of r o y a l p l a n s f o r
p l u n d e r , two s e p a r a t e b u t r e l a t e d developments which undermined t h e
guilds.
One was a n i n t e r n a l s t r u g g l e , t h e o t h e r a s t r u g g l e between t h e
g u i l d s and o u t s i d e r s . With t h e p a s s a g e of time, t h e members of t h e
g u i l d s began t o d i v i d e i n t o two g r o u p s , one which remained o r i e n t e d
t o m a n u f a c t u r e f o r l o c a l t r a d e , t h e o t h e r which o r i e n t e d t o t r a d e
s e l f and moved away from manufacture.
it-
The l a s t group t r i e d t o r e s t r u c -
t u r e t h e g u i l d s i n t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s o t h a t t h e y would b e i n power.
9
Meanwhide commercial c a p i t a l i s t s ( o r merchants) who bought and s o l d t h e
a r t i c l e s made by g u i l d m a s t e r s were a c t i v e 2 y d i s p l e a s e d w i t h t h e e x i s t e n c e of s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n s of p r o d u c e r s .
Faced w i t h p r e s s u r e from b o t h
s i d e s , t h e independence o f t h e s m a l l m a s t e r s began t o d e c l i n e , making
way-for t h e putting-out
system.
The Putting-Out System and i t s D i v i s i o n of Labor
From t h e merchant's p o i n t of view, g u i l d s were a c u r s e .
It
w a s t h e g u i l d r a t h e r than t h e merchant t h a t r e t a i n e d c o n t r o l of product
i n both q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y .
The Weavers of B r i s t o l , f o r example,
s p e c i f i e d t h e width of t h e c l o t h , t h e amount of t h r e a d , t h e kind of
t h r e a d , and t h e d i s t a n c e between them.
,
Cloth found t o be d e f i c i e n t
by g u i l d a u t h o r i t i e s was c o n f i s c a t e d and i t s maker w a s punished by
a f i n e o r a s t a y i n the stocks.
The g u i l d s a l s o r e g u l a t e d wages w i t h i n
t h e t r a d e and t h e p r i c e of f i n i s h e d a r t i c l e s .
11
Merchants consequently were n o t a t l i b e r t y t o do b u s i n e s s
e n t i r e l y a s they s a w f i t .
T h e i r response w a s t o d e v i s e ways of c i r -
cumventing g u i l d c o n t r o l . l2 It was soon r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e r e were
advantages i n t h e u s e of r u r a l l a b o r which w a s o u t s i d e t h e r e a c h of
t h e town-based g u i l d s .
So began t h e p u t t i n g - o u t o r domestic system
i n which raw m a t e r i a l s owned by merchants were d i s t r i b u t e d t o c o t t a g e r s
( u s u a l l y small-holding p e a s a n t farmers eager t o supplement t h e i r income)
who performed some p a r t o r a l l of t h e complete production p r o c e s s and
r e t u r n e d t h e i r work t o t h e merchant.
The merchant continued t o d i s -
t r i b u t e h i s m a t e r i a l s i n t h i s manner u n t i l h e had a f i n i k h e d product
to sell.
Putting-out grew t o become c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a wide range
of t r a d e s i n p r e - i n d u s t r i a l England.
Woollen c l o t h , which w a s one of t h e most important a r t i c l e s of
t r a d e i n England, w i l l s e r v e a s an example.
making woollen c l o t h was complex.
The t r a d i t i o n a l method of
The f l e e c e had t o be cleaned, carded
o r combed, and spun i n t o yarn.
A f t e r i t w a s woven on a hand loom, i t
had s t i l l t o be f u l l e d ( f e l t i n g t h e c l o t h o r r a i s i n g t h e nap by b e a t i n g
i t ) , sheared (made smooth), and dyed.
There were i n England t h r e e sep-
a r a t e a r e a s which were prominent i n t h e wool t r a d e :
t h e south-west
c o u n t i e s , E a s t Anglia ( e s p e c i a l l y Norfolk), and t h e West Riding of
Yorkshire.
A l l d i f f e r e d i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e t r a d e .
The putting-out
system i n t h e woollen t r a d e was r e p r e s e n t e d i n
i t s most c l a s s i c a l form i n t h e West of England.
The merchant manufact-
u r e r , o r merchant c l o t h i e r a s h e was c a l l e d , was t h e imposing c e n t r a l
f i g u r e , co-ordinating every s t a g e of production.
He owned t h e raw
m a t e r i a l s ; he bought t h e wool, gave i t t o s p i n n e r s , took back yarn, gave
t h i s t o weavers, took back t h e c l o t h , had i t f i n i s h e d ( f u l l e d , sheared
and dyed) and f i n a l l y s o l d t h e completed c l o t h .
The t o o l s , a t l e a s t a t f i r s t , belonged t o t h e workers.
These
workers, who were p r i m a r i l y farmers, considered themselves independent.
They worked a t home and were n o t t i e d t o one s i n g l e merchant, b u t r a t h e r
d e a l t with more t h a n one.
However, t h i s g r a d u a l l y changed so t h a t by t h e
end of t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y i t was n o t uncommon t h a t an outworker
would be bound t o a s i n g l e merchant through a kind of debt-patronage.
When a weaver, f o r example, was i n d e b t i n l e a n times, h e borrowed from
a merchant u s i n g h i s loom a s c o l l a t e r a l .
I f he d e f a u l t e d , t h e loom went
t o t h e merchant ( i n t i t l e ) and t h e weaver proceeded t o pay r e n t f o r t h e
loom t h a t had formerly belonged t o him.
13
I n t h e e a s t of England, t h e p u t t i n g - o u t system was a l s o w e l l
developed, b u t
,
i t d i f f e r e d i n t h a t t h e r e was q u i t e commonly a n o t h e r middleman i n t h e
shape of t h e m a s t e r woolcomber.
Wool combing
*
was a very s k i l l e d t r a d e ,
and wool combers enjoyed h i g h p r e s t i g e and h i g h r a t e s of pay and were
e a r l y among t h e b e s t organized and p r o t e c t e d workers of t h e t i m e .
t h i s a r e a of England, they themselves were p u t t e r s - o u t ,
In
g i v i n g combed
wool t o s p i n n e r s and s e l l i n g t h e spun y a r n t o mercgant c l o t h i e r s who
t h e n i n t e g r a t e d t h e remaining s t e p s i n t h e production of f i n i s h e d c l o t h
i n t h e same manner a s t h e merchant c l o t h i e r s i n t h e south-west.
14
Up
t o s e v e r a l hundred people may have been employed a t once by one merchant
clothier.
15
The West Riding p r e s e n t s a r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t p i c t u r e .
Unlike
t h e m a s t e r c l o t h i e r of t h e o t h e r two a r e a s , t h e West Riding c l o t h i e r
w a s f r e q u e n t l y a master c l o t h i e r i n h i s own household, meaning t h a t
t h e small independent weaving family w a s n o t unusual.
Some of t h e s e
f a m i l i e s made t h e c l o t h almost from s t a r t t o f i n i s h themselves i n t h e i r
home.
The men carded and wove, w h i l e t h e women spun.
be done a t home.
F u l l i n g w a s done i n l o c a l w a t e r m i l l s which could be
used by anyone who paid.
e s t town.
Dying could a l s o
The c l o t h was s o l d i n t h e market of t h e near-
Other f a m i l i e s , and t h e r e were probably more of t h e s e , p u t
wool out t o be spun, t h e r e a s o n being t h a t one loom provided work f o r
f i v e o r s i x spinners.
t h a t only spun.
So i n t h e West Riding a l s o t h e r e were f a m i l i e s
Some weaving f a m i l i e s had more than one loom, and t h e
weaver, w h i l e s t i l l himself working, had a few h i r e d weavers under him
is
h i s house.
These l i t t l e master manufacturers, a s they were known,
*A woolcomber used a p a i r of hand c a r d s resembling w i r e brushes t o
s t r a i g h t e n wool f i b e r s f o r s p i n n i n g .
only e x c e p t i o n a l l y had more t h a n f o u r o r f i v e looms.
made a l s o p a r t l y from t h e l a n d .
T h e i r l i v i n g was
16
A r e p o r t of t h e government i n 1806 d e s c r i b e d t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
of t h e wool t r a d e a s follows:
I n t h e domestic system, which i s t h a t of Yorkshire,
t h e manufacture i s conducted by a m u l t i t u d e of master
manufacturers, g e n e r a l l y p o s s e s s i n g a very s m a l l and
s c a r c e l y e v e r any amount of c a p i t a l . They buy t h e
wool of t h e d e a l e r and, i n t h e i r own houses, a s s i s t e d
by t h e i r wives and c h i l d r e n , and from two o r t h r e e t o
s i x o r seven journeymen, they dye i t , when dyeing i s
n e c e s s a r y , and through a l l t h e d i f f e r e n t s t a g e s work
i t up i n t o undressed c l o t h . l7
The term "domestic system'' h a s come t o r e f e r interchangeably w i t h "putting-out system" t o a l l i n d u s t r y of t h e p e r i o d between about 1500-1840
which w a s c a r r i e d on i n t h e homes of non-guild workers s c a t t e r e d about
t h e countryside.
However, i t w i l l avoid confusion h e r e t o r e s t r i c t t h e
u s e of t h e term "putting-out
system" t o those i n s t a n c e s of domestic
i n d u s t r y i n which t h e workers were i n f a c t providing l a b o r f o r merchants
o r f i n a n c i e r s who a c t e d a s a co-ordinating agent f o r t h e s t a g e s of a
p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s and a s a middleman between t h e domestic workers and
t h e i r market.
For t h e s e merchants, t h e putting-out
system i n i t i a l l y meant
g r e a t e r freedom from g u i l d r e g u l a t i o n s concerning methods of production
and q u a l i t y a s w e l l a s q u a n t i t y of merchandise.
It gave them g r e a t e r
c o n t r o l over t h e a r t i s a n s who were more a t t h e mercy of t h e i r "customers"
than they formerly had been.
The outworkers d i d n o t enjoy t h e p r o t e c t i o n
of t h e g u i l d s i n t h e s e t t i n g of r a t e s of pay.
While t h i s w a s damaging
t o t h e i r p o s i t i o n a s w e l l a s f u r t h e r undermining t h e a l r e a d y weakened
g u i l d s , i t g r e a t l y s t r e n g t h e n e d t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e merchants who
could d e a l w i t h t h e outworker a r t i s a n s on a more d i r e c t one-to-one
basis.
The advantages of t h e putting-out
system f o r t h e merchants
have been surmnarized a s follows:
Very e a r l y , urban merchants came t o r e a l i z e t h a t t h e
c o u n t r y s i d e was a r e s e r v o i r of cheap labour: p e a s a n t s
eager t o eke o u t t h e meagre income of t h e l a n d by
working i n t h e off-season, wives and c h i l d r e n w i t h .
f r e e t i m e t o p r e p a r e t h e man's work and a s s i s t him i n
h i s t a s k . And though t h e country weaver, nail-maker
o r c u t t e r was l e s s s k i l l e d than t h e guildsman o r
journeyman of t h e town, h e w a s l e s s expensive, f o r
t h e marginal u t i l i t y of h i s time w a s , i n i t i a l l y a t
l e a s t , low, and h i s a g r i c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s , however
modest, enabled him t o g e t by on t h a t much l e s s income.
Furthermore, r u r a l p u t t i n g - o u t w a s f r e e of g u i l d r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e n a t u r e of t h e product, t h e techniques
of manufacture, and t h e s i z e of e n t e r p r i s e . 1 8
The p u t t i n g - o u t system grew t o be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a wide range
of t r a d e s i n p r e - i n d u s t r i a l England.
It should be apparent t h a t i t s
growth and t h e concomitant r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work were due i n p a r t t o
t h e advantages they a f f o r d e d t o a dynamic c l a s s of commercial c a p i t a l i s t s ,
t h e merchants.
Before t h e o n s e t of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, t h e o l d
g u i l d system had d i s i n t e g r a t e d and given way t o t h e putting-out
although v e s t i g e s remained.
system,
19
Many of t h e o l d E n g l i s h laws d e a l i n g w i t h
g u i l d s were s t i l l . o n t h e books a l b e i t n e a r l y f o r g o t t e n and n o t enforced.
Concentration:
The C e n t r a l i z e d Workplace
The f o r e g o i n g d e s c r i p t i o n p r o v i d e s a background f o r an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work which were
about t o occur i n connection w i t h t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution.
.
One of t h e
most s i g n i f i c a n t changes w a s t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of t h e p l a c e of work.
P r e v i o u s l y , t h e g r e a t e r p a r t of p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s e s such a s weaving
had been c a r r i e d o u t i n e i t h e r t h e home o r a small workshop c l o s e l y
connected t o i t ; hence, t h e name domestic i n d u s t r y .
But immediately
p r i o r t o and d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l Rkvolution, work was i n c r e a s i n g l y
performed by a l a r g e r number of workers g a t h e r e d t o g e t h e r under one
roof belonging t o t h e employer.
These p l a c e s were known a s manufact-
ories.
It would be misleading t o s a y t h a t l a r g e numbers of workers
had never b e f o r e been g a t h e r e d i n t o one p l a c e .
C e r t a i n l y l a r g e numbers
were involved i n enormous a g r i c u l t u r a l o p e r a t i o n s such a s t h e p l a n t a t i o n s of t h e new world o r v a s t c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s such a s c a t h e d r a l s ,
p a l a c e s , even pyramids.
But what we a r e h e r e concerned w i t h i s t h e
worker who produces a manufactured o r c r a f t e d product f o r a market. Even
t h e s e workers had been on e c c a s i o n c o l l e c t e d i n t o c e n t r a l i z e d workshops.
I n t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y on t h e Continent t h e r e had been r e l a t i v e l y
l a r g e p l a c e s of work such a s t h e Gobelin t a p e s t r y works i n P a r i s whose
purpose w a s t o produce h i g h q u a l i t y h a n d c r a f t e d l u x u r y a r t i c l e s f o r
t h e European r o y a l t y .
However, no h i s t o r i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p can b e t r a c e d
between t h o s e r o y a l workshops and modern i n d u s t r i a l methods of production.
It i s noteworthy t h a t t h e r e was no a l t e r a t i o n i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r i n s i d e t h e r o y a l workshops.
21
I n England i t s e l f t h e r e had a l s o been some p r o t o - f a c t o r i e s
b e f o r e t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution.
long
The wool works of John Winchcombe,
p o p u l a r l y known a s J a c k of Newbury, had become semi-legendary:
20
Within one roome being l a r g e and long
There stood two hundred loomes f u l l s t r o n g :
Two hundred men t h e t r u t h i s s o
Wrought i n t h e s e loomes a l l i n a row.
By everyone a p r e t t y boy
S a t e making q u i l s w i t h mickle ioy:
And i n a n o t h e r p l a c e hard by,
An hundred women m e r i l y
Were c a r d i n g h a r d w i t h j o y f u l l c h e e r e
Who s i n g i n g s a t e w i t h v o i c e s c l e e r e . 2 2
The song o r poem goes on f o r s e v e r a l more v e r s e s t o c h r o n i c l e t h e f u r t h e r
employment of two hundred s p i n n i n g maidens, one hundred and f i f t y c h i l d
woolpickers, f i f t y shearmen, e i g h t y r o v e r s , f o r t y dyers and twenty f u l l e r s . 2 3
While t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n i s d o u b t l e s s an e x a g g e r a t i o n , i t remains q u i t e c l e a r
t h a t t h e r e w a s a n e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y grand wool works i n Newbury i n t h e e a r l y
p a r t of t h e s i x t e e n t h century.
John Winchcombe was t h e most famous of a
h a n d f u l of t h e s e e a r l y e n t r e p r e n e u r s who gathered employees and t o o l s
under t h e i r own r o o f .
W i l l i a m Stumpe was a n o t h e r .
cloth-making b u s i n e s s i n t h e mid-sixteenth
He c a r r i e d on h i s
c e n t u r y i n an o l d abbey, every
c o r n e r of which w a s supposed t o be f u l l of looms.
24
Such e s t a b l i s h m e n t s were unique; they were considered remarkable.
I n f a c t , they were considered a t h r e a t by both t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n
and t h e r u l e r s of England.
The a u t h o r i t i e s were d i s t u r b e d by t h i s con-
c e n t r a t i o n of t h e "unruly" elements of s o c i e t y i n t o one p l a c e .
The g u i l d
workers saw t h e s e e s t a b l i s h m e n t s a s an i n c u r s i o n on t h e i r independence
and a t h r e a t t o t h e i r c r a f t s i n c e t h e s e l a r g e e n t e r p r i s e s d i d n o t nece s s a r i l y make use of p r o p e r l y a p p r e n t i c e d and t r a i n e d a r t i s a n s .
The
a u t h o r i t i e s were a l s o alarmed by t h e r e s u l t i n g p r o s p e c t of unemployment
a r i s i n g among p r o p e r a r t i s a n s .
The i n j u r i e s a r e summarized by t h e
25
63
t h e Weaver' s Act of P h i l i p and Mary (1555) which say
The weavers of t h i s realm have complained t h a t
t h e r i c h and wealthy c l o t h i e r s do i n many ways
o p p r e s s them; some by s e t t i n g up and keeping
i n t h e i r houses d i v e r s e looms, and keeping and
m a i n t a i n i n g them by journeymen and persons
u n s k i l f u l , t o t h e decay of a g r e a t number of
a r t i f i c e r s which w e r e brought up i n t h e a r t of
weaving, t h e i r f a m i l i e s and households; some by
i n g r o s s i n g raccumulatiod of looms i n t o t h e i r
hands and p o s s e s s i o n , and l e t t i n g them o u t a t
such unreasonable r e n t s a s t h e poor a r t i f i c e r s
a r e n o t a b l e t o m a i n t a i n themselves; some a l s o
by g i v i n g much l e s s wages and h i r e f o r t h e
and workmanship of c l o t h t h a n i n t i m e s
weavi?%
past.
Consequently, c l o t h i e r s who l i v e d o u t s i d e t h e towns were p r o h i b i t e d
from having more t h a n one loom, w h i l e r u r a l weavers could n o t have
more than two.
L a t e r , t h e workhouse f o r pauper c h i l d r e n was a common form of
c e n t r a l i z e d workshop.
The Act of 1723 brought a b o u t 4 t h e b u i l d i n g of
a t l e a s t one hundred and t e n a c r o s s t h e country, although t h e r e had
been some e a r l i e r . 2 7
They were p o p u l a r l y considered a s exceedingly
u n p l e a s a n t p l a c e s t o have t h e m i s f o r t u n e of being acquainted w i t h ,
and a s being similar t o p r i s o n s .
T h i s a t t i t u d e w a s subsequently repro-
duced w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e l a r g e workshops and f a c t o r i e s t h a t became
e v e r more widespread j u s t b e f o r e and throughout t h e I n d u s t r i a l
Revolution.
None of t h e above examples of c e n t r a l i z e d workplaces can be
p r o p e r l y placed among t h e a n c e s t o r s of t h e modem c e n t r a l i z e d workplace.
The modern c e n t r a l i z e d workplace a r o s e from a d i f f e r e n t l i n e of h i s t o r i c a l evolution.
The r e a s o n most o f t e n c i t e d f o r t h e r i s e of c e n t r a l i z e d work
p l a c e s i s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of machinery.
f a c t o r i e s w i t h machinery.
It seems n a t u r a l t o a s s o c i a t e
David Landes:
...
r e q u i r e d t h e use of
The I n d u s t r i a l Revolution
machines which n o t only r e p l a c e d hand l a b o u r b u t
compelled t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of p r o d u c t i o n i n f a c t ories
i n o t h e r words, machines whose a p p e t i t e
f o r energy w a s t o o l a r g e f o r domestic s o u r c e s of
power and whose mechanical s u p e r i o r i t y w a s s u f f i c i e n t t o break down t h e r e s i s t a n c e of t h e o l d e r
forms of production. 28
-
P a u l Mantoux i n h i s c l a s s i c work The I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n t h e
Eighteenth Century:
The f a c t o r y system...was t h e n e c e s s a r y outcome of
t h e u s e of machinery. P l a n t which c o n s i s t e d of
many i n t e r d e p e n d e n t p a r t s , and which w a s worked
from one c e n t r a l power s t a t i o n , could only be s e t
up i n one main b u i l d i n g , where i t could b e superv i s e d by a d i s c i p l i n e d s t a f f . T h i s b u i l d i n g was 29
t h e f a c t o r y , which admits of no o t h e r d e f i n i t i o n .
John Addy l e s s e l e g a n t l y i n h i s study
of t h e t e x t i l e i n d u s t r y :
"It
was t h e steam e n g i n e which c r e a t e d t h e f a c t o r y of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century. ,t30
And D.C.
Coleman ( r e f e r r i n g t o t h e p e r i o d b e f o r e 1750):
The e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s of c e n t r a l i z e d p r o d u c t i o n
and t h e n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n s f o r i t s f u n c t i o n i n g may
be s e t out...Four b a s i c t e c h n i c a l c o n d i t i o n s may be
d i s c e r n e d , which would n o t merely f a c i l i t a t e some
s o r t of c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , b u t would r e q u i r e i t . F i r s t ,
i t may be t h a t t h e p r o d u c t i v e p l a n t i s a p i e c e of
f i x e d c a p i t a l equipment t o which t h e raw m a t e r i a l s
have t o b e brought f o r p r o c e s s i n g i n some way...
Second, t h e p r o d u c t i v e p l a n t may be d r i v e n by power,
normally i n t h i s p e r i o d t h a t of wind o r f a l l i n g
water...
Third, t h e p r o d u c t i o n may be c e n t r a l i z e d
f o r t h e simple r e a s o n t h a t t h e e s s e n t i a l p r o c e s s i s
mining o r e x t r a c t i o n . . .
Fourth, and l a s t p r o d u c t i o n
may t a k e t h e form of an assembly process. 31
These n o t i o n s of t h e t e c h n i c a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n of work organized
i n t o t h e f a c t o r y a r e a t t h e c o r e of contemporary t h i n k i n g about t h e
i n e v i t a b l e l o g i c of work o r g a n i z a t i o n .
I n f a c t , t h i s way of t h i n k i n g
is s o f i r m l y r o o t e d t h a t two of t h e above h i s t o r i a n s l a p s e i n t o i t desp i t e t h e i r own i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e c o n t r a r y , a s we s h a l l s e e .
What t h e s e
e x p l a n a t i o n s omit t o e x p l a i n i s t h e h i s t o r i c a l precedence of c o n c e n t r a t i o n
over t h e i n v e n t i o n of power d r i v e n machinery.
Although t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
of c e r t a i n mechanical i n v e n t i o n s no doubt a c c e l e r a t e d t h e p r o c e s s , workers
were i n c r e a s i n g l y b e i n g c o n c e n t r a t e d under t h e employer's roof b e f o r e
t h e widespread adoption of such machinery.
The f a c t o r y system a s an
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l form made i t s appearance b e f o r e i t was r e q u i r e d by machi n e r y , and i t had a u s e f u l n e s s a p a r t from t h e housing of power d r i v e n '
machinery.
It i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e h i s t o r i c a l precedence of conc e n t r a t i o n over i n n o v a t i o n h a s n o t gone e n t i r e l y unrecognized by h i s t o r ians.
The economic h i s t o r i a n s M.M.
Knight e t a l . w r i t i n g i n 1927 were
very c l e a r on t h i s p o i n t i n s e v e r a l p l a c e s .
They wrote concerning t h e
cloth industry :
Before t h e g e n e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n of power-driven
machinery, t h e r e was an e v i d e n t tendency, b o t h
i n England and on t h e Continent, t o group t h e
v a r i o u s p r o c e s s e s under t h e same roof where l o c a l
c o n d i t i o n s a g j t h e n a t u r e of t h e i n d u s t r y made i t
practicable.
and on t h e f a c t o r y system i n g e n e r a l :
The f a c t o r y system i s e v i d e n t l y n o t merely t h e prod u c t of a s e r i e s of mechanical i n v e n t i o n s , any more
than i t i s of a number of o t h e r f a c t o r s . To s t a t e
t h a t i n v e n t i o n s made i t p o s s i b l e c a l l s f o r t h e
r e t o r t t h a t they themselves became p r a c t i c a b l e
o n l y a t c e r t a i n p o i n t s i n t h e growth of c a p i t a l i s m
and t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r . 3 3
Moving from t h e realm of p o s s i b i l i t y t o t h e realm of c a u s a l i t y , they
say (though they a l s o s a y t h a t t h e i d e a of c a u s a l i t y i s merely a s o u r c e
of confusion i n t h o u g h t ) ,
...
t h e f a c t o r y system i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a concent r a t i o n of p e r s o n n e l , by d i v i d i n g up t h e t a s k s r a t h e r
t h a n t h e t r a d e s ( a s i n t h e putting-out system). A
marked tendency t o c o n c e n t r a t e t h e workers and t h e
p r o c e s s e s w a s v i s i b l e b e f o r e t h e appearance of power
machinery. Although t h e mechanical i n v e n t i o n s s t i m u l a t e d t h i s , i f e i t h e r w a s a prima
"cause" we must
p i c k t h e one which appeared f i r s t .
3
The e x t r a o r d i n a r y l a c k of r e c o g n i t i o n of t h i s by subsequent h i s t o r i o g r a p h y
and popular b e l i e f r e q u i r e s t h a t i t be explored i n some d e t a i l .
D e s p i t e t h e c o n n o t a t i o n s of t h e term, " I n d u s t r i a l Revolution",
the
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l form of production d i d n o t change from t h e simple domestic
system t o t h e f u l l y mechanized f a c t o r y system i n one g i a n t l e a p .
There
was i n s t e a d a more g r a d u a l t r a n s i t i o n i n which i t i s p o s s i b l e t o s e e t h e
o p e r a t i o n of motives o t h e r than t e c h n i c a l .
mind t h a t t h e
It is important t o keep i n
domestic system w a s never s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l y a s i n g l e method
of o r g a n i z a t i o n even i n t h e woolen i n d u s t r y i n s i d e of England a l o n e ;
t h e r e were r e g i o n a l v a r i a t i o n s .
I n t h e West of England, t h e m a s t e r c l o t h i e r , whose u l t i m a t e aim
was t o market c l o t h , i n t e g r a t e d a l l t h e s t e p s i n c l o t h manufacture,
p u t t i n g o u t wool t o s p i n n e r s and y a r n t o weavers, c l o t h t o f u l l e r s and
s h e a r e r s , and s o
I n t h e West Biding of Yorkshire, i t was more
common t h a n elsewhere t h a t t h e i n t e g r a t i v e f u n c t i o n r e s i d e d i n a s e l f employed person who w a s a l s o a farmer.
This s m a l l independent producer
would buy t h e raw m a t e r i a l s and himself make t h e c l o t h which he s o l d
on t h e market.
I n e i t h e r case, t h e work would be done i n t h e home o r
i n a shed n e x t t o t h e home. 36
( I n t h i s s e n s e t h e term "domestic system"
i s more a p t than "putting-out system").
t r a d e prospered.
However, t h i s changed a s t h e
Master c l o t h i e r s g a t h e r e d t h e i r employees i n t o work-
shops w h i l e t h e more s u c c e s s f u l independent farmer c l o t h i e r s abandoned
t h e i r farming and h i r e d o t h e r people t o work w i t h them on t h e i r premises.
Their d i f f e r e n c e s began t o merge i n t o t h e commonality of being employers
and o v e r s e e r s of workshops.
It w a s t h e s e workshops which must be seen
a s a c r u c i a l s t e p i n t h e t r a n s i t i o n from t h e domestic system t o t h e f a c t o r y system.
Workers i n o t h e r i n d u s t r i e s were a l s o being c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t o
central locations.
Workers i n t h e h o s i e r y t r a d e , c e n t e r e d i n t h e
Midlands, used a hand powered k n i t t i n g machine, i n v e n t e d i n 1598 by
William Lee, c a l l e d a s t o c k i n g frame.
Since t h e s e machines were r e l -
a t i v e l y expensive, many of t h e domestic k n i t t e r s who had s t o c k i n g
frames i n t h e i r home d i d n o t own t h e frames which i n s t e a d belonged
t o master h o s i e r s who r e n t e d them o u t .
I n t h e mid-eighteenth c e n t u r y
by f a r t h e m a j o r i t y of s t o c k i n g frames were i n t h e k n i t t e r s 1 homes
which r a r e l y h e l d more than t h r e e , and u s u a l l y h e l d only one o r two.
There were then a few merchant h o s i e r s and middlemen who b u i l t workshops c o n t a i n i n g up t o twelve s t o c k i n g frames.
By t h e end of t h e
century, t h e s e workshops were becoming more common. 38
It should be
37
noted t h a t t h i s c o n c e n t r a t i o n had no connection w i t h t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
of d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of machinery.
I n the s i l k trade i n
1704 t h e r e w a s a weaving "factory" with
20 looms, a l t h o u g h t h e u s u a l number i n one p l a c e was l e s s than s i x . 3 9
S h o r t l y a f t e r , i n 1716 t h e Lombe b r o t h e r s , who had discovered t h e closely
guarded I t a l i a n s e c r e t of water powered s i l k throwing, s e t up t h e famous
Derby s i l k throwing m i l l employing t h r e e hundred people, b u t
.,.even b e f o r e t h e Lombes' Derby f a c t o r y , we may
s e e approaches t o t h e f a c t o r y system i n t h e throws t e r s ' shops w i t h t h e i r g a t h e r i n g t o g e t h e r of women
and c h i l d r e n t o t u r n wooden machinery, and i n t h e
b r i n g i n g t o g e t h e r of a number of looms under t h e
m a s t e r ' s roof .40
I n b o t h t h e s a i l c l o t h i n d u s t r y and smallware manufacture i t was n o t unu s u a l by 1760 t h a t workers were c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t h e employer's e s t a b l i s h ment without b e n e f i t of t h e urging of new machinery.
'' Also by t h i s time
t h e m e t a l t r a d e s were being reorganized i n t o c e n t r a l workshops. 42
This
was happening i n o t h e r branches of i n d u s t r y t o o numerous t o l i s t .
It seems q u i t e c l e a r t h a t t h e primary reason f o r t h e workshop
was not technical.
The techniques and t o o l s used i n t h e s e workshops
a t f i r s t were n o t d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e used i n t h e home.
The i n i t i a l
advantage of t h e workshop l a y elsewhere i n a number of managerial
concerns, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e c o n t r o l t h e workshop gave t o t h e employer
over product, and e v e n t u a l l y p r o c e s s a s w e l l , which they had n o t previ o u s l y had.
Workshops provided b e t t e r c o n t r o l over supply of product,
a f f o r d e d p r o t e c t i o n f o r t h e c a p i t a l i s t ' s t o o l s and p r o t e c t i o n from
embezzlement, allowed f o r b e t t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y c o n t r o l of workers, and
f i n a l l y , p r e s e n t e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of d i r e c t l y r e o r g a n i z i n g t h e d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r which, a s we s h a l l s e e , was a major development.
From t h e c a p i t a l i s t ' s p o i n t of view, t h e domestic system was
bound by a n i n t e r n a l c o n t r a d i c t i o n i n t h e a r e a of supply of product.
P r e c i s e l y a t t h e time when an expansion of t h e market provided an opport u n i t y f o r g r e a t p r o f i t s t o be made, t h e r e was no way f o r t h e c a p i t a l i s t
t o induce t h e outworker employees t o produce more.
A t t h i s moment i n
t h e development of c a p i t a l i s m , t h e d o c t r i n e of t h e u n l i m i t e d n a t u r e of
human d e s i r e s had n o t y e t been implanted i n t h e common mind.
consumerism belong t o a l a t e r p e r i o d .
That and
The e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y worker
In
had a f a i r l y i n e l a s t i c conception of a decent s t a n d a r d of l i v i n g .
o t h e r words, t h e r e was an upper l i m i t a s w e l l a s a lower l i m i t .
There
was a p o i n t a t which t h e a p p e a l of l e i s u r e surpassed t h a t of more income.
A t t h i s p o i n t , a p u t t e r - o u t e r had no r e l i a b l e method of compelling a
worker t o c o n t i n u e producing.
Raising wages only had t h e r a t h e r i n f u r -
i a t i n g e f f e c t of p u t t i n g an e a r l i e r end t o t h e amount of l a b o r necessary
f o r an adequate income.
Lowering wages a t t h e time of an expanding
market meant t h e r i s k of l o o s i n g t h e worker t o a higher-paying
competitor.
I n a d d i t i o n , when t h e r e were a t t e m p t s t o c u t r a t e s , t h e put-workers
fought back.
They had p o s s e s s i o n of t h e m a s t e r ' s m a t e r i a l s , and t h e s e
could be withheld t o back up r a t e demands. Some, such a s weavers and
k n i t t e r s , could v e n t t h e i r anger on t h e i r employer's r e n t e d t o o l s which
were i n t h e i r possession.
The merchants t r i e d more c o v e r t forms of
wage r u t t i n g such as changing measuring and weighing p r a c t i c e s t o t h e
employers' advantage.
I n response, vengeful workers found ways of
reducing t h e v a l u e e x t r a c t e d from them by t h e i r employers:
t h e q u a l i t y of work, embezzling, l e a v i n g work u n f i n i s h e d .
lowering
Unfinished
work was a p p a r e n t l y such a problem t h a t l a w s were passed r e q u i r i n g
workers t o e x e c u t e t h e i r commitments promptly and t o complete them
b e f o r e h i r i n g o u t t o a n o t h e r employer.
43
The c e n t r a l workshop appeared t o be a s o l u t i o n t o t h e problem
of c o n t r o l over supply, a problem seemingly i n s o l u b l e i n t h e p u t t i n g
o u t system.
A s N.S.B.
Gras h a s w r i t t e n i n a s t u d y of i n d u s t r i a l
evolution,
Under one r o o f , o r w i t h i n a narrow compass, [the
w o r k e r 4 could be s t a r t e d t o work a t s u n r i s e and
k e p t going t i l l s u n s e t , b a r r i n g p e r i o d s f o r r e s t
and refreshment. They could b e k e p t working s i x
days a week. And under t h e p e n a l t y of l o s s of a l l
employment, t y could be k e p t going almost throughout the year.
&
But t h i s was n o t t h e only advantage of t h e c e n t r a l workshop.
The v u l n e r a b i l i t y of t h e p u t t e r - o u t e r ' s m a t e r i a l s and t o o l s i n
t h e hands of out-workers w a s by no means a n a b s t r a c t p o s s i b i l i t y .
Mantoux e x p l a i n s t h e c o n t e x t i n which t h a t v u l n e r a b i l i t y a r o s e :
[ ~ i s ~ u t ebetween
s
c a p i t a l and labour3 were f r e q u e n t
and v i o l e n t b e f o r e machinery and f a c t o r i e s o r even
'manufacture' came i n t o being. A s soon as t h e means
of p r o d u c t i o n no l o n g e r belong t o t h e producer, and
a c l a s s of men i s formed who buy l a b o u r from a n o t h e r
c l a s s , an o p p o s i t i o n of i n t e r e s t s must become manif e s t . The dominant f a c t , which cannot b e too much
emphasized, i s t h e d i v o r c e of t h e producer from t h e
means of production. The c o n c e n t r a t i o n of l a b o u r
i n f a c t o r i e s , and t h e growth of g r e a t i n d u s t r i a l
c e n t r e s , l a t e r gave t h i s v i t a l f a c t a l l i t s s o c i a l
consequences and a l l i t s h i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e .
But t h e f a c t i t s e l f appeared a t an e a r l i e r d a t e ,
and i t s f i r s t e f f e c t s made themselves f e l t long b e f o r e
i t reached m a t u r i t y a s t h e r e s u l t of t h e t e c h n i c a l
r e v o l u t i o n . 45
Many groups of a r t i s a n s had formed combinations (an e a r l y kind
of t r a d e union) s h o r t l y a f t e r t h e beginning of t h e e i g h t e e n t h century
p a r t i a l l y f o r t h e purpose of r e g u l a t i n g t h e r a t e s p a i d t o them.
Wool
weavers i n t h e southwest had by 1717 formed a combination which was
s e v e r e l y denounced i n a r o y a l proclamation d e s c r i b i n g such combinations
l a w l e s s c l u b s and s o c i e t i e s which had i l l e g a l l y
presumed t o u s e a common s e a l , and t o a c t a s
Bodies Corporate, by making and unlawfully cons p i r i n g t o e x e c u t e c e r t a i n By-laws o r Orders,
whereby they p r e t e n d t o determine who had a
r i g h t t o t h e Trade, what and how many Apprent i c e s and Journeymen each man should keep a t once,
t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e p r i c e s of a l l t h e i r manufactures,
and t h e m a n g y and m a t e r i a l s of which they should
be wrought.
This r o y a l d i s a p p r o v a l of what had formerly been t h e l e g i t i m a t e ambitions
of t h e g u i l d s d i d n o t d i s c o u r a g e t h e weavers from t e r r i f y i n g t h e c l o t h i e r s
by d e s t r o y i n g t h e i r goods, f o r i n 1725, a t t h e c l o t h e r s ' r e q u e s t , a law
was enacted p r o h i b i t i n g any combination of t h e weavers f o r t h e g o a l of
r a i s i n g wages o r r e g u l a t i n g t h e t r a d e and p r o v i d i n g t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y
o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of goods during a s t r i k e .
Never-
t h e l e s s , t h e weavers' o r g a n i z a t i o n s d i d n o t d i s a p p e a r , n o t d i d t h e p r a c t i c e of applying p r e s s u r e through t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of p r o p e r t y cease.
47
And t h e weavers w e r e n ' t a l o n e .
E a r l i e r i n London i n 1710, t h e framework k n i t t e r s , whose frames
belonged t o t h e m a s t e r s , became enraged by t h e m a s t e r s ' use of too many
workhouse c h i l d r e n , a p r a c t i c e which reduced both t h e i r employment and
wages.
When t h e m a s t e r s r e f u s e d t o r e l e n t , t h e k n i t t e r s r e p l i e d by
d e s t r o y i n g t h e i r frames. 48
Mantoux s t a t e s t h a t "Such e v e n t s were very
f r e q u e n t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d immediately preceeding t h e I n d u s t r i a l
Revolution. ,149 For example, i n 1763 when t h e s i l k m a s t e r s d e c l i n e d t o
pay what t h e s i l k weavers f e l t t o b e a f a i r r a t e , two thousand of them
went o u t on s t r i k e a f t e r d e s t r o y i n g a l l m a t e r i a l s and t o o l s . 50
Given
t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , i t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t merchant manufacturers would
begin t o s e e a c e r t a i n measure of s e c u r i t y i n a workshop t h a t g a t h e r e d
t h e i r t o o l s , m a t e r i a l s , and workers w i t h i n t h e i r reach.
Although t h i s
s e c u r i t y was by no means a g u a r a n t e e of peace ( a s would soon be l e a r n e d )
i t d i d r e p r e s e n t a s u b s t a n t i a l r e d u c t i o n of v u l n e r a b i l i t y .
The c e n t r a l workshop a l s o provided p r o t e c t i o n t o t o o l s from a
d i f f e r e n t managerial p o i n t of view.
A t a time when competition was
r a t h e r c u t t h r o a t t o market cheap v e r s i o n s of expensive hand made items
such a s luxury c l o t h i n g , any e n t r e p r e n e u r who came up w i t h a new modifi c a t i o n i n h i s technique of p r o d u c t i o n was i n danger of being undermined
by having i t s t o l e n by a competitor.
t o maintain.
P a t e n t s were n o t o r i o u s l y d i f f i c u l t
I n t h e s e circumstances, some merchant manufactures b u i l t
workshops p u r e l y t o s e r v e a s a s a f e r e c e p t a b l e f o r a modified p i e c e of
equipment i n o r d e r t o keep an advantage i n t h e market.
The s t o r y of Samuel Fellows (1687-1765),
"who pioneered t h e con-
51
c e n t r a t i o n of p r o d u c t i o n i n t h e t e x t i l e t r a d e s i n ( ~ o t t i n g h a m ) " , i s a
case i n p o i n t .
H e is s a i d t o have gone t o Nottingham i n about 1706 from
London, where he w a s born, t o avoid t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e excessive
u s e of pauper a p p r e n t i c e s t h a t t h e framework k n i t t e r s were i n s i s t i n g
upon and which l e d t o t h e p r e v i o u s l y mentioned d e s t r u c t i o n of 2000
frames i n 1710.
I n Nottingham he took advantage of h i s d i s t a n c e from
t h e London Company of Framework K n i t t e r s by s e t t i n g up a workshop employi n g l a r g e numbers of c h i l d pauper a p p r e n t i c e s a t a low r a t e .
o u t t o be v e r y p r o f i t a b l e and h i s b u s i n e s s grew.
This turned
Around 1730 he began
t o s p e c i a l i z e i n s i l k h o s i e r y and o t h e r f a s h i o n i t e m s which required
t h e a l t e r a t i o n of t h e meshes on t h e frames.
Fellows bought some of
t h e s e s p e c i a l l y a l t e r e d frames and b u i l t "a l a r g e f a c t o r y t ' i n which t o
conceal them.
"The i d e a was taken up by s u c c e s s i v e h o s i e r s who sponsored
i n n o v a t i o n s o t h a t , by t h e time Arkwright cwho i s u s u a l l y thought of a s
t h e f a t h e r of t h e factory]
came t o Nottingham t h e f a c t o r y could be rec-
ognized a s a l o c a t i o n of production commonly used by innovators. ,152
These ' f a c t o r i e s ' were n o t t h e f a c t o r y t h a t we t h i n k o f , i . e . ,
with rows of i n t e r c o n n e c t e d power d r i v e n machinery; t h e new machines
involved were n o t h i n g more than minor a l t e r a t i o n s and modifications of
t h e s t o c k i n g frame f i r s t developed i n 1598.
The " f a c t o r i e s " were prot-
e c t i v e armor f o r t h e s e v a l u a b l e p r o p e r t i e s .
They were sometimes b u i l t
with only s k y l i g h t s t o keep out prying eyes. 53
But even t h i s did not
d e f e a t t h e more determined u s u r p e r s who,by going t o t h e l e n g t h of boring
h o l e s i n t h e w a l l s t o g e t a look, were known t o have d r i v e n a t l e a s t
one i n v e n t o r (Samuel Crompton
who developed t h e s e l f - a c t i n g mule f o r
spinning) t o make h i s s e c r e t p u b l i c .
54
Embezzlement w a s a n o t h e r problem w i t h t h e putting-out system
f o r masters.
Domestic workers who r e c e i v e d raw m a t e r i a l s from t h e
m a s t e r s would keep a l i t t l e and s e l l i t on t h e black market when they
f e l t t h a t they were n o t given proper compensation f o r t h e i r l a b o r s o r
when they were i n p e r i o d s of poverty.
They dampened t h e y a r n w i t h
g r e a s e o r b u t t e r t o g i v e i t f a l s e weight, o r s t r e t c h e d t h e c l o t h t o
make i t look b i g g e r .
itude:
They d i d n o t t h i n k t h i s involved any moral turp-
on t h e c o n t r a r y , i t w a s regarded a s q u i t e j u s t i f i e d by t h e i r
e x p l o i t a t i o n a t t h e hands of t h e masters.
I n f a c t , some of t h e m a s t e r s
were former outworkers who had accumulated enough c a p i t a l i n t h i s way
t o s e t themselves up a s manufacturers.
II
...t h e worker's
And according t o P r o f . Landes,
p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r embezzlement, sharpened i n d e p r e s s i o n
by t h e d e s i r e t o compensate f o r i n c r e a s e d abatements and l a c k of work,
w a s nowise d u l l e d i n p r o s p e r i t y ;
on t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e reward f o r t h e f t
w a s g r e a t e r . 1155
The magnitude of t h e embezzlement problem i s i n d i c a t e d by t h e
h i s t o r y of l e g i s l a t i o n enacted t o d e a l w i t h i t .
Since a t l e a s t t h e
f i r s t of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , Parliament w a s p r e s s e d by master manu f a c t u r e r s t o p a s s i n c r e a s i n g l y s t r i c t laws a g a i n s t embezzlement.
The
f i r s t v i c t o r y came i n 1703, a t t h e r e q u e s t of t h e Lanchashire c o t t o n
t r a d e r s , i n t h e form of a law which upgraded t h e c e n t u r y o l d punishment
f o r embezzling ( s t o c k s o r whipping) by s p e c i f y i n g a f i n e f o r double t h e
damages, w i t h whipping and 14 days of imprisoned hard l a b o r f o r d e f a u l t .
This law t r e a t e d t h e embezzler a s a person who had breached a c o n t r a c t .
But 1749 s a w t h e enactment of a more p u n i t i v e law which t r e a t e d t h e
o f f e n d e r as a c r i m i n a l by d i s p e n s i n g w i t h t h e f i n e and imposing an
immediate 14 day p r i s o n sentence.
These a c t s , though i n s t i g a t e d by
p r e s s u r e from t h e t e x t i l e m a s t e r s , a p p l i e d t o domestic i n d u s t r y gene r a l l y , i n c l u d i n g i r o n , l e a t h e r , f u r , f l a x and h a t manufacturers a s
well a s others.
Even t h i s l a s t a c t did n o t have t h e r e s u l t t h e employers would
have l i k e d f o r , according t o P o l l a r d , "The problem, s i g n i f i c a n t l y ,
appears t o have assumed major p r o p o r t i o n s o n l y i n t h e t h i r d q u a r t e r
of t h e c e n t u r y though t h e [domestic)
system i t s e l f w a s c e n t u r i e s old. tr56
The m a s t e r s i n many a r e a s found i t n e c e s s a r y t o form combinations f o r
t h e purpose of p r o s e c u t i n g t h e embezzlers.
I n 1764 t h e worsted m a s t e r s
formed such a committee which appointed people t o roam about g a t h e r i n g
i n f o r m a t i o n u s e f u l i n proceeding w i t h p r o s e c u t i o n s .
This plan f e l l
a p a r t , p o s s i b l y because t h e r e were many m a s t e r s involved i n buying
cheap wool from t h e embezzlers.
The Manchester c o t t o n s p i n n i n g masters
j o i n e d t o g e t h e r t o combat embezzlement i n 1766.
Rewards were o f f e r e d
t o informers i n 1772 by "an i n f l u e n t i a l committee of manufacturers
and c r o f t e r s . "
Again i n 1773 t h e worsted yarn m a s t e r s appointed
i n s p e c t o r s . 57
Four y e a r s l a t e r
under English law.
came t h e Worsted Act which w a s q u i t e extreme
Conviction could be secured on mere s u s p i c i o n supp-
o r t e d only by t h e o a t h of an employer, i n s p e c t o r , o r " c r e d i b l e witness."
Employers and c o n s t a b l e s had s p e c i a l r i g h t s of s e a r c h which allowed them
t o ' i n s p e c t t h e house of anyone thought t o have embezzled.
Furthermore,
,
76
a worker who had n o t r e t u r n e d h i s m a t e r i a l s w i t h i n e i g h t days was
considered t o have embezzled them.
It would seem t h a t t h i s law went s o
f a r a s t o v i o l a t e t h e premise of t h e E n g l i s h l e g a l system t h a t an
accused was deemed t o b e innocent u n t i l proven otherwise.
In this
c a s e , anyone suspected of embezzlement would b e a r r e s t e d and presumed
g u i l t y u n l e s s he could prove h i s innocence.
58
The s e v e r i t y of t h e a c t
i n d i c a t e s t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e problem was s e e n a s c r i t i c a l .
The g a t h e r i n g of workers onto t h e i r own p r o p e r t y was e x p l i c i t l y
viewed by some master manufacturers a s a way t o p r e v e n t t h e f t of t h e i r
materials.
According t o testimony given i n 1802 b e f o r e t h e p a r l i a m e n t a r y
committee on t h e Woollen C l o t h i e r s P e t i t i o n , "The p r i n c i p a l motive of t h e
C l o t h i e r s who have weaving a t home i s t o guard themselves from t h o s e
Embezzlements which t a k e p l a c e t o an enormous
e x t e n t i n t h e Houses of
t h e Weavers. 1159
Discipline
The problems f o r t h e new breed of e n t r e p r e n e u r s of c o n t r o l of
supply and p r o t e c t i o n of t o o l s and m a t e r i a l s were r e l a t e d t o t h e e x t e n s i o n
and maintenance of d i s c i p l i n e among workers.
Obviously i t was e a s i e r t o
e n f o r c e such d i s c i p l i n e among workers who were w i t h i n r e a c h than i t was
among workers s c a t t e r e d about t h e c o u n t r y s i d e .
So t h e c e n t r a l i z e d work-
shop allowed i n a g e n e r a l s e n s e t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a d i s c i p l i n e which
sought t o put an end t o t h e abuse of t o o l s and m a t e r i a l s and t o e s t a b l i s h
t h e s u b o r d i n a t i o n of work h a b i t s t o t h e n e c e s s i t y of p r e d i c t a b l e and r e l i a b l e supply of p r o d u c t .
It was w i t h t h i s i n mind t h a t Gras wrote,"[~he
c e n t r a l workship] was p u r e l y f o r purposes of d i s c i p l i n e , s o t h a t t h e
'
workers could be e f f e c t i v e l y c o n t r o l l e d under t h e s u p e r v i s i o n of foremen. lt60 and t h a t , "The c e n t r a l workshop i n t h e modern p e r i o d d i d f o r
d i s c i p l i n e what s l a v e r y had accomplished i n a n c i e n t times. ,161
But i n a more p a r t i c u l a r s e n s e , t h e c e n t r a l workshop c r e a t e d
an e n t i r e l y new s e t of d i s c i p l i n e problems which were based i n t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i n t o a c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n was i n
d i r e c t o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e l i f e and c u l t u r e of t h e workers who were
employed i n i t .
an experience.
This w a s t h e f i r s t g e n e r a t i o n t o be s u b j e c t e d t o such
There w a s every reason f o r them t o n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y
a c c e p t t h e supposed n e c e s s i t y of a new r i g i d and a r b i t r a r y r e l a t i o n
t o work.
The rhythm of work p a t t e r n s b e f o r e t h e I n d u s t i a l Revolution
was not regular.
nor y e a r .
Labour w a s c o n s t a n t throughout n e i t h e r t h e day, week,
The domestic worker had a g r e a t v a r i e t y of t a s k s surrounding
t h e p e r f o r m n c e of h i s o r h e r occupation.
a farming weaver from 1782-3,
E x t r a c t s from t h e d i a r y of
quoted by E. P. Thompson, shows how they
varied.
On r a i n y day he might weave 8% o r 9 y a r d s ; on
October 1 4 t h he c a r r i e d h i s f i n i s h e d p i e c e , and
s o wove o n l y 4 314 y a r d s ; on t h e 23rd h e "worked.
out" t i l l 3 o ' c l o c k , wove two y a r d s b e f o r e sun s e t ,
11
c l o t t e d (mended) my c o a t i n t h e evening".
On
December 24th "wove 2 y a r d s b e f o r e 11 o ' c l o c k .
I was l a y i n g up t h e c o a l heap, sweeping t h e roof
and w a l l s of t h e k i t c h e n and l a y i n g t h e muck midden
Apart from
(midden?) t i l l 1 0 o ' c l o c k a t night".
h a r v e s t i n g and t h r e s h i n g , churning, d i t c h i n g and
gardening, we have t h e s e e n t r i e s :
January 18, 1783: "I was employed i n p r e p a r i n g
Tops of t h r e e P l a i n Trees home
which grew i n t h e Lane and w a s
t h a t day c u t down & s o l d t o john
Blagbrough. "
.
January 21st:
"Wove 2 314 y a r d s t h e Cow having calved
s h e r e q u i r e d much attendance".
(On t h e
n e x t day he walked t o H a l i f a x t o buy a
medicine f o r t h e cow.)
On January 25th h e wove 2 y a r d s , walked t o a nearby v i l l a g e ,
and d i d "sundry jobbs about t h e l a t h e and i n t h e yard & wrote
a l e t t e r i n t h e evening".
Other occupations i n c l u d e jobbing
w i t h a h o r s e and c a r t , p i c k i n g c h e r r i e s , working on a m i l l
62
dam, a t t e n d i n g a B a p t i s t a s s o c i a t i o n and a p u b l i c hanging.
For a domestic worker, t h e d a i l y t a s k s depended i n p a r t on t h e
time of t h e y e a r .
Nearly everyone p u t down t h e i r r e g u l a r work d u r i n g
h a r v e s t time and f o r t h e o t h e r annual chores i n a l i f e t h a t i s c l o s e l y
r e l a t e d t o t h e land. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e hours of work expanded and cont r a c t e d w i t h t h e l e n g t h of t h e day s o t h a t l a b o r was l o n g e r i n t h e
summer.
The work c y c l e of t h e y e a r was a l s o broken up by a number of
t r a d i t i o n a l h o l i d a y s and f a i r s as w e l l a s f u n e r a l s which were cause f o r
g r e a t and long wakes.
The work week had a p a t t e r n of i t s own w i t h i n t h e l a r g e r p a t t e r n
of t h e y e a r .
There were n o t many t r a d e s which d i d n o t honor S a i n t
Monday a s a day of r e s t o r a day i n which t o t a k e c a r e of p e r s o n a l business.
Work was slow on Tuesday and g r a d u a l l y b u i l t up t o a f e v e r p i t c h
on Friday and Saturday i n o r d e r t o g e t t h e week's work f i n i s h e d :
"On
Monday o r Tuesday, according t o t r a d i t i o n , t h e hand-loom went t o t h e
slow chant of Plen-ty of ,Time, Plen-ty of Time:
A day t ' l a t ,
A day t ' l a t . 1163
Here i s one r a t h e r i r o n i c view of t h i s from 1639:
You know t h a t Munday t o Sundayes b r o t h e r ;
Tuesday i s such a n o t h e r ;
Wednesday you must go t o Church and pray;
Thursday i s h a l f - h o l i d a y ;
On Friday i t i s t o o l a t e t o begin t o s p i n :
The Saturday i s h a l f -holiday agen. 64
on Thursday and F r i d a y ,
And a more i r a t e view from 1681:
When t h e framework k n i t t e r s o r makers of s i l k s t o c k i n g s had a g r e a t
p r i c e f o r t h e i r work, they have been observed seldom t o work on Mondays
and Tuesdays b u t t o spend most of t h e i r time a t t h e ale-house o r nine-pins
The Weavers, ' t i s common with them t o be drunk on Monday, have t h e i r
head-ache on Tuesday, and t h e i r t o o l s o u t of o r d e r on Wednesday. A s f o r
t h e shoemakers, t h e y ' l l r a t h e r be hanged than n o t remember S t . C r i s p i n
on Monday
and i t commonly h o l d s a s long a s they have a penny of money
o r pennyworth of c r e d i t . 65
...
...
T h i s kind of i r r e g u l a r i t y of working h a b i t s , t h e " a l t e r n a t e
b o u t s of i n t e n s e l a b o u r and i d l e n e s s , " proved
e a r l y owners of c e n t r a l i z e d workplaces.
t o be i n t o l e r a b l e t o t h e
These men almost i n v a r i a b l y
found i t n e c e s s a r y t o i n i t i a t e an a t t a c k on t h o s e h a b i t s .
The a t t a c k
w a s , of course, v a s t l y i n t e n s i f i e d w i t h t h e use of power d r i v e n machine
factories.
But t h i s i s n o t t o say t h a t t h e s e f a c t o r i e s caused t h e
a s s a u l t on work h a b i t s and t h e accompanying a s s a u l t on popular c u l t u r e .
The power f a c t o r i e s of modern i n d u s t r y presuppose t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of
r e g u l a r i t y i n a t t e n d a n c e t o t h e t a s k and t h e machine.
d i s c i p l i n e i n t e n s i f i e d w i t h them.
Consequently,
Nevertheless, t h e c a p i t a l i s t manag-
e r i a l requirement f o r d i s c i p l i n e d r e g u l a r i t y predated t h e moment i n
which machinery presupposed i t .
This can be q u i t e c l e a r l y s e e n i n t h e
e f f o r t s of e a r l y l a r g e workshop m a s t e r s , and i n t h e g e n e r a l r e l i g i o u s
and moral d i n a g a i n s t t h e supposed i d l e n e s s and s l o t h f u l n e s s of t h e
11
lower c l a s s e s , " a d i n which had p r e v i o u s l y e x i s t e d b u t h e i g h t e n e d
d r a m a t i c a l l y i n t h e y e a r s l e a d i n g up t o and following t h e end of t h e
e i g h t e e n t h century.
Perhaps t h e e a r l i e s t example of such e f f o r t s i s t o b e found i n
t h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y Law Book of S i r Ambrose Crowley.
Crowley s t a r t e d out
a s an o r d i n a r y working blacksmith and became one of t h e most s u c c e s s f u l
e n t e p r e n e u r s of h i s time (he was worth 200,000 pounds when he d i e d ) 6 7
a s w e l l a s a k n i g h t and member of Parliament.
By t h e end of t h e 1 6 t h
c e n t u r y h e w a s t h e master of a huge ironworks i n t h e North of England
which c o n s i s t e d p a r t l y of r o l l i n g , p l a t i n g and s l i t t i n g m i l l s t o f o r g e
p i g i r o n and f u r n a c e s f o r s t e e l , and p a r t l y of many s m a l l hand work
shops f o r making n a i l s (which w a s t h e foundation of t h e b u s i n e s s ) and
o t h e r i r o n p r o d u c t s such a s t o o l s of a l l s o r t s , f r y i n g pans, c h a i n , .
anchors, hinges, b a r r e l hoops, e t c . 68
A l l of t h i s Crowley managed by
m a i l from London which was t h e h e a r t of h i s r e t a i l t r a d e .
I n o r d e r t o govern h i s r e c a l c i t r a n t workforce, Crowley e s t a b l i s h e d a complete c o n s t i t u t i o n a l code of conduct and procedures which
s e t f o r t h i n minute d e t a i l t h e d u t i e s , r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , and p e n a l t i e s
f o r misconduct f o r every person from t h e p r i n c i p a l o f f i c e r s t o t h e manu a l laborers.
H i s g o a l was t h a t every moment of h i s employees' l i v e s
should b e o r i e n t e d towards making h i s e n t e r p r i s e a p r o f i t a b l e one.
69
Excerpts from some of t h e preambles of h i s more than one hundred
laws r e v e a l h i s s e n s e of o u t r a g e a t t h e working h a b i t s of h i s employees.
From Law 16:
Whereas I have had g r e a t and grievous complaints of my workmen
l o s e i n g much t i m e f o r want of r e g u l a r method and c e r t a i n t i m e
of reckoning and l e g a l l demanding of t h e same, and
considering
t h a t t h e workmen's time i s t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d and t h a t they ought
i n j u s t i c e t o b e s p e e d i l y and c h e e f u l l y d i s p a t c h t . . 71
...
.
From Law 40:
I have by sundry people working by t h e day w i t h t h e connivence
of t h e c l e r k s been h o r r i b l y cheated and p a i d f o r much more time
than i n good conscience I ought and such h a t h been t h e baseness
& t r e a c h e r y of sundry c l e r k s t h a t they have concealed t h e s l o a t h
& n e g l i g e n c e of t h o s e p a i d by t h e day.. . 7 2
70
From Law 103
Whereas i t h a t h been found by sundry I have imployed by t h e
day have made no conscience i n doing a d a y ' s work f o r a d a y ' s
wages, nor have n o t had a due regard i n doing t h e i r d u t y by
l a b o u r i n g t o do t h e i r utmost i n t h e l a w f u l 1 propagating my
On t h e
i n t e r e s t and answer t h e end of t h e i r being p a i d
o t h e r hand, some have due r e g a r d f o r j u s t i c e and w i l l p u t
f o r t h themselves t o answer t h e i r agreement and t h e t r u s t
imposed i n them and w i 1 exceed t h e i r hours r a t h e r than t h e
service shall suffer. 7
...
4
Some have pretended a s o r t of r i g h t t o l o y t e r , t h i n k i n g by
t h e i r r e a d i n e s s and a b i l i t y t o do s u f f i c i e n t i n l e s s time
t h a n o t h e r s . Others have been s o f o o l i s h t o t h i n k b a r e
a t t e n d a n c e w i t h o u t being imployed i n b u s i n e s s i s s u f f i c i e n t
Other s o impudent a s t o g l o r y i n t l f ~ i v
r i l l a n y and
upbrade o t h e r s f o r t h e i r d i l i g e n c e
...
...
The d e t a i l s of Crowley's c o n s t i t u t i o n o r managerial scheme, though
f a s c i n a t i n g , a r e t o o e l a b o r a t e t o g e t i n t o ( t h e Law Book i s over 100,000
words). 75
However, i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e h e r e t o e x p l a i n some of t h e p o i n t s
r e l a t i n g t o time d i s c i p l i n e .
Crowley appointed o f f i c i a l s , c a l l e d t h e
Monitor a t one m i l l and t h e Warden of t h e M i l l a t a n o t h e r , t o be timekeepers.
T h e i r d u t i e s included keeping " t i m e papers" f o r each employee
p a i d by t h e day i n which they were t o n o t e t h e moment of a r r i v a l and
departure.
But they were t o s u b t r a c t time f o r "being a t t a v e r n s , a l e -
houses, c o f f e e houses, b r e a k f a s t , d i n n e r , playing, s l e e p i n g , smoaking,
s i n g i n g , r e a d i n g of news h i s t o r y , q u a r e l l i n g , c o n t e n t i o n , d i s p u t e s o r
anything f o r e i g n t o my b u s i n e s s , any way l ~ ~ t e r i n ~The
. " Monitor
~ ~
and Warden of t h e M i l l were t o make random s p o t checks i n t h e o f f i c e s
a t l e a s t twice a day i n o r d e r t o d i s c o v e r who might be s h i r k i n g t h e i r
'
appointed t a s k s s o t h a t i t could be recorded i n c a s e any c l e r k t r i e d
t o c l a i m time h e had n o t been working.
They had t o r i n g b e l l s announc-
i n g t h e s t a r t and f i n i s h of t h e working day and a t meal times. 7 7
Crowley
a l s o c a r r i e d one s t e p f u r t h e r h i s n o t i o n of time i n h i s employment by
r e q u i r i n g h i s time keepers t o e n s u r e t h a t "no person s h a l l have any
time allowed them f o r being i n company, i n d r i n k i n g w i t h any person,
although a t t h a t t i m e they a r e doing my business" and t h a t "no person
s h a l l have anytime allowed them f o r smoaking although they a r e i n my
b u s i n e s s a t t h e same time.1178 (emphasis mine)
Once a week t h e time-
keeper had t o p o s t h i s r e c o r d w i t h a d e p o s i t i o n s t a t i n g t h a t , " t h i s
account of t i m e i s done without favour o r a f f e c t i o n , i l l - w i l l o r h a t r e d ,
& do r e a l l y b e l i e v e t h e persons above mentioned have worked i n t h e
s e r v i c e of John Crowley Esq [the son]
t h e hours above charged. t i 7 9
Crowley a l s o p l a c e d himself f i r m l y a t t h e head of a long t r a d i t i o n of employers who became f i x a t e d on c o n t r o l of t h e a c t u a l c l o c k
used f o r r e g u l a t i n g t h e d a i l y movements of employees.
The law d e f i n i n g t h e Monitor's d u t i e s s a y s :
And whereas I have been informed t h a t sundry c l e r k s have
been s o u n j e s t a s t o reckon by c l o c k s going t h e f a s t e s t
and t h e b e l l r i n g i n g b e f o r e t h e hour f o r t h e i r going from
b u s i n e s s , and c l o c k s going too slow and t h e b e l l r i n g i n g
a f t e r t h e hour f o r t h e i r coming t o b u s i n e s s , and t h o s e
two b l a c k t r a i t o r s Fowell and S k e l l e r n e have knowingly
allowed t h e s a m e ; i t i s t h e r e f o r e ordered t h a t no person
upon t h e account d o t h reckon by any o t h e r c l o c k , b e l l ,
watch o r d y a l l b u t t h e M o n i t o r ' s which clock i s never
mine-t o b e a l t e r e d b u t by t h e c l ~ c k k e e p e r . ~(Emphasis
~
Crowley set up a system of rewarding informers who r e p o r t e d
when someone w a s n o t performing according t o t h e laws governi n g them.
And t h e warden was t o g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e c l o c k w a s
"so locked up t h a t i t may n o t be i n t h e power of any person
t o a l t e r t h e same."82
More t h a n a century l a t e r , f a c t o r y masters were s t i l l concerned
t o have t h e l a s t (and only) say on c l o c k s , as t h i s worker t e s t i f i e s :
I have worked a t M r . B r a i d ' s m i l l . There we worked a s
long as we could s e e i n summer time, and I could n o t
s a y a t what hour i t w a s t h a t w e stopped. There was nobody b u t t h e m a s t e r and t h e m a s t e r ' s son who had a
watch, and w e d i d n o t know t h e time. There w a s one
man who had a w a t c h . . . i t was taken from him and given
i n t o t h e m a s t e r ' s custody because he had t o l d t h e men
t h e t i m e of day
...
And a t a n o t h e r m i l l , d e s p i t e t h e b a t t l e f o r r e g u l a r i t y which h a s o f t e n
been spoken of as a simple requirement of machinery:
...
i n r e a l i t y t h e r e were no r e g u l a r hours: m a s t e r s
and managers d i d w i t h u s as they l i k e d . The c l o c k s
a t t h e f a c t o r i e s were o f t e n p u t forward i n t h e morni n g and back a t n i g h t , and i n s t e a d of being i n s t r u m e n t s
f o r t h e measurement of time, they were used a s c l o a k s
f o r c h e a t e r y and oppression. Though t h i s was known
amongst t h e hands, a l l were a f r a i d t o speak, and a workman t h e n w a s a f r a i d t o c a r r y a watch, a s i t w a s no
uncommon e v e n t t o d i s m i s s any one who presumed t o know
too much about t h e s c i e n c e of horology. 83
Crowley, although he c o n s t a n t l y r a i l e d a g a i n s t t h e v i l l a i n y
and t r e a c h e r y of h i s employees, must have been f a i r l y s u c c e s s f u l i n
imposing h i s d i s c i p l i n e , f o r h i s f i r m f l o u r i s h e d .
But s e v e r a l g e n e r a t i o n s
l a t e r i n t h e l a t t e r h a l f of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y h i s e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l
s u c c e s s o r s s t i l l confronted t h e same problem.
The complaint of Edward Cave, owner of a hand c o t t o n s p i n n i n g
workshop i n t h e e a r l y 1 7 4 0 1 s , i s t y p i c a l :
"I have n o t h a l f my people
come t o work today, and have no g r e a t f a s c i n a t i o n i n t h e p r o s p e c t I have
t o p u t myself i n t h e power of such people.
'lg4
Before t h e r i s e of t h e
power f a c t o r y , working people, e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e whose t r a d e c a r r i e d a
measure of p r i d e i n independence and c r a f t , a l r e a d y r e s e n t e d t h e cons t r a i n t s of t h e c e n t r a l workshops.
A journeyman weaver d e c l a r e d a s l a t e
a s 1806 t h a t he would n o t go i n t o a hand loom shop because of h i s
repugnance t o "being confined t o go e x a c t l y a t such an hour and
minute..."
and he t e s t i f i e d b e f o r e t h e Committee on t h e Woollen Trade
that:
A t e n d e r man when h e had h i s work a t home could do i t
a s h i s l e i s u r e : t h e r e you must come a t t h e time: t h e
b e l l r i n g s a t h a l f p a s t f i v e , and then a g a i n a t s i x ,
then t e n minutes was allowed f o r t h e door t o b e open;
i f e l e v e n e x p i r e d , i t w a s s h u t a g a i n s t any person
e i t h e r man, woman, o r c h i l d ; t h e r e ou must s t a n d out
of door o r r e t u r n home t i l l e i g h t . 8f
This k i n d of r i g i d i t y meant i n a very r e a l s e n s e t h a t t h e working
person, t h e a r t i s a n who a c t u a l l y made t h e p r o d u c t , w a s no l o n g e r t h e
master of h i s own time and was reduced t o t h e s t a t u s of a s e r v a n t .
Regardless of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s e a r t i s a n s had n o t i n t h e immediate
p a s t been completely independent (being i n a kind of employer-employee
r e l a t i o n s h i p ) t h i s new r i g i d i t y was f e l t t o be a d e g r a d a t i o n of t h e i r
status.
C e n t r a l workshops were a l s o f e l t t o be an e v i l because they
t o r e a p a r t t h e family.
Thompson d e s c r i b e s how a domestic weaving
family worked:
Weaving had o f f e r e d employment t o t h e whole f a m i l y ,
even when s p i n n i n g was withdrawn from t h e home. The
young c h i l d r e n winding bobbins, o l d e r c h i l d r e n watchi n g t h e f a u l t s , p i c k i n g over t h e c l o t h , o r h e l p i n g t o
throw t h e s h u t t l e i n t h e broad loom; a d o l e s c e n t s working
a second o r t h i r d loom; the wife t a k i n g a t u r n a t weavi n g i n and among h e r domestic employments. The family
w a s t o g e t h e r , and however poor meals were, a t l e a s t
they could s i t down a t chosen t i m e s . A whole p a t t e r n
of family and community l i f e had grown up around t h e
loom-sho s ; work d i d n o t prevent c o n v e r s a t i o n o r
singing. i 6
But when s p i n n i n g was g a t h e r e d i n t o one p l a c e , and weaving i n t o a n o t h e r ,
t h e women and c h i l d r e n went o f f t o t h e f i r s t and t h e men t o t h e second.
This w a s n o t h i n g less than a f r o n t a l a s s a u l t on working c l a s s c u l t u r e .
For t h i s a s s a u l t t o be s u c c e s s f u l i t had t o be g e n e r a l i z e d .
i t was.
And
The o b s e s s i o n w i t h d i s c i p l i n e w a s n o t confined t o t h e i n t e r i o r
of work p l a c e s .
Rather i t became expanded i n t h e l a t t e r h a l f of t h e
e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , and e s p e c i a l l y around t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y , t o
inc1ude.a widespread r e l i g i o u s a t t a c k on t h e " c h a r a c t e r of t h e lower
o r d e r s " , a g e n e r a l moral o u t r a g e a g a i n s t working c l a s s l e i s u r e and
Il
disoluteness",
and t h e deployment of e d u c a t i o n as a weapon i n t h e
b a t t l e against it.
What a l l t h i s amounted t o w a s a n a t t e m p t , n o t a l -
ways conscious b u t sometimes s o , t o transform t h e c u l t u r e of working
people s o t h a t they would be r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e i n c e n t i v e s w i t h which
an i n d u s t r i a l o r i n d u s t r i a l i z i n g c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y hoped t o m o t i v a t e
t h e e f f o r t s of human l a b o r .
I n p a r t i c u l a r , a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of "res-
p e c t a b i l i t y " w a s mounted, f o r without a d e s i r e t o be " r e s p e c t a b l e " ,
workers would n o t i n t e r n a l i z e t h e n e c e s s i t y of obeying d i s c i p l i n e and
a c c e p t i n g t h e i r employer's p r e c e p t s about p r o p e r conduct.
They might
b e f o r c e d i n t o obedience through t h e s e v e r i t y of s a n c t i o n s imposed,
b u t t h i s i s q u a l i t a t i v e l y i n f e r i o r , from t h e employer's viewpoint, t o
a kind of w i l l i n g compliance.
It i s w i t h i n t h i s c o n t e x t t h a t we can i n t e r p r e t t h e a s t o n i s h i n g range of i n f r a c t i o n s f o r which f i n e s were e x t r a c t e d i n t h e e a r l y
workshops and f a c t o r i e s .
We have t h e r e c o r d of o f f e n s e s f o r which
t h e S t r u t t family ( p r e v i o u s l y p a r t n e r s w i t h Arkwright, so-called
.
f a t h e r of t h e f a c t o r y system) f i n e d t h e workers i n t h e i r c o t t o n spinni n g f a c t o r y i n t h e e a r l y y e a r s of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century.
Aside from
t h e p r e d i c t a b l e o f f e n s e s of absence without permission, t h e f t o r dest r u c t i o n of company p r o p e r t y , and f a i l u r e t o perform t h e work p r o p e r l y ,
w e r e a d an i n c r e d i b l e l i s t of a p p a r e n t l y g r a t u i t o u s censures i n c l u d i n g
87
t h e following :
Frequently looking through t h e window
C a l l i n g through t h e window t o some s o l d i e r s
Making n o i s e s i n t h e counting house
Riding on each o t h e r ' s back
Making a n o i s e when o r d e r e d n o t
Dancing i n t h e room
Quarreling
Telling l i e s
Using i l l - l a n g u a g e
Fighting
Playing Tricks
Being saucy
Talking
It
T e r r i f y i n g S. Pearson w i t h h e r ugly face"
And t h e S t r u t t s saw f i t t o l e v y f i n e s f o r misconduct o u t s i d e working
hours a s w e l l .
The o f f e n c e s which r e s u l t e d i n a f i n e i n c l u d e p u t t i n g
someone's dog i n a bucket of h o t w a t e r , r e c e i v i n g s t o l e n p o t a t o e s , and
rubbing t h e f a c e w i t h blood t o s c a r e people.
88
The name of Richard Arkwright, who was i n h i s time and s t i l l
i s regarded a s t h e c r e a t o r p a r e x c e l l e n c e of t h e f a c t o r y system (Ashton
says " ~ r k w r i g h t ' s technique, and h i s methods of o r g a n i z i n g l a b o u r , were
copied by l i t e r a l l y hundreds of master c o t t o n s p i n n e r s i n England,
Scotland, and Wales. "89), is c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e e x t e n s i o n of
labor discipline.
Mantoux s a y s t h a t , " H i s most o r i g i n a l achievement
w a s the d i s c i p l i n e he established i n h i s m i l l s . "
And Ure i n h i s
a p o t h e o s i s of t h e f a c t o r y system w r i t t e n i n 1835 says of Arkwright,
a f t e r d e s c r i b i n g t h e f a i l u r e about 40 y e a r s e a r l i e r than him of an
e n t r e p r e n u e r who i n v e n t e d n e a r l y t h e same mechanical improvement
t h a t Arkwright later employed t o g r e a t s u c c e s s b u t who "was of a
g e n t l e and p a s s i v e s p i r i t "
(Lewis Paul),
It r e q u i r e d , i n f a c t , a man of Napoleonic nerve and
ambition, t o subdue t h e r e f r a c t o r y tempers of workpeople accustomed t o i r r e g u l a r paroxysms of d i l i g e n c e ,
and t o urge on h i s m u l t i f a r i o u s and i n t r i c a t e cons t r u c t i o n s i n t h e f a c e of p r e j u d i c e , p a s s i o n and
envy. Such was Arkwright, who s u f f e r i n g n o t h i n g t o
s t a y o r t u r n a s i d e h i s progress, arrived gloriously
a t t h e g o a l , and h a s f o r e v e r a f f i x e d h i s name t o a
g r e a t e r a i n t h e a n n a l s of mankind, an e r a which h a s
l a i d open unbounded p r o s p e c t s of wealth and comfort
t o t h e i n d u s t r i o u s , however much they have been
o c c a s i o n a l l y clouded by ignorance and f o l l y .
One cannot h e l p b u t be embarrassed by such unashamed a d u l a t i o n of an
autocrat.
Control of t h e Labor P r o c p u
t h e Minute D i v i s i o n of Labor
The o b s e s s i o n w i t h d i s c i p l i n e , which was s o pronounced j u s t
b e f o r e and d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, was i n t e g r a l l y r e l a t e d
t o a profound t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o c c u r r i n g a t t h a t t i m e i n t h e l a b o r process.
To understand t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , c e r t a i n
p o i n t s about t h e development of c a p i t a l i s m must be k e p t i n mind.
Cap-
i t a l i s t s o c i e t y i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d , among o t h e r t h i n g s , by two r e l a t e d
b u t q u i t e d i s t i n c t s t r u c t u r e s of c o n t r o l .
One i s t h e s t r u c t u r e of
c o n t r o l over t h e means of p r o d u c t i o n which l i e s i n t h e development of
p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ownership.
The o t h e r i s t h e s t r u c t u r e of c o n t r o l over
t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s which i s implemented through, o r allowed by, p r o p r i e t a r y c o n t r o l of t h e means of production.
the l a t t e r .
The former h i s t o r i c a l l y precedes
It o r i g i n a t e d w i t h t h e commoditization of l a n d , l a b o r and
c a p i t a l , and w i t h t h e p r i v a t e a p p r o p r i a t i o n of t h e p r o d u c t s of l a b o r
by c a p i t a l .
I n t h e e a r l y p e r i o d of c a p i t a l i s m , c a p i t a l had only formal
c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s i t s e l f , which remained e s s e n t i a l l y unchanged.
Today, c a p i t a l h a s r e a l c o n t r o l , which i s t o say t h a t t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s
h a s been decomposed, re-organized,
i n t e r e s t s of c a p i t a l .
and r e c o n s t r u c t e d t o conform t o t h e
This r e - o r g a n i z a t i o n began i n e a r n e s t during t h e
e a r l y p a r t of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n t h e form of t h e r e - d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r under t h e i n i t i a t i v e s of t h e more s u c c e s s f u l employers.
How-
e,ver, i t did n o t end w i t h t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, a s s h a l l be seen
later.
89
As mentioned above, t h e r e i s a l i n
of reasoning which a t t r i b -
u t e s t h e comforts of c i v i l i z a t i o n u l t i m a t e l y t o t h e development and
c o n s t a n t l y i n c r e a s i n g e x t e n s i o n of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e d i v i s i o n of
l a b o r , and t o t h e t e c h n i c a l advances based upon i t .
This e x p l a n a t i o n
treats a l l forms of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r as of t h e same type:
more
s p e c i f i c a l l y i t omits t o r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e r e w a s a q u a l i t a t i v e break
i n t h e form of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r which became predominant i n t h e
e a r l i e r p a r t of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution.
That q u a l i t a t i v e change
must be c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s p a r t of any u s e f u l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e org a n z a t i o n of work.
Simply s t a t e d , t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i n s o c i e t y
i s d i f f e r e n t from t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i n s i d e a workshop o r manufactOrY-
The d i v i s i o n of f u n c t i o n i n t o b u t c h e r , b a k e r , c a n d l e s t i c k -
maker i s n o t t h e same as d i v i s i o n of f u n c t i o n i n t o l e a t h e r - d y e r ,
leather-cutter,
and leather-sewer,
f o r example.
The f i r s t a l l o w s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of some form of independence,
because t h e worker i s a c r a f t w o r k e r who h a s produced a complete product
over which he o r s h e has d i s p o s a l , o r a t l e a s t h a s a t r a d e f o r which
t h e r e i s a f a i r l y wide market.
The second kind of worker i s a consid-
e r a b l y more v u l n e r a b l e p o s i t i o n , because h e o r s h e produces no s a l e a b l e
commodity ( o r a t l e a s t n o t one f o r which t h e r e i s a wide market), b u t
only performs a p a r t of t h e process of making a product.
i n f a c t i s u s e l e s s without some way of co-ordinating
t h e complementary l a b o r of o t h e r s .
Their labor
i t d i r e c t l y with
Such a d i v i s i o n of l a b o r r e q u i r e s
a co-ordinative f u n c t i o n .
But t h i s i s a n a b s t r a c t i o n which may b e misleading.
The
impression should n o t b e g i v e n t h a t t h e advance i n t h e s o c i a l d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r grew of i t s own accord t o such a p o i n t t h a t i t c a l l e d f o r t h
t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e c a p i t a l i s t a s a f i g u r e who could p r o v i d e t h e nece s s a r y i n t e g r a t i v e f u n c t i o n , a s a f i g u r e without whom t h e r e would have
been chaos.
I n f a c t , the reverse w a s true.
It w a s h i s t o r i c a l l y the
requirements of c a p i t a l which pushed forward t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
However, t h i s does n o t mean t o s a y t h a t t h e combined producti v i t y of c o l l e c t i v e l a b o r which stems from t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r can b e
had o n l y under t h e a u s p i c e s of t h e c o n t r o l of c a p i t a l .
This product-
i v i t y appears t o belong t o t h e c a p i t a l i s t who p r e s e n t l y combines (and
h i s t o r i c a l l y combined) workers i n a more extreme d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
92
A s s u c h , i t goes a long way toward l e g i t i m i z i n g c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n
of t h e economy by v i r t u e of t h e e f f i c i e n c y which appears t o belong t o
it.
But i t would seem t h a t t h e r e i s i n f a c t no economic reason why
t h i s p r o d u c t i v i t y would n o t a r i s e from a d i v i s i o n of l a b o r under t h e
c o n t r o l of workers. 93
A b s t r a c t l y , i n t r a d i t i o n a l economics, l a b o r
could employ c a p i t a l a s w e l l a s c a p i t a l employs l a b o r .
We know t h a t
i n a c a p i t a l i s t economy t h i s i s nothing more than an a b s t r a c t i o n .
Returning t o t h e aforementioned q u a l i t a t i v e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r , t h e c r a f t d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r ( b u t c h e r , baker,
c a n d l e s t i c k maker) w a s d i s t i n g u i s h e d from what can be c a l l e d t h e d e t a i l
o r minute d i v i s i o n of l a b o r . 94
It w a s s a i d t h a t t h e former allowed
some independence w h i l e t h e l a t t e r r e q u i r e d s u b o r d i n a t i o n t o an o v e r a l l
i n t e g r a t i v e f i g u r e , o t h e r w i s e known i n t h i s h i s t o r i c a l i n s t a n c e a s t h e
capitalist.
This i s n o t s t r i c t l y t r u e .
Over a r e l a t i v e l y long p e r i o d
of s o c i a l time ( g e n e r a t i o n s ) , c r a f t workers had been s e e i n g t h e i r
independence g r a d u a l l y undermined by t h e r i s i n g s t r e n g t h of c a p i t a l i s t
enterprise.
T h i s corresponds w i t h t h e p e r i o d i n which c a p i t a l was
g a i n i n g formal c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s , and s e t t h e s t a g e f o r
t h e subsequent q u a l i t a t i v e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n which c a p i t a l gained
r e a l c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r process.
Once t h e formal c o n t r o l of c a p i t a l
had a s s e r t e d i t s e l f by c o n v e r t i n g a r t i s a n s i n t o employees under t h e
putting-out
o r domestic system i n t h e way explained above, i t became
a p p a r e n t t h a t i t w a s i n t h e i n t e r e s t of c a p i t a l t o push f a r beyond
t h e t r a d i t i o n a l known limits of t h e e x i s t i n g d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
We
can s e e t h i s f i r s t i n t h e domestic system i n t h e r e f i n i n g of t h e
f u n c t i o n s of v a r i o u s workers s o t h a t t h e e x t e n t of t h e i r c r a f t w a s
narrowed o r broken i n t o s m a l l e r p a r t s of t h e o v e r a l l p r o c e s s .
was only t h e beginning.
This
It w a s a f t e r workers were g a t h e r e d i n t o t h e
c e n t r a l workshop t h a t we s e e t h e d e c i s i v e s t e p s .
I n o r d e r t o keep i t c l e a r l y understood what we a r e t a l k i n g
about, we s h a l l r e t u r n t o t h e q u e s t i o n of why a r a d i c a l l y new d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r was i n t h e i n t e r e s t of c a p i t a l a f t e r we have explained what
t h e new d i v i s i o n of l a b o r looked l i k e .
We can t a k e a s o u r example t h e metal-working i n d u s t r y . 95
1n
t h e e a r l y p a r t of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , t h e i n d u s t r y w a s composed
of many s p e c i a l t r a d e s , each s e p a r a t e from t h e o t h e r , u s i n g d i f f e r e n t
k i n d s of metals and making d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of f i n i s h e d a r t i c l e s .
o hey were organized a l o n g t h e l i n e s of t h e domestic i n d u s t r y , b u t
a l s o r e t a i n e d f a i r l y s t r o n g and s t r i c t guild-type r e g u l a t i o n .
Generally, t h e master a r t i s a n s s o l d t h e i r
products t o merchants.
But g r a d u a l l y t h e more s u c c e s s f u l became
d i r e c t t r a d e r s themselves.
They began t o c o l l e c t t h e d i f f e r e n t
branches of t h e i n d u s t r y t o g e t h e r i n t o t h e i r own workshops.
For
example, Joseph Hancock i n 1765 owned s i x workshops i n S h e f f i e l d
(one of t h e c e n t e r s of t h e m e t a l i n d u s t r y ) which combined a l l t h e
t r a d e s of t h e a r e a .
Matthew Boulton ( b e f o r e he j o i n e d w i t h Watt t o
form t h e p a r t n e r s h i p t h a t would supply t h e steam engine t o t h e Indust r i a l Revolution) a t t h e Soho Works had an e s t a b l i s h m e n t which made
every kind of a r t i c l e produced i n t h e e n t i r e Birmingham r e p e r t o i r e .
Concerning t h e s e e v e n t s , Mantoux wrote:
This grouping t o g e t h e r of d i f f e r e n t and p r e v i o u s l y
s e p a r a t e branches of work was only one of t h e r e s u l t s
of t h a t tendency towards c o n c e n t r a t i o n which manif e s t e d i t s e l f i n a l l i n d u s t r i e s a t t h e same time.
Another, and probably a more important r e s u l t (cert a i n l y a more f a r - r e a c h i n g one) w a s t h e s u b d i v i s i o n
of t e c h n i c a l p r o c e s s e s w i t h i n each branch i n t o an
e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g number of fragmentary o p e r a t i o n s ,
each of which was e n t r u s t e d t o a s p e c i a l workman o r
group of workmen. This c l a s s i c a l form of t h e d i v i s i o n
of l a b o r showed i t s e l f nowhere e a r l i e r o r more c l e a r l y
than i n t h e secondary metal-working i n d u s t r i e s . I t
was from one of them t h a t Adam Smith took t h e wellknown example which i s d e s c r i b e d i n t h e f i r s t page
of h i s Essay on t h e Nature and Causes of t h e Wealth
of Nations.yb
Here i s Adam Smith's famous d e s c r i p t i o n :
...
i n t h e way i n which t h i s b u s i n e s s i s now c a r r i e d
on, n o t o n l y t h e whole work i s a p e c u l i a r t r a d e , b u t
i t i s d i v i d e d i n t o a number of branches of which t h e
g r e a t e r p a r t a r e l i k e w i s e t r a d e s . One man draws o u t
the wire, another s t r a i g h t s it, a t h i r d c u t s it, a
f o u r t h p o i n t s i t , a f i f t h g r i n d s i t a t t h e top f o r
r e c e i v i n g t h e had; t o make t h e head r e q u i r e s two o r
t h r e e d i s t i n c t o p e r a t i o n s ; t o put i t on, i s a p e c u l i a r
b u s i n e s s , t o whiten t h e p i n e i s a n o t h e r ; i t is even
a t r a d e by i t s e l f t o p u t them i n t o t h e paper; and t h e
important b u s i n e s s of making a p i n i s , i n t h i s manner,
d i v i d e d i n t o about e i g h t e e n d i s t i n c t o p e r a t i o n s , which,
i n some manufactories, a r e a l l performed by d i s t i n c t
hands, though i n o t h e r s t h e same man w i l l sometimes
p e r f o m two o r t h r e e of them.97
What w e a r e l o o k i n g a t h e r e i s a group of people who a r e c o n s t a n t l y
employed i n a s i n g l e o r a few minute o p e r a t i o n s .
This i s n o t an
example of a c r a f t w o r k e r known a s a pin-maker who makes p i n s .
It
i s n o t even a s i t u a t i o n i n which a pin-maker i s employed i n a cons e c u t i v e s e r i e s of o p e r a t i o n s which a r e performed many times b e f o r e
moving t o t h e n e x t .
We a r e looking a t a d e t a i l worker, i . e .
someone
whose f u n c t i o n is r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e r e p e t i t i o n of a very circumscribed
s e t of o p e r a t i o n s which a c q u i r e t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s and meaning o n l y i n
t h e c o n t e x t of t h e o v e r a l l p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s of which i t i s b u t a
small p a r t .
This d e s c r i p t i o n of d e t a i l work conforms t o t h e u s u a l conception
of f a c t o r y work a s we t h i n k of i t i n t h e p r e s e n t day.
So much s o t h a t
we even tend a u t o m a t i c a l l y t o t h i n k t h a t t h i s kind of work e x i s t s because
t h e t e c h n i c a l b a s i s of f a c t o r y p r o d u c t i o n makes i t necessary.
Melvin
Kranzberg, f o r example, i n h i s s t u d y of work i n t h e western world speaks
about".
..t h e new d i v i s i o n of
l a b o r imposed by m a c h i n e s Y t t g 8and s a y s
t h a t " t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of machines brought q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n "
from t h e c r a f t g u i l d t y p e of work o r g a n i z a t i o n . 9 9
I t seems t o be an
o b j e c t i v e t e c h n i c a l n e c e s s i t y r a t h e r than a s o c i a l p r o j e c t t h a t work
,
should have t h e c h a r a c t e r t h a t i t began t o t a k e on d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l
Revolution.
However, t h e f a c t t h a t t h i s kind of work o r g a n i z a t i o n
appeared b e f o r e machine f a c t o r i e s ( o r "modern i n d u s t r y " ) c o n s t i t u t e s
a profound a t t a c k on t h i s g e n e r a l l y accepted i d e a .
That t h i s i d e a i s s o u n c r i t i c a l l y accepted i s demonstrated
by Kranzberg himself who approvingly q u o t e s Adam Smith t o support h i s
p o s i t i o n , w i t h o u t n o t i c i n g t h a t Smith a c t u a l l y c o n t r a d i c t s i t .
He
c i t e s t h e above account of t h e m e t a l t r a d e s a s i l l u s t r a t i v e of t h e
new d i v i s i o n of l a b o r brought about by machines, even though t h e account
begins a s follows:
A workman n o t educated t o t h i s b u s i n e s s (which t h e
d i v i s i o n of l a b o r h a s rendered a d i s t i n c t t r a d e )
nor acquainted w i t h t h e u s e of t h e machinery
employed i n i t ( t o t h e i n v e n t i o n of which t h e same
100
d i v i s i o n of l a b o r h a s probably g i v e n occasion)
(emphasis mine)
...
And l a t e r Kranzberg q u o t e s a s e c t i o n from Smith a g a i n which even more
c l e a r l y c o n t r a d i c t s h i s own p o s i t i o n :
A g r e a t p a r t of t h e machines made use of i n those
manufactures i n which l a b o r i s most subdivided were
o r i g i n a l l y t h e i n v e n t i o n of common workmen who,
being each of them employed i n some very simple
o p e r a t i o n , n a t u r a l l y t u r n e d t h e i r thoughts toward
f i n d i n g o u t e a s i e r and r e a d i e r methods of performing
it.101
W
e have s e e n t h a t t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r had been establ i s h e d i n t h e metal working t r a d e s a t an e a r l y d a t e ( b e f o r e they were
~ c h a n i z e d . ) There i s a n o t h e r famous example which cannot be n e g l e c t e d ,
which i s t h a t of Wedgewood t h e p o t t e r .
P o l l a r d , a s t u d e n t of management
h i s t o r y , w r i t e s t h a t , "Boulton and F o t h e r g i l l a t Soho (metal t r a d e s ) ,
and Wedgewood a t E t r u r i a , o b t a i n e d v i r t u a l l y a l l t h e i r
...advantages
production from a s k i l l f u l use of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r . . . "'02
i s a l i t t l e more s p e c i f i c :
in
Ashton
he w r i t e s t h a t i t was t h e i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n
of t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r which was Wedgewood's g r e a t success.
103
The p o t t i n g i n d u s t r y up u n t i l t h e time of Wedgewood w a s based
on t h e expanded domestic system of o r g a n i z a t i o n .
A master p o t t e r worked
w i t h one oven, 6 journeymen a t t h e most, and a few boys.
According t o
Mantoux, t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r was as follows:
One man shaped p o t s , a n o t h e r made t h e h a n d l e s and
p u t them on, w h i l s t t h e o t h e r s d i d t h e d e c o r a t i o n ,
t h e g l a z i n g and t h e f i r i n g . But t h e y were none of
them s p e c i a l i s t s , f o r a good workman had t o know
e v e r y t h ' g and t o be a b l e t o t u r n h i s hand t o anyt h i n g . 168
A t t h i s p o i n t t h e p o t t i n g i n d u s t r y w a s n o t c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a d e t a i l
d i v i s i o n of l a b o r because, although a worker might perform one p a r t
of t h e o v e r a l l p r o c e s s over and over a g a i n f o r a t i m e , h i s knowledge,
s k i l l , and f u n c t i o n w a s n o t l i m i t e d t o t h a t p a r t i c u l a r t a s k , but encompassed t h e whole p r o c e s s .
The journeymen p o t t e r s were accustomed t o
1I
p a s s from one kind of l a b o r t o a n o t h e r , j u s t a s impulse o r convenience
prompted. "'05
It w a s Wedgewood's i n t e n t i o n t o change a l l t h a t .
J o s i a h Wedgewood, son of a p o t t e r and himself a p o t t e r , was a
v e r y ambitious businessman.
He had soon s u f f i c i e n t l y expanded h i s
b u s i n e s s t o b e a b l e i n 1769, a t t h e age of 39, t o open a new e s t a b l i s h ment c a l l e d E t r u r i a , whose d e s i g n contained a l l h i s i d e a s about how t o
organize labor.
H i s premise was t h e s t r i c t s e p a r a t i o n of d i f f e r e n t
p r o c e s s e s and t h e r i g i d d i v i s i o n of l a b o r .
He designed a system i n which each important p r o c e s s i n t h e
production of p o t t e r y would be c a r r i e d o u t i n a s e p a r a t e workshop.
He r e q u i r e d t h a t h i s workers conform t o t h i s arrangement i n t h a t each
one was assigned t o one p a r t i c u l a r t a s k i n one of t h e workshops.
Neil
McKendrick, a s t u d e n t of Wedgewood's o p e r a t i o n s w r i t e s ,
H i s workmen were n o t allowed t o wander a t w i l l
from one t a s k t o a n o t h e r a s t h e workmen d i d i n
t h e pre-Wedgewood p o t t e r i e s . They were t r a i n e d
t o one p a r t i c u l a r t a s k and they had t o s t i c k t o
i t . 106
Out of Wedgewood's 278 workers i n 1790, only 5 had no a s s i g n e d p o s t .
There were a t l e a s t 37 d i f f e r e n t p o s t s , n o t counting t h e c l e r i c a l
ones.
A worker i n one kind of c l a y was n o t allowed t o work w i t h any
o t h e r k i n d , though t h e job might o t h e r w i s e be t h e same.
107
It i s f a i r l y c l e a r t h a t mechanical i n n o v a t i o n s had nothing t o
do w i t h Wedgewood's r e s t r u c t u r i n g of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s , although he
d i d i n t r o d u c e t h e u s e of t h e mechanical l a t h e i n t h e p o t t i n g i n d u s t r y .
One h i s t o r i a n of t h e p o t t i n g i n d u s t r y wrote t h a t ,
Up t o t h e y e a r 1845, t h e p o t t i n g i n d u s t r y had
remained almost completely u n a f f e c t e d by t h e
s c i e n t i f i c and mechanical improvements which
had g r e a t l y modified some t r a d e s , and had revo l u t i o n i z e d o t h e r s . The whole range of mechani c a l s c i e n c e w a s almost s o l e l y r e p r e s e n t e d i n
t h e manufacture of p o t t i n g by t h e throwers'
wheels - i d e n t i c a l i n mechanical p r i n c i p l e ,
and p r a c t i c a l l y s o i n form, w i t h t h a t used by
108
and t h e t u r n e r s ' l a t h e .
t h e a n c i e n t Egyptians
-
The Hammonds add, "Perhaps t h e most s u r p r i s i n g f a c t about t h e development of t h e P o t t e r i e s w a s t h a t mechanical power played no p a r t i n i t . It109
P o l l a r d agrees.
He s a y s , "Wedgewood
...who
was helped by no s t a r t l i n g
mechanical i n v e n t i o n , imposed a system of ' s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and h i t h e r t o
unheard-of
d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r ' "110
.
I n view of t h i s , we must i n q u i r e
why Wedgewood developed a d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i n v o l v i n g t h e comp l e t e s e p a r a t i o n of t a s k s and t h e s t r i c t adherence of workers t o only
one.
'
Among Wedgewood's many pre-occupations was t h e f e a r t h a t h i s
workers would t a k e h i s s e c r e t s t o a n o t h e r employer, e s p e c i a l l y a
f o r e i g n one.
This was n o t an i d l e t h r e a t .
e i g n r i v a l s e s p e c i a l l y was f i e r c e .
The competition from for-
Indeed, one of h i s own a n c e s t o r s ,
D r . Thomas Wedgewood, had made a t i d y b u s i n e s s o u t of u s i n g an improve-
ment i n g l a z i n g which two p a r t n e r s had s t o l e n from Dutch p o t t e r , whose
own p r e c a u t i o n s were s a i d t o b e s o e l a b o r a t e t h a t h e had b u i l t a speaki n g tube a m i l e long from h i s house t o h i s works t o warn of v i s i t o r s .
111
Wedgewood w a s very a c t i v e i n pushing f o r l a w s t o p r e v e n t e m i g r a t i o n , and
went t o e x t r a o r d i n a r y l e n g t h s i n s u g g e s t i n g how t h e powers of t h e s t a t e
could b e used i n l i m i t i n g t h e freedom of E n g l i s h workers. He proposed
rewards f o r o f f i c e r s who apprehended would-be emigrees, rewards f o r
i n f o r m e r s , and t h e opening of m a i l belonging t o suspected o f f e n d e r s .
He b e l i e v e d however t h a t i t was "much b e t t e r t o p r e v e n t crimes t h a n t o
have them t o punish. rt112
Although t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s belonged t o a l a t e r p e r i o d i n h i s
l i f e than t h e b u i l d i n g of E t r u r i a , t h i s preoccupation played a r o l e i n
t h e design of E t r u r i a .
I n a l e t t e r t o h i s p a r t n e r concerning p l a n s f o r
t h e new b u i l d i n g s , Wedgewood wrote:
...
t h e s e new hands should i f p o s s i b l e be k e p t by
themselves 'till we a r e b e t t e r acquainted w i t h
them, o t h e r w i s e they may do us a g r e a t d e a l of
mischief i f we should be o b l i g e d t o p a r t w i t h
them soon. I have had some thoughts of b u i l d i n g
s t e p s t o t h e o u t s i d e of some of t h e Chambers f o r
t h a t purpose. What do you t h i n k of i t ? We cannot
avoid t a k i n g i n S t r a n g e r s and s h a l l be o b l i g e d
sometimes t o p a r t w i t h them a g a i n , we should theref o r e p r e v e n t as much a s p o s s i b l e t h e i r t a k i n g any
part of the business with them. Every different class should
if possible be ke t by themselves, and have no connection
with any other. 114
Etruria was in fact built so that the various departments had individual
entrances making it necessary to go outside to pass from one to the
other. This was certainly unnecessary from the viewpoint of technical
efficiency in building design.
From the viewpoint of managerial advantage,
it made a certain amount of sense to separate parts of the production process into different unconnected rooms with workers assigned to specific
rooms. Wedgewood built his pottery and organized the work of his
employees on the basis of the "need to know" concept. The work was
physically divided up in such a way that they knew nothing more about the
whole production process than what they needed to know to do their own
small part of it. This may have been one of the first applications in
the workplace of a concept that has since become the basis for the organizational structure of all international intelligence operations as well
as an important fundament of modern business organization and management.
But this does not explain why Wedgewood felt it necessary to
further restrict workers to the performance of one task among the
several which might take place within each departmentalized workshop.
He constantly complained that his "dilatory, drunken, idle, worthless
workmen" were not adequately skilled for his purposes. His double, and
seemingly contradictory ambition was "to make such Machines of the
as cannot err," ' I 4
and "to make Artists.. .of.. .mere men. "'I5
Men
It would
seem that his problem was one of underskilled workers. Shortly after
the opening of Etruria, he wrote to Bentley:
'
...
few hands can be got to paint flowers in the
style we want them. I may add, nor any other
work we do--We must make them. There is no
other way. We have stepped forward beyond the
other manufacturers and we must be content to
train up hands to suit our purpose. Where
amongst our Potters could I get a complete
Vase-maker? Nay, I could not get a hand through
the whole Pottery to make a Table plate without
training them up for that purpose and you must
be content to train up such painters as.offer
to you and not turn them adrift because they
cannot immediately form their hands to our new
stile, which if we consider what they have been
doing all their life we ought not to expect
from them. 116
Leaving a s i d e t h e a p p a r e n t i m p r o b a b i l i t y of n o t being a b l e t o
f i n d among p o t t e r s one who could make a p l a t e , we could suppose f o r a
moment t h a t a d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r w a s needed i n o r d e r t h a t t h e
workers develop t h e r e q u i s i t e p r o f i c i e n c y .
"We a r e p r e p a r i n g some hands
This w a s Wedgewood's view:
t o work a t red & black ...(ware)...=-
s t a n t l y & then w e s h a l l make them good, t h e r e i s no such t h i n g a s making
now & then a few of any a r t i c l e t o have them t o l e r a b l e . ~
But t h i s i s n o t y e t t h e whole s t o r y .
1
7
We must t a k e i n t o account
Wedgewood's a t t i t u d e towards t h o s e who were a l r e a d y p l a i n l y and without
doubt h i g h l y p r o f i c i e n t , t h e famous a r t i s t s of t h e day.
Wedgewood' found
t h a t t h e r e w a s no p l a c e f o r t h e s e people and t h e i r s k i l l i n h i s p o t t e r y .
They c o r r u p t e d t h e o t h e r workers.
One had t o be removed because " t h e
hours h e chose t o work would, by example, have ruined t e n times b e t t e r
men t h a n h i m s e l f . "11'
Another, "Tebo" ( T h i b a u l t ? ) , couldn' t be t o l e r -
a t e d because,
...
h e h a s done u s very c o n s i d e r a b l e mischief f o r o u r
Modelers do l e s s by one h a l f than they d i d b e f o r e ,
charging double p r i c e s f o r t h e i r work, & when t a l k ' d
t o about i t , have t h e i r r e p l y ready t h a t i t is cheaper
than M r . Tebo's, & i s f i n i s h e d , which h i s work never
is. T h i s w i l l be a s e r i o u s a f f a i r f o r m e t o manage,
h b r i n g back a g a i n without ~ a g t i n gwith any of them,
which I do n o t wish t o do."
Eventually Wedgewood ceased t o employ a r t i s t s i n t h e i r own
r i g h t , and i n s t e a d bought t h e i r d e s i g n s a t a s a f e d i s t a n c e .
What was
a t s t a k e h e r e was h i s a b s o l u t e p r e r o g a t i v e t o have t h i n g s run e x a c t l y
a s h e wanted them.
The independently competent and famous could n o t
be made t o submit t o h i s a u t h o r i t y , and i n r e f u s i n g t o do s o caused
him more problems w i t h t h e o t h e r workers than he a l r e a d y had.
Concern-
i n g t h i s m a t t e r , h e wrote,
Oh! f o r a dozen good & humble modelers a t E t r u r i a
f o r a couple of months. What c r e a t i o n s , r e n o v a t i o n s ,
& g e n e r a t i o n s should w e make!
Well
f a i r & softly,
we must proceed w i t h o u r own n a t u r a l f o r c e s , f o r I
w i l l have no f i n e modelers h e r e , though I seem t o
120
wish f o r them, they would c o r r u p t , & r u i n u s a l l .
-
-
Wedgewood's s o l u t i o n t o t h i s dilema was t o p a i n s t a k i n g l y
i n s t r u c t people of l e s s e r s t a t u r e t o every t a s k i n a way which f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r obedience t o h i s a u t h o r i t y .
Here w e can s e e why, through
t h e use of d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r , t h e r e w a s from Wedgewood's p o i n t
of view no c o n t r a d i c t i o n between making " A r t i s t s
I1
such Machines of t h e
Men
...of...mere
men''
and
a s cannot E r r . "
He d i d n o t of c o u r s e accomplish t h i s w i t h o u t some r e s i s t a n c e
from h i s workers.
P o t t e r s regarded themsleves a s a r t i s a n s and they
were proud of t h i e r s t a t u s .
E. P. Thompson n o t e s t h a t "The Book of
English Trades l i s t s t h e apothecary, a t t o r n e y , o p t i c i a n and s t a t u t o r y
a l o n g s i d e t h e c a r p e n t e r , c u r r i e r , t a i l o r and p o t t e r . "121
They d i d n o t
t a k e k i n d l y t o t h e complete submission t h a t Wedgewood demanded and t o
t h e decomposition and recombination of t h e i r work t h a t he e s t a b l i s h e d .
He had s e t himself t o d e s t r o y t h e i r independence and t h e i r t r a d i t i o n s .
He demanded p u n c t u a l i t y , s e t t i n g up perhaps t h e f i r s t e v e r clocking-in
system.
Fixed h o u r s , c o n s t a n t a t t e n d a n c e a t t h e t a s k , and unyielding
c l e a n l i n e s s were a l s o r e q u i r e d .
He attempted t o v i o l a t e t h e s a n c t i t y
of t h e wakes and f a i r s w i t h t h e i r days of r e s t and e n t e r t a i n m e n t .
There
'
w a s a s u c c e s s i o n of r e v o l t s a g a i n s t t h i s a s w e l l a s a g a i n s t h i s a t t e m p t s
t o reduce wages o r h o l d them down.
Although h e was f i e r c e i n q u e l l i n g
t h e s e r e v o l t s , he never d i d succeed i n wiping o u t t h e observance of t h e
wakes and f a i r s .
He went t o e l a b o r a t e l e n g t h s t o extend h i s a u t h o r i t y
as f a r as p o s s i b l e i n every a s p e c t of h i s manufactory's o r g a n i z a t i o n ,
work and l i f e .
From t h e f o r e g o i n g d e s c r i p t i o n s of two famous examples of t h e
e a r l y d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r , i t should be c l e a r t h a t t h e d e t a i l
d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r began t o appear a s a l o g i c a l e x t e n s i o n of c a p i t a l ' s
need t o e s t a b l i s h and extend r e a l c o n t r o l over t h e l a b o u r p r o c e s s .
The d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r a l s o extends a n o t h e r important
advantage t o c a p i t a l which Charles Babbage w r i t i n g i n 1832 was a p p a r e n t l y
one of t h e f i r s t
t o p o i n t out:
t h a t i t cheapens t h e l a b o u r c o s t s .
In
h i s own words,
...
t h e m a s t e r manufacturer, by d i v i d i n g t h e work
t o be executed i n t o d i f f e r e n t p r o c e s s e s , each
r e q u i r i n g d i f f e r e n t degrees of s k i l l o r of f o r c e ,
can purchase e x a c t l y t h a t p r e c i s e q u a n t i t y of both
which i s n e c e s s a r y f o r each p r o c e s s ; whereas, i f
t h e whole work were executed by one workman, t h a t
person must p o s s e s s s u f f i c i e n t s k i l l t o perform
t h e most d i f f i c u l t , and s u f f i c i e n t s t r e n g t h t o
e x e c u t e t h e most l a b o r i o u s , of t h e o p e r a t i o n s
i n t o which t h e a r t is divided.122
Babbage then f o l l o w s Adam Smith's example by using t h e manufacture
of p i n s t o i l l u s t r a t e h i s o b s e r v a t i o n .
He e x p l a i n s t h a t by d i v i d i n g p i n
making i n t o i t s s e v e r a l o p e r a t i o n s , and a s s i g n i n g each o p e r a t i o n t o one
worker, each of whom is p a i d d i f f e r e n t r a t e s according t o a scheme based
on t h e d i f f i c u l t y and s k i l l involved i n each o p e r a t i o n , t h e c o s t of making
p i n s i s c o n s i d e r a b l y cheapened from what i t would be i f s e v e r a l a l l around
p i n makers were employed a t r a t e s r e f l e c t i n g t h e i r t o t a l a b i l i t i e s .
Although Babbage himself does n o t e x p l i c i t l y
state it, it
should be r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r reduces l a b o u r
c o s t s n o t because i t reduces t h e amount of l a b o r n e c e s s a r y t o produce
a given item.
It does n o t magically t a k e l e s s work t o make a p i n
simply because t h a t work h a s been reorganized.
The advantage, c l e a r l y
i n t h i s c a s e f o r c a p i t a l , i s t h a t t h e p r i c e of l a b o u r t i m e i t s e l f i s
a c t u a l l y reduced.
For example, women and c h i l d r e n were h i r e d a t v a s t l y
reduced r a t e s t o perform some o p e r a t i o n s w h i l e men were r e t a i n e d a c
much h i g h e r r a t e s f o r o t h e r s .
The d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r would n o t have been n e a r l y s o advantageous t o c a p i t a l i f i t d i d n o t a l s o i n v o l v e t h e p r a c t i c e of conf i n i n g workers t o one s p e c i f i c t a s k i n t h e process.
One would have
thought t h a t i f t h e chief v a l u e of t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r was
merely t h e r e d u c t i o n i n a c t u a l l a b o u r t i m e n e c e s s a r y t o produce a given
item, i t would n o t be of any f u r t h e r u s e t o c o n f i n e a worker t o t h e
c e a s e l e s s r e p i t i t i o n of one o p e r a t i o n .
A worker could work a t one t h i n g
f o r a time and then p a s s t o a n o t h e r o p e r a t i o n when f a t i g u e and boredom
c a l l e d f o r some r e l i e f .
T h i s would i n v o l v e t h e same p r i n c i p l e of doing
one o p e r a t i o n c o n t i n u o u s l y and s e p a r a t e l y from o t h e r o p e r a t i o n s .
This
p r i n c i p l e of work o r g a n i z a t i o n does n o t r e q u i r e of i t s e l f , e s p e c i a l l y
i n a c e n t r a l i z e d workshop, t h a t each worker should do only one t h i n g
c o n s t a n t l y and f o r e v e r .
The c r e a t i o n of t h e d e t a i l worker (assigned t o
a s s i n g l e o p e r a t i o n w i t h i n t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r ) can b e t t e r be
explained by t h e f a c t t h a t i t means workers do n o t have t o be paid
according t o a s u p e r f l u o u s a b i l i t y t o t u r n o u t something a k i n t o a
f i n i s h e d p r o d u c t , b u t r a t h e r can b e p a i d on t h e b a s i s of a b i l i t y t o
complete one simple t a s k .
That i s obviously much l e s s t h a n what t h e
whole o p e r a t i o n o r even s e v e r a l p a r t s of t h e whole o p e r a t i o n e n t a i l s .
Though t h i s i s c l e a r l y i n t h e i n t e r e s t s of c a p i t a l , i t i s n o t s o
c l e a r l y i n t h e i n t e r e s t s of workers nor i s i t s o c l e a r l y i n t h e i n t e r e s t of pure t e c h n i c a l e f f i c i e n c y .
The d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r and t h e appearance of t h e d e t a i l
worker i n t h e e a r l y p a r t of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution w a s n o t , a s i s
p o p u l a r l y b e l i e v e d , c a l l e d i n t o being by t h e simple t e c h n i c a l necessi t i e s of machine p r o d u c t i o n o r i n c r e a s e d e f f i c i e n c y .
It was f i r s t a
p o l i c i t a l and economic n e c e s s i t y of t h e growing c a p i t a l i s t c o n t r o l of
economic a c t i v i t y .
The i n t r o d u c t i o n of machinery proceeded t o a l a r g e r degree t h a n
i s o r d i n a r i l y recognized a s an a s p e c t of t h e i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of t h e
d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r r a t h e r t h a n a s a cause of t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n
of l a b o u r .
t h e matter.
But h e r e we cannot t a k e an a b s o l u t e and s i m p l i f i e d view of
We can say t h a t i n g e n e r a l t h e kind of machinery t h a t
appeared presupposed t h e e x i s t e n c e of a d e t a i l d i v i s i o n o f l a b o r and
t h e accompanying kind of d i s c i p l i n e and c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s
t h a t we have seen.
S i n c e they presupposed t h e e x i s t e n c e of a d e t a i l
d i v i s i o n of l a b o r , when they were introduced they imposed t h e n e c e s s i t y
of i t i f i t d i d n o t a l r e a d y e x i s t i n a given time and i n d u s t r y .
In this
Sense, i t could b e s a i d t h a t machinery caused t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of
labor.
But t h i s of c o u r s e misses t h e p o i n t t h a t t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of
l a b o u r had a l r e a d y been p u t i n t o p r a c t i c e , n o t u n i v e r s a l l y b u t i n t h o s e
i n d u s t r i e s which were t h e most economically dynamic and s i g n i g i c a n t ,
because of i t s own advantages t o t h e c a p i t a l i s t .
To s a y t h a t machinery
caused t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r r e q u i r e s a narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
which m i s r e p r e s e n t s r e a l i t y because i t a b s t r a c t s t h e c o n t e x t away.
I n any c a s e , t h e concept of c a u s a l i t y i s out of p l a c e when
t r y i n g t o i n t e r p r e t t h e r o l e of machinery i n t h e development of t h e
modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
It was s a i d i n Chapter Three t h a t t h e
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work was composed of two i n t e r d e p e n d e n t elements: t h e
d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r and technology.
The p a r t i c u l a r form of t h e d i v i s i o n
of l a b o u r and o f t h e machinery t h a t i s made u s e of i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h
t h a t d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r do n o t s t a n d i n a c a u s a l r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h each
other.
history.
They a r e two p a r t s of a whole and do n o t have a s e p a r a t e
The mutual changes t h e y may undergo a r e guided by more profound
changes i n t h e s t r u c t u r e of s o c i e t y i t s e l f , and t h e changes i n t h e two
p a r t s a r e l i n k e d t o each o t h e r .
Thus i t i s j u s t a s v a l i d t o say t h a t t h e
d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r "caused" machinery by making machinery p o s s i b l e
a s i t i s t o say t h a t i t was t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of machinery t h a t "caused"
t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r .
This i s a s t r u e now a s i t was d u r i n g
t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n England.
The p r o c e s s of i n c r e a s i n g t h e
a p p l i c a t i o n of machinery and i n t e n s i f y i n g t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r
which began d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution has been a continuous one
down t o t h e p r e s e n t day, s o t h a t s u c c e s s i v e g e n e r a t i o n of workers have
been s u b j e c t e d t o i t .
Each new advance i n t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of labour
opens up t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of f u r t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n s of machinery, which
106
results in even more intensification of the detail division of labour,
and so on.
Today, even white collar workers are not exempt from that
self-perpetuating cycle. Much of the work that secretaries do is
routine detail work.
The nature of that work has made possible the
innovation of sophisticated word processing equipment that will in
turn intensify further the routine detail nature of secretarial work.
The next section of Chapter Four is concerned with the specific
role of machinery in the changes in the organization of work that took
place during the Industrial Revolution in England.
Innovation: The Introduction of Machinery
The struggle is not so much against machinery
as against the power behind machinery, the
power of capital. 123
It was argued in Chapter Three that all productive technique
bears the marks of the form of social organization which is its
prerequisite, and that technology conceived of as a collection of
things does not provide a sufficient explanation of the organization
of work in any given social formation. In this section we.see how
that applies to the innovation and introduction of machinery during
England's Industrial Revolution.
The previous sections of this chapter have sought to
describe and interpret the early manifestations of the modern capitalist organization of work in the context of the historical social
I
formation. In particular, it was seen that three major aspects of
the early capitalist
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work, i . e .
t h e c e n t r a l i z e d workplace, a r a t h e r r i g i d
d i s c i p l i n e e n u n c i a t e d and enforced by t h e owner o r h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ,
and a minute d i v i s i o n of l a b o r performed by s p e c i a l i z e d d e t a i l workers
under t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e owner, were t o a l a r g e e x t e n t r e l a t e d t o t h e
owner's need t o e s t a b l i s h and extend c o n t r o l over t h e l a b o r process.
It was a l s o shown t h a t machinery, o r what i s narrowly conceived of a s
technology, played no p i v o t a l p a r t i n t h e appearance of t h o s e t h r e e
a s p e c t s of t h e e a r l y modern d i v i s i o n of l a b o r . I n f a c t , most i n d u s t r i e s
were n o t f u l l y mechanized u n t i l w e l l i n t o t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , long
a f t e r t h e e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s of t h e e a r l y c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of
work had been e s t a b l i s h e d .
Machinery i s o n l y one s i d e of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work, of which
t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i s t h e o t h e r h a l f .
J u s t a s t h e a c t u a l form taken
by t h e s o c i a l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i s r e l a t e d t o t h e dynamics of t h e l a r g e r
s o c i a l formation i n which i t i s c o n t a i n e d , s o too i s t h e form t h a t machi n e r y took and t h e ways i n which i t was implemented and used r e l a t e d t o
t h e l a r g e r s o c i a l formation.
The e n t i r e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution w a s t h e l o g i c a l consequence of
c a p i t a l i s m coming i n t o i t s own a s a method of o r g a n i z i n g s o c i e t y ' s economic a c t i v i t i e s .
Any i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution which
f a i l s t o recognize t h e c e n t r a l i t y of t h a t occurrence w i l l have missed i t s
major s i g n i f i c a n c e .
There i s a high l e v e l of agreement among h i s t o r i a n s
on t h i s p o i n t .
I f t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution meant t h e r i s e of c a p i t a l i s m a s a
method of economic a c t i v i t y , i t a l s o meant t h e r i s e of t h e working c l a s s .
R e l a t i o n s between t h e owners of i n d u s t r y and t h e i r workers were n o t t h e n
harmonious j u s t a s t h e y a r e n o t now harmonious.
And i t would n o t be
unreasonable t o add t h a t r e l a t i o n s i n t h a t p e r i o d of g r e a t s o c i a l t r a n s formation and upheaval were c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s harmonious t h a n they have
been much of t h e time s i n c e then.
t o become an o u t r i g h t b a t t l e .
delineated.
On o c c a s i o n t h i s c o n f l i c t e s c a l a t e d
A t o t h e r times i t w a s n o t s o s t r o n g l y
It was a b a t t l e about c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o r p r o c e s s , b u t i t
was a l s o about much more.
From t h e working p e o p l e s ' p o i n t of view i t
w a s about t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of home l i f e and of t r a d i t i o n s , about having
enough t o e a t , about d e g r a d a t i o n of t h e c r a f t s m a n ' s independence and
From c a p i t a l ' s p o i n t of view, i t w a s about economic - s u r v i v a l
dignity.
i n t h e f a c e of s t i f f competition, about t h e r i g h t s of p r o p e r t y , about
e x e r t i n g t h e i r a s c e n d i n t power i n s o c i e t y and t h e economy.
It i s w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t of t h e c o n s o l i d a r i o n of c a p i t a l i s m a s
a method of economic a c t i v i t y t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e r i s e of t h e working
c l a s s t h a t t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work, i n c l u d i n g t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of
machines and machine p r o d u c t i o n a s w e l l a s t h e new d i v i s i o n of l a b o r ,
must b e understood.
The a p p l i c a t i o n of machinery t o production was a
p r o c e s s t h a t responded t o a m u l t i t u d e of f a c t o r s both economic and
political.
This s e c t i o n l o o k s a t some of t h e ways t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of
machinery responded t o t h e p o l i t i c a l e x i g e n c i e s of t h e c o n f l i c t between
l a b o r and c a p i t a l .
The development and i n t r o d u c t i o n of machinery was
p a r t of t h e b a t t l e between l a b o r and c a p i t a l and proceeded according t o
t h e v i c i s s i t u d e s of t h a t b a t t l e r a t h e r than according t o an independent
l o g i c of t e c h n o l o g i c a l p r o g r e s s of c o n s t a n t l y improving e f f i c i e n c y .
Mach-
i n e r y w a s n o t uncommonly used d i r e c t l y a s a weapon i n t h e c o n f l i c t as a
l e v e r t o a d j u s t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c a p i t a l and l a b o r .
In t h e f i r s t
p a r t of t h i s s e c t i o n w e look a t some of t h e ways t h a t c a p i t a l used machi n e r y a s a weapon a g a i n s t l a b o r and why.
I n t h e second p a r t we look a t
some of t h e ways t h a t l a b o r used machinery a s a weapon a g a i n s t c a p i t a l .
The f i r s t appearance of some machines was due t o t h e conscious
and e x p l i c i t d e s i r e of employers t o b e f r e e d of dependence on a workforce
t h a t w a s o f t e n u n w i l l i n g , i n t r a c t a b l e and r e b e l l i o u s .
We can f i n d numer-
ous examples of a p a r t i c u l a r p i e c e of machinery coming i n t o u s e a s a
r e s u l t of a s t r i k e o r some o t h e r form of u p r i s i n g by a group of workers.
Marx observed i n t h i s connection t h a t machinery "is t h e most powerful
weapon f o r r e p r e s s i n g s t r i k e s , t h o s e p e r i o d i c a l r e v o l t s of t h e workingc l a s s a g a i n s t t h e autocracy of c a p i t a l . "124
'
The u l t i m a t e s i m p l i c i t y of
i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s was t h a t i t could make redundant t h e workers who were
a t t e m p t i n g t o e x t r a c t concessions from t h e owners.
We have w r i t t e n r e c o r d t h a t t h e manufacturers of t h e day and t h e i r
a l l i e s were n o t unaware of t h e advantage o f f e r e d t o them by t h e use of
machinery.
Earl F i t z w i l l i a m , Lord L i e u t e n a n t of t h e West Riding of
Yorkshire ( a c e n t e r of t h e wool t r a d e ) who was l a t e r t o b e known f o r h i s
humanity i n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e Luddites and who w a s s t i l l l a t e r t o be d i s missed from o f f i c e f o r p r o t e s t i n g over t h e n o t o r i o u s massacre of weavers
a t P e t e r l o o , urged i n 1802 t h a t t h e wool croppers ( a s k i l l e d and e l i t e
group of wool workers about whom we w i l l h e a r more l a t e r ) should be
r e p l a c e d by machinery s o t h a t " t h e i r consequence would b e l o s t , t h e i r
Banks would waste, t h e i r combinations would f a l l t o t h e ground, and we
should h e a r no more of meetings of any s o r t of description."125
This
i s i n f a c t what happened t o them a f t e r a p r o t r a c t e d b a t t l e of twenty
years' duration.
The Manchester Commercial A d v e r t i s e r i n t h e midst
of t h e Luddite r a i d s of t h e hand loom weavers devoted an a r t i c l e t o
e x p l a i n i n g how t h e power loom would. save t h e c o t t o n m a s t e r s from t h e
d i s s i p a t i o n and human f o l l y of t h o s e weavers.
W i l l i a m Fairbairn,
who invented a r i v e t i n g machine a s a r e s u l t of a s t r i k e by b o i l e r makers
i n h i s Manchester b u s i n e s s i n t h e l a t e 1 8 3 0 ' s wrote t h a t " t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
of new machinery and t h e s e l f - a c t i n g p r i n c i p l e owed much of t h e i r e f f i c acy and i n g e n u i t y t o t h e system of s t r i k e s . ,8127
The u s e f u l n e s s of machinery i n t h i s regard d i d n o t escape t h e
n o t i c e of Andrew Ure, t h e a r c h a p o l o g i s t of t h e f a c t o r y system.
He gives
us s e v e r a l examples i n The Philosophy of Manufactures of machines t h a t
were designed s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r t h e purpose of undermining workers' i n i t i a t i v e s t o e x e r t o r m a i n t a i n some kind of c o n t r o l over t h e i r wages and
working c o n d i t i o n s
.
He mentions a power loom weaving f a c t o r y i n Manchester a t which
t h e r e w a s a s t r i k e by t h e y a r n d r e s s e r s .
A s a r e s u l t of t h i s s t r i k e ,
t h e owner i n s t a l l e d a machine which was s o simple t h a t i t enabled him
t o employ " f r e e l a b o u r e r s " r a t h e r than "monopolists" ( s k i l l e d workers)
t o do t h e work.
Ure comments,
Thus t h e combined mal-contents who fancied themselves
impregnably i n t r e n c h e d behind t h e o l d l i n e s of t h e
d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r , found t h e i r f l a n k s turned and t h e i r
defences rendered u s e l e s s by t h e new mechanical
t a c t i c s and were o b l i g e d t o s u r r e n d e r a t d i s c r e t i o n . 126
Judging by h i s u s e of m i l i t a r y terminology, t h e r e i s no doubt i n Ure's
mind t h a t t h e c o n f l i c t w a s a b a t t l e of some kind.
He f i n d s a n o t h e r example i n t h e p r i n t i n g of c a l i c o .
According
t o Ure, t h e workers i n t h i s branch of t h e t r a d e were r u l i n g t h e i r
m a s t e r s " i n t h e s p i r i t of t h e Egyptian task-masterstt by e n f o r c i n g t h e i r
conceptions concerning t h e number of a p p r e n t i c e s t o be employed (apprent i c e s h i p by t h i s time, r a t h e r than being a procedure f o r t e a c h i n g t h e
m y s t e r i e s of a c r a f t , was used by t h e m a s t e r s t o h i r e cheap young
u n s k i l l e d l a b o u r ) , t h e h o u r s of work, and t h e wages t o b e paid.
Faced
w i t h t h i s i n t o l e r a b l e s i t u a t i o n , t h e owners turned t o s c i e n c e and were
duly r e i n s t a t e d i n t h e i r r i g h t f u l p l a c e , " t h a t of t h e head over t h e
i n f e r i o r members", by t h e development of a machine f o r p r i n t i n g c a l i c o .
Ure s a y s t h a t t h e machinery f o r dyeing and r i n s i n g
c a l i c o was a l s o
devised "under t h e h i g h p r e s s u r e of t h e same d e s p o t i c confederacies".
129
Apparently t h e enlargement of t h e mechanical s p i n n i n g frame, by
which one man w a s enabled t o do t h e work of two, was a l s o t h e r e s u l t of
what t h e owners viewed a s unconscionable t r a n s g r e s s i o n s of t h e i r workers.
These workers had managed t o e s t a b l i s h some kind of c o n t r o l over t h e
e n t r y of new u n s k i l l e d people i n t o t h e t r a d e , thereby i n Ure's view
having " s e t themselves i n h o s t i l e a r r a y a g a i n s t c a p i t a l , b o a s t i n g t h e i r
power t o c o n s t r a i n i t t o t h e i r w i l l " .
The m a s t e r s a f t e r many a t t e m p t s
found i t impossible t o reduce t h e r a t e s of pay.
Finding i t impossible
t o reduce t h e p r i c e they p a i d f o r l a b o r , they r e s o r t e d t o an approach
which reduced t h e amount of l a b o r they needed t o use.
by e n l a r g i n g t h e s i z e of t h e s p i n n i n g frames.
T h i s they d i d
Ure w r i t e s of t h a t
event :
I n doubling t h e s i z e of h i s mule [the name g i v e n t o
t h e s p i n n i n g machine4 , t h e owner i s enabled t o g e t
r i d of i n d i f f e r e n t o r r e s t i v e s p i n n e r s , and t o become
once more master of h i s m i l l , which i s no s m a l l advant a g e . I am w e l l a s s u r e d , t h a t b u t f o r t h e e x t r a v a g a n t
p r e t e n s i o n s of t h e r u l i n g committee f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
of t h e s p i n n e r d , t h i s c a t a s t r o p h e would n o t have bef a l l e n t h e o p e r a t i v e s f o r many a day t o come.. . I 3 0
The i n v e n t i o n of t h e f u l l y automatic s p i n n i n g mule f o r t h e
s p i n n i n g of c o t t o n t h r e a d i s one of t h e b e t t e r known examples of a
machine being developed a s a weapon t o be used a g a i n s t workers.
In
Ure's t e l l i n g of t h e s t o r y , t h e c o t t o n s p i n n e r s had p a r t i c i p a t e d i n
a s e r i e s of s t r i k e s "wantonly i n f l i c t e d upon one s e t of mill-owners
a f t e r a n o t h e r throughout t h e s e v e r a l d i s t r i c t s of Lancashire and
Lanarkshire, f o r t h e purpose of degrading them i n t o a s t a t e of s e r v i t ude."
Although Ure does n o t mention i t , t h e s e s t r i k e s were probably
t h e r e s u l t of a g e n e r a l agreement among t h e owners t o impose a wage
reduction.
I n response, t h e owners banded t o g e t h e r and c o n t r a c t e d
w i t h a machining f i r m t o have i t i n v e n t a completely s e l f - a c t i n g
s p i n n i n g mule.
I n a few months t h e f i r m f u l f i l l e d i t s o b l i g a t i o n
by a producing a machine which had " t h e thought, f e e l i n g , and t a c t
of t h e experienced workman-which even i n i t s i n f a n c y d i s p l a y e d a new
p r i n c i p l e of r e g u l a t i o n , ready i n i t s mature s t a t e t o f u l f i l t h e func t i o n s of a f i n i s h e d s p i n n e r
...even
s t r a n g l e d t h e Hydra of misrule."
long b e f o r e i t l e f t i t s c r a d l e , i t
The s p i n n e r s c a l l e d t h i s new machine
,
t h e I r o n Man.
Ure t e l l s u s t h a t t h i s i n v e n t i o n "confirms t h e g r e a t
d o c t r i n e a l r e a d y propounded, t h a t when c a p i t a l e n l i s t s s c i e n c e i n h e r
s e r v i c e , t h e r e f r a c t o r y hand of l a b o u r w i l l always b e t a u g h t d o c i l i t y . tt131
I n Ure's mind, t h e s e few i n v e n t i o n s d e s c r i b e d above a r e n o t i s o l a t e d chance occurrences of machinery being used t o s u b v e r t t h e a s p i r a t i o n s
of t h e l a b o r i n g poor, b u t r a t h e r demonstrate a g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e of mecha n i c a l i n n o v a t i o n , and of t h e f a c t o r y system i t s e l f , which i s t h e replacement of s k i l l e d l a b o r by machinery:
"...whenever
a process requires
p e c u l i a r d e x t e r i t y and s t e a d i n e s s of hand, i t i s withdrawn a s soon a s
p o s s i b l e from t h e cunning workman, who i s prone t o i r r e g u l a r i t i e s of many
k i n d s , and i t i s p l a c e d i n charge of a p e c u l i a r mechanism, s o s e l f - r e g u l a t i n g t h a t a c h i l d may a t t e n d it."132
He informs u s what h e means by a t
l e a s t one of t h e s e " i r r e g u l a r i t i e s of many kinds":
By t h e i n f i r m i t y of human n a t u r e i t happens, t h a t
t h e more s k i l f u l t h e workman, t h e more s e l f - w i l l e d
and i n t r a c t a b l e he i s a p t t o become, and, of course,
t h e l e s s f i t a component of a mechanical system, i n
which, by o c c a s i o n a l i r r e g u l a r i t i e s , he may do g r e a t
damage t o t h e whole. The grand o b j e c t t h e r e f o r e of
t h e modern manufacturer i s , through t h e union of capi t a l and s c i e n c e , t o reduce t h e t a s k of h i s workpeople t o t h e e x e r c i s e of v i g i l a n c e and d e x t e r i t y ,
- - f a c u l t i e s , when concentred t o one r o c e s s , s p e e d i l y
brought t o p e r f e c t i o n i n t h e young. 3
13
A b i t of h i s t o r i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n may be n e c e s s a r y t o e x p l a i n
why i t should have been f e l t t h a t s k i l l e d workers were more insubordi n a t e than others.
Through t r a d i t i o n d a t i n g from t h e days of g u i l d s
and p a t e r n a l i s t l e g i s l a t i o n which g r a n t e d e x c l u s i v e r i g h t s and guardians h i p of a t r a d e t o i t s workers, almost every c l a s s of s k i l l e d workers
had some k i n d of c o n t r o l , a t t h i s p o i n t more from custom t h a n law, over
,
t h e i r working c o n d i t i o n s .
This c o n t r o l ranged from t h e pacing of t h e
weekly work c y c l e through t o r e g u l a t i n g t h e e n t r y t o and l e n g t h of
a p p r e n t i c e s h i p s , which w a s t h e o n l y l e g i t i m a t e way t h a t new people could
e n t e r t h e t r a d e a s long a s t h e workers had anything t o s a y about it.
They a l s o had a c e r t a i n amount of p r i d e i n t h e i r c r a f t , and were accustomed t o s e e i n g themselves a s a group w i t h common i n t e r e s t s and problems,
and w i t h c o m o n s o l u t i o n s t o t h o s e problems.
These t r a d i t i o n s and s e l f - c o n c e p t i o n s made i t r e l a t i v e l y easy
f o r them t o seek ways of c o l l e c t i v e l y r e f u s i n g t o a l l o w t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y
powerful owners t o impose t h e i r a b s o l u t e a u t h o r i t y over work and production.
There a r e c o u n t l e s s s t o r i e s of s k i l l e d workers impeding
i n one
way o r a n o t h e r t h e owners' e x e r c i s i n g a f r e e r e i g n o v e r t h e o p e r a t i o n
of t h e production s i d e of t h e i r b u s i n e s s .
I n many c a s e s t h e s k i l l e d
workers based t h e i r claims e x p l i c i t e l y on o l d h a l f - f o r g o t t e n p i e c e s of
p a t e r n a l i s t l e g i s l a t i o n which gave them r i g h t s incompatible w i t h t h e
new s p i r i t of l a i s s e z f a i r e c a p i t a l i s m , such a s t h e r i g h t t o l i m i t t h e
number of a p p r e n t i c e s used by t h e m a s t e r s and t h e r i g h t t o r e g u l a t e t h e
q u a l i t y of goods produced.
I n f a c t , when t h e f i r s t o u t b r e a k s of Luddism
appeared among t h e framework k n i t t e r s ( t o which we w i l l l a t e r r e t u r n ) ,
they claimed a r i g h t t o d e s t r o y t h e k n i t t i n g machines on t h e b a s i s of
an o l d C h a r t e r g r a n t e d t o t h e Framework K n i t t e r s Company by Charles I1
which gave them t h e power t o a p p o i n t d e p u t i e s t o i n s p e c t goods and d e s t r o y
t h o s e which were i n f e r i o r .
A s l a t e a s 1773 t h e S p i t t l e f i e l d s s i l k weavers
had o b t a i n e d an Act which provided f o r t h e r e g u l a t i o n of t h e i r wages by
t h e Lord Mayor i n London and by t h e m a g i s t r a t e s i n o t h e r p l a c e s .
This
s u c c e s s provided encouragement t o t h e s k i l l e d workers i n o t h e r t r a d e s
who s p e n t many y e a r s and l a r g e sums of money t r y i n g t o o b t a i n s i m i l a r
a c t s t o apply t o t h e i r own t r a d e .
The m a s t e r s s p e n t a s many y e a r s
and an e q u a l l y l a r g e , i f n o t l a r g e r , sum of money i n opposing any such
acts.
The l e g a l p l e a d i n g s of t h e workers a l t e r n a t e d throughout t h e
n e x t f o r t y y e a r s w i t h p e r i o d i c o u t b u r s t s of r i o t i n g and machine breaki n g , b u t they were none of them s u c c e s s f u l a f t e r t h e s i l k weavers.
A l l t h e major e p i s o d e s of Luddism i n t h e y e a r s 1811 and 1812 were pre-
ceeded by u n s u c c e s s f u l a t t e m p t s t o win p r o t e c t i v e l e g i s l a t i o n from
Parliament.
I t w a s t h i s long h i s t o r y of i n c r e a s i n g l y more determined and
organized c o l l e c t i v e a t t e m p t s by s k i l l e d workers t o l i m i t t h e autonomy
of t h e m a s t e r s t h a t engendered t h e i r f e e l i n g t h a t s k i l l e d l a b o r was
something w i t h which they d i d n o t wish t o a s s o c i a t e .
A s w e saw above,
they used t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of machinery t o t h e work c a r r i e d on i n t h e i r
m i l l s and workshops a s one way t o f r e e themselves from t h e onerous
e f f e c t s of having t o r e l y on s k i l l e d l a b o r .
However, t h i s was n o t
t h e only t a c t i c they employed; they were j u s t as f o r c e f u l i n lobbying
a g a i n s t any kind of p r o t e c t i v e l e g i s l a t i o n as t h e workers were i n lobbying f o r it.
And by and l a r g e they were much more s u c c e s s f u l because
t h e s p i r i t of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century w a s e v e r
more s o l i d l y embodying
t h e economic p r e c e p t s of people l i k e Adam Smith who advocated t h a t t h e
government r e g u l a t e d b e s t when i t r e g u l a t e d l e a s t .
Those who r e p l a c e d t h e s k i l l e d workers were t o a g r e a t e x t e n t
women and c h i l d r e n who were regarded a s a more t r a c t a b l e l a b o r f o r c e ,
and who most c e r t a i n l y c o n s t i t u t e d a cheaper l a b o r f o r c e .
The s k i l l e d men
s a w t h e i r replacement by female and c h i l d l a b o r a s an i n t e n t i o n a l a c t on
t h e p a r t of t h e i r employees.
When t h e worsted hand loom weavers drew up
a l i s t of g r i e v a n c e s i n 1835, they p r o t e s t e d a g a i n s t " . , . t h e
a d a p t i o n of
machines, i n every improvement, t o c h i l d r e n , and y o u t h , and women, t o t h e
e x c l u s i o n of t h o s e who ought t o labour--the
MEN. 1,134
Although t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y widespread u s e of machinery d i d n o t
i n i t i a l l y cause t h e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of work i n t o an employer c o n t r o l l e d
l o c a t i o n , i t would be f a i r t o say t h a t i t a c c e l e r a t e d t h a t t r e n d .
Whether
i t w a s t h e women and c h i l d r e n going i n t o t h e m i l l s and r e p l a c i n g t h e
s k i l l e d men, o r whether i t w a s t h e male a r t i s a n s being f o r c e d t o f o l l o w
machines w i t h which they could n o t compete i n t o t h e f a c t o r i e s , t h e u s e
of machinery f u r t h e r r e i n f o r c e d t h e e r o s i o n of t h e working c l a s s p a t t e r n
of family l i f e by breaking up t h e p r a c t i c e of domestic l a b o r .
We have
seen how t h i s was r e s e n t e d by t h e l a b o r i n g poor.
A very s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t of i n c r e a s i n g mechanization was t h e
f a c t of ownership i t s e l f .
This i s w e l l expressed i n a comment made by
t h e c o t t o n s p i n n e r s of Lancashire i n a submission t o Parliament i n t h e
l a t e 1770's a g a i n s t t h e u s e of t h e w a t e r frame (an e a r l y - s p i n n i n g machine
f i r s t used i n Arkwright's m i l l s which prompted a v i o l e n t and d e s t r u c t i v e
response on t h e p a r t of t h e s p i n n e r s ) .
They s a i d t h a t " t h e Jenneys a r e
i n t h e Hands of t h e Poor and t h e P a t e n t Machines a r e g e n e r a l l y i n t h e
b e f o r e t h e advent of machinery, t h e t o o l s
~
Hands of t h e ~ i c h . " ' ~ Whereas
o f ' t h e t r a d e were f r e q u e n t l y , though by no means u n i v e r s a l l y , i n t h e posse s s i o n of those who worked w i t h them, a f t e r t h e appearance of machinery,
i t was l e s s and l e s s t h e c a s e t h a t t h e means of production were i n t h e
p o s s e s s i o n of t h e workers.
By t h e n a t u r e of t h e i n v e n t i v e p r o c e s s and
t h e high c o s t of t h e f i n i s h e d machine, they
of someone o t h e r than t h e workers.
ended by b e i n g t h e p r o p e r t y
Hand looms i n g e n e r a l belonged t o
t h e weavers, power looms always belonged t o t h e masters.
And s o on
throughout t h e t r a d e s a s they were mechanized.
The combination of t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of s k i l l and t h e removal of
t h e i n s t r u m e n t s of l a b o r from t h e ownership of t h e workers and a r t i s a n s
proved t o b e an u n f o r t u n a t e one from t h e i r p o i n t of view.
The following
d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e i n v e n t i o n of t h e Jacquard loom c l e a r l y shows why:
...
t h e s p e c i a l f e a t u r e of t h i s i n v e n t i o n i s t h a t ,
whereas i n o r d i n a r y looms t h e v a r i o u s i n t r i c a t e
arrangements of t h e t h r e a d s t o form a p a r t i c u l a r
p a t t e r n a r e e f f e c t e d by t h e worker h i m s e l f , sometimes by s p e c i a l p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e loom, and sometimes by p r e c i s e adjustments during t h e work; on
t h e new machine, thanks t o a simple and ingenious
mechanism, they t a k e p l a c e a u t o m a t i c a l l y w i t h o u t
any i n t e r f e r e n c e by t h e workers. The weaver's work
c l e a r l y became much more mechanical. The i n t e l l i g ence which h e had t o apply b e f o r e i n o r d e r t o t r a n s f e r t h e p a t t e r n on t o t h e loom had passed now, t o a
c e r t a i n e x t e n t , over t o t h e machine; and t h e b e n e f i t
which t h e worker used t o d e r i v e from h i s u s e of h i s
i n t e l l i g e n c e w a s now l o s t t o him, and r e s t e d w i t h t h e
owner of t h e machine, t h e commercial employer. A s
a r e s u l t , t h e worker s u f f e r e d a double disadvantage:
f i r s t , he could now use, and t h e r e f o r e r e a l i z e , only
h i s mechanical powers and s k i l l ; and secondly, he was
i n no p o s i t i o n t o p r o v i d e himself w i t h a s i m i l a r b u t
much more expensive Jacquard loom: he w a s no l o n g e r
h i s own independent m a s t e r , b u t could only pursue
h i s o c c u p a t i o n i n t h e s e r v i c e and pay of a "foreign"
master. 136
One of t h e responses of workers and a r t i s a n s t o t h i s "double disadvantage"
was t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of t h e o f f e n d i n g machinery.
turn.
It i s t o t h i s t h a t we now
I m e d i a t e l y Luddism comes t o mind, w i t h images of unruly backward-looking gangs roaming t h e c o u n t r y s i d e and t e r r o r i z i n g peace l o v i n g
c i t i z e n s with t h e i r f u t i l e attempts t o stop progress.
But Luddism w a s
o n l y a s h o r t p e r i o d i n t h e h i s t o r y of machine b r e a k i n g during t h e
I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n England, and i t w a s n e i t h e r t h e beginning nor
t h e end of t h i s mode of i n d u s t r i a l s t r i f e .
Luddism must be seen i n t h e
c o n t e x t of t h e l o n g e r h i s t o r y of machine breaking, and machine breaking
must be s e e n i n t h e c o n t e x t of t h e s o c i a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l t r a n s formations t a k i n g p l a c e a t t h e time.
Seen i n t h i s c o n t e x t , t h e h i s t o r y
of machine breaking i s l a r g e l y t h e h i s t o r y of l a b o r using machinery a s
a weapon a g a i n s t c a p i t a l .
Hobsbawm reduces t h e " i n d u s t r i a l " concerns of t h e work people
d u r i n g t h e tumultuous time of t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution t o two:
"prev-
e n t i n g unemployment and m a i n t a i n i n g t h e customary s t a n d a r d of l i f e , which
included non-monetary f a c t o r s such a s freedom and d i g n i t y , a s w e l l a s
wages.
Workers and a r t i s a n s had been involved i n d e f e n s i v e a c t i o n s
around t h e s e concerns f o r q u i t e a long time, a c t i o n s ranging from food
r i o t s t o d i r e c t c o n f r o n t a t i o n s w i t h employers.
A time honored method
of p u t t i n g p r e s s u r e on t h e m a s t e r s was t o d e s t r o y t h e i r p r o p e r t y , includi n g raw m a t e r i a l s p u t o u t t o domestic workers, f i n i s h e d goods, t o o l s ,
and even p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y such a s houses and farms belonging t o t h e
masters.
Machine breaking
b a r g a i n i n g by r i o t t ' .
was i n i t i t a l l y p a r t of t h i s " c o l l e c t i v e
Hobsbawm c h a r a c t e r i z e s i t a s "simply a technique
o f ' t r a d e unionism i n t h e p e r i o d b e f o r e , and d u r i n g t h e e a r l y phases o f ,
t h e I n d u s t r i a l evolution. 1'138
T h i s i s of course n o t s t r i c t l y speaking
t r u e , s i n c e t h e r e were no t r a d e unions a s we know them, b u t t h e n o t i o n
t h a t machine b r e a k i n g w a s a t r a d i t i o n a l technique f o r encouraging
employers t o s e e t h i n g s t h e workers way, r a t h e r than an e x p r e s s i o n of
a c o n s i s t e n t and a b i d i n g h a t r e d f o r a l l machinery, i s born o u t by a
c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of evidence.
To g i v e o n l y a few examples of l a b o r ' s use of machinery as a
t a c t i c a l weapon a g a i n s t c a p i t a l i n t h e e i g h t e e n t h century:
i n 1710
t h e London framework k n i t t e r s , angered by t h e employment of t o o many
p a r i s h "apprentices"
(cheap u n s k i l l e d l a b o r provided by abandoned,
orphaned o r o t h e r w i s e impoverished c h i l d r e n ) , wrecked one hundred
k n i t t i n g frames i n p r o t e s t . 13'
I n Melksham i n t h e l a t e 1730's t h e
t e x t i l e workers c u t t h e c h a i n s i n a l l t h e looms belonging t o a c e r t a i n
employer who had attempted t o i n s t i t u t e a r e d u c t i o n
f i n i s h e d work. 140
i n the price f o r
I n t h e Northumberland c o a l d i s t r i c t t h e miners burned
and smashed p i t head machinery d u r i n g r i o t s i n t h e 1740's and a g a i n i n
1165.
For t h e i r e f f o r t s they won i n t h e f i r s t i n s t a n c e a wage i n c r e a s e
and i n t h e second t h e r i g h t t o choose t h e i r employer when t h e annual
c o n t r a c t expired. 14'
The Nottingham framework k n i t t e r s , af t e r having
been twice d e f e a t e d i n t h e l a t e 1770's i n t h e i r e f f o r t s t o g e t Parliament
t o e n a c t a law r e g u l a t i n g t h e i r wages and t h e p r a c t i c e s of t h e k n i t t i n g
t r a d e , disposed of t h r e e hundred k n i t t i n g frames belonging t o a M r . Need,
the strongest lobbyist against
t h e b i l l , and o t h e r s .
This s o impressed
t h e m a s t e r s t h a t they agreed t o r a i s e t h e men's wages i f they would s t o p
the destruction.
T h i s agreement on p r i c e s , and a subsequent one reached
a few y e a r s l a t e r , remained i n e f f e c t f o r about t h e n e x t t h i r t y y e a r s .
142
C o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g by r i o t f e a t u r i n g t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of machinery
was n o t without i t s s u c c e s s e s .
It w a s , i n f a c t , on more than one occa-
s i o n more e f f e c t i v e t h a n p e t i t i o n s t o Parliament.
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h i s p a t t e r n of machine breaking a s p a r t of
c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g by r i o t t o win i n d u s t r i a l o b j e c t i v e s n o t connected
t o t h e f a c t of t h e machine i t s e l f , t h e r e was i n c r e a s i n g l y i n t h e second
h a l f of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y a p a t t e r n of h o s t i l i t y t o machinery i t s e l f .
This h o s t i l i t y was u s u a l l y generated by a f e a r of t h e unemployment a t t e n d a n t upon t h e u s e of t h e machinery,
The h o s t i l i t y expressed i t s e l f through
b o t h c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and v i o l e n t channels.
It was concerned both w i t h
unemployment stemming from t h e e l i m i n a t i o n of work due t o t h e machine
doing t h e work of more than one man, and w i t h unemployment a r i s i n g from
t h e replacement of t h e s k i l l e d a r t i s a n by t h e u n s k i l l e d l a b o r e r , o r
11
a p p r e n t i c e " a s they were somewhat a n a c h r o n i s t i c a l l y c a l l e d .
One of t h e most famous campaigns of t h i s type was i n Lancashire
i n 1779 when s e v e r a l thousand c o t t o n s p i n n e r s and t h e i r s u p p o r t e r s
destroyed a l l t h e w a t e r frames ( e a r l y s p i n n i n g machines) i n Arkwright's
m i l l and t h e n burned t h e p l a c e down f o r good measure.
by an encore a t a m i l l belonging t o a M r . P e e l .
This was followed
The s p i n n e r s explained
t h e s e a c t i o n s t h e f o l l o w i n g s p r i n g i n a p e t i t i o n t o Parliament t h a t c a l l e d
t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e new machines ''a Domestic E v i l of a very g r e a t
magnitude" which t h r e a t e n e d them w i t h t o t a l l o s s of employment.
,
How-
e v e r , t h e s p i n n e r s ' f e a r s of massive unemployment soon gave way w i t h t h e
dramatic i n c r e a s e i n t r a d e t h a t m i t i g a t e d t h e e f f e c t s of t h e new machinery.
Other groups of workers were n o t s o f o r t u n a t e .
Many groups of s k i l l e d workers voiced s i m i l a r f e a r s .
The wool
combers i n t h e i r 1794 p e t i t i o n t o Parliament a g a i n s t C a r t w r i g h t ' s combi n g machine s a i d
...
by t h e i n v e n t i o n and p r a c t i c e of a new machine
f o r combing wool, which diminishes l a b o u r t o an
alarming degree, t h e p e t i t i o n e r s e n t e r t a i n s e r i o u s
and j u s t f e a r s t h a t themselves and f a m i l i e s w i l l '
s p e e d i l y become a u s e l e s s and heavy b u r t h e n t o t h e
S t a t e . It appears t o t h e p e t i t i o n e r s t h a t one machi n e o n l y , w i t h t h e a s s i s t a n c e of one p e r s o n and f o u r
o r f i v e c h i l d r e n , w i l l perform as much l a b o u r a s
t h i r t y men i n t h e customary manual manner...and i t
i s w i t h t h e most h e a r t f e l t sorrow and anguish t h e
p e t i t i o n e r s a n t i c i p a t e t h a t f a s t approaching p e r i o d
of consummate wretchedness and poverty, when f i f t y
thousand of t h e p e t i t i o n e r s , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i r
d i s t r e s s e d f a m i l i e s . . . w i l l b e i n e v i t a b l y com e l l e d
t o s e e k r e l i e f from t h e i r s e v e r a l p a r i s h e s . 1x4
The.hand loom weavers, who r a r e l y r e s o r t e d t o machine wrecking when t h e
power loom began t o make t h e i r l a b o r u n v i a b l e , advocated t h r e e p r o p o s a l s
w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e u s e of t h e power looms:
f i r s t , t h a t t h e looms should
b e taxed s o t h e i r l a b o u r would be more c o m p e t i t i v e (and t h a t t h e t a x could
be used f o r t h e r e l i e f of t h e d i s t r e s s e d weavers); second, t h a t t h e hours
of work be r e s t r i c t e d s o t h a t t h e work would be more evenly d i s t r i b u t e d
among t h e weavers, ( a l s o reducing t h e working day f o r t h e . b e n e f i t of
t h o s e employed), and t h i r d , t h a t t h e power loom weavers be a d u l t males.
145
The s t r u g g l e of t h e wool croppers a g a i n s t t h e g i g m i l l , which s t r e t c h e d
from t h e time of Edward V I (1547-53)
through t o one of t h e more c o l o r f u l
episodes of Luddism, was based on t h e w e l l founded f e a r t h a t t h a t machine
would make them " i n t o an o r d e r of men n o t n e c e s s a r y t o t h e t r a d e " .
146
This was e x a c t l y t h e i r f a t e , though they succeeded i n postponing i t f o r
a g e n e r a t i o n o r two.
A t h i r d p a t t e r n of machine wrecking w a s generated by a h o s t i l i t y
n o t s o much t o t h e machine, i t s e l f a s t o t h e way i t was used.
The
Lancashire s p i n n e r s ' r i o t of 1779 mentioned above, f o r example, extended
beyond t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of t h e m i l l s u s i n g w a t e r frames t o t h e s y s t e m a t i c
d e s t r u c t i o n of a l l s p i n n i n g j e n n i e s (an e a r l i e r s p i n n i n g i n v e n t i o n of
t h e same p r i n c i p l e a s hand s p i n n i n g b u t which had more t h a n one s p i n d l e )
w i t h more than 20 s p i n d l e s .
(The jenny simply m u l t i p l i e d human hands,
w h i l e t h e water frame w a s a s u b s t i t u t e f o r human s k i l l . ) 147
BY l i m i t -
i n g t h e i r wrath t o o n l y t h o s e j e n n i e s w i t h more than 20 s p i n d l e s , t h e
s p i n n e r s were making a d i s t i n c t i o n between t h o s e j e n n i e s which were too
l a r g e t o be used i n domestic manufacture and t h o s e t h a t could be used
i n c o t t a g e i n d u s t r y which they considered "a f a i r machine" s i n c e i t d i d
n o t have t o be i n t h e hands of a c a p i t a l i s t . 148
They a l s o destroyed
s e v e r a l o t h e r t y p e s of machines such as c a r d i n g , t w i s t i n g and roving
machines, which had been g a t h e r e d i n t o c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n s and d i d work
which had p r e v i o u s l y been done by hand.
ranging support
-
They a p p a r e n t l y had wide
t h o s e a r r e s t e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c l u d e d weavers,
s p i n s t e r s , c o l l i e r s , nailmakers, l a b o u r e r s , j o i n e r s , and even a c o t t a g e
tradesman. 14' It seems c l e a r t h a t i n p a r t they were angered by t h e
"foreign" ownership of t h e machines, and by t h e i r being . s e t up i n
f a c t o r i e s r a t h e r than t h e spinners' cottages.
The Luddite u p r i s i n g s among t h e framework k n i t t e r s can be seen
t o some e x t e n t a s p a r t of t h e p a t t e r n of h o s t i l i t y a g a i n s t machines
f o r t h e way they were used.
When t h e Nottingham k n i t t e r s embarked on
t h e i r c a r e e r of Luddism, i t was n o t o u t of anger a t any new machinery,
but r a t h e r a t an a d a p t i o n of p r e v i o u s l y e x i s t i n g machinery t o make a
new kind of product which, i n a d d i t i o n t o being cheaper, w a s widely
considered t o be i n f e r i o r .
Of course t h i s f a c t a l o n e e x p l a i n s nothing.
It a c q u i r e s i t s meaning and assumes i t s r o l e a s a cause of Luddism only
when i n t e r p r e t e d i n t h e c o n t e x t of t h e r e l a t i o n s of p r o d u c t i o n i n e x i s t ence a t t h e time.
J u s t a s a s i n g l e f a c t such a s t h a t means n o t h i n g on
i t s own, n e i t h e r does t h e f a c t of a p a r t i c u l a r machine mean anything on
i t s own, t h e n as now.
h i s t o r y of i t s own.
N e i t h e r machinery n o r any o t h e r technology has a
Its h i s t o r y i s subsumed i n t h e h i s t o r y of t h e organ-
i z a t i o n of work which i n t u r n can o n l y be understood a s p a r t of a l a r g e r
h i s t o r y . It i s on t h e b a s i s of t h i s understanding t h a t t h e c a u s e s , ambit i o n s and meaning of Luddism should be seen.
There were t h r e e main Luddite u p r i s i n g s i n t h r e e p a r t s of England
among t h r e e d i f f e r e n t groups of workers:
i n Yorkshire among t h e wool
c r o p p e r s , i n Nottingham among t h e framework k n i t t e r s , and i n Lancashire
among t h e c o t t o n weavers.
These movements, though f r e q u e n t l y misunder-
stood, have been reasonably w e l l s t u d i e d and documented. lS0 T h e i r s t o r i e s
a r e r e p e a t e d h e r e i n t h e hope
of i l l u m i n a t i n g t h e meaning of machinery
a s p a r t of t h e new c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of work seen i n t h e c o n t e x t
of t h e changing s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s of t h e time.
For t h e purposes of b r e v i t y ,
t h e s t o r y of t h e Lancashire Luddites has been e l i m i n a t e d .
By t h e time t h e Luddite d i s t u r b a n c e s appeared among t h e framework k n i t t e r s , t h e i r t r a d e w a s s t i l l n o t a f a c t o r y i n d u s t r y .
I t was con-
t r o l l e d by merchant h o s i e r s who had t h e i r goods made by t h e k n i t t e r s , o r
s t o c k i n g e r s as they were a l s o known, working i n t h e i r own homes o r i n a
s m a l l workshop.
The k n i t t i n g frames t h a t they used (which were a much
e a r l i e r i n v e n t i o n ) were more expensive than t h e hand looms of t h e
weavers, and n o t many of them were a c t u a l l y owned by t h e s t o c k i n g e r s .
I n s t e a d they were i n c r e a s i n g l y t h e p r o p e r t y of t h e merchant h o s i e r s
who r e n t e d them o u t t o t h e k n i t t e r s .
Frame r e n t s were a c o n s t a n t source
of i r r i t a t i o n t o t h e s t o c k i n g e r s because they were s u b j e c t t o being
r a i s e d by t h e more a v a r i c i o u s of t h e h o s i e r s .
t h e same e f f e c t as lowering wages.
Raising frame r e n t s had
We have a l r e a d y seen how i n 1779
a f t e r s u f f e r i n g P a r l i a m e n t a r y d e f e a t i n t h e i r a t t e m p t s t o win r e g u l a t e d
improvements i n t h e t r a d e , t h e framework k n i t t e r s went on a f a i r l y
s u c c e s s f u l campaign of frame d e s t r u c t i o n , winning f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s
a more o r l e s s f i x e d and uniform wage r a t e .
By 1810 t h e k n i t t e r s
looked back on t h e y e a r s from roughly 1785 t o 1805 a s t h e golden age
of t h e t r a d e when work w a s p l e n t i f u l and wages l i v a b l e .
began t o worsen.
ment.
Then c o n d i t i o n s
Changes i n f a s h i o n had l e d t o some amount of unemploy-
Moreover, markets were d i s a p p e a r i n g on t h e Continent and i n t h e
U.S. because of war c o n d i t i o n s .
Wages had f a l l e n by about one t h i r d .
I n some v i l l a g e s t h e t r u c k system, o r payment i n k i n d , had almost comp l e t e l y r e p l a c e d wages.
It was about t h i s time t h a t t h e owners of wide frames, which
had p r e v i o u s l y been used t o make a r t i c l e s t h a t were now o u t of f a s h i o n ,
began t o use them t o make i n f e r i o r goods known a s "cut-ups".
Cutting
up was a p r a c t i c e whereby s t o c k i n g s and o t h e r goods were c u t from wide
p i e c e s of k n i t t e d f a b r i c and sewn
t o g e t h e r , producing an a r t i c l e t h a t
d i d n o t have proper s e l v a g e s a s d i d t h e s t o c k i n g s made i n a "tradesmanl i k e " manner, and were t h u s prone t o f a l l i n g a p a r t w i t h r a p i d i t y .
They
were cheap and could be m a s s produced.
For more t h a n one reason
t h e y were profoundly d i s l i k e d by t h e s t o c k i n g e r s . .
t h e market f o r p r o p e r l y made goods.
They undermined
They d i s c r e d i t e d t h e good name
of t h e t r a d e because they were of i n f e r i o r q u a l i t y , and t h i s was
important t o t h e s t o c k i n g e r s who d i d n o t want t h e i r t r a d e t o become
"dishonourable".
of " c o l t i n g "
-
And c u t t i n g up l e d t o t h e even more odious p r a c t i c e
t h e u s e of u n s k i l l e d l a b o r o r too many a p p r e n t i c e s ,
which amounted t o t h e same t h i n g .
Even i f i t had n o t a l r e a d y been r e a l i z e d , t h e connection between
t h e c u t ups and t h e d e t e r i o r a t i n g s t a n d a r d of l i v i n g of t h e k n i t t e r s
was made q u i t e c l e a r i n 1809 when a group of h o s i e r s announced t h e i r
agreement among themselves t o reduce t h e k n i t t e r s ' wages u n l e s s they
( t h e k n i t t e r s ) could e n f o r c e t h e s u p p r e s s i o n of c u t up work.
The k n i t t e r s
t r i e d by v a r i o u s l e g a l means t o accomplish t h i s , b u t f a i l e d .
It was i n
t h e a f t e r m a t h of t h i s f a i l u r e t h a t Luddism f i r s t appeared.
The a c t i v i t i e s of t h e Nottingham Luddites were w e l l planned
and organized, and h i g h l y s e l e c t i v e .
A song of t h e time, e n t i t l e d
"General LuddfsTriumph", speaks t h e i r i n t e n t i o n s :
The g u i l t y may f e a r b u t no vengeance he aims
A t t h e honest man's l i f e o r E s t a t e ,
H i s wrath i s e n t i r e l y confined t o wide frames
And t o t h o s e who o l d p r i c e s a b a t e ,
..........................
L e t t h e w i s e and t h e g r e a t l e n d t h e i r a i d and advice
Nor e ' e r t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e withdraw
T i l l f u l l - f a s h i o n e d work a t t h e o l d fashioned p r i c e
Is e s t a b l i s h e d by custom and law.
Then t h e t r a d e when t h i s arduous c o n t e s t i s o ' e r
S h a l l r a i s e i n f u l l splendour i t s head,
And c o l t i n g and c u t t i n g and squaring no more
S h a l l d e p r i v e t h e honest workmen of bread. 151
With a few exceptions t h a t were a p p a r e n t l y mistakes, t h e Luddites
s t u c k t o t h e i r p o l i c y of d e s t r o y i n g o n l y t h o s e frames which were
being used i n an o f f e n s i v e way.
I n a d d i t i o n t o d i s p o s i n g of frames
making c u t ups and working under what they considered a f a i r p r i c e ,
they a l s o d i d away with t h o s e frames t h a t were being used by " c o l t s " .
The Luddites moved a t n i g h t i n small armed d i s c i p l i n e d bands from
village to village.
A l e t t e r from a n observer d e s c r i b e s t h e i r methods:
...
two men came t o t h i s p l a c e who c a l l e d themselves
i n s p e c t o r s from t h e committee; they went t o every
s t o c k i n g e r ' s house and discharged them from working
under such p r i c e s as they gave them a l i s t o f , and
s a i d they should come a g a i n i n a few days, and i n
c a s e any of them were found working w i t h o u t having
a t i c k e t from t h e i r Master saying t h a t he was w i l l i n g t o g i v e t h e p r i c e s s t a t e d i n t h e i r list--They
should break t h e r e frames. They summoned a l l t h e
s t o c k i n g e r s about twelve o r f o u r t e e n i n number of
Master Men t o a Publick House, w i t h a s much consequence a s i f they had a mandate from t h e P r i n c e
Regent. When they g o t t h i t h e r a l l I can l e a r n a t '
p r e s e n t , was f o r t h e purpose of c o l l e c t i n g money
from them f o r t h e support of t h o s e f a m i l i e s , who
were deprived of g e t t i n g t h e i r bread by having
t h e i r frames broken.--Where they found a frame
worked by a person who had n o t served a r e g u l a r
a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , o r by a Woman, they discharged
them from working, and i f they promised t o do s o ,
they s t u c k a paper upon t h e frame w i t h t h e s e words
w r i t t e n upon i t : "Let t h i s frame s t a n d , t h e c o l t s
removed. "Is2
I n some a r e a s t h e h o s i e r s began t o l a b e l t h e frames belonging t o them
w i t h a n o t i c e t h a t read:
"This frame i s making f u l l f a s h i o n e d work, a t
t h e f u l l price".
Although a few thousand t r o o p s had been posted i n t h e a r e a , i t
was n o t p o s s i b l e t o p r o t e c t t h e o f f e n d i n g frames.
The Luddites had pop-
u l a r sympathy on t h e i r s i d e , and t h e k n i t t e r s who used t h e frames were
%
Some of t h e
n o t o v e r l y i n t e r e s t e d i n defending t h e i r m a s t e r ' s p r o p e r t y .
m a s t e r s who d i d n o t l i k e t h e c u t ups a l s o sympathized w i t h t h e Luddites.
When t h e f i r s t phase of Nottingham Luddism came t o an end i n e a r l y 1812,
some one thousand frames had been destroyed and t h e k n i t t e r s had succeeded
i n r a i s i n g t h e i r wages f o r a time.
T h e r e a f t e r u n t i l 1817 t h e k n i t t e r s
combined l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s f o r t h e purposes of p e t i t i o n i n g Parliament t o
r e d r e s s t h e i r o t h e r g r i e v a n c e s w i t h f u r t h e r s p o r a d i c o u t b u r s t s of machine
breaking.
But t h e r e s u l t s of t h e 1811-12 machine breaking were t h e i r
l a s t v i c t o r y , and they were soon reduced t o a g e n e r a l s t a t e of impoverishment and s t a r v a t i o n .
1 53
The c e n t r a l i s s u e i n response t o which t h e Nottingham
Luddite
campaign a r o s e w a s t h e a t t e m p t by t h e hosders t o cheapen t h e i r c o s t s a t
t h e expense of t h e workers through v a r i o u s methods such a s c o l t i n g ,
lowering wages, making c u t ups, payment i n t r u c k , i n c r e a s i n g frame r e n t s ,
etc.
There were unquestionably no new machines involved.
It was r a t h e r
t h e manner i n which t h e o l d machines were p u t t o new u s e s , a s w e l l a s
o t h e r i n i t i a t i v e s by t h e h o s i e r s n o t r e l a t e d d i r e c t l y t o machinery, t o
which t h e k n i t t e r s o b j e c t e d .
Machinery w a s d e s t r o y e d i n an attempt t o
f o r c e t h e m a s t e r s t o d e s i s t from t h e s e v e r a l i n j u r i o u s p r a c t i c e s i n
which they were engaged, p r a c t i c e s t h a t were undermining t h e i r economic
s e c u r i t y and degrading t h e honor of t h e t r a d e .
I n t h i s s e n s e , Nottingham
Luddism was p a r t of t h e t r a d i t i o n of c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g by r i o t , i f
t h e i r s y s t e m a t i c and o r d e r l y campaign can b e c a l l e d a r i o t .
The c e n t r a l i s s u e of Yorkshire Luddism w a s d i f f e r e n t .
Here t h e
primary o b j e c t i o n was t o a machine which w a s t o a g r e a t e x t e n t r e p l a c i n g
t h e workers.
The machines w e r e t h e s h e a r i n g frame and t h e g i g m i l l ,
and t h e workers were t h e wool croppers.
But t h e meaning of Yorkshire
Luddism goes f a r beyond s p e c i f i c g r i e v a n c e s a g a i n s t c e r t a i n machines,
f o r i t w a s p a r t of a much more g e n e r a l i z e d and long s t a n d i n g f i g h t of
t h e e n t i r e body of wool workers a g a i n s t t h e e f f e c t s of t h e new methods
of o r g a n i z i n g p r o d u c t i o n and a g a i n s t t h e i n c r e a s i n g power of those who
were g a i n i n g c o n t r o l of production.
evolved
I n f a c t , Yorkshire Luddism soon
from t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of c e r t a i n machines i n t o some kind of
g e n e r a l l y r e v o l u t i o n a r y conspiracy.
The wool c r o p p e r s , o r shearmen a s they were sometimes known,
were t h e e l i t e of t h e wool workers.
These h i g h l y s k i l l e d men f i n i s h e d
t h e c l o t h through a complex p r o c e s s i n v o l v i n g many s t e p s t h a t were
t r a d i t i o n a l l y done by hand.
It was s a i d t h a t "they can make a p i e c e
20 pr.Cent b e t t e r o r worse by due c a r e and l a b o u r o r t h e r e v e r s e . "
T h e i r wages were h i g h , customarily s e t a t 5% of t h e v a l u e of t h e f i n ished cloth.
T r a d i t i o n a l l y t h e u n f i n i s h e d c l o t h w a s bought by merchants
from s m a l l c l o t h i e r s and p u t o u t t o be f i n i s h e d i n s m a l l workshops employing f i v e o r s i x perople.
By t h e end of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , some of
t h e l a r g e r manufacturers had f i n i s h i n g done on t h e i r own premises.
Samuel G o t t , one of t h e l a r g e s t , had up t o e i g h t y croppers working i n
h i s establishment.
The comfortable p o s i t i o n of t h e c r o p p e r s w a s t h r e a t e n e d by two
machines, t h e g i g m i l l and t h e s h e a r i n g frame, which r e p l a c e d t h e need
f o r t h e i r s k i l l e d l a b o r i n two important s t e p s i n t h e f i n i s h i n g p r o c e s s .
Presumably i t w a s of t h e s e two machines t h a t Lord F i t z w i l l i a m spoke when
h e s a i d t h a t t h e c r o p p e r s should be r e p l a c e d by machinery s o t h a t
11
w e should h e a r no more of meetings of any s o r t of description."'
The
g i g m i l l as noted e a r l i e r was an o l d i n v e n t i o n d a t i n g from t h e mids i x t e e n t h century.
Although t h e c r o p p e r s ' long f i g h t a g a i n s t t h e g i g
m i l l had a t one p o i n t r e s u l t e d i n i t s being outlawed, t h e r e was an
i n c r e a s i n g number of them s c a t t e r e d about t h e wool d i s t r i c t c o u n t r y s i d e
by t h e end of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y .
The Yorkshire croppers were
determined t o p r e v e n t i t s i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o Leeds.
I n t h i s they succ-
eeded through s t r o n g o r g a n i z a t i o n t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t a s l a t e a s 1814
t h e Leeds manufacturers were a f r a i d t o b r i n g i n t h e g i g m i l l s .
But t h i s w a s only one town.
The croppers decided t o p e t i t i o n
Parliament t o e n f o r c e an old s t a t u t e banning t h e use of g i g m i l l s .
They a l s o l o b b i e d f o r t h e enforcement of two o t h e r o l d laws:
the
enforcement of t h e E l i z a b e t h a n s t a t u t e r e q u i r i n g a seven y e a r apprent i c e s h i p f o r weavers and o t h e r c l o t h workers, and an e a r l y s t a t u t e
which l i m i t e d t h e number of looms t h a t could be owned by any one person.
I n t h i s l e g a l e n t e r p r i s e they were j o i n e d by t h e weavers, and a l s o by
many small c l o t h i e r s , a l l of whom were u n i t e d by some s e n s e t h a t what
w a s a t i s s u e was t h e power of t h e b i g manufacturers t o t a k e over t h e
t r a d e and t e a r a p a r t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s of production.
For
c l e a r l y t h e i r c o n c e n t r a t i o n of looms and workers i n t o l a r g e workshops,
and t h e i r u s e of improperly a p p r e n t i c e d workers, c o n t r a r y t o t h e o l d
s t a t u t e s which had f a l l e n i n t o d i s u s e , w a s a t h r e a t t o t h e p o s i t i o n
and power of weavers, c r o p p e r s , and s m a l l c l o t h i e r s a l i k e .
For t h i s
r e a s o n , t h e f i g h t of t h e c r o p p e r s a g a i n s t t h e g i g m i l l s , which w a s
a l s o a f i g h t a g a i n s t t h e power of t h e b i g c a p i t a l i s t s i n c o n t e n t i f
n o t i n form, expanded i n t o a much l a r g e r c o n f l i c t .
T h e i r a t t e n d a n c e upon P a r l i a m e n t , begun i n 1802 and c a r r i e d
on by a n o r g a n i z a t i o n of croppers known a s ' t h e I n s t i t u t i o n ' , dragged
on f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s a t heavy expense t o t h e workers.
~
The I n s t i t u t i o n
claimed t o have n e a r l y a l l t h e croppers i n Yorkshire a s members, a s
w e l l a s a l a r g e number of weavers and s m a l l masters.
Their challenge
t o t h e u n r e s t r a i n e d growth and power of t h e l a r g e c a p i t a l i s t s was
widely supported by many o t h e r k i n d s of s k i l l e d workers and a r t i s a n s .
The I n s t i t u t i o n had r e c e i v e d e i t h e r money o r membership from " c o l l i e r s ,
b r i c k l a y e r s , w o o l s o r t e r s , c l o t h i e r s , j o i n e r s , sawyers, f l a x - d r e s s e r s ,
shoemakers, turnpike-men,
papermakers".
cabinet-makers,
pattern-ring-makers,
and
The P a r l i a m e n t a r y Committee i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e p e t i t i o n
r e p o r t e d t h a t "they [the p e t i t i o n e r s )
r e t a i n t h i s Law Con apprenticeship]
f r a n k l y a l l o w t h a t the;
wish t o
on account of i t s t e n d i n g t o embarr-
a s s t h e c a r r y i n g on of t h e Factory system, and thereby t o c o u n t e r a c t
i t s growth. 1,154
The Committee regarded t h e wool workers w i t h t h e utmost suspici o n , s a w dark p l o t s i n t h e f a c t t h a t they had been a b l e t o j o i n t o g e t h e r
i n r a i s i n g t h e money t o s u s t a i n t h e high c o s t s of a t t e n d i n g P a r l i a m e n t ,
and t h r e a t e n e d them w i t h p r o s e c u t i o n under t h e r e c e n t l y enacted Combinat i o n Acts which made any c o l l e c t i v e e f f o r t s on t h e p a r t of t h e workmen
(and t h e o r e t i c a l l y t h e m a s t e r s as w e l l ) i l l e g a l .
One of t h e w i t n e s s e s ,
when c l o s e l y q u e s t i o n e d about h i s connections w i t h any organized groups
of workers, answered t h a t he belonged t o "An A s s o c i a t i o n , t o s u b s c r i b e
o u r Mites t o b r i n g b e f o r e t h e Honourable House of Commons.
what?
To b r i n g
Our Case t h a t we might n o t be s e n t t o t h e F a c t o r i e s . ,'1 55
P a r l i a m e n t , a f t e r a d e l a y of s e v e r a l y e a r s , had by 1809 abro-
g a t e d every l a w t h a t t h e wool workers had hoped might o f f e r them some
protection.
Some of t h e l a r g e r employers raced w i t h each o t h e r t o
c a p t u r e what was l e f t of t h e market i n t h o s e w a r d i s t r e s s e d y e a r s by
i n s t a l l i n g g i g m i l l s and s h e a r i n g frames, thereby a v a i l i n g themselves
of t h e u s e of t h e consequently cheaper l a b o u r .
T h i s was t h e s i g n a l f o r
t h e beginning of Yorkshire Luddism:
W
e w i l l never l a y down A r m s [till] The House of
Commons p a s s e s a n Act t o put down a l l Machinery
h u r t f u l t o Commonality, and r e p e a l t h a t t o hang
Frame Breakers. But We. We p e t i t i o n no more
f i g h t i n g must.
--that won't do
Signed by t h e General of t h e Army of
Redressers
Ned Ludd, Clerk 156
Redressers f o r e v e r Amen.
--
By t h e time t h e i r f r u s t r a t i o n s w i t h l e g a l methods of r e c o u r s e
gave way t o Luddism, g i g m i l l s had come i n t o more o r l e s s g e n e r a l use
except i n Leeds i t s e l f .
Yorkshire Luddism w a s more concerned w i t h shear-
i n g frames which had n o t come i n t o such widespread use.
I n t h e beginn-
i n g t h e i r a t t a c k s e q u a l l e d t h o s e of t h e Nottingham L u d d i t e s i n organizat i o n and thoroughness.
They s e n t l e t t e r s t o t h e owners of t h e frames
warning them t o s t o p u s i n g them i f they d i d n ' t want t h e i r frames and
premises destroyed.
I f t h e owner d i d n ' t comply, they descended upon
h i s premises a t n i g h t i n two groups, one t o keep watch w h i l e t h e o t h e r
d i d t h e job.
A f t e r one such a t t a c k , according t o a Leeds newspaper,
A s soon a s t h e work of d e s t r u c t i o n was completed,
t h e Leader draw up h i s men, c a l l e d over t h e r o l l ,
each man answering t o a p a r t i c u l a r number i n s t e a d
of h i s name; they t h e n f i r e d o f f t h e i r p i s t o l s
gave s h o u t , and marched o f f i n r e g u l a r m i l i t a r y
o r d e r . I57
...
Within s i x weeks of t h e f i r s t a t t a c k s , most of t h e s m a l l e r
m a s t e r s who had i n s t a l l e d s h e a r i n g frames had taken t h e i r machines
down.
Faced w i t h g e n e r a l p u b l i c h o s t i l i t y , t h e apparent h e l p l e s s n e s s
of t h e m i l i t a r y and t h e s u c c e s s e s of t h e Luddite bands, t h e i r determina t i o n f a i l e d them when they r e c e i v e d l e t t e r s such a s t h e following:
Information h a s j u s t been given t h a t you a r e a
h o l d e r of t h o s e d e t e s t a b l e Shearing Frames, and
I was d e s i r e d by my Men t o w r i t e t o you and g i v e
you f a i r Warning t o p u l l them down...You w i l l t a k e
n o t e t h a t i f they a r e n o t taken down by t h e end
of n e x t week, I w i l l d e t a c h one of my L i e u t e n a n t s
w i t h a t l e a s t 300 Men t o d e s t r o y them and f u r t h e r more t a k e Notice t h a t i f y o u g i v e u s t h e Trouble
of coming s o f a r we w i l l i n c r e a s e your m i s f o r t u n e
by burning your B u i l d i n g s t o Ashes and i f you have
t h e Impudence t o f i r e upon any of my Men, they have
o r d e r s t o murder you, & burn a l l your Housing, you
w i l l have t h e Goodness t o your Neighbours t o inform
them t h a t t h e same f a t e a w a i t s them i f t h e i r Frames
a r e n o t s p e e d i l y taken down.
..
A f t e r l e s s than two months of a c t i v i t y , l i t t l e remained f o r t h e
Luddites t o do e x c e p t mount an a t t a c k on t h e few l a r g e m i l l s t h a t s t i l l
used t h e d i s p u t e d machines.
The f i r s t a t t a c k by a crowd. of between 300
and 600 on an "extensive" c l o t h manufactory n e a r Wakefield was a success.
T h e i r n e x t a t t e m p t was on t h e Rawfolds M i l l of M r . Cartwright, one.
of t h e b i g g e s t wool manufacturers.
w a s defended.
inery.
The a t t a c k w a s expected and t h e m i l l
The a t t a c k e r s l e f t i n d e f e a t w i t h o u t d e s t r o y i n g any mach-
The a f f r a y r e s u l t e d i n t h e d e a t h of two of t h e Luddites who,
a f t e r being l e f t behind wounded, were r e f u s e d a i d by Cartwright because
they d e c l i n e d t o inform on t h e i r companions.
shed i n t h e e n t i r e Luddite a f f a i r .
This was t h e f i r s t blood
Following t h i s , Yorkshire Luddism
ceased t o c o n s i s t of a t t a c k s on machinery and became c h a r a c t e r i z e d by
more g e n e r a l l y s u b v e r s i v e and r e v o l u t i o n a r y aims, g i v i n g way t o w e l l
organized r a i d s f o r arms and money.
It l a t e r faded away i n a c l i m a t e
of a r r e s t s , t h r e a t s and b e t r a y a l s , a s w e l l a s a r e v e r s i o n t o pursuing
avenues of l e g a l r e c o u r s e and more p a c i f i c t r a d e union t y p e organizat i o n and a c t i v i t i e s .
Yorkshire Luddism was n o t a q u e s t i o n of a b l i n d unthinking
o p p o s i t i o n t o machinery.
I n f a c t , s h o r t l y a f t e r t h e t u r n of t h e century
t h e r e were p r o p o s a l s made by t h e wool workers f o r t h e g r a d u a l introduct i o n of t h e machines w i t h p r o v i s i o n f o r f i n d i n g o t h e r employment f o r
t h o s e who would thereby l o s e t h e i r jobs, o r f o r a t a x on c l o t h f i n i s h e d
by t h e machines f o r t h e r e l i e f of t h e unemployed looking f o r work.
p r o p o s a l s came t o naught.
These
The croppers from t h e i r p o i n t of view had
q u i t e l o g i c a l f e a r s about t h e meaning of g i g m i l l s and s h e a r i n g frames,
and t h e s e f e a r s were j u s t i f i e d .
T h e i r t r a d e w a s soon e l i m i n a t e d :
Between 1806 and 1817 t h e number of g i g m i l l s i n
Yorkshire was s a i d t o have i n c r e a s e d from 5 t o 72;
t h e number of s h e a r s worked by machinery from 100
t o 1,462; and o u t of 3,378 shearmen no l e s s than
1,170 were u t of work w h i l e 1,445 were o n l y p a r t l y
employed. 158
I n t o t a l d e f e a t they t r i e d t o g e t t h e government, s i n c e i t would n o t
s t o p t h e i r replacement by machinery, t o h e l p them emigrate.
This too
was refused, and a s t h e Hammonds wrote, they "were l e f t t o s t a r v e a s
E e s t they could".
Although Yorkshire Luddism was s p e c i f i c a l l y d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t
t h e use of s h e a r i n g frames and g i g m i l l s , i t was t h e r e s u l t of and
founded upon a much more g e n e r a l u n r e s t concerning t h e u n r e s t r a i n e d
ascendency of i n d u s t r i a l i z i n g c a p i t a l i s m trampling underfoot t h e
t r a d i t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s and methods of p r o d u c t i o n and t h e ways of l i f e
t h a t they were p a r t o f .
According t o Malcolm Thomis:
...p a r t of t h e resentment of t h e Yorkshire
L u d d i t e s a r o s e from t h e f a c t t h a t manufacturers
were n o t only o p e r a t i n g shearing-frames and gigm i l l s b u t a l s o g a t h e r i n g them t o g e t h e r i n l a r g e
numbers and housing them i n f a c t o r i e s , a l o n g s i d e
o t h e r p r o c e s s e s i n cloth-production from which
they had t r a d i t i o n a l l y been k e p t s e p a r a t e . 160
We have a l r e a d y seen how t h e l e g a l b a t t l e a g a i n s t t h e g i g m i l l immedi a t e l y g e n e r a l i z e d i t s e l f i n t o an e x p r e s s i o n of o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e f a c t o r y
system by a v e r y d i v e r s e p a r t of t h e p o p u l a t i o n .
It was i n p a r t a wide-
spread and deeply f e l t moral o u t r a g e a g a i n s t t h e i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l i s t s
t h a t allowed Luddism t o win what v i c t o r i e s i t d i d a t a t i m e when t h e r e
were 12,000 t r o o p s i n t h e a r e a , a g r e a t e r number t h a n General Wellington,
who l a t e r d e f e a t e d Napoleon, had under h i s command.
It was a s e n s e of
o u t r a g e a t a system which t h e working people f e l t v i o l a t e d t h e honor of
c r a f t s m a n s h i p , t h e c o n t r o l of workers over t h e i r t r a d e , and t h e r i g h t
of people t o e a r n a decent l i v i n g .
"What was a t i s s u e , " according t o
Thompson,
was t h e 'freedom' of t h e c a p i t a l i s t t o d e s t r o y
t h e customs of t h e t r a d e , whether by new machinery,
by t h e factory-system, o r by u n r e s t r i c t e d competi t i o n , beating-down wages, u n d e r c u t t i n g h i s r i v a l s ,
and undermining t h e s t a n d a r d s of craftsmanship. 1 6 1
Marx c r i t i c i z e d Luddism and machine breaking i n g e n e r a l :
It took both time and e x p e r i e n c e b e f o r e t h e workpeople l e a r n t t o d i s t i n g u i s h between machinery and
i t s employment by c a p i t a l , and t o d i r e c t t h e i r
a t t a c k s , n o t a g a i n s t t h e m a t e r i a l i n s t r u m e n t s of
p r o d u c t i o n , b u t a g a i n s t t h e mode i n which they a r e
used. 162
But h e c l e a r l y misunderstood t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of Luddism.
It i s absurd
t o t h i n k t h a t workers o b j e c t e d t o machines simply a s machines.
The i d e a
t h a t machine breaking w a s some form of p r i m i t i v e s u p e r s t i t u t i o n , a d i s placement of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e owner on t o t h a t w i t h t h e machine,
i s t o f a i l t o understand t h a t t h e machine i s p a r t of t h e power of t h e
owner.
Machinery w a s t h e embodiment of c a p i t a l .
A s t h e Hammonds
observed, "The s t r u g g l e i s n o t s o much a g a i n s t machinery a s a g a i n s t t h e
power behind t h e machinery, t h e power of c a p i t a l . ,,I63
Marx's c r i t i c i s m of machine breaking and t h e Luddites h a s b e e n '
r e p e a t e d i n one form o r t h e o t h e r by many and sundry.
It h a s been s a i d
t h a t t h e i r hopes and ambitions were r e a c t i o n a r y and s h o r t - s i g h t e d ,
that
they d i d n ' t understand t h e i r s i t u a t i o n and they c o u l d n ' t hope t o stem
t h e t i d e of h i s t o r y and win a g a i n s t t h e new economic o r d e r , and t h a t i t
was obvious they would be d e f e a t e d i n t h e long run.
Of c o u r s e i n t h e
long run they would a l s o be dead, and i n t h e meantime they had t o e a t .
A s we have seen, some, though not a l l , of t h e i n c i d e n t s .of machine break-
i n g d i d succeeed i n postponing impoverishment and o b l i v i o n f o r a generat i o n o r two.
Machinery, l i k e any o t h e r k i n d of technology, cannot be unders t o o d on i t s own.
It makes s e n s e only w i t h i n a c o n t e x t , a s p a r t of an
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work which i s p a r t of an economic system which i n t u r n
136
i s p a r t of wha t a s o c i e t y i n.tneds t o b e f o r i t s p e o p l e .
Neither t h e
r i s i n g c a p i t a l i s t s n o r t h e working p e o p l e of t h e I n d u s t r i a l R e v o l u t i o n
f a i l e d t o understand t h a t , i m p l i c i t l y i f n o t e x p l i c i t l y .
h a s no h i s t o r y of i t s own.
Machinery
Machines d i d n o t a p p e a r a s t h e p h y s i c a l
e x p r e s s i o n of some k i n d of independent pre-ordained
l o g i c o f techno-
l o g i c a l e ~ a h t i o n . R a t h e r , machinery was developed and a p p l i e d under
t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e p r i o r i t i e s of t h e b u s i n e s s system, by t h e n a t u r e
of t h e i n v e n t i v e p r o c e s s .
The k i n d of machinery developed, t h e
methods by which i t i s a p p l i e d t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s and t h e u s e s
t o which i t i s p u t r e f l e c t t h e i n t e n t i o n s of t h o s e i n c o n t r o l of t h e
b u s i n e s s system.
That remains a s t r u e , t o d a y , i f n o t more s o , a s i t
was d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l R e v o l u t i o n .
The development of machinery and t h e form t h a t t h e d i v i s i o n of
l a b o u r t o o k - u n d e r t h e r i s e of t h e c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m c o u l d a l m o s t b e
c h a r a c t e r i z e d as a t e l e o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s , i f w e r e a l i z e t h a t t h e y evolved
under c o n d i t i o n s t h a t determined t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s i n advance.
What
t h i s means i s t h a t t h e r i s i n g dominance o f t h e c a p i t a l i s t system
c a l l e d i n t o b e i n g t h a t which was n e c e s s a r y f o r i t s e l f - - i n
t h i s case,
c e r t a i n k i n d s of machinery and ways of combining l a b o u r w i t h them which
t o g e t h e r formed t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work t h a t conformed t o t h e needs of
t h e system.
During t h e I n d u s t r i a l R e v o l u t i o n , t h a t p r o c e s s was a n ad
hoc i n f o r m a l one: i t was n o t y e t s y s t e m a t i c and thorough.
C a p i t a l had
n o t y e t e s t a b l i s h e d hegemony o v e r i m p o r t a n t p a r t s o f t h e s t r u c t u r e of
s o c i e t y such as e d u c a t i o n and s c i e n c e t h a t would s e r v e t o make t h a t
p r o c e s s s y s t e m a t i c and thorough.
Although Andrew Ure saw i n t h e
i n v e n t i o n of t h e s e l f - a c t i n g s p i n n i n g muze t h e g r e a t power r e s u l t i n g
137
when "cap it a 1 e n l i s t s s c i e n c e i n h e r s e r v i c e , " t h e f u l l magnitude of
t h a t power had y e t t o b e s e e n .
i n which Ure wrote t h a t we
It wasn't u n t i l t h e end of t h e century
s e e t h e f u l l f o r c e of t h e e n l i s t m e n t by
c a p i t a l of s c i e n c e i n i t s s e r v i c e .
The r e s u l t s of t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t
of hegemony by t h e b u s i n e s s system over s c i e n c e and education a r e
c l e a r l y shown i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e e n g i n e e r i n g m e n t a l i t y t o t h e
d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r and t o t h e i n n o v a t i o n of new machinery through
r e s e a r c h and development, b o t h of which took p l a c e i n a s y s t e m a t i c way
i n t h e decades b e f o r e and a f t e r t h e beginning of t h i s century i n t h e
United S t a t e s .
That i s t h e s u b j e c t of t h e n e x t c h a p t e r .
The I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n England was t h e i n e v i t a b l e
consequence of c a p i t a l i s m coming i n t o i t s own as a mode of economic
activity.
The conquest of economic and p o l i t i c a l power by t h e c a p i t a l i s t s
wrought g r e a t changes i n t h e s t r u c t u r e s of s o c i e t y .
The s u b j u g a t i o n of
t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work t o t h e managerial need of t h e c a p i t a l i s t s t o
extend c o n t r o l over t h e p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s was only one of t h o s e changes.
This c h a p t e r has ateempted t o show how t h e appearance of t h e c e n t r a l i z e d
workplace, an employer enunciated and enforced d i s c i p l i n e on t h e j o b ,
t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r and t h e a c c e l e r a t e d i n n o v a t i o n and
a p p l i c a t i o n of machinery were r e l a t e d t o t h e l o g i c of t h e needs of
employers i n h e r e n t i n t h e emerging c a p i t a l i s t system of production.
The
n e x t c h a p t e r i s concerned w i t h f u r t h e r refinements of t h e c a p i t a l i s t
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work t h a t occurred around t h e beginning of t h i s century
i n t h e United S t a t e s .
,
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR
S a h l i n s , Chapter One, e s p e c i a l l y p. 15-6.
Melvin H. Kranzberg and Joseph G i l e s , By t h e Sweat of Thy Brow:
Work i n t h e Western World (New York: G.P. Putnamts Sons, 1975),
p. 4.
L.A. Clarkson, The P r e - I n d u s t r i a l Economy i n England 1500-1750
(London: B.T. Basford, 1971), p. 103.
E. Lipson, The H i s t o r y of t h e Woollen and Worsted I n d u s t r i e s
(London: Frank Cass & Co., 1965), f i r s t pub. 1921 by A & C Black,
P
J.L. Hammond and Barbara Hammond, The R i s e of Modern I n d u s t r y .
(London: Methuen and Co., 1925), p. 100.
D. C. Coleman, I n d u s i r y i n Tudor and Stewart England (London:
Macmillan P r e s s , 1975), p. 19.
Lipson, p. 34.
Clarkson, p. 104-5.
Clarkson, p. 104 and G.D.H. Cole, A Short H i s t o r y of t h e B r i t i s h
Working Class Movement 1789-1947 (London: George A l l e n and Unwin,
1948) , p. 12.
Hammond and Hammond, p. 99.
Lipson, p. 31-2.
Hammond and Hammond, p. 99 and David Dickson, A l t e r n a t i v e Technology
and t h e P o l i t i c s of Technical Change (Glasgow: William C o l l i n s Sons
and Co., 1974), p. 72.
P a u l Mantoux, The I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n t h e E i g h t e e n t h Century
(London: Jonathan Cape, 1961), p. 62-5 and John Addy, The T e x t i l e
Revolution (London: Longman Group, 1967), p. 6.
Mantoux, p. 67.
Clarkson, p . 101.
Mantoux, p. 58-61 and Addy, p. 7-8.
Report from t h e S e l e c t Committee appointed t o c o n s i d e r t h e S t a t e
of t h e Woollen Manufacture i n England, 1806, p . 1. Quoted i n
Mantoux, p. 61.
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
18.
David S. Landes, The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change
and I n d u s t r i a l Development i n Western Europe from 1750 t o t h e
P r e s e n t (Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1969), p. 45.
19.
Clarkson, p. 105 and G.D.H.
20,
Mantoux, p. 32.
21.
Kranzberg and Giles, p. 84.
22.
W . J . Ashley, An English Economic H i s t o r y and Theory (London:
Longmans, Green and Co., 1925), 4 t h e d . , f i r s t pub. 1893, P a r t
11, p. 255n. a s quoted i n J u r g e n Kuczynski, The Rise of t h e
Working C l a s s (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), p. 7.
Cole, p. 13.
Ashley i n Kuczynski, p. 7.
Lipson, p. 47-9.
Mantoux, p . 33-4.
Quoted i n Lipson, p. 49-50.
Sidney P o l l a r d , The Genesis of Modern Management (Cambridge:
Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1965), p. 163.
Landes, p. 81.
Mantoux, p. 246.
Addy, p. 26.
31.
Coleman, p. 35-6.
32.
Melvin M. Knight, Harry Elmer Bornes and F e l i x F l c g e l , Economic
H i s t o r y of Europe, (Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Co., t h e R i v e r s i d e
P r e s s , 1927 ) , p. 346.
33.
Knight e t a l . , p. 382.
34.
K n i g h t e t a l . , p. 382-3.
35.
Addy, p. 6.
36.
Addy, p. 7.
37.
S t a n l e y D. Chapman, The E a r l y Factory Masters: The T r a n s i t i o n
t o t h e F a c t o r y System i n t h e Midlands T e x t i l e I n d u s t r y (Newton
Abbot, England: David and C h a r l e s , 1967), p. 35.
140
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
Chapman, p. 37.
A.P. Wadsworth and Julia De Lacy Mann, The Cotton Trade and
Industrial Lancashire 1600-1780 (Manchester: Manchester
University Press, 1931), p. 107.
Wadsworth and Mann, p. 107.
Wadsworth and Mann, p. 284-5.
Mantoux, p. 279.
Concerning the relationship of wages and output in the domestic
system, see Landes, p. 58-60 and Dickson, p. 73.
N.S.B. Gras, Industrial Evolution (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1930), p. 77.
Mantoux, p. 74.
Mantoux, p. 79.
Mantoux, p. 80.
Mantoux, p. 81.
Mantoux, p. 81.
Mantoux, p. 81.
Chapman, p. 37.
Chapman, p. 39
Chapman, p.
Mantoux, p. 324.
Landes, p. 57.
Pollard, p. 33.
This account is taken from Wadsworth and Mann, p. 398.
J.L. Hammond and Barbara Hammond, The Skilled Labourer 1760-1832
(New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1967; first pub. 1919), p. 191.
Pollard, p. 33.
Gras, p. 77.
Gras, p. 83-4.
14 1
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
E.P. Thompson, "Time, Work-Discipline and I n d u s t r i a l ~ a p i t a l i s m " ,
P a s t and P r e s e n t 38 (December 1967): 71-2.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m " ,
p. 73.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m " ,
p. 72.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m " ,
p. 72.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m " ,
p. 73.
M.W.
F l i n n , Men of I r o n (Edinburgh: U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 19621, Po 99.
P o l l a r d , p. 55.
P o l l a r d , p. 56.
E. L i p s o n , Economic H i s t o r y o f England v o l . 2:The Age of ~ e r c a n t i l i s *
(London: Adam and C h a r l e s Black, 1964; f i r s t pub. 1931), p. 179.
P o l l a r d , p. 59.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m , " p. 81.
. P o l l a r d , p. 58-9.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m , " p. 81.
F o r a c o m p l e t e e x p o s i t i o n see F l i n n .
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m , " p. 81.
F l i n n , p. 202.
F l i n n , p. 202.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m , " p. 82.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m , " p. 82.
F l i n n , p. 201.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m ,
"
p. 82.
Thompson, " I n d u s t r i a l C a p i t a l i s m , " p. 86.
Wadsworth and Mann, p. 433.
Thompson, The Making of t h e E n g l i s h Working Class, p. 305-6.
142
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
Thompson, The Making of t h e English Working C l a s s , p. 306-7.
R.S. F i t t o n and A.P. Wadsworth, The S t r u t t s and t h e Arkwrights
A Study of t h e E a r l y F a c t o r y System (Manchester:
1785-1830:
U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1958), p. 235-6.
F i t t o n and Wadsworth, p. 236-7.
J.S. Ashton, The I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, (London:
P r e s s , 1967; f i r s t pub. 1948), p. 57.
Oxford U n i v e r s i t y
Andrew Ure, The Philosophy of Manufactures (New York:
M. K e l l e y , 1967, f i r s t pub. 1835), p. 16.
This i s Marx's f o r m u l a t i o n , C a p i t a l , v o l . 1 (Moscow:
P u b l i s h e r s , n . d . ) , p. 334.
Augustus
Progress
See Marx, p. 315 and 340 on t h i s p o i n t .
See Marx, p. 315 and 340 on t h i s p o i n t .
D e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o r i s Harry Braverman's term i n Labor and
Monopoly C a p i t a l : The Degradation of Work i n t h e Twentieth Century
(New York: Monthly Review P r e s s , 1974). Minute d i v i s i o n of l a b o r
i s Marx's term.
This account i s t a k e n from Mantoux, p. 278-9.
Mantoux, p. 279-80.
Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, (Homewood, Ill.:
I r w i n , 1963; f i r s t pub. l 7 7 6 ) , p. 5 .
Richard D.
Kranzberg and G i l e s , p. 92.
Kranzberg and G i l e s , p. 93.
Smith quoted by Kranzberg and G i l e s , p. 93.
Smith quoted by Kranzberg and G i l e s , p. 101-2.
P o l l a r d , p. 179.
Ashton, p. 57.
Mantoux, p. 387.
Hammond and Hammond, The R i s e of Modern I n d u s t r y , p. 172.
143
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
Neil McKendrick, "Josiah Wedgewood and Factory Discipline,"
The Historical Journal 4 No. 1 (1961) : 32.
See list in McKendrick, p. 33.
Harold Owen, The Staffordshire Potter (London: Grant Richards,
1901) , p. 63.
Hammond and Hammond, The Rise of Modern Industry, p. 172.
Pollard, p. 265.
Hammond and Hammond, The Rise of Modern Industry, p. 165.
This account is taken from McKendrick, p. 47.
Wedgewood to Bentley, June 25, 1769, reproduced in Ann Finer
and George Savage, eds., The Selected Letters of Josiah Wedgewood
(London: Cory, Adams & MacKay, l965), p. 76.
Wedgewood to Bentley, Oct. 7, 1769 in Finer and Savage, p. 82-3.
Wedgewood to Bentley, April 9, 1773 in McKendrick, p. 34.
Wedgewood to Bentley, May
19, 1770 in Finer and Savage, p. 92.
Wedgewood to Bentley, Dec. 1, 1769 in McKendrick, p. 32.
Wedgewood to Bentley, May 12, 1776 in McKendrick, p. 36.
Wedgewood to Bentley, Oct. 28, 1775 in McKendrick, p.. 36.
Wedgewood to Bentley, May 12, 1776 in McKendrick, p. 37.
Thompson, The Making of the English Working Class, p. 237.
Charles Babbage, On the Economy of Machinery and Manufactures
(New York: Augustus M. Kelly, 1963; first pub. 1832), p. 175-6.
Hammond and Hammond, The Town Labourer, p. 28.
Marx, Capital, p. 410.
Hammond and Hammond, The Skilled Labourer, p. 190.
Malcolm I. Thomis, The Town Labourer and the Industrial Revolution
(London: B.T. Batsford, 1974), p. 74.
144
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
From The L i f e of S i r W i l l i a m F a i r b a i r n ed. William P o l e , quoted
i n H . J . Habakkuk, American and B r i t i s h Technology i n t h e Nineteenth
Century (Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1962) , p. 153.
Ure, p. 370.
Ure, p. 369.
Ure, p. 365.
Ure, p. 368.
Ure, p. 19.
Ure, p. 20-1.
Thompson, The Making of t h e English Working C l a s s , p. 303.
Wadsworth and Mann, p. 499.
K a r l Biedermann, Vorlesungen uber Socialismus and s o c i a l e Fragen
(Leipzig, 1847), p. 5 5 f f , quoted i n Jurgen Kuczynski, The R i s e
of t h e Working C l a s s , t r a n s . C.T.A. Ray (New York: McGraw H i l l
1967), p. 59.
E r i c J. Hobsbawm, "The Machine Breakers," P a s t and P r e s e n t 1
(February 1952) : 6 2 .
Hobsbawm, p. 59.
Hammond and Hamond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 221.
Hobsbawm, p. 59.
Hobsbawm, p. 59.
Hammond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 224.
Hammond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 55.
Mantoux, p. 406-7.
Thompson, The Making of t h e English Working C l a s s , p. 303-5.
Thompson, The Making of the English Working C l a s s , p. 523.
Hamond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p . 51.
145
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED
Hammond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 54.
Wadsworth and Mann, p. 497.
See f o r a more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n and a n a l y s i s : Malcolm I.
Thomis, The L u d d i t e s (New York: Schocken Books, 1972); Hammond
and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p . 257-340; and Thompson, The
Making of t h e E n g l i s h Working Class, p. 521-602.
Thompson, The Making; of t h e E n g l i s h Working C l a s s , p. 534.
Quoted i n Hammond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 263-4.
T h i s account h a s been t a k e n from t h e f o l l o w i n g s o u r c e s : Thompson,
The Making of t h e E n g l i s h Working Class, p. 530-5 and 553-6; Hannnond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 225-70; and Thomis,
The L u d d i t e s , p. 47-50 and passim.
Thompson, The Making of t h e E n g l i s h Working C l a s s , p. 528.
Hammond and Hammond, The S k i l l e d Labourer, p. 183.
Thompson, The Making of t h e English Working C l a s s , p. 530.
Quoted i n Thompson, The Making of t h e E n g l i s h Working C l a s s , p. 557.
Thompson, The Making of t h e English Working C l a s s , p . 558.
Lipson, The H i s t o r y of t h e Woollen and Worsted I n d u s t r i e s , p. 191.
p. 191.
Thomis, The Town Labourer and t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution, p. 77.
Thompson, The Making of t h e English Working C l a s s , p. 549.
Marx, p. 404.
Hammond and Hammond, The Town Labourer, p. 28.
CHAPTER FIVE
WORK AND WORKERS DURING THE PROGRESSIVE ERA
Changing Economic Conditions
The p e r i o d between 1875 and 1920 was a t i m e of g r e a t economic
and s o c i a l change i n t h e United S t a t e s , a s w e l l a s elsewhere i n t h e
kconomically developed world.
The United S t a t e s e n t e r e d t h i s p e r i o d
a s a p r i m a r i l y r u r a l a g r a r i a n s o c i e t y and emerged from i t a s an urban
i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y ; i n f a c t , a s t h e w o r l d ' s foremost i n d u s t r i a l power.
I n 1870 one i n f o u r people l i v e d i n a n urban a r e a .
had i n c r e a s e d t o one o u t of every two people.1
By 1920 t h e number
Along w i t h t h i s popula-
t i o n c o n c e n t r a t i o n came o t h e r k i n d s of c o n c e n t r a t i o n :
industrial.
f i n a n c i a l and
It i s d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d t h a t we can l o c a t e t h e o r i g i n s
of what has been c a l l e d monopoly c a p i t a l i s m .
Simply s t a t e d , monopoly
c a p i t a l i s m i s a way of r e f e r r i n g t o t h e replacement of small time
competition among many f i r m s whose s h a r e of a g i v e n market i s r e l a t i v e l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n p r o p o r t i o n t o t h e o v e r a l l s i z e of t h e market by
l i m i t e d competition among a few l a r g e f i r m s t h a t have a s i g n i f i c a n t
s h a r e of and c o n t r o l over t h e i r market.
The emergence of a few f i r m s
with a l a r g e s h a r e of t h e i r market was accompanied by a s t r i k i n g growth
i n t h e a b s o l u t e s i z e of manufacturing f i r m s .
According t o Daniel Nelson,
" ~ u r i n gt h e l a s t t h i r d of t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y t h e 'average' p l a n t i n
11 o u t of 16 major i n d u s t r i e s more than doubled i n s i z e .
"'
I n 1870 one
of t h e n a t i o n ' s l a r g e s t f a c t o r i e s , t h e McCormick p l a n t i n Chicago, had
no more than 400 t o 500 employees.
T h i r t y y e a r s l a t e r , t h e r e were more
than 1,000 f a c t o r i e s employing 500 t o 1,000 people and 443 t h a t had more
than 1,000 workers.
The 22 l a r g e s t had more t h a n 4,000 employees.
3
The p r o c e s s by which monopoly c a p i t a l i s m came i n t o being was
one of i n t e n s e competition.
During t h e l a s t h a l f of t h e n i n e t e e n t h cent-
u r y , t h e dynamic of competition d e s t r o y e d t h e v i a b i l i t y of competition
i n t h e economy.
During upswings i n t h e b u s i n e s s c y c l e , manufacturers
raced t o i n c r e a s e t h e i r production.
They made heavy c a p i t a l investments
i n p l a n t which saddled them w i t h h i g h overhead c o s t s and excess c a p a c i t y
during r e c e s s i o n s i n t h e b u s i n e s s cycle.
Under t h e burden of h i g h over-
head c o s t s during t h o s e r e c e s s i o n s , manufacturers were f o r c e d t o c u t
p r i c e s t o lower t h a n t h e f u l l c o s t of t h e i r product i n o r d e r t o g e n e r a t e
some revenue t o s e r v i c e a s much of t h o s e overhead c o s t s a s they could.
They had t o s e l l t h e i r p r o d u c t s , even a t a l o s s .
Under t h o s e c o n d i t i o n s ,
t h e weaker and l e s s s k i l l f u l l y managed f i r m s went bankrupt, l e a v i n g
fewer and b i g g e r f i r m s i n any g i v e n ' s e c t o r of i n d u s t r y .
The p o s i t i o n
of t h e remaining f i r m s was s t r e n g t h e n e d , only t o be t e s t e d a g a i n d u r i n g
t h e n e x t downturn i n t h e b u s i n e s s c y c l e .
Thus t h e dynamic of competition
l e d t o t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of t h o s e b u s i n e s s which could n o t hold out d u r i n g
recessions.
Competition engendered among manufacturers t h a t managed t o
s u r v i v e t h e v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e b u s i n e s s c y c l e a s t r o n g tendency t o want
t o l i m i t t h e i n s t a b i l i t y and i n s e c u r i t y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p r i c e competition.
It was i n t h e i n t e r e s t of s u r v i v i n g b u s i n e s s e s t o p u t a s t o p t o t h e i r
, v u l n e r a b i l i t y t o p r i c e competition.
That was a prime r e a s o n f o r t h e
appearance of branded commodities, a s Smythe e x p l a i n s i n h i s forthcoming
book :
I f . . . a p a r t i a l monopoly could be c r e a t e d f o r t h e
product of a p a r t i c u l a r manufacturer, a p a r t l y capt i v e market could p r o t e c t t h a t m a n u f a c t u r e r ' s produ c t from p r i c e competition and might avoid t h e l o s s e s
and p o s s i b l e bankruptcy which followed i n p e r i o d s
of t h e c y c l i c a l depression. A d v e r t i s i n g of brand
names was t h e means t o t h a t p a r t i a l monopoly i n t h e
s e l l i n g market f o r a commodity.. .4
The r e s t r i c t i o n of competition w a s a l s o t h e purpose of t h e famous
d i n n e r s h e l d by Judge Gary, t h e P r e s i d e n t of U.S.
S t e e l , a t which
i n f o r m a l agreements t o f i x p r i c e s were made by t h e e x e c u t i v e s of t h e
s u b s i d i a r i e s of t h e c o r p o r a t i o n .
The i n d u s t r i a l empires forged around
t h e t u r n of t h e century i n t h e United S t a t e s and elsewhere were t h e
n a t u r a l r e s u l t of c u t - t h r o a t
competition.
The i n s t a b i l i t y of t h e com-
p e t i t i v e s t r u g g l e f o r s u r v i v a l l e d t o t h e formation of monopolies by
t h e more powerful f i n a n c i a l and i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e s i n o r d e r t o
minimize t h e t h r e a t posed by competition.
I n t h i s k i n d of b u s i n e s s c l i m a t e , every c o m p e t i t i v e edge t h a t
a f i r m could g a i n w a s c r u c i a l t o i t s a b i l i t y t o s u r v i v e .
Any r e s t r i c -
t i o n on t h e a b s o l u t e freedom of owners t o o p e r a t e t h e i r b u s i n e s s s o a s
t o t a k e advantage of whatever o p p o r t u n i t y came t h e i r way was a hindrance
and a t h r e a t .
Both t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of workers i n unions and many
a s p e c t s of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i n t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y
f a c t o r i e s c o n s t i t u t e d a r e s t r i c t i o n on t h e freedom of t h e employing
owners.
This p e r i o d saw an upsurge of concerted a t t e m p t s t o undermine
and deseroy both what remained of w o r k e r s ' c o n t r o l over t h e i r on t h e job
shop f l o o r a c t i v i t i e s
and unions, t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s of workers t h a t i n
p a r t expressed and defended t h e i r l i m i t e d c o n t r o l .
'
It was a t t h i s time t h a t "management" appeared a s a d i s t i n c t
and recognized a r e a of endeavour i n t h e b u s i n e s s world.
Its emergence
a s a conscious and s e l f - r e f l e c t i v e a c t i v i t y w a s a n e x t e n s i o n of t h e
growing need t o p l a n c a r e f u l l y and o r g a n i z e a l l a s p e c t s of a f i r m ' s
o p e r a t i o n s i n o r d e r t o m a i n t a i n and improve i t s c o m p e t i t i v e p o s i t i o n .
The management a c t i v i t i e s of t h e c a p t a i n s of i n d u s t r y soon began t o
encompass e f f o r t s t o i n c r e a s e t h e i r a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l t h e f a c t o r y
work f o r c e .
Attempts t o i n c r e a s e c o n t r o l over t h e workforce l e d t o profound
a l t e r a t i o n s i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work, and over a p e r i o d of time t h e
'.
managerial movement i n t o t h e realm of work o r g a n i z a t i o n wrought f a r r e a c h i n g changes i n t h e i n d u s t r i a l and s o c i a l landscape.
These changes
c o n s t i t u t e d t h e f o u n d a t i o n upon which much t h a t i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of
t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s b u i l t .
The o r i g i n s of some of t h e
most s i g n i f i c a n t a s p e c t s of t h e workplace as a communication system
can be t r a c e d t o developments i n t h i s p e r i o d .
Much of what was being
fought over was t h e p o s s e s s i o n and c o n t r o l of knowledge i n t h e workplace.
This c h a p t e r f o c u s s e s on t h e developments i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of
work t h a t took p l a c e i n t h e United S t a t e s i n t h e period.between 1880
and 1920.
The United S t a t e s a t t h a t time was r i s i n g t o t h e f o r e f r o n t
of i n t e r n a t i o n a l i n d u s t r i a l expansion, and i t was h e r e t h a t t h e second
r e v o l u t i o n i n t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work unfolded, though t h a t
r e v o l u t i o n soon found i t s way t o o t h e r c o u n t r i e s w i t h s t r o n g and growing
*
economies, i n c l u d i n g ~ a n a d a .
The f i r s t s e c t i o n of t h i s c h a p t e r d e s c r i b e s
t h e way t h e l a b o u r p r o c e s s was organized p r i o r t o t h e g r e a t changes t h a t
were t o come.
The forms of work o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t had come t o b e
t r a d i t i o n a l i n f a c t o r i e s by t h e l a t t e r p a r t of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century
were t h e s u b j e c t of an a t t a c k by employers and managers t h a t become
more vehement and thorough a s time went on.
The second s e c t i o n exam-
i n e s t h e f i r s t t h r u s t of t h a t a t t a c k which c o n c e n t r a t e d on unions,
s i n c e they were t h e most obvious e x p r e s s i o n of t h e e x i s t i n g d e g r e e
of worker s o v e r e i g n t y i n t h e workplace.
The t h i r d s e c t i o n i s con-
cerned w i t h t h e second phase of a t t a c k on t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f a c t o r y
o r g a n i z a t i o n of work, t h e r i s e of t h e s c i e n t i f i c management movement.
The e f f e c t s of t h i s movement on modern concepts of workplace organiza t i o n and communication i n t h e workplace cannot be underestimated.
The
f o u r t h s e c t i o n looks a t t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of a new kind of h i e r a r c h y i n
t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work:
job l a d d e r s .
They were t h e f i n i s h i n g touch
on t h e r a d i c a l changes i n t h e l a b o u r p r o c e s s t h a t were i n i t i a t e d a s
p a r t of t h e s c i e n t i f i c o r s y s t e m a t i c management movement, and a r e an
important component i n t h e f l a v o u r of t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
Many examples w i l l b e taken from t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y .
The e v e n t s
t h a t a r e t h e s u b j e c t of t h i s c h a p t e r unfolded i n t h o s e i n d u s t r i e s t h a t
were i n t h e f o r e f r o n t of economic growth.
t h e most important.
The s t e e l i n d u s t r y w a s among
The s t e e l i n d u s t r y i n t h e United S t a t e s generated
t h e w o r l d ' s f i r s t b i l l i o n d o l l a r c o r p o r a t i o n , U.S. S t e e l .
The Hierarchy of Workers' Control i n t h e
L a t e Nineteenth Century F a c t o r y
I f we were t o look i n on t h e shop f l o o r of an average f a c t o r y
i n t h e 1880s o r 1890s, we would f i n d a r e l a t i v e l y simple, u n r e f i n e d
l
and incomplete k i n d of h i e r a r c h i c a l c o n t r o l of workplace a c t i v i t i e s
based on t h e r e t e n t i o n of some shop f l o o r autonomy by s k i l l e d workers.
I n t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , f a c t o r y owners l e f t many of what l a t e r
became management f u n c t i o n s t o t h e i r foreman o r s k i l l e d workers, includi n g t h e h i r i n g and s u p e r v i s i o n of o t h e r workers and, through i n d i r e c t
ways, t h e c o n t r o l over production l e v e l s .
I n many r e s p e c t s , t h e r i g h t s
and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h e foremen o r s k i l l e d worker c o n s t i t u t e d somet h i n g approaching an empire.
The e a r l y simple forms of h i e r a r c h i c a l
c ~ n t r o li n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work were b u i l t w i t h t h o s e l i t t l e empires.
The c o n t r a c t system, p r e v a l e n t i n t h e i r o n and machine i n d u s t r i e s
among many o t h e r s , p r o v i d e s an example of one of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l k i n d s
of work o r g a n i z a t i o n i n t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y f a c t o r i e s .
It was
used i n many of t h e l a r g e r o p e r a t i o n s a s a way t o c o o r d i n a t e production
activity.
Under t h e c o n t r a c t system t h e f a c t o r y owner c o n t r a c t e d w i t h
a s k i l l e d craftsman t o produce a given product of a s p e c i f i e d q u a l i t y
f o r a s e t p r i c e agreed upon i n advance.
i a l s , t o o l s and o t h e r n e c e s s i t i e s .
then h i r e d h i s own work crew.
The company provided t h e mater-
The c o n t r a c t i n g s k i l l e d craftsman
He n e g o t i a t e d t h e p r i c e of t h e i r l a b o u r
w i t h them, based on what he was g e t t i n g p a i d by t h e f a c t o r y owner.
crew u s u a l l y g o t a day r a t e .
His
The c o n t r a c t o r g o t what was l e f t over from
t h e c o n t r a c t p r i c e a f t e r t h e crew had been p a i d .
Often t h e wages of t h e
crew flowed almost a u t o m a t i c a l l y from t h e p r i c e of t h e o v e r a l l contract
s i n c e t h e r e were t r a d i t i o n a l wage d i f f e r e n t i a l s between workers accordi n g t o t h e k i n d of work they performed on the c o n t r a c t .
s k i l l e d craftsman had a wide-ranging autonomy.
The contracting
According t o Daniel
Nelson, they
11
...
made v i r t u a l l y a l l t h e important d e c i s i o n s
r e l a t i n g t o what, when, how and by whom t h e product
would b e made...the c o n t r a c t o r s had n e a r l y complete
c o n t r o l over t h e f a c t o r y work f o r c e . "6
The c o n t r a c t system of n i n e t e e n t h century America bore some
resemblance t o t h e putting-out
system of e i g h t e e n t h century England.
The n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y f a c t o r y owner and t h e e i g h t e e n t h century p u t t e r o u t e r both gave raw m a t e r i a l s out t o be worked on by people who were
n o t s t r i c t l y speaking t h e i r employees.
This s e r v e s a s a reminder t h a t
t h e development of t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work d i d n o t procede along
a r i g i d l i n e a r path.
The t r a d i t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i n nineteenth
c e n t u r y America r e f l e c t e d t h e i n i t i a t i v e s taken by employers during the
I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n England, b u t not e n t i r e l y .
In the contract
system, work w a s performed on t h e employer's premises, b u t t h e c o n t r o l
of t h e employer i n t h e l a b o u r p r o c e s s was s t i l l n o t f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d .
The c o n t r a c t system a s a way of o r g a n i z i n g work w a s i n a sense t h e putting-out system i n s i d e t h e f a c t o r y .
The h e l p e r system was a n o t h e r v a r i a t i o n on t h e simple hierarchi c a l method of o r g a n i z i n g production.
The p o s i t i o n of t h e s k i l l e d worker
i n t h e h e l p e r system x a s very s i m i l a r t o t h e s k i l l e d worker's p o s i t i o n
i n t h e c o n t r a c t system.
The craftsman was paid a l a r g e sum f o r t h e
completion of a c e r t a i n amount of work.
Out of t h i s l a r g e sum, he had
t o pay t h e wages of h i s a s s i s t a n t s and h e l p e r s .
The c r a f t s m a n ' s wage
was u s u a l l y l i n k e d d i r e c t l y t o h i s o u t p u t , w h i l e t h e h e l p e r s were paid
a fixed daily rate.
Both t h e c o n t r a c t system and t h e h e l p e r system a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d
by David Montgomery, a h i s t o r i a n of workers' c o n t r o l , a s embodying " t h e
f u n c t i o n a l autonomy of t h e craftsman".
He lists i r o n molders, g l a s s
blowers, coopers, paper machine t e n d e r s , locomotive e n g i n e e r s , mule
s p i n n e r s , b o i l e r makers, p i p e f i t t e r s , typographers, jiggermen i n p o t t e r i e s , c o a l miners, i r o n r o l l e r s , p u d d l e r s and h e a t e r s among t h e c r a f t s workers who performed t h e i r work under c o n d i t i o n s of f u n c t i o n a l autonomy.
Under b o t h systems t h e r e was a h i e r a r c h y of j o b s through which a worker
on t h e bottom i n t h e lowest paid p o s i t i o n could hope t o r i s e t o a h i g h e r
p a i d and h i g h e r s t a t u s p o s i t i o n .
t h e b a s i s of s k i l l .
That job h i e r a r c h y w a s a r t i c u l a t e d on
The ones a t t h e t o p were t h e most h i g h l y s k i l l e d ,
and t h e ones a t t h e bottom were t h e l e a s t s k i l l e d .
The g r a d a t i o n s
r e f l e c t e d r e a l , d i s c r e t e and e a s i l y recognized d i f f e r e n c e s i n s k i l l
and e x p e r i e n c e requirements f o r s p e c i f i c job f u n c t i o n s .
s e e l a t e r , t h e dismantling
A s we s h a l l
of job h i e r a r c h i e s based on immediately
obvious l e v e l s of s k i l l was one p a r t of t h e change i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
oC work t h a t w a s t o come.
Owners of f a c t o r i e s i n which t h e c o n t r a c t i n g o r h e l p e r system
was n o t p r a c t i c e d made use
tion.
of t h e foreman t o o v e r s e e shop f l o o r produc-
Foremen t h e n had a wider degree of freedom t o r u n t h e i r depart-
ment a s they s a w f i t than they g e n e r a l l y do i n contemporary f a c t o r i e s .
They were u s u a l l y l e f t a l o n e by t h e owners t o handle most a s p e c t s of
7
what happened on t h e shop f l o o r .
According t o Nelson, they made
d e c i s i o n s about
I1
...
how t h e job w a s t o b e done, t h e t o o l s and o f t e n
t h e m a t e r i a l s t o be used, t h e timing of o p e r a t i o n s ,
t h e flow of work, t h e workersr methods and sequence
of moves...
they were h e l d accountable f o r what
t h e workers d i d . . . i n p e r s o n n e l m a t t e r s - t h e h i r i n g ,
t r a i n i n g , s u p e r v i s i n g , m o t i v a t i n g , and d i s c i p l i n i n g of f a c t o r y workers-the foreman had v i r t u a l l y
complete c o n t r o l . "8
Nelson i s somewhat misleading when he s a y s "complete c o n t r o l " because
h e d o e s n ' t convey an impression of t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e workers under
t h e purview of t h e foremen themselves e x e r c i s e d some autonomy i n t h e i r
working a c t i v i t i e s .
H e may perhaps be f o r g i v e n because he i s t r y i n g t o
make t h e p o i n t t h a t i t was t h e foreman, s k i l l e d worker o r c o n t r a c t i n g
worker who enjoyed many of t h e powers t h a t were l a t e r t r a n s f e r r e d t o
managers.
It i s important t o r e a l i z e t h a t a t t h a t time, managers a s such
did not e x i s t .
The appearance of managers went hand i n hand w i t h t h e
replacement of simple forms of h i e r a r c h i c a l work o r g a n i z a t i o n by more
r e f i n e d h i e r a r c h i e s t h a t g r e a t l y reduced t h e scope of t h e s k i l l e d
workers' and foremens' domain.
I n i t s p l a c e w a s e s t a b l i s h e d t h e domain
of t h e manager.
The manager's domain w a s carved out n o t only by d i s m a n t l i n g
t h e empire of t h e s k i l l e d c o n t r a c t i n g worker, craftsman and foreman,
b u t a l s o by an a s s a u l t on t h e t r a d i t i o n a l autonomy of t h e o t h e r workers.
The t r a d i t i o n a l autonomy of n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y f a c t o r y workers was, of
course, not absolute.
But i t was r e l a t i v e l y s t r o n g enough t o have
placed l i m i t s on t h e a u t h o r i t y of foreman and on t h e behaviour of cont r a c t i n g workers on t h e one hand, and on t h e a b i l i t y of employers t o
a s s e r t managerial a u t h o r i t y a s q u i c k l y a s they wanted on t h e o t h e r hand.
The d e g r e e of t r a d i t i o n a l autonomy t h a t f a c t o r y workers i n n i n e t e e n t h
century America enjoyed was expressed i n two ways:
through a moral code
and through union r u l e s .
F a c t o r y and o t h e r workers had formulated what amounted t o a kind
of moral code p r e s c r i b i n g c e r t a i n s t a n d a r d s i n t h e i r workplace behaviour.
It w a s a s t a t e m e n t of what each worker had a r i g h t t o expect of o t h e r
workers, and i t w a s a m a n i f e s t a t i o n of some degree of c l a s s consciousn e s s and s o l i d a r i t y .
For example, i n most branches of i n d u s t r y t h e r e
were s t a n d a r d s accepted by t h e workers among themselves a s t o what cons t i t u t e d a f a i r day's output.
I n t h e i r o n i n d u s t r y , f i v e f i r i n g s of t h e
f u r n a c e w a s considered t o be a d a y ' s work.'
Anyone w i l l i n g t o work more
than t h i s was considered t o be a s e l f - s e e k i n g money grubber w i t h no compunctions about doing t h e work of more than one man, and thereby d e p r i v i n g
a n o t h e r worker of a j o b .
The moral f o r c e of those d e f i n i t i o n s of a f a i r d a y ' s work were
f r e q u e n t l y c o d i f i e d i n union r u l e s .
Union r u l e s extended f a r beyond a
d e f i n i t i o n of a f a i r d a y ' s work, however.
Most unions i n t h e l a t e nine-
t e e n t h century were c r a f t unions b u i l t on t h e e x e r c i s e of c r a f t knowledge
and s k i l l .
The r u l e s of t h e c r a f t unions covered many a r e a s t h a t have
today become p a r t of management's r i g h t s and p r e r o g a t i v e s .
Union r u l e s
commonly contained s p e c i f i c a t i o n s about t h e q u a l i t y of p r o d u c t , t h e
m a t e r i a l s t o be used, t h e t o o l s t o be used and t h e methods of completing
work t a s k s .
Some examples from t h e b u i l d i n g t r a d e s a r e :
bricklayers
had r u l e s a g a i n s t l a y i n g b r i c k s with more than one hand and a g a i n s t
spreading mortar w i t h any implement o t h e r than a trowel.
Those r u l e s
had t h e e f f e c t of r e s t r i c t i n g t h e speed w i t h which b r i c k s could be l a i d
and were i n t e n d e d t o encourage c a r e f u l good q u a l i t y work.
The brick-
l a y e r s ' and masons' union r u l e s a l s o placed r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e use of
c e r t a i n k i n d s of machines.
The machines had t o be operated by union
members, and could n o t be worked l o n g e r than t h e hours customarily
worked by t h e i r members.
A c e r t a i n number of employees were r e q u i r e d
t o be h i r e d f o r each machine t h a t the-employer operated.
I f employees
who d i d n o t work on c e r t a i n machines were l a i d o f f , then a p r o p o r t i o n a l
number of employees who d i d work on t h e machines a l s o had t o be l a i d
o f f .lo Many unions a l s o had r u l e s r e g u l a t i n g absenteeism and drunkeness
a f f e c t i n g t h e a b i l i t y t o work.
The r u l e s were intended t o p r o t e c t t h e
l i v e l i h o o d of t h o s e who p r a c t i s e d t h e t r a d e , and t o m a i n t a i n worker
determined s t a n d a r d s of q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y of performance.
Unions
were n o t i n t h e h a b i t of n e g o t i a t i n g t h e r u l e s w i t h employers:
r u l e s were n o t t h e employers' b u s i n e s s .
union
The unions attempted t o answer
i n f r a c t i o n s of t h e i r r u l e s on t h e p a r t of employers w i t h b o y c o t t s and
strikes.
I n f r a c t i o n s of t h e r u l e s by members m e t w i t h f i n e s and o t h e r
punishments.
Workers who s e r i o u s l y o r h a b i t u a l l y i n f r i n g e d on t h e r u l e s
were n o t uncommonly o s t r a c i z e d by t h e i r f e l l o w union members.
I n many
f a c t o r i e s , work s i t e s and i n d u s t r i e s , foremen were r e q u i r e d by t h e
s k i l l e d workers t o j o i n t h e union s o t h a t they would b e s u b j e c t t o union
d i s c i p l i n e r e g a r d i n g adherence t o t h e u n i o n ' s shop f l o o r r u l e s .
Bruno Ramirez, an h i s t o r i a n of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s i n t h e
U.S. d u r i n g t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y , g i v e s an i d e a of t h e e x t e n t of
union r u l e s :
Through t h e so-called union r u l e s , c r a f t unions had
been i n a p o s i t i o n t o impose on employers c o n d i t i o n s
b e a r i n g on v i r t u a l l y a l l a s p e c t s of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
of production: t h e manner i n which new machinery and
new work t e c h n i q u e s were i n t r o d u c e d , t h e number of
a p p r e n t i c e s t o b e allowed t o work i n a given shop,
t h e method of wage d e t e r m i n a t i o n , and c o n t r o l over
t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of work. 11
Union r u l e s embodied a form of workers' c o n t r o l which was an o b s t a c l e
t o t h e a b i l i t y of employers t o t a k e advantage of p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r
improving t h e c o m p e t i t i v e p o s i t i o n of t h e i r companies.
C r a f t unions i n g e n e r a l c o n s t i t u t e d a s e r i o u s c h a l l e n g e t o t h e
expansionary i n s t i n c t s of t h e r i s i n g i n d u s t r i a l i s t s .
The c h a l l e n g e
r e s u l t e d from t h e unions' d e f e n s e of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f a c t o r y organizat i o n of work i n which s k i l l e d workers r e t a i n e d a r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t power
t o determine t h e i r own working c o n d i t i o n s , a s w e l l a s from t h e a c t i o n s
of t h e unions aimed a t keeping wages up.
While employers f o r t h e most
p a r t had always been f i g h t i n g unions when they could, t h e r e was a renewed
d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n t h e i r f i g h t a g a i n s t unions i n t h e decades b e f o r e and
a f t e r t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y .
That renewed d e t e r m i n a t i o n was i n s p i r e d
by t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y i n t e n s e competition a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e whorlwind
c o n s o l i d a t i o n of t h e g i a n t f i n a n c i a l and i n d u s t r i a l empires a t t h a t time.
The f i g h t a g a i n s t unions, and what t h a t meant f o r t h e r a d i c a l changes i n
t h e c a p i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of work, a r e t h e s u b j e c t of t h e n e x t s e c t i o n
of t h i s c h a p t e r
.
The D e s t r u c t i o n of Workersv Control:
The Attack on Unions
During t h e h e a t of t h e i n t e n s e competition a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e
formation of t h e g r e a t monopolies i n t h e l a s t y e a r s of t h e p a s t c e n t u r y ,
a t t e m p t s by t h e expanding f i r m s t o improve t h e i r c o m p e t i t i v e p o s i t i o n
l e d t o concerted and f e r o c i o u s a t t a c k s on t h e e x i s t i n g degree of
workers' c o n t r o l , on t h e p r i v a t e empires on foreman and c o n t r a c t o r s ,
and on unions.
A l l t h o s e phenomena were u n i t e d by t h e common g o a l on
t h e p a r t of employers t o p u t themselves more f i r m l y i n t h e d r i v e r ' s
s e a t of t h e i r e n t e r p r i s e s .
The owners l o a t h e d t h e unions f o r a v a r i e t y of r e a s o n s , n o t t h e
l e a s t of which was t h a t they saw t h e unions a s an o b s t a c l e t o e x e r t i n g
t h e i r own c o n t r o l over what happened a t t h e p o i n t of production i n t h e i r
operations.
Many o f t h e f i e r c e s t b a t t l e s between c a p i t a l and l a b o u r i n
t h e l a s t y e a r s of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century were fought over t h e q u e s t i o n
of union r e c o g n i t i o n .
The famous Homestead s t r i k e of 1892 p r o v i d e s . a n
e x c e l l e n t example.
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of work a t Andrew Carnegie's s t e e l m i l l a t
Homestead, Pennsylvania, was based on a combination of t h e c o n t r a c t
and h e l p e r system.
The company c o n t r a c t e d w i t h t h e s k i l l e d workers
through t h e i r union, t h e Amalgamated A s s o c i a t i o n of I r o n S t e e l and Tin
Workers,to produce a c e r t a i n amount of product a t a given r a t e p e r ton.
The r a t e was c o n t i n g e n t on a s l i d i n g s c a l e t h a t corresponded t o market
prices.
When t h e market p r i c e went up, t h e company's l a b o u r c o s t s went
up a u t o m a t i c a l l y .
The union took t h e tonnage r a t e c o n t r a c t e d f o r by t h e
company according t o t h e market p r i c e , and d i v i d e d i t up among a l l
t h e v a r i o u s k i n d s of s k i l l e d workers involved i n producing t h e product.
C a l c u l a t e d i n t o t h e i r n e g o t i a t i o n s among themselves was t h e amount t o
be p a i d t o t h e i r u n s k i l l e d h e l p e r s .
percentage of t h e h e l p e r ' s wages.
The company a l s o p a i d a s m a l l
I f a s k i l l e d worker wanted t o h i r e
more than t h e number of h e l p e r s provided f o r him, he p a i d them o u t of
h i s own wages.12
That system of o r g a n i z i n g and compensating l a b o u r d i d
n o t l e a v e t h e company much c o n t r o l over i t s l a b o u r c o s t s , o r o v e r t h e
pace and e f f i c i e n c y of production.
C a t h e r i n e Stone, i n h e r s t u d y of
l a b o u r i n t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y , summed i t up l i k e t h i s :
The p r i c e Cof a c o n t r a c t e d job] w a s determined by
t h e market, and t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o r and t h e pace
of work was decided by t h e workers themselves.13
I n a time of r a p i d l y expanding markets and i n t e n s e competition f o r t h o s e
markets, employers i n t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y found t h i s system t o be a g r e a t
hindrance.
They were f u r t h e r annoyed by t h e c o n s t r a i n t s imposed upon them
by t h e formalized c o n t r o l over a c t i v i t i e s a t t h e p o i n t of p r o d u c t i o n
t h a t t h e union gave t h e workers.
The Amalgamated A s s o c i a t i o n of I r o n ,
S t e e l and Tin Workers was one of t h e s t r o n g e s t of t h e day, i f n o t t h e
strongest.
The union had a s t r i n g of r u l e s i n t e n d e d t o prevent speedups
and o v e r s t r a i n among t h e workers, and t h e r e were a l s o r u l e s t h a t served
t o m a i n t a i n t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r they had arranged among themselves
on t h e b a s i s of t h e i r c r a f t knowledge.
d e s c r i b e d it:
This i s how a company h i s t o r i a n
Every department and sub-department had i t s workmen's
II
committee1', w i t h a "chairman" and a f u l l c o r p s of
o f f i c e r s . . h a r d l y a day passed t h a t a "committee" did
n o t come forward w i t h some demand o r grievance. I f a
man w i t h a d e s i r a b l e j o b d i e d o r l e f t t h e works, h i s
p o s i t i o n could n o t be f i l l e d w i t h o u t t h e consent and
t h e a p p r o v a l of an Amalgamated c o m i t t e e . . . T h e method
of a p p o r t i o n i n g t h e work, of r e g u l a t i n g t h e t u r n s , of
a l t e r i n g t h e machinery, i n s h o r t , every d e t a i l of
working t h e g r e a t p l a n t , was s u b j e c t t o t h e i n t e r f e r ence of some busybody r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e Amalgamated
Association.
Some of t h i s meddling was s p e c i a l under
t h e agreement t h a t had been signed by t h e Carnegies,
b u t much of i t w a s n o t ; i t was only i n l i n e w i t h t h e
g e n e r a l p o l i c y of t h e union...The h e a t s of a t u r n were
d e s i g n a t e d , a s were t h e weights of t h e v a r i o u s charges
c o n s t i t u t i n g a h e a t . The product p e r worker was
l i m i t e d ; t h e p r o p o r t i o n of s c r a p t h a t might be used
i n running a f u r n a c e w a s f i x e d ; t h e q u a l i t y of p i g - i r o n
was s t a t e d ; t h e p u d d l e r s ' u s e of b r i c k and f i r e c l a y
was f o r b i d d e n , w i t h e x c e p t i o n s ; t h e l a b o r of a s s i s t a n t s
was d e f i n e d ; t h e t e a c h i n g of o t h e r workmen was prohibi t e d , n o r might one man lend h i s t o o l s t o a n o t h e r
except a s provided f o r . l4
.
?he union a l s o had r u l e s d e f i n i n g what a "job" was, and p r o h i b i t i n g i t s
members from doing more than one.15
A l l of t h i s prompted a Carnegie
S t e e l Company o f f i c i a l t o say t h a t "when t h e union was f i r m l y entrenched
a t Homestead, t h e men r a n t h e m i l l and t h e foreman had l i t t l e a u t h o r i t y . ,116
The p r e v a i l i n g s i t u a t i o n of worker c o n t r o l a t t h e p o i n t of product i o n formalized through t h e r u l e s and p o l i c i e s of t h e union l e d t o a powerf u l d e s i r e on t h e p a r t of t h e company t o exterminate t h e union.
The up-
coming n e g o t i a t i o n s i n 1892 t o renew t h e t h r e e y e a r o l d c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e
Amalgamated A s s o c i a t i o n p r e s e n t e d t h e company t h e o p p o r t u n i t y they needed.
Andrew Carnegie i n s t a l l e d Henry F r i c k , who had p r e s i d e d over union-busting
i n t h e coke f i e l d s , t o r u n t h e m i l l during n e g o t i a t i o n s .
Frick s t a r t e d
by proposing a wage c u t , even though t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y was on t h e upswing.
The Arnalgated, of c o u r s e , r e f u s e d t h e o f f e r .
F r i c k responded by f o r t i f y i n g
t h e m i l l , e n c i r c l i n g i t w i t h a high f e n c e w i t h r i f l e s l i t s i n i t and
barbed w i r e on top.
H e announced t h a t i f t h e workers d i d n o t a c c e p t
h i s o f f e r w i t h i n one month, t h e company would h e n c e f o r t h c e a s e t o recogn i z e t h e union, and d e a l w i t h t h e workers a s i n d i v i d u a l s .
A s t r i k e began
a few days a f t e r t h e end of t h e s t i p u l a t e d acceptance p e r i o d .
B r i e f l y , t h e e v e n t s of t h e s t r i k e , which was one of t h e most
n o t o r i o u s i n U. S. l a b o r h i s t o r y due t o i t s b i t t e r n e s s and l e n g t h , and
t h e v i o l e n c e t h a t a r o s e from i t , a r e as follows:
a few days i n t o t h e
s t r i k e , t h r e e hundred P i n k e r t o n guards, arranged f o r p r i o r t o t h e beginni n g of t h e s t r i k e , a r r i v e d on F r i c k ' s o r d e r s w i t h t h e e x p r e s s i n t e n t i o n
of t a k i n g over t h e m i l l s o t h a t i t could b e r u n using scab l a b o u r .
e n t i r e town came o u t t o t u r n them back.
The
A pitched b a t t l e ensued' i n
which about s i x t y p e r o p l e were s h o r t , s i x t e e n f a t a l l y .
I n t h e end, t h e
P i n k e r t o n s r e t r e a t e d , pursued and badly b e a t e n by t h e workers' wives.
S h o r t l y a f t e r t h a t e v e n t , which a t t r a c t e d nation-wide a t t e n t i o n and
h o r r o r ( f o r widely d i f f e r i n g r e a s o n s ) , 8,000 s o l d i e r s of t h e N a t i o n a l
Guard took o v e r t h e town, and t h e m i l l resumed o p e r a t i o n s using scab
labour.
The s t r i k e r s h e l d o u t f o r a f u r t h e r f i v e months u n t i l , d e f e a t e d
by hunger, e v i c t i o n s from company houses and c o s t l y c o u r t a c t i o n s , they
voted t o end t h e s t r i k e .
Almost none of t h e union men g o t t h e i r j o b s back.
When they
went t o ask f o r them, they discovered t h a t new p r o d u c t i o n methods and
new machinery i n s t a l l e d d u r i n g t h e s t r i k e had made them r e p l a c e a b l e by
e a s i l y t r a i n e d unskilled labour.
meetings were banned.
Grievance committees and workers
Wages were s l a s h e d f a r more than had been
,
o r i g i n a l l y proposed.
Twelve hour days and seven day weeks were t h e
F r i c k s e n t a c a b l e t o Andrew
r u l e r a t h e r than t h e exception.''
Carnegie :
OUR VICTORY IS NOW COMXL
' ETE AND MOST GRATIFYING.
DO NOT THINK WE WILL ENER HAVE SERIOUS LABOR
TROUBLE AGAIN. WE HAD TO TEACH OUR EMPLOYEES A
LESSON AND W
E HAVE TAUGHT THEM ONE THEY WILL
NEVER FORGET.
F r i c k r e c e i v e d t h e following r e p l y :
LIFE WORTH LIVING AGAIN.
AROLZiD l8
.
CONGRATULATE ALL
Although t h e immediate cause of t h e Homestead s t r i k e was a con-
flict o v e r r e d u c t i o n of wages, a s John F i t c h noted i n h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n
of t h e s t e e l w o r k e r s :
ism".19
"There was a n o t h e r i s s u e . ' . . t h a t
i s s u e was' union-
There i s l i t t l e q u e s t i o n t h a t t h e i n t e n t i o n of Carnegie and
F r i c k even b e f o r e t h e ? t r i k e began w a s t o f r e e themselves of union
interference.
Carnegie had w r i t t e n a d i r e c t i v e t o F r i c k p r i o r t o commence-
ment of n e g o t i a t i o n s which s a i d "These w o r k s . . . w i l l
be n e c e s s a r i l y non-
Union a f t e r t h e e x p i r a t i o n of t h e p r e s e n t agreement."
Fitch reports
t h a t many of t h e s t r i k e r s b e l i e v e d t h a t "Frick d e l i b e r a t e l y sought t h e
c o n f l i c t because he wanted t o d r i v e t h e union o u t of Homestead" and
t h a t "they were going i n t o a f i g h t t o determine t h e i r r i g h t t o u n i t e d
action."2o
That they had cause f o r t h e s e b e l i e f s i s borne o u t by t h e
s t a t e m e n t made by t h e company t h e day a f t e r t h e outbreak of v i o l e n c e
during the s t r i k e :
This outbreak s e t t l e s one m a t t e r f o r e v e r , and t h a t
i s t h a t t h e Homestead m i l l h e r e a f t e r w i l l never
a g a i n recognize t h e Amalgamated A s s o c i a t i o n nor any
other labor o r g a n i ~ a t i o n . ~ ~
,
The Homestead s t r i k e of 1892 w a s t h e f i r s t s h o t i n a long and
u l t i m a t e l y s u c c e s s f u l f i g h t by t h e b i g s t e e l companies (and o t h e r major
i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e s ) t o g a i n g r e a t l y i n c r e a s e d c o n t r o l over t h e i r
labour force.
The v i c t o r i o u s r e s u l t f o r Carnegie S t e e l gave o t h e r
employers i n t h e i n d u s t r y t h e encouragement they needed t o engage i n
a showdown w i t h t h e union on t h e i r own t e r r i t o r y .
And i t s p e l l e d t h e
end f o r t h e Amalgamated A s s o c i a t i o n of I r o n , S t e e l and Tin Workers.
I n j u s t two s h o r t y e a r s , t h e A s s o c i a t i o n , once t h e p r i d e of t h e American
F e d e r a t i o n of Labor, had l o s t n e a r l y h a l f i t s membership a s a consequence
of being f o r c e d o u t of one m i l l a f t e r a n o t h e r .
and purposes, i t no l o n g e r e x i s t e d . 2 2
By 1910, f o r a l l i n t e n t s
The e x t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e Amalga-
mated A s s o c i a t i o n meant t h a t U.S. S t e e l , t h e n t h e w o r l d ' s l a r g e s t corpora t i o n (which was Xormed i n p a r t o u t of Carnegie S t e e l ) , could o p e r a t e
f r e e of t h e power and c o n t r o l t h a t workers' s k i l l and union o r g a n i z a t i o n
had given them over t h e i r working c o n d i t i o n s and a c t i v i t i e s a t t h e p o i n t
of production.
Without t h e union t o contend w i t h , t h e s t e e l moguls had
a f r e e r hand t o r e o r g a n i z e t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r i n t h e i r m i l l s u s i n g
u n s k i l l e d o r s e m i - s k i l l e d workers and new techniques t h a t f u r t h e r weakened t h e formerly s t r o n g and p r i v e l e g e d p o s i t i o n of s k i l l e d workers who
had p r e v i o u s l y c o n t r o l l e d production.
The s t e e l i n d u s t r y showed t h e way.
c l o s e l y behind.
Other employers followed
The y e a r s around t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y saw an unprec-
edented, widespread and f a i r l y s u c c e s s f u l a t t a c k on unions by l a r g e
employers.
by F i t c h :
The i n t e n t i o n s of those employers were s u c c i n c t l y summarized
The motive back of t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of unionism
w a s d e s i r e f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t r o l . That
c o n t r o l d i d n o t r e s t e n t i r e l y i n t h e hands of
t h e employers s o long as t h e r e wagja s t r o n g org a n i z a t i o n among t h e i r employees.
The employers were aiming f o r complete c o n t r o l over methods of work,
l e v e l s of o u t p u t , q u a l i t y of f i n i s h e d p r o d u c t , h i r i n g and f i r i n g t h e
number and kind of w o r k e r s - t h e y wanted and t h e freedom t o implement any
kind of payment system they wanted.
They wanted no i n t e r f e r e n c e from
workers i n determining t h e d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r on t h e shop f l o o r , o r i n
determining t h e kind of equipment and machinery they would use.
Some
of t h o s e g o a l s a r e expressed i n t h e adopted p r i n c i p l e s of t h e N a t i o n a l
Metal Trades A s s o c i a t i o n which r e p r e s e n t e d t h e employers of over 30,000
workers and w a s one of t h e c o u n t r y ' s foremost employers1 o r g a n i z a t i o n s .
They a r e reproduced i n p a r t by Ramirez a s follows:
CONCERNING EMPLOYEES 1. S i n c e we, a s employers, a r e
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e work turned o u t by o u r workmen,
we must have f u l l d i s c r e t i o n t o d e s i g n a t e t h e men
we c o n s i d e r competent t o perform t h e work and t o
determine t h e c o n d i t i o n s under which t h a t work s h a l l
be prosecuted, t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e competency of t h e
men being determined s o l e l y by us. While disavowing
any i n t e n t i o n t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e p r o p e r f u n c t i o n s
of l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , we w i l l n o t admit of any
i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e management of our b u s i n e s s .
APPRENTICES, ETC. 4. The number of a p p r e n t i c e s ,
h e l p e r s and handymen t o be employed w i l l be d e t e r mined s o l e l y by t h e employer.
METHODS AND WAGES 5. We w i l l n o t permit employees
t o p l a c e any r e s t r i c t i o n on t h e management, methods
o r p r o d u c t i o n of our shops, and w i l l r e q u i r e a f a i r
d a y ' s work f o r a f a i r day's pay.
Employees w i l l be paid by t h e h o u r l y r a t e , by
premium system, piece-work o r c o n t r a c t , as t h e
employers may e l e c t .
6. It i s t h e p r i v e l e g e of t h e
employee t o l e a v e o u r employment whenever he s e e s f i t ,
and i t i s t h e p r i v e l e g e of t h e employer t o d i s c h a r g e
any workmari when he s e e s f i t . 2 4
FREEDOM OF EMPLOYMENT
By t h e e a r l y y e a r s of t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y , t h e b a t t l e f o r c o n t r o l
had p r e c i p i t a t e d a g r e a t number of c o n f r o n t a t i o n s .
According t o
David Montgomery, s t r i k e s over c o n t r o l reached an a l l time high i n
1 9 0 3 . ~ Almost
~
40 p e r c e n t of a l l s t r i k e s d u r i n g t h e n e x t y e a r were
fought over r e c o g n i t i o n of union r u l e s o r of t h e union i t s e l f .
The
number of l o c k o u t s caused by t h o s e i s s u e s w a s h i g h e r t h a n ever. 2 6
The v i c t o r y of t h e b i g s t e e l employers o v e r t h e Amalgamated
Association w a s a s i g n i f i c a n t
blow t o t h e p r i v i l e g e d and r e l a t i v e l y
powerful p o s i t i o n of t h e s k i l l e d workers. It gave t h e employers t h e
o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e p l a c e them w i t h a combination of new techniques and
semi-skilled workers who provided t h e l a b o u r needed f o r t h o s e new
techniques.
A r a p i d i n c r e a s e i n mechanization followed t h e d e f e a t
of t h e s k i l l e d workers i n t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y .
Mechanization went
hand i n hand w i t h a l e v e l l i n g of t h e k i n d s of workers employed i n t h e
industry.
The i n t r i c a t e h i e r a r c h y from s k i l l e d t o u n s k i l l e d worker
c o l l a p s e d w i t h t h e i n c r e a s i n g use of s e m i - s k i l l e d workers t o o p e r a t e
t h e v a r i o u s k i n d s of machines.
The d i s a p p e a r a n c e of t h e h i e r a r c h y of
l i m i t e d workers' c o n t r o l gave employers more power t o make and implement d e c i s i o n s about what went on a t the p o i n t of p r o d u c t i o n i n t h e i r
mills.
It t h e o r e t i c a l l y gave them t h e power t o i n c r e a s e c o n t r o l over
l e v e l s of o u t p u t , q u a l i t y of product, h i r i n g and f i r i n g , methods of
uork and a l l t h e o t h e r t h i n g s t h a t t h e s k i l l e d workers through t h e i r
unions had p r e v i o u s l y had a s t r o n g v o i c e i n .
,
The disappearance of t h a t l i m i t e d h i e r a r c h y of worker's cont r o l p r e s e n t e d employers w i t h two new problems.
The f i r s t was t h a t
t h e b u i l t i n m o t i v a t i o n s t o do a good job ( s i n c e s k i l l e d workers had
i n a s e n s e been p a r t n e r s i n production) t h a t were p a r t of t h a t h i e r archy were removed, l e a v i n g an obvious and s e r i o u s l a c k of m o t i v a t i o n
f o r workers t o p r o v i d e cooperation t o t h e i r employers.
known a s " t h e l a b o r problem".
This became
' T h e second w a s t h a t employers discovered
t h a t they r e a l l y d i d n o t have s y s t e m a t i c knowledge of production proc e s s e s a t t h e shop f l o o r l e v e l upon which t o b a s e managerial d e c i s i o n s .
That problem was a p t l y expressed by Big B i l l Hayward of t h e I n d u s t r i a l
Workers of t h e World:
cap."
"The manager's b r a i n s a r e under t h e workman's
The s c i e n t i f i c management movement was one of t h e employer's
a t t e m p t s t o s o l v e t h o s e problems.
The i n s t i t u t i o n of a new kind of
h i e r a r c h y w a s a n o t h e r move towards s o l v i n g t h o s e problems.
The n e x t
two s e c t i o n s of t h i s c h a p t e r w i l l d e a l w i t h t h o s e two developments.
The D e s t r u c t i o n of Workers' Control:
S c i e n t i f i c Management
It has become popular i n r e c e n t y e a r s t o i d e n t i f y s c i e n t i f i c
management w i t h t h e e f f o r t s of F r e d e r i c k Winslow Taylor.
What Taylor
d i d w a s t o c o a l e s c e and r e f i n e t h e i d e a s t h a t were being t r i e d out by
a number of people i n a number of d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s i n t o an a r t i c u l a t e d system.
H i s work was n e i t h e r t h e beginning nor t h e end of t h e
l i n e of reasoning t h a t he has come t o r e p r e s e n t , though he d i d p u t t h e
name of s c i e n t i f i c management t o i t .
The f i r s t approximations t o t h e s o - c a l l e d s c i e n t i f i c system of
167
management originated before the previously mentioned problems arose
from the crumbling of the hierarchy of skilled workers.
The ideas that
contained the embryonic form of scientific management can be traced in
part to the increasing role of the engineer in the industrial corporation.
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, employers and engineers
working for them had devoted constant and considerable effort to developing machinery which would increase the productivity of labour. Until
the later part of the nineteenth century, the innovation of machinery
-.
under the influence of the capitalist logic of production had not been
systematic. Then the business system started to consolidate its hegemony
over the inventive process through rearranging and expanding the ways
that research and development were carried out. The enlistment of science
in the service of capital became more complete than Andrew Ure ever
dreamed. The development of new machinery through systematic research
and development was one side of the enlistment of science in the service
of capital. The scientific management approach was the other side.
Around the end of the nineteenth century, it was becoming increasingly clear that the mechanical component of the labour productivity
equation was not the only limiting factor and that the organization of
work within the productive process, and the ability to compel higher levels
of performance within that organization, was an equally limiting factor.
There was an increased interest in finding ways of extracting more out of
the labour that was paid for. That interest was spurred on by the furious
competition in that era of mergers that left us the industrial empires
that are today's major corporations. Engineers began a more systematic
s e a r c h f o r ways t o r e o r g a n i z e t h e i n t e r n a l o p e r a t i o n s of f a c t o r i e s
t o i n c r e a s e p r o f i t a b i l i t y than e v e r b e f o r e .
l i m i t e d t o the purely technical.
T h e i r e f f o r t s were n o t
They developed new methods f o r a
wide v a r i e t y of what a r e now managerial f u n c t i o n s , such a s cost-accounti n g and comprehensive book-keeping.
management.
That w a s t h e beginning of modern
27
When t h e e n g i n e e r s c a s t t h e i r eyes on l a b o u r , t h e i r f i r s t e f f o r t s
were i n experimentation w i t h systems of payment.
The assumption they
o p e r a t e d under w a s t h a t by t i n k e r i n g w i t h t h e methods of wage payment,
they could d e v i s e one t h a t would have t h e e f f e c t of g e t t i n g workers t o
work h a r d e r .
Employers had been a t t e m p t i n g t o make u s e of p i e c e r a t e s
i n i n c r e a s i n g numbers throughout t h e second h a l f of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century.
Then t h e r e was a r u s h t o implement p i e c e r a t e s i n t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y
following t h e demise of t h e o l d s l i d i n g s c a l e tonnage r a t e .
Employers
l i k e d t h e i d e a of t h e p i e c e r a t e because i t seemed t o l i n k wages d i r e c t l y
to productivity.
wage would be.
duce more.
I n t h e o r y , t h e more a worker worked, t h e h i g h e r h i s
This would provide t h e worker w i t h an i n c e n t i v e t o pro-
What happened i n r e a l i t y was d i f f e r e n t , a s a v i s i t i n g
i n d u s t r i a l i s t from England observed a t t h e time:
P i e c e r a t e s a r e f i x e d only t o be c u t a s soon a s
t h e employee develops t h e a b i l i t y t o i n c r e a s e
p r o d u c t i o n . It does n o t r e q u i r e any g r e a t l e n g t h
of time f o r a workman t o r e a l i z e t h a t he w i l l g e t
about t h e same amount of money whether he works
f a s t o r slow. 28
An a r t i c l e i n t h e i n d u s t r y magazine I r o n Age admitted a s much:
Regardless of t h e c o n t i n u a l l y i n c r e a s i n g c o s t of
l i v i n g , t h e manufacturers decide among themselves,
f o r example, t h a t $1.50 f o r 10 hours is enough
f o r a woman and t h a t $2.50 a day i s enough f o r
t h e o r d i n a r y working man and a f a m i l y . The
p i e c e work p r i c e s a r e t h e n a d j u s t e d s o t h a t t h e
normal d a y ' s o u t p u t w i l l j u s t b r i n g about t h e s e
wages. 29
The move toward p i e c e r a t e s was n o t l i m i t e d t o t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y .
Many unions r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e workers a f f e c t e d were a g a i n s t p i e c e
rates.
The comment of an o f f i c i a l of t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Association
of Machinists i s a good example of workers1 a t t i t u d e s toward p i e c e
rates:
A change i n t h e method of work i n a shop whereby
each workman w i l l have t o expend from 50 t o 100
p e r c e n t more energy, which i n t u r n w i l l produce
50 p e r c e n t t o 100 p e r c e n t more product f o r t h e
same pay, f u l l y meets h i s i d e a of robbery. 30
Employers and t h o s e working on t h e i r behalf searched f o r more
s o p h i s t i c a t e d ways of u s i n g wage payment systems t o i n c r e a s e production.
That s e a r c h l e d them t o t h e d i s c o v e r y of systems l i k e t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l
p i e c e r a t e , and t h e bonus and premium plans.
Most of t h o s e p l a n s involved
s e t t i n g a b a s i c p r o d u c t i o n quota f o r a worker's d a i l y o u t p u t , and t h e n
paying an e x t r a amount of money f o r work t h a t exceeded t h e b a s i c quota
i n t h e form of a bonus o r a h i g h e r p i e c e r a t e .
N a t u r a l l y , t h e e x t r a pay
r e c e i v e d by t h e worker d i d n o t match t h e e x t r a o u t p u t h e had t o produce
t o earn it.
The e n g i n e e r i n g magazines and i n d u s t r y magazines from j u s t
b e f o r e t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y were f i l l e d w i t h a r t i c l e s d e s c r i b i n g t h e
v a r i a t i o n s on t h o s e wage i n c e n t i v e schemes.
The wage i n c e n t i v e schemes were designed t o m o t i v a t e workers t o
bork h a r d e r .
But they had a n o t h e r very i n t e r e s t i n g e f f e c t on r e l a t i o n s
among t h e workers which was n o t overlooked by employers.
That e f f e c t
w a s t o encourage t h e workers t o s e e t h e i r s e l f i n t e r e s t a s i n d i v i d u a l s ,
and t o d i s c o u r a g e c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n s a g a i n s t t h e employer based on t h e
community of i n t e r e s t of a l l workers.
The wage i n c e n t i v e p l a n s i n v i t e d
t h e worker t o i n c r e a s e h i s wage through t h e p u r s u i t of i n d i v i d u a l ambition
i n competition w i t h o t h e r workers.
t h e s o l u t i o n t o " t h e l a b o r problem".
Many employers thought t h a t t h i s was
I n t h e words of one manufacturer
i n 1928, t h e u s e f u l n e s s of such i n c e n t i v e schemes was:
...
t o break up t h e f l a t r a t e f o r t h e v a r i o u s c l a s s e s
of workers. That i s t h e s u r e s t p r e v e n t a t i v e of s t r i k e s
and d i s c o n t e n t . When a l l a r e p a i d one r a t e , i t i s t h e
s i m p l e s t and almost i n e v i t a b l e t h i n g f o r a l l t o u n i t e
i n t h e s u p p o r t of a common demand. When each worker
i s p a i d according t o h i s r e c o r d t h e r e i s n o t t h e same
community of i n t e r e s t . The good worker who i s adequ a t e l y p a i d does n o t c o n s i d e r himself aggrieved s o
w i l l i n g l y n o r w i l l h e s o f r e e l y j e o p a r d i z e h i s standi n g by j o i n i n g w i t h t h e so-called "Marginal Worker."
There i s n o t l i k e l y t o b e union s t r i k e s where t h e r e
i s no union of i n t e r e s t . 3 l
The wage i n c e n t i v e scheme does n o t remain i n such wide use today a s
some employers from t h i s p e r i o d might have hoped.
But t h e p l a n of
consciously d i s c o u r a g i n g a union of i n t e r e s t among workers has remained
i n a d i f f e r e n t form.
That form, a s we s h a l l s e e i n t h e s e c t i o n follow-
i n g t h i s one, w a s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a job h i e r a r c h y under t h e employer's
control.
One of t h e p r i n c i p l e s of S c i e n t i f i c Management, a s e l a b o r a t e d
by Taylor, was t o encourage workers t o pursue t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l p r i v a t e
self interest.
'
Taylor f i r s t conceived of h i s s y s t e m a t i c approach t o
" t h e l a b o r problem" a s a v a r i a t i o n on t h e wage i n c e n t i v e scheme.
His
f i r s t d e s c r i p t i o n of i t , d e l i v e r e d t o t h e American S o c i e t y of Mechanical
Engineers i n 1895, was e n t i t l e d "A P i e c e Rate System".
As Taylor himself t e l l s t h e s t o r y , h e developed t h e f i r s t vers i o n of h i s system as a way t o d e s t r o y t h e c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n taken by
workers t o prevent overwork, o r what w a s c a l l e d by employers " s o l d i e r ing".
Taylor, who worked h i s way up from t h e ranks of t h e shop f l o o r
i n t h e Midvale S t e e l Company, a t f i r s t b e l i e v e d t h a t h i s primary o b j e c t i v e was t o e l i m i n a t e t h e c o l l e c t i v e l i m i t t o t h e speed of work e s t a b l i s h e d
by groups of workers.
That l i m i t w a s t r a d i t i o n a l l y placed somewhere
below what might b e c a l l e d a t h e o r e t i c a l a b s o l u t e c a p a c i t y .
The quest-
i o n of how hard workers should work h a s no a b s o l u t e answer.
A l l that
can be s a i d a b s o l u t e l y i s t h a t workers cannot c o n s t a n t l y work a s hard
a s they p o s s i b l y can w i t h o u t c o n s i d e r a b l e r i s k t o t h e i r h e a l t h and
safety.
What l e v e l below t h e t h e o r e t i c a l maximum c o n s t i t u t e s t h e o p t i -
mum l e v e l i s a m a t t e r of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , employers
have f r e q u e n t l y taken t h e view t h a t workers have n o t reached t h a t
optimum l e v e l .
Big employers a t t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y were of t h e
o p i n i o n t h a t workers were d e l i b e r a t e l y n o t performing a t t h a t optimum
level.
troy it.
They c a l l e d i t " r e s t r i c t i o n of output" and they s e t o u t t o desThe unions and t h e workers took t h e o p p o s i t e view.
They
c a l l e d what t h e employers were up t o "robbery" and they set o u t t o
prevent i t . And s o t h e s t r u g g l e was j o i n e d t o d e f i n e t h e meaning of
"A f a i r d a y ' s work f o r a f a i r d a y ' s pay."
t h a t struggle.
Taylor was i n s t r u m e n t a l i n
It was T a y l o r ' s i n t e n t i o n t o e n s u r e t h a t "what c o n s t i t -
Utes a f a i r d a y ' s work w i l l be a q u e s t i o n f o r s c i e n t i f i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n ,
i n s t e a d of a s u b j e c t t o b e bargained and haggled over. 1132
I n h i s e a r l y e f f o r t s t o win t h e w a r a g a i n s t s o l d i e r i n g , Taylor
concentrated on g e t t i n g workers t o work h a r d e r through a k i n d of bonus
'
system t h a t e s t a b l i s h e d a l a r g e bonus t o b e p a i d t o workers who exceeded
a c e r t a i n l e v e l of p r o d u c t i o n i n a day.
That l e v e l was f a r i n excess of
i
what was a customary d a y ' s work.
The bonus was l a r g e , b u t n o t i n propor-
t i o n t o t h e i n c r e a s e d p r o d u c t i v i t y needed t o e a r n i t .
Taylor achieved some s u c c e s s i n b r e a k i n g t h e team s p i r i t of t h e
men a t Midvale S t e e l Company through h i s bonus system.
H i s bonus
system w a s r e a l l y n o t h i n g new, a s h a s been p o i n t e d o u t above.
Howver,
i t was only t h e beginning.
What Taylor d i d t h a t was new i s i l l u s t r a t e d by h i s famous Schmidt
experiment which h e c a r r i e d o u t a few y e a r s e a r l i e r t o e s t a b l i s h t h e l e v e l
of p r o d u c t i o n f o r which a bonus would b e p a i d w h i l e h e was working f o r
Bethlehem S t e e l .
Taylor decided t h a t t h e 12% t o n s of p i g i r o n being
loaded i n t o r a i l w a y c a r s by p i g i r o n h a n d l e r s p e r day w a s n o t enough.
I n s t e a d , h e a s c e r t a i n e d f o r himself t h a t "47 t o n s was a proper day's
work f o r a f i r s t - c l a s s pig-iron handler."
men t o do a p r o p e r d a y ' s work.
He t h e n s e t about g e t t i n g t h e
The s t o r y of t h e method by which he
achieved t h a t i s f a s c i n a t i n g and worth r e p e a t i n g a t l e n g t h .
Taylor
observed t h e men f o r a few days t o s e l e c t t h e o b j e c t of h i s a t t e n t i o n s .
H i s choice was an immigrant worker who a p p a r e n t l y had e x c e p t i o n a l stamina
a s he was accustomed t o " t r o t back home" every day a f t e r a f u l l day of
work, coverirg t h e d i s t a n c e of about a m i l e w i t h no s i g n of exhaustion.
This man, whom Taylor c a l l e d S'chmidt, had t h e f u r t h e r advantage from
~ a y l o r ' sp o i n t of view of being a pennypincher.
of $1.15
'
He had managed on h i s wage
a day t o buy a small p i e c e of l a n d , and was busy b u i l d i n g a house
on i t b e f o r e and a f t e r work.
Taylor, having i d e n t i f i e d t h i s man a s t h e most
promising f o r h i s purposes, s i n g l e d him o u t from t h e gang of workers
and had more o r l e s s t h e following c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h him:
"Schmidt, a r e you a high-priced man?"
It
V e l l , I d o n ' t know vat. you mean."
"Oh y e s , you do. What I want t o know i s
whether you a r e a high-priced man o r not."
" V e l l , I d o n ' t know v a t you mean."
Il
Oh, come now, you answer my q u e s t i o n s . What
I want t o f i n d o u t i s whether you a r e a high-priced
man o r one of t h e s e cheap f e l l o w s h e r e . What I want
t o f i n d o u t i s whether you want t o e a r n $1.85 a day
o r whether you are s a t i s f i e d w i t h $1.15, j u s t t h e
same a s a l l t h o s e cheap f e l l o w s a r e g e t t i n g . "
.
L v a n t ' S 1 . 8 5 a day? V a s d o t a high-priced
V e l l , y e s , I v a s a high-priced man."
. "Did
man?
1t
Oh, y o u ' r e a g g r a v a t i n g me. Of a n u r s e you want
every one wants i t ! You know p e r f e c t l y
$1.85 a day
w e l l t h a t t h a t h a s v e r y l i t t l e t o do w i t h you b e i n g
a high-priced man. For goodness' s a k e answer my quest i o n s , and d o n ' t waste any more of my time. Now come
over h e r e . You s e e t h a t p i l e of p i g i r o n ? "
-
.
"Yes "
"You s e e t h a t c a r ? "
''Yes.
" W e l 1 , ' i f you a r e a high-priced man, you w i l l load
t h a t p i g i r o n on t h a t c a r to-morrow f o r $1.85. Now do
wake up and answer my q u e s t i o n . T e l l me whether you a r e
a high-priced man o r not."
-
"Vell
d i d I got $1.85 f o r l o a d i n g d o t p i g i r o n
on d o t c a r to-morrow?"
"Yes, of c o u r s e you do, and you g e t $1.85 f o r loadi n g a p i l e l i k e t h a t every day r i g h t through t h e y e a r .
That i s what a high-priced man does, and you know i t
j u s t a s w e l l a s I do."
"Vell, d o t ' s a l l r i g h t . I could l o a d d o t p i g i r o n
on t h e c a r to-morrow f o r $1.85, and I g e t i t every day,
don't I?"
-
c e r t a i n l y you do."
" C e r t a i n l y you do
"Vell, den, I vas a high-priced man."
"Now, hold on, hold on. You know j u s t a s w e l l a s
I do t h a t a high-priced man h a s t o do e x a c t l y a s h e ' s
t o l d from morning t i l l n i g h t . You have s e e n t h i s man
h e r e b e f o r e , haven't you?"
"No, I never saw him. "
"Well, i f you a r e a high-priced man, you w i l l do
e x a c t l y a s t h i s man t e l l s you to-morrow, from morning
t i l l n i g h t . When h e t e l l s you t o p i c k up a p i g and
walk, you p i c k i t up and you walk, and when h e t e l l s
you t o s i t down and r e s t , you s i t down. You do t h a t
r i g h t s t r a i g h t through t h e day. And w h a t ' s more, no
back t a l k . Now a high-priced man does j u s t what h e ' s
t o l d t o do, and no back t a l k . Do you understand t h a t ?
When t h i s man t e l l s you t o walk, you walk; when he
t e l l s you t o s i t down, you s i t down, and you d o n ' t
t a l k back a t him. Now you come on t o work h e r e tomorrow morning and I ' l l know b e f o r e n i g h t whether you
a r e r e a l l y a high-priced man o r not."
Schmidt s t a r t e d t o work, and a l l day long, and a t
r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s , was t o l d by t h e man who s t o o d over
him w i t h a watch, "Now p i c k up a p i g and walk. Now s i t
down and r e s t . Now walk
now r e s t , " e t c . He worked
when h e was t o l d t o work, and r e s t e d when h e was t o l d
t o r e s t , and a t h a l f - p a s t f i v e i n t h e a f t e r n o o n had h i s
47 t o n s loaded on t h e c a r . 3 3
-
Schmidt was rewarded f o r h i s obedience by r e c e i v i n g $1.85 p e r day (a
s i x t y p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e ) f o r a t h r e e hundred and s e v e n t y s i x p e r c e n t
i n c r e a s e i n t h e amount of work t h a t he d i d .
Soon a l l t h e man i n t h a t
shop were induced t o i m i t a t e t h e accomplishments of Schmidt f o r a s i m i l a r
reward.
The moral of t h e Schmidt s t o r y i s t h a t i t r e q u i r e d a thoroughly
unique approach on t h e p a r t of management.
Taylor e x p l a i n s t h a t t h e
Schmidt experiment shows t h a t
...
t h e r e i s a s c i e n c e of handling p i g i r o n , and
f u r t h e r t h a t t h i s s c i e n c e amounts t o s o much t h a t
t h e man who i s s u i t e d t o handle p i g i r o n cannot
p o s s i b l e understand i t , n o r even work i n accordance
w i t h t h e l a w s of t h i s s c i e n c e , without t h e h e l p of
t h o s e who a r e over him. 34
This became t h e f i r s t p r i n c i p l e of t h e g o s p e l of s c i e n t i f i c management
according t o Taylor:
...
i n almost a l l of t h e mechanical a r t s t h e s c i e n c e
which u n d e r l i e s each a c t of each workman i s s o g r e a t
and amounts t o s o much t h a t t h e workman who i s b e s t
s u i w d t o a c t u a l l y doing t h e work i s i n c a p a b l e of
f u l l y understanding t h i s s c i e n c e , w i t h o u t t h e guidance of t h o s e who a r e working w i t h him o r over him. 3 5
Therefore, Taylor c o n t i n u e s ,
...
t h e management must t a k e over and perform much
of t h e work which i s now l e f t t o t h e men; almost
every a c t of t h e workman should be preceeded by
one o r more p r e p a r a t o r y a c t s of t h e management
which e n a b l e him t o do h38 work b e t t e r and q u i c k e r
t h a n he o t h e r w i s e could.
This was t h e keynote of T a y l o r ' s r a d i c a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o management.
I n t h e Schmidt experiment, a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of management w a s l i t e r a l l y
s t a n d i n g over t h e worker d i r e c t i n g h i s every movement.
complete s e p a r a t i o n of planning from performance.
There was a
I n T a y l o r ' s system,
management w a s t o completely decompose every s t e p i n t h e work and p u t
i t back t o g e t h e r a g a i n i n such a way t h a t every d e t a i l w a s planned.
Its g o a l w a s t h e complete a p p r o p r i a t i o n of a l l knowledge t h a t workers
had about how t o do t h e work (though Taylor argued t h a t t h e workers had
only a l i m i t e d understanding) i n t o t h e p o s s e s s i o n of management s o t h a t
management could u s e i t t o e s t a b l i s h t o t a l c o n t r o l o v e r how t h e work
was t o be done and how much was t o be done.
Absolute c o n t r o l of workers'
a c t i v i t i e s implemented by t h e s y s t e m a t i c a n a l y s i s of work and i t s divi s i o n i n t o d i s c r e t e t a s k s was t h e essence of what Taylor b e l i e v e d was
a s c i e n t i f i c approach.
Taylor contemplated an a n a l y s i s , breakdown and c o n t r o l s o d e t a i l e d
and thorough-going t h a t i t r e q u i r e d a n e n t i r e l y new and d i s t i n c t e n t i t y
w i t h i n t h e p l a n t known a s t h e planning department t o c o o r d i n a t e and overs e e t h e work.
He wanted t o t a k e t h e knowledge of p r o d u c t i o n techniques
and t h e c o o r d i n a t i n g of t h e t a s k s t h a t comprised t h e p r o d u c t i o n techniques
from t h e workers and g i v e them t o t h e planning department.
The planning
department would be t h e way t h a t management would e x e r c i s e i t s c o n t r o l
over production.
Taylor devised a system of what h e c a l l e d " f u n c t i o n a l
foremanship" i n which t h e a c t i v i t i e s of t h e workers were d i r e c t e d , evalu a t e d , and rewarded o r punished n o t by one foreman, b u t by e i g h t .
All
e i g h t foremen had d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n s under t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e planni n g department:
t h r e e were t o g i v e i n s t r u c t i o n s , f o u r were t o e v a l u a t e
performance s p e c i f i c a t i o n s i n d e t a i l , and t h e l a s t w a s t o g i v e o u t punishments.
T a y l o r ' s sytem w a s never implemented i n i t s e n t i r e t y i n any given
f a c t o r y f o r long.
It w a s too e l a b o r a t e , took too long t o put i n t o f u l l
o p e r a t i o n , and was i n i t i a l l y too expensive because of t h e c a r e f u l s t u d y
t h a t Taylor i n s i s t e d on making f o r most employers t o a c c e p t t h e whole
thing.
However, t h e f a c t t h a t T a y l o r ' s system a s h e himself conceived
of i t was n o t massively adopted by b i g employers does n o t diminish i t s
significance.
T a y l o r ' s p e r s o n a l e l a b o r a t i o n of t h e system of s c i e n t i f i c
management was merely t h e most h i g h l y a r t i c u l a t e d e x p r e s s i o n of t h e
massive changes t h a t were t a k i n g p l a c e i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work
throughout i n d u s t r y .
As t h e c l e a r e s t and most r e f i n e d e x p r e s s i o n of
t h o s e changes, i t w a s a n overstatement and a n exaggeration.
Neverthe-
l e s s , t h e i d e a s t h a t Taylor c r y s t a l i z e d and focussed and t h e techniques .
t h a t h e used r a p i d l y became t h e b a s i s f o r s t a n d a r d p r a c t i c e of modern
l a b o u r management.
The theory t h a t he e l u c i d a t e d h a s been i n c o r p o r a t e d
i n t o t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i n l a r g e s c a l e e n t e r p r i s e s , i n
b o t h t h e p u b l i c and p r i v a t e s e c t o r and i n b o t h w h i t e c o l l a r and b l u e
c o l l a r work.
Harry Braverman has c a l l e d t h e t r e n d i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of
work t h a t Taylor w a s t h e c l e a r e s t exponent of " t h e s e p a r a t i o n of concept i o n from execution."37
The r e s u l t of t h a t t r e n d a r e one of t h e h a l l -
marks of t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
The main d i f f e r e n c e between
T a y l o r ' s conception of t h e way t h a t s e p a r a t i o n should be o p e r a t e d and
t h e way t h a t i t i s now a p p l i e d i n c u r r e n t p r a c t i c e i s t h e d i f f e r e n c e
between t h e o r d e r and t h e r u l e .
Taylor wanted each worker t o be i s s u e d
every day a n i n s t r u c t i o n c a r d from t h e planning department t h a t would
t e l l him e x a c t l y what h e w a s supposed t o do.
That cumbersome procedure
has been modified by t h e modern c o r p o r a t i o n o r government o f f i c e i n t o
t h e s l e e k n e s s of t h e b u r e a u c r a t i c r u l e .
There was one more major development i n t h e e x t e n s i o n of employer
c o n t r o l over t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work d u r i n g t h e P r o g r e s s i v e Era.
i s t h e s u b j e c t of t h e n e x t s e c t i o n .
That
The New Hierarchy i n t h e Workplace
W
e have seen how t h e d e f e a t of t h e Amalgamat ed Associ
I r o n , Tin and S t e e l Workers opened t h e way t o t h e b i g employers i n
t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y t o r e o r g a n i z e t h e p r o d u c t i o n process i n a way t h a t
gave them g r e a t e r c o n t r o l over i t .
Some of t h e f i r s t moves they made
were t o r e p l a c e t h e s k i l l e d workers w i t h machines.
This was c l e a r l y
observed by F i t c h i n h i s study of t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y i n 1911:
There h a s been a p o l i c y of d a r i n g , almost t o t h e p o i n t
of r e c k l e s s n e s s , t h a t probably no o t h e r i n d u s t r y can
d u p l i c a t e . No change has been overlooked t h a t would
p u t a machine a t work i n p l a c e of a man; thousands of
men have been d i s p l a c e d i n t h i s way s i n c e 1892.. .38
The r e s u l t was a c o l l a p s i n g of t h e s k i l l d i f f e r e n t i a l s of workers
needed f o r t h e p r o d u c t i o n of s t e e l .
collapse.
There were two a s p e c t s of t h a t
One a s p e c t i s s t a t e d s u c c i n c t l y by F i t c h :
The p e r c e n t a g e of t h e h i g h l y s k i l l e d has grown s t e a d i l y
l e s s ; and t h e p e r c e n t a g e of t h e u n s k i l l e d h a s s t e a d i l y
i n c r e a s e d . 39
The d e c r e a s e i n t h e number of s k i l l e d workers n e c e s s a r y was n o t t h e
only r e a s o n f o r t h e demise of l a r g e d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n t h e s k i l l l e v e l
of workers i n t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y .
The o t h e r reason i s t h a t w i t h t h e
advance of mechanization, t h e kind of s k i l l needed was becoming more
and more s i m i l a r from worker t o worker.
s p e c i a l i z e d machine o p e r a t o r s .
The workers were becoming
Although they worked on d i f f e r e n t mach-
i n e s , t h e k i n d of s k i l l r e q u i r e d t o o p e r a t e them was minimal and i t was
n o t g r e a t l y d i f f e r e n t from one machine t o t h e o t h e r .
.being homogenized
.
The workforce was
The homogenization of t h e workforce, w h i l e s o l v i n g some problems
i n t h e c o n t r o l of t h e l a b o u r f o r c e f o r employers, c r e a t e d o t h e r s .
Homo-
g e n i z a t i o n was t h e r e s u l t of s h a t t e r i n g t h e l i m i t e d c o n t r o l o v e r t h e
production p r o c e s s t h a t s k i l l e d workers had p r e v i o u s l y e x e r c i s e d .
It
i s q u i t e c l e a r t h a t i t w a s a major s t e p forward from t h e employers' p o i n t
of view i n extending t h e i r own c o n t r o l over t h e p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s .
i t l e f t employers w i t h some new problems.
But
The o l d h i e r a r c h y of t h e
s k i l l e d workers, and t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of production based on t h a t h i e r archy, had provided workers w i t h some degree of m o t i v a t i o n i n t h e i r work.
They had been t o some e x t e n t p a r t n e r s i n production under t h e c o n t r a c t i n g
system w i t h t h e s l i d i n g s c a l e of wages.
There was a l s o a l o g i c a l c l e a r l y
d e f i n e d p a t h f o r upward m o b i l i t y f o r workers through t h e h i e r a r c h y of
skill.
job.
That provided a n o t h e r m o t i v a t i o n f o r workers t o do a c r e d i t a b l e
Once t h a t h i e r a r c h y had been dismantled, t h a t was no l o n g e r t r u e .
There was nowhere f o r workers t o go, and no way f o r them t o improve t h e i r
c o n d i t i o n except through u n i t i n g t o g e t h e r and t a k i n g c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n
t o demand b e t t e r c o n d i t i o n s from t h e i r employers.
That p r e s e n t e d t h e employers w i t h a s e r i o u s and long term t h r e a t
--a
t h r e a t they had t o do something about.
Their i n i t i a l a c t i o n s t o
a d d r e s s t h a t problem were i n t h e a r e a of v a r i o u s k i n d s of i n c e n t i v e pay
schemes, a s we have seen.
I t should, however, be noted t h a t i n c e n t i v e
pay schemes were f i r s t being experimented w i t h b e f o r e t h e d e s t r u c t i o n
of t h e h i e r a r c h y of s k i l l e d workers.
They were seen a s a way t o d e a l
, w i t h u n s k i l l e d workers b e f o r e t h a t happened.
The p o i n t h e r e i s t h a t
i n c e n t i v e pay schemes achieved a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s and came i n t o g e n e r a l
180
u s e as a way t o d e a l with t h e e f f e c t s of t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of t h e h i e r archy of s k i l l e d workers, although they o r i g i n a t e d b e f o r e t h a t .
As we s a w i n t h e p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n of t h i s c h a p t e r , t h e premium
and bonus wage systems and t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l p i e c e r a t e systems had two
advantageous e f f e c t s on workers from t h e employers' p o i n t of view.
First,
they were d i r e c t l y intended t o encourage workers t o produce more.
Second,
and more i m p o r t a n t l y , they had t h e e f f e c t of causing d i v i s i o n s among t h e
workers and d e s t r o y i n g t h e i r community of i n t e r e s t , which w a s a t h i n g
g r e a t l y d i s l i k e d by managers and owners.
The s p r e a d of i n c e n t i v e payment schemes d i d n o t s o l v e t h e g r e a t
ferment and u n r e s t p r e v a l e n t among workers around t h e t u r n of t h e cent u r y i n t h e United S t a t e s .
t h a t unrest.
Indeed, i n a g r e a t many c a s e s , i t added t o
Workers and t h e i r unions of a l l k i n d s ranging from t h e
c o n s e r v a t i v e American F e d e r a t i o n of Labor t o t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y I n d u s t r i a l
Workers of t h e World fought a g a i n s t such schemes.
e r a l w a s i n f a c t on t h e i n c r e a s e a t t h a t time.
Labor u n r e s t i n gen-
Employers c o u n t e r a t t a c k e d
w i t h a number of ingenious p l a n s which changed t h e c h a r a c t e r of indust r i a l society.
The r i s e of what was c a l l e d "welfare work", whereby b i g
c o r p o r a t i o n s undertook t o s t a b l i z e
t h e i r workforce by dangling c a r r o t s
such a s providing improvements i n t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s o f f t h e job ( a funct i o n which has s i n c e been l a r g e l y taken over by government), was one of
those plans.
The United S t a t e s S t e e l Company pioneered i n t h a t a r e a .
While t h e workings of company w e l f a r e p l a n s , and t h e w e l f a r e p l a n of
U. S. S t e e l i n p a r t i c u l a r , a r e f a s c i n a t i n g , they too f a r a f i e l d t o go
i n t o here.40
Another of t h e ingenious p l a n s of t h e employers was t o
r e c r e a t e a job h i e r a r c h y i n t h e workplace.
By 1911 when F i t c h pub-
l i s h e d h i s s t u d y of t h e s t e e l i n d u s t r y , he r e p o r t e d t h a t " i n every
department of m i l l work t h e r e is a more o r l e s s r i g i d l i n e of promotion.
Every man i s i n t r a i n i n g f o r t h e n e x t p o s i t i o n above. 1141
This w a s a very c u r i o u s development g i v e n t h e s i m i l a r i t y of
t h e low l e v e l of s k i l l r e q u i r e d f o r t h e d i f f e r e n t j o b s i n t h e s t e e l
mills a f t e r t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e production p r o c e s s following t h e
replacement of s k i l l e d workers by masses of s e m i - s k i l l e d machine t e n d e r s .
The p r e s i d e n t of Bethlehem S t e e l Company had s t a t e d j u s t n i n e y e a r s e a r l i e r t h a t a competent s t e e l m e l t e r could be made o u t of an unexperienced
worker i n s i x t o e i g h t weeks.42
t h e most h i g h l y s k i l l e d .
The job of a s t e e l m e l t e r was one of
Obviously t h e r e w a s n ' t much t o l e a r n i n any
of t h e jobs involved i n s t e e l making under t h e new p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s .
It would seem t h a t t h e i d e a of every man being " i n t r a i n i n g f o r t h e n e x t
p o s i t i o n above'' involved some kind of f i c t i o n .
It d i d , and i t i s a f i c -
t i o n which i s s t i l l maintained today.
I f t h e r e w a s l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e d e g r e e and kind of
s k i l l s and e x p e r i e n c e n e c e s s a r y t o be a b l e t o competently perform a
number of d i f f e r e n t jobs i n a given company o r p l a n t , t h e n t h e r e i s
no immediately a p p a r e n t l o g i c a l reason a r i s i n g from t h e work i t s e l f
why workers should be placed i n a p r o g r e s s i o n from one job t o t h e n e x t . ,
But t h e r e a r e some very good r e a s o n s from a managerial p o i n t of view,
and t h o s e r e a s o n s a r e similar t o t h e r e a s o n s why employers were s o
enamoured of i n c e n t i v e payment schemes.
The e x i s t e n c e of a job l a d d e r
provided workers w i t h a m o t i v a t i o n t o do a decent job i n t h e hopes of
being a b l e t o p r o g r e s s up i t .
The p r o v i s i o n of a r o u t e of upward m o b i l i t y w a s a conscious
a c t i o n on t h e p a r t of major employers t o undercut t h e kind of r e s t l e s s n e s s and d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n of what they c a l l e d "dead-end
encouraging l a b o u r u n r e s t .
jobs" from
I n o r d e r t o p r o v i d e t h a t r o u t e , employers
e s t a b l i s h e d a h i e r a r c h i c a l g r a d a t i o n of t h e v a r i o u s jobs i n t h e i r p l a n t s
and m i l l s i n s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l e v e l of s k i l l , r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
and t h e amount of time and e x p e r i e n c e n e c e s s a r y t o l e a r n t h e j o b s were
more o r l e s s e q u a l and were n o t l o g i c a l l y cumulative.
A textbook w r i t t e n
i n 1918 by an i n d u s t r i a l manager recognized t h e importance of t h e way
j o b s were arranged i n r e l a t i o n t o one a n o t h e r :
A good d e a l of l i t e r a t u r e has been published w i t h i n
t h e l a s t dozen y e a r s i n which s c a t h i n g c r i t i c i s m i s
made of what h a s come t o b e known a s " b l i n d a l l e y "
The work i t s e l f i s n o t under
o r "dead-end" j o b s
a t t a c k as much a s t h e l a c k of i n c e n t i v e and a p p e a l
i n t h e scheme of management. 43 (Emphasis mine. )
...
What employers d i d w a s t o i n s t i t u t e a new scheme of management by prov i d i n g a l a d d e r f o r t h e i r employees t o climb.
It would undermine t h e
purpose of t h e l a d d e r i f new employees were h i r e d from o u t s i d e t h e e x i s t i n g company workforce t o f i l l p o s i t i o n s on t h e upper r e a c h e s o r even t h e
middle reaches of t h e l a d d e r .
I n view of t h a t , i t i n c r e a s i n g l y became
company p o l i c y t o h i r e from w i t h i n (except f o r r e c r u i t i n g management).
F i t c h noted t h i s p r a c t i c e i n U.S. S t e e l :
I f a l l t h e r o l l e r s i n t h e Homestead p l a n t were t o
s t r i k e tomorrow, t h e work would go on, and only
temporary inconvenience, i f any, would be s u f f e r e d .
There would simply b e a s t e p up along t h e l i n e ;
t h e tableman would t a k e t h e r o l l s , t h e hooker would
manipulate t h e t a b l e s , perhaps one of t h e shearman's
h e l p e r s would t a k e t h e hooker's p o s i t i o n , and somewhere, away down t h e l i n e , a n u n s k i l l e d yard l a b o r e r
would be t a k e n t o f i l l t h e vacancy i n t h e lowest posi t i o n i n v o l v i n g s k i l l . The course would v a r y i n t h e
d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s of m i l l s , a s t h e p o s i t i o n s vary i n
number and c h a r a c t e r , b u t t h e o p e r a t i n g p r i n c i p l e
i s everywhere t h e same...In t h i s way t h e companies
develop and t r a i n t h e i r own men. They seldom h i r e
a s t r a n g e r f o r a p o s i t i o n a s r o l l e r o r h e a t e r . Thus
t h e work f o r c e i s pyramided and i s h e l d t o g e t h e r by
t h e ambition of t h e men lower down; even a s e r i o u s
break i n t h e r a n k s a d j u s t s i t s e l f a l l b u t automati c a l l y . 44
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of j o b s i n t o a h i e r a r c h i c a l l a d d e r a l s o continued and g r e a t l y improved upon a n o t h e r advantage t h a t t h e o l d e r system
of i n c e n t i v e payments had provided t o employers.
It continued t o i n v i t e
and encourage workers t o improve t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s and pay i n d i v i d u a l l y
r a t h e r than a s a group.
And i t went f u r t h e r than t h a t : i t p u t workers
i n d i r e c t competition w i t h each o t h e r i n o r d e r t o have a b e t t e r chance
of advancement.
The importance of t h a t a p p e a l t o i n d i v i d u a l i s m cannot
be underestimated because i t was a profound v i c t o r y over t h e s p r e a d i n g
of t h e concept of community of i n t e r e s t and c l a s s consciousness among
workers.
The d i v i s i v e e f f e c t of job h i e r a r c h i e s d i d n o t go unnoticed
by workers, as t h i s e x c e r p t from a manifesto by t h e founders of t h e
I n d u s t r i a l Workers of t h e World shows:
Laborers a r e no l o n g e r c l a s s i f i e d by d i f f e r e n c e
i n t r a d e s k i l l , b u t t h e employer a s s i g n s them
according t o t h e machine t o which they a r e a t t ached. These d i v i s i o n s , f a r from r e p r e s e n t i n g
d i f f e r e n c e s i n s k i l l o r i n t e r e s t s among t h e
l a b o r e r s , a r e imposed by t h e employers t h a t
workers may be p i t t e d a g a i n s t one a n o t h e r and
s p u r r e d t o g r e a t e r e x e r t i o n i n t h e shop, and t h a t
a l l r e s i s t a n c e t o c a p i t a l i s t tyranny may b e weakened by a r t i f i c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n s . 45
The e s t a b l i s h m e n t of h i e r a r c h i c a l job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n systems provided
major s u p p o r t through t h e s t r u c t u r e of everyday experience on t h e job
f o r t h e e t h i c of i n d i v i d u a l i s m and t h e e t h i c of consumerism which i s
c o n s t r u c t e d upon t h e foundation of i n d i v i d u a l i s m .
The e x i s t e n c e of promotion h e r i r a r c h i e s based on a v e r t i c a l
d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of jobs t h a t b u i l d s t h e promise of i n d i v i d u a l advancement i n t o t h a t h i e r a r c h y h a s become one of t h e most p e r v a s i v e a s p e c t s
of t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
e f i t s from promotion h i e r a r c h i e s .
Employers d e r i v e a number of benThey m o t i v a t e workers t o do a good
job i n t h e hopes of i n d i v i d u a l advancement.
e d i e n c e t o on-the-job
They encourage employee ob-
p o l i c i e s of t h e employers.
They encourage employees
t o show a "proper" i n t e r e s t i n t h e w e l f a r e of t h e company.
Promotion h i e r a r c h i e s a l s o have t h e e f f e c t of reducing labour
turnover and t h e c o s t s of r e c r u i t i n g a work f o r c e .
Workers i n t h e
second h a l f of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century i n America were accustomed t o a
high degree of m o b i l i t y t o move from one employer t o a n o t h e r .
That was
one of t h e r e a s o n s t h a t workers, when they had t h e power t o do s o , opposed
t h e implementation of any kind of s e n i o r i t y schemes when they were f i r s t
devised by employers i n t h e second h a l f of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century.
Workers then s a w such schemes a s a l i m i t a t i o n on t h e i r freedom:
they
had t h e e f f e c t of b i n d i n g workers t o a s i n g l e employer, t h e r e b y m a k i n g ,
them more v u l n e r a b l e t o t h e ill i n t e n t i o n s t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r employer
might have.
Promotion h i e r a r c h i e s i n t h e end accomplished e x a c t l y t h a t :
workers l e a r n e d t h a t t h e i r f u t u r e l a y i n s t a y i n g w i t h t h e company.
What
r e p r e s e n t e d a r e d u c t i o n i n c o s t l y l a b o u r turnover f o r management meant
a l o s s of independence f o r workers. Once t h e i r power t o m a i n t a i n t h e
independence of workers w a s gone, workers' o r g a n i z a t i o n turned t o t h e
concept of s e n i o r i t y a s a way of a m e l i o r a t i n g t h e worst e f f e c t s of promotion h i e r a r c h i e s :
f a v o u r i t i s m by employers which engendered even more
obedience and s l a v i s h n e s s among employees.
Modern unions expend a l a r g e
amount of e f f o r t r a t i o n a l i z i n g t h e s t e p s i n t h e promotion h i e r a r c h y t o
which t h e i r members a r e s u b j e c t and t h e method by which i n d i v i d u a l
workers a r e s e l e c t e d t o advance through t h o s e s t e p s .
The job l a d d e r
h a s now come t o b e regarded a s a n a t u r a l and l o g i c a l p a r t of r e a l i t y .
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FIVE
Melvin Dubofsky, We S h a l l Be A l l : A H i s t o r y of the IWW
(New York: The New York Times Book Co., 1969), p. 6.
Daniel Nelson, Managers and Workers: O r i g i n s of the New
F a c t o r y System i n t h e United S t a t e s 1880-1920 (Madison:
U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin P r e s s , 1975), p. 4.
Nelson, p. 4.
D a l l a s W. Smythe, Dependency Road: Communications, Capitalism,
Consciousness and Canada (Norwood, New J e r s e y : Ablex, f o r t h coming) , Chap. 3.
See
Canadian Dimension December
1979, e s p e c i a l l y Graham Lowe's "The Rise of Modern Management
i n canad;," f o r - a d i s c u s s i o n of how and when some of t h e
i n n o v a t i o n s i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work came t o Canada.
Nelson, p. 37-8.
David Montgomery, "Workers' Control of Machine Production i n
17 (Fall
t h e Nineteenth Century," Labor H i s t o r y
1976): 487.
Nelson, p. 40.
John A. F i t c h , The S t e e l Workers (New York: Amo P r e s s , 1969,
f i r s t pub. 1911), p. 35.
Solomon Blum, "Trade-Union Rules i n t h e Building Trades," i n
S t u d i e s i n American Trade Unionism, Jacob H. Hollander and
George E. B a r n e t t , eds. (New York, Arno P r e s s , 1969; f i r s t
pub. 1912), p. 306-9.
Bruno Ramirez, When Workers F i g h t : The P o l i t i c s of ~ n d u s t r i a l
R e l a t i o n s i n t h e P r o g r e s s i v e Era 1898-1916 (Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood , P r e s s , l 9 7 8 ) , p. 88.
Catherine Stone, "The O r i g i n s of Job S t r u c t u r e s i n t h e S t e e l
I n d u s t r y , " Review of R a d i c a l P o l i t i c a l Economics 6:2 (S~Inmer
1974) : 116-7.
Stone, p. 118.
James Howard Bridge, The I n s i d e H i s t o r y of t h e Carnegie S t e e l
Company (New York: Aldine Book Co., 1903; r e p r i n t ed. New York:
Arno P r e s s , l 9 7 2 ) , p. 201-2.
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FIVE CONTINUED
F i t c h , p. 100.
F i t c h , p. 102.
For d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t s of t h e Homestead s t r i k e see: F i t c h ,
Chap. 10; Bridge Chap. 14-6; M i l t o n M e l t z e r , Bread and Roses:
The S t r u g g l e of American Labor 1865-1915 (New York: Random
House, Vintage S u n d i a l Books, 1973: f i r s t pub. 1967), Chap.
1 3 ; and Sidney Lens, The Labor Wars: From t h e Molly Maguires
t o t h e Sitdowns (Garden C i t y , New York: Anchor Books, 1974),
Chap. 5.
M e l t z e r , p. 144.
F i t c h , p. 123.
F i t c h , p. 125-6.
M e l t z e r , p. 142.
M e l t z e r , p. 144-5.
F i t c h , p. 205.
Ramirez, p. 94-5.
David Montgomery, "The 'New Unionism' and t h e Transformation
of Workers' Consciousness i n America, 1909-22," J o u r n a l of
S o c i a l H i s t o r y 7 (1974): 509-29.
Ramirez, p. 95.
For an account of t h e r o l e of t h e e n g i n e e r i n t h e development of
modern management i n t h e United S t a t e s , see David F. Noble,
America By Design: S c i e n c e , Technology, and t h e R i s e of Corporate
C a p i t a l i s m (New York: Knopf, 1977).
Ramirez, p. 90.
I r o n Age, 19 May 1910, p. 1190, quoted i n Stone, p. 129.
Eleventh S p e c i a l Report of t h e Commissioner of Labor, Regulation
and R e s t r i c t i o n of Output (Washington, D . C . , 1904), p. 143,
quoted i n Ramirez, p. 90.
N a t i o n a l I n d u s t r i a l Conference Board, Systems of Wage Payment,
p. 25 quoted i n Stone, p. 130-1.
188
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FIVE CONTINUED
F r e d e r i c k Winslow Taylor, The P r i n c i p l e s of S c i e n t i f i c
Management (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1967: f i r s t pub.
l g l l ) , p. 11.
Taylor, p. 43-6.
Taylor, p. 48.
Taylor, p. 25.
Taylor, p. 25-6.
Taylor, p. 25-6.
Braverman's Monopoly C a p i t a l : The Degradation of Work i n t h e
Twentieth Century (New York: Monthly Review P r e s s , 1974) h a s
provided t h e i n s p i r a t i o n f o r a number of s t u d i e s of t h e modern
labour process.
F i t c h , p. 140.
F i t c h , p. 141.
For a thorough d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e w e l f a r e p o l i c y of U.S. S t e e l ,
see C h a r l e s A. Gulick, Labor P o l i c y of t h e United S t a t e s S t e e l
Corporation (New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1924). See
F i t c h f o r an i n f o r m a t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e bonus system and
t h e p r o f i t - s h a r i n g scheme of U.S. S t e e l .
F i t c h , p. 141.
Stone, p. 133.
Meyer Bloomfield, Labor and Compensation (New York: I n d u s t r i a l
Extension I n s t i t u t e , 1917), p. 295, quoted i n Stone, p. 133.
F i t c h , p. 141-2.
"Manifesto" c a l l i n g f o r t h e formation of t h e IWW, i n Rebel V o i c e s , ,
ed. Joyce L. Kornbluh (Ann Arbor, Mich.: U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan
P r e s s , 1964), p. 7.
CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s a s o c i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n t h a t conveys
and r e p r e s e n t s t h e v a l u e s and p r i o r i t i e s of t h a t s o c i e t y t o i t s members.
It can be presumed t o have a profound i n f l u e n c e on t h e ways t h a t people
t h i n k and i n t e r a c t w i t h each o t h e r .
may be even more t r u e than ever.
I n modern i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y , t h i s
The t i m e s p e n t a t work i s of g r e a t
s i g n i f i c a n c e t o t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e p o p u l a t i o n i n modern i n d u s t r i a l
societies.
There a r e fewer people self-employed o r l i v i n g an a g r a r i a n
l i f e t h a n e v e r b e f o r e , and t h e number i s g e t t i n g s m a l l e r .
There a r e
more women i n t h e workforce and f o r l e n g t h i e r p e r i o d s t h a n e v e r before.
The e x p e r i e n c e of working f o r o n e ' s l i v i n g i n t h e employ of someone
e l s e i s a g r e a t common denominator.
The o r g a n i z a t i o n of work i s , along
w i t h a few o t h e r social c o n s t r u c t i o n s such a s t h e family and t h e educat i o n a l system, one of t h e b a s i c s o c i a l arrangements of human l i f e .
As
such i t i s one of t h e b a s i c communication systems i n s o c i e t y , although
i t s primary purpose i s n o t communication.
The workplace, as any o t h e r of t h e s t r u c t u r e s of everyday l i f e ,
i s a system i n which messages c i r c u l a t e .
And a s i n any o t h e r communica-
t i o n system, messates do n o t c i r c u l a t e i n a random o r haphazard manner,
b u t observe r u l e s and p a t t e r n s which a r e a r e f l e c t i o n of t h e way t h e
s'ystem has been organized.
Those r u l e s and p a t t e r n s , a s w e l l a s t h e
c o n t e n t of t h e messages whose c i r c u l a t i o n i s c o n t r o l l e d by them, a r e
themselves r e f l e c t i o n s of t h e r e l a t i o n s of power t h a t o b t a i n i n t h e
190
larger social and economic context of which the workplace is a part.
The organization of work, through its implicit rules governing the
formation and circulation of messages in social interaction in such a
universal and basic sphere of life, cannot help but have a.significant
impact on the formation of consciousness and the perception of
reality.
The modern capitalist organization of work is a model of hierarchical communication. Today in management magazines, it is common to
find articles with titles such as "Issues in Upward Communication,"
"Opening the Channels of Upward Communication," and "Mastering the
Techniques of Two-way Communication." One of those articles contains a
description by a former vice president and area general manager for New
England Telephone that gives an indication of how even management
recognizes the hierarchical communication of the workplace and sees it
as somewhat of a problem:
Communications in a hierarchical society or organization
work according to the principle that governs gravity.
Downward communications are usually better than anyone
realizes and frequently more accurate than those at higher
levels want them to be. Conversely, upward communications
have to be pumped and qiped, with a minimum of filters, in
order to be effective.
This thesis has attempted to examine how this kind of situation
came to be in the workplace, without resorting to a general principle
like gravity.
It has been argued that the hierarchical structure of
the communication process inherent in the modern organization of work
has been formed by the political economy of the society of which it is a
part.
Productive activity in our society is carried on through the purchase
of labour power' by those with the means to make use of the labour and time of
workers.
Once a n employer h a s s e c u r e d t h e s e r v i c e s of a n employee,
t h e c e n t r a l problem becomes how t o g e t h i s money's worth.
The employer
h a s purchased t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r g e t t i n g work performed on h i s b e h a l f ,
and h e must endeavor t o t r a n s l a t e t h a t p o t e n t i a l i n t o a s g r e a t a quant i t y a s h e can.
The q u a n t i t y t h a t t h e p o t e n t i a l w i l l be t r a n s f o r m e d
i n t o depends on s e v e r a l t h i n g s , n o t t h e l e a s t of which i s t h e s u b j e c t i v e
e f f o r t s and w i l l i n g n e s s of t h e worker.
It is i n t h e i n t e r e s t of t h e
employer t o s e c u r e t h e employee's g r e a t e s t e f f o r t s , b u t i t i s n o t nece s s a r i l y i n t h e i n t e r e s t of t h e employee t o p r o v i d e h i s b e s t e f f o r t s .
The s e a r c h f o r a s o l u t i o n t o t h e problem of how t o s e c u r e t h e maximum
e f f o r t s of h i r e d employees h a s had a primary i n f l u e n c e on t h e development of t h e modern o r g a n i z a t i o n of work.
The m a n a g e r i a l need t o c o n t r o l
t h e b e h a v i o u r of t h e worker on t h e j o b s o as t o g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e worker
w i l l maximize h i s o u t p u t f o r t h e employer h a s p l a y e d a major r o l e i n
s h a p i n g t h e communication s t r u c t u r e of t h e workplace.
This t h e s i s h a s t r a c e d t h e s t e p s i n t h e h i s t o r i c a l process t h a t
l e d t o t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of c o n t r o l i n t h e modern cap-
i t a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n o f work and t h e everyday communication system t h a t
it constitutes.
W
e have s e e n t h a t t h e a p p e a r a n c e of t h e most fundamental
and o u t s t a n d i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s took p l a c e d u r i n g two p e r i o d s .
Changes
i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work were i n t e g r a l t o t h e prdound t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s
i n t h e economic s t r u c t u r e t h a t were o c c u r r i n g a t t h o s e two t i m e s .
Those
two p e r i o d s were t h e I n d u s t r i a l R e v o l u t i o n i n England and t h e t u r n of t h e
century i n t h e United S t a t e s .
192
We s a w d u r i n g t h e I n d u s t r i a l Revolution t h e beginnings of t h e
c e n t r a l i z e d work l o c a t i o n , an employer enunciated and enforced d i s c i p l i n e
i n t h e c e n t r a l i z e d work l o c a t i o n , t h e d e t a i l d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r and t h e
a c c e l e r a t e d u s e of machinery, and we saw how t h o s e developments were
r e l a t e d t o t h e need of employers t o i n c r e a s e t h e i r a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l
t h e working behaviour of t h e i r workforce.
During t h e p e r i o d around t h e
t u r n of t h e century i n t h e United S t a t e s , we say t h e d e l i b e r a t e d e s k i l l i n g of workers through a r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s e s based
on t h e i n c r e a s i n g u s e of machinery by employers who wanted t o b e f r e e
of t h e l i m i t e d form of workers' c o n t r o l over p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s e s t h a t
t h e i r s k i l l i n p r o d u c t i o n gave them.
We a l s o s a w t h e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n
of l i n e s of a u t h o r i t y i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work by an ext.ension of
d i r e c t managerial a n a l y s i s and c o n t r o l over t h e work p r o c e s s through
t h e techniques t h a t s c i e n t i f i c management c l a r i f i e d .
And we saw t h e
d e l i b e r a t e b u i l d i n g i n t o t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of work of i n c e n t i v e s a p p e a l i n g
t o i n d i v i d u a l i s m through t h e c r e a t i o n of promotion h i e r a r c h i e s .
I n b o t h p e r i o d s t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of new machinery d i d n o t p l a y a n independent determining r o l e .
The i n v e n t i o n and i n t r o d u c t i o n of machines
i n production a s w e l l a s t h e e l a b o r a t i o n and e x t e n s i o n of t h e d i v i s i o n
of labour a r e s e e n a s inter-dependent p a r t s of a s i n g l e s t o r y whose
unfolding responded t o t h e requirements of t h e l o g i c of t h e c a p i t a l i s t
economic system.
Both were t h e r e s u l t of t h e e n l i s t m e n t of s c i e n c e i n
,
t h e s e r v i c e of c a p i t a l .
The s y s t e m a t i c e n l i s t m e n t of s c i e n c e i n t h e s e r v i c e of c a p i t a l
has meant t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o n •’0 t h e production of knowledge r e l e v a n t t o
t h e workplace by employers, and t h e removal from workers of t h e r i g h t t o
193
possess and utilize independently traditional knowledge. Many of the
conflicts discussed in this work have in effect been over knowledge,
whether the participants were aware of it or not (though they were
aware in many cases).
The systematic appropriation of knowledge
about work and the workplace is a process that continues to be applied
to each new generation of workers, as Braveman indicates in his
discussion of clerical workers.Z
The modern organization of work as we now recognize it can
be understood as pre-ordained, non-political, logical and natural only
if the managerial necessities of the economic system are accepted as
pre-ordained, non-political, logical, natural and inalterable. There
have been at various times movements of workess that challenged that
idea, some more directly and clearly than others. The Industrial
Workers of the World was one such movement that contemplated a thorough
reorganization of industry under the control of workers and recommended
direct action by workers as the way to accomplish that.
Since its demise,
widespread and well defined movements of workers directly challenging the
conception of the managerial necessities of the economic system as preordained, non-political, logical, natural and inalterable.have not been
popular. Marx had an insight into that over a hundred years ago:
The advance of capitalist production develops a
working-class, which by education, training,
habit, looks upon the conditions of that mode
of production as self-evident laws of Nature.
The organization of the capitalist process of
production, once fully developed, breaks down
all resistance.3
It is of course an exaggeration to say that all resistance
is broken down. There are symptoms of disaffection with the way that work
is organized in spite of the revailing attitude that the present organi-
194
zation of work is inevitable. Those symptoms of disaffection such
as high rates of turnover, absenteeism, boredom, etc., are noteworthy
in that they are acts of individual resistance and rebellion. It is
perhaps one of.the crowning achievements of the way work has been
organized in the interests of employers that any resistance to it
takes for the most part a fragmented individualized form. Not only does
that greatly weaken the force of any resistance, but it also provides
fertile ground for the runaway consumerism which has become a cornerstone
of western industrial countrTes.
The managerial needs of employers arising from the conflict
of interest between employers and employees have established the nature
of the workplace communication system. In earlier times, working people
had a greater degree of freedom to communicate among themselves about their
workday activities and about how the work was to be done. The expansion
of managerial control over workers through the reorganization of work
established a communication network that is hierarchical in the sense
that it discourages the existence of self-managed interaction within
groups of workers. The logic of the modern organization of work subverts
the ability of workers to determine their own activities, and subjects
them to a higher authority that manages their activities for them.
In
establishing the domain of its authority, management has devised a structure that reserves the right to initiate significant communication in
the workplace to itself.
That raises questions about the ideals that a democratic
society sets for itself.
Our society is one in which workers are
,
195
a l s o c i t i z e n s expected t o t a k e p a r t i n and b e l i e v e i n t h e r i g h t s and
freedoms they a r e t o l d a r e t h e i r s .
Yet t h e h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e
of unfreedom and t h e g e n e r a l l y t o t a l i t a r i a n s t r u c t u r e of t h e organiza t i o n of work do n o t encourage t h e b e l i e f i n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h o s e
r i g h t s and freedoms.
FOOTNOTES TO C W T E R SIX
1.
R u s s e l l W. D r i v e r , " I s s u e s in Upward Communication," Supervisory
Management February 1980, p . 11.
2.
Braverman, p. 293-358.
3.
Marx, p. 689.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Addy, John. The Textile Revolution. London: Longman Group, 1959.
Aitken, Hugh G. J. Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal: Scientific Management
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960.
in Action 1908-1915.
Aronowitz, Stanley. False Promises. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973.
Ashton, T. S. The Industrial Revolution. London: Oxford University
Press, 1967; first pub. 1948.
Babbage, Charles. On the Economy of Machinery and Manufactures. New York:
Augustus M. Kelley, 1963; first pub. 1835.
Bloomfield, Meyer. Labor and Compensation.
Extension Institute, 1917.
New York: Industrial
Braudel, Fernand. Capitalism and Material Life 1400-1800.
Harper and Row, 1973.
New York:
Braverman, Harry. Labor and Monopoly Capitalism: The Degradation of Work
in the Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1974.
Brecher, Jeremy and Tim Costello. Common Sense for Hard Times. New York:
Two Continents, 1976.
Bridge, James Howard. The Inside History of the Carnegie Steel Company.
New York: Aldine Book Co., 1903; reprint ed., New York: Arno Press,
1972.
Chapman, Stanley D. The Cotton Industry in the Industrial Revolution.
London: Macmillan, 1972.
.
The Early Factory Masters: The Transition to the Factory System
in the Midlands Textile Industry. Newton Abbot: David & Charles,
1967.
Clarkson, L. A. The Pre-Industrial Economy in England 1500-1750.
B. T. Batsford, 1971.
Cole, G. D. H.
A Short History of the British Working-class Movement
1789-1947.
Coleman, D. C.
1975.
London:
London: George Allen & Unwin, 1948.
Industry in Tudor and Stewart England. London: Macmillan,
Cross, Michae1 S., ed. The Workingman in the Nineteenth Century. Toronto:
Oxford University Press, 1974.
Dickson, David. Alternative Technology and the Politics of Technical
Change. Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co., 1974.
Dubofsky, Melvin. We Shall Be All: A History of the IWW. New York: The
New York Times Book Co., 1969.
Edwards, Richard C. Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace
in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books, 1979.
Ellul, Jacques. The Technological Society. New York: Random House, 1964.
Finer, Ann and George Savage, eds. The Selected Letters of Josiah
Wedgewood. London: Cory, Adams & MacKay, 1965.
Fitch, John A.
1911.
The Steel Workers. New York: Arno Press, 1969; first pub.
Fitton, R. S. and A. P. Wadsworth. The Strutts and the Arkwrights 17851830: A Study of the Early Factory System. New York: Augustus M.
Kelley , 1968.
Flinn, M. W. Men of Iron: The Crowleys in the Early Iron Industry.
Edinburgh: University Press, 1962.
Foster, John. Class struggle and the Industrial Revolution. London:
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1974.
Friedman, Andrew L. Industry and Labour: Class Struggle at Work and
Monopoly Capitalism. London: Macmillan Press, 1977.
Gorz, ~ndrg. The Division of Labour: The Labour Process and Class-Struggle
in Modern Capitalism. Brighton: Harvester Press, 1976.
Gras, N, S. B.
1930.
Industrial Evolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
Gutman, Herbert G. Work, Culture and Society in Industrializing America.
New York: Random House, 1977.
Habakkuk, H. J. American and British Technolopy in the Nineteenth Century.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.
Hammond, J. L. and Barbara Hammond. The Rise of Modern Industry. London:
Methuen & Co., 1925.
.
The Skilled Labourer 1760-1832. New York: Augustus M. Kelley,
1967: first pub. 1919.
The Town Labourer 1760-1832: A New Civilization. London: Longmans,
Green and Co., 1966; first pub. 1917.
Heaton, Herbert. The Yorkshire Woollen and Worsted Industries. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1965.
Hoxie, Robert F. Scientific Management and Labor. New York: Augustus M.
Kelley, 1966; first pub. 1915.
Hunnius, Gerry, G. David Garson and John Case, eds. Workers' Control:
A Reader on Labor and Social Change. New York: Random House, 1973.
Jenkins, David. Job Power: Blue and White Collar Democracy. Garden City,
New York: Doubleday and Co., 1973.
Knight, Melvin, Harry Elmer Barnes and Felix FlGgel. Economic History of
Europe. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., The Riverside Press, 1927
.
Kornbluh, Joyce L., ed. Rebel Voices: An 1,W.W. Anthology. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 1964.
Kranzberg, Melvin H. and Joseph Giles. By the Sweat of Thy Brow: Work in
the Western World. New York: G. P. Putman's Sons, 1975.
Kuczunski, Jurgen. The Rise of the Working Class. Translated by C. T. A.
Ray. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
Landes, David S. The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and
Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.
Lens, Sidney. The Labor Wars: From the Molly Maguires to the Sitdowns.
Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1974.
Lipson, E. The Economic History of England. Vol. 2: The Age of Mercantilism.
6th ed. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1964; first pub. 1931.
.
The History of the Woollen and Worsted Industries. London:
Frank Cass & Co., 1965; first pub. 1921.
Mantoux, Paul. The Industrial Revolution in England: An Outline of the
Beginnings of the Modern Factory System in England. London:
Jonathan Cape, 1961; first pub. 1928.
Marx, Karl. Capital. Vol. 1. Moscow: Progress Publishers, n.d.
1887 ed.
Reprint of
~eitzer,Milton. Bread and Roses: The Struggle of American Labor 18651915. New York: Random House, 1973.
Myers, M. Scott. Every Employee A Manager. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
Nadworny, Milton J. Scientific Management and the Unions 1900-1932: A
Historical Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955.
Nelson, Daniel. Managers and Workers: Origins of the New Factory System
Madison: University of Wisconsin
in the United States 1880-1920.
Press, 1975.
Noble, David F. America By Design: Science, Technology and the Rise of
Corporate Capitalism. New York: Knopf, 1977.
O'Toole, James, ed. Work and the Quality of Life: Resource Papers for
"Work in America". Cambridge: MIT Press, 1976.
Owen, Harold. The Staffordshire Potter. London: Grant Richards, 1901.
Pollard, Sidney. The Genesis of Modern Management.
University Press, 1965.
Cambridge: Harvard
Powers, George. Cradle of Steel Unionism: Monongahela Valley, Pa.. East
Chicago, Ill.: Figueroa Printers, 197.2.
Quinn, Robert P. and Linda J. Shepard. The 1972-73 Quality of Employment
Surveyc. Report to the Employment Standards Administration, U. S.
Department of Labor. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center of the
Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1974.
Ramirez, Bruno. When Workers Fight: The Politics of Industrial Relations
in the Progressive Era 1898-1916. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood
Press, 1978.
Riesman, David. The Lonely Crowd. New York: Yale University Press, 1950.
Sahlins, Marshall.
Stcne Age Economics.
Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1972.
Sheppard, Harold L. and Neal Q. Herrick. Where Have All the Robots Gone?:
Worker Dissatisfaction in the '70s. New York: MacMillan, The Free
Press, 1972.
Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin, 1963.
Smythe, Dallas W. Dependency Road: Communications, Capitalism,
Consciousness and Canada. orw wood, New Jersey: Ablex, forthcoming.
Statistics Canada. Perspective Canada: A Compendium of Social Statistics.
,
Ottawa: Information Canada, 1974.
Taylor, Frederick Winslow. Scientific Management. New York: Harper &
Row, 1947; first pub. 1911.
201
Terkel, Studs. Working. New York: Avon, 1972.
Thomis, Malcolm I.
The Luddites. New York: Schocken Books, 1972.
The Towh Labourer and the Industrial Revolution. London:
B. T. Batsford, 1974.
Thompson, E. P. The Making of the English Working Class. New York:
Random House, 1963.
U. S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Handbook of
Labor Statistics 1976.
Ure, Andrew. The Philosophy of Manufacturers. New York: A. M. Kelley,
1967; first pub. 1835.
Urwick, L. and E, F. L. Brech. The Making of Scientific Management.
Vol. 1. London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons, 1951.
Wadsworth, Alfred P. and Julia de Lacy Mann. The Cotton Trade and
Industrial Lancashire 1600-1780. Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 1931.
Work in America. Report of a Special Task Force to the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1973.
Articles
Blum, Solomon. "Trade-Union Rules in the Building Trades." In Studies
in American Trade Unionism, pp. 293-319. Edited by Jacob H.
Hollander and George E. Barnett. New York: Arno Press, 1969;
first pub. 1912.
Bosquet, Michel. "The 'Prison Factory'."
June l972), pp. 23-34.
New Left Review, no. 73 (May-
Brighton Labour Process Group. "The Capitalist Labour Process." Capital
and Class, no. 1 (Spring 1977), pp. 3-26.
Cruikshank, George E'.. "No-shows at Work: High-Priced Headache."
Business September 1976, pp. 37-9.
Nation's
Davis, Mike. "The Stop Watch and the Wooden Show: Scientific Management
,
and the Industrial Workers of the World." Radical America 9
(January-February 1975):69-95.
Diamond, Robert S.
"What Business Thinks."
Fortune July 1970, p. 73.
Driver, Russell W. "Issues in Upward Communication." Supervisory
Management February 1980, pp. 10-3.
,
E h r e n r e i c h , J o h n and B a r b a r a E h r e n r e i c h . "Work and C o n s c i o u s n e s s . ~
Monthly Review 28 (July-August 1976):lO-8.
Gooding, Judson. "Blue-Collar
J u l y 1970, p. 69.
.
B l u e s on t h e Assembly Line."
Fortune
"The F r a y i n g White C o l l a r . " F o r t u n e December 1970, p. 78.
" C a p i t a l i s t E f f i c i e n c y and S o c i a l i s t Efficiency."
Gordon, David M.
Monthly Review 28 (July-August):l9-39.
Gorz, ~ n d r e ' . "Their F a c t o r i e s and Our People." T e l o s , no. 18 (Winter
1973-74) , pp .150-6.
.
"TBe Tyranny of t h e F a c t o r y : Today and Tomorrow." T e l o s ,
no. 16 (Summer 1973), pp. 61-7.
H e r r i c k , Neal.
"Who's Unhappy a t Work and Why." Manpower 4 ( J a n u a r y 1972).
Hobsbawm, E . J . "The Machine B r e a k e r s . "
l 9 5 2 ) , pp. 57-70.
P a s t and P r e s e n t , no. 1 (February
Kahn, Robert L. "The Meaning of Work: I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and P r o p o s a l s f o r
Measurement."
I n The Human Meaning of S o c i a l Change, pp. 159-203.
E d i t e d by Angus Campbell and P h i l i p E. Converse. New York: R u s s e l l
Sage F o u n d a t i o n , 1972.
Langer, E l i n o r . " I n s i d e t h e New York Telephone Company." I n Women a t Work,
Chicago: Quadrangle
pp. 307-360.
E d i t e d by W i l l i a m L. O ' N e i l l .
Books, 1972.
McKendrick, N e i l .
" J o s i a h Wedgewood and F a c t o r y D i s c i p l i n e . "
H i s t o r i c a l J o u r n a l 4 (1961):30-55.
The
Marglin, Stephen-A. "What Do Bosses D o ? ; The O r i g i n s a n d . F u n c t i o n s of
Review of R a d i c a l P o l i t i c a l
Hierarchy i n C a p i t a l i s t Production."
Economics 6 (Summer 1974) :60-112.
Montgomery, David. "The 'New Unionism' and t h e T r a n s f o r m a t i o n of Workers'
Consciousness i n America, 1909-22."
J o u r n a l of S o c i a l H i s t o r y 7
(1974) :509-29.
.
"Workers' C o n t r o l of Machine P r o d u c t i o n i n t h e N i n e t e e n t h
Century."
Labor H i s t o r y 17 ( F a l l 1976):485-509.
P a l l o i x , C h r i s t i a n . "The Labour P r o c e s s : From Fordism t o Neo-Fordism."
In
The Labour P r o c e s s and C l a s s Strategies. Conference of S o c i a l i s t
Economists Pamphlet no. 1. London: S t a g e 1, 1976.
Palmer, B r i a n . " C l a s s , Conception and C o n f l i c t : The T h r u s t f o r E f f i c i e n c y ,
Managerial Views of Labor and t h e Working Class R e b e l l i o n , 1903-22."
Review of R a d i c a l P o l i t i c a l Economics 7 (Summer 1975):31-49.
203
Pollard, Sidney. "Factory Discipline in the Industrial Revolution."
Economic History Reviaw 16 (1963):254-71.
Putnam, Tim. "Labour Process and Class Struggle."
14 (Summer 1976) :28-30.
Radical Philosophy
Mass
Riesman, David. "Leisure and'Work in Post-Industrial Society." In Leisure, pp. 363-85. Edited by Eric Larrabee and R. Meyersohn.
Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1958.
Rosenberg, Nathan. "~arxas a Student of Technology." Monthly Review
28 (July-August 1976) :56-77.
.
"La ~ivisigndel Trabajo : Capitalismo ,
Salvati, Michel and Bianca Beccalli
~ocialismo,utopra." In La ~ivisidnCapitalista del ~Gabaj
o:
Cuadernos de Pasado y Presente, no. 32 (1972), pp. 57-106.
I
Stone, Katherine. "The Origins of Job Structures in the Steel Industry."
Review of Radical Political Economics 6 (Summer 1974):113-73.
Strauss, George. "Is There a Blue-collar Revolt Against Work?" In Work
and the Quality of Life, pp. 40-69. .Edited by James O'Toole.
Cambridge : MIT Press, 1974.
11
Technicians and the Capitalist Division of Labor." By a collective of
Italian Workers. Socialist Revolution, no. 9 (May-June 1972),
pp. 65-84.
Thomas, Keith. "Work and Leisure in Pre-Industrial Society." Past and
Present, no. 29 (December 1964) , pp. 50-62.
Thompson, E. P. "Time, Work-Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism."
and Present, no. 38 (December 1967), pp. 56-97.
Past
Wachtel, Howard M. "Class Consciousness and Stratification in the Labor
In Labor Market segmentation, pp.95-122. Edited by
Process
Richard C. Edwards, Michael Reich and David M. Gordon. Lexington,
Mass. : D. 6. Heath & Co., 1975.
."
Weiss, Donald D. "Marx vs. Smith on the Division of ~abor." Monthly Review
28 (July-August 1976) :104-18.
Zimbalist, Andrew. "The Limits of Work Humanization." Review of Radical
Political Economics 7 (Summer 1975):50-9.
Other Sources
~arlsson,Lars Erik. "Experiences in Employee Participation in Sweden
1969-72." Program on Participation and Labor-Managed Systems.
Cornell University, 1973. Mimeographed.
204
"Scientific Management in Europe." Document from the International Economic
Conference sponsored by the International Labour Office of the League
of Nations. Geneva, 4 May 1927.
Smythe, Dallas W. "The Role of the Mass Medda and Popular Culture in
Defining Development." Paper presented to the International
Scientific Conference on Mass Communication and Social Consciousness
in a Changing World. Leipzig, 17-20 September 1974.