The Bourgeois

[sathor]

So, I went and dealt with the unfair treatment I received with regards to my raise.

Conversation went like this:

Me: "Hey, do you think you can find anyone else to do the Friday swing shift?"
Boss: "Not any time soon...why?"
Me: "Well, I didn't expect I would be doing it forever...it's cutting into my social life pretty severely, and the sleep schedule is killing me on top of third shift regular hours."
Boss: "I'll see what I can do, but I can't make any promises."
Me: "It's not just that...I have to tell you (rich), I feel a little mistreated by the company. When I started here, I was promised 50 cents after 90 days. I've been here a year."
Boss: "You know, after I told you a quarter, I was thinking about that myself. I was going to pull some of the company time guys off the line and ask them what I gave them once they got off temporary status. It's my oversight, Jake, you've been doing a good job, and if you feel mistreated, all you have to do is come to me and express that."
Me: "Honestly Rich, I didn't want to sound mean about it if I did. I myself thought it was corporate above you telling you to only grant 25 cents to new company hires. I wouldn't hold it against you either way, I mean, I know the economy is rough. Like I said, I just felt a little mistreated, that's all. As far as friday goes, if you can't find anyone else it is OK...I just expected Bob would be back by now."
Boss: "Well, I figured I was doing you a favor getting you on company time and getting you on insurance too. But like I said, if you feel mistreated, just let me know about it."
Me: "Thanks."

The last statement or so by Rich was a little more razor sharp than that...actually, it made me feel bad about going to him about it. But if I hadn't of said anything, it is likely that I would've ended up with only 25 cents. I'm not sure about his background, but something tells me he has quite a bit of managerial experience and quite possibly a degree in it. His vocabulary doesn't indicate it, but he's been around sawmill workers for years. I think picking up that vernacular is inevitable after such a long period of time.

I don't know what they teach in business management, but I had the sneaking feeling that razor statement was an attempt at negative reinforcement. If anyone has background in management, let me know if they teach or applaud that sort of underhanded bullshit.

Comments

Re: I'm no MBA, but...

[sathor.livejournal.com]

That's true about the social life, however, I try to keep my interactions as informal as possible. I don't believe in formalities and never have, and when I was asked to do it by one of my supervisors, he even said, "You know, the issue is that it's going to strain your body a bit and it will hurt your social life." That of course, wasn't Rich. At first, I didn't think it would, but it ends up leaving me only one day per week where I can actually go out and see friends, and the normal shift hours with the swing on top basically makes it impossible to go to a doctor. After I get on company time, I will probably have to set up an appointment a week ahead of schedule and ask for a day off. It's hard waking up early to go do something before normal days end, then have to go to work at 11pm (Christ, I woke up today a half hour ago for no apparent reason, after only 4 hours of sleep. The swing shift has led to that almost consistently day after day.)

Of course the company sees it as a "favor" - most guys aren't getting 40 hours a week yet unless they are boiler men (which, I technically am on Fridays and any time I have to cover for someone else.) Of course, pilers get 40 hours...and almost all of dry line...it's the production section that's getting jacked, not the "packaging" - although I never really looked at piling like that, that's exactly what it is.

Which was another point I didn't touch on - I accepted more responsibility and training than what was necessary for my job - and NO ONE ELSE THERE works multiple jobs weekly unless they are supervisors. And I was going to end up being the lowest paid ITL employee. THAT made me feel mistreated, but I couldn't SAY that, because I'm not "allowed" to know what other people make there.

I don't believe he would've given me the 50 cents had I not said something about it. I tried not to be mean or intimidating but hey...after what I've been through emotionally, sometimes I think I've ended up rather serious and vicious regardless of how I think I sound.

When I'm ready to leave there, I'm actually going to try and start a Union. That way it'll be on my head, and if they fire me for that, I'll still have people other than rich as references. There was a guy who had been working there for 13 years who was only making 10.50. It's ludicrous, that company doesn't give a SHIT about it's workers, and they don't seem to know any better.

It's either that, or I'll give rich a riddle along with my two weeks - "What's the only reason a company threatens to fire employees if they find out what other employees are making?"

It sure as hell isn't based on how hard you work - all of my supervisors know I'm one of the hardest workers there, and one of the best at any of the jobs I've ever had.

But I feel like if I could take the fire for trying something like that...and if I could succeed...I'd be doing all of those guys a huge favor, and they all really deserve it. I'd be doing something good for my /community/ and the people /I've worked in the shit with/. And for that matter, it'd get me some experience that would look good on paper as far as the white-collar professional, or academic worlds go. I imagine myself in the future as a working-class philosopher not unlike Marx - although Marx wasn't exactly in the working class like I am.

As far as your story, I probably would have said it how it was, and then said, "If you don't like it, you can have my two weeks and find someone else with my skill set to do the job that I was hired to do. No hard feelings, but good luck with that - not just anyone can repair computers." And then immediately started applying elsewhere.

I am glad though that you saw it the same way I did - I was worried maybe I hurt his feelings or something, but /everyone there/ bitches about him, says he's the reason things have gone to shit around the mill, he's the reason no one is getting yearly raises, etc. And I can see that now, considering I was only going to get a quarter.

[sathor.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's the thing though. Wage discrimination is a viable lawsuit. Wage discrimination is against the law. Why the fuck are companies allowed to have rules like that, then? Seems to me like the justice system just looks the other way while having safeguards in place if someone actually breaks rules (although they'll probably lose their job over it anyway, even if a lawsuit succeeded...the company will find some other reason, or make something up, to fire the person in question later.)

It's another example of how the government doesn't really "care" but they want to look like they care. Just like how there's no law preventing companies from preventing the formation of unions (yet) even though the government "supports" union formation.

[sathor.livejournal.com]

I'm aware of that (the union sword.)

It is a problem, but it seems to me that what the government /really/ needs to do is provide laws that simply regulate and enforce cost of living increases per year. Actually, I'm just a socialist at heart...I see service employees (actually, you know, fast food?) making more than I do, and I'm helping to produce lumber...there's millions of dollars in equipment in that mill, you CAN NOT tell me we don't produce a lot of revenue, we are one of the few mills that have the machinery that we do.

It's a screwed up system. I personally believe that the ever growing service industry is part of the problem as a whole with regards to the economy. Not just in the sense that America lacks "production" - more in the sense that if service employees that are selling products produced by people such as myself are making more than I am, that's /ass backwards/. It leads to higher prices on products (because employees for both production and service have to be paid) which in turn makes the money we /all/ make less valuable.

But the issue is really too complex for me or probably any one person to fully grasp...I just know I have an intuition about the service industry playing a greater role in all of this. It's not that service industry isn't necessary...it's that I think it has become by a far and wide margin too large to sustain itself, and it's dragging everyone down with it.

Historical economists, like Marx, would note that when a tangible good is not produced, there's no wealth produced. Thus, in /some/ cases - not all - it should be a fact that the service industry hurts wages in production based jobs, since in service "wealth" is just passing through hands, it's not being created.

Anyway...yadda yadda.

I'm sure I bore you with my communist spin ;)

Re: cont'd

[sathor.livejournal.com]

We already are moving towards a more socialist nation as it stands. Other countries, such as Canada, have completely socialized health care. That's a necessity as far as I am concerned. There is no need to reward the rich with longevity while those rich obtained their riches only through the burden that the lower classes carry. And that is a fact of capitalism - you will obtain riches only through further burdening of the lower classes. The rich also tend to self-perpetuate, as money creates more money. That burdens the lower classes further.

If you grant everyone complete health care coverage - quality shelter and food, then there are no longer any issues. If capitalism can do that for humanity, I don't care about wage rate differences. That's the ideal. That's what we should be moving towards. The rich can own a million cars, and have multiple houses in multiple places. As long as people can live healthily, and just as long as the rich, it is fair and right in my mind because material wealth is meaningless.

Oh, and socialized education. Because no one should be denied education and the opportunity to improve themselves based on ANY given socioeconomic background, racial, geographic or otherwise. I shouldn't have to put myself a hundred thousand plus in debt to obtain the same degree that a minority or poverty class individual received for free. That's burdening /me/ to provide others with an easier life, and that /isn't/ fair.

In Germany, you can go to college for 500 euros a year. Period. End of story. Tell me there's not something wrong with the American system after hearing that - and all of Europe is similar, as long as you are a /citizen/ of that given nation.

No, standardized pay rates probably would never work. It doesn't grant in incentive to educate oneself and obtain a more "important" job - but don't forget that the lower pay rate jobs likely aren't as satisfying either. But if this country keeps inching towards 90% of the wealth in 5% of the hands, there WILL be a revolution, because history has told us that's roughly the threshold where people will not take it anymore. Last I checked, it was something like 80% in 10%. That's still a HUGE disparity.

And it's also why I can't say that Capitalism is inherently better than communism or socialism. Communism in Marx's sense has never been applied. It has been modified to meet a tyrants needs, and then the name abused and applied by other countries as a negative connotation.