Issues facing Todays Workers

Labor has seen its most drastic changes in the last 25 years. Some blame corporate reneging on the social contract, some blame globalization others feel that lifetime employment was just a fad and we are know headed back to normal. All are in agreement that things are not as they were and will not go back.
The most dramatic change facing workers is the abandonment of the social contract. Entire generations are now faced with no safety net and unequipped both professionally and personally to change with the times. To cope with this change some journalists like Liza Featherstone search out the scape goat. In Ms. Featherstone's opinion, “Wal-Mart's P.R. War”[1], Wal-Mart is the root of all evil. It is easy to site the biggest and most profitable as the cause for peoples personal short comings, however, analogies and innuendo's only seem to make headlines not change habits. Wal-Mart will continue to grow and influence our buying habits while more people fail to understand the new job market we now face.
This new job market is in part brought on by the way corporate business modeling has changed and views its employees quite differently. In the past corporations invested in employees for a long term return on their investment. This long term investment was the social contract or golden parachute for the employee. There was no threat of layoffs or job loss unless the corporation went horribly wrong. There was a trust. Present day corporations have no incentive to look beyond the next couple of quarters. Wall street has set a pace so fast that in order to meet expectations everything is up for negotiation. Need profits, lay some people off. Liabilities rising, close that plant. Legacy costs creeping up, outsource those positions. Employees have moved from the asset to the liability column.
Companies now have left vertical integrated production to favor concentrating on what they have deemed as “core competencies”. The functions or products that make up a companies “non-core competencies” can be outsourced to the lowest bidder and the problems associated with that function become someone else's issue. This specialization within markets has dramatically changed the way companies are viewed. No longer is bigger considered better but rather focused and efficient are the measuring stick of today. This specialization was first seen in the manufacturing side of the American market and was not considered all to important. Now it has found applications within the white collar middle management “white man” positions. The disposable nature in which managers and “professional” jobs are now treated has scared and worried workers not able or prepared for a life without guarantees.
The guarantees that workers originally enjoyed and taken for granted are now viewed as excessive by companies today. Contingent workers are able to do projects on an as needed basis. This project based process is extremely efficient for a company and its planning. R&D departments available only when you need them takes large overhead off your balance sheets. IT departments when you need them lowers the head count and investment into assets. Manufacturing contracts eliminates asset depreciation. The picture we are left with is an office consisting of a few upper management personnel, low skilled paper pushers and maybe a sales force on the road. Logistics are outsourced from trucking to warehousing. R&D is contracted to develop specific products for specific markets rather than develop a product and find a market.
Employees find themselves scrambling to prove the value to their skills. Presently the work that employees do has in effect been “dumbed down”. Work has become repetitive. Basic computer skills are all that is needed because the positions have in effect been deskilled. Computers in the workplace have taken specialization out of jobs. It has increased productivity to such high levels that automation sets the new corporate models. These new models are in response to globalization.
Globalization is the next natural step of capitalism. From the dawn of modern capitalism brought on by the industrial revolution we see regional manufacturers putting tremendous pressure on small “mom and pop” stores. Quality was not necessarily compromised. Quantity, rather, compromised the prices of the “mom and pop” operations. Quantity drove down prices to unheard of lows and thereby justified any short comings in quality. Fast forward into the 1920's and the growth of the railroads and now national corporations start putting the squeeze on the “mom and pop” regional players. Price once again driving consumers to overlook any long term loyalty in favor of short term rewards. National corporations pushed the economies of scale in the manufacturing sector to unheard of highs. In this era bigger was better. Now as we enter the 21st century history yet again history repeats its self. Now global corporation set new lows for consumer pricing through efficiency and IT developed models. The former national “mom and pop” corporations face the dilemma of change to compete on a world wide basis or go out of business. The nationals will resist by crying “protect American jobs” and “stop foreign dumping in our market.”
The irony of globalization is it is not new. Globalization could have been the term for regionals bullying the “mom and pops”. It could be the nationals bullying the regionals. You can place any industry name today from auto's to banking and get the same results. The fact that corporations are getting bigger is not the problem rather the number of markets that all the manufacturers compete in is less. Workers today find themselves in the middle of a fight within industry. The unfortunate problem faced today is that it is not regional and not a national problem, its global. There is no place to hide, there is no place to relocate to. Workers have no choice but to wait until it all clears. Today's globalization is nothing more complex than Darwin's survival of the fittest.
Within all this turmoil there is always a resistance to change. The AFL-CIO and their fraternal twin the “Change To Win” coalition have entrenched themselves in their belief that if they resist long and hard enough the employment market will return to 1971.
It is important to recognize that workers today have organized labor to thank for their diligent effort in setting legislation to protect everyone from OSHA to minimum wage. Directly and indirectly organized labor has raised the bar within the workplace.
Today, however, workers face a different set of challenges. With corporations changing the model and thinking by which they value their employees. Issues such as portable health care, retirement, and the fear of being laid off in the event of a corporate restructuring are the preeminent concerns. Labor seems to be more contempt with serving their existing interest than adding any additional membership. Organized labor has taken a defensive position rather than taking an offensive stance to entice and gain worker respect and density.
Change To Win sites the need to attract the growing minority worker but states no clear direction for long term sustainability. It seems ironic that the union who shames corporations for lack of planning and foresight in their business plan lacks its own initiative to address the needs and changing roles of its own members. The membership of unions seems to be the anchor preventing any real adaptation of today's unions. The ideas of the “peddlers” seem to conjure up more relevancy in todays changing markets as they did in their pinnacle. Corporations struggle to stay competitive and when the corporation stands to bear all the risk there is little doubt why the is animosity toward the workers belief he is owed security, sufficient pay and benefits. There has to be a migration toward a more equal respect for the risk. Both sides must work together toward the goal whether it be long term or short. Groups like Washtech are a move in the right direction of contingent workers and management working with each other.
[1]Wal-Mart's P.R. War, Liza Featherstone. www.salon.com/news/features/2005/08/02/walmart/print.html. August 8, 2005.