Difference between revisions of "325--2011--Week 5 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→1913 Watertown arsenal’s striking workers’ petition to end Taylorism) |
(→Virginia Penny – Watchmaking, 1863) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
The company did an excellent job of taking advantage of using women’s labor in the watch making business by paying them less, and using their argument that men were more “ingenious, stronger, and better mechanics” in order to pay them more. But because this was at a time frame where women were still more accustomed to the domesticated lifestyle, this was a major stepped that the company had in having “over half skilled artisans” being women. '''By having this large amount of skilled women workers, this kind of setting allowed movement towards women working more acceptable in much later years.''' – Megan Gallagher | The company did an excellent job of taking advantage of using women’s labor in the watch making business by paying them less, and using their argument that men were more “ingenious, stronger, and better mechanics” in order to pay them more. But because this was at a time frame where women were still more accustomed to the domesticated lifestyle, this was a major stepped that the company had in having “over half skilled artisans” being women. '''By having this large amount of skilled women workers, this kind of setting allowed movement towards women working more acceptable in much later years.''' – Megan Gallagher | ||
| + | |||
| + | When I think of women working in factories I think of textile factories, not working to build watches. So that was interesting to learn. As has been the historical norm woman were paid less to do the same work as men, even though the women were better skilled for the job. I thought it was interesting to learn that European workers were paid less than American workers. However when taking into account the fact that the American watches were cheaper to make this made sense. -Kathleen Mead | ||
== Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men, 221-232 == | == Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men, 221-232 == | ||
| Line 63: | Line 65: | ||
== 1939 textbook on scientific management == | == 1939 textbook on scientific management == | ||
| − | In this reading we can really see the effect that Taylorism had on the efficiency of the workplace. It goes into detail about increase in production in the shortened amount of time by describing what exact changes were made to make this possible. Simply changing distances, training operators, and using a cordless iron made production increase by sixty six percent. Though these numbers make Taylorism seem like a logical way to manage industry, they do not look at the workers themselves and how they were seeming to become mechanized themselves. The human was now becoming apart of the American system of interchangeable parts, as they were doing their specific job and could easily be replaced by another worker with little time of training. It also did not express the workers time stress and hours they worked. Taylorism did indeed have an impact on the efficiency in production but it also came with a bit of mistreatment toward laborers. --Claire Brooks | + | In this reading we can really see the effect that Taylorism had on the efficiency of the workplace. It goes into detail about increase in production in the shortened amount of time by describing what exact changes were made to make this possible. Simply changing distances, training operators, and using a cordless iron made production increase by sixty six percent. Though these numbers make Taylorism seem like a logical way to manage industry, they do not look at the workers themselves and how they were seeming to become mechanized themselves. The human was now becoming apart of the American system of interchangeable parts, as they were doing their specific job and could easily be replaced by another worker with little time of training. It also did not express the workers time stress and hours they worked. '''Taylorism did indeed have an impact on the efficiency in production but it also came with a bit of mistreatment toward laborers.''' --Claire Brooks |
== Satires about efficiency system – Henry Mitchell, Penobscot Indian, 1938 & 1930's tale of “Highpockets” in Chicago == | == Satires about efficiency system – Henry Mitchell, Penobscot Indian, 1938 & 1930's tale of “Highpockets” in Chicago == | ||
| − | Highpockets was no ordinary factory worker. He was the “Energizer Bunny” of the factory. He works in a mill room, and as the tale goes on, he uses almost his whole body to operate different machines. He uses both hands, both legs, as well as his head. The time-study man would continuously say, “‘He’s true blue! He’s true blue! The kind of man that gets somewhere in this plant’” (Smith and Clancy 286). This is what Frank Carlton calls the “model workman”. Carlton says, “The model workman . . . is the vigorous man who freely expends all of his surplus energy during working-hours and who utilizes his non-working hours only for recuperation and preparation for another day’s work. It is not the purpose of efficiency engineering to allow the worker to depart . . . with more than a minimum of surplus energy for recreation [and] for family life” (288). The model workman does not exist. Humans cannot exhaust themselves at work every day and then go home and eat and then sleep. Humans need interaction with family and developments of relationships. | + | '''Highpockets was no ordinary factory worker. He was the “Energizer Bunny” of the factory. He works in a mill room, and as the tale goes on, he uses almost his whole body to operate different machines. He uses both hands, both legs, as well as his head. The time-study man would continuously say, “‘He’s true blue! He’s true blue! The kind of man that gets somewhere in this plant’” (Smith and Clancy 286).''' This is what Frank Carlton calls the “model workman”. Carlton says, “The model workman . . . is the vigorous man who freely expends all of his surplus energy during working-hours and who utilizes his non-working hours only for recuperation and preparation for another day’s work. It is not the purpose of efficiency engineering to allow the worker to depart . . . with more than a minimum of surplus energy for recreation [and] for family life” (288). '''The model workman does not exist. Humans cannot exhaust themselves at work every day and then go home and eat and then sleep. Humans need interaction with family and developments of relationships. '' They also need time for hobbies.''''' Following Carlton’s argument then, employers did not view their workers as humans, but as machines; hence the “model workman” standard.–Samantha W. |
== Prof. Frank T. Carlton criticizes Taylorism for what? – 1914 == | == Prof. Frank T. Carlton criticizes Taylorism for what? – 1914 == | ||
| − | Like Prof. Frank T. Carlon, I find many aspects of Taylorism, a managerial philosophy stemming from “scientific management,” extremely troubling. On the surface, proponents of Taylorism may claim that is a positive philosophy, and manages to find the “one best way” to make a product. Taylorism also emphasizes employee efficiency within the workplace – no movement or minute should be wasted. I have a problem with how Taylorism views human beings – as interchangeable, emotionless components of a larger machine. As factories and companies adopted the practices of scientific management, workers were no longer treated as human beings with feelings. Workers were not allowed to talk to one another, because this was viewed as being “inefficient.” I agree with Carlton’s notion that “work and recreation should be blended for each and every individual.” However, an activity like recreation was viewed as being unproductive, and therefore was eliminated from the workplace. I think that many of these employers failed to understand that the human psyche is a very fragile thing, and that if a person is not allowed time for leisure, and time to interact with others in a non-threatening social manner, the person will eventually turn against the company he or she is working for. However, this didn’t seem to bother employers. They knew that if one menial worker quit, they could just as easily hire two more. Once again, this is an example of how Taylorism drove any sense of humanity out of the workplace. These employers were looking for ways to maximize production from their workers, and forgot that an incredibly important part of one’s work and life is recreation, and taking breaks from the daily grind of one’s select occupation. ~Kevin Gottschalk | + | Like Prof. Frank T. Carlon, I find many aspects of Taylorism, a managerial philosophy stemming from “scientific management,” extremely troubling. '''On the surface, proponents of Taylorism may claim that is a positive philosophy, and manages to find the “one best way” to make a product. Taylorism also emphasizes employee efficiency within the workplace – no movement or minute should be wasted. I have a problem with how Taylorism views human beings – as interchangeable, emotionless components of a larger machine.''' As factories and companies adopted the practices of scientific management, workers were no longer treated as human beings with feelings. Workers were not allowed to talk to one another, because this was viewed as being “inefficient.” '''I agree with Carlton’s notion that “work and recreation should be blended for each and every individual.” However, an activity like recreation was viewed as being unproductive, and therefore was eliminated from the workplace. I think that many of these employers failed to understand that the human psyche is a very fragile thing, and that if a person is not allowed time for leisure, and time to interact with others in a non-threatening social manner, the person will eventually turn against the company he or she is working for.''' However, this didn’t seem to bother employers. They knew that if one menial worker quit, they could just as easily hire two more. Once again, this is an example of how '''Taylorism drove any sense of humanity out of the workplace.''' These employers were looking for ways to maximize production from their workers, and forgot that an incredibly important part of one’s work and life is recreation, and taking breaks from the daily grind of one’s select occupation. ~Kevin Gottschalk |
