On the flip side, who would want to buy any product made by this factory between now and when it closes?
Worker’s pride in their work only goes so far, and companies that piss on their employees like this aren’t keeping up their end of the contract.
I’d love to see an analysis of the extra warranty costs that will have been created by this plant over the coming year.
That’s a pretty nasty assumption of the worker’s professionalism.
It suggests two things, both that I disagree with.
(1) The company was wrong to give the workers any warning at all.
(2) That their professionalism is related only to their direct rewards rather than any sense of, well, professionalism.
I have hired people to work on my car and my home. Should I assume that since there’s not going to be much direct reward for doing a good job (they’ll get paid the same either way and I’m not going to break another muffler nor need my porch repaired) that they’ll do a cruddy job?
My experience doesn’t bear out that level of cynicism about the vast majority of people’s work habits.
You missed one:
(3) The workers shouldn’t be looking forward to being fired for no fault of their own; they know that; and so it shouldn’t be surprising that the quality of their work may well reflect their understanding of the injustice done to them.
You do understand that a terrible outcome (and losing their job is bad, I’m not denying that) is not the same thing as an injustice?
I’ve been outsourced once, and had my job eliminated once (after 18 years - 2 months notice in lieu of severance). Both were not fun at all, and obviously, like these employees, I was stressed and upset. It could have been utterly disastrous for my family. But the fact that a bad thing happened to me does not mean an injustice was done.
If I am entitled to my job forever, then surely my employer is entitled to my service and I have no right to leave. Or does job entitlement only flow one direction - towards me? And if I am entitled to my job, surely all those to whom I contribute to their employment by my purchases have the right to be eternally entitled to my patronage?
My complaint has nothing to do with them feeling upset, scared, and so on. I know that feeling far too well. My complaint has to do with the assumption that it’s their current employer’s job to fix it when I (and I suspect almost anyone here) would steadfastly refuse to take any similar responsibility myself.
Leave that sort of hypocrisy of single direction entitlement to the right-wingers.
If we are truly devoted to helping our fellow same-nationality worker, then let’s demonstrate by stating what sacrifices we are willing to make to help them, rather than demand that some nebulous rich guy somehow magically fix it, when almost all of us are, by any sane global standard, incredibly wealthy.
… Sorry for the rant, but I find it tiring when support for policies I think would make a real difference evaporates as soon as self-styled-“leftists” realize that this requires them to make sacrifices. Give up their Amazon? Give up cheap food? Give up cheap goods? Give up ubiquitous piracy? Give up cutting-edge healthcare?
The “I support American goods, unless it means lower quality or higher prices for me” hypocrisy is just way too ubiquitous.
Of course. Do you understand that a terrible outcome can also be an injustice? They’re obviously not mutually exclusive categores.
Speak for yourself. I, and I imagine others here, would not be in the position of those corporate executives in the first place if it means firing and tossing aside people whose work has been crucial to the success the company has had that’s enabled it to move to Mexico and stay in business, all because it puts profit first and its workers’ lives second. It’s like the choice of becoming a lawyer – I and others I know decided against that route because it meant becoming a person who HAS to lie sometimes in their job. In a similar way, I’d never pursue a job in the first place that entailed casting people aside like so much litter for the sake of higher profits for people who in many cases already have more than enough money.
I reject your implicit claim that the only solution in the Carrier case and similar ones is to toss people aside like garbage and ship their jobs abroad or charge higher prices. How about putting workers’ lives first, like an employee-owned company is more likely to do? How about being content with lower profits and executive compensation? Or even with breaking even? I suppose that sounds unreasonable or impossible or something to you, but there are people and companies that operate that way.
The “I support American goods, unless it means lower quality or higher prices for me” hypocrisy is just way too ubiquitous.
Another canard, given what I just wrote, as well as the fact that a lot of people do support American goods, including by being willing to pay higher prices for them.
You seem to think that shipping jobs overseas is inevitable, as if companies would simply die if they didn’t, which often isn’t true.
That’s an interesting point. I think we both understand that without lawyers, there CANNOT be justice. I also agree that I could not be a lawyer. The difference is that I am willing to respect lawyers more because they are able to do a vital job that I am unable to countenance myself. Likewise, I have no interest in management. But once again, that makes me respect those who are willing to take managerial responsibilities more.
And as executives, they are responsible to the stock holders. If you want to claim they should put responsibility to their employees before the stock holders, then I would ask you to invest your savings in companies that make no commitment to those who have chosen to trust them with their investment, as you are asking Carrier to do.
Again, I ask, have you maintained your relationships with all businesses at which you have made purchases? The power of each consumer is smaller, but in total is vastly more important than any executives decision (no executive can fix loss of sales). Where is your commitment to the employees of all the companies that have received your patronage, but are now being tossed aside because they were no longer as convenient or cheap or as good as their competitors. Did you toss them aside like garbage when something better came along?
In the end, you’ve made the same decisions that the executives made - doing what was good for you. Now, I don’t condemn you for it. I, of course, do the same. But let’s start changing the laws so that we no longer have the choices that harm other workers. Let’s prohibit companies doing business over the Internet, destroying our local retail sector in the name of lower prices and convenience. (If I hear one more poster condemning Walmart while praising Amazon, I’ll scream.)
In a employee owned company, it’s the employee’s own investment that’s on the line. When such companies choose their employees, I’m very happy, because they’re risking their own savings to pursue their own strategy. However, you are asking the company to risk capital that was entrusted to them. If the investors are on board for that, excellent. However, if that’s not part of the understanding, then that’s not fair to the investor, without which the jobs would never have existed in the first place.
(By the way, I don’t know the details about this plant closure, but a smart company doesn’t close a plant until it’s quite obvious that it is no longer competitive. I’m not willing to make a narrative of callousness of executives joyfully throwing away of the jobs of its employees any more than I’m willing to make a narrative of Amazon shoppers gleeful at the prospect of bankrupting their local retailer and putting American retailer and manufacturing workers out of jobs.)
No, there are many successful American manufacturing companies. However, they are usually highly automated, so that they require many fewer highly skilled workers, which also puts pressure on jobs.
I think it’s inevitable if we don’t change the rules. Let’s start by changing the rules. Let’s start with stiff taxes for household incomes over $40K (that’s enough to classify as rich by any world standard), with the proceeds allowing government investment and ownership of large shares of the economy to guarantee jobs stay here. Let’s get rid of Internet shopping that cripples local retailers. Let’s cut off cheap electronics that can’t be produced without resorting to China. Let’s make the Internet a utility that goes to everyone. We eliminate the digital divide by capping bandwidth at 1MB, which restores job lost in the entertainment sector both nationally and locally. If you want a movie, go see it in a theatre where you can actually employ people! If you want music, go buy a manufactured CD or go see a live performance, so you can actually employ people!
Milliefink, we both understand the need to protect all workers. Well, let’s support measures that will actually do so, rather than wringing our hands that a few executives are making the same decisions that we do. We the people, by simple virtue of our numbers, are the true economic power. If we’re compelled by force of law to live our life in a fashion that will bring jobs back, those jobs will come. Pretending that technology is our savior is a joke. It merely brings more efficiency that renders more people unemployed. Silicon Valley is not our saviour.
I’m old enough to remember the golden age of a 50-60’s (well, the 60’s anyway). And what I remember is that we had a hell of a lot less of everything. In terms of material goods, I’d have been considered poverty stricken by contemporary standards - my Mother sewed patches on clothes, as did all the other middle-class mothers. But the reason we had far fewer material goods is that we paid a sufficient price for everything that it could be manufactured here.
We can go back to that time. It won’t be easy - we’re all greedy at heart. But with sufficient commitment by voters, we can roll back the clock that will make the pie a whole lot fairer, even if it’s somewhat smaller.
I’m not saying there aren’t gross polluters in other nations. But I can say, somewhat proudly, that our own factories in Mexico (Mexicali and Juarez) meet the same factory floor and waste handling health and safety standards as our American and European factories. Yet the loaded labor rate is still a fraction of our American locations. Our products are not cheaper in Mexico because we’re dumping chemicals into the environment. I know enough other maquiladoras there to say this is typical, not unusual.
You can point to toxic waste issues everywhere. I’ve been involved in several American “superfund” waste sites. No, I didn’t create those toxic underground plumes but I did work for organizations that either did in their past or owned land that someone else did that to. The worst, to me, was an ex-employer (in America) who made the cover of a major magazine many years ago because of the high number of birth defects among their pregnant female employees in one area (not enough ventilation for some mutagenic chemicals, mostly solvents).
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
