Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:05:21 -0800
From: D Shniad <shniad@sfu.ca>
Reply-To: pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu To: Multiple recipients of list <pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu> Subject: [PEN-L:1577] Jobless Future (Book Review) (fwd)

> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: 24 Feb 1995 04:13:25
> From: RESCLOVE@amherst.edu
> To: Recipients of conference <pol-sci-tech@igc.apc.org> > Subject: Jobless Future (Book Review) >
> Book Review: THE JOBLESS FUTURE
> by Stanley Aronowitz & William DiFazio > University of Minnesota Press, 1994
>
> This book ain't about no pork-chop. Its serious stuff. The > authors contend jobs -- work as we know it -- is going away. They > cite the tendency of new jobs to be part-time and/or temporary, > and often at minimum wage. Official unemployment figures fail to > measure the state of partial employment and those who have given > up looking for work. The authors mention the thousands of layoffs > at GM, IBM, Boeing, Kodak and Sears and that even "the older and > most prestigious professions of medicine, university teaching, > law, and engineering are in trouble: doctors and lawyers and > engineers are becoming like assembly-line clerks... proletarians" > (p. 54). The authors comment ":... we have yet to feel the long- > term effects on American living standards that will result from > the elimination of well-paid professional, technical and > production jobs" (p. xi).
>
> The mass of layoffs and the destruction of high-quality, well- > paid, permanent jobs is produced by three closely related > developments:
>
> "First in response to pervasive, long-term economic stagnation and > to new scientifically based technologies, we are experiencing > massive restructuring of patterns of ownership and investment in > the global market. Fewer companies dominate larger portions of > the world market in many sectors, and national boundaries are > becoming progressively less relevant to how business is done, > investment deployed and labor employed... Second, the relentless > application of technology has destroyed jobs and, at the same > time, reduced workers' living standards by enabling transnational > corporations to deterritorialize production... " and thirdly, U.S. > corporations are locating not only low-skilled jobs, but also > design and development activities in other countries such as India > and China where labor is both skilled and cheap (p 8-9). >
> Their thesis may be synopsized: "All of the contradictory > tendencies involved in the restructuring of global capital and > computer-mediated work seem to lead to the same conclusion for > workers of all collars -- that is, unemployment, underemployment, > decreasingly skilled work, and relatively lower wages. These sci- > tech transformations of the labor process have disrupted the > workplace and worker's community and culture. High technology > will destroy more jobs than it creates. The new technology has > fewer parts and fewer workers and produces more product. This is > not only in traditional production industries but for all workers, > including managers and technical workers...." (p. 3). >
> Commenting particularly on computer programmers: "The specific > character of computer-aided technologies is that they no longer > discriminate between most categories of intellectual and manual > labor. With the introduction of computer-aided software > programming (CASP), the work of perhaps the most glamourous of the > technical professions associated w/ computer technology -- > programming -- is irreversibly threatened. Although the "real" > job of creating new and basic approaches will go on, the ordinary > occupation of computer programmer may disappear just like that of > the drafter, whose tasks were incorporated by computer-aided > design and drafting by the late 1980s. CASP is an example of a > highly complex program whose development requires considerable > knowledge, but when development costs have been paid and the price > substantially reduced, much low-level, routine programming will be > regulated to historical memory" (p. 21). >
> Arguing the above is the meat (& potatoes) of the book but > chapters are given over to exploring aspects of these > developments, particularly the commercialization of science and > the university (i.e. the subordination of knowledge to serve > profit-motives to the detriment of any other determinant). >
> Other chapters look at a city-planning office to study the effects > CAD has had on the city-drafters and designers over the years; > unions and their experience organizing "professionals" such as > doctors, teachers and lawyers; the university tiered, tracked and > tenure system; and recent writers on class (What!!! Class you > say?!).
>
> The authors devote a chapter to class analysis because -- though > soft-pedaling -- they locate an important nexus of social change > in a "New Class" of knowledge workers (after the work of Alvin > Gouldner but with important qualifications), especially as the > blue-collar worker and the service worker are replaced by > automation. They acknowledge that members of the new class have > "traditionally been the servant of corporate capital and the > state." But Aronowitz and DiFazio see that with the > proletarianization of knowledge workers described in their book -- > and while capital still depends on their labor -- the new class > begins questioning their identification with an exploitative > ruling elite.
>
> Here the authors' argument is weak. They say that computer > programmers etc. constitute a new class, yet at the same time -- > while describing its disappearance -- they are arguing that they > really aren't that much different from their blue and pink collar > cousins. Why not look to those outside of production altogether -- > the marginalized former factory workers, managers, operators, (and > yes, even programmers) etc., unemployed, or barely employed in > temp or part-time or minimum wage work, who have little or no > stake in the status quo -- as the "new class"? >
> An interesting couple of pages in _The Jobless Future_ traces the > origins of "The War on the Poor", talking of a changing perception > particularly amongst "liberals and leftist intellectuals" which > has seen the resurfacing of the English 18th century ideal that > "moral character" is built by economic independence -- without > consideration that a (growing) unemployable class has no hope of > participating in a shrinking labor market. >
> In the last chapter, the authors suggest some "pathways" for the > future, taking into account presuppositions of their book study. > "In addition, our proposals assume the goal of assuring the > _possibility_ of the full development of individual and social > capacities" (p. 343). Things they argue for: The need to reduce > working hours; regulating capital to prevent capital flight; > education as a right rather than a privilege (particularly > poignant in "knowledge" times); a guaranteed income; a new > research agenda steered away from profit to human motives and so > on. They argue that we need to go beyond "full employment" towards > "no employment" -- through the steps of shorter work weeks, > redistributed work load, and so forth, and work to set things up > so that such is possible.
>
> Aronowitz and DiFazio's argument for a jobless future is > convincing. It's recommended reading for those trying to get a > handle on the changing workplace and its social fall-out. Their > book also seems to have arrived into a spate of no-future-for-work > commentary. There's the FutureWork list (see below). There is > also Breecher writing in _Z Magazine_, a recent _Business Week_ > article on the "Re-Thinking Work", a _Fortune_ cover story on "The > End of the Job", the Canadian book _Shifting Time_ by Armine > Yalnizyan, T. Ran Ide & Arthur J. Cordell, and the new book by > Jeremy Rifkin, _The End of Work_.
>
> In the face of these observations and predictions, nothing is > being done to address the social dislocation upon us (unless you > count prison construction) when the agency by which humans obtain > necessities -- through sale of their skills and abilities -- is > going away. Even worse, as Aronowitz and DiFazio remark at the > start of their book, a grand delusion is in operation "as experts, > politicians, and the public become acutely aware of new problems > associated with the critical changes in the economy -- crime, > poverty, homelessness, hunger, education downsizing, loss of tax > revenues to pay for public services, and many other social issues > -- the solution is always the same: jobs, jobs, jobs" (p. xi). >
> St.Ack
>