From: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Re: GM Plant Closures Again? Won't Solve the Economic Problems
Reply-To: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
       
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:35:40 GMT

In a previous article, au329@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ronda Hauben) says:

    continuation of response

   

>
>In a previous article, bobp@hal.com (Bob Pendleton) says:
>
>>From article <1g3klqINNb62@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, by au329@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ronda Hauben):
>>> 
>>
Also, the classes in computer programming were ended not only at the 
Dearborn Engine Plant but also they were cut back in the Dearborn
Public Schools when our battle at Ford did not get any help from
the ACLU or the other regulatory agencies that were given oversight
over situations like we were in. It seemed that Ford and the UAW
were able to void any protection any of the regulatory structures
should have been able to provide.

There is a legal term for this called 
acting under color of state law
whereby the private entities that have taken on to run a public
state governmental institution liable for damages under a provision
of federal law.

All of the lawyers in Michigan insisted they knew nothing of any
law that would apply to the situation of allowing a private
company and union to run a public school system -

And the Congressional people I spoke to insisted that it was 
fine what they were doing because such relations had previously
been done with hospitals -

So what became clear from all of the efforts to deal with the situation
is that Congress acts without any oversight from any one but
the large corporate or union entities that have interests different
from the public interest.

That one must have some mechanism of overseeing government officials
and we have no such mechanism now. 

>
>>> activities. (See p. 171 in Cole's book for example where he 
>>> describes how Japanese management keeps secret records on workers)
>>
>>Yeah, I remember how disgusted I was when I found out that a product I
>>helped develop was being used to keep track of data entry clerks
>>keystroke rate. I have trouble with the idea that people can treat
>>people like that. But, then I encountered people who won't work unless
>>they are treated like that.

Well, speedup mechanisms only show that people need union rights -
when GM constantly sped up the line, it became clear to the workers
that they needed an independent (not company) union to give them
the right to grievance.

I disagree that people are the problem, but instead people need
rights to be able to function effectively and efficiently.

>>
>>>>Giving all employees access to communications is a very good idea. But
>>>>it scares management in hierarchal organizations. I could tell you
>>>>stories...
>>>>
>>> Do you have any idea how people have broken through this block?
>>> For example lots of people on usenet read usenet at work - do
>>> you have any sense of why this segment of workforce has been able
>>> to have access to communications?
>>
>>The company has to come to believe that communication is valuable.
>>
>>If you look around, you'll see that most of use that have at work
>>usenet access work with computers everyday. The computers are already
>>there, they are already connected to a corporate network. The people
>>already use e-mail as an everyday tool for getting work done.


But I know of companies that are afraid to let employees even touch a 
computer or if they allow employees to use a prewritten program, they
certainly won't let them have access to email or any other functions.
When I worked at one job where we used computers to look something up
only management was allowed to use the email capacity.

So it seems that many corporations are so afraid of their own employees
that its impossible for them to make use of email and network technology -
that all they can conceive of is for it to a be tool of management to
pass on their orders, not a means of needed communication or accurate
information - thus the whole so called "training" wind is only in 
essence a cover for the resistance of many large corporations and of 
various government entities to allowing electronic communication
access to their workforces.

And it seems that as with GM, they are willing to close their plants
and end their productive capacity, rather than open up and allow more
democratic structures to function.


>>
>>Then someone figures out how to get a usenet connection into the site
>>and it becomes an invaluable tool before upprer management is even
>>aware it's there.

Interesting that it seems universal that upper management is 
hostile to allowing communication. Thus it shows that it has been
an amazing achievement that the net has developed at all :)  
>>
>>Personally, when I interview for a job I ask if usenet and internet
>>access with ftp capability are available. If they aren't, I'm not
>>likely to take the job.

I've heard other people say this. But how can it be spread for those
people like me who don't have the choice available? 

One of the last jobs I had introduced computers but really limited what
the workers were allowed to do on them, and the result was that they
(the company) had a really hard time getting the computers to function,
whereas had they let workers have access to things like email and 
conferencing, we could have made suggestions that would have made
the computers much more useful to get the work done.


>>
>>				Bob P.
>>

Ronda 
-- 
Ronda Hauben                    email address:ae547@yfn.ysu.edu
Amateur Computerist Newsletter              or
P.O. Box 4344                   rhauben@heartland.bradley.edu
Dearborn, MI 48126
Newsgroups: alt.amateur-comp,news.misc,comp.bbs.misc,alt.culture.usenet