When I started work four decades ago,
workplace conditions had evolved as a result of union activity [link],
and there was a clear knowledge of rights and expectations. Now, as a result of
neoliberalism, work is basically insecure, with much having degraded to a bestial
“dog eat dog” competitiveness – not just between companies, but between
individuals for access to jobs that effectively mean survival in the modern
world.
Now, there can be an advantage in greater
flexibility, and that was one of the problems of the old award system, but we
have – as with privatisation – thrown the baby out with the bathwater, and
created a situation where the cure is worse than the (perceived?) disease.
Nowadays, job insecurity - and lower
employment - gives employers enormous power to do almost (there are still some checks and balances here in Australia)
anything they want, but workers are cutting down on their spending as a result,
and the markets that employers want to capitalise on with what they view as “flexibility”
are disappearing – as a direct result of their
actions.
I’ve been thinking of writing an article on
this, along the lines of a working title of “Competition:
a case of too much testosterone?”, arguing that our predominantly patriarchal
society has biased us into a fallacious view that competition is “the
only” way to ensure efficient delivery of goods and services, whereas a more
matriarchal approach, allowing for some cooperation and flexibility, would
actually be better for society – not only in terms of efficiency, but also in
terms of the nature of society, the effects life had on personalities, and the
richness of non-work life (which is much,
much, much more than solely families).
As an example of that, the effort required
to win bids for work in the water industry is truly extraordinary – every privatised
water authority has their own sets of forms, companies refer to have well
established relationships with key people in water authorities (which, to some extent, is possibly because
decision makers are not making decisions on the basis of the forms they have
create, but on personal knowledge of individuals), and there can be frequent
contact to clarify questions during the tendering process (which I consider an indictment on the quality of specifications/briefs
being prepared by water Authorities these days, possibly as a result of less
real life [aka “practical” experience [the day I get out of engineering, I’ll
start writing some articles on these sort of issues for LinkedIn … ]). These
costs become part of the overhead which is passed on to consumers in the next successful
bid.
I had hoped that the use of panels might be
a way of getting out of the extreme competition trap, but it doesn’t seem to
be, and I’ve now realised that the failure is because work still gets
concentrated into a few companies who sell their capabilities better than
others – not that they necessarily actually HAVE
better capabilities, but they certainly sell what they have better.
That leaves us with the excess of
competition, and no consideration whatsoever of a more cooperative / collaborative
approach aimed at the betterment of society. (As an example of one – unworkable, sadly – idea: maybe have all the
technical experts in a pool, which is then allocated to the successful companies,
who retain their admin and project management teams. That way, we get the best technical
solution combined with the best management solution. The point is that there
are a lot more talented people around on this issue than me: if they were to
put some time and energy into better options than endless and extreme
competition, I’m sure we could come up with something that combined the best of
competition and collaboration – maybe not initially e.g., panels], but down the
track … )
I doubt I’ll have the time and energy to write
that article properly, so the preceding few paragraphs is it :)
One of the other outcomes of this addiction
to excessive competition is the slow erosion of workplace rights and conditions
– not as a result of some malicious, one-off act, but because of – basically –
people’s fears around survival, in the modern sense.
The reason people (a) have smartphones for
work, and (b) leave their phones on after hours, is – in a nutshell – because they
FEAR not being more responsive to managers’ / clients’ demands / expectations /
whims. In other words, they are competing with an image that someone else may
be more addicted to work, which could cost them their job / a client’s project …
An excess of competition, starting with an
imbued bias …
This erosion crops up in many other areas
as well. One example is companies taking and keeping photos of workers homes
when the workers want permission to work at home. Now, the Privacy Act is quite
specific on this sort of thing: companies can only (in Australia) access your information if they have a valid need
for it, and to the extent that is necessary. Thus, for instance, companies can ONLY
access your ID documents if they have a valid need for that, and they can ONLY
scan that when sighting the documents will not suffice [link].
(This is one of my major objections to
signing up to facebook: it has NO right to some of the personal details it asks
for.) In the case of companies wanting to be sure that a workers home situation
is a safe and appropriate place to work, photos could be sighted, but there is
NO need for those photos to be kept on file – and there are considerable risks
in allowing such photos to be stored (I’m
thinking of situations where real
estate agents have put photos showing furniture of tenants up on websites [illegal,
in Queensland – quite rightly], which has led to some women being tracked
down by abusive partners and seriously assaulted), not to mention the
inherent gross invasion of privacy - particularly of others who live in the
house.
What is the solution? Well, perhaps the
pendulum needs to swing back a bit, towards respect for workers’ inherent
dignity as human beings – i.e., for workers’ rights … and maybe towards managers
who are more competent at human interactions and issues.
Perhaps people also need to acknowledge
their fear, and actively work to reduce their lifestyle
vulnerabilities …
One of the reasons I have been thinking of
this is because I am reading “The Pope’s
Last Crusade”, by Peter Eisner (pub.
William Morrow, of HarperCollins, New York, 2013, ISBN 978-0-06-204915-5; bought
on special at “The Book Grocer” in Traralgon
during a lunch break on a recent work trip). This book is about the role
that a US Jesuit, John
LaFarge (Jr.), known then and later for his work against racism in the USA,
had in the Catholic Church’s Pope
Pius XI’s “Hidden/Lost
Encyclical”, condemning antisemitism, racism and the persecution of Jews, which
would have built on that Pope’s earlier statements against Nazism and Fascism
(e.g., here)
to provide a powerful voice against the barbarity and horror of the Holocaust – much as an earlier
condemnation had led to a halt in the murder of disabled – and an
inspiration to other nations to resist Germany. Instead, the Vatican
was silent, and left open to – valid, in
my view – criticism.
It’s a fascinating book, well written, and
gives a good insight into what was happening inside key sections of the
Catholic Church – including some concerning personality influences.
One of the other concerns that the book
raises is the utter RUBBISH that
the Catholic Church believes and propagates in relation to Paganism (which it, hypocritically,
in my view, refers to as “Neo-Paganism”). Largely, this comes down to the
denial of other Deities under a close-minded charge of idolatry – and, again,
given the truly extraordinary extent of iconography in the neochristian
tradition (beginning with crosses and the
– offensive, to some – crucifixes), this is open to a charge of hypocrisy. I
have come across this extraordinary hostility – all based on misperceptions and
outright lies – in my involvement in the interfaith movement in Australia (less
so, with the international interfaith movement), and it has left me wondering
if it is worth trying to bash my head against the brick wall of neochristian
bigotry.
What is NEEDED is for
neochristians to extend the same respect and willingness to listen that they give
other religions to Paganism, so that they can learn the TRUTH
of what Paganism is about (see also here and here) - and some of
that will continue to disturb the neochristians, as it inherently challenges
anything that belittles the experience of living in the world, but some of it (particularly the social activism, and the environmental
activism which is INHERENT to Paganism) would resonate with parts of the
Christian world.
Finally, while I am on a cranky run, as a
trans woman I object to some of the things the trans community appears to be
supporting – things like unisex toilets, which I refuse to use on safety
grounds, and the appalling trend towards gender neutrality, which is an active
denial of the affirmation of myself as a woman that is so crucial to my
wellbeing.
It is also a continuation of the stupid
avoid pronouns and titles approach of the early (2nd wave – in the 60s and 70s) equal gender rights
movement, which I personally consider has allowed sexism to simply hide, and
stay present and very, very, very active over half a century later.
I apologise for publishing these posts
twice, but Blogger keeps changing my formatting. I can either publish it and
then correct it, or save and close the post and correct it when I reopen it,
but that leaves an extra copy in my "drafts" folder ...
Love, light, hugs and blessings
I am revamping my former website, and getting at least one other underway (pronounced "new-MYTH-ear"; ... aka Bellatrix
Lux … aka Morinehtar … would-be drýicgan or maga
... )
My "blogiography" (list of all posts and guide as to how to best use this
site) is here, and my glossary/index is here. The reasons for my caution when using Wikipedia are here.
I started this blog to cover karmic regression-rescue
(see here and here), and it grew ... See here for my group mind project, here and here for my "Pagans for Peace" project (and join me
for a few minutes at some time between 8 and 11 PM on Sunday, wherever you are,
to meditate-clear for peace), and here
for my bindrune kit-bag. I also strongly recommend
learning how to flame, ground
and shield, do alternate
nostril breathing, work
with colour, and see also here and be
flexible.
May the best in me, my Higher Self,
and those of the Clear Light who assist me,
help me to keep myself grounded, centred and shielded,
to be Balanced and a Fulcrum of Balance,
a centre of Balanced Positivity and Spiritual Maturity,
with my aura continuously cleansed, cleared and closed,
repelling all negative or unwanted energies,
whilst allowing positive, balancing and healing energies in and through.
The real dividing line is not between
Christianity and Islam, Sunni and Shia, East and West. It is between people who
believe in coexistence, and those who don’t.
- All of the above - and this blog - could be wrong, or subject to context, perspective, or state of spiritual evolution ...
Tags: competitiveness, economy, history, human rights, racism, society, sexism, work,
First published: Thorsdagr, 9th February, 2017
Last edited (excluding fixing typo's,
Blogger's change of my formatting and other minor matters): Thursday, 9th February, 2017
