If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I've already given you an example above, about 'workers' and 'bosses' having the same locational interests. That doesn't mean that within an individual company that the owner and the workers have the same interests. Nor does it mean all workers have the same interests - a company which, for example, decides to get rid of it employees who can't use PCs, but to stop the rest decamping gives them a payrise will find that the interests of the workers sharply divide.
In many industries its in the interests of the bosses to keep the staff well apyed and motivated because a) they do better work and b) they're not poached by a rival firm.
Loads and loads of more examples, but frankly as you seem stuck in a nineteenth century view of capital and labour I can't be arsed.
Do they though? Productivity in the UK is one of the worst in Europe.
Is there the competition there among companies? Many workers feel trapped in their job and that there aren't any better alternatives.
I do agree that not all workers share the same interests but in comparison to their bosses, they have a lot more in common with each other.
Aren't those two things linked?
In which ways are the two mutually exclusive?
If its so obvious that you need to resort to rather piss-poor sarcasm, it shouldn't take you long to explain it.
I'm sure Titus Salt is all ears.
Strictly speaking that's manufacturing productivity and since 1995 only Sweden and South Korea have had higher productivity than the US
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/prod4.nr0.htm
It also assumes the UK is some special case in industrial relations and only UK firms see the benefits from happier workers being more productive.
yep many workers feel alienated and stuck in dead end jobs. Do they share a common interest with those who are happy in their work and able to move around?
because bosses and workers in nowdays a false distinction. Apart from the fact many workers don't work in an industry where the aim is profit (about 20% for example work for the public sector for example, others in charities etc). and what common interest does a high paid lawyer (whose employed by a city law firm) really have in common with a dustman. And come to that what common interests does someone who runs a cafe near a factory (which relies on workers being paid enough that they are willing to fork out a £4 for a cooked lunch) have in common with the owners of Cargill? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargill
Yes of course. Given that profit is surplus value expropriated from workers, the only ways to increase profits are to extract more surplus value from your workers. How do you do that? Well you increase efficiency, decrease wages or increase working hours. What do you think our long hours culture is about? What do you think immigration and the expansion of the EU is about?
...and what do you think the purpose of the public sector is?
What function do you think the lawyer has? What is their relationship to capital? Is their function to support the interests of capital? What on earth do you think city law firms actually do?
Is this a serious question?
Zionism?
http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/Foundations.pdf
Well it aint to make money.
And what have any of those questions got to do with the common interests of a worker who is in a well paid job and one who isn't.
More rhetorical as I know the answer.
No chance of your own views then?
By the same token, give your staff decent conditions and a good salary and you will attract the "best" workers...
If this is the case how do you explain companies paying above the minimum wage? Why do companies pay a penny more than they legally have to?
Competition and commodity.
In such cases, the interests of the employers and those of the employees are diametrically opposed. One wants the maximum amount of profits possible, the others want a decent wage. The end product in question is going to be the same and sell for the same amount regardless, so guess where the extra profits for the employer and the company shareholders are going to come from...
i wonder how you can stand working for such a hell fiend!
But let's not pretend the interests of bosses and employees are the same- they are not.
And in many cases, they are diametrically opposed. In particular in cases where the job is unskilled.
Last I looked, McDonalds employees serving burgers behind the counter weren't earning £40,000 a year.
Which suggests that plenty of workers also have no common interests with MacDonalds burgers, though those who eat there may have a common interest with the bosses in MacDonalds remaining competitive
On the contrary, I should imagine customers want happy employees rather than disgruntled ones who might hate their job so much they start putting 'presents' in the food they prepare.
Sorry. Whichever way you want to look at it, bosses' interests are seldom the same ones as employees'.
Yes, but McDonalds getting sued by irate customers who find presents in their food isn't in the bosses interests either. Frankly whenever I go to MacDonalds I don't mind if the worker is pissed off or not - if I want nutrious food with good service I'm not going for a big mac.
Bit like the boss, he doesn't mind if the worker is pissed off, he just wants the biggest pay cheque he can get.