Every year we have a Survey at work to find out what the troops think, amongst other things, about our Lords and Masters in the top echelons of the organisation. Largely, I believe, this is for purely PR reasons but our Middle Management seem to take it seriously (or more likely have been told to take it seriously) so after almost every survey we sit in a room for a few hours and discuss the results. For at least the past 3-4 years the views from the shop floor about those apparently leading us to a brave new future have been universally bad – and when I say bad I mean pretty appalling. I don’t think that they particularly care about this – after all why should they – but it seems that someone has convinced them that they need to appear to care, hence the meeting to understand what we’re thinking. As usual we didn’t really get anywhere because Middle Management didn’t want to ask the hard questions (opening up the proverbial can of worms) and no one on the shop floor wanted to say what was on their minds as we all wanted to keep our jobs – no attributable comments? Yeah, right….
Anyway, I don’t normally Blog about work and I’m not going to start here – or at least I’m not going to continue (much) before I get to my point. So as not to descend into the expected bitch-fest our get-together was ‘facilitated’ by someone from our HR Department who asked all of the politically correct questions salted with a few examples from TV shows and comments about his children. But one thing he did say, pretty much as an aside, made me say something in return. He said that we all, everyone in the room including himself was a resource, not unlike the flipchart he was writing on. To which I responded (to the room rather than to him) at a volume only those closest to me could hear was that I wasn’t a resource I was a human being. It got a laugh from a few people near me and then the pointless meeting went on. Now I’ve had this kind of argument before with people – and again since our group meeting. People (and organisations) can see me as a resource, they can classify me as one and treat me like one but that doesn’t make me a resource. Oh, I understand why they do it. In many ways it’s more efficient (and that’s a whole other argument) not to treat us as individuals. From a top-down perspective, especially from a great height, we’re simply not individuals but are in effect worker ants doing their thing as directed from above. But down at the coal face we sure feel like individuals (or at least I do) and don’t like being treated or thought of as a resource, a number on a spreadsheet or anything else that dehumanises us.
Inevitably when I bring up this objection the first thing people say is that I’m overreacting, that it’s just a word, that I can be an individual on my own time and that the company pays my wages so I am actually a resource whether I like it or not. To which I respond that names are important and although they pay my wages that doesn’t mean that they’ve bought me and that they certainly don’t own me. Of course this idea is rather more fundamental than being called a resource by someone who, not surprisingly, works in Human Resources. It’s the idea that people and human related activities are commodities to be bought, sold and traded like any other thing in the marketplace. Such an idea is one of, if not THE, biggest problems (or mistakes) in the world today. The idea that people can be bought, be owned, and that relationships or any other human activity can be ‘traded in’ for ones with a better return is corrosive in the extreme. I might be persuaded, cajoled or even bullied into a course of action but (at least I believe) I don’t think I can be bought. OK, no one has actually valued me enough to try but still I hope that I ‘value’ myself highly enough that no one would be willing to even try to tempt me with hard cash. As far as I know I’m simply not for sale – at least I hope not. I’ll let you know if anyone has that kind of folding money available to try their luck. In the meantime I shall remain a human being, no matter what they call me.
3 comments:
I would take issue with the word as well. I probably would have said something a little louder and started a discussion about humans being different from inanimate objects. Other than when I first started working (teenager) and thought, "I desperately need this job to survive," ever since my 20s, I've always worked with the attitude that I know know my worth, this job needs me, more than I need it. I have left secure jobs because I wasn't satisfied that I was valued enough. I have no problem working hard for a company, but my job is not my identity.
The ease with which the modern world treats people as things is one of the reasons I've spurned it to keep my mind vested in the classics, in pomp and art and story. This happens even in occupations where people are the focus: they become case numbers, problems to be solved or shuttled about.
v v said: I would take issue with the word as well. I probably would have said something a little louder and started a discussion about humans being different from inanimate objects.
I thought about it, but no doubt I would have just got funny looks, rolled eyes and the look from my boss that's we'd need a chat later. Apparently I've already developed a rep of having a 'bad attitude'.
v v said: I have no problem working hard for a company, but my job is not my identity.
We've employed a whole bunch of outside consultants to tell us how to improve the way we do things. One of the ideas they came up with was 'increased professionalisation' as if we we're not professional enough already (whatever that mean), so theirs talk about career paths and such. Well, to me it's a job I do 9-5. It's not a career. I drifted into the company almost 30 years ago and stayed because the job was interested enough and they paid me enough to pay my bills and have a bit of fun with the rest. I am not now nor will I ever be a 'company man'. My identity does not revolve around work.
Stephen said: The ease with which the modern world treats people as things is one of the reasons I've spurned it to keep my mind vested in the classics, in pomp and art and story.
Definitely - and it seems to be getting worse. If 'they' can't quantify something then it either doesn't exist or they modify peoples behaviour so that they can quantify it. The thing that amazes me most and that I find most disheartening is that not only do most people accept it but actively promote it and even seem to like the idea! Inevitably people around me think that I'm odd (no change there) for having a problem with it.
Post a Comment