One of the problems faced by the first
capitalists with their mills and their machinery was the pre-existing work
culture amongst a largely agricultural population. The idea of working the same
hours every day all year round was a strange one to a population used to the
idea of working when things needed to be done, spending longer in the fields in
the summer and staying indoors more during the dark winter months. In time, the
idea that ‘work’ required regular hours on regular days in a regular location became
so deeply ingrained that most workers – to say nothing of most employers – now
find it difficult to conceive of an alternative model.
One of the few ‘benefits’ of the pandemic
has been to challenge that concept of ‘work’. Whilst many tasks still require a
physical presence at a set location (although increasing use of robots and AI
will reduce that number over time), what the pandemic has shown us is that with modern technology at our disposal an awful lot of work does not require that
workers are in a set location or even working set hours. Some employers are
even seeing this as an opportunity to reduce office costs (and improve staff
morale and motivation) by no longer requiring physical attendance on a regular
basis. Others are in a state of near panic, so tightly bound by the old
paradigm that they don’t understand how they can ever manage people without
physically policing their activities.
As we know from ‘Britannia Unchained’,
the idea that workers are essentially idle is not only the strong belief of
many employers, it is also rife at cabinet level. From their perspective, they
work hard and deserve the rewards that go with that; the rest of us are born
idlers who need to be kept in line with clear rules and firm discipline. It’s
part of the explanation which Raab and others have repeated for those Downing
Street ‘gatherings’ – these were people working under extreme pressure and
needed the relaxation, whereas the rest of us (including front line health service
workers) needed to be kept in line and observe the rules. They seem to genuinely believe that preparing for, and
debriefing after, press conferences is more exhausting than simply
looking after the sick.
Anyone who has ever considered the
question of productivity in relation to much office-based work knows how
difficult a concept it is. At its simplest, productivity is simply output
divided by input, but in many – perhaps most – office jobs, ‘output’ is
difficult to define and measure. Lazy employers therefore fall back on measuring
the easy part – input. Or, as it’s otherwise known, hours worked. They even
build up a bureaucracy around time keeping, with a host of rules and
exceptions, in order to train their staff to work by the clock. No surprise that
many end up presiding over a workforce of clock-watchers as a result. They’re
measuring completely the wrong thing, of course – output is far more important
than input. Most of us who’ve ever worked in an office will be able to think of
at least one person who’s worked long hours without producing very much (or
even who has done more harm than good during the hours worked!), as well as
someone else who’s managed to appear totally on top of his or her job without
ever staying after the end of the day. For employers measuring only input, ‘working
from home’ has left them feeling threatened and vulnerable. Instead of asking
how they can assess what their staff are producing, or even think about how to
encourage a culture of wanting to be productive, they’ve resorted to using
fancy monitoring software and demanding that staff return to the office
prematurely.
The decision
of the Welsh Government yesterday to introduce fines for those who go to work
when they could be working from home is very badly targeted. Whilst the
objective (reducing contact) is the right one in the face of the pandemic,
fining workers who are bullied and feel threatened by incompetent employers who
are unable to manage a workforce other than through monitoring their presence
in the workplace is merely adding to the pressures on the individuals. It’s
taking the easy option – just like those employers who only measure input –
rather than the difficult one, which is about encouraging and helping employers
to find new working methods (or, as a last resort, fining those who don’t). At
a time when the people of Wales have shown, in general, an amazing willingness
to act collectively and follow the leadership of Drakeford and his government, criminalising
people who are in fear of losing their jobs because of the actions of bad
employers is intensely counter-productive. It’s a surprising lapse in judgement
from a man who has generally been seen to be doing a good job.
Update: The First Minister has subsequently clarified that there has been some misreporting over this issue, and the intention is not to punish those attending their place of work, but to support them by providing a solid reason for them to refuse a request from their employers. It's a welcome clarification, although it says something about some employers that their staff need to be threatened with prosecution in order to persuade them to behave reasonably and lawfully. There is also a danger, of course, that announcing that there is, in effect, no intention ever to actually fine anyone might serve to weaken that protection. Still, not enforcing laws seems to be the in thing when it comes to Covid, as we've seen with certain parties...
Posts
