If the conventional way we do business reflects the best our
human imagination can create, then what a sad commentary on imagination.
In a November 12 Truthout article, "Work Should Adaptto Mothers: Human Shapes Don't Fit Inhuman
Holes," I argued that conventional business needs to change and that
democratic workplaces are better environments for working mothers.
The comments and reactions from readers were terrific - not
in that everyone loved it, as many did not, but in that it seemed to strike a
chord.
"A lot of this debate also ignores the assumption that
MEN aren't harmed and children aren't DAMAGED by having husbands/fathers/partners
enslaved into inhuman work habits," wrote my friend Michael Rhodes,
director of education atAdvance
Memphis, in an email to me. "The workaholic machine doesn't work for
families, even if it only crushes one partner."
I definitely agree. My partner and I have had many
discussions about the different expectations we face as new parents. Some
people assume that he's not as family-oriented as I and is happier to be at
work than at home. This couldn't be less true.
"The problem is not just what society expects, but what
most of us men have been nurtured to expect and to provide," writes
Rhodes. "One reason we want to keep Rebecca [my wife] in the workplace, at
least part time, is just so our sons grow up knowing that their mother, a
woman, is every bit as intelligent and valuable to society as their father. How
that works out? We'll have to figure that out as we go along."
We need to change the way we do business so that it supports
women and men, parents and nonparents - in a word, people. This is why the
movement toward democratic workplaces is so exciting. These are businesses in
which people and communities are valued as much as companies because in a
democratic, worker-controlled business, the people are the company. We should
recognize that for the business to be successful, people in our communities and
in the larger world need to be successful so that they can patronize our
businesses' goods and services.
In my company,
for example, we are for-profit - I'm not out in the world selling games and
educational resources just to keep my moral compass satisfied. I do it to earn
a living. More than any other place I've worked though, I will do whatever it
takes to make our business thrive, because I know I matter there as a person,
not just as a worker.
This brings me back to my point about imagination: Some
people argue that the idea of changing work to suit human lives is absurd and
would lead to more regulations that would stifle business, particularly small
businesses. Better instead to stick with what we have than to imagine any
alternative. However, we shouldn't confuse regulations that empower families
and provide space for responsible parenting with government regulations that
impede businesses. All too often, the nuances of this argument are brushed
aside by those claiming to be pro-business. While we don't want to stifle
companies and the economy, we shouldn't accept businesses that stifle lives for
the sake of profitability.
The bottom line is that when we separate the company and its
workers and prioritize the former over the latter, we hurt the economy, which
is exactly what we're seeing now.
For most of us, I'm not sure what about our current economic
structure is worth defending. When the bottom 90 percent of our population work 40, 50, 60
hours a week to make in a year what the top 1 percent earn in a week or an
hour, is that a healthy system? When the success of a business is predicated on
a handful earning the biggest paychecks while the majority of people, working
equally hard, make only a small fraction of those paychecks, is that a system
worth replicating?
Much of what I'm talking about here would take a monumental
cultural shift from a society that prizes the wealthy and helps them maintain
their wealth at great cost to everyone else, to a society that values people
over business and money. The democratic workplace model provides a natural
bridge from a capitalist economy to a democratic economy that is focused on
people and the planet, in addition to providing a living for its members.
I believe there is a path forward wherein traditional
businesses, even without transitioning to a cooperative structure, can learn
from democratic workplaces and adopt the way they function. In my company's
blog, I wrote about a recent article by David Brodwin in US News and World
Report that made the case for why more employee-owned businesses are needed in
the United States. The writer compared cooperatives and top-tier professional
firms run by partnerships, stating that each type of business is more
accountable, resilient, and flexible. This is what our local and national
economies need.
The good news is that these businesses are on the rise.
"The number of worker-owned business in the United States is growing
robustly, around 6 percent per year, and these businesses now account for about
12 percent of the private sector workforce,"writes Brodwin. But we still have a long way to go because
so few people know there is an alternative.
Democratic businesses allow workers to prioritize how they
interact with work and with their families and to create an economy that
doesn't put the two at odds. Though the number of these businesses is growing,
it will still take a considerable amount of effort to create a more equitable,
democratic economy. This is a lot to ask of people who are working hard just to
pay their bills, as well as those who have children and, thus, depleted time
and energy.
Yet this makes my point: If we don't even have the time to
think about balancing work and life so we're less strained and stressed, then
clearly conventional business and a capitalistic economy isn't working.
Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου