Re: Comments on "idleness" at work from PEN-L

[Norman Mikalac <mikalac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

i don't understand your interpretation of knowledge work.

a person who has specialized knowledge, which is the case with
trouble-shooters, often electrical, chemical and computer network
managers, physicians, firemen, etc., is paid by his/her employer to be
on hand in case there is the potential for trouble that, if it occurs,
will cause serious harm to people of a system on which people depend.
(if the trouble is expected to cause no serious harm, then the employer
will certainly not want to pay the trouble shooter to be there.)

when no trouble arises, the trouble shooter at the scene does nothing
except monitor the system and is paid for it.  when trouble arises,
he/she fixes the problem either directly or indirectly by directing
others through expertise.  the trouble shooter is paid the same amount
for that case too.  in both cases, the knowledge worker (trouble
shooter) is paid for the potential use of his/her knowledge.

the employer and his/her staff of experts in the system have to decide
beforehand whether or not to keep someone at the scene of the potential
trouble area.  in the case of vital electrical and chemical networks,
the person must be on the scene because much is a stake if trouble
arises.  often the employer elects to have trouble shooters a phone call
away, so that they are paid (if non-exempt employees) or not paid (if
exempt employees) only when they are called in by someone experiencing a
problem.  that is often the case with computer network managers.  thus,
it seems to me that subjective benefit/cost tradeoff analysis and
marginal costing definitely are used.

someone who says, "i get paid for what i know, not for what i do" is
just boasting, so you can interpret the statement to be "i get paid for
my superior knowledge, not for my inferior manual labor".

norm


Louis Proyect wrote:
>
> Louis,
>
> This is an interesting comment and one that should be recognized
> more by labour economists.  A number of years ago (many
> numbers) I was passing a campaign office of the NDP for an
> election that had been called, unexpectedly, just days before.  I
> dropped in and to my surprise saw an engineer with the provincial
> hydro company sitting behind the desk.  I said "How did you know
> the election was going to be held so you could take your
> holidays.?"
> He replied, "I'm not on holidays, I'm working."
> I asked, "How come?"
> He replied, "I am a trouble shooter.  I only need to work when the
> system crashes."  and here comes the punch line -- "I get paid for
> what I know, not for what I do."
>
> Personally, I have tried to introduce this into my labour economics
> classes -- that tier of workers who are paid for what (or who) they
> know, not for what they do.
>
> It certainly doesn't fit the normal marginal productivity model of
> orthodox economists (but then few labour markets do.)
>
> Paul Phillips,
> Economics,
> University of Manitoba
>
> Date sent:              Fri, 01 Sep 2000 10:56:56 -0400
> To:                     marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> From:                   Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject:                [PEN-L:1109] Random thoughts on Big Brother, 
> advertising
> and the Internet
> Send reply to:          pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > Yesterday as I was recounting the feud on alt.politics.socialism.trotsky
> > which led to my being victimized at work, a friend politely but firmly
> > insisted I needed a psychotherapist. Leaving aside the question of why I
> > would want to throw 100 dollars down the toilet each week, I tried to
> > explain to her why I waste my time there.
> >
> > It is this simple. I am not wasting time--I am killing time. I am a
> > maintenance programmer which means that unless there is a problem with the
> > production system I am assigned to, I really have nothing to do from 9 to 5
> > each day. If I worked as a fireman, nobody would raise an eyebrow if I
> > played checkers all day, but in the corporate world (including an Ivy
> > League corporation) you have to keep up the appearance of being
> 'productive'.
>
> Louis Proyect
> Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/