THE REALITY OF WORK CULTURES IN THE MODERN ECONOMY

Richard Sennett in his book “The Corrosion of Character” (Sennett, 1998) has presented a
gloomy economy. He claims that the changing patterns in the labor market of the capitalist
economy are damaging the personal characters of the workers. He views modern economy as a
“New Economy” (Sennett, 1998). According to him workers have to integrate the concepts such
as flexibility, flextime, teamwork, changing working conditions and de-layering in the working
environment. These concepts are harming the psychological and emotional welfare of the
employees and deteriorating the social values. He affirms to his point by providing illustrations
of the employees working in this new economy, and supporting it with historical and social
theories of Max Weber and many. He does not provide solutions to improve the said situation but
emphasizes that people should rely upon communities to protect themselves from these modern
concepts. He also asserts that this new economy is temporary and concludes that “a regime
which provides human beings no deep reasons to care about on other cannot long preserve its
legitimacy” (Sennett, 1998).
The arguments made by Sennett hold to an extent. His assertions regarding corrosion of
character of employees holds true but observations against new economy are weak. In today’s
society the traditional values that were once considered important have lost the charm. Capitalist
society has led to economic independence. The economic independence has created a sense of
awareness among the individuals. This is also applicable to labor market. Individuals over the
years have evolved their methods of earnings. From living as nomads to hunting down animals,
from growing vegetables to exchange of goods, from craftsmanship, to manufacturing and
industrial development, societies has adopted more and more modes of living. These changing
models changed the working conditions and restructured the social relations and human
interactions. Now the change is inevitable and consequently new economy shall not be blamed
for decline of social values.
Sennett assertions hold, as the changing working environment has deteriorated the healthy
lifestyles of the past and made it difficult for individuals. The shifting of employment from
small-scale to manufacturing, from industry to services sector has intensified the work efforts
and disturbed the income distribution equilibrium. Competition to acquire resources, are causing
changes in the labor market. Concepts such flexibility and flextime has resulted in development
of part-time employments opportunities. At the same time downsizing and de-layering has
become a norm. These concepts are viewed as a healthy practice to increase the effectiveness and
productivity of organization. Downsizing may be seemed as an effective tool to reduce labor
cost. Likewise, flexibility and changing work conditions are tools to increase performance levels.
The reality is somehow different. These practices tend to have negative effects on the employees.
The employees develop a low self-esteem in case of being a victim of downsizing. It further
heightens the depression and anxiety. The employees often view them as unproductive
individuals of society and they step into social isolation. Moreover, the concept of teamwork is
not implemented effectively by every organization. Often employees are not suitable to work in
teams. The productivity is effected when an individual in not being recognized for putting in the
efforts and going an extra mile to get the job done. To summarize there has been considerable
changes in work and employment. These changes have resulted in the coexistence of two
different groups. One group of employees that are secured and have well-paid employment
opportunities. The second set of employees with the same skill levels but with unstable and
expendable jobs. On the whole, the changes have increased the number in the second group
because of growing income inequality and number of working hours. These multifaceted changes
appear to be having an adverse effect on employees, often resulting in higher levels of work-
related stress and damaging the moral and ethical values of the workforce. Furthermore, the
deteriorating of personal characters is also associated to the vulnerability of the employees.
Many employees are deprived of employment benefits such as pension, health insurance, social
protections and holiday pay and other fringe benefits. Many of these employees face challenges
when it comes to access to decent jobs. Instead they end up in low paid jobs that are unable to
provide basic work protection leaving their well-being at risk.
The concept of flexibility asserted by Sennett shall be applicable to the labor market
flexibility in two ways. Firstly, employers are able to make changes to their employee base
regularly. It relates to number of jobs or positions available within the firm. Secondly, there are
fewer regulations in number of working hours. Labor Market flexibility has led to the notion of
disposable workforce. Without existence of strict regulations employers have the power to fire
the employees at anytime. They also hire employees at lower wage and change their work hours
according to their requirement. The employees can be replaced anytime and hence, are
disposable. The notion of disposable workforce has a considerable effect on the general labor
force. The people are often out of their jobs and labor market and are more willing to accept any
job just to get end the unemployment phase. It has a downward pressure on the workforce and
extends the employer power. The compensations offered tend to decrease over time. Modern
working ways are treating employees as disposable. The wage gap is widening with reductions in
job security. Employees with expertise are moving from job to job and resulting in
unemployment. Older workforce is forced into early retirement. Staff cuts are resulting in
dispirited and discouraged employees.
The increasing job insecurity can be explained by considering the concept of “precarious
workers”. Precarious work is defined as job or employment that is unprotected, and poorly-paid.
It is also related to non-standard employment. Any employee that is engaged in a job which pays
a lower wage and lack job-related benefits shall be referred to as a precarious worker. Today,
modern working conditions have resulted in job insecurity. Therefore, employees are now
increasingly to be seen as precarious workers. The social and economic restructuring has resulted
in non-standard employment opportunities. The case is best presented in industrial sector where
manufacturing firms employ a large workforce with minimum skills to run their production units
and are easily replaceable. Besides the notion of a standard employment is only being applied to
full-time employment. Fierce competition has led the greater number of labor force entering into
part-time jobs. These part-time jobs exclude the job related privileges and entitlements and are
often low-paid. Inflation and poor economic conditions has further contributed to low earnings
and make it difficult for workers to support the livelihood.
There are several causes for existence of precarious work. Firstly, the changing work
environment has led to the decline of unions. Worker Unions are important when it comes to
protection of employee rights. They are the voice of workers and enabled workers to share in the
gains from production. The situation is further fueled by declining government regulations
concerning labor force protection. This has caused a shift of power from labor force to the
employer. This also causes exploitation of employees by their employers. Moreover, the work
process has also changed. With capital-intensive and technology-intensive production process
the skill-level requirements has changed. Individuals with better skills are likely to get full-time
employment rather those with lower knowledge. Globalization has also resulted in the
development of non-standard employment. Immigrant workers form larger part of labor force
and thus have to fill in legal requirements so as to enjoy full-time job opportunities and related
benefits. All these factors have resulted in growth of precarious work.
Development of precarious work has resulted in greater economic inequality. Changing
earnings widens the income gap of the economy. The growth of middle-income class is the direct
outcome of precarious work. The standards of living are declining. This also results in loss of
confidence in society for economic institutions. Moreover, the decline in earnings results a
decrease in consumption pattern and output. Thus precarious work indirectly puts a downward
pressure and further increases the unemployment problem. The non-work related consequences
involve psychological and mental effects in an individual. It may result in social disengagement
of individuals as employees tend to seek more work to support their families and increase their
social status. The moral and ethical values are compromised as employees tend to engage in
unethical activities to increase the earnings. Another adverse effect observed, is in educational
sector. The job insecurity and increasing unemployment has spooked the students. They are
striving hard to make education choices presenting less unpredictability in future employment.
In sum, Sennett has certainly pointed out an important element of modern ways of working.
The new concepts being developed in the labor market are working in the favor of employers but
exerting negative pressures on employees. The work-related stress and unpredictability in job
market is declining the social and personal character of the employees. The capitalist economy is
one of the factors blamed for this phenomenon. There are other social factors as well as personal
factors that hamper the growth of a healthy workforce in the global competitive market.
Policies or corrective measures should focus on lowering employee’s insecurity and risk.
The government should develop regulation of social insurance for all citizens. This may lessen
some of the negative aspects related to unemployment and work changing practices.
Development of unions and other such organizations shall be encouraged. These organizations
shall be helpful in implementing social protection and labor rights. Moreover, public sector
should step up to offer more secured and permanent jobs that meet the labor market standards.
Private sector shall be offered subsidies for provision of a stable job environment within the
economy. Researchers and academia shall be engaged to resolve and address the wage disparities
and employment relations. Career-fare or job fare shall be regularly organized to sustain the
equilibrium of labor market. The challenges will continue to increase if not met with proper
policies to tackle the issue. The changing work environment shall be adopted for policy
interventions. These policies shall aim to map out the implications not just for employers but also
for employees well-being. There is also a dire need to develop a better compensation system. The
new compensation system should accommodate the modern concepts of working and reward the
employees not only for organizational goals but also for individual goals that shall be achieved.
Employees are seeking a reward system where they shall be appreciated for their value to the
firm rather the number of hours worked. Therefore, a healthy rewarding system both in monetary
and non-monetary terms shall be influential in motivating the employees. A healthy labor force is
not only productive for a single firm but for the economy. With trust and confidence a successful
work environment shall be established.
.
References

Arne, L. K. (February 01, 2009). Precarious Work, Insecure Workers: Employment Relations in

Transition. American Sociological Review, 74, 1, 1-22.

Lippmann, S. (January 01, 2008). Rethinking risk in the new economy: Age and cohort effects on

unemployment and re-employment. Human Relations, 61, 9, 1259-1292.

Moore, T. S. (January 01, 1996). The Disposable Workforce. Journal of Sociology and Social

Welfare, 23, 4, 172.

Pollert, A., & Bristol Business School. (2007). The unorganized worker: problems at work,

routes to support and views on representation. Bristol: Bristol Business School, Centre

for Employment Studies Research.

Sennett, R., & Sennett, Richard. (1998). The corrosion of character: the personal consequences

of work in the new capitalism. W. W. Norton.

Saunders, R., & Canadian Policy Research Networks. (2003). Defining vulnerability in the

labour market. Ottawa, Ont: Canadian Policy Research Networks.