Hardly Working? Modern Production And Consumption From The Eyes Of A Millennial Proletarian

Physically speaking, work occurs when a force F is displaced over some distance d.  Considering the strenuous nature of manual labor and how much energy one typically expends on the job site, the literal definition of work is applicable here.  In contrast, professional jobs clearly don’t require as much raw energy as their blue-collar counterparts, with most functions taking place in a controlled environment, usually from the comfort of a seated position. 

Ironically, we still throw this term around to describe the nature of, not only corporate tasks, but miscellaneous ones as well.  From driving to playing live music, the criteria of what counts as “work” is vague; considering, in many cases, little is technically being done.  Given, it’s a wonder that Americans take so much pride in their jobs.  This sentiment is what makes trying to measure throughput such a volatile subject, succeeded only by politics and religion.  Still, for capitalism to sustain we must look at production and consumption more critically: this can’t be done without assessing our views about work.

In an episode of Hidden Brain, professor David Graeber explains his theory of “bullshit jobs.”  As the name implies, Graeber hypothesized that the workforce is laden with jobs that aren’t as legit as they appear.  My inference was that a lot of roles exist merely because if the proletariat, per se, discovered how much leisure the elite class is afforded at their expense there’d be mass unrest.

He goes on to explain that the most significant evidence came from accounts of people working in the white-collar sector: lawyers, consultants, managers, and administrators alike responded to what started as a satirical article, each testifying to the vacuity of their roles.  This conclusion was a breath of fresh air, considering how at my last internship role, I’d been gaslighted into believing my technical skills weren’t sufficient: in actuality I just wasn’t as committed to the act. 

To clarify, my partner and I were tasked with taking an inventory app from proof of concept to the minimum viable product stage; as most tech interns are.  When we reached a roadblock, we’d both give it an honest try: meticulously perusing the web for a solution.  However, being the rationalist that I am, when I realized that our problem wouldn’t be solved without help from a more experienced developer, I’d slack off: usually by literally browsing Slack.  On the other hand, my partner would keep clicking away, searching Stack Overflow or GitHub for a solution.  On the surface it would seem he was more productive than me.  But overall, his zeal didn’t contribute much more to our velocity: the milestones of our product were usually achieved via intervention of a salaried employee. 

Admittedly, as stated in a prior post, my partner was probably more knowledgeable about the innards of the application when it was all said and done.  Though, I’m not sure knowledge of a process legitimizes it.  I’d go so far to say tech roles generally consist of redundant engineering of products whose benefit to society can’t be easily discerned.  And like my views on college assignments, if the application is frivolous, my motivation is nil; regardless of monetary incentives.  This sentiment is echoed by economist Russ Roberts in a 2010 episode of EconTalk where he describes “No one wants to turn a crank for a great deal of money and there's nothing on the other side of the crank.”  Metaphorically speaking, someone who could do that extensively deserves credit: for they are a true capitalist.

Of course, the smoke and mirrors aren’t unique to corporate offices.  In the interview Graeber insists “the same thing is happening in hospitals” and that, due to more administrators, nurses are burdened with superfluous paperwork.  However, I’d argue that even at the nurse/tech level, the claims of labor may be a tad overblown.  This is especially salient during these times, where the mantra “frontline workers” has been used to liken medical personnel to soldiers.  Thus, I’ve attempted to pay my due diligence: searching for videos of hospitals during Covid-19. 

Surprisingly, it’s hard to find footage of consistent work being done, relative to the true meaning of the word.  Except the occasional lifting a patient off/onto the bed, in the videos I’ve found medical staff seems to spend most of their time with activities such as: attending pretentious meetings (similar to corporate standups), huddling around screens, typing and other clerical work.  Other than the custodial team, the bulk of work in hospitals seems to be done by the machinery: respirators, purifiers, monitors and other electrical equipment.  So, while I can acknowledge the inherent risks of medical jobs, the labor intensity is debatable.

Furthermore, in contrast to corporate and medical, there isn’t as much masquerading in manual labor jobs: an employee’s input has a direct, measurable output.  Regardless, the melodrama is still evident at times.  For example, during the six months I spent as an aircraft fueler, I remember a lot of shifts beginning with the supervisor telling a horror story of someone being sucked into a jet engine or brutally injured in another way.  This was to get us to wear ppe, bond to the aircraft to prevent static electricity and generally follow safety guidelines. 

While the desire to avoid liability claims was valid, one couldn’t help but wonder if managers were taking things a little too serious.  I even remember an older coworker lamenting at how they “act like were in the air force” as we were shuttled out to our posts.  His complaint alludes to companies’ tendency to project urgency onto marginal operations.

Ultimately, the years I spent doing manual labor jaded me in other ways as well.  Firstly, I noticed that there was a point I reached at every job where I began to hate or at least disapprove of the service; either for social or environmental reasons.  During my time as a fueler, I remember being unsettled by the contrast between all the workers toiling on the tarmac and the passengers sitting comfortably on the planes; not to mention the thousands of gallons of fuel the aircraft need.  That experience killed the charm of aviation. 

A similar pattern happened during the years I spent as a lube tech: I was obsessed with trucks as a kid but after seeing how brutal the labor needed to keep commercial vehicles on the road was, I can’t even stand the sight of an 18-wheeler now.  Likewise, the by-products from the services we provided wasn’t any more reassuring.  Though I appreciate companies such as Lucas Lane Inc. that re-purpose the materials used in fleet operations, research implies the process seems about as efficient as using a blowtorch to make toast.  Even if some companies do manage to recycle the filters from lube shops with nominal waste, how can I be sure they're the norm and not the exceptions? Especially considering the ambiguity surrounding plastic recycling.

Unfortunately, these realizations didn’t stop with fleet service jobs.  The work component of my staff gigs at concert venues equally ruined not just live music, but all entertainment.  I remember identifying with a coworker about how much labor went into setting up for and breaking down after a show.  We agreed the energy seemed excessive given how fleeting the commodity was.  Now I can barely watch a TV show without wondering how much sweat and even blood went into its production.

Moreover, these labor-intensive jobs made salient one of the many flaws of capitalism: unchecked consumption.  I noticed this during my first job at KFC when, at peak times, cars would awkwardly pile up at the drive-thru of our tiny parking lot.  This behavior was even worse at the truck lube job.  Only there it was compounded with the psychological trauma inflicted by crew chiefs and even truck drivers: it was common to hear comparisons of how inefficient our shop was to our whiter counterpart in South Georgia. 

Granted, these comments were made to accelerate productivity and weren’t indicative of deeper bigotry, given they were made by black guys.  Nevertheless, I’d sometimes counter by saying their reviews didn’t consider the difference in customer volume; which, via word of mouth, was greater at our shop.  My rebuttal, however, always fell on deaf ears.  

Given that wasn't the first or last job where I'd heard such sentiment from co-workers, I'd advise anyone who values objectivity to question whether black locations of a chain are inherently inadequate.  Or: do customers just overwhelm the black stores and shops because they, subconsciously, can more easily sever the link between workers and their humanity when the employees are black?

All things considered, one can’t help but view consumerism with a negative bias.  Granted, narrowing the parameters of what counts as “work” and reserving empathy for individuals who are really doing it may help to curve rampant consumption.  This is particularly relevant when one considers that energy usage in developed countries like America is high relative to the population. 

Truly, research shows production in developed countries is usually also high.  However, because resources are finite, it is irresponsible assume moderation isn’t necessary because capital and/or production is high: money is useless if there’s nothing to buy.  Thanks for reading and stay pissed.   

References:

Bandlamudi, Adhiti.  Boyle, Tara.  Kwerel, Laura.  Shah, Parth.  Vedantham, Shankar.  “ BS Jobs: How Meaningless Work Wears Us Down.”  Date accessed: 7/09/2020.   https://www.npr.org/2018/08/28/642706138/bs-jobs-how-meaningless-work-wears-us-down

Roberts, Russ.  “Daniel Pink on Drive, Motivation, and Incentives.”  https://www.econtalk.org/daniel-pink-on-drive-motivation-and-incentives/#delve-deeper