[Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but also bad

[LAURIE SOLOMON]

A couple of observational responses:

1. The postal service may very well have been sexist because, when it was a
government agency, it was a major source of federal patronage in which the
old white male federal politicians - there were no female or non-white
federal politicians for a very long time in US history - and it gave (and
still does today) preference to veterans - who back in the day were all
males with who had connections (these males were mostly white).  It should
be noted that during this same period most - if not all - private companies
were all male and white (except for janitors and secretaries who worked for
lower pay than white males and had fewer benefits or upward mobility).

2. As for abiding by OSHA and being high stress, it should be noted that
OSHA has not been around all that long in the scheme of things so private
entities did not abide by it either during the pre-OSHA period - most abide
by it now but only in a pro forma manner.  It is true that during the early
periods of OSHA when the postal service was a government agency and not a
semi-independent entity they  - like most government agencies - did not fall
under OSHA coverage; but there still are many government agencies that are
exceptions with respect to some of the laws.  One only needs to think of the
Courts, the Congress, the Military, or those government contractors who are
given waivers.

The stress factor had more to do with the assembly line boredom of the job
similar to that found in any and all private industry assembly line
operations and with the fact that many of the veterans and others who got
postal service jobs did so as either a last resort because they had trouble
getting hired elsewhere or because it offered good pay and job security
rather than because they really wanted to be in the postal service.  Thus,
they were already prone to job dissatisfaction and stress.  Most companies
in the private sector are and were top down management operations; it is not
restricted to the postal service or to government agencies.  The military
model is the dominant model utilized to one degree or another by most
organizations - public and private; this may in part be due to the fact that
most administrative jobs are held by ex-military personnel whose claim to
leadership, executive, and administrative management qualities are based on
their military experiences where they learned to implement the top down
military model of management.

3. For most of its history, the postal service was a federal government
agency; it was only relatively recently that it became a semi-independent
entity - much like Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac.

4. You certainly are not claiming that private industry are big in concern
for human dignity or quick to engage in progressive social change.  Why is
there still a glass ceiling for women and racial/ethnic minorities in most
business organizations with only a perfunctory node to tokenism?  Why do we
still have wage discrimination in the private sector?  As for making us all
feel guilty for human rights abuses, we should all feel guilty for the human
rights abuses engaged in by private sector organizations and businesses who
operate in our society and under the laws of our government since it is only
because of the fact that we allow them to exist and operate in our society
that they can function and do business in this society or from this society
with respect to other nations.

5.  There is nothing to prevent anyone from holding accountable and blaming
the executive administrators of public agencies for poor performance or
misconduct of their agencies or its personnel the same as is the case for
CEOs in the private sector.  However, the fact of the matter is that we
never blame, hold accountable, or punish the executives in public or private
organizations even though we say they are paid to be the ones responsible
for the operation of the entities and personnel they command; instead, we
tend to hang those beneath them with those further down the chain getting
the most punitive measures and the greatest blame.  In the private sector,
those at the top have their incorporation law protections to protect them
from personal responsibility for the actions of their companies, their
"Golden Parachutes" to protect them from economic sanctions, and their good
ol' boy network to enable them to jump from one executive position to
another despite their abilities and performance records.

Now back to the socializing an industry. But first a few words from our
sponsors - the people for whom "nationalization" is a bad word.

I have to wonder if it is possible to socialize anything like an industry
without also nationalizing it.

-----Original Message-----
From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Medina
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 12:36 AM
To: Peace-discuss
Subject: [Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but also bad

Peace-discuss,

I would like to discuss the US taking over an industry. 

Let us take the postal service as an example. The postal service has always
been 
tied to the federal government. And has done well.

But as an institution, it was extremely sexist and racist clear into the
1980s. I 
blame this on the fact that it was tied to the federal government. For a
very long 
time, the postal service did not have to abide by OSHA's safety guidelines,
again 
because it was a government institution. The postal service used to be one
of 
the highest stress occupations -- again because it was run by the government

and was managed top-down and so very close to the way the military was run 
that many ex-military people were employed by the postal service. 

I am not saying that I think the postal service should be privatized, I am
just 
saying that when the government runs an industry, it tends to overlook human

dignity issues and is slow to change -- and it makes us all guilty for the
human 
rights abuses done by the institution. 

It is good sometimes to be able to point to a CEO and say that person is
bad, 
but it is really hard for the public to turn and look at the way the public
is 
running an industry and say "we are bad".

-karen medina
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss