We all know that multinational corporations are screwing the people they employ. Even the most die-hard of Capitalist-sympathisers would blush at the idea that massive trans-global companies bring economic, social or cultural benefit to the countries they operate in. The evidence for the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich is evident to anyone who cares to look into the stripping of natural resources, exploitation of labour, manipulation of prices, and other underhand techniques which maximise profits whilst minimising expenditure. But what of small scale businesses? Are they in any way less despotic than the multinationals?
The following are case studies of small family-run firms which treat their workers in ways which the larger companies would be more than happy to, and would do if it wasn't for Trades Unions fighting to prevent such practises:
Case Study 1: A Taxi Company
The company is controlled by a husband and wife, with their child working on occasion. The taxi company also employs a small number of drivers.
The drivers are employed on a self-employed basis so that the company doesn't have to pay National Insurance/Tax, Sick Pay, Holiday Pay or any other costs which they would have to pay if the drivers were officially taken on as employed.
The drivers have no fixed hours, but rather are expected to be ready to work as required. This means that it is normal for the drivers to work from 7am until midnight Monday to Thursday, Friday 7am to 1am, Saturday 8am until 4am and Sunday 9am until midnight. These hours do not include unexpected extras such as a night club run on a week day, which can make the shift run from 7am to 4am with a three hour gap before going back on at 7am right through until midnight.
With such dangerously long shifts, it is not uncommon for the drivers to be fatigued, with the risk of accidents being sharply increased. When inevitably distances are misjudged and the taxis are damaged, it is the responsibility of the individual driver to pay for any repairs. This includes respraying of even the tiniest of scratches, ensuring the taxis are in pristine condition at all times.
With the number of hours worked, it could be argued that any costs incurred will easily be afforded by the drivers who are obviously earning very good money, and that the excessive tiredness is handsomely compensated financially. This however is not the case.
The husband and wife team pay their drivers not for the time they are on shift, but for the time they are driving with passengers on board. This can mean that a driver is sat waiting for passengers for the better part of the day, perhaps only taking an occasional fare for a 3-minute trip, until the end of shift rush of drunks from the pub. For a week in which the driver is at work for a minimum of 16 hours per day everyday, he or she can expect to receive a total weekly payment of 16 hours!
The potential for long drives which would naturally bring in better money is ruined by the cherry-picking of fares by the owners, who ensure that they take such fares themselves, leaving the self-employed with the short runs which pay a pittance, and having to fight with colleagues and drivers from other taxi companies for the scraps which come from random people whose custom is erratic and cannot be relied upon.
The extortion racket of the taxi company is evident by the fact that whilst drivers come and go, disgusted by the lousy wages, outrageous hours and routine docking of money for scratches which appear minute yet somehow cost hundreds to pay for (with no receipts to prove the case), the owners have foreign holidays every few months, enjoy restaurant life as a norm, and live in a house which most Working Class people would not be able to afford. The cash-in-hand set-up raises additional questions, with the drivers having to trust the owners to pay what is owed to them.
This is exploitation of a type which sees the Workers become ill through sleep deprivation and malnourished through lack of time to eat adequate/decent food, as well as becoming impoverished by the deduction of money to pay for phantom damages effectively making their pay packets of a level which is comparable with that paid out to people on the dole. All the while, the owners enjoy the good life.
Case Study 2 - A Shop
The shop is one of three all owned by the same man and again run as a family concern, with his wife taking care of the accounts. Each of the three shops has an individual who works there Monday to Saturday from 9am til 5pm, with the owner calling in at each one periodically to check that everything is being run as he sees fit.
The workers have no room for individual input into the business, with each shop being organised so that the stock, window displays and layout is exactly the same. The method of answering the telephone is identical in each shop, with the owner making prank calls to ensure that his way of doing business is followed to the letter. The idea behind this ethos is simple - it means that staff can be swapped about, with the owner working in any of the shops should a member of staff leave (voluntarily or otherwise).
The workers are employed on a Salary basis, meaning that they receive the same pay regardless of hours worked. The strict 9 to 5 is never a reality. The shops do not close at dinner time, so food has to be eaten between customers and due to there being no cover, breaks are really more of a concept than a reality.
The owner has a system where the Worker who lives in 'town a' works in the shop in 'town b', the Worker from 'town b' works in the shop in 'town c' and the Worker who lives in 'town c' works in the shop in 'town a'. There is a reason for this. Each Worker is required to ensure that his/her place of work is fully stocked, and by having the stock split across the three shops, whenever something is needed in one of them, the staff themselves have to act as couriers, using their own cars to transport stock or products ordered by customers. This keeps each shop warehouse at an efficient level, preventing over-stocking and ensuring that not too much capital is tied up unnecessarily. This makes sense, but the sting is that the Workers have to give up some of their free time: getting in early or staying late so that stock can be exchanged.
The staff are - of course - employed at minimum wage level. Were the staff employed in the towns they live in, the wages would be livable, only just, but still livable. But because the owner has a policy of employing people who have to commute so that they can act as free couriers, the salaries are eaten into. This is worsened by the owner having a delivery service for customers, which the shop staff have to undertake either before the shop has opened or after it has closed, using their own petrol and time, neither of which are paid back. The owner does not allow for expenses, so all the driving around which is demanded, has to be paid for out of the pockets of the staff. On minimum wage, and with a delivery area covering a considerable distance, the costs incurred to the staff can become quite excessive.
The owner of the shops has a particularly nasty employment policy. He staggers recruitment across the shops to ensure his 'empire' is stable. His staff turnover is high due to keeping staff employed until they are on the brink of getting legal rights to protect them from dismissal, then just before they reach that point, they are sacked. This means he doesn't have to pay out for redundancies. So, he gets cheap staff, who work extra hours for nothing, do his deliveries for him for nothing and act as couriers for nothing. To make sure that they 'know their place' he makes a point of discussing the high level of unemployment in the area and the fact that anyone can be replaced. By having systems which have to be followed exactly, the staff are under no illusion that they have any input in the business. Of course he dangles the carrot of a potential pay rise in time, which never materialises because the individual is always sacked before that time is reached.
The owners live in an ordinary house. Business is good, but they cannot be called rich by any stretch of the imagination. By trimming the costs right down and squeezing every bit of labour out of his minimum wage staff, his quality of life (and his wife's) is comfortable. The same cannot be said for those who go through his shop network.
Small Business Thrives on Exploitation
The nature of Capitalism is one framed in Competition and the pursuit of Profits. The propaganda is that competition is healthy, allowing for efficient companies to do well, and punishing wastefulness. Translated into the reality of the Working Class who live under this system, efficiency means squeezing the Workers beyond the point of endurance. It means cutting costs to maximise profits, the largest cost generally being labour. In larger companies where Trades Unions have achieved some forms of security for the workforce, exploitation is rampant. In small businesses, where there are no 'rights' and the workers have to rely on the goodwill of the owners, exploitation is of such a magnitude that life for the workers is unbearable. There are exceptions, but due to the cut-throat nature of the 'free market', companies with an ethos of looking after the workers tend to be torn to pieces by their competitors. Companies which fail to embrace the mentality of shafting the staff to cut costs go out of business as the consumers, who are themselves squeezed by their own employers, cannot afford to pay a fair price to a fair employer. Capitalism ruins lives and makes all who participate in it at the owning level, into ruthless greedy bastards. It is against human nature to be this way. Capitalism is the destroyer of all that is decent.
The Solution to end Small Business Tyranny
In a Socialist Society, Wage-slavery will not be tolerated. Everyone will be entitled to the fruits of his or her labour. Trans-global companies, like all companies regardless of size will be nationalised (or closed!), with their external sections being completely severed from those parts which operate in the UK. The economy must serve the People, and no part of it can have any allegiance to any outside influences. For larger concerns, syndicalism is the best way to ensure that the Workers ARE the Bosses. But what of the small scale concerns like those in the case studies above?
The examples above are not theoretical, but real life examples which are happening right now. In the case of the taxi company, the exploitation is beyond the expected profiteering of the Capitalist system, and strays into the realm of modern slavery. Those responsible will be held to account and punished for their wilful abuse of their fellow humans. The example of the shops is perhaps more one of an internalisation of the need to be merciless in order to survive, rather than an inate viciousness and sociopathy.
In a Socialist Society concerns such as the chain of shops would have to be assessed to find if their continued existence would be of value to the people. If they were found to be selling things which only existed to generate profits and would not be missed by no longer being available, then having been designated as pointless, they would be closed. However, all small concerns found to have a positive contribution to the community would be made into Workers' Cooperatives, with all work shared equally. As equals, there would be no division between employer and employee, with everyone being his or her own boss. Located in a Socialist Nation, the profit motive would be gone, replaced by the question of how can work be utilised for the common good.
Capitalism forces people to commute to work. Under Socialism all that can be done locally will be. This will help to protect the environment and will end the need for new motorways. Socialism is all about a Society in which cooperation relaces competition, where unity of purpose replaces exploitation. Big Business is the worst exploiter of the largest number of people, because of scale. Small Business is the worst exploiter at the human level due to the negative impact on the well-being and health of the Workers. Both are equally unacceptable and when the country works together under the motto FOR CLASS AND NATION, both will be a thing of the past.
No comments:
Post a Comment