Chance democratic

Chance democratic

Friday, October 21, 2016

Fordism and the cultural contradictions of consumer capitalism

Southern Illinoisan, March 11, 2014

A century ago, Henry Ford rocked the world of American business when he doubled the wages of his workers to five dollars a day. The response of the business industry was largely negative, with the Wall Street Journal commenting that Ford “has committed economic blunders, if not crimes.” But charges of economic malfeasance were proved wrong as Ford not only quickly established his company firmly atop the industry but set the foundation for the growth of the twentieth-century consumer economy.

By 1914, Ford already had revolutionized American culture both with his novel idea that automobiles should be affordable for the working class and not just toys for the rich, and through his perfection of the assembly line to mass produce his Model T allowing him to lower their price. The impact of Ford’s innovations rippled throughout society, leading to the rapid growth of a wide range of related industries, such as those necessary for constructing highways, vulcanizing rubber and refining gasoline.

The assembly line transformed the labor process, stripping away workers’ autonomy and skills, making the work itself repetitive and monotonous. Consequently, absenteeism and worker turnover rates soared. As Ford biographer Steve Watts says, “In short, the company’s labor problem stemmed from its inability to make human efficiency as great as technological and organizational efficiency in the production of the Model T.”

To address these problems, Ford decided in early 1914 to give workers a $2.60 daily bonus on top of their $2.40 salary. As Ford saw it, the raise not only would help solve his labor problems, but would benefit the entire country. With the wage hike, he would later say, “we increased the buying power of our own people, and they increased the buying power of other people, and so on and on. It is this thought of enlarging buying power by paying high wages and selling at low prices which is behind the prosperity of this country.”

In the words of historian Harold Livesay, “Auto workers’ wages, as Ford predicted, nourished service businesses and helped create a market for other mass-produced consumer goods—washing machines, refrigerators, electric irons, indoor plumbing, sewing machines.” In short, it helped establish the foundation of the economic success of twentieth-century America by vastly expanding the purchasing power of the middle and working classes.

Since the assembly line set the work pace, Ford could not tie his raise to workers’ productivity. And since Ford was not comfortable with many aspects of this emerging consumer culture, his goal was to use the bonus in an attempt to impose a traditional morality on his workers. Thus the Ford Company established its Sociology Department to determine who received a bonus by interviewing workers and inspecting their homes in an effort to encourage such values as family life, home-owning and responsible consumerism and dissuade workers from alcohol, sexual immorality and the hedonistic attractions of jazz-age culture.

As Watts comments, “This prescription for creating new people to inhabit a new world by dint of an old-fashioned Victorian creed was replete with tension.” In his factories, Ford imposed a regimented work discipline that deprived labor of creativity and joy. In doing so, he reinforced the idea that one works only for the wages and that getting to spend those wages on consumer goods is the reward for working a boring job.

In a consumer culture though, people need to be encouraged to spend as a means of self-fulfillment. And yet Ford desperately wanted to control how his workers sought to fulfill themselves. He wanted to preserve what he saw as traditional American values. But as journalist Upton Sinclair wrote, “Henry Ford was doing more than any man now alive to root out and destroy this old America; but he hadn’t meant to do it, he had thought that men could have the machinery and comforts of a new world, while keeping the ideas of the old.”

If Ford found himself trapped in the cultural contradictions of consumer capitalism, at least his generous wages allowed his workers full participation in that culture. But it appears the Ford model is going the way of the Model T. Stubbornly high unemployment rates and business resistance to raising the minimum wage indicate, as Reuters journalist Chrystia Freeland says, “the creative destruction of twenty-first-century capitalism seems to be requiring U.S. companies to learn to prosper with fewer U.S. workers and with fewer U.S. middle-class consumers.”

Ford would view this economic transformation as not just a blunder, but an economic crime, for, as he commented in justifying his five dollar a day wage, “No one made himself wholly what he is: in a sense all humanity cooperated in the success that some men think they alone won.”

No comments:

Post a Comment