Should Not the Radical Left Take into Account the Attitude of Workers Towards Their Own Jobs? Part Four, The Case of General Motors Workers

Introduction

One of the few things that I agree with the academic leftist Jeff Noonan, professor of philosophy at the University of Windsor, Ontario, is that leftists must start where workers are at:

Political engagement begins from trying to understand where people are coming from.

But where people are coming from can be interpreted in at least two ways: objectively–what their real situaiton is, and subjectively, what their attitudes towards their interpreted situations are. In relation to workers, there is their objective situation of being treated as means towards ends defined by employers (see The Money Circuit of Capital).

Subjectively, though, there are undoubtedly a variety of attitudes and interpretations of their own work and life situations.

Some among the radical left do not even address the issue of what workers think of their own jobs. It is hardly idealist to inquire into such attitudes.

I will start to gather evidence about the attitudes of some workers in unionized (and non-unionized) settings where I have calculated the rate of exploitation of those workers. I will also in the not-too-distant future start a similar inquiry process  for unionized public-sector workers with the largest employers in Canada and in various Canadian cities.

Objective Exploitation and Oppression of General Motors Workers

In a previous post, I calculated the rate of exploitation of General Motors  workers for 2019 (see The Rate of Exploitation of General Motors Workers). I will copy part of the conclusion from that post (but with a short explanation of the nature of the rate of exploitation): 

The rate of exploitation measures the extent to which workers work for free, producing or transfering all the surplus value and hence all the profit for employers. However, even during the time when they work to produce their own wage, they are hardly free. They are subject to the power and dictates of their employer during that time as well.

Adjusted Income before income taxes: $7.383 billion=s
Total wages and benefits $18.597 billion=v

To calculate the rate of surplus value or the rate of exploitaiton (they are the same thing), we need to divide “Adjusted Income before income taxes” (s) by “Total wages and benefits” (v).

So, with the adjustments in place, the rate of exploitation or the rate of surplus value=s/v=7.383/18.5976=40%.

That means that for every hour worked that produces her/his wage, a worker at GM works around an additional 24 minutes for free for GM.

In a 7-hour (420-minute) work day , the GM worker produces her/his wage in about 300 (5 hours) and works 120 minutes (2 hours) for free for GM. Of course, during the time that the worker produces her/his own wage, s/he is subject to the power of management and hence is unfree (see, for instance, Management Rights, Part Four: Private Sector Collective Agreement, Ontario  and   Employers as Dictators, Part One).

In an 8-hour (480 minute-work day), a GM worker produces her/his wage in 343 minutes (5 hours 43 minutes) and works for 137 minutes (2 hours 17 minutes) free for GM.

In an 9-hour (540-minute) day, a GM worker produces her/his wage in 386 minutes (6 hours 26 minutes) and works for free for 154 minutes (2 hours 34 minutes) for GM.

In a 10-hour (600-minute) day, a GM worker produces her/his wage in 429 minutes (7 hours 9 minutes and works for free for 171 minutes (2 hours 51 minutes) for GM.

In a 11-hour (660-minute) day, a GM worker produces her/his wage in 471 minutes (7 hours 51 minutes) and works for free for 189 minutes (3 hours 9 minutes) for GM.

In a 12-hour (720-minute) day, a GM worker produces her/his wage in 514 minutes (8 hours 34 minutes) and works for free for 206 minutes (3 hours 26 minutes) for GM.

Of course, during these times that the worker works to obtain an equivalent of her/his own wage, s/he is subject to the power of management and hence is also unfree during that time (see The Rate of Exploitation of Magna International Inc., One of the Largest Private Employers in Toronto, Part Two, Or: Intensified Oppression and Exploitation and   Employers as Dictators, Part One).

In practice, General Motors workers work for more than necessary to produce the equivalent value of their wages and benefits, and their surplus labour produces General Motors profits (surplus of value).

You would think that, given these circumstances, General Motors workers would find their work situation mainly negative.  Indeed, there are leftists who have argued that workers explicitly experience alienation from their work. David Graeber (2018), in Bullshit Jobs A Theory, states (page 19):

The result was to reveal that men are far more likely to feel that their jobs are pointless (42 percent) than women do (32 percent).

Drawing upon data provided from another survey, he states:

… the survey makes abundantly clear that ( 1) more than half of working hours in American offices are spent on bullshit, and (2) the problem is getting worse.

In another survey, we read the following (Peter Fleming (2015), The Mythology of Work: How Capitalism Persists Despite Itself, page 3):

A recent survey … reveals that only about 13 per cent of the global workforce considered themselves ‘engaged’ by their jobs. The remaining 87 per cent feel deeply alienated.

Subjective Attitudes of General Motors Workers Towards General Motors and Their Working Situation

The data provided below, however, does not substantiate such views.

To obtain such data, I provided a review of my last employer–Lakeshore School Division–for the website Indeed in order to gain access to company reviews.

There were 624 reviews for Canada at the time that I started this post.

Of course, the numbers above will have changed in a relatively short period of time.

General Motors Workers’ Attitudes Towards General Motors and Their Working Conditions

In similar posts, I provided a more detailed quantitative breakdown of the reviews (see for example Should Not the Radical Left Take into Account the Attitude of Workers Towards Their Own Jobs? Part One, The Case of Magna International Workers),but such detail requires much more time. Unless there is a political reason for engaging in such detailed work, I will only provide the total quantitative data. 

 The ratings are from 5 to 1, with 5 being the most positive evaluation and 1 the worst.

Distribution of the Evaluations to the Various Ratings: Quantitative Data

#5 212

#4 218 [430]

#3 105 [535]

#2 42 [577]

#1 3+40+4=47=624

I will consider #5 and #4 ratings to be positive evaluations of their work experiences with General Motors. I split the #3 into two since some ratings with a #3 rating are positive evaluations while others are negative. I will consider #2 and #1 ratings to be negative evaluations.

I justify the categorisation of #5 and #4 as positive because, in addition to being quantitatively higher than #3–a nominal middle evaluation–comments made by some workers that correspond to the quantitative evaluation seem to indicate a positive evaluation. Further on, I give a couple of arbitrary examples drawn from each numbered evaluation.

Positive attitude towards working for General Motors
212+218+52=482
482/624×100=77%

Negative attitude towards working for General Motors
53+42+47=142
142/624×100=23%

To get a flavour for the ratings, I include immediately below a couple of comments from each rating. They are not meant to be representative since I chose them to reflect the above characterizations of the evaluations.

A Few Comments from Each Evaluative Category: Qualitative Data

#5

1. I love Gm
   Production Operator (Former Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 13 September 2022
   Its really a good place to work. Good people, environment, pay as well. We can learn something new always. Feel relaxed always due to the cool behaviour of people.
2. I had a good work team
   Auto Worker team leader (Former Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 29 May 2022
   I was there to do my job and I worked there for 30 year and always looked forward to going to work because I never had a bad day at work and the people were always in a good mood and we were all very thankful that we worked for GM

#4

1. Productive and fun
   Warehouse Worker (Former Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 12 November 2022
   Productive and fun. Everyone seemed to have enjoyed their job, good pay and a stable working environment. Everything seemed to have the ergonomic realty going as to prevent repetition and long term problems relating to over use of your body.
2. Overall great job
   General Labourer/Utility Repairman (Former Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 7 February 2017
   – 8 hr shift – sometimes overtime, repetitive work
   – learnt something new all the time as I changed jobs with GM on the line frequently
   -management was always doing their best for the employee – sometimes their hands were tied, however mostly really great.
   – I got along with pretty much everyone, I enjoy people
   -the hardest part of the job was frequent changes to the positions, however mostly ending back where they started
   -the most enjoyable part of the job was my co-workers and building quality products for the consumer.
   Pros
   wage and being apart of building vehicles for the community
   Cons
   the uncertainty of the job

#3

1. Good Place to work while It lasted
   General Laborer/Car Assembly (Former Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 20 January 2020
   honestly from my experience working there is was good for the first 2 years then everything went down hill had new management and they ruined the place with there cocky selfish rude attitude’s.
2. Bad Environment
   Production Team Member (Former Employee) – St. Catharines, ON – 11 June 2024
   The work was very boring and repetitive and the hours really sucked. There also was a lot of tension between management and workers which made the environment hostile.

#2 

1. Not a good place to work
   Machine Operator (Former Employee) – Oshawa – 28 September 2023
   If you can find something better go there, this is a depressing place to work.

   The party is decent but the work is killer.

   Management just sees your as a good in the system.

2. Paid the bills.
   Factory Line Worker – Absentee Replacement (Current Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 23 July 2019
   Hard work. Laborious, but thats what you sign up for. doing the same thing every minute 220 times a day isn’t the greatest, but it paid the bills and for that I’m thankful. Hard on your body, repetitive movements, and they don’t care about you in there. If your injured they don’t believe you, but again, thats just other people ruining it for the ones who are actually hurt. Honestly, GM as a company is ok I guess, its the people who run it and you work with that suck and have made it worse for everyone else.

   PS: Probably don’t get a job there because they don’t have any loyalty.

#1

1. It was alright except for lots of favoritum & all kinds of Discrimination
   Factory Worker (Former Employee) – Oshawa, ON – 24 May 2024
   What is the best part of working at the company?
   The money is a good & the benefits are good as well

What is the most stressful part about working at the company?
Never knowing if you will have a job bc GM decide to go plant idle or the layoffs

What is the work environment and culture like at the company?
Dramatic & ridiculous and very petty behavior

What is a typical day like for you at the company?
Go to work& work hard for 8 hours then go home

2. Stay Away
Machine Operator (Current Employee) – St. Catharines, ON – 15 July 2023
Worst mistake I’ve ever made getting into their facility, there’s no work Life balance and you can forget about pursuing your dreams. It’s all about managers getting their bonuses and bullying line workers everyday.

Political Relevance

Such analysis forms only a preliminary tool for socialists interested in relating to workers working for this particular employer. It is crude quantitative and should be supplemented by a qualitative analysis of comments–a much more labour-intensive task.

Unlike Jane McAlevey’s approach, which focuses on organic leaders–leaders who form a key focus since winning their allegiance leads to other workers (or community members) being convinced to join a union or community campaign (see my review in the Links section)–the issue here is to see which workers are the most disgruntled and the least disgruntled in relation to a particular employer.

It may be thought that the more disgruntled workers would then be the focus of socialists’ efforts. That may well be, but the issue is of course more complicated than that. For example, for socialists the issue is not just being disgruntled against a particular employer but generalizing this to all employers. It would be necessary for socialists to use their judgement in determining how susceptible disgruntled workers are to such generalization. In some cases, less disgruntled workers may well be more susceptible to generalizing than more disgruntled workers. Initially, though, it does give socialists a preliminary method of approaching workers, at least in a general way. Of course, no specific workers can be identified through such an approach. That would be the responsibility of socialists engaging with specific workers or community members.