Analysis of the Idea of Division of Labor - Coursework Example

? To what extent can Blauner’s operationalization of alienation be regarded as Marxian? Introduction Division of labor refers to the breaking down of work into several tasks, each performed by a specialized worker. To Durkheim, division of labor was positive in that it gave an equal chance to all members in the society to participate in its development, which also meant, that there were enough resources to go around. It meant a reduction in the struggle for survival since everyone had a role to play (Woodward 2005). According to Karl Marx, division of labor is negative mainly because it is a product of a capitalistic society. When a person sells their labor to the industry, the private owner of that industry becomes that person’s owner too. This in turn, makes that worker the property of his employer, dehumanizing him/her and resulting in alienation of the worker (Haralambos & Holborn 2008). Alienation according to Marx is the estrangement, or separation, of humans from their essential human nature due to the capitalistic system. For Marx, what distinguishes humans from animals is life-activity (Haralambos & Holborn 2008). Humans make their work the central activity of their lives, taking pride in it and going beyond satisfaction of physical needs. This is demonstrated by the fact that contrary to animals, we produce much more than we need immediately and, also strive to attain beauty and perfection in work produced (Noon & Blyton 2007). The capitalistic system deprives humans of this by necessitating that a person sells their labor to a buyer. The buyer thus owns not only the person’s labor, but also their will, since the worker now has to bend according to the buyer’s will (Watson 2011). Alienation thus occurs since the person is not only separated from the act of production and, also the eventual product of his/her labor (Woodward 2005). There are four types of alienation according to Marx. Alienation from the product of labor, as mentioned above, occurred in a capitalistic society because the worker never got to use his/her products. Cash crops, for example, would be sold, more often than not leaving the peasant worker malnourished (Edgell 2011). The cars produced by workers in the industries would never be theirs since they could not afford them. Alienation from the labor process occurred because the worker had no say over the conditions they worked in. Individualism and creativity was lost as a worker became just a cog in the industrial machine (Watson 2011). The interest of the capitalist to maximize profits came at a cost to the worker because they could be overworked and underpaid, seeing as they technically belonged to their bosses (Noon & Blyton 2007). Alienation from fellow human beings came about due to the emergence of a class system as a result of division of labor. The workers saw their employers as exploiters and tormentors, since their agony was what gave them their comforts and pleasure (Haralambos & Holborn 2008). The elimination of contact with the makers of the products we use every day also resulted in alienation. Alienation from human nature occurred due to the workers being deprived of what made them human, that is, the enjoyment of their work and the fruit of their labor (Woodward 2005). Robert Blauner’s tools for measuring alienation were the amount of control one has over their work; the sense of purpose in it; the degree of social integration with co-workers, and lastly, the degree of involvement with the work (Haralambos & Holborn 2008). Blauner’s four dimensions of alienation can be explained as such: Powerlessness- if a worker cannot control important aspects of his work, he can fail to achieve fulfillment in their personal lives. Meaninglessness; according to Marxian theory, work becomes forced labor (Woodward 2005). Blauner tries to establish the significance of the work they do to the worker, that is, whether they feel they are allowed creative license and individualism in their work. Isolation and identity is another issue especially if a worker has little or no contact with fellow workers. He/she may feel alienated due to the lack of a community. Self-estrangement; eventually, the individual becomes unable to relate to and communicate with fellow human beings (Noon & Blyton 2007). Blauner did not subscribe to Marx’s generalization of all workers as alienated due to their position beneath their masters. In his operationalization, the worker’s attitude to their work matters a lot in determining how alienated they are (Woodward 2005). Blauner’s operationalization takes into account the different working environments and does not generalize all industrial occupations as soul-sucking, monotonous jobs. His research demonstrated that industries such as the textile and printing industries afforded the workers a degree of control over their work and satisfied them (Noon & Blyton 2007). To single out the textile industry, for example, he expected a high level of alienation in the workers, objectively speaking. Textile work is highly machinated, repetitive and standard. The work has a set standard, eliminating any creativity or pride in work (Noon & Blyton 2007). There is a high level of supervision and movement is limited because the workers have to be at the machines at all times. Surprisingly, on a subjective level, he found that the workers were not alienated. This was attributed to the observation that the workers were well-adjusted to their work, having resigned to the fact that it was monotonous, and had low expectations in life due to lower levels of education than average (Woodward 2005). There was also a strong sense of community and kinship ties, eliminating alienation due to feelings of isolation and estrangement. His theory, however, aligns with Marx’s in that some industrial occupations indeed alienate the worker to a very large degree. Assembly line work in the automobile industry in his research was the worst culprit. This was because their workers were constantly feeling detached from their work, finding it stressful, repetitive and tightly controlled and monitored (Watson 2011). An extreme degree of alienation is demonstrated in the chemical industry where interviews conducted showed that the workers had no choice but to work in very dangerous conditions, sometimes several feet high in chemicals, to earn a living (Noon and Blyton 2007). In these kinds of situations, the workers have sold themselves to the factories, for the sake of making a living. They are alienated in the Marxian sense to the highest level possible and are slaves to the capitalistic system (Haralambos & Holborn 2008). Blauner’s theory that worker involvement was an essential part of how alienated they were can be observed in Mallet’s theory of the new working class (Edgell 2011). He believes workers are capable of uplifting themselves from their lowly position through collectivism and unionism. Mallet calls this group the ‘new working class’ who can revolutionize society because they have gained knowledge of how to operate the machines (Woodward 2005). He believes this gives them the power to campaign for their rights by means of holding the rest of society hostage, for example, by downing their tools and depriving them of their labor. This is essentially turning the tables where the slaves become the masters and the proletariats become the bourgeoisie (Noon & Blyton 2007). Gallie supports social determinism, that is, technology is the product of a society and culture, and essentially, necessity is the mother of invention (Noon & Blyton 2007). Technology can also only be constructed by those who have the money and power to do so; thus, technology becomes a means through which society is stratified. From this perspective, the workers hold little power, to effectively demand for their rights, since all the power still lies in the capital holders. The conditions under which the workers operate are deemed to stay as their employers want them to. This removes the possibility for worker intervention and attitude change that Blauner integrates into his operationalization (Woodward 2005). If the worker feels powerless to change any aspect of their work, including being able to negotiate for work hours and salary increments, how can they not succumb to alienation? This situation is evident in third world sweatshops and export processing zones that are practically modern-day slavery (Watson 2011). Here, people are put to work in over-crowded factories, to manufacture goods for consumption of the elite masses. The Marxian total alienation and enslavement of the person, and not only their labor, is well-represented here, as the workers cannot afford to partake of the goods they produce, and the final consumers remain largely unaware of the producers of their goods and the inhuman conditions under which they produced them (Noon & Blyton 2007). Conclusion Marx’s theory of alienation provided a foundation on which to observe the effects of capitalism as a newly- emerging system during the Industrial Revolution. The oppression of the workers and repression of their rights was rife during this time, and the inherent evils of factory work were a harsh reality then. Blauner attempts to revisit this theory and see how far we have come from the 1800s (Noon & Blyton 2007). Though differences exist, specifically in the strides that have been made in making factory workers better, unionizing and campaigning for better working conditions, sadly, things remain the same in some areas. Workers are still exploited, sweatshops still exist, and alienation of workers is prevalent in many job sectors (Watson 2011). Blauner’s operationalization of alienation differs from Marx’s in that it is not as pessimistic, making the case for positive capitalism and portraying factory work as positive in some industries. It also leaves room for the worker’s actions and attitudes as an individual to determine whether they will face alienation. By doing so, Blauner succeeds in portraying alienation in a new light that is applicable to the current era (Watson 2011). References Edgell, S 2011, The sociology of work: continuity and change in paid an unpaid work, 2nd edn., Sage Publication Ltd, New York. Haralambos, M & Holborn, M 2008, Sociology themes and perspectives, 7th edn., Collins Educational, Michigan. Noon, M & Blyton, P 2007, The Realities of Work, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke. Watson, T 2011, Sociology, work and organisation, Routledge, London. Woodward, K 2005, Social Sciences: The Big Issues, Routledge, London. Read More