"If it's provable we can kill it."
Or, why are working Americans such cheery motherfuckers?
Published on November 29, 2006 By EmperorofIceCream In Misc
I hate work. I hate it with a passion. Like the title says, the only thing I hate more is unemployment. It's a European thing generally, but it's also and particularly an English thing. One of the most alien (to me) attitudes I've encountered since arriving here is the American attitude to work. Any good working-class Englishman (which is what I am at the marrow - working-class and proud of it) will tell you that employers per se are the enemy of the worker.

In part this attitude has to do with the fact that the Industrial Revolution, the Age of the Machine, and the chronic disruption that Mechanism and Sweated Labor brought to the social structures of the laboring classes, began in England. The Luddites, those heroes of the working classes, destroyed machines used in the textile industry, and later still the threshing machines that deprived agricultural workers of their livelihoods. I am at heart a Luddite: if I could I would burn down and obliterate the entire technological basis of twenty first century existence, and do so happily.

Work, as every good Englishman knows, is a curse. And those who employ workers are at heart mere exploiters and profiteers who derive their gains from the sweat of others - no matter how hard they may work themselves. This is not a rational point of view. It is, however, deeply ingrained in the psyche of every European. If it were not for the fact that work, and payment for it, is the only way (short of winning the Lottery) by which I can gain the money I need to allow me to do the things I actually want to do, nothing could persuade to engage in it. It's not that the work I do is trivial or meaningless: I help keep your lights burning, your air conditioning ticking over. I help keep the doohickey that automatically opens your garage door when you hit a button in operation. I perform a socially important, useful function.

And? So? The only meaning this work has for me, personally, is the pay check that lands in my bank account each week. I grant you, that's not something of little consequence, and I do my work to the very best of my ability to ensure that that pay check keeps arriving. But I look at my colleagues and I see their apparently genuine enthusiasm for the Rob-dog swine for whom they work - and I cannot understand it. That is, I cannot understand their unaffected enthusiasm.

I'm currently participating in a training course developed and provided by the Company for which I work. We'll call my instructor 'J'. J has a burning enthusiasm for her employer: at every turn, and with perfectly genuine enthusiasm and commitment, she exhorts us to go the extra mile - to volunteer for extra duties so that we can learn as much as possible about every aspect of the Company's work, and thereby become better employees who add extra value, over and above the value we have all contracted to provide, to the Compay's enterprise. I look around me at the eleven others involved in this training and on every face I see agreement, enthusiastic agreement. To me they look like so many rabbits hypnotized by a snake.

This is not meant to disparage J. She's an effective, able teacher. She is in general articulate, knowledgeable, and brings to her work humor and even, sometimes, a sense of irony. But that sense of irony is sadly under-developed and is one of the few areas in which she is less than articulate. Nonetheless, her irony is too sophisticated for my classmates, who look at her with expressions of vague unease whenever she says something that doesn't quite fit within their mindless enthusiasm for those who have condescended to give them work.

Work is only a more complex, a more subtle, form of slavery. My employer does not own me, as it owns the other assets of the Company. But nonetheless, without work I am only technically free. I am as much bound to the necessity of work as feudal peasants were once bound to the necessity of obeying their Lord's will. Without work I have no standing in the community. Without work I'm dependant (after the unemployment checks run out) on the grace and charity of others - unless I want to scrabble among the filth of our society, as some do, to recycle what the employed throw away as trash. Without work opportunities to advance economically are non-existent, the possibility of entertaining myself, of advancing myself through education, and of expressing myself through participation in society, are grievously limited.

To do what I want to do, to do what pleases me, I must work in order to gain the resource, money, that makes all these things possible. I am, and you are (unless you're independently wealthy) a wage slave. No matter what work I do, no matter how intrinsically satisfying that work might be (and I'll admit that there aspects of my work which do please and satisfy me) I will always loathe, detest, abominate, despise and condemn, the necessity, the compulsion, the wage slavery, of work.

J, filled with near-Messianic zeal, exhorts us to become better employees. I, European that I am, will never do more than is necessary to keep my employer from dismissing me, or more than is required to serve my interests. Whereas most Americans seem to work, and wish to excel in work, so that they can better serve the interests of the Company that employs them, I work so that the thieving devils who profit from my sweat will be compelled to pay me.

I can hear the Good Americans among you saying 'What theft?' They are thieving devils because they profit far more from my work than I receive in compensation for it. I am compelled to work: but they are not compelled to employ me. They receive profit, I receive a wage. There is no reciprocity, no equality (save that of market value) involved, and therefore no dignity. Work, and the necessity for it, is not only a curse - it's an insult. An insult, an indignity, from which I cannot escape.

This situation, which in its basic structure is the same for everyone who does not live from profit but is paid a wage (there is no difference between 'wage' and 'salary' - except the obfuscation and deceit of those who wish to hide the shared interests of all workers through the creation of artificial distinctions) is made all the worse in my case because I am a 'contractor' and not a 'direct employee'. I receive a higher hourly remuneration than direct employees of the Company for which I work - but extremely limited (in practice, almost non-existent) health benefits. For me, every Federal holiday that falls on a working weekday is simply a day for which I am not paid, because I have no choice other than not to work. I can choose to leave my employment, after giving fourteen days notice, for any reason or no reason - just as I can be dismissed, with fourteen days notice, for any reason or no reason, because my employment is 'at will'.

My experience here leads me to believe that most Americans will have no sympathy for my feelings in this matter. It's a cultural attitude which, apparently, is as alien to you as your zeal for your employers is alien to me. Workplace culture in America is fundamentally foreign to me, and I'm only just beginning to get to grips with it.

My last employer in the UK was an electrical utility. There, a software suite called 'GE SmallWorld' is the industry standard and is used for almost all GIS (geographical information systems) work. That being said, the community of experienced GIS digitizers (the people who draw the maps) is actually quite small, and we all know each other.

When I took up my last job in the UK the first thing I said to my immediate manager, with whom I'd worked previously, was "You sheep-shagging Welsh cunt: what are you doing here?" His response was to laugh and call me an English bastard, and then to tell me to shut the fuck up and get to work. Had I not addressed him in that fashion, and been willing to accept his insult in turn, he would have made my life an absolute misery.

None of that would ever happen here. In fact, the first time I worked for the Company that presently employs me, I made the mistake of treating my immediate manager in the same way. He never forgave me, and blocked my progress within the Company at every turn. A case of cultural mis-communication, and I don't resent him for it. I resent him for being an appallingly bad manager and a weakling, but that's another story entirely. I've since learned to be rather more 'respectful', outwardly at least, and in consequence am doing rather better than I did the first time.

Another, minor, illustration of the differences in workplace culture between America and the UK. There is no such thing as 'coffee service' in the UK. In fact, Companies are prevented from providing such amenities on the grounds of health and safety. We considered ourselves lucky if the Company provided tea and coffee vending machines - and luckier still if the tea and coffee (no matter how bad) was free: most vending machines charge you for the privilege of using them. And bringing in your own coffee-maker was utterly unheard of. I was astounded when I got my first real job here - almost every desk was equipped with a personal coffee-maker.

I no longer bat an eye at such things: but every now and then it still strikes me as utterly bizarre. I remember working at Swan Lane in Wolverhampton (an excellent town, and an excellent work location, full of highly skilled people) and making frequent trips to the Tea Machine - which charged roughly fifty cents per cup of lukewarm feeble-ass tea. And being grateful for it.

I could go on and on about the differences in work practices and conditions between There and Here. But the one constant is the difference in attitudes towards the Employer: everyone I've ever spoken to There hated his or her Employer, precisely because the Company was his or her Employer - even if he or she liked the work itself. Whereas here, apparently, everyone loves his or her Employer - precisely and solely because they are employed.

I've come to the conclusion that both attitudes are equally irrational, and that I prefer the European attitude to work only because it's familiar, ingrained and, by now, inescapable. I find the American attitude of subservient ingratiation towards managers both utterly irritating and abominably offensive - but I have no choice except to accept it in others and conceal my own furious resentment in regard to it as best I can.

Why do I resent such an attitude? That's hard to explain and is perhaps best left for another blog. But it has to do with appreciation, with respect. And it has to do with the fundamental reality that payment for services is not a mark of respect but simply a quid pro quo which serves as as a dismissal and not as a sign of acceptance. Those who employ us condemn us for being powerless to do anything except serve them. Employment is a mark of contempt, not a mark of respect.

Work will always be a necessity wherever I am, Here or There, and it will always make demands of me that I have no choice but to accept. Be that as it may, I am not free to do anything but collaborate in its indignity and its profound insult in relation to the freedom of the individual (an insult made all the deeper by my understanding that the modern concept of the Individual and of Work are inextricably linked). My collaboration in that insult, unwilling though it is, marks me as a slave. And despite my comprehension of my status it is as a slave that I must live - because I can do nothing else.

I suppose I could be self-employed, which might be seen as an escape from this system of condemnation and contempt. But the fact is that those who are self-employed still participate in a system of exchange (labor for cash) which is predicated on the idea that profit is of more value than labor - even though it is labor that is the sole source of value (hello Marx ... - is it possible that I am the last real Communist left alive in the world?) And profit is the motivator of all endeavour, in the contemporary world, whether on behalf of an external employer or on behalf of oneself, and as such is a betrayal of the freedom of the individual. Work is work, whether pursued for the profit of a Company, or the profit of the individual licensed and identified as a Company.

The only freedom the working man has left is to hate (and I do mean hate) his employer. And even though I am Here, rather than There, this is a freedom I am glad to exercise - even if it works, ultimately, to my disadvantage. Be damned to those who pay my wages and profit from my sweat. Be damned to them: how dare they use me so.

If hatred is my only freedom I will exercise it as I may. As I have said before, to many who did not understand me - the only thing I hate more than work is unemployment.

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Nov 29, 2006
I know. I don't expect anyone to understand. And to be honest, I don't care if you understand or not. It was a relief to write it. I HATE work.
on Nov 29, 2006

I've figured out my basic problem, thanks to you, Emp. I'm an Englishman, switched at birth with an American baby.

God Save the Queen! And may God have mercy on that poor American twit who's slaving away to the delight of his English overlords!

on Nov 29, 2006
To do what I want to do, to do what pleases me, I must work in order to gain the resource, money, that makes all these things possible. I am, and you are (unless you're independently wealthy) a wage slave. No matter what work I do, no matter how intrinsically satisfying that work might be (and I'll admit that there aspects of my work which do please and satisfy me) I will always loathe, detest, abominate, despise and condemn, the necessity, the compulsion, the wage slavery, of work.


Whatever makes you roll out of bed when you desired to sleep in or forced you away from your own immediate interest is where this is introduced, regardless of how much you could possibly like components of your job.

Very nice article.

Like you, I've recently been hired and am with a new company. The university is a faceless mask of productivity, churning out 50 thousand dollar minds a year, our product being exhaulted as knowledge but really is information. Those who chose to understand it and apply it are destined to be the glory winners. If you can get around all the commercial blurbs and mottos, and focus on the task at hand, I have to say that, for the most part, I like my new job. I am definitely not the person I used to be several months ago, seething and hating and being upset at the other job.

But, yeah. As much as I like what I'm doing, I understand the control I'm under.



on Dec 01, 2006
To: little whip

I think one can like their job and still despise their work, haha.


I agree. And there are parts of this job that I think I might actually be able to enjoy, if I grit my teeth and determine that what I can enjoy I will enjoy. It may even be the case that I'll eventually obtain work that I enjoy a majority of the time I spend engaged in it.

However, nothing will persuade me that working for a wage or salary is not a subtle form of slavery, an indignity and an imposition.

Poor Simon, a typical fatalistic, pessimistic, dour Englishman swimming in a sea of hopeful, cheerful, and smiling Americans.


I couldn't have put that better myself. People here seem to treat working for an employer as a privilege. It isn't: it's a form of prostitution. I've spent this week attending a Company training course, entitled 'Fundamentals of Design Work'. What I've learned is going to prove helpful - if only in the sense that I now understand in which areas I'm going to need help, and some of the right questions to ask as well as having an idea as to how I should get the answers I need.

The curious thing is that, though the training involved will prove essential to my success and the proper completion of the project I was hired to work on, the two instructors most closely involved had to virtually suck the dicks of my two immediate managers to get their consent for my attendance. Why? Cost, and the fact that this Company has a tradition of non-investment in Contract workers.

Why hire people to do shoddy work? Because the Company's interest is not in excellent work and providing value for money to customers through superior workmanship. Its interest is in profit and its short-term maximisation. I'm whoring myself out to a john that doesn't want to pay and is very happy to short-change it's customer base. It can do this as successfully as it does (while providing shoddy work) because it has a monopoly in this State on the production of its services.

This does not strike any of my fellow-whores as odd, and doesn't in any way dampen their near-hysterical enthusiam for their Employer. Only this morning I listened to one crowing over the amount of money she has generated for the Company - as if helping a monopolistic producer of substandard goods to continue gypping its customers is a source of pride. Perhaps it is, here. But it ought not to be.

Let me explain my philosophy of work. I was hired to do certain things for a certain sum of money, to be deposited in my bank account at regular intervals. In my interest I intend to the best job I can, not because I take pride in my work or wish to be a good employee, but because a good report from this john will help ensure I can whore myself out with another in the future.

Would I volunteer (as I and the other trainees were constantly exhorted to do by our instructors) for other or extra work in order to become 'well-rounded employees, familiar with other branches of the Company's work'? Hell no. Certainly I'm a whore - but I'm not a stupid whore.
on Dec 01, 2006
I know. I don't expect anyone to understand. And to be honest, I don't care if you understand or not. It was a relief to write it. I HATE work.


I understand it and I hate it too. I subscribe to my wife's philosophy: give e'm 100% and maybe a tiny bit more, but not much more! All they'll do is exploit you.

How'd that old song go? What do you get when you work your fingers to the bone? Boney fingers!
on Dec 05, 2006
To: Shovelheat

I understand it and I hate it too. I subscribe to my wife's philosophy: give e'm 100% and maybe a tiny bit more, but not much more! All they'll do is exploit you.


A noble American sentiment. Utter nonsense, but noble. My own, far more sensible, principle is: make just sufficient effort to justify, in my mind, getting paid. And whenever possible, less. Because the thieving ungrateful swine we all work for will only despise us and exploit our good nature if we do more.

The Company for which I work continues to meet my expectations in every way - no matter how low they are. Many Companies of sufficient size and diversity of enterprise use a suite of statistical techniques called Six Sigma to organize their work processes and increase efficiency. The Company I work for is one of these. The Project I'm now working on is a result of these techniques, just as the previous Project was. That one worked so well that every time I did my job right I actually lost the Company money. It worked well as a Six Sigma Project because Six Sigma works with the assumptions built into any scenario subjected to its analysis - and the originators of that first Project never actually checked to see if their assumptions about reality were actually related to reality in any way.

They weren't.

When I'd demonstrated this to a sufficient degree by losing enough money the Company disbanded the Project team, moved an excellent manager sideways into a Corporate deadend, and declined to renew my contract. Not because I'd done anything wrong, or failed to satisfy, but because I'd done everything asked of me, and a little more (in the interest of alleviating my utter tedium), with a greater level of diligence and accuracy than they were expecting - or wanted.

The Company I work for appears, from the outside, to be the epitome of efficiency - and in certain respects it does exhibit a degree of competence that lives up to that image. But in many others it does not, especially in its propensity to pull Six Sigma projects out of its ass like a magician pulling rabbits out of a hat. My current project is no different. Demonstrated by Six Sigma analysts (the High Priests and Oracles of the Company) to be feasible, no doubt - but at the same time completely unthought through and chronically ill-prepared.

At the interview they told me they want me to contribute to developing time saving strategies that will speed up the process in which I'm involved - which is what I ended up doing the last time I worked for these people (it's the credit I built up the last time I worked for them that got me rehired, even if as a contractor once more).

I intend to do a similarly good job this time. And if I can lose them some more money through doing my job right and well - then doing it right and well will be all the sweeter. I hate statisticians almost as much as I hate doctors and lawyers, and people who work in 'human resources'.

Human beings are not resources (haven't any of these people read Kant?): oil, and minerals, and trucks, and wrenches are resources. Labor is only a resource in terms of organizing, scheduling, work. Labor is the source of all real value, and without it the parasitic managerial bloodsuckers who sit at the top of every organization 'directing' affairs would be lost.

I don't deny that the work of a manager is necessary to a Company's success - that would be stupid. I do deny that the function of a manager is in any way more integral or necessary or intrinsically more valuable to an enterprise than that of the guy who runs the lathe, pushes the mop, or does any of the things that constitute the actual product, the thing that is sold in the market place, from the sale of which the Company derives its revenue.

Do I respect individual managers I've worked with? Yes, some individuals I respect. Do I respect their positions as managers? No, because by far the vast majority of managers I have known have done their jobs badly, or very badly. Even in Britain, there's usually a sucker ready to take up the slack and make things come out right - or as nearly right as possible - and that's even more true of Here than it is of There.

One of the reasons I detest work so is that it's always a disappointment, always a revelation of corruption, incompetence and venality; of simple human stupidity at work, sometimes on an epic scale. A simple example is enough to prove the point. The Project I'm engaged in is a pilot, a new way of doing a recurring task that until now has been considered a small part of wider responsibilities. Small, but frequently recurring and in high demand.

No thought has been given to how the workers involved in this new way of doing things are to be trained; preparation, basic consideration of how to communicate the nature of fundamental techniques necessary to the success of the work, began a week before I was hired. The simplest organizational preparations (such as a logical division of tasks and responsibilities) are only now being thought about. Everything worked out in advance according to the doctrines of Six Sigma (which is more than a suite of statistical techniques in this Company - it's a philosophy of work and a system of 'practical' organization or, to use another word entirely, an ideology) but nothing done to meet the demands of the work itself.

Same shit, different day.

C'est la vie, c'est la guerre.
on Dec 06, 2006
Work....

It's such a disappointment.
on Dec 10, 2006
My. For such a loquacious people, for whom work is almost a matter of religion, for whom (so it appears to a stranger) the Company and its Activities, its successes and failures, seem to be matters of burning importance, you're all remarkably quiet when it comes to confronting someone whose ethos of work is diametrically opposed to the values you all espouse - or appear to. Could it be that you are all, in fact, closet Europeans; could it be that you all really feel as I do - that employers are thieves, that work per se is an indignity and an insult, that to give 100% to your employer is actually an act of folly on a par with dousing yourself in kerosene and striking a match, that loyalty to the Company is actually an act of egregious disloyalty to yourself and everything you value?

Could that be the case?

Why are you not here demonstrating how foolish, how wicked I am?
on Dec 10, 2006
When I was making an income and working as a reporter, I was thankful for my job. Thankful because they needed a reporter and I needed a job. Astonished I could get PAID to do something I loved.

I didn't know Europeans have such a "right of entitlement" attitude to life. Do they think they are so wonderful they shouldn't HAVE to work and contribute to society? They are so marvelous they should all be rich and not forced to worry about mundane matters like bills? Pfft.

Employer/employee relationships in MOST jobs are cyclical in nature. The better an employee performs, the better the company does. The better the company does, the more money the employee makes.

There are exceptions of course, but generally that is how I see it.

In my mind, doing my best, is about self satisfaction. (It's not worth doing, if it's not done right.) I don't do much of anything half way (personal or professional), and when I do it nags me. When I interview and take the job it is with the unspoken understanding that I will do my best for whatever salary negotiated. If I do less than my best, then I am stealing. And I do believe, what goes around comes around.

on Dec 11, 2006
To: Tova7

I didn't know Europeans have such a "right of entitlement" attitude to life. Do they think they are so wonderful they shouldn't HAVE to work and contribute to society? They are so marvelous they should all be rich and not forced to worry about mundane matters like bills? Pfft.


As I pointed out at the beginning of the article, employer/employee relations (in the UK at least) are predicated not any sense of entitlement, but in an historical recognition that employers are the enemies of those they employ. I also pointed out that this is not a rational point of view. Its roots go back even further than the Industrial Revolution which itself produced, among other things, changes in working practices that were massively detrimental to family relationships and saw the demise of traditional methods of work that had existed for centuries. It goes back further still as I say, to the feudal period, where work for the local Lord was exacted as a form of tribute and had to be carried out before any work that served the interest of the worker. Long before wage slavery and profit, long before Capitalists and Workers, the English working man knew in his marrow that to work was to be exploited. Certain things have changed: no one now owes work to a feudal lord as an obligation for which he receives no recompense - but there is a legacy of genuine class-hatred between those who work and those who profit from that work - a legacy that I have inherited.

It has nothing to do with 'entitlement' and everything to do with an ingrained, a culturally determined, sense that all work is a form of theft. And that those engaged in that theft thieve on a grand scale, without any fear that 'social justice' will ever catch up with them.

To most Americans that I've encountered this is an entirely alien point of view. They believe that they actually engage in a negotiation with their employers, a negotiation conducted from a position of equality. How this delusion is supported by seemingly intelligent people is beyond me - there is no equality in the relationship being discussed in an employment interview, because workers need to work and employers do not need to employ that particular individual. There are usually tens, and sometimes hundreds, and occasionally thousands, of applicants for any given position. Unless you're in the fortunate position of possessing a rare skill, rare but in high demand, the applicant for a position has no hold upon the prospective employer and is in every way subject to the demands of that employer.

You may think you've 'negotiated' a contract - but all you've ever done is accept what the employer has offered, and that offer was made at the employer's discretion, not yours.

The English have a habit, as employees, of taking whatever they can from their employers. Americans, apparently, have a habit of devoting themselves to the interests of their employer before their own. Neither position is rational - and to me your comment

If I do less than my best, then I am stealing.


is not merely nonsense but nonsense on stilts and wearing a party hat. The working English are slaves who know and hate their slavery. Americans are slaves who, grinning like fools all the while, celebrate and rejoice in their slavery. Being English I prefer the former irrationality to the latter.

on Dec 11, 2006
*in the style of Mr Mash from Are You Being Served*

UP THE WORKERS!

Peace, brother.
on Dec 11, 2006
a culturally determined, sense that all work is a form of theft. And that those engaged in that theft thieve on a grand scale,


Reminds me of a quote at the start of The Godfather. To wit:

Behind every great fortune, there is a crime.
-Balzac
on Dec 11, 2006
To: Tova7

One other thing I meant to comment on. You say -

In my mind, doing my best, is about self satisfaction. (It's not worth doing, if it's not done right.) I don't do much of anything half way (personal or professional), and when I do it nags me.


in a sense I'm in agreement with you. I take satisfaction in doing my work to the best of my ability - because in doing so I know I'm compelling those who employed me to live up to their end of the bargain. Generally (but not always - as the demise of my last contract proved) the better you do your work the less likely you are to be fired - and as I said, the only thing I hate more than work is unemployment. Equally, I'm never more stressed at work than when I'm bored - so I make it a point to seek out opportunities in whatever I'm employed in to make my time at work productive. Not because I give a damn for the interests of my employer but because I detest being idle at work, because being idle means being bored.

Just because I hate the thieving, exploitative swine for whom I work does not mean that I do not do good work. But my interest in doing so has nothing to to do with promoting the interests of the damnable Rob-dogs that employ me, and everything to do with continuing to be paid and avoiding boredom. A perfect example of Adam Smith's 'Guiding Hand', the coincidence of interests coming together to 'profit' all those engaged in an enterprise - whether or not they regard themselves as allies or enemies.

Certainly, my empoyer is my enemy; but an enemy with whom I'm forced to collaborate because I despise with even greater intensity the indignities consequent upon unemployment.
on Dec 11, 2006
Emp,
I see your point and understand why you feel the way you do. If I had been born in the 1880's or 90's I would have been out with the Wobblies throwing bricks at the Pinkertons.
Of course I actually do enjoy my work now but am looking forward to retiring and becoming a wage slave again. It is a bit scary since it seems that these days every job can be sent overseas to a lower paid wage slave.
If doing the extras as J encourages would give you a job with the company as a permanent employee, with benefits and similar pay, for doing a job that brings you some modicum of enjoyment, wouldn't it behoove you to consider it?
That said, if the job sucks and increases your stress level, then it probably isn't worth your effort. There are a lot of those jobs out there and I have worked a bunch of them.
It is too bad that more people in service industries don't have the attitude that doing more for your wage is a good thing.
on Dec 11, 2006
To: SSG Geezer

As I've said, my point of view is not rational. Neither is the unthinking devotion to Corporate interests exhibited as an article of faith by many of the Americans I've met. Being irrational, there's no justification for my opinion - other than that of growing up surrounded by a certain attitude exhibited by all my contemporaries within the society that formed me. It might, as you say, behoove me to consider a different point of view.

But the fact of the matter, irrational as it is (and if you've read anything else I've written here you'll know I'm no advocate of the rational), is that I don't want to.
2 Pages1 2