What about the Luddites? Pt. 2

I'm sure that none of your fellow workers have smashed machinery simply because they felt that their sphere of work was threatened. Worker sobotage isn't unheard of, but rare. but it is likely that at some time you have worked with someone who was reluctant to change methods of working, causing others frustration including you. Why? We're going to look at some possible reasons.

Some workers are simply technophobes. Office workers who were used to typewriters were intimidated by computers; set up a mental block toward any new technology. Stubborness toward new technology can be due to resentment toward mangement, a conscious effort to derail any effort of management to change their way of working. Union or non-union, workers may be suspicious of new efforts as a way to get more out of employees without paying for it, or to eliminate work, reduce staff, etc.

Let'a take a specific example. John has been operating a press in a small plant for 15 years. But it's much older than that. John continuously complains about the old press, but fellow employees and his supervisor also know that he takes great pride in knowing his machine inside and out. Even if outside help needs to be called in for repairs, John will already know what needs to be done, and can get more production out of the machine than anyone else. Finally, a new updated machine is brought in and John is told he won't have to deal with the old clunker any more. How will John react?

He may not react positively; because his area of mastery has been either taken away, or he may be disturbed or unsettled at the very least. His pride of work has been based on a personal of accomplishment, and management reaction to his reluctance is in every way both well intentioned and paternalistic. That paternalism will disipate his self esteem, once again dealing with a problem as a worker deficiency.

Bill is an older worker is a specialty wood working shop. New tools, machines and adhesives were picked up by the younger guys as soon as they came on the market, but Bill drew scorn for sticking to some of his hand tools. The management didn't really mind, because there were certain jobs that were consistent given to Bill because of his ability and experience and sometimes customer preference.

A master doesn't necessarily feel the necessity of changing proven methods for its own sake. He's putting his own name on the job. This is the essence of a master and his methods; why mess with what works? Even his understanding of which woods work best, how to make inferior woods look better than choice selections.

According to one account, Steven Speilberg preferred splicing film to editing digitally, because he liked the feel of the film and the time delay in the process allowed time for thoughtfulness, so that his methodology went hand in hand with his philosophy of film making. Bill could be like that; taking pride in producing a particular piece of furniture is inextricably linked to the tools he selects from a large collection, and the methods he has picked up over the years from books and others and modified to make them his own; and they work for him. And the sound and feel of a sharp chisel or hand plane bitting into wood with just the right rythym and pressure, gives him satisfaction.

Added reading: Google: David Pye craftsmanship