5 ms·

Yeah I did. I was responding to the above post about how companies aren't inherently evil by pointing out that when companies do good, it's not because they are

by learc83 12y ago

Yeah I did. I was responding to the above post about how companies aren't inherently evil by pointing out that when companies do good, it's not because they are altruistic, but because it's making them more money. Also whether there is going to be any real change here is debatable. When I worked in retail, schedules were posted 2 weeks in advance, so posting 1 week in advance is hardly "doing right by the employees". The rest of it is a nebulous promise to allow managers more input in creating the schedule and allowing workers to transfer to more convenient locations. Basically all this change amounts to is something that sounds good in a press release, but is unlikely to actually do much.

mindcrime 12y ago
by pointing out that when companies do good, it's not because they are altruistic, but because it's making them more money. We could argue about the exact definition of "evil" and "altruistic", but the point is that companies do do right by employees at times, and I'd argue that in reality it's more often than not. What people should keep in mind is that "companies" aren't just some abstract caricature pulled out of Das Kapital or The Communist Manifesto - companies are people, and most people aren't fundamentally evil. I'll stand by what I said before (albeit perhaps paraphrased a bit) - when companies DO do "evil" vis-a-vis employees, it is not, generally speaking, because they have a generally evil/negative outlook towards employees or because they don't care (at some level). It's more because they are trying to strike that delicate balance where everybody wins, while using imperfect humans to manage things. Honestly, we'll make more progress towards improving things when we get beyond the socialist/communist caricatures of businessmen as "Boss Hogg" from The Dukes of Hazard, or some "Robber Baron" and deal with the actual issues, not tearing down strawmen.

by learc83 12y ago

mindcrime 12y ago

by pointing out that when companies do good, it's not because they are altruistic, but because it's making them more money. We could argue about the exact definition of "evil" and "altruistic", but the point is that companies do do right by employees at times, and I'd argue that in reality it's more often than not. What people should keep in mind is that "companies" aren't just some abstract caricature pulled out of Das Kapital or The Communist Manifesto - companies are people, and most people aren't fundamentally evil. I'll stand by what I said before (albeit perhaps paraphrased a bit) - when companies DO do "evil" vis-a-vis employees, it is not, generally speaking, because they have a generally evil/negative outlook towards employees or because they don't care (at some level). It's more because they are trying to strike that delicate balance where everybody wins, while using imperfect humans to manage things. Honestly, we'll make more progress towards improving things when we get beyond the socialist/communist caricatures of businessmen as "Boss Hogg" from The Dukes of Hazard, or some "Robber Baron" and deal with the actual issues, not tearing down strawmen.