Glue Safety Messages Not Sticking

                Ian Urbina’s article, As OSHA Emphasizes Safety, Long-Term Health Risks Fester, points out the poor working conditions in Royale Comfort Seating factories, and the politics that allow this to continue.

                Starting with the case of Sheri Farley, the article quickly dives into the problems caused companies putting profits above working conditions. Sheri Farley is one of many adults who can no longer support themselves because of permanent nerve damage. The cause has been linked to the nPB glue frequently used in furniture production for its fast drying qualities, high rate production, and low cost. While the article brings up multiple times how Royale Comfort Seating and others are trying to keep business local, this message and the resulting morale debate of unsafe work vs. no work are undermined by the continued apathy of the company towards recommendations to improve safety. Requests by OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) to improve air quality have resulted in ventilation that goes unmaintained, and demands for $18 respirators have been met with $0.90 dust masks previously noted as useless against the vapors by inspectors.

                Work related injury has historically been one of the big reasons behind unions in America. Poor conditions and hazardous jobs could lead to permanent debilitation and leave adults and parents with no future job opportunity on top of medical bills. The effort to get companies to support these unfortunate employees, and prevent future occurrences was an important step in improving the safety of citizens, and the American standard of living. While I can understand the conflict on spending money to swap to a safer and far less profitable glue, the reluctance to put in some money and effort to improving worker safety indicates to me the company and its managers lack concern for their workers, both from a morale and monetary perspective. Even if managers feel detached from responsibility to look for ways to affordably improve safety, the fact that American policies don’t provide a fiscal incentive for the company to get on top of problems its branches are causing stands as a problem in society.

                The article brings up an important issue in our society and makes an effort to bring the reasons behind both sides to the table; which I applaud it for. But I find several facts from the article about our country concerning or downright frustrating to know are true (like how small funding for protecting employees is compared to other government budgets.)

What We Want When Working

                The article, The #1 Feature of a Meaningless Job, by Adam Grant explores what most employees want from a job. It focuses on what jobs give employees a sense of purpose, the benefits of this, and possible ways for other fields to utilize these benefits.

                After supporting that most employees seek purpose from their work, Grant listed jobs, varying from teachers to firemen, which have been noted for a high degree of meaningfulness to workers. He notes how these jobs see more interaction between the worker and those who benefit than other jobs which, despite some having more opportunity for creativity and independence at work, are statistically found less meaningful to the workers. Of particular interest are the studies referenced, with one linking a employees sense of job meaningfulness to positive impacts on others, another pointing out how, in countries around the globe, most citizens describe activities that contribute to society as work.

                While it is hard to know how big a role an employee’s sense of purpose plays in their work, the examples cited definitely support the claim that work which benefits others is inspiring. Improved performance from radiologists simply from having a patient’s face linked to an x-ray and how meeting a single person who’s directly benefited from their work resulted in significant improvements in revenue (>150%) from university fundraisers. These examples demonstrate both the degree to which motivation improves work, and simple ways to foster this motivation.

                Grant furthermore noted his own experiment on motivation. He and his colleagues worked with salespeople on crafting their job and approach to work to be more motivating to them. He noted how coworkers and employers of these salespeople reported them as happier and more effective for at least six months after developing motivational skills. However, as positive as the author is towards his experiment, without a control group it’s hard to judge how much of this improvement is due to the actual benefits of this job crafting, and how much is due to the placebo effects of attending an hour and a half session on improving your work.

                Overall the article was informative and filled with supportive studies from other sources. With so many studies indicating the link between benefiting others and finding fulfillment in your work, I can definitely view increased interaction as a way to improve worker happiness, and with it a better society.

Work Times Work You

                David Cain’s article Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed, on his blog about being human, covers his observation on work hours in America compared to those abroad and how it affects society. Focused on why we have a 40 hour work week and its effects the article covers the economic benefits, social issues, and history of American work hours.

                One of the first aspects the author brings up is how differently he spent his time on vacation abroad in comparison to at home after work. He observed that with more free time in vacations abroad he was spending less than he normally did and enjoyed free activities like nature walks and beaches. From this he’s hypothesized that the 40 hour work week in America plays a large role in promoting consumerism because “Suddenly I have a lot more money and a lot less time,” (David.) While it would be nice to see some studies backing his observations up, the time versus cost of activities he mentioned definitely supports the logic behind his article.

                In his discussion of social issues he points out that, while he could live happily off of far less than he makes, he doesn’t have the option to only work a portion of the work day, despite how “the average office worker gets less than three hours of actual work done in 8 hours” (David.) While with no citation it’s hard to verify that ratio, it is common knowledge that typical workers don’t spend most of their work day being fully productive.

                One thing I didn’t know about the forty hour work week was the fact that it originated in Britain in the 19^th century to protect workers. He points out the increase of production due to technology as a valid reason to reduce work hours (as we can produce more in less time) that hasn’t been used by businesses because of their reliance on people spending during their free time.

                The article was definitely an interesting read for someone who hasn’t considered why we work the hours we do, although it’s lack of studies leaves its observations in question. While the article’s reasoning is logical, it would still be unsurprising to find that 40 hour work weeks are currently common for other reasons and it’s hard to judge how much of our consumer culture is maintained through limited free time.

Science, Society, and Some Super Sneaky Alliteration

Do Artifacts Have Politics by Langdon Winner is an article on the relationship between engineering, science, and society in America. It uses historical examples to show how individuals have used science to influence society and how scientific developments have, deliberately or otherwise, shaped society.

To show how science has been used to influence society, the author references the construction projects of Robert Moses. Robert had overpasses on roads in Long Island New York constructed low enough that the public buses, widely used by poorer racial minorities, would be unable to use them.

                In discussing the part of engineers and construction workers, I find it hard to blame them for not noticing a concealed reason for their instructions and even if individuals had noticed why that height was being used, it’s unlikely they could have done much more than inconveniencing Robert with finding a replacement. While I could accept this as an example of why we should promote awareness of workers on public projects in relation to the public, I find it unfair to blame engineers in particular for not noticing buses they didn’t use wouldn’t fit and to assign them some sort of guilt or punishment for their involvement would implicate numerous other employment fields for managements decisions they didn’t make.

                In his writing on how science has influenced society, he notes the current business structure and the status of workers as an example of science building authority and society. The article points out how modern society is currently dependent on factories, work, and businesses due to how large scale our population has become and how this takes precedence of typical social morals. While I would agree that we are currently reliant on businesses and factory work to maintain our daily lives, I feel that it is important to consider how humanity was similarly dependent on morally dubious authority figures long before present technologies. Compared to spending your entire life in debt to whoever owned the land you farmed I don’t view modern industry as a net loss for society. It’s not a pinnacle of social reform and equality but the improved life span and (to my knowledge) standards of living are definite pluses in my book.

                Overall I found some of the historical examples from the article interesting. Unfortunately it failed to point out solutions to prevent the issues it raised and wasn’t establishing why it is was unintended consequences of science where responsible for the continuation of inequality in society.

Daddy, where does stuff come from?

                The Secret Life of Everything: Where Your Stuff Comes From by Brandon Keim is an article detailing the difficulty of tracking down the sources of production and delivery of common household items. It covers the author’s compilation on others research regarding delivery, supply lines and product complexity.

                In its discussion of final destinations for products Brandon notes how much easier it is to find where something is delivered compared to where it came from. Sensibly this is because stores already communicate what they have in order to sell it, although whether the difficulties the author encountered in finding where it came from are because the businesses are striving to hide all sources or just the result of whoever he asked being unsure where their products come from. For all his detail on the process of delivery in regards to mathematically maximizing the efficiency of their box placement for when it’s unloaded the author doesn’t express whether the delivery services where separate from companies or more compliant in sharing where the stuff they moved came from.

                The supply lines aspect focused on the complexity and control of delivery of car parts. To illustrate the difficulty of tracking every part of a product to its source he cites how Pietra Rivoli spent years of research to make their book, The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy. Of greater interest however is his information regarding a coffee company whose president was able to link him to the source of the beans from which their coffee was made, without knowing where products they bought from other sources like cups came from. To me this paints the picture of multiple companies who can account for their own products while having little clue regarding how the products they buy from others are made.

                While not a focus of the article, the difficulty of tracing the production of a computer was noted by the author as so difficult that “Even focusing on one part, a single display or chip, would be a daunting.” (Brandon.) I find this particularly interesting given computer manufacturing taking place almost entirely after vastly improved information storage and communication.

                Ultimately I found the article to be a well-structured summary of its author’s venture into the world of modern supply lines and an eye opener to the amount of information that is and isn’t out there. The greatest concern I found was regarding the difficulty in finding the source of any error in a product when finding the sources behind a t-shirt take years without trying to research individual sources for problems.

Class Discussion With Our New Overlords, the Teacher's Assistants

                The in class TA discussion was a refreshing twist from regular lectures with multiple speakers, student interaction, and more in depth discussion of reforms and developments. While I found the emphasis on preventing unintended consequences somewhat overboard, I strongly support increased communication between researchers and those who would want to use their product.

                Unintended consequences are a regrettable occurrence, but when combating them it is important to have realistic goals and methods. While preventing accidents and hazardous circumstances is important, you need to include focus on what happens when problems occur. Focusing on preventing problems has the difficulty of some people trying to work around rules to make more money and leaves me skeptical on what level of accident prevention is enough. At some point the cost to prevent possible accidents or issues outweighs the statistical occurrence of said problems, much like attempts to further reduce bug content in food. While I can support increased regulation and precautionary steps, at this point preventing businesses from abusing loopholes and shirking responsibility for deliberate hazards seems more prudent.

                On the other hand, communication between researchers and the public in which they work and/or work for would be a great way to improve products and promote public knowledge. Seatbelts were developed long before their widespread use in large part because they weren’t comfortable and public knowledge of the seatbelts protective capabilities was sketchy. Increased focus on communication could help call attention to issues like this faster so that problems that go unnoticed or ignored by those unaffected can be handled. As an example of fields already implementing this feedback from test audiences plays a large role in movie production and more to allow developers an outside look at their product. Even when they don’t make significant changes they still serve as excellent sources of data. Communication and information are cornerstones to the use of intelligent trial and error and I fully support widespread use of interaction between researchers, developers, and the public.

                While I felt like the discussion could have used more details and facts to go along with topics, I definitely enjoyed having multiple speakers and hearing viewpoints from other groups. One point to add for future discussions is that students would probably feel somewhat on the spot to openly dissent from the class viewpoint so actually asking for criticisms could promote more discussion of pros and cons instead of primarily pros.

On Voting in our sort of Democratic Democracy

The Infrastructure of American Democracy Is Dysfunctional by John Nichols focuses on issues with the current election process in relation to voting. It points out current issues with voting in America, the recommendations put forth by a commission under Obama, and what the author wants to see.

One of the main issues facing voter turnout today is the inconvenience of voting in America. While I have often criticized the Electoral College and first past the post system, under which you could theoretically “become president with only 22% of the popular vote” (CGP Grey) having not yet participated in voting I had no idea that voting is frequently an hours long process taking place on a work day and now feel I have a better understanding of why retired people vote in such larger margins. Another issue brought up is the inconsistencies in how states and cities run their vote. While I personally feel that having a one-size fits all isn’t necessarily the solution, streamlining and improving every cities voting process individual would take much more time and resources to develop.

The commission’s recommendations focused on improving the means by which people vote and allowing them to vote at earlier dates. While allowing people to vote at earlier dates is a step in the right direction, moving the official voting day to a non-work day would help make voting more convenient without confusion of finding when other days are available to vote. I’m unsure of the security of online voting but if it were well implemented I could definitely see it as an easier way for US citizens to vote.

The author expresses how he wants to see more public interest in voting through increasing social education regarding how and why to vote in addition to current plans to make the voting process simpler. While making voting easier to do will make people more interested in the political scene of America, the current system of counting votes through the Electoral College still makes it so that Americans who don’t live in swing states receive very little interest from political campaigns and candidates.

While I found the article informative about the voting process in America, I found its failure to address issues with our election process concerning as I view the inaccuracies in our election process and representation to be a far more significant issue than inconsistent and inconvenient voting processes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k Cgp Grey Electoral College