Dietmar Henning
Representatives of government, industry, economic institutions and
trade unions have recently been citing “Industry 4.0” in strident calls
for a “fourth industrial revolution”. Behind it is the demand for total
labour “flexibility” and a brutal sharpening of workplace exploitation.
According
to the web site of the German ministry of education and research, the
“... Industry 4.0 project aims to enable German industry to be prepared
for commodity production in the future world. ... Industrial production
will be characterised by a strong customisation of products under
conditions of greatly flexibilised (high-volume) production, a
comprehensive integration of customers and business partners into
business and value-adding processes, and a coupling of production and
top-quality services”.
Through use of the Internet, working hours,
rates and payment will be completely adapted to “market” conditions and
subordinated to company profit interests. Although the government
continues to champion itself as a great reformer because it introduced a
(very low) minimum wage, it is preparing new forms of exploitation that
make the iniquity of piecework look like a veritable social benefit.
Numerous
research projects and institutes, financed by big business and the
federal government, are the driving forces behind the campaign. Heading
them is the Institute for the Study of Labour (IZA), whose 1,300 members
worldwide makes it the world’s largest economic research network.
IZA’s
Werner Eichhorst calls the imminent development a “process of creative
destruction”, meaning that job types will disappear and new ones come
into being. He stresses that simple forms of labour, routine work and
even skilled jobs in industry will become less important, while work
requiring high qualifications will become more important. He neglected
to add that this would amount to work under conditions of virtual
slavery and at minimum wages.
In its 2013 study, “Production Work
of the Future—Industry 4.0”, the Fraunhofer Institute of Labour
Economics and Organisation (IAO) provided a platform for leading
scientists and business leaders to speak out, and thus give a taste of
the social impact expected to accompany the new forms of work.
Higher
volatility in markets would have to be dealt with more efficiently in
the future. “That means it will no longer simply be a matter of
flexibility in our customary eight-hour working; it will go far beyond
that”, explained longtime Fraunhofer IAO director Professor Dieter
Spath, who became CEO at the global Wittenstein gearing technology
company in 2013.
Stefan Ferber Bosch described the current problem
thus: “What is in it for me, if I have a factory that brings me the
highest profits when it is functioning at 98 percent of its capacity,
but I cannot predict what I will be able to sell next month?” He urged
that factories would have to be built that could handle these
fluctuations, and do so “in real time”.
Two thirds of the
companies surveyed in the study are considering the possibility of using
short-term production staff to be a matter of particular urgency. This
is said to apply especially to “large firms with more than 1,000
employees (82.9 percent), companies from the automotive industry (77.8
percent) and businesses subject from day to day to strong short-term
market fluctuations (76.8 percent)”.
The Fraunhofer study cites
the operation of Stuttgart Airport as a good example of workforce
flexibility. Local air traffic there fluctuates greatly between summer
and winter, weekdays and weekends, and within the day. The approximately
200 employees in ground handling services (loading luggage,
transporting passengers to the aircraft etc.) are extremely flexible,
i.e., for 365 days a year and around the clock.
Professor Georg
Fundel, managing director of Stuttgart Airport Ltd., reported that when
production dropped by 30 percent following the onset of the world
economic crisis staff work time accounts were reduced considerably.
Employees then worked longer hours in the summer.
Internal
relocation of employees was also practiced at Stuttgart Airport. “When
we have less to do in the winter, the staff are glad to be able to
exercise their work skills in other parts of the company”. Workers who
had no luggage to load could take on various monitoring jobs in security
sections; others distributed leaflets in the terminal or performed
public relations tasks. “That would have been unthinkable in the past”,
CEO Fundel admitted.
According to Fundel, the flexible system
introduced in 2004 has proved a success: “In the past, we paid almost a
million euros a year in overtime pay. Today, we no longer pay in terms
of overtime hours; instead, we reduce them when less work is available”.
But
the company’s idea of flexibility goes a lot further than this.
Temporary and contract labour are no longer regarded as sufficient ways
of cost-cutting. The time has come for the creation of the “flexible
freelancer”. This involves skilled personnel with multiple
qualifications, who are available round-the-clock, are capable of doing a
variety of jobs, require no company contributions to social security
benefits, and have no rights to a guaranteed income—which amounts to a
daily wage swindle targeting skilled workers and academics.
As
soon as they are in plentiful supply, “flexible freelancers” will be
pitted against each other so that their earnings can be greatly reduced.
This slight-of-hand form of exploitation already exists in the practice
of so-called “crowd-sourcing”. Here, transnational companies tender
problem-solving tasks from an Internet platform, and each “solo
self-employed” person offers a solution. However, only the contributor
of the best piece of work is paid; all the others are left empty-handed.
In
this way, companies relieve themselves of any and all social
responsibility. All the achievements and forms of security, won by the
working class over more than a century, are obliterated. Most of the
solo self-employed, who are usually highly skilled, are responsible for
their own pensions, health insurance and unemployment support. They
receive no sick pay when they are ill, no paid holidays, and no holidays
or Christmas pay at all.
In addition to “self-employment”,
various forms of “flexibility” are demanded in order to optimally
exploit human labour. Dr. Constanze Kurz, union secretary on the IG
Metall executive board, observed that “Wage contract settlements already
set frameworks that allow employers to deviate from prior agreements,”
adding: “But when it comes to the issue of flexibility, I think the
companies are in many ways only just beginning.”
In addition to
the now widely instituted forms of temporary and contract work, the
flexible deployment of workers in a variety of workplace departments is
cynically welcomed by companies as a “qualification offensive”.
According to the Fraunhofer study, “Lending employees from one kind of
working group to another, whenever it is deemed necessary, requires
employees to be able to offer a broader range of qualifications”. It
concludes that continual job training in pursuit of ever more
qualifications will be of great importance.
The fact that moving
employees from one company department to another involves acquiring new
skills is also used as an excuse to lower wages. The Institute for the
Study of Labour (IZA) suggests that young workers, in particular, must
be willing to work for low wages at the beginning of their professional
careers. They receive payment in the form of training and
qualifications—although such qualifications are tailored to the
requirements of their current employer and thus important only to that
employer’s company.
Dortmund professor Michael ten Hompel suggests
that “people with mobile terminal devices, e.g. smart phones, should be
integrated into the Industry 4.0 project”. Such people would be
available 24 hours a day and seven days a week. They could also work
from home and therefore save the employer the cost of office space and
work equipment. Commenting on this, Dr. Klaus Mittelbach of the
Electrical Technology and Electronics Industry association said: “I
think factories of the future will be just as empty of people as are
today’s paperless offices”.
The involvement of workers using
mobile devices will also lead to an enormous intensification of work
stress. First, it makes every step taken, every handshake, every pause
to take breath, literally everything, subject to monitoring. Large
shipping corporations, such as Amazon and Zalando, have already
implemented this employment strategy in their warehouses. Scanners worn
on the wrists of all employees there make them locatable and observable
at all times. Second, when something unexpected happens to disrupt the
working process, it is the worker who has to react quickly and flexibly,
and pay for the damage or delay by working overtime. He or she has no
fixed working hours, anyway.
The campaign for the “work of the
future” in Industry 4.0 strikingly recalls the campaign for the
introduction of group work into industrial production in the 1990s. At
that time, companies and trade unions used Orwellian doublespeak to
glorify group work as the “humanisation of work”. Today, entrepreneur
Manfred Wittenstein, rhapsodically musing in the Fraunhofer study,
foresees that “People will find greater satisfaction in work for which
they are responsible.” He adds that the increased availability of
information on a company’s premises “facilitates (the employees’) entry
into the creative process, as opposed to (their traditional obligation
of) merely carrying out prescribed tasks.” In Wittenstein’s view, this
autonomy “leads to less alienation from work”.
In reality, group
work meant group piece rate work, and now this principle is to be
extended to the entire “networked” workforce in the context of Industry
4.0.
Trade unions are playing a central role in the development of
these new methods of exploitation. It is no coincidence that Verdi boss
Frank Bsirske has a place on Fraunhofer IAO’s advisory board. Dr.
Constanze Kurz, union secretary in the IG Metall leadership, expresses
herself several times in the Fraunhofer study. Among other things, she
welcomes the possibility that in the future “people, who today would
never think about working in industrial production, will find this field
attractive”. According to the IG Metall secretary, production work
today has “a certain smell about it and it is not easy to get rid of”.
The
Institute for the Study of Labour (IZA) is led by the “policy fellows”
Hubertus Schmoldt, former chairman of the Mining, Chemical and Energy
(IG BCE) union, and Ruprecht Hammerschmidt, press spokesman for the
Construction, Agriculture and Environment (IGBAU) union.
The trade
unions praise IZA as a key player in German industry: “And especially
central is the organization of specific work procedures in the
factories”. At a new year press conference last week, German Federation
of Trade Unions (DGB) boss Rainer Hoffmann stressed that the DGB would
be actively taking part in determining changes in the working world. The
motto for this year’s trade union May Day is: “We shape the work of the
future!”
No comments:
Post a Comment