Move Work Ford

Amid continuous change, the way we work seems stuck in the past

Henry Ford changed the way we work by doubling the wages of his workers more than a century ago. This upended the consensus at the time by suggesting that businesses could make more money by paying out higher wages. Workers were assumed to apply themselves to their work with greater fervour if they feel as if they are being treated better. Fast forward to today and it seems as if we need a modern-day revolutionary to reshape work to fit a changing world. While the level of pay is becoming an issue again, large potential gains in worker welfare as well as corporate profits seem possible from freeing workers from their desks. The problem seems to be not why it should happen but why it hasn’t happened yet.

Change often comes from taking a fresh perspective on what is otherwise seen as normal. Wages for workers had been seen as a cost that was to be kept to a minimum. This all ended when Henry Ford doubled the pay for his employees in 1914 offering, what in the day was a substantial amount of, five dollars a day. The reasons for this large pay hike was to help retain workers but also to ensure that they had enough money to offer to buy the cars being producing in massive quantities. A trend hence ensued in which the pay of workers steadily increased for more than a century, along with various forms of other benefits, such as healthcare, paid time-off, and pensions.

Some of these gains for workers are being lost as globalization expands the worldwide supply of labour. An extra squeeze comes from higher costs for housing as well as long commutes into work as cities expand up and out. These trends seem likely to change as people continue to flock toward prospering areas where much of the new jobs are being generated. Despite all of the growing costs (amounting to more than just money), it seems to be taken as a necessary element of modern-day life, with few efforts made to deal with the issues.

The obvious solution would be for many of the workers who work nine-to-five in offices to do their work from elsewhere. Benefits would not only accrue to the workers themselves through shorter commutes and cheaper housing, but also to companies that would require less office space in prime locations. Workers might also be happy to accept lower wages if permitted to live away from the hustle and bustle. On top of this, the economy as a whole would also get a boost as economic activity would be less centralized in the larger cities, helping out areas feeling left behind despite the growing economy.

Working practices are changing, with tech firms in Silicon Valley starting a craze for a different type of workplace that includes nap pods and snack bars. Less enlightened companies have been employing “hot desks” which leaves workers free to roam while still requiring them to be onsite. The setup of “hot desks” appeals to businesses as it allows for better use of space when many employees might otherwise be away from their desks. It could be a stepping stone so that workers can “hot desk” from anywhere but that day still seems far off despite almost seeming entirely feasible.

The sticking point seems to be the old-fashioned notion that people will only work if watched. The concern is that, if workers are left to their own devices, they will skive off. Instead, company employees are expected to prove themselves by spending longer hours at their desks. Putting in the hours at the office is a way in which companies know that their employees are committed to the firm. With well-paid jobs often involving creative input on the part of the worker, output is both difficult to measures and highly dependence on the individual. Perhaps companies see “time on the job” as the only way of keeping tabs on what their employees are up to. Even the progressive firms of Silicon Valley expect workers to put in the time.

Another reason why workers are kept inhouse may be the power companies seem to have over their employees. Globalization and outsourcing along with the demise of trade unions have stripped workers of much of their bargaining power relative to their employers. Those on lower pay have to submit to zero-hour contracts and a lack of paid lunch breaks. And it seems as if even the better paid workers cannot escape from even longer commutes into the office. It may be that the limited supply of so-called “good jobs” mean that even the more productive workers have to submit to the whims of their paymasters.

To flee from the office, the only option for workers seems to be to set out on their own. Selling your services to businesses, rather than working for a wage, is a way by which workers can take back control of their own labour. This escape route might only be available in a limited number of cases and might also require years of working for a wage to gain experience to strike out on one’s own. But it is a means by which more talented workers can gain bargaining power, while also benefitting businesses who might like the flexibility of farming out work.

For the rest of the office workers, it may require someone like a Henry Ford type figure to kickstart a rethink of the way we work. As the number of people drawn into cities rises, costs for both workers and business will continue to mount, hence providing greater impetus for change. When the time does come, change will be swift but we may have some time to wait yet for it all to begin.