Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 325:questions:week_5_questions_comments-325_19 [2019/09/25 17:26] – [Christine Frederick, The New Housekeeping, 1913] 192.65.245.89
+++ 325:questions:week_5_questions_comments-325_19 [2019/11/14 02:50] (current) – 108.45.143.34
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ====== Virginia Penny – Watchmaking ======
+//Who was Virginia Penny?//
+**“The principal objection to employing women is that they are very apt to marry just as they become skillful enough to be reliable, therefore, what does not require a long apprenticeship or a great expense to learn, is most desirable for them. A good degree of intelligence is indispensable. The more, of course, the better.”** (p. 152) Said by a manufacturer of chronometers in Boston. I have to disagree because some women find ways to be a part of a company/master the stuff that they have learned and I really don’t like it when people say that there is this tension between men and women like we are still fighting for civil rights in a way. Men and women should be treated as equals. Whatever men can do, I believe that women can do just as good or better. It shouldn’t matter what gender, race, etc. you are, you can still master technics that you learned for a business. – Hunter Dykhuis
+The focus on this article wasn't only to point out the information on early watchmaking but also to point out early discrimination in the workplace for women.**"We pay from $4 to $7 per week for intelligent girls, and women's average pay is $5. About half are paid by the piece. Men earn about double the wages of women, because,
+first, they do more difficult work, are more ingenious, more thoughtful and contriving, more reliant on themselves in matters of mechanics, are stronger, and therefore worth more, though not perhaps double, as an average; second, because it is the custom to pay women less than men for the same labor."** (p.152) This statement shows the mistreatment of women because of the way they are perceived by men in the workplace. This is still somewhat seen today in the workplace with uneven wage for women and it was weird to see the ways they differentiated a women's capabilities as compared to a mans. -Nick Bass
+**This piece was interesting to read about the watchmaking process and how women were necessary throughout the process. It states that women were usually hired because of their ability to work with their hands and ability to work with little training(page 152) I thought that it was really interesting to read about how in London and overseas there were very few women workers hired compared to in America.** I think that this speaks a lot about the acceptance of women in the workplace. I thought on page 152 when the American Watch Company at Waltham was quoted stating that “Men earn about double the wages of women, because, first, they do more difficult work, are more ingenious, more thoughtful and contriving, more reliant on themselves in matters of mechanics, are stronger, and therefore worth more” was really interesting. **This is still an ideal that many Americans have and needs to be reevaluated.** Many women in powerful roles in society are fighting this ideal now for example this summer the US Women’s Soccer team fighting for higher pay. People can learn a lot from this article by seeing that women in the workplace are necessary for specific jobs and deserve just as equal pay. -Tory Martin
+In Virginia Pennys contrast between American and European Watchmaking, she focuses on the role of women in watch manufacturing. Women were often hired in these factories due to the fact that they have “proved their ability to execute the most delicate parts” this is due to being “dexterous with their fingers”. This is essentially just due to the fact that women naturally have smaller hands and therefore can deal with the small parts easier. In America many watching making factories run through machinery but the appeal of watches being made by hand keeps the hand watch making business successful.** While this is a step in the right direction of women having a more prominent role in the labor force Perry goes on to note the pay difference and the fact that women are kept in low ranks in the factories.** Additionally noted is that women would be expected to work until they got married at which time they would take on their role in the house. Which reminds us that while women were gaining some rights and some “equality” there was still a long journey for women in the work place.  -Emma Monaghan
+I found it very interesting when reading this part of the article that women were used in most factories, yet men were the "faces" of the company- CEO's and whatnot. They brought up a good point about the fact that women are known to have more dexterous fingers as well and be able to do very tedious things. - Lauren Blouch
+This weeks readings were extremely interesting to me from the perspective that employers were less likely to hire women. They genuinely believed that hiring women was nearly a waste as they were likely to marry and quit some time into their employment, after having been properly trained. Looking at this from an historically empathic lens, to a certain degree hiring officials were probably right, as most married women stayed home and reared the offspring resulting from their marriages. -Elizabeth Davis
 ====== Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men ======
+**While industrialization is often rightfully seen as a monument to the progress of civilization, Smith and Clancy are correct in pointing out the racist history that comes with it.** Industrialization allowed for the empires of Europe to rapidly expand in ways never before seen in history, which o course led to rapid colonization. As talked about in the reading, industrialization fueled the forced and unnatural development of civilizations in Africa and Asia. Europe's justification for this, that the natives of these parts of the world are inferior and must be forcefully re-educated and culturally uplifted under the guide of white people, is disgusting to say the least. All of this casts a dark shadow on industrialization, at least in less developed parts of the world, and provides further context for many of the effect of post-colonialism we see to this day. - Michael Dietrich
+Anglo-Saxons seeing themselves as superior than others is an obvious trend throughout history and Adas' "Machines as the Measure of Men" is another example of that trend. After decades of attempting to claim superiority through superficial means (fashion trends, head size, eating practices, etc.), a need for a quantitative trait grew. This was the foundation for the idea that industrialization was equivalent to progress; that less developed countries needed the assistance of major manufacturing powerhouses in order to move up in society. This idea is still at play today, but there is an counter movement growing. As discussed briefly in class prior, companies would brag about the size of their factories and showcase the smoke plums as signs of their productivity. Today, the idea is drastically different. While the 20th century focused on exporting to less developed countries in order to spread influence and "superiority", there is a shift away from that in consumer desires in the modern era. I think that there is a higher demand for more local and less manufactured goods in exchange for wanting to export our culture. -Kim Eastridge
+On page 227, there is a section that starts with "the assumption". Whenever something is assumed, usually there isn't enough to truly back up that claim.** Why was it desirable for humans to master nature? or why was it led to think that it was destiny to expand? Everything at this time was centered around the market and building things bigger and better. It was a "moral obligation" for Europeans to conquest and dominate other peoples.** Machines like railroads and the reaper were helping people do just that and making the machines the measure of the man. - Haley Denehy
 ==== THESIS? ====
@@ Line 14: / Line 35: @@
 ==== Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management, 1911 ====
-Frederick Winslow Taylor, the Father of the Scientific Management Movement, was among the very first (along with his associates), to study the labor process scientifically. His core belief was that making people work as hard as they could was not efficient in optimizing productivity and diligence. Rather, he believed that managers and employees should frequently work together, which was a foreign concept during the early twentieth century. Additionally, perpetuated employment - the studied workers’ motivation, was not as effective as higher wages. Ultimately, he concluded that particular workers could work more thoroughly than others, and thus more selective managers would also increase efficiency. How does the recent rise of high-skilled, sedentary work affect the original Principles of Taylor’s Scientific Management? (--Nate Stringer)
+Frederick Winslow Taylor, the Father of the Scientific Management Movement, was among the very first (along with his associates), to study the labor process scientifically. His core belief was that making people work as hard as they could was not efficient in optimizing productivity and diligence. Rather, he believed that managers and employees should frequently work together, which was a foreign concept during the early twentieth century. Additionally, perpetuated employment - the studied workers’ motivation, was not as effective as higher wages. Ultimately, he concluded that particular workers could work more thoroughly than others, and thus more selective managers would also increase efficiency. **How does the recent rise of high-skilled, sedentary work affect the original Principles of Taylor’s Scientific Management?** (--Nate Stringer)
 ==== Christine Frederick, The New Housekeeping, 1913 ====
- I found it interesting how even the poorest housewife could use a scientific method of management. I found that the way that every chore in a household can possibly standardized very intriguing. When Frederick discusses how to make a cake using the scientific management method he makes little changes such as arrangement of utensils and ingredients(277). He uses these steps to lessen the wasted motion it takes to do a task thus saving time. I never really thought about managing mundane tasks such as doing the dishes or washing my car by using this method. I think this passage shows the capability this theory has for big corporate factories as well as everyday households.-(Kendell Jenkins)
+ I found it interesting how **even the poorest housewife could use a scientific method of management. I found that the way that every chore in a household can possibly standardized very intriguing.** When Frederick discusses how to make a cake using the scientific management method he makes little changes such as arrangement of utensils and ingredients(277). He uses these steps to lessen the wasted motion it takes to do a task thus saving time. I never really thought about managing mundane tasks such as doing the dishes or washing my car by using this method. I think this passage shows the capability this theory has for big corporate factories as well as everyday households.-(Kendell Jenkins)
+I think it is interesting to think about wast motion. **Frederick describes making a cake with the least amount of wasted motion as possible. While I was reading this I was thinking about how I make a cake. I definitely waste a lot of motion in doing that task. There can be a scientific method or approach for everything that we do but how much does it really help in the long run?** Besides having a strict schedule to keep track of. -- Erin Madden
+I found the time’s mindset to be very interesting.  They are really focusing on the fact that women need to be good housekeepers, so much so that they researched how they need to do things differently to be efficient.  He’s basically **telling her that women should work smarter not harder.  As if women can’t figure this out on their own from trial and error.  As a woman I kind of find it insulting, they are assuming that woman, as a whole, don’t work efficiently.**  I think the concept is interesting but personally I do these things already because they should be common sense.  **She suggests that it’s the lower class women that need these training classes, but class has nothing to do with how a person’s brain works.  She also suggests that this lower class is inefficient because they are from a lower class themselves, meaning that it’s trained.**  Where they talk about waste motion and cooking I find that the notion of, lower class is this was because they were born into lower class thing, is flawed.  They are insinuating that efficiency is learned.  When I am cooking, I bring out everything I need before I start, but my Mom is the type of person who grabs as she goes.  I just think it’s interesting to see the idea’s from this time and how they play into now as well.  They still teach home economics in public schools as an elective, where they teach students all the things that they were saying needed to be taught back then. -- Claire Starke
 ==== James O’Connell – 1911 ====
+**James O'Connell was an affiliate of the American Federation of Labor, or AFL. In his letter he describes the dangers of the system of Taylorism, a new form of organizing and standardizing labor during the industrializing time.  O'Connell denotes three key differences between Taylorism and previous methods of work.** First, the system employs four specialized "subject-area" foremen instead of one. Second, instead of workers using their expertise to judge construction, a "planning department" would set standard guidelines that could be followed by any low-wage worker. Finally, O'Connell describes the introduction of "clocking in," in which workers are paid by their time, rather than by the piece. In his letter, O'Connell demonstrates his hatefulness toward Mr. Taylor's system of the workplace. O'Connell fears that replacing high skilled workers and wages that are earned by piece made with low wage and low skilled workers will hurt the workforce in the United States. He does not like that the workers need to work for a certain number of hours and if they do not comply with the Taylor system, they will be easily replaced with someone who will comply to the rules. O'Connell wants to keep high skilled workers and does not want low skill workers to run the workforce. -Kevin Bach
+O'Connell worries that such a system leaves no trust or honor in place to the workers, and instead, seeks to replace once skilled workers with either machines or low-waged, no-skill, easily replaceable men who will complete "life-destroying work" in "intolerable conditions," all with no organized Union protections (281) **It is interesting to look at the shift in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in the United States from piecemeal work to that of a wage laborer.** While O'Connell could not predict the rise of middleman office jobs by the latter half of the twentieth century, he was correct in arguing that without a system of organization for workers, they could easily be exploited by employers seeking to maximize profits.  **Even nowadays, there are many ethical questions about replacing low-skill workers - primarily now in the service industry - with kiosks and other forms of artificial intelligence. On one hand, such jobs have undesirable conditions, so it would make sense to have them done by machines. On the other hand, those with few skills often lack the resources needed to obtain further skills, leaving them with few options.** ==Glynnis Farleigh
+James O'Connell had an essential part in recognizing Taylorism from other forms of work. Taylorism "seeks machine and work efficiency." O'Connell is worried about this new form of work because it could turn workers against managers and leave the workplace with no signs of trust. When these high-skilled workers are forced to leave, low-skilled workers will come in; this leaves room for injuries and mess-ups in the factories and companies. Low-skilled workers bring lousy work conditions and no Union protections. They are working with unsafe equipment, long workdays with minimal breaks, and close quarters. - Reilly Miller
 ==== 1913 Watertown arsenal’s striking workers’ petition to end Taylorism ====
@@ Line 29: / Line 64: @@
 ==== 1930's tale of “Highpockets” in Chicago ====
+Highpockets is a term used for a factory worker who "bent every muscle towed helping the company." **Nelson Algren explains his perfect employee. It was interesting in the very beginning how the highpocket was a "hillbilly." They assumed this simply from how he walked. But he worked twice as hard as the others and agreed to do more by the "time-study" mans request. It was interesting they they said this was a tall tale because it did not sound too out of the ordinary.** The boss seemed to take advantage of this person while the other employees watched and pushed for him to do more. **There was also multiple uses of comparisons (similes and metaphors) and rhyming. For me, it made it slightly confusing to fully understand.**-- Erika M.
-==== Prof. Frank T. Carlton – 1914 ====
-Carlton here writes about how America and the greater world are entering a new era of industry and social progress having seemingly utilized a great amount of natural resources and land. I’m not sure in what month and/or what knowledge has already emerged about WWI at his time of writing, but I suppose no one at the time could imagine what significant effects WWI would have on the American economy and its manufacturing processes. I wonder then if Carlton would agree that WWI was crucial, if not necessary, for American development in the global market and that without it the US may still have remained a debtor country trying to figure out scientific efficiency in engineering and its place in the world. - Dillyn Scott
+==== Prof. Frank T. Carlton – 1914 ====
+**Carlton here writes about how America and the greater world are entering a new era of industry and social progress having seemingly utilized a great amount of natural resources and land.** I’m not sure in what month and/or what knowledge has already emerged about WWI at his time of writing, but I suppose no one at the time could imagine what significant effects WWI would have on the American economy and its manufacturing processes. I wonder then if Carlton would agree that WWI was crucial, if not necessary, for American development in the global market and that without it the US may still have remained a debtor country trying to figure out scientific efficiency in engineering and its place in the world. - Dillyn Scott