16 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2019
    1. As with neoliberalism more generally, New Public Management is invisible, part of a new “common sense” that has somehow become hegemonic, whereby the “entrepreneurial spirit” has infused the public sector, leading to “businesslike government”. As with the claims of neoliberalism more generally as to its positive outputs in terms of prosperity, NPM has never been shown to have been successful even in its own terms. NPM “introduced punishments and rewards to produce better services with lesser staff. Instead of having freed energies and creativity of employees formerly shackled by their bureaucratic turfs, NPM reforms have bound energies into theatrical audit performances at the cost of work and killed creativity in centralizing resources and hollowing out professional autonomy... Fundamental deprivation of the legitimacy of public employees . . .has traumatized many most-committed employees and driven others toward a Soviet-type double standard.” (Juha Siltala, New Public Management : The evidence-based worst practice?, Administration; Vol. 45, No. 4.; 2013 pp. 468-493) Sekera quotes Christopher Pollitt et al., who “after compiling a database of 518 studies of NPM in Europe, determined that “more than 90% of what are seen by experts as the most significant and relevant studies contain no data at all on outcomes” and that of the 10% that had outcomes information, only 44% of those, or 4% of the total, found any improvements in terms of outcomes.” But in the end, the point of NPM is less that of measureable outcomes, and more that of the ideological victory of turning the public and its good into customers exercising their “choices” (see tax revolt example in Duggan), along of course with the radical disempowering of public administration workers and their unions, instituting “cost savings” by cutting their real income and putting more and more of the public sector’s production directly into the profit-making market.
  2. Jan 2019
    1. Collective bargaining in action. And, more importantly perhaps, this puts Unions as a power to the people backstop. The action of Federal Employees, unionized, who could just stop showing up without fear of being fired is what we should be selling.

  3. Sep 2018
    1. rigid schedules

      Improve practices for scheduling that take into account workers needs

    2. commute

      Assessment and implementation of protective measures for long commutes particularly those linked to long hours of work to avoid safety risks

    3. travel

      Improve information for LDLC workers about travel; assess the existing gaps to protect workers during their work related travel and develop or improve the tools for their protection

    4. information LDLC workers

      Improve information for LDLC workers about their rights related to OH&S and WC

    5. Transportation

      Improve in a timely manner transportation services according to the needs of LDLC workers taking into account those with low income.

  4. Feb 2017
    1. While a small, although growing, body of research has emerged that focuses on individual perceptions of voice (Withey and Cooper, 1989; Leck and Saunders, 1992; Luchak, 2003; Avery and Quiñones, 2004; Bryson, 2004), little attempt has been made to understand how trade union membership impacts these perceptions.
    2. Contemporary research findings contest the accepted wisdom in the industrial relations literature that unions are the primary mechanism of employee voice through their representative role (Freeman and Rogers, 1993; Lansbury et al., 1996; Kaufman and Taras, 1999; Bryson and Freeman, 2007). As Addison and Belfield (2004: 564) argued, the collective voice model is deficient for ‘uncritically equating collective voice with autonomous unionism’.
    3. As Addison and Belfield (2004: 564) argued, the collective voice model is deficient for ‘uncritically equating collective voice with autonomous unionism’.
    4. (Freeman and Rogers, 1993; Lansbury et al., 1996; Kaufman and Taras, 1999; Bryson and Freeman, 2007).
    5. Over the past two decades, the collective union voice view has been challenged as research has broadened to include direct voice mechanisms within a variety of non-union settings (McCabe and Lewin, 1992; McLoughlin and Gourlay, 1994; Terry, 1999; Benson, 2000; Gollan, 2003, 2006; Butler, 2005; Dietz et al., 2005; Dundon et al., 2005; Haynes, 2005; Machin and Wood, 2005; Taras and Kaufman, 2006; Bryson and Freeman, 2007; Dundon and Gollan, 2007).
  5. Aug 2016
    1. Uber and Lyft both use independent contractors, instead of employees who would likely get more benefits, to staff their services

      except that a court ruling recently ruled that Uber employees were not independent contractors but actually employees

  6. Apr 2016
  7. Dec 2015
    1. Since ducks can both swim and fly, each duck is found twice inC, once labeled as aflyer and once labeled as a swimmer. The typesAandBare kept disjoint inC, whichjustifies the name “disjoint union.”

      The disjoint union reminds me of algebraic datatypes in functional programming languages, whereas a set-theoretic union is more like a union in CS: the union has no label associated with it, so additional computation (or errors) may arise due to a lack of ready information about elements in the union.

  8. Oct 2015
    1. If Barack Obama was capable of muscling through the sort of laws that the labor movement—and Barack Obama—would like to see enacted, he would not have to give labor leaders a summit. He could give them political victories. But that does not seem to be the reality of the moment. So we all got invited to the White House instead, to talk about “outreach strategies” and to “#StartTheConvo” on labor issues. I did not get the impression that the conversation needed more starting. We all seemed pretty well decided on what we wanted. Left unspoken was the fact that the working class will not be getting what it wants, any time soon.

      Hurts to read.