Social Science in Buisness: Surviving Progress or The Corporation

Capitalist Division of Labor
Student’s Name
Institution
Capitalist Division of Labor
In a political and economic system where the industries and means of production are under the control of private owners, profitability is the main focus. According to Braverman (1974/1998), social division of labor has been common throughout the history of human beings, unlike the capitalist division of labor, which is a recent phenomenon. This paper focuses on Braverman’s view of capitalism. The paper begins by differentiating detailed division of labor from the social division of labor and goes to explain how workers are oppressed under the capitalist society. The paper also examines the Babbage Principle and how it relates to ‘degradation of work’. Finally, the paper shows how Elmer Rice’s play illustrates the life under capitalism as described by Braverman. It is the argument of the paper that capitalist division of work only favors the interests of the few elites who have power, wealth, and control at the expense of workers.
Social division of labor differs significantly from detailed division of labor. According to Braverman (1974/1998), involves social division of labor into crafts. In this sense, there is no further subdivision of the crafts. Braverman points out that while men and women may be connected in the development of particular products, there is no rule in place that seeks to divide the operations involved in the making of each product. This form of division of labor, according to Braverman, is a feature of all societies in the history of human beings. One community can focus on the production of a product which it has a comparative advantage in. As informed by Elwell (2013), the social division of labor is a significant factor in dictating technological development rate, the extent of socio-cultural cohesion and solidarity, and the degree of inequality and stratification. A significant feature of the social division of labor is that one community can specialize in the production of a particular product and then exchange with another community that specializes in the production of another. The operations involved in the creation of the products, in this case, cannot be subdivided. This can be advantageous in the sense that it members of a community or a group can focus on producing a product in the best possible way. However, too much dependency on a particular product can be disastrous in the case it becomes replaced or extinct.
On the other hand, there is the detailed division of labor, which is a completely different phenomenon. According to Braverman, this detailed division of labor involves the breaking down of the operations involved in the making of a product such that each part can be done by different workers. An aspect that sets aside the detailed division of labor from the social division of labor is the productivity. The process of making products often involves numerous operations. When one man performs all the operations, the productivity is low. However, if each of the operations involved in making the products is divided among many workmen, a significant increase in productivity occurs. As informed by Elwell (2013), the high level of productivity that comes with detailed division of labor is made possible by three factors. One of such factors is the increase in dexterity in carrying out a simple operation repeatedly. Another factor is the cutback of time that is lost in moving from one work type to another. Finally, the increase in productivity is also made possible by the development of machines to perform simple tasks. The higher the number of operations the process of manufacturing can be broken into and the more the operations can be performed by different workmen, the higher the productivity that can be achieved. Elwell (2013) points out that the workman is okay with the breakdown of work since he does this often to ensure in order to suit his own needs. However, it is rare for the workman to voluntarily be a detailed worker for the rest of his life. In the detailed division of labor, there is the endless repetition of carrying out simple tasks and this can be mind-numbing. There is the lack of variety and as well as the increased control of the labor process by the capitalists. Elwell (2013) also points out that it creates a situation where the worker is “unskilled” in that the skills he possesses are not distinctive and can easily be interchanged by many others. Therefore, the worker has little control over the labor process. With little leverage, it becomes difficult for the worker to increase his level of wages. According to Braverman, the detailed division of labor favors the interests of the buyers of labor and not the sellers. The result of detailed division of labor is lower wages, increased productivity and increased control over the labor process (Elwell, 2013). From Braverman's point of view, capitalism has made workers just another production factor, just a commodity that can be purchased.
<...