More what you’d call “guidelines” than actual rules
We are not against bosses. Not against work. Not against capitalism or communitarianism, collectives or individuals. Not against corporations or government, taxes or barter.
The real enemies are our own assumptions about what is necessary, possible, and forbidden.
Collegiality is preferable to formal partnership. Partnership is preferable to work for hire. Work for hire is preferable to long-term employment. Employment is preferable to poverty.
But even poverty is preferable to social isolation.
What have I missed?
Author: vaguery
Posted: Sunday, March 2nd, 2008
Category: Philosophy
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:19 am
Seeing this as an opportunity for exploration I commend to you this quote by Dave Pollard.
“We need more laboratories, exploratoriums. Places with the people, resources and collaboration tools to do experiments and share what works and what doesn’t. With no requirement for a tightly-focused short-term ROI. Play spaces where people who care about something can sketch, make stuff up, try it out.”
In this good spirit I wish you luck.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:43 am
It almost sounds like you’re groping for something like the Agile Manifesto.
I find this idea really interesting and look forward to following it. It’s clear that many traditional ideas of how labor and capital are structured just don’t make sense in our current universe; if nothing else the role of physical capital and goods has changed radically since 40’s and 50′ (which I suspect may prove to be the last great heyday of physical goods).
As a tenured academic at a highly collegial institution, I’m personally in a somewhat gray space. I am definitely an employee, and probably among the longest-term sort that there is. On the other hand, I have far more flexibility in my work, projects, relationships, and commitments than most people.
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:40 am
Nic, I don’t know why your link didn’t work properly (it made your comment invisible) — we’ll look into it so your post is as you intended and visible. [Seems to relate to the Semiologic DoFollow plugin. Using a different plugin.]
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:17 am
Actually, you may want to look closely at that. According to a good friend who happens to be a Department Chariman around here, he’s not, nor are his faculty colleagues.
One of the goals you might ascribe to us is that of bringing the Life of the Mind out into the “real world”. There are some places in the Academy it can’t be found; surely there’s some law of conservation we can take advantage of….
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:47 am
“surely there’s some law of conservation we can take advantage of…”
The total amount of energy in a closed system does not change. Why not focus that energy on the work, and the client, instead of office politics? (Spoken as one who is still partially tied down by said politics.)
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:11 am
And the coffee is probably better, too.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:13 am
Vaguery: I’m not sure what you mean by “he’s not”.
A long term employee? While nothing’s certain in life, I suspect my job is about as stable as any. (If I were to lose mine, there we’d probably be concerned with vastly more troubling things in the world than my employment.)
Or collegial? I realize that many academies (perhaps most) aren’t terribly collegial, but mine actually is, and that’s one of the key reasons that I work there. I do totally agree, however, that the “Academy” is by no means a paradise of sweetness and light.
I also agree that there are good things about the Life of the Mind that can move out into other parts of the world. As we move from an economy of physical things to an economy of ideas, it seems that some of this is inevitable. Cool to have groups like this moving that forward.
March 4th, 2008 at 7:01 am
My friend’s point was that, as far this institution is concerned, as tenured faculty he is differentiated from “mere” employee status. As I understand it, tenure is a permanent (or long term) property right that supersedes others’ rights to manage staff appointments, and therefore establishes a legal relationship that is substantially different from that of staff or other employees (and even some administrators).
Check and I suspect all the handbooks, for example, say “Faculty and Employees” where you work, too. That’s not a mistake the lawyers made, nor is it merely a respectful bow to faculty’s universally esteemed social standing.
That tenure thing makes a big difference.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:53 am
Gotcha. You’re spot on - tenure does clearly put you in a different status than many employees. Still, as a practical matter I am a (very) long-term employee of the U. They sign the checks that ultimately pay for hearth and home, and every spring I have to assemble an annual report of my accomplishments to argue for a merit raise if the legislature sees fit to grant us any that year. (Damn - that’s due in a few weeks. Hmph.) I’m a lot harder to fire than most employees, but for me that just places more emphasis on the other kinds of social capital that arise in a highly collegial environment like UMM’s.
Finally, I’ll note that a senior worker in a strong union can have a position that is in effect not unlike tenure. It sucks to be forced to let exceptional junior employees go in a budget cutting adventure, while you have to retain much less useful senior staff. I’ve seen it happen numerous times in several different organizations, and it really isn’t fun.