March 26

Blog #15 – Henry Ford’s Omnipotent Approach to his Workers

In Roderick Nash’s essay, “Henry Ford: Symbol of an Age,”  the author discussed how Ford checked on his workers’ sobriety – his workers drank at the risk of their jobs.  Ford also implored his workers not to smoke tobacco either.  He was pleased that the children of new immigrants who poured into his factories were growing up “who have never seen a saloon and who will never know the handicap of liquor”  (Nash 158). 

After he paid $5 a day beginning in 1914, his workers’ turnover rate plummeted from 370% to 16% by 1915.   His workers worked 8-hour days as stated in this 1914 press release:

“Not only would the plant switch from two nine-hour shifts to three eight-hour ones, allowing it to run around the clock, but each man over 22 would receive the minimum wage of $5 a day, and ones under 22 would qualify if they had dependents.”

Initially, women didn’t qualify for the $5 / day wage.  “I consider women only a temporary factor in industry,” Ford explained. “I pay our women well so they can dress attractively and get married.”  But, eventually women were included by 1916 (emphasis is mine).

And with the increased wage came higher expectations from Ford: he didn’t want his workers spending their expanded income on cheap thrills, so he created a “Sociology Department” that checked up on his workers during their private time.  A team of 150 investigators checked up on all of Ford’s workers to make sure that they were saving money, getting married, buying a house, and living a healthy lifestyle.  If a worker wasn’t doing these things, he was put on six-months probation, and if by the end of that time he didn’t clean up his act, he was fired.   Critics thought that this intrusion into workers’ private lives was excessive, but over 75% of Ford’s work force willingly accepted the intrusion and the additional pay.   The Sociology Dept. was disbanded by Ford in 1920 (Gibson).

By the time the U.S. entered the Great War in 1917, $5 / day was the common wage.  Whether this was b/c of Ford or inflation caused by the boom in war production is unclear, but Ford’s effect on his workers was amazingly profound. 

 Under today’s laws, as taken from a website by the government’s Small Business Administration, employers like Ford might not be able to do what they were able to do back in the 1910s.   Today, employers can:

1. Ask for an employee’s credit report but only w/ that person’s consent;

2. Conduct a background criminal check, including finger printing (depends upon the state’s laws);

3. Inquire about an employee’s health and past health, but accessing medical records are off llimits;

4. Ask for military and educational records with the consent of the employee;

5. Examine things that are public records including divorce papers, bankruptcies,

They cannot ask for a polygraph test either before hiring or during your employment with the company.

See what is permissible today for employees’ background checks, according to the Small Business Administration

 This article (pdf) deals with how to deal with what they call your “digital dirt” or online stuff that a person may have posted (which never really goes away) that could be embarassing or even incriminating.  Google is being used as a way to weed out candidates for executive positions and even lower level positions b/c the job competition is so fierce.  According to the article, a survey they took in 2005 found that job recruiters used the internet  75% of the time to find out more information about job candidates, but only about 26% of the time did that info disqualify them from the job. 

Some of the things that can disqualify a job applicant, according to the survey’s respondents, were weird personal habits, suspended licenses, pending court cases, falsifying job titles or info, and mistated (lying) about your academic qualifications (just think Gatsby – did he really graduate from Oxford or just spend time there?).   Bulletin board posts can also expose your thinking, or lack thereof, and political biases.   For instance,

“Perry recalls a rabidly anti-George Bush candidate who posted some messages on a website that was later found by the potential employer. “Those postings cost him a $108,000 a year job, but of course, you can’t tell the candidate these things.”

Also, sometimes blogging about your job after you’ve been hired can get you fired, depending upon what you’ve revealed (classified company info) or how you’ve portrayed the company and its employees.  Getting fired for this is called being “dooced.”

While you work for a company, anything you do on their computers, phones, etc., can be examined and used against you if you say or do something stupid with it.  Other companies have software that blocks sites to increase their employees’ productivity (just think about the NCAA brackets and how much time has probably been lost by employers while their workers research the internet for the latest info).   This is all true for our school district and as employees, we sign a form that acknowledges that we understand this policy (so if fired, we can’t use “I didn’t know” as our defense). 

 

Henry Ford didn’t have to deal with the internet, but he did want workers who reflected his ideals.  My questions for you are:

1.  Do you see anything wrong with what Ford did in the use of his Sociology Dept., in exchange for the $5 / day wage?  Why or why not? 

2. With the internet and its lasting legacy, how does this change or reinforce your thoughts about what you put online or make available to the public?  Explain. 

3. Do you think it’s an invasion of privacy for companies to use your online profile against you in the hiring process?  Or do you think it’s possibly illegal or unfair?  Explain. 

 

Please answer all three questions for a minimum total of 300 words.   Since this was posted late, you have the option to turn this in by Tuesday, March 29 before your class begins. 

Sources:

1. The Ford Five Dollar Day –  http://www-personal.umd.umich.edu/~ppennock/L-FiveDollarDay.htm

2. American Heritage – Christine Gibson, “Henry Ford’s Revolution for the Worker.” http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/web/20060105-henry-ford-five-dollar-day-model-t-ford-motor-company-assembly-line-james-couzens-highland-park-detroit-automobiles.shtml

3. Dealing With Your Digital Dirt. http://www.abilitiesenhanced.com/digital-dirt.pdf

Tags:

Posted March 26, 2011 by geoffwickersham in category Blogs

64 thoughts on “Blog #15 – Henry Ford’s Omnipotent Approach to his Workers

  1. David Bellefleur

    1. I think that what Ford did was a huge invasion of privacy with the workers but he did do it with best intentions. It is kind of like your mom barging in on your room without knocking, you can’t hide the bottles or shoosh out the smoke. He did this so that the workers would perform to the best of the abilities and his conservative values and ideals were not very uncommon in those days. I think the workers knew what they were signing up for and the $5 a day made up for most inconveniences that were caused by Ford and his sociology department.
    2. Since almost everyone has social networking sites and profiles like facebook, it makes you think about what you put on the Internet. Whether it is a photo or comment, you always think about what other people will say when they see or read it. I think it makes people more responsible on the Internet if the have a dignity to censor what they want to say, because it causes no harm if you keep some things to yourself. The Internet will continue to grow and more and more things will pay attention to you on it, like colleges, and you wouldn’t want things you wouldn’t show your mother on something where your favorite college can view it.
    3. I think it is perfectly fair for companies to use your online profiles against you. Companies are trying to find the best workers for them to hire and they don’t want crazy slackers working or them. It should not be illegal because you have the choice to put what you want on the Internet, and the companies don’t affect this. Embarrassing comments and photos can almost always be removed, and if you are applying for a job and use one of these profiles as a contact, you’re probably not suited for the job if you can’t clear some of it out. Sometimes it is unfair if you are going on an angered rampage one day, because everyone knows that the way people act on the internet is not really who they are, or is it……

  2. Andrew Hausman

    1. It was wrong that Henry Ford utilized the Sociology Department to monitor his employees’ behavior outside of work. It was a gross violation of privacy. Henry Ford did not have to pay his employees $5 per day. However, once the employees had worked, it was their money and they should have been able to do with it what they please. It is understandable that Henry Ford wanted good workers, but practically spying on them to insure they were leading a good life is unacceptable. If employees were acting irresponsibly, Ford could fire them. This should occur only at the place of employment: the factory at which the worker was employed. Employers should not be able to have control of their employees’ lives, just as schools should not be able to control students’ actions outside of school hours, just recommend a suggested course of action.
    2. I like to communicate and voice my opinions on the internet, but I am extremely careful about what I post, especially when my name and personal information is attached to it. Even though I hold strong opinions on many topics, I try to refrain from making comments that could be considered offensive on the internet. This is because I am aware that nothing truly ever goes away on the internet. I am also very careful with my privacy to prevent people I don’t know from viewing my information and gaining access to the posts that I have made. In order to be disqualified from a job, a person must not only make an inappropriate post, but also allow potential employers the opportunity to see this mistake. Some people take on an overly cautious and paranoid attitude towards the internet, while others are unrestrained in their habits. While I am not condemning either of these approaches (notice the irony of not being offensive on the internet), I attempt to take a middle ground.
    3. I believe that it is somewhat unfair that companies use online profiles of potential or current employees as grounds for disqualification for a job opportunity or firing, but not an invasion of privacy or illegal. While it is wrong to monitor employees while they are not at work, as the Sociology Department did, companies are just doing more detailed research on their employees. I think the current regulations in place in regards to companies finding out additional information about their workers are fair to both parties. The laws enable companies to perform suitable background checks on employees, while still protecting those peoples’ personal privacy.

  3. Patrice Bell

    I think that Henry Fords use of the Sociology Department was very wrong. I understand that Ford wanted to promote an alcohol and smoke-free work environment, but the fact that he checked up on them outside of the workplace is a total invasion of privacy. I feel that work and home should be two different things. People shouldn’t have to completely mold their lives outside of work simply to please their bosses. I think people should go into work eve day, perform at their very best, and be able to go home and not worry about what other people think of their private lives.
    I think people should be careful of what they put on the internet regardless of whether or not it will get or cost them a job. I also think that if you put something online, you are untimely responsible for whatever consequences come from it. If you’re brave enough to let your friends, and even strangers, see it, you should be willing to let a possible employer see it. I think privacy on the internet is very different than privacy within the home. I don’t think it’s right for an employer to pry into the private lives of their employees, but once the employee makes that private public, then by all means the employer has the right to use it against the employee.
    I’m not sure whether or not it is illegal, but I don’t think it is unfair. As I stated before, once you decide to put something that you would like to be kept private on the Internet, anyone has access to it. It’s simply one of the dangers of the Internet, and if people don’t want their future employers looking at things they post, they just shouldn’t post them at all.

  4. Emily Novick

    1. I think that the Sociology Dept. had good intentions but I feel that if something similar to that was around today, I would be bothered. I admire the idea that Ford is checking his workers to make sure they are living a “good” lifestyle but I don’t think Ford has a right to define that for them. I know that they are his workers but he should base his decisions regarding them on how they perform, not personal habits. I feel like this would be unfair to people who don’t live “normal” lives in that time period. If someone was single and smoking, they shouldn’t get fired. Maybe they are actually more efficient and it would be unfair to fire them. They should be able to make the life choices they want.

    2. I don’t think any of the things I put on the internet will hurt me in the long run. I’ve had some stuff that I look back on and wonder why I put it there but nothing that could really hurt me. I put security settings on Facebook and whatnot so they can’t stalk me too much. I guess the only thing I really have to worry about is if my employer has something against Flobots, Harry Potter, or my basic personality, in which case they probably shouldn’t hire me.

    3. I believe that a company has every right to look on your profiles but I don’t think it’s a very good idea. It’s a lot easier to click the “send” button on a stupid post than to actually mean it. I’ve seen a lot of people get wrecked from mindless posts and sure, that was stupid of them, but people make mistakes. Or sometimes there’s an explanation like when we did that Twitter thing on the Haymarket riot, I’m pretty sure that might confuse someone who’s hiring me. The problem is that the internet is extremely impersonal and it’s easy to mess up. One bad post might not dictate who you are, but f someone continually expresses an immoral mindset; the employer would be disadvantaged by hiring them. I guess it’s just up to the employer and how they interpret mistakes against mindsets.

  5. Benjamin Sadler

    1. No, because he knew that people would work for that 5 dollars whether the job got torturous for them or not. The idea was quite brilliant because the workers would be getting paid around double as much a day than other companies and Ford would still be making money.
    2. I feel like you should always be careful what you put on the internet because once it’s there, it’s not coming off. Anything and everything can be used against you on the internet but on the contrary, it could also help. Now with Facebook and different websites like that, colleges and jobs will look at you facebook page to find out about you.
    3. I don’t think that it is invasion of your property and it definitely should be illegal. If you put something on the internet, you should know that anyone will be able to look at it, including your work place. I think that it is good for a company to check those things out because it may save their butts and if there is something on the internet that isn’t giving you a good reputation, uyou probably should be working that job.

  6. Allison Roche

    1. Ford was acting in an immoral and invasive manner with his sociology department in exchange for the five dollar a day wage. He over stepped his boundaries regarding his workers. What his employees do should only be his concern if and only if it directly affects his company. What employees decide to do with their money and how they spend their time is completely not Fords business and he shouldn’t have tried to make it his business. If a Ford employee wants drink and/or a smoke Ford shouldn’t have a cow and possibly dismiss his employees. He thought he control his employees lives by paying them five dollars a day and in some ways he could.

    2. I think that you should always use caution before posting anything online, if you wouldn’t want your grandparents to see it you shouldn’t put it up. However I think that with something as public as the internet people do realize that whatever you put up never goes away. It’s like a public library, anyone can access anything if they know how.

    3. It is a complete invasion of privacy for companies and prospective employers to “facebook stalk” you and possibly use their findings against you during the hiring process. Facebook and other online profiles are personal, their for your friends and not for the general public. Since their for your friends people may post some less then “G” rating things. But that doesn’t make the prospective employee a bad person or unfit for employment. I think that simply looking them up on facebook or other sites shouldn’t be illegal since anyone can do that at any time, but I do think it should be illegal to demand your user name and password so that employers can look into all of your profile. If you wanted everyone to be able to see your profile you would make it public instead of private.

  7. charles zuccarini

    1)i dont see anything wrong with how ford used his sociology department. he payed his workers well and kept them from starting bad habbits like drinking and smoking. and by doing this he increased productivity. and its not like his department was extreamly cutting into their personal lives other than the occasional check up. and either way over 75% of his workers approved of it anyway.
    2)it doesnt realy change my opinion of what i put on the internet. i dont think that what i put up on the internet is too wierd. and non of the things i do put up are anything that could get me into trouble. it would be nice if only my friends could see what i put up but its not that big of a concern to me as to who sees it.
    3)i dont think that its an invasion of your privacy for companies to use what you put on the internet as a source of info about you. though they should use alot more than just your internet account to hire you. if they did then that would be very unfair. its not an ivaison of privacy because everything thats on your online account can be seen by everyone anyways and why should it be differant for companies to look at it.

  8. dorianballard

    I think that the use of the sociology department was wrong. People should be able to live their own way without the intrusion of their employers. People have the right to privacy and Henry Ford blatantly disregarded this. I realize that this helped people stay on the right path and that it helped keep workers in line but I don’t believe that Henry Ford meant for it to firstly benefit the workers. He meant for it to benefit him first and then his workers. This was just another selfish thing that the big business tycoon did. The things you put on the internet never come off, and it is very hard to hide them. That is one difference between Henry Ford and the modern day. You could try to be sneaky but today you post the wrong tweet and you can get fired. I think that the big business executives are just trying to protect the company that the run so they have to be sure that the people who they are employing are not doing anything to jeopardize the image that they have created. However I don’t believe that bosses should be able to go into your private stuff and use that as bases for firing you. Your private life is different from business life, so what you do on your own time, unless it is affecting your work, should have anything to do with whether you get hired or fired. I think that when companies dig through your private life it is unfair and it is an invasion of privacy. If you have done something in the past that was a mistake, I don’t think you should be held to a fault for the rest of your life. It’s unfair because companies are ab2le to pick apart your life and they will know everything about you, and there are some things that should just stay with you.

  9. Ryan Stratton

    1. I feel that it was wrong. The fact of the matter is that, although drinking at the time was illegal, Ford should have been perfectly content with workers drinking as long as they were sober while working. I don’t think it should have Mr. Ford’s responsibility to keep them from drinking. I feel that it’s a massive violation of privacy. That’s not even worth five dollars a day. Although Ford had good intentions, I think he went way to far in his quest to raise an alcohol/smoke free generation.

    2. The internet is permanent. Everything you post will without question remain there, and come back to bite you later in life. On Facebook, I see loads of pictures of my Facebook friends drinking and doing other things that a potential job owner would be very unhappy seeing. Personally, I make a point to set my privacy settings so that only people I’m friends with can see my profile. However, I’m still friends with many family members, and try to do what I can to keep the inappropriate stuff to a minimum.

    3. I don’t think it’s an invasion of privacy for employers to look at your online profiles and potentially using it against you. What you put up is your responsibility. It’s very simple: If you don’t want an employer to see it, then don’t post it. However, it’s not fair if the company decides to use friends’ information against you. Just because somebody posted something about you does not mean that it should be used against you. While not illegal, that could be considered an invasion of privacy, because they would be looking at not only your profile, but also others as well.

  10. Katia Lev

    1. I don’t think Ford’s use of the Sociology Dept in exchange for the 5$ per day wage was at all unfair or anything. He was kind of like a fatherly figure giving his children an allowance but then making sure they didnt spend it all on candy. That’s kind of a patronizing metaphor, but Ford wasn’t trying to be unfair, he wanted his workers to be healthy and well so they would in turn work better and make more money for him so he could continue to pay them the high wages. Everybody wins in this situation. He wasn’t trying to hurt anyone, and I don’t think he was trying to completely control his workers’ lives.
    2. This does not change my opinion of social networking sites or online profiles etc. I always thought that if you put something on the Internet you should understand that anyone anywhere in the world can see what you post. If its something you dont want even ONE person to see, whether it be someone you know or not, you probably shouldnt post it on your Facebook/Myspace/whatever. Besides parents and other relatives being able to see absolutely everything, your future employers are also very easily able to learn a lot about your personal life that you probably dont want them to know.
    3. I dont think it is an invasion of privacy at all. For one thing, when you post something on an online profile, you HAVE no privacy. If you wanted something truly private, you wouldn’t blog about it on the Internet: thats what journals are for. You have to use judgement when you post things on the Internet, so if the drunk college pictures and page-long rant about your boyfriend not approving of your drug addiction is probably not something you want popping up in 5 years when you apply for a job, dont post it online! You want privacy, theres one simple solution: dont post your private life on the Internet. Shocking, isn’t it?

  11. Brad Miller

    I don’t really see anything wrong with Henry Ford’s Sociology department in exchange for the $5 work wage. He needed to make sure his workers were suited to handle their jobs and not collapse or have any mental issues while on the job. He also wanted people to check up on his workers while they were at home, just to make sure everything was alright. If I were a worker, I wouldn’t have a problem with this. Also, the people probably didn’t think too much of it because they got $5 per day, which was way above average for that time. With the internet being what it is and it’s lasting legacy, I do have to watch what I put out there, but I have nothing shady or anything to hide, so I’m not too worried, however, I also don’t want a stalker or creep coming to my house or school tracking me down. I believe some information should be allowed to be available to the general public, however, most information should be private and the user should be the one to allow others to view the information. A lot of people have been attack because they couldn’t control the extent to which they posted things on the internet, allowing predators easy access to personal information. It is definitely not an invasion of privacy for an employer to do a background check of you on the internet before hiring them because they need to make sure that you are a person that is credible and wouldn’t commit acts against the company. It is perfectly ok to check sites like Facebook or Twitter to see more into the personal lives of the employees. It might be a little unfair, but that is what you risk when you post all of your information to the web, that is accessible to anyone.

  12. Connor Mason

    1. I do not think that Ford’s exchange with the sociology department for the 5 dollar work day was unfair because the 5 dollar work day was a lot of money for only a day of work and the workers were getting a good deal. People may have liked the sociology department more but why would they when they could have more money for less time at work.

    2. The internet is forever. Anything you put or take from the internet will be there forever for everyone to view. People need to be careful of what they put on the internet because anyone and everyone can see it and possibly judge people based on ther the things they have posted on the internet. Personally, I am very careful of what I put on the internet because I know that every one can see what I publish and could be used against me at anytime and any place.

    3. I do not think that using the internet for job applications is an invasion of privacy. The job people have a right to know certain things about you before they hire you to their company. If someone has something on the internet that they do not want companies to see then they should not have posted it on the internet in the first place.

  13. Maddie Perfitt

    1. I believe that despite Ford’s good intentions, what he did was wrong with the use of his Sociology Dept. It was acceptable when he was just checking on his worker’s drinking habits because a man’s alcoholism could very well affect his working quality and devotion. Snooping into other aspects of their life, though, is absolutely ridiculous and taking an unnecessary and harmful precaution. It wasn’t any of Ford’s business whether his employees were using the money to give to charity or to go to the nearest strip clubs-unless it started affecting their working habits. Employers only need to be concerned with matters that effect employee’s work ethics and not just ones that could indirectly, possibly -if the conditions are right- mess up the ethics.
    2. This greatly affects the militancy I, and my peers, are with what’s posted on the Internet. People are constantly reviewing pictures that are supposed to be posted on social network sites and we know the boundaries on what can be said. There have been too many stories that I’ve heard and have been scarred by. Even if companies couldn’t see anything/everything you’ve basically ever posted, there are some things I wouldn’t want the general public seeing/knowing and wouldn’t post regardless of the impact it could have for my future. It’s just common sense.
    3. Despite the logic behind the online search and the accessibility no matter your power, I do still think it is invading your privacy. Again, if there is something online that would potentially affect the employee’s work ethics, it shouldn’t be investigated or even found out about until it does start intruding on work. Employers will see things that maybe aren’t what they should be seeing, whether innocent or inappropriate. People separate work and social life naturally. Not everyone can be an all work all of the time and invading online profiles is like peeking what’s going on on the other side. A true professional doesn’t have those two lives, only having the work part all the time, but we are human and naturally need to have that second life.

  14. Devan Moosherr

    1. I feel that what Ford did with the 5$ wage was a good thing for the workers. At that time, getting five dollars a day was a big deal for only one day of work. I feel that he was being very fair with his workers in paying them this much money in that time period.

    2. The internet lasts forever and we do not, so putting what we want to on the internet seems like a good idea to me. If what I am typing today has the possibility of being read by students hundreds of years from now, then I think that it is a good idea. When you start putting explicit or bad stuff on the internet then that is when you start to come to some problems. Even though you deleted it, someone could have already taken a picture of it, saved it, or even created a whole new website exposing you. It truly is scary stuff. People should use the internet at their own risk and think deeply about what they are putting on it.

    3. I think that it is totally unfair for companies to check your social networking profiles to judge you. Your social network websites are meant for you to express yourself and to stay in touch with people, and when companies decide to not take you for a job over what you have on them is just totally unfair. Sometimes it is a good things for companies to look at the websites in such cases as the FBI or police jobs because those are very serious positions in our community and we need to truly know who is holding those positions.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*