I'm not much of a consumer. My lifestyle is comparable to what the Quakers call voluntary simplicity. After expenses I have very little disposable income, I live alone, and it doesn't make sense to pay for a membership to the discount store Costco. When I need an appliance, software or commodity item I check to see if the product I need is on sale at Fry's, a giant California based tech emporium. Fry's TVs are in a back corner -- I never look at them because I'm doing just fine with my antenna on the roof, converter box and old JVC CRT TV -- so when a friend recently took me to Costco, I was immediately captured by the big screens displayed first thing when you walk in.
Not a Luddite, I enjoy high-def TV, but what caught my eye was all the labels touting WiFi, YouTube, Facebook, Pandora , Netflix and Cinema Now. One of my friends recently bought a new DVD player with all these capabilities, and we've been so happy running Pandora that we haven't even explored the other options. But now I've been shocked out of my lethargy, and I'm wondering if a new TV hooked to a faster Internet connection might serve my interests better than the hodge podge of antenna TV, computer Internet, FM radio and DVD recorder I've been running.
I spend a lot of time practicing saxophone and piano -- a retired professional keeping my chops up. And I spend a lot of time writing -- getting older, there are things I want to say before I go. So my viewing habits are not typical. I don't kick back and watch for hours with the remote in my hand, I cherry-pick. I like PBS and NPR, and I get the great jazz station KCSM (91.1 FM, KCSM.org on the web) on channel 60-3 with my antenna and digital converter. I get the major networks, but I enjoy older syndicated shows on 4-3, 11-2, 20-2, plus the Classic Arts Showcase on 32-5 here in the San Francisco area. Looking forward to baseball season starting soon, but I have to go to a sports bar for most of the games, or better yet visit a friend with Tivo, pause near the start, then compress the time span to half with fast forward.
So maybe we're still not quite to the point where everything is available over the Web -- we still need cable for sports. But PBS streams complete shows, Netflix has movies, Internet radio can replace my FM receiver and give me access to the whole planet, and there's plenty of news on the Web, too. Depending on how much one wants to spend on new hardware, it's definitely about time to forget about cable! Of course this is easy for me to say, because I've never had cable -- initially because my local provider didn't have MTV -- later because of habit and expense. And I'm not the only one to say that out of the great number of channels on a typical cable setup there are times when nothing good is on!
The pending merger of Comcast and Time Warner means less competition and higher prices. LA Dodger fans are freaking because the only way to see the Bums this year is on Time Warner -- in the past their games were on broadcast TV. But if people start pulling their cable subscriptions, then MLB will have to move their programming -- maybe to an Internet streaming service. That could create an international audience, might even be better for business! Your viewing habits are no doubt different than mine -- but check out the new TV offerings for yourself. WiFi and the Internet may be good for you, and less costly than paying Uverse, Comcast, Dish TV or your local programming source for a bunch of stuff you'll never watch just to get a couple of good channels.
-- Don Baraka
Monday, March 24, 2014
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Prevent religious war, reaffirm secular governance...
Because of our reverence and respect for religious institutions, the cloak of the pious can provide cover for the bigot and refuge for scoundrels. I have no problem with pure hearts doing good works, guided by enlightened clergy. But I fear the influence of those who use their pulpit to teach anti-Semitism, foster hatred against the LGBT community or slander Muslims by suggesting all Islam is infused with the pathology of twisted jihadists. Indeed the flames of war in the Middle East are fed by states where dogma guides their body politic, but that should point to the problem of non-secular religious government, not a blanket indictment for the largest religion on the planet.
The United States of America has a carefully defined separation of church and state, but the "God is on our side" attitude that is such a comfort when we are under attack has a negative aspect that comes into play when demagogues try to lead us into aggressive action. We have a great need for the kind of excellent secular public education that will create a morally intelligent populace, keep our foreign policy free of religious bias, and teach critical thinking, lest our own sociopaths, the svengalis of talk radio and the obfuscaters who propagandize televised news will succeed in creating a puppet majority acting against their own self interest in support of the corporate controllers behind the curtain.
I just took action by writing to my U.S. Representative and Senators asking them to oppose private school voucher legislation! Support public schools by using this link to send a letter to your representatives in national government: www.au.org/our-work/legislative/action-center. And consider supporting Americans United For Separation of Church and State:
-- Don Baraka
The United States of America has a carefully defined separation of church and state, but the "God is on our side" attitude that is such a comfort when we are under attack has a negative aspect that comes into play when demagogues try to lead us into aggressive action. We have a great need for the kind of excellent secular public education that will create a morally intelligent populace, keep our foreign policy free of religious bias, and teach critical thinking, lest our own sociopaths, the svengalis of talk radio and the obfuscaters who propagandize televised news will succeed in creating a puppet majority acting against their own self interest in support of the corporate controllers behind the curtain.
I just took action by writing to my U.S. Representative and Senators asking them to oppose private school voucher legislation! Support public schools by using this link to send a letter to your representatives in national government: www.au.org/our-work/legislative/action-center. And consider supporting Americans United For Separation of Church and State:
-- Don Baraka
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
The Need For Education and Secular Ethics
Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty
The first time I became aware of protest as a necessary activity was in the 50s when people were marching in the streets in San Francisco clamoring for nuclear disarmament. I was appalled that something so obviously nihilistic as the continuing development of such a horrible weapon was being promoted -- why couldn't our government see the evil inherent in manufacturing bigger, more brutal bombs?
Then came the sad stories of the freedom riders, the battles for human dignity being fought to accomplish desegregation -- it's spelled out in the very Constitution of our country that we are all equal! Why must we fight to accomplish something we already know is right -- who could possibly persist in the persecution of our negro citizens long after the matter had been settled by a great civil war?
Almost simultaneous with the civil rights struggle we witnessed the prosecution of the Vietnam war, predicated on anti-communist dogma that should have died with McCarthyism and bolstered by lies perpetuated through the filter of the chain of command. The juggernaut of conscription was feeding our disenfranchised youth into the jaws of an immoral war, and the powers administering this jabberwock were blind to their folly, so we took to the streets.
What is this perverse streak in human nature that creates such selective blindness, that for policy or profit those who are entrusted with keeping control over great institutions intended for public good lose their moral compass and instead persevere with a reductio ad absurdum that distorts their vision to the point where they allow and encourage atrocities?
I for one grow tired of the endless auto-da-fe of discompassion, the narrow conceits of conservatism, the overcompensations of liberalism, the constant need to shine the light of reason on unreasonable policies and practices. Why do we not learn, why is there no surcease to the retrograde procession of malevolence?
The age of enlightenment's finest hour was the birth of the American nation and its great Constitution and Bill of Rights. These carefully crafted documents should not be allowed to atrophy and lose their vigor, yet it seems an influence of money and media unforeseen by the founders is conspiring to allow baser elements of the human condition to come to the fore. Scoundrels rise to the catbird seat and move the levers to suit their unseen masters while a striving innocent populace is brought to suffer collateral indignities.
My text and cries of shame to the perpetrators seem so ineffectual. Squeezed by economics, distracted by electronic circuses, huddled families have no time or expectation for protest. We can sign virtual petitions on the Internet, write letters to our representatives, some can afford contributing to non-profits with well meaning charters, but we suspect the dollars are eaten up by inflated overhead.
Yet I can't give up hope. It seems the battles being waged are eternal, but there is more than duality -- good and evil, light and dark, creation and destruction -- there is the impetus of the heartbeat. We know in our own souls what is right and wrong -- this gives rise to optimism. We witness the wrongful actions of those who sin, disregarding their own divine nature, causing hurt and pain. When others hurt themselves, we of good conscience intervene, to save the foolish from their folly. But too often when these perpetrators act to harm others we rush to vilify and oppose them -- when instead we should understand, forgive and educate.
I once witnessed a North American native, homeless and begging on the street of a college town being taunted and teased by a small group of partying students who were too drunk to know better. The only response they could elicit from their unfortunate target was the phrase, "I am enemy of no man." It proved to be an adequate defense, for the youths soon moved on. But it would have been so much better if some prevention had been enacted, less alcohol imbibed, no quest for amusement at the expense of the innocent.
Much human activity takes place in the ethical framework of a peer group. The administrator, the elected representative, the CEO, the agency steward are usually isolated by their office. They feel elevated and distant from those they serve, demonstrating a smirking superiority or perhaps a resigned shrug when they twist the rules to suit expediency and enforce a reality opposed to common sense and opposite the best interests of their constituency. This conundrum leads some of us to believe the only solution to the dilemma of perversity in human nature is a religious morality. But we can't force people to accept religion, or morality, they must come to it through their own understanding.
Let us not forget the impetus for religious freedom that drove so many pilgrims to escape the tyranny of state religions, seeking the shores of a new continent where they could worship as they please. One of the great lessons written into America's governance is the separation of Church and State. This must be kept constant and serve as a beacon for this troubled planet. It may seem counter to theosophy and dogma, but we must believe in the innate human capacity for morality and ethics. Religion may enhance and assure development of the finer qualities of the individual, but forced religion leads to separation and conflict. There are as many paths to God as there are souls of human beings, let each one find their own way.
And to find our way out of the thicket, to end the constant battle between good and evil, to stop the continuous usurpation of power by vested self interest, we need a moral and ethical revolution. This means internal change -- revolution in the most benign sense of the word. No violent overthrow of institutions twisted from their purpose by the vagaries of human nature, no bricks through the window, no bombs. Instead, we can use the loving tool of education. There are those who fear the misuse of education, when it becomes propaganda rather than a furtherance of truth, but the saving grace of humanity can be found if we listen and follow the lead of sincere and insightful teachers.
When an inspired person comes up with a good idea, we should let that idea stand on its own merits, and not dismiss the concept because it comes from someone misunderstood or discredited by one's peer group. I've been astonished to hear negative reactions when mentioning thoughts from people like Bishop Desmond Tutu, or Nelson Mandela -- usually because their philosophies are universal and may not be in keeping with someone's given church doctrine. Nevertheless, let's pay attention to the Dalai Lama when he espouses the teaching of Secular Ethics. The Dalai Lama's responsibility, that he is born into, is that of the Keeper of Compassion for the planet. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the possibly arcane system of searching the Tibetan population for the reincarnated Dalai Lama -- his role, his training, personality and insight are to be respected, even venerated.
A recent broadcast of the Religion and Ethics Weekly program on PBS featured the Dalai Lama recommending the teaching of Secular Ethics in an address at Emory College. Founded by Methodists in 1836, Emory is chartered to "educate the heart as well as the mind." This is definitely in consonance with the Dalai Lama's teachings. He spoke of cultivating genuine compassion as the correct approach to ethics. He espouses the addition of Secular Ethics into all schools, not just through religious teaching, although "all religions can guide." He recommends warmheartedness -- if we relate from the heart we will realize all humans have the same goals and aspirations, and awareness of the interdependence of all life leads to gratitude, endearment and affection -- empathy.
An excellent educational system can lead the way forward, providing skills and knowledge for the work force of tomorrow, and moral and ethical guidance can be taught at the same time. I'd prefer a renaissance in the public school system, including reintroduction of the idea that an education is the birthright of every citizen in an enlightened and compassionate country. If America is to survive and prosper, we need to fund our schools, not more prisons. And let's find a way to end the absurdity of sky-high tuition -- how cruel to saddle the new graduate with a big bundle of debt. If we do things right we could even pay people to go to school -- it would be in the country's best interest to provide universal education. If we were to spend but a fraction of the cost of our over-priced machines of warfare on educating our populace it would be a much better investment. Education, not incarceration! Go to school instead of war!
-- Don Baraka
The first time I became aware of protest as a necessary activity was in the 50s when people were marching in the streets in San Francisco clamoring for nuclear disarmament. I was appalled that something so obviously nihilistic as the continuing development of such a horrible weapon was being promoted -- why couldn't our government see the evil inherent in manufacturing bigger, more brutal bombs?
Then came the sad stories of the freedom riders, the battles for human dignity being fought to accomplish desegregation -- it's spelled out in the very Constitution of our country that we are all equal! Why must we fight to accomplish something we already know is right -- who could possibly persist in the persecution of our negro citizens long after the matter had been settled by a great civil war?
Almost simultaneous with the civil rights struggle we witnessed the prosecution of the Vietnam war, predicated on anti-communist dogma that should have died with McCarthyism and bolstered by lies perpetuated through the filter of the chain of command. The juggernaut of conscription was feeding our disenfranchised youth into the jaws of an immoral war, and the powers administering this jabberwock were blind to their folly, so we took to the streets.
What is this perverse streak in human nature that creates such selective blindness, that for policy or profit those who are entrusted with keeping control over great institutions intended for public good lose their moral compass and instead persevere with a reductio ad absurdum that distorts their vision to the point where they allow and encourage atrocities?
I for one grow tired of the endless auto-da-fe of discompassion, the narrow conceits of conservatism, the overcompensations of liberalism, the constant need to shine the light of reason on unreasonable policies and practices. Why do we not learn, why is there no surcease to the retrograde procession of malevolence?
The age of enlightenment's finest hour was the birth of the American nation and its great Constitution and Bill of Rights. These carefully crafted documents should not be allowed to atrophy and lose their vigor, yet it seems an influence of money and media unforeseen by the founders is conspiring to allow baser elements of the human condition to come to the fore. Scoundrels rise to the catbird seat and move the levers to suit their unseen masters while a striving innocent populace is brought to suffer collateral indignities.
My text and cries of shame to the perpetrators seem so ineffectual. Squeezed by economics, distracted by electronic circuses, huddled families have no time or expectation for protest. We can sign virtual petitions on the Internet, write letters to our representatives, some can afford contributing to non-profits with well meaning charters, but we suspect the dollars are eaten up by inflated overhead.
Yet I can't give up hope. It seems the battles being waged are eternal, but there is more than duality -- good and evil, light and dark, creation and destruction -- there is the impetus of the heartbeat. We know in our own souls what is right and wrong -- this gives rise to optimism. We witness the wrongful actions of those who sin, disregarding their own divine nature, causing hurt and pain. When others hurt themselves, we of good conscience intervene, to save the foolish from their folly. But too often when these perpetrators act to harm others we rush to vilify and oppose them -- when instead we should understand, forgive and educate.
I once witnessed a North American native, homeless and begging on the street of a college town being taunted and teased by a small group of partying students who were too drunk to know better. The only response they could elicit from their unfortunate target was the phrase, "I am enemy of no man." It proved to be an adequate defense, for the youths soon moved on. But it would have been so much better if some prevention had been enacted, less alcohol imbibed, no quest for amusement at the expense of the innocent.
Much human activity takes place in the ethical framework of a peer group. The administrator, the elected representative, the CEO, the agency steward are usually isolated by their office. They feel elevated and distant from those they serve, demonstrating a smirking superiority or perhaps a resigned shrug when they twist the rules to suit expediency and enforce a reality opposed to common sense and opposite the best interests of their constituency. This conundrum leads some of us to believe the only solution to the dilemma of perversity in human nature is a religious morality. But we can't force people to accept religion, or morality, they must come to it through their own understanding.
Let us not forget the impetus for religious freedom that drove so many pilgrims to escape the tyranny of state religions, seeking the shores of a new continent where they could worship as they please. One of the great lessons written into America's governance is the separation of Church and State. This must be kept constant and serve as a beacon for this troubled planet. It may seem counter to theosophy and dogma, but we must believe in the innate human capacity for morality and ethics. Religion may enhance and assure development of the finer qualities of the individual, but forced religion leads to separation and conflict. There are as many paths to God as there are souls of human beings, let each one find their own way.
And to find our way out of the thicket, to end the constant battle between good and evil, to stop the continuous usurpation of power by vested self interest, we need a moral and ethical revolution. This means internal change -- revolution in the most benign sense of the word. No violent overthrow of institutions twisted from their purpose by the vagaries of human nature, no bricks through the window, no bombs. Instead, we can use the loving tool of education. There are those who fear the misuse of education, when it becomes propaganda rather than a furtherance of truth, but the saving grace of humanity can be found if we listen and follow the lead of sincere and insightful teachers.
When an inspired person comes up with a good idea, we should let that idea stand on its own merits, and not dismiss the concept because it comes from someone misunderstood or discredited by one's peer group. I've been astonished to hear negative reactions when mentioning thoughts from people like Bishop Desmond Tutu, or Nelson Mandela -- usually because their philosophies are universal and may not be in keeping with someone's given church doctrine. Nevertheless, let's pay attention to the Dalai Lama when he espouses the teaching of Secular Ethics. The Dalai Lama's responsibility, that he is born into, is that of the Keeper of Compassion for the planet. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the possibly arcane system of searching the Tibetan population for the reincarnated Dalai Lama -- his role, his training, personality and insight are to be respected, even venerated.
A recent broadcast of the Religion and Ethics Weekly program on PBS featured the Dalai Lama recommending the teaching of Secular Ethics in an address at Emory College. Founded by Methodists in 1836, Emory is chartered to "educate the heart as well as the mind." This is definitely in consonance with the Dalai Lama's teachings. He spoke of cultivating genuine compassion as the correct approach to ethics. He espouses the addition of Secular Ethics into all schools, not just through religious teaching, although "all religions can guide." He recommends warmheartedness -- if we relate from the heart we will realize all humans have the same goals and aspirations, and awareness of the interdependence of all life leads to gratitude, endearment and affection -- empathy.
An excellent educational system can lead the way forward, providing skills and knowledge for the work force of tomorrow, and moral and ethical guidance can be taught at the same time. I'd prefer a renaissance in the public school system, including reintroduction of the idea that an education is the birthright of every citizen in an enlightened and compassionate country. If America is to survive and prosper, we need to fund our schools, not more prisons. And let's find a way to end the absurdity of sky-high tuition -- how cruel to saddle the new graduate with a big bundle of debt. If we do things right we could even pay people to go to school -- it would be in the country's best interest to provide universal education. If we were to spend but a fraction of the cost of our over-priced machines of warfare on educating our populace it would be a much better investment. Education, not incarceration! Go to school instead of war!
-- Don Baraka
Saturday, March 1, 2014
Profit Sharing -- Part of the Solution
The problem of course is income inequality, and the United States needs to end the disparity between the very rich and the struggling remainder of its citizens. Fixing this problem will ensure the survival of the great egalitarian democracy our founders envisioned, and provide a model for the the future, not only for the United States, but for the world. Many alternatives to the status quo of untrammeled, and some would say immoral capitalism have been proposed and tested throughout this young nation's history. The lack of success of Soviet socialism puts the lie to capital "C" Communism, small "c" communism is unpalatable to a great majority, but "trickle down" doesn't work either! This leads to considering possible modifications to the highly successful but increasingly unfair system of capitalism we have at present.
Being totally practical, we have to continue riding the vehicle we're on, and any new ideas may be criticized as analogous to changing a tire while rolling down the road. But only the most jaded, moneyed or idyllic can deny the stress and lack of hope characterizing the state of the citizenry today. Most certainly, it will take a whole suite of ideas to improve the distribution of wealth in our country, and by our example, the planet. In that perspective, I'm offering this suggestion. Find a way to legislate mandatory profit-sharing! Let me back up and provide a few calculations based on personal experience so the reader may appreciate the genesis of this idea, that corporate profit-sharing can lift us out of the downward spiral of our overall economy and quality of life.
I graduated from Foothill College on the San Francisco peninsula in 1974, when Silicon Valley was just beginning to roar. It was difficult to find a job with "just an AS" and no experience, but luckily a fairly long strike by IBEW 1969 had drained the Lenkurt Corporation of many of its technicians, and when the strike ended I was happy to climb aboard. Although my skills were current I apparently failed their trouble-shooting test and spent 3 months inhaling lead vapors in a room full of other unfortunates doing nothing more technical than de-soldering visibly burnt or broken components from the canvas mail carts full of failed telecommunications equipment we received on a daily basis. As soon as I was eligible for re-test, I took the same trouble-shooting test, received the same module, got the same result and this time was told that I had passed and could now work as a technician. I moved to swing shift, making well above the minimum wage, plus a 10% shift differential. In spite of the dues, working hours that separated me from family and friends, and the many incongruities of the union environment, I hung in there. After almost a year witnessing employees with tenure taunting the supervisors by doing nothing, unwittingly working on units that were passed over by other technicians because they were virtually irreparable or had unrealistically low work standards, I thought it would be worth giving up the shift differential and took an opening on the day shift. That was a big mistake. I was the low man on the totem pole, had the worst gear on my bench, and actually worked in a cage with reprobates who kept obscene joke books in their half-open drawer and took turns shouting out their profanities. I asked to be returned to swing shift and in a lunch time interview when the supervisor told me it "wouldn't be a good management decision" to move me back and cost the company the 10% shift differential, in disgust and anger I threw the supervisor's sandwich at the wall! Unionism failed me -- I agree with the Volkswagen workers in Tennessee who recently voted against unionizing.
In 1975 I worked for TRW Vidar in Mountain View and was mentored by a senior components engineer. Even though my pay was less than the union job, my fellow employees were not as angry, and less profane than the union techs. As a young worker I made some mistakes, none too costly -- "When you're chopping trees you're gonna have a few chips" -- my boss told me after I erroneously cross-referenced a relay causing a purchasing return and production delay. I learned a great lesson at the expense of one of the custodians, though. It was his job to unlock the back gate a little before noon so employees could lunch and jog at a nearby park. The day that he failed to do that I was returning from my nearby rented digs on my bike, and I picked up some thorns that flattened both my tires when I went around to the front via the shoulder of the railroad tracks. Upset at this inconvenience I told his boss, and the next day I encountered a red-faced angry custodian. "You complained, sir! And my boss used that against me in my performance review. You cost me and my family a 1 1/2 percent raise!" I immediately realized that I should have taken my complaint to him -- not management. After all, it was the Human Relations department that fired me from my previous job. The great importance he attached to losing that raise made me curious, too. I discretely asked several employees how much more a year they would require to pay their bills on time and have something for unexpected expense and special occasions. My number was about $2000, and that turned out to be the consensus. I looked at the numbers from the previous fiscal year, divided the company profit by the number of employees and it equaled just about $2000! My salary was around $9K which meant a 22% higher rate would be welcome -- but if everyone got their breathing room the company would be unprofitable.
It took a few years, but I learned some very valuable methods for insuring the quality of an electronic company's purchased parts, and armed with my two-year degree and some fortunate references I eventually became a components engineer myself. I was hired by a manufacturer of computer terminals, and received continued mentoring from one of the founders, "employee number six," the documentation manager. Zentec Corporation actually made Intel based microcomputers masquerading as "glass teletypes," wrote their own code and ran it from read only memory chips. The company was known for excellent engineering and a well-thought out manufacturing methodology. Using innovative purchasing, stocking, quality assurance and manufacturing ideas, the company spirit was buoyed up by quarterly profit-sharing and an open-door policy. Rather than risk total dependence on just-in-time buying, the company cleverly used the prefix on their piece part documentation to describe a stocking location next to the assembly area. There were no part substitutions without engineering approval, and incoming inspection was reserved for sub-assemblies. Individual components went to stock if the received part numbers matched the purchase order drawn from the approvals in the data base. These policies created the lowest "DOA" rate in the business, increased profitability and the profit sharing environment made for positive motivation and constant improvement. By 1980 I was making about $19K a year plus quarterly profit sharing checks that added about $1500, an additional 7%. Unfortunately the marketing department bet the company on a series of work stations and servers running UNIX -- not a bad idea in itself -- but the design depended on the impending release of the 80186 microprocessor and Intel decided to wait 6 or 8 months, skipping to the 80286. Until fate intervened the company had financed its growth from profits, saw employees leave to start spin offs Televideo and Wyse, and never had a layoff. Even though I was spared from the first ever Zentec layoff, the spirit was gone, sales were spinning downward and I left for a "blue pasture" at GE Calma.
Within 6 months Calma was experiencing their own downturn. A manufacturer of computer aided design stations that depended on mainframe computers for their processing power, they used a questionable manufacturing and shipping process that cost them millions when customers refused to accept shipments because they wanted to wait for the next wave of minicomputers. Calma had blanket orders for their CAD systems with staggered delivery. To make their quarterly numbers look good, they would build ahead and store the systems under plastic sheeting in a 45,000 square foot warehouse. Zentec worked their numbers, too, calling a unit shipped when it went through the "hole in the wall," but GE Calma was 3 to 6 months ahead of their shipping schedule, and the costly systems languishing under yellow argon lights in the back were "shipped" when they were locked behind the cyclone fence.
Thankfully, the 16% layoff at Calma was mitigated by an employee outplacement effort, and they helped hook me up with a promotion to Quality Assurance Manager a few miles away at Amtron, a manufacturer of 19 inch precision color monitors. Amtron's main selling feature was a low selling price and a form factor that matched the mounting requirements for a popular Mitsubishi monitor. I soon learned that I had walked in the door for my interview about an hour and a half after management had met and decided they would hire the next biped who applied for QA Manager -- they had a roaring quality problem and their existing QA man was a lame duck coasting toward retirement. I passed my first test on day 3 when my boss, the Director of Manufacturing asked me if I wanted to send everyone home because we received another batch of circuit boards full of solder shorts -- or should we inspect our way through and cherry pick enough good ones to keep building? We kept the line going, but I immediately tried to find another vendor, which is difficult when your company is in bankruptcy and the bills are being paid by a financial holding company. The situation was so bad that we would get a rental truck and move all the RMAs that were stacked in the hallways to local storage lockers when prospective customers wanted to do a site inspection.
I used everything I had learned from previous mentors, senior QA men, a series of management and statistical QA courses I had taken, and stories in the trade press about successful quality programs, and crazy as it seems, we fixed the company. There were engineering meetings twice a week, concentrating on fixes for the most frequent problems. I discovered an employee altering drawings, then "fixing" problems after they occurred with great flourish of his red pen. "Tip and tell" devices inside shipping boxes led to a change in our shipper. We created a motivational program called "Murphy's Dead." But the greatest improvement came from converting end of the line inspectors to early bird monitors who checked the accuracy of kits, processes, drawings and employee readiness at the start of the day, and throughout the daily process. Within 3 or 4 months the rework caused by units failing inspection had disappeared. I was disappointed that customers who had been burned refused to give us a chance at requalification, and then a three person delegation of manufacturing employees came to visit my office. They pointed out that when they were doing rework they got 8 hours of time-and-a-half on Saturday, and 4 hours of double time pay on Sundays. Sure it was nice to get off the 7 day a week treadmill, but now they were having trouble paying their bills, they couldn't care for their families on $6.50 an hour minimum wage. I took their case to the company president who was astounded at my naivete. "I'm not going to pay people extra for doing what they were supposed to be doing in the first place! And I want you to stop the inspectors from wandering around. Put them back at the end of the line where they belong, and take down your damn signs." I did as he said, the company slid into the abyss, and I had to lay off several people before a special vice-president "subsumed" my position.
The hourly employees were grossing $260 a week (this was 1984) plus $104 from their 12 hours on the weekend. This works out to a 40% increase above the minimum wage -- curiously close to President Obama's proposed 39% lift to $10.10. I used the autobiographical examples to convince you that I'm not "just woofing" -- there is an actual need for greater wages -- but it can't be satisfied by simply raising the rate of pay. Each example I cite above has slightly different characteristics. The TRW Vidar anecdotal evidence suggests that if an employer simply gives everyone a raise to ease their financial stress, profitability goes down the drain. The Obama $10.10 number for a minimum wage is a good number in a compassionate, human sense -- would have been good years ago -- but any business that depends on entry level workers for its profitability will balk at this imposition, like the company president at Amtron. That leaves us with the Zentec model of efficient operation coupled with motivational profit-sharing as the best method for achieving both corporate profitability and employee satisfaction.
It will take a cultural shift in perception to align all the forces required to effect any great improvement, and simply passing legislation in a vacuum with no support or understanding is not a proper solution. But I firmly believe that careful, thoughtful, phased modification of the legal framework for our corporations can bring us to a point where a combination of increased employee wages and motivational profit-sharing coupled with other efficiencies can help stabilize and heal our society.
-- Don Baraka
Being totally practical, we have to continue riding the vehicle we're on, and any new ideas may be criticized as analogous to changing a tire while rolling down the road. But only the most jaded, moneyed or idyllic can deny the stress and lack of hope characterizing the state of the citizenry today. Most certainly, it will take a whole suite of ideas to improve the distribution of wealth in our country, and by our example, the planet. In that perspective, I'm offering this suggestion. Find a way to legislate mandatory profit-sharing! Let me back up and provide a few calculations based on personal experience so the reader may appreciate the genesis of this idea, that corporate profit-sharing can lift us out of the downward spiral of our overall economy and quality of life.
I graduated from Foothill College on the San Francisco peninsula in 1974, when Silicon Valley was just beginning to roar. It was difficult to find a job with "just an AS" and no experience, but luckily a fairly long strike by IBEW 1969 had drained the Lenkurt Corporation of many of its technicians, and when the strike ended I was happy to climb aboard. Although my skills were current I apparently failed their trouble-shooting test and spent 3 months inhaling lead vapors in a room full of other unfortunates doing nothing more technical than de-soldering visibly burnt or broken components from the canvas mail carts full of failed telecommunications equipment we received on a daily basis. As soon as I was eligible for re-test, I took the same trouble-shooting test, received the same module, got the same result and this time was told that I had passed and could now work as a technician. I moved to swing shift, making well above the minimum wage, plus a 10% shift differential. In spite of the dues, working hours that separated me from family and friends, and the many incongruities of the union environment, I hung in there. After almost a year witnessing employees with tenure taunting the supervisors by doing nothing, unwittingly working on units that were passed over by other technicians because they were virtually irreparable or had unrealistically low work standards, I thought it would be worth giving up the shift differential and took an opening on the day shift. That was a big mistake. I was the low man on the totem pole, had the worst gear on my bench, and actually worked in a cage with reprobates who kept obscene joke books in their half-open drawer and took turns shouting out their profanities. I asked to be returned to swing shift and in a lunch time interview when the supervisor told me it "wouldn't be a good management decision" to move me back and cost the company the 10% shift differential, in disgust and anger I threw the supervisor's sandwich at the wall! Unionism failed me -- I agree with the Volkswagen workers in Tennessee who recently voted against unionizing.
In 1975 I worked for TRW Vidar in Mountain View and was mentored by a senior components engineer. Even though my pay was less than the union job, my fellow employees were not as angry, and less profane than the union techs. As a young worker I made some mistakes, none too costly -- "When you're chopping trees you're gonna have a few chips" -- my boss told me after I erroneously cross-referenced a relay causing a purchasing return and production delay. I learned a great lesson at the expense of one of the custodians, though. It was his job to unlock the back gate a little before noon so employees could lunch and jog at a nearby park. The day that he failed to do that I was returning from my nearby rented digs on my bike, and I picked up some thorns that flattened both my tires when I went around to the front via the shoulder of the railroad tracks. Upset at this inconvenience I told his boss, and the next day I encountered a red-faced angry custodian. "You complained, sir! And my boss used that against me in my performance review. You cost me and my family a 1 1/2 percent raise!" I immediately realized that I should have taken my complaint to him -- not management. After all, it was the Human Relations department that fired me from my previous job. The great importance he attached to losing that raise made me curious, too. I discretely asked several employees how much more a year they would require to pay their bills on time and have something for unexpected expense and special occasions. My number was about $2000, and that turned out to be the consensus. I looked at the numbers from the previous fiscal year, divided the company profit by the number of employees and it equaled just about $2000! My salary was around $9K which meant a 22% higher rate would be welcome -- but if everyone got their breathing room the company would be unprofitable.
It took a few years, but I learned some very valuable methods for insuring the quality of an electronic company's purchased parts, and armed with my two-year degree and some fortunate references I eventually became a components engineer myself. I was hired by a manufacturer of computer terminals, and received continued mentoring from one of the founders, "employee number six," the documentation manager. Zentec Corporation actually made Intel based microcomputers masquerading as "glass teletypes," wrote their own code and ran it from read only memory chips. The company was known for excellent engineering and a well-thought out manufacturing methodology. Using innovative purchasing, stocking, quality assurance and manufacturing ideas, the company spirit was buoyed up by quarterly profit-sharing and an open-door policy. Rather than risk total dependence on just-in-time buying, the company cleverly used the prefix on their piece part documentation to describe a stocking location next to the assembly area. There were no part substitutions without engineering approval, and incoming inspection was reserved for sub-assemblies. Individual components went to stock if the received part numbers matched the purchase order drawn from the approvals in the data base. These policies created the lowest "DOA" rate in the business, increased profitability and the profit sharing environment made for positive motivation and constant improvement. By 1980 I was making about $19K a year plus quarterly profit sharing checks that added about $1500, an additional 7%. Unfortunately the marketing department bet the company on a series of work stations and servers running UNIX -- not a bad idea in itself -- but the design depended on the impending release of the 80186 microprocessor and Intel decided to wait 6 or 8 months, skipping to the 80286. Until fate intervened the company had financed its growth from profits, saw employees leave to start spin offs Televideo and Wyse, and never had a layoff. Even though I was spared from the first ever Zentec layoff, the spirit was gone, sales were spinning downward and I left for a "blue pasture" at GE Calma.
Within 6 months Calma was experiencing their own downturn. A manufacturer of computer aided design stations that depended on mainframe computers for their processing power, they used a questionable manufacturing and shipping process that cost them millions when customers refused to accept shipments because they wanted to wait for the next wave of minicomputers. Calma had blanket orders for their CAD systems with staggered delivery. To make their quarterly numbers look good, they would build ahead and store the systems under plastic sheeting in a 45,000 square foot warehouse. Zentec worked their numbers, too, calling a unit shipped when it went through the "hole in the wall," but GE Calma was 3 to 6 months ahead of their shipping schedule, and the costly systems languishing under yellow argon lights in the back were "shipped" when they were locked behind the cyclone fence.
Thankfully, the 16% layoff at Calma was mitigated by an employee outplacement effort, and they helped hook me up with a promotion to Quality Assurance Manager a few miles away at Amtron, a manufacturer of 19 inch precision color monitors. Amtron's main selling feature was a low selling price and a form factor that matched the mounting requirements for a popular Mitsubishi monitor. I soon learned that I had walked in the door for my interview about an hour and a half after management had met and decided they would hire the next biped who applied for QA Manager -- they had a roaring quality problem and their existing QA man was a lame duck coasting toward retirement. I passed my first test on day 3 when my boss, the Director of Manufacturing asked me if I wanted to send everyone home because we received another batch of circuit boards full of solder shorts -- or should we inspect our way through and cherry pick enough good ones to keep building? We kept the line going, but I immediately tried to find another vendor, which is difficult when your company is in bankruptcy and the bills are being paid by a financial holding company. The situation was so bad that we would get a rental truck and move all the RMAs that were stacked in the hallways to local storage lockers when prospective customers wanted to do a site inspection.
I used everything I had learned from previous mentors, senior QA men, a series of management and statistical QA courses I had taken, and stories in the trade press about successful quality programs, and crazy as it seems, we fixed the company. There were engineering meetings twice a week, concentrating on fixes for the most frequent problems. I discovered an employee altering drawings, then "fixing" problems after they occurred with great flourish of his red pen. "Tip and tell" devices inside shipping boxes led to a change in our shipper. We created a motivational program called "Murphy's Dead." But the greatest improvement came from converting end of the line inspectors to early bird monitors who checked the accuracy of kits, processes, drawings and employee readiness at the start of the day, and throughout the daily process. Within 3 or 4 months the rework caused by units failing inspection had disappeared. I was disappointed that customers who had been burned refused to give us a chance at requalification, and then a three person delegation of manufacturing employees came to visit my office. They pointed out that when they were doing rework they got 8 hours of time-and-a-half on Saturday, and 4 hours of double time pay on Sundays. Sure it was nice to get off the 7 day a week treadmill, but now they were having trouble paying their bills, they couldn't care for their families on $6.50 an hour minimum wage. I took their case to the company president who was astounded at my naivete. "I'm not going to pay people extra for doing what they were supposed to be doing in the first place! And I want you to stop the inspectors from wandering around. Put them back at the end of the line where they belong, and take down your damn signs." I did as he said, the company slid into the abyss, and I had to lay off several people before a special vice-president "subsumed" my position.
The hourly employees were grossing $260 a week (this was 1984) plus $104 from their 12 hours on the weekend. This works out to a 40% increase above the minimum wage -- curiously close to President Obama's proposed 39% lift to $10.10. I used the autobiographical examples to convince you that I'm not "just woofing" -- there is an actual need for greater wages -- but it can't be satisfied by simply raising the rate of pay. Each example I cite above has slightly different characteristics. The TRW Vidar anecdotal evidence suggests that if an employer simply gives everyone a raise to ease their financial stress, profitability goes down the drain. The Obama $10.10 number for a minimum wage is a good number in a compassionate, human sense -- would have been good years ago -- but any business that depends on entry level workers for its profitability will balk at this imposition, like the company president at Amtron. That leaves us with the Zentec model of efficient operation coupled with motivational profit-sharing as the best method for achieving both corporate profitability and employee satisfaction.
It will take a cultural shift in perception to align all the forces required to effect any great improvement, and simply passing legislation in a vacuum with no support or understanding is not a proper solution. But I firmly believe that careful, thoughtful, phased modification of the legal framework for our corporations can bring us to a point where a combination of increased employee wages and motivational profit-sharing coupled with other efficiencies can help stabilize and heal our society.
-- Don Baraka
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
