DeoOmnisGloria.com

Labor and Its Relation to the Dignity of the Worker

Let me begin by stating that this is a subject very near to my heart. One of my passions is the study of economic theory and the application of that theory. The particular area that I wish to focus on today is labor and the dignity of the worker. Most economists consider labor to be a means for an end, that end being profit. The problem with this train of thought is its complete failure to acknowledge the dignity of the worker. An economy driven solely by profit will quickly place value of the efficiency and proficiency of the worker verses the worker's uniqueness as a human being. Man is not for work, work is for man.

Take a moment to think about the rapid development of global economics. The push for greater profits has led to an exodus of large companies' operations from our own country and into foreign economies. The rights of the American worker are not a concern to these companies, they feel no obligation to better the lives of their fellow countrymen and women. Nor do they care for the rights of the workers in foreign countries. Pay levels for workers in those countries is often below $1 an hour. This is shameless exploitation of mankind and a strong statement as to where these companies place value.

Profit can lead to many wonderful things: improved research and development, capital for growth, improved benefits for workers, increased pay for workers and management, capital to generate new jobs and so forth. The problem is that a growing trend in the world is not the improvement of the community and the society at large, but rather upper management and shareholders. Now do not misunderstand me, I do believe shareholders deserve to make interest on their investments and upper management should be rewarded, just not at the cost of the workers' well-being and fundamental rights. When a CEO of a major soft drink company convinces shareholders and the board to allow him to readjust his projected percentage increase in revenue in order to achieve his personal $7 million bonus, then lays off 700 employees, we witness first hand the unethical ramifications of flatout greed. This is the danger of a profit driven society...greed. We lose sight of the value of individuals and focus on the overall monetary potential of work. Work becomes less centered on the glorification of God through our labor and more focused on worldly gain, often at the cost of the worker's rights and security.

So what is the answer? In 1991, Pope John Paul II wrote Centesimus Annus (The Hundreth Year), an Encyclical Letter written on the Hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum (Pope Leo XIII famous encyclical, On The Condition of Labor). In Centesimus Annus the Pope wrote the following:

"If by capitalism is meant the positive role of business, the market, private property and responsibility for the means of production as well as free creativity in the economic sector, the answer is in the affirmative; though it would be more appropriate to speak of a business economy, market economy or simply free economy.
But if by capitalism is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom nor is seen as a particular aspect of freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative." (42)
"As an alternative to the absolute predominance of capitalism and socialism is proposed a society of free work, of enterprise and participation. Such a society is not directed against the market but demands that the market be appropriately controlled by the forces of society and by the state so as to guarantee that the basic needs of the whole society are recognised." (35)

So what is the answer? This is often my meditation and a topic I will revisit frequently on this site. I would sincerely like feedback on this topic. Most of us our workers, so the next time I will more clearly define the dignity of the worker and then we all can contribute to what it means to us individually.