Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The return of the company town?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/companies-meddling-in-employee-health-since-1880-2013-04-11?Link=obnetworkWith health-care costs relentlessly rising, employers are trying new tactics to promote wellness in the workforce, ranging from gimmicks like cash prizes for workers who undergo detailed health screenings to serious tough-love measures such as charging hundreds of dollars a year in higher premiums for those who cant or wont quit smoking or lose weight.
Whats worth remembering about such degrees of corporate paternalism is that while you may not have heard much about them until recently, theyre certainly nothing new. Take a (once) famous example from the 19th century: railroad car magnate George Pullmans efforts to promote clean living and boost profits by building his own village named Pullman on the outskirts of Chicago. Of course, this was justified in the name of the greater good: Pullman believed he had a right, if not an obligation, to improve his workers health and morals. Otherwise, he contended, weak and lazy lifestyle choices would hurt his railcar companys profitability much as todays employers promote fitness culture in the name of both a healthier workforce and lower shared health-care premiums.
How did it work out?
Not well. Workers resented Pullmans interference in their lives, writes historian Heather Cox Richardson, in West From Appomattox, an account of the Reconstruction. Cox cites another then-contemporary news account, from the Pittsburgh Times: The corporation is everything and everywhere The corporation does everything but sweep your room and make your bed, and the corporation expects you to enjoy it and hold your tongue.
Eventually, the town of Pullman played a cameo role in one of the eras major labor disputes: When an industrial crisis in the 1890s prompted Pullman to cut his railway workers wages, he refused to simultaneously lower the rents that his tenants had to pay to live in the town. Since Pullmans company gave hiring precedence to town residents, those that sought to move out also risked losing their jobs, according to H.W. Brandss The Restless Decade: America in the 1890s. Pullmans stand on rent proved to be the spark that set off a major strike, eventually settled only after President Cleveland sent federal troops to intervene.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1240 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The return of the company town? (Original Post)
lunasun
Apr 2013
OP
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)1. Town? Small potatos.
They are going for the company state and company country.
TlalocW
(15,380 posts)3. Maybe if it were like
Hershey, Pennsylvania, back when Milton was still alive...
TlalocW
Brigid
(17,621 posts)4. George Pullman was a control freak.
When he died, his tomb was encased in tons of concrete and asphalt. The process took two days.It was to prevent the tomb from being desecrated by labor activists. Workers resent being treated like children by their employers. It's that simple.
cbrer
(1,831 posts)5. How about a town owned company? nt