I have just returned from my eighth weekly trip to New York
to teach at Columbia. I travel Delta,
which runs a number of short non-stop flights from Raleigh-Durham Airport to
LaGuardia. I always book the 8:00 p.m.
return flight when I do not stay over and the 9:30 a.m. return flight when I
do. But on occasion, I arrive early
enough at the airport to make the earlier 6:29 p.m. flight, and this morning,
since I stayed across Grand Central from LaGuardia at the Aloft hotel, I
actually got to the airport and through security in time to make the 6:30 a.m.
flight. I buy the cheapest possible
ticket [no checked luggage, no advance seating, and no changes.] Four times now I have tried to get on an
earlier flight. Each time, I have presented
my ticket to the Delta agent at the gate and requested a change. The first time, the agent put me on the
earlier flight, no problem. The second
time the agent said it would cost me $75 to change flights [I declined.] The third time, I decided to pay the
seventy-five bucks, but was told even if I did my ticket could not be
changed. This morning, the agent made
the change and actually pre-boarded me [I chatted her up and was as pleasant as
I could manage.]
Meanwhile, in our course, Todd Gitlin has just finished
lecturing on Max Weber’s analysis of bureaucracy.
The reality does not always match the theory.
My favorite example of this comes from fifty-five years ago When I was a young
Instructor at Harvard, I lived for two years, from 1959 to 1961 as a Resident
Tutor in Winthrop House [free room and board and one is supposed to talk to the
undergraduates, thereby enriching their education and relieving senior faculty
of the necessity.] One of my colleagues
in the Winthrop House Senior Common Room was Richard Taub, a sociologist doing
a doctorate in what Harvard called the Social relations Department. By 1963, Richard had gone off to India with
his wife, Doris, to do his doctoral research.
[He has for many years been a distinguished senior member of the
University of Chicago Sociology Department.]
He wrote me several wonderful, long letters about his experiences
there. I hope he will not mind of I quote
from one of them. It is a perfect
illustration of the gap between Weber’s formal analysis of bureaucracy and the
reality on the ground. Here is what he
wrote:
“Doris and I fit outside of the category system and we have
a hell of a time. Whenever we visit a
government office or do business with more than a few rupees, we must convert the
relations into personal ones. Example
and absolutely typical.
Me: I would like a
coal permit.
Bureaucrat: You are
coming from England?
Me: No, I am coming
from America. I would like a coal
permit.
Bureaucrat: For how many days you are staying?
Me: I have been here
three months and I plan to stay another year.
Now may I have a coal permit.
Bureaucrat (to peon):
Cha Lao (bring tea). (To me): You
are perhaps working for the government?
Me: No, I have come here to do Sociology. I would like a coal permit.
ETC.
And so it goes. Until
he knows all about me. We have then had
tea and either his cigarettes (and I have given him some in return) or pan
(betel leaves stuffed with spices which everyone around here is more or less
addicted to) and then he asks, “now what is it that you are wanting.
This used to infuriate me – especially when we were in a
hurry, or just wanted to make a purchase.
But now, with the first question, I recite a speech which covers all the
questions he will have, we have tea, and then get on with the transaction. The next time I see him, he will ask me how
much money I am making, is my wife here with me, what kind of food I eat
etc. But once the relationship is
personal, the guys will do anything for you.”
10 comments:
I believe Goffmann would have insights into that softening of an interpersonal relationship
He would indeed.
Not bureaucracy, but my favorite example from real life of a similar circumstance at a diner where I used to sit at the counter to read and do homework over coffee. On occasion I'd order a sandwich for dinner.
SERVER: Can I take your order?
ME: I'd like a ham and Swiss on white, grilled.
SERVER: On what kind of bread would you like it?
ME: White.
SERVER: What cheese?
ME: Swiss.
SERVER: Grilled or toasted?
ME: Grilled.
Honest to gosh, one hundred percent true. Better, the sandwich was worth it.
On the two point: it's possible with the airline that this is just different behavior by different employees based on whim and temperament. That certainly happens. But, it's also possible that there are rules you're not seeing (and are perhaps not supposed to see) governing it. The airlines want every flight to be full, and there to be no "extra" passengers. So, if the early flight is under booked, they will be happy to let you on it. If there are people waiting to get on your later flight, it can be worth while to them to move to the earlier flight, so they might then do it for free. If, however, there are not people waiting to get on your later flight - perhaps especially if it is under booked - then they have no special incentive to move you, and so will see if they can get some money out of you for it, charging you the change fee. If you take it, good for them, but if not, it's no problem for them. If the earlier flight is full, you're out of luck, of course. I'm not _sure_ that's what's happening, but I'd be slightly surprised if something like that wasn't involved.
As for the situation in India, I am not sure enough about Weber's views to know what he says, but I have spent a good deal of time in a country where "connections" matter a lot (Russia) and so understand that situation very well. In these countries there is, of course, a bureaucracy - even a large and very ponderous one. But, it is not a bureaucracy of the sort a German, a Prussian, even, like Weber, would understand, or even an American or an Englishman. Those systems are rule-governed. (It's no surprise that Kant's view is the view of a Prussian and Bentham's an Englishman, I'd think.) These are not rule-governed systems. They are systems of personal relations or personal exchange. They have the _shape_ of a bureaucracy, but not the same inner workings. In function, they are much more like a family or a neighborhood, one where an outsider cannot expect good treatment until it's clear what he or she can provide to those with power. It is a truly oppressive system in most ways, though sometimes you can make it work to your benefit. (i.e., you don't have to play by the rules if you have connections or can pay. If you don't have those things, you are out of luck.) If seems as if your colleague wasn't understanding what was happening, thinking that this was, in fact, a bureaucracy in the British or German sense, when it merely had the outward form of it. Mistaking these institutions for a German or British bureaucracy is a bit like mistaking the Soviet Union (or Russia now) for a Democracy because people vote there, too.
Matt, I am afraid I did Taub a disservice by not quoting more from his letter. His deliberately humorous story was intended to make exactly the point you make in your comment, as the rest of his letter makes clear.
Thanks, Bob, and sorry for my misreading!
I was once given access to a secret web forum where mostly airline employees post horror stories. This was before they clamped down on such postings in recent years. Most of their posts end with how that particular employee or agent or airline resolved the issue. One thing that was clear was the ticket agents have plenty of leeway and they reward persons they "like". They never reward an unruly person. They also keep children, women, overweight, very old, etc., away from upgrading to first class so as not to "inconvenience" paying customers. Don't know if any of this still applies, but seems like chatting up still works.
In the case of India, chatting up also worked but entirely their doing. We just have to indulge. It can be frustrating, but in the overall scheme of things it's not as bad as some recent customer service horror stories from United and Delta (where passengers were dragged out of the plane).
Professor Wolff,
Please write a post on Trump's Council of Economic Advisors report on Socialism
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-10-26/maybe-we-should-take-socialism-seriously?srnd=premium
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/10/socialism-report-white-house-trump-medicare-for-all
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/23/economy/cea-socialism/index.html
doesn't that kind of bureaucracy fit better with socialism than with capitalism? It must color either kind of system at any rate
Best Merchant Cash Advance Leads are exclusive Leads addressed to you Merchant Cash Advance Leads is the Qualified MCA Leads provider as a firm in the entire globe.
Post a Comment