Dismal History of the Car Wash Industry in Exploiting Hispani...

Dismal History of the Car Wash Industry in Exploiting Hispanic Non-English Speaking Workers

From: Lance (Car Wash Industry Research)
Remote Name: 66.82.48.1
Date: 30 Jan 2004
Time: 03:30:40

Comments

Car Wash Study of mistreatment of Hispanic Workers and the reality of what it is like on the job at a car wash? Here is a great Master Thesis on the issue, one which we have personally witnessed and believe was the reason that earlier in this year the State of California cracked down on Car Washes. And it is of value during this time of Presidential Call for Resident Alien Worker Documentation and path to become a citizen based on performance and work criteria. http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040129-112143-3569r.htm . I am offering this information to our team and the industry and giving kudos to it's author for a job well done. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- An extensive Study of a Car Wash by a graduate CSUF student to meet the requirements of Sociology 436: This study examines feelings of worker empowerment in relation to intrinsic motivation at a car wash in a Los Angeles suburb and explores variables pertaining to the social hierarchy of the organization. This topic of research is important because company owners and managers should be aware of how the distribution and withholding of power to employees may affect not only the workers themselves and their motivation, but also the work environment and the product. This study is also significant because it can be seen as a microcosm of Southern Californias work force and occupational hierarchy -- with whites occupying the top strata and an influx of Latino immigrants at the bottom rung. (Key concepts and terms taken from class lectures and the text are underlined.) Power is the core concept of social stratification: the ability of an individual to realize his or her will, even against others. Power, including economic power, may be valued for its own sake. Karl Marx saw power and economics as inseparable. Max Weber, on the other hand, separated power from economics. He said there are all kinds of power, including social, political and economic (Beeghley, 1996). Orleans equates power with the range of choice an individual has (1998). Applied to the workplace, this idea holds that the more choice a worker has, the more power he or she has. Of course, power and choice may be a matter of perception: If workers have a range of choices, but do not perceive themselves as having choices, it follows that they will feel less powerful than if they were aware of their choices. Put another way, to understand the micro-stratification of an organization, a researcher needs to know what the workers perceive; do they genuinely think the organization cares about them? By looking at workers perceptions, researchers get a revealing picture of power distribution in an organization (Orleans, 1998). Making employees aware of their choices, or lack of choices, is the responsibility of management. Most managers are aware of this and use the dissemination or withholding of information as a powerful tool in rewarding employees or keeping employees in line. Since powerlessness (along with meaninglessness, isolation and self-estrangement) is an important factor in worker alienation (Orleans, 1998), it seems that one important measure of an employees satisfaction with his job is empowerment. Moreover, if managers are the slight bit interested in keeping workers motivated, they would do well not to render their employees completely powerless. To examine feelings of worker empowerment in relation to intrinsic motivation, the researcher, a graduate student at California State University, Fullerton, selected a car wash in Arcadia, an affluent, mostly white suburb about 15 miles northeast of Los Angeles. The car wash, called Macons, is privately owned by George Macon, a 26-year Arcadia resident, and has been in business about 15 years. The business employs about 50 people, including Georges son, Greg, who runs the detailing part of the business. Four people occupying various levels of the companys hierarchy were interviewed for this study. Those people were the owner, the general manager, the line supervisor and a kiss-off worker (washer and dryer), the latter of whom works at the end of the line drying and spraying before the car wash kisses off the cars. These four people were chosen in an effort to obtain a balanced, representative look at the organizations hierarchy. The owner was chosen because its his business and he ranks highest; the general manager was chosen because he is the highest-ranking non-family member in the organization; the line supervisor was chosen because he was the highest-ranking Latino in the organization and because of his interesting role as translator between the non-Spanish-speaking management and the non-English-speaking kiss-off workers. The kiss-off worker was chosen because he is a member of the lowest rung of the organization. --- Four Aspects of Empowerment --- One point of this study is to discover whether or not the four aspects of power -- autonomy, competence, meaningfulness and impact -- are positively related to intrinsic motivation. --- Autonomy: It was observed that the higher ones position was in Macons Car War, the more autonomy and range of choices the employee had. Obviously the owner had the most autonomy and determined his own schedule on a daily basis. He said that first thing every morning, he checks the volume reports and sales figures and looks around to make sure the place is clean. After that, he pretty much leaves the running of the show to his general manager. In fact, George had plenty of time to run for the City Council, as was mentioned. He came and went as he pleased, and he expected all of his employees, including his son, to accommodate his schedule. During his interview with the researcher, he received four campaign-related phone calls and drove to a local gas station (with the researcher going along for the ride) to try to talk its owner into placing his election sign on his property (the owner agreed to do so). As a result, his interview took about three times as long as the other interviews to conduct, which was just further evidence that those around George usually accommodate his schedule, not vice versa. --- The general manager, John, said he spends about half his day in his office doing paperwork and the other half among the other workers. Both he and the detailing manager had some degree of autonomy -- they could take breaks when they wanted. Each was expected to complete certain tasks by the end of each workday and work week, in addition to his supervisorial duties. In this sense, the general and detail managers had somewhat white collar roles within the hierarchy, as each one was more a coordinator or facilitator (Orleans, 1998). Their uniform consisted of a white shirt, navy blue pants and optional navy windbreaker; the lower-class workers wore navy overalls (grease monkey jumpers) and were not allowed to wear jackets. The managers also did not get their hands dirty much. Nor were they required to risk occupational injury by working near the kiss-off or vacuuming posts, where cars were continually being driven into and out of the line. Also, they did not have to dip their hands into chemicals or inhale gas fumes. The kiss-off workers were prohibited to make and receive personal phone calls. Last, both managers received salaries, not hourly wages. Salaries in their own right afford the employee a sense of autonomy, because he knows if he doesnt work as long today, hell still get the same amount of money. Hourly wages make for a more rigid mind-set, however, because workers know if theyre not putting in the time, they wont get the pay. --- The line supervisor had less autonomy than the managers. For all intents and purposes, he was a glorified kiss-off worker. He had to take his lunch when they did and he lunched with them, demonstrating commensalism (the idea that whom a person eats with reveals his status group affiliation) (Orleans, 1998). Although he earned a salary, his hours did not appear to be flexible; i.e., he worked a full shift, or longer, every day, he said. His most important role seemed to be that of an English-Spanish translator, for the customers, the managers and the kiss-off workers. --- The kiss-off workers and gas pumpers demonstrated the least amount of autonomy on the job. Their tasks were clearly delineated, and breaks were determined by the line supervisor. They were required to work with their hands, pumping, spraying, scrubbing and shining all day long. Most of them fit Orleans description of semiskilled and unskilled workers, depending on the task: They appeared to be comfortable with the regular routine and could operate simple machinery. There was some degree of responsibility involved -- such as driving cars into the kiss-off area and/or prepping cars to be washed. But the main skill appeared to be that of enduring boring work (Orleans, 1998). --- Competence: ---- Each of the four Macons employees who were interviewed expressed confidence about his ability to perform his job. No one came across as insecure about his skills. This may have been due at least in part to the fact that the work was uncomplicated and repetitive, except in the case of the owners job. In fact, when the general manager, line supervisor and kiss-off worker were asked whether they were qualified to do the job one rung above them, each answered with a very confident-sounding yes. But when they were asked about the likelihood of their actually being promoted to that particular position within the company, their answers sounded less confident. Specifically, the general manager said he knew he had the highest-ranking position that a non-family member could attain within the company; the line supervisor said he had held the general managerial position at a different company and did not like it, though he could do the job; and the kiss-off worker said he could do the work that a line supervisor is required to do but that he’d need to learn English before he’d be offered it. --- Moreover, when the owner was asked whether a low-ranking employee such as kiss-off worker had any chance of ever being promoted to, say, general manager (the highest-ranking position available to a non-family member), he responded: Well, Id like to think everyone would have an equal chance. But the truth is, some of those guys on the kiss-off line would have trouble being promoted . . . because of the language problem and the lack of education. --- So the whole of it is, Macons workers perceived themselves as confident about their work skills but were sober about their chances for upward mobility within the organization. --- Meaningfulness: --- . The concept of meaningfulness -- the perceived value of ones job in relation to personal beliefs, attitudes and values -- was applied to see how car washing could be meaningful to the workers. If they believed real work requires strength and endurance, then the job of the kiss-off worker fits well into that category. If the car washing industry seems like a mans world, and if these workers believe in traditional gender roles (which is typical of working-class people), then they were probably comfortable with their manly jobs. Also, if the car is king in American culture, then car washers may see themselves as a positive cog in the cultural process. --- On the other hand, it is quite possible that the workers, particularly the lower-ranking ones, perceive their jobs as having little meaning beyond the regular paycheck it provides. One indication of how the workers believe American society perceives car washers came when the line supervisor, Jose, pointed out, unsolicited, to the researcher that one of his sons is attending college in Mexico City studying to be a pediatrician. Given the context, it is clear that Jose was trying to say that although he holds an occupation of rather low stature in the U.S., he has provided a good education for his son, who will soon hold a position that is regarded very highly by Americans. In other words, Jose may have been trying to engage in a bit of status borrowing. --- Impact: This was defined as the belief that one is producing intended effects and has control over desired outcomes through ones task behavior. Each of the four interviewees expressed the belief that he was doing a good job and that he has control over the outcome based on how he performs his job. Even the kiss-off worker, whose job is routinized and assembly-line-like, said that the way he does his job matters and is noticed and rewarded by customers and the supervisors. He said the organization holds meetings to discuss the importance of individual effort and ties wage increases to it. ---- This consensus among the four employees regarding the feeling of impact is a sign that Macon’s is doing an effective job of making its workers believe that what each one of them does matters. This is not to say that the company is by any means egalitarian or profit optimal. It does, however, indicate that when it comes to conveying to workers the importance of individual effort, the company is doing something right. More on this later. ---- The findings were low autonomy, high perception of competence, questionable meaningfulness and high impact. Therefore, they do not seem to support the hypothesis that all four aspects of empowerment are positively related to intrinsic motivation. --- This study also endeavored to see what additional variables existed within the social system of the car wash. Five categories emerged -- commitment, hierarchy, stability, interaction and alienation. ---- Commitment ---- It was expected that of the four interviewees, the one who expressed the greatest commitment to the organization was the owner, George. When asked how important the organization was to him, he said, This business is the most important thing there is, and not just because of the money because, frankly, I could live off my investments and retire now if I wanted to. But I don’t want to do that. I want to stay involved. This business is already successful, but I’m interested in keeping it there. ---- The general manager was surprisingly forthright about his level of commitment. None at all, he said immediately. But then he thought for a moment and added, Well, there is loyalty, to an extent. But I cant say that if I got a better job offer, I wouldn’t take it. I’m not bonded to this type of work. The line supervisor and kiss-off worker gave vague answers to the question, perhaps expressing job insecurity. The line supervisor said: I cannot say nothing for the future. No one knows anything. I could drive on the freeway today and be killed. The kiss-off worker said: No one knows what’s going to happen. If a better job came along, I might take it. It would depend. Would it be too far away? Would it be inconvenient? No one knows the future. Anything could happen. All in all, these responses relating to commitment were textbook examples of worker attitudes based on hierarchy. Obviously, the owner of the business is going to feel a very strong bond to his enterprise; after all, it is his. He’s invested a lot of money in it; family members work there. It is his name on the sign. All the other workers interviewed expressed much less of a bond. Even the general manager was quite forthright about his loyalty, to an extent. But in a micro-stratification analysis, the question of commitment is a two-way street, and it seems that something reciprocal was going on here. Perhaps the employees responses were an indication of how they felt the company regards them (Orleans, 1998). Maybe they feel that since Macon’s is a family business, the owner is only bonded to them to a limited extent anyway. Of particular interest were the responses from the line supervisor and the kiss-off worker, who spoke of ones never knowing what will happen in the future in vague and possibly fatalistic terms -- I could drive on the freeway and be killed and no one knows the future. The question is, could the uncertainty of the responses be linked to their status at the company, their status in society, their culture or some combination? --- Hierarchy ---- The owner mentioned several times that he believed his business was virtually nonhierarchical because it is a small business. There’s not much hierarchy here. If an employee wanted to get promoted, Id like to think he could. That a layman, and business owner, would say this is not so surprising, as people are often unaware of the social stratification (the structured inequality) of a system even when they are members of it. No doubt he was also trying to put up a good OBHF public relations front for his business too. Yet after a few more questions, even owner George said that the kiss-off workers -- who make up the majority of the company’s 50 employees -- would have little chance of advancement. Language would be one thing holding them back, George said. Same with education. When asked how much education is required to be a general manager or detailing manager, he said a high school diploma and some college would be nice. This indicates that the owner saw there were upward mobility limits in the car wash hierarchy. The general manager said, The chances of a kiss-off worker moving up would be very slim -- mostly because of the English and lack of education. But also, take Jose -- he doesn’t want to carry [company] keys because he’s afraid he could be implicated in something if he carries them. So everyone has to find their own level. When Jose was asked about his chances of moving up from line supervisor to GM, he said, I could move up. I could do the job. But I don’t want it. I don’t want more responsibility. Why? he was asked. Too much blame, he said. When asked to elaborate, he said, The higher up you go, the more blame there is. He stiffened and turned his body, making it clear he did not want to pursue this topic. The researcher chose not to probe the matter further. Manuel was also asked about his perception of his chances of being promoted, just as Jose had been several years earlier. Well, maybe, Manuel said. I’d be better if I spoke English, though. ----- Stability ---- One thing that became clear immediately was that Macon’s Car Wash has a low turnover rate among its kiss-off workers. One has been employed at the car wash for 21 years, which is a long time considering the repetitive nature of the job. The average length of employment was about eight to 12 years, owner George said. In fact, Manuel was one of the newcomers, with only three years in the organization. The interview subjects were asked why kiss-off workers stay put at Macon’s. The one thing everyone mentioned was money. George said, They make good money, much higher than minimum wage, with merit raises, and they make tips. They all get vacations. He declined to say whether everyone received paid vacations, however, and he also said that only the top two jobs -- those of general manager and detailing manager -- came with health benefits. The line supervisor said that the job pays good. And at the last place I worked, the boss would yell. It was terrible. This boss is the best one I’ve had in 30 years in California. He always listens. I like that. So I like this family. The kiss-off worker said: The money is good. And I like the work. Really? he was asked. The researcher probed: Do you really enjoy the work? He responded: Well, you do what you know how to do. So its fine. --- Alienation ---- Alienation is when a worker feels estranged from the work (Beeghley, 1996). An instance of this was observed at the car wash: At the vacuuming area at the beginning of the line, one customer hovered around his car as the workers were inside cleaning it up. After they emerged from his car with their vacuum hoses, he looked inside the car and the trunk. He was dissatisfied about something. He complained to one worker. The worker re-vacuumed the trunk, but the customer was still obviously unhappy and seemed angry. As the car moved through the car wash, the customer complained to the cashier, who told him he could talk to the general manager or the line supervisor. He asked what their names were. The cashier said, John and Jose. The customer said, Id rather talk to John. So the cashier called John to the front desk on the intercom. John emerged from his office and talked with the customer. Then John went to the vacuum area and talked to the worker whose vacuuming had failed to satisfy the customer. The worker then walked over to the kiss-off area, and a kiss-off worker took his place at the vacuum station. The original vacuum worker did not look happy in the kiss-off area and kept visiting the workers restroom and getting sips of water from the employee drinking fountain. The researcher interpreted this behavior as the workers way of expressing anger, rebellion and alienation for being removed from his post because of what he probably regarded as one picky customer. ----- Conclusions ---- This study did not find that the four aspects of empowerment were positively related to intrinsic motivation but did discover additional categories regarding the social stratification of a car wash. The one-on-one interviews and personal observations gave little indication that the four aspects of empowerment were present in the workers. The owner and the general manager did express all four feelings -- autonomy, competence, meaningfulness and impact. But the lower-level workers, including the line supervisor, although expressing competence and some meaningfulness and impact, expressed no autonomy. Orleans suggested that such lack of autonomy is typical of working-class environments and further suggested that the reason is an inherent distrust that is built into the hierarchy. Further, the lack of autonomy among the lowest-ranking workers was expected because the higher ones position in an organization is, the more range of choices (autonomy) he tends to have (Orleans, 1998). But the question is how important autonomy is in intrinsic motivation, particularly compared with extrinsic contingencies (rewards and punishments). Regarding meaningfulness, the results were sketchy because some workers did express this feeling, but basically the results were inconclusive, primarily because time constraints prevented the researcher from investigating the subjects on this matter in enough depth. Perhaps the most telling example of what the job meant came from line supervisor Jose, who, in discussing his own job, resorted to status borrowing from his son. In other words, he seemed to be indicating that he believes his job is held in low regard by others and therefore has limited meaning for himself. -- As for impact, the employees strongly indicated that they believed how they did their jobs made a difference, that despite the routine nature of much of the work, their individual effort affected the outcome of the product -- cleaner cars. The workers also expressed high levels of confidence about their job skills, but they were less sure of whether their skills were sufficient enough to get them promoted at Macon’s. In the search for additional variables, the data paint the picture of an organization in which there is a clear hierarchy and in which 6% of the organization has virtually 100% of the power. Despite this, however, there is a very low turnover rate among the lowest-level workers. Stability is good among kiss-off workers. But it was unclear whether stability was as good among other workers, such as the gas pumpers and the cashiers. If time had permitted, interviews with those workers might have yielded interesting results. The consensus among the interview subjects was that the reason for the lower turnover among the kiss-off workers was money: Simply put, the tips and wages at Macon’s are relatively good. In general, the employees expressed rather tentative commitment. It was expected that the owner would have high commitment. Also, the rather ethereal, borderline fatalistic responses of the line supervisor and kiss-off worker to questions about commitment and the future raise interesting concerns. First, perhaps there was something about how the researcher asked the question that led the subjects to answer the way they did. Then again, perhaps their responses say something about their status in the organization, their status in society and/or their culture. Further investigation into this could provide insight. ----- Recommendations: How to Make Macon’s a Better Place to Work ---- All in all, this car wash did not seem like a terrible place to work with a high degree of unhappiness and exploitation. At the beginning of the semester, Orleans (1998) asked his students, Are the workers at your company discontent enough that they could stage a revolution? and the answer in this case is no. The workers are not uncomfortable enough with the work or the wages and, therefore, are unlikely to organize or even leave (Orleans, 1998). But there are areas of the organizations social system that could be improved upon. ---- Four recommendations are offered: First, one wondered if commitment would rise if autonomy and the opportunity for upward movement rose. In the current environment, kiss-off workers know that no matter how hard they work, they will not move up much beyond the level they’re at. So what is the incentive for them to work hard every day, investing so much effort for so little payoff? Perhaps this is what line supervisor Jose and worker Manuel meant when they said no one knows the future. Autonomy would not have to be given in huge doses. A little perk here and there (like allowing a worker to make a personal phone call once in a while instead of making him go across the street to a fast-food restaurant) would be nice. Second, given that one requirement for upward mobility within the organization is the ability to speak English, it would be helpful if the organization helped workers, at least those with management potential, to learn it. Third, the rule against kiss-off workers talking to one another on the job seems unnecessarily oppressive. Do customers really care about that? (This is a topic that might warrant future research.) Most customers occupy themselves in the waiting area, anyway, which is about 25 yards from the kiss-off area, so they’re usually out of ear shot from the Spanish-speaking workers. Fourth and last, the mystery regarding line supervisor Jose and his fear of being blamed makes the researcher think some of his managers (past and/or present) do a great deal of finger-pointing. Although only one instance of punitive behavior was witnessed by the researcher (when the vacuum/prep worker was sent to the kiss-off area after a customer complaint), it seems reasonable to assume it probably goes on even more when a nosy researcher isn’t poking about. The interaction between the owner and Jose also seemed to be evidence that the workers assumed they would be blamed for something. Obviously, blaming, and the lack of respect and trust that accompany it, is not a healthy characteristic of an organization, and Macon’s would do well to eliminate it. The result could be a line supervisor who is happy (rather than fearful) about the idea of advancing to general manager, if the position became available. Further, if Jose were to advance, this might be a nice morale booster for the kiss-off workers, who would have a reason to believe management when it says language is the main impediment to their advancement. ---- When the general manager, John, was asked what kind of environment he tries to create for his subordinates, he said that Macons Car Wash tries to pattern itself after a fast-food restaurant. We go for cleanliness, sharp uniforms [every employee except George wore a uniform], nice landscaping, fast service, aesthetic. In other words, the company strives for efficiency and appearance. Motivation and morale were not mentioned. Perhaps this mentality is at least in part creating an environment in which some workers feel alienated. References: Beeghley, L. (1996). The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States (Needham Heights MA: Allyn & Bacon). And Orleans, M. (1998). Lecture notes from social stratification class, spring semester, California State University, Fullerton. ------------------------------------------------------------------- This was a fabulous commentary of real world work politics at the car wash and it is as real today as it was in 1997 when it was written, by this graduate student. Any comments on Employee practices at Car Washes email me Lance@carwashguys.com and this might also be worth reading to see what we have done at the Car Wash Guys: http://www.carwashguys.com/080902_3.shtml . We must not allow the car wash industry to take advantage of employees, no matter who they are or where they came from. In the United States we stand for Human Rights and exploitation of labor throughout history has been riddled with undesired complications and problems. From the 1930 Union wars, the Chinese and Irish immigrants the African American Slaves. And look at the fall of Rome, the slave revolts, the French Revolution, we should be able to at least police our own industries? Should we not?

Site hosted by CCG

Site design by CCG Studio

DISCLAIMER:
Although we exert control over all articles written by our staff and consultants, we are in no way able to assure the accuracy of any content generated by our readers. Any information or advice provided by our readers should be used cautiously, and should be considered as an opinion of such, and not the views, ideas, opinions, or advice of Washguy.com. Washguy.com., its staff, and consultants shall in no way be held liable or responsible for any false or misleading information or injurious advice obtained from our readers, including any information posted to this Bulletin Board forum. Any information or advice obtained from other readers through Bulletin Board postings shall be used at the reader's own risk. The Bulletin Board forum functions as a discussion group for the exchange of views, information and opinions on issues related to the Car Wash Guys, Franchising and their associated topics. Washguy.com, its staff, and consultants will not be held liable for any incidental or consequential loss or damage sustained as a result of this information or advice. No user shall be entitled to claim detrimental reliance on any views received from the staff, consultants or other readers. By using this Bulletin Board and it's related forums, you agree to indemnify and hold Washguy.com, its staff and consultants harmless from any claims arising as a result of your use of the information or materials you download from or upload to the Bulletin Board.