In class on Thursday we discussed Brandt’s article, “Sponsors of Literacy,” where we read about Dwayne Lowery’s story. He worked in a factory for a period of time before he attended a four month training in union organizing and subsequently became a field staff representative for the union. When he began working, he had an advantage because of his training, but soon after, the companies responded to the union power by hiring lawyers. The language and process was changing and Lowery fell behind, so he was forced into early retirement. A recent MA graduate replaced him because of the “high track” literacy that was now required by the job.
In my group, we discussed the problematic nature of Lowery’s situation and we even thought that it might be a disadvantage to the union to replace Lowery with someone new because Lowery had so much more knowledge from working with the union for so long. It also goes against the ideals of a union, which is to protect workers like Lowery. Do you think that there’s any way to reconcile the newly required essayist writing skills with Lowery’s experience? Is there any way that it would have been feasible for Lowery to keep his job? Do you think that Lowery still could have helped the union even though he didn’t have the “essayist” skills?
Personally I don’t think that there would have been a way for Dwayne Lowery to be able to keep his job outside of attending university himself. Dwayne Lowery’s departure, I think, more than anything was a product of the times. Thinking about it further, I think that the union was “forced” to let go of Lowery. I mean that in the sense that the Union had to bring someone in with essayist literacy skills in order to stay competitive in the changing market. Even with years of experience, Lowery would not be as useful to the union because he could not effectively communicate the complicated essayist literacy found in today’s legal documents.
I think the advice “don’t fix something if it ain’t broke” works well here. While I do understand that the Union needs the skills of the essayist to stay competitive, I think that Mr. Lowery could be a very valuable asset to the success of the company’s expansion. The way I see it experience almost always trumps credentials. Mr. Lowery knows all the ins-and-outs of the factory and so he has ‘factory literacy’ that the new MA grad does not have. You ask if there is a feasible way that Lowery could keep his job and I think that if Lowery and the new “essayist” joined forces to create the most conscious documents the factory would flourish. Lowery + grad would be like the union’s secret weapon in the completion of factories.