It used to be that part of the job of the established worker was to train the new worker in the way things were done and why they were done that way.
These days in the day of 'get it done, faster and cheaper', there isn't always the time or the desire to do so. With full crew requesting become more and more common, production heads expect to have people full versed in their trade from the get go. So the requested have to have either the skills to do the job or the attitude to do what they are told. Work methods are passed down from head to crew and the worker must follow orders or will not be requested again.
It is a good system in that if the head knows what he doing and is able to communicate his direction, the work progresses in an orderly and safe manner. But if the head or assistant is there because of loyalty to an individual or organization, rather than being a master at his craft and aware of his responsibility to his crew, then the possibility of reasonable dissent becomes a matter of being 'not a team player' and is discouraged.
How many times have we sat through safety meetings and then been told to do something we were just warned against or, worse, willing done so of our own choice? Do we make a case against something possibly unsafe or in violation of the contract and risk not getting further calls? We would hope this would not even be an issue or a difficult decision.
At what point would our elected officers get involved and have a sit down with the people in charge instead of the people who complain?
If we allow an attitude of 'follow me because I'm in charge' override 'follow me because you can learn something' is it any wonder that some new members aren't properly school in our craft?
Take the time to train each other and things will improve for all. The best hand is the competent hand, not the most obedient. And most importantly, the learning process never ends even for the 'old' hands.
