Recently I ran across the peculiar term phats in a union journal and tried to figure it out. Here’s a more specific definition.
Phat Man
A phat man, found in some offices is a hand compositor who pays to the other compositors a bonus for the privilege of setting the display heads of articles, which, being quickly set, are therefore more profitable, or phatter, to a piece worker than other type setting. He also bids off such articles as market reports, the only changes in which from day to day are the figures, and in some book or job offices he bids off advertisements.
Objectionable Man
An objectionable man is a hand compositor who is paid a bonus by the other compositors for distributing small heads, dashes, and other unpopular work, which would otherwise occasion loss of valuable time to compositors paid by the thousand ems. Neither phat men nor objectionable men are found in an office where employes are paid by the week or where there is machine composition.
= = = = =
Nicely symmetrical. Both setups were driven by piecework pay where the company was paying by the square inch. The phat man paid the ‘regular’ men extra to set the fatter and phatter display type. The ‘regular’ men paid the objectionable man extra to take on the time-wasting fine details.
In the earlier reference it was clear that phats were a formalized part of union contracts, not just an under-the-table arrangement.
= = = = =
Later: This concept turns out to be a useful analysis tool. Watching some snippets of the latest fake “debate” among the fake Repooflican “candidates”, I’m always conscious that politicians and corporate leaders are NOT talking to the voters and customers. They’re talking to the billionaire donors such as Soros or Bloomberg in the political realm and Softbank or Andreesen in the corporate realm.
Why is Israel so important to politicians? Because thanks to Lee Atwater, Evangelicals are a cheap date. Donors pay politicians by the million vote units, just as typesetters were paid by the thousand em units. A politician who triggers the Israel reflex in Evangelicals can deliver a guaranteed wholesale block of phat headline votes, leaving room to slip in the objectionable fine details that Soros and Bloomberg need to get done.
Who are the objectionable men in politics? They certainly wouldn’t be on a national stage and probably not “elected”. Most likely they’re bureaucrats and congressional staffers who know how to hide the necessary fine details in laws and regulations.
Polistra's Mill 