what I'm asking is for you to concretize what you mean by a relation(s) of production. I don't want a negative example of what isn't one, but an example of what is one and how one would actually examine it, flesh it out, etc.
Because see, when I was studying a subsidiary of AT&T that had been negatively impacted by what the managers at the subsidiary perceived as truly bad investment, business, and merger decisions, I was very intrigued by their overt interest in unionizing and claims that they now were more sympathetic to unions but that this recognition [1] of their shared position in relation to capital was easily negated by a variety of things one would call cultural, and in showing how those cultural phenom extended, contradicted, paralleled, undermined, twisted, etc. the ways in which they actually took actions in the meeting room and behind their desks.
Similarly, when I looked at unemployed managers and professionals... well, that's enough for now.
Kelley
[1] I think studying _why_ recognizing this shared relation to capital is obscured is incredibly important.
For fun, bum a cigarette from someone and don't smoke it--while you're at your uni. Observe and record reactions. Then, do the same thing among a group of extremely poor people--like the homeless. Observe, record. The differences can be explained in terms of the relations of production--how those norms of appropriate behavior exemplify how we understand property. I think looking at those things is interesting and, at times, important, particularly for getting people to see things in a different way.