this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
654 points (99.1% liked)

Political Memes

5453 readers
2995 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 62 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Remote work also makes sense and they just fucking ignore that.

[–] Hylactor@sopuli.xyz 18 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Commercial real estate isn't worth nearly as much without people going to and from work everyday.

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Hylactor@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 months ago

Correct, but thats the real reason for the back to office push. No one cares where you are, so long as someone has to pay for you to be there.

You put on your work clothes, which are basically the same as regular clothes but more expensive. You commute to work, you consume radio/podcast/whatever, you consume ads. You get into the lobby of your building and get a coffee from the stand that pays rent. You take the elevator to the rented offices you work at. You get exploited as much as is legally allowable for 4 hours. You go back downstairs and buy food from another rent payer. You go back upstairs and get exploited some more. You consume more advertising on the way home. You get home too tired and too late to disrupt anything that makes rich guys richer.

None of the real reasons are productivity related.

[–] ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

So? Sunk costs

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Don't threaten me with a good time

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Healthcare for all makes sense in NUMEROUS WAYS and they won't give us that

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 46 points 2 months ago

you don't climb the corporate ladder and attain to c suite positions of authority by being the type of person who think employees even deserve 2 days off, let alone 3. these are also the type of people who demand that you answer the phone/emails between 5pm and 9am

[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 37 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Employers: have you considered 6 days?

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 2 months ago

It's a deal! Six days off, one on.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 7 points 2 months ago

I did that shit. 6 days, you find out your start time about 12 hours before it happens each day (make sure you're up to get the phone call about what time to come in, it could vary by 5 hours). Your work day could be from 4 hours to potentially more than 14.

I moved to a 5 day position at the same company.... 60 hours a week. 5 12s. Hourly, but no overtime pay.

Trucking is great isn't it

[–] BlastboomStrice@mander.xyz 2 points 2 months ago

Welcome to Greece🥲

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Plenty of people work 7 days now. Big profits for the top, poor compensation for the bottom.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 26 points 2 months ago (3 children)

This is only for white collar work. Every time I see this there is never any consideration for blue collar work. Factories would benefit from seven day work weeks, more time producing not less.

Not that I want it at all... We tried to argue for just 4 days weeks in the summer when it gets to be 95° and like 75° dew point and they still said "absolutely not, we need to ship 5 days a week. We have guys doing overtime why would we do less?"

Factories suck...

[–] MetaCubed@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I mean, a four day work week still benefits blue collar jobs, though it's understandably more difficult to implement this in a some blue collar workspaces, and I dont claim to have the answer for how to do it by any means.

Factories would benefit from seven day work weeks, more time producing not less.

Factories benefit from higher efficiency, and less downtime, which can be achieved with more employees, working less, being less tired, more satisfied with their pay and benefits, and having fewer accidents which interrupt production.

It can be done, but other systems also need changing to help it along.

[–] fluckx@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I think the problem there is that there's a lot of workplaces looking for extra people. Losing 1/5th of your workforce, but not financially is how I assume employers look at it.

The fact people are more efficient probably doesn't mean more efficient than working 8 extra hours to them.

I could really do with a 4day workweek. And I don't mean working 40h in 4 days.

[–] MetaCubed@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I absolute agree with you that that is how employers are viewing it and I agree with your disagreement with people in the industry that suggest the solution is ten hour days for blue collar workers.

(One of) The problem(s) behind this is that the capital class seemingly does not care what the evidence shows, and are only interested in what feels more productive. To them, it feels more productive to have fewer workers, for longer hours, with less safety measures, and because they feel it's more efficient, that means it must be (because it costs ~~more~~ "less"). Until we change that, or sufficiently collectivize to force them to change, it's gonna be hard to move the needle.

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

100% this right here. The owner-class have been deluding themselves for damn near 100 years at this point that we're not working long enough or hard enough. Henry Ford figured out exactly how much work he could squeeze out of an assembly line peon, set the requirement at exactly that point, and structured the entire operation around that 8 hours a day, five days per week quotient.

The modern CEO runs on feelings of "Well I work 12 hours per day 7 days per week, so it's not much to ask that my rank-and-file workers put in an extra hour or two per day for the sake of the company!" while discounting or ignoring the fact that there's a compensation gap of approximately 100x or more. Not everybody is CEO-brained enough to pull a 12 hour day every day and still have energy left over to perform basic functions in what little free time they have remaining that isn't dedicated to sleeping.

In reality, we need to be organizing to force companies to start paying us what they owe, and if they don't want to match our salaries with the astronomical increase in production that has taken place over the years thanks to computerization and automation, then they need to let us have more time off from work without a reduction in pay. It's only fair.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 4 points 2 months ago

On top of the issue you mentioned, and along with another comment referring to machine operators, the capital class sees us as meat machines, not people. Especially machine operators, even in my own job some people refer to them as button pressers... I'm in a psudo-supervisor type position but I'm not viewed as any more than a meat machine either... We're "undeserving" of any proper treatment because we "don't create value" we're just "necessary" like power is necessary.

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

The fact people are more efficient probably doesn't mean more efficient than working 8 extra hours to them.

Exactly, for a lot of manufacturing the bottleneck is how quickly machines run. For example right now I work in an electronics plant and our surface mount lines are limited solely by machine runtime. The operator is only there to swap out empty component reels as needed, load stacks of bare boards in ocasionally, and place the rare hand placed component. An especially slow operator can of course slow things down a bit if they can't do those tasks quickly enough, but it is very rare for the operator to be the bottleneck. There is a direct linear relationship between hours run and quantity of product produced usually regardless of operator efficiency.

There is no way my employer would ever pay the machine operators the same amount to work less. It is actually in my employers financial best interests to have the machine operators work as much overtime as possible because the amount they pay for benefits is not based on hours worked so even with overtime pay included, the amount they pay per manhour is actually slightly reduced past a certain overtime threshhold.

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

What about rotating 3 and 4 day shifts for twice as many employees? Then you get 7 days of productivity and nobody is getting burned out/making an unsafe work environment?

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they should hire more people to fill in the gaps to those who leave for the week after 4 days. Everyone deserves 4 day work weeks at minimum.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 2 points 2 months ago

That would cost them more so it's a non-starter. In manufacturing you're not a human, you're another tool. You don't consider the wellbeing or happiness of your tools. :(

Imagine how boomers brains will melt when the four day week starts roughly when they all hit retirement. I would take that as consolation price for the failing pension systems.

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As if arguments matter.

Now if possible legal and contract things allow it get fixed and a number of employers start to offer this and pull in valuable workers... That might make the others nervous.

[–] ladicius@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's already happening, at least in my social circle. People changing to four day weeks or even changing jobs when their employer doesn't offer reduced work weeks.

It's a slow trickle but it's there.

[–] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Indeed, this is how the change will be made.

Dumb question: how does this work? Is a person paid the same for less hours? What if they are hourly?

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

If they're hourly it usually goes to a 4x10 instead of 5x8 so that the hours are kept the same

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The trick is how to make this work with 24/7 businesses. Now we have a set of 5 day workers that have full benefits and 2 day workers that have partial benefits. If the full benefit workers only work 4 days and the partial benefits workers now work 3, they will be pushing for full benefits as well. That means more cost to the business.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

its the only real path to 24/7. As it stands now you can run 24/7 but you won't. weekends will never run like weekdays and its not for a lack of demand on the weekends. 4 day work week is primed for a two shift solution with one day where the shifts can collaborate.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

In my case it's a security job, so it's not like you need twice as many people one day. But I can see how that would work for certain industries.

[–] thejoker954@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe dont tie healthcare to jobs? That is the most expensive 'benefit' they offer.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Agreed, but that makes it a MUCH harder problem to solve.

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

4 12s one week, 3 12s the other, 4 shifts. I used to have that at an old job and it was kind of nice having 2 days off in the middle of the week and every other weekend having three days off. It would be Tuesday,Wednesday, Then Saturday, Sunday, Monday. Then Thursday, Friday.

I suppose you could do this on 8 hours and have 6 shifts instead of only 4. So only a 28 hour work week on average 24/32.

[–] zante@lemmy.wtf 6 points 2 months ago

The main opposition is not employers. As long as they maintain profit, they don’t care and that has long been shown as possible .

The main opponent to this will be government, who don’t want people to have to much free time on their hands, in case they call out inequalities and injustice.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Meh, I work in medicine; we’re stuck with 7 days forever.

[–] lugal@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But you have shifts and dayoffs that just don't necessarily correlate with the weekend, right? Or do you live in the Land of Free where there are no employees rights?

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I don't work in healthcare but I know plenty of people who do. The industry is notoriously understaffed, and of course there are sudden emergencies you have to deal with. Therefore, they pretty much require 24/7 operations.

[–] DogWater@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Operations /=/ employee hours. The understaffing is the issue.

[–] butwhyishischinabook@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Iaal and I would fucking kill for just a standard 40 hour, 5 day work week at this point 😓

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Corporate real estate companies too especially for in the office

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

My direct supervisor would love that at least.

load more comments
view more: next ›