Why work? Calling time on the 9 to 5

[CHIMO]

There must be a few people out there who have never dreamed of giving up work – but you wouldn't want them for a colleague. The rest of us can occasionally indulge in that Monday morning fantasy of going cold turkey on wage-slavery. And we might turn for support to an unlikely source: those supposed evangelists of dedicated productivity – the economists. After all, Karl Marx imagined a world in which citizens hunted in the morning, reared cattle in the evening and dabbled in literary criticism after dinner; while Keynes fancied that by 2030 the British would be working no more than three hours a day.

On that point at least the Master will surely prove to be a bit out. Yet the appeal of an end to the 9 to 5 remains strong, as evidenced by a report last month from the New Economics Foundation (NEF) and from an exchange in the recent Citizen Ethics pamphlet between Robert Skidelsky, Keynes's biographer, and his son, the philosopher Edward Skidelsky. Pointing out that some are overworked (both in terms of hours and intensity of work) while others are unable to get a job, NEF wants a cut in the working week from 37 to 21 hours. That, it argues, would allow employment to be split evenly between everyone, and would enable men and women to share more fairly the burden of childcare and other unpaid work.

Calling for a three-day week may not be the most astute lobbying tactic on the foundation's part; Britain had one of those in the 1970s and it has not exactly gone down in the collective national psyche as an idyllic experience. Besides, this economic crisis has already forced a cut in hours, with nearly 2.5 million people out of a job while BT, Ford and others have introduced short-time working. But the big question raised by the NEF report is the same as that asked in the Skidelsky essay, as well as by Marx and Keynes: what is the point of work?

The answer on all sides is strikingly similar: work brings in money, which is merely a means to buying stuff. Keynes thought the work-consumption spiral would end once the love of money for its own sake was recognised as "one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease". But such Bloomsbury sunniness has become paler and cloudier. Where Keynes believed future generations would sensibly opt out of the rat race, NEF and the Skidelskys argue in part that the same choice may simply be forced upon humanity by environmental constraints. They see working less not as part of the good life (as Marx and Keynes did), but simply as the most viable long-term option. Something cheery to think about on that commute today.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/08/why-work-calling-time-9-5

[panader0]

1. My work is mostly physical and I like it.

It keeps me fit and regular. I don't have to pay for a membership in a health club, and to top it all off, I get money.
Now if I could just find some.

[Warpy]

10. That's how I felt about being an RN

In addition, no matter how much reading and research I did, I could never manage to learn it all.

Unfortunately, it took a toll on my bod and now I'm largely sedentary because my joints don't work all that well any more.

However, it was great while it lasted. I loathed office work and all the inactivity.

[GinaMaria]

14. As a nurse, I used to work two 12 hour shifts on the weekend

and get paid for 40 hours. I gave up weekends and night shifts are killer but I had 5 days off during the week. I was a much happier person then. My life was way more balanced.

[Warpy]

17. I only got time and a half plus a night differential

but those were the hours I worked, too. It was all a lupie could take. I lasted 25 years as a nurse and I'm still amazed I managed. Of course, I was sicker than my patients half the time, but who's counting?

Still, I've always been happier with active work. Even now, when I'm mostly sedentary, I still manage to stagger out to the loom now and then and whack away, weaving something or other.

[KillCapitalism]

2. Wow, a 3-day 21-hour workweek?!?!

That would be very nice. Think about how much happier we'd be as a society, we'd have much more free time for personal and intellectual pusuits, and time to spend with loved ones.

Oh, there's an adjective out there to describe people who still work even though they don't have to: CRAZY! :popcorn:

[CTyankee]

3. I was forced to give up on full time work due to a frail, elderly mother and 4 grandchildren that I

wanted desperately to give time to. I could NOT do it all.

It was not a question of working 3 hours a day or anything like that. It was what I wanted my day to look like or needed it to look like. I HAD to give it up or forfeit my self respect. THAT is what I found was at stake, not some crazy idea that I would be "worry free."

[jwirr]

4. I gave up full time work to care for my disabled daughter - worked

little jobs like maid and housekeeper for extra money. As a senior now I am suffering for it as I get very little social security.

[CTyankee]

5. That is sad and discouraging to hear. I am so sorry.

Be assured that I can relate...

[jwirr]

7. Thanks, There are a lot of us out here. Parents taking care of their

own disabled children are seldom compensated.

[Lisa0825]

6. Does anyone work 9 to 5 anymore? I thought 8 to 5 was typcal business hours.

I used to hear about 9 to 5 jobs, but never actually encountered one when I got into the workforce.

[Lucky Luciano]

12. 9-5!! LOL!! More like 8-7 for me! nt

[JoeyT]

13. I've yet to see a 9 to 5 job either.

So far the best paid I've ever been was working 7-12s. 12 hour days 7 days a week.
Good money, but it wrecks your mind after a while.

[wolfgangmo]

18. Just about every other industrialized nation has more sane hours than the US does.

Just sayin.

We get worked into the ground. And for what?

[FloriTexan]

20. 9-5:30 here as a legal secretary...

Most hours in the legal industry are driven by either the court's hours and/or the banks hours (if you're in finance or corporate). I cannot complain. I have a job. The hours are fair and the pay is good. They leave me alone on weekends and I get plenty of time off.

[localroger]

8. I once had a 3-day workweek with overtime after 24

I was seriously underpaid for my skill level and negotiated it after threatening to leave. After a few years it went to 32 hours, then finally back to 40, both with substantial pay raises that more than made up for the lost "overtime." The short week was nice and it was no problem in those days because there wasn't really 40 hours of work a week requiring my skill set, except in emergencies. That's changed though. A couple of years ago they asked me about going on salary and I politely told them I wasn't interested even with the generous raise and bonus that was supposed to be attached to it.

[Hello_Kitty]

9. I've posted this wonderful article on DU several times and I'll do it again now.

The Gospel of Consumption

http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/2962/

Long, but worth it.

[eppur_se_muova]

11. Thanks for reposting, I hadn't seen it yet!

Very enlightening article! :thumbsup:

[canoeist52]

16. What a great read and an important concept. Thanks for posting.

[Juche]

22. I don't agree with all of that article

It was an interesting article, but there are things I don't really agree with.

While productivity and consumption have gone up, some of that consumption goes to worthy issues. For example back in the 1920s most people had about 8-10 years of education (1st to 8/10th grade, only about 1/4 of people had a HS degree back then). Now it is not uncommon to have 18 years of education (preschool, k-12 & 4 years of college). We spend about 7% of GDP on education.

Medical care is also far more advanced than it was back then. The pharmaceutical industry didn't even exist before WW2 in any meaningful form. Most diseases that led to death and disability back then are now treatable. We spend 17% of GDP on health care.

Plus people can go on vacations they couldn't back then. Now people can travel domestically and internationally when they are free from work.

Plus the social safety net we use didn't exist back then. There was no medicaid, medicare, social security, unemployment insurance, AFDC, etc. These programs cost about $2 trillion total in state/federal funding. After subtracting the health issues, we probably spend about 7-8% of GDP on welfare that isn't health related (unemployment insurance, social security, AFDC, etc)

So on those fronts, I don't feel the rise in consumption is a bad thing. Consumption that goes to better health, more education, more help for the elderly/disabled/poor/struggling middle class or more life experiences/leisure in the form of vacations are good uses of consumption. About 30% of GDP goes to health care, education and the welfare state.



Plus even though per capita income is up, it isn't distributed. The per capita income in the US is about $46,000. But a family of four actually has a real income of about $50,000. So on paper we have $188,000 of income per family. But the reality is the real per capita income per family is closer to $15,000 per person. If a family makes 55k a year, pays 15k in taxes, gets 20k back in tax spending then that works out to 15k per person. Then again income inequality was bad in the 20s too. But our per capita statistics are misleading. Most people in families the US have a true per capita income (after distributing among the family and after taxes are paid and given back) around 10-20k.





Anyway, having said that, my first job out of college paid about $2200/month after taxes. I lived with family, but I know from college that I can get by fine and lead a life I enjoy on $1100/month (with a roommate). So it was something I considered, how an entry level job paid me 2x what I needed to life a life I was comfortable with. Of course I had no health insurance. But if we get reform, then an extra $100-200/month for insurance wouldn't have broken me.

[marmar]

15. I was in my cube the other day, in my office full of cube rats pushing paper to the next floor.....

...... most of whom are about to blow a gasket waiting for 12 noon, and later 5 p.m. ..... And I looked out the window, into the window of another office building and a cube set-up that looked identical to ours, filled by a bunch of people likely doing the same thing.

And I thought to myself, "This really is kind of a dreary existence. There's got to be something better."

[Juche]

19. I had a 3 day workweek once

I worked 10-12 hours a day, but I worked a 2-2-3 schedule. I'd work M/T/F/S of one week then Sun/W/Th the next week.

The second week was always fun because sunday was slow as hell and you knew over the next 7 days (from Sunday until next sunday) you only had to work 2 days, on W/Th. That was nice, it was almost like a week long vacation every other week. Two days off, work two, then three off.

But they laid me off. I really don't comprehend private industry. The place i worked was understaffed, and the technicians worked a lot of overtime. Since they were paid more and overtime led to time and a half, it was cheaper to just keep us on staff and give the techs less overtime than to get rid of us contractors.

Either way. I miss my job and the dignity, independence and socialization that came with it. Fucking economy.

Either way, with people so deep in debt asking people to cut from 37 hours to 21 hours probably won't happen. Besides, do we need that many jobs? There are about 30 million unemployed & underemployed people. I think there are about 115 million fully employed full timers who want full time. So cutting hours to 30 a week might be better than 21.

Besides, France tried cutting hours to 35/week to lower unemployment. All it did was make employers force 40 hours of work out of people in 35 hours. Similiar to what happened in the economic downturn. People were laid off, but productivity went up since workloads increased on those left behind.

[Rebubula]

21. I enjoy my job

Call me crazy...but I like working.

I still have time for the wife and kid and pull down a good salary. I love the folks that I work with and enjoy my interactions with our clients.

Obviously, I recognize that I am the exception rather than the rule.

[yurbud]

23. Orwell and Jack London both wrote about this:

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2009/06/author-jack-london-made-financial-elite.html