this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
27 points (93.5% liked)

Work Reform

9797 readers
240 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

As part of his Labor Day message to workers in the United States, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday re-upped his call for the establishment of a 20% cut to the workweek with no loss in pay—an idea he said is "not radical" given the enormous productivity gains over recent decades that have resulted in massive profits for corporations but scraps for employees and the working class.

"It's time for a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay," Sanders wrote in a Guardian op-ed as he cited a 480% increase in worker productivity since the 40-hour workweek was first established in 1940.

"It's time," he continued, "that working families were able to take advantage of the increased productivity that new technologies provide so that they can enjoy more leisure time, family time, educational and cultural opportunities—and less stress."

all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even 32 hours a week with a proportional decrease in pay would be a huge improvement.

[–] Powerpoint@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

You shouldn't have to take a cut in pay for this. Productivity has increased and the benefits of the productivity increase has only gone to the ultra wealthy.

[–] AttackPanda@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Why does it feel like it’s only ever Bernie Sanders that is pushing for life improvements.

[–] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

TL;DR: Corruption and capitalism

Any kind of socialism (even relatively-speaking weak social democrats like Bernie) is severely underrepresented in US politics due to the influence of private money/capital in the government and in elections. The two party system/first past the post voting doesn't help matters either.

The people with money actively want to supress socialism by any means necessary. Look at Joe McCarthy and the Red Scare if you want an example in US history that still affects us today.

Also Reagan with deregulation and Bill Clinton with "triangulation" (effectively becoming more economically right wing by finding the middle ground between right and left, while the right is constantly pushing right. See: the Ratchet Effect)

Bernie is one of the extremely few principled politicians who doesn't take corporate money, but he also lacks power as he is one person.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Because he doesn’t have to accomplish anything. Does he have a plan for this? Has he done any due diligence on transition? Has he studied the impact on small business vs large business? It’s easy to tell people what they want to hear. It’s harder to implement. Studies have shown it working in other countries, but that’s nowhere near enough to just make it happen in the US.

[–] deadtom@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Cause he's one of the few that actually give a shit. Its why the DNC did everything in their power to scuttle his primary run. Can't have a president that actually wants to help the common American cause then the corporate overlords might lose their stranglehold on them.

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Because 95% of them are on the corporate dime.

[–] jasondj@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago

For the sake of comparison…

1940 median US male salary was $956. Women earned about 62¢ on the dollar to men.

Adjusted for inflation, that’s about $21,800.

Median US income (overall) in 2023 is $42,800.

You mean to tell me productivity has gone up 4.8x, and I don’t even see 2x the increase in salary.

Put otherwise, if my hours are worth nearly 5x to you, why aren’t they even worth 2x to me?

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

32hr week is fine, but what does he mean by no loss in pay?

The mandated work week is something a central regulator controls, and the pay is not.

The drop in productivity because of working 32hrs instead of 40hrs will be much less than 20%, that's for sure. Maybe there'll be no drop at all. That doesn't always translate to no drop in pay.

If by 32hrs we mean 4 days, then it frees that day for other workers (if we imagine any job with a physical workplace). The pay is a result of the balance of interests. It will become less.

And personally I'd say 35hr week is a better idea - as in 5 days of 7hrs .

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

We make gains by organization not legislation.

Read the excerpts of the speech quoted in the article. All is plainly said.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I would absolutely love to only work 32 hours a week instead of 40, 45 or 50.

I would also love four weeks vacation a year, full healthcare coverage and a unicorn in my backyard please.

[–] Riyosha_Namae@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

It's depressing that you've been convinced that full healthcare coverage is as unrealistic as a unicorn in your backyard.

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The unicorn comment makes me think you're being a sarcastic ass.

The rest of your comment is 100% doable. At least, lots of other countries are doing it.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I was just kidding about the unicorn, as living in the US it seems just about as likely to get a unicorn as getting universal healthcare or vacation.

😅🦄

Anyway, my son loves unicorns and I grew up watching my little pony so whatever

[–] ccunix@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In France I work 32 hours, have 7 weeks holiday and awesome healthcare.

I have cows in place of a unicorn though.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean they have to raise the retirement age and had (are having?) Protests about it the whole year didn't they

[–] lady_maria@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Have to"? That's obviously more than up for debate, especially considering how many people protested.

God forbid they consider increasing taxes for the rich instead.

[–] Matt_Shatt@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, cool, but nothing will happen because one old guy says this.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

No.

You have to join a union or form a union.

If your workplace is already organized, then build further strength through solidarity, help other workers around you, and at every turn find ways to erode the power of the bosses.

[–] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s simply not possible, I need my employees to be working more hours, not less. Last year I could barely afford my sailing trip to Aruba. If such a law passes I’m going to have to fire some people for sure or raise rents on my tenants.

[–] deadtom@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Its funny how schizophrenic your posts are from thread to thread.

[–] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He still supports Biden...The same Biden who forced railroad workers to stop being on strike. Biden who wrote the crime bill that exploded our prison population. Biden who supports every war we're involved in, all of which are illegal. Biden who was in favor of segration back in the day

Bernie had two primaries rigged against him in a row and didn't say anything about it. Speaking as a disabled person, I appreciate what he has to say about a lot of things, but what good is he if he's just going to cave in and do the same shit as the rest of them? He keeps saying that Biden is his friend. Well Bernie has some shitty friends.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Are you rejecting a call to build organized labor across the country because you have a grudge against one man for endorsing another man?

[–] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

He's never actually going to fight for anything. keep a close eye on the issue. As soon as the democrats encounter on obstacle they'll declare that they "don't have the votes" and then say "vote blue no matter who!" and then continue to do nothing even if they win.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

The call is to build organized labor across the country, giving workers the power to shape society toward our interests, not to expect the ruling class to offer voluntary concessions that have no benefit to them.

[–] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I've heard all this before. It never works.

what I mean by that is that all these politicians talk about doing good things, but they never actually do anything. They just keep saying "we don't have the votes yet" and then they give up, because they never actually wanted to fix anything.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Again, I think you are misunderstanding the message.

The speech is not giving a promise that Bernie Sanders will make gains on behalf of workers.

Rather, it is giving encouragement to workers to make gains for ourselves, by building our own power against the oligarchs.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk -1 points 1 year ago

But what about the poor billionaires?

"I've got one hobby space program yes, but what about second hobby space program?"