What if you could earn a living wage on part-time hours, would you take that opportunity? The underlying message of the article may be not obvious at first, bu

What if you could earn a living wage on part-time hours, would you take that opportunity? The underlying message of the article may be not obvious at first, but my impression was that it's a criticism on the effects of unrestrained competition. On the surface it's about how the game is structured, people are rewarded for the hours spent working rather than their work output, and questions about why do we need to do more work once the work we have signed up to do is done. However, if you dig deeper a different message emerges... imagine every worker was on flexitime, and could choose how much or little they worked so long as they got their tasks done, companies would start expecting more and more tasks to be done right? The blame for this isn't solely with the employer, whilst they might be partly motivated by greed, there is also the issue of competition, and as a general rule the more competitive a market is, the fewer resources are directly available to a company, and the fewer resources available the more demands are going to be placed on the worker. Imagine what work would be like if we didn't need to compete in order to earn a living. It's not a pipe dream, it could happen, for example a universal basic income would be a step towards this.