4 ms·

i'd be advocating for a 4-day work week for people who typically have to work 5 or more days per week, typically 40 or more hours per week. as for a 4-day not

i'd be advocating for a 4-day work week for people who typically have to work 5 or more days per week, typically 40 or more hours per week. as for a 4-day not 'fitting' many industries and positions, i'm guessing that could actually be true in some very limited set of positions/circumstances -- none i can think of off the top of my head, tho. the advocacy org tries to, effectively, grant everyone a weekend, and even expand it. it could seek to change the puritanical/wage-slavery mentality of americans and others, or argue for unions, and all sorts of tangentially-related topics, but it'd prob just focus on getting a 4-day work week for people who typically have to 'work' 5 days a week, even if much of that work is just presentee-ism. the reason(s) people might want to support the org -- and the 4-day work week -- could be various, and even opposed to each other -- but the org would be relatively neutral on that. like, you want more free time so you can work to _really_ make sure black people and Democrats can no longer vote? well, that's not ideal, but if you support a 4-day work week, then we're still on the same side of the 4-day work week issue -- hopefully there will be other folks working on the other side of your vote-stealing efforts. there are lots of risks to asking for a 4-day -- i def agree with that -- from 20% pay cuts, to 100% pay cuts, to eliminating health insurance (Americans), to increased worker instability/vulnerability, etc. these risks are already there, but they're dramatically increased - potentially/probably - with a 4-day work week.

jstx1 5y ago
If it backfires, your advocating is harming the lives and careers of people who never asked for your involvement. That alone would be enough for me to never go near this for any reason at all.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  That’s true for any kind of advocacy though. What if decades of giving women equal participation in the labor market drives down some aspect of happiness? (Which it probably did by increasing the average household income to the disadvantage of people who prefer single-earner households [whether 1 or 2 adults].) Gender equality (of opportunity) is still the right thing to advocate for.
  - jstx1 5y ago
    It’s not the same. Your analogy contains a secondary effect. While the 4-day work week example ends up being a primary “please don’t negotiate a pay cut on my behalf” effect. Also the upside in the 4-day workweek case isn’t nearly as big, not even close.
- readonthegoapp 5y ago
  yes, all sorts of things can backfire, which is why you should think about them carefully, and after a thoughtful, careful analysis, decide if you think the potential rewards outweigh the risks. to me, this idea of thinking things through first is second nature -- i've been doing it all day every day for prob 30 years -- as any would-be activist should, imo. and that comes with a realization that the lives/careers of some people may and will be harmed in almost any policy you advocate for -- and that's not a reason to _not_ do something -- because doing this analysis and advocating for anything or just doing anything that has consequences is part of growing up and being an adult. so, going to war against hitler and the axis? very bad for myriad soldiers on all sides (wounded, killed, etc.), very bad for nazis (except all the ones we/US rescued and rewarded and used for later terror campaigns), very bad for most of the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and countless civilian victims the world over, but very good for Jewish people in Europe and myriad groups of dissidents/disabled folks/gays/etc., very good for western-style democracy -- so, on the whole prob still good for the world -- it was the right thing to do, imo -- to go to war against the axis, even if, in the end, the US population had to be largely tricked and otherwise dragged into it, and the US elites mainly did it to stave off the threat of being conquered by the Nazi/axis elites. i suspect, given the precariousness of work already, a 4-day work week would probably increase workers' economic stability -- but need to study it more, and would need to continue to study it even after efforts began. if/since companies have not strongly resisted the 4-day yet -- it makes me think they see some distinct advantages in it, which is worrying.

jstx1 5y ago

If it backfires, your advocating is harming the lives and careers of people who never asked for your involvement. That alone would be enough for me to never go near this for any reason at all.

sokoloff 5y ago
That’s true for any kind of advocacy though. What if decades of giving women equal participation in the labor market drives down some aspect of happiness? (Which it probably did by increasing the average household income to the disadvantage of people who prefer single-earner households [whether 1 or 2 adults].) Gender equality (of opportunity) is still the right thing to advocate for.
- jstx1 5y ago
  It’s not the same. Your analogy contains a secondary effect. While the 4-day work week example ends up being a primary “please don’t negotiate a pay cut on my behalf” effect. Also the upside in the 4-day workweek case isn’t nearly as big, not even close.
readonthegoapp 5y ago
yes, all sorts of things can backfire, which is why you should think about them carefully, and after a thoughtful, careful analysis, decide if you think the potential rewards outweigh the risks. to me, this idea of thinking things through first is second nature -- i've been doing it all day every day for prob 30 years -- as any would-be activist should, imo. and that comes with a realization that the lives/careers of some people may and will be harmed in almost any policy you advocate for -- and that's not a reason to _not_ do something -- because doing this analysis and advocating for anything or just doing anything that has consequences is part of growing up and being an adult. so, going to war against hitler and the axis? very bad for myriad soldiers on all sides (wounded, killed, etc.), very bad for nazis (except all the ones we/US rescued and rewarded and used for later terror campaigns), very bad for most of the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and countless civilian victims the world over, but very good for Jewish people in Europe and myriad groups of dissidents/disabled folks/gays/etc., very good for western-style democracy -- so, on the whole prob still good for the world -- it was the right thing to do, imo -- to go to war against the axis, even if, in the end, the US population had to be largely tricked and otherwise dragged into it, and the US elites mainly did it to stave off the threat of being conquered by the Nazi/axis elites. i suspect, given the precariousness of work already, a 4-day work week would probably increase workers' economic stability -- but need to study it more, and would need to continue to study it even after efforts began. if/since companies have not strongly resisted the 4-day yet -- it makes me think they see some distinct advantages in it, which is worrying.