this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
244 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3067 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

One of the key demands by the United Auto Workers (UAW) union, which is in the fourth day of its historic strike against the so-called "big three" car manufacturers in the U.S., is a reduced workweek to achieve what its leader described as better work-life balance.

About 13,000 workers for Ford, General Motors and Stellantis walked out of their jobs, the first time in history that they are striking against all three companies simultaneously. Their demands include wage increases, cost-of-living adjustments for salaries to match with inflation and profit-sharing plans. They are also asking for "increased work, life, and family balance through increased paid time off and additional holidays."

As part of the work-life balance request, the union is trying to negotiate a 32-workweek for 40 hours of pay that union President Shawn Fain said goes back to the 1940s.

"Our leaders back then were talking about a 35-, a 32-hour workweek," he said.

The debate over four-day workweeks has gained significant traction over the last few years around the world as workers push for more flexibility in their jobs.

In the U.S., about 20 percent of companies surveyed by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans are either considering, piloted, have formally implemented or have instituted four-day workweeks.

The foundation found in results published this month that part of the push for more flexible work arrangements and demand for better work-life balance came with the shift of the nature of work during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"As the traditional workweek saw a major upheaval with the pandemic, a few employers are implementing a four-day workweek for recruiting and retention reasons," said Julie Stich, vice president of content at the foundation. "However, most employers, even if interested, are struggling to figure out how to make that a reality while trying to meet business operation goals."

While there is some evidence that shorter workweeks may reduce stress without affecting productivity, companies struggle to implement them.

A study in New Zealand showed that employees appreciated having the extra day and some said it helped with their well-being. But the extra day off was viewed by management as a gift and added more pressure during the four days people were at work.

"There was a feeling of 'a bit more urgency' and 'speeding up your processes,'" the study found. "Some liked what they felt was a quieter and more relaxed climate, whereas others enjoyed the 'exhilarating' and 'full-on' pace. One senior leader perceived that the 'quality of some of the work deteriorated' as a result of staff 'trying to jam 100 percent into 80 percent' of time."

Fain wants to see a more balanced approach to how employees experience their work and home lives.

"We are one of the most overworked populations in the world," he said. "We need to get back to fighting for a vision of society in which everyone earns family-sustaining wages and everyone has enough free time to enjoy their lives and see their kids grow up and their parents grow old."

Researchers say it's difficult to create that balance.

"But we must start with an honest appraisal of how productivity and time trade-offs impact the well-being of workers," occupational psychologist Emma Russell wrote for Harvard Business Review.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheBaldFox@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, it won't, but at least the UAW members will end up with decent raises and maybe an end to the tiered system.

[–] holycrapwtfatheism@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

Fwiw in my loose reading on the topic the 40 hour workweek was basically caused by the previous UAW strike. It is feasible this happens again.