Work Reform

10045 readers

1063 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:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1918

Bernie Sanders Champions 32-Hour Work Week With No Loss in Pay (www.commondreams.org)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

313 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. A group of 100 having to do what 1 person says is not a democracy. The vibes on this subject are uncomfortably authoritarian. We’re talking about fundamental level stuff here. If you’re in a group of friends deciding where to go to dinner, people can vote and compromise on where they want to go, or you can have one person have total control and decide for everyone. The latter isn’t how the US should be run.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm try to figure out what you want from him. The topic is how one person can't do anything and you're saying he's not doing enough by trying to spread the ideas, so I'm trying to figure out what you want him to do as one person if its not promoting the idea.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I want him to come up with a viable plan to get us to where he wants us to be, not just say we should have it. He needs to get enough Senators to support it so it’ll pass, and yes that means compromising on his ideals.