this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
109 points (100.0% liked)

Antiwork

8197 readers
11 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

💀💀💀

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

If we tap into the underage and the elderly, we can avoid paying more and keep our yachts!

[–] fckreddit@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am sure all those tax breaks for rich is going to work out.. Any second now..

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Trickle down economics has never worked, ever.

"But this time it will!" said conservatives.

[–] xc2215x@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

Unretirement ? Wow, that is crazy.

[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Translation: "We wil do anything before offering fair wages".

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I'm really conflicted about this. On the one hand, I am not defined by my contribution to the economy, the value capital owners are able to skim off my labour. Fuck off with that.

On the other, 50-64 year olds who could afford to retire early are exactly the demographic buying into nativist anti-immigration rhetoric resulting in this, and it's a bit funny thinking about that group getting hoisted by their own petard.

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

They're not getting hoisted by anyone's petard. It's not the people who can afford a comfortable retirement the liberals* have in their sights here.

  • for any confused USians, that word does not mean what you (probably) think it means
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is part of every tight labor market, the marginally attached come back in when the employer is willing to pay up.

Imagine someone retired for 6 months and then a big project comes up at their old employer...they might go back, but it better be for 30% more or something.

[–] Alto@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

That's exactly what my grandfather did, although it was quite a bit more than 30%.

Bit of a special case though, he legitimately really enjoyed his job and worked it so he only went into the office 3 days a week

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Meanwhile, fewer than one in 20 of participants in the government’s “skills bootcamps” – employer-led short courses aimed at equipping jobseekers for the opportunities in their area – are aged over 55.

Earlier this month, Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, championed the idea of over-50s delivering takeaways, and doing other jobs more readily associated with younger workers.

Crucially, they should extend beyond low-wage private sector vacancies to labour shortages in health, education and social care – where recruitment and retention problems are acute and linked to low pay levels and workload pressures.

But research also revealed that a substantial number of those who gave up work during the pandemic were hard-up as a result, with reduced expenditure on food and lower wellbeing.

As well as queues for operations such as hip replacements, economic inactivity is linked to the rising toll of chronic mental and physical illness.

But the coexistence of high levels of economic inactivity with key worker shortages in vital areas such as teaching remains hugely problematic, and should be addressed by return-to-work policies.


The original article contains 554 words, the summary contains 177 words. Saved 68%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!