this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
16 points (75.0% liked)

Canada

7209 readers
504 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The article ends with saying that a 4-day work week will solve the problem, but it won't.

The issue isn't that Rebecca from the article needs to work 70+ hours, and they would be completely fine if it was "only" 64 hours. The issue is stated plainly in a quote earlier on in the article; Salaries have not increased at the same pace as the cost of living. No one should need to work 2 jobs in order to survive. Going from 70+ hours to 40 would be a much bigger change in the lives of the people in the article.

[–] markev@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago

Also, they assume that employers will be happy to reduce the hours worked while keeping the same wages. That'd be wonderful but unrealistic.