• IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      No, they wouldn’t. Nobody is going to give you the money you want doing the bare minimum. There is a difference between being abused and just lazy.

      • irmoz@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        44
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Where is 6 hours defined as the “bare minimum”? Can’t find a source backing that claim up

        That’s enough time for not only many things to be done, but to be done well

          • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            7 months ago

            You appear to be talking about a specific incident. Most people in the states cannot afford to walk out in the face of sexual assault or extortion.

            Are you in a position where you can freely reveal details about what happened?

      • then_three_more@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        7 months ago

        Productivity gains have all gone to the bosses. People are expected to do the work the 2 or 3 people would have done in the past. We could be getting on for 6 hours a day and a four day work week. But no, billionaires gotta buy another island somewhere.

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        7 months ago

        Why shouldn’t people have enough to live decently for doing the bare minimum? You cannot use a term like “minimum” and claim it is “just lazy.” It is literally enough by definition.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        7 months ago

        We aren’t talking about bare minimums, we are talking about 6 hours of work in the most productive time in history.

      • Superb@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        Okay but can I have all of my basic needs met so that I don’t have to focus so much time and effort on not dying?

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        Laziness is indistinguishable from avolition a symptom of depression. Laziness, and its predecessor sloth are just terms of abuse used by the ownership class to admonish the working class.

        No one wants to work in a toxic work environment, and the only reason we tolerate them, and workplace bullying is through extortion, because we have to, to eat.

        But 2020 lockdown furlough and the great resignation that followed demonstrates to us that people aren’t lazy at all, and will turn to other ways to be productive when given half a chance. But bosses really like to enjoy their place in dominance hierarchy, and can’t actually be bothered to manage their companies – we see very little exercise of management, that is getting to know and understand the workforce and regard them in a way to maximize productivity – instead we see bosses deliberately choosing to engage in abusive and self-indulgent behavior, or enact policy that only deteriorates productivity, as we’ve seen with the return-to-work mandates. (Studies have shown people who work from home are as productive or even more so on average.)

        So no. Laziness is not a thing. If someone can couch-potato for two weeks and not get cabin fever, then they’re dealing with mental health issues, possibly exacerbated by a mean boss and a shitty work environment.

      • eskimofry@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        You’re simply out of touch then. Everybody has a right to decent livable wages. It shouldn’t be that people have to almost give themselves mental illness to survive.