5 ms·

Absolutely. Years ago I found this book on the topic really eye-opening: - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/184

by leojfc 1y ago

Absolutely. Years ago I found this book on the topic really eye-opening: - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... The process of _actually_ benefitting from technological improvements is not a straight line, and often requires some external intervention. e.g. it’s interesting to note that the rising power of specific groups of workers as a result of industrialisation + unionisation then arguably led to things like the 5-day week and the 8-hour day. I think if (if!) there’s a positive version of what comes from all this, it’s that the same dynamic might emerge. There’s already lots more WFH of course, and some experiments with 4-day weeks. But a lot of resistance too.

_heimdall 1y ago
My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for centuries by workers groups but only became a thing once governments during WWI found that longer days didn't necessarily increase output proportionally. For a 4 day week to really happen st scale, I'd expect we similarly need the government to decide to roll it out rather than workers groups pushing it from the bottom up.
- throw0101d 1y ago
  > My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for […] See perhaps: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement Generally it only really started being talked about when "workers" became a thing, specifically with the Industrial Revolution. Before that a good portion of work was either agricultural or domestic, so talk of 'shifts' didn't really make much sense.
  - _heimdall 1y ago
    Oh sure, a standard shift doesn't make much sense unless you're an employee. My point was specifically about the 40 hour standard we use now though. We didn't get a 40-hour week because workers demanded it, we got it because wartime governments decided that was the "right" balance of labor and output.
throw0101d 1y ago
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... Yes, that is the first link of my/GP post.

by leojfc 1y ago

_heimdall 1y ago

My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for centuries by workers groups but only became a thing once governments during WWI found that longer days didn't necessarily increase output proportionally. For a 4 day week to really happen st scale, I'd expect we similarly need the government to decide to roll it out rather than workers groups pushing it from the bottom up.

throw0101d 1y ago
> My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for […] See perhaps: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement Generally it only really started being talked about when "workers" became a thing, specifically with the Industrial Revolution. Before that a good portion of work was either agricultural or domestic, so talk of 'shifts' didn't really make much sense.
- _heimdall 1y ago
  Oh sure, a standard shift doesn't make much sense unless you're an employee. My point was specifically about the 40 hour standard we use now though. We didn't get a 40-hour week because workers demanded it, we got it because wartime governments decided that was the "right" balance of labor and output.

throw0101d 1y ago

> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... Yes, that is the first link of my/GP post.