Propaganda for the 16-Hour Workweek

Should we try to unite the Left over a viral campaign? We could get out of our Internet ghetto and use memes to try and achieve political impact.

I thought reviving the IWW slogan "Why Not?" about a demand for a four-hour workday in a four-hour workweek would be a great starting point.

Even if the only thing it achieves is, say, being derided as "unrealistic" or "entitled" in liberal or conservative rags — that means we might have already succeeded in becoming visible to the mass media and general public.

Look at the poster I've just made. Granted, it's terrible — I put this up in like ten minutes. It's just there as an example of the form that propaganda could take.

What do you guys think?

I would like some sort of explanation to give to others others as to how that would function since people are convinced 5x8 is the only functional schedule

Of course, you're right. I used a poster as an example here but we could also come up with flyers, folders, pamphlets, etc.

I for one advocate for 3, 6 hour days

One suggestion I see thrown around, though not entirely making up for the potential per-worker productive deficit, is doing away with the universal weekend. Net productivity takes a major hit when half of industries come to an effective standstill 2 days out of the week. Have the individual work week have consecutive 4 days on 3 days off, but have it be staggered so that, at any given time, production never ceases and all positions are manned. This also offers opportunities for greater flexibility with off-time for individuals who may find it more convenient to be off work on days other than the standard Sat/Sun. Additionally, you could introduce greater flexibility in shift times since working 4 hours isn't nearly as disruptive to workers lives than 8: people may be able to operate more outside of the typical 9-5 shift. That way you don't get nearly as much productive slow-down in those off hours.

...

At first I read that as 16-Hour Workday.

"You spend most of the day at work browsing reddit (or instert site-appropriate alternative here) so why do you have to come in for so long?" I've already seen this sentiment be popular on reddit specifically. Fewer hours a week is something they circlejerk over now and then, like UBI.

...

I want off this ride.

Not if such a demand gains global traction.

The vast majority of people find themselves forced to work at some point in — if not for the better part of — their life. If you can afford living the NEET life, good for you, but most don't have that chance.

Radically shorter working hours would be a huge step forward.

Bob Black, The Abolition of Work (1985)

It would be good if we had a mechanism for this kind of stuff, y'know like a network of leftists linked online for the purposes of propoganda and direct action.. that kind of thing

6 hours 4 days would be more reasonable
24 hours of work a week should be fine
Can be decreased with advancing automation

How is it "more reasonable"?

24 hours sounds more catchy than 16 because 24 hours can be translated to one day per week.

Why would I want a 16 hour work week when I need to work almost 50 to live well? Will you demand a pay increase in proportion?

One big point of shortening the working day is that anything you get paid over it will get paid over it. So it doesn't decrease your freedom to work more and make more it just stops you from getting worked like a dog for almost nothing.

Demanding shorter working hours implicitly require wages not to be cut — otherwise, it's pretty much useless.

Because its not such a huge reduction in working hours
And also this

Yes. The idea is that 16 hours would be equivalent to what people ideally would be earning currently given a 40 hour work week (not the shitty minimum wage that is currently standard in places like the US).

That is how every workweek shortening previously has happened.

...

8 hour is a pretty huge concession. I'd rather go with a 16-hour workweek and "settle" for 24 if we end up in a dead end, but I wouldn't phrase the demand so meekly on the get-go.

I also believe the 16-hour workweek would be a turning point because it means we finally have more time for ourselves than we have to spend at work. It becomes…

4 Hours Labor
12 Hours Recreation
8 Hours Rest

Plus don't assume this cap to be more than theoretical. Frenchmen are supposed to have a 35-hour workweek but less than a third actually get to enjoy that — most work 40+ hours a week if you include overtime and the like. And let's not forget about commuting and unpaid preparations.

Here's an estimation…

7 x 24 = 168 hours in a week
7 x 8 = 56 sleeping hours in a week
168 - 56 = 112 waking hours in a week
112 - 16 = 96 free hours (theory)
96 - 16 = 80 free hours (practice)

So you'd have a ratio of 1:5 when it comes to the work-life balance. That would completely change people's outlook on life when compared with the 1:2-ish balance we have right now.

Technically, you aren't wrong. As automation progresses, our human skills will become less and less valuable — if not completely worthless. The ranks of the obsolete will continue to grow and the four-hour workday is one way to deal with that situation.


What freedom are we talking about? The "freedom" to work long hours for low wages? The "choice" of working three jobs to make ends meet?

bump

I hope so

Honestly how anyone can be happy working 40 hours a week for 40-50 years of their life is beyond me

Isn't UBI more likely to become popular right now than a decrease in working hours?

People have about 4 hours of productivity a day in them anyways.

Yes, and would lead to an increase in bargaining power, itself making a shorter working week more likely

This. Capitalists don't want your time for 8 hours a day because of the "productivity" of such a scheme but because of the social control it grants them over your daily life.

No. What we need to do is to make a coherent and consistent program. ML, obviously. But any consistent program will be either SocDem or ML, so it doesn't matter.

But posting 16-hour workweek propaganda is not a bad idea. Just don't expect anything to come out of this.

This sounds impossible.
I don't see it going over well with normies.

I think "full time" is 35 hours in a lot of places already.

I think even 24 would freak people out. Do we have historical precedent for this kind of increase?

$7.25 * 40h = $290
$7.25 * 16h = $116

So you want to increase minimum wage to $18 an hour, except 1300/mo is still not really enough to live on your own in most cities with rent as high as it is, which will surely increase when they have to pay everyone $18 an hour and you wont get overtime because they will have to train more employees to cover the gap hours.

Really you would want to go off changing minimum to the equivalent of $15 now. So that would be

15*40hr*4.5wks= $2700 monthly, an actual livable wage in a modern city.

to make that in 16 hours you would need to make $37.50 an hour. That's never going to fly.

This would come out to $32,400.
50% of americans make less than this amount. So thats about 156 million people. Lets assume they all need a boost of 10,000 a year, that's 1.56 trillion dollarinos
You could subsidize about half of that by only paying people 18/hr at 16 hours and giving them free education, healthcare, food, housing, (FARMLAND), subsidized directly from taxing banks and corporations and not at all provided by the employer. You would have to enact strict regulations in a surprise fashion so that the 1% cant move the money around.

so basically people are going to tell you to fuck off when you say "you want $37 an hour to flip burgers".

US Budgetary Costs of Wars through 2016: $4.79 Trillion and Counting
Summary of Costs of the US Wars in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan and
Homeland Security

2016 United States federal budget
Submitted February 2, 2015
Total expenditures $3.999 trillion (requested) $3.854 trillion (estimate)
Deficit $474 billion (requested) $587 billion (estimate)
GDP $18.819 trillion (projected)
Website Office of Management and Budget


rly makes u fuckin think

A reduction in working hours implies increased progressive taxation plus cuts to military expenditures and corporate subsidies.

Your picture for ants is uninspiring. Also, you don't need to push for "why it's impossible" - it clearly is under Capitalism.

You need to present problem Capitalism can't solve.

so this is just to stir people up and not actually get anything passed?

I mean, its possible to just strait up go to $40 an hour for 16 hours of standing at the door greeting walmart people. Walmart has enough money for them and the US in general taxes enough that they could make it a UBI to bring the whole country to 30K a year.

But they won't because most people who make 7.30 think they are better then the people making 7.25 so they will vote against losing their micro rewards. Have you never seen the boss with a bachelors in business making $9.00 and being a hardass to impress the people who make 13.50? Or the ones salaried at 22K that work 75 hours a week? Thats $5 an hour lmao

There are way to many old people who would be mad as fuck and vote against it just because they want people to suffer as much as they did.

Why are americans so fucking stupid?

Are you new here? There are many people and ideologies here.

I'm ML - Marxism-Leninism. Part of Marxism is the concept of Basis (economic relations) that affects Superstructure (actual laws and political relations). While Capitalists are in charge, any victory of the working class will require immense struggle - and will be fleeting even if it somehow happens. Everything will be rolled back at the first opportunity.

Therefore, I don't see any reason for parliamentary struggle. It's not worth my time - nor anyone's for that matter. But there are other anons, who are SocDem and believe in Benevolent Capitalist.

I'm quite certain this will not come to pass not because of old people.

thats what im talkinga bout

if anything paying people more would just pacify them for a time until global inequality caught up with them.

You make a valid point. Cultural obstacles are arguably harder to overcome than the actual economic requirements. As you say, we can afford it but people are afraid of losing their status ("their micro rewards", the satisfaction derived from seeing "people suffer as much as they did", etc). Which is why I believe we need to build a counter-hegemony — and a viral campaign centered around clear, bold demands could contribute to that.

found the trotskyist

it's more likely to work than trying to revive the social-democratic welfare state, at least. Welfare policies can be repealed, but, as far as I know, at least in America, the working week has not yet been increased by law.

kek

Nazbols need to STOP

Eh, I was thinking 20 hour work week with a $50 hourly minimum wage, but the more extreme the better when it comes to things like these

bump