NappaKnowHow
20962
828
9
It'll at least get the R's on record voting against it
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4530301-bernie-sanders-unveils-32-hour-workweek-bill/amp/
Mar 15, 2024 1:56 PM
NappaKnowHow
20962
828
9
It'll at least get the R's on record voting against it
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4530301-bernie-sanders-unveils-32-hour-workweek-bill/amp/
hardytardigrade
Well that sound great for Bill, but what about me?
kylefromterminator
Ifvv be that becomes full time then I’ll get even less because my employer won’t set us at full time cause that’ll mean benefits
Korbo
Gods bless this man. In the era of Republicans easing child labor, and labor safety laws, He's like nah, more pay, less work.
mycatpoopedinmyshoe
This reminds me of the rule that employers had to supply health insurance to full time employees. Immediately…all full timers went to part timers. This always backfires.
Ilickedthecinnabar
Some of my coworkers have been able to negotiate a 4 day work-week, unfortunately, its still a 40 hour work-week. While they could do w/o the 10 hour work days, they love their 3 day weekends.
KlobberSaurus
YES
colortheworldinrainbows
I like the 32 hour work week but not the overtime after 8 hours. Sometimes I like to work 10 hours one day and 6 hours on another. It's good to have flexibilty.
LincLoud
American politicians are largely operated by puppeteers that run most of the big businesses in the country. I don't think things will ever get better
Pizza0Style0Burrito
trippingthelightfantastic
Go Bernie!
AyatollahBahloni
This is why unions exist. Corporations will never pay their workers a thriving wage unless they are forced to do so.
TChallaVanDam
Fuckin A, Barb.
cuddlydingo
Salary is about to become the default payment method instead of by the hour
DrSchlepenstein
Republicans counter with 64 hour work week bill.
hardytardigrade
Not for them, of course. For everyone else.
BobRossHB
Neat
DukePhelan
This has a snowflakes chance in hell of passing but something has to be done. The American people work too damn hard for to little in terms of pay and access to services the rest of the developed world has access to as a matter of course. Eat the rich.
billymaditsdone
I went over to the fox News comments on YouTube about this and the opinions seem split. Most who are against are worried that companies would hire more part timers and not increase pay making it harder for people to make ends meet. I would enjoy less hours but not sure if any of the negative affects are valid?
DocTanner
*chuckles in "exempt"*. This would have no effect on salary people and would just make companies cut their full-time hourly folks down to 32 hours without increasing hourly wages. A four-day work week is absolutely the future, but this bill ain't gonna create it. :(
FantomNemisis
Start here, finish with 6 weeks paid vacation
mnrelo
Companies will make everyone part time and reduce benefits since we aren't working 40 hrs. In the end we get screwed and companies will win.
Smidge204
You'll just see more people becoming part time workers or "contractors." Maybe raise min. wage and eliminate the tips loophole instead.
sunyudai
Which are other notions he has pushed, yes.
thevoiddancer
"It'll at least get the R's on record voting against it"
Two problems.
1. It won't matter to Republitards.
2. Dems will vote against it as well.
TheAnimalFactsGuy
That's an amazing idea, but I think we all know it'll never happen, ever. It's proven to cause better mental health, better work efficiency, and better quality of work. That's why it'll never happen.
Ivalicenyan
Why is everyone rejoicing about this when in reality isnt the employer just cutting people's work hours and hiring more people to avoid paying people overtime? I dont kno about other peoples jobs, but mine cuts hours on other days of the week if I work too long one day just to avoid paying the extra $10 id get if god forbid I worked 42 hours. Do y'all believe your employer wouldn't cut your hours and happily, willingly pay yall overtime? Or is there something I'm misinterpreting?
Ivalicenyan
Like I get on paper is sounds like a victory if the bill passed (it likely won't), but the cynical part of me just tells me that employers would just maliciously comply with the new mandatez and then workers struggling to get 40 hours or more, would just struggle at getting just 32, forcing many people that didn't need a 2nd job to get a 2nd job. Or am I just an asshole for assuming that's how I think reality would play out? Unless there's something in the bill that would prevent that
EekumBokumEekumBokum
I love Bernie and his crew so godly much
Knightendae
Where I live you can get a 1BRM apt for $1500. 3x rent would be $4500. 40hrs @ $25/hr is $5k/wk or $60k/yr. 60k for 32/hr/wk is now $36/hr. To barely make it. Have a kid? that's $2100 for a 2brm/2 bath. Work from home need a three brm or have more than one kid? $2700/mo which means you have to make $80k or $48/hr... Just saying thanks the new lower middle class
hyperchondriac
It won't get anyone on the voting record. All it takes is 1 senator to say "I filibuster" and it disappears forever, no vote required. Because there are not 60 votes to end filibuster.
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
I say this every time a 32 hour work week comes up, but... it's not that simple. Maybe for office workers and people who do strictly informational stuff, but not for people who actually MAKE things, where hours translate directly into productivity. You have a problem here where either you're instantly reducing the supply of goods while increasing their cost, OR you're creating a two-tier system where white collar workers get more free time while blue collar workers don't. It's not as simple as
revolutionofevolution
This also oversimplifies. Marginal costs could "always" be lower if you exploit workers more. At some point, you give innovation's productivity benefits to workers instead of driving down marginal cost for capital. This just starts that clock at whatever point production was 80% of what it would be 4 years from now. The net effect on the price of goods of more consumers from a larger workforce with more opportunities to spend (extra day off) aren't a simple CoL increase.
redsmerf
Or healthcare, where a lot of non-MD billing is by time, not by procedure.
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
"Everyone should just work less." I'd love to work less, but there are real-world economic issues to address if you want to make this happen without drastically increasing the cost of living.
TheViolinCon
It's also difficult for jobs that are coverage based (365/24/7). For my work it would probably translate to an additional 3 or 4 FTE's which is a 20%-25% increase in staffing. Plus benefits (~30% of wages). For a nonprofit, that's expensive.
AceOfShovels
We managed to adapt to a 40 hour work week when the norm was probably double that with no weekends. Historical precedent says don't fuckin worry about it.
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
The 40 hour work week was established at a point when economics and manufacturing were orders of magnitude simpler than today. Generally there was raw materials, and finished product. Today you have supply chains that involve dozens or hundreds of different companies and steps. I believe I'd prefer to actually think about the issue rather than pretending we can change up the entire way our economy works without actually changing anything.
AceOfShovels
In other words we had the same start and end points back then. The bloat in between is part of the problem today, too many parasitic capitalist middlemen taking a piece and jacking up the cost of the end product. Let it burn, the common man will be better off afterwards.
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
Oh yeah, I'm sure that everyone will definitely be better off when all our supply chains cease to exist and we're all trying to grow our own food. /s Do you even listen to yourself?
AceOfShovels
Do you even know what a "supply chain" looks like? I've worked in manufacturing for nearly a decade. A huge chunk of it is freight brokers needlessly marking up shipping costs as much as they can before paying as little as possible for the actual shipment, then keeping the difference. Others just buy shit in bulk, mark it up, then immediately resell it. It's pointless bloat. You trust that it's all necessary and useful and that shows how little you actually understand any of it
Feralkyn
The solution they're *meant* to stick with is, "hire more people."
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
Which still has an immediate effect on the price of pretty much all manufactured goods. If people are getting 40 hours pay for 32 hours of productivity, that means that anything they're making is immediately going to have 20% higher labor costs per unit. How much of the cost of an item is labor is going to vary, but you're talking about a very substantial price increase.
Feralkyn
Except that hasn't happened in places where they've implemented this.
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
Most of the places where this has been implemented have very little manufacturing, and what they do have is mostly high end items where cost increases are more easily absorbed.
Feralkyn
To clarify, there is absolutely *no* reason that should happen. The companies will be paying the same wages, for the same hours, just to different people
IDontKnowWhatToDoAnymoreAndImTired
That is 100% wrong. They would be paying 40 hours wages for 32 hours of work. This is basic math.
snikpmupgnihsamseht
The oligarchy won't let it pass.
iamgnat
And contrary to @op's commentary, it won't only be Rs voting against it.
ZachariasWolfe
Considering how unlikely it is to pass, most Ds may vote for it to say they did, knowing full well it'll fail.
iamgnat
If it was a hot button they could use for Nov, sure. Beyond thinking how 4x8 would be nice, most people aren't going to care about this enough for it to be a talking point.
So the corp stooge Dems will go ahead and vote no so they have something to show their cash cows that they did something on their behalf.
Since it won't garner them or the party significant votes, they'll focus on getting paid.
TheAnimalFactsGuy
I work 4/10s and it's amazing. I can't imagine what this could do for my mental health and happiness.
That's also why I don't believe it'll happen. After seeing how happy people were on 4/10s, my job is forcing people back to 5/8s because they don't like us having so much free time.
YBardusher
"The kings need to keep eating their blood and gold"
Saw it somewhere on the internet. Probably not verbatim, I have the memory of a dead elephant.
DarnThisStuff
Also the ignorant masses that will call this "communism."
Hotjoe1991
I was at gym yesterday and Fox News was up on one of the TV's and they were talking about this. The tagline at the bottom of the screen said "Socialist Workweek" like seriously what the fuck does that even mean?
DontYouHateWhenAllUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken
@op DON'T CATCH THE DESTRUCTO DISK!
Exyr
The chances of that passing are about as good as getting universal Healthcare.
thoushaltnotpass
Even France that was a very socialist leaning country turned back from the 35 hours despite the system working properly
natabus
True. But part of the groundwork for eventual change is getting people on the record with a yes or a no, and then using that record electorally. If you pay a price with constituents for opposition, maybe the next round opposition will be less.
Lynkfox
Big IF there...
natabus
It is a big IF... and one of the biggest pieces of the 'IF' is 'If constituents are motivated enough to actually engage politically."
khora
I’d settle for global healthcare.
natabus
"I'm sorry sir, at an altitude of more than 100 km you are no longer covered by Global healthcare. You should have opted for our Universal plan. "
Ivalicenyan
Does the bill have anything to prevent employers from just cutting people down to 32 to avoid overtime? The only reason employers don't wanna work employees over 40 is to avoid overtime pay... So why would this be any different.
JustAnotherRabidToaster
And IIRC, 32 hours a week isn't (currently) considered "full-time" and as such doesn't qualify for Obamacare (or whatever it's called, I can't remember right now)
unclefisty
It's 28 hours.
Badprenup
But that's kind of the point. Reduce working hours to 32 per week or companies pay overtime but pay would be adjusted to make so people get the same weekly pay (20% pay increase).
If the employers don't want to pay overtime, they hire additional staff and adjust schedules so the same hours get covered without them paying OT.
However it can still be manipulated by cutting staff hours even more or they can cut the total number of staff on a shift to make up for having to hire more
yallmfsneedjesus
This is already a thing in healthcare. We are paid hourly and so every minute over 40 is time and a half. Inevitably, you never swipe out on time because we are caring for people so you can't just stop if someone is needing something/work isn't finished. So, they ONLY hire for 32 hours, and call it full time. So you get full time benefits and that way when you are 3+ hours over every week (because of short staffing) they don't have to pay overtime.
Ivalicenyan
What I asked was there anything in the bill to prevent employers from cutting hours.
yallmfsneedjesus
I would LOVE this bill. I cant remember a day I didn't work at least 9 hours. It would actually give me overtime.
GiantFlyingLabia
There’s a higher chance that Republicans pass a bill mandating a 48 hour work week
JS87
Why stop at 48?
thefellerwhathadthatusername
Republicans dream of repealing the minimum wage entirely, raising the retirement age to 85, and banning collective organization into trade and labor unions. They want the government not to “interfere” in business at all, except where it helps their specific interests and portfolios.
They’d literally take us back to nobles and feudal serfs, but with corporate boards instead of families of inbred religious fanatics (for the moment).
darkninja2992
I think feudal lords actually had some basic respect and care for their population, so no, they don't want that, they'd want something worse
tonedeff
56... That's perfection.
Kenbamazingbutprobablywontbe
Yea i looked at a chart of Americas production compared to other countries. Theres no way theyd let this happen. Unless they plan on replacing ppl with robots.
LazyUsername99
Dude, that's hysterical! This is the fucking US, they're going to replace us with robots AND keep the 40 hour work week. You're on crack if you think they aren't trying to increase production AND fuck the workers at the same time. This isn't about balancing the scales, this is about putting a bigger sack of gold on their side and fuck the balance.
Kenbamazingbutprobablywontbe
They're eventually not going to keep a bunch of disgruntled laborers around. Theyll deem it an inefficient cost. Have you seen the amazon building in tiajuana. They don't care if poverty surrounds them. Robots will make less mistakes. Unless everybody plans on becoming a robot repair tech we better invest in universal income.
LazyUsername99
And that's when capitalism folds itself in half. If there are no laborers, then the masses are in poverty. If the masses are in poverty, there are no consumers. If there are no consumers, then the companies fail, robots or not.
Kenbamazingbutprobablywontbe
And the way its going. We already gave them the keys to the kingdom so we get to watch it just unfold. Hopefully ny house is paid off by then.
Exyr
If california doesn't already have a 32 hour work week when we already have all that other stuff no way it's going nationwide before california passes it
SomeDetroitGuy
First - American companies don't actually care about productivity. The whole return-to-office situation proves that they're more interested in performative gestures than they are in actual productivity. Secondly - Studies have shown that 32 hour workweeks get the same amount of work done as 40 hour workweeks.
risqueorindecent
Exactly. I'm sure it made sense when we operated a ton of factories. Doesn't make much sense in office environments.
IAmTheBadW01f
I've been in manufacturing my whole career and, as much as I like the idea.... My jobs have been largely machine limited. We need someone running this machine, and it puts out 100 units per hour. With bathroom breaks and other inefficiencies we're getting 90 units per hour, 40 hours a week.
Compare that to what a single worker could do 50 years ago and it's insane, but "same production with fewer hours" is not easily replicated here.
iCritiqueYourComment
companies could increase prices by lowering production numbers. seems like a win-win for greedy ass companies
IAmTheBadW01f
Oh that's a given either way. I'm not disputing the benefits, things like lower turnover will absolutely save companies money in recruiting and training, as well as costs associated with newer employees being more likely to screw things up.
It's an unmitigated win for the employee, and a *trade-off* for the employer. I hope it catches on more places, but when the claim going around is "no loss in productivity" and productivity is equipment limited it can be hard for it to be taken seriously.
Zetor
The metric always becomes the goal. I'm quite sure that all the shit I see on e.g. r/antiwork and here, all the ridiculous demands and "performance metrics" are all gamed to the max. Just let people do their jobs.
EekumBokumEekumBokum
I'm not sure what you're getting at
JoshuaFalken
We need another labor movement to retake some of the ground we've ceded over the last 50 years
Kenbamazingbutprobablywontbe
Yup. And raises dont keep pace with inflation nor has min wage. Its a bunch of bullshit.
TChallaVanDam
I really believed that the one good thing that was going to come out of Covid was the beginning of such a labor movement. Unfortunately the very few changes that were made were extremely minimal.
Kenbamazingbutprobablywontbe
And lots of companies pretended to care till it was over. My company even during covid gave me a hard time when i got sick finally. if my forman wasn't a germaphobe they would have tried to make me come in. He wouldn't let me touch anything lol