---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:49:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Melanie Milanich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Canadian work week
>From: Anders Hayden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>------------------
>betterTIMES
>------------------
>The Quarterly Newsletter of 32 HOURS: Action for Full Employment
>and the Shorter Work Time Network of Canada
>
>Issue No. 7 June 1998
>--------------------------------
>
>In this issue:
>- Danes Fight for the Right to Relax
>- Shorter Hours & Eco-Taxes
>- Flex-work and the Struggle to Juggle
>- Rewarding Skill & Service with Free Time
>- What Americans Really, Really Want
>- AND LOTS MORE!
>------------------------------------------
>
>I. CAN SHORTER WORK TIME HELP SAVE TORONTO'S PUBLIC WORKFORCE?
>
>Can voluntary and negotiated options for reducing work time help save
>municipal jobs? Answering that question should be a top priority of the
>new City of Toronto.
>
>The City and its employees are facing some tough choices, with over 2500
>jobs on the line. The City has been put into this situation by the
>Harris government, which forced an unpopular amalgamation on Metro
>Toronto's six municipalities and then dumped a series of new costs on
>the fledgling entity. The provincial Tories deserve the blame for the
>financial and political mess faced by the City. Unfortunately, the
>citizens of Toronto have to come up with ways to minimize the damage,
>and to do so quickly.
>
>To make ends meet in the post- amalgamation and downloading chaos, the
>new City is aiming to cut its payroll costs by $120 million over two
>years -- a 5% cut to the existing $2.4 billion payroll. There is a plan
>to cut 1278 positions in 1998, for "savings" of $45 million. Another
>1250 jobs are on the line in 1999 for an additional $75 million
>reduction. But these so-called savings will be entirely negated in the
>first year by severance payments, while the budget for the second year
>gives no estimate for how many millions will be poured down a hole in
>the form of severance costs.
>
>Fortunately, the City also has before it a set of recommendations that
>could help get it out of this jam, and possibly even turn it into a
>blessing in disguise.
>
>Last year, the Task Force on Health and Work of the old city of Toronto
>made a number of progressive recommendations with respect to work time,
>including:
>
>- "that employers and labour explore and/or expand innovative work time
>arrangements that optimize health, including a reduction in standard
>work time, flexible hours of work, job- sharing, phased-in retirement,
>education and family leave."
>
>- a call for the new city to "model leadership in enlightened
>government and healthy work . . . by supporting innovative approaches to
>work that improve productivity and enhance employment opportunities,
>including flex time, phased-in retirement and all forms of leave, as
>well as investigating the feasibility of a four-day work week."
>
>This report was approved by the old council and forwarded to the new
>government. It is now being reviewed by the City's Chief Administrative
>Officer, Commissioner of Human Resources, and Medical Officer of Health.
>
>
>Would the recommendations allow sufficient savings to be found? U of T
>Economist Frank Reid estimates that, if guaranteed the choice of a range
>of voluntary options for reducing their work hours with a proportionate
>cut in pay, Canadians would reduce their hours by a total of 6%. A 5%
>reduction of payroll costs is thus well within range of what could be
>achieved simply by giving City workers more choice to work less.
>
>Sweeten the pot for those who choose shorter hours by topping up their
>pay with the funds that would have been wasted on severance payments,
>and even larger numbers will opt for shorter work time. And if City
>management and labour focus in the years ahead on rewarding employees,
>especially those at higher income levels, with shorter work time with no
>
>loss in pay rather than wage increases, additional funds could be found
>to preserve and even create jobs.
>
>To avoid the enormous human and economic costs of layoffs, and to
>maintain access to the skills of public servants and the public programs
>they make possible, 32 HOURS calls on the City and its employees to act
>now on these recommendations.
>
>****URGENT****
>
>Toronto readers, let your councillor know you support the
>recommendations of the Task Force on Health and Work to as an
>alternative to the devastation of planned municipal layoffs. (Contact
>our office for addresses and phone numbers.)
>
>
>II. INTERNATIONAL NEWS
>
>
>* Danes Strike En Masse for 6th Week Vacation
>
>Denmark was rocked by nation-wide strikes and lockouts from April 27 to
>May 7 over workers' demands for a sixth week paid vacation.
>
>The strike cost the Danish economy an estimated $200 million per day. It
>also affected firms elsewhere, like Swedish auto-maker SAAB which closed
>factories due to lack of parts. There were positive effects, too. With
>fuel in short supply, bikes were suddenly more numerous on the road than
>cars.
>
>The social democratic government eventually legislated an end to the
>dispute. Each worker will be granted two more days off per year, while
>those with children under 14 years of age will gain an additional two
>days this year and one next year. At the same time, employer pension
>contributions were scaled back and a new sick leave levy withdrawn. The
>government's move left many workers bitter, since they felt their full
>demands could have been won if the strike had lasted another week.
>
>The Economist writes, "Happy must be a country whose trade unions stage
>a close-to-general strike to demand a sixth week, no less, of paid
>vacation." But if you're tempted to think Danes are just spoiled, think
>again.
>
>This conflict is best seen as a struggle by labour to fairly share in a
>booming economy, and as an enlightened choice of time over money as the
>way to take that share. According to Kete Persson, a 24 year old lab
>assistant, Everyone is talking about the good economic results in
>Denmark. As for me, I want my share in the form of free time.
>
>KAD, the federation of female labourers, was on the cutting edge of
>demands for more free time. This century old, all-female union has
>100,000 members. While the strikers called for an additional week
>vacation, KAD actually wanted 20 days more. KAD is also fighting for
>more
>continual education, aiming to have 10% of workers in training at any
>one time.
>
>For us, its the absolute priority, says KAD member Kirsten Moller
>about the demand for time.
>
>Lene Christensen, a 50 year-old maintenance employee at SAS airlines,
>says the reason both male and female strikers finally rallied behind the
>demand for more free time is because Danish men participate a lot more
>in family life than in elsewhere in the world.
>
>Free time is seen in Denmark more as a question of family policy than
>an aspect of employment policy, says Kare F.V. Petersen, a labour
>market researcher, who compares the situation with that in France. The
>risk of unemployment is lower here, there is money, the question is
>having time to spend with the family.
>
>Denmark's highly progressive tax system also contributed to making time
>a more attractive choice than money. According to Persson, Im
>satisfied with my salary. We have enough to live on without problem. And
>if I got more money, that would mean paying more taxes."
>
>This was the first big strike in Denmark in 13 years, a product of its
>recent economic success. Unemployment fell to 7% in March compared to
>8.3% last year. Meanwhile inflation is around 2%, and both the budget
>and balance of payments are in surplus. And this has been achieved
>without dismantling Denmark's comprehensive welfare state or cutting
>taxes.
>
>While many of us have felt that the demand for shorter work time would
>be driven mainly by concern over high unemployment, the Danish example
>suggests that perhaps people are more likely to fight for the things
>they really want -- like enough time with one's family -- when
>unemployment falls and there is a greater sense of economic security.
>With Canada's job situation getting marginally better, time will tell if
>the same effect is felt here.
>Sources: The Economist (May 9, 1998); The Financial Times (May 8, 1998);
>Libiration (May 8, 1998); Le Monde (May 6, 1998); Internet sources.
>
>
>* Most Americans Want Less Work
>
>A new study shows a sharp rise in the number of U.S. workers who would
>like to reduce their hours. The National Study of the Changing Workplace
>conducted by the New-York based Families and Work Institute found that
>nearly 2/3 of workers would reduce their time on the job, by an average
>of 11 hours a week -- an increase from 47% in 1992.
>
>The main obstacles cited to reducing hours were the need for money,
>pressure from employers, and desire to help their companies succeed.
>
>The landmark five-year study found that growing demands on the job are
>creating problems at home for time-starved employees, who then end up
>feeling too stressed to work effectively. It also found that
>productivity is far more likely to be hurt these days by job-related
>stress than by family problems stemming from child or elder care.
>Meanwhile, pay and benefits are far less important in keeping workers
>happy than the quality of work and supportiveness of a company.
>(Families and Work Institute (212) 465-2044)
>Sources: Globe & Mail (Apr. 16, 1998); Toronto Star (Apr. 27, 1998)
>
>
>* French 35-Hour Law Gets Final Approval
>
>France's 35-hour legislation received final approval in the National
>Assembly on May 19, ending a record parliamentary marathon. Attention
>now turns to the workplace level, where negotiations to work out the
>details of a shorter week have already begun.
>
>The unions are furiously preparing for an unprecedented number of
>workplace agreements expected this year.. They continue to have some
>concerns about employer demands for wage moderation and flexible work
>organization in return for shorter hours. Nevertheless, they are
>rallying behind this opportunity to reinvigorate the union movement and
>achieve "a great social advance."
>
>The employers federation remains hostile to the project, although it has
>softened its stance and resumed dialogue with the government. But at
>ground level, many firms did not wait for the final vote to begin
>negotiations. According to the daily Libiration, "Collectively,
>employers are against the 35-hour week. Individually, they watch,
>negotiate, anticipate."
>
>The experience of the 1996 Robien law, which provided financial
>incentives for shorter hours and new hiring, allowed many employers to
>overcome their apprehension. After testing the Robien law in three
>factories, the Bollori group now plans to extend the 35- hour week to
>all 10,000 of its employees in the transport, tobacco and energy
>sectors. Bollori's human resources director says, "We're for a 35-hour
>week if it does not penalize the firm. It can be an opportunity to
>reorganize and to modernize."
>
>Meanwhile, the government is helping smaller firms with consulting
>services to help make this major reorganization of work a win-win
>success.
>
>One attraction for business is the significant payroll tax reductions if
>they reduce hours and hire more workers. The incentives are even greater
>if firms act before the 35- hour week becomes law in the year 2000. The
>government has allocated 3 billion francs (C$ 750 million) for these
>incentives in 1998, and 7 billion (C$ 1.75 billion) for 1999. It's hard
>to know if that will be enough. But the government is not particularly
>worried if the demand is greater, since that will mean more jobs
>created, new tax revenues and lower social spending.
>Sources: Libiration (April 29, May 6, 19, 21, 1998); Financial Times
>(May 20, 1998); Economist (April 4, 1998)
>
>
>* Italy Reveals 35-Hour Details
>
>On March 24, the Italian government introduced its long-awaited 35-hour
>work week bill. A close look shows it is less a case of legislation than
>a package of incentives and disincentives.
>
>The main points:
>
>- a reduction of the "normal" work week to 35 hours by January 1, 2001
>for all firms with more than 15 employees;
>- financial incentives -- in the form of lower payroll taxes -- for
>firms that reduce hours, with additional incentives for those that
>create jobs or avoid layoffs (800 billion lire -- C$670 million -- is
>budgeted in 1998);
>- firms can maintain an "ordinary" work week up to 40 hours, but they
>will have to pay higher payroll taxes on hours above 35;
>- only hours above 40 will be considered overtime, with 250 overtime
>hours allowed annually per worker;
>- the incentives for shorter hours will be offered to all firms,
>regardless of size, starting this year;
>- the disincentives for long hours will only apply to firms above 15
>employees after 2001;
> by November, 2000, the effect of the "experimental" incentives measures
>will be evaluated, and possible revisions to the plan made.
>
>What all this means is that 35 hours will not actually be a legally
>binding requirement. It will simply serve as a reference point for
>applying incentives and disincentives. And the law leaves the key issue
>of salary levels up to negotiations between employers and employees.
>
>Confindustria, the employers federation, is extremely hostile to the
>law, calling it a "curse." If the law passes, it promises to seek a
>national referendum to abrogate it. On the other side of things, the
>Communist leader Fausto Bertinotti, who threatened to bring down the
>government if it did not legislate a 35-hour week without loss in pay,
>appears satisfied. Ironically, it often seems that neither business nor
>the far left are discussing the actual contents of this rather mild,
>flexible, experimental and still evolving law.
>
>The government has gone to great lengths to find ways to avoid
>compromising business competitiveness and to leave a major role for
>collective bargaining. The Minister of Industry, Pierlugi Bersani,
>recognizes that the measure has generated a "psychological" reaction
>from firms, but hopes that business pragmatism will prevail.
>
>There continues to be an unusual alliance between business and labour on
>the issue. The unions remain, for the most part, concerned that the law
>will undermine their "social dialogue" with business. However, a hard
>left minority in the unions wants the law to specify that there will be
>no loss in pay.
>
>The government says it would like a vote on the bill before the end of
>the year, but no specific date is set. In the meantime, most unions are
>already integrating the 35-hour week into their plans for collective
>bargaining. That may ultimately be as important as the law itself.
>Sources: Libiration (May 19, 1998); Corriere della Sera (March 22, 25,
>27, 28, 1998); America Oggi (March 29, 1998); www.cgil.it
>
>
>* Shorter Hours & Eco-Taxes A Potent Green Job Plan
>
>Jobs versus environment? Not according to the Central Planning Bureau of
>the Netherlands. The Bureau recently reviewed the economic viability of
>the campaign promises of all political parties, providing voters with
>an objective assessment before going to the polls.
>
>According to the Economist (May 9, 1998), the proposals of the Green
>Left party would lead to the biggest drop in unemployment, mainly by
>shortening the work week and using taxes on pollution and profits to
>finance more public-sector jobs." The poorest employment performance
>would come with implementation of the conservative Christian Democrat
>platform.
>
>The goal of reviewing campaign promises is to weed out manifestos that
>rely on fantasy financing. It seems to have helped the Green Left,
>which went from 5 to 11 seats in the May 6 election. The vote returned
>to power the "purple coalition" led by Labour Party leader Wim Kok, and
>supported by the centre-right VVD.
>
>
>* Berkeley Group Nears Target
>
>The 35-hour work week initiative in Berkeley, California is close to
>clearing an important hurdle. Work time activist Mike Delacour reports
>that with the signature drive nearing a close, there is a good chance
>enough names will be gathered to put the 35-hour week on this fall's
>local ballot. If so, voters will be asked if they favour requiring all
>private firms in the city to provide a 35-hour week with no loss in pay,
>pay double time for overtime above 35 hours, and make all overtime
>voluntary.
>
>Time will tell if this initiative can match the success of another Bay
>Area effort to improve labour standards. In March, city council in
>Oakland passed a law requiring companies doing business with the city to
>pay their workers a living wage (US $8 per hour, plus benefits).
>
>32 HOURS wishes best of luck to Mike, Gina, Roger, Marion and friends as
>they continue their efforts. Their initiative is an important step in
>putting work time reduction back on the agenda in the United States, a
>country which was at the forefront of the international movement for
>shorter hours earlier this century. (Share the Work, Box 5832, Berkeley
>CA 94705. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>
>III. CANADIAN NEWS
>
>
>* Quibicois Support Shorter Hours to Help Youth
>
>An overwhelming majority of Quibicois is prepared to reduce work hours
>if it creates jobs for young people, according to a recent poll.
>
>To increase youth access to jobs, 41.7% of Quibicois would accept a
>reduction of their salary (37.6% opposed); 71.6% would be ready to
>retire at 55 years of age (13% opposed), 64.5% would participate in a
>work-sharing program (18.2% opposed), and 66.5% would give up overtime
>hours (17.2% opposed).
>
>Inter-generational solidarity was also illustrated by the 59.6%
>opposition to unions signing collective agreements that impose poorer
>wage and working conditions on young workers, a growing practice in
>Quebec.
>
>The study holds an important message: when reduced work time can be
>clearly linked to job creation, especially for young people, support is
>substantial. Recent studies by Statistics Canada, which suggested there
>was little interest in reduced work time, failed to make this link,
>asking only whether workers would give up pay to have more free time.
>Source: Le Devoir (March 27, 1998).
>
>
>* Study Finds Flex-Work Helps With "Struggle to Juggle"
>
>A survey of 1700 employees at Royal Bank Financial Group has found high
>levels of satisfaction with flexible work arrangements among both
>employees and managers. The results challenge the impression that
>flex-work reduces productivity, is not supported by managers, and keeps
>employees from getting promotions
>
>The study, conducted for the bank by Canadian Work/Family Directions,
>found that managers have become big believers in flexible work
>arrangements after seeing first hand how they help employees juggle
>work, family and life responsibilities. And employees report that
>job-sharing arrangements and working from home allow them to gain more
>control over their lives -- without hurting their careers.
>
>Among the findings:
>
>- 94% of flex work users are very satisfied with their new
>arrangements, up 16% from 1994
>- 70% of flex users report lower levels of stress
>- 78% of flex users say opportunities for advancement are the same or
>better than working a traditional week (up 18% from 1994)
>- 63% of managers would highly recommend flexible work arrangements (up
>29% from 1994)
>- 37% of managers report an increase in employee efficiency (up 12%)
>- 36% of flex users say they would leave the company if flex-work were
>not available
>
>An estimated 30% of Royal Bank employees -- more than 13,000 people --
>use flexible work arrangements. These options include: job-sharing,
>"flexiplace" (working outside the office or from home), "flextime"
>(flexible start and finish times), compressed work week, and variable
>hours (working less than 37 hours per week). The bank, which introduced
>a broad-ranging flex-work initiative in 1990, has over 1100 job-sharing
>arrangements. (Jason Robart, Canadian Work/Family Directions, (416)
>492-3475 x235.)
>
>
>* "Five Days Costs More" Say Vancouver Workers
>
>Workers at Vancouver City Hall -- members of CUPE local 15 and IBEW
>local 213 -- have expressed strong opposition to a City Manager's
>recommendation that the city end its compressed work week and nine-day
>fortnight schedules. Over 300 staff members joined a May 12 lunch-time
>rally on the steps of City Hall to save the compressed work week.
>
>In his April 23 report to council, City Manager Ken Dobell recommended
>an end to alternative work schedules in place at City Hall since 1976.
>The reason given for reverting to a five-day week was to provide better
>customer service to the public. The report singled out the business
>community as a source of complaints about the four-day week.
>
>The compressed work week and nine-day fortnight were evaluated
>positively by consultants in 1977 and 1984. The City Manager's report
>contained no new information or analysis.
>
>At a May 14 City Council committee meeting, called to consider the
>Manager's report, union reps presented a petition signed by most City
>staff members calling on Council to throw out the recommendation.
>Non-unionized departmental management and professional staff joined the
>union members in decisively rejecting -- by 85% -- the move to a five
>day week.
>
>Elaborating on the theme "five days costs everyone more", delegations to
>the May 14 council committee meeting pointed out that reverting to a
>five-day week would disrupt child care arrangements, put more cars on
>the road during peak rush hour, impair worker morale and productivity,
>make recruitment and retention of key staff more difficult, cost
>individual employees thousands of dollars in work-related expenses and
>ultimately lead to higher taxes.
>
>After hearing yet more delegations at a May 25 meeting, the Council
>committee postponed discussion and decision to an unspecified future
>date.
>-- Report from Tom Walker, Vancouver Chapter
>
>
>* Ontario NDP Commits to Shorter Work Time
>
>The Ontario New Democratic Party has made work time reduction one of its
>top policy priorities. At its May 22-24 convention in Hamilton,
>delegates committed the party, should it return to power, to "develop a
>comprehensive, quality-of-life approach to work time reduction based on
>voluntary, negotiated agreements." The NDP would:
>
>- provide incentives to encourage workers and employers to create more
>jobs by negotiating voluntary, reduced work hours -- without loss of
>income.
>- gradually reduce standard work week hours and improve personal leave
>options and annual vacation time for all employees.
>- make all overtime above 40 hours per week voluntary and eliminate the
>cap on payroll taxes that encourages overuse by employers of overtime.
>- introduce measures to limit excessive overtime above the negotiated
>or legislated standard work week.
>
>These work time recommendations were number one on the list of policy
>commitments related to the "Future of Work." Other proposals related to
>work hours included:
>
>- a Workers' Bill of Rights to improve enforcement and awareness of
>workplace standards.
>- creating better conditions for part-time, contract, casual and
>self-employed workers through initiatives such as pro-rated pensions and
>benefits; more control over scheduling; and security measures for the
>self-employed.
>- making the minimum wage a living wage by tying it to the cost of
>living.
>
>
>* Canadians Oppose Longer Trucking Hours
>
>A poll shows overwhelming opposition to a federal- provincial proposal
>to lengthen the work week of truck drivers from 60 to 70 hours.
>
>Of 1504 people asked, 83% oppose increasing the weekly limit on truck
>driver hours. And 86% favour reducing the consecutive hours truck
>drivers in Canada can drive from the current 13 to the U.S. limit of 10.
>There was also overwhelming opposition to allowing larger multi-trailer
>trucks on the road.
>
>The Angus Reid trucking safety poll, was commissioned by Canadians for
>Responsible and Safe Highways (CRASH) and released April 24.
>
>Bob Evans, Executive Director of CRASH, says, "The strong opposition by
>Canadians against bigger trucks and against longer hours for truck
>drivers is a wake up call to governments."
>
>
>* Alternative Fed Budget Urges 36 Hour Week
>
>The 1998 Alternative Federal Budget (AFB), developed by a coalition of
>activists, academics and policy researchers, calls for major federal
>efforts to redistribute work time.
>
>The AFB was released last February, prior to Paul Martin's official
>effort, to offer a comprehensive progressive alternative to existing
>budget priorities. This year's AFB, prepared by the Canadian Centre for
>Policy Alternatives and Cho!ces: A Coalition for Social Justice, focuses
>on reinvesting in Canada's damaged public infrastructure while
>maintaining budget balance.
>
>In the chapter on job creation, the drafters of the AFB maintain that
>"most work time issues are best negotiated between employers and workers
>and their unions." But they say the federal government could help by
>establishing an office to monitor work-time arrangements and to
>encourage workplace negotiations which create jobs by redistributing
>work time.
>
>The AFB would also "commit the federal government to allocate funds to
>subsidize negotiated work-time reduction and redistribution agreements
>which create new jobs." And it would make the Canada Labour Code --
>which covers about 10% of all workers -- a model statute by:
>- reducing the standard work week in federal jurisdiction to 36 hours
>- giving workers the right to refuse overtime
>- limiting overtime hours to 100 hours per year
>- giving workers the right to return to a job after taking extended
>parental or educational leave
>- requiring employers to provide equal pay and benefits to part-time
>workers
>
>The AFB would actively encourage provincial governments to adopt similar
>standards and to strengthen enforcement of employment standards.
>
>The report adds that work time should be seen to include hours spent in
>unpaid labour such as child care, housework, and volunteer work:
>"Women's total workload (paid and unpaid) continues to be greater than
>men's. Any attempts to redistribute work time must take these balances
>into account."
>
>
>* Canadians Got Poorer in 90s
>
>A new study confirms what many suspected -- that Canadians got poorer in
>the first half of the nineties.
>
>Statistics Canada reports that the recession of the early 1990s wiped
>out the economic gains of the late eighties. Incomes fell by an average
>6% from 1990- 95. In fact, the national average per capita income of
>$25,196 in 1995 was back to its 1985 level. Almost all Canadians were
>hit -- incomes fell for all age groups, both genders, in all cities but
>two, and every type of family unit.
>
>"This is probably the first protracted period of income decline since
>the 1930s," says John McCallum, chief economist of the Royal Bank.
>
>The Globe and Mail (May 13, 1998) cites vigorous attacks on inflation
>and deficits, along with widespread corporate restructuring, as the main
>reasons for declining incomes.
>
>The study confirmed that while job creation has picked up since 1995,
>most new positions are part- time, low-paid and often temporary. It also
>shows how far behind visible minorities and aboriginal people are --
>with incomes below the national average by 15% and 34% respectively.
>Average income for men dropped 7.8%, versus 2% for women. But men still
>earn far more than women on average -- $31,117 compared to $19,208.
>
>During 32 HOURS sectoral dialogue last year, we repeatedly heard that
>intense economic insecurity is a major obstacle to people embracing
>shorter work time. This study explains a large part of the reason for
>that feeling.
>
>In such a context, one has to wonder whether any proposal that would
>legislate shorter hours with a loss in pay, even if it is less than
>proportional, has any hope of gaining public support. 32 HOURS has long
>had a vigorous internal debate on whether shorter hours should involve
>any loss in pay. We've evolved towards a position that says there must
>be no income loss imposed on low-income workers (those below a threshold
>of roughly $35,000), but above that level the wage question should be
>open for negotiation. Does this study suggest a need to re-think that
>position? We'd like to hear your comments on this essential question,
>and to open up these pages for that debate.
>
>
>
>IV. WORTH READING
>
>
>* 3 Articles by John Willis
>
>"This Week Has 32 Hours" is the title of John Willis' March article in
>This Magazine. But Willis finds commitment to that goal among
>government, business, and labour in B.C. to be lacking, despite the
>province's financial support for shorter hours in the forestry sector.
>
>In "The 32-Hour Cure" in the Spring 1998 issue of the environmental
>magazine Alternatives, Willis explores how a shorter the work week could
>create more jobs and foster sustainability. He sees little sign to date
>that the environmental movement in Canada is prepared to solidly get
>behind this issue, but adds that "a sustainable future is only possible
>if industrial societies learn that time is more valuable than money."
>
>Also watch for the July issue of This Magazine, with a discussion on the
>future of work moderated by Willis. The participants are Andrew Jackson
>(Canadian Labour Congress), Julie White (Communications, Energy and
>Paperworkers), Mike McCracken (Informetrica), Arlene Wortsman (Canadian
>Labour Market and Productivity Centre), and Anders Hayden (32 HOURS).
>
>
>* 500 Years Ahead of His Time?
>
>"The Utopians divide night and day into twenty-four hours of equal
>length and assign only six to work: three before midday, after which
>they go to lunch; after lunch they have two hours in the afternoon for
>rest; after that they work for another three hours before dinner. . . .
>The purpose is not to allow them to waste this free time in wild living
>or idleness, but to enable them to apply their minds to whatever useful
>pursuit they wish in their free time.
>
>"... For as they spend only six hours in work, it might be that you
>think a shortage of supplies must follow. This is quite the reverse of
>the truth. In fact, this period of time is enough and more than enough
>to provide everything needed to support life or make it more
>comfortable. You will easily understand this if you remember how large a
>part of the population is idle in other countries.
>
>"... So with everyone practicing useful crafts and fewer men needed for
>each, as there is great abundance of supplies, occasionally they lead
>out a huge crowd to repair the public roads if any are worn away. Very
>often not even such work is required and so they make a public
>announcement of fewer working hours. For the magistrates do not exercise
>the citizens against their will in unnecessary work, since the
>institution of this republic has this one chief aim -- that, as far as
>public necessity allows, all citizens should be given as much time as
>possible away from bodily service for the freedom and cultivation of the
>mind. For there, they think, lies happiness in life."
>
>Sir Thomas More, Utopia (1516)
>
>(See Part 2 for Vision, 32 HOURS (Toronto) News, Shorter Work Time
>Network News, and Information on 32 HOURS and the Shorter Work Time
>Network)
>********
>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: Card for Anders Hayden
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
>
>Attachment Converted: C:\IRAMPPPP\EUDORA\vcard.vcf
>
-------------------------------------------------------------
Frank de Jong, leader, Green Party of Ontario
416-531-4825, www.greenparty.on.ca
Box 68553, 360A Bloor Street West, Toronto M5S 1X0
