I have simply been lurking for some time, but the first part of this post from Thomas Lunde (combined with a post from someone else the other day about our attachment to outdated concepts) galvanised me into action (again) - on a theme I have addressed a number of times over the past two years. ---------------Original Message--------------- Story time as I sit here pen (keyboard) in hand. My ex-wife got a full time job last month. Yep! A real full-time job, not a contract, not a fly by night, not an under the table deal, nope, it was a real full time job with a major (assets of a billion $) company in the high tech world. Respectfully, Thomas Lunde ----------End of Original Message---------- Thomas, Congratulations to your wife. It is clear from the rest of your post that this change in her circumstances is seen by you all as a big step forward. It certainly seems she worked hard enough to achieve it. However, it is almost certainly NOT a full-time job. There are 168 hours in a week. None of us could work full-time for longer than a day or two without complete collapse. One of the greatest cons perpetrated on people in the past century has been the phrase full-time work - a phrase which means some organisation owns a significant portion of your life (a proportion which has increased as "downsizing" has left less people to do more in most organisations). If we all (including our employers) saw our work as part-time (as it in fact really is) we might be encouraged to make up the whole of our life with a (chosen by us) combination of part-time activities. In fact, the future will only even remotely resemble the sort of place we apparently all want until we make this shift individually, organisationally and societally. Charles Brass Chairman Future of Work Foundation PO Box 122 Fairfield 3078 Australia E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The mission of the Future of Work Foundation is: "To engage all Australians in creating a better future for work" -------------------------------------
