-----Original Message-----
From: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM
Sent: February 2, 2001 12:54 PM
To: 'Gail Stewart'
Subject: RE: Temp market for labour
I said "them" because of the reference to the article. But, yes, with basic
income in place I too might become a flexworker. Although, for me I am
probably so ingrained in the work world that I would have to have some sort
of counseling or re-education to allow me to become a flexworker and, at the
same time, keep my self-esteem intact.
You said,
In fact aren't some of these supports already in place in
most democratic societies but just not seen in that
perspective because of the conventional ways that we insist
upon looking at work? In fact, isn't it precisely those
conventional ways of looking at work that might lead to
saying "them" rather than saying "us?"
My reply,
The supports that are in place say to me "only use them in an emergency."
i.e., don't use them to support a flexwork lifestyle. If basic income or
Canada Franchise is in place it should be seen as a universal right of
citizenship-- so people don't feel shabby when the cheque arrives or is
deposited in their bank.
Arthur
-----Original Message-----
From: Gail Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: February 2, 2001 12:02 PM
To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM
Subject: Re: Temp market for labour
Arthur wrote:
> Would be appealing if there was some sort of basic income
in place which
> gave flexworkers the strength/courage/dignity to be
flexworkers. Some sort
> of income support which could allow them to come in and
out of the paid
> formal workforce.
Yes indeed, but why "them" rather than "all of us?"
We could design our institutions of work and income in such
a way that we could all have the strength/courage/dignity to
be flexworkers, couldn't we?
In fact aren't some of these supports already in place in
most democratic societies but just not seen in that
perspective because of the conventional ways that we insist
upon looking at work? In fact, isn't it precisely those
conventional ways of looking at work that might lead to
saying "them" rather than saying "us?"
...
I like your "come in out of" the paid formal workforce. It
implies the existence of a basic human community where
relations are not those of the paid formal workforce. The
increasing recognition of a basic informal community, the
root soil for social capital, augurs well for eventual
acceptance of a basic income -- or, as I prefer to conceive
it, an extension of the democratic franchise to vote to
include the facilitation of informed and meaningful
political participation. (Hence "the Canada Franchise"
proposal.)
Gail
Gail Stewart
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 8:54 AM
Subject: RE: Temp market for labour
> Would be appealing if there was some sort of basic income
in place which
> gave flexworkers the strength/courage/dignity to be
flexworkers. Some sort
> of income support which could allow them to come in and
out of the paid
> formal workforce.
>
> Arthur Cordell
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gail Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: February 1, 2001 5:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Temp market for labour
>
>
> A question that came to mind:
>
> If temp agencies had a different name - something like
> flexwork agencies for instance - might we understand them
> differently?
>
> Might we see them as facilitating self-directed
> self-employment and thus a welcome wave of the future,
> allowing people to enter the paid labour market only as
> needed and to organize their lives around active leisure
> rather than around paid work?
>
>
> Gail
>
> Gail Stewart
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 1:53 PM
> Subject: Temp market for labour
>
>
> > Dynamic pricing comes to the labour markets. A review
of
> the temp market on
> > employment, especially wages. From the Wall Street
> Journal.
> >
> >
...
