As part of his Labor Day message to workers in the United States, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday re-upped his call for the establishment of a 20% cut to the workweek with no loss in pay—an idea he said is “not radical” given the enormous productivity gains over recent decades that have resulted in massive profits for corporations but scraps for employees and the working class.

“It’s time for a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay,” Sanders wrote in a Guardian op-ed as he cited a 480% increase in worker productivity since the 40-hour workweek was first established in 1940.

“It’s time,” he continued, “that working families were able to take advantage of the increased productivity that new technologies provide so that they can enjoy more leisure time, family time, educational and cultural opportunities—and less stress.”

  • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would absolutely love to only work 32 hours a week instead of 40, 45 or 50.

    I would also love four weeks vacation a year, full healthcare coverage and a unicorn in my backyard please.

    • Riyosha_Namae@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s depressing that you’ve been convinced that full healthcare coverage is as unrealistic as a unicorn in your backyard.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I was just kidding about the unicorn, as living in the US it seems just about as likely to get a unicorn as getting universal healthcare or vacation.

        😅🦄

        Anyway, my son loves unicorns and I grew up watching my little pony so whatever

    • ccunix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      In France I work 32 hours, have 7 weeks holiday and awesome healthcare.

      I have cows in place of a unicorn though.

      • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean they have to raise the retirement age and had (are having?) Protests about it the whole year didn’t they

        • lady_maria@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “Have to”? That’s obviously more than up for debate, especially considering how many people protested.

          God forbid they consider increasing taxes for the rich instead.