Unpopular opinion: The Finnish PM's idea to legislate a 4-day work week or a 6-hour work day is a bad idea.
It would run small businesses into the ground with staffing expenses, and wage workers would suffer the consequences of not being able to work more hours (earn more income) from a single job.
Which is why so many American Millennials have more than one part time job.
I admit this might work in Finland, but I've seen way too many "Communist" teens on the internet hail the new Finnish PM as the savior of those who don't want to work long hours. They don't realize that you have to do a ton of hard work up front to get to a place where you are valuable enough to work 4 days a week and get paid the same.
These lazy fuckers do not realise that you need to work your ass off in order to attain a position where even if you do not work for 20 hours a week, you would do just fine. If you do not work hard and attain financial security in your youth, how can you relax/rest with a sense of insecurity when you are in your mid 30s?
What most people don't realise is that nobody wants to introduce said idea to any economy. Sometimes politicians have to throw wild concepts to the media in order to start a discussion in society. This is what currently happens after she formalised this "idea" during some event.
Today, people are seeking for a better goodlife balance. In societies where 50% of employees are working on computers and basically don't have any reason to commute and to show up in an office, there would be huge economical and ecological benefits of more flexible workhour models than the ones we are working under today.
The 9-5 job is very oldfashioned and more invented for an industrial society, which most of us aren't any longer. It is obvious that a nurse can't help more people from Monday to Thursday in order to take Friday off. But if an office worker gets his orders (or whatever) done til deadline,there's no need to be in some office for 8+ hours a day.
Why is reaching the set goals the bare minimum? Why should somebody who's communication works through emails solely sit at a given place? And can you imagine that there are jobs where working ahead isn't possible? And why are all your comments in this black-white fashion? So many questions you should've asked yourself.
My experiences are limited to blue collar and organization type work. In such contexts, there's always room to get ahead and do better.
Set goals are the bare minimum because they are the lowest expectation. Falling short is failure, finishing on time to spec at budget is barely scraping through. I'd want my organization to have a reputation for early and under budget.
In that case, I question your management so far, as set goals should be SMART (Google that, it might help in your future career) and so be challenging, but realistic to drive the employees growth. I am managing both blue and white collars and encouraging people to learn and advance is management 101.
D's get diplomas, C's are challenging to plenty of people, but both will always be second string to dedicated B and A workers.
Barring specialized skills, experience, and management's ability to track everyone, that is.
My whole deal is taking every opportunity to look and do better than the other guy, because that means more jobs and better opportunities.
It would run small businesses into the ground with staffing expenses, and wage workers would suffer the consequences of not being able to work more hours (earn more income) from a single job.
I admit this might work in Finland, but I've seen way too many "Communist" teens on the internet hail the new Finnish PM as the savior of those who don't want to work long hours. They don't realize that you have to do a ton of hard work up front to get to a place where you are valuable enough to work 4 days a week and get paid the same.
Today, people are seeking for a better goodlife balance. In societies where 50% of employees are working on computers and basically don't have any reason to commute and to show up in an office, there would be huge economical and ecological benefits of more flexible workhour models than the ones we are working under today.
The 9-5 job is very oldfashioned and more invented for an industrial society, which most of us aren't any longer. It is obvious that a nurse can't help more people from Monday to Thursday in order to take Friday off. But if an office worker gets his orders (or whatever) done til deadline,there's no need to be in some office for 8+ hours a day.
Set goals are the bare minimum because they are the lowest expectation. Falling short is failure, finishing on time to spec at budget is barely scraping through. I'd want my organization to have a reputation for early and under budget.
Barring specialized skills, experience, and management's ability to track everyone, that is.
My whole deal is taking every opportunity to look and do better than the other guy, because that means more jobs and better opportunities.