A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
Less congestion for people that do need to travel.
Less pollution.
More free time.
Cheaper housing because we won't all need to be clustered in the places with decent paying jobs.
But no, fuck it all because the mega rich might have to make do with very slightly less.
You should be getting triple pay to ameliorate the hazard risk it represents.
That's something a union can help with. Most compensation above poverty wages has been won by unions at one point or another. Most of them a long ago and we've been regressing for a few decades.
it's unpaid labor either way, it's a bit arbitrary to say owning a car and commuting for a job isn't time and money spent for the employer in your capacity as an employee
Not to mention the environmental damage.
Absolutely. I've been working from home for ~3 years and I'll never go back. I have so much more time for myself (and also, no one is annoying me with smalltalk or stupid questions).
If your boss decides where you have to live, then sure. But, when you choose where to live, and you choose where to work, and you choose to work for a company that requires you to work in person, and you choose to live far away from that job, then... these are your choices.
Now, if a company wants to make it much more attractive to come into the office, paying a 20% bonus that people get if they choose to come into the office, that's great. They'll probably attract a lot more applicants.
Fundamentally, the issue here is the concentration of wealth. If wealth were more evenly distributed, workers would feel like they had more choices. If a company offered a shitty employment contract requiring that the person be in the office 5 days a week for a job that was easily done remotely, the worker could just say "nah" and choose a different job. It's the same for all the other things that Americans complain about: vacation days, parental leave, sick days, etc. All of those could be things that are up for negotiation, or that employers could offer as a competitive advantage if the power balance were more even.
Even if you think these are things that should be fixed by laws, that's also down to concentration of wealth. The wealthy control the government, and so the government passes laws that are friendly to them. If the difference between the richest and poorest were more reasonable, regular people's votes and opinions would matter.
If you do the math, its just horrible. If you have one hour to work, its 2 hours every day just getting to and back from work, which is 10 hours per week.
So you are spending more than an entire work day every week in traffic! Every year, you are spending 41 full working days in traffic!!
Isnt that just insane? If you are working from home, you have 10 hours of free time every week. The value of that is insane. You could go to gym, spend time with family, learn how to cook, whatever. Its a lot of time.
On a related note, you should get off big tech social media because that will suck up so much time you could use to improve yourself instead.
Small tech social media is just as bad at sucking all that time up. Ask me how I know :(
At least it's your own brain exploiting you instead of some shadowy cabal of advertising execs and astroturf campaign strategists?
I have always felt that you should be paid for travel time for a job. If it takes 30 mins to drive to work then the company should be paying you that time.
Look at how many bosses/CEOs bill their daily travel expenses to the company
Which CEO downvoted this?
I wonder if this would make it harder for people to find jobs. I imagine companies would be less inclined to hire people an hour away if they had to pay for it.
Or they might allow more work from home if it means saving on those commutes.
There is a study that showed workers don't mind commuting so long as the route is full of greenery and nature. That explains a lot because in my hometown, I was happy enough to commute in public transport and people are nice enough that you can chat with them. Then I moved to a bigger city, which is a concrete jungle. I hate the commute. And mind you, the public transport in my home town is about ten to twenty minutes more depending on the traffic, but I didn't mind for some reason. Then, after moving to a bigger city, travelling only for one hour feels like a long trek.
Something like 4 minutes of my 25 minute commute is through trees, and it still makes a big difference. I think you're on to something.
When they started pushing for $15 federal minimum, it should have been $50.
Today, it should be about $150.
At $150/hr, you could afford to buy a an average home with a years pay.
People don't realize how insanely bad it's been getting.
I disagree that we should be paid triple to travel. We should just be paid appropriately. That's all.
Ok, so we have a lot effed up in our system right now and I'm not trying to discount that. But this is like high school economics level stuff when I ask...
At $150/hr, you could afford to buy a an average home with a years pay.
Between the lowered supply of creating houses (in that it becomes more expensive to produce a house because everyone is getting paid a hell of a lot more) and the increased demand for housing because everyone has a bigger number in their bank account... Do you really expect that housing prices would just... Stay the same?
I'm also curious when any society at any point in history has been able to sustain decent housing with about a year's worth of wages?
Maybe not one year, but it looks like a median home in the US in 1965 cost around 6 years of a median income.
In the 1854 book Walden by Thoreau, he gives a pessimistic account of how long it would take to afford a property in a town, that is still less than today:
An average house in this neighborhood costs perhaps eight hundred dollars, and to lay up this sum will take from ten to fifteen years of the laborer's life, even if he is not encumbered with a family- estimating the pecuniary value of every man's labor at one dollar a day, for if some receive more, others receive less
Although he goes on to describe building his own more remote cabin for $28.
Something is very, very wrong with incomes and housing prices currently that wasn't as bad a problem in the past.
Agreed. My wife and I are doing pretty well and we don't even make anywhere near $150/hr combined. Maybe in the Bay and NYC that wage would make sense but not most places. Making that the minimum wage would just cause a ton of inflation and put most people back at square one.
Agreed.
I'm lucky in several respects, being on a public transit line and only 10 minutes from work, but we have a guy on my team who drives, in his own car, 90 miles each way for our one day a week in the office. It's dumb.
Historically unpaid commute originated before urban sprawl, car culture and a massive spike in population, it's been grandfathered in, but it's absolutely theft in the current environment, whether the job can be done at home or not. Posit 1 hr commute either way, that's 10hrs a week, and should probably get hazard loading as well. When unpaid commute originated it was more like 10-15 minutes walk per day.
One of the most significant and efficient policy changes to combat CO2 and other pollutants would be to legislate paid commuting (with just protection against discrimination for both employee and employer). Just watch every employer WFH everyone who can doing the obvious, not to mention improved quality of life, local services and being hugely popular. Expect one hell of a fight.
I would like to add a rider to pay at least minimum wage for interview time.
I currently travel 2 hours to and from work, making my 9 to 5 a 7 to 7. I hate it so much lmao
The implication of this is that if that job can't be done from home, it's not theft. So the guy making pretty decent money in an office job that could be done at home should get compensated for their commute, but the sandwich artist making far less should not because that can't be done at home?
And before we start saying that everyone should have their commute compensated, that has a lot of baggage to it too. I live in the suburbs. I chose to live there knowing there was a trade-off between having more house for the money, but also spending more time in my car to get anywhere. If I were searching for a job, I wouldn't want to be passed over for it because of the longer commute time I was expecting to have from my own choice in where to live. And let's say I decided to move 3 hours away to be closer to my in-laws or something. But don't worry boss, I'll keep working here! I just won't be in the office for more than 2 hours a day unless you want to pay me overtime. That's... A little ridiculous.
Accepting an onsite job, regardless of whether it can be performed at home or not, places the responsibility on you to be able to commute there, and it wouldn’t be fair to compensate only office workers for their commute time when other workers face the same risks while traveling. I’d rather have reliable public transportation and fair salaries relative to costs of living.
This fails to take into account unemployment rates or any other factors that apply pressure to such decision-making. We need legislation that enshrines payment for commute time universally, as it would encourage WFH mandates rather than RTO ones. As well as compensate other workers for their commute. Or perhaps a flat rate of one hour each way's pay no matter the distance, to stop certain workers finding it harder to get a job.
The rich and poor alike are prohibited from sleeping under bridges. Just choose a better job! Easy! Why didn't everyone else think of that?
When I was renting (most of my life), I would find an apartment that was close to my job. I hated commuting with a furious passion.
Plus unnecessarily damaging the environment which is already in critical condition
I just don't understand why developers don't jump on the opprtunity to build commercial offices outside of the main downtown areas, closer to where people live, this will eliminate the long and taxing commute that everyone hates and get people back in office like they want, is there some tax or zoning reason why all the office space is located downtown in the US, with hybrid work these days it would be so much better if I could just go to some co-working space close to my home
Office parks in the middle of nowhere suck. You're never going to be close to everyone, employees can't walk somewhere for a change of scenery or to take a break, and being away from downtown means public transit is less likely to reach the area.
I'm all for letting people pick a coworking space if they want, but making people commute to the suburbs is a different kind of hell.
The lack of scenery and being in the middle of nowhere with poor public transportation options is a failure of suburban design caused by segregation of commercial and residential areas and too much dependency on personal cars. I've never liked those rows up rows of identical single family homes, they feel empty and soulless, which is why I prefer staying on the outer neighborhoods of downtown so there's plenty of walkable places and public transportation options
Rich fucks wanting skyline views from their desk?
I mean... It can be. You just have to ask for a raise. That is what I do. If I get a job that is further away, I expect to be paid more. One of the reasons I'm sticking with my current job even though the pay is not great, is that I'm less than 10 minutes away from home. I even get to come home for lunch.
Upvoting, but also commenting to say that employees are at a disadvantage in almost all cases: a company can almost certainly absorb your loss but most people cannot absorb the loss of their income.
Asking for a raise could get you fired (sorry, "let go"), especially if you're in a position where there's an eager new applicant just waiting for a position to open up, such as any service-industry job.
Even niche skilled jobs are not immune. If your cost approaches the value your employer extracts from your labor, then you will be left jobless and you may find it hard to find a comparable position if your skill-set is tightly focused. If you're the one COBOL programmer at your company, you are underpaid; the moment you demand your actual worth, they will figure out how to pivot that old code-base to something more modern, even if it costs millions of dollars to license and switch to a new ERP platform or similar bullshit.
I've turned this WFH rant into a worker protection rant, so back on topic: Wouldn't it be nice to just ... not have to drive to a place to put your butt in a seat when your butt could be at a seat at home and do the exact same thing? I get that some jobs don't work that way, but many (probably most) do.
In 2020, we witnessed most jobs at company headquarters around the world being done at home and nothing exploded. Almost everything done from a cubicle can be done from home. Wouldn't it be nice to knock down those buildings and make them green spaces instead?