You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
7 points

yup, and oh look, they recently gave us the carrot of “right to disconnect” as if it was something we previously didn’t fucking have

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

To a degree the right to disconnect is like working from home, those policies affect white collar far more than blue collar, or min wage service workers, etc.

So in my mind it makes sense that, that reform went through without much issue. Everybody is on the side of the middle clas white collar worker it seems.

Its noticeable how much media time work from home has got since COVID over just about every other issue impacting workers. Maybe its because journalists identify more with it, maybe other classes of workers haven’t the power to effect change, and influence national conversations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Really? Because the first place my mind goes to is service workers. Not answering a call wanting to get them in off shift, and not facing penalty for it.

White collar workers would not be penalised for not responding out of work hours, it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yep, true, they’re good points.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Eh, I think strictly codifying a law that basically exists but is potentially vague can be a good thing. This makes it absolutely undeniable that you have the right to disconnect from work, where previously you’d have to kind of work it out and employers might try to argue exceptions.

It’s like minimum passing laws for cyclists. A car going past a cyclist at 90 cm is obviously dangerous and irresponsible driving and any reasonable person would say it’s a chargeable offence for that reason. But in practice it very rarely got prosecuted, and even when it was it didn’t always succeed, because motornormative society defaults to saying the cyclist must be wrong. With a hard and fast rule that passing at less than 1 metre breaks the law, nobody can quibble about subjective matters like whether it’s dangerous or reckless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

As a regular cyclist, your analogy is giving me zero faith in lawful application

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ha! Yeah that’s fair. But the problem in that case is with the police refusing to do their job. Under the new laws, if it does go to court, a conviction is pretty much guaranteed. Unlike poor Richard Pollett, whose killer got off scott free on charges of “dangerous operation of a vehicle” prior to the minimum passing laws.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Australia

!australia@aussie.zone

Create post

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you’re posting anything related to:

If you’re posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

  • When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn’t show Lemmy Moderators, I’ll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

Community stats

  • 1.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 436

    Posts

  • 2.6K

    Comments