8 Hours a day.
”Eight hours' labour, Eight hours' recreation, Eight hours' rest”.
Was a slogan of Robert Owen in 1810 demanding a shortened work day. By 1847, after brutal riots, England granted a 8 hour work week for men, 10 hours for women and children. 12 hour work day for the French after the1848 Revolutions. The US passed an 8-hour Work Day in 1866, for men.
Think about that. One year after the US Civil War, and a major legislation bill is passed for more reasonable work hours. Must have been pretty important.
One hundred and seventy four years ago, legislation was passed to legally protect the working class. The US still (loosly, losly, loosely? - must look up…) weakly ’regulates’ an eight hour work day. Weekly regulation regulates the weeks, weakly schedules. (Gawd English is weird).
Eight hours of labor. Five days a week, eight hours a day. Clearly not conducive to child care. Legislation was written for those who could vote, own land, own people, and could not give birth. Brave, hard working men fought to limit the work day even when threatened by powerful bosses. Women and children were excluded from max hourly laws and could be payed much less. When laws were enacted to protect kids from factories, but still needed a labor force, schools were created. Five days a week. Eight hours a day.
Eight hours of rest. Is that where we get the notion to have eight hours of sleep every night? I wonder. It’s pushed as ‘science’ and I have lost sleep, anxious that I am not getting enough sleep. Truth is, sometimes people need more, sometimes less. Babies and adolescence need more generally. Some adults need more, some less. Seasons and times of year affect sleep.
Eight hours of recreation. Tricky. I’m going to pull out the Philosophers card here: Define recreation. Is recreation more sport, leisure, fun, pleasure, relaxation or 1810’s hobby horsing? How about simply an “activity done for enjoyment when one is not working.” (Oxford)
Got it. 24 hours a day divided by 3. Easy for anyone to follow… theoretically. And yet… is it just me, or does that labour, 8-hour thing kinda get in the way of the other two things? You know the other two things Owen suggested- sleep and relaxation?
Looks like another historical “good on paper..” retort. The ole switch-a-rooney credo. Owen championed the working class. The working class championed Owen. Workers ‘win’, companies ‘lose,’ perspectively. Then the switch. Companies strategize ways to profit after loss. Slowly over time, companies push workers harder (makes sense). Workers keep working until they have had enough (makes sense). The classic struggle.
Then the debate about an 8 hour work week (and minimum and overtime pay) ensues. This is my problem. We are arguing and basing our assumptions of 21st century working hours, from an 1866 ordinance. Like we are measuring gravity- “Ok, force equals three times the gravitational mass of sleep divided by recreation.” It’s not gravity! It was a “suggestion”. There was also a push for a Four Hour Work Week. Hmmmm, might balance out those lost hours.
Side note- If you ever argue with someone, and you are on the working class side, you will predictably hear something negative about unions (with good reason). When I searched unions- (aside from the top news stories about national strikes), this popped up: “Unions are Evil and Weird.” Here is my thing. I don’t care. That is not the debate. People are. So I say, “Yes, you may be right. And, Unions never would have formed if big businesses had acted ethically in the first place.”
Now we can talk ethics. Should children be allowed to work in factories? for example. Much better conversation.
If only we had more time.
**Double Sided, side note. This is a Newson rant. Feel free to skip.** Sort of. Seriously.
You know, now that I think about it Democracy itself is “for the people, by the people.” Right? If, by people, we mean the working class; and by the working class we mean citizens; and if by citizens we mean, what do we mean? (must consult dictionary) “a native or naturalized person who owes allegiance to a government and is entitled to protection from it.” (Merriam Webster). -Yikes, record scratch.
Oh boy, do y’all see a problem here? Native or naturalized? Owes allegiance? Entitled protection? From the government which is.. us? But not all of us. Remember women, children, and every ‘other’ nationality were not considered citizens.
Corporations/ BM’s- business management systems- didn’t like that citizens get ‘special treatment’ (paying taxes, being transparent about large political donations, dabbling in dark money) so, Citizens United was created to protect corporations as the “people.” It passed narrowly by the Supreme Court more than 10 years ago. Assumably, using the Merriam Webster definition of 1828. By the way, how have those elections gone in the past 10 years, you know, after Citizens United was passed?
It’s like the classic struggle unfolded exponentially.
Rant off.