return2ozmaBosses and workers still can’t agree on whether the commute is part of the work day, and it’s creating a $578 billion productivity problem
TexMexBazookaIt’s easy:
Are you requesting I as a worker dedicate any part of my time, and/or usage of my personal resources to accomplish something for YOUR business? Yes it’s part of the work day.
This would create an issue where they only hire people in close proximity. This is terrible, for a number of reasons.
Nepotism gets exponentially worse and is then excused, poor areas will be effected the most because they lack businesses
Subsidize based on type of transportation used? Public transit is mostly subsidized, and private transportation is the least subsidized. This would make employers seek out poorer people.
Why would the employers care?
Private transportation is not the least subsidized. The government spends ridiculous sums of money to maintain infrastructure specifically for cars.
wavebeamI think they’re saying kind of the opposite, they’re proposing that the employer be assisted in payroll by the government to hire folks, and they get more assistance for people with less commute impact?
Idk, most of these solutions boil down to UBI with extra steps imo. Once we get much further up the chain than “workers shouldn’t be burdened by commutes” then the obvious answer is to pay people to not need cars and that’s a lot like UBI, and I’d prefer we just do that than make it more complicated
A simple solution here is to compensate a flat rate based on an assumed 30 minute travel time. If employees are called to a secondary location, add on the travel time from the original location to the new location divided by two.
When I studied sociology, the common fine spent commuting was generally 1 hour each way.
My own commute by public transport or bicycle is 50 minutes to 1 hr
Right, some will be higher, some will be lower. Using the same value for everyone is the compromise we’d have to make in order to avoid biasing the hiring process.