We all have to work four days a week. That's why

Imagine that there was a single policy that would remove unemployment and partial employment, which would improve health conditions from mental problems to high blood pressure, increasing productivity, helping the environment, and making life better in the family, further encouraging men to do household chores, and that would generally make people happier. It sounds fantastic, but it exists, and it's late. It's four-day work.

Delivering citizens from overwork was one of the first demands of the labour movement. From the ashes of civil war, U.S. market unionists required eight hours of work a day, <x0... a movement that had great speed from Atlantic to Pacific, from New England to California”, as writes Karl Marx. In 1890 hundreds of thousands of people gathered in Hyde Park at a historic protest on the same request. It's a cause of emergency re-location. Periscop's statement: That movement also produces the May 1 / 1 celebration, the date recorded in our country.

Many Britons work too hard. It's not only the 38.5 hours a week full time; it's the unpaid time as well. According to TAC, employees had 2.1 billion hours paid off last year, making up 33.6 billion pounds.

This over-work causes huge damage. Last year, 12.5 million work days were lost because of stress, depression, or anxiety related to work. Stress can increase the risk of all kinds of health problems, from high blood pressure to heart attack. Research even shows that working long hours increases the risk of overdrinking. And this has a high economic cost: over 5 billion pounds per year. No wonder public health expert John Ashton is among those seeking four-day jobs to improve national health.

In this context, the new four-day call for work that the Autonomous Institute is very welcome. We want to change people's perspective, because the less you do it, the better you do it, the x1> Will Stronge said. And indeed, a deeply unhealthy distribution of work is hurting our society. As some work too hard, with devastating consequences for their families and health, there are about 3.3 million of “employees working partialally” who want to work harder. A four-day job would push a reshape of these hours, to the best of each. This would become even more important if automation in sectors such as manufacturing, management and retail work would create more poor workers and more partial employment.

A four-day job would also help on the issue of climate change: countries with fewer weekly jobs are more likely to release less carbon. This policy doesn't even ruin the economy. German and Dutch workers work less than we do, but their economies are stronger than ours. This would increase productivity: evidence shows that if you work less, you'll be more productive and less stress means fewer hours of work as well. A recent six - hour job experiment in a Swedish medical sister home produced promising results - more productivity and fewer days of sick workers. This increase in productivity would result in no pay cuts.

Then there is the argument of gender equality. Despite steps taken by women's movement, women still do 60% of their household chores. An extra free day will not lead inevitably to the urging of men to spend more time at home. But, as the Autonom Institute aims, a four-day job can be seen as part of the promotion to promote equality between men and women.

It is encouraging to see the resurrection of one of the larger and earliest causes of the labor movement. The great German Union, IG Metall, is only looking for 28 hours a week for workers and those in charge.

Just expressing a request is not enough. Now that socialism is being redeveloped as a political force that cannot be ignored and ridiculed, the pursuit of more leisure time, family, and comfort itself must be linked to greater wars. Increasing public ownership of the economy needs to be structured to create more self-defence and control by workers. If technology translates into further job safety cuts, basic universal incomes a basic wage paid to citizens as their right can become even more visible.

Of course, work can be fulfilling for some. I'm sorry, though, that few would agree with the idea that we should spend more time with families, see our children grow up, exercise, read books, or just relax. Many of our lives become so that we subject ourselves to the needs and whims of others, taking independence from people.

Our social model means economic growth, which very often involves the concentration of money produced by the majority in the bank accounts of few people without improving the lives of that majority. The increase should deliver not only prosperity for all and better public services, but better balloons between work, family and leisure.

Laborist politicians place themselves as publishers of a new society. This should mean building a new economy that removes the burden of all the work done. Laborists can gain the opportunity to build a socialist Britain. If this is done, it would be ambitious enough to free citizens of their overwork. No.