General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bernie: ''Moving to a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay is not radical" [View all]meadowlander
(5,171 posts)Paid for my trip to Europe in combination with two other part-time jobs I was working that summer. Temping provided a lot of flexibility around my other part-time jobs that had fixed schedules. Believe it or not, it didn't require that much training to line up ski pole shafts with the grips and tips and then pull a lever. I figured it out in less than two minutes. And the amount of scrap and defective parts made because of this temp were zero. I helped design a safer and more efficient assembly process and improved some of the protocols which is what you can get when you have more diversity and outside perspectives coming into your workforce. And even though you are a "temp" or a part-timer it doesn't mean you change jobs every week. As I said, I was at one place for two months and had the option to stay longer if I wanted to.
Not everyone wants a full time job or is in a position in life with their other responsibilities to work one. People with kids or who are caring for older relatives often can't manage to be away for a full 40 hours a week. Very often students are looking for part time work. Some people want or need to gradually reduce the numbers of hours they work as they approach retirement. Some people have disabilities or health problems that set limits on the number of hours they can work that might be less than 40. There's no reason that a full-timer is inherently more competent at their job than a part-timer or temp would be. Plenty of the full-timers at the factories I worked at were fuck ups and plenty of the temps worked as hard or harder (trying to prove themselves so they could get a full time offer) and did an equivalent or better job.
The point is that employers have options and even now most of them don't stick strictly to three eight hour shifts a day with only full time permanent staff.