In article <[log in to unmask]>, Adrian
Midgley <[log in to unmask]> writes
>If the whole or a part of our society requires that people do jobs they
>do not want to do then it should be re-engineered to at least minimise
>that.
Agreed. The operative word is 'minimise'.
>Portfolio careers are a part of our movement toward a manner of working
>which achieves that.
But the jobs which need doing, according to ourselves or society, don't
just go away. Unless society re-defines itself, in which case new jobs
present themselves.
>Fitting the employee to the need, and discarding them when the need
>temporarily or permanently ceases is not, and does not lead to
>happiness, nor in fact to efficiency.
At the risk of assuming a singular definition of happiness, who said
that life must be happy or efficient - although it may be? To think of
'gainful employment' as a human need is a Victorian ethic proposed by
the rich few to use the poor many.
Why use the emotional 'discard'? When a particular need finishes then
find a new need. If skills are not available for the new need then re-
train. The needs of a community do not always mirror the needs of the
individual. I can't just go back to sleep when I don't feel like going
to work - although I'm often tempted.
Regards
George
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|