• 2 Posts
  • 141 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle




  • Same boat mate - Aussie govt employee myself who has access to flex. Personally I felt it was better when I was working for an NGO and they always gave me the choice between being paid overtime or banking it to flex later. It was nice to get the extra cash when I needed it and extra leave when the time came too. That should be the standard the employee should have the choice between OT or extra leave.


  • I think a good way of calculating their sentence should be in lost Franc-years. That is, calculate all of the lost wages they didn’t pay and force them to serve as many years as that amount would make in minimum wage. If they paid one staff member 1/12 of the minimum wage for one year, then that’s 11 months of gaol. If they paid 10 staff members 1/12 of the minimum wage for one year, that’s 9 years gaol. Take from them (in time) what was stolen from their workers. That’s the only way they’ll understand what they’ve stolen, because they have no value of a dollar, rupee, euro or franc.


  • I’m with you here, mate. My workplace went 100% remote during COVID and has only gone back to mandating five days per month back in the office and honestly? I think we’d do better with a mandated two days in the office and three days at home per week, mandating days where our team can all work together. I’m a social worker in an intake/assessment/referral position, and I desperately miss being able to look over my shoulder and debrief my case or gain some peer consultation on how best to manage the case I’m on. The one day I’m in I’m almost alone and gain barely any benefit from being in the office.

    We have a fair few physically disabled colleagues, for whom I’d recommend a no-limits flexibility working arrangement that works for them, but for those of us who are physically able I think a 2/3 split would work far better. Our attrition rates have gone right up since COVID despite previously having some of the highest retention rates in our Department, and I can’t help but think that some of that is due to us being isolated while needing to rely on one another from time to time.





  • Instigate@aussie.zonetoScience Memes@mander.xyzYass Queen
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    13 days ago

    Fair call mate, he might be your ally but sadly he’s not mine. I’m not sure if you’re LGBTQIA+, but if you’ve spent time in the community you’ll know that not even all of those who identify as queer or non-cis support one another. To the best of my knowledge May doesn’t openly identify as queer himself, and thinking that he’s an ally just because he’s been friends with gay and/or bi men isn’t necessarily the best indicator that he’s an ally to all peoples. Personally, I feel like that argument is pretty similar to “I can’t be racist because I have a ____ friend”.


  • Instigate@aussie.zonetoScience Memes@mander.xyzYass Queen
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    13 days ago

    Probed on whether Queen would be able to win a BRIT gong in 2021, he was reported to have responded:

    “We would be forced to have people of different colours and different sexes and we would have to have a trans [person]. You know life doesn’t have to be like that. We can be separate and different.”

    Apparently he was ‘ambushed’ and ‘stitched up’ and his words were ‘subtly twisted’ but he never stated what his original words were, if they were different from the quote. I’m not usually a fan of people who use terms like “a trans” or who lament “cancel culture” because gendered categories are removed from awards ceremonies.

    https://www.thepinknews.com/2021/11/28/queen-brian-may-brit-awards-twisted-trans/


  • They definitely did learn. They learned that they could charge for mods and people, sadly, will pay. They’ve learned that they can make more money by paywalling what should be essential patches and bugfixes. They learned that the average gamer is willing to be fleeced. They learned that they can run an IP into the ground and still extract maximum cash from it.

    They’ve learned. They just didn’t learn the lesson that we here on Lemmy wanted them to learn. That’s a sad fact of being part of a minority community.



  • I always used to use a 3PA that had no ads or recommendations, just my own curated sub list, and I honestly loved that. There were definitely echo chambers but things worked well for me as long as I stayed conscious to that. Then when the APIpocalypse happened I browsed reddit on the web and in their official app for the first time in almost ten years and just noped right the fuck off.

    At one point in my feed it went:

    • Ad
    • Suggested Subreddit
    • Ad
    • Suggested Post
    • Post from subscribed feed
    • Ad
    • Suggested Post

    Like, only 1/6 items were things I had actually asked to see. It was atrocious. Default reddit is absolutely cancer now, and I really struggle to empathise with people who are still using it vanilla without any extensions or domain changes.



  • Wow. That’s a bunch of great ideas right there!

    I really like using federal government to set direction but pushing for local changes ASAP. Honestly that seems like the most logical way to cater to individual needs while moving as quickly as possible.

    Obviously we also have to invest heavily in public transport, right? Not only do we need to beef up what existing but we’ll need to create new linkages in order to prevent transportation deserts. Part of the issue with that is it might require some compulsory acquisition of land. That’s always a super tetchy area because I don’t always ascribe to a utilitarian “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one” view.

    I think another area that needs to be looked at is mandating some level of working from home in roles where that’s possible. Travelling to and from work causes the most congestion both on roads and in public transport, and it’s just silly to be forcing people to travel when they don’t need to all the time. That’s something that will need another top-down approach - probably set down either at State or Federal level and mandated legislatively.

    Can I just say thank you so much for your considered and good-faith reply. This is what I come to Lemmy for - the ideas and the opinions that really spark debate and discussion!


  • That sounds like a good place to start to me!

    A few other concerns that I have with a blanket ban are around implementation - if it’s done suddenly then public transport systems will be extremely overwhelmed and will underperform, leading to large losses in productivity across the economy. Do you think a staged approach or a fast approach is more appropriate, and what sort of timeframes do you think are feasible for enacting a ban?

    You’re absolutely right - just about any action taken on a population-wide scale will have both positives and negatives, and they’re also not likely to be shared equally among stratified groups in that population. Just to be clear - I’m not discounting a car ban as an option entirely but rather trying to determine how it would actually work. In my utopia there would rarely be need for personal vehicles, but I’m not smart enough to know the steps to get there. I’m keen on discussing what those steps might be, and how we can engage them in a way that their impact on individuals is as equitable as possible.


  • I think you might’ve made an unfair assumption about my position just because I asked a question. To clarify: I am all for reducing car usage as much as possible by implementing high-quality no-cost public transport solutions. I am however concerned that a blanket ban on all cars will negatively impact already underprivileged communities, and so a more methodical approach that limits and disincentivises car usage for those who don’t need it, while still retaining options for those who do, would better address the issue with the least unintended consequences possible.


  • I see the confusion - my semicolon usage was to denote items in a list. Physical disabilities, Autism and obesity were three separate conditions that I was suggesting may be impacted by removing all cars from the road. My apologies if that was not clear. I included Autism in there specifically because my cousin recently got his licence and has been over the moon about how he no longer has to deal with the sensory overload shit he puts up with on public transport. It was an example close to my heart, and clearly it was close to yours as well.

    I’m sorry that it seems as though I’ve presented concepts as absolute truths - that was not my intention. My intention was to list some circumstances where some people may be negatively affected as a starting point for discussion around disability accommodations in a car-free world.

    Just to state - I personally do believe we need to reduce car usage as much as possible and seriously ramp up accessibility while removing all costs for high-quality public transport. I think cars are a blight on our society and we rely far too heavily on them. I just don’t know how to get rid of them without any negative unintended consequences. I was seeking a debate, or to be informed on how this could be done well. Instead it seems as though I’ve offended you, which was not my intention.

    I know that understanding tone from text can be difficult at the best of times but I’ve honestly tried to be as genuine and non-combative as possible. I’m sorry there’s not more I can do to convey that I agree with your sentiment and am asking for help in how that can be put into place without accidentally harming anyone.