<html> Has anyone asked them if they would like what they get in a week with overtime for only working 40, or 30 hours a week?  As I recall, such proposals (I recall liking Rifkin's discussion in The End of Work) typically involved the same, or more, pay for less work, the increase coming straight from capital's share.  I still don't understand why any Democrat (okay, who is not affiliated with the DLC) doesn't get up and back such a proposal, have talking points handy to beat back the charges of "class warfare" and get on with it. At 01:01 PM 9/30/02 -0700, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Some like overtime, but forced overtime was a big issue among workers. On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 03:48:24PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote: > joanna bujes wrote: > > >1) Because there's no large, organized labor movement? > > UAW leaders wanted to make an issue of overtime, but there was no > interest in it among the rank and file. Quite the contrary, the > workers liked putting in long weeks and pulling down $100k/yr. > > Doug -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael@ecst.csuchico.edu</blockquote></html>