Some ramblings about a system of work.

[chess]

You wake up in the morning, and you call up a list of the jobs that are available to you this morning. Usually, you select one near the top of the list. It's sorted by a few simple rules; your most usual areas of work come higher, and so do jobs that you are qualified for and few people are, and so are jobs which haven't been in much demand lately, especially those which are beginning to need doing badly, and hence have extra credits attached. Sometimes you'll pick an afternoon job instead of a morning one; maybe you'll even pick a night one, which carry double credits due to the inconvenience, and then you won't have to work the next day. If you're feeling particularly industrious, you might pick a morning and an afternoon job at once, saving up credits for a holiday later on.

Maybe you wake up in the morning feeling ill. A quick call to the doctors - the night shift is still on at this time - and a few simple self-administered tests reveal you do indeed have a virus. You can stay home today, safe in the knowledge you still earnt the one credit you need to maintain your reasonable standard of living. (If you don't want to work at all, you don't have to, but you can't expect to have nice things, merely barely adequate ones.) Or maybe you're just feeling lazy today; you have the choice to wait until the afternoon, at which point there may not be any jobs left - if that's the case, you get your credit for nothing. Then again, you might get landed with *the* job that nobody else wants to do. Your call. (After all, you could always take a night job if one looks better.)

If you've got something useful to say, you've got another option; you can teach. Just register your course in the morning, attaching details of whatever qualifications it's leading up to if any, and it'll be listed ready for taking in the afternoon - or several days hence, if you want to maximise your chances of getting a class together, though you'll still have to earn a credit somehow today in that case. Get enough people interested - the precise number depends on the demand for your services elsewhere - and you get yourself an appropriate room to teach in, plus a credit. Of course, your students can then rate you, which will be shown to any future classes you might take; ratings expire with time, so don't panic if you get a miserable class that just don't like you - the stain will go away.

You might like to browse the classes list and see if there's anything interesting for this afternoon, or even this morning, if you feel so inclined. You can get credits for learning the right thing (the course being by a well-rated teacher helps too), although it gets more difficult if you're already well-qualified - after all, you can always learn in your free slot, if the community doesn't desperately need you to have those skills. Most qualification is still by examination, but taking the exam costs nothing but your time (which is, after all, your most valuable commodity), and you can take it again whenever it is offered. Setting exams is a job you can volunteer to do much like teaching, although there are also regular times at which the job and hence the exam is available, especially for the most common qualifications. Those qualifications not based on examination are based on experience at a certain job - the more you return to a certain job, the more you're allowed to take supervisory and work-assignment posts in that area - or some kind of distributed rating system.

There are other reasons why you might not be looking at the job list, of course. Maybe you're the carer of a child - each child is allowed one full-time carer, right up until they're 16 if they still want one, although they can start working in their own right pretty much as soon as they like, building up credits for later years when they'll be spending them - they're encouraged to build up qualifications instead, but it's up to them. Maybe you're the carer of an older person who's registered as unable to care for themselves. Maybe you've found a partner who's willing to do both shifts for you to stay home for some reason of your own. Maybe you're a well-rated artist (a term covering all manner of self-employment which others appreciate), and hence are deemed enough of a social good in your own right to devote all your time to your art instead of just half. Maybe you have some kind of permanent certified disability, although if you're not under permanent care there's probably still something you could do from home, so you should have a look.

One credit per day entitles you to pretty much anything that isn't an absolute, profligate waste of resources. One or two things that burn up massively more resources than the community can handle on a regular basis will cost more; you can earn more than one credit a day by working both slots, working nights, or working jobs that nobody wanted and are becoming increasingly desperate. The amount of stuff you can have varies directly with the amount of stuff the community can produce. The only adjustment in 'pay' for different types of job is the 'nobody qualified will take me and I really need to be done' bonus, which is applied to jobs which need doing and which pass whole morning-afternoon-night cycles without getting done. ((Unfortunately, this will probably end up scaling back into the supply-and-demand pay scales of normal jobs; there isn't a lot to be done about this, and hopefully the system will at least smooth this out a little by allowing variety, easy gaining of qualifications, and a level playing field for most, plus disagreeable jobs being paid more.))

One issue here is skill cartels. People with a certain qualification can try and hoarde the knowledge of how to obtain it, and use their skill exclusivity to drive up the job pay to whatever they like, or even demand reductions in service for everyone else so that their newfound wealth is more meaningful. I haven't thought up a way around this particular type of system breakdown yet.

I'd appreciate some critiquing of this general idea; I know it needs an awful lot more work and fleshing-out, it's just something I've been thinking about for a while and never actually putting into words. (The original inspiration came from a SF book titled Salt, which featured an anarchist nation (the Alsists) working along vaguely similar lines.)

Comments

[naath.livejournal.com]

That doesn't look good for someone who wants to work away at one thing, the constant changing of who you work for/where you work/what you do.

Would you count research as an 'art'? You can't do some today and then leave it... nothing would happen.
And teaching is better when an entire course is given by the same person, and then it's best if the set and mark the examination... to ensure continuity.

Medical care is easier if the same person looks after you for the duration of the problem... less hastle with 'what does this squiggle there mean on this chart'.

Good idea though... I mean for most jobs it works.

The PDoM is still getting run AM style though.

[marble.livejournal.com]

In my field of work, and I imagine probably many others, it's generally accepted that a new hire will take at least 3 months to get upto speed on the project. A project is unlikely ever to be one day's worth of work, much more likely to be 3months-2years. If people could simply choose to work on something else day-to-day, nothing would ever get completed. There are certainly bad days during any project where going away and never coming back seems like a really good idea, but without having at least a month's overlap with your successor makes it very difficult for them.

[chess]

I was hoping to have that covered by the 'you acquire 'qualifications' by staying with one job/jobtype longer' section; maybe some things you would need to commit for a longer period of time than one work-slot, but the important thing is that you don't commit to a set of supervisors or a 'company', you commit to a certain task, and when that task is done you're credited for your inconvenience in a way that will carry over if you go into a completley different area (especially if it's still within the field, but certainly not necessarily for the same people).

I think this system probably works better for the 'interchangable' jobs-people-apparently-don't-want-to-do than more qualified, state-heavy occupations. I must admit I hadn't taken lead-time into much consideration; I think the book's system had slots lasting for three months, or something of the sort, for more trained work.

[marble.livejournal.com]

Having longer periods would make it easier to manage. It would be very hard to try to coordinate things when you didn't know in advance whether you'd have people working on it. Of course, with longer periods, you're almost describing contractors...

Double Hmmmmm

[dr-vannacutt.livejournal.com]

That sounds a great deal like comunisum the way i understand it. If im roung please tell me.

And what abiut the "tellers(overseaers)" the ones who make the rules and right the paper what work do they do???

And that bit about (lol i cant find what i want to refer to)(right here it is) "One credit per day entitles you to pretty much anything that isn't an absolute, profligate waste of resources. " Whos is to say what an "absolute, profligate waste of resources"??? Lots of stuff i do could be classed as that but im not going to give them up.

I feel so bad for saying this as you have spent time an energy devising this system. I like the way it comes sort of out of a cool book but i want to waste what i ern on pointless rubbish otherwise i wouldnt bother earning it.

I hope this has not upset you that isnt what im attempting to do. i just wanted you to know my thorts about it.

[chess]

I was after people's thoughts; that was the whole point. This isn't a particularly well-formed theory, it's just some ramblings. Thanks for the feedback, this kind of thing is exactly what I was looking for.

Yes, it is kind of like communism. It's one of my many and varied random stabs at getting comminism-like systems to work.

For any given industry, there are a few work slots available for people who have plenty of experience in that industry and relevant qualifications, who will then assign jobs within their area to get certain tasks done. This particular model doesn't tackle the issues of higher-level government; I have a few ideas on that, but they're beyond the scope of this hand-waving exercise.

I say 'absolute, profligate waste of resources' to mean 'something that would bankrupt the community' - so what was covered would depend on the productivity of the community as a whole. Basically, it's just a let-out clause; most of the time you should be able to do anything for one credit, but some things are just too expensive in terms of scarce resources for everyone to do all the time, so they have to be somehow more expensive. I'm assuming a fairly high base productivity for the community and hence a fairly high 'basic' level of services, which would probably include most things normal people want to do on anything like a regular basis.

Re:

[dr-vannacutt.livejournal.com]

Yes its interesting and i often think that comunisum would be beautiful if it worked. But the rich would not take it lying down.

I hate to say it but some of the people my dad works for could well afford there own army of merks to retain there personal welth till the day they died.

Id happlie work for nout if i got what i wanted for nout but all the job that there are i wont do some of them nomatter what the incentive is.

Plus jobs that risk lifes no one will want to do.

The reason it works in star trek is cos they have unlimeted energy and robots and comouters that do all the shit jobs. Things would become bland and boring cos the top cheff in the world cant cater for all the same way he caters for the select few that pay him at the mo.

We could talk about this for hours and still not have a conclution that would be perfect. But it would be a fun chat.

[foreverdirt.livejournal.com]

Just a thought - I'm inclined to believe that while pretty much all aspects of the system are open to manipulation, a significantly complicated computer program and a significant shift in social attitudes could deal with both the ability to manipulate it and the desire to do so. Is that a fair assessment - I know relatively little about computing, especially in the operational research side of things, and I'm not sure whether your system assumes today's Western culture or another type.

[chess]

It's part of my musings on how society is going to find ways to cope in the transition period between full employment being socially desirable and mostly-unemployment being socially desirable, on the grounds that much of the 'work' that is done today probably isn't necessary and is only done because there's a social stigma attached to being unemployed, and this situation is only likely to get worse. Also in response to the theory that all the 'bad work' would get done more cheerfully if people were allowed to dip in and out of it rather than commit to it, on the grounds that it's okay (and even quite fun) being dustman for the day, but most people wouldn't want to do it for a living.

[theinquisitor.livejournal.com]

Some jobs need doing whatever... What does the 'system' do, if everyone wants the day off because of (say) a big football match, and they don't have enough firemen, or enough people to run the power station, or sufficient people on call to keep the drains unblocked?

Some things can be done on an 'as and when you feel like it' basis, but some things need people here, now.

There were issues with specific projects requiring 'specialised' knowledge - even something simple like being a security guard would take a significant number of minutes of orientation each and every day.