I’m leading the Review of Modern Employment for UK Government and I am determined that the Review will be bold and offer a comprehensive strategy for a better work future.
I decided early on that tackling exploitation, confusion and perverse incentives in work would only be likely if we all care as much about the quality of employment as about its quantity.
Good work is something the RSA cares about deeply.
We need a good work economy because
-
Most people in poverty are already in work.
-
Bad work is bad for people’s health and wellbeing
-
Bad work is more likely to be low productivity work and thus bad for the economy
-
Automation will impact the future of work
-
Bad work – with no choice or voice for workers – just feels wrong in 2017
But if good work for all is to become a reality, I need to show that there is strong support in civil society and the wider public for this goal.
The RSA wants you to talk about what good work means to you.
We have a few weeks to persuade whoever wins the next election that good work matters.
Post a video on Facebook or Twitter using #GoodWorkIs to tell us what good work means for you
Or comment below to share your conversation about good work
Related articles
-
Prosperous Places: creating thriving communities
Tom Stratton
With regional growth at the top of the agenda, it is vital that we create thriving communities across economic, social and natural perspectives. Prosperous Places is a suite of interventions aimed at responding to the unique ambitions and challenges of places.
-
Pride interview: Felipe Tozzato
Deborah Ajia
The commercial photographer and RSA Fellow explains what Pride means to him, the importance of courage, making friends through rugby and why being gay is his superpower.
-
Let's smash the Rainbow Ceiling
Ben Oliver
Reflecting on Layla McCay’s recent RSA talk, Ben Oliver offers five ways for employers to create a positive culture for their LGBTQ+ staff that benefits both the individual and the organisation.
Join the discussion
Comments
Please login to post a comment or reply
Don't have an account? Click here to register.
Most of these comments seem to ignore the fundamental point that most of us do not go to work, primarily, because we seek fulfilment and satisfaction from the deployment of our creative juices. Surely, the vast majority of us primarily go to work because we need an income to survive. This might not be true for most of the contributors to this discussion, who are probably largely pre-selected by good education and 'middle-class' cultural values, but billions of people around the world are in no such fortunate position. At the very least, work is not just about stimulating and enjoyable employment, but, probably more importantly, is the means of distribution of wealth. t has been the primary means of wealth distribution, presumably, since humans started bartering. I do not believe that generations of people spending the best part of their lives digging coal or tightening wheel-nuts on a production line were thus engaged because they sought fulfilment and contentment thereby.
Changes in work patterns, especially of those 'threatened' by artificial intelligence (AI) and automation should provide an opportunity for relief from years of drudgery and boredom, but this will necessitate new systems for distributing wealth.
This issue of wealth and income distribution is inseparable from, and more important than discussion of how to make 'work' more fulfilling.
Is the concept of a Universal Basic Income a starting point for this?
I've been fortunate to mostly work for 'good' employers in the public sector where employment rights are respected, so while the work itself hasn't always been the most engaging I have had good terms and conditions and have had opportunities for training and development as I've moved along. Striking a balance between demands of home and work have been very important to me, so flexible working such as flexitime and working from home have been essential. The other part of good work is the value and meaning that it has for me, and this has influenced my work choices far more than the terms and conditions or the money. When working freelance I've had more scope to direct my work, but poorer pay and conditions while its been the other way round when employed. Some of the most rewarding work is voluntary, or is the time that you give to yourself for thinking, reading, talking, exercising and I've chosen currently to work 4 rather than 5 days a week so that I have a day for those things, achieving a balance that contributes to my well-being, and that I think makes me a better worker on the 4 days when I'm employed.
The definition of good work, is derived from definitions of what is good (to be desired or approved) and work (activity requiring mental or physical effort)
....valued
....valuable
....useful
....used
....productive
....clever - promoted and justified within a broad range of interdependent necessities and shared values
....sensible - connected to sustaining our lives in the world of the senses and our human need for shelter / warmth / food / water / love / health.
...never solely for profit
"good" work is a relative concept. We feel 'good' about ourselves if we are appreciated for what we do and if we ourselves feel like we are doing a good job. In many of today's workplaces, many demands are made on employees: time, effort, contribution. The feedback I hear, is that the little things in the workplace are often missing: the thanks, the fun, the camaraderie. I agree with many of the comments that not all work can be stimulating or interesting but one can derive satisfaction even when it is not, provided that one feels valued. Missing out on these 'softer' factors destroys the pleasure and satisfaction.
I also think that automation is concerning. Research has shown that work is hugely important in terms of identity and opportunities to socialise. If more and more activities are automated, how will this impact on us? It is not just those with less education who are now being threatened, although they have a greater opportunity to find other things to do. Unfortunately, some of the activities less likely to be mechanised are also those with perceived lower societal value, such as caring for others. Will this change?