You do not exist to be used

by Absolut Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:22 am

https://thebodyisnotanapology.com/magazine/you-are-more-than-what-you-do-dismantling-ideas-of-productivity-in-life-purpose/

Within the economic and social landscape, the bifurcation of the normative abled bodied citizen and disabled one creates an assumption that a proper citizen is an able productive one, that the economic and social value of personhood is conflated with restrictive notions of productivity. The result of this binary is that the disabled body is rendered as other, less useful then simply as just less.

by Caker Mon Jul 31, 2017 12:39 pm

A very resonant article. The ideas are not restricted to people with disabilities either. I can think of instances where people, who are not in paid employment, start to feel that they have low self esteem because they conflate work with self esteem. This type of attitude is inculcated by DWP/partner agents/media.

Thinking outside the box (I know I said I hate business jargon Rolling Eyes

kill me now lol!

) it is important that people learn to separate their 'usefulness' and 'employability' with notions of self esteem and actually start to think of self esteem more in terms of personal qualities such as kindness, pragmatism, intellect, integrity or whatever set of personal attributes makes you who you are. Time for a 'conscious un-coupling' of self esteem and productivity. They are not twins.

by Absolut Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:38 am

Yes indeed. I found certain sections within the article to be pertinent when questioning the whole idea of what "work" actually is.

Your personhood, your value does not correlate with how measurable your achievements are on a wider scale or how they benefit the capitalist underpinnings of society.

The body is not a tool to be used or disposed of regardless of your ability or productivity. Do not let any system or person convince you that you are disposable or less because you cannot be used to measure up to ablest notions of work.

by Brutus Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:13 am

At risck of using a cliché I would repeat the aphorism that life is a miracle that should be respectfully (with regard to the rest of life) enjoyed.
Those that oppose the idea that each human being should pursue fulfilment, within the means available, are those that we should consider enemies.

by Caker Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:30 am

Absolut quoted:

The body is not a tool to be used or disposed of regardless of your ability or productivity. Do not let any system or person convince you that you are disposable or less because you cannot be used to measure up to ablest notions of work.

Yes, this is actually very true for ZHC. People are treated as disposable You do not exist to be used 1392310362

by El-dudeareno Wed Aug 02, 2017 12:12 pm

Caker wrote:Absolut quoted:

The body is not a tool to be used or disposed of regardless of your ability or productivity. Do not let any system or person convince you that you are disposable or less because you cannot be used to measure up to ablest notions of work.

Yes, this is actually very true for ZHC. People are treated as disposable

I feel the same Caker as being treated like a 'Resource' (Hr) by some company's, with as much right as a paper-clip.

. Seem like dehumanisation to me, or as one person commented on 'social splintering'.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/01/holocaust-survivors-uk-social-cohesion-splintering-warning-memorial

by Caker Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:36 pm

......I have actually felt like I was used toilet paper when the boss told me (at 5.30pm) that there was no need to come in tomorrow as another worker (his personal favorite) was covering my shift "because she needs to keep her hand in". I later discovered that my replacement had been arranged for weeks in advance. This is one of (not the only) reasons I left. You do not exist to be used 2650990582

by Absolut Thu Aug 03, 2017 9:55 am

A ZHC is the ultimate example of the employer being a user, particulary when there is regular work and the employer refuses to make the contract a permanent one in order to avoid paying holiday pay.

by **Admin** Thu Aug 03, 2017 10:09 am

im aware of agencys using the permanent employment sack the employees for a few days re-employ the same group to get around the full time rule and also holiday pay for people that they employ

by Caker Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:22 pm

Absolut wrote:A ZHC is the ultimate example of the employer being a user, particulary when there is regular work and the employer refuses to make the contract a permanent one in order to avoid paying holiday pay.

It is very common misconception that ZHC workers are not entitled to holiday pay. They actually are entitled to holiday pay. I took my ex-employer to a tribunal and I was awarded the holiday pay that I calculated I should have been paid Very Happy

https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights

by Caker Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:24 pm

Admin wrote:im aware of agencys using the permanent employment sack the employees for a few days re-employ the same group to get around the full time rule and also holiday pay for people that they employ

Agencies are not exempt from paying holiday pay. They are the same as any other employer.

by Absolut Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:08 am

Caker wrote:It is very common misconception that ZHC workers are not entitled to holiday pay. They actually are entitled to holiday pay. I took my ex-employer to a tribunal and I was awarded the holiday pay that I calculated I should have been paid

Yet the tribunal process is so heavily weighted in favour of the employer (due to the fact that it is down to the individual employee to take their employer to court) that most don't bother. It is a confrontational and erroneous task to have to take an ex-employer to court and both the State and the employer know that. The employee can't take their employer to court during the contract because the employer will withdraw any offer of work and after the contract has ended, in exchange for the money awarded at any tribunal, the employee can then kiss goodbye to any future job reference from that employer.

I don't see any justice accruing from the employment tribunal process. Overall the employee loses. It's a prime example of the court simultaneously giving with one hand (the money) while taking away with the other (any future employer reference).

by Caker Fri Aug 04, 2017 11:19 am

The issue of a reference is a very thorny one. I appreciate that. I still don't regret my actions though.

by helping_hand Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:41 pm

A bit off topic..

@Caker

Some of the information within these cases may come in handy in any negotiations:

When revenge is bitter sweet...
This decision sends a clear message to past and prospective employers alike – that they may both be required to compensate employees for their future loss of earnings if they give or act upon a bad reference because an employee has made a tribunal claim!
https://www.nelsonslaw.co.uk/when-revenge-is-bitter-sweet/

If in doubt say nowt...
http://www.baineswilson.co.uk/news/1264-doubt-say-nowt

CAB behaving badly! Surprised