• webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Sure but we are responsible for our own health and that of our family also, so the main objective for many is to obtain “stable employment” the more invisible, the better.

    Work to live. Not live to work.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Its asking what my primary responsibility is when acquiring a new job.

        My primary responsibility is to look after my own health and wellbeing and to some extend the wellbeing of people i interact with. This at all times regardless of what my current goal is.

        The most direct way a job relates to wellbeing is that it can provide a stable income to live from. So that is the correct answer.

        No amount of additional context can change this.

        Id like to take it a step up even.

        The primary responsibility for any employer Is to make sure its employees have “enough” wage. Because if they can’t those jobs become objectively inhuman.

        • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          The primary responsibility for any employer Is to make sure its employees have “enough” wage.

          I disagree, and I think it works in exactly the same way as the initial question. The primary reaponsibility of the employer is the success of the company. The success of the company is at least partially dependent on keeping good employees with good wage, benefits, and culture. You can get short-term profits out of shorting those things (just like an employee can scrape by temporarily with shit wages, poor benefits, and bad work culture), but in the long term that hurts everyone involved.

          • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            45 minutes ago

            I value people’s freedom to chose their own priorities but i can’t quite wrap my head around this.

            If an organization does not strive to benefit its maintainers or the common public (which includes its maintainers) then for what reason do we allow that organization to exist?

            I know capitalism is a thing but it has never not sounded crazy to me how exploitation (be it nature or people) got normalized. Profit = Loss