Work Reform

14198 readers

24 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

seeCseas@lemmy.world

tintory@lemm.ee

TinMod@lemmy.world

873

Scientists have been studying remote work for four years and have reached a very clear conclusion: “Working from home makes us thrive” (oneworkforce.org)

submitted 3 weeks ago by FenrirIII@lemmy.world to c/workreform@lemmy.world

138 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmings.world/post/35783610

https://archive.li/URhbv

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] elderorb@feddit.nl 41 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Does anyone have a link to the actual study? The article doesn't seem to have it.

[–] NycterVyvver@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm having a tough time finding it. I found this citation from an article that appeared to reference the same four year study.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0248008

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago

And to be clear, that study does not have those conclusions:

Participants slept 27 minutes longer (95% CI 9–51), got up 38 minutes later (95% CI 25–50), and did 50 fewer minutes (95% CI -69–-29) of light physical activity during COVID-19 restrictions. Additionally, participants engaged in more cycling but less swimming, team sports and boating or sailing. Participants consumed a lower percentage of energy from protein (-0.8, 95% CI -1.5–-0.1) and a greater percentage of energy from alcohol (0.9, 95% CI 0.2–1.7). There were no changes in weight or wellbeing. Overall, the effects of COVID-19 restrictions on lifestyle were small; however, their impact on health and wellbeing may accumulate over time.

[–] FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What? You don't automatically trust "The Editorial Team's" assertion at the bottom that "This article is based on verified sources and supported by editorial technologies" is valid? I mean they linked to a few other articles - the fact they're only ones on their own site shouldn't matter...

🙄 "Trust me, bro!"

[–] NycterVyvver@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I got it from this totally legit article.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/work-life-balance/after-four-years-observing-telework-researchers-came-to-one-clear-conclusion-working-from-home-really-does-make-us-happier/ar-AA1HL99S

I know it's legit because it has a picture of a Man Working At Home With A Laptop, Wearing A Shirt.

[–] SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social 4 points 3 weeks ago

Wearing A Shirt

And nothing else!

[–] loonsun@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah I'm a researcher in the field that studies stuff like this and it's infuriating that there is no citation for this. I can probably find it but it's just horrible "journalism" to have no citation to the subject of your article.

[–] zipkag@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I haven't looked extensively, but for the past ten minutes I've not been able to find any article. About 20 different news stories to say the same thing, but none of them actually link a peer reviewed published article.

[–] loonsun@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

When you have to conduct a literature review just to find the results of one study there is something deeply wrong