In this turbulent world, we never seem to have enough time; and yet there has never been so much time available to us. We live longer, use less time to make and do things as we become more efficient, and should, therefore, have more time to spare. We have, however, made this strange commodity into a competitive weapon, valuing speed over leisure. If we were truly wise, wouldn’t we take the price tag off time, and give ourselves time to stand and stare?
Organizations are now re-thinking time for their own advantage, [1] (1. whenever 2, as if 3. inasmuch as) they had finally recognized that there are actually 168 hours in the week, not just 40. Sleeping assets make no money, so why shut them down for 128 hours a week when half of the world is still awake, and when customers like to shop at the end of the day or the end of the week, and when some people like to work [2](1. since 2. unless 3, while) others sleep. Most factories are now like processing plants, working a 24-hour day. There are night shifts in financial offices worldwide, stores in London that stay open [3](1. for 2. until 3. around) 9 p.m. or 10 p. m. and on Sundays. Schools in Wandsworth in South London have abandoned a long summer holiday, originally designed to allow pupils to help with the harvest, [4](1. in favor of 2. irrespective of 3. as compared with) five eight-week terms.
There is a long list of the ways in which organizations are re scheduling time. There is flextime, which has been with us for a while, but if we moved to a 35-hour week, flextime could mean an hour [5] (1. off 2. on 3. away from) each working day, or Friday afternoons off. And there is part-time work for new parents, part-time before retirement, job-sharing, term-time jobs, weekend jobs, or four ten-hour days a week [6](1. In contrast 2. In addition 3. To sum up), we have annual hours contracts, zero-hour contracts (being available as and when required), parental leave, career breaks, sabbaticals, time-banking (accumulating vacation time over several years), and individual hour contracts [7](1. that 2. which 3. where) individuals and their bosses agree on a timetable of hours per week or month.
On the face of it, there is enough flexibility for everyone. Why, then, does Juliet Schor need to write a book called The Overworked American, which sells so well that it must have struck [8](1. a chord 2. a mind 3. an eye) with many? The average American, she finds, now works 164 more hours per year than 20 years ago-the equivalent of an extra month. The typical American now works 47 hours per week, and if current trends continue, in 20 years he or she will be on the job 60 hours a week, for an annual total 3,000 hours. That compares with 1,856 hours per year in Britain in 1989. Why do they do it? Schor says that organizations want fewer people working longer because it saves on [9](1. overhead 2. fewer hands 3. people’s energy), while individuals want the money. This seeming “bargain of time for money,” says Schor, has created an insidious* cycle of work and spend as people increasingly look [10](1. in 2. to 3. for) consumption to give satisfaction, and even meaning, to their lives.
The paradox is that they seem to know that it is stupi In a U. S. Department of Labor survey in 1978, 84% of the respondents said that they would choose to trade off some future increases in income in return for more leisure time, with almost half opting to trade all the increases. A [11](1. similar 2. favorable 3. frivolous) situation was observed of workers at a shoe factory in Britain. When hard times hit, the factory went into work-sharing, and the employees who [12](1. had worked 2. have been working 3. could have worked) all the extra hours they could get, including Sundays and holidays, found themselves with time on their hands. One worker reported: Bit by bit, there was an unbelievable phenomenon of physical renewal. The idea of money really lost its intensity. It’s quite true that we lost a good deal of money, 25% of previous income, but, quite soon, only one or two of the fellows [13](1. agreed 2, minded 3. settled down). It was about now that friendships began; we were now able to go beyond political conversation, and we managed to talk about love, jealousy, family life. It was also [14](1. important 2. friendship 3. at this time) that we realized the full horror of working in the factory on Saturday afternoon or evenings. We were once again learning the meaning of living.
Schor says that Americans seem to have decided to take the benefits of the improved productivity of the past 50 years in money rather than time. Work and spend has become a [15] (1. habit 2. reminder 3. best-selling book). Of course, she is the first to recognize that for some people there is no choice. Nearly one-third of American workers earn wages that, on a full-time basis, would not lift them out of poverty. The same is true of Britain. Millions of people can only make ends [16] (1. meet 2. meeting 3. to meet) through overtime or multi earning households. They would willingly give more time to make more money in order to pay the bills.
The trouble started when we turned time into a commodity, when we bought people’s time in our organizations rather than buying what they produce. Under these conditions, the more time you sell, the more money you make. There is an inevitable trade-off between time and money, Organizations, [17](1. for their part 2. from time to time 3. out of their context), get choosy They want less time from the people they pay by the hour, but more from the people they pay by the year because, in the latter case, every extra hour during the year is free.
Time turns out to be a confusing commodity. Some people will spend money to save their time, others will spend their time to save money, and still others will trade money for time at certain periods of their life, [18](1. managing 2. preferring 3. encouraging) to work less for less money.
Busy people will, if they can afford it, spend money to save time, buying time-saving equipment for their homes, pre-cooked meals, and help with their chores; they will prefer taxis to buses, child minders to child minding, gardeners to gardening if it [19](1. forces 2. demands 3. allows) them to spend their time on what they really want to do. Their needs create an important market opportunity. The affluent unbusy, on the other hand, spend money to buy time-time to travel, time to learn, time to play, and time to keep fit-[20](1. if 2. or 3. although) they spend their time doing themselves what they used to pay others to do. Time, therefore, creates new growth areas: personal services for the busy in order to save time; health, education, travel, and recreation services for the affluent unbusy in order to spend time; equipment and materials for those who want to spend time to save money. It is interesting to note that these new growth areas will be best served not by large corporations but by small independents providing personal and local delivery, linked perhaps by franchising or other networks into bigger combinations.
コメントを残す