Here’s a summary of the Occupy declaration, as drafted by Lawrence Lessig (the same guy behind Creative Commons).

1. Elimination of the Corporate State
2. Overturning the “Citizens United” Case
3. Elimination of All Private Benefits to Public Servants
4. Term Limits
5. A Fair Tax Code
6. Healthcare for All
7. Protection of the Planet
8. Debt Reduction
9. Jobs for All
10. Student Loan Debt Relief and Refinancing
11. Ending Perpetual War for Profit
12. Emergency Reform of Public Education
13. End Outsourcing and Currency Manipulation
14. Banking and Securities Reform
15. Foreclosure Moratorium
16. Ending the Fed
17. Ending the Electoral College and Enactment of Uniform Federal Election Rules
18. Ending the War in Afghanistan and Care of Veterans
19. No Censorship of the Internet
20. Reinstitution of Civil Rights

The declaration in full at: http://www.the-99-declaration.org/read-the-99-declaration/

And all the while on a sidewalk over the abyss. There are islands of time when things seem stable. Nothing much happens but the rounds of the week. Later the islands break apart. When enough time has passed, no one now alive will still be here; everyone will be different. Then it will be the stories that will link the generations, history and DNA, long chains of the simplest bits—guanine, adenine, cytosine, thymine—love, hope, fear, selfishness—all recombining again and again, until a miracle happens and the organism springs forth!

Meanwhile humanity is exceeding the planet’s carrying capacity for our species, badly damaging the biosphere. Neoclassical economics cannot cope with this situation, and indeed, with its falsely exteriorized costs, was designed in part to disguise it. If the Earth were to suffer a catastrophic anthropogenic extinction event over the next ten years, which it will, American business would continue to focus on its quarterly profit and loss. There is no economic mechanism for dealing with catastrophe. And yet government and the scientific community are not tackling this situation either, indeed both have consented to be run by neoclassical economics, an obvious pseudoscience. We might as well agree to be governed by astrologers. Everyone knows this is the situation, and yet no one does anything about it. They don’t try to instigate the saving of the biosphere, they don’t even call for certain kinds of mitigation projects. They just wait and see what comes in. It is a ridiculously passive position.

Why such passivity, you ask? Because NSF is chicken! It’s a chicken with its smart little head stuck in the sand like an ostrich! It’s a chicken ostrich (fix). It’s afraid to take on Congress, it’s afraid to take on business, it’s afraid to take on the American people. Free market fundamentalists are dragging us back to some dismal feudal eternity and destroying everything in the process, and yet we have the technological means to feed everyone, house everyone, clothe everyone, doctor everyone, educate everyone—the ability to end suffering and want as well as ecological collapse is right here at hand, and yet NSF continues to dole out its little grants, fiddling while Rome burns!!!

Well whatever nothing to be done about it, I’m sure you’re thinking poor Frank Vanderwal has spent a year in the swamp and has gone crazy as a result, and that is true but what I’m saying is still right, the world is in big trouble and NSF is one of the few organizations on Earth that could actually help get it out of trouble, and yet it’s not. It should be charting worldwide scientific policy and forcing certain kinds of climate mitigation and biosphere management, insisting on them as emergency necessities, it should be working Congress like the fucking NRA to get the budget it deserves, which is a much bigger budget, as big as the Pentagon’s, really those two budgets should be reversed to get them to their proper level of funding, but none of it is happening or will happen, and that is why I’m not coming back and no one in his right mind would come back either

Another great chunk from Forty Signs of Rain, by Kim Stanley Robinson.

“The average surplus value created by American workers is thirty-three dollars an hour.”

Anna said, “I wonder how they define surplus value.”

“Profit,” Frank said.

Edgardo shook his head. “You can cook the books and get rid of profit, but the surplus value, the value created beyond the pay for the labor, is still there.”
Anna said, “There was a page in here that said the average American worker puts in 1,950 hours a year. I thought that was questionable too, that’s forty hours a week for about forty-nine weeks.”

“Three weeks of vacation a year,” Frank pointed out. “Pretty normal.”

“Yeah, but that’s the average? What about all the part-time workers?”

“There must be an equivalent number of people who work overtime.”

“Can that be true? I thought overtime was a thing of the past.”

“You work overtime.”

“Yeah but I don’t get paid for it.”

The men laughed at her.

“They should have used the median,” she said. “The average is a skewed measure of central tendency. Anyway, that’s…” Anna could do calculations in her head. “Sixty-four thousand three hundred and fifty dollars a year, generated by the average worker in surplus value. If you can believe these figures.”
“What’s the average income?” Edgardo asked. “Thirty thousand?”

“Maybe less,” Frank said.

“We don’t have any idea,” Anna objected.

“Call it thirty, and what’s the average taxes paid?”

“About ten? Or is it less?”

Edgardo said, “Call it ten. So let’s see. You work every day of the year, except for three lousy weeks. You make around a hundred thousand dollars. Your boss takes two thirds, and gives you one third, and you give a third of that to the government. Your government uses what it takes to build all the roads and schools and police and pensions, and your boss takes his share and buys a mansion on an island somewhere. So naturally you complain about your bloated inefficient Big Brother of a government, and you always vote for the pro-owner party.” He grinned at Frank and Anna. “How stupid is that?”
Anna shook her head. “People don’t see it that way.”

“But here are the statistics!”

“People don’t usually put them together like that. Besides, you made half of them up.”

“They’re close enough for people to get the idea! But they are not taught to think! In fact they’re taught not to think. And they are stupid to begin with.”
Even Frank was not willing to go this far. “It’s a matter of what you can see,” he suggested. “You see your boss, you see your paycheck, it’s given to you. You have it. Then you’re forced to give some of it to the government. You never know about the surplus value you’ve created, because it was disappeared in the first place. Cooked in the books.”

“But the rich are all over the news! Everyone can see they have more than they have earned, because no one earns that much.”

If the scientific community were to propose a platform of political goals based on scientific principles, how would it be formulated, and what would the platform say?

It would help to have a macro-goal. Two present themselves:

1) Some form of the “Greatest good for the greatest number” rubric.
Without implying in any way that this “greatest good” could include or justify any planned or accepted structural or permanent disadvantaging of any minority of any size. As should be clear in the wording of the rubric, the greatest number is of course one hundred percent, including also the generations to come.

2) Even in the context of any religious or humanistic anthropocentrism, the life of our species depends on the rest of Earth’s biosphere. Even the utilitarian view of nature as something distinct and subservient to humanity must grant the biosphere the status of a diffused expression and aspect of our bodies. Interdependence of all the components of biosphere (including humanity) is undeniable. An observable, confirmable fact (breathing).

This leads us to the detail of the “Contract with Our Children”

1. Protection of the biosphere: sustainable uses; clean technologies; carbon balance; climate homeostasis.

2. Protection of human welfare: universal housing, clothing, shelter, clean water, health care, education, reproductive rights.

3. Full employment: Current economy defines 5.4% unemployment as optimum for desired “wage-pressure balance,” treating labor (people) as a commodity and using a supply/demand pricing model. Five percent in U.S.A. = approx. fifteen million people. At the same time there is important work not being done.

If government-insured full employment reduced “wage pressure,” forcing a rise in minimum wages from the private sector, this would help pull millions out of poverty, decrease their government dependence and social service costs, and inject and cycle their larger incomes back into the economy.

4. Individual ownership of the majority of the surplus value of one’s labor. 

People create by their work an economic value beyond what it costs to pay them and provide their means of production. This averages $66,000 per year for American workers, a surplus now legally belonging to owners/stockholders.

American workers therefore receive between a fifth and a third of the actual value of their work. The rest goes to owners.

A minimum share of 51% of the surplus value of one’s work should be returned to one, this value to be measured by objective and transparent accounting as defined by law.

3. and 4. combined would tend to promote the greatest good for the greatest number, by distributing the wealth more equitably among those who have created it.

5. Reduction of military spending

Match U.S. military expenditures to the average of other nations; this would halve the military budget, freeing over two hundred billion dollars a year.

More generally, all national militaries should be integrated in an international agreement upholding nonviolent conflict resolution. (Using black helicopters of course.)

Disproportionate size of U.S. military and arms industry a waste of resources. Doubling since September 11, 2001 resembles panic response or attempt at global hegemony. Results undermine goals outlined in the foundational axioms.

6. Population stabilization

Human population stabilized at some level to be determined by carrying capacity studies and foundational axioms. Best results here so far have resulted from increase in women’s rights and education, also a goal in itself, thus a powerful positive feedback loop with chance for results within a single generation.

Context/ultimate goal: Permaculture

A scientifically informed government should lead the way in the invention of a culture which is sustainable perpetually.

If reproductive success is defined as life’s goal, as it is in evolutionary theory, then stealing from descendants is maladaptive.

Protection of the environment, therefore, along with restoration of landscapes and biodiversity, should become one of the principal goals of the economy. Government must lead the way in investigating potential climate-altering strategies to mitigate current problems and eventually establish a balance that can be maintained in perpetuity.

Apart from the more specific ones (like ‘keep water high on the land’, but maybe just try to metaphor these as taoist haikus to trigger bewildering insights.)

• Relative Location Components placed in a system are viewed relatively, not in isolation. Functional Relationship between components.
• Everything is connected to everything else. Recognise functional relationships between elements.
• Every function is supported by many elements – Redundancy Good design ensures that all important functions can withstand the failure of one or more element.
• Every element is supported by many functions Each element we include is a system, chosen and placed so that it performs as many functions as possible.
• Local Focus “Think globally – Act locally” Grow your own food, cooperate with neighbours. Community efficiency not self-sufficiency.
• Diversity As a general rule, as sustainable systems mature they become increasingly diverse in both space and time. What is important is the complexity of the functional relationships that exist between elements not the number of elements.
• Biological Resources We know living things reproduce and build up their availability over time, assisted by their interaction with other compatible elements. Use and reserve biological intelligence.
• One Calorie In/One Calorie Out Do not consume or export more biomass than carbon fixed by the solar budget.
• Stocking Finding the balance of various elements to keep one from overpowering another over time. How much of an element needs to be produced in order to fulfil the need of whole system?
• Stacking Multi-level functions for single element (stacking functions). Multi-level garden design, ie., trellising, forest garden, vines, ground covers, etc.
• Succession Recognise that certain elements prepare the way for system to supports other elements in the future, i.e.: succession planting.
• Use Onsite Resources Determine what resources are available and entering the system on their own and maximise their use.
• Edge Effect Ecotones are the most diverse and fertile area in a system. Two ecosystems come together to form a third which has more diversity than either of the other two, i.e.: edges of ponds, forests, meadows, currents etc.
• Energy Recycling Yields from system designed to supply onsite needs and/or needs of local region.
• Small Scale Intensive Systems start small and create a system that is manageable and produces a high yield.
• Make Least Change for the Greatest Effect The less change that is generated, the less embedded energy is used to endow the system.
• Planting Strategy 1st-natives, 2nd-proven exotics, 3rd unproven exotics – carefully on small scale with lots of observation.
• Work Within Nature Aiding the natural cycles results in higher yield and less work. A little support goes along way.
• Appropriate Technology The same principles apply to cooking, lighting, transportation, heating, sewage treatment, water and other utilities.
• Law of Return Whatever we take, we must return Every object must responsibly provide for its replacement.
• Stress and Harmony Stress here may be defined as either prevention of natural function, or of forced function. Harmony may be defined as the integration of chosen and natural functions, and the easy supply of essential needs.
• The Problem is the solution We are the problem, we are the solution. Turn constraints into resources
• Mistakes are tools for learning
• The yield of a system is theoretically unlimited The only limit on the number of uses of a resource possible is the limit of information and imagination of designer.
• Dispersal of Yield Over Time Principal of seven generations. We can use energy to construct these systems, providing that in their lifetime, they store or conserve more energy that we use to construct them or to maintain them.
• A Policy of Responsibility (to relinquish power) The role of successful design is to create a self-managed system.
• Principle of Disorder Order and harmony produce energy for other uses. Disorder consumes energy to no useful end. Tidiness is maintained disorder.
• Chaos Has form, but is not predictable. The amplification of small fluctuations.
• Entropy In complex systems disorder is an increasing result. Entropy and lifeforce are a stable pair that maintain the universe to infinity.
• Metastability For a complex system to remain stable, there must be small pockets of disorder.
• Entelechy Principal of genetic intelligence. i.e. The rose has thorns to protect itself.
• Observation Protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labor.
• We are surrounded by insurmountable opportunities
• Wait one year
• Hold water and fertility as high (in elevation) on the landscape as possible
• The only ethical decision is to take responsibility for our own existence and that of our children.
• Cooperation, not competition, is the very basis of future survival and of existing life systems.

http://www.thefarm.org/permaculture/

The current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives; this is where we work towards them.What is needed is a democratic alternative to the political-state system. This alternative must be built by people’s assemblies across the country, to facilitate a new constitution guaranteeing:

• full social and political participation
• a new and popular democratic sovereignty
• a common, structured political economy that delivers social equality and wellbeing for all

It is proposed this insertion be linked to a call for the formation of people’s assemblies in neighbourhoods, workplaces and education establishments across the country, and for a day of action in  support.

via Real democracy is rising on the horizon at Occupy London

Personally I really like the sound of liquid democracy since it seems to have a lot of the biomimicry about about, and take account of some pretty fundamental human behaviours.

Problem

Sigh. Where to begin? Broadly speaking, however..

• Most of our critical anatomy was never designed for the world we find ourselves living in.
• The economic, political, social, and environmental structures we invented to facilitate our lives are struggling to deliver the outcomes we need to navigate the 21st century in a peaceable and civilised manner. E.g:
• Economic: despite collosal bailouts leading to pernicious cuts, we are still mired in economic crisis and dangerous imbalance.
• Political: one minute Gadaffi is our friend, the next he is the enemy of the people. Where is the integrity?
• Social: we work harder than ever, yet real standard of life has not improved; and wealth and power is increasingly concentrated.
• Environmental: despite agreement for the need for urgent action, there is no urgent action.
• This is no surprise: the world has changed hugely. 7 billion+ people, lightspeed communication, and approaching the limits of a finite planet is bound to have an effect.
• Unconscionable behaviour is expected of us if we are to comply with common “normality”.
• Patching up the system is becoming increasingly expensive and futile.
• Governments fail to take sufficient action due to apparent lack of support from the populace.

What can be done? What does it do?

1. Write to your MP –> lets them know there are votes in it but is also very ignorable (3/10)
2. Occupy stuff / Go on a march –> says there’s votes and media in it, but also it’s the same old crowd doing something silly 6/10. In fact, look what good it did in Iraq.. so maybe 5/10
3. Burn some cars –> says there are penalties for not listening, and frustration has reached a high. But illegal and easily frowned upon. 2/10.

What we need is something which…

• doesn’t inconvenience the public
• gets press attention
• people – and companies, crucially – want to / can be seen to be a part of
• encourages people to address 21st century issues
• doesn’t involve burning stuff, guns, or martyrdom

A suggested answer

Go on Strike!

We know this can work, because it’s one of the few things in history which has. If you stop following a leader, they become a lone idiot. So let’s just all stop. We no longer think you’re leading us in the right direction. We have utterly lost faith in your ability, dear Government, to do the right thing.

The goal here is NOT to punish employers. The goal is to send a message to the government, and to acknowledge to each other as a society, that the game has changed, and that we would like to do change the way we play it.

We are, in fact, looking to our employers to be our saviours here (…since the government are refusing to do their jobs properly). We are looking to them to help us live the better lives that we want to. We would like to work in allegiance with our employers to help make our world’s better. Whilst we are going to come to work 10% less, we will strive to ensure this has minimal impact on the employer.

#4DW or #9DF ?

My original thinking here was have a 4 day work week (which has some precedent with the 1970s 3 day week, but now I see also has environmental support already. However, whilst potent, it’s unlikely to win friends with employers.

So how about a nine day fortnight instead? This tallies nicely with the 1010 campaign, in that if GDP and CO2 are intrinsically linked, then by working 10% less, we will make it easier to hit out 10% targets.

However, Denmark has divorced GDP from Energy Consumption and C02. Reducing GDP is not really the aim yet…

What do people with with the extra day?

Essentially, whatever they want to. However they will be encouraged to do something which is good for their environment (social or ecological). (Employers might like to make it part of the deal of letting it happen in the first place.) It could be nice to stipulate that

• no money can change hands
• unwelcome environmental impact should be minimised

This is great, because it gets people thinking about how value is genuinely created in an economy, too, and means we can get the ideas of Douthwaite and friends more widely known about.

On the website we would need to

• amass a list of other things that people can do, eg Volunteer groups
• create an ideas submission (by twitter, too) place
• create a directory of where and when people can help

Benefits

• The goal of the 1010 campaign is to reduce CO2 emissions by 10% in 2010. By working 10% less, we help this happen, since there is a direct correlation between CO2 and GDP
• People will want to get behind it – even those who don’t care much about climate change. But once they start having those conversations, they will know more, and will almost inevitably begin to care more as they learn

What do we ask people to agree to?

There is a paradox in that we want to strike to send a message to the Govt, not to damage our employers. We are looking to them to take a lead where Govt fails. But if the employers fail to get on board, then we are toothless if we don’t then strike.

So essentially we’re saying to employers, “You can do this the easy way, or the hard way.”

Those who choose the hard way will be inconvenienced, and will put pressure on the Government to do better.

Those who move to a 9DF will gain employee loyalty and not see (much) fall in productivity. (In fact many companies report gains – but bear with me, I’m still amassing figures on this.)

Thus it needs to be phrase and positioned in such a way that the commitment people agree to minimises repercussions for the employers, but makes it painful enough to compel the govt to act.

Whilst linking it to Copenhagen makes sense, this is not just an environmental pledge, and it will have more takers if it can be propositioned more broadly. However there is now a legal precedent for respecting environmental beliefs, which might make it stronger legally.

What pledge would you ask people to agree to to meet these slightly paradoxical aims?

• What would you like to see achieved at Cophenhagen?

Making it real

I’m better at ideas than at reality, so please help here, especially!

Everyone who cooperates benefits

Much like the lots of societal actions, everyone who cooperates and agrees benefits. Everyone who doesn’t, doesn’t.

1. Grassroots / employees

• Create a pledge site where people can say “if there is not meaningful commitment at Copenhagen, I will start working a 9DF” (or whatever the optimal specific, measurable, commitment is) [1]
• Who do you work for? — this way we can build up a numbers per company, making it easier for companies to be petitioned, and jump before they’re pushed
• Possibly ask for demographics (age, income, voting trend, postcode) so that people can see it has broad support
• “I will commit to my employer to do my best to get the same amount of work done in the hours I will be working” — it’s important that the action is against the govt / in favour of change, not an action intended to penalise your employer
• Obviously make it v easy to spread the word
  • Badges – everyone loves a badge!
  • #9df hashtag on twitter / facebook
  • Twitter / facebook accounts / pages

[1] Give the option to say “And moreover this is something I’d like my employer to consider anyway”

2. Corporate / employers

• Provide tools and support for employers wanting to take action
• Give them so much PR and fluff, that it becomes a no brainer
• Have a credit roll, asking people to support / buy from participating companies
• Get it promoted and recorded as a metric for work / life balance, and the best companies to work for
• Encourage discounts from one company to another, eg cafe’s give 10% off for people on 9DF days
• Much like UN Principles of Responsible Investment, allow it to be aspirational and voluntary, so something that can be worked towards with your employees. They will be reasonable, but they will also be mindful of the fact that there’s no point in striking if it doesn’t make a difference, so you’re going to have to be sure that your company is leading where your government is not.

3. PR

• We must manage the unavoidable in order to avoid the unmanageable
• If politicians won’t lead us where we want to go, we’ll stop following. Looking to companies and organisations to take a lead.
• Ask Age of Stupid etc
• Get Milo from ldnnudecalendar and that lot

People to contact

Likely businesses

• School of everything
• Howies
• L’Oreal – they funded Home
• JP Morgan

Related organisations who might like this / people with big mailing lists

• 1010orguk
• The Wave
• 350.org
• Age of Stupid
• 100months
• The Hub
• Jamie Oliver
• http://www.socialbreakfast.org/contact-us/
• @RealDMitchell
• Unions
• Adbusters

Key companies it would be a boon to get on board

• WPP / big ad agency
• Google
• BT
• Virgin
• The cooperative
• Smile
• The Church of England
• Signatories of the Bali Communique

Others

• Richard Douthwaite, economist – to write a piece promoting the benefits of adding non-currency value to the economy
• Colin Challen, MP – to support and give credibility
• Martin Tod – Lib dem, Winchester

“Good company to work for” competitions

• http://ethisphere.com
• http://www.topcompanies.co.uk/
• http://www.greatplacetowork.co.uk
• http://business.timesonline.co.uk
• http://www.bestcompanies.co.uk/

Evidence of…

Not reducing productivity

• Need to find examples of productivity curves over the average week
• Find evidence of 9df increasing productivity – seek at:
  • productivity501
  • lifehacker
  • ask people to submit evidence
• Utah’s Four-Day Work Week Scores Well – less overtime hours worked, 9% less leave taken, 70% satisfaction (evidence from a compressed 4dw)
• Less absenteeism since employees know they will have time to get those things done
• A recent survey by salary.com of over 10,000 American workers revealed that on average, we waste more than 2 hours each day surfing the web or making phone calls to friends. We would be less likely to do that if work occupied less time.
• Feasta review of Sharing the Work and Saving the Planet – a great global comparison or working time reduction effects
• The Great Transition report from the NEF. See also link
• Need to work out actually how much carbon would be saved by some people not turning up at the office.

Other employer benefits

• Increased loyalty = less training costs
• Lower accident rates
• Lower insurance rates
• Decreased operational costs (eg smaller building, less maintenance, less cleaning.. etc)
• Reduced cost of child care

Climate benefits

• Energy use down 13% in Utah
• 10% fewer commutes
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants.
• less traffic congestion = more efficient traffic flow = less fuel consumed

Good for people

• Reduce persoinal expenses, since most pay their own travel costs
• More time to prepare food
• More time to help each other
• More time to learn
• Study finds (compressed) four-day work week optimal
• Reduced cost of child care

Good for society

• Gives more time to fix the broken window syndrome
• Allows the informal, local economies to grow, stimulating local demand (local since we’ll be encouraging people not to travel far on day 10)
• The floods in Cumbria demonstrate that we will increasingly need to work together to manage the unavoidable. Giving people tie to contribute to their community and learn new skills sets a strong foundation for that.

This being effective direct action

• 9DF was part of BPs policy until 2008: “In a 2003 report on flexible working, BP was named as one of 50 model employers by the Department of Trade and Industry in its approach to employees’ “work-life balance”.” http://is.gd/512CN

Quotes

• “I like having the three-day weekend. I like being able to have one day set aside to do everything that I need to do, and then the other two days where I can devote to my son.” .” Every Friday morning now, Smith volunteers at her son’s school. She helps students with their spelling tests and relishes the extra time with her son. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102938615
• “The efficiency and morale of our employees is so increased, the accident and insurance rates are so improved, and the unit cost of production is so lowered that we can afford to pay as much for six hours as we formerly paid for eight.” W.K.Kellogg
• Consider what has actually happened to the employment rent in places like Kellogg, Medtronic, and Ideal. Each company reduced hours without reducing pay. Therefore the hourly wage went up, thereby maintaining the original employment rent. That’s why productivity didn’t fall. In cases where workers are paid by the hour, where the company raises the hourly wage, and where the changes are incremental (on the order of one to two hours a day), a shorter workday has been shown to pay for itself. The changes also improved morale. Workers appreciated the company’s willingness to schedule fewer hours and raise pay. As a result they conducted more personal business on their own time and showed up for work more regularly. If a workplace reform is done right, a company can gain loyalty and productivity from its employees at no cost. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1510/is_n77/ai_12923129/

Helping Employers make the transition

• By all accounts, the workforce of tomorrow will be older, more culturally and ethnically diverse, and will consist of more female workers than ever. This diversity will require companies to use new and innovative approaches toward managing human resources and delivering services. To succeed, we must successfully compete for skilled workers; and it must be able retain them by providing challenging job opportunities and the flexibility to accommodate family responsibilities and other activities outside work.
• 5 steps towards a mokre flexible workplace
• 35 Questions You Should Ask When Drafting a Compressed Work Week Policy
• Numbers from Utah’s 4/10 compressed schedule
• Get in touch with the people who run the various “best companies” surveys, ie The Sunday Times and the FT and get them to incorporate a stringent green credentials section to all of their best companies surveys (inc the SME one which we came 3rd in!). That’d immediately have the effect of making all entrants (usually in the region of 600 companies, I believe) at least make some effort on that front.

Alternative structures

• 9/80 – still do 80 hours / week, but over 9 days instead of 10
• 4/10 – do 10 hours / day on 4 days per week, thus still equally 40 hours
• Flexitime

Legal

• Climate change belief given same legal status as religion
• A strike is only lawful if it is considered a trade dispute. BBC staff attempted to strike due to ideological opposition to apartheid in South Africa (transmission of FA Cup final overseas) this was not considered a suitable reason for strike action. That was a while ago but is still the case that is used in teaching to define the issue.
• Therefore in this case given where the law is now there would have to be an impact of employee’s terms and conditions to consider strike action. Furthermore, in order to take lawful strike action there are a number of hurdles to jump over in terms of consultation, notification, balloting, numbers required to support etc.
• Any strike action outside of that would be considered a “wildcat strike” and any action taken against individuals would depend on how the company’s decide to deal with it. In some cases recently companies have decided not to take action against individuals (legally they can dismiss for gross misconduct on these grounds) due to the negative PR it would attract. So its not impossible just a bit tricky!
• The EAT said a belief must have five essential featuresto be covered by the regulations. It must be:
  • genuinely held
  • not merely an opinion or viewpoint
  • related to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour
  • persuasive, serious, cohesive and important
  • worthy of respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with human dignity or conflict with the fundamental rights of others
• In addition to all sort of other reasons not to actually “strike”, striking workers do not get paid by their employers. If the industrial action being taken is sanctioned by the Trade union then the union has funds that ensure that the workers are paid for there actions. This may not be as much as the worker would have got but it might be in the long term. But most will not be in unions.

HR

• Top employers not reducing emissions
  • The research was conducted by Marketing magazine and Brand Republic, with ENDS Carbon, a specialist carbon ratings agency, and the University of Edinburgh business school. The aim is to give leading UK brands an annual emissions rating.
  • Rachael Stilwell, publishing director of Marketing magazine, said: “These results will become an important reputational milestone for brands.”
• Guardian article on brand reputation and climate change
  • Best brands: Tesco, T-Mobile, Dell, BMW, Eurotunnel, Accenture, Standard Chartered, Ericsson, KPMG, AMD
  • Worst brands: Barclays, Sky, correcteBay, Toyota, RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland), Travis Perkins, Bosch, Axa, British Gas
• A survey of the carbon performance of 600 of the UK’s biggest brands reveals that two-thirds are either increasing their greenhouse gas emissions, have targets that are weaker than the government’s Copenhagen goal for carbon cuts, or are failing to put information about their carbon emissions in the public domain.

Legal starting places

• Shah Quereshi, the original lawyer who made the case
• Mahood J. another lawyer who writes about this
• ACAS, UNISON

Ok.. maybe it’s not interesting, but it’s certainly a big step towards better.