The Meaning of Work

Twelve people wash up on a desert island. What are their immediate needs? They need cover, so four people volunteer to be builders. They begin to look for materials and construct shelters. They need food and water, so four people begin to scout the jungle for fresh water and fruit. They want to be rescued, so four people take responsibility for gathering wood and keeping a signal fire going. But the builders continue their occupations, discovering better materials, fashioning crude tools, and building better, sturdier huts. The hunter gatherers have been working out a way to make nets and catch fish. Someone takes responsibility for cooking the fish. Our “firemen,” for lack of a better term, are going farther in the search for wood, and are beginning to map out the boundaries of the island. Two years go by with no sign from the outside world. Babies are born. Someone stays at camp with the infants while the parents pursue their work.

Looking at human occupation in this way, particularly taking the exchange of money out of the equation, it is easy to see that work is nothing more than providing value to society. In this insular example, each person’s survival depends on cooperation. If any one person says “I can’t do anything” then everyone suffers. If one person is disabled and unable to build or wander the island, they will still find some way to contribute, providing ideas, wisdom, moral support. The only excuse for not contributing to the group is coma.

Compare this to modern society. We’ve lost the meaning of work. Work is something you do when there are no other options (when your parents can no longer support you, when your lottery numbers fail you) until you earn your retirement. If you want to directly benefit society, you usually do that unpaid. No wonder our biggest problem worldwide is greed. The work we do is no longer attached to our survival. More often than not, it is linked to our destruction. We work for corporations which exploit, pollute, and create agents that kill.

Society has failed to regulate business to assure each is beneficial. The free market allows such businesses to flourish as long as there are buyers for these products. This, unfortunately, is an issue for perhaps a later essay. This essay is on the meaning of work.

Work is inextricably linked with money in our capitalist society. Money, ideally, is a measure of the value you provide to society. This is seen more vividly in the case of the entrepreneur – the more valuable her product or service, the more customers, the more income. This is not as obvious in the case of employed work, where the teacher is barely paid a living wage but the manager is given large bonuses. Or jobs in the service sector where someone has to work two or three jobs to support a small family. But ideally it is a measure of value.

The problem with unemployment is that it leads to low self-esteem and low self-worth. This can lead to depression and lethargy and their associated side effects. I say this from personal experience, having been unable to find even meaningless work for two months one summer between years at uni. Now I live in an area of high unemployment, and living “off the dole” becomes a way of life, not a temporary measure to keep from losing your house between positions. These mostly young people are not benefiting society at all, except in the way they keep the chip shops open. And they have tremendous worth, so much potential, which is being wasted. So having all these youths living off benefits is damaging to them and to society. Surely there is a solution.

We don’t lack vision in Penwith. On the contrary, we have a comprehensive plan to achieve a wonderful standard of living. What we lack are resources. Is anyone else seeing the puzzle pieces coming together? We are already paying benefits for hundreds of people in my town alone. If a condition of unemployment benefit was part-time volunteer work, this labour would essentially be gratis. Hundreds of hands pushing forward the agenda of the area. Hundreds of people gaining skills in all areas of occupation. Hundreds of people building affordable housing, organizing events, keeping accounts, working in charity shops, providing support for new businesses, working with the elderly, the very young, the disabled, caring for injured or unwanted animals, there simply is no aspect of our modern society which could not benefit from an increased pool of unpaid workers. The trade off for industry and government is that, in exchange for all this free labour, time must be taken to provide these workers with training in valuable skills. Too often volunteers are given the unskilled work only, which benefits only the organization and not the volunteer (many voluntary workers become disenchanted with this kind of work when they remain unchallenged).

This seems like a win-win-win to me. People on benefits contribute to society, which leads to increased self-esteem and empowerment, and learn new skills, which also lead to increased self-esteem and better chances of well paid employment. Businesses both public and private are able to increase their workforce at no additional cost (most businesses are understaffed but lack the funds to add workers). Paid workers find their workloads become more manageable and they benefit from the experience of mentoring unpaid workers. Social programmes which now cannot get off the ground due to lack of resources find the human factor miraculously accounted for.

I cannot see the flaw in my own logic. Perhaps one of my intelligent readers (all two of you) can explain why this wouldn't work. As usual, I welcome all polite responses.