this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024

175 points (97.8% liked)

World News

37367 readers

2867 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

175

Australia to allow workers to ignore after-hours calls from bosses (www.reuters.com)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/world

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 30 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] BombOmOm 36 points 5 months ago

If you aren't getting paid extra for after-hours, don't pickup that phone!

[–] [email protected] 33 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

What a garbage misleading title from Reuters.

We always could not answer calls after work, it was never mandatory.

What this change is, is banning employers from doing it at all and giving fines for those who try to do so.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 months ago (2 children)

To allow? What? Was Australia requiring/forcing everyone to answer calls from bosses at all hours?

[–] Mr_Blott 51 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Lemmy is called that because we have to keep saying "Lemmy read that article for you, ya lazy cunt"

Australia will introduce laws giving workers the right to ignore unreasonable calls and messages from their bosses outside of work hours without penalty, with potential fines for employers that breach the rule.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Is this the good, banter cunt or the bad, you stink cunt in this context? I can never tell.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I took it as good banter and it's a response to me. So if you're offended in my honor then you're a bit too sensitive for the internet.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm offended that you think I'd be offended!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well I'm offend at your offense of my idea that you'd be offended!!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Fair enough. Cheers!

[–] Mr_Blott 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The "ya" bit makes it the bantery type. If it was "you" it'd be the stinky type

[+] [email protected] -44 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

I mean you spend the time to read the article already, why not help someone else save that time?

Also, calling someone lazy is ableist, please don't do that, you don't know another person's circumstances or if that's a trigger...

Edit: For anyone interested to know more about ableism or why laziness is an ableist concept:

[–] Mr_Blott 24 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

People like you make the world worse, not better

Calling someone a lazy cunt is better for them in the long term than being a self righteous wank like you

Edit to reply to OP's edit -

Stop reading shite like that mate, it's fucking brain-rot 😂

[–] Feathercrown 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Lemmy's in a fighting mood today huh?

[–] Mr_Blott 8 points 5 months ago

Yeah, if someone uses "ableist" and "trigger" in the same sentence, they got their personality from other people online who are also just desperate to make everything about themselves and feel morally superior to everyone around them

Then they wonder why they grow old lonely lol

[–] ArtVandelay 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

So ideally, one person should read the article and disseminate it to others, who then disseminated to others, all in the name of saving time? Have you ever played a game called telephone?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I have played that game! You make a convincing argument for reading the article and not relying on others to read it for you, as nearly every time I've played telephone the original phrase is completely lost.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

I have fiddled with that concept, too! You are almost persuading me to buy a newspaper and have a look by myself, instead of trusting people to read the article to me, because when I send too many letter chains, the result is usually non sense.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

First of all, thanks for the interesting outlook, it gave something to think about!

In general, I don't like thinking in absolutes. It's not like everyone will read the article or everyone won't, some people will and some won't.

There it helps me to break down to more categories:

People that will read the article, understand it, and have critical thoughts to share.
People that will read the article, understand it, but won't have anything to add or critize.
People that will read the article, but won't understand it.
People that won't read the article, but would if something caught their attention (like a question on the comments).
People that won't read the article, but would read the comments.
People that won't read the article, but will comment something interesting about the title or the discussions in the comments.
People that won't interact with the post at all.
Other possible categories I haven't considered.

The telephone game is really helpful to understand how interactions between people of the categories above will go. However, keep in mind that the goal is not necessarily 100% accurate transmission of the author's message. On the contrary, it's possible people are looking for different interpretations, relevant information, criticism, and/or a laugh.

Personally, I really like it when people provide quotes they find interesting along with their own analysis. An example would be:

To allow? What? Was Australia requiring/forcing everyone to answer calls from bosses at all hours?

Australia will introduce laws giving workers the right to ignore unreasonable calls and messages from their bosses outside of work hours without penalty, with potential fines for employers that breach the rule.

So you cannot be fired anymore for not answering your boss's 2AM call. It nice to make to make progress, but the bar is so low it's a tavern in Hades...

[–] Mr_Blott 1 points 5 months ago

Sorry mate, didn't realise you were an autist lol

Don't learn to interact with people by using phrases that you read on the internet, you just end up sounding like a fuckin idiot, which I'm sure you're not 😂. Entirely.

[–] theherk 7 points 5 months ago

Telling somebody that using basic adjectives otherwise not considered pejorative is ableist is my trigger, so like… please don’t do that around me.

[–] TheBananaKing 10 points 5 months ago

Our labour laws are a lot better than the US, but there are some gaps.

One of those gaps is out-of-hours work calls/emails: there's currently no explicit protection against your employer insisting you make yourself available.

Lots of unionised workplaces have a 'right to disconnect' clause in the EBA, but if you don't have an EBA, you're on your own.

This legislation aims to fix that.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

This wasn't already the case?

[–] not_that_guy05 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Wtf do you mean allow? Are people from Australia fuckin servants or something?

Wtf is going on down under?