My friend Steve Kneale has done us a useful service by getting us to think about the implications of a home working culture and Christian faith. You can read what he has to say here. I’m writing here not to disagree with Steve, though there are perhaps a couple of things we would have different views on, reflecting political and economic views as much as anything. For example, I’m not convinced by the Trade Union approach of a 4 day week. However, I rather felt that the issues he raised are worth further thinking and development.
It’s maybe self evidently obvious that there cannot be a Christian perspective on whether office/factory working is better than home working. After all the modern concept of office/factory is just that, modern and attempting to overlay that onto Biblical descriptions of work and family is risky.
However, here are some things that are worth thinking about from a Christian perspective. First of all, Scripture tells us that we are to work six days and set one apart completely for rest. This doesn’t mean that our paid work must fill up six days. You are not less Biblical if you take Saturday and Sunday off, or work the aforementioned four day week. It does mean that we are meant to be using our time wisely, providing for our family and community. So, if you do work a four day week, that’s not meant to be so that you can idle away the Friday or enjoy more leisure. It’s meant to be that we use that time gainfully. Housework, maintenance e, voluntary work in the community, things that help to raise your children are all meant to be part of that.
In terms of Steve’s points around the question of productivity, I think it is helpful to consider how we are employed. Some people are paid by the hour, by how much time they give. Others by the amount of work done or the results achieved. In that sense, if my employment is of the latter kind, then I think that there is some flexibility about how I spend the time, If it takes a full day to deliver the results, then that’s what it takes, if iI can achieve what is needed by lunchtime, or if I find that I work better if I go more slowly and break from it for other activities, then that doesn’t matter too much. Again though, whether I’m finishing my paid work by 11 in the morning or breaking it up, I should be considering whether I’m using the downtime from employment fruitfully.
There are also maybe some implications for pastors to think through. Most of us work from home, though a few have church offices. We often find ourselves working flexible hours and in my experience have contracts that talk about “getting the job done.” It’s important that we think about how we best use our weeks. I also am not comfortable with the idea that a pastor takes another day as his “sabbath.” Surely, our sabbath is with God’s people. Surely a day off in the week is not about replacing a Sabbath but rather about creating space for us to do the other kinds of work we need to do.
The Sabbath point leads me to something just as important. Whilst much of the focus from Governments and industry has been on productivity and the fear that people might not be as productive working from home as in the office, the reality is that it is often the other way. Many diligent people find that they work harder and longer if at home. This has long been true of traditionally hybrid professions such as teaching. You are locked in on your own with the wior, there’s no reminder to take breaks and no natural end point to the working day. It’s important that people are resting and taking time to do the non-paid aspects of work.
This also means that we need to think about how employers treat employees. Ephesians 6 of course talks about masters and slaves but the implications are there. There have long been concerns about the treatment of piece workers when working form home (those paid by the amount of product they produce rather than by the hour). Are they receiving a proper minimum wage, are they properly on the books so that employment rights are maintained. There’s a risk with all home workers that they can become isolated. I’m sure unions would be concerned that this risks hindering collective rights and action. It also means that workers are less visible when it comes to career development. The ability to work from home and it to be beneficial may well be a luxury, many workers will not have separate space in the home, dedicated office space as opposed to perching on the end of the bed or using the dining room table. Even that assumes that there is a dining room. There’s probably not a lot to be done about that but it is important that employers still pay attention to working conditions, that employees share in the benefit of reduced rental requirements for the firm, that ergonomic checks are still done and that additional heating costs etc are factored in.
This also brings us back to the specific issue Steve raises concerning “LARPing your job.” The term as he notes comes from the idea of Live Action Role Play. The idea is that you are getting paid to do a job but you aren’t really doing it. You are taking the mickey. As Steve rightly argues, we are not to do this. We are to work diligently both when the boss is watching and when he isn’t.
Larping your work is of course something that happens in both workplace and working from home contexts. Steve quotes the following workplace example from Cierra Gross.
It is inevitable that there will be people who try to game the system in every company… Taskmasking might be associated with low performers, but high performers who quickly finish their work can also do it, too.”
It’s not uncommon for workers to complete a big project and then have nothing to do in the office. “As far as your manager is concerned, your work is done, so you can just sit at a computer and surf the web,”
Note first that what Gross describes here is essentially what has long happened quite overtly at the higher echelons. Consider the perception historically that the bosses could head off to the Golf Course at lunch time. Is that any different to the guy being allowed to play games on the computer? Is there a risk that we see the democratisation of perks causing resentment?
We might also want to think about why the person in the example is allowed to do what he does. One possibility is that it is intentional because the company needs them to be available to respond to urgent needs. There isn’t another meaty bit of work that needs starting just yet and if they do start the next thing early or clock off, then they might not be able to respond quickly to a crisis. In effect they are being paid a retainer.
However, sometimes the issue is around dishonesty. The person is not being open about how quickly they finish work, just as other people are working more slowly than they need. If they are sitting back on the report that took 2 hours to put together and making the recipient wait 48 hours because that’s how long they claimed it would be then that’s not good. So, accountability, transparency and motive are important.
Similarly, sometimes high performers can be under pressure from bosses and peers not to be seen to be too productive because it might start to create questions about whether more work can be achieved, whether the same number of staff are required etc. That would be a bad reason for the boss to let you play computer games or surf the web when you have completed the task.
Again, I appreciate the fact that Steve has got us thinking about work and what God expects of his people in relation to it.
Faithroots 