|
|
|
|
|
by watwut
1256 days ago
|
|
That article ignores quite a lot of activity that needs to be done. It seems to count only some kind of field work or work for landlord as work and ignores everything else that needs to be done. Or take this: > t stretched from dawn to dusk (sixteen hours in summer and eight in winter), but, as the Bishop Pilkington has noted, work was intermittent - called to a halt for breakfast, lunch, the customary afternoon nap, and dinner. Depending on time and place, there were also midmorning and midafternoon refreshment breaks. These rest periods were the traditional rights of laborers, which they enjoyed even during peak harvest times. This literally describes full day of work, but tries to make it sound like it is less then that. It is made to sound like it is somehow less, because there is time for lunch, dinner and a break once in two to three hours. |
|
That 90+ minute break is a little more than a smoke break in the middle of a long shift. Similarly people didn’t have stop watches to time the other two breaks which lasted significant periods on top of the normal short breaks required for any significant physical labor.
Also in reference to “work that need to be done” we don’t include washing our clothes or shopping in labor statistics. If you define works as any productive activity then modern labor statistics also need no be dramatically increased.