Mikael Ottosson

Digital Working Life: Some Introductory Reflections

The development of technology and its ensuing impact on society and working life has taken different expressions in the course of history. Historically, the execution and organisation of labour have always been characterised by the technology it has appropriated. During the 18th and 19th centuries, the steam engine contributed to the industrialisation of much of Europe and North America; during the 20th century, the combustion engine and the electric engine coincided with the development of centralised and large-scale production. These processes were based on the core technologies of their era, but they were also processes that were closely linked to an infrastructure that was undergoing change, urbanisation, globalisation and not least the emergence of wage labour and a capitalist commodity market. Social change should be seen as an interaction between technology and the conditions of production. This means that social change can in itself be technologically driven, but it does not mean that technology alone determines social change. Historical changes do not follow any predetermined course; rather, historical changes require human actions. In this special issue, “Digital Working Life”, we examine the digitalization of working life. Although none of the authors explicitly discuss historical driving forces, the five articles do revolve around the relationship between the organisation of labour and technological change. All articles also highlight knowledge gaps that the authors believe are important to overcome if we are to avoid a development that could lead toward a dystopian future.

What the Hell is a High Standard? The Swedish Employers’ Confederation and the Six-Hour Workday debate in the mid 1970s

A concept that lies at the heart of political rhetoric is that of ‘workfare’. The issue, however, is what types of arguments have been invoked to assert the value of the concept. During the 1960s and 1970s, extensive criticism emerged towards a working life that was said to hinder women’s emancipation; a working life that wasted resources and had a negative impact on the environment; a working life that sought material consumerism rather than quality of life. The demand for a work time reduction also received much support. In this article, we have studied the use of language that The Swedish Employers’ Confederation used when publicly formulating their stances on the work time issue in 1975. We have chosen to highlight the argument contained in a discussion pamphlet published by Swedish Employers’ Confederation, in a situation where the use of language was determined by the left-wing movement, and solidarity, international aid and daycare places were keywords, rather than growth and consumption. The arguments employed in the discussion pamphlet were based in the idea that non-work entails a lack of solidarity for social development. Those who desired a work time reduction were portrayed by Swedish Employers’ Confederation as environmental villains and opponents to the liberation of both oppressed women and the impoverished of the third world. Swedish Employers’ Confederation’s pamphlet can be regarded as an example on how capitalism may handle major criticism. By reversing the meaning of the core concepts of the criticism, opponents’ arguments were assimilated, which contributed to a new rationalization of the capitalism. One of the major contributions from our study to the research field is an improved understanding of how this process developed.