Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice?

[Beverly Jones Redekop (beverly.jones.redekop]

Yes, allowing people to donate hours to others is what it keeps it fair,
compassionate, and grounded in reality.  A specific individual can choose to
give some hours to a neighbour who is busy with an art show or cancer
treatment or being a single parent.  This is different than saying that
people with struggles are excused from work, as that creates the new problem
of wondering who will do the work.

The work doesn't go away, so it's nicer for a specific individual to give
directly to a specific individual.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

          Beverly Jones Redekop

    beverly.jones.redekop [at] gmail.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 7:32 AM, Sharon Villines
<sharon [at] sharonvillines.com>wrote:

>
>
> On 17 Apr 2011, at 1:53 AM, David L. Mandel wrote:
>
> > the problem with "pay or play" is that it can reinforce the inequality.
> Say I'm very busy with what I consider the very important responsibilities
> of my work, family, other activities, whatever. But I'm lucky enough to have
> a well-paying job and rather low expenses, so I can easily choose to pay
> more and work less in the community. You, on the other hand, do vital work
> that doesn't pay much and are struggling to put two kids through college.
> You don't have that choice, so you get stuck with some of my share of the
> community work too. How fair is that? How likely to foster good community
> feelings?
>
> Arguments based on hypotheticals are destructive because they are endless
> and unresolvable. They require counter-arguments based on even more extreme
> examples. And for solutions to be arm wrenchingly impossible. When I was
> interviewing the record keeper at EcoVillage of Loudoun County I raised some
> what-if questions. She responded, "That never happens."
>
> "But what-if?"
>
> "Well, we would deal with it, but it never happens."
>
> Everyone considers their work to be important — either because they need
> the money or it is intrinsically important. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing
> it.
>
> All the workshare programs I've seen allow people to contribute time to
> others — or presumably, even pay for the hours of another. So unless doing
> the work, rather than the work itself, is considered to be essential to
> belonging to the community, one person could do the work of the other and
> use their own judgement about whether it was helpful to the community.
>
> What is important is figuring out how to build and maintain a strong
> community — one in which everyone feels physically and emotionally secure.
> Maintaining a consensus community requires accountability and everyone
> playing by the same rules. If a community can do that without a play or pay
> policy, go for it. I"m not hearing that. They may be doing well in many
> ways, but scratch the surface and you get blood — and factions and
> back-biting, if not back stabbing.
>
> Fairness isn't about exactly the same, but it is about everyone
> contributing more to the sense of the whole than they take away.
>
> Sharon
> ----
> Sharon Villines
> Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
> http://www.takomavillage.org
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
>
>
>