• @Phoenix3875
    link
    English
    3528 days ago

    I’m not saying everything about China is evil, but 996 is an actual thing, actively resented by Chinese young people. I’ve got friends working such schedules. I’m presenting their views. I had also visited their offices and saw the folding beds.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -628 days ago

      Every instance of someone taking a company to court over 996 has resulted in them winning. Those choosing not to do so are doing exactly that, choosing not to. In my experience, it’s usually because they’re already well-paid and they get multiple hours long breaks anyway, so they end up working about 8 hours a day.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        28 days ago

        Is it possible to share your source on “Every instance of someone taking a company to court over 996 has resulted in them winning.”?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1428 days ago

      Yes people all over the world sometimes work long hours, in China 996 is illegal so your friends should report their boss or maybe they are working in an illegal industry like scamming or fraud and choose to do this?

      The whole reason 996 is so well know.in the west is it’s part of the reason jack ma was forced out of such a powerful position, the government have actually being doing stuff to stop bad working practices.

      Congratulations you support and agree with measures the ccp are taking.

      And yes you might know one billionth of the Chinese population but that anecdote us not data, the fact remains fhe people in the article like the statistical majority of working people in China do 9-5 or equivalent.

      • @Phoenix3875
        link
        English
        1428 days ago

        Have you heard of 996.icu? I don’t know where you get your statistics, but have a walk around 五道口 and you’ll understand.

        Also, I don’t know where you see that I’m a fan of CCP. The government is largely responsible for the phenomenon by not prosecuting the companies lol.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1228 days ago

          Ha you’re clutching at straws now ‘ccp isn’t heavy handed enough in enforcing it’s legislation’ OK buddy, sure.

          And obviously I was joking it’s clear you’re emotionally set against ccp and see fhem as ontological evil so can’t even imagine the possibility you and them agree about a complex social problem in China, though I am surprised you went for saying they’re not authoritarian enough lol

          China has traditionally had very poor labor conditions but the ccp is working to change that by opposing the very thing you hold up as a moral failing in China- is it really so hard to say you agree with them and say they’re on the right in this?

          And again walking around affluent bits of Beijing might be lovely on a summers evening but it’s no replacement for actual statistical analysis of working conditions, it’s probably less informative than your friend’s out of context anecdote tbh.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            6
            edit-2
            28 days ago

            Chinese government are turning a blind eye on companies, but not on individuals, this is the primary evidence of state-sponsored capitalism.

            Right on the front page of 996.icu, Chinese government are willing to prosecute a individual for the use of VPN for work, and confiscated all their income for the duration of their use of VPN (3 years, 1058k rmb, roughly 146k USD, which is more than most people’s life savings), with some additional fine.

            Imaging if CCP seek to bankrupt every single company that disobey the law in the same manner, then 996 would never ever exists.

            Maybe you can educate me on this, is there any prosecution that fine a company the entirety of its revenue during the 996 policy period?