As I thought he would too.
Skidelsky’s report on working hours has failed – entirely except for just one line which doesn’t go anywhere – to mention unpaid household working hours. Which, given that this is some half of all working hours is an important lacuna in a report about working hours.
It is simply not possible to make sense of what has happened – and will – without understanding this.
A pencil sketch of working hours this past century. A massive fall in female unpaid household working hours. A large fall in male unpaid household working hours. A considerable rise in female paid market working hours. A reduction in male paid market working hours.
The combination of all leading to increased leisure hours for both male and female.
Now try and parse events without reference to household working hours. Not going to make sense, is it? Today’s massively richer women are working more hours? Whut?
Skidelsky’s report ain’t worth the transient electrons its printed upon.