Working From Home: A Philosophical Exploration

在家工作：哲学探索

• 批准号: 2732603
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: University of Oxford
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2022
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2022 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2732603
• 关键词: Working; Home; Philosophical; Exploration

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically upended previous working arrangements. According to the Office for National Statistics, a whopping 47% of working adults in the UK did some paid work at home in April 2020 during the national lockdown (ONS 2020). Far from some momentary blip, working-from-home (WFH) looks likely to become the new modus operandi for many office workers. Despite this, there has been almost no writing on WFH within mainstream political theory. There is an emerging philosophical literature on paid work (Appiah 2021) and economic policies such as universal basic income (Bidadanure 2019). However, it is noteworthy that most of this literature focuses on standard forms of employment. Even rare exceptions to this, such as the EU-funded project 'Justice at Work' (Universitat Pompeu Fabra 2021), still neglect WFH. My research, which falls within the field of analytical political theory, will fill this gap by offering a novel conceptual and normative analysis of WFH.My main research question is the following: How, and on what basis, should governments regulate working-from-home? In order to answer this overarching question, I will pursue three sub-questions:1. What are the non-monetary goods and bads associated with working-from-home? 2. What would a free market approach to working-from-home look like, and what is its initial intuitive appeal?3. Why would a free market approach to working-from-home be defective?For my first sub-question, I am keen to document how the shift towards WFH alters the relative balance of the non-monetary 'goods' and 'bads' of paid work (Gheaus & Herzog 2016). This information could help firms to improve the nature of WFH for their employees. For example, the UK trade union Prospect has called for a ban on the use of surveillance technology such as webcams to monitor employees throughout the working day (Prospect 2021) - would this be desirable?My second and third sub-questions offer a normative analysis of WFH, which is urgently needed. Initially, it might seem plausible that in a liberal society, individuals should ceteris paribus be given the opportunity to choose where to work, including the choice of whether to work-from-home. In this way, a 'free market' approach to WFH is intuitively appealing since it supposedly maximises workers' autonomy. I will argue against this free market view, examining three powerful objections which each have profound implications for how governments should regulate WFH. My research has the potential to be highly significant for policy. In the final chapter of my dissertation, I will assess how UK and EU policymakers should amend existing legal frameworks around WFH in light of my normative analysis.My PhD dissertation will build on my 30,000-word master's thesis on the same topic. My background in political theory is chiefly in the analytic tradition; I have experience reading philosophical texts closely, unpacking key concepts, and undertaking detailed argumentative analysis. To facilitate the writing of my dissertation, I will attend academic conferences, read online journals and use resources in the university's libraries.I intend to use the research method of reflective equilibrium, which I am familiar with and will have already employed in my master's thesis. This is a deliberative process whereby a political theorist goes back and forth between a set of normative principles and their own considered convictions, either revising the principles or their convictions until there are no further discrepancies between the two; John Rawls famously relied on reflective equilibrium when attempting to derive principles of justice from the so-called 'Original Position' (Rawls 1971).v

新冠肺炎疫情戏剧性地颠覆了之前的工作安排。根据英国国家统计局的数据，在2020年4月国家停工期间，高达47%的英国成年职场人在家中做过一些有偿工作。在家办公(WFH)看起来很可能成为许多上班族的新工作方式，而不是昙花一现。尽管如此，主流政治理论中几乎没有关于WFH的文章。出现了关于有偿工作(Appiah 2021)和普遍基本收入(Bidadanure 2019)等经济政策的新兴哲学文献。然而，值得注意的是，这些文献大多侧重于标准的就业形式。即使是极少数的例外，比如欧盟资助的项目“工作中的正义”(University At Pompeu Fabra 2021)，仍然忽视了WFH。我的研究属于分析政治理论领域，将通过提供对WFH的新的概念和规范分析来填补这一空白。我的主要研究问题如下：政府应该如何以及基于什么来监管在家工作？为了回答这个首要问题，我将回答三个子问题：1.与在家工作相关的非货币性好处和坏处是什么？2.在家工作的自由市场方法会是什么样子，它最初的直觉吸引力是什么？3.为什么在家工作的自由市场方法是有缺陷的？对于我的第一个子问题，我热衷于记录向WFH的转变如何改变有偿工作的非货币性“好处”和“坏处”的相对平衡(Gheaus&Herzog 2016)。这些信息可以帮助公司改善其员工的WFH性质。例如，英国工会展望呼吁禁止使用网络摄像头等监控技术在整个工作日监控员工(展望2021年)--这是可取的吗？我的第二个和第三个子问题提供了对WFH的规范分析，这是迫切需要的。起初，在一个自由的社会里，个人应该有机会选择在哪里工作，包括选择是否在家工作，这看起来似乎是合理的。在这种情况下，WFH的“自由市场”方法直观上是有吸引力的，因为它理应最大限度地提高工人的自主权。我将反驳这种自由市场观点，考察三种强有力的反对意见，每一种反对意见都对政府应该如何监管WFH具有深远的影响。我的研究有可能对政策具有非常重要的意义。在我论文的最后一章，我将根据我的规范分析，评估英国和欧盟政策制定者应该如何修改围绕WFH的现有法律框架。我的博士论文将以我30,000字的硕士论文为基础。我的政治理论背景主要是分析传统；我有仔细阅读哲学文本，梳理关键概念，进行详细的论证分析的经验。为了方便我的论文写作，我将参加学术会议，阅读在线期刊，利用大学图书馆的资源。我打算使用我熟悉的反思平衡的研究方法，我的硕士论文已经使用了这种方法。这是一个深思熟虑的过程，在这个过程中，政治理论家在一套规范性原则和他们自己深思熟虑的信念之间来回转换，要么修改这些原则，要么修改他们的信念，直到两者之间没有进一步的差异；约翰·罗尔斯(John Rawls)著名地依赖于反思平衡，试图从所谓的“原始立场”推导出正义原则(Rawls 1971)。