Uppsatsen tog utgångspunkt i det trendiga begreppet postsanning som 2016 utsågs till årets ord av Oxford Dictionaries (BBC 2016). Trenden är till följd av den postfaktiskta epok vi, av många, påstått trätt in i. En epok där relationen till sanningen kommit att bli sekundär och där ett kommunicerande gentemot känslor och övertygelse kommit att bli desto viktigare. Ingenstans är detta mer tydligt än på sociala medier. Med kritisk diskursanalys som metod undersöktes Facebookgrupperna inte rasist men och #sverigeärfullt. Frågeställningarna som söktes besvaras var vilket innehåll dominerar i de två grupperna, vilka återkommande föreställningar ges uttryck för och vad är förgivettagna fakta i dessa grupper och hur produceras och reproduceras detta? Fokus för analysen handlande om hur ramverken på de båda sidorna skiljer sig åt i sin uppbyggnad till innehåll, men fann dem också förefalla snarlika i sina diskursiva praktiker. Här fokuserades på hur båda grupperna använder sig av postsanningar och bullshit för att bygga upp ramarna inom grupperna och för att ifrågasätta andra ramar som uppstår i motstånd till den rådande dito. Gruppernas eget existensberättigande tycks finnas i konflikten till den tilltänkta motparten som ofta beskrivs som förljugen och vilseledande. / The thesis centers itself on the trendy concept of post-truth, which in 2016 was named the word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries (BBC 2016). The trend emerged due to the alleged post-factual epoch we have entered. An epoch where the relationship to truth has come to be secondary and where a communication to feelings and conviction has come to be all the more important. Nowhere is this more evident than on social media. Using critical discourse analysis as a method, the Facebook groups, inte rasist men and #sverigeärfullt were analyzed. Questions that the thesis set out to answer was what content dominates in the two groups, what recurring notions are expressed and, what are the facts in these groups and how do they produce and reproduce this? The focus of the analysis was on how the frameworks in the two Facebook groups differ in their structure, but also appear similar in their discursive practices. Here, focus was on how both groups use post-truths and bullshit to build the frameworks within the groups and to question other frameworks that arise in opposition to the prevailing one. The groups' own justification exists in the conflict to the intended counterparty, which often is described as lying and being deceitful.

In my thesis I deal with the concept of meaningful work in a platform economy. Meaningful work is a theoretical as well as a practical problem that exists across various fields of study. Meaningful work is increasingly important topic, which corresponds with actual problems that workers face in their workplace. The main goal of the thesis is to inquire if and how is this concept useful to describe the working conditions of emerging platform economy, which strengthens the class conflict at the workplace. I research this problem on the case of Viennese food delivery service Mjam with application of the method of the phenomenological analysis, which enabled me to study dailiness and experiencing of meaningfulness of work of the couriers. For the analysis, I conducted semi-structured interviews with the riders. Even though the couriers experience occasionally meaningfulness as well as meaninglessness at the workplace, the thesis shows that this concept is rather used to rephrase their crucial problems of the workplace. The researched literature partially ignores the real problems of workers in their workplace as well as the complexity and heterogeneity of the problem of meaningful work.

The objective of this study is to understand the paradigm shift that unfolded throughout the “Great Resignation\Reshuffling” (2020-2022) within the minds of individuals post March 2021. To fully understand the Great Resignation, one must look at the year prior to the event. In March of 2020, the world changed as billions of individuals watched as boundaries, academic institutions, government agencies and corporations shut their doors all in the name of containment of the infectious disease known as Coronavirus (COVID-19). As cases increased across the global, organizations had to reassess the human capital cost considering dwindling revenue and executive orders that closed all nonessential businesses. The decision by U.S organizations to furlough and/or lay off workers led to approximately 23 million Americans unemployed and standing in a place of ambiguity. Over the next two (2) years, the government worked in collaboration with organizations to instate policies/protocols to re-open America and return life to the new normal inclusive of working online and in person. However, Americans were slow to return to the workforce that once so flippantly provided them a termination letter. The stagnation in ready and able bodies willing to return to the workforce has led to a labor shortage. Despite several efforts to incentivize individuals to return, the statistics did not reflect the desired outcome and the cause was and is relatively unknown. In light of this unprecedent phenomenon, this study utilized a netnography to explore the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Bullshit Job Theory within the framework of re-engaging in the job market after the pandemic. The findings from study one (1) suggest that a newfound sense of worth, salary, stress steward of care, and stumbling blocks are the leading factors that may prohibit individuals from returning to work. As individuals remained on the work sidelines a spillover effect started to unfold. Those individuals working had to shoulder the work of those who had not yet returned and an uptick in quit rates soon emerged known as the Great Resignation. Consequently, the organizations started to cannibalize the job market creating an environment for individuals to resign and explore new opportunities. To investigate this phenomenon, study two (2) performed a deep dive into the subreddit “r/antiwork:” to explore why individuals were quitting their jobs. The data from study two (2) indicates 20% of the high engaging posts on the subreddit thread of “r/antiwork” can be associated with one (1) of the five (5) categories defined as a Bullshit job. / Business Administration/International Business Administration

No description available.

Ce mémoire s’intéresse à la centralité politique du travail à travers une lecture croisée des pensées de la philosophe française Simone Weil (1909-1943) et de l’anthropologue états-unien David Graeber (1961-2020). Il se penche sur le potentiel qu’a le travail de nous former à l’activité politique en développant notre sensibilité au monde qui nous entoure, ainsi qu’à autrui. Nous interrogeons d’abord la forme actuelle que prend le travail. Nous creusons pour ce faire le phénomène de bullshitization de l’économie, décrite par Graeber comme la hausse de la part du temps au travail accordé à l’accomplissement de tâches superflues, de même qu’à l’augmentation générale des emplois inutiles, dits bullshit jobs. Phénomène lié à la bureaucratisation néolibérale croissante de tous les secteurs de la vie, les bullshit jobs impliquent aliénation, ennui et maux physiques liés au stress. Son occupant·e, par la conscience de l’inutilité sociale de son travail, se voit privé·e de participer à la collectivité de manière significative. Iel est, pour emprunter un langage weilien, déraciné·e. Via les travaux de Weil sur le travail d’usine, nous affirmons une certaine continuité entre les formes d’aliénation au travail décrites par Weil et Graeber. Il y a, dans le travail à la chaine des années 1930, dans les bullshit jobs et dans les emplois bullshitizés, une dissociation entre les gestes et la pensée. Dans son expérience en usine, Weil observe la perte de la capacité à exercer son esprit au travail comme un arrachement à la condition humaine. De cette dissociation découle donc une douleur psychologique et sociale considérable — dite « déracinement » —, ainsi que des formes d’hostilité politique. Nous nous penchons finalement sur le potentiel politique d’un travail digne. Pour Simone Weil, la centralité politique du travail découle de sa propension à cultiver la capacité d’attention. Plus qu’une simple capacité cognitive, l’attention est à la fois ce qui permet la liberté individuelle (être capable d’orienter par soi-même son attention) et ce qui favorise le rapport éthique aux autres. La pratique de l’attention au travail permet en ce sens de développer la réceptivité envers autrui, l’un des fondements de la qualité des rapports démocratiques. Pour David Graeber, le travail, sous certaines conditions, se révèle comme lieu de déploiement de l’imagination. Cette dernière permet la nouveauté politique, car elle tend à décloisonner l’imaginaire de cellui qui l’exerce. Chez Weil comme chez Graeber, le travail peut engendrer des relations sociales émancipatrices qui échappent aux rapports de pouvoir oppressifs. / This master’s thesis examines the political centrality of work through a comparative reading of the works of French philosopher Simone Weil (1909–1943), and American anthropologist David Graeber (1961–2020). It focuses on the potential of work as an activity prone to the development of a form of sensitivity to the world, and to other people. We first consider the present experience of work through Graeber’s concept of bullshitization. The bullshitization of the economy refers to the increase of time and energy at work dedicated to needless tasks, as well as to the increase of useless jobs, which Graeber calls “bullshit jobs”. Inseparable from the neoliberal bureaucratization of all branches of life, bullshit jobs lead to alienation, boredom and physical pains related to stress. Moreover, the bullshit worker is kept from having a significant impact on the community they inhabit; they are, in the words of Simone Weil, uprooted (déraciné·e). Through a reading of the Weil’s writings on factory work in 1930s′ France, we establish a continuity between the forms of suffering at work theorized by Graeber and Weil: at the factory, in bullshit jobs and in jobs that have been bullshitized, there is a disconnect between thought and action. During her experience as a factory worker, Weil describes the loss of thinking at work as a stripping of the human condition. From this separation derives not only psychological and social suffering (uprootedness [déracinement]), but also forms of political hostility. We finally explore the political potential of dignified work. Weil derives the political centrality of work from its propension to encourage the practice of attention. More than a cognitive ability, attention is a condition for individual freedom and fosters ethical relationships to others. Attention thus enables openness and receptiveness to others—one of the foundations of a healthy democratic life. For Graeber, work can nurture imagination, which in turn enables the imagining of new political practices. For Simone Weil and David Graeber, dignified work can bring on new and emancipatory social relations, free from oppressive power dynamics.

S'appuyant sur les résultats de trois ans d'enquête de type ethnographique par observation-participante (Lapassade,2006; Plane 2014) auprès des Intermittents du travail- anciens actifs qualifiés qui ont opéré une rupture radicale et volontaire avec un ancien mode de vie confortable, principalement centré sur le travail pour un mode de vie d'apparence plus précaire où la quête d'une meilleure qualité de vie prime sur celle d'un travail rémunérateur et expressif-, cette recherche propose de comprendre ce qui a été rejeté dans le travail et au profit de quoi.L'approche de la psychosociologie du travail et la pratique clinique qui l'accompagne (Lhuilier et al., 2013) nous ont permis d'interpréter les données sous l'angle dialectique d'une transition professionnelle comme acte de résistance autant que de création. Ont ainsi été mis en lumière plusieurs mécanismes potentiellement nocifs dans le travail aujourd'hui, comme l'entretien d'une culture du "stimulacre" (Bouilloud, 2012) autour d'un travail rêvé épanouissant et au réel fondamentalement décevant et, d'autres, plus vitalistes, comme l'expérience d'un travail autrement par un retour à l'"artisanat" au sens large (Sennett,2010) - celui du "beau travail" qui entretient autant le corps que l'esprit -, la débrouille, la polyactivité, l'interconstruction des milieux de vie, entre autres.Cette thèse propose aussi une réflexion sur le travail de terrain du chercheur, ses dilemmes et ses enjeux / Based on the results of a 3-year field study among a population of occasional French workers named after the researcher "Intermittents du travail", this research aims at understanding what is expected from today's work and what is rejected in the way executives experience it. After achieving brillant studies and a successful career start as executives in a big company, the "Intermittents du travail" left everything to come and live on the French West Coast,attempting to design a new way of working which would grant less space to work and more space to private activities. We choose the theoretical framework of the French psychosociology of work and the clinical practical approach that underlies it (Lhuilier et al.,2013) to interpret the data. By conceiving work transitions as an intricacy between resistance and creation processes, both at micro-and macro-social levels, this approach enables us to unveil some mecanisms potentially harmful in today's work that would make top-level workers deeply unsatisfied about the true nature of a work they had dreamt of and idealized during so many years before.Furthermore, the analysis of the transition's aftermaths reveals the critical aspects of what a "good job" should consist in as appositive to the "bullshit job" (Graeber,2013)these people experienced previously: the importance of working as a craftsman in every situation- which means to be concerned by the beauty and the quality of work, both using the head and the hands (Sennette,2010)-, the art of unravelling, the capacity of balancing work activities with leisure ones and,among others