In most places employers are required to offer some amount of vacation pay to their employees. This amount encourages workers to take their vacations, and keeps the workforce happier and healthier. As such it is an already extant form of paid rest.

Paid Rest, as it pertains to this idea, does not yet exist. It is based on the simple observation that much of workers' time outside of the workplace is still devoted to the workplace. For example, in order to be well-rested for a day's work, workers must go to bed early. This means that workers are not only sacrificing their time during their shifts, but also well beyond shift's end.

Heretofore workers have not been compensated for this time. What's worse is that they have even lost employment for not having had enough rest, but for spending every precious moment of their free time at their amusement. It's not been just a few workers who have faithfully staggered bleary-eyed to the punch clock only to be dismissed.

If only they had been paid to rest would this treatment be just! Therefore, employers should be made to adopt a system of Paid Rest. While this would be mandatory, it is for the employer to decide how much rest they require from those they employ. Afterall, it would not be fair to demand eight hours paid rest when only four would suffice. However, an appropriate amount of time must be paid to allow for the recovery of workers from their previous day's labour which would be determined by the nature of the work.
-- rcarty, Apr 10 2012

[+]... I hate the idea mind you, but [+] nonetheless.
-- FlyingToaster, Apr 10 2012


Vacation pay? hahaha
Benefits? hahahahaha
Pension? hahahahahahahaha

Stop it.
Stop it now, I'm gonna pee.
<wipes tear>
-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Apr 10 2012


The opposite used to exist, in the bread baking biz back in the Victorian era. The bakers would knead the dough (apologies to Terry Pratchett again), then cover it in a (hopefully) clean sheet, then sleep on it and their body heat would make the dough rise.

Found it in Das Kapital (Volume 1), as you do.
-- not_morrison_rm, Apr 10 2012


The flaw seems to be- if employers must pay for rest time, they should pay for everything we need to do to go to work. They'd have to pay me for shopping for work clothes, buying lunch, gas in my car (which some people do get reimbursed for), and esp. all the things I can't be doing at home, whilst I'm at work!
-- xandram, Apr 10 2012


I believe (could be wrong) that some companies in Japan and Spain have paid naptimes during the workday.

The same exists in at least one form in the US, albeit under extenuating circumstances: when I worked for the railroad, I was part of the 'Wrecking Crew' that would go out and put cars back on the rails after derailments. Since a main line derail effectively shuts down major segments of the road, the crew works straight through until the job is done (I once worked a nineteen-hour stretch, but others have gone even longer). If this takes multiple days, a nearby hotel room is rented and guys are pulled off the line to go sleep for four or five hours. In this case, wreckers get paid for 'sleep time' just as if they were still on site (and wrecking pays _a lot_, between overtime and multiple hazard pay). This being the railroad, which is eclipsed only by international shipping in terms of unregulated business practices, some guys would spend their sleep time at the nearest bar or strip joint without fear of recrimination.

In addition, I think long-haul truckers are paid for their required rest periods while on the road. Not sure about that one.
-- Alterother, Apr 10 2012


This could be achieved by dividing the minimum wage by three.
-- nineteenthly, Apr 12 2012



random, halfbakery