+
From: "na.devine" <na.devine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 10:39:04 +1200
Doug's comment is important despite his deprecation. If the U.S. bureau
of statistics is correct, then traditional methods of organising labour
(and of thinking labour) would still be working. They are not - here at
least, and probably through the 'developed' world.
What definitions of contingency did the Govt use in its statistics?
Whosse ends did such a conclusion serve? Come on, Doug, this is
pre-post-modern state-istics we are talking here.
Nesta