Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.
One effect of the pandemic has been to strip away some of the mythologies of the labor market to reveal its bare essentials, what we have come to know as our “key workers”: that extraordinary front line army in the NHS, the indispensable “caring professions”, the teachers who have tried to manage their children at home and our children on Zoom, the refuse collectors and transport workers and shop assistants and delivery drivers who have risked their health to keep it all going. How can it be that these jobs, that none of us can do without and not all of us would be able or prepared to do, are routinely among the lowliest in terms of reward? Should it really only be the market that decides what work is worth? How can we continue to justify a world in which Dido Harding’s management consultants pocket in a couple of days what an ICU nurse might earn in a month or where Jeff Bezos makes many, many times more in a second than one of his warehouse workers takes home in a year?
Sarah Jaffe’s book Work Won’t Love You Back is an extremely timely analysis of how we arrived at these brutal inequalities and of some of the ways in which a deliberately atomized workforce is beginning to organize to challenge them. Through a series of detailed case studies of modern “laborers of love” – the unpaid intern, the overburdened teacher, the 24/7 domestic help, the NGO employee, the fixed-term academic, the discarded Toys R Us worker, the working single mother – Jaffe, a New York-based journalist, examines two of the most damaging philosophies of our times. The first is the idea that we need to get used to a “disrupted” world in which job security and regular hours and living wages are necessarily a thing of the past, quaint, pre-internet relics such as affordable housing and three TV channels; the second, perversely, that work is supposed, more than ever, to bring us pleasure, meaning, fulfillment, that we should be grateful for it and happy in it and if we are not, we are simply not trying hard enough or being “smart” enough.
Apart from that, the pandemic has exposed the false borderline of home and work as necessarily separate and hostile worlds, a line that justifies the belief that work done for love in the home is less “valuable” than work done for money out of it. The liberating spirit that justly celebrated women competing on the same career ladder as men often had less to say about the working conditions of the domestic help required to enable it.
Why has the borderline between work and home been described as false in the passage?
Because it does not allow people to work from a comfortable place
Because pandemic has proven that work from home is possible
Because work done in home for love was considered as less valuable which pandemic has proven other wise