Dear Editor,

This piece is in response to Jaemar Johnson’s letter to the editor titled ‘One job is no longer enough!’, which was published in the January 8, 2026 edition of the Jamaica Observer.

Johnson’s thoughts — articulated with profound frustration — aptly captured a long-standing reality for many employees across Jamaica. Indeed, given the high cost of living, stagnant wages, and persistent economic pressures, it is extremely difficult for many workers who earn low or modest salaries to be able to sustain themselves or their families on a single full-time job. Consequently, there is merit in recognising that holding more than one job can be rational, and even empowering, for modern Jamaicans.

At its core, Johnson’s letter speaks to economic survival. Food, housing, utilities, transportation, and education costs continue their upward climb, often far beyond wage growth. Many workers find that a single income, especially at entry-level or minimum wage, simply does not cover basic needs. Many people are living hand to mouth. And even while public sector salaries were increased awhile back, the words of national icon and poet Louise Bennett reflect deeper today in our society: “Sun a shine, but tings no bright…Rain a fall, but dutty tough.”

Many — including some in admirable positions or professions — are literally struggling to make ends meet, even while living within their means. To alleviate the financial struggles people should be afforded the flexibility to have more than one job. Finding additional sources of income should not be considered a sign of disloyalty or lack of commitment to an employer; it is a coping strategy, a way to keep food on the table, maintain dignity, and fulfil one’s dreams and goals. Additionally, some of us are in demand because of our rare skill set, so we are sought after. Therefore, supporting flexible work arrangements — staggered hours, compressed schedules, and remote options — could help workers balance multiple roles while preserving productivity and health.

Every day workers wake up early and dress up nicely to go work, building another man’s business and the Government’s coffers. But while we build these companies and agencies, helping them to increase productivity and profits, who is building our futures when we spend eight to 12 hours daily at work? Some employees are deeply invested in their jobs, but in the long run there is nothing to show for their immeasurable commitment and enviable work ethic. This begs the question: Should we really give our all to our workplace? There should be mutual benefit.

Moreover, multiple jobholding can help broaden skill sets and diversify income streams. A part-time business, gig work, freelancing, or a second job in a related field can allow workers to develop new competencies, network across sectors, and build professional resilience. This diversification can be especially valuable in economies in which employment opportunities are limited or unevenly distributed across geographic areas. In that sense, embracing a broader understanding of work can align with the growing global trend towards portfolio careers and lifelong learning.

Besides, do workers in every sector need to be at work physically for a minimum of eight hours daily? Many people’s work can be done in four hours. What, then, is the point of a full day in office simply because the system wants to police you? And if my job does not require me to be on site daily to complete my tasks, why should I go through the hassle of traffic, commute time, paying toll, and buying gas to perform something I could do from my bed? What exactly is work? Is it one’s physical presence or one’s completion of specific tasks within a fixed time frame?

However, while normalising multiple jobholding may be part of a practical response, it should not be mistaken for a long-term solution to structural economic challenges as it presents serious limitations and risks if it becomes a substitute for decent wages and fair labour policy.

First, not all workers have the capacity or physical energy to juggle multiple roles, especially those with caregiving responsibilities, health challenges, or long commutes. Normalising multiple jobs without addressing underlying wage stagnation could inadvertently reinforce a low-wage economy in which workers are expected to do more for less.

Second, Johnson’s letter rightly calls for more flexible work arrangements, but this must be tied to strong labour protections. Flexible work should not be a euphemism for job insecurity, unpredictable hours, or unpaid overtime. Workers should not have to trade stability for flexibility; policymakers and employers must ensure that flexibility enhances work–life balance, not erode it.

Third, focusing solely on individual adaptation risks obscuring broader structural factors that depress incomes and limit economic mobility. As other economic commentators have pointed out, issues like low productivity growth, mismatches between education and labour market needs, and insufficient investment in high-value sectors all contribute to the wage–cost imbalance many Jamaicans face. Increased jobholding does little to address these root causes if incomes remain disconnected from the real cost of living.

Finally, normalising multiple jobs should not distract from the need for policy frameworks that promote fair wages, robust social protection, and opportunities for upward mobility. Whether through stronger minimum wage laws, targeted skills training, expanded remote work opportunities that tap into global markets, or incentives for businesses to create more meaningful, well-paid roles, structural reforms must accompany shifts in work culture.

In other words, while multiple jobs might be a necessary survival strategy for many today, they should not become a permanent expectation imposed on workers by economic necessity. To truly support Jamaicans in 2026 and beyond, we need a dual approach: one that gives workers the flexibility to pursue multiple incomes when beneficial and another that strengthens the conditions under which one good job — one that pays fairly and respects worker well-being — can once again be enough.

Oneil Madden

maddenoniel@yahoo.com