Working fewer hours would make us more productive • Hacker News Board

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#21

Post by robinwarren » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:19 PM UTC

Alan01252 wrote: post #18

DanBC wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The article mentions a correlation between shorter working hours and higher productivity. As always, correlation does not equal causation. Most likely those countries with shorter work weeks are developed countries which have higher output per capita than less developed ones not because working 40 hours a weeks is more productive than working 80, but that utilising a higher level of technology gives superior output…

Purely anecdotal I know, but since giving up my job in the city and going freelance I have indeed spent far less time drinking and far more time exercising. A quick one after work was far too common. I buckled far too easily to peer pressure and conformity. After all it's the done thing to do right? A crap day at work is solved by a pint (or three) after? And a good day at work... well that could be considerably more…

What is the cause of the reduced drinking? Reduced hours worked meaning you're happier? Or no work colleagues to lead you astray?

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#22

Post by lmm » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:24 PM UTC

golergka wrote: post #7

I agree that shorter hours are likely to be beneficial, but why are people trying to achieve this by passing a law? I think that this can be achieved with a softer approach. Imagine that when you sign up for a job, you select how many days per week do you want to work, from 3 to 6, with proportionate wage scale. That you can select what hours do you want to work. That it's easy to change this arrangement while you're…

The only way to change culture is through law. Look at seatbelt use: decades of public awareness campaigns did nothing, but once it became a legal requirement people switched.

Also laws are the way to prevent a race to the bottom. If it's legal to work longer hours people will, and everyone else will do so to compete with them. Compare OHSA, see http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ .

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#23

Post by lmm » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:25 PM UTC

glasz wrote: post #10

let's start by just cutting aka not doing ALL THE BULLSHIT that is being done. all the needless crap. ding 50% time saved. "what" you ask? take a serious look at your inbox.

If you have to have your bum in the seat for 40+ hours/week to get paid, why would you bother? The "bullshit" gives you something to do when you're too tired to be actually productive.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#24

Post by Alan01252 » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:28 PM UTC

robinwarren wrote: post #21

Alan01252 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Purely anecdotal I know, but since giving up my job in the city and going freelance I have indeed spent far less time drinking and far more time exercising. A quick one after work was far too common. I buckled far too easily to peer pressure and conformity. After all it's the done thing to do right? A crap day at work is solved by a pint (or three) after? And a good day at work... well that could be considerably more…

What is the cause of the reduced drinking? Reduced hours worked meaning you're happier? Or no work colleagues to lead you astray?

The reduction in hours has allowed me to do activities which overall make me happier and less inclined to drink.

I now do a lot of running and bodyweight fitness. Drinking decreases my performance in those two activities and so I tend not to drink as I get far greater happiness from dropping a second in my minutes per mile than I do from having three pints during the week.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#25

Post by marklgr » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:29 PM UTC

golergka wrote: post #19

marklgr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need to stop labeling the first of these persons as "successful" and second one as a "failure" It's not about judging employees from a moral standpoint, but getting the most skill and involvement going into your project/company. So, one of the questions would be: does 20h/wk + 20h/wk = 40h/wk skills+involvement, ie. is it linear? Wouldn't 20h/wk jobs be limited to inherently part-time, low importance tasks--whic…

> Wouldn't 20h/wk jobs be limited to inherently part-time, low importance tasks--which means you got to have plenty of funds to staff for them in the 1st place? Interesting question. Not necessarily; as a lead developer, I just had an experience of a talented freelancer joining my project for 20 hours per week and helping with issues that we delegated to him so we can fit in the deadline. On one hand, _usually_, 9 wo…

Freelancers often work part-time because they are more expensive, so they are not hired full-time, but they generally have many clients in the same week when they can. Moreover, they most often have some expertise in their field, which means they still devote quite a bit of time keeping up to date--they don't just spend their time with the kids. What they can do, though, is taking several months off, either between contracts or when it is ok with their long-time clients.

Anyway, that's a kind of special situation, essentially unrelated to the employee working 20h/wk to take care of their family.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#26

Post by zerebubuth » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:31 PM UTC

marklgr wrote: post #15

golergka wrote: post #7

I agree that shorter hours are likely to be beneficial, but why are people trying to achieve this by passing a law? I think that this can be achieved with a softer approach. Imagine that when you sign up for a job, you select how many days per week do you want to work, from 3 to 6, with proportionate wage scale. That you can select what hours do you want to work. That it's easy to change this arrangement while you're…

> We need to stop labeling the first of these persons as "successful" and second one as a "failure" It's not about judging employees from a moral standpoint, but getting the most skill and involvement going into your project/company. So, one of the questions would be: does 20h/wk + 20h/wk = 40h/wk skills+involvement, ie. is it linear? Wouldn't 20h/wk jobs be limited to inherently part-time, low importance tasks--whic…

> So, one of the questions would be: does 20h/wk + 20h/wk = 40h/wk skills+involvement, ie. is it linear? Wouldn't 20h/wk jobs be limited to inherently part-time, low importance tasks--which means you got to have plenty of funds to staff for them in the 1st place?

It would seem to me that 2 people working 20h/wk offers some significant advantages over one person working 40h/wk.

Firstly, it allows for fail-over; when one person is unable to work (due to holiday or illness, for example) the other might be able to handle 40h/wk for a short period to cover. If one person leaves the company suddenly, it allows for continuity of knowledge while a third person is hired and trained.

Secondly, it allows for variable output; two people can "burst" up to 80h/wk in response to workload, whereas one person would find that very stressful.

Thirdly, multiple people bring multiple points of view, increasing the chances of serendipitous ideas and solutions, and increasing the potential benefit of using people's special skills or experience. Basically, the company is renting two brains for the price of one.

There are some downsides too: The management overhead is higher (equipment, legal, payroll, etc...) and things that were simple when done by a single person are now more complex since there needs to be coordination between multiple people.

To use an incredibly bad analogy: It's like moving from a monolithic "big iron" server to a pair or farm of smaller ones. There are many advantages, but it means it's now a distributed system with all the problems that can bring.

The problems aren't insoluble and don't limit 20h/wk employees to low-importance tasks: Many open source and volunteer projects function perfectly well with many, small, variable inputs from their contributors, many of which will be high-importance.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#27

Post by miseg » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:33 PM UTC

golergka wrote: post #7

I agree that shorter hours are likely to be beneficial, but why are people trying to achieve this by passing a law? I think that this can be achieved with a softer approach. Imagine that when you sign up for a job, you select how many days per week do you want to work, from 3 to 6, with proportionate wage scale. That you can select what hours do you want to work. That it's easy to change this arrangement while you're…

I would give higher preference to an employment opportunity that required less than full-time work. But I haven't found any like that.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#28

Post by mooreds » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:46 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #22

golergka wrote: post #7

I agree that shorter hours are likely to be beneficial, but why are people trying to achieve this by passing a law? I think that this can be achieved with a softer approach. Imagine that when you sign up for a job, you select how many days per week do you want to work, from 3 to 6, with proportionate wage scale. That you can select what hours do you want to work. That it's easy to change this arrangement while you're…

The only way to change culture is through law. Look at seatbelt use: decades of public awareness campaigns did nothing, but once it became a legal requirement people switched. Also laws are the way to prevent a race to the bottom. If it's legal to work longer hours people will, and everyone else will do so to compete with them. Compare OHSA, see http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ .

Wow, thanks for the link. That is awesome--at least what I have read of it so far.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#29

Post by branchless » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:47 PM UTC

Until we have control over land prices via land value tax we will always work a full week.

Land prices are set by credit which will expand to fill all labour less food / heating costs.

Only when land is cheaper can we opt out of working 40 hours and this will see a general reduction in the average working week. Until then we are all banker bitches.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#30

Post by throwaway7767 » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 12:47 PM UTC

I changed my working arrangement to 80% recently, so now I work four 8-hour day weeks. I wholeheartedly recommend it if you can make it work.

I have wednesday off, so the week is divided into two-day stretches.

Not sure if I'm any more productive (maybe), but I'm a lot happier. I suspect some coworkers are going to follow my lead, now that the precedent has been set.