Live data from Hacker News

Working fewer hours would make us more productive

theguardian.com

131–140 of 253 posts

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#131
post #31

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.

I don't think your plan is for everyone since if you need to be synced with a team not working on Wednesdays is negative in the long run.

Pretty much anything can be made to work if it's planned for and executed properly.

Our dev process required a lot of meetings and interaction. So in order to ensure clear blocks of working time, we used to set aside days as "no meeting days" Some people would take the opportunity to work from home on those days since it was guaranteed they wouldn't be pulled into a meeting. Once you know Sally, Jared and Kaitlyn won't be in on Tuesdays, you plan around it.

It's really not a big deal.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#132
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/ .

The only way to change culture is through law. Not at all. For gay marriage or pot legalization, large shifts in public opinion have preceded changes to laws. If it's legal to work longer hours people will, and everyone else will do so to compete with them. The Moloch post is excellent, but it doesn't really apply here. Productivity isn't a zero sum game; unless you're in a dysfunctional stack ranking environment lik…

I think the point of the Moloch reference wasn't that individuals would work longer hours, it's that companies that have people who work longer hours will be more successful.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#134
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you manage to arrange that? I can't imagine going to my boss and proposing I spend 20% less time working for the same amount of pay, and getting approval for that.

Who said the pay was the same? I'd be happy to take a 20% pay cut for a 4-day work week at some point in my life. I have a semi-retired relative who does just that. As it is now, I'm vocal at reviews that I'll take more days off per year in lieu of direct salary increase -- an idea which seems to throw people off and hasn't been seriously entertained. At some point, I'll make enough annually, that I'll simply start t…

> ...I'll simply start taking days off without pay, which is something payroll seems to really hate for some reason when it concerns salaried folks.

At the risk of sounding too glib, the short answer to why they hate it is it creates work for them. In the US, all of the major payroll processing services are geared towards either hourly or salaried templates. Most companies' payroll procedures are built around the core assumption that if you are salaried, then it is X salary divided across N weeks/months/your-pay-period. If you take days off without pay, changing the salary, someone in payroll has to manually key in the delta off your normal pay period processing numbers. That sometimes has downstream ramifications upon unemployment insurance reporting and remittance, for larger companies there are other regulatory-originated reporting that this can impact, and put in common issues like tax liens and family court-mandated levies, just for starters, and it gets hairy. Generally payroll processing is still built around a set of assumptions that are at odds with emerging knowledge workforce trends; the trends can be accommodated, but it's a hassle.

If you have a good enough relationship with your manager, then you are far better off negotiating a sub-rosa agreement to (in your example) work Wednesday this week and take off a couple days next week (or leave a couple hours earlier each day), and net out to zero change in time worked over a short (sub-month) period and leaving payroll none the wiser to any change in time worked, than making the payroll department perform an exception-based processing of your payroll.

US payroll processing trivia to illustrate how rigid payroll processing systems are today for the small business, and for flexible work arrangements: if you are a really small, micro-sized business, like say an Etsy seller with a couple full-time employees, set up as your own LLC or whatever, you will run payroll, except unlike larger businesses you will frequently want to know how much to pay yourself (after paying off all employees and vendors) including all employER-side tax liabilities, and not just the employEE-side disbursement. All of the top-ten payroll processors have no capability to compute that for you; you have to iterate to an approximation. In other words, if you know you can afford to pay yourself only $10K total this month, payroll processors force you to key in a employEE net pay number then they spit out the gross including the employER side, and only then do you see if you are over/under the $10K amount. There is no feature that lets a small business owner say, this pay period, I can only afford at most $X cash out the door total including all tax liabilities for so-and-so employee, iterate and solve for me what the best result is to achieve that.

US payroll processing can get really complex, really fast even for small businesses, so I can imagine what a nightmare it must be for the designers and developers of those systems. However, I believe there is still plenty of room for someone to create a disruptive service that caters to and appeals to small businesses.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#135
post #22
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/ .

Changing the law is not the only thing that would need to be done.

You would also need an executive order to change the way that federal contracts are handled. Currently, huge numbers of salaried professionals employed by contractor companies have to punch the clock as though they were wage-earners in order for the company to get paid for their work.

If you don't log X hours during a given week, your salary for that week may be docked by N/X. If you log more than X, you are not necessarily paid any more for overtime. The contractor-employer could set X to be 40, or 45, or 50--whatever it wants.

If an executive order said that no individual could work more than 30 hours total in any calendar week on any combination of federal contracts, unless that person is paid an additional 10% of their normal weekly salary for each hour in excess of 30 (aka triple-time OT), while the company still gets paid the same rate, then lo, nearly everyone in the military-industrial complex would suddenly have a 30-hour work week.

As it is now, the contracting arrangements dance around the fuzzy edges of labor law, to the detriment of the workers and to the benefit of their employers, and possibly also to the benefit of several additional layers of middlemen. Changing the law is meaningless if you can't enforce it.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#136

My circle of friends are what you call professionals. They spend an awful lot of time at work, most of it on looking like they're working. There's a fair number of jobs where the work itself is not hard or time consuming, but where a culture has grown where everyone needs to justify their position. This skew incentives; if you're a junior, you end up doing a bunch of little things that can pass as a laundry list of t…

You can opt out of the 48 hour directive in your employment contract in Britain, I expect this is true of most of these type of City jobs.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#137
post #31

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.

I don't think your plan is for everyone since if you need to be synced with a team not working on Wednesdays is negative in the long run.

This happens where I work- one of my coworkers is here Monday - Thursday (10 hour days) but takes Friday off. He's the only one with knowledge of a lot of our legacy systems, so a lot of potential work doesn't happen on Fridays. I'd argue that more of us should learn what he knows to avoid "hit by a bus syndrome" but we don't have enough spare man hours to devote to that.

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#138
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you manage to arrange that? I can't imagine going to my boss and proposing I spend 20% less time working for the same amount of pay, and getting approval for that.

The better deal would be working four ten-hour days. Particularly if you have a long commute, this is wildly better than five eights. Eight hours isn't really enough time to get anything done, particularly during business hours.

I do this every once in a while, and my most productive hours tend to be... the two hours left in my day after everybody else has gone home. The office is silent and there are no distractions or emails. I can just get "in the zone". Maybe I should start doing this more often...

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#139
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The better deal would be working four ten-hour days. Particularly if you have a long commute, this is wildly better than five eights. Eight hours isn't really enough time to get anything done, particularly during business hours.

How is that working less?

It's not working less, some of us need 100% of our pay to get by and can't afford a 20% cut for less work (the stress of having less money > the stress caused by working more)

Re: Working fewer hours would make us more productive

#140
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said the pay was the same? I'd be happy to take a 20% pay cut for a 4-day work week at some point in my life. I have a semi-retired relative who does just that. As it is now, I'm vocal at reviews that I'll take more days off per year in lieu of direct salary increase -- an idea which seems to throw people off and hasn't been seriously entertained. At some point, I'll make enough annually, that I'll simply start t…

> ...I'll simply start taking days off without pay, which is something payroll seems to really hate for some reason when it concerns salaried folks. At the risk of sounding too glib, the short answer to why they hate it is it creates work for them. In the US, all of the major payroll processing services are geared towards either hourly or salaried templates. Most companies' payroll procedures are built around the cor…

If you are a salaried employee, the only thing payroll should need to know is whether or not you worked at all during the week. If the answer is yes, you get paid your full salary. If it is no, you get paid your full salary if you have a vacation week left. If it is no, and you have no vacation weeks left, you don't get paid. Simple.

If taking a day off during a working week causes them additional effort, it is only because they are grossly abusing the definition of salaried employee the entire remainder of the year.

If they want to handle employees as though they were hourly, they could just stop lying about their people being salaried exempt employees.

If you are salaried, and your manager is fine with you taking Fridays off, payroll does not need to know. If a deadline approaches, and you need to work Saturday and Sunday, too, payroll does not need to know. Salaried workers are supposed to be paid for getting their work done, and not just for punching the clock.

It seems as though many employers are abusing the legal definitions in order to bend labor laws.

Post reply on HN