Working over 40 hours a week is bad for work-life balance, as the employee won't have enough time to spend his money, but it's a lie that it decreases productivity. The most productive people that I know work more than 40 hours, and I don't think they do it just because they are lazy / stupid.
Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
21–30 of 70 posts
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#22From what I've seen the software industry is pretty good at this. At companies I've been at, people sometimes choose to work over 40 but it's rare. Friends in finance regularly work 60 though.
I think this is an interesting example of having intrinsic motivation driving the extension of the work. Perhaps being requested to do so has a different effect on performance
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unions got ostracized for a reason. They in many cases evolved past reasonable worker protection. I've seen examples of both, my dad has a good union as an elevator mechanic, with strong benefit bargaining power, but which allows for advancement by merit and not only seniority. However I worked for UPS for a few years, and teamsters is the worst organization. You can't advance by merit, only seniority, and job perfor…
Companies do bad things too (often very bad things) yet nobody thinks it's reasonable to just remove companies from society. Same for shares and shareholder culture, international franchise, etc. Yet with unions, so many people think "Unions sometimes do bad, therefore it's just better not to have unions, and all the downsides of not having unions we'll just have to live with".
I suspect it's an issue of (observed) frequency; many people at least believe that the overwhelming majority of unions do more harm than good. I have nowhere near enough experience to say whether this is true, a misconception, or blatant propaganda, but it is a sentiment that I have observed.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#24anecdotal evidence in the United States, in the last twenty years.. the concept of "overtime" has been crushed out of existance.. tech workers are essentially expected to respond to signals and/or work, just about all of the time; certain contract-bound jobs are "milking" overtime to get pay raises that are otherwise not available; employers offer extra shifts and hours to existing employees rather than hire, even if there is too much work.
It seems naive to see these one-line comments calling for 35 hours or less, when the actual-fact on the ground is extremely the opposite in a large number of cases.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#25If you don’t want to work more than 40 hrs a week. Don’t. Afraid of company retaliation? Find another job at a company where the culture is more in line with your views. Better yet, start your own company and work as little as you want. Life work balance is on you. Regardless of who you work for or with in the US. If you still want to whine about it, join the armed forces, serve your country, and get back to us about…
When it works, this is good advice. Unfortunately, not everyone is in a position where they can reasonably make that kind of decision; someone with (say college) debt in an area with a terrible job market realistically has very little choice.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#26I work 40 hours a week, give or take a bit here and there. I know startups and some bigger companies expect more, but I've never worked for one. I don't think I ever will if I can avoid it. I feel like companies asking their workers (and I'm thinking of software devs) are abusing their position.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#27Don't ostracize unions and 40-hour week will be back.
Unions got ostracized for a reason. They in many cases evolved past reasonable worker protection. I've seen examples of both, my dad has a good union as an elevator mechanic, with strong benefit bargaining power, but which allows for advancement by merit and not only seniority. However I worked for UPS for a few years, and teamsters is the worst organization. You can't advance by merit, only seniority, and job perfor…
Couldn't help but wonder what role the union played in the recent GM plant harassment case.
They're gonna hang a noose and GM is still too scared/unable to fire them? Am I misreading this?
But also can easily also see how merit based promotion at a production plant would be used to work workers to the bone. Gotta be some kind of balance.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#28I think there is a distinction to make here about working extra hours because you want to and being told you have to work those extra hours. My company is focused on work-life balance and goes to great lengths to not ever explicitly say that one should work some extra hours this week. But I regularly work 60 hours/week anyway because I'm the lead on a major project and want it to succeed and anyway, I love doing it.…
In a lot of places this is an implicit rather than an explicit expectation, which makes it more culturally acceptable. It can also be “optional” in the sense that you won’t get fired for underperformance if you don’t put in extra hours, but if you want a bonus/raise/promotion (or to be protected from the next round of layoffs) you need to “demonstrate your dedication” with presenteeism.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#29Working over 40 hours a week is bad for work-life balance, as the employee won't have enough time to spend his money, but it's a lie that it decreases productivity. The most productive people that I know work more than 40 hours, and I don't think they do it just because they are lazy / stupid.
It’s true, but some of the most un-productive people I know also work a lot more than 40 hours. If anything it feels like no correlation to hours working.
Re: Bring back the 40-hour work week (2012)
#30anecdotal evidence in the United States, in the last twenty years.. the concept of "overtime" has been crushed out of existance.. tech workers are essentially expected to respond to signals and/or work, just about all of the time; certain contract-bound jobs are "milking" overtime to get pay raises that are otherwise not available; employers offer extra shifts and hours to existing employees rather than hire, even if…
In my experience, the reason for this is deep specialization. Even for relatively simple jobs, it's very time consuming to get someone up to speed. For complex jobs it's sometimes downright impossible.
Bosses respond by heaping more work on the employees who already know what to do and can achieve it efficiently.
You should respond by asking for a raise. Be tactful, do it a few times and then use it as an argument. It really doesn't matter whether they pay you for overtime explicitly or as part of your base.