Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The anti crunch hours license

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 140 posts

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#51

Post by jstanley »

I-Iuw wrote: post #10

Before this comment section gets any more toxic, please understand the context. The org on GitHub that developed this license is called 996ICU ( https://996.icu/#/en_US ). It is a (very large) group of Chinese developers that are upset with the common practice of working 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week. Please be mindful of the fact that lots of developers around the world work under genuinely awful conditions, and that yo…

> your (x times y) work week is a privilege earned by a long history of labour activism in the Western world.

You have no proof of this. The (x times y) work week for manual labourers was earned by a long history of labour activism.

Good working conditions for highly-skilled in-demand work arise naturally through supply and demand.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#52

Post by dragonwriter »

est31 wrote: post #36
seba_dos1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhm... of course there is? https://github.com/996icu/996.ICU https://996.icu/#/en_US Even on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19507620 The link just shows you one particular file in the repo, but that should be obvious to anyone who ever used GitHub.

From the github page: > The purpose of this license is to prevent 996-style companies from using the software or codes under the license, and force those companies to balance their work schedule. Doesn't sound like protest to me, but like extortion. Either you do what we want, or you can't use our software.

Offering a benefit (software license) you have the rights to and are under no obligation to give in exchange for something you want (adopting certain labor practices) isn't extortion, it's just selling.

Not everything is sold for money.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#53

Post by TheCoreh »

forinti wrote: post #38
TheCoreh wrote: post #18

I live in Brazil. Under Brazilian labor laws, a work week is defined as 44 hours, with each work day having up to 8 hours. So you just excluded companies that have ever had anyone do more than one hour of (paid) overtime any week. Which is basically every company in my country, considering (occasional, paid) overtime is normal and predicted in the relevant laws. Here, 12 hour shifts with 36 hour rest periods is also…

It's a bit worse than it seems, because lunch breaks are not included, so whereas an American would call his 9-to-5 job a 40 hour work week, it would be equivalent to a 35 hour Brazilian work week. A Brazilian work day is usually 8h30 to 18h18 so that 44h will fit into 5 days. You can see how adding a commute of at least and hour (could easily be 2h or 3h in São Paulo or Rio) will simply eat up your whole day. I thin…

> I think a reduction of the 44h week is long due in Brazil and I don't understand why there isn't more pressure from workers.

I found the expectations around what you're supposed to do during work hours to be very different between Brazil and US.

Extreme conditions obviously exist, (e.g. telemarketers, which are usually _continuously_ taking calls) but from my observation a significant portion of those 44 hours is spent idling or socializing.

I think proposing any change in work hours under the current political and socioeconomic climate (12% unemployment) wouldn't be feasible, and without the needed shift in work culture our productivity would probably fall further behind.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#54

Post by whatshisface »

Overworking is a problem on a national scale, because it leads to the decay of every aspect of society that is not work. The most critical aspect is that it leads to the decay of families. It can lead to a big problem where the population is much lower and the people that do exist have had little invested into them as children. It also leads to a decay of the civil duty to shepherd your government, although the Chinese would consider that a good thing. It is tempting to eat the cake today but the price will be paid in full in one generation.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#55

Post by um_ya »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #44
I-Iuw wrote: post #10

Before this comment section gets any more toxic, please understand the context. The org on GitHub that developed this license is called 996ICU ( https://996.icu/#/en_US ). It is a (very large) group of Chinese developers that are upset with the common practice of working 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week. Please be mindful of the fact that lots of developers around the world work under genuinely awful conditions, and that yo…

your (x times y) work week is a privilege earned by a long history of labour activism in the Western world. With most of "us" being some kind of a software engineer, I'm sincerely curious: was 80-hours workweek ever a mandatory thing for an engineer (teacher, doctor)?

In terms of a software development, laws/licences requiring maximum workweek hours is kind of pointless. If any company forces their employees to work in those kinds of conditions, they're going to get poor results, and their customers will notice. Software development requires a clear thinking mind, you can only get away with so much before productivity tanks. Manufacturing work is mindless, so they can get away with extra hours without as much decrease in productivity.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#56

Post by rqs »

est31 wrote: post #16

I support the general idea of not having to work 12 hours a day for 6 days. That's crazy. But there are other venues for labour activism than changing the license. And in other Chinese industries that aren't related to software at all, labour activism is quite successful as well. So there is no need to resort to license changes. As for your PS, there is no indication that it's a protest and not just a license.

> But there are other venues for labour activism than changing the license

The thing is, this kind of online protest is the safest for both initiators and participants. If by "other venues for labour activism" you mean go to the street, you're basically risk sending people to jail (And after the thing, nobody want to risk to get milled down by tanks).

Also, did you know that 996 is by law illegal in China? You can technically report your company if they force you to work 996. But: 1) After that, you will probably get fired for any number of excuses. 2) Your company is clever, they know many ways to get around the law.

Now, after all that dilemma, how could you protected yourself and help other developers just like you? The license idea come out naturally.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#57

Post by logicchains »

jstanley wrote: post #51
I-Iuw wrote: post #10

Before this comment section gets any more toxic, please understand the context. The org on GitHub that developed this license is called 996ICU ( https://996.icu/#/en_US ). It is a (very large) group of Chinese developers that are upset with the common practice of working 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week. Please be mindful of the fact that lots of developers around the world work under genuinely awful conditions, and that yo…

> your (x times y) work week is a privilege earned by a long history of labour activism in the Western world. You have no proof of this. The (x times y) work week for manual labourers was earned by a long history of labour activism. Good working conditions for highly-skilled in-demand work arise naturally through supply and demand.

>Good working conditions for highly-skilled in-demand work arise naturally through supply and demand.

But they don't necessarily arise if the demand from workers wanting to do that work is sufficient. For instance, game developers have relatively terrible work conditions by the standards of the software industry, because so many people want to work on games. You could reasonably argue that they get enough satisfaction from being able to work on games that they're willing to put up with worse conditions, but that doesn't change that their work conditions are relatively bad. The nice thing about somehow bringing about a reduction in developer working hours is that it wouldn't necessarily result in any loss in economic output or employer profit, as there's a wealth of research showing that working beyond a certain amount of hours daily is counterproductive, so it's a win-win, and could even increase productivity.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#58

Post by geofft »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #44
I-Iuw wrote: post #10

Before this comment section gets any more toxic, please understand the context. The org on GitHub that developed this license is called 996ICU ( https://996.icu/#/en_US ). It is a (very large) group of Chinese developers that are upset with the common practice of working 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week. Please be mindful of the fact that lots of developers around the world work under genuinely awful conditions, and that yo…

your (x times y) work week is a privilege earned by a long history of labour activism in the Western world. With most of "us" being some kind of a software engineer, I'm sincerely curious: was 80-hours workweek ever a mandatory thing for an engineer (teacher, doctor)?

Well, it sort of depends on how / where you see yourself and whether you work for yourself. Doctors today work long hours, and teachers are sort of limited by class schedules so their labor organizing has generally focused on better pay / benefits rather than fewer hours, but even for engineers, there's a spectrum from locomotive engineer to Nikola Tesla.

Here are some things I've learned from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day#United_States and linked pages :

- In 1791, carpenters in Philadelphia went on strike against "the prevailing sun-to-sun system, and the 75 hour work week" and fought for a 10-hour day. http://www.red-coral.net/WorkCoops.html

- The International Typographical Union, which had relatively well-off members, went on strike around 1900-ish initially for a 48-hour work week and then for a 40-hour work week. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Typographical_Un...

- In 1907, the US passed the "Hours of Service Act," which limited railroad telegraphers to a 9-hour day. In committee the act was almost going to be a limit to a 12-hour day (i.e., the normal day was longer than that!), until the telegraphers spammed their congresspeople using their telegraphs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Railroad_Telegraphers...

I would say that software engineers, SREs, etc. working IC jobs maintaining large codebases/services at the direction of their bosses in large companies are far closer to the professions that historically have made up the labor movement—carpenters and typesetters and electricians and actors and journalists and composers and telegraph operators and so forth—than they are to the doctor running their own private clinic as their own business.

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#59

Post by [deleted] »

jimktrains2 wrote: post #37
jimnotgym wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope so. Hospitals make their staff work counter-productive hours, as if they couldn't function with 8 hour shifts. And you don't need to put double quotes around employees. They are employees and deserve to work in a good environment like everyone else

While I'm not defending the schedules that hospital employees work, one thing to factor in is that every hand off can increase errors. (I wish I could find a paper, but I'm on mobile and not having luck.) However, yes, I do believe that multiple 12+ hour days in a row is ultimately counterproductive. Also, I wonder if overlapping shifts would reduce the chance of errors.

[deleted]

Re: The anti crunch hours license

#60

Post by chrisseaton »

jimnotgym wrote: post #24
rbohac wrote: post #14

so hospitals can never use this? their doctors and nurses, who are "employees" regularily work 12 hour shifts. the same goes for first responders

I hope so. Hospitals make their staff work counter-productive hours, as if they couldn't function with 8 hour shifts. And you don't need to put double quotes around employees. They are employees and deserve to work in a good environment like everyone else

Those long shifts are there to protect patient safety - they reduce the number of dangerous handovers. Part of being a doctor or in something like the military is putting other people first rather than having a comfortable short day.
Post reply on HN