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

The Case for a Shorter Workweek

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–57 of 57 posts

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#51

Post by munk-a »

vipermark7 wrote: post #35
munk-a wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I worked in gaming the reward for getting your work done early was... attending the same mandatory overtime as everyone else because one department going home early would "hurt team morale". Granted - the same company seemed pretty oblivious to how much underbudgeting projects "hurt team morale" but that side of the equation was never changed. I thankfully changed industries but I still live with some of the con…

What are some of those consequences?

Oh, obstructive sleep apnea - not worth it IMO.

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#52

Post by munk-a »

tshaddox wrote: post #33
munk-a wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can safely ignore entry-level roles here - for a while in the early 00s everyone with an MBA thought that entry level engineers were just like other engineers but at 20% of the cost - what savings! Then the industry realized that both junior employees and off-shoring come with real costs that need to be analyzed in advance - they can be the right answer, but you need to tread very carefully. So I'd take a…

> I think we can safely ignore entry-level roles here You mean, as long as we're personally beyond entry-level? My own career and compensation isn't my only concern.

No - because I think their wages are far too volatile to easily track. When I entered into software development (like fifteen years ago - not in the 70's) I initially made 45k - while first years in SV were pulling in 120k-140k. I wanted to look at more senior positions first because I think they're more stable over time and the employees there will advocate stronger against paycuts... And if the senior employees are stubborn in their advocacy then junior employees tend to benefit from it - if senior employees consent to letting their wages slip then everyone below them in experience is expected to just go along with it.

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#53

Post by jxidjhdhdhdhfhf »

5F36B5F62640 wrote: post #23

I work as a programmer in a dying industry. Over the last several years we've cut hours instead of having layoffs. We are now down to a 3 day work week. Everyone left knows they should have left years ago but we are all curious to see how long the company can keep going. Everybody knows how 5 day work weeks are. You get back to work Monday and it may take a little while to pick up where you left off Friday but surely…

What company? So I can crawl on my knees begging them for a 3 day/wk job.

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#54

Post by tshaddox »

munk-a wrote: post #52
tshaddox wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think we can safely ignore entry-level roles here You mean, as long as we're personally beyond entry-level? My own career and compensation isn't my only concern.

No - because I think their wages are far too volatile to easily track. When I entered into software development (like fifteen years ago - not in the 70's) I initially made 45k - while first years in SV were pulling in 120k-140k. I wanted to look at more senior positions first because I think they're more stable over time and the employees there will advocate stronger against paycuts... And if the senior employees are…

My point wasn't that only entry-level positions would be affected over time, but rather that the compensation of all roles could be affected simply by starting new people out with lower compensation and increasing compensation more slowly throughout each worker's career. In other words, the average pay of a senior engineer could be lower in 20 years than it is now without any individual's pay ever decreasing.

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#55

Post by munk-a »

tshaddox wrote: post #54
munk-a wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No - because I think their wages are far too volatile to easily track. When I entered into software development (like fifteen years ago - not in the 70's) I initially made 45k - while first years in SV were pulling in 120k-140k. I wanted to look at more senior positions first because I think they're more stable over time and the employees there will advocate stronger against paycuts... And if the senior employees are…

My point wasn't that only entry-level positions would be affected over time, but rather that the compensation of all roles could be affected simply by starting new people out with lower compensation and increasing compensation more slowly throughout each worker's career. In other words, the average pay of a senior engineer could be lower in 20 years than it is now without any individual's pay ever decreasing .

I think that entry-level positions (outside of SF) are usually driven mostly by whatever the local cost of living is plus a bit to keep the positions clearly above what retail positions can offer - CoL would similarly take a while to adjust to the new lower income of folks so I wouldn't expect it to respond particularly quickly. But yea, I agree that that's one way to pull down the wages. I do think they'd end up suffering from the same sort of pressure though - if you pull on an entry level person at a low rate then there will be a lot of tempting competing offers they'll be considering when they've got a year or two under their belt - and then they'll be in the same pool as the other junior devs (or maybe the intermediate ones).

I hasn't really thought about the zero experience folk though - thanks for mentioning it!

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#56

Post by 5F36B5F62640 »

burlesona wrote: post #36
5F36B5F62640 wrote: post #23

I work as a programmer in a dying industry. Over the last several years we've cut hours instead of having layoffs. We are now down to a 3 day work week. Everyone left knows they should have left years ago but we are all curious to see how long the company can keep going. Everybody knows how 5 day work weeks are. You get back to work Monday and it may take a little while to pick up where you left off Friday but surely…

Do you think that you would get most of the personal freedom benefits without the difficulty in work continuity if you worked 5 half-days a week instead of 3 full days? Not suggesting you’d want to do that, I’m just wondering how you think it would play out.

I think that the half days would have enough work time to keep from really getting going on personal things on those days and enough personal time to keep from really getting going on work.

I've thought of trying a schedule of working a 5 day week, a 5 day week, taking a week off, working a 5 day week, and taking a week off, and repeating that pattern.

Re: The Case for a Shorter Workweek

#57

Post by burlesona »

5F36B5F62640 wrote: post #56
burlesona wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that you would get most of the personal freedom benefits without the difficulty in work continuity if you worked 5 half-days a week instead of 3 full days? Not suggesting you’d want to do that, I’m just wondering how you think it would play out.

I think that the half days would have enough work time to keep from really getting going on personal things on those days and enough personal time to keep from really getting going on work. I've thought of trying a schedule of working a 5 day week, a 5 day week, taking a week off, working a 5 day week, and taking a week off, and repeating that pattern.

Makes sense. Thanks for sharing!
Post reply on HN