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

What Long Hours Really Mean

wearemammoth.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 224 posts

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#91

Post by throwaway9848 »

brianmcconnell wrote: post #84
throwaway9848 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and if you're in a startup and you have a significant equity position then you are not working for free, you are directly monetarily motivated. Also, people act to maximize their utility, not necessarily compensation. The act of working hard and hitting deadlines is a form of compensation in itself. Finally, lots of people work a lazy 8 hours (with lots of time spent on the phone, Facebook, personal email) and…

Ah! The equity position as fake compensation. Unfortunately for the worker beeze, said "equity" usually turns out to be worthless in a exit, except in unicorn situations (Facebook, etc). The founders, early investors and insider shareholders are all first in line, so mostly likely, you end up with shit, or maybe some options that might be worth something in a few years, if the company hasn't tanked by then. No thanks…

That's not always true.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#92

Post by joelrunyon »

dasil003 wrote: post #66
joelrunyon wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "deserves" This word always makes me coil. Everytime I hear it - I assume someone is trying to sell me something.

In this case someone is trying to sell you the idea of work-life balance. I guess you can take it or leave it, but it doesn't seem that slimy or nefarious to me.

I'm fine with it defined on the individual level - but somehow making a blanket statement about all people regardless of culture of culture on something as subjective as "work-life balance" seems a bit broad.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#93

Post by joelrunyon »

dalek_cannes wrote: post #30
qq66 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do these numbers come from that you proclaim them to be universal human standards? Why not 7 hours of work? Why not 9?

Don't take the numbers literally, and read it as "I believe every man deserves...". Merely an unscientific three-way split of a 24-hour day, with a liberal sleep quota and a traditional weekend. It's also the most defensible scheme against the old guard. Commuting is a different problem.

But why split it in 3?

Why not allocate more time for sleep or activities? Why not work more (not all people hate working).

Seems like we could come up with a bunch of other arbitrary decisions that would make just as much sense if they were already a part of our culture for the last 100 years.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#94

Post by felipehummel »

com2kid wrote: post #69
dalek_cannes wrote: post #9

Every human being deserves an average of 8 hours of work, 8 hours of family/leisure, 8 hours of sleep and 2 days a week free. Even a doctor on whom many lives are depending . Lives of critical employees are just as valuable as the lives of those who are affected if they don't work harder. The whole "if I don't do this, the project will sink / things will be destroyed" is a self-imposed ransom situation that managers…

By what natural law is this true? By what will of nature or physics are you deriving your statements? Deserves? Why does anyone deserve anything? Nature itself does not act that way. People around the world deserve not to live in fear of their government killing them. Women deserve not to live in fear of being raped. Children should not live in fear of abuse. Yet untold millions starve, are beaten, tortured, abused,…

Not really a natural law, but medicine from time to time finds out that working too much or sleeping less or not having time for pleasure/fun/family hurts your health.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#95

Post by heuan »

This work hours issue is quite contentious. I don't want to stifle discussion but right now I wish there was a standard "gwen" response at the top of the thread with well researched papers on the subject.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#96

Post by mattlutze »

mekarpeles wrote: post #54

During my first startup, I worked 6 or 7 day weeks, 13+ hours a day. At Hyperink, in my first year, I (on my own accord) slept in the office over 30 days. During this entire stretch, I was perhaps more productive and happier than any other time I can remember. The main reason why? The teams and the comradery. I wish this article at least had relevant studies + statistics on this subject as it is not representative of…

I spent two months this past spring on a project where I put in similar time of my own accord as well. Had 2.5 days off in 7 weeks. Averaged 78.5 hours a week over the period. Slept 4-5 hours a night.

It was one of the most rewarding and happy periods of work I've had.

I know there are medical studies that suggest less than x hours of sleep a night is bad for your health. Or, working more than 45-ish hours in a week spikes cortisol levels.

I'd like see the results of these studies correlated with respondent's happiness and satisfaction.

You've got a good insight here:

> Why pressure to work hard can be destructive

I also wonder if the negative health effects are more strongly correlated to the stress of "having" to work those sorts of hours vice legitimately "wanting" to work them, sans stress.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#97

Post by dasil003 »

joelrunyon wrote: post #92
dasil003 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case someone is trying to sell you the idea of work-life balance. I guess you can take it or leave it, but it doesn't seem that slimy or nefarious to me.

I'm fine with it defined on the individual level - but somehow making a blanket statement about all people regardless of culture of culture on something as subjective as "work-life balance" seems a bit broad.

That's fine for privileged artisan-class freelancers like talented software engineers are today. What about the powerless working class though?

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#98

Post by mattlutze »

mseebach wrote: post #88
mattlutze wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every human being deserves an average of 8 hours of work, 8 hours of family/leisure, 8 hours of sleep and 2 days a week free. "[...]deserves an average of 8 hours of work[...]" "[...]2 days a week free[...]" I think that's the snake oil you're smelling. How does society ensure this can happen? With laws, of course! Why, we can just make overtime and >5 in every 7 days with worked hours illegal, it's so simple...

How about a law against ridiculously naive expectations of what can be achieved through the law? Ignoring a thorough analysis of unintended consequences when proposing a law should be punishable by the rack. It's so simple.

That would be a very interesting law.

"It is a criminal offense to have unreasonable expectations of this law."

Or did you mean "the law" as in the institution?

(Also, to check, you didn't read my sarcasm as sincerity, right?)

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#99

Post by mattlutze »

While I take issue ith the "deserves" comment floating around the top of the page, in general the article is spot-on. For the most part, extended periods of high volumes of work indicate a project is either under-staffed or poorly managed.

Sprints and pushes now and again are exceptions -- there is nothing inherently wrong with needing to put in a long week or two, even a month or two, irregularly in order to get a feature out that just needs to be built. But extended continual work definitely does sap the creativity and stress every relationship a person has outside of the office.

Re: What Long Hours Really Mean

#100

Post by luikore »

Wingman4l7 wrote: post #3

Working even half an hour extra each day adds up to ~3 weeks a year of extra work that you're not getting paid for. That's several thousand dollars in wages. It's easy to dismiss a half-hour here or there but if you sit down and run the numbers, it's quite an unpleasant conclusion.

Why not just increase working efficiency by 1/8 and save that hour?
Post reply on HN