Slashdot Mirror


How Does a 9/80 Work Schedule Work Out?

cellocgw writes "My company is in the process of implementing a version of '9/80,' a work schedule that squeezes 80 hours' labor time into 9 business days and provides every other Friday off. I was wondering how this has been implemented in other companies, and how it's worked out for other Slashdot readers. Is your system flexible? Do you find time to get personal stuff done during the week? Is Friday good for anything other than catching up on lost sleep? And perhaps most important, do your managers respect the off-Fridays, or do they pull people in on a regular basis to handle 'crises?'"

163 of 1,055 comments (clear)

  1. I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by brian0918 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It was really nice, especially if you set it up so that one week you're paid, and the next you get the Friday off. They were also flexible about it and would let you switch occasionally, although that obviously depends on the company.

    1. Re:I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by DataBroker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've worked 9/80's for a couple of years. They're great! It's nice to have a weekday off because you can easily get through a weekend's errands in a day because of the lower crowds, and in my case, no kids to slow me.

      As for management respecting the day -- that's like any off-day. You have to enforce it yourself. I've been asked to work on my 9/80 day, and never had a problem agreeing to it. I just swapped it for a different day. Management loved my flexibility (in when I took a day off).

    2. Re:I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by fishbowl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I would always make plans well in advance and make sure that my supervisor knew not only that I had plans, but how much money I had invested in them. The implication was always there -- if your action deprives me of my ability to execute this plan, I am going to charge you the amount noted. I never had to play that card, but that's because I think the strategy worked to secure my days off, either when I had 9/80 or when I was simply planning vacation time.
      I'm seriously considering to write into my next contract, language that requires them to make reasonable compensation for travel or entertainment that I have to forego at the company's insistence.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    3. Re:I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by GizmoToy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree, 9/80 is great. I hired on with a company about a year ago that had just switched to the 9/80 system. There were some issues as everyone adjusted, but it's been great since. I like it so much, I'd view a typical 5/40 as a negative for any future employers.

      I found that I didn't miss the extra hour during the week, and the Friday off is great for sleeping in, doctor appointments, or for random things that can't be done on the weekend.

      My employer doesn't typically pull people in on the off Friday, but I imagine it happens every once in awhile. Although, I'm sure this varies greatly by company.

      Overall, I'd say it's nothing to be scared of as long as the entire company embraces it. It's when portions of the employees are working regular weeks and some are on 9/80 that things tend to fall apart.

    4. Re:I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by Composite_Armor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Extra days are for golf, biking, rest and friends/family. extra hour each day not a problem. Efficiency of work-group, same. [Teh company i worked for still laid-off ~1500 engineers, in these times.] I say, take the work where you can, and do the best with your days off.

    5. Re:I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Informative
      I worked at a place that did this. Very nice, really. Easier to schedule things like dentist appointment and whatnot without taking time off, since I had a three-day weekend 26 times a year.

      And I could make a nine-day vacation on 36 hours vacation time, as long as I picked an off Friday week for the vacation.

      I can only remember once I had to work on an off Friday in a couple years there. And I got the following Monday off that time.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    6. Re:I worked 9/80 for 4 summers by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      >I'm not sure how this will work out in the current economic climate

      We need trailblazers, we need more people willing to say "damn the torpeodes!"
      I'm sick and tired of everyone blaming everything on "the economic climate."

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  2. it sucks by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 5, Informative

    My company does it - and yes frequently we get hosed out of our day off OR have to travel on our day off. It is inconvenient to many of our customers and I spend a lot of time on my off Fridays checking my e-mail for potential issues. It is not much of a day off. We USED to have a 4-9-4 work week, where we worked 4 nine hour days and half days (4 hours) on Fridays this was AWESOME and I loved it - 9/80 is bogus IMHO

    1. Re:it sucks by fishbowl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A half day Friday defeats the purpose for me. If I have a Friday off, I can leave on Thursday night and actually go somewhere interesting, be there for Friday morning, return Sunday night, and it's like a vacation. But then I'm pretty spoiled. I can pretty much take off whenever I want at my current job. I'm thinking about going to a new job as a contractor, for a really good rate, but I'm worried about the shock when I find out I have to actually work hours that someone else specifies. I have not had an experience like that since the mid 90s.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    2. Re:it sucks by fishbowl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I should not read *any* "workplace discussion" right now. I'm about to leave my very cushy, very low-paying job for a contract gig with an offer of money that I can't refuse. But I'm pretty sure I'll have to actually work, and worse, work for other people. I'm a little scared. But I *Really* need the money.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    3. Re:it sucks by kelnos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think this is really just about managing expectations. If your company has an official 9/80 policy, then *you* have to stick to it as well. That means not checking work email on your day off, and if your boss calls, you don't answer it. Or if you do, you tell him you're not at home, and it's not feasible for you to leave what you're doing. If your boss still somehow manages to get you to come in on your day off, then you ask him -- up front -- what you're getting in return.

      If you let your boss walk all over your schedule, he's just going to assume you don't mind and keep doing it.

      If I had this arrangement and my boss pulled this, I'd start looking for a new job, while cutting back my hours in general so losing the day off doesn't give the company more of my time than I'm supposed to be giving.

      But anyway, I question how this works if you're salaried. At my company we're just expected to get our work done, and for many people here that means working 9- or 10-hour days as a matter of course with a normal 5-day work week. I guess in a company where you -- for example -- do a lot of government contracts this might work, since you're usually expected to account for the time that you've worked on various projects for billing purposes.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
  3. Lost sleep? by gilxa1226 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I interviewed at a large defense contractor, the office I interviewed at did a 9/80, it sounded great at the time and still does. As for lost sleep... seriously... you work 9-9-9-9-8, 9-9-9-9-off. I doubt the extra hour a day will kill you. If it does, just eat through lunch.

    1. Re:Lost sleep? by Tokerat · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it does, just eat through lunch.

      Nonsense! Why would lunch be for eating?

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    2. Re:Lost sleep? by jlarocco · · Score: 2

      That could go either way, though.

      I used to drive about 65 miles to work, 130 miles round trip. If I left for the day at 5:30 I would get home around 7:00-7:15. If I waited for traffic to die down and left at 6:15, I would still get home between 7:00 and 7:15. Lucky for me there was a similar effect in the morning and my employer wasn't too picky on the schedule.

    3. Re:Lost sleep? by pintpusher · · Score: 5, Funny

      I prefer to lunch through work myself, ymmv.

      --
      man, I feel like mold.
    4. Re:Lost sleep? by dangitman · · Score: 5, Funny

      just eat through lunch

      This statement is baffling on so many levels.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    5. Re:Lost sleep? by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      not baffling, depressing. That working through lunch has become a standard...

    6. Re:Lost sleep? by dangitman · · Score: 2, Funny

      But again, that doesn't make sense. It would if you said "working through your lunch break" - but "working through lunch" would mean that lunch somehow enables your work. Likewise, "eating through lunch" is bizarre. You "eat your lunch" - I'm not sure what "eating through lunch" would mean something like you only eat the center of your meal.

      The other odd aspect is; how does taking your lunch break to eat, make a longer working day any shorter?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  4. 4/10 is easier by poet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You get every friday or monday off depending on the stagger. The idea of 9/80 bothers me. There is a point of no return for employees. If you are going to work like that, you should make sure and take two one hour breaks a day.

    --
    Get your PostgreSQL here: http://www.commandprompt.com/
    1. Re:4/10 is easier by bughunter · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I did both 4/40 and 9/80, and I tell you, the first extra hour isn't that noticeable, but going from 9 to 10 hours a day sucked. It means either you arrive at 6am so that you can leave at 5. If you can't get there until 9am, have fun working till 8pm...

      I'm back to working 5/40 now, and do indeed miss the 9/80 schedule. One of the best things was the regular 4-day holiday weekends. The accounting calendar was usually arranged so that Fridays off fell before Monday holidays like Memorial Day, etc.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    2. Re:4/10 is easier by pete-classic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I hate four tens. I always found that I got NOTHING done outside work and spent the whole extra day trying to catch up. Not fun.

      To each his own, I suppose.

      -Peter

    3. Re:4/10 is easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have also done both 4/40 and 9/80. I came to the opposite conclusion. Living a fair distance from work, my day is pretty well shot working 9 hours. On top of that, my company wants everyone to start at either 7:00AM or 8:00AM. Consequently, we get to leave at either 4:45PM or 5:45PM. If I come in at 7:00AM it takes ~40 minutes to get to work and ~70 minutes to get back at 4:45PM (rush hour). Going in at 8:00AM and leaving at 5:45PM just swaps the drive time. When I was on a 10 hour schedule, I could avoid traffic both ways. So I worked an extra hour but only lost 30 minutes of my day. On the 8 hour schedule, I could also avoid traffic both ways. So I worked an hour less, but got back an hour and a half of my day.

      If you live close to work, or your company gives enough flexibility to avoid traffic, then 9/80 is probably pretty nice. However, if your situation is like mine, then it's worthless. Most people in my workplace have kids and consequently really hate 9/80.

      On a side note, I've only be forced to come in on an off friday when another company schedules a meeting that I'm involved in on friday (which was never before 9/80). Interestingly, shortly after the switch to 9/80, most such meetings somehow make their way to our off fridays. If possible, make sure you're involved in the scheduling process or they can take advantage of it.

  5. Also by brian0918 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Also, to answer your question, those off-days were always respected, and I never missed the lost hour each day.

  6. Just a second, here... by IorDMUX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wait-wait-wait-wait... Do you mean to say that you've found a job in the (non-government) tech industry that lets you work only 40 hours a week?

    ... Are they hiring?

    --
    >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
    1. Re:Just a second, here... by diehard2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I work 40 hours, an hour lunch break included, and do .NET development work at a major company. This isn't to say that there aren't deadlines where you might work longer, but they're pretty rare. I find that I get more done with the 7 hour workday than I do with a 10 hour day. I'm more focused and not pissed about all the time I'm wasting at work.

  7. Crises by egcagrac0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If your manager pulls you in to cover a crisis, you need to demand flex time (a different day off next week) or overtime.

    Or, send them an invoice from your consulting firm for about six times whatever your daily rate is.

    1. Re:Crises by Spasemunki · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or, send them an invoice from your consulting firm for about six times whatever your daily rate is.

      Yeah, that way you'll have a lot of time to look for a new job.

    2. Re:Crises by mabhatter654 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      why is "more money for more work" such a taboo? really?

  8. My experience by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 5, Informative

    A friend of mine worked under 9/80 and loved it. He felt like he could be more productive staying later on the busy days and he took the extra friday off to take small trips with the family.

    I worked for the same company but different location under a flexible hour system where the only requirement was that I met the 40 hrs per week. It made things much more difficult to free up space on the weekends, but allowed me to be more available during the week.

    It's just preference.

    --
    while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
  9. MIB by Thelasko · · Score: 5, Funny

    The twins keep us on Centaurian time, standard 37-hour day. Give it a few months, you'll get used to it. Or you'll have a psychotic episode.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  10. Get out now by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While it is not a bad idea in and of itself, changing work schedules to some bizarre non-standard system is usually a sign that the company management is trying to squeeze more work out of you. First they change the schedule to give you more work per day, then they will ask you to work more days.

    In this economy, they know you don't have anywhere to go, so unless you fight back against this or leave for a new job altogether, you're going to get screwed. Ask them if they've been considering offshoring the IT department. I'd be willing to bet that within the next year they are looking to thin the local IT staff to a skeleton crew and then migrate the servers over to India where they can do your job for a third of the cost.

    1. Re:Get out now by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...and then migrate the servers over to India where they can do your job for a third of the cost.

      And where they burn 4x as many hours in the process ;)

  11. Lobby for 10 hour days by insanecarbonbasedlif · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With 4 tens, I get every friday off. As far as being pulled in on other days, it depends on whether your manager is an ethical person who respects their employees or not. You are the only one who knows enough to tell that, and a bunch of slashdot pundits won't help.

    --
    Just because I doubt myself does not mean I find your position compelling.
  12. I love it. by friedmud · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've worked for two consecutive companies with 9/80. At the first it was optional (but most people did it) at the second (current one) it is pretty much mandatory.

    Let me tell you.... it's awesome.

    Having a 3-day weekend every other week outweighs any perceived negatives. It gives you the ability to leave on a trip on a Thursday night... spend 3 days somewhere and still make it back for work without taking any vacation.

    To answer your questions:

    - I was wondering how this has been implemented in other companies.

    For both of my companies you work 9 hours a day except the friday you work you only work 8 hours. Then you get every other friday off.

    - Is your system flexible?

    At the first company it was... you could choose which friday you wanted to start your 9/80 schedule on... so half of the people were gone every other friday.

    At my current job it's not... everyone has the same friday off. I see the benefits of both. Personally, I really enjoyed fridays at my previous job... when (at least) half the people were gone I could get a lot of work done.

    Both places I worked for have been flexible in your start time in the morning... meaning I can go in early and still get off early to get stuff done... which leads to:

    - Do you find time to get personal stuff done during the week?

    Yes. If I really need to get something done after work then I'll go in early. If I'm there by 7:00 then I can get off around 4:00 to 4:30... leaving plenty of time.

    - Is Friday good for anything other than catching up on lost sleep?

    Yes. You can use it for weekend trips like I mentioned above. Also, it's a great time to catch up around the house (mending fences, etc.). Finally, it's also a great day to get grocery shopping (and similar) done because most people are working...

    I use the day a lot of different ways... and I do often sleep in a bit... but never sleep the day away!

    - And perhaps most important, do your managers respect the off-Fridays, or do they pull people in on a regular basis to handle 'crises?'"

    Has never happened to me. Like I said.. at my current job the friday off is mandatory. They actually turn out the lights and turn down the air-conditioning, etc. They really expect no one to be there.

    But... I know my jobs are normal (I'm a research scientist at laboratories) so YMMV.

    In conclusion... it can only be a good thing... go for it!

    Friedmud

    1. Re:I love it. by JoeLinux · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The only issue that has ever come up is:

      1) When a customer comes in, and we have to come in on our day off

      and

      2) Because of the increased rest on a three-day weekend, people use less vacation time, resulting in the office being virtually deserted in December.

  13. Seriously... by afabbro · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...this is what Ask Slashdot has been reduced to? Asking how a rather small change to a weekly schedule might work out?

    Future Ask Slashdots We Can Look Forward To:

    • "I'm thinking of switching from a soft toothbrush to a medium-soft. How has that worked out for you?"
    • "I'm considering moving my sock drawer from the top right to the top left drawer. Can anyone tell me the pros and cons of each arrangement?
    • "We're moving to a new home and are having a family meeting this Thursday to evaluate hanging toilet paper so that the next sheet is over versus under on the roll. I was wondering how other readers have approached this decision?"
    • "I'd like to set my USB to automount to a fixed drive letter when I plug it into my Windows XP laptop. I'm considering J:, P:, and possibly Q:. What do you all think? Should I look at M: as well?"
    --
    Advice: on VPS providers
    1. Re:Seriously... by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

      * "I'm thinking of switching from a soft toothbrush to a medium-soft. How has that worked out for you?"
      A: You should really try one of those electric toothbrushes.

      * "I'm considering moving my sock drawer from the top right to the top left drawer. Can anyone tell me the pros and cons of each arrangement?
      A: Have you considered moving the sock drawer to a closet in the bathroom? This would allow you to put on your socks while you are still warm instead of having to freeze your toes off on the way back to the dresser.

      * "We're moving to a new home and are having a family meeting this Thursday to evaluate hanging toilet paper so that the next sheet is over versus under on the roll. I was wondering how other readers have approached this decision?"
      A: Under. What kind of barbarians do you live with?

      * "I'd like to set my USB to automount to a fixed drive letter when I plug it into my Windows XP laptop. I'm considering J:, P:, and possibly Q:. What do you all think? Should I look at M: as well?"
      A: Hello, McFly! Use the U: drive.

      Sheesh!

    2. Re:Seriously... by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Under!? Over! It's closer and easier to get to! When it's under, it's right against the wall and harder to grab at. Plus, it's easier to roll down than up, so if you can't see the end, you can get it easier.

      Seriously, what's this world coming to?

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  14. "Summer Hours" by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 2, Informative

    My employer implemented a schedule like this last summer. They're planning on doing it again for 4 or 5 months starting in March or April. It's really pretty nice. Basically, while they're in effect you need to work an extra hour each day. How you do this is up to you. I ended up splitting the difference--get in 30 minutes early and stay 30 minutes longer. Since it was company-wide all the meeting schedules were adapted pretty quickly. It's worth it to have a 3-day weekend every other weekend. Makes setting up trips/vacations a whole lot easier.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
    1. Re:"Summer Hours" by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 2, Funny

      Feel free to delete both of them moderators.

      Wow! You really are new here, aren't you?

      --
      This guy's the limit!
  15. I work that. by Ouchie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work the 9/80 schedule but if you can get them to let you take every other Monday or better yet every other Wednesday. You can get a whole lot more done on a Wednesday. No lines at the bank, grocery store, etc. Unless you decide to just stay up all night Tuesday playing Halo then sleeping till 4 in the afternoon.

    --
    "Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." ~Ozzy Osborne
  16. Sound better then 5/80 by colinmcnamara · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously though, does anybody actually work only 40 hours a week?

    --
    Colin McNamara - CCIE #18233 "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible just takes a little longer"
    1. Re:Sound better then 5/80 by seebs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most of the time. (Not including extracurricular stuff, I do some consulting.)

      I'll push it a bit for a release date, but apart from that, I don't do much over 40 hours of work. I might spend an evening logged into IRC in case anyone needs anything, but then, I might take an hour off to play with my cat.

      The work gets done, we meet turnaround time commitments, the managers are happy.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    2. Re:Sound better then 5/80 by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously though, does anybody actually work only 40 hours a week?

      Apparently, your job sucks.

    3. Re:Sound better then 5/80 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, stupid American's. I mean the GDP of the US is the same as what ... Ghana. They are all over worked, lazy, and I have never met a productive American. And lastly when is the last time the US has done anything productive. They hardly win any Nobel Prizes anyway. Stupid Americans.

      Viva La [fill in your European Country].

      ---
      Productivity is measured by GDP/Population:
      US GDP: 13.8T / 306M = $45,098
      EU GDP: 16.9T / 491M = $34,419

      Compare the US to EU, do not pick some random country in order to boost your numbers. Otherwise you include North Dekota into the mix and reduce the numbers on the US side.

      Based on this US workers generate more than 25% more per person than Europeans. You do have an extra 2.5 hours to spend every week.

  17. 3x12.5 is even better! by Sandman1971 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I once worked a job that was 3x12.5, and it was great! It was overnight, and the boss didn't mind if we slept during the downtimes. The staggered schedule also made it that we had a full 7 days straight off every third week (followed by 6x12.5 in 7 days, that was a bit of a killer). Though being overnight in made family life hell for 3 days, the time off more than made up for it.

    --
    It's better to burn out than to fade away
  18. 9/80 works really well by GIL_Dude · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've worked 9/80 for the last 13 years or more. I also recently became a supervisor and am still working 9/80 and most of my employees do as well. In our company (68,000 employees total), it is generally implemented as schedule a, b, c, d (where a and b are opposite Friday's and c and d are opposite Monday's. Way back when I did LAN Admin work (Novell back then), Monday's were "password reset day" so I chose one of the Monday off schedules. On my "Monday on" I work from home - so I only drive in 4 days a week.

    I don't think I would ever want to go back to a 5 day a week schedule - 9/80 is just so much better.

    You also asked about whether the company respect those days off. In general they do really well with it. It is normally the employee that makes most decisions about "oh, we have some vendors coming in Monday - I will come in and just take the following Monday instead." There is almost never a "we need you to give up your day off" (I have rarely ever even heard of this happening and it certainly never happened to me).

  19. 90% of the employees voluntarily choose 9/80 by EMB+Numbers · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My employer offers optional 9/80 schedules. I estimate that 90% of the employees voluntarily choose 9/80. It is great to have at lest 26 three day weekends every year. When holidays fall on Monday, you may get a 4 day weekend.

    The off-Friday is well respected by management. The managers generally don't come in either.

    An off-Friday is a great time for banking, appointments, the start of vacation, volunteering in your kids' school, etc.

    Most people who choose the 5/40 schedule do so because they need to be home early to meet kids at the school bus or because the spouse works a regular schedule and they want to match schedules.

    Flexibility is always good. We have core hours from 10:00 to 3:00. Some people come in very early and leave at 3:00 to minimize the time kids are home alone. It can save a lot of child care costs. Others like me regularly come in at 10:00 and leave at 7:00.

  20. Trade-offs of a 9/80 work week by shdragon · · Score: 4, Informative

    The company I work for just switched to a 9/80 a few months ago. We're a little different since we have a schedule A and a schedule B, so only 1/2 the people are at work any given Friday. It's had some ups & downs.

    Here's what I see as the positives:
    1. Having a 4 day work week every other week rocks!
    2. Getting paid on the Friday where I work 5 days makes it all the more bearable.
    3. Easier to get chores, errands done since everyone else is at work.
    4. I get more work done during the last hour of every 9 hour day than any other hour.

    Here's the negatives:
    1. It's a PITA to schedule meetings.
    2. Sometimes I travel and it seems to always fall on a week where I'm supposed to be off that Friday.
    3. Customers are annoyed because they're not on the same schedule and aren't understanding that it won't be until Monday before I get back to them.
    4. I feel like I have less time to get work done since every other week I only work 4 days.
    5. More free time means I spend more money.
    6. Getting to work while it's dark & leaving when it's dark is depressing.

    --
    "...we dont care about the economics; we just want to be able to hack great stuff."
  21. I work 9/80 by tknd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pros:

    • On the short weeks you can get away with only charging 36 hours of vacation if you want to take the week off.
    • The off friday is convenient for getting errands done (dry cleaning) or appointments (dentist) that normally can't be done outside of business hours.
    • You save some money and time commuting 9 days instead of 10
    • For certain holidays you end up with really short weeks or really long weekends
    • If you find that you're consistently working more than 8 hours, you will actually work less since M-Th is usually 9 hours so you're not always getting screwed by being at the office late as much as you would with only 8 hour days.
    • Every other thursday feels like friday.
    • The off friday is a good excuse to not show up because you can always say "well no one is going to be at the office so I can't get work done."

    Cons:

    • The off friday is a good excuse to have you come in and do things that normally can't be done when everyone else is in the office (might be a pro in some cases since you wouldn't have to come in on the weekend.)
    • Though you have friday off, most other people are at work so you can't just "hang out" during the day.
    • The extra hour for M-Th takes some getting used to; you may find you have zero time left over to do anything on 9 hour days.
    • If you have regular schedules synced with schools (pick up kids and such), the off friday can be awkward.
    • The long weeks feel really long.
    • If you need a random day off, you'll end up charging 9 hours instead of 8.

    9/80 is best when paired with a flex time schedule so that you can move around hours when you need to. The off friday gives you an option to tell your boss "i'll work more these days or just come in friday" if you want to take a different day off instead of the off friday. Coming in on the off friday usually means the office is dead. That can be good and bad. Some people like not having anyone around because they normally get interrupted too much when people are at the office. Other people hate it because there's nobody else to kick the bucket with.

    If you find you are normally working more than 8 hours everyday, 9/80 is actually a good option because you will have a decent excuse for not coming in on the off fridays and you will have to work 9 hours most days anyway. If you find you are working even on the weekends, 9/80 will have no impact on your hours.

    As a single guy, I prefer 9/80. But I do know some family types that prefer the 5/40 since they really need the consistent 8 hour days to keep their family schedules synced. At first you will loath the 9 hour days because that extra hour is bigger than it looks. After a while though 9 hours will seem like nothing and the working fridays will seem really short.

  22. I'd rather have 4/36 by trolltalk.com · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'd rather have 4x9hour days, a 10% cut in pay, and 3 days off every week. (Hey, most of the last 10% is taxes anyway, right). If everyone did this, we could avoid tons of layoffs nationwide, lower energy costs (4 days commuting instead of 5), and 3-day weekends every week ...

    1. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The best schedule I ever worked was 12 hour days. I'd work 3 days one week, and 4 days the next week. I always had either 3 or 4 days off.

      A buddy of mine worked a variant of 9/80 schedule. They worked 9 hour days M-Th, and then worked a half day every Friday. Frankly, I'd rather have a full day off every other week.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    2. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right. That worked so well in France.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's nice for everyone who's not already working two or even three jobs just to make ends meet. And, surprise, surprise, most of the layoffs are also in the fields where you have unqualified people (who just happen to be also the ones that earn the least).

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      My father did the 12 hour 3on/4off/4on/3off for years...He said 12 hour days consisted of...He would show up at 9...Take a 2 hour lunch, well that adds up to 11 and leave at 1...and that adds up to 12!

    5. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Der+PC · · Score: 4, Funny

      I remember working a schedule like that when I was in my teens..

      3 work, 2 off, 2 work, 3 off... something like that...

      *SIGH* the time flew while flipping burgers.....

      --
      This signature is DRM protected. By the DMCA, you are not allowed to counteract or oppose to it.
    6. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by DudeFromMars · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >>(Hey, most of the last 10% is taxes anyway, right)
      Not Right.
      The idea that at a certain point, the govt takes most of your earnings in taxes is an urban legend.
      For anybody working by the hour, there is no "tipping point" where the govt keeps most of each additional dollar - it is just untrue.

      >>If everyone did this (4x9hr days), we could avoid tons of layoffs nationwide.
      A company can avoid layoffs by cutting hours and pay.
      If everybody at every company had their hours and pay cut, their bills remain the same, so the workers' spendable income after covering expenses is either gone or greatly reduced - You have just created a recession.

    7. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by trolltalk.com · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (Hey, most of the last 10% is taxes anyway, right)

      Not Right.

      Depends on where you work, what deductions you have, and your tax bracket. Come up to Kanuckistan and you'll see just how much higher your marginal tax rate is on the last few hours income each week.

      Also, which is more economically efficient - to pay people a marginal amount to sit around (unemployment - which comes out of taxes, remember), or for everyone to get some extra time off? I'd love a 9/36 w.a 10% pay cut. Between the lower taxes and the cost savings and sheer convenience and higher quality of life, who wouldn't?

    8. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Average · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is no doubt that, cutting back to necessities (as the country may finally be lurching toward), we have a surplus of working capacity. If people *really, really* cut back to needs (rice, beans, 100 warm square feet), we'd have 75%+ unemployment. Tech, mech, and automation meant that we had enough surplus to have more hairdressers and marketers than farmers. The flip side is that we don't need more farmers, even if millions wanted to go back to it.

      As for me, I'm lucky as hell. I'd found the ability to work 30 hours or so a week, with some vacation flexibility, in my nice cheap midwest small town, for slightly under $30k a year. Lucky as all hell to have it, for now. With my degrees and training, I 'should' make $80k or maybe $100k+ on the coasts. Instead, I get time to garden, volunteer, cook, and jam with friends. Awesome and a half. But, of course, it's far less efficient for most companies. Hiring 6 people and pushing them 50 or 60 hours a week is, sadly, much more efficient than having 10 people work 30 to 35. Perhaps shifting certain fixed costs (health care) off the employer might help this become an option for more people?

    9. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm a firefighter. I work 24 on, 48 off. As long as there aren't calls during the night, I get paid to sleep. Relevant to your question? No. Friggin' Awesome schedule anyways? Yes.

    10. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And if we started cutting asinine executive compensation for selling off the company's capital to turn a profit that quarter while driving the company into the ground, you wouldn't even have to take that 10% cut.

    11. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by EvanED · · Score: 5, Informative

      If it can knock you down into a lower tax bracket you can come out ahead.

      You will never decrease your tax liability by making less enough to compensate for making less, all other things being equal, even under a system as complex as the US tax code. If you think it can, tax brackets don't work the way I suspect you think they do.

      For instance, suppose in a hypothetical universe the brackets were set up so that $0-$50000 was taxed 0% and $50000+ was taxed 50%. If you made $60,000, people would say they fall into the upper bracket, but that doesn't mean they are paying $30,000 in taxes (which would imply that getting a $10,001 pay cut would increase take home pay by 20 grand). Rather, they pay 50% of the amount of money they make in excess of $50,000, meaning they will pay $5,000.

      Continuing the analogy, if there was another bracket starting at $100,000 with 75% tax, someone making $200,000 would pay:
      * 0% of the first $50,000
      * 50% of the next $50,000 (or $25,000)
      * 75% of the next $100,000 (or $75,000)
      giving a total tax liability of $100,000, rather than the $150,000 they would have to pay if they were paying 75% on everything.

      Now, there are changes to your employment state that can have big consequences. I am a grad student, and am taking up a teaching position this semester. Before I was a research assistant. RAs are exempt from FICA taxes (this is at least true in my state, and I think is common) but as an instructor I won't be, so even though I will be getting a nice raise, I'll also essentially be taking an instant 7.5% pay cut too. There may be something similar going from part time to full time or something like that which would apply. But in any case, if taking a pay cut actually increases your take home pay, it is definitely not because it puts you into a different tax bracket.

    12. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by the_B0fh · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are people really that stupid? A simple google search turns up:

      For single filers (this is slashdot after all):
      (Tax Rate Schedule X)

              * 10% on income between $0 and $8,025
              * 15% on the income between $8,025 and $32,550; plus $802.50
              * 25% on the income between $32,550 and $78,850; plus $4,481.25
              * 28% on the income between $78,850 and $164,550; plus $16,056.25
              * 33% on the income between $164,550 and $357,700; plus $40,052.25
              * 35% on the income over $357,700; plus $103,791.75

      Do you understand what the fuck that means? If you make less than $8025, you get taxed 10%. If you make between $8025 and $32550, that means you pay 10% on the first $8025, and 15% on the rest. That means the effective tax rate at $32550 is 13.77%.

      At which fucking point can you come out ahead while making less money?!

    13. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by trolltalk.com · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A lot of people don't "get" the idea that we don't "need" a lifestyle supported by huge mountains of debt. That's what started this whole problem - people (and countries) piling on more and more debt as they over-leveraged themselves. If you have no debts, and your work hours and pay are both cut 10%, you'll probably be okay. If debt payments represent half your net income, a 10% pay and hours cut is going to mean you don't "make your nut" each month. It's not the lower income, but the high debt level that leaves NO room to maneuver.

      When you take into account that as many as 1 in 2 mortgages (and even the most conservative estimate now puts it at 1 in 4) will be under-water over the next 5 years, now is the time to be shedding debt, not taking on more.

      The debt that is being incurred in everyone's name for all the bailouts isn't free money - every $ the government borrows is one buck less that consumers can borrow (or, if the government just revs up the printing presses, the excess currency forces the value of the consumers' dollars down by an equal amount).

      Depending on who you talk to, the dollar has lost between 93% and 97% of its' value in 40 years - the typical "generation". Why should anyone lend you money for 40 years if history shows that in terms of real purchasing power, it's worth less? The answer is, they won't lend, so watch for the US Dollar to continue to fall in value.

      Propping up the banks pretty much guaranteed a Japan-style "lost decade", unfortunately. Bail-outs don't put money in the consumers' pocket - they suck it out to prop up an inefficient system or create an artificially-high floor price.

      But that's another story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pduy96-kES4&NR=1

    14. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Average · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are correct. That's why they're called *marginal* tax rates. This lack of understanding, along with the inability to understand that businesses are taxed on net profit, not revenue, is why Joe The Plumber was such a target of mocking, and such a totem of economically-illiterate America.

    15. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by garett_spencley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm self employed and have often worked 12 hours / day. While the idea of taking 3 days / week off is appealing (and I've done it), I find that when I work 12 hours / day my productivity goes down the drain incrementally with each hour. I get extremely tired by the end of the shift and my brain turns to mush.

      I get way more work done doing a standard 8 hour work day with weekends off. Of course that's just me, though.

    16. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Funny

      If I could, I'd gladly shed 20% of my pay for a 4-day workweek. I might even be persuaded to shed more than 20% to get a four-day work week. :-) I would not, however, want to lose time in my evenings to work more hours to get the same or similar pay. Well, some evenings it would be okay, but other days I'd have to make it up on the front end because of evening activities, and I wouldn't much like making it up on the front end. (Wait, there's a 7:00 in the morning? Why didn't anyone tell me!?!)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    17. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Average · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Japan's 'lost decade' (and continuing) also has a lot to do with lack of population growth. Sadly, interest-based capitalism goes hand-in-hand with growth. Japan has gone into negative population growth territory. Much of the west will follow in our lifetimes. From a green or even moderately sane perspective, the cessation of growth and consumption is a blessed and long-hoped-for event. But, economics as we know it stagnates. People get money, but they don't lend it. They don't because lending entails some risk, but, whatever you might invest in is unlikely to grow in a steady or shrinking economy.

    18. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by CDMA_Demo · · Score: 5, Funny

      do you work 9/11 days?

    19. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by smaddox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A large number of people seem to be confused on this issue. For some reason people think a bracketed tax screws over the people making more money, when in actuality it is designed based on the idea of decreasing returns on income utility.

      On the other hand, businesses do come out ahead (tax-wise) for making less money. If they put all their profits back into the business, they pay fewer taxes. Kinda odd if you think about it, but it has the benefit of promoting growth.

    20. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Excellent post. I can't tell you how many people I know who misunderstand tax brackets and think they can be substantially penalized for earning an extra $1 if it puts them into a higher bracket.

      Another factor I would add that even further detracts from that myth, since I saw you mention it, is FICA. (For non-US residents unaware of FICA, it is a separate federal payroll tax which funds Social Security and Medicare.) For 2008, an employee pays 6.2% up to $102,000 for FICA. If you compare to the US income tax brackets, any money you earn over that $102,000 up to $164,550 is being effectively taxed at 6.2% less than the $78,850 to $102,000 earned (considering Fed Income Tax plus FICA, the vast bulk of most payroll tax). The $164,550-$357,700 bracket raises the rate 5% on additional dollars earned, which still leaves you paying 1.2% less and only when you enter that top bracket are your additional dollars effectively taxed at a whopping 0.8% more than you were taxed for $78,850 to $102,000.

      Bottom line, under the US federal tax system you never lose money by making money. In fact, it really doesn't look so progressive when you spell it out like that.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    21. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have to tell you, that I fell into that misconception for a lot of years. It is poorly described almost universally. On the plus side, it did give a pal of mine who I have frequent friendly rivalries with, a good chance to be right.

      Honestly, that isn't even the worst misconception people have about taxes. Many people (most?) don't even realize that the taxes that come out of their paychecks are "withheld". They think that they have to pay one set of taxes through the year, and a seperate set of taxes at the end of the year. Just look at the tax preparation commercials that are now running where they are bragging that "95% of our customers receive a refund". They say it like it is their great service that gets the government to give you money and that the fact that you have been overpaying throughout the year has nothing to do with it.

      Scarier yet are the commercials that ran last year by H&R Block. Their commercial boiled down to telling people that they should trust them with their money because they were holding a lottery.

    22. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by bigsteve@dstc · · Score: 2, Funny
      You will never decrease your tax liability by making less enough to compensate for making less, all other things being equal, even under a system as complex as the US tax code.

      Yes you can, but first you will need two SSNs ... :-)

    23. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by tompaulco · · Score: 4, Funny

      any money you earn over that $102,000 up to $164,550 is being effectively taxed at 6.2% less than the $78,850 to $102,000 earned
      Which is why I encourage my employer to pay me more than $102,000. Not only do I get taxed less, but so does my employer. Alas, they didn't see the logic in my argument, nor in the charts which showed the average person with my experience in my position earning $120k in my locale.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    24. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have absolutely no idea how the US tax code works.

      Nobody knows how the US tax code works.

    25. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by mgblst · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It takes a while for the layoffs to hit the higher paid/more qualified people but it will. Unless things improve quickly, which they won't.

      It is called the trickle up effect. The lower paid jobs can react to this quickly, because they have less money in the bank, and their employees are protected less by law.

    26. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Informative

      I just wrote a post below about tax brackets and rates, and it just so happens that I'm a dual US-Canadian citizen, living and working in Canada now but most of life was in the US. Out of curiosity I wanted to compare US vs. Canadian income tax rates, I was surprised to find that Canadian income tax rates are slightly lower across the board than the US.

      Canada 2009:
      - 15% on the first $38,832 of taxable income, +
      - 22% on the next $38,832 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $38,832 and $77,664), +
      - 26% on the next $48,600 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $77,664 and $126,264), +
      - 29% of taxable income over $126,264.

      US 2008:
      - 10% of $0 to $8,025
      - 15% of $8,025 to $32,550
      - 25% of $32,550 to $78,850
      - 28% of $78,850 to $164,550
      - 33% of $164,550 to $357,700
      - 35% of $357,700 and up

      The US figures do not count FICA which is 6.2% up to $102,000. My additional taxes on my Canadian payroll check do not come close to matching FICA plus other non-Federal taxes that I paid in the US.

      The place where I feel overtaxed in Canada in comparison to the US is not on my income, but with the GST/PST, and the slew of fuel, booze, etc., etc., taxes which contribute overall to higher cost of living here.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    27. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by EightBits · · Score: 2, Informative

      I understand this was about taxes, but from a non-tax point of view, you can actually come out ahead by other benefits qualifications.

      A single mother where I used to work was making a certain wage. Because of how low her income was, she was able to get child care subsidy from the state. She was told she was going to get a raise of $0.25/hour. It was going to put her total annual income over the limit and disqualify her for the subsidy which was worth about $2.00/hour. She asked to only be given an $0.11/hour raise so she would not go over the income limit. $0.25/hour was the maximum annual pay raise for her position and she was going to nursing school part time. She was going to be out of there in a couple of years making more money as a nurse so she came out ahead by making less money.

      While reducing income will not help with lowered taxes, it can help with other things and this should not be forgotten.

    28. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is simple.

      Person A makes $50k a year. Let's say they pay 15%. They pay $7.5k per year.
      Their apartment costs $800 per month. Their car costs $400 per month. Their food costs $300 per month.
      At the end of every month they have about $500 left over for spending money.

      Person A gets a 50% raise. They now make $75k. Let's say their total tax burder is now 20%. They now pay $15k in taxes a year.
      They buy a house with their new found fortunes with a $1800 a month mortage. They ea tout more and their food costs $500 a month. They get a nicer car and their lease is now $500. Now they have a net debt of $200 a month.
      Suddenly they're broke. Obviously the government is holding them down. Before their raise they had money to spare. After their raise they are out of money. Taxes are to blame.

    29. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by youknowjack · · Score: 5, Informative

      Research suggests that while 12 hour shifts can make people happy and psychologically healthy, they can introduce long term health effects due to fatigue (accrued sleep debt).

      Also, people make more errors towards the end of long shifts (particularly dangerous in industrial work environments). An 8 or 9 hour shift as suggested can mitigate this risk.

      http://pt.wkhealth.com/pt/re/oeme/abstract.00022707-199804000-00001.htm

    30. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by QRDeNameland · · Score: 2, Informative

      Replying to myself... Sorry! Scratch that...I didn't see the additional provincial taxes below. I thought there was missing taxes somewhere. Still, when it comes down to it my overall payroll taxes on, I'll just sat between $50-$100K, seems to be pretty much the same as the US.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    31. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by ktappe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Come up to Kanuckistan and you'll see just how much higher your marginal tax rate is on the last few hours income each week.

      Unless the tax rate is greater than or equal to 100%, you're wrong--it will always benefit you to work more hours than fewer. Yes, the per-hour benefit will decrease at higher brackets but the benefit will never completely go away.

      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    32. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by blitziod · · Score: 4, Funny

      yea but firemen get LAID all the time.. I mean really there is like NO other job in the same pay range that will get you that much sex.

      --
      The only way to bust a doper--is when you yourself become a smoker!
    33. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by mjwx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are people really that stupid?

      Yes, yes people are really that stupid.

      This is pretty much how the tax system works in AU. You have to pay a certain amount based on the minimum of the tax bracket and then a percentage of each dollar after that. they only way you possibly end up worse off is if you move tax brackets and end up at the top end of the next lowest bracket or at the bottom end of the next bracket up (and I think this is exclusive to Australia's screwed up tax code).

      I'm not a taxation expert but I have enough brains to keep my semi-formed ideas to myself and ask someone who fucking knows.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    34. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by proverbialcow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wish I had mod points so I could mod you "+5, Comic Genius." Also, I wish we could mod people "Comic Genius."

      The real trick is to look at the marginal take-home wage per hour if you happen to be on the edge of jumping tax brackets. Essentially, determine how much you're currently bringing home per hour worked, and comparing that to how much you'd be bringing home per EXTRA hour you worked to get the bump in income. At some point you're going to have to determine if that extra $100 in take home pay is worth the extra 10 hours you worked to get it.

      At some point, quality-of-life needs to enter the equation.

      --
      The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
    35. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Directrix1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I actually wasn't aware of that (you know short of the post above this one), thanks for presenting this information in the most douchiest mother fucking assholiest way possible. No, seriously thanks. People are this fucking stupid because the concept is presented in a fucking stupid way.

      But regardless, if your time is worth $x / hr (and you net $x / hr in your normal tax bracket), and after exceeding a certain threshold you start getting $y / hr such that $y $x (due to entering into a higher tax bracket), then you have just started selling your time at a loss. I have screwy logic though I suppose.

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    36. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by lewp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I worked this schedule several years ago as a night shift NOC monkey. I think I might go back if given the chance, despite the fact that I'd make about 1/4 the money I do now. Nothing like staffing a data center by yourself (or with one other person) in an empty building with nothing to do except write code, watch movies, play video games, order takeout, and wait for an alarm. Plus we had several OC-12s at a time when I was paying $150/mo for 768k SDSL.

      You didn't get to see other people very often, but everything was just starting to open on your way home from work so running errands was a snap, your commute was the opposite way traffic was going, and shopping was easy because the grocery store was empty. I used to hit the health club downstairs, swim a couple miles, and be headed out to my car to go home just as the 9-5ers were rolling in.

      Just thinking about it makes me dread riding the train into the city in a few hours. I need to go to sleep...

      --
      Game... blouses.
    37. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by cyborch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Buu huu...

      In Denmark tax rates are:

      - 39% of $0 to $48,300
      - 44% of $48,300 to $58,000
      - 59% of $58,000 and up

      Actually it's a lot more complicated than that, but it boils down to approx. the rates above...

    38. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by b4upoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have worked 10 hrs. and four day systems and that isn't the best way to work at all. In many trades that last two hours drains a worker too much.Every work day seems like life is suspended as it is filled with nothing but work.

    39. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 3, Funny

      During the summer I switch to working four ten hour days. Its nice as it gives me Fridays off and have a long weekend. :)

      I used to do that back when I worked at the explosives factory... shame it's not there anymore...

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    40. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Pippinjack · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Glad I'm in the UK:
      • $0-$8836 = 0%
      • $8836 - $59788 = 20%
      • $59788+ = 40%
      --
      hear all, see all, say nowt; eat all, supp all, pay nowt; and if tha ever does owt for nowt - do it for thissen
    41. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by ultranova · · Score: 2, Informative

      A large number of people seem to be confused on this issue. For some reason people think a bracketed tax screws over the people making more money, when in actuality it is designed based on the idea of decreasing returns on income utility.

      I suspect that at least some of them are purposefully spreading misinformation. Progressive taxation is, after all, contrary to the ideology and perceived or real interests of both plutocrats and John Galt wannabes of this world.

      Remember, equality is seen as bad by those who think they'd be the 500-pound gorillas in a jungle.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    42. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by JavaRob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's interesting. I'm also self employed and I've found that usually I get more productive towards the end of a 12 hour day.

      I find the same thing, but (at its worst) I think it functions more along the lines of "holy shit -- I have gotten hardly anything done and it's 6pm".

      Though there's also the factor of thinking more clearly when it's dark out and quiet, and all of those other things I know I should do before stores close/etc. can be forgotten.

    43. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Squegie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've been working that same schedule for the last year or so and love it. Every week I have Thursday morning through Sunday evening off, and every other week I get Wednesday off as well.

      It's actually 36 and 48 for an average of 42 hours/week. However, I very much enjoy having that "long weekend" every weekend.

      I'm currently doing remodeling work around the house and having a full day or two during the "workweek" to do these projects is almost crucial. I couldn't imagine accomplishing running wire and drywall in the evening after dinner and a bit more on Sunday when some of the stores close early.

      On any job I've worked where I worked the "9-5, M-F" deal, I always hated getting of work and finding that various offices/banks/stores were closed. So many errands stack to get done "by noon on Saturday". If I couldn't do a flexible (4x10) schedule, I would try to shift my hours to earlier (7am-3pm) so I could do stuff in the afternoon.

      When I was younger, I tried shifting my work schedule to later in the day: 10-8 or 11-9. I liked it at first because I like sleeping in and staying up late, but I soon discovered that I didn't have time for anything. I stayed up all night by myself and then slept till it was time to go to work. Once I forced myself to get up for a 7am shift a few times, I got used to it.

      On a side note, I do Linux admin work at a 24x7 data-center and doing the home repair adds a nice sense of balance.

    44. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by JavaRob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right. That worked so well in France.

      There's something to be said for putting some focus on quality of life as opposed to simply maximizing income.

      It's kind of nice to notice in France that grocery stores aren't normally open 24/7 (more like 10/6 or less), so no one has to work those shitty shifts. I moved to France a few years ago; I never noticed how weird the US was until I was back on business and managed to get a haircut at 10pm on a Sunday night. WTF, America? Yay, jobs created. But they are so shitty and so poorly paid that mostly they just prevent the employees from having the time for education, family, friends, or even searching for a better job.

      Not that France had the ideal balance at all (or even that they took the best approach to "enforcing" quality of life) but I think the base idea is a very good thing.

    45. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by GospelHead821 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This highlights an unfortunate truth. Employers have an economic incentive to decrease the quality of their employees' lives. I could come up with a dozen different plans involving scheduling, benefits, and workplace amenities that would help to make employees happier and foster a richer national culture. Each and every one of them, however, can and would be countered by businesses as promoting inefficiency. As a society, we've decided that being being productive and successful is all the culture that we need. That makes me pretty sad.

      --
      Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
      Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
    46. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by dotmax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I want to mee-too the part about errors on long shifts. 12 hr. shifts are great if you're generally sitting around not doing anything real complex, but if it's something that requires a lot of mental concentration for the whole 12 hrs, you're asking for trouble because your brain will turn to oatmeal. The sleep deficit thing is quite real also. I am a ... long time ... shift worker at the big atom smasher's main control room. (not the one that blew up). I know whereof i speak.

    47. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Sobrique · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depends on the pattern. The problem with anything that rotates like that, especially if it covers 'outside normal hours' is it's murderous on the social life.

    48. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Oct and Nov of 2001, a fiend of mine dressed in whatever it is NYFD wear off duty that says, "hey I'm a fire fighter" and hit the bars. Never before and not since had he gotten so much tail.

    49. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by blueZ3 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Kama Sutra?

      --
      Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
    50. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by jbr439 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're not including provincial income taxes which are generally significantly higher than state income taxes; and, with the exception of Alberta (I think), have the same progressive nature as federal income taxes.

    51. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by bluie- · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've always thought even 8 hours is too much, for coding work anyway. I'd love to set up an experimental office that runs like so:

      Show up at 10:00. 30 minute meeting for everyone to quickly discuss what they're doing/what needs doing.

      Work like crazy for 2.5 hours. Take a group lunch break/meeting for 30 minutes, to quickly discuss progress/concerns.

      Work like crazy for 1.5 hours. Have a 30 minute meeting to go over what was done/what needs to be done tomorrow. Work is done for the day (4:00pm).

      I really feel like that could be super productive. Meetings would motivate and keep people on track, and knowing that your day will soon be over would further motivate you to keep working. I also feel like workspaces without walls would help discourage web-surfing, maybe also have people work side-by-side to be able to answer each other's questions.

      These are just ideas of course, and may fail miserably in the real world, but even so I'd love to try it and tweak it until some variation at least could work. What does everyone else think?

      --
      life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think
    52. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by MilesAttacca · · Score: 2

      Seven years is hardly too soon.

      --
      98% of America's teens drink alcohol, smoke, and have sex. Put this in your sig if you like bagels.
    53. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by Fallingcow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd definitely take a 4-5% pay cut to get 4 weeks of vacation time rather than the standard 2.

      Hell, give me a 15% cut and put me on a completely continental European work schedule--4 or 5 weeks vacation, extra holidays, and occasionally some "faire le pont" when a holiday falls only one day from a weekend. That'd be more than a fair cut for that.

      Barring legislation mandating such things, it'll never be a realistic desire for someone who doesn't wish to be stuck at the bottom of their career's pecking order for eternity... but I can dream!

    54. Re:I'd rather have 4/36 by icebrain · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most graduated tax systems don't work that way. In your example, the money you make from working X hours would be taxed at 20%. Working X+1 hours doesn't mean that your whole income gets taxed at 40%; rather, the 40% rate is only applied to the additional money earned through the +1 hour.

      In other words, your returns diminish from working extra, but they never go negative. A plot of take-home vs. earned income would start out at a 1:1 slope, then gradually decrease to a lower (but still positive) slope, but it would never go negative.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  23. Getting Customers to leave you alone Fridays by billstewart · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm not on a 9/80 plan, but I've been with my company long enough that when they started requiring us to use or lose our vacation every year rather than carrying it over, I started taking Fridays off most of the summer. I had mixed success with it; just because I'm not planning to work on a given day, that doesn't mean that my customer doesn't want to schedule a meeting or call me on the phone, or that people stopped sending me emails that needed attention, or there might be training from the head office folks or whatever, so Fridays were often only half-off, or I'd sleep late and do email around noon. But still, that meant that I really did get my Saturday off :-)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Getting Customers to leave you alone Fridays by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Leave the computer and phone off, if you're going to take the day off, especially if you've notified people in advance. I say if you're taking the day off, take the day off.

    2. Re:Getting Customers to leave you alone Fridays by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This seems to be a very American (and Japanese) phenomenon. In Europe, it wouldn't even be legal to offer only 10 days of vacation time in many countries (possibly all of them, these days). Here in the UK, for someone working in a typical developer or sysadmin role in IT, I'd say somewhere around 25 days +/- 2 is fairly typical, plus the 8 public holidays (which is fewer than most other European countries get).

      Some employers do say you lose whatever vacation allowance you don't use by the end of each year, but in reality only the kind of poor managers and die-hard workaholics who think employees who don't take vacations are more productive seem to fail to use up their allowances under these circumstances. IME, it's fairly typical for decent employers to set a cap of, say, 5 days rolling over: this avoids long-term employees building up a huge vacation allowance, but allows some flexibility and avoids everyone taking off half of December and leaving the office near-empty just to use up all their remaining leave.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    3. Re:Getting Customers to leave you alone Fridays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      exactly, they wouldn't let you beer it up during work ours, so don't let them put your work during your beer hours!

    4. Re:Getting Customers to leave you alone Fridays by Seindal · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Denmark we have five weeks of holidays each year, and as the law is made, you don't have a right to five weeks, it is your duty to have five weeks of holidays. This means you cannot trade your holidays in for other benefits - you have to go one holiday.

      For some reason nobody complains about this egregious limitation of our freedoms :-)

      --
      René Seindal
  24. I worked 9/80 for several years by abarrow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It was great. I usually put in 10 hour days anyway, so someone telling me that I was to get every other Friday off was great! Not only do you get the occasional 3 day weekend, but you will probably find that the Fridays that you do work are really quiet - assuming not everyone in the office is on the same 9/80 schedule. If you are in a "meeting rich" environment, you are spared on Fridays because half the people aren't there.

    After I got into middle management, 9/80 basically meant that I didn't feel guilty for taking a Friday off, but often-times I was working those days as well.

    In big companies where folks that work a normal 8 hour day are treated like slackers, it's a good way to actually get some benefit for those 8+ hour days. Also, remember that 5 days of vacation turns into 10 days off! Bonus!

  25. 4-10s are the shit by icebrain · · Score: 3, Informative

    The company I work for runs 4x10 as the "regular" workweek for most of engineering and production. Friday (the usual day off) counts as an overtime day. Non-exempt people get time and a half, and even the salaried people get straight time for that day.

    I usually come in for a half day every Friday and pick up a few extra hours (business needs permitting, of course), though sometimes I'll sleep in an hour or two first--I usually show up around 615 the rest of the week. It still gives me an afternoon off to get stuff done around the house, run errands, or go to the range before my wife gets home. If we need to travel for the weekend, I can either use the day to pack and get ready, or we can leave early if she takes a day off.

    If you find a company that offers this, take it.

    --
    The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  26. 80 hours by suso · · Score: 5, Funny

    I already work 80 hours.

    Oh wait, 9 days. Ok, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant 5.

    1. Re:80 hours by Sfing_ter · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have a system where I only work 6 half days.... 12hrs each day... sigh.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
    2. Re:80 hours by metlin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Tell me about it.

      80 on a usual week, 100 on a bad week and 60 on a good week.

      80 hours for nine days? Slackers.

    3. Re:80 hours by buddyglass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hope it's worth it. That sounds miserable.

    4. Re:80 hours by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      " Tell me about it.

      80 on a usual week, 100 on a bad week and 60 on a good week.

      80 hours for nine days? Slackers."

      OUCH!! Why would you (or anyone else) do that to themselves? I hope, at least, you are getting paid at least straight time for every one of those OT hours...??

      If not, you are just killing yourself and robbing yourself of valuable hours of your life.

      That's why I will ONLY work hourly....put it in a contract, I will work when needed...but, I will not work an hour for free. My time is valuable, and I will get my bill rate for every hour worked wherever I work. Doing this way...makes them also think twice about asking if they need you or not for OT. This way...I also don't have a problem with working hours around personal time off. Even if W2 hourly, you just usually have to get avg. 8 hours a day for the pay period, so if you need a day off...swing hours around the rest of the days in the billing period.

      The best is when doing corp to corp 1099...where you work as you wish generally. Don't wanna work 40 hours that week? Don't. Want to work 60 the next...ok.

      Seriously...I just have to believe salary is for suckers. They expect you to work over if 'needed'...but, do they happily let you leave early when your work is done? Hmm....I didn't think so.

      And you can do it W2 too....with benefits if you just know to negotiate it up front with them...if that is the route you'd rather go.

      I'll never work for free again...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:80 hours by Tyr_7BE · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Seriously...I just have to believe salary is for suckers. They expect you to work over if 'needed'...but, do they happily let you leave early when your work is done?

      In a word, yes. I understand where you're coming from - managing your own time is a sweet gig. But don't be so quick to dismiss a salary scheme. When run properly, it can be pretty decent. At my office when there's not much going on, not a lot of people work 40 hr weeks. When it's crunch time, you're going to see a lot of people putting in 60 on a regular basis. Pretty similar to what you described, actually. Work gets done on time, and nobody bats an eye if you work an entire week of half days. It's all in how you execute the salary scheme. I could see it being abused, for sure, but when it's not abused, it's a nice ride.

    6. Re:80 hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They deem me mad because I will not sell my days for gold; and I deem them mad because they think my days have a price.
        - Kahlil Gibran

    7. Re:80 hours by Metasquares · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those tech. jobs may pay well, but the hours on most of them aren't great either.

    8. Re:80 hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      5/80? Your job must be a slave pit! I get 7/80 with a promise of all my weekends back when I retire.

    9. Re:80 hours by Symbha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ya I guess, but I dare you to try and keep that up for another 15 years. Or try and have a significant personal relationship working like that...

      There is no life to be head with 66% of your time at work.

      So, unless that is *literally* the only thing you like... do yourself a favor and find some balance.

    10. Re:80 hours by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's only 72 hours.
      Slacker.

      You mean 72 half hours.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    11. Re:80 hours by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sorry. I paid my dues in construction and an iron foundry before getting a cushy tech job. Although oddly I find my software engineering job much more stressful.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    12. Re:80 hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So true, but you are forgetting something. Most people on Slashdot are generally quite young, under 30. To many of these people, the amount of time you spend on work is actually something to be proud of.

      Take Sfing_ter here. Half-jesting, he's complaining about his 70+ hour work week, but inside, he *likes* being required to work that much, makes him feel important.

      So to Sfing_ter and others, I was as delusional as you in my youth for a couple of years until I got my senses back. Or rather, I started a family and realized it's more to life than working.

      Posting as AC because I don't feel like taking a Flamebait hit, but you all know this is true.

    13. Re:80 hours by Angstroem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Frankly, I don't believe you.

      Telecommuters like to count as work every minute they have their PC.

      Executives count in any minute they're awake, cause even running around with a cup of coffee or having a chat on the toilet is "work".

      Regular employees count the sheer presence, regardless of standing outside smoking, drinking coffee with others (that's called meeting), or just browsing slashdot (called recherche).

      If you start logging what you really do in those 60/80/100 hrs you most likely will notice that you get done no more than the average worker, eventually even less.

      The only people I believe being truly working those insane hours are doctorate candidates in their final year and/or before conference deadlines.

    14. Re:80 hours by arse+maker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      lol thast bullshit.

      at a previous job I occasionally worked 100 hours a week (thats insane though, only allowed by a crisis allowing you to give up sleep).

      But often 80 hours a week. The reason it was ok was I could work from home or work, as I pleased. Also, my job was crossing various duties. So while I couldnt sustainably code 80 hours a week, at least not in a productive way. I can do some db work, work on some web statistics, review some servers, view some feedback from our site easily. Its the monotony that kills your ability to be productive for long periods.

      If you happen to have a job you enjoy, and you have the ability to do various tasks its very possible. However no person believes you, im unsure why, they start making claims you arent really working all that time.. but to be honest, get fucked, do you only count the time your fingers are striking the keyboard as working? The idea you can only work 40 hours a week and the rest is just wasted is crap, sure, some people fluff some hours where they have already clocked off well before they have left the office, but its not always true.

    15. Re:80 hours by Angstroem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      at a previous job I occasionally worked 100 hours a week (thats insane though, only allowed by a crisis allowing you to give up sleep).

      The key word here is occasionally. I'm fully aware that there are situations where you just have to kick in the overdrive and get something by insane working hours. BTDT, and more than once. It usually is, however, a sign of bad company management because they either have too much work for too few people or acquired a too big project. Bad planning in both cases. Only emergency situations justify such insane overload.

      If you continue that overdrive you'll sooner or later burn out and/or start doing nonsense. Especially sleep deprivation is not exactly known for improving your work performance. Raised stress levels may lead to a temporary productivity boost, but that boost comes at a price.

      Unless, of course, your job has a recreational effect on you, which is probably anything but the norm. I know a lot of people who really like their jobs (being one of them myself), but doing some hobbyist stuff, even if somewhat work-related, is something completely different than work. And neither is a replacement for sleep.

      The idea you can only work 40 hours a week and the rest is just wasted is crap

      It indeed is. Usually the quote of productive work per day is much lower, about the range of 5h.

      You mentioned that it's the monotony that kills concentration. True. Zombie work kills. On the other hand, you also need a certain time to adjust to a new task and get that going smoothly. Too frequent task changes (being the norm today with telephone, email, and slashdot interrupts...) will make you feel utterly busy, but in the end being highly unproductive.

    16. Re:80 hours by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If someone needs to work 80 hours a week on average then I would say that their life doesn't have much quality to begin with. Unless by "maintain our quality of living" you mean "paying off the luxury goods and services you've purchased". But then again, as your work load stops you from benefiting from them, I seriously doubt that they do much good.

      Materialism and all that keeping up with the joneses is a bitch, isn't it?

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    17. Re:80 hours by Sobrique · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If your approach to salaried work is - paid to do a job, hours irrelevant. Then yes. It can work quite nicely. I have had jobs that meant I was working late some days, and not working at all other days. Sometimes I'd have to cut lunch, other times I'd have time enough to go have a leisurely meal.

      However all too often, what 'salary' translates to, is 'you must be in the office in normal business hours, overtime doesn't get paid, but your future prospects will be directly correlated to how long you spend looking like you're working'.

      It's ironic really. Henry Ford did actually study the subject of working hours, and realised he got the same productivity when he went from 6 days/week, 12 hours shifts, to 5 days a week 8 hours shifts. He also had a workforce which didn't burn out as quickly.

    18. Re:80 hours by davemabe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sounds like you're one of the most unproductive workers I can imagine.

      The first thing that comes to my mind when I hear about people working these long hours is that they're wasting a lot of time.

    19. Re:80 hours by lawaetf1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Couldn't agree more. A solid day's work is a noble thing but this "80 on a usual week, 100 on a bad week" is for the birds. I have no pity whatsoever unless it truly is the only job you can get or you absolutely have to have it (pays the extra $5k you need for your kids' medicine).

      I've as much sympathy for the OP as I do for lawyers who put in similar hours for 10 years in order to make partner. Enjoy the $$.. you'll have no soul at the end... huh, that explains a lot.

      --
      CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
    20. Re:80 hours by loshwomp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, some of us [work 80-hour weeks] to maintain our quality of life in these wonderful times.

      I hate to break it to you, but if you're working 80- or 100-hour weeks, you don't have any quality of life.

    21. Re:80 hours by datababe72 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, I arranged a similar thing after the birth of my baby. It was brilliant. I changed jobs for other reasons and had to go back to the normal schedule. I miss my every other Friday off. Sometimes, I took my daughter out of day care and spent the day with her. Sometimes, I sent her to day care like normal and got chores done so that my husband and I could both have more time with our daughter on the weekend.

      You already have a lot of people on this thread boasting about how many hours they work. Whatever. I have generally worked 40 hour weeks (or 80 hours every two weeks) my entire career, and I have advanced up the ladder just fine, thank you. I always get good performance reviews and good raises. Working hard and getting a lot done does not require insane work hours, and I have rarely met anyone who could remain productive for all of the insane hours they "worked". Personally, I find I can sustain crazy hours for about two weeks, and I'll do that if I think whatever crisis needs handling is worth it.

      Good luck- the system will work for you if you let it.

    22. Re:80 hours by The+Man · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Worse still, your employer probably isn't getting much for all your effort. I just finished a 12-month run of pretty consistent 70-hour weeks with the occasional 80- or 90-hour marathon thrown in for fun, including a (record, for me) run of 49 consecutive days worked. I was probably getting only about 1/3 as much work done per hour as I might when properly rested and working 45-50 hours a week.

      Of course, I knew this at the time, too - the problem was that the alternative was taking a couple days off, which would mean that instead of getting (1/3) * (14/9) * 2 days' worth of work done in that time, I'd get nothing done. That would of course mean that when I got back I'd still have all the work that needed doing before, plus two more days' worth, and an extra 2 days' worth of schedule pressure added as well. While the first day back might be ok, I'd need to work extra hours to start catching up, and after another 12-14 hour day or two I'd be right back where I started: unproductive and working way too much, but even farther behind. It's really a Hobson's choice at that point.

      Anyone can work extra time to get past a crisis or a single near-term deadline. But the constantly intensifying pressure of a looming but obviously unachievable deadline really makes scheduling your work a vicious circle. No matter how hard you work, the deadline will just keep getting pushed farther out, and there is no work schedule that would allow you to meet it. But you have to try, so you work more but get less done, and the pressure ratchets up another notch! Ugh. All you can really do is make whatever progress you can, try to stay sane, and look for any possible opportunity to dump work on others (who btw are probably just as loaded down as you are).

      If you're in this spot, you have to really want to do whatever you're doing. If you don't, you should be looking for a new job and/or trying to get yourself onto the next RIF list. It doesn't really matter that "you have a family to feed" or whatever else you're telling yourself. As the parent said, you don't have any quality of life. You're just going to have to learn to get by on whatever pay is available to someone with your skills and experience willing to work hard 40-50 hours a week. That might mean less "stuff" in your life. So be it. Of course, the problem is that there are very few jobs available at all that don't require long hours; I blame the high fixed costs of hiring and compensating most developed-world workers. At many companies, these fixed costs are over 50% of total compensation cost. If employers stopped offering these large fixed-cost benefit packages, they could afford to hire enough workers to get the job done (and as a side benefit, their employees would be free to choose how to spend their money). Instead, they have an incentive to understaff and get more hours out of existing workers, amortizing all those fixed costs over a larger amount of work. And with a generally weak labour market - though frankly not nearly as bad as in 2001-2003 - they can really put the screws to you right now. A job that offers at least somewhat interesting work and mostly requires 40-50 hours a week is an absolute treasure, whatever it pays.

    23. Re:80 hours by Angstroem · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Talk to any lawyer, management consultant or finance professional in one of the top tier firms.

      And you see the contradiction to my posting exactly *where*?

      Excuse my frank words, but what you cited here are exactly those jobs which either create one huge pile of cow manure after the other (which is left for others to clean up), or where every food and drink intake becomes a "work meeting". Mostly both.

      I do have relatives working at McK and I do know how McK sucks the life out of them, with them finding each and every excuse for why that is good. For *that*, the paycheck is not even remotely big enough. Besides, consulting firms like these are responsible for any major business fuckup: We need to outsource. No, outsourcing is wrong, we need to be fully self-supplying. We need to concentrate the company to its core business and sell everything else. No, we need to amalgamate to acquire a wide, solid base.

      Not to mention those financial firms who seeingly created the current world-wide mess.

      Thank you, but if that is your point pro 80-100hrs of work per week, I rest my case...

    24. Re:80 hours by no1home · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You already have a lot of people on this thread boasting about how many hours they work. Whatever. I have generally worked 40 hour weeks (or 80 hours every two weeks) my entire career, and I have advanced up the ladder just fine, thank you. I always get good performance reviews and good raises. Working hard and getting a lot done does not require insane work hours, and I have rarely met anyone who could remain productive for all of the insane hours they "worked". Personally, I find I can sustain crazy hours for about two weeks, and I'll do that if I think whatever crisis needs handling is worth it.

      Agreed. Yes, there are times in some industries, such as our tech industry, wherein we have emergencies to answer to, but I find regular hours are enough to get my work done. Otherwise, I would consider myself unfit for duty and find a new career. I understand that some, few, places push hard and require more (push back and demand better treatment).

      As for working a 9/80 work schedule, it works best when the off days are respected. Much of my team works a 9/80 and on the rare occasion their off Friday is interrupted, they get the time back. Staffing prevents us from having the entire team on the 9/80 schedule, so it's granted to those listed as 'managers'. (If you're truly familiar with IT, you realize that, somehow, many of us are listed as such.) I wish I had a 9/80, though a 7/80 would be even better for me (one week of three 12-hour days and one week of three 12-hour days and one 8-hour day).

      --
      I hope this comment is well received... I could have moderated instead!

      Persecutors will be violated!
    25. Re:80 hours by khellendros1984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Californians are spoiled. Apparently due to game companies' abuse of programmers, software engineers and programmers must be hourly employees, not exempt. If they ask me to work 80 hours a week, they're going to be paying me overtime on half of that.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    26. Re:80 hours by amuro98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No but working 16 hrs, 7 days a week, WILL.

      I had a few coworkers who were like the OP. They'd willingly work ridiculously long hours just because they liked what they were doing.

      Problem was, management came to depend on their crazy schedules. Which meant when crunch time came, they had nothing more to give. A few times we'd come in to work the next morning, only to find one or both of them literally passed out on their keyboards after working 36+ hours straight. It wasn't healthy, and basically anything they did in those last 12 hours wasn't very useful, or even coherent, for that matter.

    27. Re:80 hours by hoppo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In an "up or out" organization, employees are also highly inclined to inflate the number of hours they claim to be working. Since a tremendous amount of one-upsmanship is present in these organizations, one person's inflated claims forces a colleague to inflate his hours worked even more, which forces another colleague to top that, and so on. Eventually, an equillibrium is reached, which represents the maximum believable number of hours one can work while still taking time to eat a hot pocket and and grab a couple hours of sleep. This is how one arrives at the mythical 80-hour week.

      I don't think anyone here doubts that you work quite a lot. However, your claims of an 80-hour week on a regular basis are most likely false. I've seen you claim in other posts that you work out regularly and read quite a lot of books. There's not a lot of time to do those things when you have a 12-16 hour workday, especially when you tack on additional time for meals and commuting. So you're either lying about how you spend your free time, or you're exaggerating how much time you spend at work. I'm inclined to believe the latter.

      But we get it. That's the world in which you live. Many of your peers are likely to read Slashdot as well, so you're forced to perpetuate the illusion here as well as in your workplace. Just don't kid yourself into thinking people believe it.

    28. Re:80 hours by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called working your way through school.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    29. Re:80 hours by lxs · · Score: 2, Funny

      What are these "personal relationships" you speak of?

    30. Re:80 hours by quanticle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At many companies, these fixed costs are over 50% of total compensation cost. If employers stopped offering these large fixed-cost benefit packages, they could afford to hire enough workers to get the job done (and as a side benefit, their employees would be free to choose how to spend their money).

      You think management wants the situation to be this way? Management wants the situation to be like the one you describe as well, as that would make planning hiring and firing much easier. Its just that, if you stop offering things like health care and 401(k) and other side benefits, the people that apply for your open positions are the bottom of the barrel dregs that you don't want to hire.

      Frankly, we're all just tiptoeing around the true elephant in the room - the fact that health care costs have grown unsustainably. If health care costs are passed to the employers, we end up with the present situation - employers are afraid to hire for fear of taking the health care costs, and ask more of their existing workforce. If we pass those costs to the employees, we'll see a dramatic rise in bankruptcies and uncollectable emergency room visits as people put off getting medical treatment until their diseases are nigh-incurable. If the costs are passed to the government, we'll either see massive tax increases, or a rise in the public debt (and a corresponding rise in interest rates).

      The only real way to ensure continued economic growth (past the end of the current crisis) is to deflate this health-care bubble in a controlled fashion. What the best way is to do that is still not clear, but it is clear that something must be done before the health care industry bankrupts the rest of the economy.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    31. Re:80 hours by geoffrob · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Some industrial and mining companies here have a 4 day (12 hour shift) 4 days off cycle. The mining company at Roxby Downs is one, many people live in Port Augusta or Port Pirie and commute (desirable as Roxby is isolated and in a desert so housing is much more expensive.) Pirie people drive (90km) to Port Augusta and take the company bus to Roxby. Seems to work.

    32. Re:80 hours by quanticle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nobody wants to be sick, and nobody wants to die, and no one wants to go bankrupt from having to pay hospital bills either. The issue is that no one seems to know what the actual costs are of providing health care. All we have are biased numbers from various industries that are all intent on passing the blame onto someone else within the system.

      Yet, we know that there must be inefficiency somewhere within the system, since other countries (like Britain, or Taiwan) are achieving statistically comparable outcomes while spending only a fraction of what we do? So where is the extra money going?

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
  27. I work whatever hours I want by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The company measures my performance by what I get done.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  28. That depends... by SETIGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're hourly, you can often get away with a "40 hour" work week that lasts less than 45 hours. If you're salaried, whether in government or not, you will be expected to get your job done whether it takes 10 hours a week or 168 hours a week. If you don't get it done, in this economic environment they will find someone who will get it done.

    That said, my wife works a 40 hour week that's supposed to be 4 days per week, 10 hours per day. Usually that translates to 8am to 7pm daily. She say's she'd never go back to 5x8.

    Unfortunately we car pool to work, so I work 8 to 7 as well. And then I usually put in 4 or 5 hours on Friday, and a few hours each on Saturday and Sunday. The difference.... You guessed it. She's in an hourly position that isn't exempt from overtime rules. I'm in a salaried position that is exempt from overtime rules. And to top it off, she makes about 20% more than I do because she is in an industry that competes to get workers. I'm in an industry that has more workers than it can afford.

    All in all 4-5x9 probably works OK, and if you're in an urban area, it's 10% less time that you'll sit in traffic. Maybe more because you either be commuting early or late. If the extra hour in the work day is cutting into your sleep, your commute is way too long. If it's cutting into your TV watching, then get TiVo and watch on your new day off.

  29. I hated it by HangingChad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I worked a 9/80 schedule for years and grew to hate it. If you've got any kind of a commute that turns a 9 hour day into an 11 hour day. Days seemed interminable. All those extra hours for two days off a month. And the three days fly by because you tend to pack everything into your day off. Car maintenance, doctor visits, any errands.

    A new company got the contract and didn't include the flex schedule and we went back to 8 hour days. It was like a vacation every day. 8 hours was a breeze.

    Better than any flex schedule was finding a job I could telecommute part of the week. Now that's a luxury. Work is exactly the same but the stress is way lower. You don't realize how much time you spend getting ready and getting to work. No jarring alarm clocks, no traffic. I'm probably going to jinx it saying this, but since I started the telecommute schedule I haven't been really sick once. The difference is really quite amazing.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  30. Source? by Feynman · · Score: 3, Informative

    the countries that have higher productivity per worker than the US.

    According to a U.N. report released in 2007, only Norway had higher productivity per hour worked than the U.S.

  31. Re:feh by chrisxcr1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Moof!

  32. Toilet Paper Survey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From a non-scientific poll we conducted as undergraduates, we found some interesting results:

    All of the science and engineering students we asked said the next sheet should go over. All of them. (About 14 people.)

    The art students' inclination (8 of 12 people) was to put it under, with the other four simply saying "whichever way it ends up - I don't even look."

  33. Re:I'd hate that commute. And... by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Informative

    You two are completely missing the schedule. Not 8-9 days straight, but rather:
    Mon-Thurs 9 hrs a day, Friday 8 hrs. Sat, Sun off. Next week Mon-Thurs 9 hrs a day. Fri, Sat, Sun off. 80 hours within 2 weeks, rather than 40 hours in 1 week.
    A 3 day weekend twice a month. Sometimes a 4 day weekend when it coincides with a federal holiday.

    It works well.

  34. 12/24 by Eil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This doesn't answer the poster's question in the least (hey, this is Slashdot after all), but the wackiest schedule I ever worked was when I was deployed to Turkey in the military for 2 weeks.

    There were only three of us to cover one around-the-clock job: a staff sergeant, another airman, and me. The sergeant made it so that both he and the other airman worked two consecutive 12-hour shifts and then had a full day off. The only way you can do that, though, is to make the third guy pull a 12-hour shift with the next 24 hours off with no "break" in the schedule. Think about it: 12 then 24. My work shift (and hence my off-hours) were completely inverted each cycle.

    I was definitely pissed about it at first. But it's the military, who am I going to complain to? I went along with it, consoling myself that it was only for two weeks. But man, I gotta tell you, I got used to it in just a few days. You would think that it would be impossible to get used to a schedule where one day you're going to sleep at 6AM and the next day at 6PM, but it worked fine for me because it meant that I got to sleep for 8 hours straight and then wander the base (or do whatever) for another 8. It was because of this schedule that I got to get off base for awhile and go on some tours of the country.

    I could almost do that schedule again over here since my sysadmin job doesn't tie me to any specific hours, but my wife would never agree to it. The biggest downfall is that I'd never get a "real" weekend without using up vacation time.

  35. 4x10s work for us by legLess · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've worked four ten-hour days at several companies, and I love it. Recently I had a little boy, and with his sleep schedule I found it really hard to spend enough time with him after work, so I'm back to five eight-hour days. It feels like cheating, going home every day at 4pm. Until Friday morning :)

    Four other folks at our company work 4x10, including the CEO, and it works just fine. Friday is fucking sacrosanct: no emails, no phone calls, no contact of any kind. If a fire flares up, other people in the office deal with it.

    And when I say 4x10, I mean it. We track our time pretty religiously, and our most bust-ass employee has averaged about 42 hours a week over 18 months.

    And yes, we're a tech company :) Live in Portland? Want to move here? We're hiring.

    --
    This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
  36. 100 hours?! Luxury!! by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why, back in our day we would wake at quarter-to-ten, half-an-hour before we went to sleep, then we'd pay $10 to go work in the mines for 28 hours a day, 373 days a year, double-time on holidays. And we considered ourselves lucky!!

    --
    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    1. Re:100 hours?! Luxury!! by ross.w · · Score: 3, Funny

      You tell the young people today that, and they'll never believe you.

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    2. Re:100 hours?! Luxury!! by Fluffy+Bunnies · · Score: 5, Funny

      Getting modded informative was way funnier than the joke.

  37. salary by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 2, Insightful

    isn't for suckers, theoretically... It's supposed to mean you work whatever damn hours you like and they judge the result, not your exact attendance.

    I know things rarely work that way though.

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  38. What's so magic about 40 hours? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's interesting that everyone is implicitly assuming that keeping a 40-hour work week makes sense when it's divided into a different number of days. This almost certainly isn't true, because people's productivity drops after a certain amount of time at work in a single shift. Companies like Ford did a lot of research into this a long time ago, which is why we all work 40-hour weeks now. (Of course, these days, managers who naively assume that extra hours = extra work getting done have pushed it to 40 hours plus breaks, when it often used to be 40 hours including breaks, hence the expression "9–5".) And Ford's people were doing manual work, not jobs that depend primarily on thinking, where the number of productive hours per week, averaged over the long term, is lower for most people.

    I think it's both sad and quite telling that no-one seems to be considering that those extra few hours might not really be worth anything anyway, but employees who get an extra day off every couple of weeks are likely to be both better rested/more productive while at work and more loyal to the company. Businesses that have tried radically different working practices have sometimes seen counter-intuitive results, particularly when it came to working much lower hours. I'd like to see a company suck it up and have all their employees working only 9/10 Monday-Fridays over a two-week period without expecting them to turn up for an extra hour on most of those days, and see whether it made things more or less productive.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  39. 9/80 rocks! by rocket+rancher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been doing 9/80's for ten years in the IT department here at the rocket ranch. This schedule is the best schedule I've ever worked in the 30+ years I've been a wage slave, and I've worked a lot of schedules -- split shift, rotating, days, swings, mids - you name it, I've probably worked it. The number one benefit for me is the three-day weekend that 9/80 generates every other week. With some judicious use of vacation time, I can take a lot of on-Fridays off as well, so that I can have even more three-day weekends, or the occasional four-day weekend by taking a vacation day on the Thursday preceding an off-Friday, or on the Monday following one. 9/80s make taking frequent mini-vacations feasible, which definitely keeps my morale high.

    On a related note, working in IT means sometimes being available 24/7, but that goes with the territory. I don't think I'm being abused by management when they require me to be available on my off-Friday. As long as the compensation I receive from the company in return for being available is commensurate with the inconvenience of being on call, I have no problem with it. It is in my best interest, and the company's, to try to make sure that my services aren't needed on that off-Friday. The key here, as I see it, is that when I am on call, I get paid the same whether or not I get called in, and as long as that policy remains, I will remain with the company. I've worked on-call for companies that compensated me only if I actually was called in. My employer makes no distinction between being on call and actually being at work, when it comes to compensation. Recognizing that there is an opportunity cost for an employee on call is very important to me.

  40. Ease of correcting mistakes by Chmcginn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Henry Ford did actually study the subject of working hours, and realised he got the same productivity when he went from 6 days/week, 12 hours shifts, to 5 days a week 8 hours shifts. He also had a workforce which didn't burn out as quickly.

    Factory work, specifically assembly, is very prone to an actual loss of work output with excessive hours. When you're working with a thousand dollars of parts, and a simple mistake can make them into ten dollars of scrap metal, making sure your workforce works as many hours as they can before their error rate begins to spike is crucial.

    Some would argue that, in the information age, it's easier to correct the mistakes that overwork & undersleep will lead you to. I'm not entirely sure this is correct... while fixing the extra '$' or misplaced ')' is an amazingly trivial task, finding it can be challenging.

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  41. You've got it all wrong!!! by cyn1c77 · · Score: 3, Informative

    If someone needs to work 80 hours a week on average then I would say that their life doesn't have much quality to begin with. Unless by "maintain our quality of living" you mean "paying off the luxury goods and services you've purchased". But then again, as your work load stops you from benefiting from them, I seriously doubt that they do much good.

    Materialism and all that keeping up with the joneses is a bitch, isn't it?

    It's not 80 hours a week! It is an average of 40 hours a week. It is called a 9/80 because you work 80 hours over 9 work days and get the 10th day off.

  42. Re:feh by Creepy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Offtopic (see below for on topic),
    Originally the Dogcow was used for the Cairo font, and later it was printing alignment (amongst other places).

    Claris likely got its name from Clarus.

    On topic,
    My wife had a 9/80 workweek during the summers for several years and loved it. My workweek is more like 10/130 (10/120 if you subtract slashdot :D - and that's regular hours, not crunch, which has hit the upper 120s in a week without any slashdot breaks)