Gadget Addiction or Work Intrusion?

Yesterday the NY Times ran a story about the worry in Silicon Valley of addiction to gadgets, and how it might affect stress levels and people's ability to focus. But today an article in the Atlantic takes issue with "gadget addiction," and instead highlights how workplace concerns are intruding more and more on employee's private lives, suggesting that the inability to put down your smartphone is merely a symptom, rather than a disease. "To elide that one of the reasons we spend so many hours in front of our screens is that we have to misses the key point about our relationship with modern technology. The upper middle class (i.e. the NYT reader) is working more hours and having to stay more connected to work than ever before. This is a problem with the way we approach labor, not our devices. Our devices enabled employers to make their employees work 24/7, but it is our strange American political and cultural systems that have allowed them to do so. And worse, when Richtel blames the gadgets themselves, he channels the anxiety and anger that people feel about 24/7 work into a different and defanged fear over their gadgets. The only possible answer becomes, 'Put your gadget down,' not 'Organize politically and in civil society to change our collective relationship to work.'"

Comments

I haven't bought a gadget in weeks

[ackthpt]

And the stress is killing me!

Working more hours

[0123456]

"Our devices enabled employers to make their employees work 24/7, but it is our strange American political and cultural systems that have allowed them to do so."

Or you could just say 'No'. So long as people are willing (if not eager) to be tied to work 24/7, companies will be happy to allow them to be.

Re:Working more hours

[cayenne8]

I work my ass off while at work.

When that door hits me on the ass on the way out...I leave work behind, mentally and physically. After all, it is only a job. I work so I can pay the bills and have lots of fun on my free time.

If they want me...they can pay me, I don't work for free....even at W2, I expect to be paid for any hour I work, and over 40 I still want at least straight time. That keeps them from wanting extra work unless necessary.

You have to know your worth....and usually they will respect if you know it and they know it.

But it is a job, and when I'm not at work, I'm not thinking about work, and I don't ever expect work to intrude into my personal time. If work has to contact me, it had better be because the sky is falling and something catastrophic is happening. If it is that bad, well, the clock starts running immediately....and I'll help out, but it had better be important.

God help them if it my vacation time...I often go where there is NO cell phone signal nor computer connection...that is on purpose.

A vacation is time saved up by me, for me...to relax and get away from normal life. I leave back up plans...it is up to them to implement them.

Re:Working more hours

[cayenne8]

Sadly, this is not always possible. In many places, high tech industry has a specific exemption from overtime compensation laws, or provides the employer with the option of mandating time off in lieu.

Well, there is a thing known as negotiating the terms of your accepting a job and employment.

First, if you're good...know your worth and ask for what you want. Ask for a bit MORE than you want...and compromise if needed to what you can live with.

I prefer doing 1099 through my own company....much easier to go that route. But when doing W2, I insist that I be paid for every hour I work. I get straight time for all hours worked.

I don't want OT...but will do it if necessary. My time OFF is the most important part to me.

I doubt I'll be on my deathbed, wishing I'd put in a few more hours tuning a database or attending a meeting.

Re:An Internet news addiction is far, far worse

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd be interested too. That would really make this Tuesday at work go by faster to have some good reading.

What does it mean to be willing?

[garyisabusyguy]

I am 'willing' to not get downsized in the next set of sweeps
I am 'willing' to keep my income from stagnating
I am 'willing' to not seem less competitive than other workers

of course you could replace 'willing' with 'scared shitless', 'being strong-armed' or 'having a gun held to my head' and it would describe the situation all the same

What is truly shocking is the long-term loss of effectiveness of unions and/or their complete lack of influence in hi-tech 'salary' jobs. Sure, you can poo poo Unions, their largess in the '70s even their (apparently) corrupt leadership, but it is high time that Americans came to realize the positive benefits of Union membership and the need to maintain leverage against corporate leadership that seems willing to work us to death and feed our remains back to the rest of the workers (for the sake of shareholder value dammit)

Yeah, I'm willing, yeah I'm tired, yeah it gives me a sad chuckle to read about the rosy projections from the 1950's about 20 hour workweeks and the benefits of automation

Re:What does it mean to be willing?

[Hatta]

I am 'willing' to not get downsized in the next set of sweeps
I am 'willing' to keep my income from stagnating
I am 'willing' to not seem less competitive than other workers

of course you could replace 'willing' with 'scared shitless', 'being strong-armed' or 'having a gun held to my head' and it would describe the situation all the same

This is what libertarians mean by "voluntary". They fail to understand that economic power can be just as coercive as the threat of violence.

Re:What does it mean to be willing?

[networkBoy]

Loyalty to a company is misplaced loyalty. Loyalty to an individual manager can be exceptionally well repaid.
This is an important distinction, one I only fully learned about 5 years ago.
-nB