Slashdot Mirror
Workaholism In America Is Hurting the Economy
An anonymous reader writes Work/life balance is a constant problem in the tech industry. Even though experienced and mature engineers have been vocal in fighting it, every new generation buys into the American cultural identity of excessive work being a virtue. Each generation suffers for it, and the economy does, too. This article backs up that wisdom with hard numbers: "The 40-hour workweek is mostly a thing of the past. Ninety-four percent of professional workers put in 50 or more hours, and nearly half work 65 or above. All workers have managed to cut down on our time on the job by 112 hours over the last 40 years, but we're far behind other countries: The French cut down by 491 hours, the Dutch by 425, and Canadians by 215 in the same time period. ... This overwork shows up in our sleep. Out of five developed peers, four other countries sleep more than us. That has again worsened over the years. In 1942, more than 80 percent of Americans slept seven hours a night or more. Today, 40 percent sleep six hours or less. A lack of sleep makes us poorer workers: People who sleep less than seven hours a night have a much harder time concentrating and getting work done."
If you do not enjoy work then that is the problem to be fixed. Find a job you love.
I just need to finish this one thing...
Federal holidays. That's it.
it's all in the past. adapt or do something else.
They've finally figured out why sleep deprivation kills you -- and its also why it makes you make stupid mistakes.
Sleep Drives Metabolite Clearance from the Adult Brain
Problem is it is mainly during slow wave sleep that the cleaning crew works on the CSF, and as people age they their slow wave sleep diminishes.
Seastead this.
Not seeing the outside of an office for most of your adult life is considered as a virtue only by fools. Sadly many will post here supporting this form of modern day slavery.
The wtf moment of missing what life is all about will come when it is too late.
totally people are addicted to working longer hours. Not, maybe, and this is just a shot in the dark here, the proles are being taken advantage of by the bourgeoisie, business as usual.
Calling it "Workaholism" implies we have a choice. Companies are demanding we do more with less. If you don't like it there's not much you can do. The job market sucks, and it's never going to get any better. Off-shoring and abundant work Visas guarantee that. You're given X amount of work to do and Y amount of time and if you don't do X you're fired, so you put in extra hours. Again and again and again. Heck, it's even worse for the Visa holders. They're practically indentured serfs. If they don't put the hours in it's back to where they came from with a black mark to boot. And those are the guys we're competing with for jobs....
Heck, is it just me or can nobody in the American Media do anything except blame the workers? Maybe it's because the capitalists own the media... Heck, I don't know.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This country is losing it. Don't know if you realize it my fellow citizens, but you are getting your ass kicked in the world. Socialism is not working.
an ill wind that blows no good
I do not do it because I want to as a direct desire.
I do it because I love my family, and they depend on my income, so I try to make sure, like running away from zombies and not being slowest..., that I am not the least productive worker, m'kay?
Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
Muricans that don't get enough sleep aren't not sleeping because they work too much. They're not sleeping because they're playing any one of a couple hundred MMOs and watching exabytes of Netflix videos in 20 hour Soprano's marathons and billions of hours of porn from tens of thousands of adult sites.
Work too much my ass. The parking lot where I work is mostly empty at 9:00 AM, mostly empty at lunch and mostly empty at 4:30 PM (earlier on Friday) and not a soul comes here on the weekend. They might do 7-ish hours a day, and probably 40% of that screwing around on the interwebs. The construction workers building the house next door don't start much before 10:00AM and they're long gone 8 hours later, never put in any weekend time, and half of them aren't even citizens.
The whole image of the 60 hour a week death-marching 'murican worker is a fiction. And their self-inflicted sleep problems have got jack shit to do with work.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
People complain about the French... but maybe that's the way we should be going.
what were we talking about? sorry tired. Hey, my 80 hour work-weeks are what kept me employed during the recession. They couldn't fire me -- I was doing too much work for next to no pay. Yeah, I made a few mistakes. But I fixed 'em. Sure, my salary history will work against me when I go apply for another job. At least I stayed employed in my field. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need some more coffee before I pass out at my desk.
Seriously. Try getting by on $30-35K a year. Now try doing it WITH KIDS.
Cost of living alone is insane. Let alone other things, like an apartment/house, utilities, etc.
Now have a bad month or two. Or get sick, or injure yourself in a way that prevents you from working. Rent/mortgage don't pay itself!
Most people in this country aren't working +40 hours because they WANT to, or because they LIKE it.
They're doing it as a buffer to stay ahead of instantaneous bankruptcy and poverty in case they cannot work for some reason.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I don't work any more than 40 hours a week (in fact doing so requires management approval... but that's another story).
i sleep less because I help out around the home. I help my wife raise our children.
Gone are the days when a father would be in the pub while his children is born, celebrating the birth with his mates.
Men have the expectation of a much larger commitment when it comes to family these days. The cost for that is time.
With a title like that, maybe the summary could point to the amount of damage and evidence on the harm to the economy without having the reader to deduce it on their own?
Dear team,
After coming back from my vacation in Aruba, I've decided that in these times of trouble we need to do more with less. We're in a troubled economy -- do you realize how much yacht gas has gone up in the past year? In addition, the Affordable Care Act has made it cost ineffective for our FTNE (Full Time Non-Employee) initiative to continue.
Moving forward, we'll need to tighten our belts and take on other responsibilities. Some of you will work longer hours than usual. My performance bonus is based on how much money we can save, so I'm simply going to let go anyone who refuses to comply with this iniative -- I'm sure I can find someone to replace you.
Cheers!
PHB
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
I get 10 unpaid compulsory holidays a year. If I do come in to work on those days, I don't get paid any extra.
that while I only make 50k+solid medical, dental, vision, pension and 401k, I only work 40 hours a week and am RARELY asked to work overtime because they just don't want to pay me that much for the work. I also get paid personal holidays, paid vacation and sick days, all cashed out if not used in the allotted year. Union job but I'm at the top of the pay scale and its kind of not keeping up with inflation or minimum wage increases. Oh I also get incentive pay on Sunday and on worked holidays. I'm essentially paid 44 hours for 40 hours of work if I work a full 8 on Sunday. It's not a glamorous job but its doing okay.
That this article says nearly half of all professionals work 50-65 hours a week. I really hope all those professionals are clearing 70k
40h*50w=2000 hours worked with two weeks vacation. $50,000 / 2000 hours = $25 per hour
50h*50w=2500 hours worked with two weeks vacation. $60,000 / 2500 hours = $24 per hour
60h*50w=3000 hours worked with two weeks vacation. $70,000 / 3000 hours = $23.34 per hour
Needless to say, my direct bosses that make in the above two ranges after my $50k are at about those pay scales. If this is true for most other professions I truly hope all these people are living it up in those spare hours and the extra money at their disposal.
Still, I'm also going back to school to hopefully allow myself to pickup some side work and ideally start making investments on a monthly basis as alternative income streams, regardless of how trivial they initially may be.
Cheers
I am a veteran Engineer when I hit my 40 I leave, my work can go fuck itself if they want more. Jobs are a dime a dozen.
Well it depends on what you negotiate with the company. I currently have 5 paid weeks a year and generally have another week in the bank just in case. One company I worked for a few years ago, I negotiated a weeks more vacation for slightly less salary, in part because I know I'd get increases. I'm just that good :D
[John]
Shit better not happen!
Then shut up and change your job. Or are you not skilled enough to find another?
To see how workaholism saps productivity and rarely leads to better results, look at Japan. Overtime is sacrosanct in Japan, at the company I worked at previously it was a badge of honor that the average amount of overtime was 60 hours a month. Japan has the lowest per-hour output in the G7, and it's a small wonder why. Managers will often times not buy hardware that can increase productivity because hey, you can simply make the workers work longer hours for free, whereas hardware costs money. The result is a populace that is unhappy, unhealthy, and well dying. The low birth rate is well known, what is less well known is that the Japanese have the least amount of sex in the developed world. The technology industry that everyone once thought would rule the world has come to be dominated by the west because managers have very little incentive to innovate, to increase productivity. And as the cherry on the shit sundae, the low productivity means that wages in Japan are lower, i.e. longer hours for less money. Trust me, you don't want to go down this route.
Monstar L
i work 30-35 hours a week from home and make far over 100k
I remember back in the 1990s (I think) reading news stories about corporations pursuing 'increased productivity' per worker as a strategy for success, particularly in relation to international competition. Is there any other way to translate that language into plain English other than to say that what was desired was less wages for the same amount of work? I never saw it put in quite those terms, but it seems fairly obvious to me that that's what talk of productivity means. And if that's so, there's clearly a downside to increasing productivity. It means less income going to workers in direct proportion to their increasing profitability to the corporation (what some old ruddy-duddies used to refer to as the exploitation of labor, I believe). It also means fewer jobs, as a smaller number of people handle workloads that were previously distributed across a larger number. Am I just not thinking about this correctly?
I get 10 unpaid compulsory holidays a year. If I do come in to work on those days, I don't get paid any extra.
And you will be told you have to come in on those days because the company isn't doing well, and not put it on your timesheet in order to not get your boss in trouble. Failure to comply will show up in your next raise... if you are lucky enough to be employed by then.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
If everything I've read about it is true(and I mentioned this in another article here on /.) you literally can't get more than 40 hours of work out of people anyway. Oh sure, the first couple of weeks they do more work but then they get tired and slow and make mistakes. After a few weeks of that they're working more than 40 hours but aren't producing any more work. Go ahead, read stuff like Peopleware where they point this out. (That working overtime makes no sense, you don't get anything but pissed off employees.) Before anybody asks, no I don't work more than 40 hours a week. (And yes one of the big reasons is I'm old enough to recognize I don't get any more work done if I do. Plus the fact you do it and your manager quickly abuses it.)
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
I work my 45-50+ hours a week minimum like everyone else in tech land, but I also normally only have a 10 minute commute. (I'm currently visiting another office and the commute is 30 minutes from my hotel, bleah.)
I know people who are losing two hours of their life a day commuting each way, in addition to working our nasty hours, leaving fewer hours to actually live. It's either cut out eating or sleeping, and thus it's usually sleep that takes the hit.
I could make twice as much money if I committed to a horrible commute but I value my free time too much.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
They lie to you in the interview, "oh, it's rare, but there are a couples of weeks here and there, that we burn the midnight oil." Yeah, bullshit. 50-hours minimum, and everyone gives you the stink-eye, if you head for the door before 6PM. Suck it, corporate America. Sell your soul to the corporate idol for NOTHING in return. Once again, suck it.
the main source of sustenance was farming of one form or another, and sure they worked less hours as dictated by the sun, but even the most hardened desk jocky would fall over before the day's end
Yeah, nevermind that workaholism makes the overwhelming majority of people miserable--certainly that couldn't be more of a reason (or even a sufficient reason) to be concerned. Would someone please think of the upper class's ability to maximize profits by squeezing the life out of the working cla--I mean the Economy, would someone please think of the Economy?
I got 2 weeks up front for signing the paper on my first day of an entry level job + federal holidays, dunno what your problem is other than being a doormat.
I know some bleeding heart is going to pop in and say economy and joblessness rates and blah blah blah, well I started in early 2012, and was unemployed since early 2011 and still worked nearly every single day thanks to one up jobs from the computer store around the corner when they got overwhelmed and seasonal temp jobs for more than minimum wage.
the days I didnt work I was at multiple temp agencies and admittedly I sat on my ass for a couple weeks floating on savings after the initial fact. So don't boo hoo cause you grabbed the first trinket on the shelf and are now stuck with it
"Don't mourn. Organize"
Don't let the bosses control the work place.
Don't let the union leaders become bosses.
You have to fight for it, then fight to keep it.
Or you'll get used up.
"All workers have managed to cut down on our time on the job by 112 hours over the last 40 years"
In a summary addressing the "work week," how does one end up reducing it by 112 hours or more?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Does anyone remember that, at one time, the big promise of technology and automation was that we would be able to reduce the workweek for Joe Workerbee?
Somewhere along the way the goal of tech has become to employ as few people as possible, preferably with lower skills so you don't have to pay them as much.
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
And people ask what unions are for...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
In this economy, the question is rather whether you're not well enough connected to find something else. Skill plays little role anymore when it comes to unemployment.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Does anyone else find that 94% figure for professionals working more than 50 hours a week rather high? I know it isn't anywhere near that where I work and we are relatively well paid.
Thanks for proving wage slaves don't exist, John. I was all worried that many people are economically stick in crap jobs, but your anecdotal story has proven how wrong I was.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You can't be loyal to the company and not put in boatloads of overtime. Doesn't matter if you're gettting anything accomplished; the company is the be-all end-all and deserves the blood sacrifice.
I've read comments above about loving your job, about pressure from management, about socialism, about Obamacare, and none of them seemed really to address the issue -- at least, as far as I could see. I worked in IT for 25 years, plus another 15 or so in other fields. I absolutely loved programming, the others just paid the bills, but there was one constant: my productivity maxed out at about 45 hours a week. If I worked 50, I didn't get any more done (net, i.e., after fixing errors) than if I had only worked 40; if I worked more than 50, things just got worse. I'm sure I lost some job offers along the way, because I was always careful to ask about overtime and then describe my experience if I was told it would be significant. Yes, I would work overtime if it was necessary; if it needs to be done, then "suck it up" is the rule of the day. But long term, heavy overtime costs more than it gains -- even if it's unpaid.
The fuck is workahol?
Petition the US Congress to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to include not overtime pay (time and a half pay), but simply pay for salaried, professional workers, working over 40 hours a week, who do not own a significant stake in their company. This proposal is founded on the following axiom:
-The cornerstone of a free market economy is trust, meaning that known goods and services are traded for known prices. If either the buyer or seller is able to arbitrarily mandate exchange conditions, one party is looting the other.
Under the current Fair Labor Standards Act, any salaried workers, engaged in skilled labor, bear no right to bargain for their time and service. Salaried workers enter into a relationship in which an employer arbitrarily mandates the value of an employee's time and service. For example, if a salaried employee works 8 hours a day one month, then 12 hours a day the next, the employee's time and services have been devalued 33% the second month. The only condition that has changed from one month to the next is the employer's need of the employee's time and services. Under the normal laws of market equilibrium, this demand for time and services would increase the price of them, but instead the inverse occurs and the services rendered become less valuable over time, even though their demand increases.
These practices steal an employee's valuable time. They obfuscate the true price that employer's are willing to pay for an employee's time and services. They undermine the principles of a free market. And, by sanctioning these practices, the government is sanctioning corporate socialism by awarding employers the right to arbitrarily mandate exchange agreements with employees, based on an employer's need, rather than their ability.
That's at least what I tell my people. I can't use them if they burn out.
I made that mistake once and lost a very valuable employee that way. I didn't notice it. He was always around and, hey, who doesn't like an employee who seemingly never sleeps? Until one day he didn't show up anymore. Burnout. Boom, gone. To understand how severe that really is, it takes AT LEAST three months for someone to get our workflow down. If, and only if, they are not only clever but also know the relevant underlying security protocols and process systems. Else, double it. Including the hiring process, the screening, the preparation and all the crap associated with HR and security procedures to actually get someone into our crystal palace, from the moment you decide you want someone to the moment he is actually a full member of your team... let's put it that way, conception to birth is faster.
So we had the additional workload of that person for a whole year on our shoulders. Which, as you can imagine, nearly costed me more people due to overtaxing.
Never again. Of course I can't protect myself and my team against one of them having an accident or even becoming unable to return to work forever. Even though risky sports are already "unofficially" disallowed (can't really outlaw them legally 'cause what you do in your spare time is your business, but it is "frowned upon". Let your imagination come up with what this means in a corporate environment...).
But at the very least I can ensure that I don't add to the problem. Nobody here clocks more than 40 hours (unless the fecal matter got into contact with the air transportation device, and then you will go and take those hours out as soon as you can).
I don't need my people to spend time in the office. I need them to get stuff done. That can mean that I might suddenly call them at some rather odd hours and ask them to come in, but I don't see any compelling reason to keep them around when there's nothing to be done on time. It's an agreement we have, and so far both sides can live perfectly with it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Really? Look at the French economy, I certainly don't see a useful model there to aspire to. I work for myself, so maybe there's more direct incentive to put in the long hours, but in a global economy, I just don't see a 40-hour workweek and prosperity going hand in hand. If we still had a manufacturing base in the US, you might argue otherwise, but our middle class has been gutted by globalization; the idea of a well-paying manufacturing job is largely history. 40-hour weeks are a quaint relic of the past, regardless of your place in the economy.
It seems we work for at least a couple of reasons. One is pretty obvious, that is, to earn income to support a hopefully comfortable life for ourselves and our family and provide a secure retirement. Maybe also something for our heirs. There's also the whole business of enjoying our work so as to feel accomplishment, contribute to our company's and society's improvement and success, and professional and personal associations with coworkers. What happens when all this becomes unbearable because over work compromises or destroys these features of work? You may be earning a living but without any joy not only affecting your personal life but your work and its quality. Is this burn out? Companies must begin to realize this and make changes.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
Right now I'm in one of the most enjoyable jobs I've ever had.
It's also the highest paying I've ever had.
I do have some overtime... but it's rare that I end up with more than a 45 hour week. And I get time and a half when it's more than 8 hours in the day.
I did obsessively check my work provided smartphone for email... but that's more often for the personal email than work.
Now the current hobbies are a bit ridiculous... small time poultry rearing. It's physically grueling... but mentally clearing.
I work my 45-50+ hours a week minimum like everyone else in tech land
Really, where I work we do just the regular 40 hours. Occasionally we do additional hours in case of incidents, but that results in time n lieu, which can be used whenever you want an additional day off.
Sorry, but if you think that's normal, there's something horribly wrong with the society you're living in.
I worked in the UK in the late 90s for a multinational. The company sent me to Philadelphia for an interview. Offer included two weeks holiday a year. I asked the recruiter why this was so low (in the UK it was four) - she replied that the folks there really loved to work.
Uh-huh....
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
No I won't.
I'm self employed, if it's not in my contract, I don't do it.
If I do work, I get paid.
There is no middle ground.
Unions can go fuck themselves, btw.
Fuck you. And fuck everyone else who says workers can't get together to demand a decent work week.
You are a selfish and mean SOB to think employers can dictate the market solely on there terms.
Learn some fucking history you knuckle dragging moron.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Then remove the exempt status from all the employees and pay them overtime.
I think the problem is that the nature of most of our jobs and work environments are repetitive, non-physical, dull, uninspiring, and often lacking in meaningful interpersonal communication. You can only take so many hours of that sort of stuff without burning out. In that context I understand and agree with the supposition that our productivity is hurting because of these long hours.
On the other hand, sometimes working long hours isn't that bad of a thing, but it depends on the context. Currently I'm working in a family partnership doing agribusiness (IE farming). Depending on the day I may be working from 8 to 14 hours a day. But since it's a lifestyle as well as a job, and family lives here on farm, it's not quite as soul-sucking as working 14 hours behind a computer screen, though sometimes I do spend hours doing things on the computer doing things like server maintenance, or the odd bit of software development, which is rather tiring after a few straight hours (maybe it's being behind a screen shining in one's eyes that makes jobs so fatiguing). Each day differs pretty significantly. Yesterday I put in some hours after supper and came in at 9:30 pm. Today I was done by 5. Those seasons that demand long hours do get old in a hurry, but they don't last forever, and there are other compensations. Also I take one full day a week off (Sunday). Most farmers really enjoy the lifestyle, and their families too, as well as many farm workers, despite sometimes putting in long hours, and they do find balance and it works out. At least for some people.
So it's not just a simple hours put in issue, but more of an inability to balance personal and family needs against an employer's demands, and the type of work these long hours consist of.
Oh, is that what it is. Being a doormat. I thought there were fewer jobs than there were people looking for work.
Ah, of course: stating the realities of the supply and demand market is "bleeding heart."
Well, have fun. Your hard work has clearly served you well, and it's not like others work as hard as you do, or they'd be in your job and you'd be unemployed. It's not like you were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. It's definitely your hard work.
Well that's nicel Wait, you worked for the computer store and seasonal temp jobs for more than minimum wage? You were fucking lucky. In one of my previous jobs, at a computer store, when we got more work in than I could handle it meant that I just had to stay late. Every night. For free. That lowered me to about $5/hour beneath minimum wage.
My previous job had me working similar hours, and I was only $2.60 beneath minimum wage. I did start taking my breaks, until they gave me a written warning and a threat of dismissal.
But I guess it's just that I wasn't working hard enough, with a few 13 hour days and weekend work sprinkled in, and no pay for overtime work. If I'd only worked harder, or negotiated better ("If you don't want the job with these conditions, someone else will take it and you can stay unemployed") I'm sure I could have been in exactly the same position.
Lucky you. When I go to temp agencies, they look at my skill set (Computer Science degree, 10 years in IT support and networking, 6 years in media production) and tell me that there's just no work out there, and if I come back in a couple of weeks they might have something but I should probably look at getting my forklift licence and start at the bottom in retail or warehousing.
So what? Are you attempting to point out that you were "smart" enough to save some money? All you've done is point out that you were sufficiently well paid to save money, which is a completely different thing entirely - and something that minimum wage employees don't get.
Yeah! How dare people allow themselves to be forced to accept the first job offer that comes along as unemployment support requires in so many places? They should just harden up and work harder, like you did, and that way they'll get the Just World desserts that they so richly deserve.
You should go find someone who's desperately unemployed, and find out how willing they really are to work. You'll be surprised - more willing than you are, willing to work harder than you do, and by the sound of things, a damned sight less entitled than you are.
You "Just World" cunts make me sick.
Who knew! That and it appears that despite the stock market's 'record breaking' performance the US of A is just as screwed as the rest of the world.
Ah well, record profits, and all is right...
Let's not forget that significant portions of the American workforce are 100% on-board with the idea that *not* slaving your life away makes you a worthless layabout. Slave mentality, indeed.
Am I just not thinking about this correctly?
There are 2 ways to increase profits: Decrease expenses or increase sales. Productivity is sales over expenses. By increasing control over the supply chain, a business can pay less and increase productivity. Back in the '90s, a business could work harder or work smarter. Both approaches were tried, such as downsizing (employees work harder) and enterprise sharing (stealing IP from smarter people). There were some workplace protections during that decade so wages couldn't be decreased forcing most business into the 'smarter' path. In a global market, productivity levels are always changing so businesses need to do whatever to keep their merchandise affordable. Unfortunately, as competing nations improve their technology, working smarter becomes more expensive and actually reduces productivity. So it is easier to compete by reducing expenses.
I supposed I should thank the unions actually.
I get paid more than the employees I work with for doing the same job. That's more to do with the employment law here, not the unions though. You can't fire someone for being not very good at their job without years of mediation, warnings and pumping excessive money into extra training and coaching for people who are essentially just a drop kick.
You can fire a contractor on the spot for no reason whatsoever.
I have yet to hear anything good come from a union in the last decade or so.
Juxtapose with this onion article:
"Magical Office Worker Able To Turn Everything He Touches Into More Work For Colleagues"
http://www.theonion.com/articl...
We've failed to work smarter, not harder.
Unions just protect those that are incompetent or barely capable.
Fuck unions. I haven't even had to negotiate a raise in 3 years because they are a afraid of me leaving. >10% *grins*
In species survival, out fucking everybody else WINS !
So, USA citizens, you MUST out fuck every other country, Even Germany !
So Get To IT ! FUCK UP !
Pure dumbfuckery. Do you like picking up the slack for lazy incompetents at your non-union company? Of course not. Would that change if you changed jobs and joined a union? Of course not.
So why, exactly, do you think union members spend all day thinking, "boy, I wish Bob over there would stop doing his job so I can do my work plus his!"
Aside from the lack of sleep and general burnout, working overtime also tends to skew expectations with management. Upper management is not going to be aware of exactly the amount of effort required complete a project. They are only going to see the results, the number of employees, and the amount of resources it took to achieve those results. So, if everybody gives it 110%, with lots of overtime and everything, that has the effect of raising the expectations of management. This leads management to believe employees can accomplish this great feat as a matter of course, when in fact, that type of effort can't be repeated. It all ends up with management making unrealistic demands while believing it is entirely reasonable.
When from the tone of the post it's pretty obvious I meant
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Where I'm from unions aren't at the company level, they're at the industry level. People don't voluntarily joins the unions, the unions opt everyone in and claim to work on their behalf and attempt to take over. They threaten employees who don't join in their stop-work actions and threaten employers who would let them come to work.
Unions don't protect employees, employment law protects employees.
that I read mentioned that someone worked 60 hours a week as a manager of a convenience store.
After fed/state tax 25k a year is going to be 20k net...oh not to mention even though you're going to get a good chunk back (since 20k is considered poverty by the fed) its going to be missing basically the entire year.
So what you're really talking about is $1600-$1800 a month....or $800 a paycheck if your bi-weekly. Doable, but you're by no means going anywhere in life.
At that amount you might as well be on welfare, It would be more cost effective for everyone in my mind. Less people on the road, less gas use, less everything. Just pay the broke people to stay at home till they find something.
I work something like 35 lately. The guy who sits in front of me works 60. I'm pretty sure I also have a higher salary than he does.
I attribute this to willingness to be a jerk. I refuse to work more than 40 at all or even more than 35 lately if nobody has a plan for what the hell we're supposed to be doing. 5 more hours to get to 40 would just be 5 more hours to throw away when they decide on a real plan. I have 35 hours of real work I can do at present, the other shit would be make work that will get trashed. When we have real work I'll go back to doing 40, but no more. If someone asks me to do more than 40 I'll happily tell them I will do over 40 (short term) if I am additionally compensated and point out the downsides to doing it long term. My managers at least accept the studies I point out and "being a jerk" and refusing has had no apparent adverse affect on my career.
I also was bitchy and whiny enough about feeling underpaid to get a significant % increase in pay outside of a promotion and then got an additional % increase the next year tied to a promotion.
Aww man, but there's all this money to be made! You don't turn down revenue, right? :0)
The purpose of existence is to make money.
In 1942, more than 80 percent of Americans slept seven hours a night or more. Today, 40 percent sleep six hours or less.
How do you even compare these two stats? I get that it sounds dramatic, but you can't work with this crap.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Some people may not afford to work less because they need the extra income from a 50 hours workweek.
Of course - this means either that they try to have a higher living standard than what's possible for a normal salary or that the salary is too low.
However there are demands for competent people, the problem is to find competent people because a lot of the unemployed can't even swing a hammer or do basic math - much less do engineering math. It doesn't matter that you are an expert in the works of Van Gogh or can play xylophone with your feet - only a few can live on that.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Designed to manipulate the unwashed, undereducated masses using the 1 reliable tool the "controllers" have: 'Hope' (false hope). That's why it actually works, & always has worked, on the poor serf class folks. Don't get me wrong: I believe there IS an almighty creator spirit out there. You can call this being God. I do. I just do not like when men use that and twist it to their OWN malicious ends.
The real corporate brainwashing is that we need his and her SUVs, his and her cell phones, $120/mo cable bill and a 4000 sq ft house. Almost all of the true jobseekers would be employed in a month if we didn't have double income middle class families. In fact, a rough look at the numbers (economics is mostly voodoo horseshit, but the raw data is generally somehow connected to reality) shows that if there were no dual-income middle class families, the entire nation could be pulled out of poverty. There are second order affects that aren't included in that look ... it doesn't account for day care workers losing their jobs (why are we outsourcing our children anyway) and it doesn't account for American jobs lost due to not buying a whole lot of shit we don't need, However, McDonalds because you're too busy to cook is bad in every way except as a shareholder. Outsourcing your children is bad. Buying things you don't need is bad for you and bad for the environment. Two SUV's is an extra 5000 lbs of steel produced, which extra 9000 lbs of CO2 in the atmosphere before you start driving it. And how much healthier would we be with less stress and better food?
If people are working 60 hour weeks, that means every two people are eliminating employment for a 3rd person.
One of the key drivers behind the 40 hour work week was 25% unemployment rates.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Bingo! This is definitely a HUGE factor for those of us living and working in the metro D.C. area! (I'm pretty sure Californians working in the Silicon Valley area have the same experience, but I can't speak about it with any direct knowledge.)
My commute is a little over an hour each direction. (Basically, I can take the train in to a station where I have to transfer to the metro and ride it for about 4 stops until I get to my workplace. Alternately, I can drive in but it takes about the exact same amount of time.)
Either way, it's "lose, lose", really. Everyone loves to point out that if you take public transportation, the time is really "your own time" since you don't have to drive. But due to the lack of reliable cellular data connections through much of the trip, it doesn't let me do a lot of productive things I'd like to do with that time (like check email or handle trouble tickets that came in). It's good for reading a book or magazine, but honestly? I'm not too enthused about spending 45 minutes to an hour reading that early in the morning, or right after a long day of work. I like to read on weekends or possibly at night just before bedtime. If I opt to drive, then I'm out the cost of the gas money and wear and tear on my vehicle. I also get stuck paying about $8 a day for parking. (The train and metro fare is over $275 a month though, too.)
But in this part of the country, you don't have any other realistic options to live closer to your job if you have a family with kids. Singles or child-free couples can usually find a reasonably affordable apartment that's nearby, but adding kids to the mix really makes that unworkable unless you're one of the "elite" (such as govt. contractors getting huge paychecks or politicians or their lawyers).
Out here, it used to be, you were directed to one of the "inner D.C. suburbs" like Rockville or Gaithersburg or Silver Spring if you needed to find a 3 or 4 bedroom house at a somewhat normal price. But so many people have relocated up here for the government and military jobs and contracts, those properties were quickly snapped up and priced escalated with the demand. So you have to look further and further out to find something at a sane price point.
You are understaffed. You are part of the problem.
You should not be operating where one person on your staff being incapacitated has the effect you describe. I know this is normal but it it completely against so-called best business practices. It is however, common business practice.
People like me with 2 master's degrees (CS and TEL with a perfect average and 15 years of experience in the field) and my son who graduated with honors Math/CS minor and proved a new result in his thesis still can't even get INTERVIEWS, let alone a job.
I've been functionally unemployed for 5 years, in my mid-50's I never expect to work again. At least not in CS/IT which I have completely lost interest in as a career or field of endeavor. It is simply soul-destroying.
I am starting to think my son will never work.
So fuck you, fuck this economy, fuck the lying CEO's hiring H1-B's, fuck the US and its Oligarchy.
Other industry's also abuse OT also time off rules need to ban use it or lose vacation policy at least some pales the law is on the workers side.
It's not just tech the retail places want mangers to work 60-80+ weeks with no Pay and a pay that can be hit min wage or lower when you look at you per HR rate.
Even in tech your pay rate can hit number that make doing non tech jobs look good even for less pay with an 40 hour week.
I've got one word for you; deodorant.
There are two kinds of people putting in these hours: 1) those w/multiple low paying jobs who need the income and 2) those who think the future of the free world rests upon their efforts because that's how they measure their self worth.
I'd put so called 'workaholics' in the second category. Employers are pushers selling them their self worth fix. Just Say No!
remove health care from jobs and then they can hire more then as right now it's cheaper to work 1 person 60-80 hours an week and replace them when they burn out
You could have saved a lot of time by just writing a three word post: "I've got mine."
To my boss.
Ah yes - the "libertarian" answer - just get Daddy to put up the money to start a business, stop whining, and if your Daddy isn't rich then you are nobody so you don't matter. It's posts like the one above that just give yet another petty little insight into a flawed human nature but provide no other useful information. Banks may as well not exist for people starting in the workforce so most people can forget about anything other than capital from family.
how much is in meetings that can be better used by doing real work / finding other ways to the info most of the little to no use meetings?
Talent is usually worth paying extra for, so make your business a talent center and attract the top players. Then give them freedom to get things done and don't micro manage. Ask what isn't getting done (read: the small things, like documentation) and pay someone do to that. Grease the wheels. Allowing people to work from home *IS* a huge benefit for many people, and more importantly, lets people disconnect from the office. I tend to get way more done at home as the office is just pure interrupt driven non-sense most of the time. Technology work is difficult and frustrating, but on the bright side, can pay very well. Deal with it or don't play.
Where I work, we have annual awards. And the awards always seem to go to those who are putting in the most hours. The management think those people are doing a great job and hence should be rewarded. But a thought is never given to doing a little analysis as to who is actually producing the most results by working the least or in essence who is most efficient. And for those wondering who the most efficient worker is, they are the one who gets all of his/her work done but is usually seen sitting around reading slashdot or watching youtube. Yet people wonder "How does that person get their work done when they are sitting around not working?"
One of the most dangerous conditions known to medicine - prolonged lack of proper sleep increases the risks of developing depression and psychosis apart from the other detrimental effects [which are many].
Sleep deprivation is a method of torture that leads eventually to insanity.
But don't worry, fellow Americans - your insanity is spreading fast around the world. Our brave leaders, here in Europe, work around the clock [with apparent lack of sleep - see symptoms above] to implement every detrimental [to humans and society] system and method disguised as "increased efficiency" and "cutting costs".
And here too, the new generation is brainwashed to accept all this as normal. "Work harder and we will make it" - yhea, right. Work harder under artificial, manipulative and downright abusive financial system which can delete your life [together with your hard work] in a second? Work harder when the rules of the game are not what they are professed to be? Work harder so that 0.1% of the wealth you actually produced trickles down to your ever shrinking middle class budget? Work harder and we will increase your children tuition fees by 100%. Work harder and will keep on increasing the costs of living [energy, housing, food, water, education, health care] with a rate that outpaces the increase in your income by factor of 2 or more?
I don't mind working and I do like to do many things. I love to feel appreciated and I love the thought that I am contributing in my own way to my life and the whole of humanity. But I do not accept to be a hamster in wheel who has to run ever faster [shortening my life in the process] in order to stand still [or go backwards as it happens in the last decade].
People, we have to stop this insanity and the first step is to realize that we are manipulated into "camps" so that we keep on fighting each other. Reading the discussions about such topics I notice that at least half of the population has bought into the scam and will defend the system with their lives. I do not see any way how this can be changed. I have spent years trying to convince a handful of people to look a bit further than the next meal without substantial success. And I am bloody good when it comes to talking and convincing people.
Any ideas?
In this economy, the question is rather whether you're not well enough connected to find something else. Skill plays little role anymore when it comes to unemployment.
If you are highly skilled and those skills are in demand, hire yourself. You can't be fired unless you fire yourself. You can't be underpaid unless you underpay yourself. You can take as many vacation days as you like.
If you succeed, that's great. If not, you have no one left to blame but yourself.
Shorten the workday to put americans behind other countries workers in the industries we STILL can compete in??
Good way to make sure everyone can sleep 16 hours because there arent any jobs any more.
Some people can hack it and make a company a success and others cant - this sounds like 'those who cant' trying to force/mandate everyone else into their situation.
Try not texting/phoning at work half the day and then you can get your work done as you are supposed to. Then maybe you wont have to 'work' as long to get done
private industry unions many people have no problem with - that is as long aas those workers arent force into being in a union they dont want or who represent something they despise.
there should be no public worker unions as they have too much ability to extort whatever they want from the taxpayers.
in private business there is competition AND if the unions attempt extort too much then they are out of a job when their company fails
its time to simply open up most of this government work (any of it that is actually needed) to private business and if you want unions then you can go be in one of those businesses instead of extorting the least work for the most money as happens in government job unions.
Again, where do you get the contracts from if you lack the network?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Again, where do you get the contracts from if you lack the network?
From the gettin' place.
Disclaimer: You may or may not find that amusing depending on whether you've seen "No Country For Old Men"
But who is going to bribe the politicians to pass employment laws?
...if you are given a bottle of wine and then told "Drink until you pass out", while pointing at you with a gun?
"I know people who are losing two hours of their life a day commuting each way, "
I commute well over 2 hours, 4 days per week. I don't see it as lost time. I'm reading slashdot and other sites in the train like now (plenty of space since I travel after the peak hours). In addition, 15 km of cycling per day, which is my only exercise. Fortunately the climate over here allows cycling.
But the idea of driving a car for 2 h/day horrifies me...
Avantslash: low-bandwidth mobile slashdot.
I'm one of those that travels almost 2 hours a day.
I live outside of Stockholm, cause living in Stockholm has not been within my reach even tho I'm a well payed software developer. Maybe the problem isn't really the pay or the prices, but I refuse to live in a appartment the size of a wardrobe.
I work what I would say is a 40h week, but it takes 11 hours of my time every day, cause of commute and a break to get some food during the day.
I'm also dead when I get home, I can not understand how people can work much more, and here we talking about a total spent time of 55 hours a week, how do you put in 65 or more at work, and to that add travel? How is it possible? Someone that do this, please explain to me.
That's the most amazing thing to me, compared to here in the UK. I get 20 days paid holiday a year and my company is not considered the most enlightened when it comes to this. I know people who get 30. I also work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. As a software developer I can't imagine staying an extra 3 hours a day just to make it up to the US average and actually getting any more work done than I do now. I mean my brain is burnt out by around 4pm in any case.
You don't need a union to GTFO of your job and go work somewhere else where the pay and conditions are more suited to the kind of lifestyle you want.
If you don't mind that your situation will never improve, no, you don't.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I started out in 1974, writing accounting software on CPM machines. HP and DEC ruled, everyone was doing hardware and writing code. Cheap 8 bits ruled.
Those time were fun and exciting. The corporate hacks hadn't taken over, and china outsourcing was a few years away, Jobs in tech where plentiful.
About 1977, the suits saw the cash and had taken over, They built production lines here, tuning them and then packing up the operation for deployment somewhere else, usually china.
The culture that was created in the early 60's and 70's at places like HP, Tektronix and Xerox was destroyed for increased profits by those raiders. We need to take back our culture of exploration, Or we and out children will be sentenced to a life of poverty.
Neolithic "working time", estimated at 4/5 hours a day max. is the goal !!!
By law, working time should be limited to 34 hours a week.
I note with interest that this is close to the optimum shown is the article linked above (http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/working-hours).
How can we speak about progress is working time increases ?
And automation was supposed to make our lives easier...
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Hey, I can replace you with 3rd world labor in an instant ... look, they made a cup of rice a day for their labor before, and I'm now given them a cup and a half - literally a 50% increase in their pay ... and they breed like rabbits, so there's a never-ending supply. Odd part is, I can't seem to find any customers for my products, everybody says they can't afford them ... wonder why that is ? ... must be excessive regulation or confiscatory taxation, must buy politicians to remove those obstacles, then there will be customers ... still none ? ... hmmm, I wonder who is screwing with the system, there should be profits here ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Forget that its an ad for a bad product by a bad company... and just focus on over arching message... which is just a cultural difference between the US and a lot of other places.
Enjoy your free time, euros... You're welcome to it. Americans want to work.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I don't know, we're tied with Denmark as the least corrupt countries in the world.
I'm self employed.
The people I work next to get paid half as much as I do but they get 20 days leave, get paid for those 10 public holidays, get at least 2 weeks paid sick leave and numerous other benefits of being an employee.
I have yet to hear anything good come from a union in the last decade or so.
Ahhh so because they have done nothing in the last decade means they are completely worthless and shouldn't exist at all? I don't like unions for much of the same reason you don't. They breed a slack workforce full of people who can't be fired for some bullshit reason.
But they do provide balance. Thanks to the union movement some 30+ years ago I have a government mandated minimum 4 weeks holidays. I have leave loading meaning I get paid extra on top of my salary as an incentive to take those holidays. Much of what the unions argued for in the past has made it into law that gives us (not the USA) the great conditions I enjoy today.
I'm all for getting rid of the unions now, but only if you get rid of the government at the same time. If you freeze employment / wage laws where they are it would be ideal. It's in balance. The problem is every time I turn on the TV it's yet another article about the government attempting to reduce my rights and the unions attempting to milk for all it's worth. In the middle I'm quite happy.
An ever-growing segment of the population doesn't work at all.
So why not simply make workahol an illegal substance, or at least license it's production and distribution?
Here here!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Yeah, that's what everyone should do- become and independent contractor. All those big corporations that employ thousands of people can start negotiating a fresh contract for each and every independent contractor they hire. And for engineers who do things like design or manufacture semiconductors, well, they can all buy their own equipment and hire themselves out as contractors too.
Oh, wait, they might have trouble getting loans to purchase millions of dollars worth of stuff, just so they can do their work.
Hey, I have an idea, what if large corporations hired people as employees under a more or less uniform contract? Then they wouldn't have to do so much negotiating, and people who do work that requires massive investment in infrastructure could do that work without having to own that infrastructure themselves...
Now I can hire myself out as an HR consultant and explain the benefits of hiring employees to big corporations!
Unions don't protect employees, employment law protects employees.
That's a frightening thought, considering how much law is written at the behest of corporate lobbiests.
As the American culture "rewards" hard work, I think Americans exaggerate how hard they actually work.
A 65 hour, 5 day week means getting in at 9am and leaving at 10 pm. A 65 hour 7 day week means getting in at 9 and leaving at 6:15 every single day. While one might occasionally work that many hours, I do not believe that half of all professionals work that many hours every week of their lives.
I think people claim that their max work week is their average work week.
I think I would give up my 20 days to get paid twice as much. At least for a few years, or until I'd paid off my mortgage.
This Post is a Choose-Your-Own-Post Post!
For Cheeky Sarcasm goto 10.
For Argument goto 20.
For Abuse goto 30.
For Mouthbreathing goto 40.
10 I knew Denmark had been going downhill, but I didn't know it was that bad over there.
20 [Citation Needed]
30 Stupid git.
40 *pant* *pant* *pant* *drool*
Ohh, the irony...
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
You should look into your local laws. It's called minimum wage for a reason, and I'm not aware of anywhere (in the US) where violations are not a big deal.
Either you are applying at the wrong agencies (there are many that deal exclusively in unskilled labor), or you are in the wrong market. Unpleasant as it may be, you might have to move to a different city/state to stay with that career.
"We need to see more than 40 hours a week on your time card so we can justify getting more staff."
1) We tried that for quite a long time, and guess what? The bean counters are happy to just drive the existing staff into the ground, and didn't add anyone.
2) How about actually staffing for your planned projects? You're paying big bucks to PMs to figure out resource requirements. If Project C is going to need 100 man-hours, how about actually finding out if someone actually has the hours available to handle it instead of just tossing it on the pile of our existing workload of just trying to keep the lights on?
I work in Boston, and I spend 4 hours/day commuting. It's a pretty lousy lifestyle.
Rush hour in atlanta.
(Ugh...never going back)
We need more mass transit.
More cities with GOOD metro lines.
High speed commuter rail.
Etc.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
It's ambiguous, but it doesn't explicitly say "112 hours per week" which led me to assume it meant over the course of a year.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
80/60/40 years ago, automation was going to lead to a life of leisure for everyone with a 20-hour work week.
Now those of us that are employed do the work of five people because employers are sitting on record profits and while not hiring more workers. While we have huge numbers of people that can't find work.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
That's right, unionize. So instead of overworked Silicon Valley, we end up with collapsed Detroit. That's best case; the more likely case is that the companies will find no shortage of non-union labor.
Wow reading the comments here I can understand why firms might prefer to hire new college grads as described in this recent /. post:
http://m.slashdot.org/story/203667
Unions just protect those that are incompetent or barely capable.
Fuck unions. I haven't even had to negotiate a raise in 3 years because they are a afraid of me leaving. >10% *grins*
Am I to understand that your personal experience negates the value of collective bargaining in general?
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
At my company, whenever someone goes on vacation, 75% of the time when they send out the notices "I'll be gone for a week, but will have access to email."
Some of that is their own doing, but it's peer pressure to check email during vacations.
146M out of 315M according to the BLS. Its 59% percent if you only look at working age adults. 26M of those 146M are parttime too.
What I am taking away from this, the last few paragraphs at least, is that I should work 60 hours a week for 4 weeks then take a weeks vacation.
7 days a week. Why time and a half everything over 40, double time for Saturday and triple time for Sunday and Holidays.
Man I love my job.
I'm shocked at the stat that 94% of tech workers are putting in more than 50 hrs/wk!
I have a nice well paying 40 hr/wk job, which occasionally requires the rare 45 hr wk. Those 40 hrs/wk already seem unnaturally long for me.
BUT...I'm currently applying to new jobs, and this stat makes me concerned about expectations that my new employer might have for me. I'm up front in the interviews that I'm looking for a 40 hr wk. Some companies are cool with this and offer me jobs, others, like Amazon.com are openly not cool with it, and that's fine. I don't want those jobs. But still, makes me wonder how hard it will be to find a 40 hr/wk job.
BTW...I'm not counting general reading/studying/training required to remain an expert in my field. The 40 hrs I'm referring to are specific job tasking.
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
I'm from Melbourne, Australia and I'm sure we have a very similar work culture to the US. A culture where a whole lot of people define their social value, and a great part of their self value to their work. I think we all get sucked into this to some degree. Then my girlfriend got a job in Paris and I threw it all in and tagged along. Now I work maybe 8-9 hours a day, down from 10-12. No one eats at their desk because food it respected enough to give it some respect. The work we do is of high quality because we're not stupid after staring and screens for too long. And we tend to spin our wheels less and waste a whole lot less time. So overall I'd be surprised if productivity is really down. And life is much nicer. France isn't perfect (far, far from it) and your anecdotal milage may vary but hey, so far, so good.
Interesting argument. I agree that people have more options than they often realize. Or that they unnecessarily limit their options by excessive spending, debt, etc.
BUT....not everyone wants to become an employer. And I think there ought to be room in this economy for both skilled and unskilled workers to earn a living wage with a 40 hr work wk.
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
I was getting buy just fine in grad school on $12K/yr. Never felt poor. Lived cheaply and had everything I needed. Even saved a few bucks each month.
I was making $36K/yr in my first job and was living the good life, nice apartment, going out, etc. and still saved a bit each month.
Now I make much much more than that, but I've been hit with up to $10K in medical bills the past few yrs, despite having good health insurance. I also have a family and a house in a good school district, and suddenly things are tight even though I now make 6 figures.
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
I have to first laugh at the neckbeard movie theater employees claiming people chained to desks want to defend their lifestyle, "defending the man" and whatever "modern day slave" type comments they want to pull from the beatnik bible. Very few people WANT to work a 60+ hours week. But you don't have much of a choice in the matter. The big problem is that if you won't do it, there's someone waiting to replace you who will, so you have to do it. Even if you're salaried, with no overtime - the best you can hope for is a little recognition and a bonus. If you don't work those exhausting hours, you will be replaced by someone who will. Employment is better than unemployment, so that's what you do, unless you want to work 22 hours a week and live in your parents basement.
My first job out of college I averaged 70+ hours a week - and I was on a salary BELOW $30,000. I had graduated 7 months ago and took a bad offer just to finally have "a" job. But it wasn't worth it. I got to a point where I worked through my weekends, ten hour days, and got to 34 days in a row when I finally told my boss I was clearly being abused. Within a few weeks, I was fired. The guy they hired to replace me started at $46,000. Valuable lesson learned: never undersell yourself just to get in. Raises don't happen as frequently as they did in our parents' generations, and frankly, you'll never even get one of those if you don't stick your neck out and ask.
I've job hopped a bit, and was even at a job where I would work about 50 hours a week, clients would call and email at all hours of the night and I had to be able to respond to those calls, too. My boss, one day, would tell me that these things weren't expected of me, and the next day ask me why a project wasn't moving as quickly as he wanted it to. To mitigate some of those problems, I asked him to prioritize the multiple tasks I had in front of me. He would decide what got finished in what order (usually forcing him to choose between pet projects and profits).
The simple fact is that it's still an employer's market out there. Unemployment is still just high enough that they have their pick of the litter and if you don't live up to their expectations, you're gone, and another warm body can fill your chair. The problem isn't so much that people are willing to do this, the problem is that employers are expecting them to do this. It is the expectation set by the "driven" few at the top, who expect all of their employees who earn a tiny percentage of what the guy up top earns, to be just as driven as they are. I'm not going to "make partner" as an IT guy, why should I have to work just as hard at your law firm, accounting firm, medical practice, etcetera?
Bob isn't able to do the new work. Management needs to send him to training. Frank can take care of it in the meantime
Bob is still having issues with this new system, more training. Frank can take care of it in the meantime
3 years down the road, Bob still doesn't know how to stop/start a Unix service or manage the backup system. Well, actually he might if he tried, but Frank is still the one that gets poked to handle it all. Really, Bob is just somewhat lazy and is milking the system. Bob *could* be fired, but it would take another several years of fighting between the union and management, and that's expensive. So install Bob manages a few servers in the old system, and Frank gets 1.5x the work.
And yes, this *does* happen in unions. I worked in one shop where the guy wasn't coming to work, was mis-using company resources, and basically did it all with a smirk. It took them *years* to get him out, and years again of fighting to keep him from being brought back.
I've also been in union management. Even if you know Bob is being a useless turd, you still need to defend his lazy ass. Meanwhile, Frank is being overworked, and Sally is being screwed over but you're too busy dealing with the Bob's of the world to help out the honest employees to the extent that's needed.
Oh, but *everyone* gets a 3% raise this year based on negotiated contracts. That includes Frank - who more than earned it - and also Bob, who definitely did not.
The promise of lesser work hours comes from technological utopianism.
Our current work load and hours come from unbridled capitalism.
I really miss my old commute. When I started, the office was a five minute bike ride away. I could ride home, have a nice lunch, and ride back. Six months later, they moved 15 miles north. That 15 miles represents over an hour of rush hour driving. Ended up moving to a spot that wouldn't require me to deal with the worst rush hour roads, but I'm still a good 20-minute drive away.
The worst I've seen are devs at a client in DC. Between driving in from the surrounding area to a parking garage at the tail end of the Yellow line and then taking the metro into town, they spent an absurd amount of time in transit to their jobs (not to mention the $200/month or so they had to pay for parking).
I'm one of those that travels almost 2 hours a day.
I live outside of Stockholm, cause living in Stockholm has not been within my reach even tho I'm a well payed software developer. Maybe the problem isn't really the pay or the prices, but I refuse to live in a appartment the size of a wardrobe.
I work what I would say is a 40h week, but it takes 11 hours of my time every day, cause of commute and a break to get some food during the day.
I'm also dead when I get home, I can not understand how people can work much more, and here we talking about a total spent time of 55 hours a week, how do you put in 65 or more at work, and to that add travel? How is it possible? Someone that do this, please explain to me.
Someone that do this, please explain to me
Cocaine.
But who is going to bribe the politicians to pass employment laws?
Not the unions. They get around the law with the union contracts the companies are forced to take.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
totally people are addicted to working longer hours. Not, maybe, and this is just a shot in the dark here, the proles are being taken advantage of by the bourgeoisie, business as usual.
You say that like socialism is the solution, when it's the problem--all it does is let the ruling classes say and perhaps even truly believe that in screwing the plebeians they are doing them a favor.
When you make it expensive to employ additional people, you're going to ensure giving people overtime is favored over adding another employee, even when it would be otherwise preferred to have an additional employee.
When you make it expensive to have somebody work full-time, you increase the number of part-time workers--and the number of people having to work two part-time jobs in order to pay bills.
There is a problem when you set up the economy so that a company can be punished for deciding to be kind to their workers and not make a single worker do the labor of many...
Corporate welfare isn't the problem as much as bureaucrat welfare & the granting of functional monopolies to large corporations by screwing the smaller guys for them.
You should look into your local laws. It's called minimum wage for a reason, and I'm not aware of anywhere (in the US) where violations are not a big deal.
Minimum wage does not typically apply to salaried workers who are generally "professionals" which are exempt from minimum wage. There are also a host of positions (such as working at a movie theater) that are also exempt. (See http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/co... for details.)
Now, if you are hourly and in a position that qualitifes, then you are generally good. Restaurant workers that receive tips are guaranteed by law at least minimum wage - that is, they get the greater of minimum wage or their base of $1.20/hr plus tips for the pay period. Beware - not every position qualifies.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
I feel for you. The price of housing inside the beltway (or near it) is insane, and only going to get worse. There's really no space to build more w/o tearing up existing structures. I fought the daily commute from western Fairfax Co. to inside the beltway for several years. Once I was able to afford better digs, I attempted to find a place closer to work, but even an additional $70k increase in property value wouldn't have got me something comparable within five miles of the office. That was back in the mid-90s, and the housing bubble bursting didn't really improve matters here.
Just another day in Paradise
Institutions pushing ultimately destructive long-term behavior in favor of short-term returns.
Honestly, the longer I work, the less time I have for leisure activities and "consuming" of any sort. I do less, so I need less stuff to do it with. I don't have time to shop, or time to enjoy what I'd buy, even if I bought it. The only people that stand to make a mint are whoever picks up the pieces when I burn out physically or mentally.
As a datapoint, the old idea of "professionals" being "salaried" is that they didn't have to keep track of their hours, they'd be well-compensated, and would make those hours... not *HUGE AMOUNTS OVER*.
These days, and I looked it up on the US Dept of Labor site, there's a special exemption written *just* for computer people, that they can be "salaried", and can't charge overtime, and aren't eligible to join unions, in general (unless I misinterpret a *lot*).
So, last year, when the #$%^&#$%^&*$%^&* neoConfederate "Tea Party" shut down the US government, they *stole* those days from those of us who are, for example, federal contractors, and we will never, ever get that back, even though we're allegedly "salaried", if we can't charge, we do *not* get anything.
Then there was when I worked for Ameritech (former Baby Bell, swallowed by SBC). I swore I'd never do it gain when I broke 70 hours one week. My DBA said the same the week he did 80. But both of us were pikers (that, and not as young and stupid as too many slashdotters) compared to the young consultant who, in one week, put in 119 hours..... Overtime? Fat chance.
And thern there's all the folks who are out of work, or on part time and "underemployed" because a hell of a lot of *suckers* will work "whatever it takes", rather than management hiring enough people to do the work....
mark
Nice to see all the douche bags on Slashdot now. Can't even make a comment without folks taking some offense.
Nowhere did I say there weren't wage slaves and folks weren't stuck in crap jobs. My anecdotal story is just that. A little bit from me responding to the original poster indicating that while the US doesn't have mandatory vacations, you are capable of asking for more.
Chill out a little. It's not all about you, or me.
[John]
Shit better not happen!
I believe that the GP said "organize", not "unionize"
More specifically, he makes the statement "Don't let the union leaders become bosses", which is indeed part of the problem these days.
And this is bad how exactly? And how does working harder HURT the economy? That makes no sense.
If you're exempt from overtime pay, it's quite the loophole to effectively cut wages in half while still looking OK on the books.
You do have a choice. If you don't see that you have a choice it is because of your own limited brainpower, not because it isn't there. Wake up.
Everyone - bar none, and including myself - who claims that they "work 60 hour weeks" might indeed be AT WORK 60 hours a week, but they do things like post /. comments at quarter after two in the afternoon or spend hours playing farmville, solitare, or updating their facebook posts.
-Styopa
I've had this idea in my head since the economy downturn in 2008/2009.....
If we have a federal law that mandates maximum 50hrs of work per week, this will force companies to hire more regardless of their profitability.
I said this because I have couple friends who worked at AMD/Intel/Cisco at the time... they came to my birthday party Sunday noon time, and at 2PM they had to split because they have to get some work done at the office.
I think that's a serious violation taking advantage of employees' resources... they knew the job market was dry, they squeezed every possible drop of juice out of their employees' energy because they knew there was no where else to go.
If US corporate management think more for the general economy than their own corporate interests... we would actually boost economy, people got jobs and have more buying power... it automatically increases service/product demands and we're back in shape. But it's easier said than done.
I laughed, consider this +1 Funny.
Here are the 10 least corrupt countries in the world, according to the index:
Denmark.
New Zealand (tied with Denmark for No. 1)
Finland.
Sweden (tied with Finland for No. 3)
Norway.
Singapore (tied with Norway for No. 5)
Switzerland.
Netherlands.
Please tell me that 90%+ of my fellow IT professionals are not really working 50+ hours a week.
You guys do realize that software developers/engineers/database dudes are in very high demand right now, right?
If you don't want to work over 40 hours a week, then don't!
Over the past 6 years of being a software developer, I've had three jobs and all have been 40s hour a week.
They've actually been less. You know why? I come in late and typically leave early. I get the job done and my bosses didn't/don't want to lose me.
So, just get the job done and don't worry about "what people think" about you leaving at 5pm. If you're good at what you do, they're not going to let you go.
If the demands are unrealistic, then again, find another job. There is PLENTY of work out there right now.
I wish CS majors were required to take economics. If these punk arse companies that like to play games and force long hours were actually hit with an informed workforce, they would have empty cubicles and we wouldn't have conversations like this.
Don't forget, you can still take unpaid leave.
Although, you need to be good at your job, since they can fire you on a whim and when projects end you can be out on your ass too.
No problems ars long as you follow two rules:
Don't be a dick
Be good at what you do
So move. DC is not exactly a great area to live in. There's plenty of awesome places that offer much more at a lower cost of living.
Really, I thought the only reason people actually moved to DC, was because they were offered one of those "elite" jobs you referred to.
I don't know if people understand how short life is. I am 51 years old. I've got three awesome sons, an awesome wife, a cool dog... When I was in my late twenties I made the mistake of working a lot.. I got home and my wife was sad... that changed everything. family, friends ... that's all more important than a job.
I want to be honest here, if you're in your mid-50s, you might have a hard time convincing me that you're a good candidate for me. I'd probably ask you VERY personal questions (that I may not even ask you legally, but they'd be of course completely voluntary to answer on your part with you refusing you having no impact on your chance to be hired. Yeah. Honestly. You bet...). The reason isn't even that you're going to retire in about a decade and, as mentioned before, training will require about a year. With relevant prior experience that may even be less the reason (of course, if you neither ever worked in the business field nor in security, your chances might be getting a wee bit thin...).
The reason is that you're most likely not "compatible" with our work style. We do offer a great range of freedom (come as you are, pretty much whenever you want, and your average work load will probably be considerably below the 40 hours you get paid for), but there's of course the backside to it. Odd work hours ("Mind staying 'til 5am today? You get tomorrow off and the next Monday."), odd phone calls at odd hours ("Can ya come in? Yes I know it's 4am, and it's your day off, why're you asking? Be here in an hour, ok?") and the kind request that you inform us should you plan a vacation abroad so we know that it's kinda futile calling you to come in.
These are, of course, rather "insane" requests. Ok, let's call a spade a spade, requirements. We do offer a lot in compensation, including training programs that pretty much triple your salary, VERY liberal work hours unless there's an emergency (which basically amounts to "come when/if you feel like it"), no asshole PHBs breathing down your neck, near perfect work security and a few more tidbits and benefits, but that all comes at a price: It is near impossible to have a functional relationship when you try to hold down this job. Twice so if you have kids. I know for a fact that this line of work killed more than a few relationships. It isn't really possible to have a rich family life or even plan something. Want to explain your 8 year old why you suddenly had to leave just when he had his first big role in that school theater performance?
This job is something for the younger audience. Where having an unpredictable life may even be entertaining. I just learned that most people prefer more stability and predictability when they get older. Of course you may be that odd man out who pushes 60 and still gets an adrenalin rush when his boss calls at 2am with a "Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi. You are my only hope.", but I'd guess even that joke gets old quickly. I tried it a few times with people who claimed that they "don't mind" and that they still have the drive, but in the end they all eventually folded.
I would not mind having someone older than me on my team. But there's a reason why most here could call me "dad", from an age perspective... I guess I AM already the odd man out.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
How much employment law would there be without union actions?
you're correct. A business only has one concern. Make more money for the shareholders, regardless of where it comes from. Steal, lie, cheat...it doesn't matter as long as the shareholders make more. When the economy tanks because of us, the taxpayers will just give us a bailout and we will get bonuses.
No, really, what the heck is their deal? If I get only 7 hours of sleep for more than 2-3 days, I start turning into an ornery, unfocused, weak, idiot zombie who's as likely to pour a cup of coffee into his lap as into the mug!
I don't understand how people do it.
-
I'm thinking of becoming a plumber (hydronic heating area). Equally challenging (think fluid dynamics), well protected from outsourcing and I can work 20-30 hours a week making almost as much as my current IT job. It does require working 3-5 years as a slave/apprentice however...
You should keep in mind that reading comprehension relies on what is written and is not mind reading. I strongly suggest you improve your writing skills before attempting to lecture people for reacting to what you wrote instead of what you may have meant.
Now I can hire myself out as an HR consultant and explain the benefits of hiring employees to big corporations!
You jest, but this is a necessary task. The C-level executives have managed to insert their heads so far up their asses they're in danger of disappearing entirely.
Except for Charter Cable. Which I was absolutely ASTONISHED to learn has dumped basically all of their contractor technicians, hired employees, instituted training regimes that insist those employees spend a mandated minimum amount of time doing fresh installations before they're ever sent on trouble-shooting calls, and, wonder of wonders, hired quality inspectors who follow after those technicians and independently and apparently rather severely criticize their work.
It seems there is one executive in the country who escaped the echo chamber. I can only assume s/he'll be fired next year for spending all that money without generating miraculous profits.
A software project that actually ends? What kind of crazy company do you work for?
According to that link, even if you are salaried, you must work over 62 hours to drop below minimum wage.
You didn't specify what position, but I doubt that working in a theater would count as an "executive, administrative, professional and outside sales employees. "
Again, check local laws. Many (most?) have restrictions beyond what the feds require.
According to that link, even if you are salaried, you must work over 62 hours to drop below minimum wage.
You didn't specify what position, but I doubt that working in a theater would count as an "executive, administrative, professional and outside sales employees. "
Again, check local laws. Many (most?) have restrictions beyond what the feds require.
Here's the link. Working in a movie theatre would fall under "Employees of certain seasonal amusement or recreational establishments".
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
There is a problem in this country..
I go to Nashua, NH, around the Oracle and other labs residential areas, and there are basically nothing but H1B Indians all over. Go to Herndon, VA (another tech hub), same thing, go up and down the office parking garages, streets, and basically nothing but H1B Indians all over again. Americans are virtually nowhere to be seen..
I talk to my university placement officer of a top 25 US business and tech school, and he says that he cannot place half of his new grads..
Tech salaries are falling year by year, even though there is this 'supposed' shortage..!
It is a fraud, there is no shortage. The recession for the middle class tech people would have ended 5 years ago if it wasn't for H1B. We'd all have permanent good jobs, with high salaries, strong benefits and good vacation, with respect from management..if it wasn't for H1B. Apparently 1 out of 2 new tech jobs in this country now goes to an H1B, while there are millions of high educated Americans out of work or underemployed in 'junk-jobs' and tempwork.
Campaign money by large employers are corrupting the law and steal money from regular middle class educated Americans as long as this continues.
It is NOT racism to say that this is wrong.. !
There probably is not much that can be done about offshoring, but 'fake shortage' H1B is happening right here in this country. We are being rubbed out, and being replaced.. in our own country! It *CAN* and *SHOULD* be stopped...now!, if we rise up..
Why don't we take action?. Maybe not a union like the Teamsters, but Lawyers have a union (the American Bar Association), Doctors do (you need to be 'licensed' to practice..that is just like a union..). How about we all wear our Guy Fawks masks(so we can still keep our jobs the next day..those of us that have jobs anyways..) and have a day of protest in tech parks across the country this summer, in front of senate and representatives district offices all over the country.
Be loud, be vocal, like those French unions do. Be disruptive to company bottom lines. Protest in front of their clients when they contract out to firms that use H1B, like those Anti-Abortionist and NRA people do, make the companies feel pain so this changes!.
We don't have to do nothing... If we unite and make disruption enough that it costs more to companies to not listen to us...then they will listen to us, and stop doing things like 'fake shortage' H1B that destroy the middle class.
The majority of engineers value getting the job done and extra pay, not merely working longer hours. The companies that employ them often egregiously take advantage of these particular aspect of the work ethic and draw them into working longer hours to the point that it becomes commonplace. This is a big reason for the current trend towards wholesale contract workforces. and there is an ebb and flow to it that will reverse soon enough. companies will realize that they're paying the contract workforce much higher then they would directs and they're not all that much more disposable because it now takes up 75-80% of their total headcount. So they'll try to pull in more to directs at lower rates, arguably more perks and the illusion of increased stability. If you've been talking into believing that simply working a longer day is at the heart of a strong work ethic, you're clearly not thinking for yourself. and, with that, you're probably not truly an engineer (applies hard sciences vs. "sales engineer", "social media engineer" or any of the drivel). I still remember a remark one of my professors made about an intrinsic characteristic of engineers: we're lazy. we're always trying to find simpler, better ways to do mundane, time consuming tasks LONG TERM and we're willing to put in 100 hours now if we anticipate it saving us and a million other people 1000 hours of work down the road. benefits always have to outweigh the risks and costs.
One where 6 month contracts turn in to 2 years.
Nope, you're right.... DC is really *not* that great an area to live in. However, I'm pretty happy with the small town in Maryland we wound up buying a house in. Only about 20 minutes outside Frederick, MD, which is a fairly nice city itself.
The only reason I moved up to the the DC area in the first place is a need to get out from a dead-end I.T. job I was in, in the midwest, working for a steel supplier and fabricator. In general, I.T. careers in the midwest doing server/network administration on hands-on PC support are mainly found in the manufacturing sector. (Exceptions would primarily be hospitals or education -- both of which handle I.T. fairly differently than the typical business.... sort of their own worlds.)
Not just one, but two of my friends who used to live near me and also worked in I.T. wound up moving away and taking jobs with the company that offered me the DC area position. The fact I'd get to work with two of my long-time personal friends (albeit each of us in different offices in different cities) was a major reason I accepted. This was also a company which was actually growing during the recession, while most were downsizing.
Truthfully? I think a lot of folks up here relocated for jobs that were far from "elite" - simply because they were promising-sounding career jobs in a bad economic climate. (I've met several people who moved here from other parts of the country for jobs with MedImmune in Gaithersburg, for example. Probably pays well, but not "defense contractor well" or anything like that.)
I don't know why everybody assumes there is only one life/work balance that's optimal throughout your life. When you first get out of school, want to make a mark, and don't have a family, it's often very rewarding to put more hours into work. But later on in life when you get a family and other interests, work just isn't as important for most people. It's not that one is better than the other, it's that priorities change as you age.
Human beings are work machines. In the end, that is all we are. We work ourselves to exhaustion, rest briefly, then go back and work some more.
Nothing else matters. A person's life is worthwhile only so long as he is working. Everything else he or she does is something that helps them continue to work. Nothing but work matters. Nothing.
A good man is one who gives everything to his employer, sacrifices himself relentlessly for the sake of the job, and drops dead at his desk at 50 before he can collect Social Security. And if he does make it to 70, he commits suicide rather than retiring -- because if you can't earn a living, you don't deserve to live.
"When I go to temp agencies, they look at my skill set (Computer Science degree, 10 years in IT support and networking, 6 years in media production) and tell me that there's just no work out there, and if I come back in a couple of weeks they might have something but I should probably look at getting my forklift licence and start at the bottom in retail or warehousing."
Where do you live though? I cant imagine this would be the case in a big city.
Cute story, and I'm sure that oceanfront property you're selling in Nebraska is beautiful as well. Just a few problems, though:
1) There is nothing about unions that prevents people from being fired for cause
2) Bob is management's problems, not the unions.
3) Because Frank, and Frank's union friends, would be the ones standing outside managements door demanding that Bob be retrained or "encouraged" to find a different job. Because, once again, joining a union doesn't mean you get a hole in your head and a desire to do your work plus someone else's.
Oooo, black and white anecdote time! Enron stole money from customers and shareholders, therefore all capitalism is bad, mmkay. And Wells Fargo ripping off homeowners means that all for profit banks are bad and should be banned immediately!
Of course, no one would be stupid enough to make those kind of leaps of bad logic with business. But people do it all the time with labor - why is that?
So you're saying workers are less abused, better paid, with greater benefits and vacation time? And this is a bad thing for you?
Here, why don't you try an experiment: go down to the office of your local Chamber of Commerce, and tell them you want to enjoy all the benefits of being a CoC member, but without having to pay membership dues. Write down the responses, and come back to us.
Why don't you go work at the Tyler Pipe factory for a while and say that again. Negligence that would land your ass in a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison gets shrugged off if done by a monied corporation.
Unions are a check on greed, and the robber baron class as only gotten more as time goes on.
Well sorry if my experience with 3 DIFFERENT UNIONS and THE SAME SHIT isn't good enough for you.
Sorry if my experience being a SHOP STEWARD as well as a member of the UNION COUNCIL wasn't good enough for you.
1.
For the record, no, being in a union DOESN'T prevent one from being fired for cause. It does however, tend to prevent one from being fired in a reasonable time, as they have to give a bunch of warnings (because, hey, not coming to work is apparently not a known problem) and then log multiple concurrences before "Bob" can really be fired. Unions don't prevent people from being fired, they just make it very time-consuming and difficult to do so, even oft-times when there is cause. Hell, "Bob" even managed to accuse a few co-workers of various things before it was finally found to be him at fault.
2. Bob is management's problem. However the union filing motions to keep him from being fired is also a problem.
3. Yes, that one happened as well. The problem is that it's pretty hard to get somebody for being a lazy turd, and some people are particularly good at making it look like they're trying when doing absolutely minimum and little more than warming a chair.
Wells Fargo ripping off homeowners means that all for profit banks are bad and should be banned immediatel
No, banks aren't necessarily bad. Stripping regulation from industry, having it fail, then bailing them out is bad. If banks were like a Union, then if 90% of banks are doing good and the rest were going down the road of Wells Fargo, then you'd give them all a 3% pay increase regardless of how screwed up or piss poor that other 10% were.
Unions aren't bad, but they share a common issue: it's difficult to hold members accountable when they go bad. I certainly don't want to go back to the days when there weren't unions and *employers* had no accountability, I just suggest we move the pendulum more back towards the middle. Let people be judged on merit, but treated fairly overall.
Why don't you go work at the Tyler Pipe factory [pbs.org] for a while and say that again. Negligence that would land your ass in a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison gets shrugged off if done by a monied corporation [huffingtonpost.com].
Why would I want to go and work in a country with shitty employment law?
Sorry my TWO DIFFERENT ANECDOTES weren't enough to get you on board to summarily ban capitalism. Three's the charm? Okay, one more:
I used to work at shop that made Wal-Mart look pro-union. One old codger did more talking than working, and one time this "talk" included telling a woman 30 years younger than him that he would, quote unquote "like to rape the shit out of you". Nothing was done by management. Now, since three different examples are what you needed, you're down for banning capitalism, yes? Or were you just getting your confirmation bias on?
Not. If. There. Is. Cause.
It's called due process, to make sure the real reason Bob's getting fired isn't because he refused to come in on his day off, work off the clock, or balked at doing a dangerous job he wasn't trained or equipped to do.
Exactly! Judging entire groups of people based on the actions of a few is just silly when it's the boss class. But for those uppity proles who don't know their place, it just makes sense.
So you had a talking point, not an argument, by admitting that employment law doesn't necessarily protect the employed? Why didn't you say so earlier? Let us know how the meeting goes at your local Chamber of Commerce goes, when you ask for all the benefits of membership without having to pay membership dues.
Unions don't prevent people from being fired, they just make it very time-consuming and difficult to do so
Not. If. There. Is. Cause.
Again. 3 unions. With cause, people did get fired but it. still. took. a. long. f*cking. time.
But for those uppity proles who don't know their place, it just makes sense
Don't see where I said that. I'm not management myself, more of a prole than such. I just prefer to see people actually do their damn job.
I used to work at shop that made Wal-Mart look pro-union
I didn't say non-union shops didn't have issues, I've seen plenty of them in private as well (lazy or poorly trained management, nepotism, etc). As per the codger, a harassment suit would probably have been useful if one had a witness to such behavior.
What I *would* like to see is for unions to get back to the days of "Proudly made in a union shop" where unions and management both don't fight like spoiled children over stupid shit, and deal more with important issues *LIKE* harassment, discrimination, unsafe conditions, and fair wages (including fair wage increases) etc.
I'm not anti-union, but I do believe that unions have lost "the power of the people" because of the crap like what I've described. We all still need to put in a real work effect (not to the bone, just good, decent, hard work), but we also need to deal with when some people - management and employees - aren't contributing to a positive workplace.
Unfortunately, in many places unions have become just another layer of middle-management. They do work for good things in a broad sense, but they've become large, unwieldy, and have their own layers of fat/pork just like businesses do.
I did that job, working for a company which provided mission-critical software and infrastructure, sold to a rather cancerous financial firm.
After the buyout, the day-to-day work was heavy, but the on-call periods were brutal - you wouldn't sleep for a week. The oldest person on the team left at 50 years old, the youngest at 43.
That kind of job eats people, and when everyone finally bailed (within a three-week span), the new manager (who had taken over from the existing IT manager) was stuck - he had no one who knew the array of systems (7 OSes, 4-5 different enterprise storage systems, network/vpn gear, connections to ancient SNA servers, etc) maintained by the old crew, and constantly called the staff who had left asking for assistance.
In general, his former staff was too polite to laugh in his face, but we did agree among ourselves that $500/hr with an 8-hour minimum was a good basic rate, as it disincentivized further calls.
The PTB in the business - to a person, jerks hired by the financial firm who'd bought the business and squeezed the crap out of it - took to calling personally, asking people to come back, offering the earth - it was really funny. No one took the offer, and it took them about twenty-four months to get out of that hole (they eventually did it by hiring a con$ultancy created by a former employee) , and burned a lot of bridges with a lot of customers bc they couldn't deliver on contracted services. There was a lot of schadenfreude pie to be had....
TFA is mostly in regards to salaried positions, but I figured I would chime in with the perspective from us hourly paid folks. As an employee working for an absentee (and often clueless) boss, the 1.5x overtime pay has saved my ass many times. I wouldn't do it if I was salaried, but as an hourly employee, the more I work, the more I make. It's a concrete connection, and one I consider reasonable to make. Especially considering that I've had shit luck in finding a job with a better pay rate. How else is one to to make extra money but to work more?
You failed to point out what clue there was to identify you as putting it forward as a serious suggestion. Your rants about "reading comprehension" and "second language" appear to only be an attempt to blame your own stupidity for putting up such an inflammatory statement on others by pretending you never did it. Quite disgusting and even cowardly in my opinion.
Obviously the post I replied to in the first place.
I made *lots* of statements and I don't believe any of them are contradictory. If you want to point out which of my statements you think contradicts another I made, go ahead, otherwise I am not going to try and guess what you are referring to.
Funny how you are now taking that line after your "take one sentence from someone's argument and ignore the rest" comment.
You know perfectly well what it was so stop trying to weasel out of it just because you do not want to admit you posted something so utterly stupid and insulting to just about everyone who's worked for more than a week in their lives.
You got nothing. You can't even cite one example where I contradicted myself. All my posts are public for everyone to see. I don't need to admit anything. Either cite where you think I have contradicted myself, or shut up.
"Well if the job market is so terrible (for employees) and never getting better, then the obvious thing to do is to exploit that and become an employer. You can hire people for essentially nothing, and rake in huge profits for doing very little work."
Are you going to start this whole naive authoritarian bullshit all over again with a "take one sentence from someone's argument and ignore the rest" like you did before? Who is this audience you think you are playing to and why would they bother to read your drivel this far down? Lay off the ego stroking mass debate bullshit and start taking responsibility for what you preach to others, because you are making us all look like clueless and heartless pieces of shit.
You sir...either need a girlfriend, or shouldn't be left unsupervised in your cubical!