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."

Comments

I can stop any time!!!

[BenSchuarmer]

I just need to finish this one thing...

Re:I can stop any time!!!

[Wonko the Sane]

And what's up with this "In 1942, more than 80 percent of Americans slept seven hours a night or more. Today, 40 percent sleep six hours or less" part?

I had to do some mental math to convert those equilvent comparisons 20% got less than 7 hours in 1942, and today 40% get less than 6.

Why would they make me do mental math when they know I probably didn't get enough sleep last night?

Re:I can stop any time!!!

[umafuckit]

Just one more turn...

Re: I can stop any time!!!

[dunkelfalke]

What shelters? What bombers? The two times USA has been bombed during the WW2 were the Pearl Harbor incident and the bombing of Fort Stevens. And only a minority of the US population has served in the military during the war - about 10% of the population.

Re: I can stop any time!!!

[Lotana]

Fair enough. I did not realize we were talking about USA specifically.

US was very fortunate to escape the ravages of war. Majority of the rest of the world had it much tougher.

Re: I can stop any time!!!

[jellomizer]

That is the reason for American Strength.
WWII Ended.
The US was one of the few major countries not ravaged by wars.
Having a monopoly on nuclear weapons, we were not in threat of retaliation for an other war.
The Men came back and with the GI bill many of them went to college.
After dealing with the Great Depression and WWII the population was starving to take advantage of the modern age, Cars, Radio, TV, a Home of their own.
As part of the great depression a lot of public works projects and infrastructure paid off. As well with the war effort manufacturing became optimized.

So we had all this stuff while the rest of the world is trying to rebuild. So the 1950's and 1960's was America's golden age. By the Mid 60's the rest of the world has been rebuilt and are in the process of getting back on track.

American dominance is less about how much better people we are, but more about being lucky enough to get a head start after WWII
 

Re:work life balance is a myth

[TigerPlish]

You say that now.

Get back to us 20 years from now.

Sleep Collects Neural Garbage

[Baldrson]

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.

Re:Sleep Collects Neural Garbage

[zijus]

Hi there. IMO this is to be linked to the cult of "work hard play hard". The problem is... always over-driving one's life, leads faster to problems. Playing too hard also leads to problems. Hopping to balance one's over-work by some over-play is - maybe counter-intuitively for some - not a sollution. In french it is named "sur-régime" : if you always drive a car with the engine spinning well beyond what's necessary, well you may go faster, but you will certainly die earlier. Over-performing, over-working, and so on, has a cost. Ciao.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

I love having a roof over my head and some food, hard to be picky when the "job creators" hold all the cards. But hey, maybe less regulations, lower taxes and more h1b visa's will make things better! /s

Corporate Brianwashed Fools

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Corporate Brianwashed Fools

[MrL0G1C]

lol at you got modded as interesting rather than insightful, slashdot mods are properly brainwashed and think overtime is good.

The people I really can't understand are the ones who do overtime for free - these people are robbing unemployed people of work and aren't even getting paid for it.

Re:Corporate Brianwashed Fools

[ultranova]

The people I really can't understand are the ones who do overtime for free - these people are robbing unemployed people of work and aren't even getting paid for it.

"Real nice job you have here. Be a shame if anything happens to it. You don't mind doing this little thing after work, right? Be a team player, don't bother telling accounting."

Strong unions could put a stop to that, but everyone is too busy ensuring Joe Slacker gets no unearned benefit to ensure they get their earned ones. It's classic divide and conquer, helped along with everyone thinking they're not only above average but such special snowlakes they can write their own ticket as soon as someone notices their talents - any day now. Of course the resulting economic collapse is taking the employers with them as well, but it's one thing to release the beast and another to put it back into the cage.

American economy is a self-imposed Hell where the only real goal anyone has is to escape from the looming specter of poverty. That's why get-rich-quick schemes never fail to find victims there. And that's also why it works worse and worse over time, as increasingly desperate people find short-term gambits more and more attractive as long-term plans yield less and less realistic chances of improving your situation or even maintaining it.

Oh yeah it's "workaholism"

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Oh yeah it's "workaholism"

[nitehawk214]

And the fact we are in an intentionally shit economy keeps everyone on edge.

Re:Oh yeah it's "workaholism"

[geekoid]

no. Certain industry group keeps spouting the myth the economy is in bad shape. Looking at the numbers, are are far from shit these days.

Re:Oh yeah it's "workaholism"

[ruir]

Exactly. Most [incompetent] people are betting that the competitiveness of a country is based on having low salaries, call it modern slavery, to attract foreign investors. Or put it bluntly, the war in the middle class is raging on. Coincidentally or not, I have seen this week the first news China is starting to outsource USA employees...

What choice do we have?

[rsilvergun]

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.

Re:What choice do we have?

[TsuruchiBrian]

Calling it "Workaholism" implies we have a choice.

Calling it "Workaholism" actually implies we are addicted to "wrokahol", and the notable feature about addiction is the lack of choice. Maybe some would argue that alcoholics can decide not to be addicted as hard as this may be. I would also argue that workers can decide not to accept jobs that overwork them.

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....

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.

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.

I don't really see anyone blaming the workers. I do see people suggesting that workers take appropriate steps to protect their interests. Maybe workers should learn skills that indentured serfs don't have. Maybe workers should take advantage of a world with cheap unskilled labor rather than being a part of the unskilled labor force and therefore causing a higher supply to demand ratio of unskilled labor (as I implied earlier). Maybe workers should actually vote. Workers clearly have an electoral advantage. They, however, continue to vote for republicans and democrats that are selling them out to corporations (or simply don't vote at all).

Is it "blaming the workers" to point out the actions that workers could do to achieve their goals? Is it "blaming the workers" to tell them that no one is going to fight for them if they won't fight for themselves?

If you want something, you need to fight for it. No one is going to just give it to you. If you're strategy is "complaining" about it, then it had better be at a level that causes politicians to be voted out of office, because what is happening right now isn't doing anything.

"In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve." --possibly Alexis de Toqueville or Joseph de Maistre

Re:What choice do we have?

[rsilvergun]

I think the difference is we either pity or look down on alcoholics, where as people that kill themselves

And nobody has the goal to be the worlds greatest middle manager. You're goal something else. Buy your kid braces, keep your car running just a little longer, pay for your Grandma's doctor's visits.

And again, I'll ask why we're racing to the bottom? There's a difference between fighting for something you want just trying to survive one more day. A man swimming the English Channel is fighting for something, a man drowning is just a man drowning. It's OK to pull him up for air you know?

And Toqueville was a rich entitled prick. Not the sort I want to base public policy on. But nice quote.

Re:What choice do we have?

[Anonymous Coward]

And with most US workers having drunk the capitalist koolaid, Forming unions or even mentioning the word 'socialism' to attempt to increase working conditions is taboo.

In the meantime, in most of Europe worker actually enjoy paid holiday, usually more than 24 days (excluding public holidays), which they are able to use when ever they like.

Why do workers keep voting in people who don't represent their interest (though US workers don't have much of a choice).

Re:What choice do we have?

[rainmaestro]

If you can take a pay cut, you can find better alternatives. Even though I'm exempt like most of IT, I never work over 40 hours outside of emergencies (only three times in five years with this company). On those rare times, I was paid for them. This was something I negotiated from the beginning: no overtime unless I'm paid.

My pay is about 15% below market average, but this was the tradeoff I was willing to make in order to have a less stressful work life (and my lifestyle is such that I could afford the cut). If you've got a huge mortgage, three kids, five cars and a mountain of student debt and credit card debt, yeah, you're pretty well fucked.

My parents quit their jobs when they moved about 10 years ago and became self-employed. They make half of what they did before, but only work about 30 hours a week. They've both said they will never go back to working for somebody else. The freedom was worth the reduced pay to them as well.

Re:What choice do we have?

[stenvar]

10 years experience in networking? Minimum wage and no breaks, or this guy over here - who was 3 years experience - will take the job. See how that works?

Yes, that is the way it's supposed to work. If one car repair shop charges you $200/h and another $100/h, and you know they both get the job done, which one are you going to take your car to? Are you willing to pay extra if the $200/h shop's mechanic has a Ph.D. in English literature?

I don't see what you think is wrong with businesses choosing cheap labor and paying only for qualifications they actually need: you do the same thing in your daily life.

Re:What choice do we have?

[tlhIngan]

The irony of the whole thing is that it's a death spiral. By asking employees to do more with less and get less sleep, their health suffers which is a negative on the company in MANY ways. First, tired workers simply are less productive, period. It's very possible that the 10, 12 hour days they're putting in they're simply not going to be as productive than if you forced them to go home after 8 and let them have a good rest, ready to take on the challenge tomorrow.

Second, there are health issues.First, weakened immune systems mean workers get sicker easier. And sick employees almost always come to work (a term we call "presenteeism", the opposite of absenteeism). Well, you have a sniffling, sneezing, coughing worker spreading their germs to everyone. What's THAT going to do for productivity?

Third, safety and quality. A tired worker just isn't safe, period. Accidents in the workplace, increased workplace compensation costs. Quality goes down because workers are less attentive and less likely to spot flaws.

Of course, short term crunches do work. In the short term. Once they become chronic, well, the whole workplace suffers and you end up at some middling level of productivity caused by sick employees, tired less productive employees, and the lack of safety and quality in the final product.

Perhaps the phrase "they don't make 'em like they used to" might actually be true - workers end up producing crap because they're too tired to take pride in their work and to do a good job!

The other problem is cultural - who hasn't heard the old brag "I work hard! I did 100 hours last week!" as if working long days at the office was something to be proud of?

Finally, we're not Japanese. The Japanese get away with overwork because companies generally care about their employees - they get hired from university or high school and work until retirement where their every need is taken care of, including family. Here you're lucky to even get a email on your birthday or anniversary.

But I suppose that's what happens when you boil everything down to numbers.

Small anecdote - there was a company that bought a bunch of coconuts for their ship's provisions. They usually bought 100 coconuts a day, at around $1 a coconut. They asked how much it would be if they increased their order to 200 coconuts a day. The price rose to $2 a coconut! (you'd expect what, 75 cents or so, right?). The reason is that the coconut gatherer would have to work that much harder to collect their 200 coconuts, the increase in stress and longer working hours meant in effect the guy had to do a lot more, and earn less on it, and that's bad for business when your employees have to work their butts off just to be in the same place.

Re:What choice do we have?

[serviscope_minor]

A business simply offers you a job and a salary. If you don't like the offer, pass on it. No threats, no obligation, no coercion involved.

Yep. It's not like you have to eat, make rent, pay medical bills or any of that.

Re:What choice do we have?

[ultranova]

That's how screwed up things are. People who listen to radio and television which is paid for by the wealthy (and I include MSNBC and CNN) are being brainwashed to slit their own throats because -- maybe --- someday-- (including the 59 year old above) they -might- become wealthy.

Of course, the only reason the 59-year old is vulnerable to being tricked into slitting his own throat is that he's willing to slit a throat to go from rich to richer. So the problem goes deeper than just having unrealistic expectations about your financial future.

Re:What choice do we have?

[kilfarsnar]

I don't see what you think is wrong with businesses choosing cheap labor and paying only for qualifications they actually need: you do the same thing in your daily life.

It's because there is a massive power imbalance between the employer and employee. Generally speaking, the employee needs a job more than the employer needs the employee. The employer probably has hundreds of applications for a given position, while the prospective employee is struggling to get interviews, let alone offers.

Price competition does not work in the same way as salary competition, because the actors are on different sides of the equation. If shop A is asking too much for a good or service, I can easily go to shop B to see if it is cheaper there because I am the purchaser. If shop A wants my business they need to either lower their prices or add value to their offering to justify the higher price. In the salary competition scenario, the employee is like the shop. He is selling his labor to the employer. So the employer is the one who can shop around, and the employee has to either lower his wages or add value to justify higher wages. The difference between the two scenarios is the power imbalance. There is not a huge power imbalance in the price competition scenario like there is in the salary competition scenario.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Finding a job is not as easy as it once was in today's job market. If you don't like your job then recommend you suck it up and keep it, because mobility isn't always present.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

This is very true. Loved computers growing up, got into programming and IT desktop, severs and infrastructure and after 20 years I can't stand doing it anymore. I am trying to figure out a career change that I can get enthusiastic about but not financially devastate me. It hasn't been an easy experience.

job security

[confused one]

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.

Re:job security

[radarskiy]

The point is that past a couple of weeks 80-hour work weeks are useless not just for you but for your employer as well. You are providing LESS productivity so it would really be in your employers interest to stop.

Maybe if the economy wasn't so fucked

[Chas]

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.

Re:Maybe if the economy wasn't so fucked

[DigiShaman]

*BOOM* Headshot!!!

So, ignore Chas. It's all Regan propaganda bullshit. Only the Democratic party can save you. If only you dumb fucks could see the light of day and realize that socialism is the answer. The rich will never go away, so taxing the middle-class is how we pay for the poor and their little brood-lings.

Sorry Chas, your realistic answer is far too dangerous for the ministry of truth to allow!

Re:Maybe if the economy wasn't so fucked

[Nemyst]

That's amusing, implying the Democrats are socialist. You guys in the US have this big boogeyman in the socialist policy (still stuck in cold war thinking perhaps?), but you haven't even seen what it actually is like. Your left-wing parties and ideas are every other country's right-wing.

Re:Maybe if the economy wasn't so fucked

[DigiShaman]

It's not amusing; It's sad. What we call socialism (in the US) is nothing more than totalitarianism and indentured servitude to the government (debt never gets paid off and forever dependent on one political party) under the guise of socialism. That's why you guys in Europe are perplexed about this. Our "socialism" not like the socialism in Europe. I'm not in favor of either, but ours is fucked up in orders of magnitude regardless.

Do more with less!

[Prien715]

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

Re:Do more with less!

[drinkypoo]

P.S. Just kidding. We know there are three job-seekers to every position in the USA, and many of those are not even intended to be filled. We'll be in bright and early on Monday.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[dreamchaser]

Your mileage may vary I suppose. I've been working in IS/IT for over twenty years now. I've programmed, done tech support, went into server and network infrastructure, then operations and project management for some years, now I'm back in an engineering role doing security work. I love my job. I look forward to it almost each and every day (I say almost because we *all* have bad days at work and in life). I guess I'm lucky for that. I really love my job, the company I work for, and my peers. The pay is awesome as well. Sure sometimes the hours get long and sometimes there are frustrations, but all in all I can't imagine being happier with a career path, realistically speaking.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Kjella]

The intersection between stuff I'd love to do and the stuff people would pay me to do = Ø, particularly if I got paid to do it. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with my job (37.5 hour work week, decent pay with overtime, 5 weeks vacation, interesting and meaningful work) but I don't love it and it's not something I'd do without the paycheck. If you can't really think of anything else to do than work, you must have a very gimped imagination. I'm sorry.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[beelsebob]

The problem is, even if you have a job that you love (and I do), that doesn't mean that you want to (or that it's healthy to) spend every waking moment doing it. Variety is important for a healthy life.

Re:Socialism is not working

[beelsebob]

Uhh, you realise that the other countries highlighted, where this is going better, are more socialist than the US, right?

Look to Japan as a model for what not to do

[antifoidulus]

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.

Re:Look to Japan as a model for what not to do

[kilfarsnar]

> least amount of sex in the developed world.

Absolutely no way it's less than Seattle. I have twenty-two direct reports and eighty-something more guys under them. That's over a hundred guys, and not a one of them is married. In Japan, at least the guys would be married. Out of that group, I only had one not show-up for work last Saturday until midnight and on Sunday until 9pm when we were all working to finish a release. Only one of the guys had a commitment, and that was for a concert with several male friends. As far as I know in the five years I've been here, not a single one of my employees has had a date. I haven't heard that mentioned having one ever. Not once. Japan can't beat zero! Outside of work, no male friend is married or has been on a date in the fifteen years since I moved to the Seattle area. Again, Japan can't beat zero!

Interesting. I read an article recently about how there are no good men is Seattle. Basically, all the new tech workers who have moved there are douchebags and the women don't want to date them. It seems your guys may need to step up their game, ask women about themselves, listen to the answers and not just talk about work all the time.

Re:Look to Japan as a model for what not to do

[dj245]

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.

You've got the overall picture, but this isn't pushed down by the companies. It's the unions. There are numerous unions, including for things which are not unionized in other countries, like Engineers. Everybody could work 8 hours a day if they wanted, but there is pressure to stretch out the work. If you aren't booking a similar level of overtime as the other workers, you might get a visit from the union guy. Companies are hesitant to increase wages to eliminate the need for overtime, because there is no guarantee that employees wouldn't just soak up as much overtime as before.

One other odd thing about Japan is that in many professions, the salary curve is an upside down "U" shape. Straight out of college they pay low salaries, mid-career the employee has received salary increases and promotions and so are making a lot more. But as the employees career peaks, so too does their salary. The salary eventually decreases every year until the employee retires. Some companies even have a special "Retiree Consulting Company" where employees work when they reach a certain age (55, 60, etc). The employee takes a big pay cut, is taken off the company payroll, and is then a contractor/consultant, but doing the same job. Usually their hours are ramped down to 3 days/week, 2 days/week, 1 day/week etc until they actually retire from working.

It has benefits in that a person retiring has had a LONG time to prepare, pass on their knowledge, and train the next worker. But it definitely adds perverse incentives to milking the salary when you can because after a certain point, the employee is just making less and less every year.

Someone explain this to me

[LittleBunny]

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?

Re:work life balance is a myth

[The Grim Reefer]

If you do not enjoy work then that is the problem to be fixed. Find a job you love.

After several decades I've decided it's better to work at something you enjoy. Every time I've done something I loved for a living, someone found a way to make me hate it.

YMMV.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[nitehawk214]

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.

And the stupidest thing about it?

[NotSoHeavyD3]

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.)

Re:And the stupidest thing about it?

[DigiShaman]

So I work 40 hours of real work and an additional 20+ of so-so work. That's not a bonus, that's to prove I'm a valuable enough to keep my full-job. I'm waiting till they replace me with three young grads. Churn-n-burn baby. There's always a fresh supply of graduates that will slave their way to pay off the student loan debt.

Re:And the stupidest thing about it?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeap, everyone is an above average driver too.... In aggregate, companies saw TOTAL output in factories increase when moving from 10 hour to 8 hour workdays. There are far fewer studies for jobs where thinking is a major work product, but the few I've seen imply that 40 might be HIGH for those positions.

Re:And the stupidest thing about it?

[BonThomme]

http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_40_hour_work_week/

It's not magic, it's science.

PS Productivity is not efficiency.

Re:And the stupidest thing about it?

[Jesrad]

you literally can't get more than 40 hours of work out of people anyway.

Try 20.

For most of our existence as a species, 18-24 hours of work per week has been the world-wide average time spent satisfying our basic needs. All the rest was leisure, endeavours in curiosity and socializing. This observation still verifies with the few primitive tribes still around. It also verifies in our records of ancestral agricultural tribes. That's the intensity of work our bodies have attuned to over hundreds of thousands of years of recent evolution.

From my professional experience too it verifies, and I'm curious about what other people may want to report about that. People around me may log long or short hours over the days but once you substract the pauses, all the staring at the screen in a blank mind right after lunch or at the end of the work day, all the heated discussions about this hot topic or that, all the trying to figure out or motivate yourself about what you should be doing next, and concentrate on the actual, value-adding focus and thinking and doing, that's hardly more than 3 to 5 hours a week-day, typically 1-3 hours around 10 in the morning and 2-3 hours around 3 P.M. Even middle management types who try to commit, who show up first and leave last everyday, spend most of their time socializing rather than actually organising things up (basically they're downrate, modernized tribes' chiefs).

If you've got a flexible enough mind, it's a lot more efficient for you (and healthier and easier and saner and...) to wake up without an alarm clock, and not rush to the office, help yourself with organising your tasks with basic methodology, then get stuff done in those 4-5 hours. And outside of those hours relax, talk with your colleagues, allow yourself to enjoy your lunch, etc. There's litterally no point trying to force it beyond that.

Also, you'll benefit immensely from cutting the crap out of your life at home too. Stop inflicting incessant news updates, FB status updates, tweets and 24/7 information TV on yourself, your brain is NOT built for that kind of abuse. Stop thinking in terms of pain/gain balance: an hour of treadmilling is not compensating a handful of cupcakes, not in any way you can measure utility for yourself, ever ; and similarly inflicting huge stress and deadlines and job abuse on yourself so you can then indulge in a more wasteful home and car and lifestyle is NOT balanced either.

That one most precious but limited resource that you have in a basically fixed amount for life: your time... stop throwing it away so liberally. You just need to spend half as much as your income (give or take a quarter of your income, there's quite a margin) and then you can get retired in your 30s (or 40s if you're already late in the game), even on a $40-50 000/year job.

Re:And the stupidest thing about it?

[RyoShin]

I went to an interview for a tech company (can't remember what they did now, this was years ago) and one of the questions went something like "We're looking for people who will be dedicated to our small company; right now most everyone regularly works 10 hours a day. Would this be a problem for you?" I can't remember my exact answer, but I tried to be clear but soft that I had no interest in doing that on a constant basis. While there were more questions, the interview basically ended at that point for me and, I'm sure, for them.

Crunch time happens, but it should be rare and compensated. If it's not rare, then something is seriously wrong at the company in the way it manages people, it's business, or all of the above. Thankfully, at my current job when I hit 40 hours I'm out the door unless there is something seriously wrong or I'm way behind a massive deadline (and those are rare to begin with). No one makes a peep about this, and everyone else does the same. My income isn't high compared to averages for the area for my job, but so long as I can survive I'm okay with that if it means not being beat like a rented mule.

Re:Socialism is not working

[plopez]

We've been following the Reageanist philosophy since the 80's and things have steadily declined. Data from the last 30 years prove you wrong.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Baaahhhhh says the sheep

How much reduced sleep is tied to long commutes?

[sandytaru]

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.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[ShanghaiBill]

Variety is important for a healthy life.

Variety is also important for a good job. Take on different assignments, learn new skills, volunteer to fly to Mongolia to get the new team up to speed, etc.

Disclaimer: If you actually do volunteer to go to Mongolia, try to go in the summer or autumn. The winters in Ulan Bator are really harsh. Also, it is not a great place for vegetarians.

I've quit two jobs, due to overwork

[marcgvky]

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.

Re:I've quit two jobs, due to overwork

[PPH]

everyone gives you the stink-eye, if you head for the door before 6PM.

Look at Yahoo! and their recent policy on telecommuting. It used to be you'd get your assignment done. Whether it takes you 30, 40 or 50 hours per week, nobody will know. Now, you've got to make your appearance at the office where everyone judges you by seat time instead of productivity.

You can land the best job, but when some asshat takes over as boss, it's all over.

Re:I've quit two jobs, due to overwork

[Bryan Ischo]

In my experience, telecommuters as a whole are only a fraction as productive as in-office workers. Notice I said as a whole - there is the rare telecommuter who is more productive. But most are not. So I completely understand corporate policy that lights fires under telecommuters' butts. It's what I would do if I were the boss.

I speak as someone who was a telecommuter at one time. I have a very hard time believing that the factors that made it difficult to be productive for me are not common for everyone. There are more distractions at home. There is a natural tendency to spread the work over a larger period of time because you can, and because the aforementioned distractions make that appealing. And that leads to habitually intending to "do more work later" but not getting to it because the day runs out. It must happen to alot of people. It happened to me.

Then there's the physical disassociation from the people you work with, which reduces communication effectiveness and tends to turn what would be small roadblocks into big ones. Not to mention having an impact on morale as you miss out on the spirit of comeraderie that often plays a role in office dynamics.

I am generalizing my explanation for what causes the ineffectiveness of telecommuters, but I am sure the factors are different for everyone. Regardless, in my expereience working with people who work from home (or worse, from far away), in the vast majority of cases, they produce at a much slower rate than I would expect from someone working in the office.

If you're one of the 5% of telecommuters who can be as or more effective as you would be in the office, then I guess it does suck when that option is taken away from you because the other 95% can't hack it.

Then there are people who are just as ineffective in the office as they are at home. I guess they'd be OK working at home too, but those people, I'd rather show the door than accepting their mediocre output, even if they can do it from home.

Re:I've quit two jobs, due to overwork

[jemmyw]

This is rather anecdotal. I refuse to believe that I'm in a 5% percentage of people more effective working from home than in the office. The office is full of distractions, noise, people to waste time with, toys like pool tables and so forth. I go in every so often because some of those distractions are important.

But home is nice and quiet. Can move between desk, sofa, bed, outside with laptop. I suspect that those who find distractions working at home will find distractions working in the office.

I've noticed that the best workers in my company are the ones who have gone remote. I'm not saying that they are best because they're remote. But they're probably the ones who don't feel they need to be seen in the office to prove their worth.

Re:Socialism is not working

[Kjella]

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.

That's because whenever you try something socialist-ish it's implemented as corporate welfare. Instead of taxing the corporations and helping the people you're bailing out the corporations and handing the bill to the people. Your version of Robin Hood would involve trying to get a trickle-down effect by handing the sheriff of Nottingham more money so he could hire more tax collectors and guards. Or to use a car analogy it's like stabbing the tires and pouring sugar in the gas tank, then comparing it to a horse.

Would someone please think of the Economy?

[rabbin]

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?

Re:What choice do we have? -- Unionize, dammit

[Anonymous Coward]

"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.

Re:I do not do it because I want to

[rolfwind]

Oh that's cute. You think hours = productivity.

That's what's killing the American worker. And the sad thing is, this was known to be false 100+ years ago.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[Tuidjy]

I got excited about computers when I saw a computer with BASIC in a chain store in the early 80's. Must have been a Vic20.

I took an 'Informatics' High School curriculum, got an M.Eng. in Computer Science, and started as 'The Computer guy' in a small, privately owned manufacturing company. Now the company has four plants, 50 warehouses, 600 PCs, and my card says CTO. I still do some programming on the job, but it's probably less than 5 hours per week.

But in my spare time, I take on real programming projects. My last three were a IDE interface for company that uses hardware that is WAY too old, a computer vision search tool, and a video game AI module. I earn more outside of my day job, and have to refuse projects... but of course the day job comes with security and health insurance.

But, yeah, mileage varies. There is nothing I would rather do to earn money than write code for applications where a small memory footprint and execution speed are the first priority. This has not changed since 1988, except that since then I've decided that maybe I can afford to use C as opposed to assembly. And, yeah, I have written AI routines for two games released in 2013 in plain old C, because pointy headed bastards think that AI does not deserve ANY resources...

Innumeracy...

[msauve]

"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?

Re: work life balance is a myth

[Opportunist]

Been there, done that, earned the burnout.

It just ain't worth it.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to be suggesting that only people from a certain generation are applying for jobs. That just isn't the case. I'm 37 and along with 100 other people was laid off in February from a job I spent 9 years at. I would have gladly spent another 9 years there. I'd love to find somewhere to spend the next 9 years. I've been looking but the jobs aren't there. A few entry-level zero benefit positions here and there, like "network engineer" requiring nothing but HS/GED and the bulk of the job description is hauling servers around. Get fucked. At some point soon I'll have to take a job at Home Depot or something to keep the bills paid.

I don't blame the state of the economy, the economy by and large is doing alright. I blame the companies who continue their greedy race to the bottom. 100+ hard working loyal employees laid off, replaced less than two months later with 30+ fresh college grads and a 50+ "offsite team" in India, despite the jobs never being posted anywhere. I guarantee you bonuses were handed out all up the chain, I guarantee you the business will be hamstrung for the next 6-12 months as the new hires get acquainted to their job and the whole company figures out how the fuck to deal with India. But that's just dandy because nobody looks beyond the quarterly report. Execs and upper management figure 6-12 months from now will be somebody else's problem.

The entitled generation you mention, they seem like the only ones who are getting jobs now because many can afford to work for peanuts. I have a wife, and a mortgage. $8 an hour hauling servers around isn't going to cut it.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[radarskiy]

All things have a marginal utility. Either you are proposing a 168 hour workweek or we are just haggling about price.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[WillKemp]

But i'm addicted to workahol!

Re:work life balance is a myth

[WillKemp]

Nah,. I'm 56 and i've had that attitude all my life. I'm not rich, but i'm a lot happier than i would be if i'd spent all my life working in a crap job just for the money. And i've done a lot of really interesting jobs - in possibly as many as 30 quite different occupations, from builder to seaman, from computer programmer to miner, from taxi driver to technical adviser in Afghanistan. Life's too short to stick at crap jobs for long!

Re: work life balance is a myth

[MightyMartian]

Thank goodness you're taking a reasoned opinion and not oversimplifying and overgeneralizing.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[Opportunist]

And people ask what unions are for...

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[Opportunist]

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.

94%, really?

[JeffOwl]

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.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[MightyMartian]

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.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Charliemopps]

If you do not enjoy work then that is the problem to be fixed. Find a job you love.

Ah... the age old myth. So you realize, that bullshit was started by marketing firms on the behalf of employers right?
Your reasoning played out: "Find the job you love, then you'll work for free!!"
That's also the where the idea of a "Career" came from.
"Well, my career is in computers, so even though I could make more helping my wife with her bakery, that would end my career!"

Bullshit all around. It's all intended to keep you working cheep because you like what you're doing, and afraid to leave because it would hurt your career. My ass.

I don't care if you're paying me to nail Scarlett Johansen. You're paying me, and expect a lot. When my shift is over, she'd better spoon with a pillow or something because I'm going home.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Richard Dick Head]

Exactly. BUT, if you're exempt and working more than 45 hours a week you are a chummmmp. So many positions out there just don't require it.

And not only that, if you put up with it, you are making the problem worse for the rest of us.

Seriously.

YOU are the market. If you are putting up with BS, then YOU are making it that way.

If you are underpaid, and overworked, and yet have put up with it for the last 10 years, YOU are the problem. And you're pulling the rest of us in the wrong direction.

I mean, I found what I was looking for in my current position:
* 40 hour work week (more like 38-ish)
* friendly, non-hostile atmosphere
* vary my time slot spontaneously and not worry about being "late"
* generous vacation (>3 weeks right off the bat)
* company sponsored outings for coffee and such
* getting compensated more than any of my other positions, even accounting for inflation and cost of living

It's still work, but work doesn't get better than that. But, to get there, I had to job hop 3 times and move my crap around because of all you fat whiny farkers out there who just sit there and take BS that doesn't have to be tolerated, making the rest of us have to go out of our way to avoid any employer you've slimed with the miserable inertia of your big fat lazy ass :P

Morale of the story...keep jumping positions, cities, hell countries until you find a good work environment. Every two years. Chop chop.

It's All About Productivity

[mckellar75238]

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.

More than 40 hours? Go home!

[Opportunist]

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.

Re:in 1942

[Opportunist]

It's actually funny, I remember a study about the daily routine of our ancestors and how we increased our "workload" with the years. In the prehistoric ages, before we developed farming and were hunters and gatherers, their calculation came up with an average daily workload of about 3-4 hours. With increased "sophistication" and culture, our daily workload increased.

Of course it's not possible to return to those days (then again, who'd want to?), but it's still interesting. Of course we gained something from the additional work. We gained security because if we have animals and corn stored instead of having to go out and search for them, it's predictable that we will be successful in finding some. It's out in the granary and barn. Ready to be picked up.

Still, our "progress" that allowed us to lower our daily workload from 12 to 8 hours in the past century isn't that big a development in that light. And now that we reverse that progress again, it ain't so twice.

Re: Socialism is not working

[Guy Harris]

It may nor be socialist, but one of the biggest problems is Obamacare.

Yup, a lot of the ideas came from that big socialist left-wing think tank the Heritage Foundation.

It absolutely kills small businesses.

So maybe MOAR SOCIALISM would help here.

Re:France is a goal to aspire to?

[Guy Harris]

Really? Look at the French economy, I certainly don't see a useful model there to aspire to.

Try Germany instead; they appear to work fewer hours than the French, and I have the impression the German economy's doing fairly well.

Back when I wor lad...

[Kittenman]

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....

Re:I sleep less.

[Opportunist]

Unlikely. If my high school and college years are any indicator, the true alpha males (tm) lack the brain power to get jobs that could provide enough money.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[iONiUM]

You're a CTO of a company with 4 plants, and you make more doing after hours work than what your job pays you? I'm not sure what to make of that, except that perhaps you're underpaid, and also appear to be working insane hours.

I also love my job, and what I do, but there is a balance, and I like my life outside of work as well and am glad to make enough from it to not have to worry.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Oh, is that what it is. Being a doormat. I thought there were fewer jobs than there were people looking for work.

I know some bleeding heart is going to pop in and say economy and joblessness rates and blah blah blah,

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 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.

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.

the days I didnt work I was at multiple temp agencies

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.

and admittedly I sat on my ass for a couple weeks floating on savings after the initial fact.

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.

So don't boo hoo cause you grabbed the first trinket on the shelf and are now stuck with it

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.

Re:40 and done

[Gogo0]

working 40 is not the "bare minimum", it's what most people are hired for -usually in a contract.
doing good work during business hours and sacrificing time from your real life have nothing to do with each other in most cases

Re:40 and done

[Iamthecheese]

Anyone who doesn't work unreasonable hours is a slacker? Fuck you.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Same here. I was involved in nuclear power then radiological controls. Got sick of that, took a huge pay cut and left. Started near the bottom of IT making in the $30's and worked my up into a position in the $150K range in 13 years. I'm now in my mid 40's. The bell is ringing again and it's time to move on to something else. This time something much different. A plumbers helper, stocking shelves at a home improvement store. Something where I put in an honest 6-8 hours a day and go home and be 100% away from work. Something I haven't had since high school. I live in the same house I did when I was making $30K/year and I still have cheap used cars. Everything I have is 100% paid for because I did not increase my recurring monthly costs as my pay went up.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[Uberbah]

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!"

Overwork also makes it hard on management

[CaroKann]

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.

Re:in 1942

[Osgeld]

only if you are a moron and live beyond your means

thats a big problem, people think just cause they work hard they are entitled to a mc mansion, new car, loads of toys and the best of everything, it was never that way in the past

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[viperidaenz]

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.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[dbIII]

You could have saved a lot of time by just writing a three word post: "I've got mine."

Re:work life balance is a myth

[Maxo-Texas]

I like your posts and I cannot lie,
You other brothers can't deny
That when a guy posts in with an itty bitty unix trace
And a resume in your face
You get sprung...

But seriously-- grats on being in the 8 to 11 % who like their jobs. The other 89 to 92% envy you.

Re:Loyalty to the co.

[Darinbob]

Why be loyal? The upper management team has absolutely zero loyalty to the worker (or the customers for that matter). So there's no logical or moral reason to show loyalty to them. They will gladly throw you under the bus if they think it would make their stock price go up a penny.

Lack of sleep?

[Evtim]

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?

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[dcollins117]

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.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[techhead79]

I agree, I love what I do and used to do it as a hobby. Now even as a job, I still come home and do my own programming...but at some point down the line you begin to realize that regardless of what you love to do, it is not more important than friends and family. Doing what you love and drowning yourself in your work, regardless if you love it or not...is not a substitute for socializing or creating memories that actually matter. Someday you will be to old to change the choices you made.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[Opportunist]

Again, where do you get the contracts from if you lack the network?

Re: work life balance is a myth

[cpm99352]

mod parent up. Given unemployment numbers, why not cancel H1-B altogether?

Re:Socialism is not working

[Jesrad]

I'm a french citizen and I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this whole debate. I wish anyone genuinely curious about this topic could live my situation for a couple years, just as I have gone and lived in other countries to see and learn. There is no way to get a useful view on this from a single vantage point.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[Tuidjy]

My salary is below 150K. We're an aftermarket automotive manufacturer, and times have been better.

Last year, I declared 170K from programing projects.

I billed anywhere from $110 to $350 per hour for side projects, and I prefer negotiating for payment upon completion rather than having to give an estimate, and charging per the hour. Many customers prefer it this way, are ready to just pay 5-10K to get something done, and do not really care how long it takes me, as long as I'm done before they need the results This is especially true for companies who are forced to migrate from one application to another, and who do not want to pay a new service provider to transfer old data to the new system, but still want to be able to access it.

It takes a fraction of a weekend to write a program to pull the data from a ADP payroll database, a Kronos timekeeper system, a Business Works Accounts Payable module, a Solomon Ledger, etc... transfer it to MariaDB and throw together a few reports that can answer 99% of the client questions about their past history.

Service providers easily charge 50k+ for stuff like this. Big companies pay without a second thought, but privately owned shops balk. And people in the same industrial parks talk to each other... to the point that I simply do not have the time to take all the lucrative projects that come my way. (Or the inclination, really. Computer vision and game AI is what really gets my attention nowadays.)

Re:I do not do it because I want to

[serviscope_minor]

Oh that's cute. You think hours = productivity.

That's kinda mean. Sounds more like the GP is just trying not to be "righsized" or whatever for getting noticed by management for not working 65 hours per week or something.

Re: Socialism is not working

[shutdown -p now]

Where did you see "really high welfare payouts" in USA? And what does military spending have to do with socialism?

Re:So what about people without that choice?

[TsuruchiBrian]

Ah yes - the "take one sentence from someone's argument and ignore the rest" answer.

It would be easy for me to take one sentence fragment from your post, and then label it as a Stalin-style communism apology, and ridicule it as such, but this is a pretty childish debate tactic.

Furthermore I was not suggesting that workers actually become employers. I was suggesting that this is what workers should do *if* the labor market was really as lop-sided as the original poster implied (which I don't think it is).

Re:work life balance is a myth

[pr100]

Only in the US would 3 weeks be regarded as a generous holiday allowance. In most of Europe 4 weeks is a minimum - many people have ~6 weeks+.

I think this explains it:

[Karmashock]

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.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[thegarbz]

Generous vacation allowance? Your generous vacation allowance is less then the government mandated minimum in many other countries, yet somehow you still feel you're being treated very generously. It goes further than that here too. Most companies will give you a leave loading of around 15%. That's right you get paid 15% more to go on holiday than you do to work.

Do you get sick leave too or does that come out of your pay / holiday? Again government mandated in Australia
What about option to cash in overtime on days in lieu? I work a 37hour week, but I get to do it over 9 days a fortnight. (This is just my job, nothing mandated here).

So I would have to correct you. It most definitely DOES get better than that. I was recently considering taking up a role in the USA, but I turned it down when I found out what the work conditions were from all the people at the other end who told me that I am crazy and they couldn't wait to trade places with me.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[mark_reh]

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!

Re:40 and done

[Rockoon]

Actually thanks in part to people that think just like you, 40 is the bare minimum

It used to be that there was work that needed to be done, workers did that work until it was done, and then there was no work to be done.

Now there is work that needs to be done, but workers work until they hit their time quota rather than until the work is done. Sometimes they finish the work before the time quota is satisfied, and sometimes they dont finish the work.

All the negatives you can think of stem from time quotas having been forced upon the various industries that do not naturally have time-based workloads.

Factories for instance make money per unit of product manufactured, but are forced by-and-large to pay their workers per unit of time T (per hour, per day, etc..). The ramifications of this is that a factory owner is now faced with optimizing a completely artificial situation. They can sell X units per day, but instead of simply making sure that they have enough workers P to produce X units per day, they also must now try to have the amount of workers P that produces X in exactly time T.

This fucks up everyones incentives. The factory owner now has fucked up incentives, but also the workers too now have fucked up incentives.

Paid just enough not to quit while working just hard enough not to get fired.

There is work where the availability of the worker is part of the job, and it is really only these where it isnt completely fucked incentive-wise to pay per unit time.

Fucked up incentives lead to inefficiency, and not just for the employer. Everyone is hurt.

Re: work life balance is a myth

[BVis]

If you are refusing projects to keep your day job, you are losing money on the long run.

Take health insurance into account when you're figuring that. If I were to pay my health insurance myself it'd be another $1300 a month.

Re:And guess how many vacation days we Americans g

[MaskedSlacker]

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*

Re:40 and done

[Bruinwar]

OK will do! Stay far away that is. Yep, I work with people like you. Likely start late, long lunch, then wonder usually quite loudly, why others want to leave on time. I start quite early, get things done before the interruptions start. Leaving on time is my goal. You want me to work late, pay me. I'm sick of unpaid OT. It never got me anywhere.

capital kept benefits of automation for themselves

[Thud457]

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.

Re:I sleep less.

[EvilJoker]

Something a lot of people forget is that with a 2-income home, we get a 2-income lifestyle. You could probably still do what they did in the 50s, but you would have to give up a lot of what we value more.

You and your (soon to be) wife would have to share a car. Dining out would be extremely rare. No cable, internet, cell phone, etc. You would mend clothes, rather than buy new ones. You would have a smaller, simpler house. You would not have anywhere near as many gadgets, of any type. A lot of kitchen gadgets arose from the idea of having extra, disposable income.

This is all on top of a sense of fulfillment. Most women I know would not be satisfied with just being a housewife. Those vacations are nice, but I bet that if you were to do it more long-term (say 3 months+), you would suffer from boredom and depression.

Re:work life balance is a myth

[kilfarsnar]

Sometimes you start as a bottom!

Re:40 and done

[nitehawk214]

Your examples only apply to people being paid hourly. Work until the job is done, you get paid until the job is done. People on salary really should get the fuck up and leave when the time is up. How is it my problem if the company is too cheap to hire enough workers to get the job done in the time allotted?

Many salary have things like on call and emergency times that they do not get paid for. In return their salary is compensated, bonuses paid, or other amenities to keep the employee happy. If the company does not compensate properly... the employees walk... usually to their competitors.

In your scenario, the company is rewarded for squeezing their employees and having them stick around "until the job is done", since the get free labor.