Slashdot Mirror


The American Workday, By Profession

An anonymous reader writes NPR has created an interesting visualization of workday data from the American Time Survey. It shows what the typical working times are for each profession. You can see some interesting trends, like which professions distribute their work throughout the day (firefighters and police), which professions take their lunch breaks the most seriously (construction), and which professions reverse the typical trends (food service). "Still, Americans work more night and weekend hours than people in other advanced economies, according to Dan Hamermesh and Elena Stancanelli's forthcoming paper (PDF). They found that about 27 percent of Americans have worked between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. at least once a week, compared with 19 percent in the U.K. and 13 percent in Germany."

26 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. "More advanced economies?" by idontgno · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Still, Americans work more night and weekend hours than people in other advanced economies,

    I believe the correct definition of an advanced economy is one which enables, empowers, and encourages a worker to be fully engaged and continuously productive at all hours of every day of the week, maximizing shareholder value and business agility while minimizing costs.

    Question for the reader: Am I joking, trolling, or serious?

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    1. Re:"More advanced economies?" by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 5, Funny

      Are you an employee, unemployed or in management?

    2. Re:"More advanced economies?" by idontgno · · Score: 2

      +1 Got It In One. Complete with correct parallel construction.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  2. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Informative

    Step 1: be a salaried employee.
    Step 2: produce good results

    Your hours will still matter, of course, but not as much.

  3. Seems good to me. by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 4, Informative

    The summary makes it sound like a bad thing. To me, it indicates an economy that doesn't roll up the sidewalks at 5pm. It takes a lot of service jobs to keep businesses open 24 hours. It's great that I can go out and buy a Big Mac and a lawnmower at 3am.

    1. Re:Seems good to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Greed drives extra hours, plain and simple. If it was a shopkeep deciding to keep his store open to let folks buy stuff on his own time that's one thing but that's now how it is, it's some employer deciding to keep doors open all the time to get that extra X percent of revenue. The people who decide the hours don't work them.

      It gets worse when you consider that a lot of jobs aren't even full time, so people have to work weird shifts to keep those doors open at all costs.

      Labour Day is just around the corner and I feel bad for the people stuck working, especially if they're shift workers. I make it a point not to patronize businesses open when they shouldn't be, but then I can tell you that on a long weekend like this the Wal-Marts and MacDonalds of the world will still be open and full of people buying stuff.

    2. Re:Seems good to me. by parallel_prankster · · Score: 2

      This COULD be a bad thing. A good economy is one that maximizes productivity while helping workers find a work-life balance. If this trend continues, soon we are going to see an increase in the number of people with illnesses related to stress/fatigue etc. Besides, it could also be due to the fact that american workers have lesser bargaining power than workers in other nations. Again, I am not saying all of this is all good or bad. There are obvious benefits with our capitalist economy as well. Just that we need a good balance between approaches and currently, we are little outside of average, that's all. Whether that average is the right balance point, no one knows.

    3. Re:Seems good to me. by tompaulco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you're only open the hours I'm at work, I'm not going to shop at your store.

      This is my problem, too. The problem is that companies not only expect you to to work late into the evening "when necessary", meaning on days that end in "y", but they also expect that the fact that you worked a 20 hour shift on Monday does not mean you can come in late on Tuesday, and you certainly cannot expect to be allowed to take a half hour to go run some errands during the day, unless you are willing to give up your lunch hour to run those errands instead of maintaining your health so that you can be a more productive employee.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    4. Re:Seems good to me. by s0nicfreak · · Score: 2

      I just typed up this long thing about how when my husband and I both had "day jobs," it was a godsend for us to have a day off and things still be open, or for things to stay open say an hour longer than normal so that we had time to go there after work. But then I realized; that was back before we had debit cards, Amazon Prime, Peapod, online inventory checking, etc. Back when we actually had to drive to the bank and then the store, had to drive around to places looking at prices and models available.

      So nowadays, really the only reason for such businesses to be open 24 hours is for the night owls. Night owls can work those night time jobs (obviously that benefit is thrown out the window if the business has rotating shifts), and patronize at night. But, if we are doing it for them, then it's contradictory to ONLY have things like Walmart and McDonalds open.

      (For the record, before I had a family, I LOVED working holidays. The important and fun stuff is all closed, might as well be at work. Granted, I worked at places were business was slower on holidays, not busier.)

    5. Re:Seems good to me. by SydShamino · · Score: 2

      I'd do it as mandatory triple pay for anyone working on a secular U.S. holiday: Memorial, Labor, Thanksgiving. The only people who need to be working are police and emergency services, and we can pay enough in taxes to cover this.

      I know, some people want to work on holidays, and some businesses want to be open. But it's too easy to coerce an employee who doesn't work into working, so laws that mandate "employees can't be punished for refusing to work" are harder to enforce than those that mandate "triple pay if they work, whether they wanted too or not".

      I suspect Walgreens and CVS and a few gas stations would stay open on those days, but most everywhere else would close. That's okay.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    6. Re:Seems good to me. by Draknor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And unions are bad again... why?

      (making a generalization - I don't know if tompaulco has ever said anything about unions or not.) Many posters comment on this extreme power dynamic differential that they are at the short end of, but then no one seems to be in favor of unions. Not saying unions aren't without their problems, but the simple fact is the only thing that can effectively fight organized bureaucracy & greed (like management) is ... more organized bureaucracy & greed (in the form of unions).

      My $0.02, anyway...

    7. Re:Seems good to me. by tompaulco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think unions were great at busting up some frankly inhumane hiring practices. These days, it seems like you need a union against the union as the percentage they take from you is probably about equal to the percentage cut you would have to take if you didn't have the union backing you.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    8. Re:Seems good to me. by Prien715 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I see unions like judges -- as a foundation of a democratic society.

      They can both be corrupted by money, be involved in organized crime, but can also make a tremendous difference in the lives of thousands by Doing Their Job (TM). Removing judges causes anarchy (the problem they were designed to fix) and removing unions concentrates wealth in the hands of a few non-working people (the problem they were designed to fix). If we look around, union membership is at an all-time low and we have wage stagnation. Coincidence? In countries with higher union participation, you also see benefits like mandatory paid vacation, wage growth, and single payer healthcare.

      People can argue whether or not union Foo is good or bad (just as we can with a given judge), but unions themselves are a necessary tool in combating the abuse of people by those in corporate governance through elections.

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
  4. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by Anon-Admin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Your Step 1 is off, you would have to be salaried exempt, in a salaried non-exempt position they can still dock you for lunch.

    Step 2 is irrelevant, I have found that it does not matter how hard you work, how much you get done, or how good your results are. The company will always say that there is an unpaid lunch, even when you are salaried exempt. It is just that most people are unaware that in such a position you can ignore them as they can not divide out the half hour or hour for lunch.

  5. Re:"Computers and Mathematics"??? by charronia · · Score: 2

    From an outside perspective, the things that IT people do might as well be summarized as "Computers".

  6. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by FreakyGeeky · · Score: 2

    Yeah, everyone knows the big money is doing hourly work! That's why executives are paid by the hour!

  7. Bah ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The hookers come out at night to screw their clients, the stock market guys get up early to screw all of us.

    Everything in the middle depends on who your clients are, and type of industry you're in.

    Educated people see daylight (or get paid a premium), less educated get shift work.

    I don't even need to read TFA to know these things. ;-)

    And, yes, I'm mostly kidding.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  8. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by mark-t · · Score: 2

    The employer cannot deduct a lunch break if the employee did not take one. If the employer mandates that lunch breaks be taken, or will not necessarily approve of all hours worked if no lunch break is taken, then this sort of thing must explicitly be described in the employment contract that the employee signs when they first start working for that employer. In some jurisdictions, it is required by law that employers offer breaks to employees who work more than a certain number of otherwise consecutive hours, but I know of no legislation anywhere that an employee might be required by law take them if they do not want to.

  9. TFA bad at math? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look at the graph in TFA. Only 35% are still working by 5pm. By contrast, 45% are working by 7:30am. So...why isn't the "standard workday" the 45%-to-45% mark of 7:30-4:30?

  10. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by mod+prime · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You want in on 28 days of paid holiday, paid sick leave, paid maternity and paternity leave and 35-hour weeks? As a culture you might try to get over your fear of the word 'socialism' :)

  11. Re:Arby's by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

    See a doctor, soon. Cravings for non-food are a very bad sign.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  12. coordinated work by mr_mischief · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lots of construction work is only safe to do when the crew is working together. You can't have people single-lifting things that require team lifting. You can't have a truck, pallet jack, front loader, paver, or crane operator running heavy equipment in confined areas without spotters and such. A roofer needs nails and shingles brought up to be efficient. Getting to lunch at the same time is good safety and good business. It's not just a union thing.

  13. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by mod+prime · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ah yes, it's all {the other group}, not {my group}. I'm afraid this isn't quite true. American culture as a whole is suspicious of socialism. The Republicans are actively trying maintain this position as they can use it to gain votes. Don't delude yourselves that Democrats are anything other than right wing capitalists just because they are left of the Republicans socially. The issue isn't just a broken political system and corruption but also your Overton window.

  14. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by mark-t · · Score: 2

    "The employer is required to provide" is not actually the same thing as "the employee is required to take". An employer cannot deduct time for a lunch break that was not taken. The employer can, however, discipline an employee for failing to take a lunch break when they were supposed to, and can refuse to honor the time worked during the expected lunch break if this is stipulated in the employment contract. In absence of any such contract, the employee is still required to be paid for all time worked.

  15. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    You're an ignorant pig. France's 10yr treasury bonds yield less than USA's, hence markets consider it MORE solvent. Sweden doesn't export oil (that's Norway, idiot) and its government expenditure is still higher than 50% of the GDP. Go back watching cartoons at the local Tea Parties' office.

  16. Re:9 to 5 is a myth by Silvrmane · · Score: 2

    Canadian here. I work 8:30 to 5:00 with an hour lunch. I'm on salary, and I while I am technically on call 24/7, I am quite sure to rarely ever work more than the 37.5 hours a week I'm paid for. I get 4 weeks paid holiday a year, and free health insurance. I have prescription, optical, and dental coverage through our group plan at work. Life here is pretty good. What I see on the news from the U.S. makes me shake my head some times. You guys just don't seem to get it.