Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

How many hours did you work this week?

Posted by JonKatz on Wed Feb 16, 2000 09:21 AM
from the the-booming-economy's-dirty-little-secret dept.
If you're reading this, you're probably what economists call a "Knowledge Worker," a major element of the new, techno-driven workplace. The government says your average work week is 32.9 hours, and employers enthusiastically agree. Nuts. Thanks to laptops, cellphones, palm pilots and wireless modems, you're probably working nearly all the time, part of every day and night. How many hours do you really work? Post below and read more.

If you're reading this, the odds are shockingly good that you're overworked and underpaid, or, at the very least, not compensated for anywhere near the hours you work.

Government statisticians, media reports and popular mythology make much of the fact that American workers are more productive than ever - the last consecutive quarters of l999 recorded a 5% growth in worker productivity. This rise frequently gets cited as a major reason for the country's long, high-tech inspired economic boom.

In the late l990's, according to economist Stephen S. Roach, productivity sped up fastest in the so-called service sector - transportation, public utilities, trade, finance, insurance, real estate, and a broad array of professional and business services. Collectively, this segment of the economy employs 77% of the workforce that isn't in government or on farms. Contrary to myth, Roach says, these people aren't low-paid, unskilled hamburger flippers and chain-store underclass. Nearly half of them are knowledge workers - like many of the people reading this - now the largest occupational category in America. In fact, almost all tech workers, from programmers to administrators to developers, are knowledge workers.

The government maintains that the average work week in the service sector is 32.9 hours; no different than a decade ago, and five hours shorter than in l964.

Roach and other economists have long argued that these figures are absurd. Surveys by the Labor Department and private pollsters suggest that people in knowledge jobs work a good deal longer. That means lots of knowledge workers aren't getting paid for the work they do.

"The dirty little secret of the Information Age," wrote Roach in Monday's New York Times [you have to join, but it's www.nytimes.com] , "is that an increasingly large slice of work goes on outside the official work hours the government recognizes and employers admit to."

Roach has a very powerful point. Laptops, cell phones and beepers, hand-held computing devices, fax machines and wireless technology mean that tech and knowledge workers can now work all the time - in their cars on the way to and from work, in planes on business trips, in their own homes. Tech and service workers are tied to their workplaces, and can hardly ever escape.

Although few companies openly insist on this, workers who want to remain valuable are understandably driven to work through nights and weekends. If they don't, they know their colleagues and co-workers might be. People hard- wired into their work are commonplace in the tech workplace, a particularly challenging environment for obsessive personalities. In fact, new technology has nearly obliterated all of the traditional lines between office and home, work and leisure time. This is a phenomenal boon to employers and companies, who get more work than ever for less cost. In that context, almost all non-entrepeneurial workers in the so-called knowledge workplace are almost surely underpaid.

College students report something of the same phenomenon - technology keeps them studying, socializing, messaging and researching much of the time, much more than is acknowledged by school administrations.

In fact, this round-the-clock work ethic is an integral part of the high-tech economy. Does anyone reading this actually work 33 hours a week? Or even 40?

Postal employees, cops and assembly-line and factory workers can boost their incomes by working overtime. But how can knowledge workers, who are already working most of the time? Workers who think for a living have a hard time boosting their efficiency.

Beyond that, there are numerous social and health implications: fatigue, stress, single-mindedness, and lack of balance and recreation in life.

Perhaps the toughest thing about being a round-the-clock knowledge worker is that you can't even acknowledge it. The rest of the world, including media and government, thinks you've got it made.

Question: How many hours do you work each week? Is it remotely close to what the government says?

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
  • What employers think is not work (by not paying u) by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:33AM
  • It depends on where you and the company are. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:37AM
  • The REAL plight is on working students - read on. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:01AM
  • Re:What employers think is not work (by not pay u) by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:20AM
  • Re:Too many... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:34AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by davidu (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:54AM
  • Re:32.5 hours would suck... by palpatine (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:46AM
  • Graduate School by ToddScheetz (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:41AM
  • Working by henrik (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:58PM
  • Two of those jobs, please by mosch (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:12AM
  • Two of those jobs, please by mosch (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:12AM
  • Re:Should I count the time I spend on slashdot? by Roblimo (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:26AM
  • Good observation, Jon by Chris Johnson (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:38PM
  • Re:I work... by Wansu (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:58AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by Wansu (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:38PM
  • I work... by valis (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:25AM
  • Contracting is the answer by Kostya (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:36AM
  • by Masem (1171) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM (#1268620)
    I believe it's due to two factors: First, the IT field is made up by a lot of young ( Second, most of these workers are probably single. Life outside of work, they're not expected to have by management.

    I also think that there is no union as far as I know within tech workers.

    I wouldn't go as far as suggesting a union, but something needs to be done; the workers need to stand up and REFUSE to work unpaid overtime, or have a time where the beeper will not go off, or anything else like that. The fact that 'spineless' IT workers has been the norm means that we need to fight against that. If you are going to be working 60 hrs/wk (and you might enjoy that), make sure you get paid for 60hrs and not 30. Demand vacation time, make sure they know you have interests outside of work, and that you don't necessarily live and breath their work ethic.

    But as with everyone else employed, I'd know I'd be afraid to approach my bosses with such requests. That's why there needs to be some collective effort, maybe lead by those IT workers already engrained in the system so that *they* can fight for better pay and offtime for workers.

  • hours? by snort (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:05AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours - level of demand by Jon Peterson (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:03AM
  • by Jon Peterson (1443) <`gro.tfirdwons' `ta' `noj'> on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:44AM (#1268623) Homepage
    That is the heart of it, really. The people who work daft hours do it because they want to, or because they start out that way and then feel guilty about cutting back.

    We (skilled computer types) are a very rare resource compared with demand and can easily set reasonable hours as part of our package, especially at big companies. I leave the office at 5.30 every day, unless I'm doing something fun and I'd rather stay late to finish it in one go.

    Yes, at small companies people tend to work later to meet the deadlines. But that's because the industry is incapable of good project management, and because in many small (and large) companies employees feel very loyal, and really want to ship stuff on time.

    There are very few places (in my experience of the UK market) that will have a problem with someone who says 'Sorry, I have a family and I only work my contracted hours'. Of course, if they then also spend 2 hours a day reading slashdot, then sure the boss won't be happy.

    And that's another thing. Alot of people work very inefficiently, so the hours stretch out. Think of all the times you started out looking for documentation on a troublesome driver and ended up spending an hour reading about the latest developments in something else.

    So, yes, there are lots of people who stay in the office alot, but it's not a case of exploitation (of course in some cases it may be, but not as an industry).
  • Wow, a Katz article with no "I" or "me" in it! by Robin Hood (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @03:36PM
  • Re:Work hours by Robin Hood (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:41PM
  • LOL! Great job, both of you! (NT) by Robin Hood (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:45PM
  • Hmm... in a dream world by tolldog (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:28AM
  • 37 Hours A Week, here. by slim (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:34AM
  • Dark when I get in, dark when I leave. by Simon Carr (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:36AM
  • Actual statistics on labour and productivity by vlax (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:30AM
  • I've worked EVERY ONE OF THEM by mgrennan (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:24PM
  • College and Computers by Hrunting (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:56AM
  • Current Situation by backtick (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • The Abolition of Work by Frank Sullivan (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:03AM
  • Long Work Days by GrenDel Fuego (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:52AM
  • Exactly 40 hours, every week by Tet (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:34AM
  • 24/7 by Squeeze Truck (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:14AM
  • Ironic subject.. by Plutor (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:33AM
  • Re:Well... by PG13 (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:53AM
  • Round the clock out of necessity by Chardros (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:18AM
  • The radical union and the general strike. by dominion (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:37AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by dominion (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:05AM
  • no less than 43 by Mickey Jameson (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:54AM
  • Friday night Scenario by Mozai (Score:1) Thursday February 17 2000, @09:16AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by smkndrkn (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:21AM
  • 35 hours/week by Frédéric (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:49AM
  • Re:Payed for working or being at work? by Genom (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:15AM
  • Union by Bwah (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:28PM
  • 50+ hours by sinnergy (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:43AM
  • Yeah it's absurd by stevew (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:52AM
  • Re:Work hours by mortonda (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:00AM
  • "Face time" by Old Man Kensey (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:55AM
  • My mantra by greg_barton (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:36AM
  • A better solution by Julian Morrison (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:23AM
  • Re:/. polled this some time ago by rew (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:37PM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by bonehead (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:22AM
  • Re:My week. by bonehead (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:52AM
  • I am throwing my shoes into the loom by gelfling (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:11AM
  • Re:This means you: by Byteme (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:19AM
  • by ilkahn (6642) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:33AM (#1268661) Homepage
    when i was young, and my father had already made it in the professional world as an executive, it always amazed me the amount of moneyt hat they paid him, because even though he was in the office 60 hours a week, he was still making like 90 dollars an hour... i would ask him, "dad, i have been to your office, all that you do is sit around, talk on the phone, and think about stuff... you don't lift heavy things, you don't build anything, nothing! how can you possibly be worth the insane ammount they are paying you?" and he would say: "simple, when a janitor goes home, the work stays at work. when a builder goes home, the work stays at work. for me, there is no difference between home and work." and i never really understood that...

    flash forward about 10 years or so, i am now the CTO of an internet startup, getting paid way more than i "deserve" by my old scale, and yet all i do is, sit on the phone, talk to the people that work for me, talk to the people i work for, and think... and for me, there is no difference between home and work. i understand now what my father told me so many years ago...

    when you are paid to think, there isn't an amount of hours that you "work" if you are good at your job, and if you are successful at it, at least in part, you are always at work, you are always thinking about how you can make something a little bit faster, how you can set up a strategic partnership, or whether payroll checks will bounce or not.

    so to answer the question, how many hours a week do I work, i argue, i work all of the hours i am awake, and even some of those when i am asleep, for my job, even visits me in my dreams...

  • Lucked out! by Darkstorm (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:33AM
  • Re:What counts? by pen (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:00AM
  • Question of payment by JonKatz (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:27AM
  • Working longer hours than reported is a crime by fishbowl (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @02:26PM
  • If more tech workers were paid by the hour by mrloco (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:15AM
  • Statistics by Lazy Jones (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:06PM
  • The statistic is composed mostly of compost by deusx (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • Rob and Hemos "work" 100hrs a week... by kuro5hin (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:31AM
  • no where near! by cabbey (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:06PM
  • "Want to" vs "Have to" work more.. by Kurt Granroth (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:15AM
  • by ch-chuck (9622) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:15AM (#1268672) Homepage
    here [washingtonpost.com] .

    Is it mere coincidence that the fortune at the bottom of the page read, "the only person who got his work done by Friday was Crusoe"?

    There are several aspects the make IT an around the clock experience: 1) training. When I went into electronics 25 yrs ago they said, "this is such a fast changing field that you're going to be in school the rest of your working days". 2) Access to mission critical servers and workstations: in many cases the only chance you get to do maintenance on servers etc. is at 4AM in the morning or early Sundays. Most of us just can't 'leave work behind' when you exit the building - we're often working on long projects and I get lots of insirations in the middle of the night or early morning, and keep a pad by the bed to jot down ideas. Yet, with all that, I resent the fact that we're often treated like factory laborers! I can't stand supervisors who want you to punch in a 7:30, be focused and creative for precisely 2 hours, take a 10 minute break, then back to the "THINK!" tank. Maybe if these managers could actually organize with effecient specilization and division of labor one could crank out code like a machine shop all tooled up for a production run, but anything that's already that mechanized is already obsolete and not worth persuing, it ain't bleeding edge!

    Bozorro the swashbuckling clown
  • The 32 hour work week myth by Fakir (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:20AM
  • by Rollo (9875) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:28AM (#1268674)
    ...and here's [slashdot.org] the link.
  • Re:Take charge of your hours by ACK!! (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:36AM
  • How many hours? 72 last week. 0 this week. by crovira (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:46AM
  • I DONT WORK AT ALL!!!! (but it pays well) by PureFiction (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:44PM
  • 24/7 by CodeMonky (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:20AM
  • At least 40, but add in coding in the shower ... by HyPeR_aCtIvE (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:32AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by binarybits (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:54AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by binarybits (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:00PM
  • Programming Staffing vs. Marketing Staffing by rnturn (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:03AM
  • Re:I work 40.. by rnturn (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:20AM
  • Re:Learning to Say "NO" by rnturn (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:03AM
  • Choice of where you live? by rnturn (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:31AM
  • Re:What counts? by Balance (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:58AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by Balance (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:11PM
  • That is _exactly_ the problem. by Serf (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:12AM
  • Work hours = How secure you are by Lumpy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:20AM
  • Re:work > 100 hours/week by willhelm (Score:1) Friday February 18 2000, @08:48AM
  • work > 100 hours/week by willhelm (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:33AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by sholden (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:56PM
  • ten years to save a million by peter303 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:07AM
  • 70+ hours by andrews (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:35AM
  • Not yet living in the Real World by pulp (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:50AM
  • 32 hours? I wish by cak (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:30AM
  • Blurry vision (Score:4)

    by jabber (13196) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:38AM (#1268697) Homepage
    While I agree with Katz (Whoa!!) that technology makes it possible to work outside work, and that this is sometimes abusive, I have a different perspective.

    How much time do I spend 'working' at work? Less than 40 hours. I pursue personal interests as well and professional duties. I read /., I check out a bunch of developer sites, I flip through books, heck - sometimes I even do my grad-school homework.

    I spend most of my 'free' time doing the same sort of stuff. I write some code, read a few articles, argue with friends (who are in the same field).

    Often-times I'll wake up in the middle of the night, with my head cranking away at some problem, either work related or personal-interest related.

    It's all the same. The lines have blurred to the point where work is hobby and hobby is academics, and academics is work. The symbiosis of interests, the new paradigm or leveraged synergies (well, slap me with a halibut - I could be an MBA) is the matter of fact lifestyle of the technology worker.

    In the course of a week, I probably put in 80 to 120 hours of mind-time into things that are somehow relevant to what I do for a living. If I were to broaden the definition more, I'd also count eating and sleeping, since it enables me to work and learn. The lines really are THAT fuzzy.

    We LIKE what we do. We're not piece-workers whose productivity is measured by the number of boxes we stuff on an assembly line. The 3am revelation on a work-related data structure isn't time I charge for, and I don't clock out to write this post.

    We work hard, long-hours, beacuse we ENJOY what we do. I think I speak of more than just myself, but, if I were independently wealthy, I'd still do what I do - the way that I do it. I might be a little more cocky with the boss, but that's a matter of choice in today's job market.

    Those of us who feel they work 'too hard' have the option of throttling back, slowing down or going elsewhere, thanks to the market being as it is.

    We've come full-circle to the times before the industrial revolution, I think. We're sort of farming/home-steading IT. It's what we do. It's what we love. We work to live AND live to work, both at the same time.

    This is not to say that we do not have non-tech interests or lives, but WHAT we do is part of WHO we are. IT's not just a job, it's a choice of life-style.
  • Re:a brief history of work... by meme (Score:1) Friday February 18 2000, @06:48PM
  • Re:Work hours by Gramie (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @03:28PM
  • Quality of Life by Ur_Vile (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:50AM
  • Re:Current Situation by pheonix (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:28AM
  • Does my night job count too? by Ars-Gonzo (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:58AM
  • by griffjon (14945) <GriffJon.Hotmail@com> on Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:15AM (#1268703) Homepage Journal
    If $$$ and InternetStartupdom is your #1 priority, then the 60hrs.week is part of that. If not, resist it. I started at a startup last May, and soon was getting pulled into the 'need to finish things up over the weekend' / could you do this VPN'ed in at home tonight?' etc.

    My quality of work took a nose dive. The CEO recognized this immediately, and we talked about it. I work 40-42 hours a week.

    My strength comes from my doing other things with the other hours of my life, whether it be getting Linux talking to the VooDoo card, going out swing or salsa dancing, jamming on the jews harp, etc. etc. etc.. If I don't have time for these activities, Bad Things happen.

    I know my priorities in life. My CEO knows my priorities in life. And I still get raises. Don't be afraid to stand up for your free time and time that is disconnected from the office. If you are afraid, well, it's a good job market out there...

  • Re:Time spent reading Slashdot by NMerriam (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:37AM
  • Huh? (Score:5)

    by NMerriam (15122) <NMerriam@artboy.org> on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:31AM (#1268705) Homepage
    33 Hours a week? That's definitely a joke if you work with computers (or any kind of technology). Not even counting the beeper time that a lot of folks don't deal with, that's an unrealistically low figure.

    I officially work 37.5 hours a week -- that's what I get paid for. In reality it's more like 50 or 60, what with never eating lunch and leavin an hour or two late every day ("just one more thing!").

    I find it bizarre that the government would base statistics on what employers report their professional employees working -- this is a class that doesn't get overtime and thus is generally easy to add "just a little more" work to.

    Not that I'm complaining, I enjoy my job and it pays better than most of my friends in college have (except those who are just now graduating law school! (g)). But we shouldn't officially pretend that everyone in America is getting home at 4 in the afternoon...
  • Should i count the time i spend on slashdot? by freq (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:37AM
  • Hmm, I would like to work 32.6 hours a week... by Spruitje (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:56AM
  • What do you mean "work"? by blargney (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:27AM
  • Re:Six figures isn't worth your life by Mindwarp (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:42AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by lazlo (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:23AM
  • Re:Er by Industrial Disease (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:55AM
  • 60 Hrs during a five day week by Hollinger (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:52AM
  • live at work by c64k (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:20AM
  • Remotely by EricWright (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:26AM
  • Research by Felinoid (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:13AM
  • My own $0.02 by Kaufmann (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:13AM
  • Re:Sleep? by Jeld (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:19AM
  • Paid for 20, work 60: Life as a grad student by grunkhead (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:48AM
  • Re:Balance by dlb (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:18AM
  • In the Visual Effects Industry.... by rory (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:27AM
  • About working Hours by XtBart (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:58AM
  • Make 40 hours your personal limit. by willow (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:43AM
  • how many hours? by aphrael (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:29PM
  • Work where you want by ugglan (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:54AM
  • My week. by angelo (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • Re:My week. by angelo (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:21AM
  • long hours by Arcon (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:20AM
  • How Many Hours? by dvicci (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:53AM
  • Why do it? by soop (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:58AM
  • Re:>40 hours?? I wish! by sudama (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:03AM
  • Re:What counts? by webster (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:21AM
  • Crap! Got you all beat 100-120 hrs/week by spineboy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:36AM
  • Re:Work hours by noom (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:58AM
  • Re:Not really suprising is it? by noom (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:07AM
  • How about a source? by ceez (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:05AM
  • University student hours: ~85 hours/week by tjoynt (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:27AM
  • Re:I live/work in Europe - 37.5 hours by Gedge (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:09AM
  • Close but not real by ansa (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:56AM
  • Sometimes higher, sometimes not... by JimMcCusker (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:38AM
  • The embittered. by RISCy Business (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @02:53PM
  • > 90 hrs/wk by Ken Williams (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:06AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by alkali (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:11PM
  • Re:Unskilled labor vs. Knowledge Workers by arhawth (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:27AM
  • This *used* to be me... by wageslave (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:37AM
  • >40 hours?? I wish! by RabidMonkey (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:50AM
  • Re:>40 hours?? I wish! by RabidMonkey (Score:1) Thursday February 17 2000, @04:02AM
  • education and work by Raleel (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:01AM
  • I'm to blame by dougayen (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:49PM
  • Time by a9db0 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:57AM
  • Hourly vs Salaried by frohike (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:51AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by Raven17 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:29AM
  • Re:Six figures isn't worth your life by JoeWalsh (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:32AM
  • 32 is a reachable goal by joshamania (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:58AM
  • 32.9 hours? What a load of flaming bullsh*t! by morrigan (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:14AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by Claudius (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:26AM
  • Before or after... by hey! (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:50AM
  • Re:What counts? by Pathetic Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:22AM
  • Linda Richman (Score:5)

    by / (33804) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:30AM (#1268758)
    I've found my ability to tolerate Jon Katz has remarkably improved since I started imagining his stories (or at least the summary) read in the voice of Mike Myers playing Linda Richman on SNL:
    So how many hours do you really work, anyway? Discuss.
  • Re:Huh? (Score:3)

    by jedinite (33877) <slashdot DOT com AT jedinite DOT com> on Wednesday February 16 2000, @03:18PM (#1268759) Homepage
    >That's definitely a joke if you work with
    > computers (or any kind of technology).

    Amen, brother. My official policy through my employer is that we work a total of 80-hours over a two-week pay period. Upon the discression of the employee, you are allowed to complete those 80-hours in practically any manner you see fit (flex-time, work 9 hours a day then take the second Friday off, etc).

    But that's just official policy. In practice, take the current work week for example:

    Monday: 7:00am - 8:30pm, 30-minute lunch: 13 Hours.
    Tuesday: 7:30am - 5:30pm, 30-minute lunch: 9 1/2 Hours.
    Wednesday: 7:00am - 7:15pm (heading home right after I post this comment), 1-hour lunch: 11 1/4 Hours.

    That's almost 35 hours in a three day period... I beat the gov't expectation by Wednesday. ;) And unfortuantely these type weeks are more the norm than the exception.

    And don't get me started about the 24-7 on-call period, the weekend wakeup calls at 3am to tell me something is broken, etc etc...



    ---------
    Question: How do I leverage the power of the internet?
  • Re:Huh? (Score:3)

    by jedinite (33877) <slashdot DOT com AT jedinite DOT com> on Friday February 18 2000, @08:23AM (#1268760) Homepage
    Given that it's Friday, here's an update on my previous times for this week:

    Monday: 7:00am - 8:30pm, 30-minute lunch: 13 Hours.
    Tuesday: 7:30am - 5:30pm, 30-minute lunch: 9 1/2 Hours.
    Wednesday: 7:00am - 7:15pm, 1-hour lunch: 11 1/4 Hours.
    Wednesday Night: 11:00 - 3:00 from home: 4 Hours.
    Thursday: 7:30am - 6:30pm, no lunch: 11 hours. Friday: 7:00am - 5:30pm (est), 1 hour lunch: 8 1/2 hours.

    Grand total? FIFTY-SEVEN hours and fifteen minutes of work, in a single week. And that's not counting the at-home work I'll be putting in on some presentations this weekend.

    Final point, even though this has been much discussed and pretty much agreed upon:
    37 HOURS IS IN NO WAY AVERAGE, FOR THE IT INDUSTRY!!! Why? Because for those of you who say "yes I work 37 hours a week", there are lots like me who say "50-60 hours per week". And there aren't enough (if any) saying 15-25 to make the average come out to the mid/upper 30's.

    ---------
    Question: How do I leverage the power of the internet?
  • Re:Time spent reading Slashdot by miahrogers (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:23PM
  • Correlations between Age+InternetGeneration+DotCom by CDanek (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:10AM
  • Burnt Out and Tired by creature_shock (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:45AM
  • Re:Er by Foogle (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:09AM
  • Er by Foogle (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:37AM
  • But the SI swimsuit issue does? by coyote-san (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:32AM
  • Re:NEWS FLASH! Service sector is not just computer by Frankus (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:17AM
  • Re:Same here by jregel (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:14AM
  • handouts and jobs by RoLlEr_CoAsTeR (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @02:48PM
  • Re:work > 100 hours/week by catfood (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:49PM
  • I work ~40 hours a week... but... by Sun Tzu (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:28AM
  • Productivity vs workweek by Yet Another Smith (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:39AM
  • I have to agree with 33 by mykey2k (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • Re:Amazingly... by Kool Moe (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:17AM
  • 37-40 hours at my job by georgeha (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:44AM
  • Re:Family Life? by georgeha (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:29AM
  • 40 hours and strict, but... by Zulfiya (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:10AM
  • Re:NEWS FLASH! Service sector is not just computer by w3woody (Score:2) Thursday February 17 2000, @07:41AM
  • by w3woody (44457) on Thursday February 17 2000, @08:08AM (#1268779) Homepage
    I didn't bother quoting that because I know it's bullshit.

    http://stats.bls.gov/news.release/ empsit.t11.htm [bls.gov]

    The above link points to the recent employment statistics in the United States for the entire economy. Unless he defines "knowledge workers" as including people like legal secretaries, the entire motion picture industry, and people who work behind the front desk at various hotels across the country, and if he narrows the "service sector" down to "services/miscellaneous" (or 'services2' in the table), we don't even come close to that 50% mark.

    The fact of the matter is that people who do software development or work for IT departments, or other "knowledge workers" who work in the computer industry comprises of slightly more than 10% of the entire service-producing economy. (That's the total of all engineering-related services and all business related services, verses the entire service-producing economy, which employs around 104 million people. And that significantly overestimates "knowledge workers", as the statistics I added up in the above categories also include secretarial support and the like--as the statistics are compiled by looking at employment at various companies verses it's NAICS category.)

    The long and the short of it is that Katz's second-hand hearing about 50% of the people in the service sector are "knowledge workers" is a crock, and not supported by the statistics from the US Department of Labor Statistics.
  • by w3woody (44457) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:49AM (#1268780) Homepage
    The government maintains that the average work week in the service sector is 32.9 hours; no different than a decade ago, and five hours shorter than in l964.

    I've got a newsflash for Mr. Katz. The "service sector" is not just computer-related jobs. In fact, computer-related jobs, such as IT jobs, are an insignificant percentage of those jobs.

    Other jobs which bring the average down include part-time hamburger-flippers at McDonalds (which are considered service sector jobs), the plumber who comes over and fixes your drain (another service sector job), and the woman you hire to sit your pets when you go on vacation.

    Basically, the "service sector" is jobs which involve providing a non-tangable "service", as opposed to manufacturing (where you make concrete things like cars), or retail (where you sell things like clothing to people).

    Because the "service sector" includes part-time fast-food hamburger flippers and self-employed pet sitters and the like, I would be highly supprised if the average for the entire service sector of our economy was much above 40 hours a week. The number 32.9 sounds just about right.

    The 60+ hours I worked last week, not including the time I spent last week working on free software stuff (another 10 or so), multipled by everyone on /. who work similar hours, won't make a dent in that aggrigate number, just as the self-employed people in the 1960's who worked their ass off in marketing consulting or similar highly-paid, high hour count jobs in the 1960's didn't make a dent back then. In fact, the decline in this number from the 1960's can be attributed to the rise of fast-food restaurants and their use of part-time workers.

    What makes this misunderstanding spectacularly sad is that it formed the keystone of Mr. Katz' article. Without the fact that the number '32.9' is the average number of hours worked across the entire service sector, including part-time fast-food hamburger flippers and the like, Mr. Katz appears not to have an article at all.
  • It is necessary by HMV (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:00AM
  • Re:Dark when I get in, dark when I leave. by Mr. Slippery (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:55AM
  • by xtal (49134) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:38AM (#1268783) Homepage

    This is something that I've thought about for awhile now.. most of the places I've worked have been chronically understaffed in the technical department (this does not seem to carry over to marketting, however). It's my personal belief that shoddy software coming from a lot of places is a direct result of this - but that's another issue.

    How many people have stopped to think about what they make per hour? Especially if you don't get overtime? If you're working 15-20 more hours a week, then there's obviously either a problem with you, or the tasks you're being asked to do.

    Some employers get it - IBM is one of them - that long hours != high productivity. I personally think I'd be a more effective programmer if I was only in the office for 4 hours a day - most of my planning for programs I do in my head while I'm doing other things, then, when I go to write code, I sit down and go hardcore. The only exception is debugging a serious problem - that could take a few weeks in a large system.

    Take a look at what you're taking home and see if the lack of a life is worth it. I like playing with my own stuff, and what's the good of having money for cool toys if you have no time to play with them! :)

    Don't let bosses take away your life just because they think they can take advantage - and if you're working 20 hours overtime a week, you're getting screwed. If you need money, ask for more money & less time. Lots of places are cluing in.

    Kudos!

  • Re:What counts? by Prion23 (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:09AM
  • Average of 60 hours by cyphunk (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:25AM
  • Re:Work hours by paRcat (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:14AM
  • re: how many hours . . . by cyberguyd (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:06AM
  • what constitutes work? by Marvin_OScribbley (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:57AM
  • Family Life? by charlesc (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:05AM
  • Ha, more bullshit from the government by Kythorn (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:23AM
  • Going independent (Score:3)

    by MosesJones (55544) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:31AM (#1268791) Homepage
    In the Uk more and more people in the IT sector are becoming contractors (working for a one person company, CEO = themselves), there is a minor tax glitch comming up (called IIR35) but even so the tax situation is pretty good. You get paid on average around 50% more, and most of the time you get overtime. With 000s of unfilled jobs its about time people in IT started dictating their conditions, remember you can get a job with your companies competitor, they'll have a harder time getting a replacement than you had getting that new job.
  • "Working" Hours by akiy (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • Working For The Man! by tilleyrw (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:20AM
  • Katz is so predictable by Phizzy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:37AM
  • BAH! 35 Hours a week? This is why we (or I) do it. by Pyramid (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:38AM
  • by gomi (57888) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:23AM (#1268796) Homepage

    I probably put in about 28-32 hours a week.
    My work ethic: If it ain't done by 5, darlin', it's getting done next business day. The deal is money for time -- if I'm not getting paid for the hours worked, they're not gonna get worked. I can get a job and money pretty much anywhere in this economy and with my skills, but there aren't enough $100 bills in the world to buy my afternoons or weekends back -- they're gone forever.

    From my personal observations, there's no damn need to work more than 40 hours a day -- most deadlines are utterly arbitrary. How much of those extra hours are productive, anyway? Slap-happy on caffeine, punchy from fatigue toxins, I bet the quality of work done in the 70th or 80th hour of the week sucks a lot harder than work done around hour 10 or 20. Thinking more hours directly translates to more production is delusional at best, especially for knowledge workers where mental acuity is key to useful production.

    Why spend 20 hours coding over the weekend if you're so tired and pissed off you'll introduce bugs that it'll take you 40 hours to clean up next week? Don't give your life over to the company, and especially not for freakin' free.

    Leave at 5. Read a book. Go minigolfing with a friend or sweetheart. I promise the code will still be there tomorrow.

    gomi
  • Re:it's bad, but there's hope by Velox_SwiftFox (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:19AM
  • Re:This is why I'm a contractor... by jgennick (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:22AM
  • Re:This is why I'm a contractor... by jgennick (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:22AM
  • Value added by Ristoril (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:44AM
  • Hours by _jthm (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:50AM
  • Re:Work hours by ostiguy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:37AM
  • Self Employed with Multiple Jobs by jwalters (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:42AM
  • Case in Point by Kintanon (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:13AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by Kintanon (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:12AM
  • Re:NEWS FLASH! Service sector is not just computer by Kintanon (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:04AM
  • Average.. 48-52 by Vignettian (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:14AM
  • Crazy work hours! by Yousef (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:05AM
  • Re:/. polled this some time ago by finally (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:31AM
  • Quit Your Whining! Get another job! by starlingX (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:09AM
  • What's this about college students? by [Zappo] (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:53AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by MikeHammer (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:17AM
  • Give me a BREAK!! by FooDog (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:04PM
  • Re:Paid for 20, work 60: Life as a grad student by DanMcS (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:46AM
  • ENJOYING doesn't mean EARNING by satanic bunny (Score:1) Thursday February 17 2000, @08:01AM
  • Stuff that yawn, Dilbert IS on strike by satanic bunny (Score:1) Thursday February 17 2000, @08:17AM
  • Time spent reading Slashdot by DeadSea (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • Re:What counts? by senrik (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:22AM
  • We get paid to do training tho... by Kanasta (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:21PM
  • As a witless teenager.... by pogle (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:25PM
  • Re:It is necessary by MarkKomus (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:06AM
  • Im thinking 60+ is more accurate by Hardwyred (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:44AM
  • Too many... by fat_mike (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:28AM
  • Re:Too many... by fat_mike (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:30AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by Corinth (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @03:05PM
  • Re:Six figures isn't worth your life by Otus (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:56AM
  • foo? by samic (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:16AM
  • Re:What employers think is not work (by not paying by notbob (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:46AM
  • 45hrs min. Programmer by Fooknut (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:18AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by rcromwell2 (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:13AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by ahodgson (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:09AM
  • Re:I work... by rlowe69 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:47AM
  • Re:Unskilled labor vs. Knowledge Workers by Garth Vader (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:47AM
  • This is why I'm a contractor... by NothingCleverToSay (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:44AM
  • Re:What counts? by Keepiru (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:52AM
  • Payed for working or being at work? by stjobe (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:34AM
  • 40 hours a week HA by crosstalk (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:11PM
  • Ha, more bullshit from the government by horta (Score:1) Thursday February 24 2000, @04:00AM
  • Hey there! by Potatoswatter (Score:1) Wednesday February 23 2000, @10:40AM
  • Bwaaaahhaaaa by Zamis (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:55AM
  • Work hours (Score:5)

    by Pfhreakaz0id (82141) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:49AM (#1268841)
    Man, I've went off on this more times then I can count. Many right here on Slashdot.

    People look at me like I'm crazy when I say I only want to work 40 hours per week. When I interviewed for my latest job, I said this in interviews, word for word: "If you're looking for somebody to work 45 or 50 hours per week, don't hire me. I have to get home to my real job, being a husband and a father." Result? I'm sure I lost out on some positions. Instead took a job with a consulting firm that now (3 months later) does what? Pressures we to bill more than 40 hours a week!

    As for after hours work? I've done it a few times to get something done, but I bill it and try to take comp time. Mostly, I'll surf or play games or study for a certification test if I get on the computer.

    We work more hours per year here in the USA than in almost all industrialized nations. And then we wonder why our divorce rate is so high. Why our teen suicide rate is so high. We don't spend time with our families, that's why! When we do get home, we watch something like 30 hours of tv a week, plus we have to work out, 'cause God forbid we're not skinny and perfect!

    A freind of mine recently said to me "You're just gonna have to realize that professionals work a lot of hours. That's what we do." This is from a guy having serious marital problems!

    I tell ya, my employer clears over $1500 a week beyond my salary easy with me billing 38 hours. They're not hurting. They need to get over it.
    ---
  • Re:Two of those jobs, please by scumdamn (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:48AM
  • 40 hours? by d-man (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:05AM
  • Get a job where they treat you right. by Schmerd (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:25AM
  • Is it hard work? Blah... by jidar (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:11AM
  • Amazingly... by riggwelter (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:33AM
  • Balance by websensei (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:06AM
  • I hate time sheet by jyang (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @02:52PM
  • Re:/. polled this some time ago by streepje (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:53AM
  • Why Not? by dwalsh (Score:1) Thursday February 17 2000, @05:35AM
  • Re:Six figures isn't worth your life by Quintin Stone (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:53AM
  • Re:Why is this the case? by Quintin Stone (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:02AM
  • The truth? by Raffy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:23AM
  • Speed of technology by threaded (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:36AM
  • 33 hours? no way. by niven (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:40AM
  • The Gov't forges timekeeping... by ericr (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:31AM
  • This week is a short one by Adam Selene (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:00PM
  • im a cyberslave or something like that by imperfect being (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @02:01PM
  • Well... by ElDaveo (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:25AM
  • I'm afraid of a promotion! by Doomsdaisy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:55AM
  • geez, where do they come up with this stuff by bfwebster (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:01AM
  • Definition of a knowledge worker... by boredgourd (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:05AM
  • Re:32.9 my arse by kimflournoy (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:16PM
  • Learning to Say "NO" by TopShelf (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:04AM
  • Re:Learning to Say "NO" by TopShelf (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:14AM
  • Re:Balance by JimStoner (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:03AM
  • 12 hours of work, 40 hours of pay by dhowe (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:31AM
  • Re:What about THIS study by aetius2 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:24AM
  • 32 hours is a bare minimum... by infojunkie (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:03AM
  • Mine is less..but... by TheCarp (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:59AM
  • Re:Research by spiralx (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:36AM
  • Same here by spiralx (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:00AM
  • Re:Huh? by spiralx (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:33AM
  • I work 40.. by Mark F. Komarinski (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:45AM
  • Re:I work 40.. by Mark F. Komarinski (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:02AM
  • I'd have replied sooner, but I was sleeping in... by Aighearach (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:52PM
  • Hours? Bah. Only mortal measure in Hours. by JesseNoller (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:56AM
  • Salaried employees: Document it! by nharmon (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:35AM
  • I'm posting from work as we speak by Legion303 (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @09:13AM
  • Well by guran (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:09AM
  • My hours are reasonable :) by FortranDragon (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:01AM
  • 32.5 hours would suck... by bero-rh (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:12AM
  • Enough is ENOUGH! by btlzu2 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:23AM
  • by bartyboy (99076) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:55AM (#1268884)
    I live and work in Canada.

    My work day begins at 4 am, when I get up to feed the Huskies. At the same time, I have to chase off any polar bears that have been wandering around my igloo.

    By 5:30 am, I have eaten my smoked bacon and am ready to begin my daily 40 mile commute (by dog sled) to work.

    After I get there at about 7:30, I need about 2 hours to get any sensation in my fingers so I can type properly. In that time, our boss holds very productive discussions about last night's hockey game. This keeps the employees happy.

    At about 9:30, when the feeling returns to my limbs, I work for about 15 minutes and then take a coffee break.

    After that, it's time to slaughter a seal and cook it for lunch. We alternate this chore daily between all the employees at the company. (Company pays for the lunch every day - keeps the employees happy, again).

    After lunch, we do about 3 hours of work, and then head home because the sun is setting and it's not safe to be out in the dark in the winter.

    I make my way home by 5 pm, have a beer, watch the hockey game (I like to be ready for the next day's meeting) and go to bed by 8 pm.

    Life is good in Canada.

    Bart
  • 50 - 60 hours by TheCodeMaster (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:07AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by Bushwacker (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:29PM
  • by BlueMonk (101716) <BlueMonkMN@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:05AM (#1268887) Homepage
    I'm a computer programmer. I find it quite unfortunate (for the unskilled laborers of the world) that I probably put forth far less effort than an unskilled laborer, enjoy my job a good deal more than most, and probably earn a good deal more. Even by doubling my current salary I don't think you could convince me to switch to an unskilled labor job. How ironic. Yes I do make more money than I feel I deserve *compared to the average laborer*, and no I don't think I even put as much effort into it. It's just the luck of the draw I guess.

    On the topic of the main post, I must be unusual. I for one almost never have to work late or even think late. I finish projects so quickly that I'm often left reading Slashdot for a good portion of the day, sometimes all day for days in a row. When I leave work, I *leave* it (behind). I spend the rest of the day on my *own* projects, almost never thinking of anything related to work. Ususally it's TV or music composition, sometimes a personal programming project. That's arguably related because it might be considered practice, but business programming is not very related to game programming.

    Even the extra time, effort and money spent on a 4-year college education (same one as CmdrTaco, BTW!) doesn't account for all that discrepancy that will likely last a lifetime. (BTW, the education was finished early too -- 3 years.)

    I make it a point to be at work 40 hours a week as precisely as possible, since that's what I figure I'm paid for as a full time employee -- no more, no less. Is my job or skill so unique? I haven't yet figured out why my situation seems so different. Am I supposed to find myself a more challenging job? I'm quite happy with what I've got already :-). It's not that I don't get work to do, just that I've never found it necessary to think or work beyond (or even up to) the supposed regular 40 hours a week (8 to 5 minus one hour for lunch).

  • Re:Work hours by chrisbell (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:07AM
  • Be a Contractor or a Consultant... by thanz (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:17AM
  • Re:College and Computers by |deity| (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:52PM
  • flawed logic, service sector != knowledge worker by grv (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:25AM
  • It varies... by Orville (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:37AM
  • Re:I live/work in Europe - 37.5 hours by david-currie (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:04AM
  • Laughable by meisenst (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:44AM
  • Re:Time spent reading Slashdot by meisenst (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:51AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by Omega996 (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:59AM
  • Which IBM where you in ? by Suit (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @01:52PM
  • Information professionals at large corporations. by GossG (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:48AM
  • Re:NEWS FLASH! Service sector is not just computer by GossG (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:06AM
  • Re:Why is this the case? by GossG (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @11:10AM
  • College Students.. by hoss10 (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:54AM
  • I work like a dog! by Succa (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:37AM
  • I've not really thought about it.. by God I hate mornings (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:48AM
  • Re:Average of 60 hours by Mr. Sketch (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:55AM
  • Your not really saying... by Thiarna (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:45AM
  • Notice by jyak (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:53AM
  • Legalized American Sweat Shops? by lconover (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @10:05AM
  • 168... by roomfull of blues (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @03:00PM
  • Re:Hey there! by roomfull of blues (Score:1) Saturday February 26 2000, @09:21AM
  • You are not given a choice by modelrailroader (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @08:15AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by pieguy (Score:1) Thursday February 17 2000, @01:42AM
  • What counts? (Score:5)

    by paulywog (114255) on Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:35AM (#1268912)
    It seems important to consider what the government counts as "hours spent working." I wonder what measure the government uses in comparison to what most people count.

    Let's have a new survey. When you say "I work X hrs each week", what do you count?

    [ ] Only the hours you get paid for.
    [ ] Only the hours you spend in an office / home office.
    [ ] Only the hours you actually do business related tasks.
    [ ] All the time you spend thinking about work.
    [ ] Include all the you spend enhancing skills that relate to your work.
    [ ] Other hours: ____________

    In consulting firms, bonuses are often related to the percentage of hours you bill to a client during the year. Wouldn't it be nice if I could count all of the time I spend on my computer at home working on personal projects!? (Gaming makes me a stronger asset to the company!)
  • billing hours by xDroid (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:07AM
  • But what about early retirement? by JTB (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:48AM
  • Re:I live for work. by freequi (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:05PM
  • Me? by In-Doge (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:17AM
  • I live for work. by kortens (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:17AM
  • it's bad, but there's hope by split horizon (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:25AM
  • How many hours did you work this week? by Fredbo (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @04:26AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by nanode (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:56AM
  • Where I get paid by Bigdom (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:55AM
  • Long Hours == Bad Project Management by czei (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:47AM
  • Re:part-timers... by tburkhol (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @07:01AM
  • Re:a brief history of work... by tlauf (Score:2) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:18AM
  • Re:important comment by haYs for hroses (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @06:04AM
  • The Joys of Maintance by xianzombie (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:01AM
  • Re:I work in Canada, eh? by StatGrape (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:57AM
  • Re:Ha, more bullshit from the government by Ingram (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @02:15PM
  • My Working Day by lblack (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @05:23AM
  • Well, my time card says 43.3 hours, but it lies... by Avenzoar (Score:1) Wednesday February 16 2000, @12:38PM