People Who Claim To Work 75-Hour Weeks Usually Only Work About 50 Hours (nymag.com) 233
An anonymous reader quotes a report from New York Magazine: I want to thank Kevin Drum from Mother Jones for surfacing a 2011 Bureau of Labor Statistics study that confirms something I've long suspected: Virtually anyone you know who claims to be working more than 60 hours a week is not telling the truth. Bureau of Labor Statistics researchers reached this conclusion by comparing regular survey data to diary data from the American Time Use Survey, a Census project that asks Americans to track, diary style, how their weekly time is divided among 163 different activity categories, from sleeping to shopping to pet care.
The BLS study found respondents in the ATUS tend to give an estimate of typical working time that is 5 to 10 percent higher than what shows up in their diaries. But the divergence was not uniform across the population. The largest overestimates came from the people providing the highest estimates: People who said they typically worked 75 or more hours per week tended to provide diaries reflecting 25 hours' less work per week than they estimated. People claiming to typically work between 65 and 74 hours weekly tended to be overestimating by 18 hours. Again, this sort of misreporting is not limited to work hours. People overestimate how often they do all sorts of things they "ought" to be doing, often by even larger margins than with work for pay.
The BLS study found respondents in the ATUS tend to give an estimate of typical working time that is 5 to 10 percent higher than what shows up in their diaries. But the divergence was not uniform across the population. The largest overestimates came from the people providing the highest estimates: People who said they typically worked 75 or more hours per week tended to provide diaries reflecting 25 hours' less work per week than they estimated. People claiming to typically work between 65 and 74 hours weekly tended to be overestimating by 18 hours. Again, this sort of misreporting is not limited to work hours. People overestimate how often they do all sorts of things they "ought" to be doing, often by even larger margins than with work for pay.
cyclical (Score:2, Insightful)
People's self-reported use of time is proved false by people's self-reported use of time?
Re: cyclical (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: cyclical (Score:2)
Somehow I get the feeling you mostly try to come up with new ways to flame people while driving to the vet.
Re: cyclical (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
https://dilbert.com/strip/1995... [dilbert.com]
Sorry, couldn't find an xkcd.
Re: cyclical (Score:2)
Re: cyclical (Score:2)
Re: cyclical (Score:2, Interesting)
People who have time to do surveys and claiming 75 hour work week may be lying. When I was on a crazy schedule (4 years) I would not have bothered with something else that wants my time.
Re: (Score:2)
... is proved false by people documenting their said use of time.
Office Space (Score:5, Funny)
Peter Gibbons:
Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working. I do that for probably another hour after lunch too, I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work.
You see, Bob, it's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't even care."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re:Office Space (Score:5, Interesting)
Studies have actually shown that 6 hours is about the upper limit of creative work you can get out of most people. Not to say there aren't exceptional people out there who can do more, but for the average individual doing tasks that actually requyire thinking (as opposed to just being a cog at a production line which is where the 8 hour work-day originates), productivity plummets, and stress increases. In fact when youy start working for more than 50 hours a week, the chances of burning out start to climb up fast.
I've personally had to spend time fixing statistical reports created by people in a hurry that were practically useless because the data was missing stuff it was supposed to include. The people in question are not incompetent, in fact at other times they've done the same task extremely well but I could see that they were under a lot of pressure and that caused them to be sloppy (I since spent time automating the whole process to cut down on manual work and errors). For the same reason I avoid taking up large tasks close to the end of a work day. If you ever start something with the mindset of 'I'm just going to do this one thing quickly and then head home', you're most likely better off just leaving it for tomorrow or if you absolutely have to do it today, go home and do it from there with more time and after some relaxing.
This is why the concept of 'crunch' in IT especially is so counter-productive: game companies especially are notorious for 'constant cruch' because the update cycle in free-to-play games is intense to keep new content coming in and the players engaged. Quoting a recent Kotaku article [kotaku.com] on the subject:
(here's a link [polygon.com] to the Polygon report for those interested)
Now look at that as a european project manager and my eyes roll. I mean the strategy is clear: you take in young and aspiring coders, you create and atmosphere where people are pressured to work overtime constantly (lest you're not a 'team player' and can expect to get fired/not have your contract continued), then you work them until they burn out and quit or become so tired and stressed that they're useless and you fire them, and you replace the with
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The way they tally data suggests to me they had a goal of calling people liars. If I'm on call M-F 9a/9p, I'm working 60 hours a week whether I get called or not. If you ask me to do a daily tally of my activities that would not be represented. Would I have sat at my desk watching funny cat videos for 12 straight hours if I were not on call? Fuck no, but I was not free to go live my life, I was expected to be ready to handle potential disaster on 5 minute notice.
When the boss is calling me after I have left
Re: (Score:2)
Diary-style "live reporting" that is chronologically closer to the event is generally far more reliable than aggregate reporting that occurs long after the event(s).
So, yes, more reliable self-reports can and should take precedence over less reliable self-reports.
Also, in general, the self-report that paints the reporter in the least favorable light is usually the most accurate. There have been multiple studies using different methods that demonstrate this point. Intentional or not, we are always trying to
Re: (Score:2)
I sometimes calculate 'inflation indices' for my coworkers and associates, just so I can deflate their future claims where I wasn't there to watch the actual work.
It takes one incident where you observed what they did, they what they reported doing.
30% plus 10% per year elapsed since the event is typical. But it can be _much_ higher in the insecure.
Stealing credit for the work of others gives them an undefined 'inflation index', div by 0.
And those who claim to work 40 hours (Score:3, Insightful)
Work about 26 hours?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"The largest overestimates came from the people providing the highest estimates"
So no, the people who estimate a standard 40 hours, which would not qualify as a 'higher estimate', are probably working more like 35-40 hours.
Subjective hours (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Subjective hours (Score:4, Insightful)
The report dosent seem to have clearly defined "working hours". Right at the bottom of page 8 under possible reasons for the gap, they admit they didn't control for commute times. It's not made clear exactly how accurate the diaries were kept. Was it minute by minute or just guess to nearest 15? There are so many holes in this paper that dosent seem to mention witness recollections are terrible, and only get worse under stress. A better conclusion is getting people to keep journals on thier activities can often be inaccurate, and this tends to increase with the amount of other stuff they are doing. A better way would be to have them consent to being actually monitored and have the activities reviewed by a third party even if this lowered your sample size.
One thing I wonder about is what those days for the longer workers looked like.
For instance, you come into work at 8 am and leave at 8 pm, well that's 60 there.
Though if you have a 1 hour lunch break, and a 1 hour dinner break... well now you're down to 50 working hours.
Both methods are valid in their way, but the longer you work the bigger those discrepancies are going to get.
I looked through the paper a bit but it wasn't clear whether they really looked at that, but I suspect a lot of the gap comes from the long workers having fragmented schedules where they feel like they're never really off.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they are Chinese and working the 996 schedule - 9 AM to 9 PM, 6 days a week.
Although having seen people working that in practice they spend much of that time doing other stuff. They are manning the shop or in the office, but also cooking dinner on a little gas stove or on WeChat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where can you work and claim your lunch and dinner breaks? I'd have been fired if I'd done so.
Re: (Score:2)
This. Exactly this.
When I calculate how long I work, I think that I set my alarm for 5am, and I get home at 6pm. Yes, many of those hours are unpaid but they are all hours I need to "pay" to work. At most like 30 minutes in that entire time period are even semi free where I have some choice in what I want to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Getting washed, eating and going to the toilet are required even if you are not going to work. So clearly you are one of the people over estimating things.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Getting washed and dressed is not required if you are not going to work.
2. Getting washed and dressed takes like 15 minutes so hardly effects anything.
3. You need to eat either way, but munching on dry toast as you run out the door, when I am not even hungry, because I know it will be 7 hours before I am allowed to eat again, is not how I would of eaten if I were not working.
4. It works both ways. I am still not counting the numerous hours on weekends and after work I spend preparing food, transportation
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, well I only do 2 out of three of those things even when I am going to work.
Re: (Score:2)
"Ah, of course. So, we get to add 10 hours (1 hour both ways) to most people's work time? No? Yea, I thought so."
Well obviously if you walk or bike to work, you are expending energy, therefore it is work.
and if you are driving to work, well its like a truck or bus driver, itswork.
OTOH if you ride public transport, not so much work is involved.
Travel time should count. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you can't actually use the time involved for actually living your life, it really REALLY should be counted as work time. That includes travel time, work-at-home time, any lengthy phone calls, and being asked to go somewhere to buy something/deliver something.
In that regard, I'd say the estimate would work out just find for lots of folks, in terms of the time taken from them that they can't use for their own needs or desires.
Ryan Fenton
Re:Travel time should count. (Score:5, Insightful)
That includes travel time, work-at-home time, any lengthy phone calls, and being asked to go somewhere to buy something/deliver something.
I don't know what you mean by travel time. If it is from your home to your regular office you go to everyday, I'd argue that probably you shouldn't count it because it depends where you live and that is not in the control of your employer. But if it is business travel time (fly to a field office, drive to see a client in a nearby city, or even in the same city), then absolutely.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Is "work" paid time only? Then no
Is it travelling for a client? Then yes.
Is it travelling to your job when considering your work life balance? absolutely.
Depends on if you consider all the time you don't get paid, but yet perform work auxiliary functions, as "work". Travelling is one perfect example of that. You need to travel for work, and travelling usually takes a lot of your attention. Many people ar
Re: (Score:2)
Travel time counts because (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what you mean by travel time. If it is from your home to your regular office you go to everyday, I'd argue that probably you shouldn't count it because it depends where you live and that is not in the control of your employer.
You are thinking of "billable hours" from the employers point of view whereas the OP is talking about hours taken from your life in pursuit of earning money from the employees point of view.
Granted, your employer generally doesn't control where you live and therefore, shoudln't have to pay you for your commuting time; however, that commute time is not something you would do for your own pleasure; therefore, from the employees point of view, that commute time is part of work, even if it is not payable time.
Re: (Score:2)
If it is from your home to your regular office you go to everyday, I'd argue that probably you shouldn't count it because it depends where you live and that is not in the control of your employer.
Very often, the employer controls where they put their office. Quite frequently they choose that location for retarded PHB reasons. So the argument can go either way, depending on the situation.
Anyway this thread demonstrates pretty adequately that time is only one dimension by which we are measuring a multidimensional "quantity"... which frankly is as much a qualitative as quantitative thing when you get right down to it.
(Alternatively, to quote the great thunderclese, "time is an abstract concept invent
Re:Travel time should count. (Score:4, Insightful)
Hey, if you want to argue that people should be paid for their commute time, fine. It's not a fact that people "forget" to ask for compensation of their employer relocates. Most people are like your self-employed example: they often are given the choice of sucking it up with little or no compensation or leaving and trying to find other employment with a possible black mark for leaving.
The problem is that most the people saying they're working 75+ hours are the managers and executives who are paid adequate compensation for their time--at least, they're paid substantially more than someone merely making a pay boost plus overtime. They're also like the self-employed example but they've got a lot more job security and they signed up for those 75+ hour weeks because either they're workaholics or a lot of that 75+ hours is traveling to locations for which they can argue is all billable time--if they weren't salaried.
That's what tends to infuriate the rest of us who want to work 40 hours for a decent wage. People who want to work themselves to death for substantially more pay is fine. They should at least be honest about the amount of hours they work, not overstate it in ways we could, nor try to use their inflated hours to try to shame us into more work. That final bit is the frustrating part. You want to actually work 75+ hours, that's on you. You want to spout hyperbole while sitting on your ass hardly doing anything but being technically on the clock? Yes, I don't really feel sorry for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's what tends to infuriate the rest of us who want to work 40 hours for a decent wage.
I've found that "the rest of us" are infuriated by the more productive people. Most people who were pissed off by the hours I worked wanted work arranged so that they could do as little as possible for as much pay as possible. But we accomodated them, by giving them 24 hours a day free time when there was a downturn.
People who want to work themselves to death for substantially more pay is fine.
Cool story bro! Who has worked themselves to death?
Look - we all get it. You want to maximize your pay for the least work. As well, I'm pretty certain you have an inculcated concept that you
Re: (Score:2)
You made a contract permitting your client to demand you work 80-hour weeks at the drop of a pin for $reason, other than making right what you screwed up the previous week due to bad sleep management?
If so, serves you right.
Re: (Score:2)
I've worked with people who drove 90 minutes each way, some due to traffic (they drove from Irvine to San Diego), and others who just wanted to live in the sticks (Valley Center to San Diego. Hi Paul!).
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't just never do 'death marches', but expect and _bill_for_ the recovery time at the end of the death march.
Never bill death marches by the day or job, they are hourly and the hourly rate is at least double your normal one. They aren't a good deal for the company. They are for desperate times.
If you are working someplace that is constant (crisis/death march) just stop working and focus on your job search. The upside of those places is the line managers are just as crispy as the workers and won't not
That's nothing (Score:5, Funny)
This Monday, I worked about 28 hours in just one day before driving home, and Tuesday it was the same. These people need to stop lying, it makes the rest of us look bad.
Re: (Score:3)
I did the same, but I had to walk to work, and it was uphill both ways.
Re: (Score:2)
WALK? You were lucky, we had to crawl, on gravel, 10 miles twice every day, and we were happy to do it.
Re:That's nothing (Score:5, Interesting)
I know you're joking, but my story is true...
I put ~28 legitimate hours on my timecard for one day many years ago (early 80s). We were allowed to bill our travel time, and leaving my hotel in Germany at 5am for a ride to the airport, I ended up having five hours of delay at Frankfurt Intl. Our original non-stop flight turned into a layover in London, where they inexplicably made everyone deplane and run through security before reboarding the same plane. Somewhere over Canada, one of our four engines decided to stop functioning, but our pilot told us that we were just fine with 3 engines, and would continue on to LAX. By the time we landed, my connecting flight had departed many hour earlier, and it was after midnight in CA. Since my destination was only a couple hours drive away, I requested and received a voucher for a rental car. So, with all the timezone changes (think it was 9 hrs), I entered the actual travel time (5am-midnight + 9 hours for timezones) on my timesheet. Accounting called, and after much discussion accepted my claim.
Re: (Score:2)
HA! That is funny(well not the failing engine part). I can imagine their heads spinning when trying to deal with the time zones. :D
Re: (Score:2)
I have that beat. 10 hours Sydney (I was 'working' with the client during the long lunch at the 'gentlemans club'), 15 hours overnight travel (including puddle jumper from SFI), 6 hours Sacramento (mostly debriefing for the previous week).
Great employer, didn't even bitch (much) that I was 'late for work' and only did a six.
I'll grant that we didn't fly over the dateline at exactly 12 midnight, but close enough.
Accounting didn't argue, it was billable, they loved it. The club/brothel costs were 'legi
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure they were all chicks? You have to be careful down there.
Overtime short-term? (Score:2)
It seems to me that overtime is generally only productive in the short term. Too long on overtime and your productivity drops, so that you're working extra hours, but only getting the standard amount of stuff done.
Someone else mentioned good ideas coming after a good night's sleep. I find this too, though the ideas often pop into my head in the shower. Taking a brisk, relaxing walk is also a good way to let the ideas percolate.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it has been studied to death; all types of work really peak at an “honest week’s worth” of work— generally 35-40 hours.
My personal issue is I have 2-3 productive hours in the morning, a block of 2 hours goofing off before lunch, an hour of personal time for lunch, a very productive, caffeine induced spurt for another hour or two, then two or three hours “wasted” mostly mentoring people or goofing off, and then a final hour or two productively before I go home.
I don
Re: (Score:2)
No, I have tried that. If my tasks were balanced to my period-of-day skill matrix a little better I could shave an hour or two off my day easily. I would need to take on more responsibilities that I simply don’t like though. I mean really— browse /. or do financial budgeting: which would you pick?!
Truth be told, I really should just retire for a few years.
Re: (Score:2)
"Truth be told, I really should just retire for a few years."
I just did last month at 60, and highly recommend doing so as soon as you're financially able to. Every other retiree that I know has been happy with the decision to punch out. For the last few weeks, I've had plans every single day. I do plan to work periodically as a consultant, but that will be on my own schedule.
Re: (Score:2)
Retire early, retire often.
On sabbatical now. ;)
Opposite for Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, RTFA. Not exactly opposite for part-time workers.
... Unless you're a Truck Driver. (Score:2)
Truckers are limited to a maximum of 70 Driving hours a week.
There's a lot more than driving to their job, too.
Most of them "fudge" their log books to make their work day fit into each page, regardless of how long it actually took to do what was expected of them every day. Nevermind all the stuff they are expected to do at weird hours "off the books" that cut into their expected 10 hour off time they are supposed to have every day. (Like 3 AM unloading during their "Sleep Time")
Given this little factoid, is
Re: (Score:2)
Over in Canada, we have Logs books, and are limited to 11 Driving hours in a 14 hour window of operation that is "strictly enforced". Trucks are governed at 65 mph (105 km/h) so daily payable distance is capped, too.
E-Logs are becoming common, but have not been mandated yet. You can get tickets based on your logs alone as well.
Our southern neighbours have maximum 10 driving hours daily with the same 14 hour window. and a maximum of 140 hours in a 10 day stretch before having to take a "reset" of 36 continuo
100 hr work weeks (Score:5, Insightful)
Over my life time, I have done 3-4 weeks of over 100 hours a week. For those wondering what that looks like... you don't go home; you drink lots of caffeine and sleep 4-6 hrs at your desk. For 7 days straight. Then crash the following week for a day or two.
Are you actually doing work those 100 hours? Of course not! About 40 hours is waiting on some dependency to get figured out so you can do your 4 hr sprint on yours. But you can't go anywhere, you can't go do your normal life stuff (other than bath, crap, & eat). Initially, the free time is wasted on online browsing, TV, whatever. By Thursday you just kind of vegetate out; mentally shutting down to rest when you get a chance. On a per hour level, it's utter shit performance. Everyone knows it.
But politically, it's seen as some twisted sort of "dedication", "achievement", and taking "responsibility".
And those weeks you didn't fly out/in. Normally we did 60+ hours; at the Client 6-6 for 4 days, lunch at desk, capped by 5 hours of flight/travel each way, and regular employee catchup stuff on Friday for 4 hrs. We were just happy everyone was too tired to bug us on between Friday noon till Sunday morning.
People exaggerate? Naawww, can't be (Score:5, Funny)
"I work the most hours ever, believe me! I work 200 hours a week, tremendous hours, really tremendous. Lyin' CNN claims 200 is mathematically impossible, but those losers fouled up my inauguration crowd count, what do they know about maths? I know Calculus, Copernicus, and Algae bras. Lots of bras, know 'em all, do 'em in my sleep; bing bing, bong bong, all done, great answers, people love 'em. #MakeMerikaWorkLongly
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In other news, anybody who tells you (or anybody in earshot) loudly and repeatedly that they are a billionaire, is not.
Not to worry...chips & GPS (Score:2)
How to keep your workers working (Score:2)
A shift of 10 workers can "cover" for a few workers who add hours to a weekend by leaving early on Friday. Who come to work late on Monday.
Any advanced digital tracking of hours worked is always corrected to show a full shift worked.
Want to keep your workers working?
Do an inspection Friday afternoon. Call it a "meeting", "project" report. Anything to gather all the people who should be at work together.
See if a few of the best workers are doing all th
Re: (Score:2)
What tracks them in and out of a building, what keeps track of their hours?
Who can be trusted to ensure they keep their working hours?
Re: (Score:2)
They are enjoying long weekends while doing no work on a full days wage.
It's worthwhile (Score:2)
... to make a distinction between being at work and working. It's easy to do extra hours of the former without doing so many of the latter.
Re: (Score:2)
100% agree. However, some jobs are different than others. There are plenty of jobs that are somewhat mindless, and can be done for many hours. Before I retired, when I was planning out my work day, I'd always save those kind of tasks for the end, when I knew that I'd be zoned out. There are also a lot of jobs that are essentially on standby, waiting for something to happen...I call these firemen jobs, which I did in my early days as a computer technician, waiting for the phone to ring.
So what? (Score:2)
I see so many people who claim to work 40 hours a week really only work 26. The rest of their time is spent socializing with co-workers, browsing the web (and using /.) and pretending to do work. Why would this not scale the same way to a 75 hour week?
Try it for yourself (Score:3, Interesting)
I work 70 hours (Score:2)
shifts, flow, whatever (Score:2)
If you don't track your time at work, you should try it, particularly if you have management responsibilities.
How much time are you actually working? What things are wasting your time? What things are making you feel like you're working more than you actually are?
There's nothing like a pointless meeting to bring productivity to a standstill and yet make everyone feel like they're working 10 hour days.
Unless youre in the Navy (Score:2)
it was fairly common to work five and dime watch rotations at sea down in the engine room. Thats 5hrs of watch and then 10 hours off. But hold up, your 10hrs off doesnt mean its your free time. If it falls between 7am - 4pm you are still expected to show up at your workcenter and put in a full day of work doing preventive maintenance, cleaning workspaces, getting ready for inspections, etc. Sunday is the only day that you dont have the 7am-4pm workday, which, btw, when crossing the international date line g
Just like shoveling snow claiming hardship dibs (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A similar phenomenon here in Chicago during winter. For every hour people claim it took them to shovel our their car, it actually only takes them 15 minutes on average.
It only takes 15 minutes in Florida.
What is "work"? (Score:2)
In my job, I am able to work from home a lot - I'm a teacher, and it doesn't really matter where I'm sitting, when I'm grading exams, updating lectures, or whatever. I have absolutely no idea how I would even count the number of hours I work, because the work is interspersed with private things. Right now, I'm on /. because I have a 15 minute window before I have to leave for a meeting.
Which brings me to the point of this comment: If I were in the corporate world, with this 15 minute window of time (too lit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In my job, I am able to work from home a lot - I'm a teacher, and it doesn't really matter where I'm sitting, when I'm grading exams, updating lectures, or whatever. I have absolutely no idea how I would even count the number of hours I work, because the work is interspersed with private things. Right now, I'm on /. because I have a 15 minute window before I have to leave for a meeting.
Yeah, people do not usually understand what we do. The "work time" of a teacher is not just the time spent in class. It is also grading, prepping for lectures, answering students questions, talk to students to understand what they students need and that may not be curricular. It is also figuring out better ways to teach your class, that could be reading other textbooks, understanding how the previous class in the sequence is built and adjust to that, understand what the next class in the sequence expects. I
People who talk about work ... (Score:2)
...always work less than they say.
Simple Math (Score:2)
I am expected to be on site by 7 am. That means I arrive at about 6:45, but I am going to stick to the 7 am number for the simple math.
I am expected to be here until 5 pm. That comes out to 50 hours per week so far.
Then I am expected to put in at least four hours on either Saturday or Sunday.
That comes out to 54 hours per week.
However, there is a balancing factor. I am a teacher; so I have about two and a half months off in the summer where the expectation is that I will put in, an average of, two hours per
Re: (Score:2)
Not in fishing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never met anybody who claims to work that much and is telling the truth.
I have done a few weeks in a row at these kinds of hours. But not for extended periods of time. Frankly after doing crazy 70 hours weeks for about a month and a half, I was exhausted beyond what is safe. It took me 3 month of about 35h/w workload to recover. So yeah anyone who tell me they are working an average of 70 hours a week, I don't believe.
regrettable episodes of hypervigilance (Score:2)
I have N24 and the weird thing is that sometimes I don't get tired the way other people do. Other times, I can't function properly on what seems like normal sleep.
In my thirties, it wasn't uncommon to work anywhere from 20 to 28 hours straight through (pausing only to collect food, which was immediately hauled back to my desk), sleep for 12 to 16 hours, and then pull another 20 to 28 hour shift. It's not supposed to be possible to maintain solid focus for 24+ hours, but this would sometimes happen when my b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not even in Japan (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, does that mean that you're at work, or that you're actually doing work for 60+ hours/week? Some jobs, I like to call them firefighters, are generally waiting around for the phone/firealarm to ring. Putting in 60 hours that way, while legitimate is not the same as 60 hours of coding or some such job where you are actually using cognitive skills the entire time. Yeah, it can be done in spurts, but other than that, your work quality is suffering.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you realize how many hours it takes to fix the things you screw up after 60 (short term) or 50 (long term)?
It's no surprise they have to work 168/week. Just to keep up with the new bugs they are creating, working so many hours.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hence should have interested in actual production, rather than facetime.
Those kind of hours are less productive than shorter ones, for anything other than pure 'assembly line' grunt work. Even there, there are limits after which extra hours are counterproductive.
The smart move remains to leave 'something in the tank' for legit emergencies and/or a life.
Re: (Score:2)
I would work from 6-6 in the office and then head home to work from 8-2. That went on for months-long stretches, including a 43 hour long marathon that ended up with me passing out in my office.
Iâ(TM)m glad youâ(TM)ve never met anyone who actually worked like this, because it was absolutely horrible for my health and home life. Iâ(TM)m glad my kids were both too young to remember that time.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)
Fun fact: In Japan, it is illegal for your employer to let you work more than 55 hours per week. And over the longer term, they are supposed to restrict overtime further, to a maximum of 360 hours overtime per year (so approximately 47 hour weeks on average).
Another fun fact: Japanese are known for strictly following rules. Except when it comes to rules surrounding individual rights.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)
Come to Japan or Korea. Most people overwork +40-80 hours per week.
They may sit at their desks that long, but not much work is getting done. Many of them are playing games (with the sound off) or watching porn. Productivity in both countries is much lower than in America.
They are evaluated based on hours, not output, and most promotions are based on seniority, not performance, so there is little incentive to work hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Productivity in both countries is much lower than in America.
False. Economic productivity as measured by the OECD in terms of GDP per hours worked is higher in Japan than in the USA and Korea is 9th overall in the OECD dataset leaving both Japan and the USA (a very low performer in productivity metrics) in the dust.
https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/g... [oecd.org]
Now zip up your fly, your prejudice is showing.
Re: (Score:2)
Having spent six years working in Korea, I'll argue that my personal observation matches what ShanghaiBill states. It was very common to see groups of laborers standing around while one person actually did the work. There was also a cultural issue with them doing just enough. I could give you many examples, but one that was typical...
I went to a small shop to have a couple spare keys made for my apartment. The woman took my key, grabbed some blanks, and ground out a couple new keys. The problem is that
Re: (Score:2)
that link also states:
Labour productivity only partially reflects the productivity of labour in terms of the personal capacities of workers or the intensity of their effort. The ratio between the output measure and the labour input depends to a large degree on the presence and/or use of other inputs (e.g. capital, intermediate inputs, technical, organisational and efficiency change, economies of scale).
How else would you explain the spike in productivity in Ireland after 2014, temporarily ran out of Guinness?
Re: (Score:2)
I bet she's younger than you. Great choice, assuming everything else you post is true in your marriage.
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't talking about what they try to bill, they are talking about all these people who claim they work a ton of hours to their friends, family, coworkers, facebook girlfriend, etc. All it says is people measure hours worked with the same ruler they use for their dick size.
Re: (Score:2)
All it says is people measure hours worked with the same ruler they use for their dick size.
So the Chinese who work 100 hours have a 2.5x dick size? Wow they really are replacing American workers.
Re: (Score:2)
mm vs. inches.
Re: (Score:2)
That troll has left or changed his tune. Don't invoke him.