Vive La Loafing!

theodp writes "Bonjour Paresse, an anti-corporation slacker manifesto whose title translates as 'Hello Laziness,' has become a national best seller in France and made a countercultural heroine of its author, who encourages workers to adopt her strategy of calculated loafing in response to dimming prospects of success for rank-and-file employees. Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?"

Slacker Thee

[ackthpt]

who encourages workers to adopt her strategy of calculated loafing

In english: reading/posting on slashdot (e.g. I should be working on X but wonder if CowboyNeal is mentioned in the latest slashpoll)

in response to dimming prospects of success for rank-and-file employees.

Got news for you, there was a terrific article in the Detroit Free Press back in the 80's regarding the epic scale slacking which contributed to the ills of the automotive industry. Overly strong unions and workers with an "I deserve stuff" attitude resulted in many of the anecdotes of redundant jobs and slacking where the line was already overstaffed (workers taking turns going across the street for a few quarts of beer and sitting on the roof working on tans and such.) I went to school with a lot of laid-off workers who recounted many tales which often even amazed them by the audacity of the perpetrators. Slacking is by no means unique or original to people in IT.

Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?

Dunno, when Silicon Valley finally hires a a worker I'll ask.

Work hard. Learn new skillz. Get sacked anyway

Re:Slacker Thee

[TyrranzzX]

I believe the goal here is to show bosses that giving the fruits of their workforces labors to the workforce and not to investors or themselves is the key to success. Infact, it is the key to making a capitalistic society go round. Unfortunatly, a corporation exists for the enrichment of investors, workers be damned unless they own voting stock. The workers revolt by working based on their pay; if they're paid minimum wage to stock shelves, they work slow and slack off. If they're paid $8 or $10 to stock shelves, then they work hard.

Re:Slacker Thee

[Dravik]

This only works if you can get rid of bad workers. My brother works at Publix and this is how they do it. Pay at the top of the range and you always have a pool of willing new hires. Then you can set higher standards for hiring and toss out the slackers. Resulting in a workforce of good hard working people whoes higher productivity and motivation cover the higher labor cost. If, as in France, it is almost impossible to get rid of poor workers then the higher pay method doesn't work. Your good people get fed up with having to take the the slack from the lazy guy and leave. Eventually the unremovable slackers build up and you have high labor costs with the same level of people as everybody else.

Re:Slacker Thee

[cubicledrone]

regarding the epic scale slacking which contributed to the ills of the automotive industry

While the hairpieces in middle management heroically toiled late into the night to keep the business afloat, no doubt.

Funny how the slightest voice in support of workers generates a response of "they're just a bunch of lazy bastards who want more money for less work" along with the obligatory "they're all in unions too."

The article makes a very important point: that the possibility of success in the average corporate job is zero. That much is quite beyond dispute.

Now, let's all sing the company song.

Re:Slacker Thee

[anagama]

• Now, let's all sing the company song.

Workers Doxology:

• Praise bossman morning workbells chime
  Praise him for bits of overtime
  Praise him whose wars we love to fight
  Praise him fat leach and pa-ra-site
  AMEN
  

Re:Slacker Thee

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not a lazy employee. I am a very dedicated, loyal, hard-working employee with the best of work ethics. I just want a company that values me and that will reward my hard work with more than a pending layoff. If I knew that I would be with a company for most of my life, like people did a generation or two ago (or they do in some other countries), I would continue to be the most productive, enthusiastic and capable employee ever.

However, after putting in years of sweat and tears and relationship building and education and heart into a job for the last five years only to be laid off with a thirty second phone call one morning (not because I sucked - but because after a half dozen layoffs, I could no longer escape the axe and a few thousand more of us said goodbye), I've come to realize that all of my hard work and loyalty was for nothing. Here I am five years later, starting all over again.

People work hard and are dedicated and productive and happy when they know that progress and achievement can be theirs. But when they recognize that for all the toiling they put in, they could be axed due to budget constraints or politics (as opposed to personal ability) on a whim, they give up.

Would you run a marathon if you knew the finish line was going to be randomly extended and that you would periodically be grabbed and yanked back to the starting line all over again? After awhile, wouldn't you realize that the race itself is pointless and give up?

That's the goal

[rsilvergun]

the goal of a just, modern society is workers who work less for more. The idea that we should all be furious worker bees is crap pushed on us by staggeringly greedy bastards who have been living like kings off other people's backs for as long as human society existed.

Re:That's the goal

[flacco]

the goal of a just, modern society is workers who work less for more. The idea that we should all be furious worker bees is crap pushed on us by staggeringly greedy bastards who have been living like kings off other people's backs for as long as human society existed.

amen, brother.

what's sad about it from my perspective (my hair grows grey and my knees aren't quite what they used to be) is that so many bright, energetic young people just don't recognize this fundamental truth.

it's like reverse-idealism: in their optimistic prime, young people are more willing to spend their days, nights and weekends wading around in the shit their corporate masters pour on them, because they earnestly believe that *they* are special, and that *they* will be the ones who succeed, and they're therefore willing to accept a labor environment that's unjust and socially primitive overall.

as time goes on, you realize how much of your life and soul you've devoted to making other people rich and comfortable, and you resent the means they've used to get you to do that... and even if you've accumulated some material wealth in the process, the balance sheet looks questionable.

the current economic system has produced some miracles to be sure, and perhaps it may be the best that human beings can do - but don't fool yourself: an enormous price has been paid by a great many, while a relative few have paradise handed to them as a result.

Re:That's the goal

[Rimbo]

"what's sad about it from my perspective (my hair grows grey and my knees aren't quite what they used to be) is that so many bright, energetic young people just don't recognize this fundamental truth."

Yup.

I'm really lucky in that right now, I work for a company that is well managed.

We got a great kid, wet behind the ears, fresh out of grad school. After a couple of months, he asked me if I had any advice.

I told him he needed to take it easier.

I learned this lesson at my last job. I kinda felt I was a lazy worker, so when I got the last job offer and they told me I'd need to work hard, I went with it. We all worked ridiculous hours, and the company failed.

What I learned from that experience was that I got more done working a 40 hour week and enjoying my time outside of work than working 60+ hours and working weekends. I actually got more accomplished that way, because my head was clear.

This new company recognizes that, too. We're all lucky that they do; not only are we happier, it increases our odds of success. And now that I've got a position of some leadership, I want to pass that wisdom along to my co-workers.

It's one thing to work 60+ hours a week for a brief couple of weeks to meet a deadline -- it's something else to do it all the time. Eventually, the return on investment drops to below what you had before.

Re:Slacker Thee

[ackthpt]

The Big Three in Detroit agreed to and signed off on every letter of those contracts, so wouldn't that make the management at least one half responsible for this supposed "audacious slacking"?

You have to remember, back in the 50's and 60's the automotive industry had a LOT of capital tied up in foundries, assembly lines, parts plants and logistics. I hail from the former heart of GM, Ford and Chrysler where cities grew with the fortunes of these companies and saw first hand the stranglehold the unionized workforce had on this investment. With nowhere else to go for labor (a strike would idle their lines and the competitors would reap those lost sales, and damn few would cross a picket line in a company town) and much of their investment located where the attitudes were complacent, GM, Ford, Chrysler and AMC were sitting ducks for the japanese automakers. The pendulum has swung very far to the other side, now as the companies have considerable strength in negotations (don't ratify the agreement, we'll move to Mexico or China)

Re:Slacker Thee

[cubicledrone]

You have to remember, back in the 50's and 60's the automotive industry had a LOT of capital tied up in foundries, assembly lines, parts plants and logistics.

Yeah. A lot of people had real jobs then too, and could afford a house before they started applying for Medicare. Funny how that works, isn't it?

Re:Slacker Thee

[ackthpt]

Yeah. A lot of people had real jobs then too, and could afford a house before they started applying for Medicare. Funny how that works, isn't it?

You don't know the half of it. Kids would drop out of highschool at 16 and go work for one of the autobuilders. They didn't need math, science, french or anything but a pair of hands and could do the job. It was called 'skilled labor' which really translated to someone who could do a repetitive task once it was demonstrated to them, no thinking involved. One

Re:Slacker Thee

[cubicledrone]

It really was the good life on very little education.

Yeah, it was.

when they found other people in the world could do the same job and would do it for a fraction

Now that has been expanded to all jobs except management, so the "good life" isn't even available to those with four-year University educations any more. In fact, education has been rendered largely worthless because nothing can overcome the money grab of selling out to the lowest possible wage.

So, no house, no boat, no university, no cabin, no nothing. It's five to a rent application and hope they don't build a Wal-Mart.

It's all been sold, and progress it ain't.

Re:Slacker Thee

[Dravik]

I'm not going to pay thousands more for a car that will break down sooner. American auto has not recovered because many of the improvments in manufacturing have been fought by the unions. Most of the processes that increase quality also increase efficancy. If the line is more efficient then you don't need as many workers. The unions have fought everthing that reduces the numbers of workers needed.

Re:Slacker Thee

[GreyPoopon]

Unions got you the 40 hour work week, vacations, unemployment insurance, work-place safety, end of child-labor, end of the 16 hour mandatory work day. The worst thing for the economy has been the decline in worker power in the last 30 years. It has allowed concentration of wealth at unprecedented levels.

Unions are only useful when a company has little or no other place to which to turn. Since labor markets started opening up overseas, the power of the Union has declined dramatically. Funny how the movement of labor to overseas started at about the 30 year-ago-mark that you cited for the beginning of the decline.

I agree with you that the power of the Union has declined. I agree that the wealthy have taken unprecedented advantage of it. However, I'd like to point out that the rise to power of Japanese automobile manufacturers is a perfect example of what happens when American companies try to "play ball" with the unions. The only reason that American automobile companies are beginning to compete again is because the cost of manufacturing has risen dramatically in Japan.

Eventually "white collar" workers will realize that unions are the only way to resist.

All this would do is move jobs to India and China at a faster pace. If you really want to fix the problem, you have to get people to start paying attention to the employment practices of companies from which they purchase goods and services. All of those on-strike unionized workers continued to buy products from other companies who were treating their employees pretty much the same way. If you don't break this cycle, your union has no power at all, and only serves to give the company a reason to start offshoring.

Re:Slacker Thee

[Darby]

However, I'd like to point out that the rise to power of Japanese automobile manufacturers is a perfect example of what happens when American companies try to "play ball" with the unions.

Don't try to blame the rise of the Japanese Automakers on the unions.
The primary reason is that the Japanese thought for the long term and the American auto makers thought for the short term.
Ever heard the term "planned obsolescence"?
American cars were absolute shit for a number of years *by design*. Their thought was that if the car broke down sooner then the customer would have to buy a new one sooner. Obviously, they would buy a new American car because the Japanese cars were crap.
Well, lo and behold the Japanese cars were no longer the peices of crap that they once were.

That is why there was a crisis in the US auto industry, and that is why the Japanese auto industry rose.

This short term thinking is rampant in this country and it is almost universally negative for the country. It does make a few people very rich in the short term. At the expense of everybody else and with no long term benefit to anybody.

Re:Slacker Thee

[KilobyteKnight]

Read "Strike!," "Which Side are you on?" and "Rivethead"---learn something about history, and stop repeating the Pravda-esque ideology of the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and the
Republican and Democratic parties.

Wow, that's quite an attack on American institutions. It would be absurd in and of itself. However, as this was a story about a French woman upset with the French socialized work place, your comments are even more out in left feild. Did you read and comprehend the article?

Re:Slacker Thee

[serutan]

Sounds like you are very happy in your job. Fine. Lots of people are. But there's a reason Dilbert is so popular, and it's not because cubicle-land is utopia. My experience of 25 years in the corporate world as a contractor, working for many different companies, is that managements that treat technical employees like commodities are more common than those that don't.

Post again someday after you change jobs and work for a manager who is technically clueless yet insists on micromanaging you anyway, who turns vague estimates into hard deadlines, who insists that you work 60 hrs/week to solve the latest crisis caused by his/her own ill-considered decisions, who believes outside consultants and ignores you, who basically wants you to shut and do as you're told and leave the thinking to the smarter, higher-paid people who get stock options. Then come back and preach the joys of your world.

Re:Slacker Thee

[flacco]

The bottom line? My only way to resist is not stealing stuff from works or unionizing. Unionizing would hurt myself and others like me who are well above average in skill, productivity, and value-added to the company.

that's a nice personal perspective, but what about the (by definition) large majority of workers who are *not* "well above average"?

true, employment is driven by a series of sticks and carrots, and i don't think we can get away from that; but should human beings necessarily have their destinies dictated by the results of endless "cage-match" style antagonism with their fellow workers (competitors), having nothing but their personal, individual strengths to protect them?

i think there is a role for collective power in the labor force. sure, everyone wants to maximize productivity, but there is something to be said for smoothing out the distribution of wealth too, and coming to common understandings about what makes a humane, non-hellish work environment. even if you, personally, believe you would do better in a dog-eat-dog environment, you're still living the life of a dog, and consigning those around you (many of whom, admittedly, may have lesser talents than yourself) to the same circumstances.

organized labor is simply the counterweight to amassed capital in the hands of the economic elite. capital would love to deal with each worker-unit individually, and play one against the other. the role of labor is to realize labor's true worth as a unit.

Re:Slacker Thee

[lysium]

replacing me would cost between $15k and $30k in training costs as well as anothe $10k-20k in lost revenues while my replacement comes up to speed.

So you are basically tenured. You have a close rapport with your management, you are functioning well in the niche you have created. As the French author advocated, that is surely the best way to get ahead in a broken system.

Unionizing would hurt myself and others like me who are well above average in skill, productivity, and value-added to the company.

Re:Slacker Thee

[Phoenix666]

i cannot believe that this was modded up to 5. anyone arrogant and ignorant enough to believe that blue collar workers are just "human machines" and that white collar workers are somehow more intelligent and skilled either has a lot of growing up to do or desperately needs a visit from the down-sizing fairy.

the fact is, rare indeed is the employee who does not do the same task over and over again, white-collar/blue-collar be damned. my brother is an engineer with ford motor company. he graduated with honors from carnegie-mellon. know what he works on now, day in and day out? hood fasteners. they could just as easily replace him with another engineer to design hood fasteners as they could the union guy assembling them on the line. it is, my friend, the hallmark of working for corporate America. they do not want you to be indispensable, because then you are irreplaceable. they dedicate entire management training sessions to making sure that the enterprise is not exposed to that sort of risk.

unions protect their members against the amoral, artificial persons known as corporations. if you are not an executive with a high priced lawyer, or in a union that can protect your livelihood, then you are vulnerable. from the sound of it, your turn is long overdue, and mazeltov! redefining the meaning of "blue collar" and "white collar" to suit your current situation won't seem so cute then.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Can't be bothered to RTFA.

[Kenja]

Can't be bothered to RTFA, I've got too much slashdotting to do here at work before lunch rolls around.

Re:Can't be bothered to RTFA.

[ackthpt]

Can't be bothered to RTFA, I've got too much slashdotting to do here at work before lunch rolls around.

<Comic Book Guy>
"Sorry, I can't get to that project right now, I'm terribly busy, please call back later, thank yew!"
"Now where was I? Oh, yes, moderating on /. 'Worse post, ever!'"
</Comic Book Guy>

Please follow her advice.

[grub]

Let the weenies that hate their work slack away. When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead. Then the weenies will bitch about not being liked, etc. ANYTHING but looking in the mirror and taking responsibility for their place on the ladder.

Re:Please follow her advice.

[NeoSkandranon]

Beware the union shop (well, some of them), where it might be the status quo to slack off and delay work, and anything resembling industrious labor will get you ostracized

Re:Please follow her advice.

[GeckoX]

Great point. (Not always the case as you have implied, but certainly true much of the time)

Anyone ever had a job on a roadwork crew?
What happened when you showed up on your first day and tried to actually work a full day without standing around with your thumb up your ass?

I quit after 2 weeks of being shown that it is not actually acceptable to 'work' all day long. How people can show up to a job day in and day out and fuck the dog all day every day is beyond me. In my experience this leads to the LONGEST days imaginable. Working is a heck of a lot easier when you actually work. (You know those days where you don't even get a chance to think hardly, and they're typically over before you realize the day was even begun!)

Re:Please follow her advice.

[WormholeFiend]

In my experience this leads to the LONGEST days imaginable.

looking on the bright side, at least it will give you the impression that you live a longer life, as opposed to life in the fast lane...

Re:Please follow her advice.

[GeckoX]

Careful, I never suggested I'm living in the fast lane.

I cherish my time above all else. I work to live and nothing more. I do not and never will live to work.

I work an 8 hour day 5 days a week on average. I will not work overtime unless it is compensated with flex-time. My work days fly by and the _rest_ of my life gives me the impression of a longer life.

It's up to us as individuals to make these choices and decisions though, and to stick to them. Our employers are not people, they are corporations and they will use us as much as we let them.

Choose not to let them, you'll be a happier human being for it I assure you.

Re:Please follow her advice.

[GeckoX]

Don't make the mistake of assuming you have no choice, and that you have made no choices. You have made your bed, and appear to have no problem in lying in it. That's great, but you have made a choice to live your life this way, the company you work for did not force this on you.

Who is forcing you to work for that employer? Nobody except yourself. Don't like it? Change. Can't find a better employer? Be your own. There is ALWAYS choice.

Concidering you appear to be sacrificing your own personal life for wor

Re:Please follow her advice.

[gmack]

Forget that.. I did that for months on end only to get layed off and I having to completely relearn what to do with free time.

Now that I'm employed again I fight any hours over 40. The laugh is that now that I'm not the company footstool I'm valued even more now. It does however help that there is no one here who can do what I do.

Learn some ballance.

Re:Please follow her advice.

[hey!]

Hehe. This takes me back.

Back when I was putting myself through school working as a electronic/mechinical tech in a research lab, I had a terrific work ethic.

A lot of our time was wasted waiting around for some project mileston or some demonstration needed for a proposal. So, being industrious me, I made it my job to be useful every hour of every day. I checked the lab bays and made sure that all the appropriate safety equipment was in place and that there were first aid kits available and everyone knew where they were. I fabricated shelves and racks for things and made useful devices for moving heavy stuff around. I checked that all the equipment was inventoried and properly cleaned and maintained. I broke down useless old equipment for parts that we'd need, sorted and inventoried all the pieces. When there was nothing else I could think of, I swept the floor while the other guys sat around and drank coffee.

So, when a really cool project came along, who did the bosses turn to?

Right. Somebody else but me. I was already busy, the cool projects went to the guys who spent their time loafing. In fact, I'd trained everybody to think of me as their maid or their mom. I was useful as hell doing what I was already doing. Oh yes, and since the things that you do affect your job description, and the skill level of the things on your job description determine your compensation, guess who was in line for promotion and raises?

There was an important lesson in this situation for me. I just wish I knew what it was. Other than that bosses (even ones with PhDs) are stupid.

Re:Please follow her advice.

[hey!]

Job title: Eletromechanical tech. I was working during a hiatus in my school career to raise money to pay for tuition, not as an intern. The jobs were not ones that required a degree (i.e. technician jobs, not engineer jobs). I had way on the ball more than the other guys.

And, no I'm not bitter. I was being funny.

I think this post has gone to +5 faster than any other post that I've made, so I seem to have touched a nerve. The truth is that this work experience, as well as others, has taught me a lot.

Looking back at my young self, I have to laugh. I expected to be a)noticed then b) appreciated then c) rewarded for being more diligent and hard working than the other guys. Well, the plan fails at step A. Very few bosses notice when anything happens unless it is bad and requires their attention. People don't go to boss school and learn how to run an efficient organization. By in large, bosses are consumed with their own day to day concerns and as in the dark as anyone else as to how make things run better. They'll piss away all the staff time and let the place turn into an unsafe stye, then deal with accidents and curse the slow response time when crunch time comes.

The lesson is: when you are the situation of having to manage yourself, then you are also in the position of having to manage your boss. Bosses love to have somebody tell them what needs to be done, as long as it doesn't sound like your are telling them what to do. I call this "Boss Management", and key is bringing things to the boss's notice. This is how the older, wiser me would handle this situation today:

Me: Hey Dick, I noticed we have a lot of down time around here.

Dr. Dick: Yeah, but right now there isn't any work to do until until we present to DOE next month.

Me: Well, sure, but there's still better ways we can use our time than just sitting around and waiting. We can improve the safety and organization of the lab; I've noticed for example there's only one first aid kit and it's nowhere near where anyone is going to have an accident. We can get things organized and ready for crunch time. We can build things that are useful or spend our time on projects that would sharpen our skills. Hell, you know you're going to give a VIP tour, and the place looks like a pigstye. There's no reason we can't keep the place spruced up rather than running around at the last minute. Plus a well organized lab will make a better impression.

Dr. Dick: OK, why don't you go ahead and do it.

Me: Great, but I think this would be better coming from you. The guys would take it more seriously. Why don't you write a memo suggesting the tech staff put together a plan to use slack time more effectively. You can use some of the suggestions I made.

Dr. Dick: I don't know, I'm really busy now.

Me: OK, I'll draft it for you, and if it looks OK it can go out over your signature.

The things to remember is that you can't expect bosses to notice things or to have a plan to make things better. You're the one with the ideas, so you package them up nice and sweet and tie it up with a bow and let the boss rubber stamp it. It gets the job done, spreads the work fairly, and it gets you noticed and credited with making things better.

The funny thing is you have it backwards

[SuperKendall]

If you'd bother to read the (very short) article at all, you'd know that actually part of the reason she proposes slacking is in fact to get ahead!

It's very dependant on the French business climate, but basically she says that since you have no chance to advance through good work (becaue the system is very rigid and based on tenure or diplomas), instead slack off in ways that few people notice - since the system makes it almost impossible (or very unlikley) to fire you, a boss will more likley move you up somewhere else than try to deal with you!

Now for an American slant - could you please let us all know where you work where your review determines how much you move forward? I have had a great carreer but any movements up have been more about me forcing the issue than being moved up because of good reviews. And I've seen plenty of people move up the ladder without good reviews to back them. Reviews, and pandering to them, are possibly the most pointless waste of time ever invented by humanity.

Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards

[bobthemuse]

It's very dependant on the French business climate

No, it's dependent on not being able to fire people who are useless. If you ever work for a unionized public agency in the US, you will see this. Completely incompetent people with no drive whatsoever. Most of them are determined to put in the absolute minimum. Can't fire them, so they get promoted in the hopes that the new hire won't be so bad. Ever wonder why state universities are so top-heavy?

Re:Please follow her advice.

[Mateito]

When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

Please give me a one-way ticket to your ideal world.

The chances that annual reviews will hand out awards in a way that correspondes to reality is basically nil. The problem, widely documented, is that most low to middle IT managers have no management skills. Corperations are failing to instill these skills when promoting good technical people.

Its Catch 22, we need your technical skills so we promote you, but when we p

Re:Please follow her advice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Annual reviews are garbage. Half the time, they are glossed over because there is WORK TO BE DONE rather than filling out pissy little paperwork. The rest of the time, they often go by a "curve" which means if 100 employees all kick super ass, 20% will always get fucked, 20% will always be gods on paper and 60% will be mediocre... evne though they ALL kick as much ass.

And companies don't so much care about your reviews. When it comes to layoff time, seniority plays more of a role than capability, productivity and work-ethic. That seems bizarre since a company that is having financial trouble should trim their belt by retaining only the few best people they can rather than ditching everyone based on number of years in the company, retaining some of the crappier, lazier, lesser qualified individuals simply because they've been at the company, skating by without notice, longer.

Seriously, reviews aren't worth the paper they're written on.

I put in 80 hour work weeks for seven years. I lived my work. I worked at work, then I went home and worked on work the rest of the night. Plus weekends. And holidays. That's assuming I didn't just live at work, which I did for weeks at a time. And all of my reviews were golden. But I didn't play the political game as much. Rather than kissing ass and talking big about myself, I kept my nose down and did the work that was being neglected by those who were spending their time ass kissing rather than working.

I neglected my health and social life and now I'm in very poor health (living in an office and eating crap food so you can spend more time working is a bad thing in the long run) and I have no social network. All I did was work. Day, night, weekend, holiday. Sometimes I would go home at 10pm and drive back at 2am because I got bored or wanted to get more work done, even though the work day didn't start until 9am.

Anyway, I was laid off a few months ago in favor of hiring a bunch of people in india. I noted that all of the people that were laid off had been there less tiem than those who were kept on the payroll, and many of those who were laid off were known company-wide to be far more talented and capable than those that stayed on.

Re:Please follow her advice.

[bluekanoodle]

Here's where you missed it then. Most people who complain about how "I work harder then everybody else in my office, and I don't play the political game at work, i just do my job, and do it well and now I got shafted," don't get it.

The fact is, that playing the social game is part of your job. Is it written in your job description? No. Do they teach a college course on it? probably not. Don't like it? Tough. It's a harsh world out there and nepotism, favoritism and who you know are just as important as what you know. Deal with it and move on, or drop out, grow some dreadlocks, and blame the man.

Re:Please follow her advice.

[phearlez]

Yeah, they're of the same breed as the men who whine they don't have any luck with women because they are "nice guys" and not "assholes." The reason they have no luck is that they're wimps who never stand up for what they want (which they mistake for what it is to be 'nice') and nobody - men or women - respects a doormat. They're great to wipe your feet on but you wouldn't take one to bed.

But I think you misidentify it when you call it "playing the social game" though - this assumes it's necessarily frivilous rather than perfectly reasonable. Being agreeable to your cow orkers means they feel free to approach you for assitance. Putting the big boss's requests above other people's demonstrates a respect for the hierarchy (even if s/he doesn't respect the chain of command).

Re:Please follow her advice.

[Ubergrendle]

I feel for you. I've seen employees -- coworkers, superiors, people who report to me -- lose their focus in life. Corporations and management can easily run over their employees unless they say 'no'. What I've always found surprising is how little negative response 'no' ultimately solicits... I've never seen someone fired for saying 'no' to overtime, or 'no' to working on yet another project, or 'no' to a missed deliverable. At most it only hits your performance rating (in a severe case) which might effect

Re:Please follow her advice.

[mvdwege]

In my personal experience, working harder than the slackers just means that the boss will pile even more responsibility (read: work) on your shoulders, until you're about to break.

Meanwhile, the slackers will just have to do a little more than just slack oof, just enough to get in a decent performance review.

And worse, because the corporate ladder is actually a pyramid, your chances of climbing the ladder are actually not as good as they want you to believe. The competition for the next highest level job

Re:Please follow her advice.

[pubjames]

When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

My dad once gave me a piece of advice that stuck with me because it was so out of character of my dad to say it.

He had worked dilligently and hard all his life for a good employer. He did so thinking that that was the way to get to the top - your achiements would be recognised.

What he told me was, it isn't the people like him who get to the top. It's those that know how to "play the game":

* take credit for work you haven't done. This espcially works if you have junior staff that want to get ahead - you can ride on top of them.
* quickly dissociate yourself from projects that go wrong. Subtly point the finger of blame at others.
* be a nice guy most of the time, but know when the moment is to stab your friends in the back.
* get others (especially your subordinates) to do your job for you. They'll probably do it better anyway.
* Make friends with people as high up the ladder as you can. Really suck up to them.
* etc.

My dad didn't want me to do any of these things, he just didn't want me to spend my working life under a false illusion.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Close, but misses the mark

[skrysakj]

This mostly pertains to France, which is similar to other European countries whereby employees stay at one job, for life, and very rarely get fired.

I think US citizens should focus on different things, like getting 3 or 4 weeks of vacation per year, not just two.

Also, some professions are not equal in the USA. Medical residents, for example, are under the same employee laws as everyone else, but routinely work 100 to 120 hours per week. Only *now* are they starting to get tired of it and fight back.
Good for them, because that kind of thing is outrageous and needs to change.

Instead of focusing on "Bonjour Paresse", people should focus on working to live, not living to work. [worktolive.info] Or, how to be a good employee [skrysak.com] and not slack off, bringing down the system.

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[pubjames]

This mostly pertains to France, which is similar to other European countries whereby employees stay at one job, for life, and very rarely get fired.

That's one hell of a sweeping generalisation.

Although this is more true of Europe than the USA, it is not true of all jobs (especially IT jobs), nor is it true of all countries.

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[Mateito]

Nah.

Spanish companies are bastards (and, as an sometime employee of Telefonica, I can say that with authority).

The Spanish management mentality is really stuck in the "People are meat" age. Bum on seat = position filled. If you can sack somebody and replace them with somebody cheaper, then do it. Experience counts for nothing. If you've got a degree, then that is what you are.

Efficiency means "sack people", business plan means "sell stuff". Its really a very simple way to look at the complex dynamics of

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[Mateito]

I'm can't speak for the French, but realise that "hours worked" does not equal productivity.

Chileans are number 3 when it comes to most hours worked, but number 43 when it comes to productivity.

Maybe US culture still rewards people who spend 80 hours a week with their nose to the grindstone, but in general, people who achieve goals are more highly regarded, whether they do it in 20 hours or 80.

Work HARD = Work SMART, not Work LONG

And, yeah, I'm slacking, but I'm putting in my resignation next week (unless I can negotiate an exit package this week).

AHHHHOOOGAH! ALERT!

[TiggertheMad]

Work HARD = Work SMART, not Work LONG

ALERT! DANGER WILL ROBINSON, DANGER! This person has uttered a Dilbert 'Pointy haired boss'-ism, and no humor or irony has been detected. Someone notify Cowboy Neil that a PHB has gained access to Slashdot, and pull the account, quick!

Re:so you're too lazy to fight

[madcow_ucsb]

You took the words right out of my mouth. It's not that the French are born to be slackers. It's that we Americans are born to be workaholics.

Frankly, very few of us do important enough work that if we put in 35 hour weeks instead of 80 the world would collapse in on itself. I mean, I take pride in what I do, but come on.

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[Ancil]

The French and Germans.. ..productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.

No it isn't.

USA: Unemployment 6.2%, GDP per capita $37,800
France: Unemployment 9.6%, GDP per capita $27,500
Germany: Unemployment 10.7%, GDP per capita $27,600

Those numbers are from the CIA World Factbook [cia.gov]. Obviously the details fluctuate, but you get the idea.

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[Ancil]

Average hours worked in 2003 (source [sbpost.ie]):

USA: 1,792
France: 1,453
Germany: 1,446

Per-capita GDP divided by average hours worked per year:

USA: $38,700 / 1,792hr = $21.60/hr
France: $27,500 / 1,453hr = $18.93/hr
Germany: $27,600 / 1,446hr = $19.09/hr

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[quax]

According to these numbers [ucsc.edu] the above statement is wrong - although GDP is pretty much tied. Given that the unemployment rate is so much higher and the number of vacation days almost double this does however mean that the productivity per worker per hour of labor must be higher in Germany than in the US. I.e. German workers get much more done in one work hour so that they can afford more holidays as well as subsidize such a high unemployment rate.

Having worked both in Germany as well as the US I can attest

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[Planesdragon]

Well, yes, but they have double-digit unemployment too. You can have all the holiday you want if you don't have a job!

"unemployment" is a bad measure. Tracking "per capita poverty" and "per capita productivity" is a much better measure. Or, heck, we could track "per worker productivity."

If your country and my country both have 100 people, and we both produce $1,000,000 in wealth per year, we have the same per-capita producitvity. If you employ 98 of those 100 while I employ 85, and those 2 non-workers in your society live in poverty while only 1 of mine lives in poverty, then picking statistics is even more important.

GDP: $1,000,000 you & me.
Per-capita: $10,000 you & me
Unemployment: 2% you, 15% me
Per-worker: $10,204 you, $11,764 me.
Poverty rate: 2% you, 1% me.

(if the conventional wisdom about socialsim and capitalism holds out, of course, your country would have a 1% poverty rate, while mine would be much higher--regardless of the rest.)

Good US Gov report regarding Productivity

[implex]

Mentions 4 countries with greater productivity per hour worked than the US. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1999/07/art3full.pdf [bls.gov]

Re:Close, but misses the mark

[clintp]

Uh-huh. Maybe he was committing fraud and came in every weekend "just to cook the data" a bit to make sure he wasn't going to get caught.

In some "secure" industries, vacations are mandatory for this reason (and others). If you're gone for a week, it's harder to keep the books cooked.

One name ...

[Lead Butthead]

Walley. (read: Dilbert.)

In Slashdot?

[rkrabath]

Are you aware of who you're posting to?

All we are is lazy. This post is the proof!

The title is a pun

[JohnGrahamCumming]

On the title of a very famous French book called Bonjour Tristesse [amazon.com] (Hello Sadness).

John.

That'll lower the productivity index

[grunt107]

And give businesses more excuses to outsource.

If you are so worried about the dead-end/exiting nature of the lower/middle jobs, start kissing major butt to move into managment.

Or maybe start your own business doing something you are interested in.

And if you still think loafing is the way to go, please do not procreate.

Re:That'll lower the productivity index

[laigle]

What good would that do? I'm still a competent engineer, no matter how much butt I kiss. That means I can't be promoted, or they'd have to find soemone else to fill my slot. It also means I'm ineligible for pay commensurate with my abilities, because management doesn't consider anyone a "real employee" unless they're involved in hyping stock.

Trying for middling promotions is just polishing the brass on the Titanic. We're not going into economic collapse in the US because of slacking. We're collapsing because management is viciously incompetent, and Wall Street insists on keeping them that way.

Re:That'll lower the productivity index

[Mateito]

We're collapsing because management is viciously incompetent

Hallajulah, brother!

Then, do what I'm doing.

After 5 years of complaining about shit managers, I arrived at "I can do better than that", so I enrolled in an tech-oriented MBA program.

Recommend it to anyone. You can't lead tech if you don't understand tech and leadership. We are engineers, we learn from manuals. An MBA has plenty of merit. Also has plenty of bullshit and a good dose of religion... but enough hard and real stuff to justify its exi

Re:That'll lower the productivity index

[laigle]

"If your manager doesn't want to pay you more, and you think you are worth more, GO FIND ANOTHER JOB. If you really are good, you'll find one."

No you won't. Have you picked up a business paper in the last ten years? Even at the height of the dot com "boom" people were working two or three jobs just to break even. That's why all us good worker bees keep showing up for the low wages and the crappy benefits, because the alternative is living in a cardboard box.

"If you can't find another job, you're probably not worth what you think you are."

You misunderstand the concept of worth. In capitalism, a good or service is worth what the buyer is willing to spend for it. This price depends on market conditions and on the perceived value. In this case, the buyer (management) percieves the value as virtually nothing, because they don't care about making product, only increasing stock value. And the market is offering them a cheaper alternative due to illegal currency fixing in the Asian market, combined with hideously low standards of living. On top of this, management makes no value distinction within the engineering profession, because they don't understand engineering.

I understand my value very well. That's why I'm sitting at this desk, taking what I can get.

"Think about it from management's standpoint. You are willing to take low pay and still work."

Because my alternative is to take no pay and not work. Fairly easy decision matrix there.

"What economic benefit is there for the company to voluntarily raise your salary, given that you are already working for the salary you have agreed to -- agreed to through your own inaction."

They would be able to get a real work day out of their employees. They would be able to hire better employees. They would increase their customer base. They would increase the perceived value of their product in the market.

"I've tripled my salary in 5 years by advocating for myself, so I speak from experience."

No you haven't. Jesus, do people honestly think this type of transparent garbage convinces people? Let me guess, you're also the head of a Fortune 500 company, hold seven degrees, are married to a lingerie model, and just discovered cold fusion.

"Show your value."

Meaningless phrase in a capitalist system. The market sets your value, not you. Your value is set by a consumer, in this case a wantonly uninformed consumer who happens to be stuffing several items into their pocket while the cashier isn't looking.

"Show your value. Be dependable. Be consistent. Demonstrate integrity."

I am. I have. I do. That's why I'm locked into my job. If I weren't, I would be fired. But the same competence and professionalism that gives me job security eliminates the prospect of advancement, because I'm too valuable in my current position. And the lack of advancement insures wage stagnation.

Re:That'll lower the productivity index

[Mateito]

And if you still think loafing is the way to go, please do not procreate.

She's on top!

..why not spread gangrene..

[burgburgburg]

"why not spread gangrene through the system from inside?"

I'd have to imagine that that sounds much more attractive in the original French. Let's see what Babelfish says:

"pourquoi gangrene non écarté par le système de l'intérieur ?"

Yes, I was right. That sounds much more attractive. I'd like some, but without the butter.

Gangrene up on that azz...

[Mitleid]

[the author] argues that France's ossified corporate cultural no longer offers rank-and-file employees the prospect of success, so, "why not spread gangrene through the system from inside?"

Interesting concept. Of course, I'd have to read the book to get the full explanation of this philosophy, but I think corporatist/capitalist countries have in fact gotten to the point where the corporate culture isn't one where one can aspire to promote themselves, but moreso just make sure that they're going to have a job come tomorrow morning. Business administration seems to have gotten to the point where employees have become so anonmyous and replaceable that, for the most part, it seems no one is encouraged to maintain or even develop a sense of loyalty. Maybe her suggestion to eat out these corporations from the inside could prove to light a fire under their asses. On the other hand, as I think anyone can attest to being displayed in the past, it will most likely just instill the people in charge to take away more and more rights and benefits from the employees as a means to counter-act the half-assed work they're getting in return for paying out salaries. Ah well, the door swings both ways it would seem. I guess it'd just be safe enough to admit that we're all pretty much fucked.

Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this.

[Performer Guy]

Seems like a self fulfilling prophecy, but French socialists are the first to complain when the little guy actually gets a piece of the action from a company instead of the State.

The fact is that in Europe tech employees don't benefit as much from options etc whether at startups or larger corporations. The typical reaction however is not to expect better rewards or demand a piece of the pie (with the corporate tax incentives that are required to encourage it) but to tax the hide off profitable corporations and wealthy individuals a.k.a. "fat cats". There are no angel investors in Europe and almost no engineer level guys who made it rich in the rank & file who are then able to comfortably start their own business.

The typical small business starts out there with one or two guys, no cash (or a bank loan taken against your house) and maybe a grant from the EU or some development commission.

she might lose her job...

[Anonymous Coward]

...just for writing the book. I had read this BBC article a few weeks ago:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3935669.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Wrong time of year...

[Tailhook]

...as about half the French corporate workforce is on vacation right now. Probably not the best season to try to advise them.

Vive la SI!!

[Potor]

This is old hat. Guy Debord's Internationale Situationniste [nothingness.org] was daubing "ne travaillez jamais" on walls back when it was formenting the Paris student riots of 1969. And they meant it, man ...

Living in France...

[dmayle]

I know it's kind of cynical, but I live in France, and this isn't vry counter-culture at all. There's a continuous struggle between those who try to take advantage of the system from the bottom (the "lazy" ones), and those who are trying to take advantage from the top (what we usually term "evil corporations"). The French are working on equitable treatment all around, and for the most part they get it. (36 hour work weeks, I get 7 weeks of paid vacation a year, great social care/ health insurace, and no, the taxes are almost exactly what I paid in the United States. They're only very sharp once you get to the 150,000 and up range.) The downside is that there are many who take advantage of this to try and bilk the system. I'm glad to be here, because they do right by me, and I try to do right by them, but the worst of the lot are really making things terrible for the companies that are trying to do the right thing, and aren't "evil".

Nice try

[lorcha]

the taxes are almost exactly what I paid in the United States.

V-A-T

Re:Nice try

[dmayle]

The parent brings up VAT (or AVT as it is known in France) which stands for Value Added Tax. He's right to point it out, because many luxury goods cost much more in Europe than they do in the U.S. In France, the AVT is 19% (imagine having to pay 19% sales tax on DVD players, TVs, etc.). It's a very valid point, however the basic cost of living is much cheaper here than in the U.S. Fresh baked loaves of bread can be had for 20 cents. Bottles of wine for 2 or 3 dollars. Going out, you aren't expected to tip the bartender a dollar for every drink, and you won't pay 8-10 bucks for a single drink at the bar. Top shelf resteraunts are just as expensive, but the quality of food you get at your average resteraunt blows away what you're used to getting in the U.S. And, to top it all of, as a way of subsidizing resteraunts in France, most employees get these vouchers called 'Ticket Resteraunt' that cost $4.50 each and have a face value of $9.00, which is just perfect for lunch at a resteraunt. Most resteraunts have lunch 'menus' (think of it as a gourmet version of McDonald's #2) that typically consist of something equivalent to a steak, a glass of wine, and an after dinner coffee at this price range. (For an additional buck or two, they throw in dessert.)

But, of course, for the geeks who want to know about the gadgets. I just bought a 120GB hard drive and it cost me 80 Euro. Blank DVDs are around 50-60 cents a piece (as opposed to the 25 cents thats starting to be common in the U.S.) SFF computers will run you about 320 Euro, and yes, these all include tax, and are all a little bit more than you pay in the U.S.

Music is much more expensive (unless you shop iTunes Europe), and DVDs definitely run a little more expensive, though the bargain bins get to be as low as 3.00 each. All in all, I make less then I did in the U.S., but I live as comfortably, and I travel a lot more. (I've been to Spain, Ireland, and Italy already this year.)

Well, that's France for you... A bit off topic, but maybe of interest to see what it's like to live over here...

This is an American phenomenon too...

[jkiryako]

"...if you don't like your job, you don't quit, you just go in every day and do it really half ass, that's the American way." - Homer Simpson

Managment by Paper

[rf0]

If you just walk around with a bit of paper in your hand you look busy and can make sure you achieve nothing.

Rus

The Stint

[havoc]

There was a time when factories ran around the clock and would then close down for months on end until all their stock was sold. The workers had a great solution to this problem called "The Stint," an agreed upon rate of production that no worker would go over. To quote Joanne B. Ciulla:

Employers were constantly trying to make employees work faster. Most workplaces had a stint, and those who failed to maintain it by doing too much or too little were ostracized. Workers who upheld the stint despite the curses of their boss earned reputations as "good men" and trustworthy masters of the trade. The worker restriction of output symbolized "unselfish brotherhood," personal dignity, and "cultivation of the mind." One reason why the stint was important is that workers wanted control over the amount of time that they worked. Businesses at this time often ran factories around the clock and then shut down for months at a time.

Another interesting part of the workingman's moral code was having a "manly bearing" toward the boss. In the nineteenth century this popular expression was an honorific signifying dignity, respect, and egalitarianism. A person earned his honorific by refusing to work while the boss was watching. It is useful to reflect on the difference between only working when the boss is watching and not working when the boss is watching. They are both gestures of defiance, but one is about keeping one's job and the other is about keeping one's dignity. The first says, "I don't want to work, but I will, because you are watching." The second says, "I'll work because I want to, not because you are watchingThere was a time when factories ran around the clock and would then close down for months on end until all their stock was sold. The workers had a great solution to this problem called "The Stint," an agreed upon rate of production that no worker would go over. To quote Joanne B. Ciulla:

Employers were constantly trying to make employees work faster. Most workplaces had a stint, and those who failed to maintain it by doing too much or too little were ostracized. Workers who upheld the stint despite the curses of their boss earned reputations as "good men" and trustworthy masters of the trade. The worker restriction of output symbolized "unselfish brotherhood," personal dignity, and "cultivation of the mind." One reason why the stint was important is that workers wanted control over the amount of time that they worked. Businesses at this time often ran factories around the clock and then shut down for months at a time.

Another interesting part of the workingman's moral code was having a "manly bearing" toward the boss. In the nineteenth century this popular expression was an honorific signifying dignity, respect, and egalitarianism. A person earned his honorific by refusing to work while the boss was watching. It is useful to reflect on the difference between only working when the boss is watching and not working when the boss is watching. They are both gestures of defiance, but one is about keeping one's job and the other is about keeping one's dignity. The first says, "I don't want to work, but I will, because you are watching." The second says, "I'll work because I want to, not because you are watching."

Re:The Stint

[mikael]

He/she has doubled their productivity by posting the same reply twice in a comment. We won't hear from 'havoc' for another three months now.

No loafing

[Burpmaster]

Seriously, have these businesses considered a no loafing [homestarrunner.com] sign?

One obviosly hasn't tasted India

[Neo's Nemesis]

I am living in India's capital, New Delhi. And the condition of government departments here is stagnating. According to the official hours, you work from 10AM to 6PM. But the schedule goes something like this:

10AM - Crowd bundles up at the office
10:30 to 11:00AM - The staff arrives
11:00 to 12:30PM - Work!
12:30PM to 1:00PM - Closed for Lunch
1:00 to 1:15PM - Getting-all-the-gas-out break
Then it is followed by some work, lots of bribery, lots of chatter with friends while the common man waits for his turn and so on...

On paper, its actually 40-45 hr weeks, but in reality its much less. And thats the situation in cities. In villages its worse than anything. No work for days, and that too only thru bribery. And OTOH, the private sector employee works his ass off till night to make himself and country proud (and also to pay off those heavy bribes). Sad and sic!

Venality and slackness would kill Indian dreams.

Dilbert- comparison

[panurge]

Scott Adams famously was an economist working for Bell on ISDN, who concluded it would flop because it was just made too difficult to understand. So he created Dilbert...which is all about dysfunctional corporate culture. I spent 10 years of my life being Dilbert before becoming a PHB, and Dilbert is still so true it sometimes hurts.

So a Frenchwoman, an economic adviser to the electricity industry no less, does something similar and it's:

• Jokes about the French (rather than useless management) on /.
• A disciplinary hearing.

My conclusion: We're all much the same. And my other conclusion: I hope she makes as much money as Scott Adams. It would go some way to show there is some kind of justice in the world.

I claim Prior Art!

[HorrorIsland]

Who do I sue?

Aw, forget it - too much work.

Obligatory Office Space quote

[UnknowingFool]

Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?

Have you seen Office Space?

Of the Bobs: Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
Peter: I wouldn't say I've been 'missing' it Bob.

Fuck you

[Hard_Code]

Slacking must be principled. If you have a pointless job and are going nowhere, ok, slack. On the other hand, if you have a white collar job that allows you to sit in a padded adjustible height chair and browse the internet, you are probably already better off than the vast majority of humanity. It means that some other chump has to pick up the slack because you decide to take out your ennui about the dismal nihilism of life in your workplace instead of confining such gestures to solitary binge drinking on weekends, like the rest of us schmoes do.

And if you are going to slack, slack productively! Become an activist or a political grafitti artist or something so the rest of us slobs have something amusing to look out on through our windows.

Re:Fuck you

[idiot900]

On the other hand, if you have a white collar job that allows you to sit in a padded adjustible height chair and browse the internet, you are probably already better off than the vast majority of humanity.

Just because someone else's life sucks worse than yours doesn't mean it's wrong to be unhappy with how things are in your own life, and want to change them for the better. If calculated slacking does that, then great.

This "sit down, shut up, and be thankful for what you have" attitude has always bother

"Political grafitti artist"

[0x0d0a]

On the other hand, if you have a white collar job that allows you to sit in a padded adjustible height chair and browse the internet, you are probably already better off than the vast majority of humanity....And if you are going to slack, slack productively! Become an activist or a political grafitti artist or something so the rest of us slobs have something amusing to look out on through our windows.

"Oh, yes, and sir, the VP of international business development is out spraypainting our walls with 'Terro

Rot

[e.m.rainey]

So her point I guess is a mental strike. Instead of fixing the rotting system from the inside by working harder and going nowhere, accelerate the rotting by doing nothing. Either they will have to give up on their socio-political HR poilicies and start basing promotion, hiring and firing on applicable indicators like skill or die by their own hand.

I'm suprised, France, that's very capitialistic of you. And here I thought you didn't swing that way.

My funny story

[GreenCrackBaby]

When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

A few years ago my job (programming) started to suck very very much. I started to slack, and I pushed to boundaries a little more every day. Over the coarse of a year I dropped from an 8-hour work day to 5-6, and most of those hours were spent surfing.

My manager called me into his office out of the blue, and I figured the time to answer had finally come. Instead, he gives me 1,000 stock options, a certification that said "Keep up the good work", and a 5% raise.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Ah the French...

[Patik]

then you piss-and-moan about Americans being more successful.

Gonna back that one up?

Re:Ah the French...

[JohnGrahamCumming]

Insightful?! Not sure the French are complaining about the Americans being more successful, they're actually sitting on the beach going on about how productive they are...

A much more informed view of "Europe vs. USA" can be found in a recent Economist. There's a multi-page special on the subject that boils down to:

1. USA has higher GDP/capita than EU, but
2. USA and EU have similar GDP/capita growth rates (in fact the same if you eliminate Germany which is having to cope with unification). How about the US tries merging with South America?
3. GDP/work hour is similar in USA and EU
4. US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours, i.e. EU citizens have same productivity as US, but work less hours, hence lower GDP/capita. Or to put it another way EU citizens have traded GDP/capita for leisure time, US citizens work much more and hence buy more stuff (TVs, cars, ...)

So there's no fundamental difference in GDP/work hour or productivity between the two federations. Europeans just take more time off, which might have a lot to do with the better health and better life expectancy in the EU. US citizens work like crazy and hence can afford houses stuffed with electronics, appliances and multiple cars.

I assume that you are a US citizen, perhaps you'd like to spend some of your disposable income buying the article here.

John.

Economist link

[JohnGrahamCumming]

Is here [economist.com].

John.

Re:Ah the French...

[pubjames]

So, Americans are more successful after all.

Depends on your definition of success. In Europe, "having the most money" is not the sole criteria for success.

Re:Ah the French...

[tumbaumba]

>>US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours

>So, Americans are more successful after all.

Perhaps when you turn forty and get tired of working your butt off you will realize that there more to success than having more disposable income than your neighbor, who can actually spend some time with kids and perhaps teach them something worthwhile.

Re:Ah the French...

[Mateito]

Getting all of South America drunk first would be prohibitively expensive.

No it wouldn't. South Americans are light-weights when it comes to alcohol, and every country has its native un-identifiable clear spirit that sells for a song because there's no import tax. In Peru its "Pisco", in Chile its "Aguadiente" (They also have "Pisco" but they deny stealing it from the Peruvians), in Bolivia it doesn't even have a name but its 95% alcohol and tasts like rocket fuel. I don't remember what the Brazillian one is called, but they mix into with lemons into a Cahparinha, which is really yummy.

Disclaimer: I am an Australian with an engineering degree. I am fully qualified to talk about drinking.

Re:Ah the French...

[pubjames]

Let's see, you read this, you get like 1-2 months off every year, then you piss-and-moan about Americans being more successful.

You really don't hear many Europeans moaning about Americans being "more successful". We could be more "successful" (if your definition of success is having more money) here in Europe if we wanted to just by working more.

However, the culture is very different here. Whereas someone like Bill Gates is looked up to in the USA, in Europe very rich people are not socially looked up to very much. In fact, they are generally looked upon as being greedy.

Believe me, the main reason Europeans "piss-and-moan" about the USA is because of your foreign policy, especially under Bush.

Re:Ah the French...

[fbg111]

"However, the culture is very different here. Whereas someone like Bill Gates is looked up to in the USA, in Europe very rich people are not socially looked up to very much. In fact, they are generally looked upon as being greedy."

My amateur theory on that difference is that Europe has a history of powerful people hoarding the wealth of society and justifying it using red herrings such as "divine right" and "noble blood". That was back in the time before people understood that sustained economic growth

More successful?

[leathered]

The French drink more, smoke more and do less than most Westerners. Yet they are third in the WHO rankings for life expectancy behind Japan and Australia while the United States languishes in 24th place. All I can say is that the French must be doing something right.

Americans work harder for longer hours, get paid more but die earlier. The French work less hours, get more holidays and live longer. So who is really the most successful?

Re:Caffeine

[GeckoX]

Those 3 statements just don't add up to an insightful comment without a) data backing up each of those points and b) something to correlate those 3 statements together.

Re:Caffeine

[Gooba42]

Personally, my theory on coffee and insomnia and all the other crap that's going on is related to the kind of work we're being made to do.

We're tired all day because we've tuned our bodies to a life of sitting at a desk or on a production line for 8 hours. Then at the end of the day our minds are so fried that we just want to vegetate. When it gets to be "bedtime" our bodies aren't tired enough to sleep properly so we take pills or stay up late.

Then in the morning after not having slept well, if at all, w

Re:Imagine...

[wmaker]

Imagine a beowulf cluster of people slacking off!

slashdot?