Infosys Founder Says India's Work Culture Must Change: 'Youngsters Should Work 70 Hours a Week' 171
NR Narayana Murthy, the founder of software consultancy giant Infosys, urged youngsters in India to work 70 hours a week if they want the nation to compete with other economies. From a report: Narayana Murthy, in conversation with former Infosys CFO Mohandas Pai, said that India's work productivity is among the lowest in the world. In order to compete with countries like China, India's youngsters must put in extra hours of work -- like Japan and Germany did after World War 2.
He also blamed other issues like corruption in the government and bureaucratic delays, saying: "India's work productivity is one of the lowest in the world. Unless we improve our work productivity, unless we reduce corruption in the government at some level, because we have been reading I don't know the truth of it, unless we reduce the delays in our bureaucracy in taking this decision, we will not be able to compete with those countries that have made tremendous progress." Murthy, 77, added his request to the youngsters of today. "So therefore, my request is that our youngsters must say, 'This is my country. I'd like to work 70 hours a week.'"
He also blamed other issues like corruption in the government and bureaucratic delays, saying: "India's work productivity is one of the lowest in the world. Unless we improve our work productivity, unless we reduce corruption in the government at some level, because we have been reading I don't know the truth of it, unless we reduce the delays in our bureaucracy in taking this decision, we will not be able to compete with those countries that have made tremendous progress." Murthy, 77, added his request to the youngsters of today. "So therefore, my request is that our youngsters must say, 'This is my country. I'd like to work 70 hours a week.'"
proven to be the bad choice (Score:5, Informative)
More hours doesn't mean more productivity, it means less productivity. Study after study has shown that people that work fewer hours are more productive overall. In the case of India, youth unemployment is also extremely high. For jobs where you just need to be there, having one person work 70 hours means you aren't paying for two people to work 35 hours. Unemployment means desperation, which breeds crime.
Re:proven to be the bad choice (Score:5, Insightful)
And as long as the country apparently has a rampant corruption problem won't this just mean more money for the corrupt officials with no outward gains for the country?
Re:proven to be the bad choice (Score:5, Insightful)
More hours doesn't mean more productivity, it means less productivity. Study after study has shown that people that work fewer hours are more productive overall. In the case of India, youth unemployment is also extremely high. For jobs where you just need to be there, having one person work 70 hours means you aren't paying for two people to work 35 hours. Unemployment means desperation, which breeds crime.
For jobs that require your mind to work, that's definitely true. I'm not sure to what extent it is true for jobs that don't require much thinking (e.g. various types of manual labor that aren't too strenuous). Then again, those jobs will all be done by robots in twenty years if they aren't already, so what's the point of destroying everybody's health trying to keep up with that?
But yes, working 70 hours per week doing almost anything is bordering on suicidally stupid if your goal is anything other than squeezing every penny of short-term productivity that you can out of the workers and then dumping the companies on some sucker before they collapse from mass burnout. Any time anybody suggests something like this, if you assume it's basically a pump-and-dump, more often than not, you'll be right. Either that or they're assuming a never-ending supply of people desperate to work in their industry (a la the video game industry) so that they can keep burning people out with impunity.
Either way, it isn't really sustainable, it just becomes unsustainable in different ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, those jobs will all be done by robots in twenty years if they aren't already, so what's the point of destroying everybody's health trying to keep up with that?
India has a large population. Killing off of a few of them through overwork won't impact much. If anything, it gives those in power less mouths to worry about spreading dissent, and it means that when their loyal servant robots finally replace the majority, they'll have less unruly subjects to kill. Why not encurage them to off themselves? Especially when the public will blame themselves for the deaths.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Guess what, guys (because these choads are seemingly always guys)... since you aren't, try asking some actual straight men when they "chose" to love the pussy. The reaction will be some mixture of bemusement and confusion, because it was never a choice, it was a realization that came one day shortly after nature flipped the horny switch to "on"
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why those AI robots are gonna be such a game changer.
Re: (Score:2)
You laugh, but there are people out there who actually believe that nonsense. I don't know if they have trouble separating fantasy from reality or if they just think slavery is really cool, but it's probably best not to encourage them.
Re:proven to be the bad choice (Score:4, Interesting)
I wasn't joking. And AI bots ARE going to be massive. The race is to get to where they can make more of themselves.
We had better get serious about a universal basic income real fucking soon.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh... I'm sorry to hear that.
We had better get serious about a universal basic income real fucking soon.
I agree, but for the many real reasons, not silly imaginary ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh... I'm sorry to hear that.
Thanks. :)
I agree, but for the many real reasons, not silly imaginary ones.
Whatever the reasons, global warming, shrinking populations, AI, a UBI may be the only way to stabilize societies in the medium term.
Re: (Score:2)
I totally foobared the quotes in that one, didn't I?
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, those jobs will all be done by robots in twenty years
The robots doing all the manual labor has been about 20 years away for the last 60 years.
Will it happen eventually? Probably. But we'll get into a whole heap of trouble assuming that its basically already here before it actually is. In 500 years robots will probably be doing all the manual labor. At which point between now and then the actual switch occurs is anybody's guess.
Re: (Score:2)
It is actually more true for manual labor. Scheduled overtime doesn't work, leads to higher accident rates and reduced quality. As the GP stated, study after study has shown this to be true. Overtime only works for short-term needs, and even then the extra hours are unlikely to yield more than 50% of normal throughput.
Re: (Score:2)
More hours doesn't equal more productivity, it just means people leave the workforce faster.
There are only three broad scenarios:
- 37.5 or 40 hour week in either 5 x 8 or 4 x 10 fixed no-overtime / 20 minute commute
- 30 or 32 hour week in 4 x 8 or or 3 x 10 or 5 x 6 fixed no-overtime / 30 minute commute
- Work from home with no minimum and unlimited overtime / 0 commute. Basically you work when you have time to work.
Basically Status quo, lighter status quo, and "work from home without commute"
At any rate, wh
Re:proven to be the bad choice (Score:5, Insightful)
India already has a huge brain drain. InfoSys isn't known for the quality of its workers anyway. So the people leaving the workforce already happens, as soon as someone gets some good experience they start looking anywhere except InfoSys, and if they can get that work visa in Us or Europe they start packing. Why work 70 hours a week for subsistance wages when you can work 70 hours a week for a contracting agency in America?
(an incentive to work long hours is to have hourly pay so you can make yourself more money, however a disencentive to work long hours is when only your lame CEO gets rich).
Re:proven to be the bad choice (Score:4, Interesting)
You are missing the point
Working 70 hours a week and just barely getting by means in a generation Indias 1 billion plus people will be gutted.
Just a mere 40 years worth. Will cut their population down to managable levels
Think chinas 1 kid policy for 35 years without the politcial side effect
Re: (Score:2)
If you're going to look at the eugenics angle, is it a good idea to enforce a lack of ability to reproduce on a population that demonstrates technical acumen to learn and technical skill?
For what it's worth I don't really think that it's a good idea to choose any particular group for that sort of penalty, because once imposed it can be applied elsewhere at the whims of then-current leadership.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just propaganda to convince workers that they need to work longer. Like many It jobs in the US, you have a class of workers that insist they must work more than 40 hours a week because "it's expected", even though technically this is illegal in most states.
Re:proven to be the bad choice (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a kind of measurability bias going on here. Productivity is hard to measure, but it's easy to count time an employee spends in the workplace -- in fact you're probably doing that already with timesheets. So if you need to show you're doing something about productivity, the thing that takes the least effort or imagination is to increase work hours.
I recently heard a historian talking about the crude frontal assault tactics used by Russia in Ukraine, and he brought up the famous WW1 "Christmas Truce". This is romanticized as a magical story of the Christmas spirit, but in fact spontaneous local truces [wikipedia.org] between enlisted soldiers facing each other across no man's land were an ongoing headache for commanders. If you as a British soldier firing at a German in his trench made a point of shooting conspicuously high, there was a very good chance Fritz would return the favor. Commanders resorted to frontal assaults [youtube.com] because compliance with those orders was easy to measure. You simply count your own soldiers' corpses.
Russians are trying to wage a war of attrition (Score:2)
And it's working, incidentally. Call it crude or not, it works. The military fraction in the Ukraine is draining rapidly in the face of it. You can tell by the increasingly strident recruiting calls within Ukraine and their openness to conscripting women recently. It's incidentally how the Soviets beat the Nazis, same kind of attrition. Tactically, the Germans were always superior when the numbers were within reasonable measure. Didn't matter in the end when they were outnumbered by 3-5 times with a f
Re: proven to be the bad choice (Score:3)
He said "work", he didn't say the workers should get corresponding pay raises to compensate for the extra work... that was a big leap of faith on your part. LOL
But I agree, the issue is productivity, which is calculated as:
Productivity = Widgets / hours
If an Indian worker makes 100 widgets in 35 hours, they'd have to make 200 widgets in 70 hours to break even, and to increase productivity they'd need to grind out in excess of 200 widgets.
Re: (Score:2)
I interpreted it specifically as not getting a corresponding pay raise, because of the appeal to jingoism^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hnationalism.
Re: (Score:2)
This Pai geezer probably also believes that two women can have a baby in 4 1/2 months.
Hasn't anyone tried to tell him or isn't he much of a listener?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can fuck off now.
Re: (Score:2)
Lol (Score:4, Interesting)
The guy is 77, out of touche with reality.
Re: (Score:3)
He's an owner, they're out of touch with reality at any age.
Re:Lol (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Being 77 means there is a higher probability that you are out of touch with reality than someone who is 27. It does not guarantee that comparison in the slightest.
2) Being 77 means you are far more likely to see the world and economics in very antiquated ways and might pine for the "good ol' days" when powerful people whipped the non-powerful into compliance, paid them shit, expected them to be thankful for having the means to buy a can of beans, and carried guns everywhere.
Biden fits neither of those cases. Your MAGA-shite-posting trolling attempts fails at basic logic
Re:Lol (Score:4, Insightful)
The post had nothing to do with Biden. Your mind is politically warped.
The post that calzones was replying to literally said, "Does this also apply to Biden?"
Did you even read what you were replying to?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, and also Trump who showed signs of senility longer before Biden did.
Re: Lol (Score:3, Informative)
The argument "Your out-of-touch septuagenarian is suffering with slightly more dementia than my septuagenarian" is really a very weak argument.
Biden falls up stairs, off of bicycles, trips over sandbags, and gets lost on stage after he finishes reading his 60" diagonal teleprompter but he's 'on top of his game' - Trump slowly shuffles down an inclined ramp and he's in "cognitive decline" and we need to explore the 25th amendment!
I'd prefer both sit out the next election, but it's not up to me.
Infosys founder says... (Score:5, Insightful)
"You must work harder to increase my wealth!" He is right on the other point, in that any increase in productivity would just be met with increased productivity of corruption. But basically this is a privileged person crying in his beer that he doesn't make the most money, and really doesn't give a crap about whose face he has to step on to get more (or put another way, doesn't really care about your life balance.)
Always blaming younger generations (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My takeaway isn't 'youth should actually work 70h'.
It's more like 'there's so much corruption and inefficiencies our youth need to work 70h to remain competitive on the world stage ... ergo they should rise up and reject corruption by their elders so they *don't* need to work 70h a week'. Yah, more words, but a a lot more meaning. The 'work 70h' is the bait to get people to pay attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Which job? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The only jobs I can think of where you can really put in that many hours usefully is a creative job where there's an element of "flow" (i.e. you're losing track of time).
You can keep up that schedule for a while in creative jobs, but at some point, you still burn out or just plain become fatigued and want to get away from it, no matter how much you might like doing the job. And your work quality will suffer the more hours you put in, to the point where at some point it goes from diminishing returns to negative. At first, that tipping point is farther out, but over the course of a few weeks to a few months, that number of hours declines.
About the only jobs I can think of w
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree you eventually burn out, but if you really love it you could do it for a couple years. Just look at startup founders and indy developers. But I have to disagree with you... working in a restaurant is very stressful and makes you tired,
You'll notice I was somewhat more specific than that. I was thinking about someone preparing a thousand premade turkey sandwiches all alike for some corporate or convention center cafe, not someone dealing with customers. I don't know if that would be sufficiently low-stress to do for more than eight hours, but it seems like the sort of thing that at least in theory might be.
Also, there's a time-dependent component to this. A lot of jobs in restaurants are way more stressful during certain times of day,
Re: (Score:2)
Point being - doesn't matter the level of physical or mental needs. At some point, you need some solid break time.
Oh, no disagreement. From a psychological health perspective, working too long is terrible. I'm mostly just playing devil's advocate when saying that hating your job doesn't necessarily preclude productivity. :-D
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Data entry. If all you're doing is copying information from hard copy into an electronic form, you can keep that up for hours and hours, as long as you have regular breaks to stretch your legs, hydrate, deal with your hydraulic needs and give your mind a bit of a rest.
Up to the limit of your eyes' ability to focus up close. Works well for young people, not so much for older folks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are jobs where you can legitimately put in 70 hours a week and be productive
Such as?
Re: (Score:2)
The Kiwk-E-Mart?
Re: (Score:2)
There are jobs where you can legitimately put in 70 hours a week and be productive
Such as?
Scam calling. India has built a very successful industry of it, and those phone jockeys certainly put in 70 hours.
Re: (Score:2)
There are jobs where you can legitimately put in 70 hours a week and be productive
Such as?
Porn star
Re: (Score:2)
In the immortal words of Lily von Schtupp, "I'm not a wabbit! I need west!"
Re: (Score:2)
The only jobs I can think of where you can really put in that many hours usefully is a creative job where there's an element of "flow" (i.e. you're losing track of time).
In my experience this is only true in short bursts. I'm an integrated circuit design engineer (a highly creative job) and it is pretty normal to have these kinds of 70 hour weeks right before a chip submission.
However, then you need to decompress and take it easy for a while. You can be extremely productive working 140 hours over two weeks in a panic, but it can't be the norm.
I was at a startup that started pushing more and more hours and everyone burned out and quit.
Re: (Score:2)
Nine women (Score:2)
At least they have enough people already, so the nine women that have been making a baby a month can rest.
More hours means less productivity (Score:5, Insightful)
People should work fewer hours but work more effectively and efficiently. India will never compete with modern economies if it tries to instill a Victorian-era work strategy.
Re:More hours means less productivity (Score:4, Interesting)
He doesn't seem to want a Victorian work ethic. He wants a postwar Japanese work ethic.
So Dumb (Score:3)
In IT working extra hours stops adding value pretty quickly once you reach a certain point, as any value you add is offset by the many bugs you also add.
Who the hell would want to compete? (Score:3)
I don't think the current generation of kids is dumb enough to fall for the same things that the last generations did. They've had too much education. That's the paradox of the modern economy is that you need a highly educated population but the tricks you would normally use to control a large population and make them accept horrible working conditions and low pay don't really work with that many educated people.
Re: (Score:2)
Nationalism and competition do not go hand in hand. Your typical nationalist demands trade barriers making it so domestic labor need not be competitive with foreign entities.
Sometimes competition is about doing better than the biz across town or even the guy in the next cubicle.
Excellence and hard work isn't always about some wealthy parasite exploiting you.
That's literally the point of the article (Score:2)
And at this guy's level there is no competition. You just buy out your competitors. Then you can make everyone work 70/hr a week because there's nowhere else to go work, and if you try to start a competing business he just crushes you.
It's a race to the bottom across the board and again I'm not surprised the (much better educated) ki
This is why (Score:2)
I would never want to work for one of the companies.
It isn't about working your people to death.
It's about managing the work and paying employees a livable wage, and doing the work correctly.
Far too often, the culture is to submit work, they add someone new to the team, do the bare minimum, bill, reallocate worker, repeat.
If the worker sees a problem, they don't bring to anyone's attention and expect the client to find the problem and then deal with it. They don't record the issue - it just goes to a blac
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, this statement is an ad warning other countries to NEVER work with Indian companies because they will be overworked and not have time to do a good job if they are being forced to work 70+ hours per week. That is an insane amount of time to be working, no good work can ever come from it unless your job is watching TV or something equally pointless.
This is ridiculous and no we don't need to compete (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Was gonna say, if he wants that much more productivity, maybe he and his colleagues should consider paying for it?
Re: (Score:2)
pay overtime? or have it be work 70 for only 40 (Score:2)
pay overtime? or have it be work 70 for only the pay of 40
Re: (Score:2)
walk the walk (Score:4, Insightful)
"Let's race China to demographic collapse" (Score:2)
India is already at sub-replacement fertility as a whole. The states where Infosys is most active (Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh) have fertility rates about the same as Hungary and Romania. Really. You also have huge sex-selective gender imbalances and large-scale outward migration. I know, India and "not enough children" are boggling things to put in the same sentence, but we said that about China and they've reached the problem stage now. 70-hour working culture is a surefire way to speed up that process.
Re:"Let's race China to demographic collapse" (Score:5, Insightful)
But, hey, shareholder value.
These kinds of seed-corn-eating, self-defeating statements by greedy billionaires always reminds me of this classic cartoon.
https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995 [newyorker.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps Mr. Murthy should consider why India has a problem being productive with the work hours people put in already.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you're seriously suggesting they return to previous fertility rates, so what's the answer? Has anybody ever "soft landed" a population? Wiki says that even with this slowdown they're still projected to add another 300 million by 2050. I guess then it will decline if nothing changes, and of course it'll be full of old people. They should get out ahead of that and encourage as many people as they can to go in to the medical field, with incentives to stay in country. Of course they've also g
Unproductive? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Unproductive? (Score:2)
I had to add another line to my cell plan to try to load balance all those warranty calls.
Re: (Score:2)
They seem pretty productive in India. I get at least 781 phone calls per week about my car's extended warranty.
Wait until they put 70h/week, your phone will ring nonstop.
Re: (Score:2)
I had a legit lol moment. And I type lol a lot. I just don't laugh.
It's the UK's prime minister's father-in-law (Score:2)
When they ever get a trade-agreement with India, this doesn't bode well.
Hourly billing + timesheet fraud = $$$ (Score:5, Interesting)
If I were one of the many companies that outsource to him I would start paying more attention to what I was paying Infosys for versus what I was getting, especially if the contract is in terms of billable hours. He is basically asking for his employees to commit fraud in what he thinks is a clever way. Smells like a hint-hint "baby needs a new yacht" situation.
You first Narayana Murthy (Score:2)
I'd like to see a minimum six-month record of your 77-year old ass working a 70 hour work week. And no, conversations with other executives about how the youth just don't want to work anymore do not count as "work" for the purposes of this exercise.
Just Say No (Score:4, Interesting)
This attitude by management at companies breeds bad results.
I have seen it first hand.
Any department/company with Indians in management expect this and give poor reviews to anyone not looking busy for 70 hours.
Productive people leave those departments in large companies or get a better job at other companies.
You end up with people barely able to do the job in 70 hours a week.
!st generation Indian immigrants in management is a red flag.
Look at the people reporting to them.
If this is Infosys official opinion... (Score:4, Interesting)
...then I will work towards finding other partners in our company to work with.
We don't tolerate inhumane working conditions where I work, and we do use Infosys.
I was not aware of this. It will be investigated.
We are workaholics by historical standards (Score:5, Interesting)
Humans didn't evolve to work that much. One researcher reckons that for 95% of human history, we worked 15 hours per week [inc.com].
While agriculture and the industrial revolution undoubtedly had enormous benefits, they also had the downside of making us work way more hours per week than before.
Re: (Score:2)
What altruism (Score:4, Insightful)
They already are. (Score:2)
They're just smart about it and doing the extra hours on the side..
Culture (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a dominant work culture that I see from Indian tech workers that is anti-productive. A rush to call something done when it's not and then justifying why it really is done until backed into a corner and then they say they'll take another look. And if they don't know how to do it - going radio silent.
Not being willing to sit in a chair for many hours ain't their problem.
I am sure plenty of Indian workers exhibit the right attitude, otherwise they never would have landed a moon rocket.
This Infosys guy could easily double productivity with some skills training. He sounds desperate.
People willing to work 70 hours should leave and form a startup. Also a place where fake results won't fly.
70 hours a week? Bah! (Score:5, Insightful)
I once did 100 hours in a week (Monday-Friday).
No, it wasn't a good idea.
No, I'm not keen on repeating it, ever.
His Daughter Akshata Murthy and Rishi Sunak (Score:4, Informative)
Where Can I Get Some? (Score:2)
Where can I get some plebs of my own? I'm tired of working myself to the bone.
Fix your University system first (Score:2)
Corruption shows up everywhere there. A big drag to India growing beyond its current ceiling are the paper mills churning out farcical degrees without much meaning. When interviewing candidates who went to university there we had to get one of our Indian employees to decode which Universities were worth anything, and which (the majority) were semi-scam operations with poor instruction and no real standards. He helped us dodge a lot of bullets, and helped us know where to press on skillsets to find out if
India only 57% as productive as others (Score:2)
That's what he was saying right? In order to compete with other nations who have a 40 hour work week, Indians need to work 70 hours? That means they are only 57% as productive as a western worker. Keep that in mind when you apply for the next H1B batch of "cheap" labour.
Re: (Score:2)
InfoSys (Score:2)
InfoSys is a horrible horrible company. I would not take any advice from anyone who is in a leadership role in that company.
They hire and bring over H1B candidates to the US based on bribes and who can pay the most. Then there's tons of issues surrounding their work practices and such on the internet if you look, several involving the employee being forced to pay 50%+ of their paycheck to the recruiter that got them lined up with the job while they're here too.
Our state gave InfoSys $12M in tax incentives t
Reduce Indias Population? (Score:2)
They work their youth uber long hours they will eventually become despondent, depressed and feel life is futile. Thus many turning to suicide like we have seen in many of the sweat shops in China.
I mean it's possible what this old @$$ idiot is thinking....
So he wants (Score:2)
16 hour days?
I know the math says 14, but what's the difference, right? He's not the one doing it.
The culture is already leaking all over the world.
and they should reply (Score:2)
The world says that Infosys Founder ... (Score:2)
... should definitely be wrapped in barbed wire and shot into the sun. For everyones entertainment and a boost in global economic wellbeing.
Go fuck yourself. (Score:2)
"Not my fault" culture (Score:3)
Whether doing business with massive companies like TCS or individuals, it's impossible to perform even the simplest transaction in India without first establishing blame or at least responsibility.
As a dramatized example, if you bring a car in to have the tires changed, they'll attempt to do it without jacking up the car or unscrewing the lug nuts and simply slash the tires to try and cut them off. When you ask what's taking so long, they'll explain that you didn't actually say that you wanted the car jacked up and lug nuts removed. Of course, the price you paid didn't cover that service. If you ask whether they should have mentioned that or whether they believe such service is implied when paying for a tire change, they'll say it wasn't their place to contradict the customer and it would be wrong to do something the customer didn't ask for.
At this point, you must accept blame and clearly state that you would like to pay to have the car lifted, lowered afterwards, have tires removed efficiently from the rims and replaced using the appropriate tools and have lug nuts removed, replaced and tightened appropriately.
Of course, since you already paid for the tire change and admitted all the problems were your fault, you'll have to pay the appropriate fee to correct the issue. But sadly, there is no time to complete the work this week and your tires are currently slashed. But for a fee, they'll store your car until the jobs complete and for an additional fee, they will arrange a loaner car and for another additional fee, the loaner will also be drivable.
I wish this were a joke, but I have had a very similar experience recently where I paid to have a tire fixed so they plugged it and I came back the next day to complain. They plugged another hole, but only after I accepted blame for not clearly specifying I wanted then to plug ALL the holes or sell me a new tire. And I had to agree to pay for the whole job at $50 again since it clearly wasn't their fault.
By comparison, doing business with China , you buy something, if it doesn't work, they'll ask "are you doing it wrong or are your expectations too high?" and when you answer "No", they'll try to fix it or refund you.
The number of hours are only an issue if you waste most of the time establishing blame. Drop the blame, do the job and you need far fewer hours to be efficient.
The Prime Minister's Father-in-Law (Score:3)