
Researcher says careers should be longer but have more breaks along the way - rchaudhary
https://work.qz.com/1314988/stanford-psychologist-laura-carstensen-says-careers-should-be-mapped-for-longer-lifespans/
======
eganist
Since Dr. Carstensen's opinion seems to be landing on the wrong side of the HN
consensus, let me play the devil's advocate.

> “We need a new model,” Carstensen says of the current norms around career
> pacing. The current one “doesn’t work, because it fails to recognize all the
> other demands on our time. People are working full-time at the same time
> they’re raising children. You never get a break. You never get to step out.
> You never get to refresh. . . .We go at this unsustainable pace, and then
> pull the plug.”

I believe this explanation is intended to _sell_ the idea, but I don't believe
this should be the motivation for driving towards a different model. Rather,
I'd suggest the motivation to be to enable "productive unemployment" as
automation continues to spread. Hear me out.

If there's a consistent and unwavering societal expectation to enter the
workplace full time between the ages of 19-22, there'll also be a persistent
risk of political upheaval when employment numbers stagnate or falter and when
people feel as if they're not achieving what's expected of them (or generally
when they're unable to eat), a scenario which will continue to play out and
perhaps even become endemic as automation and various branches of AI capture
more and more unskilled and skilled labor categories, respectively. Shifting
labor expectations allows for a more potentially graceful transition over the
course of a few generations to a model where people can choose which direction
to take their lives, either studying something in depth before diving into a
niche that still needs human talent or focusing on exploring their own
personal passions as the world around them continues to operate mostly
automatically.

It's a very Gene Rodenberry-esque position to take, and it's perhaps
_ludicrously_ optimistic, but a model like what Dr. Carstensen is pitching
might make sense in facilitating a gradual transition to a more automated
world.

This is the very basic kernel of an idea, and I expect what I've just voiced
is crude enough to be utterly dismantled on deeper analysis, but I voice it to
get minds thinking moreso than to say "Laura's right and you guys are all
wrong"\-- nah. It's just a passing thought.

------
default-kramer
I'm currently working 26 weeks a year (one on, one off) and it is awesome. I
realize that I'm very lucky to be able to do this - I have low expenses,
almost no debt, and programming pays well enough for me to live comfortably on
about half my previous salary.

I used to be planning for early retirement, but this trade-off seems safer.
After all, I could spontaneously die the day after I retire and then what was
all that work for?

~~~
littleweep
This is really cool, haven't thought about it before. Do you work for the same
company or do you find a new job every year?

~~~
daveFNbuck
They're taking about having a 9-day weekend, not a 6-month vacation.

~~~
littleweep
I see. I read it as 1 year on, 1 year off.

------
guard0g
I worked really hard for 10 years after grad school, then retired for 4 years
to have a kid. Changed careers and worked hard or another 8 years, and then
retired for 3 years when we had to deal with an extended family illness. I'm
currently on the 4th year of my 3rd career. Working hard and taking long
breaks has really given me the opportunity to learn and grow, and stay young
(most of my team won't believe I'm twice their age).

~~~
jedzarybe
Curious, how do you prep for comebacks after 3years break? Do you switch
fields with each career? Do you try to keep your toolset sharp on almost daily
basis since day one of your long break? Thanks

~~~
guard0g
I owe it to intellectual curiosity as a lifelong learner, by accumulating
skills and building upon them, and having time to think about problems. With
the light speed innovation of business, finance and tech these days, the
breaks actually gave me time to catch up. It was much harder to do this
working heads down. I was an early user of Coursera and edX as well.

------
ghosterrific
>"There is no real reason why we need to work this way. The hardest thing is,
how does [change] start?” Carstensen said. But “once it starts, there’s very
little question that it’s going to roll on."

I will continue to work intensely for my first 10 years of career and retire.
Additionally, I'm raising my children to do the same.

The rest of the slaves can feel free to "take time off and work until they're
80".

I can't believe how far our of touch this women is from the nature of
dominance hierarchies and productivity.

------
startupdiscuss
There is a lot riding on the word “shouldn’t”.

She sounds like she is saying we should structure society in such a manner
that this is possible.

She’s not saying individually you could try this at the present time.

------
afinlayson
Let me guess he's tenure, and got it at age 40....

------
albertTJames
Life should not be about work and productivity. Retirement at 80? This
researcher has totally lost touch with the reality of society outside of
Silicon Valley.

~~~
smt88
She's advocating almost the exact opposite of the stereotypical Silicon Valley
model.

This is the fourth paragraph of the article:

> _" Rather than a four-decade professional sprint that ends abruptly at 65,
> Carstensen argues, we should be planning for marathon careers that last
> longer but have more breaks along the way for learning, family needs, and
> obligations outside the workplace."_

