

The Case Against Work/Life Balance - jlesk
http://www.martynemko.com/articles/case-against-worklife-balance_id1426

======
DanielStraight
When lots of people (especially in a particular field) work long hours, it
creates an expectation which negatively affects those who cannot or will not
work long hours.

Compensation (both monetary and in the form of benefits) does not increase
linearly with number of hours worked. If someone can only handle working 35
hours a week in the U.S., they won't be earning 87.5% of what they would if
they worked 40 hours a week. This forces a lot of people into working more
hours than they otherwise would.

If work is capped at 35 hours a week, then people don't have to work insane
hours (I would classify 70+ hours a week as insane) to maximize their
compensation per hour. They can maximize it at 35, which for most people, is a
much more sustainable (in terms of mental and physical health) number of
hours.

If the goal is to maximize the benefit to society produced by workers, then I
think a far better method is directing people into work which actually
benefits society. McDonald's, for example, employs 400k people worldwide, and
as far as I'm concerned, they're working for a net loss in social benefit.
Assuming the average McDonald's employee works only 25 hours per week, that's
over 500 million worker-hours wasted each year. To put it another way, every
year McDonald's wastes almost 6 millenia of labor.

If all workers were doing work that truly benefited society, I think 20 hours
a week would probably be more than enough. Technology has made us, as a
species, incredibly efficient. We can sustain ourselves with almost no effort.
Most of the effort that _is_ being expended is going to produce garbage food,
garbage media and the garbage infrastructure necessary to consume the two.

Consider again the tale of the fisherman and the tourist
(<http://tiki.oneworld.net/sustain/tourist.html> or if you read German, the
original: <http://www.uni-flensburg.de/asta/pol_kultur_anekdote.htm>). _We can
all be the fisherman._ We have the resources. I think the whole notion of
limiting working hours in a week ultimately stems from this idea. I think it's
a way of saying, "We don't need more stuff. Take a break and enjoy what you
have."

But ultimately, I think it's designed to benefit those who would like to work
87.5% of the time for 87.5% of the pay, not those who have a bad work/life
balance by choice. If I'm right, it might be better to make the law that
employers must offer a part-time option (as long as it's not completely
impractical to do so) with at least 95% total compensation parity (per hour
worked) with full-time workers in the same position. It would also make sense
to limit additional compensation for overtime workers to perhaps 105% of full-
time compensation (per hour worked). This way workers could chose for
themselves how to set their work/life balance. When part-time workers get 60%
or 70% per hour (total compensation) of what full-time workers get, then the
choice is largely out of their hands.

------
devmonk
Work addicts love work just like alcoholics love alcohol. Make sure you are
doing something you love if you're working long and hard, and make sure that
family isn't sacrificed.

~~~
biot
> and make sure that family isn't sacrificed.

Fortunately, it was just then that Abraham hit his 35 hour work week limit.

------
plesn
I feel like reading stakhanovist USSR propaganda. Work more and the world will
be better and you'll be a hero. Look, those french required to work 35 hours,
they should be ashamed. Do like those couragous doctors, you tiny humanoid
working daily at your java bigco, and even you doing this thrilling job for
this missile company. Or even you changing the world for the benefit of this
great sexy monopolist company. Let's rather be passionate and honest in what
you do, "work" or not.

------
shykes
_France has a 35-hour workweek_

That doesn't actually mean French workers only work 35 hours per week. It
means:

1\. Hours worked beyond 35/week can be reclaimed as vacation

2\. This only applies to low level white-collar jobs. Secretaries get 35
hours. Engineers don't.

3\. There's a lot of abuse. The definition of "low level" is vague, and not
tied to salary. So you'll see a lot of "editorial managers" who barely make
minimum wage, but don't get their 35 hours.

------
frobozz
From the article:

"As a group, employees who are asked to work long hours are the above-average
workers;"

Nonsense. Employees who work longer hours are, (IMHO) the below-average
workers who can't get the work done in the time allotted. Whether they do it
of their own accord, or are asked to stay behind and finish.

