2 ms·

There's a weird pride in working long hours. I see it a lot in nyc, and when I hear it I always wonder what combination of stimulus were able to generate that w

There's a weird pride in working long hours. I see it a lot in nyc, and when I hear it I always wonder what combination of stimulus were able to generate that willful want of it. I prefer to calculate and maximize dollars per hour. If you're working a lot, then at least have it be at a high hourly rate.

TuringNYC 10y ago
I worked at Goldman Sachs for one year and saw this a lot. People even put bottles of Paxil on their desk, as if depression was sign of commitment to the job. A large percent of these people were working at the firm for other people's approval. I left, quickly. Not only did I work at lot less at my next job, a hedge fund, but I found a set of people that liked to work and get the heck out. Everyone had other things they were doing after work, whether it was socializing or coaching baseball or open source projects. Burnout includes context. People at Goldman Sachs were burnt out often, because for most, the premise of working there was irrational. People at my next job were working just as much but it was more meaningful and for the right reasons, so I saw little burnout.
sotojuan 10y ago
I've had experiences like these at tech companies (long hours + expected to work on the weekends). No thanks. I'm glad my current NYC employer doesn't ask any more than 40 hours. But yeah, finance is another scary world.
rwallace 10y ago
It's past time this was said: we need to start shaming people who voluntarily work long hours. Not those for whom the alternative is unemployment, of course; they are victims to be pitied. But those who work long hours when they could have chosen otherwise, are harming not only themselves and their employers, but everyone who has to interact with the economy, which means pretty much everyone. That behavior needs to stop being considered socially acceptable.
- dasmoth 10y ago
  I get what you're saying, but it seems pretty dictatorial. Would you apply it to startup founds? Lone inventors tinkering in their basements? Musicians practising to be the best? It would seem to exclude trades like "work hard for 10 years with a reasonable hope of stashing way enough to retire", which are probably rational for some (60 hours/week of wage labour may be bad, but 40 isn't exactly wonderful either).
  - rwallace 10y ago
    If you think a yes answer is unreasonable, bear in mind that you actually get less done in a 60-hour week than a 40-hour one (maybe not in the first week, but in the second and subsequent ones), so discouraging it in the three cases you mention would still help the people involved. Of course, if you're working alone in your basement, you're not obliged to tell anyone how many hours you work, let alone take orders from anyone on the matter, but it still shouldn't be considered socially acceptable to boast of long hours. As for the last, the trade is only that way because employers with high-paying jobs can get away with gratuitous abuse of their employees, and that's precisely the state of affairs we need to put an end to.
    - dasmoth 10y ago
      >>> bear in mind that you actually get less done in a 60-hour week than a 40-hour one On aggregate, sure (and for a lot of people in a lot of scenarios, the actual threshold is probably lower still). But there are outliers here -- particularly when we're talking about highly-driven people doing things they really want to do -- and I'd be nervous about legislating here.
      - rwallace 10y ago
        Well, I only advocate legislating a maximum 40-hour (or better yet, 30-hour) week for employees. If you're self-employed and you think you're an outlier? You're probably mistaken. Chronic fatigue is like being drunk; it impairs your judgment in such a way that you can't judge the degree of impairment. But if you still think you're an outlier? I won't lift a finger to stop you, but please keep quiet about it and refrain from poisoning the noosphere for everyone else.

TuringNYC 10y ago

I worked at Goldman Sachs for one year and saw this a lot. People even put bottles of Paxil on their desk, as if depression was sign of commitment to the job. A large percent of these people were working at the firm for other people's approval. I left, quickly. Not only did I work at lot less at my next job, a hedge fund, but I found a set of people that liked to work and get the heck out. Everyone had other things they were doing after work, whether it was socializing or coaching baseball or open source projects. Burnout includes context. People at Goldman Sachs were burnt out often, because for most, the premise of working there was irrational. People at my next job were working just as much but it was more meaningful and for the right reasons, so I saw little burnout.

sotojuan 10y ago

I've had experiences like these at tech companies (long hours + expected to work on the weekends). No thanks. I'm glad my current NYC employer doesn't ask any more than 40 hours. But yeah, finance is another scary world.

rwallace 10y ago

It's past time this was said: we need to start shaming people who voluntarily work long hours. Not those for whom the alternative is unemployment, of course; they are victims to be pitied. But those who work long hours when they could have chosen otherwise, are harming not only themselves and their employers, but everyone who has to interact with the economy, which means pretty much everyone. That behavior needs to stop being considered socially acceptable.

dasmoth 10y ago
I get what you're saying, but it seems pretty dictatorial. Would you apply it to startup founds? Lone inventors tinkering in their basements? Musicians practising to be the best? It would seem to exclude trades like "work hard for 10 years with a reasonable hope of stashing way enough to retire", which are probably rational for some (60 hours/week of wage labour may be bad, but 40 isn't exactly wonderful either).
- rwallace 10y ago
  If you think a yes answer is unreasonable, bear in mind that you actually get less done in a 60-hour week than a 40-hour one (maybe not in the first week, but in the second and subsequent ones), so discouraging it in the three cases you mention would still help the people involved. Of course, if you're working alone in your basement, you're not obliged to tell anyone how many hours you work, let alone take orders from anyone on the matter, but it still shouldn't be considered socially acceptable to boast of long hours. As for the last, the trade is only that way because employers with high-paying jobs can get away with gratuitous abuse of their employees, and that's precisely the state of affairs we need to put an end to.
  - dasmoth 10y ago
    >>> bear in mind that you actually get less done in a 60-hour week than a 40-hour one On aggregate, sure (and for a lot of people in a lot of scenarios, the actual threshold is probably lower still). But there are outliers here -- particularly when we're talking about highly-driven people doing things they really want to do -- and I'd be nervous about legislating here.
    - rwallace 10y ago
      Well, I only advocate legislating a maximum 40-hour (or better yet, 30-hour) week for employees. If you're self-employed and you think you're an outlier? You're probably mistaken. Chronic fatigue is like being drunk; it impairs your judgment in such a way that you can't judge the degree of impairment. But if you still think you're an outlier? I won't lift a finger to stop you, but please keep quiet about it and refrain from poisoning the noosphere for everyone else.