4 ms·

It has. 80 years ago your worked more hours, and you could not slack at work. Today, you work not only less, but half of the people in the offices I go to don

It has. 80 years ago your worked more hours, and you could not slack at work. Today, you work not only less, but half of the people in the offices I go to don't work their full shift. They go to facebook, send text messages, take long breaks, do their shopping and watch porno (yep), etc. Also, an hour of work doesn't have the same value. When your work is moving boxes, an hour is an hour. But in an office work, there are plenty of opportunities to be busy without being productive. I'd say 30% of the work I see in offices is at best useless, at worst harmful. So we have more office jobs, which have less hours, during which we work less, said hours being worth less. And this is very uneven, because a nurse probably works more now than before. But all in all, office jobs are talking over in rich countries.

wu-ikkyu 9y ago
If there is so much useless/wasted time at office jobs, what's the practical purpose of requiring them to be there for a fixed number of hours?
- sametmax 9y ago
  There are several reasons for that. First, employee don't want less money and fake it. Employers want the employee to be on site because they paid for it. Second, society praises people for working. You will look better if say you are busy. Third, our systems would collapse if people were actually paid to their real value. You would see the total unfairness of it, and also how truly brilliant or useless people are. Fourth, laws, syndicates, medias and logistics come in the way. And with a big inertia. Fifth, humans are not rational and don't do "the right thing" according to the intellectual or displayed objectives. And they have all their own agenda.
- peoplewindow 9y ago
  It's very much easier to measure hours of physical presence than actual value of a worker's output. The other problem is that if you measured people purely by output, 10x developers (assuming you believe in such a concept) would be able to work 1/10th as much and would very visibly be missing much of the rest of the time. This would lead to a lot of resentment from people who are less productive and would be having it rubbed in their faces. To get to a place where people are judged purely on output we would need to change society such that the notion of equality was essentially never mentioned or thought about at all. Because people's productivity is wildly, wildly unequal.
fatwah 9y ago
80 years ago women could afford to stay at home.
- sametmax 9y ago
  Population increased also. And consumerism. And debt. And a lot of laws have been added. But last year, 2 of my friends fire their 5 employees and started again, them alone. They made the calculation: there productivity ratio was better with only them 2, than with the 5 part time workers they had that they were paying full time + benefits. And their team was "good" in my book. Most teams I meet are not, and I travel from companies to companies all the time.
  - nnq 9y ago
    > Population increased also If this were really the problem, it would be pretty easy to solve... (HINT: this isn't really the problem!)
  - geezerjay 9y ago
    > Population increased also. And consumerism. And debt. And a lot of laws have been added. These factors are irrelevant when compared with the fact that the active population essentially doubled since WW2 with women entering the workforce.
- watwut 9y ago
  They also had to stay at home, at least middle class. Poorand blacks were in different situation anyway. And wen were completely dependent on men and f@cked when he died or got sick.
chillwaves 9y ago
This is just some weird anecdote. I work at an architecture firm where the employees have deliverables and bill to clients, we all work really really hard. I work between 45-50 hours a week of real work. One any given Saturday or Sunday you will find dozens of people in my firm working. They are not just pretending. I have worked at a job you describe where people do not do much, but I would hardly say that is the norm. Especially for people on the lower end of the pay scale. In my experience they typically work more than they are paid for (forced to work off the clock) than there are people just sitting around on facebook. That's great for you that your life is so comfortable but do not assume it applies universally. You really think the working poor in this country who have 2 or 3 jobs are just on facebook all day? This has to be one of the most out of touch comments I have ever read on HN.
- hfhdnenen 9y ago
  I’m leaving architecture proper (staying in the design field, but working independently) for this reason. My labour is billed to clients at three times my hourly rate, I receive no benefits as a contracted employee (paid as a consultant), and regularly work overtime to execute someone else’s concepts. The latter would not be an issue if the industry-wide quality of work were better here in Canada, but the overwhelming majority of medium to large firms (where one would receive benefits) produce cookie-cutter buildings the mercy of cheap developers and clients. Disregarding the quality of the work, the most obvious solution to the ubiquitous presence of overtime in the industry would be to hire more people, but there doesn’t seem to be enough money to go around - especially if you want to do something even slightly outside the norm.
  - walshemj 9y ago
    That's why I don't understand the poor rates so called contractors get in the USA and Now Canada certain types of employers try this on in the UK but they wont get the best candidates by offering straight time for a 4-6 month contract - instead of 3x
- sametmax 9y ago
  > That's great for you that your life is so comfortable but do not assume it applies universally. I'm an independent contractor, I just go from company to company. I just witness it, it doesn't apply to my life. > I have worked at a job you describe where people do not do much, but I would hardly say that is the norm. You stay very long at the same company. I don't. My job involve dev and training, and hence I go from company to company. There is a trend in what I see.
collyw 9y ago
80 years a ago a single parent would go to work and provide for the family. Productivity increases have decoupled from wage rises.
watwut 9y ago
The stats I read says that Americans now work more hours. And likely, you need a better job.
- sametmax 9y ago
  > And likely, you need a better job. Hardly. My job consist in dev and training. I go to those companies, and I'm paid because they can't get things done. Then I go to another one, rinse and repeat. This situation plays very much in my favor.
0x445442 9y ago
Yeah that's one thing I'm really looking forward to when the kids leave is being able to pursue meaningful work again. My experience with corporate America is that it's almost indistinguishable from government in terms of work environment. The waste and apathy toward it just turns my stomach.

wu-ikkyu 9y ago

If there is so much useless/wasted time at office jobs, what's the practical purpose of requiring them to be there for a fixed number of hours?

sametmax 9y ago
There are several reasons for that. First, employee don't want less money and fake it. Employers want the employee to be on site because they paid for it. Second, society praises people for working. You will look better if say you are busy. Third, our systems would collapse if people were actually paid to their real value. You would see the total unfairness of it, and also how truly brilliant or useless people are. Fourth, laws, syndicates, medias and logistics come in the way. And with a big inertia. Fifth, humans are not rational and don't do "the right thing" according to the intellectual or displayed objectives. And they have all their own agenda.
peoplewindow 9y ago
It's very much easier to measure hours of physical presence than actual value of a worker's output. The other problem is that if you measured people purely by output, 10x developers (assuming you believe in such a concept) would be able to work 1/10th as much and would very visibly be missing much of the rest of the time. This would lead to a lot of resentment from people who are less productive and would be having it rubbed in their faces. To get to a place where people are judged purely on output we would need to change society such that the notion of equality was essentially never mentioned or thought about at all. Because people's productivity is wildly, wildly unequal.

fatwah 9y ago

80 years ago women could afford to stay at home.

sametmax 9y ago
Population increased also. And consumerism. And debt. And a lot of laws have been added. But last year, 2 of my friends fire their 5 employees and started again, them alone. They made the calculation: there productivity ratio was better with only them 2, than with the 5 part time workers they had that they were paying full time + benefits. And their team was "good" in my book. Most teams I meet are not, and I travel from companies to companies all the time.
- nnq 9y ago
  > Population increased also If this were really the problem, it would be pretty easy to solve... (HINT: this isn't really the problem!)
- geezerjay 9y ago
  > Population increased also. And consumerism. And debt. And a lot of laws have been added. These factors are irrelevant when compared with the fact that the active population essentially doubled since WW2 with women entering the workforce.
watwut 9y ago
They also had to stay at home, at least middle class. Poorand blacks were in different situation anyway. And wen were completely dependent on men and f@cked when he died or got sick.

chillwaves 9y ago

This is just some weird anecdote. I work at an architecture firm where the employees have deliverables and bill to clients, we all work really really hard. I work between 45-50 hours a week of real work. One any given Saturday or Sunday you will find dozens of people in my firm working. They are not just pretending. I have worked at a job you describe where people do not do much, but I would hardly say that is the norm. Especially for people on the lower end of the pay scale. In my experience they typically work more than they are paid for (forced to work off the clock) than there are people just sitting around on facebook. That's great for you that your life is so comfortable but do not assume it applies universally. You really think the working poor in this country who have 2 or 3 jobs are just on facebook all day? This has to be one of the most out of touch comments I have ever read on HN.

hfhdnenen 9y ago
I’m leaving architecture proper (staying in the design field, but working independently) for this reason. My labour is billed to clients at three times my hourly rate, I receive no benefits as a contracted employee (paid as a consultant), and regularly work overtime to execute someone else’s concepts. The latter would not be an issue if the industry-wide quality of work were better here in Canada, but the overwhelming majority of medium to large firms (where one would receive benefits) produce cookie-cutter buildings the mercy of cheap developers and clients. Disregarding the quality of the work, the most obvious solution to the ubiquitous presence of overtime in the industry would be to hire more people, but there doesn’t seem to be enough money to go around - especially if you want to do something even slightly outside the norm.
- walshemj 9y ago
  That's why I don't understand the poor rates so called contractors get in the USA and Now Canada certain types of employers try this on in the UK but they wont get the best candidates by offering straight time for a 4-6 month contract - instead of 3x
sametmax 9y ago
> That's great for you that your life is so comfortable but do not assume it applies universally. I'm an independent contractor, I just go from company to company. I just witness it, it doesn't apply to my life. > I have worked at a job you describe where people do not do much, but I would hardly say that is the norm. You stay very long at the same company. I don't. My job involve dev and training, and hence I go from company to company. There is a trend in what I see.

collyw 9y ago

80 years a ago a single parent would go to work and provide for the family. Productivity increases have decoupled from wage rises.

watwut 9y ago

The stats I read says that Americans now work more hours. And likely, you need a better job.

sametmax 9y ago
> And likely, you need a better job. Hardly. My job consist in dev and training. I go to those companies, and I'm paid because they can't get things done. Then I go to another one, rinse and repeat. This situation plays very much in my favor.

0x445442 9y ago

Yeah that's one thing I'm really looking forward to when the kids leave is being able to pursue meaningful work again. My experience with corporate America is that it's almost indistinguishable from government in terms of work environment. The waste and apathy toward it just turns my stomach.