4 ms·

Actually working more than ~55 hours in a week is soul crushing and physically very hard. At a certain point you would need an escalation of stimulants or risk

Actually working more than ~55 hours in a week is soul crushing and physically very hard. At a certain point you would need an escalation of stimulants or risk not being able to get out of bed if you actually worked 75 hours.

ska 8y ago
Hence some of the dysfunction in medicine.
- ridgewell 8y ago
  Medicine is an interesting case. The prioritization isn't so much on the health of medical practitioners and nurses, but on patient safety. It is argued that patients have higher survivability rates when patient handoffs/shift changes are kept to a minimum. The focus has never been on the health of doctors, nurses, X-Ray technicians, etc. but from a public health perspective. This has far-reaching consequences in itself.
  - Scoundreller 8y ago
    The nurses may be working 12 hour shifts, but they’re unlikely to work more than 4 in a week. Overtime is expensive for employers, so they prefer to hire more or hire contract nurses where necessary. Even the doctors usually cover 12 clinical 12hr shifts a month. They may do more work after another takes over, academic work, moonlight, or have admin work. And having a good income allows you to buy your way out of most modern problems/work, like comparison shopping, cleaning, or even having and then raising their children for them.
    - kelnos 8y ago
      A friend of mine who is a nurse tells me that she's at the hospital an hour before her shift starts (in order to prep) and is there a good hour after her shift ends (in order to help prep the next shift). So she's effectively working nearly 14 hours a day, even though she only works 3-4 consecutive days. I stretches credibility to me that people can keep up a high quality of work for 14 hours straight, even with a 3 day break every 3-4 days.
    - RHSeeger 8y ago
      > The nurses may be working 12 hour shifts, but they’re unlikely to work more than 4 in a week. Overtime is expensive for employers, so they prefer to hire more or hire contract nurses where necessary. Or they're picking up more hours at a different hospital, so there's no overtime but they still make more.
  - ska 8y ago
    Yes, I've heard that argument before. I've asked before if the research shows the problem is handoffs per se, or the protocol around them, but haven't had a good answer. There also doesn't seem to be good research into the longer term impact of these negative consequences on the practitioners. I've worked around clinicians and clinical staff, and several times been surprised how much is left to personal memory and scheduling, including some inherently risky protocols/procedures that are at all functional only because the people doing them are careful ... some of these obviously easily improvable.
    - kelnos 8y ago
      I have several friends who are doctors or nurses, and have talked with most of them about this. They all parrot the "doctor/nurse-patient continuity" line, but when pressed as to whether fewer handoffs actually outweigh the effects of exhaustion on outcomes, they all seem to take it as a given that it does, without being able to support it. I suspect that, even if fewer handoffs does take an edge over exhaustion, the handoff process could be improved greatly; from what I'm told, handoff processes vary wildly, often aren't formalized, and even when they are, adherence to process is pretty lax, in part due to the effects of exhaustion.
      - ska 8y ago
        It’s really interesting to do workflow analysis in clinical settings. It’s not uncommon to run into “we do it this way because that’s the way we’ve always done it” situations. There is also a bit of machismo/pride for the shifts worked thing, which isn’t helpful.
  - tonyedgecombe 8y ago
    I've just been reading Why we sleep by Matthew Walker. In it he mentions doctors will on average kill one patient during their residency due to sleep deprivation.
darkr 8y ago
In my personal and subjective experience, working beyond 55 hours in a week is very doable... But it's absolutely not sustainable. I've found that doing it for more than 2-3 weeks in a row will generally result in declining productivity and burnout after that, requiring 2-3 weeks of 0-30 hour work weeks afterwards to recover. Some hard learned lessons that I now adhere to: * Don't push past 50 hours a week regularly * If you do, cut your hours down to below 40 the following week, or even take some days off * Take at least one full weekend off at least once per month
mdorazio 8y ago
I can confirm. In the consulting world I've had several instances of either being doubled up on projects or having to hit extremely demanding deadlines for milestone payouts that required legitimate 60+ hour weeks. One week is doable, 2 is a stretch, beyond that people (myself included) generally had to turn to things like modafinil to keep going and there's a noticeable toll on general health and wellness. On the flip side, people who say they work stupid hours are usually just at the office stupid hours, not necessarily working all the time. But so are people who say they work 40 hour weeks. From working with hundreds of "normal" employees at clients over the years, I'd say the average actual productive time per person is around 25 hours.
- okmokmz 8y ago
  >But so are people who say they work 40 hour weeks. From working with hundreds of "normal" employees at clients over the years, I'd say the average actual productive time per person is around 25 hours Agreed, I'd be surprised if I spent more than 25 hours a week actually actively working
bluGill 8y ago
I have found that I have 35 hours of good code in me per week. I make sure that I average at least 1 hour a day for meetings just so I can hit my 40 hour mark (this isn't hard). I can work more hours for a couple weeks if needed, but my quality goes down a little each week.
stjohnswarts 8y ago
40 hours is enough for me.

ska 8y ago

Hence some of the dysfunction in medicine.

ridgewell 8y ago
Medicine is an interesting case. The prioritization isn't so much on the health of medical practitioners and nurses, but on patient safety. It is argued that patients have higher survivability rates when patient handoffs/shift changes are kept to a minimum. The focus has never been on the health of doctors, nurses, X-Ray technicians, etc. but from a public health perspective. This has far-reaching consequences in itself.
- Scoundreller 8y ago
  The nurses may be working 12 hour shifts, but they’re unlikely to work more than 4 in a week. Overtime is expensive for employers, so they prefer to hire more or hire contract nurses where necessary. Even the doctors usually cover 12 clinical 12hr shifts a month. They may do more work after another takes over, academic work, moonlight, or have admin work. And having a good income allows you to buy your way out of most modern problems/work, like comparison shopping, cleaning, or even having and then raising their children for them.
  - kelnos 8y ago
    A friend of mine who is a nurse tells me that she's at the hospital an hour before her shift starts (in order to prep) and is there a good hour after her shift ends (in order to help prep the next shift). So she's effectively working nearly 14 hours a day, even though she only works 3-4 consecutive days. I stretches credibility to me that people can keep up a high quality of work for 14 hours straight, even with a 3 day break every 3-4 days.
  - RHSeeger 8y ago
    > The nurses may be working 12 hour shifts, but they’re unlikely to work more than 4 in a week. Overtime is expensive for employers, so they prefer to hire more or hire contract nurses where necessary. Or they're picking up more hours at a different hospital, so there's no overtime but they still make more.
- ska 8y ago
  Yes, I've heard that argument before. I've asked before if the research shows the problem is handoffs per se, or the protocol around them, but haven't had a good answer. There also doesn't seem to be good research into the longer term impact of these negative consequences on the practitioners. I've worked around clinicians and clinical staff, and several times been surprised how much is left to personal memory and scheduling, including some inherently risky protocols/procedures that are at all functional only because the people doing them are careful ... some of these obviously easily improvable.
  - kelnos 8y ago
    I have several friends who are doctors or nurses, and have talked with most of them about this. They all parrot the "doctor/nurse-patient continuity" line, but when pressed as to whether fewer handoffs actually outweigh the effects of exhaustion on outcomes, they all seem to take it as a given that it does, without being able to support it. I suspect that, even if fewer handoffs does take an edge over exhaustion, the handoff process could be improved greatly; from what I'm told, handoff processes vary wildly, often aren't formalized, and even when they are, adherence to process is pretty lax, in part due to the effects of exhaustion.
    - ska 8y ago
      It’s really interesting to do workflow analysis in clinical settings. It’s not uncommon to run into “we do it this way because that’s the way we’ve always done it” situations. There is also a bit of machismo/pride for the shifts worked thing, which isn’t helpful.
- tonyedgecombe 8y ago
  I've just been reading Why we sleep by Matthew Walker. In it he mentions doctors will on average kill one patient during their residency due to sleep deprivation.

darkr 8y ago

In my personal and subjective experience, working beyond 55 hours in a week is very doable... But it's absolutely not sustainable. I've found that doing it for more than 2-3 weeks in a row will generally result in declining productivity and burnout after that, requiring 2-3 weeks of 0-30 hour work weeks afterwards to recover. Some hard learned lessons that I now adhere to: * Don't push past 50 hours a week regularly * If you do, cut your hours down to below 40 the following week, or even take some days off * Take at least one full weekend off at least once per month

mdorazio 8y ago

I can confirm. In the consulting world I've had several instances of either being doubled up on projects or having to hit extremely demanding deadlines for milestone payouts that required legitimate 60+ hour weeks. One week is doable, 2 is a stretch, beyond that people (myself included) generally had to turn to things like modafinil to keep going and there's a noticeable toll on general health and wellness. On the flip side, people who say they work stupid hours are usually just at the office stupid hours, not necessarily working all the time. But so are people who say they work 40 hour weeks. From working with hundreds of "normal" employees at clients over the years, I'd say the average actual productive time per person is around 25 hours.

okmokmz 8y ago
>But so are people who say they work 40 hour weeks. From working with hundreds of "normal" employees at clients over the years, I'd say the average actual productive time per person is around 25 hours Agreed, I'd be surprised if I spent more than 25 hours a week actually actively working

bluGill 8y ago

I have found that I have 35 hours of good code in me per week. I make sure that I average at least 1 hour a day for meetings just so I can hit my 40 hour mark (this isn't hard). I can work more hours for a couple weeks if needed, but my quality goes down a little each week.

stjohnswarts 8y ago

40 hours is enough for me.