3 ms·
You may have a hard time getting a new job at 60% time, but I bet you’d have better luck starting full time at a company and working your way up to it. That’s w
by cbsks 6y ago
You may have a hard time getting a new job at 60% time, but I bet you’d have better luck starting full time at a company and working your way up to it. That’s what father did for the last 10ish years of his career as a programmer. He started working full time then transitioned to 80% time at 80% pay, then 60%, then 40%. He says it was a really good way to ease into retirement.
- majewsky 6y agoI'm working 70% part-time (5.6 hours per day). Overall, it's really nice for work-life balance. My biggest gripe is that the communication overhead does not scale proportionally. I'm expending the same time on communication (reading e-mail, reading chat, reading tickets, attending meetings) as if I were employed full-time, so the actual time I get to spend on the actual "work" part of work (designing systems, writing code, responding to incidents, etc.) is less than 70% of hypothetical full-time me. I suspect that this is the reason why part-time is not more widely adopted. Theoretically, you can replace two full-time workers with three 66% part-time workers or ten 20% part-time workers. In practice, communication overhead destroys that equation.