4 ms·
> Therefore your math doesn't add up. 2hr commute against 8 hours of work is not a 25% increase. What? Going from 8 to 10 hours is absolutely a 25% increase. 1
by wutbrodo 5y ago
> Therefore your math doesn't add up. 2hr commute against 8 hours of work is not a 25% increase.
What? Going from 8 to 10 hours is absolutely a 25% increase. 10 is 125% of 8
- throwaway3b03 5y agoThe situation is a bit more complex than that. First, people don't live in the office, so even if you live closer to the workplace, you still spend a non-negligible amount of time preparing and getting there. It can easily amount to more than 30 minutes a day. And secondly, an office job can be stressful, consuming, in a way that commuting isn't (if done by train or bicycle for instance). So i wouldn't put them all in the same box as time devoted to work.
- UglyToad 5y agoThere's a world of difference between going for a nice cycle or taking the train to see a new place or even going for a drive in the country versus cramming onto a standing-room-only train or risking your life in rush hour traffic or crawling along the highway in a tailback. Commuting is absolutely part of work, it's an unpaid part sure, but people aren't choosing it of their own free will.
- l-lousy 5y agoThis is mainly discussing WFH, so in this case people actually are living in the office.
- mojuba 5y agoYou are right, I was wrong. But I was mainly arguing that the commute time shouldn't be counted against work time, it really isn't: you can listen to radio, or read if you are on public transport. Rather, I'd count the saved commute against my life (as in, not work) time.
- ihattendorf 5y agoBut I can listen to music while I work 90% of the time if I want to.