3 ms·
I think a lot of it is that a 40 hour a week job is really 40 hours of availability a week. There isn’t 40 hours of work.
by MattGaiser 5y ago
I think a lot of it is that a 40 hour a week job is really 40 hours of availability a week.
There isn’t 40 hours of work.
- TeMPOraL 5y agoThese kinds of situations - whether you're pulling 40 hours / week split between two jobs, or 20 hours in one, or 80 hours total in two - are hard to evaluate, because trying to compute correct salaries means opening a Pandora's box that almost every employee (including perhaps most managers) would prefer to stay closed. It means dealing with questions like: - Am I paid for my tangible work output, or for availability? What about intangibles? How do you measure it anyway? - It there, or is there not, an expectation that I devote my "best hours" of the day to the job? It's really better just not account for things in such detail. Like, I'm willing to ignore a co-worker doing two jobs at the same time, because I'd like to avoid getting my salary cut because as a night owl, my "best hours" are really outside of 9-5.
- HWR_14 5y agoI think, far from being a Pandora's box, those are important discussions to have. Why on earth would I want to have a mismatch in the expectations between me any my employer on any of those. Otherwise, it's almost always the employee who gets screwed. And, to answer one specific question: Why would you owe your "best hours" to the job? They contract for specific hours.
- HWR_14 5y agoThat doesn't seem responsive. If someone puts 80 hours of availability out a week, that just seems to make the case even stronger.