3 ms·
So in the past I've worked 33h/w instead of 38.5h/w. Soon I'll go 35h/w to get an afternoon with the kids or some time for a workout. That will make me more lik
by nedt 4y ago
So in the past I've worked 33h/w instead of 38.5h/w. Soon I'll go 35h/w to get an afternoon with the kids or some time for a workout. That will make me more likely to divorce? I think the opposite is the case.
- netrap 4y agoThe definition of full time is also changing slowly, right?
- t-3 4y agoAny of the hours OP listed are legally full time. Part time is less than 32/week.
- nedt 4y agoHere the full-time is defined by the collective bargaining agreement, which in my case is 38.5h/w (and you must take one 30 minutes break). Anything less is part-time.
- TheHappyOddish 4y agoThat highly depends on where in the world they are.
- red-iron-pine 4y agoWhat are you getting paid per hour? I'm sure my wife won't complain if I'm working only 20 hours a week at $250/hr. But if you're only pulling $25/hr cutting out 10 hours a week is a significant dent in total earnings. Plus you have kids, and workout -- both uses of your time that I'm sure your spouse probably approves of. You're not working 30 hours a week and then playing competitive Yu-gi-oh for another 30, non?
- nedt 4y agoSurely not 250/hr. But then US wages and what you get in Europe can't be compared just by numbers. Had always been earning to go along easily. Which is also the reason why reducing weekly hours a bit is possible. But also the article says it's not about the earnings at all. But then also talks about widening the husband and father role, which is not done by getting more man into full-time, quite the opposite.