3 ms·

People who read Hacker News are naturally biased about what work is or should be. If everyone did work that was interesting, engaging, and meaningful, society c

People who read Hacker News are naturally biased about what work is or should be. If everyone did work that was interesting, engaging, and meaningful, society couldn't function. There are plenty of jobs that are neither interesting nor engaging but are necessary. How many garbage men or laundromat employees really enjoy and are stimulated by their work?

untog 14y ago
How many garbage men or laundromat employees really enjoy and are stimulated by their work? I think you can live two kinds of life. One where your job is your passion, and takes over your life. A lot of startup folk are in this bracket. I'd argue that if you aren't, then you shouldn't be doing a startup. On the other side, people work to earn the money they need to pursue the interests outside of work. I really don't think there's anything wrong with that, and it annoys me when people in communities like HN get snobby about it. The garbage worker is even getting a physical workout every shift- meanwhile, the rest of us slowly get less fit sat at a desk, and end up sacrificing our free time to go to the gym.
- mejarc 14y ago
  One thing I liked about my time as "dog-collar labor" is that all my co-workers had interesting non-work pursuits, and there was no penalty for leaving work behind to engage in them. None of us mistook our stints as cashiers, food servers, or book store clerks for our passions, nor did our employers. There was refreshing frankness that the whole thing was just business, nothing personal: no, we weren't enticed with company-paid meals, but we also weren't required to work limitless overtime.
  - coldtea 14y ago
    >no, we weren't enticed with company-paid meals, but we also weren't required to work limitless overtime. I.e exchange your little precious time in this world for some token BS "handout", that's pre-calculated in your pay expenses anyway.
    - pmcg 14y ago
      I prefer company meals since it saves my time. I don't have to go out and get food or bring my own. This is assuming the food is good and healthy, which it happens to be.
      - kelnos 14y ago
        Being served lunch at the office is certainly convenient, and takes less time, but I wouldn't say it saves me time. We have catered lunches 2-3 times per week. On those days, I will usually take about 30 minutes for lunch, and get right back to work. On other days, I'll take 45-90 minutes for lunch, and I'll get to take a walk, go outside, possibly see some of my non-work friends, and have different food. The bottom line is that I'm going to leave the office at the end of the day at roughly the same time, regardless of the length of my lunch. That's almost certainly not the case for everyone, but, as a data point, it is for me. Lunch at the office only "saves" me time to get more work done that day. Don't get my wrong: I love my job, but I also love being outside and seeing friends too.
guard-of-terra 14y ago
IF you own a laundromat and not just look after it I can see how it can be attractive. Same with garbage. Especially if the competition isn't killing.
erichocean 14y ago
If everyone did work that was interesting, engaging, and meaningful, society couldn't function. I've seen many, many people cite this as some kind of provable, immovable fact -- a way to shut off the mind towards that line of thinking. I'm not so sure. I see no inherent reason why some people should need to suffer merely to stay alive, why some people, or perhaps many people, should live lives of futility and meaningless work. Frankly, I'd like to think that human ingenuity can overcome even that. Slavery was considered normal until a few hundred years ago, why should crappy work be any different?
- calibraxis 14y ago
  Yes, many work towards a more advanced society where we'd try to automate away unpleasant labor; and whatever residue of unpleasant jobs remain would be shared equally. (As opposed to bosses using tech to deskill and commoditize workers, as alluded to in the article.)
city41 14y ago
I don't know if that is necessarily true. There is a different kind of joy that comes out of jobs like that. I worked at LensCrafters making glasses in college. Making glasses is not that much different from flipping burgers or picking up garbage cans. After a finite amount of time there's nothing more to be learned and it's just a matter of cranking them out. But I found the job very enjoyable. It was a rather zen-like experience, and the shifts would just fly by.
- jaggederest 14y ago
  Agreed. I found manual labor jobs in many ways to be more rewarding than software. When you bake pies, at the end of the day you're tired, covered in flour, and your feet ache, but you can point to a rack full of cooling pies and say "I did that today. 600 people are going to enjoy delicious pie today because I put in the work" - more than I can say most days working on software for a living.

untog 14y ago

How many garbage men or laundromat employees really enjoy and are stimulated by their work? I think you can live two kinds of life. One where your job is your passion, and takes over your life. A lot of startup folk are in this bracket. I'd argue that if you aren't, then you shouldn't be doing a startup. On the other side, people work to earn the money they need to pursue the interests outside of work. I really don't think there's anything wrong with that, and it annoys me when people in communities like HN get snobby about it. The garbage worker is even getting a physical workout every shift- meanwhile, the rest of us slowly get less fit sat at a desk, and end up sacrificing our free time to go to the gym.

mejarc 14y ago
One thing I liked about my time as "dog-collar labor" is that all my co-workers had interesting non-work pursuits, and there was no penalty for leaving work behind to engage in them. None of us mistook our stints as cashiers, food servers, or book store clerks for our passions, nor did our employers. There was refreshing frankness that the whole thing was just business, nothing personal: no, we weren't enticed with company-paid meals, but we also weren't required to work limitless overtime.
- coldtea 14y ago
  >no, we weren't enticed with company-paid meals, but we also weren't required to work limitless overtime. I.e exchange your little precious time in this world for some token BS "handout", that's pre-calculated in your pay expenses anyway.
  - pmcg 14y ago
    I prefer company meals since it saves my time. I don't have to go out and get food or bring my own. This is assuming the food is good and healthy, which it happens to be.
    - kelnos 14y ago
      Being served lunch at the office is certainly convenient, and takes less time, but I wouldn't say it saves me time. We have catered lunches 2-3 times per week. On those days, I will usually take about 30 minutes for lunch, and get right back to work. On other days, I'll take 45-90 minutes for lunch, and I'll get to take a walk, go outside, possibly see some of my non-work friends, and have different food. The bottom line is that I'm going to leave the office at the end of the day at roughly the same time, regardless of the length of my lunch. That's almost certainly not the case for everyone, but, as a data point, it is for me. Lunch at the office only "saves" me time to get more work done that day. Don't get my wrong: I love my job, but I also love being outside and seeing friends too.

guard-of-terra 14y ago

IF you own a laundromat and not just look after it I can see how it can be attractive. Same with garbage. Especially if the competition isn't killing.

erichocean 14y ago

If everyone did work that was interesting, engaging, and meaningful, society couldn't function. I've seen many, many people cite this as some kind of provable, immovable fact -- a way to shut off the mind towards that line of thinking. I'm not so sure. I see no inherent reason why some people should need to suffer merely to stay alive, why some people, or perhaps many people, should live lives of futility and meaningless work. Frankly, I'd like to think that human ingenuity can overcome even that. Slavery was considered normal until a few hundred years ago, why should crappy work be any different?

calibraxis 14y ago
Yes, many work towards a more advanced society where we'd try to automate away unpleasant labor; and whatever residue of unpleasant jobs remain would be shared equally. (As opposed to bosses using tech to deskill and commoditize workers, as alluded to in the article.)

city41 14y ago

I don't know if that is necessarily true. There is a different kind of joy that comes out of jobs like that. I worked at LensCrafters making glasses in college. Making glasses is not that much different from flipping burgers or picking up garbage cans. After a finite amount of time there's nothing more to be learned and it's just a matter of cranking them out. But I found the job very enjoyable. It was a rather zen-like experience, and the shifts would just fly by.

jaggederest 14y ago
Agreed. I found manual labor jobs in many ways to be more rewarding than software. When you bake pies, at the end of the day you're tired, covered in flour, and your feet ache, but you can point to a rack full of cooling pies and say "I did that today. 600 people are going to enjoy delicious pie today because I put in the work" - more than I can say most days working on software for a living.