Working hours... 11

[willir]

I came across this post on the web.

Europeans suffering more hours on the job

In paticular...

European governments, facing high unemployment and spiralling fiscal crises, effectively told their workers to follow the lead of countries such as Canada, where people work a lot more hours than they did a couple of decades ago — without making any more money, in real terms.

When I read this, I thought of how true -- I am working longer hours, less incentives with modest cost-of-living increases (and I have been told by management I am in the top 10% of the performers so I can only imagine what others endure).

More over, there seems to be a push to cut benefits, changes to OT rules or having to work OT without any further pay, etc.

Although the Dot.com or Tech bubble burst has something to do with the change, I really feel this is business reacting to the outsourcing Pacific rim because of the reduced labour costs, possibly the reduced liability for environmental and HR concerns, etc.

So....
- What are your thoughts? Perspectives from North America, Europe, Asia.
- Have others seen this trend?
- How do the ones being affected adjust? What about the next generation or two?
- Is this the price we pay as the global society adjusts as the Pacific rim continues to become more competitive with reduced costs, improved quality and improved productivity?
- How do you personally cope with the change?

 

[DoubleD]

I live in midwestern US. Economy is reasonably solid.
I consider myself one of the fortunate few who have the self-confidence to ask for what I want and to leave a bad situation when it's necessary. Although I've moved departments several times at my current employer, I've been with the company for over 7 years.

Anytime I consider a new position, one of the items I discuss with a gaining manager is the pay being offered versus the hours expected. With the agreement that if the hours change, the pay needs to change accordingly. Any good manager will understand and respect this stance when discussed openly and honestly. I work on average 45 hours per week and my hours are quite flexible when necessary.



I am what I am based on the decisions I have made.

DoubleD

 

[lionelhill]

I'm sure most of the people writing here really are working long hours. But there is another class of people who are bodily "at work" for long hours, but could realistically achieve the same and go home at lunch time if only they were half organised about what they did, and ruthless about not doing unnecessary things. Strangely these people often feel very upset at their long hours.

I remember many years ago looking at a friend who lived several hour's drive away. She always turned up at exactly 9am, and left at 5-30pm (she had to, to share transport), but still got quite literally twice as much done as I managed (I often stayed till 8pm). The reason was that she never wasted a minute on trivialities, and everything she intended to do was well-planned, and carried out with forethought. I'm still not in her league, but it's worth trying.

 

[langleymass]

I am here in the United States of America. I am also single and simply have way too many other things in life that I want to do. I often say that I have the "Bo Jackson Syndrome."

For two years, I had a job where I was the only IT guy. That meant my cell phone often rang when I wasn't there. But I ended up averaging about 40 hours a week. The job also had the best benefits I've ever had. People were reasonable and fair. I actually felt bad when I wasn't there.

I find it especially interesting that people are working long hours in depressed areas. It seems to me that there would be an ample pool of people to do the work. This is unfortunate because two people who are both working 60 hours are simply taking a job away from someone else. And you will never convince me that two people working 60 hours each are just as productive as three people working 40 hours each.

I don't want to hear any garbage about a lack of experienced people to do the work. If there aren't enough experience professionals out there, then the employers will simply have to produce more experienced professional (that means give the experience to people who may be able to learn to do the work at a lower rate). I have never seen experience on sale at Walmart or on Amazon.

I don't see unions (as we currently know them) as a fix either. Unions in many cases have become another problem. There is of course the entire union bureaucracy and the fact that they seem to be designed to keep things from getting done. My brother knows a guy who is doing quite well at a non-union coal mine.

My experience with long hours seemed to indicate that the company problem wasn't a lack of time, but simply a lack of organization. I wasted lots of time with meetings and other silliness. I always got more work done when my supervisor was not around.

And I also forgot to mention that about half of our time here in the USA is spent paying various taxes. In Europe, it is worse.

 

[spamly]

I find it especially interesting that people are working long hours in depressed areas. It seems to me that there would be an ample pool of people to do the work. This is unfortunate because two people who are both working 60 hours are simply taking a job away from someone else. And you will never convince me that two people working 60 hours each are just as productive as three people working 40 hours each.

No, but two salary employees working 60 hour weeks cost the company 50% less than three salary employees working 40 hour weeks.

 

[Zelandakh]

And if the 60 hour a week guy leaves you can hire another as they are all clamouring for the jobs.

The days of 40 hour a week are long gone. I can't recall a week I haven't done 50 hours other than holidays. Plus I train myself, run my own network at home to learn (and support it) plus every "friend" needs help...

But I do actually have a life. Not much time for it, but I do get one.

Choices: Change to another long houred job. Stay as I am. Go upstairs and insist on a 35 hour week. Oh yes, that is the same as changing jobs...

 

[leztek]

All I have to say is..

Wow, I'm not the only one. I just went nose to nose on my boss about this one.

I've been with my current company ten years. Preety much the only IT guy. I answer call all day and expect to do everything else after hours.

I did some research and found I am underpaid for my area by 15 percent, so I asked to be paid for my extra time. He said there isn't anything he can do right now, so I countered that I can't work the OT anymore.

It's not a fair practice. I can see working OT here and there to get a project done, but to expect someone to do it week in and week out with out compensation, wether it's time off or money, is not justifiable.

Now, if I agreed upon a longer work week when I took the position that would be a different story.

Hey, just my opinion.

Lez

 

[langleymass]

I would be looking elsewhere.

 

[leztek]

Resumes are flying...

I'm going to start using my time to learn what I can, instead of puting out fires.

Let's take yesterday for example. 8 hour work day, including lunch. 32 phone calls, the day before 24 calls.
and I'm suppose to be preparing to migrate a novell server to Win2K3? Which is being self taught... on my own time.

Sorry venting.. no one at work will listen.

I took and idea from an earlier post. The systems always ran very well.. no one complains, so everyone took it for granted.

Well.. I stopped the OT, now things are slowly coming full circle. Slowly things are not getting done. I log my daily activities and phone calls, to cma (cover my ass).

I just don't understand what employers expect out of employees or is that they really don't understand what is involved with technology? They think that once a system is set up, everything else works on it's own. Or when a new technology is going to be utilitized, you already know it.

I know my uppers don't understand. They are all business people without and tech background.

They will not understand till it is too late and they have to replace me and pay what I wa asking for in the first place...

Live and Learn...

Thanks for listening

JLez

Just my opinion.

 

[langleymass]

Why in the world are you migrating a Netware server to Windows 2003 server? The first thing you are going to have is more servers.

 

[leztek]

Lang..

Our accounting package at teh Corp office is currently running under Access. It is getting to large and I need to run it under SQL. I could be wrong, but I believe SQL will not run on Netware.

Additionally, the server is very antiquated, and is running low on resources. So, it seemed like the logical time to make the switch to Win 2K3 server.

By all means, if I am mistaken on thi s correct me. I am a peron who has to learn as I go. I do not have a mentor and basically the only one in the compnay who has anything to do with the technology.

Thanks

 

[Zelandakh]

Lez,
Don't worry. Some people are pro Netware! Windows does most things you'll want although it needs more power to run. Just go for it.

 

[willir]

Sorry for not keeping current with this thread I started -- you guessed it, more OT, worked the last eight of nine days.

First, In a past life, I found myself working a lot of OT. Back then I was paid properly for it, but it got real tiring after awhile. I did some preventative maintenance and put some thought into the infrastructure. I probably resolved 90% of the repeating problems by installing high-end UPS's on the servers and switches. What an eye-opener -- the UPS monitoring software revealed how uneven the power was to the plant. I resolved more problems by buying better printers. Then more problems were addressed by routinely rebooting servers.

Next, I found NetWare a more stable platform, better security and a better print server, but it is nowhere as good as Win 2000 / 2003 for an application server.

We moved to a common platform, ie, Windows server environment, but yes, we had to buy more servers -- getting Windows 2k servers to run multiple applications was problematic due to conflicts in requirements, resource problems, etc.

My favourite was when we ran a mixed environment Netware and Win 2k -- capatalize on the the strength each OS had to offer.

leztek -- you bring up an excellent point. It really difficult to focus on project work while trouble shooting. Management I have expereienced in the past seemed to think that one could easily flip between the two. Not so. Project work requires focus and sequential thought whereas trouble shooting requires a different skill set (including trouble shooting) and often non-linear thinking. I have always found it ineffecient to switch between the two different tasks.

You may be able to get management to hire a co-op student from a local college. This type of resource is short-term, and I have always found the quality of work better and less expensive than contract work.

 

[leztek]

Willir,

Hire? now that's funny. Not intended towards you but my mangement.

Example, I'm working on the Win2K3 conversion. I got a quote to have it outsourced to a local company to do after hours, so I wouldn't have to work the overtime. My boss and I quote "I don't know how long I am going to play this game." refering to my refusal to work OT. I said I could so it over the weekend and take the following Thursday and Friday off. Yeah. When I take a sick day, my phone rings half the day, so I can image what that day would be like. Additionally, I was married back in October, so the more time I spend working the more it takes away from me and my wife.

I went in and spoke to my boss and his boss about the fact of how much OT I am putting in and somethign need to be done with it. Both said that nothing could be done right now, we are in a salary freeze at the present time.

I asked back in January for the company to pay for my Masters degree in Information Technology. It is March and I have yet the have a reply.

I have a log on daily activity, number of calls and projects that need to be completed. I did my home work on salaries for IT Managers in my area. I'm not trying to say I'm the IT God, but I just want to be compensatied for my services. It really sucks (sorry for the terminology) when you see people taking their hour lunches, putting in their 8 hours a day and playing on the net and talking an hour or two of the 8.

I know I've been a dedicated employee and an extremly hard worker. I will be graduating in May with a dual bachlors in Accounting and Computer Science. This summer I want to work on my MCSE and follow up with some Cisco? Next fall I went to head back for my Masters Degree.

Unless you guys can lead me in a better direction.

I know what the anser is and the is to get out!

Sorry for the long post and sort of hijacking the Thread. Just really frustrated!

Jlez

 

[Thadeus]

It really sucks (sorry for the terminology) when you see people taking their hour lunches, putting in their 8 hours a day and playing on the net and talking an hour or two of the 8.

Try not to displace your frustration on workers with better management. Not that you are, but I have held such feelings in the past.

Today, I work my 8 a day and go home. The company has a "you must take a 1/2 hour lunch" policy. I work through it and therefore I actually put in 8.5 a day. If there is a project, or just a high priority item, I have no problem staying later, but in my line, they are few and far between.

I've been in a position like yours before. I worked Christmas morning for about 5 hours one year while my 6 year old waited and waited to open presents. Not a good day. For my troubles I was granted a "Thank you". I just refuse to put myself in a company like that again. I have no problem busting my butt for a company that is busting their butt to support me. Beyond that, I write it off as poor/bad management and start looking elsewhere.

~Thadeus

 

[Onyxpurr]

When I was younger, I was more willing to put in a lot of extra hours, however my father ended up in ICU and I had to start reevaluating my priorities.

I asked myself, "Will I, on my death bed, be upset that i didn't put in more hours at work?" Um, no. "Regret that I didn't spend more time with my family and experiencing life?" Er, yea!

Ever since then, I have not let myself work for an employer that expects my work to be my life. Plus if I worked OT on salary, I'd be making much less an hour and I deserve more than that.

Why do employers do this? Simply because they can. The more willing we are to put up with something, the more they'll try to take.

Right now I make more money than I ever have and work 40 hours a week. Sometimes more, sometimes less. However I do try to offset that with the QUALITY of my work. i frequently get comments from my boss, and previous bosses, that they were highly impressed with my work. For that, they're willing to recognize that I will not spend hours on end in front of the desk.

We need to start pushing back like our forefathers did. Safety comes in numbers. You don't have to be aggressive about it, but respectful. "I'll work like a maniac when I'm here, and work extra when the need dictates it, but don't expect me to be here 50+ hours a week on a regular basis."

Maybe I'm jaded, but it's worked so far. Plus it gives my bosses a realistic expectation of what really needs to be done. I never say, "I'll work tons of overtime to get that done." I say, "You have two options: either you can choose a longer deadline or give me some help.

 

[DoubleD]

Onyxpurr has hit it right on the head. As long as you are willing to work the long hours, your company will expect you to work the long hours. (Insert Vicious cycle here.)

I am what I am based on the decisions I have made.

DoubleD

 

[leztek]

Oh.. I agree Onyxpurr and Double D!

That's exactly what happened. I worked and worked, made sure ever thing was done.

Until one day I just realized, Hey, I'm working all this time and it's not being recogonized. My raises were the sameas everyone elses. Everyone else was taking thir lunches and sitting around shooting the crap, while I was nose to the stone. I figured enough is a enough.

The kicker is when I said I wans't going to it anymore? They said you can't do that, you've been putting in all this time and it's not fair if you just stop doing it. Fair!

or when I made a point to my boss how much it would cost them to out source a installation of a new server and I said I didn't think it was fair that I give up my weekend without compensation. His response to me is take the following Thursday and Friday off and I don't know how long I'm going to play this game. Game... my life is a game.

It goes to show... You have to have the mentality of, IT's all about me. I use to be company oriented, not anymore.

Oh well.. I just keep sending out the resumes.

JLez

 

[DoubleD]

You have to have the mentality of, IT's all about me.

This is only partially true. It's about respecting yourself and your needs. It's about finding a compromise between what you need and what the company needs. Sometimes the two are not compatible.


I am what I am based on the decisions I have made.

DoubleD

 

[SQLSister]

I had one job where the shortest day I worked in the last 4 months I was there was 11 hours, I worked at least one 18+ hour day a week and usually 2 and every weekend. My subordinate (who could get overtime) worked 40 hour weeks. For some odd reason they were suprised when I quit.

My personal opinon is that virtually all use of the salaried exempt from ovetime category of employment is abuse and we should be fighting to have this category removed from the law. No one should be required to work overtime without compensation.

One thing I learned as a management analyst was that tired people are not as productive as rested people. I can get more doen in an 8 hour day, day in and day out than I can when I'm so exhausted it takes me 30 minutes to do a five minute task. Management needs to learn that they are wasting money requiring people to work longer hours. Because what happens is that less actual work gets accomplished when too many hours are worked on a regular basis.

Questions about posting. See faq183-874
Click here to learn Ways to help with Tsunami Relief

 

[langleymass]

Part of the problem is that corporations would rather pay $40,000 and get $40,000 worth of productivity than pay $60,000 and get $80,000. There is no easy way to measure how much "tired" employees cost you.

Last night, I was at one of the Toastmasters division contests here in Austin. I was talking about looking for work and mentioned that I wanted to work at Whole Foods "because they treat their employees with respect and dignity."

It shows. Whenever I walk into their "landmark" store here in Austin, I am always amazed at how happy all the employees seem to be. This is even the case with people running cash registers and stocking the shelves.

The person I was talking to immediately talked about how much he worked at Dell, and it was obvious he disliked it. It's not hard to get any Dell employee or former employee to talk about how much they dislike Dell. The complaints always come back to it being a "sweatshop" and working "a lot."

What does this cost a company? Michael Dell probably has no idea, and it's nearly impossible to measure. The fact that ti can't be measured is exactly why he should worry about it.