Hacker News Reader

Comment by tablet | Hacker News Reader

I partially agree with you, but personal productivity varies. So in our company we have a rule "work as much as you like, usually we expect no less than 30 hours, but it is OK to do 50. Anything beyond these ranges is odd".

View on HN

What would you say if I told you in a given work day, I only work maybe 3-5 hours (including meetings) and still meet all targets?

This has been consistent for every job I've ever had.

I can definitely believe that. But in my line of work I'm expected to bill at least 8 hrs/day to the client regardless of my personal productivity.

> Pfft. A man-hour of labor is a man-hour of labor

> I'm expected to bill at least 8 hrs/day

I bet you're capable of far deeper, more intellectually stimulating and rewarding work than you're doing now.

I used to be someone who worked only 4 hours max in any company and use remaining time to be on top of tech stacks(SysAdmin). But last four years i self trained on stock trading and it close to be becoming my main job in another year or so. Though i now look for trader jobs where i can trade for profit % but the salaries are no where near in my country for traders.

What was your growth path to excel and mature as a trader?

I'd like to think so, but the pay is good and there isn't much else in this area.

I'm stuck in the billable hour purgatory as well. It seems to be a trend that becomes more and more pervasive.

For my next job I'll move to an inhouse position, hopefully things will be better in a setting like that.

Well many managers and execs might respond with "well then, give 'em more work! We obviously aren't giving them enough to do!"

Salary exempt is usually a losing game for developers. Crappy places will say "we pay you a salary to get the work done" and under staff and/or overwork. If it takes you 60 hours then you have to work 60 hours. But if it only took someone 30 hours they can't leave early because a) deadlines will be tightened to ensure 40+ hours or b) more work and assignments will be given.

If we're assuming salaries are based on a 40-hour work week, neither A nor B is "bad" for the developer - it's exactly what they signed up for.

The larger the org and the closer to government (unless you ask for more work), the more likely I find this to be the case.

I'd say you could expand your role and earn more, if you want and can find an opportunity.

Same experience. I've used the extra time to start internal side projects, for which a few I've earned $$ for. Surprisingly no one asks how I have the extra time

Everyone is different, so good managers set targets based on past performance. If you set the bar at what you can accomplish by working 3-5 hours per day, they'll assume it takes you 8 hours per day, and give you work based on that. If that works for you, great.

I would ask where do you work and what sort of industry are you in?

W/O knowing anything about your situation sounds like some sort of financial services job.

Some thinking-intensive work can bring you at the edge in just 3 hours a day. After that, you generate more problems than solutions. Especially mathematicians are prone to this. Similar cases in software development need to be respected.

Grothendieck worked twelve hours per day every day of the week for a decade.

Source: https://math.stackexchange.com/a/874290/161054

Yeah we should all - at he miminum - outperform a mathematical giant.

Good for him. I have no desire to sacrifice all of my free time to make someone else rich.

3 hours of thinking-intensive work is fine. Then take lunch/walk/shower, and sit down to write documentation, update bug reports, chat with a coworker about your ideas, review someone else's code.....

Reply on news.ycombinator.com