If you stay in the office any longer, I’ll start charge you rent

On contrary, I never had such a job - always 40h weeks, having 6 different employers. In past 15 years I worked literally once hard over whole weekend, to deliver on Monday 1am. In my current work I had to come during weekend once every few months for go-live, but it was due to business nature of employer - you can't patch ebanking or banking core integration during week (unless fixing showstoppers of course).

I have some colleagues around me who work more than I do, for no good reason - they don't get pay more because of this, some vague promise never put on paper/email that maybe yearly bonus will reflect that (it rarely does), or they might get a raise (they rarely do), or even get promoted (happened like once in past 6 years). Surprisingly, their private life ain't very rich, they definitely don't compensate "quantity with quality".

The remaining life that you have - be it next 30 or 60 years, NOW are the best times to enjoy it. You will not get healthier or stronger over time, you will not have more free time or motivation. You can't put a price on a life lived well. What you definitely can do is having regrets later, when its too late.

So, are you suggesting that the company has an overtime policy (regardless of exemption status) in an effort to reward any extra time put in? I don't disagree in the least. But, that would still need to be reviewed to prevent abuse. Much in the same way a 35 hour employee's work would need to be reviewed to ensure they aren't being unproductive.

This is where autonomy (ie trust) come in. This type of work ethic should be clearly visible upon hire or review.

I think a 30, 40, 50, 60 hour employee can be very different things. A 50 hour employee who isn't productive is clearly an issue. A 60 hour employee who is clearly burned out BUT productive is a problem too.

I don't think that hours are the first or only thing by which an employee can be judged. It's more about setting a standard and allowing the manager to monitor and enforce that based on the individual.

My experience might be a bit jaded. I work for a company that is "small", very close (many 15+ year employees). So, time spent "in the office" doesn't necessarily mean we're locked to our chairs and keyboards.

This is very true. Work product outside of office hours is a sign of a good candidate. Somebody who's always tinkering, reading or enriching themselves is obviously beneficial to both parties. This is a character trait that should be obvious upon hire or review.

Unfortunately, minimum hours requirements need to exist in some businesses to set the expectations. It's up to the manager on how to enforce that. If I have a employee that is clearly meeting project deadlines and is a positive impact in the company, I'm going to be less scrutinous on their hours. But, that person can't just skate by on 30 hours. I've seen far to many culture/team issues arise from somebody who is productive on paper but doesn't put in a "fair" amount of hours compared to other employees. "They work more than you" doesn't always go over well with other employees.

My point was about finding the balance between what the business needs and what the employee needs. Your point about autonomy (ie trust) is paramount to all of this.

70 hour work weeks are common in some industries or job roles. Chefs, game-devs and cruise ship staff come to mind straight way...

Most of these people are taking the hit for the extra hours for some kind 'added value', which this company hopes to compete with maybe? They just seem like a shitty marketing company though?

I consider it supply and demand, that there are places out there not demanding more than 40 hours a week for the same job.

I can't ever see myself requiring time tracking on projects, that's far too scrutinous. Unless we were billing hourly on project.

It's more about finding that balance of what the business needs and what the employee needs. Setting standards and expectations is important so that there's very little left to question or ambiguity if an issue ever comes up. BUT, it's up to the manager to decide if there's other factors outside of hours worked that contribute to productivity. I doubt that I'd ever write up or fire somebody for putting in 35 hours and is meeting project/productivity requirements.

I lean more towards the life side of the work/life balance. The company I currently work for has purchased vacations for employees who took little or no time off. Not out of policy, but out of need.