Comment by deprecative | Hacker News Reader

Comment by deprecative | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The folks with wealth have seen our productivity gains. We as labor have not. We seem to have less free time because we're working more. We have less free time. We should be down at least to 32 hours per workweek at 4 days. If we unionized we'd be able to negotiate such things. Unfortunately, our industry as a whole seems somehow illogical about that as it, we're all some 100x rockstar type. As it stands that we (IT/Software Engineers) are classified as salary exempt (in the US at least) is incredibly damaging. When you can be made to work 70-hour workweeks with no additional pay and with your job hostage, I'd say that's a perfect time to unionize.

But broadly speaking we in the US view down time as somehow the greatest sin imaginable. Take time off? Better be sick. Don't want to spend 3+ hours of your day in waste? How dare you, you entitled commie!

WFH is the best way to reclaim time that we presently have. I get to lose two hours commute and an hour lunch that wasn't really mine anyway. My work week isn't going to be reduced so the time I have around that is what I can reduce. Given that I see no other way to do that besides working from home. When we work from home we must be diligent to create boundaries. Don't install Slack on your personal phone. Don't put your email on your personal phone. At the end of your workday shut the work machine down and leave it until the start of your workday.

>so what is your excuse for not completing that task on Saturday?

I don't work on my personal time without additional compensation. If you want that task done on Saturday you can do it yourself. If you want me to do it then you can wait until Monday.

> WFH is the best way to reclaim time that we presently have.

Is it? WFH is great for many reasons but the normalization of WFH is also bringing a lot of pressure for more hours. Some (many?) companies are using those hours you are no longer commuting to do more meetings.

Nobody (at least in Silicon Valley) would do 8am meetings because commutes made that impractical. But if you're sitting at home already.. hey let's meet at 8am.

Everyone had to leave the office at 5 to 5:30 to go sit in traffic. But now you're home already, so let's run this meeting to 6:30 or 7pm. You're not commuting after all, let's be productive with the time.

So it's companies that are stealing more time from you. That has nothing to do with WFH. Don't accept those meetings.

Anyone can find an arrangement where they work less. You seem to imply everyone should be required to work less, so that you’re not competing with people that are willing to allocate more of their time to work.

You don't compete with people that are willing to allocate more of their time to work. You compete against who can get more work done in the same amount of time. If you work for free why would the employer give you more money? You've already signaled that you don't have self-worth. You get nothing, boss laughs at you, and you think you're indispensable because you worked 60 hour weeks for the last three years with barely anything to show for it besides more work.

We shouldn't be required to work less. We should get the benefit of our productivity. If you are more productive you get punished by getting more work thrown your way.

>Anyone can find an arrangement where they work less.

Sure, anyone can quit their job. I don't see how that's helpful.

You compete with both kinds of people.

Maybe you do. If I have to compete with them I am not interested in the job.

You misunderstand, you're competing with both kinds of people in your career all the time. There's no opting out. There's a global pool of talent and it's one big market.

But an important corollary is that you absolutely do not have to be at the tip top of that competition to live a good and successful life. It's a global competition, but there are a lot of slots to be filled out there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com