News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We’re all paying for someone else’s 4-hour work week, not ours. Parent comment

Re:We’re all paying for someone else’s 4-hour work week, not... by strken on Monday June 07, 2021 @09:11AM (#27422137)
You probably want employers who think a 35 hour work week is quantifiably better value, and understand they're harming retention and productivity by having workers work more.

I'm convinced that the marginal hours between 35 and 40 are much less productive than the marginal hours between 25 and 30, and the marginal hours between 50 and 55 may actually be negative.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We’re all paying for someone else’s 4-hour work week, not... by donatzsky on Monday June 07, 2021 @09:26AM (#27422310)
> the marginal hours between 50 and 55 may actually be negative.

It has in fact been proven to be negative:

https://igda.org/resources-archive/why-crunch-mode-doesnt-wo...

https://lifehacker.com/working-over-40-hours-a-week-makes-yo...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We’re all paying for someone else’s 4-hour work week, not... by s1artibartfast on Monday June 07, 2021 @09:47AM (#27422560)
, the problem with that is the marginal benefit argument only works white collar workers, who still net value unless it truly goes negative. Blue collar worker value is usually tied to hours on the job.

Also, having personally struggled with overwork and burnout, I can say 60 and 80 weeks can be productive.. Until they aren't.

[ Parent | on HN ]