Interns

[Mich the Tester]

I think we ARE in a war. Let me ask you airy fairy tarts one question

if my company acts like it was in a war (and acts legally) and your airy fairy, arty farty, wishy washy, namby pamby, mumsnet basket case company does not
who will go out of business ?

get real guys. we are the shock troops of the future. its a war. the enemy are the competion and the wanky attitudes that are making themselves heard more and more in a once proud forum

You're in a war. I'm in a pub.

[EternalOptimist]

You're in a war. I'm in a pub.

dont bandy legs with me.

[d000hg]

"Average is 110 hours per week" the article says.

Let's see 168 hours in a week, take away 8*7=56 for sleep, that leaves you with 2 hours for everything else. Sorry even if they were taking taxies back and forth to the house for a shower they'd use up those 2 hours. I don't believe this article.

You're really that daft?

I have had phases over the last 20 years where I have worked 16 hour days, high pressure. Only 8 might be at my desk, but solving major problems whilst in the shower, in the traffic or even asleep is not unusual.
plus when I was this guys age, I worked 24 hour days for three or four days on the run, under the most stressful conditions known to mankind, and there are thousands over in Afghanistan and other places doing the same right now.

Yep, fighting a war, under highly trained officers who take responsibility for the well being of their charges. If they get injured, the army provides world class medical care and psychological help. They're intensively trained to do the job having been through tough selection. And again; it's to fight a war, not to push a bit of paper around the place with some numbers on it. You can debate the sense and nonsense of war all night, but working people into serious psychological problems for the sake of investment wanking is screwed up and wrong.

In many countries, working a 15 hour day is simply the norm and you're lucky to get that job... hell even in the USA many work 2 or 3 jobs. Junior doctors always used to do this for months at a time and my understanding is army bootcamp is like that too. Nothing says a human can't work long days, the "you shouldn't work more than 40 hours a week" line is merely the current compromise between government and labour unions in the UK.

[AtW]

It appears that most of the problems in banks are caused by people working long hours.

Problems in banks were caused by:
1) massive greed among bankers
2) piss poor controls over bankers

That's it.

[doodab]

the "you shouldn't work more than 40 hours a week" line is merely the current compromise between government and labour unions in the UK.

Er, no, it was introduced by Henry Ford to improve productivity in his factories, which it did, and therefore became widely adopted.

[d000hg]

Er, no, it was introduced by Henry Ford to improve productivity in his factories, which it did, and therefore became widely adopted.

And yet it varies from country to country what the legal situation is and how companies do things. Odd that Chinese companies and sweatshops, who are pretty keen on maximising profits, still work longer days out of their workers when they could be more profitable doing otherwise. Odd that farmers don't work a 9-5 day when this will apparently be more productive.

Not to mention that the findings of factory workers several decades ago might not be considered cutting edge research, and might not apply to modern people doing non-factory jobs. Coding C++ and ploughing a field for example are very different to each other and to working in a factory.

And - yes it is the current compromise. In France it's lower for instance and countries change their working week, typically to a lower number of hours, over time. The working week is set up to protect employees, not to help employers.

[SueEllen]

You're really that daft?


In many countries, working a 15 hour day is simply the norm and you're lucky to get that job... hell even in the USA many work 2 or 3 jobs. Junior doctors always used to do this for months at a time and my understanding is army bootcamp is like that too. Nothing says a human can't work long days, the "you shouldn't work more than 40 hours a week" line is merely the current compromise between government and labour unions in the UK.

There is a difference in working long shifts in the restaurant/hotel industry and as a junior doctor (or in any medical role.)

Doctors knew this was unsafe so they campaigned for the working time directive to include them.

Many medical staff still do 12 or 13 hour shifts with a one hour drive at both ends giving a minimum of 15 hours.

Their shift patterns are often allocated just to coincide with the working time directive which means they work their hours then have 2-8 days off in a row. (I've friends and family who have gone on holiday due to having a rota like that.)

Car insurance companies know this and have adjusted insurance prices to reflect that doctors based in hospitals are more risky on the road.

[Mich the Tester]

You're really that daft?


In many countries, working a 15 hour day is simply the norm and you're lucky to get that job... hell even in the USA many work 2 or 3 jobs. Junior doctors always used to do this for months at a time and my understanding is army bootcamp is like that too. Nothing says a human can't work long days, the "you shouldn't work more than 40 hours a week" line is merely the current compromise between government and labour unions in the UK.

Well I haven't suggested that there should be some regulation to stop this; I've merely questioned the leadership of people who push their people so hard for what I think is a very questionable gain.

[doodab]

Not to mention that the findings of factory workers several decades ago might not be considered cutting edge research, and might not apply to modern people doing non-factory jobs. Coding C++ and ploughing a field for example are very different to each other and to working in a factory.

Which is why I posted a link to a recent paper.

http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/pub...cms_187307.pdf

If you can't be bothered to check back.

A recent analysis of 18, mostly European, Member countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development explores the degree to which longer annual hours have been associated with per-hour productivity at the national level, since 1950. It finds that the responsiveness of perhour productivity for a given increase in working time is always negative. Not only are there decreasing returns on added working time, the returns in the form of added production diminish more rapidly for longer working times. When annual working time climbs above a threshold of 1,925 hours, a 1-per cent increase in working time would lead to a decrease in productivity of roughly 0.9 per cent at the threshold and a fully proportional decrease of 1 per cent past the threshold of 2,025 hours

[bobspud]

Not to mention that the findings of factory workers several decades ago might not be considered cutting edge research, and might not apply to modern people doing non-factory jobs. Coding C++ and ploughing a field for example are very different to each other and to working in a factory.

Anyone that has ever worked near a sysadmin will tell you that keeping them awake for 24 hours then setting them loose on your organisation's SAN fabric is a VERY stupid idea. I have written complex scripts in the past and I can always look back and identify the work that was done under extreme tiredness or strenuous working conditions because its normally not as good as the stuff that I have done when I am relaxed.

I guarantee if you are sat at a desk for 15 hours monday through friday then the crap that you create on the Thursday / Friday will be the stuff you are rewriting on monday...