French workers fight for the right to be lazy

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Besides, it's their country, they like the law, what the hell do you care anyway.

That will make people campaigning for longer work weeks look stupid.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


"Manage"?. With modern methods and automation, people shouldn't just have to manage, people should have a decent work life balance where they don't feel like they are constantly chained to the job. Try it when you've got a family to look after, you need all the time you've got, plus the money.

Let me know when you invest half a million in a bot to go to work for you.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Sikander,

So to help us work less we should do everything we can to help our employers. What a bunch of right wing bull.

No wonder you're wrong about almost everything, your reading comprehension is abysmal.

[aneeshm]

@Kidicious -

In India ( as I have explained many times before ) , the school system is one in which there is a central board of secondary education ( the CBSE ) , which does not own schools , but with which schools are affiliated . The school could be private , or state(centrally)-run . The CBSE is the most common ( and the most widely accepted ) affiliation in India .

As I said , thanks to the huge incompetence and corruption rampant in any government venture , most good schools here are private ( simply because they have to provide good education to survive as a school ) . The CBSE has its own norms , which all schools ( private and public ) must meet to remain affiliated to them .

The CBSE conducts two tests , both centalised . The only exception is the national capital region , where they have a different paper . The exams are - the 10th board , and the 12th board . This is because , till tenth , you have all subjects ( Maths , Science , Social Science , Hindi , and English ) . After tenth ( from 11th ) , you are asked to choose your subjects - the sciences , commerce , or the humanities . the 12th board tests how much you get in your chosen subjects .

The workweek is , on an average , 48 to 50 hours . And the work is not easy . Just as an example , the textbook I use for physics in the 11th grade is "University Physics" ( Young and Freedman ) . And there is a lot of stuff in the course which I do not find in the book ( mostly advanced application ) .

Examinations are tough . The average percentage for physics in our class was less than 45 % . Out of a class of twenty-five , I was one of the lucky few to manage a 70 % ( the highest was 79 % , IIRC ) .

You don't have to work ( as in a job ) , but if you don't work ( as in schoolwork and study ) , then you are in a bd position . A very bad position .

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


I am not sure that is the case. The productivity of a worker does not increase linearly with time at work. The unit productivity stays fairly constant for awhile, IIRC at around 6 - 7 hours a day, then drops off. That means paying overtime to get extra work done isn't a good idea, you are better off getting some part-time help.

I'll go with the evidence that it is a much more common practice in the U.S. for people to work overtime than it is for an employer to have some slack. Sure performance does drop off, but not enough to offset the costs of hiring additional employees, which was the point of my post.

[dannubis]

Originally posted by DanS


Has it occurred to you that the reason why the taxes are so high is that the government has to squeeze sufficient money out of a low number of work hours? The society's needs don't change, even if the number of work hours does.

Not really

firstly we do have a very nicely build social security network taking alot of money. changes are on the way to make it a little bit more managable, but the system works very well in the end. (this includes both unemployment and health care)
secondly, a large part of our taxes go to our educational system which is lightyears ahead of yours. (and lets keep it that way)
thirdly, we have to carry the burden of a large hystorical debt.

all in all, our country doesn't do a bad job right now.

as for the 35 hour week i have my doubts about the feasibilty. the problem is i have a 38 hours week and work about 45 hours just to get the job done. ok, they are very happy with me and my work, but it shows the system doesn't work that well

and now i am on a holiday so i am not wasting valuable working time posting on this site...

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by dannubis
as for the 35 hour week i have my doubts about the feasibilty. the problem is i have a 38 hours week and work about 45 hours just to get the job done.

That's the way it's going to be everywhere. At least with some jobs. I think that's more true with state jobs where there have been cutbacks.

[Provost Harrison]

It's pretty crap. Quite often I need an hour extra or so to finish what I am doing but I do get paid for it, as should be anyone's entitlement...

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm
You don't have to work ( as in a job ) , but if you don't work ( as in schoolwork and study ) , then you are in a bd position . A very bad position .

And that's the only way to do it. If you don't study, and you mess around in class you should be kicked out of school. That's the problem here. There are a bunch of kids in our schools who think it's Disneyland.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
I call BS on your BS.

pwned.

Ted Striker

[DanS]

secondly, a large part of our taxes go to our educational system which is lightyears ahead of yours. (and lets keep it that way)

Belgium does pretty good in regard to education outcomes. The US does better than Belgium in some areas and worse in others. But suffice it to say that this is a relatively modest portion of both Belgium's and the US' public spending. With regard to this discussion, the funding needs are increasing for education. A comparatively small and static (perhaps decreasing) total number of hours worked have to cover those costs.

[Dinner]

Question: Wouldn't French productivity growth have something to do with the 35 hour work week and the high cost of labor. It's a built in incentive to squeeze all the productivity out of each worker since costs are so high and low productivity jobs simply move over seas. If we eliminate all the low productivity jobs it looks good on paper but it also means they've lost a great many job fields.

[RGBVideo]

If we have a high standard of living, and work less hours so enjoy our lives more, who cares about who's more productive per hour?

Quality of life != Quantity of material posessions.

Yes, I agree, BUT

That's not the issue. The issue, the reason why the frogs are protesting now is a proposal to ALLOW private invididuals to work more than the goverment wants them IF THEY WANT TO.

I mean, am I missing something here? How can anyone who wants to support workers' rights oppose this proposal?

DanS: Federal EU bureucracy is located in Luxembourg and southern Belgium. Don't underestimate the bureucrat's impact on the economy, they get massive amounts of federal money each year which they'll spend on the local economies.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I call BS. The whole idea the Socialist government used to sell the idea (That it would lead to higher employment) is based on a fallacy.

The idea that it would significantly increase employment is indeed a fallacy. Employment rose under the Socialists thanks to economic growth and thanks to many extra State-sponsored jobs. However, the impact of the 35 hours as such was not negative; on the contrary, its slight impact was positive.

And it was a great boon for our quality of life.

[el freako]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Question: Wouldn't French productivity growth have something to do with the 35 hour work week and the high cost of labor. It's a built in incentive to squeeze all the productivity out of each worker since costs are so high and low productivity jobs simply move over seas. If we eliminate all the low productivity jobs it looks good on paper but it also means they've lost a great many job fields.

If this was the case you would expect a very poor performance in the growth of French total hours worked, however the opposite has been true.
During 1973-83 total hours worked in France grew 2.4% a year slower than in the US, in 1983-93 the gap narrowed slightly to 2.0% but in 1993-03 it halved to 1.0% (not much more than the difference in population growth)
Indeed over the EU15 as a whole the gap in the growth of hours worked relative to the US has narrowed significantly in the last decade, in 1973-83 and 1983-93 the EU15's total hours rose 1.9% a year less than the US's but during 1993-03 the gap fell to only 0.6% a year (less than the difference in population growth)

Now i'm not saying that the 35 hour week caused this narrowing of the gap, indeed it is possible that other labour market reforms have masked a detrimental effect produced by the 35 hour week - however you have to agree that Europe's labour market has improved significantly in the 1990's and in many respects is now close to the US's; in terms of employment/working age population the EU is slightly below the US (66.1% vs 66.9%), in terms of workforce/working age population it is actually above (71.8% vs 70.8%).
Five years ago the US was significantly ahead on both measures.