How does a 60+ hour work week look like?

[MikeH]

"well they can find another job" is a ludicrous argument, if it was more productive to push workers to work all hours then all other employers would need to do that and would implement the same policy to compete.

[Devil's Advocate]

"well they can find another job" is a ludicrous argument, if it was more productive to push workers to work all hours then all other employers would need to do that and would implement the same policy to compete.

Unfortunately that happens all too often. I know a lot of people in the fashion industry, and 12 hour days are par for the course. Their salary is based on a 40 hour week, of course.

[MikeH]

That is because of high demand for the profession though. Same thing with computer game programmers. The demand for the jobs is such that the employers can expect those hours and keep pay low.

[MikeH]

But at the moment the demand for most jobs is higher than the supply. So it's good that we all have protection.

[KrazyHorse]

"well they can find another job" is a ludicrous argument, if it was more productive to push workers to work all hours then all other employers would need to do that and would implement the same policy to compete.

Jesus ****ing Christ.

There are TWO SIDES in the market for labor. If people don't want to work a job where they're expected to work 60 hour weeks then employers will find it difficult to get employees for such jobs.

This is ****ing elementary reasoning. When you want to make arguments that aren't ludicrous on their face then I'll be here.

[onodera]

The point of the employment protection law is that there are rights that you CANNOT waive by signing an agreement. If you can waive your rights, then it's usually no different from having none at all.

[KrazyHorse]

I object when employers (in general, not mine) expect long hours of unpaid overtime from their employees. It's too vague of an arrangement. "Well, they can find another job" is not the answer. Employees deserve to have a concrete agreement regarding their hours.

If they want a concrete agreement then they're welcome to negotiate such an agreement.

Your post lacks even the vaguest hint of insight.

[Devil's Advocate]

That is because of high demand for the profession though. Same thing with computer game programmers. The demand for the jobs is such that the employers can expect those hours and keep pay low.

...which is why the workers need protection under the law.

[KrazyHorse]

The point of the employment protection law is that there are rights that you CANNOT waive by signing an agreement. If you can waive your rights, then it's usually no different from having none at all.

Precisely. The only labor law which can be expected to actually influence the labor market is one which restricts the choice of some or all workers.

[Devil's Advocate]

If they want a concrete agreement then they're welcome to negotiate such an agreement.

Your post lacks even the vaguest hint of insight.

Here's an insight you seem to be missing: the employer/employee relationship is rarely an equal one. Without some basic standards one will take advantage of the other. I'm not a great lover of government regulation, but I don't think it's too much to ask that employers compensate employees for their time.

[KrazyHorse]

The information asymmetry in the labor market is wholly tilted toward employees, Drake.

[Jon Miller]

Depends on where you are. There are places in the world with little labor mobility, what labor there is is unskilled, and few employers.

JM

[Dauphin]

Try responding to the actual post. Thanks.

You're welcome. It's nice to see you've taken on board my advice.

[Spaced Cowboy]

KH,

Is the 60 hour requirement a productivity thing, or it is just expected that you sit in the chair for 60?

I noticed that you have time to post on Poly while you are at work.

[Dinner]

Jesus ****ing Christ.

There are TWO SIDES in the market for labor. If people don't want to work a job where they're expected to work 60 hour weeks then employers will find it difficult to get employees for such jobs.

This is ****ing elementary reasoning. When you want to make arguments that aren't ludicrous on their face then I'll be here.

That's one of those nice academic arguments which runs into problems in the real world. One of the reasons companies move out to fly over country and you saw the creation of factory towns in the 1920's and 30's was because the employer wanted to be the only game in town and literally they were the only employer of meaningful size in that town or even county. The just get a different job or move argument doesn't work sometimes in the real world due to mobility issues (family obligations, inability to sell property for a decent price, etc...).