Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I read a lot of posters saying they wouldn't work more than x hours a week (40, 45, 50,... 80+) and people say they've quit jobs due to this. In my real life, though, it seems like people just work the hours the job requires.
So it got me thinking: At what salary/compensation would YOU be willing to work 50, 60, 80 hrs a week?
In this hypothetical situation let's assume you still have at least 1 weekend day off. And how would you count things like answering a few emails from home, or taking a couple of conference calls on vacation? At what salary or title/level would this acceptable to you?
Interesting question. I've always taken the approach that it's not about the hours, but fulfilling your role. I have no problems working through the weekend because I need to get crap done. On the flip side though, I also expect to be able to knock off early on a Wednesday afternoon because my schedule is open.
There's also that concept of "work". When people say I work 9-5. How much "work" are you actually doing? I'll be honest in that when I'm in the office, I'm here from 7-5. But I'd be lying if I said I'm "working" a 10 hour day. A good bit of that time is surfing, getting personal stuff done, hanging with colleagues, etc.
For me, it's all about flexibility. I don't mind being "tied" to work (email/phone etc.) 24 hours a day. But I also expect to come and go as I wish.
Not sure if this answers the question - but I would take longer "flexible" weeks for less pay over shorter "strict schedule" weeks. There is, however, a limit to everything. I wouldn't know where that limit is from a number perspective.
It would take a lot to make me give up my free time.
I'm VERY fortunate in that my G/F and I both make high salaries and do not work long hours. I look forward to going home at night and going to get an ice cream with the kids before dinner. That's fun for me. How much would it take to give that up? A lot.
I used to work 50-60 hour weeks a couple of times a month at my previous job and my base pay was between 28-33k. I was single at the time and enjoyed the work, so it didn't bother me.
I think my answer now would depend on numerous factors:
How is my financial situation? Do I need more money or am I pretty comfortable?
Do I like the job enough to tolerate it for more than 40 hours?
How is my family situation? I'm married now, but have no children. Obviously if I had children, my answer would be different.
If it was a flat out requirement that I work more than 40 hours EVERY week, I'd probably want at least 60k. And honestly, a job like that is probably not something I would stick with long term. I would use it to save money and then find something less stressful. My sanity is not worth a large paycheck!
I know people who have had to work 100 hour weeks (finance). They don't do it because they want to. They do it, because they want to keep their jobs.
I think no amount of money would be worth it though. That's just tragic.
I know people who have had to work 100 hour weeks (finance). They don't do it because they want to. They do it, because they want to keep their jobs.
I think no amount of money would be worth it though. That's just tragic.
It's a choice to take that kind of job in the first place, though. I know lawyers who worked those insane hours too, and friends who slept under their desks to try to get through it. I opted out of that from the start and never pursued a career path within the law that would have required those 80-100 hour weeks.
Interesting question. I've always taken the approach that it's not about the hours, but fulfilling your role. I have no problems working through the weekend because I need to get crap done. On the flip side though, I also expect to be able to knock off early on a Wednesday afternoon because my schedule is open.
For me, it's all about flexibility. I don't mind being "tied" to work (email/phone etc.) 24 hours a day. But I also expect to come and go as I wish.
Not sure if this answers the question - but I would take longer "flexible" weeks for less pay over shorter "strict schedule" weeks. There is, however, a limit to everything. I wouldn't know where that limit is from a number perspective.
This is very much how my closest friends and family view work also. That's part of why I'm curious to learn more about the "I won't work more than 40 hrs" mindset.
That "limit" you refer to is another of the questions I've been grappling with.
These are definitely questions that will be different for everyone--and change throughout ones life...
Yeah...I get that sentiment...but, you would really turn down a C-level, $1MM or $2MM a year if it meant you'd frequently work, say, 7am-7pm? Or hypothetically speaking, you'd take 40hrs a week at $10.60 an hr over $300K a year at 60 hrs?
I'm not being antagotonist, I really find this to be one of life's complicated questions.
It's not a linear curve just on cost alone. If you're just trying to survive, you'll work longer hours. But once you move up the hiearcy of needs, your time starts to become more valuable. Then also other things such as satisfaction come into the picture.
There are times in my life, esp in the service, where I've worked incredibly long hours, sometimes for weeks at a time. But all those were things that had an end. For me to take a job that was 60 hours a week permanently, I'd have to probably double and maybe triple my salary.
And, as for the $2M a year job. Yes, I'd take that for a couple of years. Then retire.
As long as I can work 40 hours a week and make somewhere around 40k to 60k I could give less of a damn SH!!T
Im in IT and always get discriminated that IT pros should be working long hours weekends and nights no thanks a$$hole i do my thing and go home no matter what industry im in otherwise time for a new career or job
I feel the pain also. I am a CIO with a small company but worked my way up from the bottom. And IT is always seen as a bump in the bottom line, a cost center, a convenient patsy to throw under the bus.
The reason IT always get screwed is because IT employees usually always give in and work the extra hours rather than protest it. Why? For some it's out of fear of losing the paycheck, for others, they simply lack the courage to stand up for their rights.
I will say that C-level people in my experience have always been terrified of large-scale resignations. If more workers would stand up and push back, up to and including, if needed, quitting, things might change. Particularly if your job is critical within the framework of things.
American workers have become too passive and have thus lost much as they pursue the materialistic items they covet. Corporate America knows that and will always keep you hooked on the opiate of materialism. They know you won't stand up for yourself if you're hooked.
Yeah...I get that sentiment...but, you would really turn down a C-level, $1MM or $2MM a year if it meant you'd frequently work, say, 7am-7pm? Or hypothetically speaking, you'd take 40hrs a week at $10.60 an hr over $300K a year at 60 hrs?
I'm not being antagotonist, I really find this to be one of life's complicated questions.
Yes. As I said before, unless I really needed he money or really loved the job I wouldn't do it. What is the point in making a million or more a year if you have no time to enjoy it? Even $300K? No one needs a million or more a year. $300K maybe if there were large family medical bills or something like that. I'd work 60 hr. a week for $300K if one of my family members had a serious medical condition with high costs. But it would take something like that. Also, no one was talking about $400/wk. vs. $5,700/wk. You can find 40 hr./wk. jobs that pay $2K/wk.
My job is not my life, it's how I pay for my life.
This is very much how my closest friends and family view work also. That's part of why I'm curious to learn more about the "I won't work more than 40 hrs" mindset.
..
You're changing the original question. That dealt with working more than 40 hrs./wk. on a regular basis which is not the same as "I won't work more than 40 hrs.". Plenty of people are willing to work occasional overtime when it is necessary to get the job done.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
