France in Mourning...

[missdpuck]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I see the lose of the 35hr week as kind of a step back. We have computers and other technological work saving devices and yet the work week has probably gone up since the 60s. It must be a flaw in our human make up that wants us to labor our lives away or maybe just greed for that extra HDTV that we'll be too busy to watch anyways.

This isnt the link I was thinking of but it's okay http://www.gciu.org/archives/99oct/hours.shtml

[Burninator]

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I see the lose of the 35hr week as kind of a step back. We have computers and other technological work saving devices and yet the work week has probably gone up since the 60s. It must be a flaw in our human make up that wants us to labor our lives away or maybe just greed for that extra HDTV that we'll be too busy to watch anyways.

With the cost of living being as it is and wages not keeping up, the extra hours worked are pretty much a necessity for most workers. I'm sure many Calgarians would love a 35 hour work week but would probably have a hard time paying the mortgage and such.

The longer work hours and the resulting pay has in a way driven up the prices of goods and services. It becomes a game of cat and mouse as the consumer works more to keep up.

[FurnaceFace]

The biggest thing France could do is firm up their unemployment benefits. My Aunt-in-law was telling us lots of people finish school, work for two years, and then go on unemployment for a couple years at full salary (or something every similar to this). The French unemployment rate among the young is something like 25% (it's over 10% total population) and she said an awful lot of that number was people who could
work, but weren't.

In my mind that puts an awful strain on the social network and would be something to clean up along with the overtime issues they have.

[Ozy_Flame]

nm

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Dion

With the cost of living being as it is and wages not keeping up, the extra hours worked are pretty much a necessity for most workers. I'm sure many Calgarians would love a 35 hour work week but would probably have a hard time paying the mortgage and such.

The longer work hours and the resulting pay has in a way driven up the prices of goods and services. It becomes a game of cat and mouse as the consumer works more to keep up.

The main difference I notice from when I was growing up is that it was rare for a married woman to work. The average guy could buy a house and car and support his family on one income. I don't blame the housewives for wanting to go to work, it must have been damn boring staying at home plus it gives women independence, but now it's become almost a necessity. So the average work hours per family have doubled right there and now the home duties have to be shared, further lowering leisure time.

[Muta]

I have a decent, above-average salaried career position here in Calgary. But I have a 2nd part-time job in the evening, and have two promotion jobs on call as well. I might be the exception, though. I do it so that my other jobs help to pay down my traveling debts. Everyone I've mentioned this to think I'm crazy... but hey, them's the breaks.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by fotze

Also, having a brand new big house was a rarity, now it is expected when purchasing your first one after school.

Well, lets make a distinction - a condo is more in tune with today's younger crowd given the higher cost of living. There are far more people my age buying a condo as their first piece of real estate.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I see the lose of the 35hr week as kind of a step back. We have computers and other technological work saving devices and yet the work week has probably gone up since the 60s. It must be a flaw in our human make up that wants us to labor our lives away or maybe just greed for that extra HDTV that we'll be too busy to watch anyways.

It's the opposite. Computers and technology turned out to be work making devices instead of work saving devices. When you get your e-mails right away and everything is instantly transmitted, instantly printed, instantly calculated, etc. you are expected to do and handle more.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

The main difference I notice from when I was growing up is that it was rare for a married woman to work. The average guy could buy a house and car and support his family on one income. I don't blame the housewives for wanting to go to work, it must have been damn boring staying at home plus it gives women independence, but now it's become almost a necessity. So the average work hours per family have doubled right there and now the home duties have to be shared, further lowering leisure time.

The biggest loser in what you've said are todays children. Instead of being at home with a loving mother they get shuffled off to a daycare where they spend a good portion of thier day with total strangers. In some cases the woman could stay home but instead that career becomes more important than her children. My statement might come across as offensive to those woman, it's just that i believe a parent should be the one teaching these young impressionable kids morals and values as opposed to some stranger in a daycare.

My mother stayed at home to raise us 3 kids until we were all in school. I'm forever grateful that she did and strongly belive that whom i am today came part and parcel to her staying home to raise us 3 kids.

[Mightyfire89]

Originally Posted by missdpuck

Agree. There are stats about the lengthening work week and if I find that I'll do a link. As for greed..it's always cracked me up that,say, some hockey player who already makes 8 mill a yr or whatever will uproot his family and play for a team he doesnt really like and live somewhere he doesnt want to live just because they are going to give him another 250k a yr than the other team . How much money does someone need?? Ego? Whoever dies with the most toys wins???

Oh boy. Don't get into this discussion because there are plenty of people these days who believe there's no such thing as enough money, let alone too much.

As for the thread subject, I'm not surprised. The only thing remotely surprising is that it took this long for it to happen.

[troutman]

How can you keep up with all your mistresses if you have to work more than 35 hours?

[Addick]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Studies have shown that the wealthy work far more than other people. According to U.S. Trust Co., 71 percent of the affluent work more than 40 hours per week, and 31 percent work more than 50 hours.

Have the studies shown that the affluent have: a better quality of life, get more enjoyment out of life, and are generally happier than other? I don't know about the affluent in North America but my lifestyle is not one where I "live to work" but rather one where I "work towards living". I think the French had it right and missdpuck is right to pose the question, "does the person with the most toys when they die win?".

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Addick

Have the studies shown that the affluent have: a better quality of life, get more enjoyment out of life, and are generally happier than other? I don't know about the affluent in North America but my lifestyle is not one where I "live to work" but rather one where I "work towards living". I think the French had it right and missdpuck is right to pose the question, "does the person with the most toys when they die win?".

Great point. Also, the wealthy are not above human problems the rest of us suffer from either - sadness, depression, divorce, self-reflection, mental stress, drugs, death of family members, etc. Money does not usually make these things go away, they simply come in different forms.

The length of time worked just to be wealthy, IMO, is a direct threat to your well-being, unless you're built for long hours at work, which most people are not.

[The Yen Man]

I work 37 hours a week, but I wouldn't mind if I worked 40-45 hours a week at my current salary level. At least that'd give me several grand more a year. But I guess I don't mind the 37 hours either.

[CaptainCrunch]

I pretty much set my schedule due to the fact that I do a lot of business development where I work. So while I get a decent enough base, I hustle my butt to make bonus and commission. As long as I make sure that the time that I work is quality and productive and I hit or exceed target, I've got a lot of freedom if I choose to take it.

[Bobblehead]

Last year I worked large amounts of OT. It cost me more personally than I could have imagined.

I was directed to take the time off this year, and to that end, I'm working 24 hour weeks all summer. That is nice, but it isn't worth the cost, and it isn't like the amount of work coming to me is any less than if I was working my regular hours.

As people mentioned, there are issues no matter how many or few hours you are working. I think the only solution is to like what you are doing so it doesn't feel like a grind. If you hate your job it doesn't matter how many or how few hours you are working.

[gaulois69]

I grew up there and let me tell you something.
1) You have 5 weeks vacation a year (even your first year). Combined with Statutories holidays (and there are way more than in Canada) you don't work much.
2) You have 10% of unemployed or living of insurance.
3) An average Joe make around $25000/ year.
4) Oils is over $2/l.
5) Unions are everywhere and fight to keep all they have (and that's a lot)

Who want to live there?
You work = you make money (simple equation !)

Lucky us in Canada and the bonus is that we have Hockey ! lol

[Kerplunk]

I would love to work less than 40 hours a week...although I think that is more because of laziness than anything else. With the amount of work I get assigned I don't think I could get everything done on schedule with any less.

That being said I am also a great believer in not doing more than 40 hours a week unless at great need, and of taking all of my vacation time for a year. I need the downtime away from work, even if it is doing chores at home.