[HammockWarrior]

Seems like much of the problem could be solved by just having the working world chill the f' out for women and for men. For example, a 32 hour workweek along with generous paid parental leaves. Everyone should have time for a life outside of work, not just women of childbearing age.

Also, The whole idea of having young people work like dogs in order to have a shot at making partner, or gaining tenure, or gaining a medical degree is both outdated and ageist.

[virtuous_signal]

32 hour workweeks might work but there will always be the issue of defection.

If a company allows employees to take unlimited leave, then worker A who avails him/herself of it, will be at a disadvantage to worker B who keeps working like a dog, when it comes time for promotions.

If company A mandates 32 hour workweeks, then they will eventually lose out to their competitor company B who mandates 40 hours (or more informally).

If country A says ALL companies must have <=32 hour workweeks, then country B, with no such law, will become more productive. And on and on. There will always be some less enlightened competitor to take advantage -- and do we really think America is ready to stop being #1?

[asdff]

That assumes that working like a dog is more efficient than having a 3 day weekend and free time to interact with your family and coming back in on monday fresh and alert.

It also assumes that workers A and B both working 40 hours (or more informally) are both working like dogs, trying to earn a promotion before the other. This is definitely true in some fields like finance, but not all.

The last assumption is that there is no economic benefit to added free time. Where would we be if the world was solely workers who didn't have the free time to engage with their own thoughts? We certainly wouldn't be on this website, or a computer for that matter.

We aren't computers with a job queue that can be maximized. We are animals that get exhausted easily, distrust our own warning signs, and have been known to do foolish things like jump from buildings if an artificial number dips below some arbitrary level. I think we can all afford to slow down just a little.

[therealdrag0]

> That assumes that working like a dog is more efficient

Naw. Efficiency is only one variable. Working like a dog is usually marginally inefficient, but the first 6 hr/day are still roughly as efficient to the 3-day-weekend-er. Working more hours absolutely increases productivity even if per-hour-productivity decreases (except in extreme cases of burn out). This is pretty obvious when you look at how any high-achiever spends their time. It's amazing how often people claim the opposite on HN.

[satyrnein]

Wouldn't these concerns apply just as well to minimum wage laws, OSHA regulations, environmental protections, etc?

[kkarakk]

yeah and china is now manufacturing the world's things coz they don't follow any of those laws and their citizens don't have a say in it.

[chadcmulligan]

You can use tariffs to correct the imbalance, although they seem a dirty word until recently

[RonanTheGrey]

> Also, The whole idea of having young people work like dogs in order to have a shot at making partner, or gaining tenure, or gaining a medical degree is both outdated and ageist.

You can't dictate this though. Say you have a well-run engineering team where everyone spends exactly 40 hours a week and only 40 hours a week on their jobs. And everyone does this.

You hire one new person who just LOVES THEIR WORK and they work 80 hours a week. Their output is through the roof, they get recognition, raises, bonuses, and promotions.

Now everyone chases them. Goodbye work/life balance for the entire team.

And before one suggests "make it against the rules to do that", good luck seeing how long your group or business lasts with such a policy. Probably NOTHING could be worse for morale.

Even being generous and kind, you end up with that situation. So your solution must work with that tendency, not assume it out of the problem.

[barry-cotter]

Shorter workweeks would unavoidably lead to lower economic growth. People get better at things the the more they do them and the more hours they work the more they get done. The marginal value of an extra hour worked only turns negative around 60 hours.

No one is forcing people to work that hard to gain money and social status. They do it to themselves.

[hinkley]

Why does the medical profession think 16-24 hour shifts are okay? I really hate hazing, and it just stinks if it.