[jk4930]

If one wants to work for SpaceX we can assume that he's at least aware of the space industry environment and SpaceX's goals to get to Mars by the end of this decade (plus some years of buffer). It should be clear that SpaceX utilizes the available (human) resources intensively to iterate quickly over new design approaches.

I'm positive that with a more cosy, relaxed way grasshopper wouldn't safely land and no Dragon would dock at the ISS. In this case SpaceX wouldn't exist any longer.

[jdotjdot]

It's not about "cozy" or "relaxed"--regardless of my thoughts of how cushy or stress-free an environment should or shouldn't be, SpaceX is at the point where simply you are reducing the productivity and effectiveness of your employees, as well as their health. They are more likely to make mistakes, which in the case of space exploration, can be life-threatening mistakes. There are quite a few articles out there describing how lack of sleep (not to mention stress) cause people to react similarly to how they would if they were drunk (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/05/sleep/max-text). Less social acceptance of drunk employment, but similar danger and productivity loss.

I think you'd need to provide more explanation of why you think the Grasshopper wouldn't land if SpaceX's employees were permitted to get a full night's sleep. Why is SpaceX different than NASA? As far as I know, no one ever worked those kinds of hours at NASA, and certainly not for years on end--maybe for the week before a space launch. I know if I were an astronaut, I'd much rather the people at mission control were well-rested and alert rather frenzied and terrified of management, falling asleep at the controls.