Do americans really work so many hours?

[nameta9]

From those I know and see most work about 8 hours, 5 days a week. But I read on the internet that a lot of americans work 50 hours or more a week. Is this really true or is it only a small portion of the population? Thanks for any real life data! I feel that people are either a) exaggerating or b) lying or c) just wasting a lot of time at work to add up hours.

 

[Monique]

I worked 60 hours during 5 days a week (6 am to 6 pm), depending on the profession I think the people in the US DO work extraordinary hours. Ofcourse you don't get paid for the 60 hours, you just get paid for 37.5 hours

 

[nameta9]

What percentage of the population in america do you think exceed the 40 hour week? Most of the people I know don't seem to do more than 40 hours (suburb of south NJ), but maybe I don't know or didn't notice. Also I read people putting in 14 or 16 hour days, but if you do an intense and concentrating job how can you possibly last? I mean I imagine the breaks or down times are quite long during a 14 hour day...

 

[Monique]

Actually, people usually don't take breaks.. a break is having a sandwhich wile sitting behind the computer doing analyses ;)

I'm not sure about the percentage, a friend of mine in the automotive industry also worked 6-6 hours standard daily and he had to come in on Saturdays too.

All I know is that here in Holland working hours are 9 to 5 with a standard lunch and two coffee breaks. A few months ago there was a government incentive to start working a few hours more a week, which met with great resistance. One in seven works 40 hours or more, one in 10 has a contract to work 40 hours or more a week.

 

[Evo]

In the US, the difference is the class of worker. Blue collar (occupational) workers that get paid by the hour will rarely work over forty hours unless they get paid overtime. Their jobs usually allow them very little flexibility during the work day.

White collar Professional, management, salaried employees tend to work very long hours. Before PF, it was not uncommon for me to work over 80 hours a week, every week. We make the same amount of money no matter how many hours we work. It's a different work ethic, usually you work until it gets done. There is generally more flexibility with how you schedule your time which make the longer hours easier to deal with.

 

[russ_watters]

A buddy of mine used to do tech support for Unisys (voicemail servers). They started him on hourly, expecting him to make around $35k. After making over $60k his first year, working 60-80 hours a week (no overtime bonus), they switched him to salary at something like $45k.

I have the best of both worlds: I get paid hourly, but for a guaranteed 40 hours plus paid vacation. If we're slow (we are now) and I work maybe 30 hours a week, I get paid for 40. When we're busy I might work 60 and get paid for 60. I rarely work more than 60.

There is also a larger percentage of Americans working multiple jobs. With less social welfare than in Europe, one crappy job may not be enough to make a living. Another friend of mine works at an aquarium for $22k and works reail at the mall a couple of nights a week.

 

[nameta9]

Thanks a lot for your view. In the 80 hour week job, I imagine people make quite a lot of money, more than 5,000 US dollars clean a month? Otherwise it would seem that 8 hour jobs at McDonalds actually pays more... Is it also the case that companies are always threatening to fire people so they are forced to work so many hours? Also planning projects that then require so much extra time means someone is not planning really well...

 

[JasonRox]

I don't really know anyone who works more than 40 hours.

My mom has 35, sister 35, who are both full-time. The full-time guys at work do work 48 hours every other week, so they average 44 hours.

It seems like only smart individuals work 40 hours or less. Working too much is stupid and a waste of life. I would never sacrifice my time for some company who's going to **** me over on my paycheck.

I'll work hard for those companies who appreciate the work, but nowadays, appreciation doesn't seem to exist.

 

[selfAdjoint]

It seems like only smart individuals work 40 hours or less.

My two kids are smart and have smart-people jobs, and they work like dogs. My daughter trained as an engineer and is now a project leader of two teams. My son is a tech wizard for an international company. They both work way over 40 hours a week, and come home when they can and crash.

US productivity increased at a rate of about 1.5% per year up to 1995, and at around 2.7% from then to 2001. Since the dot-com bust productivity has been increasing at over 4%; the figures for Q4 2004 were just revised upward and are in accord with that. Some of that is surely technological, and a little (not much) is offshore outsourcing. But a lot of it is companies driving the employees like never before.

 

[Kerrie]

i would say it all depends on the company itself. in my situation, i work 40 hours on average...when i was traveling as the company salesrep, i worked more like 50 hours a week. but, i know of a person who works maybe 25 hours a week as a top manager/owner of a company yet gets paid 50K plus perks that add up to around an additional 25K. it is this typical example that gives Americans the reputation of being lazy, but overall, most Americans are not like this.

 

[Entropy]

I'll work hard for those companies who appreciate the work, but nowadays, appreciation doesn't seem to exist.

Then you might be out of a job.

 

[Zantra]

This is a broad question with an even broader answer. I agree that most white collar workers put in more hours because of several factors, such as competition, going for higher salary/promotion and sometimes just keeping their job.

I will say this. I used to be hourly, and I worked a lot of overtime. At one point I worked about 90 hours a week(had a 2nd job.) In fact it made up over 20% of my income. Now that they switched me to salaried, I just put in 40, unless it's absolutely necessary. But I'm going against status quo, I know.

This is the rat race, and it blows. That is why I refuse to work longer hours anymore. I'm willing to sacrifice money for quality time that is my own. Many americans can't or won't do that. I see these commercials about vacations - the drug company guy talking about how americans find happiness in the form of a pill, or the mortuary guy talking about how americans work themselves to death. It's funny but ironically true.

 

[Moonbear]

In most offices, the support staff type employees (i.e., secretaries, file clerks), typically work 8 am to 5 pm or 8 am to 6 pm. In places like factories, where it's shift work and paid hourly, there are three 8 hour shifts a day. Sometimes you can get overtime pay to cover a second shift, but generally that's it, you put in your 8 hours (with one 1 h break for lunch/dinner/coffee - not sure what meal third shift breaks for), and go home.

For salaried employees (those who get paid a fixed amount, no matter how many hours are being worked), it's more that you get paid for a certain job that needs to be accomplished. There are some people who get salaries who do have minimum and maximum hours defined in contracts, and often don't stay to work extra hours. For example, a lot of our lab technicians fall into this category. They show up at 8 a.m. and leave around 5 or 6. Whether or not they stop for lunch, sometimes they just grab a 15 min break for a sandwich, is up to them generally. Those are their normal hours, but they have some flexibility too. If they need to stay late one day assisting with an experiment, they can come in late or leave early another day to make up for it. Or, if someone needs to stay home on a weekday waiting for a repair person, or something like that, then they can come in and get whatever needs to be done on a Saturday instead, or work late several days the next week. The idea is you have a guaranteed paycheck coming to you, and aren't penalized for the slow weeks, but then don't get anything extra for the busy weeks. Hopefully it pretty much evens out.

Then there's the last category, those of us who are salaried and don't get any extra pay for working 60 to 80 hour weeks. Often, the salaries are higher to start. But, the reason you work those hours is more that you have a personal stake in keeping the office/company/lab running. For example, in a law firm, the secretaries and paralegals may work pretty fixed hours, while the associates who want to make partner someday work their butts off; the idea is if they can bring in enough clients and enough money to the firm, they'll be rewarded with a partnership in the firm.

Having grown up in the American culture, that's just normal to me. If you want more, you work harder for it. I have a hard time really understanding how people elsewhere can get anything done with so many holidays and breaks, etc.

 

[russ_watters]

Is it also the case that companies are always threatening to fire people so they are forced to work so many hours?

No, aside from the long hours, American companies generally treat their employees pretty well.

But, the reason you work those hours is more that you have a personal stake in keeping the office/company/lab running. For example, in a law firm, the secretaries and paralegals may work pretty fixed hours, while the associates who want to make partner someday work their butts off; the idea is if they can bring in enough clients and enough money to the firm, they'll be rewarded with a partnership in the firm.

Having grown up in the American culture, that's just normal to me. If you want more, you work harder for it. I have a hard time really understanding how people elsewhere can get anything done with so many holidays and breaks, etc.

Heh - me too. I'm amazed at how much off time people get in other countries (yet we have the reputation as being lazy? ).

nameta9, companies don't need to threaten or abuse their employees. Moonbear is right - Americans really are that driven/competitive.

Another example: my dad is self-employed. He works out of a spare bedroom at my parents' house analyzing utility bills and saving clients money. There's a pretty direct relationship between how much he works and how much money he makes. He's slowed down a little now, but when he started the business he obviously didn't have any clients yet, so he worked extremely long hours to get the business going.

The electrical engineer who consults for my company works alone, out of his basement.

I don't know how common that is in other countries, but there are a fair number in the US who start their own small business.

 

[Monique]

No, aside from the long hours, American companies generally treat their employees pretty well. Heh - me too. I'm amazed at how much off time people get in other countries (yet we have the reputation as being lazy? ).

Actually, Americans are known for their workdrive and crazy hours. Also as lazy, but that's because of the lack of physical excersize.

 

[spender]

comparing to europe or japan we are slaves here.

 

[Norman]

Actually, Americans are known for their workdrive and crazy hours. Also as lazy, but that's because of the lack of physical excersize.

That is because they are always at work, and we are great at automating our jobs and daily tasks. Is it assumed that since so many americans are overweight that, as a whole, americans don't exercise? Is this same stereotype applied to other cultures who are larger than average?

 

[Monique]

comparing to europe or japan we are slaves here.

Compared to Japan?? To my impression Japan is very competitive too!

 

[jcsd]

I thought Japan had worse hours than the US. Conmtinetal Europeans are genrally very lazy (it's their genetics), but in the UK long work hours are pretty normal.

 

[Monique]

That is because they are always at work, and we are great at automating our jobs and daily tasks. Is it assumed that since so many americans are overweight that, as a whole, americans don't exercise? Is this same stereotype applied to other cultures who are larger than average?

I never mentioned being overweight. Generally I'd say that it is true that life in America revolves around driving a car. For me it was almost impossible to go places with a bicycle, but I tried.

 

[spender]

europeans (except uk) have more vacations earned per year, next are the japanese,usa is dead last even behind brazil or china.

 

[russ_watters]

Actually, Americans are known for their workdrive and crazy hours. Also as lazy, but that's because of the lack of physical excersize.

Yeah, I know. Actually, the duality shouldn't be surprising: after a rough week of work, its natural to just want to spend the weekend on the couch drinking beer and watching football.

 

[Norman]

I never mentioned being overweight. Generally I'd say that it is true that life in America revolves around driving a car. For me it was almost impossible to go places with a bicycle, but I tried.

You are correct, I guess I was putting words into your mouth, so to speak. I apologize.

And it is true about cars in America. I think the reason we drive so much is so we can afford to get our cars fixed. Cars are a giant black hole of money- they only consume it and you can never excape putting money into the things. It is so nice in Europe... being able to walk everywhere without being the only person within miles on foot. Anyways I digress...

 

[BobG]

It seems like only smart individuals work 40 hours or less. Working too much is stupid and a waste of life.

I agree with the sentiment about working too much. I enjoy my job, but there's a lot more to life than just work.

In spite of that, I probably normally work about 40 hours a week, maybe a few hours extra (sometimes I get locked into something, thinking I'll just take off early on Friday, but then, come Friday, wind up staying 'just a few more minutes to finish this one thing'). There have been times (even up to a few months at a time on very rare occasions) when 60+ hours was probably a very conservative estimate - you do what you have to do to get the job done when it needs done. I don't think I could put up with those kind of hours on a routine basis (and especially not in the summer).

 

[BobG]

And it is true about cars in America. I think the reason we drive so much is so we can afford to get our cars fixed. Cars are a giant black hole of money- they only consume it and you can never excape putting money into the things. It is so nice in Europe... being able to walk everywhere without being the only person within miles on foot.

Not only that, if you live somewhere real friendly, people keep slowing down and asking you if you need a ride somewhere or if your car broke down. If you tell them you're just walking because you want to, they don't believe you - they just think you're embarrassed to ask for such a huge favor and try to convince you that it would be no trouble at all to give you a ride where you need to go.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

From those I know and see most work about 8 hours, 5 days a week. But I read on the internet that a lot of americans work 50 hours or more a week. Is this really true or is it only a small portion of the population? Thanks for any real life data! I feel that people are either a) exaggerating or b) lying or c) just wasting a lot of time at work to add up hours.

In my line of work, 80 hour weeks are common. Any high dollar, large scale project has deadlines. When I or others in my field [industrial automation] have a deadline, when it's crunch time, typically you work as much as needed; even if, as often happens, it means going for days or even weeks with hardly any sleep.

 

[marlon]

I think we in western europe can learn a great deal from the US. You Americans work harder, more efficiently, and you are more honest and more direct (at least in my personal experience). You guys are not slowed down by an ancient history of Roman-prosetilism and nepotism.

And you guys have a very efficient political system (you are better of being lazy over here in Belgium, France,...) but if you want to achieve something, you guys get on with it...

marlon

ps : your president recently visited Belgium...i can only say : you guys have a great president, nomatter what the French say about him...VIVA BUSH

i'll run and hide now :)

 

[jcsd]

Long hours aren't particularly great, the Uk has the longets hours in Europe, but IIRC the lowest productivity.

 

[marlon]

Long hours aren't particularly great, the Uk has the longets hours in Europe, but IIRC the lowest productivity.

No but americans are the most productive species around...Just look at the number of Nobel-prize winners, their great corporations, and their FANTASTIC actors (though there are some failures too, ain't that so mr Chevy Chase )

marlon

 

[spender]

America is just an experiment in pure capitalism, and it is going down hill for them,just take a look at their finnancess

 

[marlon]

America is just an experiment in pure capitalism, and it is going down hill for them,just take a look at their finnancess

Pff, that is no argument. West European finances are bad as well...Take Germany for example. When did they ever have such high unemployment rates ? You will have to look prior to Hitler...


marlon

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The success of the corporations is a direct measure of the decrease in the quality of life for the individual. Many Americans don't work so hard because they want to; its because they have no choice. This happens because the labor laws for salaried employees are a joke. It usually goes like this: There is no limit to what an employer can expect from a salaried employee. If one objects to the work load on the basis that one can't possibly do the work in eight or even twelve hours a day, then you are subtly given the option to leave. The cold hard fact is that someone out there is hungry enough to put up with the abuse, so if you want your job, shut up and do the work. This is one reason that I work for myself. If I have to work long hours at least I can be the one to profit from it. In short, Americans are becoming slaves to the corporations.

One of the judges nominated by Bush and stonewalled by the Democrats believed that we should eliminate all labor laws.

 

[Norman]

The success of the corporations is a direct measure of the decrease in the quality of life for the individual. Many Americans don't work so hard because they want to; its because they have no choice. This happens because the labor laws for salaried employees are a joke. It usually goes like this: There is no limit to what an employer can expect from a salaried employee. If one objects to the work load on the basis that one can't possibly do the work in eight or even twelve hours a day, then you are subtly given the option to leave. The cold hard fact is that someone out there is hungry enough to put up with the abuse, so if you want your job, shut up and do the work. This is one reason that I work for myself. If I have to work long hours at least I can be the one to profit from it. In short, Americans are becoming slaves to the corporations.

One of the judges nominated by Bush and stonewalled by the Democrats believed that we should eliminate all labor laws.

Actually labor laws in general are quite loose. Basically, many of the "laws" we think of (ie amount of break time given in a day, etc) are actually artifacts of Labor argreements with Unions that have just become industry standards. The problem is that there were not a lot of white collar unions (actually were there any? I just said not a lot because I am unsure). The major labor laws these days are mainly to do with harrasment, safety/injury, benefits, etc. Things that are mainly periphery to actual work (other than workplace safety). The company my father works for actually looked into this kinda stuff since they didn't want to be breaking any laws. They run a twelve hour swing, (sidenote- I worked there for a couple of summers and loved the 12 hour swing. Four days working, Four days off, a beautiful thing) and wanted to know if there were laws for how many breaks they needed to give since it takes a minimum number of people to work the line. Once again digressions... sorry.

 

[spender]

This happens because the labor laws for salaried employees are a joke.

No kidding !
Few weeks ago Wal-Mart closed their Quebec store because workers voted for union.

 

[franznietzsche]

We make the same amount of money no matter how many hours we work. It's a different work ethic, usually you work until it gets done.

Its not a different work ethic, its that we have a work ethic.

 

[JasonRox]

No kidding !
Few weeks ago Wal-Mart closed their Quebec store because workers voted for union.

That has nothing to do with it.

Unions cost $$$, and Wal-Mart runs a tight cost budget. They probably couldn't afford the union because they know it would spread and cost more $$$.

It was a smart business decision.

It does pay to reward employee's, but this only works in non-unionized environments. I work in an unionized environment, and yes it has its advantages, but I know that they don't protect good workers. I am naturally a good worker, but they do nothing for me. Being a good worker already secures your job.

I've experienced both sides, and it really depends on management in the end.

It's all about management and if they decide to boost employee morale, in which case they never want to.

 

[franznietzsche]

No kidding !
Few weeks ago Wal-Mart closed their Quebec store because workers voted for union.

You are an ignoramous.

Walmart does not pay their employees on a salary(not the ones that would want to unionize anyway). Thats not even remotely connected to labour laws for salaried workers.

And quite frankly, the people working at walmart are being payed a fair wage for their work. Rule of thumb: If a monkey can be trained to do it, you don't deserve union type benefits for that labour.

Of course that means Microsoft employees are far over paid, but that's not really the point.

 

[nameta9]

nameta9, companies don't need to threaten or abuse their employees. Moonbear is right - Americans really are that driven/competitive.

So if I worked in a company where people work 9 AM to 8 PM and decide to leave everyday at 5 PM they would keep me? Even if I am very good at my job? Or would they just increase my workload to make it reach 8 at night?

When I was given the freedom to work at a client on my own (as a programmer) I actually could pull off 5 hour work days because the hours I worked there where very concentrated and I didn't waste any time so I could have more free time. I guess a Boss in a big corporation wouldn't care how good the work done was, just that you are there up to night so he can see you.

 

[franznietzsche]

So if I worked in a company where people work 9 AM to 8 PM and decide to leave everyday at 5 PM they would keep me? Even if I am very good at my job? Or would they just increase my workload to make it reach 8 at night?

When I was given the freedom to work at a client on my own (as a programmer) I actually could pull off 5 hour work days because the hours I worked there where very concentrated and I didn't waste any time so I could have more free time.

It varies from field to field.

The bottom line, workers on a salary (a fixed amount of money per year) generally work until their job gets done. If they get their day's worth of work done in five hours, they're done in five hours. If it takes twelve, it takes twelve. We work until the job is done.

I guess a Boss in a big corporation wouldn't care how good the work done was, just that you are there up to night so he can see you.

No, that's not how it works, unless you want to be fired. You're missing the point, number of hours worked isn't what's important, its that the job gets done (again this is for salary).

Well, i shouldn't say the number of hours worked is unimportant, but its not the determining factor.

 

[nameta9]

"Work until the job gets done" is very ambiguous in the end because you as a boss can always say "why didn't you write the same program in C++ instead of leaving at 5 PM?" Or as soon as a bug pops up you didnt' do your job because you left at 5 PM instead of 8 PM. I think the problem is that there is no precise measure as to what work and most office work is worth today except that the boss has to see you there, and if you leave earlier you're a criminal. I read of people working on projects that took 70 hours a week for months and were fired anyways because the project tanked...

 

[russ_watters]

Wal Mart is actually a great example: its an extremely successful company but it has extremely high worker satisfaction. No, Ivan, corporate success and worker dis-satisfaction (exploitation) do not go hand in hand. This isn't 1920 anymore.

 

[Astronuc]

Wal Mart is actually a great example: its an extremely successful company but it has extremely high worker satisfaction. No, Ivan, corporate success and worker dis-satisfaction (exploitation) do not go hand in hand. This isn't 1920 anymore.

By some standards, Walmart is successful. It has grown and made the family and a few others very wealthy. However, at the moment, as an equity, WMT represents a poor investment - dividend is approx. 0.67% of share price (based on $0.36/share at $53.10), earnings per share is 4.54% - not spectacular (and is certainly not reflected in the dividend) (data from Thomson). The share price has remained relatively flat or somewhat decreasing since last 1999. For the general common stock investor, there are much better investments.

But then -

Connecticut lawmakers were outraged Thursday to learn that a state program meant to help poor families is footing the healthcare bills of workers for some major companies, led by Wal-Mart.

from http://hr2.blr.com/Article.cfm/Nav/5.0.0.0.32276

Then there is the Wal-Mart discrimination lawsuit. I think if you take aside some Walmart employees - away from the job, you'll find that things are not so rosy. Fear of retaliation is a concern.

 

[member 5645]

By some standards, Walmart is successful. It has grown and made the family and a few others very wealthy. However, at the moment, as an equity, WMT represents a poor investment - dividend is approx. 0.67% of share price (based on $0.36/share at $53.10), earnings per share is 4.54% - not spectacular (and is certainly not reflected in the dividend) (data from Thomson). The share price has remained relatively flat or somewhat decreasing since last 1999. For the general common stock investor, there are much better investments.

But then -
from http://hr2.blr.com/Article.cfm/Nav/5.0.0.0.32276

Then there is the Wal-Mart discrimination lawsuit. I think if you take aside some Walmart employees - away from the job, you'll find that things are not so rosy. Fear of retaliation is a concern.

For the longterm there may be no better investment on the market than walmart because of it's steady slow growth. Walmart won't be going belly up anytime soon as they move more and more into international ventures.
But then again, the term "general common stock investor" is quite subjective, isn't it?

 

[Astronuc]

But then again, the term "general common stock investor" is quite subjective, isn't it?

By that I mean the general public who does not get inside or priviliged information and who cannot forsee the peaks and dips in particular equities ( e.g. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=WMT&t=5y ). Certainly is one is adept at following the variations on each equity, one can receive a good return. Most investors are not so adept.

Growth is a poor indicator of performance. Return on investment and yield (and beta) are much better. Growth rates for many companies are slightly above the inflation rate.

And getting back on topic, it is not uncommon for salaried personnel to work 50 to 60 hrs/week, and sometimes up to 70-80 hrs.