Is 40hr/week too much?

Status
Not open for further replies.

nwink

Puritan Board Sophomore
Let me clarify the title. In our country, many working people are used to working 40 hours per week...some more, maybe some less. However, in some countries, the general public work less hours and get more vacation. I don't think the Bible anywhere specifies how long we are to work each week except that we are to work 6 days and rest the seventh.

So my question is: do you feel Americans work too much? Or do you think they don't work very long or just the right length of time? Different people in places of the world and times in history have worked differently (some little, some all day), but what amount of work do you think is reasonable for the general working population?

I'm not asking a question about you personally, but about the general American population, as a society. Just curious.
 
40 hours is, I think, reasonable in an industrial or post-industrial society. What is not reasonable is the expectation that many companies now have that the employee always be willing to work overtime and on weekends (including the Lord's Day).
 
Depends. I have often thought that if we were not so attached to the bells and whistles of the world that we could work less hours in order to spend more time with our families or for the kingdom of God. In many families that I know, both husband and wife work just to pay for their lifestyle, expensive mortgage, multiple cars, etc. (myself being guilty of some of this). If we really only paid for what we need, we could all probably work part time. :2cents:
 
Some Americans work too much. Some just enough. Some don't work at all, and milk the system. I think the 40 hour workweek is a reasonable standard to be expected by the employer and employee. Some occupations (police/fire/nursing for example) do 12 hour shifts and have a 48 hour week as a standard. The problem, that I believe exists, is an imbalance on what people think is worthy of higher or lesser pay. Why should a football player get 14 Million a year and a school bus driver 14 thousand? Why does a gov't worker get 80 thousand a year for teaching, and a Christian school teacher get 18 thousand? The world's priorities and gov't labor rate fixing have the whole labor market messed up, in the USA, In my humble opinion.

Personally, I'd be happy to get a 40 hour work week. I'm currently contracted at 27.5 for this year. It was nice when I got 35. There's not much more I can trim out of our budget. I'll bet you a cookie that many pastors would like to only have to work 40 hours a week, and not get phone calls at 2AM. :wink:
 
The biblical pattern is work six rest one.

It might also include something of a sabbatical break after each seven years, a redirection of the routine.

We're blessed to live in a time with as much freedom and flexibility as there is, and a pattern centered around five work days, one free day, the sabbath, and several weeks of paid vacation expected.

We do too much complaining about the work God has given us to do, and spend too little time being grateful for and faithful with the lot he has appointed us to in this life, to the end of His Honor and His Glory.
 
You also have to define what the work is. If it's accounting, odds are you won't be stretching more than 40 hours. If you're going into something like journalism (which I am), it could potentially be a 6-7 day/week job, ESPECIALLY if you're attached to a major news station and working overseas.
 
40 hrs a week works for me, but that's most likely because it's what I'm used to. There are rare occasions where I'll have to cover for an ill co-worker and I'll work an extra 8 hr day, but again that is only about once every 4 months or so. There have also been times when my supervisor has asked me if I'd like to cover extra shifts for the OT, but I usually turn down the offer. As long as my income provides for my family, I don't need any extra income. I'd rather have the extra time to spend with my wife and son.
 
Many of the countries with less than 40 hour weeks are in a downward spiral - with Greece as the prime example. With a Blackberry, only working 40 hours is a fond memory, but I'll take my current schedule over unemployment, of which I've had way too much.

The year I worked a job that required a minimum of 6 - 10 hour days a week, with additional time encouraged, was a bit much.
 
One size does not fit all. That is the importance of a free market system.

40 hour weeks should not in any way be mandated.

It is between us and God how much we work. Volunteer work is just as valid.

God alone knows our capacity. Some of us are very high energy, healthy, capable. Others are weaker, whether mental or physical, and need more breaks, more down time, more time to recuperate. I think of the various jobs of the mentally ill I am aware of, the supermarket bag boys and supervised janitors. They are not employed "full time." It is too taxing for them.

So I oppose any particular mandate. Let each man decide for himself how much he needs to earn, how much time his family demands, how much volunteer work he should do, etc. And work it out as best he sees fit.

My son currently works 60 hours a week. It is the best thing for him. Otherwise he watches movies all day. He is young and healthy. His life is best lived by working long hours right now, from my vantage point.
 
What irks me are the employers who will give a person 31 hours, because at 32 hours benefits apply.
 
40 hours sounds about right. I do at least 60 - self employed in retail so work or starve. I will not work on Sunday (apart from turning the air con off and on in summer), I will not even thing about work. But as I only have Sunday away from work, I have more of a social life on the Lord's day than I would wish. But till I retire (a date that seems to recede faster than I age) I have no choice.
 
Many of the countries with less than 40 hour weeks are in a downward spiral - with Greece as the prime example. With a Blackberry, only working 40 hours is a fond memory, but I'll take my current schedule over unemployment, of which I've had way too much.

The year I worked a job that required a minimum of 6 - 10 hour days a week, with additional time encouraged, was a bit much.

I agree, it seems to me that the only countries where people work less than 40h per week are some western places which are both going bankrupt and getting older.

I really don't understand why, in some places in europe, people protest to work less than 40h each week when, since everyone is getting older and having less children, there is already not enough money to sustain all the elderly men and women of the land.

We usually work (and by "we" I mean "people") 40 to 44h per week here - that's just my guess, however, since I don't have the statistics right now; the maximum permitted by law is a 44h/week.

I believe that, at most, people should live in the 8/8/8 system - 8h of sleep, 8h of work, 8h of leisure; but I would like to work less than that.
 
"What irks me are the employers who will give a person 31 hours, because at 32 hours benefits apply. "

That's human nature, and employers want to be good stewards of their money, too. Here you will find an employer employing 2-3 part time people instead of 1 or 2 full time - to avoid paying "required" benefits. Or, people getting hired for 39 hours a week.

Better for the government not to legislate these things, and let each employer/employee negotiate the terms of employment as best they see fit, in my opinion.
 
If it's accounting, odds are you won't be stretching more than 40 hours.

I think, as April approaches rapidly, that many CPAs might find this laughable. Or talk to an accounting department at month-end/year-end. I have a friend who has worked 24 hours straight to finish up what needed to be done by the year-end date.
 
In Europe maybe you have too many people who don't work enough, and in the US you have too many people who are slowly being killed by their employer. (This is a generalisation, the opposite is true too.) Some employers treat their employees well, others don't. Sometimes the system regulates itself, other times it seems the only way to protect people is to legislate.

Some companies don't care if they exhaust their employees and destroy their bodies because there is always someone else willing to work once the first employee is broken.

It is easier to work long hours when your employer considers your welfare, and acts in a reasonable manner towards you.

It is easier to not resent your employer when you are able to visit the dentist and mend your truck and attend an international funeral and clean up the hurricane debris from your yard.

Depraved man tends to make the worst of every situation. But ideally work would even out, that is, either people work long hours and people are hired to care for old people (eg) or people work shorter hours and care for their own old people.
 
I'll bet you a cookie that many pastors would like to only have to work 40 hours a week, and not get phone calls at 2AM.

I once had a pastor who worked 90+ hours a week on a church plant. I used to worry about his health and family. He explained it like this to me. He never met a farmer who worked only 40 hours a week. Plus the farmer is not guaranted a pay raise every year, he depends on God for his harvest. He said as the church starts growing and the people start using their gifts in the church, his work load would go down. It did go down but he said he still spent more than 40 hours a week. He said that a pastor should not work less than the people in the church. He said that I needed to add my 40 hours of work with my teaching Sunday School, plus my study time for that class, plus what ever else you do for the church. And pray for your family.

I think our society has become obsessed with not working. Even all those good parents that have to attend their children sporting events. You ever go to little league games, a good part of the parents act like animals. I might be going off in the wrong direction here, sorry.
 
Depends on the job. You really can't say that 40 hrs/week is a "one size fits all" answer. A musician puts in different time than a teacher, who in turn puts in different time than, say, an author (I happen to be all three :D ).

I like to tell people that as a teacher I earn my summers off, because I'm doing twelve months of work in nine months' time. But as an author, it's virtually impossible to put in 8 hours of writing consistently a day (Try doing it some time and let me know how far you get with PRODUCTIVE writing at the end of that 8 hours). Musicians seem to get paid a lot for an hour or two hour concert, but it needs to be remembered that they (we) also spend hours on end practicing our pieces, and recording musicians at times can spend 12 to 16 hours a day in a recording studio.

Not every job demands the same time. I work five days a week at a teacher, but I don't begrudge the college professor who works only three. His/her job has different requirements than mine, plain and simple. We work what is necessary for the job, and we should know up front what is expected of us and whether or not we can and should handle it.
 
Not every job is of the same nature and not all require the same level of education or involve the same amount of risk. But I do think that the United States (my former country and all my family live there) need more paid maternity and paternity leave as opposed to more vacation time. The US lacks very much behind the rest of the world in this area. Children and families are more important than the bottom line and we ought to invest more in the family instead of trying to get the mother or father back to work ASAP.
 
"But I do think that the United States (my former country and all my family live there) need more paid maternity and paternity leave as opposed to more vacation time. The US lacks very much behind the rest of the world in this area."

I object to the government legislating this type of thing. I don't find a biblical warrant for it; or a pragmatic reason. If the government makes it more and more expensive to hire an employee, then less and less employees are hired. This does not help any family, ultimately. Also, the single or infertile are rather punished. Also, those who have children out of wedlock are encouraged.
 
I object to the government legislating this type of thing. I don't find a biblical warrant for it

I wasn't aware that the government was supposed to operate under the regulative principle. Regardless, I think we all agree that the government ought to legislate that employers provide one day per week off.
 
Last edited:
"But I do think that the United States (my former country and all my family live there) need more paid maternity and paternity leave as opposed to more vacation time. The US lacks very much behind the rest of the world in this area."

I object to the government legislating this type of thing. I don't find a biblical warrant for it; or a pragmatic reason. If the government makes it more and more expensive to hire an employee, then less and less employees are hired. This does not help any family, ultimately. Also, the single or infertile are rather punished. Also, those who have children out of wedlock are encouraged.
Agreed. Taking money from government is like taking money from Tony Soprano: sooner or later, he comes back, ready to pull on the strings attached to that "generous contribution."

A better solution would be NOT TO TAX SO MUCH!!!
 
Some companies don't care if they exhaust their employees and destroy their bodies because there is always someone else willing to work once the first employee is broken.

In most jobs, it isn't the labor that's going to wear you down and kill you, it's the mental attitude created that will shorten your life. I have a heavy workload in a job that can be stressful, but with great co-workers who help each other out, a great boss and honorable supervisors above him I don't dread going to work in the mornings, and while I need some time in the evenings to wind down, it's a great place to work.
 
An American businessman was at a pier in a small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellow-fin tuna. The American complimented the Mexican on the quality of his fish and asked how long it took to catch them. The Mexican replied only a little while. The American then asked why didn’t he stay out longer and catch more fish? The Mexican said he had enough to support his family’s immediate needs. The American then asked the Mexican how he spent the rest of his time. The Mexican fisherman said, “I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siesta with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play guitar with my amigos. I have a full and busy life, senor.”

The American scoffed, “I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing and, with the proceeds, buy a bigger boat. With the proceeds from the bigger boat, you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City, then LA and eventually NYC where you will run your expanding enterprise.”

The Mexican fisherman asked, “But senor, how long will this all take?”

To which the American replied, “15-20 years.”

“But what then, senor?” asked the Mexican.

The American laughed, and said, “That’s the best part! When the time is right, you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public. You ll become very rich, you would make millions!”

“Millions, senor?” replied the Mexican. “Then what?”

The American said, “Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos.”
 
I object to the government legislating this type of thing. I don't find a biblical warrant for it

I wasn't aware that the government was supposed to operate under the regulative principle. Regardless, I think we all agree that the government ought to legislate that employers provide one day per week off.

Well, there is sphere sovereignty. I don't think that forcing maternity or paternity leaves is a legitimate part of government. The case law we see about employment doesn't support it.
 
Well, there is sphere sovereignty. I don't think that forcing maternity or paternity leaves is a legitimate part of government.

Why not? I don't find sphere sovereignty as a concept in Scripture. If you hold to it as a concept in political theory, that is fine, but realize that those who formulated it (Kuyper, Dooyeweerd, etc) conceived of government as having exactly the role of ensuring that the mediating institutions of civil society did their duty and acted in a manner in accordance with Christian principles.
 
I'm surprised no other moms have popped in with: "only 40 hours, I wish!"

Switching instantly from the professional world to being a mother of 3 (now 5) children was difficult in part because I can never look forward to a time with no demands being made of me. And that was switching from a job where I "donated" many hours and could be called out any time for 21-days of fire duty.

Likely, my experience as a mom is more like what people experienced for centuries before things like the Fair Labor Standards Acts, etc., were invented. You worked in whatever your profession, went to sleep, and started over. Thank God for the Sabbath!
 
"I don't find sphere sovereignty as a concept in Scripture."

Well then, we don't much have a common ground for debate. Obviously, I think it is there.

But I can't articulate it better than Dooyeweerd, so, I'll leave it at that.

I'll offer the more secular caveat: "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." I don't want any government to have so much power that it dictates my basic terms of employment. I think grown men should work that out themselves, to their mutual satisfaction.

Unless theft, or fraud, or some such is involved - then a crime has been committed, and the employer or employee should have the recourse of law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top