Is 40hr/week too much?

[Philip]

I think grown men should work that out themselves, to their mutual satisfaction.

That's the problem, isn't it? Grown men have to take what they can get, not what is satisfactory. I don't want to give corporations absolute power over terms of employment (which is what they have, unless a particular employee is somehow so valuable that they are able to dictate their own terms of employment).

Remember that Kuyper and Dooyeweerd were not libertarians and that their notion of sphere sovereignty does allow the state to intervene and ensure that mediating institutions of civil society (like businesses) are doing their job properly.

 

[Miss Marple]

"Grown men have to take what they can get, not what is satisfactory."

I disagree, in a free society we can bargain and also start our own businesses, work as independent contractors, take two jobs if we like, quit one, move, etc.

Of course if the society is not free then the employee is at a disadvantage.

I don't mean to give the impression that I am a Libertarian. I am not.

 

[Philip]

I disagree, in a free society we can bargain and also start our own businesses, work as independent contractors, take two jobs if we like, quit one, move, etc.

Assuming, naturally, that one has the skills/education/capital to do so. The individual employee is always at a disadvantage at the bargaining table unless his particular skills are such that a) the employer cannot do without them b) he is the only (or best) available option. Consider today's economy where many jobs are capable of being offshored. In this kind of economy, the individual worker is always expendable unless they can show that their personal services are indispensible.

 

[thbslawson]

I don't think 40 hours is unreasonable, but at the same time it may not always be necessary. Some companies have moved to shorter work weeks, but require the same amount of work to be done. Netflix is one major corporation that does this I believe. What they've found is that productivity actually increases, and that employees are happier because they get more time at home.

Also, we need to keep in mind, that when the Bible talks about "work" it's not necessarily referring to a 9 to 5 career job where one clocks in and out. Cutting the grass, fixing leaky faucets at the house, washing the car, cleaning the house, etc. are all forms of work. Based on some studies I've read, and based on what some companies are starting to do, I actually think it might be better to shorten the work week and pay people for what they accomplish rather than how long they're physically present in one place, and give them more time with their families. Give them an extra day or half day per week to work around the house, plant a garden or wash the car with the kiddos, or do some other form of "work"

Just my two cents.

 

[Miss Marple]

"Assuming, naturally, that one has the skills/education/capital to do so."

So true, and that has so many ramifications. All positive. For instance, it is a giant incentive for us to maximize our skills and pursue our education; to capitalize ourselves.

We are rewarded, for example, for delaying gratification. My son lived on peanuts with his parents (!) and studied and worked very hard, about 500 hours for free doing pretty gross stuff, to get his EMT certification. Why? He was sick of working at, literally, McDonalds. Low pay, uninspiring work, ill treatment from customers and management, no future. Because those with skills, education, and capital are usually rewarded, he worked hard to improve his skills and education. We supplied, by God's grace, as called as we are as parents, most of the capital.

As I home school our children we supply oceans of educational capital, equipping our children to earn the best living they can as they become adults.

Some "skills" are so very valuable, and require no degree. When I have been in a position to hire, it was very difficult to find people who were PUNCTUAL; HARD WORKING; POLITE; DEPENDABLE; and above all, HONEST. Such an employee is gold. So we are incentivized to increase these graces in ourselves as well.

Further, as parents, as church bodies, and as philanthropists, we are incentivized to educate our wards, capitalize them as appropriate, and develop their aptitudes into useful skills. This is also very commendable behavior.

Finally, we are called to charity towards those who, through no sinfulness of their own, can't be very productive, for example the mentally challenged. Again, very positive.

 

[Philip]

So true, and that has so many ramifications. All positive. For instance, it is a giant incentive for us to maximize our skills and pursue our education; to capitalize ourselves.

Yes it does. What's sad, though, is the fact that many don't know this because many don't have the opportunity for an education that will teach them a) why doing this is valuable b) how to actually do this. Education that teaches these kinds of skills is primarily the domain of the relatively well-off in today's society.

 

[Miss Marple]

"Education that teaches these kinds of skills is primarily the domain of the relatively well-off in today's society. "

True, but even the poorest of parent(s) can provide for their children to be employable and even attain wealth. It does require effort, discipline, and sacrifice on the parent(s)' part. But we are an upwardly mobile society. In the absence of a decent or able parent(s), the extended family and the church should stand willing to stand in the role.

My church, for example, has sent two children to Christian school that I know of. One had non-Christian parents but attended our church himself. The other has a lovely Christian mother but not enough funds.

 

[Philip]

True, but even the poorest of parent(s) can provide for their children to be employable and even attain wealth.

If they themselves are educated and knowledgeable about these kinds of things, maybe. Many people in our society simply don't have the skills, the resources, or the imagination to make the system work for them.

 

[Gloria]

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.

Yes. I think more places should shorten the number of hours per day, days per week or other flex time options. A good bit of my work can actually be done from home. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Edited to add:

I'm truly an advocate of working until tasks are completed. In my position, sometimes my work is complete in 4 hours. Other times, it's really necessary for me to be around 12-14 hours. In the instances where I can complete my work in 4 hours, I'd REALLY like to go home. lol

 

[Miss Marple]

"If they themselves are educated and knowledgeable about these kinds of things, maybe. Many people in our society simply don't have the skills, the resources, or the imagination to make the system work for them. "

It seems we are in agreement about the problem, but not about the solution.

I don't think the solution to parents who are so bad that they can't or won't teach such skills as hard work, punctuality, honesty, and a willingness to learn will be helped by labor laws requiring a minimum wage or a 40 hour week or whatever. The problems that needs to be addressed at this point is almost certainly spiritual, unless there is a mental damage of some sort, and the state can't do much, there. To require taxpayers to support such folks as they continue their indolence, or to require employers to pay them high wages and give them long breaks and etc., ultimately harms us all.

I like to see individual Christians and churches offering opportunity and a hand up to those who'd like to improve their lot. Education, certainly, but also jobs and character training and encouragement for innovation and entrepreneurship. Support for the hard times. It is, within parameters, a diaconal role. It seems to me the best thing to do for those who want to improve themselves, rather than forcing employers to sweep up all the flotsam and jetsam, which includes a lot of people who don't have an employable attitude.

The son I mentioned previously, who recently got his EMT certificate and so greatly improved his prospects, was genuinely helped by folks in the church who hired him for landscaping and babysitting and such. It was much appreciated and bore good fruit.

 

[Organgrinder]

I regret not working more than 40 hrs. a week when I was younger and had the stamina.

Looking back there was not much I would have missed working more than 40. We were living in gov't housing, I was traveling hours on public transit and had nothing to do but watch TV and do laundry when I got home. Yes, those were the bad ol' days and I"m glad they're gone.

I really felt okay back when I decided to work two jobs. I felt like I was contributing more to the family by being more responsible. Besides we had money to do stuff and I had more self respect.

So, I would say that for some people working more than 40 hrs is a good thing. Its even better if you have a goal like getting out of debt or to by a house.

 

[darrellmaurina]

Baron is right.

Not only conservative Reformed Christians but broad evangelicals and even "freethinkers" such as Benjamin Franklin from just a few generations ago would likely have rebuked someone who worked only 40 hours for being slothful.

It's hard for me to come up with an example of a small business owner or a farmer today who works only 40 hours, and before the industrial revolution that simply would have been impossible. Perhaps the focus should be on figuring out how to obey God's command to work six days, and be grateful that we can do something to work for the church in our "off time" rather than the 60, 80 or 100-hour weeks that our forefathers had to work?