Posted on 11/28/2006 11:10:16 AM PST by freemarket_kenshepherd
American laborers are “going to extremes” working in jobs “where 60 hours a week can be considered part-time, and overtime is an understatement.”
That’s how ABC anchor Charles Gibson teased a story in the opening credits of the November 27 “World News.” Yet for all the hype, fewer than one percent of Americans hold these type of “extreme” jobs, and most are well-compensated.
The “so-called extreme jobs,” Gibson told viewers, involve “high-pressure work that often comes with a very high salary and a very heavy personal toll.” Yet it’s only about “2 million Americans” that “fall into this fast-growing category,” Gibson conceded as he introduced a report by Betsy Stark.
In a nation of roughly 300 million people, that’s only 0.67 percent of the country’s population, although Stark’s report made “extreme” work sound like a pandemic.
What’s more, Gibson got his 2 million number by rounding up from the 1.7 million Americans in “extreme” jobs as determined by the New York-based Center for Work-Life Policy (CWLP). Stark featured CWLP senior fellow Catherine Orenstein in her story but did not mention the organization’s name or its ideological leanings.
A review of CWLP’s Web site shows the group often focuses on traditional liberal workplace concerns such as the number of women and minorities in executive leadership in American business. Liberal activist and Princeton religion professor Cornel West serves as CWLP vice president. In 2001, West resigned his post at Harvard University after then-president Larry Summers criticized West for focusing on political activities at the expense of his academic obligations.
Stark chose a Florida lawyer as a textbook case of the “extreme” worker. The correspondent profiled 35-year old David Shontz, a “man who rarely vacations,” who is “a trial lawyer hoping to make partner at his firm..."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessandmedia.org ...
No one's stopping them.
I could still be working those hours now, but I took a less remunerative but also less time-consuming position to spend more time with my wife and kids.
But the five years I spent in the workforce before getting married, I worked most of the time I was awake.
And I've got a better job now because of it.
90% of the people who work these kind of jobs are unmarried 20something singles in large cities anyway.
I enjoy telling people in other countries about the American work ethic. The reason we get ahead, I explain, is that we work very hard. "America is the land of opportunity to work your tushie off."
And to join clubs, send your kids to private schools, own a bunch of nifty stuff as a result of your work.
This raises eyebrows, especially in commie countries where no one is allowed to work much or to own much. Castro, for example, tells the poor beleagured Cubans that in America, some people have to work two or three jobs. Rotten capitalist pigs. Soon they'll own three apartment houses in downtown Cleveland.
That's all true. But the thing is, many still have that expectation of the high paying, 40-hour work week.
The only people I have seen get paid extra for working more hours were hourly employees.
You get paid for the quality of work, not the amount of time you sit in a chair. Most of the 60 hour employees I have known worked that much to hide their incompetence.
You don't get rich working 40 hours a week.
Although I am in the military where more than 40 hours are common. That does not guarantee rich. I just got my monthly statement for November and made before tax 57k. So max I will make a little over 60 for the year. It is ok though. I am comfortable. I do understand that if you own you own business you must work in order to have it successful and so you can put food on the table. I wish you best of luck in your quest to become rich, but have fun too!!! I am glad to see you take occasional breathers to hang out with your FRiends!!!!!
The work loads are much greater now for most decent paying jobs. Just over the last couple of years I've seen some mid-sized companies cut nearly a third of its employees and still maintain productivity. Some of that gain is via technology, but not all of it.
Zig Ziglar used the analogy of flight: you have to rev the engine quite a bit to get off the ground, but once you hit cruising altitude you have to ease back ou you'll cook it.
We all make our choices. I don't have issues with people who want to work 70 hours + per week. I've done it and to me it wasn't worth it. I hardly ever saw my family and when I did, I was too tired to enjoy the time I had with them.
Believe me, I have no trouble working reasonable hours (40-50 hours per week) and spending time with my family and doing things that I really enjoy.I got to coach my kids' ball teams (football, baseball and basketball), attend their school activities, spend quality time with my wife, eat supper together as a family, socialize with friends. To each their own!
Two words - billable hours
(whether he works as many hours as he bills is a guess)
They certainly do, but it's kind of a spoiled expectation.
Historically, such jobs are complete anomalies.
Thank god I live in Europe.
So, the question is: will the trend work its way down to the foodchain? Will it take 60 hours a week to earn $40k or $50k?
Yes, if you have an H1-B...
You have to understand: 70 hours per week, or even 60, is A LOT to a TV journalist.
You're joking, but in a lot of tech jobs the H1-B is the baseline. "Hey, you don't want to work hard for the salary we're offering, I know where to find someone who will."
My answer is a big, "So what?" What do you propose? Should long hours, at the discretion of the worker, be illegal? Should it be mandated that everyone be paid the same, regardless of hours worked?
What, o' brilliant author, is your bloomin' point!?
They are trying to tell me putting in 60 to 70 per week is a problem? Great, now I'll hear "we're from the gooberment and we're here to help, we insist that you go home now...."
Economy in the tank, just like France. Neeeeeaat!
I don't think it will take 60-hour weeks to earn 40 or 50K.
The question really is: how many people will be satisified with that much money?
The ambitious will always work more.
A highly familiar pattern! LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.