this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
583 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
59669 readers
2727 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I would disagree about your average because it's brought down by people working multiple jobs that won't generally staff them past those 30ish hours or what ever the magic number is to be just under the required time to be eligible for a benefits package. It's a widely known problem in the work force.
https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/what-are-full-time-hours
No, as these are the numbers reported by worker's themselves (Robert Whaples's research) and not by their disparate employers. But looking at it as you suggested, it comes out to 34.3 hours.
Here are two more views on it:
https://ourworldindata.org/working-more-than-ever (world trends)
https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/january-2007/working-hard-or-hardly-working-the-evolution-of-leisure-in-the-united-states [dated]
Lol? What you just said doesn't disprove what I said. If people work multiple jobs their hours will be lower. Nothing in your studies you presented said people only work 1 job. Just that the hours at any given job are only 30ish hours. Still doesn't talk about people working more than 1 job.