My work do not require regular work hours, but since when is 8:30-6 a normal work hour? I always thought work hour is 9-5.
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
25 points (74.5% liked)
Linus Tech Tips
53 readers
1 users here now
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
North American here. 8-5 is 8 hours of work with a 1 hour lunch. That ends up being only 40 hours a week. Some workplaces standardize on 45. Some workplaces pay overtime starting at 40 (extra pay for the 41st hour) while some wait until 90 hours in two weeks before paying overtime. If the work hours arrangement doesn't work for an employee they should bring it up to HR or managers. They can quit anytime.
That is really unfortunate, so sad to see NA work culture progress backward... I am pretty sure 9-5 was standard for a while.
What's even more messed up is part time work here. Legislation stipulates that workers get additional benefits at 30 hours. End result is companies only hire people for 29.5 hours and don't have to supply those benefits. Meaning people take two jobs and still have no healthcare paid by either employer.
Where was 9-5 ever standard? Here in Europe you usually work 8 hours plus 1 hour lunch. So you either do 8-5, 9-6 or 10-7. 9-5 is only standard if you work like a slave without food all day.
Like I said, I have never worked a job with fixed schedule, so I really don't know. However based on this article: https://www.historydefined.net/the-9-to-5-workday-a-brief-history/
The idea of 9 to 5 being a standard workday comes from the years just after World War II, during a high in the economy when many people worked 9 to 5 with their lunch being counted as part of the workday.
Also several of my friends work 9-5 in the U.S. including lunch, although many others work 8:30-5.
The 9-5 work day usually refers to a work day without a lunch. It was common for employers not to offer lunch breaks for labor jobs. Even now, there are a lot of states that don’t require employers to give employees an hour for lunch. I live in Texas and they don’t require giving breaks or lunch.
Yeah, but I am refering to the time when 9-5 was first introduced, I imagine they would include lunch break, since most people do need to eat. If they were doing 8h without lunch break, I think they would simply call it 8-5 or 9-6.
I think it mainly depends on the employers. I live in nyc and while I was in the USPS it was 7:30 to 4:30 because of the unpaid hour lunch, when I started working at Kawasaki it was 7 to 3:30 for the 30 minutes unpaid lunch, now as a Train inspector I do 7 to 3 with paid lunch. My buddy is a data analyst and does 9 to 5 but because he takes his lunch at the end so he's done, otherwise it'd be 9 to 6 with unpaid lunch. Fiance works for WIC and does 8 to 3 they don't pay for her lunch and she's only allowed to work 7 hours.
I do 0900-1800, lunch isn’t included for me. But I’m also fortunate enough to work for a company that only does four days a week.
Yeah, 4 days a week is a valid tradeoff for no lunch break I guess.
Most places where I live have 9 hour work days, some even have 10 or 11 hours (longest scheduled shift I did at my old workplace was 11 hours).
That sounds really unfortunate, hope as least you are paid handsomely for your long work hours, even though I know it is unlikely.
In this capitalist society, leachers unfortunately are paid way more than hard working workers...
A reasonable take. I think they are earnestly trying to improve.
Yeah, me too.
Are they going to address Linus's active investment in companies from markets they cover? The Framework investment seems like a conflict of interest that should be addressed since it was part of Gamer Nexus' criticism.
At some point I feel like you have to admit you are a biased entertainment show or commit to journalistic standards. I don't know that an active investment in a subject you report on can be waved away by disclosure and a promise not to let it color your conclusions. Im sure there is a balance, and maybe I am being too critical.
can be waved away by disclosure and a promise not to let it color your conclusions.
I don’t think it’s ever been stated that the framework investment hasn’t lead to direct criticism of competing products. The disclosure is there to let us know that there is pre-existing bias in the upcoming review.
This is similar to watching Mac Address and being pissed off that they have a bias towards Macs.
Linus specifically said he wasn't going to let the investment influence their coverage of Framework or competing product when he announced his investment in the company, though that is not Gamer Nexus's point. It is the long term and ongoing potential for bias that is the issue. Id argue that discloure is certainly better, but that doesn't mean it's suddenly no longer a concern. It just means you know about it. You can't in one breath claim to be an authoritative reliable source of knowledge and explain why you are not in the next.
The Mac Address show is a different issue. Bringing it up is either a misunderstanding or a strawman. If Apple the company had a show about Mac's and Apple products, that would be a similar issue. If a large investor of Apple made the show, that would also be a similar issue. LMG, to my knowledge, has not disclosed a ownership stake in Apple.
Linus has made it clear from the start that the Framework investment was about supporting their mission first and making money second.
If you don't think LMG can be objective in the laptop segment due to this investment, I would ask for evidence of bias in recent reviews because I certainly haven't seen any.
Firstly, I want to say that I'm a fan of LMG and have greatly enjoyed their content over the years. I also acknowledge that I don't have any specific examples of bias to point out in their reviews post-Framework investment. However, my concern centers on the subtle, often hard-to-detect type of bias that can be particularly insidious over time.
As LMG increasingly positions itself as more of a journalistic entity, I think it's important to consider whether they are upholding the standards that come with that role.The kind of subtle bias I'm concerned about and Gamer Nexus brought up is difficult to identify, but it could influence things like the framing of a review, which aspects are emphasized, or even the choice of products reviewed. It is not even necessarily intentional.
Returning to my original point, my concern is the long-term and ongoing potential for this subtle form of bias, not necessarily any immediate, overt issues. While I appreciate the responses discussing Linus's motives for the Framework investment and requests for concrete evidence of bias, they don't directly address the aspect I'm trying to bring up. For what it's worth, I'm more concerned with right-to-repair than I am with LMG as an accountable journalistic entity. I'm in line for the big AMD version when it comes out.
Since most of my old tech journals were physical media that has died off in the last few years, I noticed that rightly or wrongly I found that I have come to rely on LMG as an authoritative source. I'm guessing I'm not the only one, and I feel like that is a role LMG is actively positioning for, so I think this is a topic worthy of discussion. I'm disappointed that Linus didn't address it.
During this entire time I've felt worse for LTT overall. Can't wait for more content. The wan show was great.