50-60 Hours/Week?
Posted by codeandtrees@reddit | ExperiencedDevs | View on Reddit | 75 comments
Recently I heard someone say they can usually get 50-60 hours out of their developers comfortably. Later they mentioned 80 hour crunch weeks are not sustainable.
Am I missing something or is this insane? I would expect no more than 40 hours/week except in extreme cases it may go a bit over. Even then, I suspect a lot of people still actually do less than 40 hours/week of actively engaging work (I am jealous!).
Thoughts?
SpeakingSoftwareShow@reddit
37.5-40 is the norm for where I work. If we need to work more it's because some pointy-haired boss has got it wrong.
tappthis@reddit
in mexico, 50 hours are quite common. It's a disgusting and exploitative tactic, you can see on any serious graph that we're far below the productivity of any other western country
chebum@reddit
Productivity is measured in dollars earned per an hour of work. As long as Mexico salaries are lower, the Mexico’s productivity will be lacking.
SituationSoap@reddit
...huh? The US is 9th in the world in GDP/capita. We're 3.7X the median GDP/capita.
In terms of the actual metric of measuring how much we produce per person, we're near the top.
cjd280@reddit
Mexico is not part of the US.
SituationSoap@reddit
I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you were communicating there. That's on me, I got things mixed up.
cjd280@reddit
I also didn’t make the original comment you replied to 🤣
skeletal88@reddit
US problems.. and I can't understand how someone can be productive working that much. I would produce less when working over 40 hours
jaymangan@reddit
Sounds like a general lack of ruthless prioritization. Sounds like a good way to go in the wrong direction really quickly.
Also, there are diminishing returns with increasing hours to those extents. The more critical thinking that is required, the less effective the long tail of those hours will be. I’d rather have an engineer spend less time, making room to breath and think about what is the highest leverage tasks, and then working with a clear mind on those tasks.
Disclaimer: I’ve spent years in startup land where we’re empowered as engineers and wear many hats. When I’m not at my computer, I’m still thinking about the product half the time. But my thoughts turn into action that benefit the team, and our entire small team all do the same with their time and ideation. I can imagine this being less and less true as employee counts scale up 10x, 100x, 1000x.
_sw00@reddit
Exactly. It's not the hours that count, but the impact.
Time spent away from the keyboard becomes more valuable the longer you stay on it.
dashingThroughSnow12@reddit
It kinda depends how old (busy?) your developers are and how much they like their jobs.
Many of us got into this field because if we won’t developers, our hobby would be coding. Many of us are tinkerers and find programming fun.
I’ve never been but if you are the stereotypical 20-some programmers with no kids, no spouse, and gaming as your only other hobby, 50-60 hour work weeks are pretty easy to do.
I was a single teenage parent before I finished university and got a job. Even with the limited time, I’d often work 45 hour weeks at my main programming job and 10 hours per week in the evenings moonlighting as a programmer. And I had fun. My bosses for years (and later my spouse) would be the ones to encourage me that I could work less.
kolya_zver@reddit
US problems
casualfinderbot@reddit
I’ve been working like 55+ hours a week for over a year. Sometimes closer to 40. A lot of that time was straight up coding, more recently more management type stuff
Most people I bet work more like 32. 40+ isn’t necessary unless you’re very ambitious and want to move up fast, or work in a startup
It’s really more about doing what works for you, what your priorities are in life. The advantage of working more is that you will get more stuff done and achieve more over time, and overall be a more capable developer.
The disadvantage is you will have no life and it’s hard to really think about anything but work when working so much.
Scarface74@reddit
Are you getting paid more to achieve more? I bet you could get paid just as much and work a normal amount of hours if you changed jobs.
The only time that I routinely work more than 40 hours a week is when I am learning a new to me technology
nonasiandoctor@reddit
I work 50+, more if you consider my commute every day. But I get paid 200k cad, which for someone with 5 yoe in Canada isn't bad.
Scarface74@reddit
No one considers their commute part of working hours
nonasiandoctor@reddit
Some people consider it, is 140k full remote worth more than 200k in person? Commute is a factor in that calculation.
Scarface74@reddit
I wouldn’t work on an office for $60K more at this point in my life. But it’s not because I have something better to do for 10 hours a week than make $60K. I just like the flexibility of working from anywhere and I live in a tourist heavy city with no real software developer jobs
sevvers@reddit
I work 40 hours a week fixing the bugs introduced by those working 60 hours weeks.
goodmammajamma@reddit
best answer. all that overwork has a cost
ElliotAlderson2024@reddit
The OG Macintosh team worked 90 hours/week and had the t-shirt to prove it.
Nofanta@reddit
It’s an abusive industry for sure. That’s why hiring H1Bs is so popular.
ImSoFuckingTired2@reddit
I wish these kind of H1B myths would die already.
Nofanta@reddit
It’s not a myth that they have to leave the country if their employer lets them go and they can’t find another sponsor in 60 days. With this market it’s almost impossible to land a job that quick so effectively you take all the abuse your employer can dish out or you have to leave the country. Employers know his well and take advantage of the situation.
ImSoFuckingTired2@reddit
Yes, the 60 days rule is not a myth. The myth is that employers systematically abuse visa holders just because of their status.
brianofblades@reddit
Whats the problem with it though? Perpetuating this stereotype would only encourage people to either stand up for them, or get legislation passed to legally protect them? Challenging it doesnt have any net benefit from my perspective
ImSoFuckingTired2@reddit
When did the stereotype of "cheap and/or manipulable labour stealing jobs" ever helped anyone?
Look at what happened with farm labour, for instance.
brianofblades@reddit
i dont really understand your point. if its true, which in both cases it is, then all you are advocating for is throwing a rug over a very huge societal issue?
ImSoFuckingTired2@reddit
A sizable part of society rely on stereotypes to target vulnerable communities, instead of acknowledging the underlying issues.
There are plenty of real world examples to support that.
Nofanta@reddit
Everywhere I have worked over the last 27 has beat the piss out of them. We do it where I work now. A few years ago the H1B that sat next to me jumped to her death in front of the BART train after all the abuse. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/sanfrancisco/news/30-year-old-woman-struck-killed-by-bart-train-in-san-leandro-identified-alameda-fremont-daly-city/
brianofblades@reddit
From my experience they also never dared to stand up for themselves. I often had to DM them and tell them to stop agreeing to things so i could say no on our behalf.
Nofanta@reddit
With deportation hanging over your head, you’re scared to. Imagine if you had kids in school.
brianofblades@reddit
yes my point exactly
ImSoFuckingTired2@reddit
Alright I guess? My personal experience is the complete opposite, and I myself was a visa holder not that long ago.
If there's anything that needs fixing in the US, is the lack of worker protection, regardless of their status. Most US based workers are treated like cattle by first world standards, and it's infuriating to see how instead of protesting these piss poor conditions, there's always a very vocal subset of white collar workers who would rather point the finger at their own colleagues.
AmputatorBot@reddit
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web.
Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/30-year-old-woman-struck-killed-by-bart-train-in-san-leandro-identified-alameda-fremont-daly-city/
^(I'm a bot | )^(Why & About)^( | )^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)
false79@reddit
I burned out 60 hours a week, in the first 3 months of a job. In a 1:1, I raised the issue to management that why is it on Mondays, people are reporting what work they did on the weekend. It's not normal.
Letsgettribal@reddit
What was their response? I’m currently dealing with this culture but my worry about bringing up any concerns is that the answer will be “you’re free to work somewhere else”
false79@reddit
They stopped paying me until I delivered their expectations. In response, I showed up to remote standups but I didn't participate unless I was asked to. It wasn't a good look that I didn't bring the same energy as everyone elses. But I wasn't exactly motivated. The main reason why I didn't disconnect completely because the project was so close to being finished.
After a month, I got the codebase into a state where the other devs took over. I was happy/relieved to be let go.
Flag_Red@reddit
I've only ever worked at one company that expected 50+ hours a week, and employee productivity there was abysmal. I definitely produce more total output working 40 hours a week than I did there.
Maybe this isn't universal, though. I could imagine there are companies that expect 50+ hours and make it work. "Passion" companies like SpaceX and video game studios come to mind.
NUTTA_BUSTAH@reddit
I would maybe add indie to the term video game studios. The generic video game studio work day probably just kills your passion as it is driven by something much more capitalistic :)
Western_Objective209@reddit
I worked somewhere where the people around me were putting in 50+ hours a week, and so much of it was just inefficient workflows and processes that were very people and time intensive
DJuxtapose@reddit
Pretty sure there have been studies that after about 2 months of 60 hour weeks, workers in most industries will have produced less than if they did 40 the whole time. That's why Henry Ford ran 40 hour weeks--it basically got the most labor done. You can get an increase in productivity for a while by adding hours, but output gets worse doing that over time.
discord-ian@reddit
I'll just say one of the most "productive" companies I worked at most folks worked about 30 hours. But we had a work hard play, hard kinda attitude. When we were working, we were very focused and were working on the right problems. I only left because the pay wasn't the best. In my current position, I feel like I work much harder but get much less done.
PragmaticBoredom@reddit
The Venn Diagram of people who work 60 hours per week and people who post a lot on Reddit is basically two separate circles. Most people on Reddit draw a hard line at 40 hours per week.
I have worked at companies where 12 hour days (60 hour weeks) were normal. I was paid a lot. It was stressful, but the work was fun at first. I couldn't do it for a straight decade, but to be completely honest I was young and having a lot of fun with the project and my coworkers so I didn't care at the time.
Now with family and kids I wouldn't do it. Back then if the compensation was low I also wouldn't do it.
So this isn't really a question with one single answer. Different companies have different expectations for productivity. Different people have different tolerances and different thresholds for how much they need to be paid before 50 or 60 hours are worthwhile. For some people, no amount of money would make 60 hours worthwhile.
chipmunksocute@reddit
Fuck with young kids Id be working PAST midnight daily to do 60 hour weeks. I work 9-5 then Im not free of toddler bedtime till after 9pm. I could literally get nothing else done in my life with young kids if I had to work 60 hour weeks.
seminole2r@reddit
Any advice on how to screen for this when job hunting? Of course there’s the obvious companies that advertise how hard they work but it can be tougher to discern during interviews at smaller places. Is there an indirect way of asking or is it just best to be direct?
grain_delay@reddit
Be direct, the company has no incentive to mislead you about WLB if it really is part of the culture like that
norse95@reddit
In my experience, the recruiter made me aware that my company is known for having a great work life balance, and 40 hours would be a high workload week here for most
PragmaticBoredom@reddit
Ask them directly.
Ask multiple people. Some hiring managers might sugar coat it. If you get interviewed by engineers, ask them privately.
Ask indirect questions like when they last worked weekends or how often they had crunch time.
Shafter111@reddit
This is the right answer. Once 60 hours + happy hours with 15 guys and gals was the shit. Then you grow up and have the experience to say fuck you to anyone who expects that of you.
aqjo@reddit
r/overemployed would like a word.
schmypescript@reddit
Those guys aren't really working though right? I always thought a lot of it was overlapping, being logged in at two places at once
tr0w_way@reddit
I have a W2 and a 1099, still pretty rare to work more than 40/week. Remote work is tough to find
aqjo@reddit
That's a good point.
It was the first thing I thought of when I saw that blanket statement.
WJMazepas@reddit
Well, i do have 2 remote jobs, and they definitely dont require 8h of working every day.
The problem is getting luck in finding 2 jobs that are chill.
I had jobs that required more from me than these 2 combined
PragmaticBoredom@reddit
Every time someone talks about r/overemployed I go check out the sub. It's definitely this: People farming multiple jobs that have low expectations and accepting that if they get fired from one it's not a big deal.
schmypescript@reddit
Tell me about it. My remote job went under and now I'm on a bank contract: my mental health is worse than ever.
PragmaticBoredom@reddit
I find it extremely unlikely that most OE people are putting in a full work week at two separate companies, let alone full-time performance at 3 or 4 different companies.
The OE game appears to be about finding multiple companies with very low expectations so you can get away with relatively little work at each job.
Scarface74@reddit
I bet unless you were at one of the top paying companies in the industry, you could have been paid a lot more and work closer 40 hours a week
ImSoFuckingTired2@reddit
> The Venn Diagram of people who work 60 hours per week and people who post a lot on Reddit is basically two separate circles.
You mean people who *claim* to work 60 hours a week.
PragmaticBoredom@reddit
Nah, those people are actually right here on Reddit 12 hours per day.
UXyes@reddit
People who “work” sixty hours a week are either full of shit or aren’t very good at their jobs.
patoezequiel@reddit
More than 40 is insane
ancientweasel@reddit
I ask everyone I interview with how many hours a week they work and I double any overtime they admit to.
People being busy all the time is a sign of inefficiency, and unless I am being brought in as the effiency Czar I am uninterested.
ACrossingTroll@reddit
It depends on the work. If it's greenfield and just content etc. No problem with that. But if it's complicated (and that's more often than not) then no thanks. Then crunch time only means being held hostage at the workplace without actually being able to think straight and slowly burning out while staring on the screen. Managers really don't get it, do they?
ivancea@reddit
You better want to do those hours yourself, because you like it. Being forced to do them, first, may be illegal in some countries, and second, is quite despotic
4444For@reddit
I was commenting in some other post about burnout how I've lost my hair from stress caused by working 2 jobs, I've had 60+ hours a week... It is absolutely not sustainable and not good for your health. 30 hours a week is what we should all fight for.
ActuallyFullOfShit@reddit
Depends. If your TC is at 200k or less, you really shouldn't be doing more than 40 hours per week. Above that, you do what you gotta do.
Beneficial_Map6129@reddit
First couple months is usually 10 hours a day easily, and then you have oncall, which I guess some people will count depending on how bad it is at your particular role.
I've also been at companies like Amazon where even senior devs/team leads who had families were easily doing 10-7 at the office, plus more work at home.
40h/week is dead unless you purposefully navigate yourself to an easy role/company, but then comp would also be lower.
Very rare to hit above 200 with such low hours.
Far_Archer_4234@reddit
Some people are of the opinion that if you need more than 40 hours a week to do your job, you are either bad at it, or your employer is unreasonable.
There is also a line of thinking that if you work from home when you are not supposed to, that you probably arent the most reliable person either. If you cant be trusted to disconnect when you are supposed to, you probably dont trust your coworkers much.
Some companies will chant different expectations in an attempt to drain you of your worth and leave you a burnt-out husk. Dont work for them.
daredeviloper@reddit
lol at 40hours, just on paper
Scarface74@reddit
I can think of only a few reasons that you should have unavoidable crunch time as process. One that comes to mind is TurboTax. The IRS doesn’t finalize everything until the end of January and taxes are due in April. That’s going to create crunch time for developers that really can’t be avoided.
It’s also going to create a crutch for their customer service department.
I can also think of other regulatory and compliance deadlines.
b1e@reddit
So the thing is hours/week isn’t a super meaningful metric. That could be time all in meetings, not doing anything productive, focused work time, or any mix.
I will say it’s not sustainable to do long hours especially of focused work for more than a few months. That quickly leads to bad burnout and even sooner than that the quality of work will plummet.
In practice, most people can do around 4.5 hours of actual focused work a day. After that efficiency or quality drop especially if done day after day.
Quite frankly when i see startups trying to push people to work 80+ hour weeks it’s usually a sign of immaturity. Sure you can keep it up for a few weeks but you’re way past the point of diminishing returns and your engineers won’t be fresh enough to keep steady progress and will miss things/make mistakes.
De_Wouter@reddit
Incompetent manager fetish to squeeze out as much hours as possible out of your employees. When you have to work with your mind (creative and/or knowledge work) this is very counterproductive. You reach the point of negative returns quite fast.
While it might work for the average blue collar worker, the typical developer would be more productive per week with 30 hours instead of 60 hours.
You need a clear mind and focus to be productive in this field. An exhausted runner isn't going to win a race.
devoutsalsa@reddit
I can definitely work -10 hours per week.