Cell Phones blurring work/leisure?
Hey peoples, I am doing this small paper on how people having cell phones are blurring the line between work and leisure. Because you can be contacted at any point, even during a vacation, is there any blurring actually occurring. Is leisure when there is not work going on, or is work when there is no leisure going on?
I am curious what you guys think. Also, if you have any resources you could point me to, that would be helpful also. (my schools article searches were pretty weak)
For me, personally, I think it does blur the line, there is no longer a 9 to 5 with a lunch break. You can be called at any time with an emergency, whereas before if you were out to lunch, they would have to go and find you and bring you back. You're on call 24 hours a day because you have a sure of contacting someone, and if you are not connected, you may lose.
I am curious what you guys think. Also, if you have any resources you could point me to, that would be helpful also. (my schools article searches were pretty weak)
For me, personally, I think it does blur the line, there is no longer a 9 to 5 with a lunch break. You can be called at any time with an emergency, whereas before if you were out to lunch, they would have to go and find you and bring you back. You're on call 24 hours a day because you have a sure of contacting someone, and if you are not connected, you may lose.
Comments
For example, I can no longer take a day off without getting an "emergency" call from the office detailing some issue or another. This is not an issue about setting boundaries, but a reflection on the fact that management structures have flattened to the point where, if you are in charge, there is no one else who can make a decision.
BTW, the best vacation I ever took was to Europe a few years ago and my cellphone was not compatible with their standards. Two weeks out of touch - I need to go back.
why don'y you leave the cell phone at home when you go on vacation or turn it off when you ahve days off
I like my job and I like being employed.
Originally posted by Nebagakid
For me, personally, I think it does blur the line, there is no longer a 9 to 5 with a lunch break.
When was there ever a 9 to 5 with lunch break? Unless you're working for the government, or in some sort of low-end service job, you'll be working different hours. Generally, working class jobs are 6:30 to 3:30 with two breaks. Most white collar jobs are salary based, and usually the hours you put in doesn't really matter as long as you get the job done. If you don't get the job done, someone somewhere is getting screwed, and they're usually pretty good at finding the source of the problem.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Most white collar jobs are salary based, and usually the hours you put in doesn't really matter as long as you get the job done.
This statement probably ought to be revised a tad...because in my observation is it more like:
"Most white collar jobs are salary based, and usually the hours you put in, as long as it is at least 40-50, doesn't really matter as long as you get the job done."
Which has the following question...
If I am able to perfom my job efficiently enough to get it done in say 20-30 hours per week, am I allowed to leave early? Keep my job? Get the same salary?
Because the implication of the statement is basically...
If I am unable to perform my job very efficiently and it takes me 50-60 (or more) hours per week, then that is my problem.
If this "usually the hours you put in doesn't really matter as long as you get the job done" thing worked both ways (it usually does not), I think many people would be:
a) incented to find more efficient ways to do there work and get out out early, and
b) less frustrated by the blurring of "the line" (as alluded to by the thread starter).
BTW...there are other problems with the "usually the hours you put in doesn't really matter as long as you get the job done" statement...namely that "the job" and what "done" means are usually both quite open-ended and vague. Leading to situations where "the job" is never really "done", thus the hours worked are rather open-ended too.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Leading to situations where "the job" is never really "done", thus the hours worked are rather open-ended too.
You make valid points, but I'll answer your question about "when the job is done." The job is done when you're ahead of schedule and are waiting on dependencies. Good management will generally schedule things well so that tasks are overlapped, but there are always times where you may as well leave early. Likewise, good management generally knows when these times come, and it's not such a big deal to be in the 40-50 hour comfort zone.
If you only require 20 to 30 hours a week, you're either a consultant who's getting the job done on your own time, you have bad management that can't give you enough work, or you should step it up a notch and then ask for a raise. If you are the management, then you're being lazy if you only "need" 20 to 30 hours a week.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
I'll answer your question about "when the job is done." The job is done when you're ahead of schedule and are waiting on dependencies.
Well, that is an answer, but not necessarily applicable in all cases. Second, it has a pitfall (for the employed anyway) of being subject to the tendency for overly-optimistic or aggressive schedules that show little respect for the people working them. This is an observable reality in my own experience. There is always one more deadline...and often they tend to be "end of the world" deadlines (true "dead" lines)...or so we are told.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Good management will generally schedule things well so that tasks are overlapped, but there are always times where you may as well leave early. Likewise, good management generally knows when these times come, and it's not such a big deal to be in the 40-50 hour comfort zone.
Well, we probably need to define "good management" a little better (beyond that tautological "good management is that which schedules resources well, and those that schedule resources well are 'good management'") Some (many)...capitalists anyway...would likely argue that "good management" is that whose work increases shareholder value (preferably over the long term...but we needn't be bound by such silly limitations for our discussion
Originally posted by Splinemodel
If you only require 20 to 30 hours a week, you're either a consultant who's getting the job done on your own time, you have bad management that can't give you enough work, or you should step it up a notch and then ask for a raise.
Possibly. Not sure I'd ask for the raise. I might be content with the 20-30 hours and the current salary. So might my employer for that matter. On the other hand it might be reasonable to ask for a raise if you are then asked to do more work. Of course this all pre-supposes that "job" and "done" are reasonably well defined and clearly understood by all parties.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
If you are the management, then you're being lazy if you only "need" 20 to 30 hours a week.
I'm trying to stay away from such emotionally-loaded terms as "lazy". I think they are generalizations that are patently unfair and show a likely ignorance of a person's individual circumstances, goals and motivations (for example, maybe that person values time with their family very highly.) and the are usually coming from another person's own "interpretive grid" that layers their own goals, values and motivations onto another person's.
Originally posted by Nebagakid
I was just thinking that there are many stories about how people come back early from their Vacations because they read an e-mail.
NebagaKid, you are totally on the right track. Cell phones, email, even wi-fi hotspots and internet cafes, all blur the work/leisure line very heavily nowadays
Also, the fact that you have professional and personal contacts on your 1 cell phone, is *risky*... because of text messaging, drunk dialing, etc... you just may end up accidentally telling your boss/secretary (gay/straight/male/female/whatever) that you'd love to grab their a... well you get the idea
Umm sorry I have no *actual* research stuff to point you to. Do you your own damn research! That's what the Internet and library and journals are there for
Edit: Also major security issues if your girlfriend or ex or whatever happens to pick up your phone or some other person with malicious intent, they can send text messages posing as 'you'... not good
If I'm on vacation and I dont recognize the number, I dont answer. If I see its a work number then I dont reply.
Whomever they are, they can leave a message. If I feel like it, at the end of the day I'll listen to them and do what I feel like.
If its important, they would've called more than once...
Originally posted by ZO
the wonders of Caller ID
If I'm on vacation and I dont recognize the number, I dont answer. If I see its a work number then I dont reply.
Whomever they are, they can leave a message. If I feel like it, at the end of the day I'll listen to them and do what I feel like.
If its important, they would've called more than once...
dude, that's cool, that's a very disciplined approach.
i was once out at Point Reyes in Northern California (wilderness reserve thingy) and a few of my fellow webbies were like 'dude, where are you?' even though i was on holiday. not their fault, there was some Flash stuff that they had to figure out, unfortunately the work could not wait till i got back
the wonders of no reception