5 comments

[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 25.6 ms ] thread
Something to do with the fact that we now have work email on smartphones, and 24/7 VPN to our office?
Not mentioned in the article is the effect our (U.S.) health care system has in encouraging 'under-employed' entry-level workers.

Since the employer doesn't need to offer benefits (the most expensive of which is health insurance) to part-time workers, it's very common to give them 29 or 27 hours per week.

Contrast this with the salaried worker, who is measured by work product, and may work 60 hours per week to justify the salary.

What would be the effect if employers were required to offer benefits to all employees, as a linear function of the percentage of "full time" worked?
Except they are not talking about the rich, more the middle class.

Figures from the American Time Use Survey, released last year, show that Americans with a bachelor’s degree or above work two hours more each day than those without a high-school diploma. Other research shows that the share of college-educated American men regularly working more than 50 hours a week rose from 24% in 1979 to 28% in 2006, but fell for high-school dropouts.

Yes - the article is using the word 'rich' to mean 'wealthier than average/median' - which, for the moment at least, graduates are!