How Much Of Your Workday Do You Actually Spend Working?

Didn't we just have a poll like this?

That was a thread about actual working hours, IIRC.

This is a thread about the usage of the hours that people do work.

xthread!

Let's work on this:

Imagine.workplaces
not (wanting people) not (to do things) that aren't (work).

Two nots = AND: so it becomes

Imagine.workplaces not (wanting people) (to do things) that are (work).

Yes, but it's a triple negative which makes it a negative again.

I think? At least that's the way it works in maths.

minus and minus is a plus, but then another minus makes it a minus again.

I mean, "aren't" is a contraction of "are not".

Anyway, to get back to the original topic, of the stupid, counter-productive things that my workplace is doing to "boost productivity" they've not just cracked down on the interweb. Also, when they moved offices they broke up several established groups of desks of people who worked together, who used to sit together.

And now we are all grouped rather arbitrarily according to line manager, as opposed to what we do. Now, I swear, this was done to prevent people from chattering over their desks while they work.

It hasn't boosted productivity at all. What has happened is that these friend groups of colleagues who used to chat over their computers between tasks now clock off and go to the pub to chatter. So they take longer lunches, and leave earlier. The cumulative effect is that the office is a less pleasant environment, so they spend less time there. I would bet that this negatively affects productivity in the medium term, though obviously it would be hard to find any kind of statistics I could use to measure this.

It also decreases office communication, which is a whole nother kettle of smelly fish.

It's up to you whether you want to include sitting in meetings - I probably wouldn't

I'm curious about the ambiguity that's been placed on this. Lots of meetings I go to are very productive and are definitely work. The ones that aren't fall into the whole Business Management/Reporting/Business Improvement axis and definitely aren't "productive and doing your job" but are absolutely part of what you're expected to do and aren't monging on the interwebs or texting your mates. This axis isn't exclusively about meetings though (see also creating presentations, reading papers, moving desks, team building, staff surveys etc).

Depends on the meeting. Too many meetings that I go to are meetings about having meetings.

Usually they'll have a big meeting to decide what a certain team or department wants in reporting. I don't really understand what I'm even doing at these meetings, they're so unproductive for me, and a waste of time I could be actually getting something done. Honestly, they should have the meeting with the projects manager (this is her job, and why she's my line manager) first, and bring me in on a one-to-one with the person who actually needs it when they actually have some clue of what they want or need.

But this is the way that my role works. Other jobs may vary. I'm sure some people have very productive meetings. My job doesn't work that way.

I usually call and run all meetings I attend so they are productive (for me anyway).

Yes I do think restricting things like net access sucks. I would like to work for a place that respects the intelligence and work ethic of its employees (I have similar views on pee tests). But the fact is it's their company and it is not an unreasonable policy. People wasted time long before the 'net and will surely find ways to do so again. If the company wants to restrict your usage, well go find a workplace that doesn't.

With regards to other things like restricting phone calls, chatting, etc., I don't know. I've always (with the exception of one job where there was literally no such thing as time to do things other than your job - not even eating lunch) worked in internet positions so pretty much every single thing we do is online (little phone, little F2F, etc)

My job is too variable. Many days it's less than 1 hour; the last week it's been 10+ every day.

It would also help to state what your allotted work time is, and what your actual working hours - i.e. being present in the office - are

It's very dependent on the prevailing work culture. In previous jobs it was usually 8.45am to 6pm. Now it's 9.15am to around 5.45pm - and I'm intrigued by a number of 'special cases' where people who are full-time habitually come in late and leave early (like 10.30am - 4.00pm).

I currently work in a public sector environment where there's a strong taboo about challenging - or even commenting on- anyone's work hours or productivity. I don't really understand the reasoning behind this.

I'm lucky in my job b/c I can come and go as I please. My boss says as long as he gets no complaints about me, he's happy. I rarely stay past 4:30 to avoid the shitty commute but am usually here by 7:30. Sometimes, when needed I work at home too.

My job is too variable. Many days it's less than 1 hour; the last week it's been 10+ every day.

Actually, this is pretty true of my job.

During monthend it can be 10 or 12 hours straight with about 5 minutes worth of "HALP!" on the internet. Just before monthend, I can have only 2 hours of work to stretch out to all day. I'm trying to figure out what my average is, and not be distracted by recent events in this office putting a negative view on the whole thing. I'm *supposed* to have flexi-time. I insisted it got written in my contract for precisely these reasons. Corporate environments change, new management comes in. You want it in writing.

u know, i have one of those seasonal jobs. summer is like molasses. come september, not so much.

I run my parents' shop. Lately I have been too tired to do much, but I still work. It's very flexible, as I can set my own pace more or less. But it also depends on the amount of clients coming in. Another factor is Ophelia: if she's here - she stays with us about 4 days in the week - I get done a lot less.

Yes, I try not to calculate the amount of hours. *tralalala*

ugh that's like my dream. my parents keep telling me to look into renting space in Brooklyn to open up a book shop. THAT would be heaven.

It work be interesting if people actually said what they do for a living, for people who may not know, ie me.

I'm an estimator for a large construction company in the UK (one of the biggest). My working hours are 8.30 to 4.30, but it's been so quiet lately I've probably worked for about 2 hours each day for the last week or so. But a lot of work has just come in so hopefully that'll change.

I do web development (programming, design, project mgmt) for one of the largest universities in the US.

about 42 minutes per day on average

You work too hard.

ugh that's like my dream. my parents keep telling me to look into renting space in Brooklyn to open up a book shop. THAT would be heaven.

Running a shop doesn't seem hard, but it really is. One thing: an extreme amount of stress and no constant stream of money. The good/bad thing about it: you can set your own hours and amount of work you do. But that is also teh crap thing about it: you have to be disciplined as noone is looking over your shoulder.

re grammatical pedantry, I meant it to be a triple negative, and I was being ever-so-slightly flippant. In context for anyone who doesn't give a flying one about stuff on the watercooler thread (from whence that came), all I meant that it is not unreasonable for employers to dictate what you can and can't do in the time for which they are paying you.

Sitting in meetings counts, of course it does. They're work! They're paying you to sit there, whether you actually want to or not. To give another example, I wouldn't want to count all the time I spend sitting in my car getting from A to B and back again via C as work, because I am generally listening to the radio, fuming at other drivers, hating on traffic jams and not actually doing anything productive, but since client meetings are an important part of my job, the travelling to and from them is a byproduct of that and therefore has to count as part of my duties, even though I'm not actually "working" as I'm doing them.

surmounter, if you open a bookshop can i plz come work for you??

i spend as little time as possible working. which at the shoe store means i do very little - probably about 2 hours out of 8. but at the restaurant i work my ass off because i have no choice - so 4 out of 4 hours (or however long the shift is).

today i am working in veryproductivespurts then a bit of spazzing out trying to do 50 things at once then actually focussing again

this is a spazzbit

actual hours are 10-7 with a 1hr lunch. i'm usually in by 9, almost always by 9.30, by sometimes 8.30 (though i then spend 15 minutes making coffee and something for breakfast), i very rarely leave before 8, and most days i eat lunch at my desk. usually i'm here until about 8.30, or whenever it's time to leave to go to the gig. the latest i've been here until is 2.15am, i have pulled a few midnights and a couple of 1ams. also sometimes i'm in at weekends cos it's quiet and good for sorting stuff out. if i'm online somewhere else i'll usually check my work mail and answer anything that needs answering. i spend nearly all of my time at work actually working, but working genuinely includes checking out bands on myspazz etc. i probably dick around on the internet/check work mail for up to an hour a day, including while eating lunch and breakfast. also i guess you can count work gigs as working, so maybe a few evenings a week... i dunno, it's hard to quantify...

Emsk, the difference is, you actually *like* yr job, and would probably do it even if they didn't pay you. ;-P

That was a thread about actual working hours, IIRC.

This is a thread about the usage of the hours that people do work.

no, it wasn't, it was the exact same topic as this. my answer has changed since so it's ok i think! i'm really going out of my way to do as little work as humanly possible at this point here.

OK, I don't actually have an encyclopaedic memory for every thread that has ever been on ILX. To be honest, day to day I remember about 10% of what actually happens here. But anyway...

The reason I actually asked the question was because I felt that internet usage was being unfairly targeted in my particular office, and singled out for restrictions. (Probably because it's one of the few things they can actually control or restrict.)

This prompted a discussion in my workplace last night, and then on the 'Cooler about whether or not time spent faffing on the internet is really that much more of a concern than spent otherwise faffing. Maybe it's easier to faff online because you can make it look like you're working. Maybe it's a generational thing, that one of my colleagues sees nothing wrong with the occasional personal phone call or email at work, but objects to the same activity if it takes place on a social networking site.

I suppose it's a multi-faceted question, really. How much do people actually *work* as opposed to faffing. And is there a difference in quality in faffage on old media or new media?

today i am leaving at SEVEN amazing!

on a normal day when i'm not functioning like a squirrel with adhd, i'll do a chunk of work, then when it's done refresh new answers and see if anything looks interesting. my gmail stays open all day and if i notice the new messages count has gone up i'll look to see what it is and open it right away if it looks urgent/interesting, or leave it until lunch/hometime/waiting for work email to sort if not

I don't think it was so much a conversation on the watercooler as Kate calling me a troll, but whatever.

Just give it a rest, OK, Ailsa?

Um, you're the one that called me a troll then started a whole other thread to discuss it since it wasn't actually developing into a conversation. Just sayin', as it were. (seriously, I'm putting this in context for people who don't know the circumstances which brought this about, since there's been querying as to why this is worth a whole new thread)

I still stand by my position that working for other people means doing what other people say. And, for what it's worth, I've jacked in loads of jobs when I'm not happy with the conditions I'm put under. But not one of these has been because my employers have stopped me trying to carry on my out-of-work life on their time.

Aren't trolls usually making attacks merely to provoke?

I agree with Alisa. It might suck but it's certainly within the right of the employer to limit whatever non-work activities they seem fit. Nobody's going to support you going on strike b/c you've been blocked from MySpace.

Disagreeing with Kate on "her" thread = provoking, it seems. but this is retreading boring old ground. Let's not go there, eh?

(for reference, people might want to read the Watercooler, particularly the bit where Kate was told, twice, by her bosses not to dick around on the internet. It starts here, UK Watercooler 27: Let's Get Cool In Der Pool, Let's Get HOTT In Zee Dancing Spot!!! and continues, with some bollocks about alcoholic Europeans in the middle of it)

Um, I am teh drunk, btw. Due, as it happens, to being fucked off with work. Still, at least I'm letting off steam at home.

hi. I work 8-5 and do around 6 hrs of productive work.

hey, I'm shite at posting links! Perhaps I should waste more of my working day on ILX.

That link reminds me why cooler = rubbish.

Disagreeing with Kate on "her" thread = provoking, it seems

Well, taking into accounts people's personality is also a wise thing. When you know how people will react, should you post it or not? You have made clear how you think about bosses setting rules re internet surfing. And before you say, you have a skewed vision of how it went, YES I KNOW but STUFF IT cause I like Kate.

Anyway, I'm postponing work cause my friend emailed me to ask for some changes on his site yet again. *ARGH* :-)

*settles down with massive tub of popcorn*

Is that salty or toffee?

salty!

When you know how people will react, should you post it or not?

Just because someone else is irrational doesn't mean you should self-censor. (See my Noize board banning)

I got pulled up by the boss today for having a crowd around my desk watching the Champions League draw on the UEFA web site. I took it on the chin as I really have no right to be doing that. He accepts that I will use the Internet for personal use from time to time and I accept that now and again I'll get my arse kicked for taking liberties with it. They pay the wages so I have to accept it.

My guy works at D3ll and they regularly have off worksite days which usually involve things like bowling and lunch. Today they've rented out a theater to watch the simpsons movie. But one of his co-workers is on vacation and he's so slammed with both of their workload, he can't go.

I feel very bad for him. Yet also envy the ways D3ll makes up for blocking nearly every web site ever.

nath, I'm reiterating my viewpoint on this on here because Kate can't go batshit on me here (well, she can, but it'll still hold no truck with me and she might find a lower proportion of people here willing to defend her) which is why I'm quite happy to reiterate my general viewpoint here where it can be taken for what it is rather than Kate apologists taking anything i say vs kate's viewpoint as a personal attack on Kate. Ms M OTM. ( I think Kate's "give it a rest" post shows who's the one taking it personally, btw)

hold teh popcorn emsk, I'm not making this a fight, even if other peopel are determined to.

ps sorry kate for talking about you like you aren't there but you must get what this depersonalisation shit is like sometimes. also, as always, I can offer the "i am pissed again" excuse.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

I like these poll bumps. Also this seems to match up to the previous poll. I wonder what the national average is.