Young Indians should work 70 hours a week, says billionaire tech founder
-
I donot agree, the 70 hour work week is the way of slavery and low self esteem. If so little is left of an employees time, where is the scope for self education, introspection, family life, illness and recovery. I know for a fact that his company Infosys is consistently one of the lowest paying organizations in the country. Even startups pay better. I know people who take a job there only for the tag and leave it in about a year. The offers that come to them after the stint are the ones that actually correspond to market reality. Then and only then, the pay actually corresponds to what an average engineering student earns as first choice. However, again, he has a point in that students who graduate from our lower and middle education tiers have abysmal skills. Skills that we would not even see in a 8th standard passout from a good Institute. The professional, communication, and attitude skills are so bad that they need to train for an additional 2 years to catch up. And this is pure adult learning. These employees are the ones who need 70 hr weeks to just catch up to the whole wide world. I've interviewed so many and found them to be so lacking in basic skills like connecting to a database and getting some data out of it. Designing an employee database and querying for some salary data. Nothing magic, just run of the mill humdrum CRUD stuff. And again, I bet he wouldn't have worked that long except for his first decade. Maybe not even that long. Pure BS and virtue signalling.
Paras Parmar
Paras Parmar wrote:
I've interviewed so many and found them to be so lacking in basic skills like connecting to a database and getting some data out of it. Designing an employee database and querying for some salary data. Nothing magic, just run of the mill humdrum CRUD stuff.
I would fail in that too, because I have used three or four times in my life, and that was during studies to pass the exam. But I am pretty sure that if I go to any industry production line in the world, I will be able to win some decimals if not several seconds in the process what at the end of the year is a huge performance boost. Or improve your quality vision systems, or... or... or... The right question is not if the candidate fail to answer a concrete question / topic or not, the right question is, is he willing to learn and to improve his skills? That's why when confronted with something I didn't know I have always answered: NOW, I can't do that. But if I get a chance and a couple of weeks, I will learn it.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
Does that include commuting? I consider it (part of) "work"; unproductive work .... which makes most people's days pretty long.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
(Working long != working hard) && (working long != working productively) No need to say more. Edit: Added the second term due to the answer below.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Does that include commuting? I consider it (part of) "work"; unproductive work .... which makes most people's days pretty long.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
Gerry Schmitz wrote:
Does that include commuting? I consider it (part of) "work"; unproductive work ....
When I have been abroad I have always started the timer leaving the hotel and stopped it when coming back to the reception. But I did specify what was conmuting and what was "factory" time in my reports. Both got billed (and payed).
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Amarnath S wrote:
Youngsters need to work hard to build the nation, since India is still termed as a "developing country".
So is the idea then that you'll eventually reach a point where an employer says "ok, we're developed enough now, you can ease off a bit and no longer have to work yourselves to death"? I'm in Canada. As far as I've been told, this is a developed country. If employers could get us to put in more hours, if it weren't for those pesky labor laws, most absolutely would put us through the ringer without hesitation. So don't think you'll be done when you're no longer "developing". I work to live. I don't live to work.
You might be wrong. I'm an employer and I'd rather have well rested and happy employees than overworked employees. I even prefer for them to have a four day work week and put in no more than the necessary eight hours a day, unless it's absolutely necessary. Work from home for at least half the time and flexible work hours is not a problem. More hours == more work is pretty outdated, and countries like Japan, where people generally make long hours, show the contrary. Of course, some of these things are not applicable for factory workers and other professions. Anyway, even for those professions, if I had a boss like that I'd be out as soon as I got a chance.
Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript
-
(Working long != working hard) && (working long != working productively) No need to say more. Edit: Added the second term due to the answer below.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Nelek wrote:
Woirking long != working hard.
Concisely stated! I will add "Nor working productively". Many moons ago the team I was on had a young guy who worked 70 hours a week, while everyone else worked 45-50. Management repeatedly praised him for his effort. The sad fact was that he couldn't get his work done in the same time as everyone else, and had to work ridiculous hours to keep up.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
"...if they want to see the country become a global economic powerhouse." He also expresses the goal of India expanding their global impact, but in neither case are we told why any of that should matter to the Indian workers. How will any of that help them? Perhaps he should start there instead of simply opining that the Indians aren't working hard enough.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
Most, many, some? Developers seem to generate the best solutions when they AREN'T at work. Walking the dog, or going for a bike ride, or pushing the kids on the swing and suddenly inspiration strikes. This doesn't seem to happen as much when you have a gun to your head to work insane hours to make your boss happy.
-
Nelek wrote:
Woirking long != working hard.
Concisely stated! I will add "Nor working productively". Many moons ago the team I was on had a young guy who worked 70 hours a week, while everyone else worked 45-50. Management repeatedly praised him for his effort. The sad fact was that he couldn't get his work done in the same time as everyone else, and had to work ridiculous hours to keep up.
BryanFazekas wrote:
I will add "Nor working productively".
Good point
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
You might be wrong. I'm an employer and I'd rather have well rested and happy employees than overworked employees. I even prefer for them to have a four day work week and put in no more than the necessary eight hours a day, unless it's absolutely necessary. Work from home for at least half the time and flexible work hours is not a problem. More hours == more work is pretty outdated, and countries like Japan, where people generally make long hours, show the contrary. Of course, some of these things are not applicable for factory workers and other professions. Anyway, even for those professions, if I had a boss like that I'd be out as soon as I got a chance.
Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
I guess he's not worried about productivity and quality. Long hours reduces productivity and quality. I've worked with so many people who work crazy long hours but don't produce anything or what they do produce is full of defects.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
Maybe this idiot should work 70 hours a week instead...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
I strongly agree with every one of your points. I think you replied to the wrong post. :-) If not, I'd be curious to understand what it is I've said you're disagreeing with.
I'm disagreeing with this part "If employers could get us to put in more hours, if it weren't for those pesky labor laws, most absolutely would put us through the ringer without hesitation." ;) I think more and more employers are well aware that employees have choices and if you're not a good employer you'll lose employees quickly and also that a happy employee is a good employee.
Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript
-
I'm disagreeing with this part "If employers could get us to put in more hours, if it weren't for those pesky labor laws, most absolutely would put us through the ringer without hesitation." ;) I think more and more employers are well aware that employees have choices and if you're not a good employer you'll lose employees quickly and also that a happy employee is a good employee.
Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript
OK, I'll grant you that. Most employers that people *like* to work for agree with you, they'd rather have happy employees even if it means they work fewer (but more productive) hours. But there are employers, throughout the entire world, who only look at the bottom line as it affects their own paycheck/bonus. And that, IMO, should be strongly discouraged.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
This mindset is not limited to Indian culture. I've seen it here in American culture before our work sector was inundated with cheap labor and lesser work-culture mores. This approach is not what made America's economy soar far above any other in history. The approach that has worked best in the history of the US, is this: - Prioritize working smart, not working hard. - A person working smart (and as hard as need be) will do more in 40 hours than a person working hard in 70 hours. - A balanced life - God, family, work - is what enables one to be highly productive for an entire career. - Some work does require long hours, even when working smart. Agriculture and law enforcement are just two examples. But it is the priority on working smart that increases productivity and makes the difference between success and failure. - Working smart involves solving problems without a recipe. Most anyone can follow what someone else has figured out and try to shoehorn it into a current problem or work challenge, but that is inefficient and gives poor to mediocre results. Working smart means creating your own solutions by applying reason, knowing what to glean (not use directly) from "recipe" solutions similar challenges, and delivering excellence. - Aim for excellence, not just enough to get by. In most cases, working smart in software development and support for 40 hours a week yields better and more profitiable results than 70 hours of working hard, applying someone else's recipe without understanding the consequences.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
So, the very rich founder of a software company, in a country where employers treat workers like slaves, thinks the serfs should work 70 hours/week. I suppose his megayacht is a slave galley too. He gets all nationalistic about this self-serving opinion, because if he didn't, it would be even more obviously self-serving. *I* think that if developers were paid for every hour they worked, you would hear this kind of opinion far less frequently. If they were paid time-and-a-half for overtime, you wouldn't hear it at all.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
Or put another way, if you want to be an "outlier", you need to put in 10,000 hours first. (1000 days?)
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
I'm disagreeing with this part "If employers could get us to put in more hours, if it weren't for those pesky labor laws, most absolutely would put us through the ringer without hesitation." ;) I think more and more employers are well aware that employees have choices and if you're not a good employer you'll lose employees quickly and also that a happy employee is a good employee.
Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript
Sander Rossel wrote:
I think more and more employers are well aware that employees have choices and if you're not a good employer you'll lose employees quickly
Not sure I agree with the phrasing of that. Is it possible that 10% used to understand that (as a significant factor) and 15% do now? Perhaps. But I haven't seen anything that suggests otherwise. I can remember reading decades ago that it was well understood that there was an actual cost when employees turn over. But I don't see that resulting in actual changes any more now than in the past. Look at the tech layoffs in the last 2 years which were the direct result of missteps by C level executives. Layoffs of course cause a huge hit on morale. Look at some of the more public strikes over the summer where the companies involved had had very profitable years yet their public viewpoints do not acknowledge that at all. Even in the tech industry companies (executives) still look at employees an interchangeable cogs. Outside the tech industry that is probably more prevalent. And probably a lot of that is intentional in that they just do not think about it. At one company they wanted to promote this to employees by retaining a company that determined that the total compensation that the company paid was 5% above average. So all employees, salaries and benefits. They needed to do this because they had just altered the way employees were paid and many were taking home less than they had been.
-
[Infosys’ billionaire founder says Indians need to work 70 hours a week to succeed | CNN Business](https://edition.cnn.com/india-infosys-founder-work-hours-success-intl-hnk/index.html)
Caveat Emptor. "Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
Hmmm, I think he's the father in law of the (current) British prime minister. I hope he doesn't start thinking this way. Edit: yup, that's him.
