Labor Day by the numbers: Americans can’t stop, won’t stop working

[GMDino]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/09/05/labor-day-numbers-americans-cant-stop-wont-stop-working/89768022/

Quote:Americans are taking less vacation and more work home. Some are even working this Labor Day.

The ignore-vacation trend has been more than 15 years in the making, Project Time Off reports. And, when workers do leave the office, they can’t unplug. Thirty-five percent of employed online adults say the Internet, email and cell phones have increased the amount of time they spend working, according to the Pew Research Center.

Americans...

Don’t use vacation days: 41% of Americans didn’t take a single vacation day in 2015, according to a Skift survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans didn’t use all of their vacation days in 2015, according to a recent Project Time Off study.

Work holidays: More than one-third of employers require employees to work on Thanksgiving, according to a 2015 Bloomberg BNA survey. Nearly two in five organizations (39%) will require some employees to work Christmas or New Year's,BNA reports. And, this weekend, 41% of employers will have some staff working on Labor Day.

Aren't being paid much more: Data from the Economic Policy Institute published last year shows while workers produce more, pay isn't increasing at the same rate. Middle class wages are stagnant and wages of young college grads have been declining since 200, the report says.

Can’t take paid family leave: Unlike nearly all countries around the world, the U.S. also offers no paid leave for parents, as visible in a map by World Policy Center. New Zealand, France, Spain and Russia are among countries to offer at least 14 weeks of maternity leave paid in full. The Family Medical Leave Act, gives 12 weeks job-protected unpaid leave, but many workers don't qualify for that.

Are worried about their future: About a quarter of Americans feel that corporate budget cuts/corporate restructuring will limit their job growth potential over the next five years, according to a Labor Day Job Growth Survey published this year.

Aren’t the only ones: Despite American’s worth ethic, the USA isn’t the most overworked country. Turkey tops that list, with Mexico not far behind, according to the Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development. The U.S. (where workers average about 34.4 hours per week) doesn't even make the top five. In 2014, the U.S. came in at No. 16.

Working more, making less money and more worried about losing our jobs and our ability to take care of ourselves in the future.

The American Dream is a nightmare.

Happy Labor Day.

[Rotobeast]

I'm taking the hit, to balance this out, and working as little as possible.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Belsnickel]

I will use all of the days that I have accrued this year, but only because I hit the max last year and because I donated to some leave sharing requests.

I'm trying to be better at this, but it's tough. Also, I am typing this while sitting in my office. Happy Labor Day!

[*bfine32*]

Looks like it's time to make America Great Again.

I don't use all my vacation days each year, but it's more of a safety net thing. I can roll them over to a certain point until we get what we call "use or loose". At that point I'll take the required or donate a few hours to someone in need.

[6andcounting]

Not trying to discredit the post or the stats, but doesn't the last point contradict all the other points? Everything sounded good and made sense until that.

[basballguy]

These polls are always skewed to meet an agenda.

41% of americans didn't take a single vacation day? I'm willing to bet it's because a large chunk of those people didn't actually have paid vacation to use.

1/3 open on thanksgiving....considering how many people like to shop on/after thanksgiving, not surprising.

US averages 34.8 hours/week.....I'm not doing something right...I wish that was all i worked...but ya to someone elses point, this clashes with the first point

[McC]

I don't really see the downside to people working hard.

[Belsnickel]

(09-06-2016, 10:00 AM)McC Wrote: I don't really see the downside to people working hard.

It's not that people are necessarily working hard, it's that they are working long hours. In some countries the workers are more productive while working fewer hours per week. There can be arguments made that striving for a better work/life balance can increase productivity even with less time in the office.

[McC]

(09-06-2016, 10:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: It's not that people are necessarily working hard, it's that they are working long hours. In some countries the workers are more productive while working fewer hours per week. There can be arguments made that striving for a better work/life balance can increase productivity even with less time in the office.

It's kind of an individual choice, isn't it? 

And most of those "in other countries" arguments don't really apply here.

If being at the office is someone's bliss, so be it.  Lots of type A personalities love nothing more than working. 

[Belsnickel]

(09-06-2016, 10:37 AM)McC Wrote: It's kind of an individual choice, isn't it? 

And most of those "in other countries" arguments don't really apply here.

If being at the office is someone's bliss, so be it.  Lots of type A personalities love nothing more than working. 

It's a matter of what the expectation is. If someone wants to spend all their time in the office, so be it. But it shouldn't be something we expect of people. The culture in a lot of workplaces here is that is the expectation.

[fredtoast]

Lots of spin in both directions.  

Hear is my take on the numbers.  It is not just about the current numbers.  It is the trends.  

Overall worldwide wealth is increasing.  Because of increases in technology and population the the world is producing more and more wealth each year.  If we continue along the current trends the middle class will disappear and the United States will be reduced to a plutocracy where a very small percentage control all the wealth and the current middle class will be consumed back into the lower class.

I don't want the United States to end up like that. The idea that the the middle class should work harder for less when overall wealth is growing is heading down a dangerous path.

The top 1% are not making millions.  About $400K a year gets you into the top 1%.  But they control one-fifth of the total adjusted gross income of the U.S.  Some of them will cry about paying more than their "fair share", but they define "fair share" as taxing the poorest of the poor at the same rate as people making almost half a million a year.

The wealthy should be willing to pay a little more in order to live in a safe healthy country.  And they are not going to leave just based on cost of living.  The rich live where they enjoy living.  If cost of living determined where the wealthy lived then I would be surrounded by millionaires here in eats Tennessee.  Rich Americans don't want to move away to other countries.

The problem is that so many people people think that living in government housing on food stamps and a couple of hundred dollars a month is so awesome that no one in that position ever wants to better himself.  The truth is that it sucks to be poor, and very few people start out satisfied to live their entire life in poverty.  

I don't deny that there is a certain percentage of shifty, criminal, stupid, and just plain lazy people who settle into that lifestyle.  I have dealt with that type in my job for many years, and I even have some family members that could be poster material for lazy white trash.  But punishing those people more does not create jobs or raise the quality of the country.  We need to invest the government money into programs to help the lower and middle class instead of just giving the poorest of the poor more cash.



Uh, what was the original point again?

Oh yeah.  People should not have to work harder for less when the overall wealth is growing.  Tax the rich a little more and spend the money better.  

"America.  Not Bad, But Trending That Way!"

[JustWinBaby]

(09-06-2016, 09:48 AM)basballguy Wrote: 41% of americans didn't take a single vacation day?  I'm willing to bet it's because a large chunk of those people didn't actually have paid vacation to use.  

That, and I think something like 35% of the workforce is now contract or self-employed.  There's no paid vacation for that, generally.

And, like you said, all the part-timers probably don't have paid vacation.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-06-2016, 05:22 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: That, and I think something like 35% of the workforce is now contract or self-employed.  There's no paid vacation for that, generally.

And, like you said, all the part-timers probably don't have paid vacation.

Would a company save the money spent on benefits (such as paid leave) by hiring two part time employees who typically don't receive benefits (such as paid leave) compared to one full time employee who does receive benefits?  That is if the full time position is with a company that even provides benefits and not one of these shitty jobs without benefits meant to motivate the individual's self improvement so they don't need to work one of those shitty jobs in the future?

[JustWinBaby]

(09-07-2016, 01:07 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Would a company save the money spent on benefits (such as paid leave) by hiring two part time employees who typically don't receive benefits (such as paid leave) compared to one full time employee who does receive benefits? 

Normally, yes.  In practice it is tough to split jobs like that, and find two people equally capable of doing the work.  Inefficiencies and other issues probably end-up costing more in the long-run.  

Obviously companies do it, I just don't think it happens a lot.  It's really only feasible for adding staff in peak volume periods, places like call centers and non-union warehousing.  You're probably not going to take a full-time accounting job and make it two part-timers.

It could probably be done more, but usually more trouble than it's worth.  The far more prevalent trend is contract employees, which usually receive no benefits.  Some people actually prefer that, because they normally get a little higher base (take home pay) and already receive benefits from a spouse, and there can be additional tax benefits, as well.