Reseach Workoholics Essay

Is a 40-hour work week too much? Should there be a mandatory cap on the number of hours a person can work? Should there be changes in employment laws to give Americans more relaxation time? A workaholic definition is a noun a person who compulsively works hard and long hours. But the definition in a workaholics eyes is a person who â€Å"values work over any other activity†, according to careercast.com. Merriam-webster.com says it’s a â€Å"compulsive worker†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ (Productivity) The reasons for someone to become a workaholic are some people don’t feel their lives are fulfilled unless they’re engaged in constructive activities. The more they work, the happier they are. It’s addictive. Where in the world can they be productive and reap the rewards of their labor but at their job? Workaholics can’t be idle. They need to be constantly working. Proving their value Children who were raised in dysfunctional families, or by perfectionist parents, and were made to feel like their best was never good enough can grow up to be workaholics. Spending their adult lives immersed in their work is a way for them to constantly prove themselves and their worth. Escaping problems and negative feelings another reason why people become workaholics is because they lack a sense of control in their lives. They have problems at home they can’t fix, or they don’t want to deal with, for example. Being at work all the time allows them to escape painful, negative feelings. It also gives them a sense of control they can’t find otherwise. Adrenaline rush working non-stop provides an adrenaline rush to some people. Being extremely busy, rushing to meet unrealistic goals, and pushing themselves beyond their limits gives them that intense feeling they crave. That same adrenaline rush- the increased heart rate, the burst of energy, the heightening of their senses- comes from roller coaster rides and other thrilling activities. In 1965, a U.S. Senate subcommittee predicted that as a result of increasing labor productivity from automation and â€Å"cybernation† in other words, the computer revolution. Americans would be working only about 20 hours a week by the year 2000, while taking seven weeks or more of vacation a year. By the mid-1970s, and especially after 1980, median wages weren’t keeping pace with increases in our capacity to produce. But flattening incomes didn’t derail the consumption train. Americans continued to buy more, in part by going deeper into debt, by having more members of the family enter the workforce and by working additional overtime. By the boom times of the late 1990s, Americans worked more than the notoriously workaholic Japanese. To answer the question of limiting the number of hours you can work I think we would have a happier and healthier society if we worked a little less. As of right now, some jobs require a lot of time and energy. Legalizing mandating the number of hours worked is an interesting idea. It would see a drop in stress levels, more family time and participation and healthier workers. This probably wouldn’t make too many people happy at first, though, and it would take some getting used to. It is a way to raise healthier families and having less levels of stress that are exhibited in really tough jobs, like ER doctors and nurses, and other highly stressful occupations. American work-life balance according to the Center for American Progress on the topic of work and family life balance, â€Å"in 1960, only 20 percent of mothers worked. Today, 70 percent of American children live in households where all adults are employed.† I don’t care who stays home and who works in terms of gender (work opportunity equality for all – it’s a family choice). Either way, when all adults are working (single or with a partner), that’s a huge hit to the American family and free-time in the American household. The U.S. is the ONLY country in the Americas without a national paid parental leave benefit. The average is over 12 weeks of paid leave anywhere other than Europe and over 20 weeks in Europe. Zero industrialized nations are without a mandatory option for new parents to take parental leave. That is, except for the United States. Let’s say someone make $60k/year. Excluding benefits, employee taxes, etc., let’s consider this equivalent to $30/hour. ($30/hour x 40 hours x 50 weeks = $60k). Now they want to figure out the hourly number that he/she use to decide if it’s worth it to do something. For example, if he/she owe a fine on something he/she don’t think they should owe, but it’s only a $5 fine, it’s not worth spending an hour ($30) to contest it. BUT, it’s not clear to me if he/she should use $30/hour for this number, because I’m only working 8 hours/day. Like, if someone is willing to pay me for 40 hours/week at $30/hour, presumably he/she could get one or two more such jobs. Or should she/he divide that by 3 to get $10/hour because really for every 24 hours, they’re only â€Å"able† to earn $30/hour for a third of them? Because some of these activities he/she would be doing in my off-hours (e.g., they’d have to dispute that fine after work). Or is it something in between?