So I was in a conference call this morning at 9am. Unfortunately I dozed off, and failed to answer a question that I could have answered on the call. Afterwards, I apologised to my boss, explaining that I was very tired, and that it wouldn’t happen again. His response?
“You’re going to have to learn to work smarter, not harder”
So I just needed to come here to vent
FUCK YOU!!!
This week I worked 124 hours. ONE FUCKING HUNDRED AND FUCKING TWENTY FUCKING FOUR FUCKING HOURS. There are only 168 in a whole week. And I have to travel 30 minutes each way.
I always work damn hard in my job. I probably average around 80 to 90 hours a week. I know this is an important project, but I am still only a human. Short of giving blood, my soul or my first born child I just don’t have anything else to offer.
Ah, one of the all time great Dilbertisms. I’ve always felt that this mantra was best embodied by the character of Wally in the strip. Wally does not work hard at all, but goes to great mental effort devising ways he can be perceived as a valuable employee without actually being a valuable employee. He receives the same (if not greater) rewards and accolades as Dilbert does, while doing only the smallest fraction as much work as Dilbert does. This, to me, is the very definition of “working smarter, not harder.”
I’m a banker. I work for the London branch of a US Investment Bank. Oh and I don’t get overtime. This week was pretty extreme, but I’d say once in 8 weeks is like that. I’m still trying to work out if he is oblivious or a wanker.
It sounds to me like your boss would prefer it if you worked less hard (i.e., fewer hours) but found ways to be more effective the hours you do work. I certainly can’t imagine that you’d be in top form after working hours like that for any length of time, no matter how dedicated, focused, and conscientious you are.
Thank you Docklands for helicoptering this key issue; we’ll task an enablement team yesterday! - they will touch base with you, please diary some quality time.
Sounds like you don’t have the bandwidth to accomodate the issues. At the end of the day, it’s the one who maximizes her efficiencies who creates the new paradigm and wins.
Unless a serious note is disallowed here: The stupid thing about companies and supervisors who expect people to work extra-long hours (instead of hiring more people) is that they actually get less done this way, and what’s done is more likely to be wrong.
As a salaried employee myself (no overtime pay, “professional day” = “however long it takes to get the work done”), I have no problem pulling the occasional long day. Emergencies do happen. At the same time, when I have to leave unexpectedly because of a family emergency, I expect to receive no guff for doing it. However: if this is chronic, it simply means the place is understaffed.
Of course, in many fields the job market is so poor that if you aren’t willing to work overtime there is somebody else available who will.
Not to throw a wet blanket on Docklands rant but he did choose a profession that is known for consistant 100+ hour work weeks. That would kind of be like me complaining (which I did ;)) about having to travel every week as a management consultant or a lawyer complaining about billable hours.
In this economy, there are probably a thousand MBAs and another thousand out of work Analysts waiting for Docklands to quit and his bank knows this.
IMHO, most of these types of jobs are a suckers bet. You take a bunch of college grads with Type-A personalities. Set unreasonable goals with lofty rewards and watch them burn themselves out trying to make Partner or MD by the time they are 35.
What does “PDB” mean?
Snappy Comebacks for when you’ve lined up a better job:
“Work Smarter? Is that why they ask me the questions and not you then? As for working hard: One of us has to work hard in the department, and on this project it sure as hell hasn’t been you.”
