comment: >
  
  Jobs that can't be flexible should pay the most to accommodate for that, and the rest of the jobs should be open and flexed. The way things are now is fucked, out dated and wrong.
context: Disappointing news for control freaks who believe micromanaging is "leadership". >
  
  I see you have met my boss! >
  
  Mine too! >
  
  Middle management just flooded the office with a flop sweat >
  
  
  
  A new study on work-life balance says flexible schedules and shorter work weeks can lead to more productive, healthy and loyal workers.
  
  
  The report released Friday by the International Labour Organization says giving workers flexibility in terms of where and when they work can be win-win for both employees and businesses.
  
  
  The United Nations agency says flexible work schedules can improve workers’ job satisfaction, performance and commitment to an organization – reducing recruitment costs and increasing productivity.
  
  
  Meanwhile, the study found that employers who enforce strict work arrangements or schedules such as a 9-to-5 office workweek, could see productivity and job performance drop, and turnover and absenteeism increase.
  
  
  “Better work-life balance is associated with a multitude of benefits for employees,” the report said, noting that the benefits include improved psychological and physical health of employees, increased job satisfaction and greater feelings of job security.
  
  
  A survey by recruitment firm Robert Half conducted in late November asked nearly 800 LinkedIn users about what topped their work goals for new year.
  
  
  The No. 1 response was work-life balance, with 39 per cent of respondents saying it topped their work wish list, followed by 28 per cent who said remote work options were the most important. >
  
  Working five days a week means having only two days for other stuff, including resting. People have to make a tight schedule within those two days.
  Having worked five days/a week for ten years, the reason I can keep going is that I only work at the maximum concentration and effort no more than three hours a day. For the rest of the working hours, I am in energy-saving mode. >
  
  "The first 15min I just space out"
  "Space out?"
  "Yeah, I just stare at my screen, but it looks like I'm working..." >
  
  Wait... You mean every single job doesn't HAVE to be done exactly the same way everywhere? Mind. Blowing. >
  
  These studies hardly ever take into account that some jobs just can’t accommodate the flexible scheduling championed by the study.
  Always reminds me of somebody I heard talking about how much time they thought people should have off. They were really adamant about not overworking people and included not making people work hours that would disrupt their circadian rhythm for better sleep and everything which is admirable. But at the end they justified by saying what they thought people should be able to do with their time off. This person said they should be able to go out to eat in a nice restaurant with friends and family.
  Who would have served them in the restaurant though? According to them nobody should have to work that kind of shift, including the restaurant staff
  Want your father to have a doctor see him when they have a heart attack on Christmas? What about the fire department when your house is on fire during Thanksgiving? Of course for the jobs where it’s possible we should be flexible and reduce hours if possible, but headlines like this gloss over that and in my experience the articles do too.