1002
100%
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025
1002 points (100.0% liked)
People Twitter
8655 readers
720 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because it is much easier to make that sort of contract than measure some objective "work done" metric. Unless you're hoping to be signing piecework/work by tender contracts all the time.
My employer mandates 40h of work per week and a core working time where all employees are supposed to be available. No fixed hours required. I don't see how fixing hours is easier than that.
And ultimately, that is my point: Why set fixed times, if the time itself doesn't actually matter?
It can be that the employer just considers it easiest for them.
That's hardly a good reason to continue doing it. I consider it easiest to just let me work whenever I want to and stop worrying about how much.
If there's no big consequence to starting a few minutes later, Employers shouldn't be so anal about it. It's a waste of everyone's time and will probably cost more time and productivity than those few minutes I wasn't gonna be super productive anyway.
I mean for the employer it's a fine reason. If they didn't get their way with that then they'd probably have to figure out a different system. But right now most workers have set hours
And the whole thread is about workers not wanting it.
It's sorta tough shit as long as you are under such contract. Then again, breaking it is one way to get out of it