Workaholism: Hazards and Benefits

One of the most obvious effects of the end of the "job for life" of the company is that if we want to keep our work we have to do our service program for the employer. For many, this is interpreted as a long hard hours, and the "stay at work" Culture is often the result. But is this necessary? Did someone actually loses his job by running at home on a normal time? People lose their jobs, either because they are not good (also known as fired), or because the company is not good, or is the restructuring in a certain way (also known as redundant) .

Indeed, for many employers, work late is not a sign of loyalty, it is a sign of incompetence. If you are working in a normal working day you are either poorly organized or have not learned to say "no" to an on-call for employers. And if you have to work long hours in a regelmaigen base They are probably less and less productive over time, because you want and burn your morale is sinking. If this is the case, why we think that employers are trying to deny us the right balance in our work and lives?

First of all let's examine the concept itself. I have never liked the phrase "work-life balance". He suggests that the work is an activity and life is a separate conflict. The truth is that the work is a part of our life, and it competes for our time against the other activities in our lives that we want to participate. I prefer to use the simple term "life balance" or "life-mix .

The key factor in the life balance is" time "and critical, the work is perhaps the only use of our time, which we do not have, control. If we choose when and for how long we work, the number of hours we do not allocate a conflict. The recent dispute between BA and employees of the airline at Heathrow was not some Luddite response to new technologies, was born from the fact that this particular technology is a mechanism to enable the administration to a fine BA degree, if the employees come in the In accordance with the work of passengers. BA has of course the right to determine what hour it particularly for the employment of staff, but the fact remains that the mechanism shifts by the time sovereignty employees, the employer.

For executives, the situation is somewhat different. While there are still moments when we need it just in the office, a task as for the preparation of a meeting ( "but I would bet that most of these cases can be extinguished with better organization and planning), employees have more Autonomy as a worker in relation to the hours at work. contracts, written and oral, tend to be on the basis that the work expected of us, but the how and when (within an agreed time frame) is up to us. If you are good and we can in a six-hour day, which I doubt, that you are still fired, but not for others (although it is probable that more work) .

My contention Also, that people involved in the "stay at work" culture choose to do so. Thatcher's fine by me. It seems that in our enlightened society late work is a "bad thing." As a rich nation Let us spending less time at work and more time spirit expand to meet, what with our time, the expenditure with our friends and family, or the exercise. But for many people, work is the perception and promoting activity in their lives. Why should it be the case that there is anything wrong with working addiction? Is it wrong that these people should work 80 hours or more per week?

The problem is that the time sovereignty of the employees will gradually eroded, mainly through the introduction of family-friendly measures. Far from the flexibility of the workers that they captivate the personnel policy for the organization through the creation of such an infrastructure, the support to leave, not only would the task difficult enough to adapt to the new employers, but also the need to re-enter all the other arrangements that have been the recent initiative care of.

A I heard coming from Asda. IVF treatment for women (5 days per year) and their partners (11 /2 days) The latest great idea. Do not get me wrong, I am in favour of IVF for those who want it, and welcome the idea that employers should allow their employees to take time out for them, just as with all other medical matter. My point is that such initiatives are not as a meaningful step towards improving the life balance of employees improved because life balance requires a fundamental review of how we spend our lives, we can not know whether you have a few hours off every few weeks for medical treatment. The truth is that initiatives such as this and flexible working hours, child care and feathers days is a reaction to the difficulties in attracting and retaining staff.

Staff data retention is much more a problem with graeren company, which is the reason why they are before the game. by upping the ante these employers will reach the short to medium term benefits that will be lost if the rest of the industry is finally out what they must do to attract and retain staff. What's more, the advantage is seldom, if ever, with the employees. instead to fulfill the expectations and show commitment increases, which usually with such conditions are attached, such as "golden handcuffs", long notice periods, and the provision of equipment for the home-work, which at once allows flexibility for workers and ties for even more hours at the company - they never escape work.

When the playing field was leveled it will simply be that employers will remove have an argument or reason for us not to dedicate our lives to them. we move away from us not to, a graere control over our lives working, and the reason is that we encourage employers to take away the sovereignty of our time . If I do not have a problem, over the removal of children from kindergarten because the nursery is on the first floor, then the company gets from that time, and I still can not decide, as I organize my life, or my children.

So let's look at our employer to us with life balance - they are only working with our lives. It is up to us to take control of our time and our satisfaction with the work. We are not exhausted and de-motivated by trying to strike a balance between our busy lives, we are exhausted and de-motivated because we did not come from the performance of our lives. Work should encourage, that give meaning and inspiration. It is up to us to decide to what extent we should pursue in order to achieve those objectives.

The specific balance between work, family, hobbies, health, relaxation and whatever else might be on the menu of your personal use time is entirely up to you . Only you know how much of each you need in a given period of time. It is my conviction that in the last few years, the pressure to "succeed" (a term that now has an almost exclusive reference to the professional status or wealth) We were encouraged to spend more time at work than our natural balance would recommend.

Yet are simply excuses. we can our lifestyle change, if we want, it is in our control, unless we are prepared to reduce our physical desires and a good long look at what we do for employment. is my contention that the vast majority of people have not chosen, but their current career hineingefallen they more or less by Serendipity. to the question of whether they really "love" their jobs, and why She chose her career most perplexingly, while many professionals (lawyers, doctors, tax consultants, etc.) refer to pressure from the family to secure their future in a reasonable occupation.

The employees, not know how to live in balance an optimally meet, or fear for the fact that the "balance" will not necessarily agree with the balance of his wife wants him (I have deliberately hinted men in this scenario, as I believe we are the ones who prefer to immerse ourselves in work as a participation in our feelings and relationships) is the one with a real problem address.

Moving, unfortunately, is a frightening alternative. "Better the devil you know" is the usual response. "I can not be happy But I am a good payment "does not sound like a good balance for me. course, we are all more for the life, as long as it does not mean that a salary trade-off. It is a shame that so many people either feel they can not afford to buy at any time away from work, or otherwise in the "stay at work" culture that keeps them in office until only a taxi get them home, because they believe that Somehow, that the peg will be less slippery after 5.30 pm. With this attitude is certainly regrettable, followed at some time or other.

The argument I am presenting is not that flexible working times and similar initiatives are wrong. am I arguing that the individual that you and I, not our employers, need to find out what we really want, and for our work to increase as the compliance and the rest of our life. by maximizing the performance we reduce our stress and this is the key to what we are looking for when we are working for a better life balance. How we manage the children to find the dentist or time to mow on the weekend to follow decisions as easy, if our priorities are in place.

(c) Nick Gendler, 2003

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Nick_Gendler