Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChemicalWarfare | Hacker News Reader

for me personally the bigger issue is the actual 9-5ish work hours. I'm way more productive later in the day, so if the schedule would allow something like a Noon-4 pm/break/8 pm -midnight type breakdown I'm all for that. this is sometimes possible with telecommuting arrangements, whenever I'm able to do that I'm more productive, more rested and feel like my personal work/life balance is better.

View on HN

I was having a conversation with my boss at lunch today - and he made a joke how the difference between our respective sleep/activity schedules is basically the same as the difference between our schedules on the east coast of the USA and our team overseas (he's a morning person, I'm not and have never been).

I told him I'd never again work at a job that required me to be there at 9am, because I'm effectively useless before 11am, completely independent of how much sleep I've had the night before. The only plus side, I joked, was that even though I'd only gotten 4-6 productive hours of work done, no one batted an eye when I left at 5pm, since I'd been there since 9.

I used to be kind of the 'leader' in flex hours where I worked, and I worked a lot (too much I think).

  Then I got layed off.

  Remember, its not how many hours you work, its how many hours you work when the boss is there.

I more of a 6-3 kind of person. But that just strengthens the argument that one size does not fit all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com