首頁>教育>

At some point after the war Europeans decided to take more time off(花更多時間), while Americans opted (or were persuaded) to keep their shoulders to the wheel for longer.A survey by Project Time Off found that the main reason why Americans are reluctant to(不情願) take all their vacation is fear of being replaceable(可替換的)。

在第二次世界大戰之後,當他們的歐羅巴同胞決定增加休假時間時候,美國工人的工時卻進一步增加了,當然,其中一些人出於主動,一些人是被迫的。 一項由“專案時間”所進行的調查研究發現,美國人對休假缺乏熱情的主要原因,可以歸咎於害怕自己可能隨時被他人取代。

Other factors are heavy workloads(工作量) and lack of cover(保證) from fellow(同事) employees. One useful feature of public holidays is that workers worry less about bunking off(逃跑) if everyone else does the same。

其他影響美國人休假積極性的因素,是出於缺乏來自同事的保證,對於公共假期而言,其中的一項關鍵的特徵是,如果每個都投身到假期之中,那麼工人們便不會為自身缺席工作,而感到憂慮。

Forgoing holiday time does not always please the boss.

當然,放棄休假的機會,並不總會取悅老闆

A study by the Harvard Business Review in 2016 found that those who took 11 or more days off a year。were almost twice as likely to get a raise or a bonus(獎金) as those who took ten days off or fewer (although the causation(因果關係) could be the other way around; star workers may feel they can afford to take a break).

Nor do extra hours automatically lead to higher productivity. An analysis of figures from the OECD(經濟合作與發展組織), a club of mostly rich countries, in 2013 found a negative correlation between GDP per hour and the number of hours worked(工作的) across member countries。

此外,即便人們在工作中投入更多的時間,生產率也不會因此有所提高,正如2013年,一份由經合組織(一個由大量發達國家所組成的俱樂部)所進行的一項研究發現,在成員國之間,工作小時數,與但小時內的生產總值之間,呈現出反比例的關係。

Again, the causation(因果關係) is unclear-workers in richer nations may feel they can take more time off. But there is plenty of other evidence. A study of munitions(軍需品) workers in the first world war found that their output per hour tended to decline once they spent over 50 hours a week toiling(辛苦工作)。

再者,舊有的因果關係也並非定式,在發達國家中,一些工人也許會感覺,自己將更多的時間用來休息。但是,證明工作時間與工作效率成反比例的證據十分充足,一份對於第一次世界大戰期間,生產軍需用品的工人的研究發現,一旦其美洲的工作時間超過50小時,他們但小時的產量就會下降。

The Institute for Employment(職業) Studies in Britain reviewed academic research on the subject and concluded that long hours working (more than 48 hours a week) was associated with (but was not proved to cause) various negative effects。such as decreased productivity, poor performance, health problems, and lower employee motivation. The danger is that long hours simply lead to wasted effort. C. Northcote Parkinson, a management theorist, wrote that work expands to fill the time available。

英國的職業研究所在評估了有關此專題的學術研究後,得出結論,每週超過48小時的長時間工作,與多種負面效應有關,但是,這一研究並未證明,長時間工作,就一定會導致相關負面效應。這些負面效應包括生產力下降,工作表現不佳,員工積極性降低,以及一系列的健康問題。而真正的危險在於,長時間的工作僅僅是在浪費員工的精力。正如管理學家斯科特帕金森寫道,延長工作時間,僅僅是在填補時間的空洞而已。

Every editor knows that many journalists only deliver their articles when the deadline(截止日期) is imminent(即將來臨). Workers may be staring at their computers, but how many have disappeared down(消失) the rabbit hole of Twitter spats。

The modern world is supposedly moving in a direction where routine tasks(日常任務) are automated(自動化的), leaving the more creative processes to the humans. And humans are undoubtedly(毋庸置疑地) more creative when they are not feeling tired or jaded(疲倦)。

因此,在一個更加現代化的世界中,越來越多單調冗長的日常工作,在未來都應朝著自動化的方向發展,1而人們需要將越來越多的精力,投入具有創造性的工作中。畢竟,當身心疲憊之時,也就是創造湮滅之際。

3
最新評論
  • 「完整」2022年中級註冊安全工程師《化工安全實務》真題解析
  • 教育部嚴管補習班後,新的“補課形式”又將興起,家長表示擔憂