Fiona @ lovefibre just forwarded me a link to a petition about retained firefighters, who evidently may be at risk as the right to opt out of European working time directive is rescinded. Checking through to the Hansard record, it seems this is really a precautionary debate as the crunch is not until 2012.
However, I was wondering how that was going to impact UK academia if, in 2012, the 48 hour maximum cuts in.
It may make no difference if academics are not required to work more than 48 hours, just decide to do so voluntarily. However, this presumably has all sorts of insurance ramifications – if we do a reference or paper outside the ‘official hours’ would we be covered by the University’s professional indemnity. I guess also, in considering promotions and appointments, we would have to ‘downgrade’ someone’s publications etc. to only include those that were done during paid working hours otherwise we would effectively be making the extra hours a requirement (as we currently do).
The university system has become totally dependent on these extra hours. In a survey in the early 1990s the average hours worked were over 55 per week, and in the 15 years since then this has gone up substantially. I would guess now the average is well over 60, with many academics getting close to double the 48 hour maximum. I recall one colleague, who had recently had a baby, mentioning how he had cut back on work; now he stops work at 5pm … and doesn’t start again until 7:30pm, his ‘cut back’ week was still way in excess of 60 hours even with a young baby1. Worryingly this has spread beyond the academics and departmental administrators are often at their desks at 7 or 8 o’clock in the evening, taking piles of work home and answering email through the weekend. While I admire and appreciate their devotion, one has to wonder at the impact on their personal lives.
So, at a human level, enforcing limited working hours would be no bad thing; certainly many companies force this, forbidding work out of office hours. However, practically speaking, if the working time directive does become compulsory in 2012, I cannot imagine how the University system could continue to function.
And … if you are planning to do a 3 year course, start now; who knows what things will be like after 3 years!
- Yea, and I know I can’t talk, as an inveterate workaholic I ‘cut back’ from a high of averaging 95 hours a few years ago and now try to keep around 80 max. I was however very fortunate in that I was doing a PhD and then personal fellowships when our children were small, so was able to spend time with them and only later got mired in the academic quicksands.[back]
Well, we could start by making all meetings stand-up meetings and with a strict time limit of 30 minutes.
Then we could establish reasonable expectations of what’s expected for publications (say 2 papers per year, on average) and emphasise that it’s quality rather than quantity that’s important. If we could get a 50% reduction in publications that would be great (so long as it was the right 50%).
Many (at one time most, I’m not so sure now) academics spend far too much time preparing teaching material rather than reusing material. There’s some scope for saving time here.
Less publications would also mean less reviewing 🙂
Excellent comments by Ian and Alan. With the current system, quality (of papers and life) is just diluting. The big number of publications just gives us extra work: not just reviewing but reading what others have being writing (in the search of what possibly may take us to some interesting work). We are less productive and lying to ourselves, a shame in fact.