“There is no line in the sand that separates the normal work hours from personal time because of technology,” Espinal told Moneyish following the City Council hearing Thursday morning. “We live with an always-on mentality because we believe that that’s what’s expected from us from our job. That can lead to exploitation of workers. Technology has aggressively advanced over the past 15 years with email and smartphone, but regulations and laws haven’t caught up with it.”
I don’t even know what to think about that. I’m just not caught up enough with this kind of politics. You can already force salaried employees to work basically unlimited hours already right? So that seems like a bigger fish to fry than something specifically email related. But maybe it’s useful for individual cities like this to set precedents? France already has a law like this, so there is international precedent.
Fighting against the “always on” mentality seems like a good goal, but apparently it’s a tricky line to walk, as it can also cause harm of a certain type:
Not checking work emails after hours may sound like a welcome relief from the 24/7 work culture where managers expect their subordinates to be hooked up to their smartphone at all hours, but banning employees altogether from email during certain hours can backfire, new research suggests.
Anxiety-prone workers who aren’t allowed to access work email on weekends and after hours could experience a decline in their well-being, a recent study from the University of Sussex published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior found.
Some part of me thinks employees can take matters like this into their own hands and just not respond to emails (or communication of any kind) during agreed upon off-hours. But another part of me must admit that’s a bit naive, as many employers will take whatever they can legally get from workers and the only thing capable of stopping it is legislation.
For myself, I’m a little skeptical of “just hide it from myself” to solve addiction issues. I would have put the Oreos on high shelf and lost 50lbs a long time ago if that worked. But I think there is some evidence that it does work for some personalities.
It’s just some fancy front-end codin’ that literally hides the inbox part of your Gmail inbox for timed intervals.
I like how it doesn’t prevent you from sending email, just looking at your inbox. I too like thinking of these things as distinctly different and worthy of treating differently. I like the idea that hand-writing an outgoing email to someone is probably a lot bigger deal at pushing yourself forward in the world than the rat race of responding to email after email in your inbox.
Scott is right, it’s perfect because nobody knows what it means and nobody wants to sound dumb asking, so nobody does and we can all just move forward.
If you were forced to define “out of pocket”, it probably essentially mean “whatever I was just gone and not responding to stuff for a while but I literally don’t want to discuss why/what/where/when so let’s get on with it.”
It seems to me we really are in a email newsletter renaissance. Perhaps in the last three years I’ve seen loads of people start newsletters. Even just personal newsletters where the point is updates about their personal lives. Like in lieu of a personal blog. The most common reason I hear is that it feels more intimate.
As huge of a fan of email as I am, I’m still a bigger fan of blogging over email (the long-term capital of a URL is just… good). And especially because blog posts can become emails rather trivially.
I wonder if an extension to the personal newsletter trend is people using email literally as a social media site. A threaded email amongst friends is like a free little social network, isn’t it?