748
Infosys co-founder once again calls for longer than 70-hour weeks - and no, he's not joking
(www.techradar.com)
this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2025
748 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
77196 readers
2574 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't understand why these assholes insist on people working more hours. What's the difference to them between 1 person working 70 hours a week or 2 people working a combined total of 70 hours if they're both paid the same hourly rate?
That's the fun part: you only have to pay them for 40 hours!
You just aren't thinking like a billionaire, man. What you do is get the two people anyway, and still force the 70 hour work week.
Your job is not to find a reasonable steady state of operation. Your job is to exploit the resources before you (even the ones with emotions and families) to extract value for the shareholders in the most efficient way possible, before somebody even more evil and clever than you figures out a better way and we direct future fresh meat to his meat grinder instead of yours.
Not only is it your job, you're legally required to, and your shareholders can sue you if you don't as per Ford v Dodge
He gets less profit this way
Benefits can be expensive, and they only pay you for the 40 hours because it's a salaried rather than hourly position. They just want free labor at the expense of the employees' sanity.
Overworked peasants have neither the time nor the energy to revolt.
Insurance, benefits and labor expenses. Even in places with little worker protections there are costs that scale with the number of workers instead of the number of hours.
A brief look indicates employers in India can expect to budget on the order of 18% of an employees take home per year for those expenses.
There are some circumstances and places in the US where you don't need to provide as many benefits to employees who work below 40 hours. Then you see employers hire more people and schedule them for just under the threshold to give them benefits.
The answer is always because it's cheaper for them somehow.