Anyone ever experience burnout?

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

From another IT persons PoV, do not do this. Absolutely do not work like this, or work somewhere where this is expected out of you.

This will burn anyone out, regardless of profession. I left Warehouse management because it was getting to that level.

I work my 40 hours per week and I am done. My burn out comes from all the extra time studying and other shit that comes with it. But if you can't get the work done in 40, well that's on management to figure that problem out.

I worked 3750 hours last year. Does that make me a moron?

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

I worked 3750 hours last year. Does that make me a moron?

via GIPHY

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

via GIPHY

Yeah man. It’s different when it’s your money that goes out the window when shit doesn’t happen.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

I worked 3750 hours last year. Does that make me a moron?

Do you get time and a half? Or at least paid by the hour?

Or are you just a self-employed farmer who tracks how many hours you work?

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

I worked 3750 hours last year. Does that make me a moron?

Averaging 72 hours a week? Perhaps. You look at TPS and Muda, Muri, and Mura. It's obvious there's Muri here. Are there others to distribute that workload to? Are there activities that aren't fruitful and largely a waste (muda)?

I say that because I watch an owner of the company I work for do a lot of the same. He complains more than I do about burnout and how much he works.

The problem for him is likely different from you, but he feels this urge to micromanage and have his fingertips on everything that goes on. He has a great staff that can run the company without him, seriously. He's a smart guy and hires the right people. The problem is he just can't let those people do their jobs.

My advice to him has been to work smarter, not harder. It seems simplistic, but its truly the issue at hand for him. He needs, and maybe you too, to define the things that he should focus on and be responsible for and schedule them throughout his week. If its a non-value add process, should you be focusing on it? If its of no real or immediate benefit to you or the customer, dump it or at least put it on the back burner until its reasonable to work on. If its necessary for the customer, can you delegate it?

There was a company I worked for a decade+ ago where we did a specific TPS study and looked at the time we were spending on tasks. What we were surprised to find is that many of us were picking up the slack for others and working on tasks outside of our job description and what should have been our priorities. If I'm in accounting and doing 50% of an HR coordinators job, then I should probably replace the coordinator. Of course, I'm in a smaller company now and wear both hats, but my accounting workload has went down and I can absorb that adminstration segment. That is probably the case for many in a similar role. In any event, be careful the number of hats you try to wear. You find yourself becoming wildly inefficient at everything rather than efficient at a few tasks.

If I were in your shoes and I'm putting in 72 hours a week, I definitely would consider adding at least a part-time employee to delegate some workload to. Re-prioritize your workload and figure out what are the most important tasks for you to handle. Its not especially sustainable to continue on the path you're on.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Averaging 72 hours a week? Perhaps. You look at TPS and Muda, Muri, and Mura. It's obvious there's Muri here. Are there others to distribute that workload to? Are there activities that aren't fruitful and largely a waste (muda)?

I say that because I watch an owner of the company I work for do a lot of the same. He complains more than I do about burnout and how much he works.

The problem for him is likely different from you, but he feels this urge to micromanage and have his fingertips on everything that goes on. He has a great staff that can run the company without him, seriously. He's a smart guy and hires the right people. The problem is he just can't let those people do their jobs.

My advice to him has been to work smarter, not harder. It seems simplistic, but its truly the issue at hand for him. He needs, and maybe you too, to define the things that he should focus on and be responsible for and schedule them throughout his week. If its a non-value add process, should you be focusing on it? If its of no real or immediate benefit to you or the customer, dump it or at least put it on the back burner until its reasonable to work on. If its necessary for the customer, can you delegate it?

There was a company I worked for a decade+ ago where we did a specific TPS study and looked at the time we were spending on tasks. What we were surprised to find is that many of us were picking up the slack for others and working on tasks outside of our job description and what should have been our priorities. If I'm in accounting and doing 50% of an HR coordinators job, then I should probably replace the coordinator. Of course, I'm in a smaller company now and wear both hats, but my accounting workload has went down and I can absorb that adminstration segment. That is probably the case for many in a similar role. In any event, be careful the number of hats you try to wear. You find yourself becoming wildly inefficient at everything rather than efficient at a few tasks.

If I were in your shoes and I'm putting in 72 hours a week, I definitely would consider adding at least a part-time employee to delegate some workload to. Re-prioritize your workload and figure out what are the most important tasks for you to handle. Its not especially sustainable to continue on the path you're on.

2019 was a confluence of ****. I'm headed for a lot of hours in 2020, but hopefully fewer. Some of it is on me, sure. But logistically it's going better.

I'm pretty efficient. I've removed virtually all the non-value added activities from my workload.

As far as the structure, there is my farm, dad's farm and a couple other ancillary entities that don't matter. I have some operations and dad has some operations that we pay each other for. In 2019 he had a full time and a part time dude working for him and I had none. I reimbursed him for the little bit of labor they did on me.

2019 had a bunch of weird shit. First and foremost Dad's fulltime and partime guys were shit they barely did anything, meanwhile dad and I were killing ourselves.

Second, I crammed a fairly big system change in our operation in the winter, which typically I work fewer hours. So that added a lot of hours to a normally slow time.

Third, the spring was goddamned wet. That did 2 things, 1, allowed us to move a lot of acres to fall crops that we hadn't planned on, which really stacked up a bunch more work in an already busy timeframe. So much so that I hired out some acres to go under one of my machines. Great way to NOT make money, but it is what needed to happen. Then when it came time to roll, it stayed wet, further compressing the busy timeframe. So I worked my ever loving ass off.

Fourth, I made some agronomic changes that needed some additional management to incorporate properly, because we hadn't done them before.

As far as moving forward, That shitheel guy isn't around anymore. The part time guy is now full time, and his work is better, but he wants a lot of time off. So the answer is obviously to hire more employees. But that's a tough ask in my part of the world. Everybody has labor problems it seems like and objectively, a lot of places can pay more than I can. Labor management will be pretty big moving forward as dad slows down.

Also, margins are ass. So it's difficult to make structural decisions which will further erode my already shit margins, which in 2020 are certainly going to be negative.

And I'm pretty efficient. I already eliminated most every non-value added activity from my life. Dad and his guy do some piddly shit, but I don't. I GTFO if I'm caught up.

There are also some functions that lend itself to screwing up my life, most importantly is irrigation, but I push the structure pretty hard, which puts me out there at 3 AM or whenever it needs swapping. But I'm doing it because it pays compared to the alternatives. So I do it. I run the numbers pretty studiously, so I continually evaluate operations and am not afraid to make systemic changes.

All that being said, I'm not burned out. I make time for my kids, and my wife does a good job of bringing them out when they can. Overall, I'm pretty happy. I'm also pretty self-aware and can objectively analyze my mental state.

It's not what I should be doing almost certainly, and definitely wouldn't be if I could secure higher level labor, but it's not in the cards and it's what I'm doing.

Well shit, I just looked at my payroll and I've already worked 2100 hours. I'll for sure be over 3000, but hopefully I can keep it around 3200 and under the 3700 I did last year.

[Shiver Me Timbers]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

2019 was a confluence of **.............
Well shit, I just looked at my payroll and I've already worked 2100 hours. I'll for sure be over 3000, but hopefully I can keep it around 3200 and under the 3700 I did last year.

Buehler- you are a star in my book. Working 70 plus hours a week and keeping it logical/real is impressive. It takes a special kind of drive and vision to pull that off- regardless of vocation!
Good on you!

[BryanBusby]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

In my experience, the people who go the route of "pay me more if you want more hours" don't get more pay nearly as often as those who prove it first.... of course, there's no guarantee, but I've been fairly lucky with managers who will give it to me straight in that regard.

It depends on priorities though... if someone is happy salary-wise, then 40 hour work weeks will of course be ideal. I just get annoyed when people want it both ways, refusing to work more than 40 hours/week while bitching about never getting a decent raise and getting ahead.

This works both ways and I think you aren't quite on the same page with me here. There's a difference between working 80+ hours a week slamming your head against the wall for your employer and working your 40 hours and taking some of your own time to learn things that interest you and invest in your own continuing education.

That's different from someone who works the 40 and goes home to play video games all weekend or watch public access TV. I do not put in a minute over 40 hours on the actual job, but I do spend time advancing my own ability. At the same time, I'm not going to pretend I know it all because it's just imposters syndrome.

With that said, you have to look at it from the employers prospective. Why the **** should we hire another person so Bearcat can have a reasonable life when he's already doing the work of two people? We're saving money. On the same token, why should we pay Bearcat more when they're already doing all this shit at salary X?

If you really need to work 80 hours a week to get anything more well I'm truly sorry. When I had my early mid-life crisis I checked out a company doing something completely different and how they tried to sell you on your own self-worth being tied to working 7 days a week 10+ hours a day was Top 5 grossest things I've dealt with in my working life. Is the money really worth it if your life is a pile of shit? I know people who rack in 150k+ a year as an AWS specialist and don't even work 40 a week. I know it's not impossible.

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

We swapped resumes didn't we? I have 20+ technical certifications. Not a single one braindumped. I have to do this shit in the real world. Cant shortcut the tech or yourself in the real world. You cant hide. Everyone will know your tech skills in a few months anyway. I'll set aside time on the weekend to deep dive into the new tech. I'll watch a baseball game and set up stuff to practice with. I do still love the learning of new tech. That helps.

I'm not sitting on 20 plus, but I've racked up 3 in the last year and would have 4 if not for COVID-19. Hoping to get one more in before the year is up.

I'm starting to learn in this industry that it's perfectly fine to not know everything. I admit it all the time at my current job.

It's okay because your co-worker and your boss probably doesn't know either. Show a willingness to learn and that you can do your own research and pick things up quickly. I think that's the one thing I really learned after being put on furlough and think that's why I got this current job.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

This works both ways and I think you aren't quite on the same page with me here. There's a difference between working 80+ hours a week slamming your head against the wall for your employer and working your 40 hours and taking some of your own time to learn things that interest you and invest in your own continuing education.

That's different from someone who works the 40 and goes home to play video games all weekend or watch public access TV. I do not put in a minute over 40 hours on the actual job, but I do spend time advancing my own ability. At the same time, I'm not going to pretend I know it all because it's just imposters syndrome.

Makes sense, and there are definitely areas where you can get sucked into very company-specific tech, so it's important to keep broader/industry-wide skills up to date.

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

With that said, you have to look at it from the employers prospective. Why the **** should we hire another person so Bearcat can have a reasonable life when he's already doing the work of two people? We're saving money. On the same token, why should we pay Bearcat more when they're already doing all this shit at salary X?

My devil's advocate to those questions...
- I've never seen a company actually hire anyone to specifically relieve someone of extra hours, and I'm not sure it would ever happen if those extra hours are seasonal or something like go live support, where people are working a ton more for a relatively short amount of time before going back to a much more reasonable workload.
I've worked for companies in growth spurts for sure, hiring people left and right, and while it is in the end the company's fault.... the reality is help (probably) isn't coming, and....

- The flip side of the 2nd question is -- we already have x number of people working a ton of hours, why should we give Bearcat a raise before he starts doing the same? We could just find someone else who will work 60 hours/week.
As I mentioned before, the extra hours are no guarantee of raises, just that it's the best bet in the IT world, from my experience.

And I've had it both ways... I was at one company and received a couple of ~2-3% raises over two years, and probably averaged 50-60 hours/week. So, I left, and the next company and managers there really saw the value in the extra hours, taking on more projects, mentoring, etc; and I really saw the benefits from it.

That just goes back to having those conversations with management on what you're looking for....
- What's my salary ceiling right now? How do I get there, or advance to the next level?
- I want to be making x% more a few years from now, is that possible? How so?
- I'm looking at this kind of salary trajectory, what does that take?
- I want highly visible projects, or to move to this area, how can I prove myself?

In my experience, a lot of people don't drive their own career growth or salary growth in this way, and make assumptions on whether their extra work/effort will pay off... and as I said before, set the expectation and have those discussions, and if they don't work out, either find something else or reset your own expectations (such as working less hours).

There are of course still managers who aren't transparent and still companies that get away with abusing employees.... yet, employees have more leverage these days than ever before. Specific to IT, employers know you can simply find a new job every couple years and get decent bumps on salary. The managers and companies that figure this out will do what it takes to retain their best and hardest working talent.

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

If you really need to work 80 hours a week to get anything more well I'm truly sorry.

Nah, just under 60 hours/week during the craziest years. Granted, that's still several 70-80 hour work weeks, shit has to be completely out of control for me to kick it into that gear.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Nah, just under 60 hours/week during the craziest years. Granted, that's still several 70-80 hour work weeks, shit has to be completely out of control for me to kick it into that gear.

to qualify myself....80 hour work weeks were on short contracts to restore ransom ware when the company is losing millions, sometimes 10’s of millions $’s a day. They are more than happy to compensate you for the sleepless nights. Usually I’m working 45-50 hours a week. Reasonable hours to me.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

to qualify myself....80 hour work weeks were on short contracts to restore ransom ware when the company is losing millions, sometimes 10’s of millions $’s a day. They are more than happy to compensate you for the sleepless nights. Usually I’m working 45-50 hours a week. Reasonable hours to me.

Yeah, I've never minded 9-10 hours/day and rarely work less than that (granted, unlike when I was younger, I make it a priority to use all PTO)... feels productive, yet doesn't really impact getting home at a decent hour and doesn't impact the weekends (for the most part).

Sixty starts getting extreme when it's week after week, as you're either taking away from weekends or not doing much else besides work on the other 5 days. That's when it starts becoming more difficult to find the motivation to workout, etc.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

I'm not sitting on 20 plus, but I've racked up 3 in the last year and would have 4 if not for COVID-19. Hoping to get one more in before the year is up.

I'm starting to learn in this industry that it's perfectly fine to not know everything. I admit it all the time at my current job.

It's okay because your co-worker and your boss probably doesn't know either. Show a willingness to learn and that you can do your own research and pick things up quickly. I think that's the one thing I really learned after being put on furlough and think that's why I got this current job.

good on you to not brain dump the cert’s. It might get you by HR that you checked that box and they pass you on to the hiring manager but unless you really know the tech, your not getting past the interview. So it’s wasted time and money to try to shortcut the tech.