what is your thought on this? https://overemployed.com/the-overemployed-way/

My thoughts? A rather poor attempt at making unethical things look ethical lol. What about people burning out doing a single job?

This is my take. Not sure if I really understood the article though. I just listened to an intro video. It talks about working multiple jobs at the same time. If you can do it, I don't see any issue with it. Working 2-3 jobs is common for folks who don't make enough income from a single job. They don't have the luxury of surviving with a single job. Now, as someone who makes enough with a single job, doing another job on the side is a choice. You exchange time you can spend with friends and family for money. If that is what one wants, I think it's okay. Remember that people usually create their startup while working on a full-time job. It isn't unethical if your employer is satisfied with a lower quality or quantity of work. Your job is not to deliver the best quality work, but meet the bar set by your employer. It makes sense to go above and beyond it only if there is a huge financial incentive or you just love being great at your work.

@fresh-analyst-84724 @ripe-needle-9726 Agreed. I was surprised to see a site like this. It's not like i support/oppose this concept. just wanted to get our folks opinion about this. 👍

I don't understand how this is new/different? Contractors/freelancers with multiple clients is very common. When I used to be the employer, I've had people on contract and on payroll as well who had side gigs. They always got their work done and I couldn't care less about what they did outside of that. I don't even know which ones were paid and which were pro-bono. In my current setup, I work 8 hours a day, 3 days a week with my current client. If I want to, I can take up another rest of the time. If an employer is unethical enough to forbid working with other people in your free time, they're not worth working with in the first place. If there are no fixed hours and you're able to finish your work at the quality that's expected of your role. Go for it! Try not to get in a breach of contract situation as even if unenforceable, it's stressful to go through the motions.

Weekly 80 hours commitment with multiple jobs then the health is obviously compromised that comes as 13-14 hours a day.

I think the point was more that you can do less hours than 40 a week at one place and do something else rest of the time. We're very geared to think that we should pour our entire energy on this one thing that we're working on. That's not necessarily true or the most productive. Learning and growth, especially in remote/contractual work, is largely your own responsibility.

@dry-monkey-93718 Pretty sure the article is about doing two full time remote jobs. If that was not the case why would they try to justify using all those lame reasons. Didn't read much though seemed like some teenager wrote it.

The author specifically said that these jobs don't have a fixed 40 hour weeks. They also specifically spoke about not overworking. Maybe read without the presumption you've walked in with? I agree that it's not very fleshed out in its presentation and thought clarity. Sometimes there's non-sequiturs and weird reasoning. Eg: companies make asshole contracts so we should breach them. That's just asking for pain. I am sure there's value in doing that for the bigger community and that's how change has happened over the ages, but it's not a path everyone can/should take.

Maybe read without the presumption you've walked in with?

Didn't seem like it was worth the effort, like I already said. I'm glad if you found something useful from it.