Working Around the Clock

by PAUL and FAITH PIGORS

1

THE operation of war industries around the clock throughout the week is necessary as a war measure. But multiple shifts have upset daily routines for masses of industrial workers and have presented new problems to the community. Since we are members of the same community, and many of us hope soon to qualify for the industrial front, these new conditions and problems are of immediate and practical concern to all of us. What have the new work schedules done to daily living patterns?

First there is the question of what constitutes a day or a week. In American civilization the normal pattern for the day is: work, recreation, sleep. For the week it is: work, recreation, rest — and for many people, worship. Work begins on Monday and pauses on Sat urday. By Thursday morning a hardpressed worker in a normal week can encourage himself with the thought that he is “over the hump.” But how are we to reconcile the new work units with customary units of time? What determines the beginning of a “season” — the date, the thermometer, the “social calendar,” or a peak production load? Can essentials still be made in six days, or must the work span for people in industry be lengthened to seven days?

Should there be any end to their week, a “weekend”? Or are work spells to be punctuated by different amounts of time off on a day or days determined by rotation? Some of these cycles are so complex that workers cannot calculate whether their time off coincides with the traditional weekend by any surer method than the old guessing game — this week, next week, sometime, never. In some cases, management hands the worker a printed chart on which he can read the dates of his time off throughout the year, but this is scarcely a natural method of anticipating the week-end.

The central difficulty is that workers live in two communities that are run on different time schedules. The home community operates on the assumption that a working week always ends on Saturday, and that everyone has Sunday off. In factories, workers had become used to having both Saturday and Sunday oil until the 48-hour week was rcimposed because of war demands and an increasing shortage of manpower. The longer work week, which in critical areas may soon be set at 52 hours, inflicts penalty payments on management and — except in a two-shift setup — deprives the worker of his free Saturday. Saturday work was naturally resented when it was again imposed. Penalty rates reflect the general objection to week-end overtime and the particular resentment against Sunday work.

In continuous operation, late shifts so distort the worker’s day that he may fairly ask what we mean by “a day.” Is it a work spell of 8, 10, or 12 hours, a span of daylight, or the 24 hours that divide Monday from Tuesday on the calendar? Take the example of the third-shift worker in a plant where the “graveyard” shift starts at midnight. In plant terms, his is the third shift on Monday, but actually he is working during the first eight hours of Tuesday morning. The difference between a workday and the normal conception of daytime is revealed in his phrase: “I have to begin the day by going to bed.” In spite of the reversal of sleep and work caused by his shift assignment, a “day” to him is still the traditional one, even though it does not now coincide with his working day or begin at the hour when he wakes from sleep.

Some variation in stopping and starting time is accepted as inevitable, though starting time is correlated with social prestige. If you have to punch the clock at 6.00 A. M., you automatically are lower in the social scale than if you report for work at 9.00. The later starting time for office workers bestows on them, vicariously, part of management’s prestige. Since the boss’s secretary works for the boss, she naturally works on practically the same schedule as the boss. Even in normal times, some executives push themselves and their staffs so hard that they have less time off than the average industrial worker. But for executives the rewards of work are great both financially and spiritually, and their secretaries often share in the interest of the work. On the whole, except during emergencies or under high-powered executives, office staffs live and work on a humanly agreeable schedule.

The men and women at the machines, however, work for the machines. The week that determines the shape of their lives is one of 168 hours in which, for production purposes, all days and hours are regarded as interchangeable units. But is it enough to concede that a man’s day should include recreation and sleep, as well as work, if these activities are scheduled at such a time and in such an order that they interfere with each other and other people interfere with them ? Can a man really profit by recreation all by himself in the morning and before work? Surely a day off on Monday is not of much use to a family man, because he is only in his wife’s way unless he turns to at the washing machine.

Work in the evening is doubly uncongenial because “everyone else is having fun.” And work at night, sleep by day, is an exhausting program for many people who cannot adjust psychologically or physiologically to either part of it. Yet if management tries to be fair, by rapidly rotating uncongenial shift assignments, the health and social life of all workers suffer from the constantly required readjustments.

The day shift is the only one that allows continuance of a normal living pattern; consequently it is the most popular even though work is usually harder than on either of the late shifts, because the day shift is the period of major production. The normal pressure of this shift is increased if an insufficiently serviced night shift is added. In one plant, the repair crew during single-shift operations could easily cope with the work that piled up during the day. When the night shift was added, the inexperienced new workers turned out more defective work than either of the other crews, but were assigned no repairmen. The day repair crew was now confronted with more than twice the amount of work it had been doing before. Despite their best efforts, the men were falling cumulatively behind, and their foreman was losing sleep at night because the problem was beyond his power to solve.

The interrelation of shifts makes more trouble for the late shifts than for the day crew because most decisions are based on first-shift considerations. Furthermore, few executives or personnel men have ever worked on late shifts. They do not know accurately the results of their decisions for latcshift workers. Yet adequate planning of multiple shifts can only be based on a factual knowledge of each.

This is evident even in regard to such a simple matter as shift-change timing. If not controlled by the production process, should it be determined by the season, by traffic loads, or by such purely social considerations as recreation? If the day shift starts as late as 9.00 A. M., the effect on traffic loads may be good, and workers do not have to get up in the winter darkness. On the other hand, the afternoon is spoiled for the first-shift crew, and the Second crew, while having more free time in the afternoon, gets home from work in the small hours of the morning. But if the first shift starts at 6.00, the day crew has the disadvantage of having to get up in the dark to counterbalance the advantage of a free afternoon. The second crew then gets home at a reasonable hour at night, but must work all afternoon.

2

THE second shift is usually one of less pressure than the first, and therefore inside the plant is more agreeable to easygoing workers. As a production shift, it occupies a position midway between the other two. It may have a fair representation of day-shift services, both technical (repairmen, engineers to assist with blueprints, and others) and human (cafeteria, first aid, personnel consultations). Even if all these services do not cover the whole period of the second shift, the workers are not left to their own devices so much or so long as the night crew. There is, however, considerable loss of contact with the “front office,” since top executives leave at about the time the second crew arrives.

But the unique characteristic of the second shift that makes it the most unpopular of the three is that it is scheduled to include the whole period that is naturally and traditionally given over to recreation. Whether it lasts from 4.00 to midnight, or only from 2.00 to 10.00, the evening, properly speaking, is gone by the time the second crew is free. Some people do attempt recreation after work on the second shift, but it is always at the expense of sleep, and is more costly in physical terms than recreation for day workers. Most employees on second-shift schedules acknowledge that recreation is out.

The degree of dislike occasioned by the necessary realignment depends on particular needs for synchronizing one’s activities with the normal daily rhythm of other people’s lives. Aside from recreation, eating and sleeping are thrown out of line with normal habits. This dislocation may be slight on on an early shift or considerable on a late schedule. For instance, if the day shift is from 6.00 to 2.00, second-shift workers (on a 2.00 to 10.00 schedule) may enjoy a normal family dinner at noon and only slightly readjust their sleeping habits.

But if the day-shift start is postponed till 8.00 or even 9.00, so that the afternoon shift cannot begin until 4.00 or 5.00 p. M., a major dislocation is produced in the lives of the second crew. The workers now have to live on a schedule difficult of adjustment for any individual and practically impossible to synchronize with the rhythm of normal family life. They must sleep in the morning (the noisiest time of day in most houses and neighborhoods) while everyone else gets up and goes out. They want breakfast about 10.00 A. M., shortly before the family dinner must be prepared and when a woman is usually busy with housework, bathing the baby, or marketing.

The man of the house then begins his day with leisure (if he can get away with it), or the young worker finds himself at liberty to amuse himself, usually in solitude, if he can get into the mood. He doesn’t want to eat at noon with the family, but needs a well-balanced meal at about 2.00 p. M., when his wife might otherwise have a quiet moment to sit down to the family mending. Shortly afterward he goes to work, just as “everyone else” is getting ready to knock off, and works till midnight, having “supper” or “lunch” somewhere in the middle of the shift. When he gets home all the others have gone to bed, or should have, since they must get up at the usual time in the morning. If he is to eat after work, he may “grab a bite” on the way home, get himself a cold snack front the icebox, or keep his wife or some other obliging person out of bed to cook a meal for hint — always assuming that he is not too tired to eat at all.

This topsy-turvy existence is very hard on all but the most solitary and independent persons, since the day begins with leisure and ends with work. Dinner, not breakfast, comes before work, and breakfast comes after work, before he goes to bed — which he never does on the same day as that on which he got up (since he gets out of bed at 9.00 or 10.00 A. M. and is not ready for sleep again until about 2.00 the next morning.

The question of meals for the second-shift worker is one not only of sociability and convenience for himself and his family, but more acutely of health. Specific regimens differ according to specific shift timings, but the difficult decision for every secondshift worker is when to have dinner or the big meal of the day. If he has it before going to work, he is likely to feel sick or lethargic during work. Midshift time is a still more impractical choice and most people are too tired after second-shift work to benefit by a large meal, even if they can get it at that hour. This, incidentally, is one of the many indications that the timing of second-shift work makes it more tiring than day work even when work demands are less. Day workers often eat a heavy meal an hour or so after work and thrive on it. One second-shift worker, on being questioned about the timing of his meals, expressed his feelings with bitterness when he said: “Brother, on the second shift you just don’t eat.”

Trying as the physical demands may be, it is the loss of evening freedom that is most generally disliked. If work is not exhausting, we are in the mood to enjoy ourselves at the day’s end. Many people feel that evening is the only time when they are really free to live. It is generally assumed that only younger workers suffer from the loss of their evenings, but our research indicates that many older workers want their “beer with the boys’ and their games of poker or billiards quite as much as when they were younger.

Even ambitious workers who prefer to spend their leisure in study, with a view to job advancement or self-improvement, find obstacles in second-shift schedules. Evening is not the best time for education, but it is the usual time, and adult education programs still seem to be scheduled for that time of day. Even foreman-training programs generally take place in the evening and are not likely to be transferred to the morning when the second-shift worker is free. Other educational schedules could and perhaps will be set up, but until they are, the difficulty of obtaining further training, education, and recognition constitutes a real obstacle to advancement for second-shift workers.

Fortunately, however, individual differences work both ways in regard to acceptance of specific circumstances. Some workers prefer the second shift to the first because of its slower pace. A few prefer it because of the timing of leisure outside the plant. Although this is usually its most disagreeable feature, special temperaments and interests may make it into an advantage. A case in point was that of a composer who decided to capitalize on his mechanical ability and serve his country by going into war work. He chose the second shift because it allowed him three hours in the morning (the best time of day for creative work) to devote to music before he went to the plant.

But probably the great majority of “contented” second-shift workers are those who merely tolerate the schedule because they do not expect much fun out of life anyway. Many instances of this attitude were encountered in our research, especially among older workers who had learned that life is not all beer and skittles. If week-end work is not required, recreation is not absolutely ruled out and workers make the best of rather disagreeable schedules without thinking too much about it.

Interviews show that acceptance of shift assignments depends on the temperament and interests of the workers, conditions in the plant (including the congeniality of work-mates), associations outside the plant, and expectations of the duration of the assignment. On fixed assignments, workers have a greater incentive for adjustment than on rotating schedules where adaptation seems scarcely worth while in view of the frequent changes.

But whatever and whenever adjustments are needed, success depends to a great extent on the intellectual and emotional maturity of the individual and the advice he receives. Realistically to assess a new situation and successfully to reshape a living pattern are no mean feats. They are the acid tests of intelligence and a genuine philosophy of life. But these processes are not normally even attempted by persons whose experience has led them to think as little as possible about the probability of reshaping their lives nearer to the heart’s desire. The worker’s need for counsel in adjusting to multiple-shift schedules is a perpetual challenge to the personnel manager, who must demonstrate that management is genuinely concerned with the problems that present such difficulties to workers.

3

THE night shift is unique in that it calls, not for adjustment, but reversal of the normal timing in working, sleeping, and eating. Where the secondshift worker suffers the annoyance of finding that his morning is other people’s afternoon, the night worker’s life is completely reversed by having his day turned into night. Not everyone can make the necessary physical and psychological adjustments, and the situation as to work efficiency in the plant is usually worse than on either of the other shifts.

The drawbacks of night work are obvious, and in many plants a pay differential is offered as compensation. In addition, some firms offer greater security of job tenure — as, for instance, a year’s contract for night work. When no such contract is offered, the situation of the night crew is insecure. Workers know that contraction of operations usually means that the night shift will be the first to go. And since seniority is a primary factor in layoff, and the night shift is commonly manned by shortservice workers, they have a double expectation of being laid off. Opportunities for promotion are also fewest on the night shift, since the line of contact with management stops at the level of the foreman. The various technical services are, for obvious reasons, scanty. Some of them are not needed at night, or only so occasionally that it seems too expensive to provide them.

In deciding these matters, do executives ask themselves: What is a complete shift setup? The same question should be asked in relation to non-technical services. In many plants, for instance, there is little or no service at night from nurses or first-aid attendants, although accidents are peculiarly likely to occur at night if there are numbers of new workers on the shift. Washroom attendants and sweepers are not necessary from a technical viewpoint, but such services make a difference to workers, especially women, and are regarded by them as symptomatic of management’s attitude. Another difficult question is that of cafeteria service. This is seldom provided at night, and certainly could not be offered on the same basis as it is during the day, when there are so many more people in the plant. All such matters could best be decided by worker-management committees that could ask and answer such questions as: What is needed? What is wanted? What can be done?

In physiological terms, night work is the most costly for the average person, and daytime sleep is the crux of the problem. It is interfered with by radios in adjoining apartments, children at play, daytime traffic, peddlers, hurdy-gurdy men, and all the other neighborhood noise-makers. As one worker said: “It’s hard to live a night-shift life in a day-shift neighborhood.” The night worker’s reversed view of life causes him to applaud anything that subdues or muffles daytime activity, and leads to the often expressed wish: “Gee, I hope it rains today.”

Another major obstacle of daytime sleep is indigestion. A few doctors, nutritionists, and other experts have considerable knowledge about food for night workers, but this knowledge has not, in most cases, penetrated to the family kitchen and lunch box, where it is needed. There are opportunities for service here by both personnel men and foremen who can gather information and initiate experiments. In one chemical plant, workers themselves were carrying on experiments under the guidance of a fellow worker who had previously been a shortorder cook in a diner. Cans of soup were lowered on a string into the steaming caldrons of acid that the workers tended, and even small chickens, potatoes, and pork chops were baked in the free corner of a drying oven. The motto of this volunteer cook was: “The bigger and hotter the meal, the better.” All the workers were enthusiastic about the addition of hot food to their 2.00 A. M. lunches, though it is to be doubted whether management would wholeheartedly have shared their pleasure in the methods by which it was prepared.

Physiologically night work is arduous, but socially it is not so disagreeable as the second shift. It is, however, more trying than is commonly supposed, for even on a late-shift schedule the evening is not perfectly “free” for the night worker. And on an early schedule, when work begins at 10.00 P. M. for instance, his evening is cut short, the amount of curtailment depending in part on how long it takes him to reach the plant. To people who value evening gayety, a shift scheduled to start at 10.00 p. M. appears an intolerable infringement of precious liberties. Even when the shift starts at midnight, so that most of the evening is free, parties are “just getting going” at 10.30 or 11.00, especially on Saturday.

Nor is the evening spoiled only for those who wish to go out for their recreation. Evening at home can be very pleasant, and its distinctive charm lies in relaxation. But of what use is a “free” evening to a person who suffers from “commuter’s nerves”? One worker had voluntarily accepted a third-shift assignment from 11.00 p. M. to 7.00 A. M. He did not seem to think himself ill-used, but only because he had ceased to expect much from life. As he lived six miles from work and buses ran only every half hour, he felt he must catch the 9.45 bus or run the risk of being late for work. He was unusually conscientious and felt keenly his responsibilities as “second man on the shift” (unofficial assistant foreman). When asked about his evening’s recreation prior to leaving for work, he replied: “Oh, I just poke around the house” — scarcely an exhilarating program of recreation. From other remarks it appeared that all evening he had one eye on the clock and could not really settle down to anything.

Special feelings about night work arise from the interlocking of home and work situations and run the gamut from cheerful acceptance to hearty dislike. The present trend toward the employment of women to supplement the nation’s manpower is introducing too many new problems to discuss here, but the hazards of night work for mothers of young children cannot be passed over without mention. When mothers work at night they are actually holding down two jobs, an undertaking that is always recognized as hazardous for men. Homemakers are listed as persons of “no occupation” and are supposed by men to pass their days in playing with the children and toying with laborsaving devices. How far this is from the truth can be testified to by any man who ever tried temporarily to substitute for a woman who takes entire care of her house and children.

Women themselves are to blame, perhaps, if they allow their enthusiasm to run away with their common sense and sign on for night work. But personnel men and supervisors should know more than they commonly do about home conditions and whether the women they employ are getting adequate sleep by day. One night foreman expressed surprise and disgust that the high incentive payments offered on his shift were not more effective in increasing production. “The men bull through for the money, but the women just say ‘What the hell’ and go to sleep on the shift.” Although these women had evidently signed up for night work because of the extra money offered, their fatigue was such that they were unable to earn it.

4

THE most general cure-all for the ills of multiple shift workers is rotation. Schedules vary as to the length of the work and rest units, and the rapidity with which workers move from one shift to the next. In practice, this method has many drawbacks and, like other innovations, produces new problems of its own. In making out charts, management is concerned chiefly with the spaces allotted to work, but since to most industrial employees the values of life are not mainly realized while making a living, the hours that are most important to workers are those in the spaces allotted to free time.

What does free time mean to a worker? What is it free from and what is it free for? It is certainly not empty time, nor is it free from certain necessities. The mere fact that management “makes no demands” between clock-punchings does not mean that the worker’s time is his to do what he likes with it. He is still bound, even by work requirements, to allow time, ranging from ten minutes to two hours, for travel to and from the plant on every working day. The physical claims of eating and sleeping further whittle away his free time, and for a worker whose life includes family, friends, community and religious interests there may be so much competition for his “free” time that he scants the demands of health.

The values of free time and the acceptability of work are determined not only by their respective amounts and their proportion to each other, but also by their unity, regularity, and timing in relation to physical and mental sets and other people’s activities. For instance, work is hardest and most uncongenial when “everyone else is having fun’ ; when normal bodily activity is lowest; when it comes unexpectedly; and when it is not in consecutive units with time off at the end. Conversely, work is most acceptable when “everyone else is working”; when one feels most vigorous; when one is mentally set for it.

Similarly, time off is most valuable after work, at the end of the day, toward the end of the week, in an unbroken span, and after payday. The possibility of evening recreation on Monday through Friday and daytime freedom on Saturday and Sunday, every week, makes the day assignment on a fixed schedule the obvious choice for most people. Free time is of less or minimal value before work, at the beginning of the day or week, after an overtiring work spell, in short and unanticipated sections, and before payday. These drawbacks arise from abnormal.or alternating timing of work spells. Monday morning is a poor time to “paint the town red”; and a free evening before work is partly spoiled by such job requirements as promptness and alertness.

Industrial workers need satisfactory recreation to counterbalance the monotony or pressure of their work. Without going high-brow as to “worthwhile” forms of recreation, what are the essential ingredients? Chiefly, that you can let yourself go; you are mentally set for it; you are not too tired to enjoy it; and you and your family or friends can anticipate it as a regular and frequent event. The night worker, the second-shift worker, and anyone on a rapidly rotating schedule miss out on some or all of these points. Yet if any of these conditions are lacking, recreation is not possible in the full sense of the word. If all of them are lacking, recreation is impossible. And not only recreation but all social and family life, and any constructive form of leisure occupation is ruled out by schedules that prevent regularity of living and cause undue fatigue. But since these are the activities that make life worth living, can we be satisfied with schedules that preclude them for thousands of people?

The technicians and executives who have evolved the present schedules are still experimenting to achieve greater efficiency. There are no abler men in our community. If they can see the whole picture, they can surely work out schedules that will allow workers to live a productive and integrated life both inside and outside the plant. But if top management is to understand workers they must depend on personnel men with real vision who are willing and able to concentrate on the vital aspects of their task.

There is a crying need in industry not only for more personnel work but chiefly for better personnel work. There is too much waste motion even now in setting up game rooms, teaming up soft-ball leagues, and arranging for occasional festivities. Every available iota of energy and thought should be expended on issues that are central to daily life instead of being dissipated on side issues. Constantly renewed insight will enable executives to attain a measure of foresight, to assess present trends and to build for the future. They must maintain the experimental approach to these problems epitomized in the question of a great American philosopher: “In view of this, what next?”