There is a bogeyman lurking behind corporate America’s push to bring workers back to the office: The remote employee who is secretly working a second full-time job, not by working 80-hour weeks, but by toggling between Job 1 and Job 2.
Over the past two years, the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Wired, the BBC and many others have run exposes of these “overemployed” people. The details are always irresistibly juicy. One engineer told Vanity Fair that he earns US$295,000 a year combined from two jobs, one of which requires about 15 hours a week, and a second that takes up “zero” time — he is not sure his bosses even remember he still works there.
A marketer told Vice that he gets 80 percent of his work done with ChatGPT, freeing up enough time to add a second job.
The workers say the appeal of holding two full-time roles is entirely financial: Doing decent work at two jobs pays far better than excelling at one. They claim there is so much slack in the typical work day that they can easily pass as busy, committed workers.
These stories tap into broader fears among corporate bosses that the pandemic era has spawned an unsupervised swath of workers who use the cover of working from home to do the bare minimum. To most managers, “career polygamy” is even scarier than quiet quitting.
However, bosses frightened of this workforce monster should know that it is nearly as mythical as the one that supposedly lives in Loch Ness.
When an employee is not contributing, it should be obvious, whatever the reason. If an organization’s demands are so lax that workers can easily hold down a second full-time role, that probably says more about the employer than the employee.
Sure, some people do clandestinely juggle multiple remote jobs, as these anecdotes suggest, although they probably are not as good at hiding it as they think.
However, it is probably far rarer than some sensational headlines suggest.
Indeed, much of the data supporting the ostensible trend do not hold up under scrutiny.
Often-cited is a Resume Builder survey from last year of 1,250 remote workers claiming that 79 percent of remote or hybrid employees were working multiple jobs. About 25 percent of remote workers have at least two full-time jobs, according to the survey.
However, the phrasing of the question is confusing: “In addition to your full-time job, how many other jobs are you employed to do [not including self-employed work]?”
Moreover, some of the listed side hustles do not exactly fit the stereotype of a coder trying to listen to two Zooms at once. For instance, 39 percent of remote workers with multiple jobs included self-employment as a second job. Of these, 28 percent say their side hustle is gig work, almost a quarter cited social media influencing and 15 percent mentioned sex work. This last item makes me deeply skeptical of the entire survey. Do we really believe sex work is this common? There are about 168 million civilian workers in the US. Although the murky legality of sex work makes it hard to measure, experts estimate that there are 1 million to 2 million people doing it. That is just 0.6 percent — 1.2 percent of the workforce.
This is not the only dubious survey to suggest a high number of workers with multiple full-time jobs. A Monster survey of 1,000 workers conducted this year claimed 37 percent of workers — that is apparently all workers, not just remote workers — had more than one full-time job.
This simply cannot be true. Look around. Do you think a third of your colleagues really have a second full-time job?
Other data sources paint a far different picture of multiple job holders. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), only 4.4 percent of men and 5.2 percent of women have more than one job. Most of these individuals are juggling multiple part-time jobs, or a full-time job and a part-time gig; says the St Louis Federal Reserve’s analysis of BLS data, less than 0.3 percent of US workers hold two full-time jobs.
Most of them are not working remotely. They are combining morning shifts at Starbucks with a night job cleaning office buildings. A 2021 investigation of US census data found that most multiple job holders were clustered into a few low-paying industries like retail, food services and waste management.
Nor are these multiple-job holders raking in the money. In fact, they are not even earning as much as people with one job. Average total earnings of those with multiple jobs are about US$54,000 a year. By contrast, average earnings of people with a single, stable job are about US$63,000 a year.
While there are a few higher-earning workers who hold more than one job, these tend to be professionals such as doctors — who might have both a private practice and a job at a hospital. They are not feigning busyness, but working long hours. And they are not keeping their second job a secret.
Gleb Tsipursky, writing in Fortune, attributes the outsize attention to highly paid, two-timing remote workers to “a cognitive bias known as base rate neglect, where we focus on individual anecdotes and fail to assess the likelihood of statistical events.”
Put differently: Is it possible there is a centuries-old aquatic lizard living in a lake in Scotland? I suppose. But is it likely? Nae, laddie.
Sarah Green Carmichael is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and editor. Previously, she was an executive editor at Harvard Business Review. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS