I agree. When this whole discussion started about 80/90 hour workweeks, I was thinking about investment banking and consulting, where people work insane hours, nights, and weekends. But they are also handsomely compensated (at least in the big firms). Salaries are typically double that of alternative careers for the same set of people.

I am sure if Infosys or L&T offered folks a chance to get 2.5 times the salary for working more hours instead of 40 hours, there would be takers. Some people might opt for the extra pay.

But the core issue is that the leadership wants to get more out of the same pay—getting 90 hours of work for 40 hours of pay. That's what employees are against.

There are a lot of things to emulate/learn from China, but this is not one of them. The way Chinese employees don't get their fair share is a major component of the structural imbalances, low consumption, and rapid fall in total fertility rate (TFR) that the Chinese economy is facing. The consequences of this will play out over the next few decades. We do not need to take that route.

In fact, one of the things we need to adopt is to work more effectively and efficiently. Our meetings need to be more concise and productive. Rather than boiling the ocean, companies should focus on things that make an impact. The return on investment (RoI) of employee time is rarely optimized. A lot can be done here. This can actually result in higher and better output while also giving a better quality of life to employees.