"jps" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
No, actually, *you* are wrong. Productivity is a measure of total
man-hours
needed to produce a product. If someone can build 2 widgets per hour
(ie--1/2 man-hour per widget), you don't get increased productivity
numbers
by working that guy 50 hours per week, rather than 40 hours. You
increase
productivity by figuring out a way to get that guy to build 3 widgets
per
hour (1/3 man-hour per widget). Didn't you ever take a business class?

And do you know for certain that your sources are measuring productivity
in
this manner?

My sources? My source is the BLS:
"The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported
preliminary productivity data--as measured by output per hour of all
persons"

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/H....08072003.news

Perhaps in academia but not in the commercial markets. Just
because it's how we were taught to think of defining productivity in
school,
that doesn't mean it's the measure being used.

You really are being pretty obtuse. The statistics are from BLS...and there
own website tells you that they define productivity as "output per hour".


I've heard our increased productivity is indeed due to longer hours and
reduced time off.


Longer hours won't change "output per hour".


I'd like to see your sources and what measures they're really using.

Go to the www.bls.gov website!