ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Working Two Full Time Jobs

Also alot of people have a full time job and then take a temp job at same time.

So they might be working for phizer full time and see AstraZeneca is looking for a 3-6 month full time fill in for an employee out on maternity leave and they apply for that job as well to do both at home at same time.

Crazy thing is for these temporary jobs ay these big companies they know employees are full time workers for another company but because it's so hard to find quaiity workers in this tight market that they hire them anyway and just accept it.
 
A new phenomenon has taken hold in America since the pandemic. A lot of people working from home have secretly started to work two jobs unbeknownst to their employers. Who wouldn't want two paychecks, right? Ideally, this wouldn't be a problem so long as you're adequately doing both jobs, but there in lays the problem. Can you truly work two full time jobs with concurrent hours? Most employers would say no and have started firing employees whom they've caught doing this. My question to you is:
1: Do you know anyone doing this?
2: What are you thoughts on this practice in general?
3: Do you think this is fair relative to those who have to work in-person jobs (police officers, construction workers, doctors, etc) and are thus only able to work one job at a time?

The implications of this is far reaching. All of a sudden, your money doesn't go as far because someone down the street is getting paid two wages for the same number of hours. Does this mean those who work in-person now deserve to be paid more to make up this difference? Should the IRS tax these people more than the general population?
Discuss...

I don't think this is happening that much but I know if my company found out they would fire you for cause.

I do take exception to point #3--those jobs you mentioned have had plenty of instances of people being paid for no show jobs so they've managed to scam the system just fine and on the tax payers dime for some of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_Sinister
It means that, as an employer, you are not offering enough pay.
Even if you paid said employee say... 500k, you do realize that people would still be motivated to get more, right? Again, why take one pay check when you can get two for the same hours?
 
Even if you paid said employee say... 500k, you do realize that people would still be motivated to get more, right? Again, why take one pay check when you can get two for the same hours?
Just a personal opinion but I have no problem with two jobs that are NOT concurrent; but if they were at the same time, I don’t see it—at least for me. I’m retired but worked many weeks of 60 or 70 hours but that’s what I needed to do to get ahead. I think you have to assess your employment/career/goals and determine if your time should be invested in one company/opportunity or two. Definitely a personal decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: superfan01
I'd imagine if you could work 2 jobs from home simultaneously then neither is truly needed which means during downturns, sayanora. Of at the very least the work you do could easily be done by someone else. Neither of these scenarios is heartwarming
 
  • Like
Reactions: superfan01
Even if you paid said employee say... 500k, you do realize that people would still be motivated to get more, right? Again, why take one pay check when you can get two for the same hours?
His point was that an employer couldn't find workers to take a low paid per diem gig. If you offer enough pay, ppl will show up. Whether they are working another job or not is irrelevant.
 
As the OP said, "Concurrent". Plenty of people work two jobs... but doing two jobs at the same hours of the day... thats different.

No one questions the guy that leaves his accounting job at 5:00, then goes and tends bar for a couple of hours.
Exactly. People are missing this point. This isn't a case of clocking out at one job and going to the next like the old days. The advent of high speed internet combined with the push to allow people to work from home has created this loophole that people are exploiting. My hat goes off to the people working two full time jobs the old school way. My hat also goes off to the people who are doing it remotely, but it is in fact a loophole that diminishes the value of everyone else wages because said individual is getting paid twice for the same number of hours. I have a hard time believing that those exploiting this loophole are really working twice as hard in concurrent hours. In fact, the reason they even have the thought of finding another job to do in parallel is because they're not really working all the hours of their first job to begin with. Moreover, if this practice was totally kosher as people claim, then the question is why do people doing this feel the need to hide it from their employers?

The way I look at this is like this:
Would I want my doctor holding a zoom meeting for his/her other job during my procedure? No...? Well, then why is it okay for someone else in any other field to do the same? It is a matter of productivity. Wages have been tied to hours of productivity since the invention of money. If you are supposed to work 9 hours, you are paid according to those 9 hours with the assumption that you are putting in 9 hours worth of work. Some fields are such that you can power through your work in a shorter amount of time. Nothing new there. However, you were still expected to be available for the remainder of those hours. The value of wages are baked into those hours. Getting paid by an unwitting employer for those same hours is essentially cheating the system and it diminishes the value of everyone else's wages bc they don't have the opportunity to work two jobs in parallel even if they wanted to. So it's not like these people are just working harder than everybody else. They're just exploiting the system.

To another person's point, we certainly don't want people to work less in this country, but the idea that people are being equally productive while working two jobs in parallel is a farce. And as such, they are cheating the system in a way. Because again, they are making double wages for the same work hours. Which in turn means your hard earned in-person wages is worth half of theirs. So can you then blame your mechanic, private contractor, construction worker, or any in-person worker for demanding 2x wages in the future to make up the difference? Ultimately, the concept of wages would not hold up and the system would fall apart. Mad max barter system, here we come!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: superfan01
Exactly. People are missing this point. This isn't a case of clocking out at one job and going to the next like the old days. The advent of high speed internet and now the push to allow people to work from home has created this loophole that people are exploiting. My hat goes off to the people working two full time jobs the old school way. My hat also goes off to the people who are doing it remotely, but it is in fact a loophole that diminishes the value of everyone else wages because said individual is getting paid twice for the same number of hours. I have a hard time believing that those exploiting this loophole are really working twice as hard in concurrent hours. In fact, the reason they even have the thought of finding another job to do in parallel is because they're not really working all the hours of their first job to begin with. Moreover, if this practice was totally kosher as people claim, then the question is why do people doing this feel the need to hide it from their employers?

The way I look at this is like this:
Would I want my doctor holding a zoom meeting for his/her other job during my procedure? No...? Well, then why is it okay for someone else in any other field to do the same? It is a matter of productivity. Wages have been tied to productivity since the invention of money. If you are supposed to work 9 hours, you are paid according to those 9 hours with the assumption that you are putting in 9 hours worth of work. Some fields are such that you can power through your work in a shorter amount of time. Nothing new there. However, you were still expected to be available for the remainder of those hours. The value of your wages are baked into those hours. Getting paid by an unwitting employer for those same hours is essentially cheating the system and it diminishes the value of everyone else's wages bc they even have the opportunity to work two jobs in parallel even if they wanted to. So it's not like these people are just working harder than everybody else. They're just cheating the system.

To another person's point, we certainly don't want people to work less in this country, but the idea that people are being equally productive while working two jobs in parallel is a farce. And as such, they are cheating the system in a way. Because again, they are making double wages for the same work. Which in turn means your hard earned in-person wages is worth half of theirs. Can you then blame your mechanic, private contractor, construction worker, or any in-person worker for demanding 2x wages to make up the difference? Ultimately, the concept of wages would not hold up and the system would fall apart. Mad max barter system, here we come!
You are still equating productivity with time spent. With knowledge workers, that simply doesn't work anymore. You are paying for delivery of services and a worker's expertise. Not the number of hours spent doing something. If you need an analysis of particular financial instruments to be done by Thursday, does it matter if it takes a worker 1 hour or 20? Or should the measure be the quality of that analysis?
 
  • Love
Reactions: fluoxetine
Exactly. People are missing this point. This isn't a case of clocking out at one job and going to the next like the old days. The advent of high speed internet combined with the push to allow people to work from home has created this loophole that people are exploiting. My hat goes off to the people working two full time jobs the old school way. My hat also goes off to the people who are doing it remotely, but it is in fact a loophole that diminishes the value of everyone else wages because said individual is getting paid twice for the same number of hours. I have a hard time believing that those exploiting this loophole are really working twice as hard in concurrent hours. In fact, the reason they even have the thought of finding another job to do in parallel is because they're not really working all the hours of their first job to begin with. Moreover, if this practice was totally kosher as people claim, then the question is why do people doing this feel the need to hide it from their employers?

The way I look at this is like this:
Would I want my doctor holding a zoom meeting for his/her other job during my procedure? No...? Well, then why is it okay for someone else in any other field to do the same? It is a matter of productivity. Wages have been tied to hours of productivity since the invention of money. If you are supposed to work 9 hours, you are paid according to those 9 hours with the assumption that you are putting in 9 hours worth of work. Some fields are such that you can power through your work in a shorter amount of time. Nothing new there. However, you were still expected to be available for the remainder of those hours. The value of wages are baked into those hours. Getting paid by an unwitting employer for those same hours is essentially cheating the system and it diminishes the value of everyone else's wages bc they don't have the opportunity to work two jobs in parallel even if they wanted to. So it's not like these people are just working harder than everybody else. They're just exploiting the system.

To another person's point, we certainly don't want people to work less in this country, but the idea that people are being equally productive while working two jobs in parallel is a farce. And as such, they are cheating the system in a way. Because again, they are making double wages for the same work. Which in turn means your hard earned in-person wages is worth half of theirs. Can you then blame your mechanic, private contractor, construction worker, or any in-person worker for demanding 2x wages to make up the difference? Ultimately, the concept of wages would not hold up and the system would fall apart. Mad max barter system, here we come!
I think it is fine if they are independent contractors but wrong if they are an employee
 
You are still equating productivity with time spent. With knowledge workers, that simply doesn't work anymore. You are paying for delivery of services and a worker's expertise. Not the number of hours spent doing something. If you need an analysis of particular financial instruments to be done by Thursday, does it matter if it takes a worker 1 hour or 20? Or should the measure be the quality of that analysis?
Regardless of what metric you use, it still boils down to wages. This is the ultimate measure of value. If someone else's time is worth twice as much as yours simply because they have the ability to work remotely without their employer's knowledge, then where does that leave the rest of society who have to show up to work in person?
As I stated, do you then charge said individual twice as much? Why not? Would your mechanic be wrong for charging 2x for his/her knowledge base? How about your doctor who has the knowledge to save your life? Perhaps, 2x isn't enough. It becomes a slipper slope...
 
  • Like
Reactions: superfan01
Regardless of what metric you use, it still boils down to wages. This is the ultimate measure of value. If someone else's time is worth twice as much as yours simply because they have the ability to work remotely without their employer's knowledge, then where does that leave the rest of society who have to show up to work in person?
As I stated, do you then charge said individual twice as much? Why not? Would your mechanic be wrong for charging 2x for his/her knowledge base? How about your doctor who has the knowledge to save your life? Perhaps, 2x isn't enough. It becomes a slipper slope...
Why is it a slippery slope? That's how capitalism works.
 
  • Love
Reactions: fluoxetine
Why is it a slippery slope? That's how capitalism works.
So be it. Then you agree that everyone else should simply charge more for their services to account for this practice? Because they will... and we'll be left wondering why peanut butter cost $20 and a family of 4 is sharing a pizza slice
 
So be it. Then you agree that everyone else should simply charge more for their services to account for this practice? Because they will... and we'll be left wondering why peanut butter cost $20 and a family of 4 is sharing a pizza slice
When too many people can't afford to eat, it hurts corporate bottom lines. Shrinks the customer base.
 
Why is it a slippery slope? That's how capitalism works.
There has to be regulation and rules to a degree or the capitalism system gets too lopsided and collapses in it self if groups of people get too powerful or the system starts getting scammed too much.

capitalism works best when it encourages people to work hard and take risk with the hope it would be paid off "return" down the line.

If you have people just scanning the system it ceases to exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_Sinister
There has to be regulation and rules to a degree or the capitalism system gets too lopsided and collapses in it self if groups of people get too powerful or the system starts getting scammed too much.

capitalism works best when it encourages people to work hard and take risk with the hope it would be paid off "return" down the line.

If you have people just scanning the system it ceases to exist.
But how are they scamming the system? Are these workers not meeting the expectations of their employers in terms of work product? Are they violating company policy? If the answers to both questions are no... then what's the scam?
 
But how are they scamming the system? Are these workers not meeting the expectations of their employers in terms of work product? Are they violating company policy? If the answers to both questions are no... then what's the scam?

IF
 
But how are they scamming the system? Are these workers not meeting the expectations of their employers in terms of work product? Are they violating company policy? If the answers to both questions are no... then what's the scam?
Q1: Yes, see argument above regarding wages
Q2: Probably. Impossible to work two jobs in parallel with concurrent hours without one suffering.
Q3: Yes. Most employers fire employees that they catch doing this. Thus, the hiding game that employees play doing this.
 
As the OP said, "Concurrent". Plenty of people work two jobs... but doing two jobs at the same hours of the day... thats different.

No one questions the guy that leaves his accounting job at 5:00, then goes and tends bar for a couple of hours.
Some salary jobs may complain when crunch time hits and that guy is expected to stay beyond 5PM to help out.
 
But how are they scamming the system? Are these workers not meeting the expectations of their employers in terms of work product? Are they violating company policy? If the answers to both questions are no... then what's the scam?
Violating company policy. No company will allow you to work another job at the same time they are paying you to work said job. It's in every single employee contract you sign when you work.
 
I'd imagine if you could work 2 jobs from home simultaneously then neither is truly needed which means during downturns, sayanora. Of at the very least the work you do could easily be done by someone else. Neither of these scenarios is heartwarming
Meh. There are a lot of jobs that require a specialist but don’t take people 40 hours per week. A company might need a “full time” IT guy but might only need 20 hrs/wk of actual work from him. They can’t just lay him off when times get tough
 
Regardless of what metric you use, it still boils down to wages. This is the ultimate measure of value. If someone else's time is worth twice as much as yours simply because they have the ability to work remotely without their employer's knowledge, then where does that leave the rest of society who have to show up to work in person?
As I stated, do you then charge said individual twice as much? Why not? Would your mechanic be wrong for charging 2x for his/her knowledge base? How about your doctor who has the knowledge to save your life? Perhaps, 2x isn't enough. It becomes a slipper slope...
The slippery slope you are talking about is called a free market. Yes, you can and should charge 2x or 10x if your services are worth that much. If the in person guy could really get 2x by going remote then he should go do that.. or negotiate 2x more from his current employer.
 
Q1: Yes, see argument above regarding wages
Q2: Probably. Impossible to work two jobs in parallel with concurrent hours without one suffering.
Q3: Yes. Most employers fire employees that they catch doing this. Thus, the hiding game that employees play doing this.
On Q3... workers are doing this at their own risk. Up to the employer to figure it out and take whatever action they need/want to take.

I'm not advocating breaking the rules... but if the rules are not explicit, or if they have permission, then earning two incomes should not be a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fluoxetine
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT