Ever since graduating from college, I've adhered to one principle: I only work for employers who either 1) value output, not seat time, or 2) who explicitly require 40 hours a week (no more, no less; this can be an average over the previous year). It's not because I'm not dedicated, or a high performer--in fact, I'd argue my preferences are rooted in actually being a high performer. I know that not much of additional value occurs beyond 40 hours, and I value time beyond that 40 hour mark at an exponentially increasing premium.<p>So for me, I do a very solid, focused, and productive 40 hours and leave time in life for everything else which matters: family, friends, hobbies, sleep.<p>I definitely have experienced the judgment of my peers for being so strict about how I work. Even though I do great work, they frequently give me a hard time for, apparently, not being dedicated enough. But isn't that a little ridiculous? When you're an employee, even of a great employer, it's still just a job. If, in that job, you cease to be an asset (no matter the quality of your work, or the number of hours you put in), you will be reassigned or terminated. To me it's idiotic to treat any job as being anything other than that: a job. There's good, interesting jobs with lots of challenges and great pay; there's really horrible jobs which are menial, micromanaged, abusive bosses, with low pay. It's a continuum of jobs, but that's all they are: jobs. It's almost like people are turning work into a religion. Or that there's a belief that if you sacrifice your life, health, etc. for work that you are to be honored and respected. But that's just masochistic.<p>Work to live, not the other way around.