Recently I've observed a few threads where folks seem to have polarized views of how much work is enough. On one hand you have folks who think working the bare minimum amount of hours is the way to go, citing family, personal time, creating more FT positions, and their financial status that allows them to live on a smaller yearly amount. On the other hand, you have guys who want to work more to increase thier retirement, have debts to pay off so they must work more, don't have a family, want more toys, or just in general have no life outside of UPS. Salaries here (all things being equal, top pay, routes) can widely vary from 50k a year to 120k a year. Hours that an employee can work can vary from 1-2 days working a week ( 3 no pays) to 6 punches (Sat OT) or anything in between. I have been one of the more vocal people about this, defending those who want to work more, but at the same time I fully support the measures in place to prevent unwanted OT placed on employees who don't want it. Personally I try to get as many hours as I possiably can to enhance my retirement, children's future, and my modest lifestyle. I think of it as the more I work now, the less I will have to later. We don't know what the future holds, seizing the opportunity to make 100k+ a year while I can is my objective. I know several people on this forum follow Dave Ramsey in his montra about living like no one now, so you can live like no one else later. But when it comes to working more several of you bash those doing that exact thing which is a hypocritical at best. Everyone has their own reasons for working more or less, I've been guilty of bashing on those FTer's who work 1-2days a week and are in a panic come the end of the month, terminated for a week, or are out hurt for more than a week. I believe this makes our union weak and I also think management knows this. So, what's your opinion on this very polarized topic?