Well, I'm not one of those people. I like waking up with the sun and driving to work in the daylight. The idea that DST solves anything absolutely blows my mind. If you want the ability to start your work day earlier and end it earlier, that seems like a worker protection bill that needs to be passed. DST is the kludgiest kludge that ever kludged.

The problem of offices is not when we spend time in them but rather that we spend time in them at all. What a banal hell it is we have consented to endure compared to the comforts of our homes or of any space actually designed for the wellness of human beings or even focused work.

Except for people like me who struggle to wake up before dawn. And whether people prefer light after work doesn't change the available scientific evidence which suggests there are significant negative health effects of waking up too early relative to sunrise, but no significant health benefits from having sunlight hours after work. People's preferences in this case are generally only mildly held and typically are not well informed by the science. I suspect if more people were aware of the deleterious health effects, their stated preferences would change.

Average school start/end times in BC are 8:30 AM and 3 PM. Standard time in Vancouver puts sunrise/sunset at 8AM/415PM at winter solstice for standard time. That's 30 minutes of daylight before school and 75 minutes after school. IOW, kids are more likely to be walking in the dark in the morning, even with standard time.

Switching to daylight time will switch sunrise/sunset to 9AM/515PM, guaranteeing kids will be walking in the dark in the morning.

I agree with you. I also need to shout at the clouds on this because the experts who make the argument for time changes drive me crazy.

I live in Calgary. At a previous grade school my daughter went to, school started early enough that she left in pitch black conditions in winter, regardless of "experts" and their precious daylight savings time.

'You need sunshine when you wake up' is really a ridiculous argument, there is no sunshine even with DST.

Get rid of it. Maybe egg the houses of the "experts" too.

(As for my kids, thankfully, they did remote school during Covid (hence late mornings) and then I moved to a place where the school starting time was later than 8.)

In addition to the reason already given (kids get home before the evening traffic picks up), another reason is that generally driving conditions are worse in the morning than they are in the evening so if there isn't enough light for both the morning and evening drives to be in light it is safer to give the light to the morning drive.

> kids coming home in the darkness (against exhausted drivers).

If you’re exhausted you shouldn’t be driving. Period. You’re the danger to kids, not light or darkness. (Your headlights are in working order, right?)

> (against fresh drivers)

How many people roll out of bed, rush out the door and jump in the car before they're actually awake? In my circles, that would be a larger percentage that of those that get up with plenty of time to wake up. I'm not sure any time of the day is safer regarding attentive drivers. Especially if we're going to consider idiots on their phones while driving.

> I've seen arguments about kids going to school in the darkness being thrown around a lot

I’m sure there’s some correlation with the time zone, but it feels like a “think of the children!” argument that ignores much more significant factors (e.g. traffic speed and volume).

What time the clock says shouldn't affect this

Will all jobs, schools, stores, etc also change their working hours?

That's partly because it's in the same timezone as Poland. Madrid is further west that London, but London is an hour behind. Moving Spain to permanent DST puts it on the same effective timezone as London.

http://blog.poormansmath.net/images/SolarTimeVsStandardTime....

Without the DST offset, Spain much more "red" than England.

It's not so much a "permeant DST" but rather a "we want to change to GMT without moving out of the CET timezone."

Spain instead adjusted it's entire country around the time.

And they still do DST. They're just on a different time zone than they should be because during WWII, they changed to the same time zone as Germany.

Or just have schools change their hours as needed.

Time changes are just a hack to make every business change their effective office hours back when the sign on the door - and coordination - mattered. Today brick and mortar is way less relevant. Way more people are working from home or going to work at random hours. The time change doesn't affect going to grocery store or restaurants or the gym. It's basically just schools, banks, and the DMV.

Why not have a given entity change its hours through the year, if the relation to the sun actually matters?

(And no, I don't buy that there needs to be time coordination between schools, since they are all already slightly different anyway. Different kids have different after school programs different days. Different parents are already going to work different hours. There's no way to coordinate for everyone to be happy, ever.)

No one wants another Indian time zone in the world - one is already enough of a hassle to deal with.

If US states want to get rid of time switches they are free to go to year-round Standard Time (like Arizona).

> I remain unclear what authority the federal government has over such a matter

It's actually an enumerated power under Article I, Section 8, Clause 5:

> [The Congress shall have Power...] To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; ...

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C5-1/...

I read elsewhere this may be partial reason why BC forged ahead. As Canada/US relationship is on the rocks and BC stopped waiting for the US to change.

It is crazy, because there is actually a law that allows us to switch to year round PST if we want (but no one wants that), while we need congressional approval to switch to PDT year round (which is what everyone wants) and the house voted for it, but the senate simply didn't make it a priority.

A lot of people hate standard time in winter because the sun sets at 4 or 5, and they want the sun to instead set at 8 or 9 like it does in summer. DST in winter doesn't actually give you the 8 or 9 sunset, it gives you a 5 or 6 sunset (which doesn't get you all that much) combined with moving your sunrise to 8 or 9, which causes its own set of issues most people don't think about.

The last time we went to year-round DST, we stopped almost immediately because people experienced what winter DST was actually like and went "wait, this sucks."

They worked best when everybody were farmers and had to get up early and go to bed early. Now most people don't live their lives centered around noon, our free time comes after our work is done at around 17:00, so having more light in the evening instead of worthless light in the night makes sense.

We don't use standard time because it works best, we use it because it's "correct" relative to the position of the sun.

Now, standard business hours (9-5 or whatever) were probably chosen for working well in the circumstances where they became standard, and it might be interesting to watch for whether tweaking the clocks leads to tweaking the nominal time of things...

> It's "standard" for a reason

The reason is that with standard time, solar noon coincides with local noon, so the day is approximately symmetric about noon, not regarding atmospheric refraction lengthening the day. It wasn't done on a whim.

The article, however, says 93% wanted daylight savings in the linked public engagement report.

The US decided (and Canada followed) that daylight time was more correct for the larger portion of the year, presumably it's easier to transition the remaining 4mo to daylight than it is to move 8mo to standard.

But also, all the opinion polling (business and individual) was like over 90% in favour of year-round daylight time, so here we are.

the reason was valid 50 years ago when most people didn't work 9-5 in front of a computer.

Sadly, this isn't really right. Humanity settled on solar time. For somewhat obvious reasons.

Alas, I don't see my preferred method of changing the clock by 10 minutes every month taking hold. Basically ever. :D

I also don't think this is nearly as important for places that are not further away from the equator. If you are on the equator, you are almost certainly fine with no change throughout the year.

I’d guess that there is less of a need for light at the beginning of the day since most people don’t farm. Personally I prefer more light at the end of the day.

> Humanity settled on these numbers long ago because they work best.

Absolutely not. It was a compromise tempered by practical and political considerations.

And that reason was that it was the standard before the standard was rethought. There's no deeper meaning to it.

And we rethought it yet again, should we go on the time standard (DST) that we're already on for ~65% of the year, or the one we're on for ~35% the year.

It should be pretty obvious why DST is the new winner, it's the current standard.

Not that long ago, and we keep fiddling with them. The US time zones were adopted just over a century ago. The dates for daylight saving time were changed less than 20 years ago. Much of Western Europe changed time zones (much of it rather violently) in the 1940s, as did China. The tz database often requires updates for changes.

If you want to go with what was settled long ago, that would probably be a return to each town observing its own time based on local solar noon, which would be pretty annoying.

I have children and I’ve never heard any arguments for DLS that make any sense.

Most of the time people conflate longer summer days with DLS.

The situation with dark mornings is winter not standard time.

My children are already waking to school in daylight this time of year prior to the switch to DLS.

As others have said. I would rather permanent standard time but I’ll take permanent DLS. Moving the clocks twice a year is insanity.

I don’t have children, but I was a child once. I didn’t mind going to school in darkness (in winter) and enjoy 1h more of daylight in the evening. Having that extra hour of daylight in the morning always seemed a waste for me because I wasn’t doing something I wanted (I was doing something I had to do, this is, going to school)

I don't have children and I prefer permanent Standard Time because I have the apparently weird belief that noon should be at noon.

(i.e. the time 12:00PM should be when the sun is overhead)

I'm not a "capitalism gives you brain worms" kind of person, but the idea that it is somehow better to literally change the location of the sun in the sky because the holy hours of 9-5 are sacrosanct is so strange to me.

Where I live, in winter it's dark in the morning (and also the evening depending on the length of the school day) with and without DST, and in summer the sun is also up either way.

Conversely, I'd rather my kids have more daylight after school so they can explore outside.

Selfishly, I just want as much daylight as possible, which has very little to do with how a government selects a time range for legal reasons. The rotation of the globe has not been yet controlled, as far as I'm tracking.

Save it in the evening, it was always dark in the morning.

Historically we were saving daylight for the morning

> Uncle Steve is zero hours ahead.

Uncle Steve is the same number of hours ahead that he has always been, and that's a thing that could be looked up just as easily as finding his time zone. I think the author is greatly exaggerating the degree to which time zones solve any of the problems mentioned. Uncle Steve might be on a different sleep schedule from me, regardless of whether or not he's in a different time zone.

Days of the week definitely become interesting in a global UTC system, but noon used to literally mean "the sun is at it's highest point". I suspect that people would grumble for a year or two and then forget that another system ever existed.

thank you for sharing, I was trying to find something similar that explains why UTC everywhere is such a bad idea!

My nightmare world would be one where we apply "everything else" logic to time.

1 kilosecond: about 17 minutes

1 megasecond: about 12 days

1 gigasecond: about 32 years

"Oh man, it's been a hot megasecond since we last spoke!" Said everyone, in my worst nightmares.

12 oz of alcohol would obviously be larger in the winter the closer you get to the poles. I think I like this idea.

Nah, it also sounds terrible on paper.

I care about morning more than evening. That's when the most important parts of my day happen

On further reading, the northeast of British Columbia is actually on permanent Mountain Standard Time, as seen here:

https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zone/canada/chetwynd

Parts of the Columbia-Kootenays change between Mountain Standard and Mountain Daylight time:

https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zone/canada/cranbrook

while the Town Of Creston is permanently on Mountain Standard Time.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day!

The biggest unreasonability is switching at all. I admit other points of view, but switching back and forth is a compromise that seems far worse than just sticking with one. Either one.

What stops you from going to work one hour early, so you get off earlier as well? Most employers these days allow flexible working hours.

And if we are permanently moving our clocks to advance by an hour, why stop at just one hour? Why not have +2h or +3h so we get even more brighter evenings.

Sure. But this argument is surely less powerful than it was back in the era of church bells and big clocks on factory walls and so on. We now have electronics that add a whole new layer of abstraction to our schedules, to the point that you can now miss a DST change if you're not paying attention. For many people (I'm one) this change is now just a useless irritation.

So adjust the work schedule.

If people want more time in the evening, get up earlier and go to work and go home earlier.

You can even shift school/work schedules throughout the year.

The social construct is moving later though. I guess this is because people's desire to sleep longer is making them move the social constraint of being at work later, while they stay up "partying" regardless of the social constraint.

School and business hours are already fairly arbitrary where I live. The only places observing "standard" hours seem to be banks and even many of those stay open later in the evening these days. Meanwhile the schools do everything based on juggling a limited number of busses meaning that start and end times are staggered over a period of 3+ hours. You see evidence of this in traffic patterns as well. It starts early with the trades and runs well into the late morning due (AFAIK) to tech.

> As someone else pointed everyone is already on DST for approximately 65% of the year. This just removes the remaining 35%. Picking standard time would have been a much bigger change.

This 65% started during the Dubya presidency (source: I was there updating tzdata on systems), and previous to that it was a 50/50 split.

So 65/35 or 50/50 is arbitrary.

I'm merely saying that the mass adoption of clock time for planning daily routines was an industrialist conspiracy to get people working when by natural right they should be sleeping.

We could easily have software presenting time to us as true solar time. We're not limited to gears and levers anymore, our "clocks" now have GPS and can trivially calculate solar time with that. Doing this one off is easy. The problem is society at large still trying to make plans like when to start work shifts or school hours based on a system of time that flies wildly out of synch with Earth's natural rhythms throughout the year.

Massive self-own for humanity.