All points well taken, most of which I agree with.
There are two separate issues - the assertions about the past and the assertions about the future.
To say "people work more today than ever" is testable. We have data and that assertion is not supported. Nor is the assertion that we have less leisure than ever. But neither would the assertion that people in industrial economies today work less than ever, which is also testable and false. As for the seasons of agriculture, that depends on the time and place. As the home wool industry spread and inflation set in during the sixteenth century in particular, peasants many places found themselves compelled to weave in the down times to make ends meet, as just one example. The book whose title I can't remember was written partly to dispell the notion of the easy winter of the 18th-century peasant.
In terms of counting childcare and so forth, it's common to do so because if you don't you distort the entire household work picture dramatically once you include women in your calculations.
Then there are the assertions about the future, which are not testable and seem mostly far-fetched in this article. In the 1930s John Maynard Keynes posited that the grandchildren of his generation (so roughly speaking, us or for some of you, your parents) would have a work week of only a few hours and mostly live a life of leisure.
So respected economists and thinkers have been making the same prediction as the article author since at least 1930 and yet last I checked nobody considers a 10-hour work week to be "full time." So basically I think the article is likely to be BS from start to finish.
That said, I can't help but think we'd be better off with fewer iPhones and fewer work hours, but historically we've chosen to reduce work slightly and increase material conditions dramatically. It is possible that we will reach a point where we decide we don't need to increase our material wealth and we just want to reduce the amount of work, but there will always be people who will want to work 80 hours a week for as much as they can get and most people will probably always want to allocate a substantial portion of their day to having a handful of luxuries. Pretty much as Rupert said.