51–60 of 108 posts
On paper it seems nice, but in reality it will just decrease salaries and people will have to work two jobs for the same money. Better to support work from home. It should be considered misogynistic and "anti green", if employer demands work at office.
Misogynistic?
The takeaway for employers: People putting out as much work in four days as they did in five. That must mean that the previous requirement was too low and should be increased.
This assumes an awful lot about the type of work done. Many jobs are about being present between certain given hours. Good luck getting 5 days work out of a nurse in 4 days.
There are at least 3 radically different concepts of a 4 day work week: - same hours, same pay - reduced hours, same pay - reduced hours, reduced pay Why is it always so hard to find this information when people discuss 4 day work weeks? The constant vagueness here is extremely toxic to the diaglogue. People talk past eachother.
Hopefully they do same pay, Less hours. It's a bit tough out there with inflation
I'm still not really seeing how the 4-day-week, at 5 days pay, is delivering the (almost magical) 20%+ productivity boost that its proponents seem to claim it does. I'm sure almost all people feel better when given the option to work fewer hours for the same money ... I know I would! How does that translate into increased productivity, though?
It also forces you to consider anything that stops you getting your work done quickly enough and have more reason to get rid of it.
Not sure how it works with a Fish and Chip shop but I suspect that even service organisations that need 24/7 cover could make up the shortfall by increased happiness and motivation.
For those of us who have a lot of work to do, I couldn't possibly do it in less days (although I guess I would have to drop stuff) but I guess at worst, I might get less interuptions from staff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the OP, but I suspect it's more a question of time. My my wife and I work on opposite ends of town, so if we where to both hop on a bus, meet in the middle, enjoy a nice and leisurely lunch at a nice restaurant (as opposed to just grabbing some fast food) and then hop on a bus back to our respective offices, we're probably looking at at least 2 hours door to door. Hell, even if I'm just going for lunch by myself…
> it's more a question of time So, given we're talking about employers offering flexibility, how about allowing people to take a longer lunch break so they can go for lunch with their OH, but either start their day earlier or stay at work later?
It’s not the same thing though. It’s avoiding the pressure to crush wasteful time in the working day (think 30 person zoom meetings that consist of 2 people talking and 28 people quietly doing emails). This pressure is unavoidable with the typical “100 per cent pay, for 80 per cent of the time, while maintaining 100 per cent productivity” 4 day approach.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not where I am! Rather, it's a negotiation with your manager to see what works best. That way, we can ensure we have coverage across the week. We're all "on" for Mondays and Tuesdays, and then people take Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday off according to preference and suitability. Yes, more people take Friday than Thursday, but quite a lot of people enjoy the zen-like lack of distraction when they work Fridays. Or so…
The pro tip is to work Monday, and thereby catch nearly all the stat days. Some enlightened countries pro-rata stat days, but New Zealand doesn’t.
I'm still not really seeing how the 4-day-week, at 5 days pay, is delivering the (almost magical) 20%+ productivity boost that its proponents seem to claim it does. I'm sure almost all people feel better when given the option to work fewer hours for the same money ... I know I would! How does that translate into increased productivity, though?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It mentions a fish and chip shop and an education facility. I’d guess that the bulk of fish and chips are sold outside 9-5 Monday to Friday, and that there would be rioting in the streets if school days were reduced 20%.
> there would be rioting in the streets if school days were reduced 20% Why not move schools to a four-day week, too? If it works for adults at work, I'm sure children would see similar benefits. We already know that typical school hours deprive children of much needed rest.
Because the unspoken advantage of a four-day week is you get an entire day to yourself without your kids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not where I am! Rather, it's a negotiation with your manager to see what works best. That way, we can ensure we have coverage across the week. We're all "on" for Mondays and Tuesdays, and then people take Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday off according to preference and suitability. Yes, more people take Friday than Thursday, but quite a lot of people enjoy the zen-like lack of distraction when they work Fridays. Or so…
The pro tip is to work Monday, and thereby catch nearly all the stat days. Some enlightened countries pro-rata stat days, but New Zealand doesn’t.
I wonder how much people are adjusting their behavior for these trials... if and when it becomes the norm, do the long meetings and less productive practices creep back in?
Assume 20 productive hours per week (human cpu time) out of a total 40 work week hours (wall time, 9am to 5pm, 5 days a week). Productivity ratio 50%.
Assume 20 productive hours per week (human cpu time) out of a total 32 work week hours (wall time, 9am to 5pm, 4 days a week). Productivity ratio 62.5%.
Simply divide your productivity ratios by each other for a ~20%-25% improvement.
I wonder, if we tack on just an extra 20 productive minutes per day for a total of..
21 productive hours per week (human cpu time) of a further reduced work week of 24 hours (wall time, 9am to 5pm, 3 days a week). Productivity ratio 83.3%.
An additional massive 33% boost over the draconian slavery schedule of the current four-day status quo!
I think I may be on to something.
Further productivity increases are left as an exercise to the reader. Hint: there is a totally logical and clear path to a productivity ratio of 137.5%!