Posted on 12/01/2022 8:24:22 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
(NEXSTAR) – One less day of work, not a dollar less in pay – for an employee, what’s not to love? But even employers like the idea, a recent trial of about 30 companies shows.
Thirty-three companies employing about 1,000 people in the U.S., Ireland and Australia decided to test out a four-day, 32-hour workweek as part of a six-month pilot designed by the nonprofit 4 Day Week Global and professors at Boston College. The trial instructed “employees to work 80% of their regularly scheduled hours in return for 100% of their pay and a pledge to deliver 100% of their standard output.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
LOL...my first thought, too. Get people to stop texting, browsing the web, playing games, yakking on the phone, etc and you are down to four days of honest work.
I doubt this applies to manufacturing operations, more like the office jobs. As a matter of fact if most those office jobs people stayed away, the factories that make goods would experience much greater productivity.
Just wait for the big war-—the munitions factories going 24-7 most of the work force in uniform fighting Chinese drones in far away battlefields. Supply lines cut, The wall to keep Americans from fleeing to Mexico. All will be Flags and saving the world for Democracy in the “War to end all wars”. I fear its coming soon. Then a 48 hour work week will be normal, along with rationing, and privation.
But not having the commute and being comfortable in my quiet home is worth it. I am my most productive in the off hours when useless people aren't calling me, trying to get me to do their job. Wish they would just be fired. Also love having a healthy lunch which I am doing now!
I hear ya. Had to fill up twice a week just to sit at a desk in an office to do the very same thing I can do at home.
Depends on the job. Mine is analytical in nature. Spreadsheets, etc. I can do it anywhere with a solid al gore connection.
Oddly enough, there are technological miracles such as databases and spreadsheets (and bosses who don’t have their heads stuck in their asses) which allow one to track actual productivity rather than ‘time at desk’.
I’ve had more than one moron supervisor or manager who judged ‘productivity’ by ‘seat time’.
I get paid for what I get done, if that takes me 2 hours or 12, only an idiot who should be hanging sign instead of supervising would care. Yeah, if providing coverage, but it’s just getting ‘x’ tasks done?
“One less day of work, not a dollar less in pay – for an employee, what’s not to love?”
Just a thought but, a company might not love the significant decrease in overall productivity.
Same here. I got approval from my management to go 100% remote and moved to TN. The nearest offixe for me is in Raleigh, NC. 6 hours each way. No way. I’ll quit first.
No, they are not.
From the article:
The trial instructed “employees to work 80% of their regularly scheduled hours in return for 100% of their pay and a pledge to deliver 100% of their standard output.”
Of course, I start at 5:00am.
I would quit as well. I’m lucky what I do is undermanned, old, and buried in work.
(Electrical Distribution Design)
Many people actually work but if they were to do the job without being watched, it might take 2 total hours instead of the 8-10 when required to come to the office. In many industries, most of the time is waiting on data or for others to be finished with their work (standby). Personal things in the office are frowned upon so people on standby would just waste their time looking busy by stretching out what work they have. It is the nature of the industry and was previously no way to get around it but now people can be on standby without being in the office.
Doing laundry or taking a break is a much more effective use of time than “stretching” and keeps employees charged for when they do the actual work.
Every job I’ve had, I busted ass for 40 hours/week.
Got paid for same.
“This country is screwed. Get money for sitting at home, doing the laundry. No industrial output. Everyone is entitled to do nothing.
I am not joining that world.”
I worked a four day week for the police; the difference is that it was a four day 10 hour day. The three days off were welcome and needed.
I think we are all in agreement that for various types of jobs, you might find some where working from home ALL the time works perfectly for both employer and employee, working some portion might work, but some, will never be conducive to it in any fashion due to the type of work.
My issue is that it doesn’t appear to me to be viewed in that practical way by potential employees in many respects in this environment.
Absolutely. I am completely in favor of four ten hour days or three 13 hour days, or whatever works. There is a difference there.
Especially in jobs with high burnout rates.
If you've hired the right people then WFH is very doable.
We've had an issue of some slackers in WFH. I'm afraid of instead of dealing with those on an individual level a company says, aha!!! We knew folks were slacking so they have to come back to the office.
Here's an HR newsflash....slackers are gonna be slackers at the office or at home.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.