
Efficiency up, turnover down: Sweden experiments with six-hour working day - smackay
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/17/efficiency-up-turnover-down-sweden-experiments-with-six-hour-working-day
======
douche
When I was working a blue-collar, industrial job, I would be happy to work 10
or 12 hour days. Usually the schedule was 4 10s, with the Mondays and Fridays
rotating to give a four-day weekend every other week. Of course, longer days
meant overtime pay, too, if it added up to more than 40 hours in the week. I
was also commuting about two hours a day, so shorter days didn't really give
me any extra free time (downside of government holidays was that they only
paid 8 hours, so you'd end up still working 4 days, just for 8 hours each
instead of 10).

Working as a programmer now, I find that I mostly can put in about 4 hours of
real work in a day, before my brain is mush. Although there are other blessed
days when I get in the groove and have plenty of work to do with no
interruptions, and I might work steady for 12 or 15 hours straight. It takes
something of a miracle for this to occur, though, since two or more 30 minute
meetings, or having to bounce around a couple different projects doing email
support can wreck any attempt at getting into a flow for the day.

Physical labor might be strenuous, but I generally find it to be less
exhausting than mental labor.

~~~
agumonkey
I fondly remember digging trenches[1] in a hot summer. It was the most painful
thing I ever did, but I approached levels of zen I rarely have now. Everybody
is built differently, but there's something deeply good about physical
exhaustion. When you know the job, you get in flow easily. When done you feel
all reset, the next day you feel a bit sore but it's the good kind, you even
anticipate it.

[1] And if some kind of tasks are too brutal, there's always swimming (or even
qigong).

------
hashberry
I used job hop every 1-2 years looking for the perfect work environment. I
couldn't find one until I started working as remote developer where the only
thing that matters are results. My personal turnover is down: I've had the
same job for seven years.

If you leave at the same time every day YOU ARE A SEAT WARMER. I remember
sitting in a cubicle having completed all my work for the day, but couldn't
leave at 3pm because it would look bad. That was my own personal hell because
efficiency did not reward me with more personal time.

~~~
Spearchucker
_YOU ARE A SEAT WARMER._

Yeah or maybe you have kids.

~~~
dikaiosune
I read that the opposite way -- GP doesn't seem to be talking about staying
late, but rather leaving early.

------
stefs
after almost burning out at my previous job (mo-thu 9 hrs + 1 hour break, so
10 hours at the office, friday until 3pm) i decided on a 30-hour week at my
current job, 5x6 hours - with aliquot salary of course and flexible work time.

i couldn't be happier. sure, i'm not earning as much as i could (though i earn
as much for 30hrs as for 42hrs at my previous job - living expenses are higher
though, but it's enough to get me through the day), but the overall increase
in quality and happiness is well worth it. i'm more concentrated and
productive, instead of just looking at the clock and wishing for the bell to
ring. if i can't concentrate at all i leave earlier and when i'm motivated and
productive i stay longer - win/win situation for me and my employer, i'd say.

i'm pretty sure i get more work done in those 6hrs than during the 9 hour day
on my earlier job, and more important: i don't completely despair in the
evening, close to tears because i don't know how to get through another day in
the office. to the contrary: i love the work, i love the job (i also love the
coffee machine and ping pong table in the cellar).

~~~
rectang
How did you find or negotiate such an arrangement?

There seem to be very few non-40-hour software engineering positions
available, even though many of us would happily trade away some salary for
quality of life.

~~~
brianwawok
Small companies can be flexible. Large companies have to deal with rules
written by people too far removed from your boss.

------
jobu
Nursing is a _hard_ job, and tired/stressed people make mistakes. I would be
interested in seeing data on patient outcomes before and after this change.

~~~
Osmium
I was reading an informed opinion recently that longer shifts are much better
for nursing, in that there's a lot of lost efficiency and lost knowledge
during shift changes. Perhaps limiting the total number of hours worked in a
week, rather than the length of any one individual shift, might be better?
This person's opinion was that tiredness was not as big an issue as it's made
out to be -- though I'm personally skeptical of that, and would be surprised
if statistics back it up, it does seem to be a view I hear from some medical
professionals.

~~~
Retric
There is two ways to deal with that problem, either fewer handoffs or better
handoffs. I suspect focusing on more efficient handoffs and practicing more
may be better than simply having longer shifts. Because 6h vs 12h shifts might
cut handoff mistakes in half, but with 6h shifts good record keeping becomes
more obviously important, and fewer things need to be communicated at handoff
aka 6h worth of info vs 12h worth of info.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Shifts (being groups of workers that start and finish at a particular time _en
masse_ ) themselves are probably contrary to good practice wrt patient care.
If the whole shift changes then it seems there would be a substantial
discontinuity in care; you'd want people to have staggered work patterns so in
any hour there is always a substantial proportion of staff who were there the
previous hour.

Unless you have many-to-one carers-to-patients then it wouldn't matter so
much.

------
malanj
These results are super interesting, but I wonder how much can be attributed
to the Hawthorn Effect
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect)).
I.e. will this result be generalizable and stable over time.

~~~
Dylan16807
I'd expect the Hawthorne Effect to lead to more stress...

------
daxfohl
This could be inverting cause and effect. Perhaps those looking for 6-hour
days are the ones more likely to want a long-term job. Those wanting "the next
big thing" will work long hours until either it hits or they move on in a
year.

------
blisterpeanuts
How would this model work for a startup where people often put in 60+ hours a
week?

It's fine to let public workers like the geriatric nurses in the article do
6-hour shifts as long as you have the budget to hire extra staffers to cover
the lost hours.

And, of course, that extra budget comes out of the pockets of private sector
workers and businesses in taxes.

------
a3voices
Much of software engineering (and probably other white collar work) is
subconscious thought that is invisibly churning in your brain. It's very
difficult, if not impossible, to speed it up. So working more hours isn't
helpful because a lot of the delay is waiting for your subconscious.

~~~
daxfohl
[https://twitter.com/codequalified/status/627113899754717184](https://twitter.com/codequalified/status/627113899754717184)

------
kfk
So, they work less, but they had to hire more people, at the same salary.
Operating Costs are going up. Who is paying for that? Tax payers of course!
Most of which have to work more than 6 hrs to pay for those kind of politics.

~~~
yardie
I've rarely met anyone that has actually "worked" a full 8 hours. The marathon
work days where you actually do 8, and more likely 16, are few and far
between. Once you exclude the coffee breaks, snack breaks, stretch breaks,
brain breaks, etc. you easily get back to 6 hours. Hell if you are on here and
at work you are technically not working. Most managers will overlook the
occasional reddit or YC page load because they know it's hard to "crush it"
for hours straight.

~~~
rm_-rf_slash
You're absolutely right. I get to work at 8 and start to lose steam around 1
(hence why I'm here). I would gladly buy an extra two hours in return for the
expectation that work is for work goofing around is for home.

I think the contemporary startup idea that people have to be "working and
playing" at the office for 10-14 hours a day to make anything significant
happen is at worst, misguided, and, to a cynic like me, just a way to grind
people out of your company before they can vest any significant amount of
equity.

~~~
mgraczyk
Unfortunately that isn't how this would play out long term. With a six hour
work day, people would just work for 5 hours and goof off for the rest of the
time. If we reduced to day further, we would see a corresponding, proportional
decrease in the ratio of productive to unproductive time.

~~~
vectorjohn
Well, I don't believe that for a second and it sounds like you made it up.

I (and others) anecdotally lose steam part way through the day. The last
couple hours are a waste. I see no reason why that would happen earlier if the
day ended earlier.

