
Moving the World to a 4 Day Workweek – An Interview with Aidan Harper - nbrempel
https://blog.30hourjobs.com/an-interview-with-aidan-harper-of-the-4-day-week-campaign/
======
le205
I run a ~20 person digital marketing company and we are experimenting with a 4
day week this summer. Everyone has Fridays off in June and July. Pay is
unchanged.

Fundamentally it seemed like a cool thing to do for staff - more time to enjoy
a summer in London. Doing whatever you want on a Friday - life admin, hobbies,
long weekend away, recovering from a hangover... your call.

But then it also seemed like an opportunity to experiment with this new
constraint. Could we avoid losing 20% of our output? We certainly didn’t want
to work 2 extra hours per day. So the idea was to really take the chance to
look at how we work, how we organise ourselves, how we prioritise, how we
communicate and share. What can we automate or improve processes for. How we
use meetings as a tool for value. And also how we really dive into our work
with intensity and drive for the hours we are there.

Overall, sentiment across the company has been extremely positive. We
certainly haven’t made up for the lost day in measurable improvements or
efficiencies. But we have maybe got half way there - without inducing
increased stress during the four days. The team feels more together. And we
have probably all learned some skills that will make 5 day weeks that more
productive when we restart them. So overall I would be surprised if it wasn’t
win-win for all involved.

I can certainly see us doing this again next year - and maybe also again for a
month like December. It really just feels good/right overall.

~~~
julienreszka
French?

~~~
sp332
The comment mentions London. Not impossible by train, only unlikely :)

~~~
julienreszka
Parisians often go to London for weekends

------
gdubs
The comments on this seem trapped by conventional thinking and pessimism. At a
time, the 40 hour work week was seen as a fantasy that, if inacted, would
destroy the economy. Instead, we saw rising productivity due to lower rates of
illness and injury, among other factors. [1]

People aren’t robots, and there’s nothing magical about the current number of
days and hours considered “normal”. There’s plenty to suggest that such a move
would be a net benefit for society and the economy.

1: Robert Gordon, “The Rise and Fall of American Growth.”

~~~
chasd00
if 5 days worked (down from 7) and 4 days will work (down from 5) then why not
just go straight to zero days?

~~~
krageon
For the same reason that we want cars to drive slower but not stop driving at
all. This is the poster child for reducing an argument to ridiculousness. What
is proposed is what is proposed, not an extrapolation pulled so far out of
context that it becomes unthinkable.

------
otoburb
To be really clear, Aidan Harper is campaigning for the following:

 _" We make the case for a general reduction in working hours __without__ a
reduction in pay. We also make the case for a steady managed transition to
shorter hours with a bolstered welfare state in such a way that the most
vulnerable and underpaid in society are protected."_

It's hard enough to ask companies to shift to a 4-day workweek for the various
reasons outlined in the article and sibling comments, but usually this is
accompanied by a corresponding cut in compensation. Adding the "without a
reduction in pay" condition makes the proposition much more difficult for
small-to-medium sized businesses.

In fairness to the article, there is the possibility of asking employees to
work 10hr workdays for 4 days to accommodate the 40-hr work week model (or
8.75hrs/day in France to accommodate their 35-hr work week). Since (most of
us?) are already overworked, maybe this then just boils down to a scheduling
and staff coverage problem.

~~~
baron_harkonnen
Anyone who does knowledge work in a large company knows a huge amount of the
"work" is just a weird game we all agreed to play. Sure everyone is busy, but
surprisingly little is really getting done. We agree to work 40 hours because
that model worked for people making widgets in factories. People work extra
hours to demonstrate socially that they're hard workers, but again, nothing is
really getting done.

There is no reason at all you could not reduce all of this to 30 hours a week
and get the same amount of productivity accomplished. Why shouldn't people be
compensated the same if the end result is the same? For labor intensive job
where a human is working as a type of robot then hours of labour is directly
correlated with hours of product (with some point of diminishing returns as
you overwork people).

~~~
kdmccormick
I think you're over-generalizing. Yes, some people work more than 40 hours for
social recognition without getting any more real work done. On the other hand,
I know people who truly do work over 40 hours out of a feeling of passion or
obligation, completing extra work while not advertising the extra hours
they're putting in.

~~~
baron_harkonnen
To be clear, I'm not talking about people "goofing off at work" (such as
myself on HN right now). Socialization is something deeply internalized so it
doesn't matter if you know people are watching. I've been those people working
on things late a night without anyone knowing, then I realized so much of it
was sweat and stress for literally nothing.

The thing is, when you look at the fruits of the labor put in, the result is
nearly null. There are people who are working very hard on things that have no
real long term (or short term) purpose or function for their employers, it's
work that exists because "work" has to be done. When I look at the projects
being busily worked on around me, nearly none of them have any value or will
make a dent in the overall productivity of the larger company. These people
aren't goofing off. This is the ritual of work.

People pray in the privacy of their own home but that doesn't mean there's a
god listening. The same goes for the culture of "work" in most large
organizations.

~~~
aeternus
What industry to you work in, and how large of a company is it?

Sounds like a great opportunity for a more efficient competitor to undercut
this company :D

~~~
krageon
Once you get past a certain size, efficiency is a pipe dream.

------
alissasobo
It's a sick reality that, in this country, we sell wellness to the masses as
if "wellness" and "health" are entirely one's own responsibility. One of the
main roots of the problem is a work culture that exhausts many of us and
pushes most families to the edge.

~~~
elamje
That is an exaggeration. We have the ability to choose careers and jobs, so we
have the ability to choose a healthier lifestyle via career moves. If someone
has locked themselves down with debt, children, unhealthy stress levels, etc.
an employer is not the one that is held responsible at the end of the day.
Part of being in a society that values the individual, is that the individual
gets the praise in good times, and must own the blame in bad.

If you believe your employer should be taking better care of you, you can vote
via leaving your employer. Who exactly should be responsible if not yourself,
and how? Many people on HN sit at desks most of the day doing tasks that are
laughably easier than what 2, 3, 4 generations ago were doing.

~~~
jkartchner
If I understand you right, you're saying an employer has ZERO responsibility
if their employees are overworked because the employee could always just
"choose another job." This does not align with reality the vast majority of
the time.

~~~
elamje
I was commenting on the parent saying "It's a sick reality.." That seemed a
little over the top, when you can leave your employer if the situation isn't
good. I know job transfers can be hard to find, and career moves are
difficult, but it is reality that quitting your job is never impossible.

~~~
deegles
Technically correct answer, but missing the point about how job
transfers/retraining are way more difficult than they need to be... hence
people being "unable" to quit.

------
allthecybers
I beat this drum pretty regularly on HN but it is staggering to me why with
our technological productivity we haven't already transitioned to less working
hours. I am aware that not every industry/job could do this but how many
couldn't?

It makes no sense to me why masses of people are okay with giving their prime
waking hours, in the prime years of their life to earn a wage. Then we
relegate living to nights and weekends. Being able to retire with the health
and wealth to live your dreams is a crapshoot at best.

I realize it is a process but I would love to see more companies treat this as
almost the ultimate quality of life perk they could offer.

~~~
amiga_500
Name the only thing that's increased in price many fold that _everyone_
requires. Not everyone has a degree, so it's not that, plus skyrocketing
education costs are limited to the USA. It's not health either as this has
happened in countries with proper healthcare. It's the other thing.

That's where the answer lies.

~~~
krageon
I actually have no idea what you mean.

------
jedberg
At my company I enforce a no-meetings-Friday rule. Combined with being fully
remote and biasing towards asynchronous communication whenever possible, it
effectively means a four day work week if you want it. If you disappear on
Friday, no one will really notice.

~~~
catacombs
> At my company I enforce a no-meetings-Friday rule

Do you make any exceptions? Seems weird for someone who might need to discuss
something will need to wait until Monday.

~~~
jedberg
I mean the same could be said for someone who needs to know something on
Friday having to wait until Monday.

If it’s really critical you could set up a meeting on Friday or Saturday or
Sunday. Or you can send an email and maybe they’ll answer on the “weekend”.

~~~
catacombs
> Or you can send an email and maybe they’ll answer on the “weekend”.

If a SCUD missile isn't headed toward the office, what makes one think people
in working four days a week will answer email on the weekend?

~~~
jedberg
The same thing that gets them to answer email on Saturday or Sunday? Maybe
they want to work. Maybe they are avoiding their family. Maybe they took some
time off on Wednesday and felt the need to make up for it.

There's really little difference between a two day weekend and a three day
weekend.

------
endymi0n
The biggest problem if you really wanted to do this is that gross and net work
aren't the same. And depending on the job, they can be really, REALLY
different.

My wife is a part-time accountant and for her it's working out nicely. She
spends maybe 2-3 hours every week on generic stuff like coordination, meetings
or bureaucracy which she would also spend at 40h.

For Engineers, this ratio is absurdly different. To speak in a cloud metaphor,
Engineers are limited by I/O bandwidth and not by compute or RAM.

Because you need to learn so much about general coding, languages, algorithms,
architecture, frameworks, domain specific expertise and whatnot AS WELL AS
coordinate with stakeholders, on-location and upstream contributors,
reviewers, managers, architects, QA, ... — they spend maybe 2-3 hours net of
_actually writing code_.

The rest of the week is spent on how and why to write that code in the first
place.

Once I understood the fundamental difference, the allure of crunch mode made a
whole lot more sense to me. For 10-50% more time, you can get a whopping
100-500% in output for a short time. Compare that with the negative efficiency
of adding more people (which, as we all know, will make the project later).

A 30h workweek would work into the opposite direction. For 25% less time, you
might get 50-70% less productivity.

Not gonna happen. Sorry.

~~~
mnm1
> For 10-50% more time, you can get a whopping 100-500% in output for a short
> time.

No you can't. Not quality output anyway. After a few hours writing code even
the best engineers stop being productive and the quality goes down. From an
ignorant manager's perspective this might be true, but it's not reality. Most
people cannot code well for more than about five hours or so anyway. There's
still plenty of time for bureaucratic bullshit. Of course to managers, people
are robots to be pushed to the max and exploited. That's why ridiculous
thinking like the above exists. And this isn't even taking into account the
negative consequences on the employee being forced to work long hours over
even a short period of time like a few days to a week which build up and start
to reduce quality even further even in the five or so hours that could be
productive. It is just a stupid managerial delusion to think putting in more
time coding will be more productive, thinking completely removed from reality.

------
mbrundle
For the last four years I’ve been a data scientist whilst working a 4 day
week. I look after our 3 young kids on Friday - my wife is a corporate lawyer
who works 24/7 so this arrangement lets our kids have a bit more parent time.
The kids and I have a lot of fun going to places in central London that I
would typically avoid due to high crowds on weekends.

I don’t think my career has had a negative impact - all the companies (a mix
of v early startups and large multinationals) have been very supportive, and
I’ve managed to do some of my best professional work during this time.

The work life balance is really great this way. It’s clearly not an option if
you need that fifth day to pay the bills, but if that’s not the case then it’s
worth considering. One slight negative is not having time to learn new skills
or work on side projects in the evenings - I’m too exhausted! - but I’ve also
been lucky to be able to learn everything I need on the job, so it hasn’t
mattered much up till now.

------
g_len
Just as Tim Ferriss's "4 hour workweek" is a simplified tagline used to convey
a more complex point (there are more possibilities than ever to escape the
9-5), in my mind the "4 day workweek" term is the same (a work week need not
be 5 days): it's not the precise form of the reduced workweek that matters,
it's the shattering of the unchallenged acceptance of society's ideals with
respect to work (full-time = 40 hours/week; hard workers work more and are
better employees; aspiring to work less means you are lazy/lack ambition/will
never achieve anything great etc.).

What surprises me (VC backed founder topping out at 40 hours per week) the
most is how having an aspiration to work less is seen as a goal that needs to
be in some way defended - why does everyone (feel they have to pretend to)
love work so much? I literally felt the need to create a blog about the perils
of overwork [1] just to help justify to myself why it's OK that I don't want
to spend more time working (result = peace of mind that I'm not letting the
entire world down by not working myself into the ground)... Of course, a lot
of this pressure is in my head, but these standards are informed by society's
. I have worked jobs where 60 hours per week was the _aspiration_, where
leaving at 6PM was met with snide remarks of "taking a half day" and I could
count on one hand the number of senior business leaders I've encountered in my
career who paid more than lip service to any notion of work-life balance.

I look forward to the continuing changes in and challenges to the work ideals
of high performing businesses as the composition of the workforce changes over
the coming decades and (politics aside) commend movements like 4 Day Week
campaign and 30hourjobs.com for their role in accelerating this progress.

[1] [https://thefreedomseries.com](https://thefreedomseries.com)

------
kingkawn
I don’t think this change needs obey any hand-wringing about lost efficiency.
Lose the efficiency. Gain a deeper relationship to community, loved ones and
self. We’ve been through, as a culture, more than enough self-brutalizations
for growth. Enough. Time for a new metric to meet a new understanding of the
world.

------
fastbeef
For the past two years I’ve been my own boss and one of my main terms I tell
my clients is that I commit to 30 hours on-site per week.

I’ve tried to splice this as 4x7,5 and 5x6 and I prefer the latter _by far_,
even if this means one more day of commuting. After 6 hours in front of the
computer my mental energy is spent and I’m basically running of the clock on
the clients dime. It’s demotivating and I’d much rather spend that time at
home with my family and/or exercising.

------
didibus
What would happen if everyone shifted to a 4 day week, or let's say more of a
32h week?

Would we suddenly be unable to produce and offer all the goods and services
needed to sustain ourselves as a society? I doubt it. I think we'd all just be
happier working less and enjoying ourselves more.

It is different though if only some businesses make that shift, because then
they might be uncompetitive against other businesses. And in today's global
economy, it is harder to say the impact against companies in other countries
where there is already a big gap on the work week.

------
aphextim
Do what I did.

Step 1, Save up 200 vacation hours at company.

Step 2, From April-August take a vacation request, every Friday off. Willing
to work during dumpster fire if needed.

Step 3, enjoy your 4 day work week.

 _Note_ Need to work at a legit company who cares about employees well being.

8 x 4 = 32 hours used per month x 5 months = 160 hours of vacation leaving
your 40 hours of vacation for sick/emergency days.

You also will earn more vacation during this time for a little bit of wiggle
room.

This is assuming you do not want to use your vacation for a legit 1-2 week
vacation.

~~~
filoleg
Step 1 will be problematic at every single company I encountered that has a
fixed number of vacation days, because they all have a cap on how many you can
accumulate. Which usually is 2 years worth of vacation time (usually 15-20
days per year, so 30-40 days max), after which you cannot accumulate any more
and just start losing them.

EDIT: I profusely apologize for this comment. It's been a rough morning, and
the math didn't check out in my head at first. Step 1 from the parent comment
should work just fine with the number of vacation days I listed, since 30 days
* 8 hours = 240 hours.

~~~
monsieurbanana
200 hours is 25 days at 8h/day, so it's fine?

~~~
filoleg
You are absolutely correct, I profusely apologize for my parent comment. It's
been a rough morning, and the math didn't check out in my head at first.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I hope your day has gotten better. Don’t worry about the math!

------
nimbius
so i guess this is just for office workers. For the more blue-collar among us,
management is constantly pushing for 7 days.

I work as an engine mechanic for an auto chain in the midwest, and can confirm
we're persistently understaffed with qualified trade-skill educated employees.
random 10 hour days in our shop are not unheard of depending on if the
customer is a fleet job or not.

We tried 6 day work weeks, where we offered just oil changes on saturdays, and
even that proved a little hectic for apprentices and new employees (they
eventually started calling it saturday suck-work.) Customers were also furious
that we _only_ did oil/air and nothing else, so management predictably caved
and our saturdays are reduced hours, but with full mechanics on site anyhow.

Pay for us stayed the same, but before we start talking about reduced work
days, we need to address the absolute shortage of competent trade-skilled
labor in this country. HVAC, plumbing, electrical, automotive, machinists,
professional drivers and boilermakers...these arent just things that get done
by anyone, but they keep the world running.

~~~
crooked-v
Sounds like you need a union.

~~~
drivingmenuts
A union wouldn’t fix the underlying issue of a shortage of blue-collar
workers. To do that, you have to convince people to take up manual labor
intensive work.

~~~
crooked-v
A union wouldn't fix the shortage, but it would ensure that it's the workers
and not the managers getting the proceeds from all that overtime work.

------
dade_
Maybe start Monday at noon and leave at noon on Friday?

It is hard to run a B2B business without people around all 5 days.

~~~
wil421
Lockheed is a big employer in my area. I know people who work 9 hour days and
they get every other Friday off. Half the staff takes one Friday and half the
other.

Planning is key here. No one is saying the whole office needs off on the same
day.

~~~
Mvhsz
Also work in defense, this is becoming pretty common. Although typically
everyone takes the same friday off - that saves operating costs (no janitors
or cafeteria on the off day). There's also the benefit that people tend to
plan their vacations around the off-fridays, and work the full day on on-
fridays. So you don't get stuck at the office trying to solve a problem with
nobody to answer your questions at 3 on a summer friday.

~~~
wil421
I believe the team in question needs to support something in person so they do
a split.

~~~
Mvhsz
I was providing a counterpoint to show that it's preferable having the whole
office take off together when that's possible for your business. I don't
disagree that staggering the off days could be necessary, but it isn't ideal.

------
biztos
I have some friends who work at a medium-sized and very profitable company in
SF that gives them every _other_ Friday off.

They have to organize it such that the office doesn't shut down completely on
Fridays but that's not so hard, swapping weeks with someone is usually
possible.

An interesting effect of this is retention: once people are used to working
two fewer days a month, they are very reluctant to lose that "perq."

As a random point of comparison, in Germany an employee has a legal right to
work part-time unless the employer can prove your job can only be done full-
time. "We'd have to hire more people" is not proof. Your benefits would not
change but you'd earn N% less money, based on how much less you work. IIRC the
maximum is half-time. I have no idea how often it's used but in principle it's
an awesome idea if you want to change your life up, have kids, get a PhD,
whatever. (I don't remember whether you have a right to go back to full-time,
but I think you do not.)

------
jeena
Interesting to see this coming up so often here lately. Especially because I
didn't get the raise I hoped for this year I went for it and asked if I could
cut down to a 4 day week thinking that they would say no because it's quite
cumbersome to work around something like that for the rest of the company but
they said yes.

I'm starting in august every other week I take the Friday and Monday off
creating a 4 day weekend. I'm hoping to use this time to do more music, to
prepare food for a better diet (I'm overweight because I never have the energy
and time to really take better care of my food habits) and perhaps even work
on some interesting home automation projects.

We start temporarily for half a year and revisit the decision end of January.
Money wise I'm just going back where I was 2 years ago so that's quite ok. The
only drawback I can see is that the work projects accumulate 2 days of changes
which I will need to catch up to every other week.

------
ancorevard
I'm all for the freedom to choose the length of your work week. But don't come
back later complaining about widening income gap among people.

There will be differences in outcome between people who work 30 vs 60 hours in
any given industry. Not in all individual cases, but generally.

~~~
phil248
Complaints against income gaps (or, more significantly, wealth gaps) tend to
focus on the top 10%, 1% or <1% versus the remainder of society. I don't think
a variance of +/\- 20% among the vast majority of workers (middle ~70%) is
going to skew the wealth gap very much. The wealthiest, who continue to become
wealthier vis-a-vis everyone else, would not be impacted by such variance.

------
hkai
One of the great things about the 4 day working week is that it's one of the
most efficient, if not the most efficient, feasible proposal to cut down
carbon emissions.

People will commute less, use less aircon at the office, and so on. The
economy is either unaffected or maybe even cools down a bit, creating ripple
effects that lead to further reduction of emissions.

------
Theodores
We have gone the other way during my lifetime in the UK. Once there was a time
when every single shop in the local town was closed on a Sunday and most of
the shops were closed on a Wednesday afternoon. The banks were only open from
10 until 3. There were very few convenience stores open until late in the
evening. The choice of late night fast food options comprised of a couple of
fish and chips shops or a couple of restaurants.

It was also possible for families to have just the one parent out working.
That parent would also be back home in time to watch the six o clock news.
People did not go on two hour commutes.

We accepted all of the changes positively. For instance, it was great that
women could now do the same jobs as men. It was nice to have the shops open
when you were not working. It was convenient to be able to buy stuff late in
the evenings, including alcohol from places other than pubs. Sundays were not
boring or difficult if you had run out of milk.

Education in those days was also about preparing the younger generation for a
future where there would be leisure time. On the syllabus were lessons on how
to use that time. But it did not pan out, this generation ended up working
more hours than what the teachers imagined, paying for their education, being
burdened with debts, unable to afford a home and having to sit in traffic jams
on absurd commutes.

Why do we do this?

There is a rent-seeking class that we collectively have to pay for. The few
that own the property, that have the capital and don't actually work. Sure
they work, making sure that people pay their rents, but this work does not add
value to the economy. We were sold this as 'trickle down economics' where the
rich, by having more money, would have more crusts available for the poor.

None of us can step out of this situation. To do so would involve loss of the
roof over one's head, destitution and worse. We just have to do the best we
can and hope matters somehow improve for the next generation.

In the world of programming we can carve a niche working differently, to
escape the tyranny of modern day capitalism. But nobody is of the strength to
get into office and un-do the changes that have been made to society by the
neoliberal revolution.

------
glonq
To burn a bunch of vacation days, I once took off every Wednesday for 2 or 3
months.

It was great to be able to break the work week in half so that you only work
two days in a row. It makes every Mon/Tue feel like a Thu/Fri because Wed is a
"mini weekend".

------
internet_user
Wouldn't people that only work 4 days get outcompeted by people who work
harder and longer?

Just seems like a very unsustainable equilibrium without some sort of legal
backstop by the government.

------
perfunctory
I’ve been working 4 days a week or less for almost a decade now. It’s great.
Never going back to 5 days. Never. As a software dev it’s very easy to do.
Highly recommended.

~~~
aryamaan
How? Are you working as a consultant?

Do you work as an employee and get a special deal to work for four days? Has
anyonee tried this? Did you take a paycut?

~~~
Tepix
When a headhunter contacts you, you tell them you want to work 30 hours.
Companies have a hard time finding developers. Give it a try. (Yes, you'll
earn 80% instead of 100%, just find a better paying job to compensate)

~~~
asdff
If you did it that way I bet you aren't getting good benefits, if any.

------
yaseer
The number of hours one can work a week productively will vary based on
individual and lifestyle.

But to me, currently working 60 hours in my startup (sleeping well, eating
well and exercising, without children and with a good social life). 40 hours
does not seem like much. Am I missing something?

If I worked only 9-5, I would pick a side project, as I would feel like I
wasn't challenged though.

I understand having a family would change this. I can see how if I had 3 kids,
a 30 hour week would be a blessing.

But we can't assume the same optimal number of hours for everyone. 40 hours is
nothing for a single person with few responsibilities.

~~~
mnm1
> 40 hours is nothing for a single person with few responsibilities.

Wrong. I'm single with few responsibilities and 40 hours is still way too
much. Just because you like to be a workaholic doesn't mean you can generalize
that to apply to everyone else.

------
frankbreetz
I hope the younger generation is much more progressive than the status quo,
this sort of thing has no chance of making it in the USA for at least 50
years. The argument I always hear made by libertarian types is "I entered an
agreement with the company, I didn't have to do this". It is mind-blowing to
me how quickly the corporation is made to be the victim. It is in the
corporations best interest to exploit the worker as much as possible and get
as much work for as little pay, and no worker has as much power as even a
small organization, so the organization will come out on top the majority of
the time.

A government that is concerned about its citizens could balance this power
dynamic.

This mindset seems so simple and basic to me, could someone enlighten me on
the other side of this argument wouldn't almost everyone's life be better if
we enacted policies like these?

~~~
knightofmars
"It is in the corporations best interest to exploit the worker as much as
possible..."

I agree with you entirely. Most people don't see themselves as exploited. Yet
when the salary to hourly calculation happens and then an adjustment for
actual hours worked happens (a regular 60 hour work week instead of a 40) lots
of salaries suddenly look much different in the eyes of those making them.

------
pard68
I work three 12s. I love the 12 hour days, feels like I can really get work
done. But I do not like the four days of waiting for work. I got a job doing
my hobby and my other hobbies are not time intensive so I have lots of down
time...

------
glonq
As I get older, my inner communist really starts to envy the European schedule
(eg: France's 35h week and 6-8wks holidays).

I spent the entirety of my career working in the US and Canada, and to me it
seems that no more than 80% of our collective effort goes into creating and
maintaining the wonderful advanced society that we enjoy. Instead of stopping
at 80% so that we can enjoy our lives, we work the extra 20%, mostly so that
the rich can get a bit richer.

------
osipov
4 day workweek is a wild goose chase. There is no consensus about which of 5
workdays to drop to get there, which means that people will lose the precious
time slots that can be used by individuals to get together at the same time as
a group.

The alternative route of reducing the duration of each workday with the 5
workday week isn't much different from what we have today: some end up working
longer hours, some work the bare minimum number of hours they are required.
Enforcing shorter days means that the gap between the hard workers and those
who are just showing up for the hours will increase even further, increasing
performance gaps in the workplace and unfairly punishing dedication and
productivity.

~~~
qsymmachus
I think you're making this sound harder to implement than this really is.

> There is no consensus about which of 5 workdays to drop to get there

As a company (or better yet as a society), just redefine the weekend as Friday
– Sunday, or Saturday – Monday. I don't think anyone is proposing a free-for-
all approach where people get to pick and choose which day they take off.

> Enforcing shorter days means that the gap between the hard workers and those
> who are just showing up for the hours

I have a hard time understanding this mentality. The law and your labor
contract only requires you to work 40 hours. Some people may choose to work
more than that, but to what end? So you get to feel superior to your
coworkers? If the law reduced the work week to 30 hours, would you seriously
hold it against people to spend more time at home with their families?

~~~
toomuchtodo
> If the law reduced the work week to 30 hours, would you seriously hold it
> against people to spend more time at home with their families?

Some people would unfortunately, but it should still be done.

~~~
aiisjustanif
By in large in the UK medium to large size companies work 35 work weeks and
holding it against people for family seems to not be a thing. It's a cultural
accountability thing.

Balanced time at home/away from work. More time with kids, more nurtured kids,
more successful kids. Same thing goes for the individual. More time to
yourself, less burn out, better long quality work output, less stressful work
environment.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Definitely agree it's a cultural issue which needs to be solved. You need
leaders who can enforce work/life balance from the top down, and employees
willing to rapidly move when a company doesn't have the will to support sane
work/life balance.

