2 ms·
I read it: outcome of the test has been seen already, and continuing it is just unfair to others. (The outcome being that yes, people who can work shorter hour
by ptaipale 11y ago
I read it: outcome of the test has been seen already, and continuing it is just unfair to others.
(The outcome being that yes, people who can work shorter hours for same salary are of course happier, but the benefits do not outweigh the higher employment costs.)
- Retric 11y agoIt's not just about cost vs. happiness. Shorter workdays reduce mistakes and having more data is going to help show long term trends that are not necessarily obvious. I suspect work type is going to play a huge role in optimum work day length with 8 really being more about factory's for high value items vs. office work vs. Surgeons.
- bobwaycott 11y agoWell, to be clear, there is disagreement on whether the benefits outweigh the higher employment costs. Seems this is really an attempt to avoid having to deal with a broader discussion about how to make these benefits available to everyone. I read it: handwringing over it being "unfair" that some people in a test group are happier than their peers, and an ideological opposition to entertaining the thought of extending this happiness any further.
- ptaipale 11y agoSince there is a very real cost increase in arranging care with six hour workday instead of ~8 hours -- you need to hire more people to do the work -- this is not just about ideological opposition; it's about economics, its about efficiency of the public sector.