They would probably be against it for a different reason. The instinctual reaction would be that 32 hours of labor means businesses need to hire 1 new person fo

They would probably be against it for a different reason. The instinctual reaction would be that 32 hours of labor means businesses need to hire 1 new person for every 4 people currently employed, growing their business's headcount by 25%, to compensate. That's cheaper than paying more overtime. In today's current labor shortage, that would be a disaster. If it was a world with enormous unemployment, then maybe there'd be an argument.