6 ms·
A pilot scheme to trail the four-day workweek in Britain deemed a success (2022)
- helsinkiandrew 4y agohttps://archive.ph/dBUUu https://archive.ph/dBUUu
- tardibear 4y ago2022
- barryvan 4y agoAlthough I'm in Australia, I work for a UK-based edtech company (Wonde) that operates a four-day workweek -- having joined just over three months ago. I know that I can only contribute anecdata, but from my perspective I've not seen any reduction in output. Indeed, I've seen fewer meetings, and meetings defaulting to thirty minutes, rather than sixty. I've also seen more async communication -- not once have I received the dreaded lonely "Hello" in Slack. It's of course not all sunshine and lollipops. People aren't always available, so you have to work around or wait. On a personal level, I find I approach each day with more energy and enthusiasm, and I love that I get to spend more time with my family and can (shock!) go out to lunch with my wife during the week while the kids are at school. There seems to be a direct correlation between my improved personal life and an improved professional life.
- 88 4y ago> People aren't always available, so you have to work around or wait. I would have thought if everyone moved to four-day workweeks, they would all take the same day off, essentially extending the weekend.
- barryvan 4y agoNot where I am! Rather, it's a negotiation with your manager to see what works best. That way, we can ensure we have coverage across the week. We're all "on" for Mondays and Tuesdays, and then people take Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday off according to preference and suitability. Yes, more people take Friday than Thursday, but quite a lot of people enjoy the zen-like lack of distraction when they work Fridays. Or so I've been told!
- lostlogin 4y agoThe pro tip is to work Monday, and thereby catch nearly all the stat days. Some enlightened countries pro-rata stat days, but New Zealand doesn’t.
- pm215 4y agoThe employer can fix up the imbalance -- if there are N bank holidays in the year, give all 80% part time workers 0.8N extra days of holiday allowance above their usual amount (etc), and mandate that they cover the bank holidays with days from their allowance if they would normally work them. (My UK employer does this.)
- cbzoiav 4y agoOr just don't have them off by default and add the days to all employees allowance, but always allow people to book them off if they want. That way if you have a family and are all off you can spend it together, but if you have nothing to do can use it when it better suits you.
- lostlogin 4y agoIt’s time and a half and a day in lieu for working a stat where I am. If you work it much outside 8.30-5 penal rates rise, but that part is employer specific rather than legislated.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
- lostlogin 4y agoIt mentions a fish and chip shop and an education facility. I’d guess that the bulk of fish and chips are sold outside 9-5 Monday to Friday, and that there would be rioting in the streets if school days were reduced 20%.
- dkdbejwi383 4y ago> there would be rioting in the streets if school days were reduced 20% Why not move schools to a four-day week, too? If it works for adults at work, I'm sure children would see similar benefits. We already know that typical school hours deprive children of much needed rest.
- sbuk 4y agoI absolutely hate it when parents respond to questions like this, but… Do you have kids? I love mine completely and unconditionally, but a day off being an employee and a parent (well half the day at least) sounds like bliss!
- stuaxo 4y agoIt's also just easier to do some of the boring chores work without kids in the house.
- lbriner 4y agoBecause unless the kids were all off on the same day each week, which wouldn't work for their parents who have to fit in with their employers needs, then everyone would need even more babsitting cover than they already do. If the kids were not all off on the same day, then teachers would struggle to get consistent teaching because 20% of the pupils would always be missing from a lesson.
- dagw 4y agoWhy not move schools to a four-day week, too? Because the unspoken advantage of a four-day week is you get an entire day to yourself without your kids.
- 4y ago
- helsinkiandrew 4y agoIf you work on the factory floor and produce all your widgets in 4 days instead of 5 then it doesn't matter what day you take off - it probably makes sense for everyone to take off the same day. If you're talking to customers 5 (or 7) days a week (restaurants, sales, helplines, healthcare), then the company needs to provide continuous cover.
- logifail 4y ago> I love that I [..] can (shock!) go out to lunch with my wife during the week while the kids are at school (Genuine question) but why wouldn't someone be able to have lunch with their OH while working a traditional 5-day week? Surely a lunch break is something everyone is entitled to even when they're working that day?
- kqr 4y agoWith children, one or both parents often have to sacrifice their lunch breaks to get 40 hours of work in while still dropping off/picking up children at school, activities, etc.
- barryvan 4y agoOh, absolutely! I have all the regular breaks etc. When I said "go out to lunch" I meant it more in the sense of "go out for a _loooong_ lunch involving a few courses and a bottle or two of wine". ;)
- helsinkiandrew 4y agoIf you home and workplace or your partners workplace is even a short distance apart the travel time can make it impractical
- dagw 4y agoNot the OP, but I suspect it's more a question of time. My my wife and I work on opposite ends of town, so if we where to both hop on a bus, meet in the middle, enjoy a nice and leisurely lunch at a nice restaurant (as opposed to just grabbing some fast food) and then hop on a bus back to our respective offices, we're probably looking at at least 2 hours door to door. Hell, even if I'm just going for lunch by myself there are lots of restaurants I cannot really go to, simply because it takes too long to get there, eat, and get back. Basically, while I always have time to eat lunch, but very rarely have time to enjoy lunch.
- logifail 4y ago> it's more a question of time So, given we're talking about employers offering flexibility, how about allowing people to take a longer lunch break so they can go for lunch with their OH, but either start their day earlier or stay at work later?
- p2hari 4y ago> I love that I [..] can (shock!) go out to lunch with my wife during the week while the kids are at school But slowly this also applies to schools. The teachers would want 4 day workweek. and then the kids would also love to have 4 days instead of 5 days. This would start happening across. The restaurants, grocery shops everywhere and people who come on off days need to be compensated accordingly and then the various other fall outs. :)
- randomuser26491 4y ago> I love that I [..] can (shock!) go out to lunch with my wife during the week while the kids are at school Rather highlights that restaurants won't get by on a four day week.
- corobo 4y agoPick a different 4 days like they do for weekends.
- snehk 4y agoThe takeaway for employers: People putting out as much work in four days as they did in five. That must mean that the previous requirement was too low and should be increased.
- obudo 4y agoTime to launch a consulting startup and promise a 20% increase in productivity
- blitzar 4y agoLacking the grindset there - my consulting startup offers a 75% increase in productivity, via a 7 day a week schedule at the daily output shown in this trial. You can trebble that if you dont let the employees sleep or eat as well, for details you would have to sign up for the platinum package.
- hkt 4y agoIs a package available where employees are taught that "unions" are where you formally marry the company?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- lostlogin 4y agoThis assumes an awful lot about the type of work done. Many jobs are about being present between certain given hours. Good luck getting 5 days work out of a nurse in 4 days.
- luckylion 4y agoThat's easy, obviously the patients will be moved to a 4-day-week as well, and adjust their recuperation accordingly.
- 4y ago
- dools 4y agoSurely the headline should read “trial” rather than “trail”
- globular-toast 4y agoAre they suggesting that this is a trailer for the real thing?
- yashg 4y agoExactly. The economist making a typo in the headline!
- dsq 4y agoYes, it’s an obvious typo.
- unxdfa 4y agoIf they blasted middle management, management and process consultants, HR and ancillary corporate fluff staff into the sun we’d get 6 days of work done in 3 days and never have to suffer a Monday or Friday again. But that doesn’t create jobs or indicate growth to investors. Shaking the wrong end of the stick as always.
- jpswade 4y agoIf this were true, those roles wouldn't exist to begin with. Do you think perhaps there's a reason why those roles have come to be?
- unxdfa 4y agoYes they exist because it’s the status quo of corporate structure. I haven’t seen any evidence that adding these staff to a problem actually have a measurable impact on productivity, ROI or decrease organisational risk.
- gyrogearloose 4y ago"they exist because it’s the status quo of corporate structure" This is circular which may have been your point, but do you have a theory as to how they originated?
- lnsru 4y agoI have 5 different HR contacts: For vacation questions, for overtime regulation, for manual corrections of buggy time accounting software, for general questions and for payslip errors. Forgot new 6th one! For reporting sickness!! They exist and are very real and I must deal with that on daily basis. It’s hard to believe, but that how works big corp.
- parineum 4y agoYou request vacation, call in sick, work overtime, mess up your timesheet, don't get paid and have general HR queries every day?
- moomin 4y agoHonestly, people keep running trials like this and time and again they have the same results and then no-one does anything. Because, just like the whole WFH thing, these decisions aren’t made by the numbers, but by the personal preferences of employers.
- luckylion 4y agoWhy would all employers say "I don't want to make more money if it means having to change this one thing"? And if they do, they'd surely be outcompeted by those adopting these policies.
- ornornor 4y agoThis is happening every day in most businesses. How much waste is incurred from not listening to frontline workers who know about problems/bottleneck and instead enact policy from clueless higher ups, or the proverbial “the beatings will continue until morale improves”, or the “strategic” decisions based on politics/the CEO’s gut feeling… Just as people are very good at voting against their interests, businesses are very good at enacting (or keeping) policies that go against profitability/retention/efficiency.
- luckylion 4y agoBut an employee saying "hey boss, we should do this differently" is something different from "here's a bunch of studies that show you save 10% on average if you do it that way". Your employee could be wrong, or their suggestion would only work with them specifically because they're very talented at sliding with their forklift etc. Unless there's some conspiracy going on, we should see someone change the policy, get significant returns, and either outcompete the others, or at least have a higher profit, which should lead to investors pressuring other CEOs to also adopt the new, better systems. Like Just In Time production did, surely there was some guy who said "no, I prefer to have my year's worth of supplies in my storage on site", but they'd have much higher capital requirements and would be very inflexible for virtually no upside (supply chain breakdowns are rare).
- andyjohnson0 4y agoUnfortunately this is very unlikely to be politically acceptable to the current UK government. The prime minister and various other ministers (e.g. Rees-Mogg) have been publicly opposed to post-pandemic working from home, so I'd expect some pushback on this too. In the end it's up to businesses what they do, but the government can hinder improvements to our lives through their control of the laws and the tax system.
- DocTomoe 4y agoThe vast majority of employers in the UK don't need to ask the UK prime minister (and his dark vizier) for permission to make you work 32 hours instead of 40.
- dkdbejwi383 4y agoMore coverage from today on the same trial: - https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/feb/21/four-day-week-uk-trial-success-pattern https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/feb/21/four-day-week-... - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64669987 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64669987
- t344344 4y agoOn paper it seems nice, but in reality it will just decrease salaries and people will have to work two jobs for the same money. Better to support work from home. It should be considered misogynistic and "anti green", if employer demands work at office.
- parineum 4y agoMisogynistic?
- t344344 4y agoWomen are more likely to stay at home with kids. They need more flexibility. One of main arguments for four-day week.
- dkdbejwi383 4y agoIs it not misogynistic to assume only women are capable of looking after children?
- parineum 4y agoIt is.
- zemnmez 4y agoSurely this is a question of supply and demand and if a 4 day workweek is the legally cheap and good path supported by governments in the same way the 5 day workweek is, the competition for salaries will be nearly identical
- whywhywhywhy 4y ago>"anti green", if employer demands work at office Tough to argue an environmental stance when it’s heating/lighting/carbon emissions for deliveries and couriers to 50 buildings vs 1.
- 4y ago
- logifail 4y agoI'm still not really seeing how the 4-day-week, at 5 days pay, is delivering the (almost magical) 20%+ productivity boost that its proponents seem to claim it does. I'm sure almost all people feel better when given the option to work fewer hours for the same money ... I know I would! How does that translate into increased productivity, though?
- TampyChimp 4y agoI'd think it's a combination of two things. Parkinson's Law says that you'll get your work completed in the time you're given for it. If you're given more time, the task will take more time. I think there is some truth to this. But also...people burn out and get unproductive. There will be times in the work week where you just get a lot less done or work slower. If you shorten the time working, you can put more effort into being productive all of the time, because you will have adequate time to rest and recover afterwards. If you don't have the recovery time, then you need to take the week a bit slower so you don't burn out. A lot of these companies in the trial took Wednesday off. So you can smash out loads of work and be productive for two days straight, and then completely relax for a day, rather than having to spend Tuesday pacing yourself for the whole week.
- lbriner 4y agoPeople realise that their dead time at work is now removed due to the day off so they need to start working smarter. They are more energised, happier, get to do things in their extra day that would otherwise be preying on their minds until the weekend etc. It also forces you to consider anything that stops you getting your work done quickly enough and have more reason to get rid of it. Not sure how it works with a Fish and Chip shop but I suspect that even service organisations that need 24/7 cover could make up the shortfall by increased happiness and motivation. For those of us who have a lot of work to do, I couldn't possibly do it in less days (although I guess I would have to drop stuff) but I guess at worst, I might get less interuptions from staff.
- whywhywhywhy 4y agoThis all relies on self driven people, people who see work as the antagonist in their lives will eventually just settle in to delivering the less than before. Same as how some people are just as productive WFH and some don’t seem to work at all from home without constant questioning and pushing. Right company and right team it could work but just a few not on the same page and you’re going to have a lopsided team where resentment will fester from both sides. >forces you to consider anything that stops you getting your work done quickly enough Significant percentage of the workforce just doesn’t think this way and never will.
- liampulles 4y agoI wonder how much people are adjusting their behavior for these trials... if and when it becomes the norm, do the long meetings and less productive practices creep back in?
- recuter 4y agoElementary. Assume 20 productive hours per week (human cpu time) out of a total 40 work week hours (wall time, 9am to 5pm, 5 days a week). Productivity ratio 50%. Assume 20 productive hours per week (human cpu time) out of a total 32 work week hours (wall time, 9am to 5pm, 4 days a week). Productivity ratio 62.5%. Simply divide your productivity ratios by each other for a ~20%-25% improvement. I wonder, if we tack on just an extra 20 productive minutes per day for a total of.. 21 productive hours per week (human cpu time) of a further reduced work week of 24 hours (wall time, 9am to 5pm, 3 days a week). Productivity ratio 83.3%. An additional massive 33% boost over the draconian slavery schedule of the current four-day status quo! I think I may be on to something. Further productivity increases are left as an exercise to the reader. Hint: there is a totally logical and clear path to a productivity ratio of 137.5%!
- joncrocks 4y agoI think I remember reading a while back that _any_ change to the work environment ends up increasing productivity in the short term, before reverting to historic norms. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect
- golol 4y agoThere are at least 3 radically different concepts of a 4 day work week: - same hours, same pay - reduced hours, same pay - reduced hours, reduced pay Why is it always so hard to find this information when people discuss 4 day work weeks? The constant vagueness here is extremely toxic to the diaglogue. People talk past eachother.
- gonzo41 4y agoEmployers don't actually use the 40 hours from knowledge workers. If managers planned they'd be able to get better productivity. But as we all know. Bubble in the pipeline cause stalls and then you get meetings and planning days and all staffs that are an hour long which could have been an email. Hopefully they do same pay, Less hours. It's a bit tough out there with inflation
- usrbinbash 4y ago> It's a bit tough out there with inflation Considering that the economy enjoyed 3 decades of basically uninterrupted growth, including right through all significant financial crisis situations (by massively supporting companies with taxpayers money), I couldn't care less how "hard" it is for companys with inflation now. Baby-Boomers are going into retirement, the next 2 generations are low birth. The workforce is going to be an increasingly limited commodity. Supply and Demand also apply when it doesn't benefit the companies. Either companies adapt, no matter how tough it is, or there will be less companies, easy as that.
- Cthulhu_ 4y agoYeah, articles like this should be more clear on that. In NL the 4 day work week is normalized (by law you're allowed to work less hours if you choose to), but your pay and everything is adjusted accordingly.
- barryvan 4y agoMy default assumption is that if people talk about "0.8FTE", they mean 80% pay for 80% time and 80% output, whereas "4dw" _should_ equate to 100% pay for 80% time and 100% output. If it's anything other than 100/80/100, it's flexible work rather than a four-day working week.
- kwhitefoot 4y agoI'm getting old; I can't tell if trail is a typo for trial or if it is a new meaning for the word trail.
- dsq 4y agoIt’s not you. It should indeed have been “trial” and it is a typo. Inside the article the word trial appears: “…mid-point survey by the trial’s organisers…” Sloppiness by the Economist. Not surprising as their best editors have probably gradually been canceled or diversified out.