3 ms·
I'm in France, I work 100% (35 hrs/week, 5 days), and there are more and more part-time workers among my colleagues. I think it's a nice option and that it sho
by rpigab 3y ago
I'm in France, I work 100% (35 hrs/week, 5 days), and there are more and more part-time workers among my colleagues.
I think it's a nice option and that it should be a thing almost everywhere, and I might consider it myself in the near future, however there are drawbacks, a colleague is 60% and starts the week on Wednesday, but often parents take Wednesdays off, or half the day if 90%, or a full Wednesday every other week. Now let's add people like in the article, who like to enjoy Fridays off, at 80%. Why not, but now if you want to schedule a full team meeting, it's gonna have to wait until next Thursday. Even for little things, if you need it urgently on Mon. from the guy who starts on Wed., you're out of luck.
Also, we have full-remote for a few people, 2-3 remote days a week for most workers, and full-time on-site for select jobs. Contract workers might work on-site some days, or from their company's office, or from their home, or they might be working elsewhere some days if it's not a 100% contract. It's a nightmare to manage calendars, as there is no single source of truth on whether collaborators are present today or not. For employees, HR software can give you that information if it's up-to-date, but I think for legals reasons you can't have contractors availability listed in HR software.
People aren't used to communicating in an "async" way, it's not in the culture, it's not implemented well right now, and even if and when it's done well, projects tend to need longer periods of time to advance.
Also, the housing crisis is hitting hard. I couldn't have bought a nice house on 80% income, and I know full remote workers who bought theirs in the center of France, very far from big cities, often way cheaper, so they can do 80% more easily.