7 ms·

Germany tests 4-day workweek amid labor shortage

31 points by pallas_athena 3y ago

kakaz 3y ago
Germany: the lunatic man of the Europe
jsz0 3y ago
If this becomes a common thing in the US I'd be worried about stoking the flames of class warfare between white collar and blue collar workers. Many of those blue collar jobs (public facing especially) cannot be compressed into a 4 day work week. Lots of blue collar workers are already furious about things like working from home, 'email jobs', flexible schedules, etc. On top of that many white collar workers already enjoy an unofficial 4 day work week with offices being ghost towns on Friday afternoons. So are we talking about realistically a 3 day work week with an extra 'will respond to e-mail emergencies' on the 4th day?
- landgenoot 3y ago
  > compressed into a 4 day work week Why do you think the amount of labor should be compressed?
- reportgunner 3y ago
  > Lots of blue collar workers are already furious about things like working from home, 'email jobs', flexible schedules, etc. Sorry, I don't understand this part. Are the blue collar workers forced to work from home, use email and have a flexible schedule ?
  - rightbyte 3y ago
    Blue collar workers might think that the WFH or flex time are good benefits, which they don't have, and that their own pay should be adjusted accordingly.
    - pjc50 3y ago
      And they probably should! Although there's been a huge increase in blue collar pay in the US lately.
    - reportgunner 3y ago
      I agree with them if they think their pay should be adjusted. Also they can just become white collar if they want the benefits, right ?
- badpun 3y ago
  Blue collar people were always worse off than white collar. Historically, they didn't rebel, but just tried to get their kids the best education they could, so that the next generation could have an easier life as a part of the white collar class.
  - mensetmanusman 3y ago
    Chinas attempt to make an entire generation of white collar workers is backfiring stupendously. It turns out the better solution is to improve the lot of blue collar workers by investing in safety, tool, automation, etc. and increasing salary.
- sureglymop 3y ago
  In reality though, this is only because they have a false sense of class association. Both blue collar and white collar workers are part of the working class. This would actually benefit blue collar workers because of that. But there are always attempts to blur the lines with expressions like "laptop class" etc.
- Clubber 3y ago
  >Many of those blue collar jobs (public facing especially) cannot be compressed into a 4 day work week. Sure it can, it's just a matter of scheduling.
mcv 3y ago
The 4-day work week is long overdue. Keynes promised us a 15-hour work week thanks to productivity gains, but those productivity gains have mostly been eaten up by excessive corporate profit-taking. Lots of people are overworked and underpaid. I've been working a 4-day week for well over a decade (also because I've got kids, but I did this well before I had kids), and I strongly recommend it for everybody.
- badpun 3y ago
  > but those productivity gains have mostly been eaten up by excessive corporate profit-taking. I'd say there were mostly eaten by increased standards of living. Compare median global standard of living in Keyens times (say 100 years ago) and today. The difference is astounding, and we even work less for it than we did - just not "15 hours workweek" less.
- walteweiss 3y ago
  How would you do that if you don’t work for yourself?
  - mcv 3y ago
    I tell every prospective employer that I work 4*8. Only once over the past 24 years has this been an insurmountable obstacle for an employer. Thought I suppose that this might be a lot harder in more conservative exploitative cultures. Working 4.5 days, with one free day per two weeks, is incredibly common in Netherland. Part time is not uncommon.
- ernst_klim 3y ago
  > Keynes promised us a 15-hour work week And I bet he was quite right, but there is an important nuance: it's true for the 1940s level of consumption. If you reduce your level of consumption to 1940s level, you could easily manage to have 15-hour week. > but those productivity gains have mostly been eaten up by excessive corporate profit-taking You seem to gravely underestimate the huge gap in economic value between what people were consuming in Keynes' times and what they consume now. The productivity gains are embodied in goods in services like Uber, Amazon, Netflix, computers and stuff, computerized cars. The newly built 1940s-level goods and services would cost a fraction of price.
jzd131 3y ago
I find it interesting when employees ask for this without reducing pay. They then think it’s a 20% reduction as it’s 20% less work. But then you factor the overhead including normal overhead like benefits, HR, office space and additional overhead like management (a manager can only many so many people so now we need two managers for a group) and your at around a 40% reduction in pay to support one less day of output.
- whstl 3y ago
  A few things: - The employer pays salaries based on negotiation, not on merit or some scientific measurement. An employee is allowed to do the same. - Unless the employee is privy to all the details and math pertaining this overhead and is the one who asked for this overhead, then it's appropriate that the employee doesn't care about the overhead at all. - There is also overhead in the employees side that is not taken into account by the employer. Commuting to that "office space" also spends the employee's time and money, for example. - A 20% reduction of work time never amounts to a 20% reduction of productivity or work output, unless the work consists solely of sitting in a chair (and that's not counting bathroom breaks).
  - rascul 3y ago
    > - A 20% reduction of work time never amounts to a 20% reduction of productivity or work output, unless the work consists solely of sitting in a chair (and that's not counting bathroom breaks). I don't understand what you're saying here. If I work 20% less then that's 20% less work that I get done. I don't sit in a chair for work.
    - truckerbill 3y ago
      Your assumptions only work when things are linear. Reality is generally non-linear as it is one huge tangled mess of feedback loops
      - rascul 3y ago
        I only have my own work history to go off of. Edit: An example. If it takes me 5 days to hang siding on a house, and I don't work one of those days, that's 20% less I didn't work and about 20% less of the work that got done.
euroderf 3y ago
Sounds good to me. Endgame: maybe have enough time for work AND leisure reading AND cooking AND household chores AND exercise AND volunteering AND civic involvement AND ... well, the list goes on. Also kids! People working 40+ hours a week just robotically wall off entire areas of ways to spend their time rewardingly. My 0,02€.
a012 3y ago
Who are these 45 org/companies?
- not_math 3y ago
  It's not listed anywhere, but they've done the same in South Africa and list the companies here: https://www.4dayweek.com/sa-2023-participants https://www.4dayweek.com/sa-2023-participants
AniseAbyss 3y ago
[dead]
rcbdev 3y ago
I feel like the discourse on worker rights / work-life balance and demographic issues are more decoupled than they should be. Low birth-rates are provably related to the ability of parents to spend time with their children. This combined with other initiatives might help Europe recover from the serious imminent demographic collapse.
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  The couples I know who don't have kids don't want kids to get in the way of their travel.
  - llampx 3y ago
    Most of the expenses around kids revolve around the space they need. Bigger apartment, bigger car, more food are the bare necessities. Then come the expenses for additional flight tickets for vacations, bigger or more hotel rooms, needing to go on vacation during high season or not at all, extra-curricular activities, and so on. One kid can easily double your expenses from a couple's level.
- ernst_klim 3y ago
  > Low birth-rates are provably related to the ability of parents to spend time with their children. I'm constantly seeing this idea, and if anything, it's the opposite of truth. Poverty is always breeding much better than the middle class, and the fertility rates always fall when standards of living rise. > ability of parents to spend time with their childre Children are an opportunity cost. When parents have a free time, it's a choice between self-realization and spending time with a kid. Spending on yourselves or spending on a kid etc. When you are dirt poor or rich there is no such choice, you'll either have no resources to spend anyway or have enough resources to not bother. I live in Berlin and surrounded by middle class people and nearly non have children. Give them one more day and they will go to Kitkat/hiking one more day a week. That's it.
  - rcbdev 3y ago
    > [...] it's the opposite of truth. Poverty is always breeding much better than the middle class I'm constantly seeing this idea, and if anything, it misses the forest for the trees. Fertility rates fall when standards of living rise - up to a specific point. After that point, fertility rises to sustainable levels again. The research is quite clear on this. > [...] it's a choice between self-realization and spending time with a kid And this is exactly my theory on why the "slope" of childlessness occurs. Rising towards the middle class means that all lesser needs are fulfilled and now only self-actualization remains unmet. The cruel joke is that people then forsake having children in favor of self-realization while someone a with more resources would not feel the need to make this compromise. So in a sense, the most deprived people don't care and still have children despite the challenges (lower class), the less deprived people forsake children in order to meet their highest-order needs (middle class) and the mostly undeprived do not have to make any trade-offs like that and again have children. (upper class) I live in Vienna, an arguably more family friendly city, and most middle class people around me (aged ~30-40) do have babies at home - esp. those working in relaxed environments like public sector. If you give people the resources, flexibility and time to have children without worrying, they will indeed have more children (in the long run).
thiago_fm 3y ago
Terribly written article and headline. Germany isn't 45 German companies that will try it. There's no labor shortage in Germany, what there is, are proper salaries. One example are childcare workers in Kindergartens (Kita). Salaries are low and regulated, so nobody wants to do it. Increase the salary and you will have many workers lining up. Germany has managed to grow for decades, from absolute destruction post WW2 without raises that accompany that amount of growth. Tech workers in Germany are paid peanuts in comparison to Americans. The situation isn't worse because some American companies offer good salaries, pushing the market up.
- 4gotunameagain 3y ago
  Increase the salary of childcare workers etc. Do not increase the salary of tech workers in Germany. We are already making more of our fair share. More than double or triple the amount of money that a person working way harder makes. Sincerely, a tech worker in Germany
  - llampx 3y ago
    Agreed. However, since we don't have the power to set the salary of childcare workers, we will just ensure we don't pay you as much as your colleagues in the US, UK or Switzerland. Sincerely, FAANG
    - rcbdev 3y ago
      Agreed. However, since I don't like being underpayed, I will pack my things and move to Switzerland after having received my taxpayer-funded education. Sincerely, a tech worker
      - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
        I assume you feel underpaid only when you look at Swiss salaries form German CoL perspective. But I assume Swiss salaries are not high when you're also paying Swiss CoL, then they're just regular salaries.
mensetmanusman 3y ago
Not enough workers? Work less!

31 points by pallas_athena 3y ago

Germany: the lunatic man of the Europe

jsz0 3y ago

If this becomes a common thing in the US I'd be worried about stoking the flames of class warfare between white collar and blue collar workers. Many of those blue collar jobs (public facing especially) cannot be compressed into a 4 day work week. Lots of blue collar workers are already furious about things like working from home, 'email jobs', flexible schedules, etc. On top of that many white collar workers already enjoy an unofficial 4 day work week with offices being ghost towns on Friday afternoons. So are we talking about realistically a 3 day work week with an extra 'will respond to e-mail emergencies' on the 4th day?

landgenoot 3y ago
> compressed into a 4 day work week Why do you think the amount of labor should be compressed?
reportgunner 3y ago
> Lots of blue collar workers are already furious about things like working from home, 'email jobs', flexible schedules, etc. Sorry, I don't understand this part. Are the blue collar workers forced to work from home, use email and have a flexible schedule ?
- rightbyte 3y ago
  Blue collar workers might think that the WFH or flex time are good benefits, which they don't have, and that their own pay should be adjusted accordingly.
  - pjc50 3y ago
    And they probably should! Although there's been a huge increase in blue collar pay in the US lately.
  - reportgunner 3y ago
    I agree with them if they think their pay should be adjusted. Also they can just become white collar if they want the benefits, right ?
badpun 3y ago
Blue collar people were always worse off than white collar. Historically, they didn't rebel, but just tried to get their kids the best education they could, so that the next generation could have an easier life as a part of the white collar class.
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  Chinas attempt to make an entire generation of white collar workers is backfiring stupendously. It turns out the better solution is to improve the lot of blue collar workers by investing in safety, tool, automation, etc. and increasing salary.
sureglymop 3y ago
In reality though, this is only because they have a false sense of class association. Both blue collar and white collar workers are part of the working class. This would actually benefit blue collar workers because of that. But there are always attempts to blur the lines with expressions like "laptop class" etc.
Clubber 3y ago
>Many of those blue collar jobs (public facing especially) cannot be compressed into a 4 day work week. Sure it can, it's just a matter of scheduling.

mcv 3y ago

The 4-day work week is long overdue. Keynes promised us a 15-hour work week thanks to productivity gains, but those productivity gains have mostly been eaten up by excessive corporate profit-taking. Lots of people are overworked and underpaid. I've been working a 4-day week for well over a decade (also because I've got kids, but I did this well before I had kids), and I strongly recommend it for everybody.

badpun 3y ago
> but those productivity gains have mostly been eaten up by excessive corporate profit-taking. I'd say there were mostly eaten by increased standards of living. Compare median global standard of living in Keyens times (say 100 years ago) and today. The difference is astounding, and we even work less for it than we did - just not "15 hours workweek" less.
walteweiss 3y ago
How would you do that if you don’t work for yourself?
- mcv 3y ago
  I tell every prospective employer that I work 4*8. Only once over the past 24 years has this been an insurmountable obstacle for an employer. Thought I suppose that this might be a lot harder in more conservative exploitative cultures. Working 4.5 days, with one free day per two weeks, is incredibly common in Netherland. Part time is not uncommon.
ernst_klim 3y ago
> Keynes promised us a 15-hour work week And I bet he was quite right, but there is an important nuance: it's true for the 1940s level of consumption. If you reduce your level of consumption to 1940s level, you could easily manage to have 15-hour week. > but those productivity gains have mostly been eaten up by excessive corporate profit-taking You seem to gravely underestimate the huge gap in economic value between what people were consuming in Keynes' times and what they consume now. The productivity gains are embodied in goods in services like Uber, Amazon, Netflix, computers and stuff, computerized cars. The newly built 1940s-level goods and services would cost a fraction of price.

jzd131 3y ago

I find it interesting when employees ask for this without reducing pay. They then think it’s a 20% reduction as it’s 20% less work. But then you factor the overhead including normal overhead like benefits, HR, office space and additional overhead like management (a manager can only many so many people so now we need two managers for a group) and your at around a 40% reduction in pay to support one less day of output.

whstl 3y ago
A few things: - The employer pays salaries based on negotiation, not on merit or some scientific measurement. An employee is allowed to do the same. - Unless the employee is privy to all the details and math pertaining this overhead and is the one who asked for this overhead, then it's appropriate that the employee doesn't care about the overhead at all. - There is also overhead in the employees side that is not taken into account by the employer. Commuting to that "office space" also spends the employee's time and money, for example. - A 20% reduction of work time never amounts to a 20% reduction of productivity or work output, unless the work consists solely of sitting in a chair (and that's not counting bathroom breaks).
- rascul 3y ago
  > - A 20% reduction of work time never amounts to a 20% reduction of productivity or work output, unless the work consists solely of sitting in a chair (and that's not counting bathroom breaks). I don't understand what you're saying here. If I work 20% less then that's 20% less work that I get done. I don't sit in a chair for work.
  - truckerbill 3y ago
    Your assumptions only work when things are linear. Reality is generally non-linear as it is one huge tangled mess of feedback loops
    - rascul 3y ago
      I only have my own work history to go off of. Edit: An example. If it takes me 5 days to hang siding on a house, and I don't work one of those days, that's 20% less I didn't work and about 20% less of the work that got done.

euroderf 3y ago

Sounds good to me. Endgame: maybe have enough time for work AND leisure reading AND cooking AND household chores AND exercise AND volunteering AND civic involvement AND ... well, the list goes on. Also kids! People working 40+ hours a week just robotically wall off entire areas of ways to spend their time rewardingly. My 0,02€.

a012 3y ago

Who are these 45 org/companies?

not_math 3y ago
It's not listed anywhere, but they've done the same in South Africa and list the companies here: https://www.4dayweek.com/sa-2023-participants https://www.4dayweek.com/sa-2023-participants

AniseAbyss 3y ago

[dead]

rcbdev 3y ago

I feel like the discourse on worker rights / work-life balance and demographic issues are more decoupled than they should be. Low birth-rates are provably related to the ability of parents to spend time with their children. This combined with other initiatives might help Europe recover from the serious imminent demographic collapse.

mensetmanusman 3y ago
The couples I know who don't have kids don't want kids to get in the way of their travel.
- llampx 3y ago
  Most of the expenses around kids revolve around the space they need. Bigger apartment, bigger car, more food are the bare necessities. Then come the expenses for additional flight tickets for vacations, bigger or more hotel rooms, needing to go on vacation during high season or not at all, extra-curricular activities, and so on. One kid can easily double your expenses from a couple's level.
ernst_klim 3y ago
> Low birth-rates are provably related to the ability of parents to spend time with their children. I'm constantly seeing this idea, and if anything, it's the opposite of truth. Poverty is always breeding much better than the middle class, and the fertility rates always fall when standards of living rise. > ability of parents to spend time with their childre Children are an opportunity cost. When parents have a free time, it's a choice between self-realization and spending time with a kid. Spending on yourselves or spending on a kid etc. When you are dirt poor or rich there is no such choice, you'll either have no resources to spend anyway or have enough resources to not bother. I live in Berlin and surrounded by middle class people and nearly non have children. Give them one more day and they will go to Kitkat/hiking one more day a week. That's it.
- rcbdev 3y ago
  > [...] it's the opposite of truth. Poverty is always breeding much better than the middle class I'm constantly seeing this idea, and if anything, it misses the forest for the trees. Fertility rates fall when standards of living rise - up to a specific point. After that point, fertility rises to sustainable levels again. The research is quite clear on this. > [...] it's a choice between self-realization and spending time with a kid And this is exactly my theory on why the "slope" of childlessness occurs. Rising towards the middle class means that all lesser needs are fulfilled and now only self-actualization remains unmet. The cruel joke is that people then forsake having children in favor of self-realization while someone a with more resources would not feel the need to make this compromise. So in a sense, the most deprived people don't care and still have children despite the challenges (lower class), the less deprived people forsake children in order to meet their highest-order needs (middle class) and the mostly undeprived do not have to make any trade-offs like that and again have children. (upper class) I live in Vienna, an arguably more family friendly city, and most middle class people around me (aged ~30-40) do have babies at home - esp. those working in relaxed environments like public sector. If you give people the resources, flexibility and time to have children without worrying, they will indeed have more children (in the long run).

thiago_fm 3y ago

Terribly written article and headline. Germany isn't 45 German companies that will try it. There's no labor shortage in Germany, what there is, are proper salaries. One example are childcare workers in Kindergartens (Kita). Salaries are low and regulated, so nobody wants to do it. Increase the salary and you will have many workers lining up. Germany has managed to grow for decades, from absolute destruction post WW2 without raises that accompany that amount of growth. Tech workers in Germany are paid peanuts in comparison to Americans. The situation isn't worse because some American companies offer good salaries, pushing the market up.

4gotunameagain 3y ago
Increase the salary of childcare workers etc. Do not increase the salary of tech workers in Germany. We are already making more of our fair share. More than double or triple the amount of money that a person working way harder makes. Sincerely, a tech worker in Germany
- llampx 3y ago
  Agreed. However, since we don't have the power to set the salary of childcare workers, we will just ensure we don't pay you as much as your colleagues in the US, UK or Switzerland. Sincerely, FAANG
  - rcbdev 3y ago
    Agreed. However, since I don't like being underpayed, I will pack my things and move to Switzerland after having received my taxpayer-funded education. Sincerely, a tech worker
    - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
      I assume you feel underpaid only when you look at Swiss salaries form German CoL perspective. But I assume Swiss salaries are not high when you're also paying Swiss CoL, then they're just regular salaries.

mensetmanusman 3y ago

Not enough workers? Work less!