3 ms·

This stood out to me: >The Swedish town of Kiruna actually gave up its six-hour working days in 2005 after finding that the increased intensity of work was not

This stood out to me: >The Swedish town of Kiruna actually gave up its six-hour working days in 2005 after finding that the increased intensity of work was not a positive. "People have seen there that the intensity of the job increases significantly, with negative effects on health as a consequence," Could that be because we are used to fit our work in 8 hours and work accordingly? Doing 100% of your work in 75% of the time does sound more intense. It might be interesting to see how the stress changes as people get used to a 6h day.

ddebernardy 12y ago
This was the big problem in France when they passed the 35h work week with no pay loss. Workers were suddenly expected to do the same output in 4h less, and this increased stress levels quite a bit -- or so I've been told by friends who live there.
- _delirium 12y ago
  As far as I know, the 40->37 hour shift in Denmark didn't produce similar negative consequences. It's a slightly smaller change (7.5% rather than 12.5% reduction in working hours), but I'm not sure that's the main reason. Perhaps something about how Danish workplaces are structured compared to French ones?
- yodsanklai 12y ago
  It may be true in some fields, but it's not my experience. A lot of workers in France work more than 35 hours. In particular, most qualified workers (in the software industry for instance) don't have a fixed schedule and overtime isn't paid. To compensate for the 4 hours (going from 39h to 35h) they have more vacation days. It amounts to about 10 days annually depending on the company. Besides, some people are pressured not to take those day off. Several friends of mine work long hours (> 10) and don't take more that 4-5 weeks vacation a year (which is good compared to the US or Asia, but far from the promised 35 hours a week).
bjourne 12y ago
That's because they did it wrong. The idea is that you should only work for 6 hours/day, with the same pay you had before, at the same pace. The 25% lost productivity would be compensated for by hiring from Swedens 10-15% pool of unemployed and underemployed people.
- mongol 12y ago
  I don't get it. Who pays the wages of the newly hired to compensate for lost productivity?
- MadManE 12y ago
  From the business' point of view, why would I keep paying the same salary for 25% less work? That's insane.
collyw 12y ago
The thing is, for myself, and I imagine any others, there are periods when I always have at least one "urgent" task, and I struggle to find the time to get that done. Then there are other times, when there isn't much to do. Averaged out it could probably all be achieved in 6 hours easily, but the changing priorities probably messes that up.

ddebernardy 12y ago

This was the big problem in France when they passed the 35h work week with no pay loss. Workers were suddenly expected to do the same output in 4h less, and this increased stress levels quite a bit -- or so I've been told by friends who live there.

_delirium 12y ago
As far as I know, the 40->37 hour shift in Denmark didn't produce similar negative consequences. It's a slightly smaller change (7.5% rather than 12.5% reduction in working hours), but I'm not sure that's the main reason. Perhaps something about how Danish workplaces are structured compared to French ones?
yodsanklai 12y ago
It may be true in some fields, but it's not my experience. A lot of workers in France work more than 35 hours. In particular, most qualified workers (in the software industry for instance) don't have a fixed schedule and overtime isn't paid. To compensate for the 4 hours (going from 39h to 35h) they have more vacation days. It amounts to about 10 days annually depending on the company. Besides, some people are pressured not to take those day off. Several friends of mine work long hours (> 10) and don't take more that 4-5 weeks vacation a year (which is good compared to the US or Asia, but far from the promised 35 hours a week).

bjourne 12y ago

That's because they did it wrong. The idea is that you should only work for 6 hours/day, with the same pay you had before, at the same pace. The 25% lost productivity would be compensated for by hiring from Swedens 10-15% pool of unemployed and underemployed people.

mongol 12y ago
I don't get it. Who pays the wages of the newly hired to compensate for lost productivity?
MadManE 12y ago
From the business' point of view, why would I keep paying the same salary for 25% less work? That's insane.

collyw 12y ago

The thing is, for myself, and I imagine any others, there are periods when I always have at least one "urgent" task, and I struggle to find the time to get that done. Then there are other times, when there isn't much to do. Averaged out it could probably all be achieved in 6 hours easily, but the changing priorities probably messes that up.