I have no link. Just heard this news on the radio. Some companies are praising the 4 day workweek. They say that this way the employees can rest more and become more productive for the companies.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
3
detransthrowaway on scored.co
1 year ago3 points(+0/-0/+3Score on mirror)5 children
The four-day workweek is only a good idea on paper. You'd think, "Oh, you'd be more productive in those four days and you get more work done! Win-win!". I personally think you'd quickly adapt to that and still put in roughly the same ratio of actual labor to malarkey, but it'd also be a genius excuse to pay you less. If you're paid by the hour, you're putting in less hours with a four-day workweek, which seems good. However, as such, your pay is only 80% of what it was with five days. And you think they'll raise wages for that so you get paid in four days what you used to in five? No! They're companies, of course they won't.
1 year ago4 points(+0/-0/+4Score on mirror)3 children
Same wage, the only requirement is that you complete the same amount of work in those fewer hours. We won't see lower wages, however there may be new policies in place to ensure that you work.
For instance, they might take your private phone once you check in to ensure you're not spending all your work time browsing fakebook. There may be more surveillance, offices replaced by cubicles so that you get no privacy... Notice a pattern here, these are just the stuff they have already done, and will continue to do. Methods that doesn't work very well. Why would you wanna spend more time under such horrible conditions?
The important thing is that the government STFU, let specialized unions deal with this sort of stuff as not every policy fits every type of job. 4 day work weeks is probably great for office work. Limited hours can work great in settings were you go to one location, work then return back home nearby.
Even with unions it's important to make exceptions. If you're a truck driver working 4 day weeks and get delayed you don't wanna spend a long weekend out on the road doing nothing. Of course you should be able to drive the last 200 miles and get back home to your family, even if it's outside your working hours, and in doing so you should get paid overtime, plus 100% for every hour outside of office hours.
Firemen who practically live at the station doesn't actually work when resting, they're on standby. 9 hour workdays there is just dumb. Let them get paid for every hour they're at the station, on standby, and allow long shifts, including overnight shifts.
1 year ago3 points(+0/-0/+3Score on mirror)1 child
going to a 4 day workweek to increase morale then immediately doing things like turning job sites into prisons to decrease morale seems too retarded even for normie corporations.
you'll see jobs that are *already* prisons going to a 4 day workweek and claiming it helps so darn much, sure, but i don't think "going to a 4 day workweek" is going to immediately be followed by "turning the job site into a prison to re-increase productivity".
I never said it would help "so darn much", in fact I even brought up some of the things that makes wage cucking like staying in a prison. You come here to re-state the problem, but provide no alternative solution.
what? i was agreeing with you on that front, just disagreeing with the doomer take of "this is actually going to make things even worse immediately instantly and every job will be a prison!"
the "so darn much" was aimed at the companies who currently run prison-like jobs who will claim that a 4 day workweek absolves them of all sins.
I see, then we're on the same page. How many days we work every week or what the wage is doesn't really matter much. The important thing is to have some freedom at work. Privacy matters. If you're White, nobody should have any reason to not trust you.
Many (((employers))) especially at big companies have definitely lost touch with reality, no understanding for what a productive worker actually needs to be productive. It's all about cost to (((them))). Some who doesn't wanna invest in better working conditions hire pajeets instead who will work for less and accept shittier conditions.
> I personally think you'd quickly adapt to that and still put in roughly the same ratio of actual labor to malarkey
If you work 40 hours in 4 days instead of 5, of course it's no big difference. However each work day is a day that cannot be used for any other activity, so having 50% more free days is actually good anyway.
If you'd work however 32 hours in 4 days, it would lead to improvement. Of course it depends on the type of work, meaning if it's something "intellectual" you cannot force more on a permanent basis. I can be as productive in 1 good day as I am in an entire week (programming).
> However, as such, your pay is only 80% of what it was with five days.
Which is not fair, given that productivity on average increases as work hour per week decreases. So you'd be paid 80% while having ~90% of the original productivity. With 50% of work time (aka paid), you'd be around 70-80% productivity. It's even well possible that *some* people work better with less working time.
That is such a bad deal for employees that they simply don't want to do that to a point it became "culture" to work 40h/week. To deviate from that is widely considered special, deviating from the norm. And the norm sure exists because it works best, right? Well, no. It exists because it was established as some form of simplification for ALL employment relations.
It doesn't even translate well for physical labor. How often do I see workers on the road where 1 guy does the work and 4 are talking and watching?
That time only applies in areas which have opening hours for customers. No matter how bad you are as an employee, if you are there, you can communicate with customers and handle whatever needs to be.
But things like programming? It's very hard to estimate how long things take to make, and often it goes into the upwards direction. It's not like "this job takes 200 man-hours" - it takes as long as it takes, and if it's done better it takes less. And a LOT cannot be predicted anyway until it is tested.
In my previous company I heard a project which was supposed to take 2 weeks took 2 years, and was still going on. Incompetence sure played a role on many levels, but things like that can happen.
Also being against the reduction of wagecucking is pretty gay bro.
Anyways, I’m in the process of turning my company to the 4 day work week soon. I think it’s great.
For instance, they might take your private phone once you check in to ensure you're not spending all your work time browsing fakebook. There may be more surveillance, offices replaced by cubicles so that you get no privacy... Notice a pattern here, these are just the stuff they have already done, and will continue to do. Methods that doesn't work very well. Why would you wanna spend more time under such horrible conditions?
The important thing is that the government STFU, let specialized unions deal with this sort of stuff as not every policy fits every type of job. 4 day work weeks is probably great for office work. Limited hours can work great in settings were you go to one location, work then return back home nearby.
Even with unions it's important to make exceptions. If you're a truck driver working 4 day weeks and get delayed you don't wanna spend a long weekend out on the road doing nothing. Of course you should be able to drive the last 200 miles and get back home to your family, even if it's outside your working hours, and in doing so you should get paid overtime, plus 100% for every hour outside of office hours.
Firemen who practically live at the station doesn't actually work when resting, they're on standby. 9 hour workdays there is just dumb. Let them get paid for every hour they're at the station, on standby, and allow long shifts, including overnight shifts.
you'll see jobs that are *already* prisons going to a 4 day workweek and claiming it helps so darn much, sure, but i don't think "going to a 4 day workweek" is going to immediately be followed by "turning the job site into a prison to re-increase productivity".
the "so darn much" was aimed at the companies who currently run prison-like jobs who will claim that a 4 day workweek absolves them of all sins.
Many (((employers))) especially at big companies have definitely lost touch with reality, no understanding for what a productive worker actually needs to be productive. It's all about cost to (((them))). Some who doesn't wanna invest in better working conditions hire pajeets instead who will work for less and accept shittier conditions.
That's unnecessary, just track the workers' output.
If you work 40 hours in 4 days instead of 5, of course it's no big difference. However each work day is a day that cannot be used for any other activity, so having 50% more free days is actually good anyway.
If you'd work however 32 hours in 4 days, it would lead to improvement. Of course it depends on the type of work, meaning if it's something "intellectual" you cannot force more on a permanent basis. I can be as productive in 1 good day as I am in an entire week (programming).
> However, as such, your pay is only 80% of what it was with five days.
Which is not fair, given that productivity on average increases as work hour per week decreases. So you'd be paid 80% while having ~90% of the original productivity. With 50% of work time (aka paid), you'd be around 70-80% productivity. It's even well possible that *some* people work better with less working time.
That is such a bad deal for employees that they simply don't want to do that to a point it became "culture" to work 40h/week. To deviate from that is widely considered special, deviating from the norm. And the norm sure exists because it works best, right? Well, no. It exists because it was established as some form of simplification for ALL employment relations.
It doesn't even translate well for physical labor. How often do I see workers on the road where 1 guy does the work and 4 are talking and watching?
That time only applies in areas which have opening hours for customers. No matter how bad you are as an employee, if you are there, you can communicate with customers and handle whatever needs to be.
But things like programming? It's very hard to estimate how long things take to make, and often it goes into the upwards direction. It's not like "this job takes 200 man-hours" - it takes as long as it takes, and if it's done better it takes less. And a LOT cannot be predicted anyway until it is tested.
In my previous company I heard a project which was supposed to take 2 weeks took 2 years, and was still going on. Incompetence sure played a role on many levels, but things like that can happen.