Billionaires Barry Diller and Steve Cohen added to four-day workweek debate as support for the idea rises and companies that made the move say it's a win.
I think the thing is you are already working less than a 4 day week (32 hr … ) your doing 18 at most so I don’t think you really can comment on this one …
Do it for hourly people or give the choice to allow workers to do five. For many jobs it would just mean people working more hours per day to keep up with the volume.
That’s the ponit same pay as 40 hr for 32 hr.
. Better work/life balanced. I know it will not matter to you as you pick your hrs but there are a ton of people that are not that lucky… if they whant to work 40 nothing is stopping them the company will just have to pay 8hrs of overtime.
Would love to reduce the number of hours worked while retaining same comp. However, I don’t think more workers is a viable solution, because that’d imply companies eating the 20% extra cost. Whether or not they can get it through shareholders and the board aside, fact that the amount of working aged adults are shrinking (due to boomers retiring and lesser children in later generations) makes it much harder to add more head counts. There must be ways to improve efficiency without corporate/shareholder greed, and that’s a tough pill for the world to swallow without very drastic changes (UBI for example).
But there it is… if the top took a hiar cut that would cover it. Lower entrance requirements to get the job… means more eligible works… it’s a tuff one yes. Is there enuff workers maybe. But it’s worth a try.
I’m stuck in middle management, and have many middle and senior management peers, so I see both sides of the arguments here getting pushed back hard. I cannot begin to imagine the top willing to take a cut, there’s no benefit for them what so ever. Anything lower tries to justify will just be brushed off. On the flip side, I definitely do not want to reduce entrance requirements… bad hires hurts my team’s performance in non linear fashion.
If meaningful changes were to happen, it would have to be mandated by laws and regulations, but I don’t see a path for those laws and regulations to change without drastic societal changes that would support such.
We don’t have a worker shortage we have a shortage of well paying jobs. If companies pay better than people will take the jobs… and that sucks she has to work so much has they try hiring at better wages or you know she could say no…
I think the thing is you are already working less than a 4 day week (32 hr … ) your doing 18 at most so I don’t think you really can comment on this one …
Do it for hourly people or give the choice to allow workers to do five. For many jobs it would just mean people working more hours per day to keep up with the volume.
That’s the ponit same pay as 40 hr for 32 hr. . Better work/life balanced. I know it will not matter to you as you pick your hrs but there are a ton of people that are not that lucky… if they whant to work 40 nothing is stopping them the company will just have to pay 8hrs of overtime.
The answer is more workers…
Would love to reduce the number of hours worked while retaining same comp. However, I don’t think more workers is a viable solution, because that’d imply companies eating the 20% extra cost. Whether or not they can get it through shareholders and the board aside, fact that the amount of working aged adults are shrinking (due to boomers retiring and lesser children in later generations) makes it much harder to add more head counts. There must be ways to improve efficiency without corporate/shareholder greed, and that’s a tough pill for the world to swallow without very drastic changes (UBI for example).
But there it is… if the top took a hiar cut that would cover it. Lower entrance requirements to get the job… means more eligible works… it’s a tuff one yes. Is there enuff workers maybe. But it’s worth a try.
I’m stuck in middle management, and have many middle and senior management peers, so I see both sides of the arguments here getting pushed back hard. I cannot begin to imagine the top willing to take a cut, there’s no benefit for them what so ever. Anything lower tries to justify will just be brushed off. On the flip side, I definitely do not want to reduce entrance requirements… bad hires hurts my team’s performance in non linear fashion.
If meaningful changes were to happen, it would have to be mandated by laws and regulations, but I don’t see a path for those laws and regulations to change without drastic societal changes that would support such.
We already have a worker shortage. So no the answer isn’t more workers.
My gf is salary and works 50 hours a week. Four days a week means she’s working 12-13 hour days. She doesn’t want that.
We don’t have a worker shortage we have a shortage of well paying jobs. If companies pay better than people will take the jobs… and that sucks she has to work so much has they try hiring at better wages or you know she could say no…
Not EVERYONE on salary is exempt from overtime pay.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17d-overtime-professional
Also, drivers and farmers are exempt from overtime pay, but you should check it out. Salaried overtime pay is a HUGE point of wage theft.