Experiments with a shorter workweek have shown that shown that working fewer hours improves worker well-being and productivity. But we can’t expect employers to implement this transformative change of their own volition.
Experiments with a shorter workweek have shown that shown that working fewer hours improves worker well-being and productivity. But we can’t expect employers to implement this transformative change of their own volition.
The only disadvantage to a four-day week is that people who can work hard but not smart will lose the only argument they’ve ever been able to win. A lot of this charade falls apart really quick after that.
There are people in the workforce that put in loads of hours to show up, but get nothing done, or at least very little, but they look busy and reliable. Then there are people who work smarter, get the tasks done and look like they slack off because they can manage proper minutes of downtime here and there
Worse are the ones who are adept at dumping all the work onto others. Lateral delegation. “Someone’s gotta do it, and it ain’t going to be me.” It’s really fun finding those net-negative producers and throwing them out into the street. They’re destructive of morale as well as being leeches.
And I hate the firefighter-arsonists even more. Those mostly appear in senior tech roles and middle-to-upper management. Fire prevention is much more worthwhile, but less dramatic, so the people you really need don’t always get the credit they deserve.
I’m stealing the term firefighter-arsonist. I’ve got one or two in mind
“Why aren’t you as stressed about this deadline as I am?”
“Because I’m actually good at my job, bud.”
Can you explain?
A lot of fields have people in them that will judge your worth by how early you show up and how late you stay and not by how good the work is. It’s more visible, and we too often equate have a shitty time with doing good work, as if having a good time at your job means it must not be as deserving of pay.
They will also refuse to learn new things, citing “not enough time for that” and you can watch them struggling when they really don’t need to. I spent a lot of time at my last job trying to make monthly, 1hr meetings happen among all the drafters and yet they couldn’t even find time for that.
Ultimately it comes down to an idea that a lot of people find uncomfortable: Salary should pay related to the value of work you produce, not the amount of time you spent on it. If you can produce a lot of value very quickly then you should be allowed to go the fuck home. I once did everything asked of me in half the time, and even asked for more work which I never got, so I would spend hours in my office just watching Youtube. The very conservative, “hard work” manager would even tell me I was working hard because all he could really see were my results.
Some companies may offer a 4-day work day at 80% pay, but because that system is actually better they end up with a 20% discount on the same value created. They’ll even act like they’re doing you a favour.
Those people should be horsewhipped, sacked, then sued, along with the cunts who count the attendees in a meeting, then loudly inform everyone of how much it’s costing the company. My usual response is “so how did you calculate the cost and risk of not holding the meeting?”
Hmm… I don’t know where you worked, but your experience seems to have sucked.
Nowadays I feel that it’s not so much about how late you stay in the office. Most professional jobs now are hybrid. Part time in the office, part time work from home. Managers don’t see how much time you spend on work at home. So this mindset has changed quite a bit since the pandemic.
Regarding learning new things, you’re asking them to sacrifice a whole hour. Even in a 40h work week that’s a lot of precious time and it’s difficult to get everyone together at the same time to do a learning session. Maybe let them learn in their own time by providing a video or documentation on the topic instead.
Finally, you wouldn’t believe how much time I spend on chores during my work hours. I still get my work done on time. Which proves a 32h 4 day work week is totally doable for professionals working 9-5 office jobs. Of course for other fields it might have a greater impact, like construction. But they can plan around that and allow more time to finish their projects.
Except among the shithead micromanagers that are on the warpath against hybrid and remote work.
Most organizations with a structure more complex than that of a bloom of pond scum have an expectation that overhead activities such as training and admin make up part of the workweek. Budgeting effort for the actual job should take that into account, or those necessary housekeeping activites fall by the wayside. And in my case, continually learning new things and sharing them with the organization is part of my job description alongside planning and delivery.
I’ve always been reprimanded for basically learning and sharing because it affects delivery. So I stopped.
“A whole hour” if you don’t have an hour free then how do you expect handle literally any emergency? There’s this expectation that if an employee’s schedule isn’t filled to the brim that they’re slacking off, but that’s not how this works. What if you get sick? What if there’s an IT issue? If I say it will take 4 days to do something then you tell the client it will take 6 or even 8. Clients would rather you take longer and deliver on time than be ready for something only to have you be late. And no, I will not expect people to learn things outside of work hours as the default. That’s unpaid work and inacceptable as an expectation(if they want to do it themselves, by all means).
The mindset has changed a little but it’s still mostly on paper, in my experience. Many companies will even quietly expect you to stay later since you’re at home and “can”. The government of Canada is forcing everyone working for them back into the office and they’re not even prepared for it, nor can they actually explain why it’s better.
It’s better than it was, that’s about all we can say.