WORKING TO LIVE ON TRIAL

MAEGAN CARTER TAKES A CLOSER LOOK AT THE 4-DAY WORK WEEK

Chances are you’ve probably heard a thing or two about quiet quitting. It seems while there’s been a clear shift in the financial and real estate markets, the job sector has also been experiencing a noticeable change.

For as long as we can remember, a full-time work week has been 40 hours, where employees work five days a week for eight hours a day. This became U.S. law in 1940, though many had adopted the practice earlier following Henry Ford’s success with it.

Today, 4 Day Week Global, funds research for programs exploring what the future of work could look like. Their proposal is a four-day, 32-hour full-time work week not the compressed 40 hours in four days many already know.

So why now? Forty hours was the norm during a time when households had a single income earner not the typical two we know today, leaving little time to spend with family, take care of responsibilities outside of work, and of course time for well...living.

The U.S. and Canada are two of the latest countries to try the six-month pilot project, while several others have already begun or reached completion in South Africa, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Iceland. The thinking is, if people can have a better work-life balance, they’ll not only be happier, but they might also do their jobs better.

After reading through the trials the benefits are clear. People with more leisure time tend to feel satisfied, healthier, and less stressed. They call in less, feel their time is valued, and tend to work smarter, not harder. Business costs can decrease as well; if no one is working on a certain day, operating costs should lessen. It can also give businesses an edge to help with recruiting and retaining top employees.

One of the biggest downfalls seems to be more of a perception problem. There are doubts on both sides of the issue, about maintaining quotas and output levels. Employers might feel taken advantage of, while employees might worry about falling behind. Another concern is that if staff aren’t as readily available it could dissuade consumers. It’s true, some jobs aren’t suited to handle the same workload in a shorter timeframe, but all are questions being examined by companies partaking in the trials.

In North America, where we’ve long been known to “live to work”, there has been no better catalyst than the recent pandemic, to cause many to question why they’re perfectly accustomed to answering work emails after hours but feel pangs of guilt when calling in sick. They don’t have all the answers, and there are definite kinks to work out regarding scheduling and benefit offerings, but the data coming back shows it’s certainly worth the try.