LogFAQs > #957178429

LinkPizza posted...

Money, probably...

That's presuming productivity remains the same and wages are adjusted to still pay people as though they worked full weeks (meaning there's no change in the amounts of money involved either way), as is generally the premise of any compressed schedule ideas. Zeus seems to be suggesting that the idea is fundamentally wrong, not that it's a bad idea because it would compromise productivity. There have, in fact, been a number of 4-day week experiments (most recently, Iceland conducted a major one (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57724779)) that have found that productivity either remains the same or improves overall, while work-life balance, mental health, and other measures of general well-being get a whole lot better.

He is correct that, if 4-day weeks become the norm, there will be people proposing a 3-day week instead, but that's going to go one of two ways:

• Studies will be conducted that find that it does result in productivity losses that are not outweighed by other benefits, in which case the idea will be shot down on those grounds
• Studies will find that productivity remains the same, in which case there's no reason not to adopt the idea

Either way, there's no reason to bring up the idea as though the mere thought of people asking for it is enough to justify refusing a 4-day week. Data can be collected to determine whether or not it's a problem, and an informed decision made from there instead of relying on knee-jerk emotional reactions to deviating from an established norm.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.