You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
14 points

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 …

permalink
report
parent
reply
-26 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

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…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

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).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Business

!business@lemmy.world

Create post

A place to share business news and insights.


Rules


  1. Follow lemmy.world rules
  2. Only post content related to business
  3. Do not use this community to promote your business

Community stats

  • 1.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 512

    Posts

  • 1.7K

    Comments