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.
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.