View Full Version : The UK needs a four-day week
Boydy
10-01-2016, 03:03 PM
Says Professor John Ashton of the UK Faculty of Public Health
"When you look at the way we lead our lives, the stress that people are under, the pressure on time and sickness absence, [work-related] mental health is clearly a major issue. We should be moving towards a four-day week because the problem we have in the world of work is you've got a proportion of the population who are working too hard and a proportion that haven't got jobs", Ashton said.
"We've got a maldistribution of work. The lunch-hour has gone; people just have a sandwich at their desk and carry on working," added the leader of the UK's 3,300 public-health experts working in the NHS, local government and academia.
"We need a four-day week so that people can enjoy their lives, have more time with their families, and maybe reduce high blood pressure because people might start exercising on that extra day.
"If you've got two people in a couple working, they need to be able to work in such a way that they can spend time together with their children. It's a nightmare," said Ashton, who worked in the NHS for 42 years until he retired last year.
"My concern is that too many people are working too long hours and too hard, and too many people aren't working at all. A large number of people are working crazy hours and a significant amount of people can't get work," Ashton said.
"It [a four-day week] is viable. We need an ambition in the next 10 to 20 years to move to that on a European level. We've had the European working-time directive. Why couldn't we have the ambition to move to a four-day week? The fifth day could be a community activity day, a giving back day. This is how you operationalise the big society," he said.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/01/uk-four-day-week-combat-stress-top-doctor
Yes please.
Lewis
10-01-2016, 03:05 PM
I suppose now they've banned fun the 'public health' wankers needed a new hobby.
Waffdon
10-01-2016, 03:06 PM
That would be great.
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 03:12 PM
Why 4 and not 3 while we're at it?
I'd love a four day but I'm not spending that extra day off doing "community activities".
Giggles
10-01-2016, 03:16 PM
That's why shift work is so much better. A regular 4 day working week is never going to happen.
igor_balis
10-01-2016, 03:16 PM
It is a shame that I'm exactly the kind of unambitious lazy wanker who would jump at the chance of working 3 or 4 days a week, but in order to gain the seniority in a job to get that privilege I'd need to work really hard for years and years - something obviously impossible with my lazy attitude. Proper catch-22. Guess I'll just have to smash the system by working incompetently for 37.5 hours a week forever instead.
People don't work hard enough. I am one of them.
Why 4 and not 3 while we're at it?
Good point.
People don't work hard enough. I am one of them.
True. Keeping you 'working' for extended hours makes no difference whatsoever though.
Somewhat relevant I guess:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/inequality-work-hours/422775/
Over the next century, he predicted, the economy would become so productive that people would barely need to work at all.
For a while, it looked like Keynes was right: In 1930 the average workweek was 47 hours. By 1970 it had fallen to slightly less than 39.
But then something changed. Instead of continuing to decline, the duration of the workweek stayed put; it’s hovered just below 40 hours for nearly five decades.
Boydy
10-01-2016, 03:27 PM
It is a shame that I'm exactly the kind of unambitious lazy wanker who would jump at the chance of working 3 or 4 days a week, but in order to gain the seniority in a job to get that privilege I'd need to work really hard for years and years - something obviously impossible with my lazy attitude. Proper catch-22. Guess I'll just have to smash the system by working incompetently for 37.5 hours a week forever instead.
Same :(
Lewis
10-01-2016, 03:29 PM
I suspect that's due to 1) 1930s futurism being balls; 2) working people actually wanting things, which the likes of John Maynard Keynes probably never considered. Or it could all be a conspiracy. I'm not sure. I'll let 'Bernie' solve it.
Or inequality as the article suggests, which I am sure is what you mean when you say conspiracy.
As mentioned before, I would gladly work 20 hours a week for $30k as opposed to the $80k+ I am supposed to be able to earn for full time work. Of course, such jobs do not exist unfortunately.
I do think that there are some people who work long hours because they are so fucking boring that they have nothing else to do.
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 03:36 PM
Part-time jobs don't exist where you are Pep?
Lewis
10-01-2016, 03:39 PM
They don't pay enough for Mr. Time Over Money.
Not for decent pay, unless I looked outside my field I guess, then maybe I could find something. The whole being a foreigner makes things much more complicated of course, which is why I'll probably move somewhere else as soon as I am done with my studies.
They don't pay enough for Mr. Time Over Money.
:D
I don't think I have ever seen a part-time engineering job. Also, in the great US of A if you're part-time you get no benefits such as the luxurious basic healthcare. I think I would be willing to go back to being a waiter, was working about 30 hours a week for over $30k, but to do that I would have to go back to working illegally which I would rather not.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 04:12 PM
I don't have enough time in a 5 day week to do my work, let alone a 4 day week. Madness.
Giggles
10-01-2016, 04:14 PM
I don't have enough time in a 5 day week to do my work, let alone a 4 day week. Madness.
Same as that.
Boydy
10-01-2016, 04:15 PM
Yes, that's the maldistribution of work he's talking about in the opening post.
Giggles
10-01-2016, 04:19 PM
Yes, that's the maldistribution of work he's talking about in the opening post.
But what can a company do? They can't give me less to do without cutting customers or stumping up for another salary/vehicle. Do they only want large multinationals operating?
I don't have enough time in a 5 day week to do my work, let alone a 4 day week. Madness.
Same as that.
There should be more than one person doing the work then.
Lewis
10-01-2016, 04:24 PM
I'll do your engineering on Fridays if you like.
Giggles
10-01-2016, 04:27 PM
There should be more than one person doing the work then.
See above. How can smaller businesses be expected to survive if they are just meant to double their staff to cut down on work?
I'll do your engineering on Fridays if you like.
Deal. :cool:
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 04:29 PM
There should be more than one person doing the work then.
Which is where the whole thing falls on its arse.
Lewis
10-01-2016, 04:30 PM
Deal. :cool:
Enjoy spending your Saturdays undoing my mistakes.
See above. How can smaller businesses be expected to survive if they are just meant to double their staff to cut down on work?
Oversimplification of course. Still, if you really don't have enough time to do all your work then they are doing a poor job anyway which means they'll go to shit anyway, or you are working extra for free, which makes you a hero (or an idiot maybe.) I have no idea who you work for but if adding one salary is enough to ruin the company then what's the point of owning such a company in the first place?
Which is where the whole thing falls on its arse.
Why? Are all companies now generating zero profit or so little than an extra hire will ruin them? How do they manage to give their CEOs multi-million bonuses then?
Enjoy spending your Saturdays undoing my mistakes.
Like they'll ever notice.
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 04:36 PM
Why? Are all companies now generating zero profit or so little than an extra hire will ruin them? How do they manage to give their CEOs multi-million bonuses then?
Not all companies give their CEO's multi-million pound bonuses.
What this proposal suggests is that every company either lose 20% productivity from their staff, or they pay 20% more to additional staff to cover that.
Add to that that a 5 day working week is absolutely fine in the first place and I'm really not sure what the problem is.
The problem, according to the article, is the number of health issues associated with work-related stress.
It doesn't suggest 20% decrease in productivity. hours working =/= productivity.
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 04:38 PM
Although I guess it all depends on how this is supposed to work.
Do employers just lose 1/5th of their staff's working hours while paying them the same wage, or is it that the same number of hours are spread across 4 days rather than 5?
If it's the latter then it's workable, but I'm not sure I'd want to do that ahead of current arrangements.
Giggles
10-01-2016, 04:38 PM
Oversimplification of course. Still, if you really don't have enough time to do all your work then they are doing a poor job anyway which means they'll go to shit anyway, or you are working extra for free, which makes you a hero (or an idiot maybe.) I have no idea who you work for but if adding one salary is enough to ruin the company then what's the point of owning such a company in the first place?
I'll do a few extra hours for free but it only means I'm driving a bit earlier or later. It's the sort of environment where I don't really mind and I enjoy most of the actual work.
One more salary and vehicle wouldn't ruin us but 3 of us doing around 6 extra hours a week (on a busy week) doesn't warrant another one.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 04:38 PM
There should be more than one person doing the work then.
Whilst i do need to improve my delegating, it's not as simple as that. The company needs to balance it's overhead with work load. We have an amount of staff which means a profit can be achieved (providing we hit our monthly fee targets).
Plus when i do delegate my work to staff, it often means it takes longer as i have to review and correct all their stuff. I know it's a means to an end, but still.
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 04:39 PM
The problem, according to the article, is the number of health issues associated with work-related stress.
It doesn't suggest 20% decrease in productivity. hours working =/= productivity.
Yeah, I probably chose the wrong word with productivity.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 04:40 PM
But what can a company do? They can't give me less to do without cutting customers or stumping up for another salary/vehicle. Do they only want large multinationals operating?
Exactly. If you reduced to 4 days a week, i'm quite sure my clients will still be expecting the same deadlines. Just don't think it would work at all. Profit margins would be affected in a big way.
Yevrah
10-01-2016, 04:42 PM
Plus when i do delegate my work to staff, it often means it takes longer as i have to review and correct all their stuff. I know it's a means to an end, but still.
The reviewing bit's fine, but if you're having to correct a load of stuff then you need better staff.
Leisure time is overrated. Especially now were people are just binge watching TV.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 04:46 PM
The reviewing bit's fine, but if you're having to correct a load of stuff then you need better staff.
Yep, agree to a point. My approach is that with each review of work they produce, the process should shorten as they should be improving. With most staff this happens, but there are the select few where you can tell they just don't have the ability or inclination to improve.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 04:47 PM
Leisure time is overrated. Especially now were people are just binge watching TV.
What did they do in the olden times?...Apart from whack a wheel down a hill with a stick?
Jimmy Floyd
10-01-2016, 05:15 PM
It depends on the job. If you do a 'project' based job then you could easily work 4 or even 3 day weeks and get the same amount done, indeed you could argue the quality of the work might improve in some cases.
In my job for example though, you can't condense it, the work is simply there and has to be done on the day in question regardless of who is and isn't there to do it. I'm sure my employers would want everyone to work 7 days if they could.
Lewis
10-01-2016, 05:17 PM
Although I guess it all depends on how this is supposed to work.
Do employers just lose 1/5th of their staff's working hours while paying them the same wage, or is it that the same number of hours are spread across 4 days rather than 5?
If it's the latter then it's workable, but I'm not sure I'd want to do that ahead of current arrangements.
Something tells me the sort of twats pushing this (they also seem keen on the idea of 'useless jobs') wouldn't be happy for people to take the pay cut, in which case I expect the company goes bust and the government puts people to work doing productive things such as informing on their neighbours' sugar intake.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 05:18 PM
It depends on the job. If you do a 'project' based job then you could easily work 4 or even 3 day weeks and get the same amount done, indeed you could argue the quality of the work might improve in some cases.
In my job for example though, you can't condense it, the work is simply there and has to be done on the day in question regardless of who is and isn't there to do it. I'm sure my employers would want everyone to work 7 days if they could.
Would never work. Majority of people will always have more than one project...and quite often several. You need 5 days a weeks so you can keep on spinning those various plates.
Henry
10-01-2016, 05:39 PM
The guaranteed income might incentive this.
Perhaps possible in certain industries, e.g. bar staffing, low-level jobs in the service industry, warehousing etc., but clearly impractical in many environments, particularly professional environments.
To flip Yev's point a bit, why work five days and not six?
I'm not sure about four day weeks, but it strikes me an awful lot of people in this country with pointless office jobs have to commute every day for very little reason.
When I say an awful lot of people I mainly mean me. I spend two grand a year commuting to go and sit at a computer by a phone all day. I could save myself a lot of time and money by just staying at home where I have a phone and a computer, unless otherwise expressly required at work, which would probably be about two weeks a year total.
Perhaps possible in certain industries, e.g. bar staffing, low-level jobs in the service industry, warehousing etc., but clearly impractical in many environments, particularly professional environments.
Why is it practical to work five instead of six or seven then? If everyone moves to four then it is the same as it is now in your 'professional' environment where things just wait during the weekend already.
Why is it practical to work five instead of six or seven then? If everyone moves to four then it is the same as it is now in your 'professional' environment where things just wait during the weekend already.
Because five is now the 'accepted' working week, and life is structured accordingly.
Boydy
10-01-2016, 07:08 PM
'Because this is how things are and I can't imagine things ever being any different.'
I'm sure my employers would want everyone to work 7 days if they could.
You are right, they would have you there 24/7 if they could. Yet the only keep you there ~40 hours a week throughout five days because that's all they can. Yet they somehow manage to still exist. Why wouldn't, say, 35 hours throughout four days work? Anything magic about the current figure?
'Because this is how things are and I can't imagine things ever being any different.'
That is usually the response, yes. In certain people's head change is impossible for some reason.
'Because this is how things are and I can't imagine things ever being any different.'
Increasing the working week isn't going to happen. You might get somewhere with reducing it for unskilled workers, e.g. bar staff, retail staff, service industry, but then they'd have to take 80% of the salary. It's not going to work for the skilled work force.
Just saying it doesn't make it a fact.
Because five is now the 'accepted' working week, and life is structured accordingly.
Life used to be structured around hunting each of your meals, yet we somehow managed to restructure it. Why have we lost the ability to do so?
Boydy
10-01-2016, 07:19 PM
Yeah, there must be nobody else out there who could do your job.
Yeah, there must be nobody else out there who could do your job.
Every minute he spends working is absolutely essential to the subsistence of mankind don't you know.
My work is project-driven, usually to deadline. As projects progress, it becomes more difficult to hand over, particularly where you have a co-ordinating role or hold key SME knowledge on the project or your part of delivery. In short, I'd have had to do the same amount of work in the same timeframe regardless. As it was international work, the UK moving to a four day working week would have been irrelevant.
Magic
10-01-2016, 07:41 PM
Please, bore us more with stories about how hard you work.
Wish it was 4 days.99% of the jobs we do is irrelevant in the scheme of life so just reduce it. Capitalism would carry on.
Offshore Toon
10-01-2016, 08:17 PM
There are some people in my office who stay there until the early hours of the morning far too often. The guy next to me very clearly needs an assistant, because he's in this situation far too often, but they won't give him one probably because he stays to do the work. That kind of loyalty is bordering on stupid. The only thing I can think of is people with kids might be terrified of losing their job so they work as hard as they can, or they hate their family.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 08:25 PM
I'm not sure about four day weeks, but it strikes me an awful lot of people in this country with pointless office jobs have to commute every day for very little reason.
When I say an awful lot of people I mainly mean me. I spend two grand a year commuting to go and sit at a computer by a phone all day. I could save myself a lot of time and money by just staying at home where I have a phone and a computer, unless otherwise expressly required at work, which would probably be about two weeks a year total.
Would your work motivation be the same at home? Employers would struggle to manage that.
Davgooner
10-01-2016, 09:20 PM
Would your work motivation be the same at home? Employers would struggle to manage that.
Why? You either do the work you're asked to do, on time and well, or you don't. It doesn't really matter whether you're in face-to-face contact with your boss.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 09:23 PM
Why? You either do the work you're asked to do, on time and well, or you don't. It doesn't really matter whether you're in face-to-face contact with your boss.
And if staff don't do the work it's a massive pain in the arse. Some staff need keeping an eye on.
Magic
10-01-2016, 09:23 PM
Exactly. Davgooner
It isn't hard to prove these days whether someone is working or not, home or otherwise.
I'd argue it's actually easier to make it look like you're working in an office than at home.
Shindig
10-01-2016, 09:26 PM
I dunno. Going into a place of work kinda funnels you into doing said work. Working from home requires you to make your own schedule. I like the distinction between work and home.
Jimmy Floyd
10-01-2016, 09:26 PM
And if staff don't do the work it's a massive pain in the arse. Some staff need keeping an eye on.
You sound like a proper Little Hitler.
I spend about 25% of my working day actually physically working, at a guess, but my bosses aren't looking at what I'm doing all day because my work is done to the quality required when it needs to be.
Raoul Duke
10-01-2016, 09:35 PM
The concept of 'office work' is pretty divorced from the notion of actually having to be physically at the same place as a bunch of other people. These things were concocted at a time when computers and super fast internet didn't exist.
For people complaining that the universe would implode if everyone worked one day fewer - it seems to function pretty well on Bank Holidays. Or when half the planet is asleep etc.
VR could potentially be the thing that enables a large majority of people to 'telecommute'.
Shindig
10-01-2016, 09:38 PM
Nah, the current office structure isn't going away. Not unless BT can magic a customer service phone line into your living room.
Raoul Duke
10-01-2016, 09:39 PM
Of course you could virtualise that and distribute it. Most people still have phone lines.
Shindig
10-01-2016, 09:40 PM
What if they're required to be in the office one day a week? Is that not a bit of a faff?
Jimmy Floyd
10-01-2016, 09:43 PM
My company would never let you do anything off site for security reasons, i.e. they don't trust us not to leak all their secret designs to Samsung.
Shindig
10-01-2016, 09:46 PM
Same here, although they toyed with the idea in the past. Official Secrets Act > Backlog.
Boydy
10-01-2016, 09:46 PM
Nah, the current office structure isn't going away. Not unless BT can magic a customer service phone line into your living room.
Some companies do have customer service agents that work from home.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 10:00 PM
You sound like a proper Little Hitler.
I spend about 25% of my working day actually physically working, at a guess, but my bosses aren't looking at what I'm doing all day because my work is done to the quality required when it needs to be.
You sound like you're not busy enough, if you're only working 25% of a working day.
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 10:03 PM
The concept of 'office work' is pretty divorced from the notion of actually having to be physically at the same place as a bunch of other people. These things were concocted at a time when computers and super fast internet didn't exist.
For people complaining that the universe would implode if everyone worked one day fewer - it seems to function pretty well on Bank Holidays. Or when half the planet is asleep etc.
VR could potentially be the thing that enables a large majority of people to 'telecommute'.
Re your first para : that is a fair comment and i do wonder once the aging directors of conpanies retire, remote working will become more popular.
Re your penultimate para : On a bank holiday week, I find myself working later than i normal would as I'm trying fit 5 days into 4.
Jimmy Floyd
10-01-2016, 10:06 PM
You sound like you're not busy enough, if you're only working 25% of a working day.
What does 'not busy enough' mean? I could just be really efficient.
Davgooner
10-01-2016, 10:07 PM
And if staff don't do the work it's a massive pain in the arse. Some staff need keeping an eye on.
That's the same whether they're at home or at work, and you can manage them effectively in either scenario. I think the cult of middle management has created a shitload of people who wouldn't have the first idea what to do without eyes on their staff, granted.
Sounds like Quincy is kind of a big deal.
Boydy
10-01-2016, 10:08 PM
What do you do Dquincy?
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 10:08 PM
I worked from home two afternoons last week and whilst i could get work done without interruption, I missed the office environment.
I also sat on the couched wuth the laptop. Probably better to sit in my study.
Working at home gets greeted (by quite a few colleagues ) of 'oh were you watching Trisha or Jeremy Kyle'. Bit annoying when you're working your bollocks off.
Raoul Duke
10-01-2016, 10:10 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co_DNpTMKXk
What does it matter what they think? Maybe you shouldn't take your job do seriously.
Offshore Toon
10-01-2016, 10:43 PM
The other person doing my job full time is an old woman that is useless with technology, so similarly to Jim I don't spend much time actually working, but I get more done than her and when called upon I'm quick and reliable.
The only issue is my desk is situation so that it is easy for people to sneak up behind me so I do get caught in the act now and then. I still can't get this place to work at work, though. I can get the forum up on Google Translate, but I can't log in. :moop:
Dquincy
10-01-2016, 10:54 PM
What does it matter what they think? Maybe you shouldn't take your job do seriously.
I take my job very seriously, nothing wrong with that. It's my career and want to do a good job and progress up the ladder.
Giggles
10-01-2016, 11:05 PM
I take my job very seriously, nothing wrong with that. It's my career and want to do a good job and progress up the ladder.
I can't understand the problem that so many have with that either. Most of this lot are coming across like they wouldn't work on batteries.
Lewis
10-01-2016, 11:07 PM
The other person doing my job full time is an old woman that is useless with technology, so similarly to Jim I don't spend much time actually working, but I get more done than her and when called upon I'm quick and reliable.
The only issue is my desk is situation so that it is easy for people to sneak up behind me so I do get caught in the act now and then. I still can't get this place to work at work, though. I can get the forum up on Google Translate, but I can't log in. :moop:
Have you chucked university, or has time gone that quickly?
Offshore Toon
10-01-2016, 11:08 PM
Gap year because I was/am poor.
Davgooner
11-01-2016, 08:54 AM
Fuck 'the ladder'. Fuck it to fuck.
Chrissy
11-01-2016, 09:02 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co_DNpTMKXk
That is uncomfortably too close to the mark haha
On a serious note, I'm self employed, have been since June last year and if anything I work a helluva lot more hours now. I find it I don't switch off at all most days.
Jimmy Floyd
11-01-2016, 09:37 AM
Fuck 'the ladder'. Fuck it to fuck.
The best people for the higher rungs of the ladder are those who have to be dragged up it kicking and screaming.
Lewis
11-01-2016, 12:07 PM
Like Cincinnatus and... That's it I think. And thank fuck. Or we would still be using the same farm equipment as him.
You can 'take pride of your work' and whatnot and still work less hours. That option will still be available. Unless you are one of those twats that thinks the only way to show you care is to stay there until 10pm every night, then you can fuck off.
Dquincy
12-01-2016, 08:08 PM
What do you do Dquincy?
Chartered surveyor.
Giggles
12-01-2016, 08:14 PM
Should have said civil ENGINEER to fit in properly.
Nice, though :thbup:
Magic
12-01-2016, 08:15 PM
Jesus Christ now that is concerning.
Magic
12-01-2016, 08:16 PM
How does it feel Boydy that dquincy is 100000000% more successful than you'll ever be?
Dquincy
12-01-2016, 08:19 PM
What does 'not busy enough' mean? I could just be really efficient.
It means if you're so efficient that you're getting your work done in a quarter of your working day, then you should be taking on more work. This is of course subject to your job role.
Dquincy
12-01-2016, 08:23 PM
You can 'take pride of your work' and whatnot and still work less hours. That option will still be available. Unless you are one of those twats that thinks the only way to show you care is to stay there until 10pm every night, then you can fuck off.
I'm working at the moment (remotely). This is because i'm snowed under with work. Why anyone would stay at work until 10pm for no meaningful reason is somewhat odd. I'm not sure i know of anyone doing this.
I was at a meeting tonight where a woman (of senior position in a big organisation) spent 50 minutes "summarising" a 30-page report. Fuck yourself to hell you scrotum, we all could have read it ten times over if we really cared.
Spammer
14-02-2018, 09:15 AM
This thread has been.....RESURRECTED
:cool:
But wait
It is also a NEW PAGE!!!!
:cool:
https://media1.tenor.com/images/9edb3d1be26f97abdbff5110b8695aba/tenor.gif?itemid=5191901
Giggles
14-02-2018, 09:30 AM
:D
Byron
14-02-2018, 11:55 AM
You know what, I'm think Hammer is saving the board here.
Disco
14-02-2018, 12:36 PM
This is the best one yet (including whoever just did a troll post delete).
Spammer
14-02-2018, 01:54 PM
People can delete history all they want, but we know the truth :cool:
The truth will out!
We really do need a four-day week.
I have no problem with a five day week at all. I'd probably be quite bored of we had an extra day off each week. Especially if the extra day was staggered so everyone had a different day off.
I'd rather lose an hour each day and start later than a whole day each week.
Giggles
14-02-2018, 04:42 PM
That smiley makes it really look like I deleted.
Only boring people get bored. :dc:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.