I like this as a concept, and since it has a low likelihood of passing, let a lone being bought up for a vote, i feel comfortable casting this critique:
We need a long-term solution that addresses the power imbalance of employer-employee relations, and all this does is places a temporary and incremental improvement on something that will inevitably be undermined.
I have a similar critique on minimum wage laws - while undeniably better for working class people, they fail to address the broader inequity and end up needing to be updated every couple years (which never happens).
This is one of those moments where I really wish Bernie would put a finer point on it - this is an issue driven by capital. The federal government wouldn’t need to spell out labor laws if they could strengthen the working-class’s position against capital more broadly. I would almost rather him propose a bill that strengthens union laws and the NLRB, since those are currently under attack.
I’d like to think this actually gets some consideration though. Totally agree with your points, but let’s be honest: Once you start calling it like it is and openly blaming Capital, your career in American politics is dust.
Somehow Bernie has managed to have quite a career, in spite of constant opposition by the status quo machine.
Nice, now you can go from two jobs to three in order to afford a house!
“Step into my office.”
“Why…”
“BECAUSE YOU’RE FUCKING FIRED!”
This sounds awesome. Here’s what I wanna know though:
What stops your boss from then saying “You better stop at 31.95 hours or you’re in trouble.” Because they don’t wanna pay overtime? They already do this in a lot of jobs.
So, you’d need additional pay to compensate for less hours, but now you have a two-pronged battle because that just sounds way too lovely.
And I’m guessing a lot of the “exempt” office workers that grind themselves into dust the hardest won’t be affected?
I mean hey, I’d rather it just passes and we see what happens, and keep fixing it as it goes, at least it’s something! But the hardest part is blocking your bosses from weaseling around laws and screwing you anyway.
Bernie is an example of what a progressive politician actually looks like.
American politicians (Republicans AND Democrats) have been moving steadily to the right for the last 40 years. So now, Democrats are where the Republicans were in the 1980s, boring corporatists and friends of banks, pharmaceutical and insurance companies.
And the Republicans have moved all the way into an insane asylum. They long for the “good old days” of company towns, run by 19th century robber barons and worry that the six corporations that control all our news are the “liberal news media.”
when workers won the 40 hour week, the 8 hour day, there were basically no restrictions on the time workers could be required to work.
a 32 hour week is a 6 hour day.
This is weak.
Why do you consider this weak?
You dont get something for nothing, either prices have to rise, or the government is propping up companies that are that ineffient that workers are only doing 32 hours in a 40 hour work week.
You should probably update your economic knowledge.
Study after study over the last 20-30 years has shown that productivity remains or increases when switching from 40 hrs to 32.
And that would be under the government is propping up companies that are that ineffient.
If you mean that the common best practice of working 40 hrs/week is inefficient, then yes.
Governments aren’t pushing for 40 hr work weeks, socialists and industrialists of the early 1900s were, and the rest is conservatism.
Cool, so you think that framers get as much done in 32 hours as 40?
I don’t know if there’s any studies made specifically on framers, but machinists and manufacturers have been reported to, and of course almost anyone in a knowledge job.
So you think that all jobs are more efficient if they just lower the hours?
I’m saying there’s independently verified, peer reviewed, and repeated research that show that many jobs keep or increase their productivity.
Yes
Cool, but you would be wrong.
Your math is wrong
No no no, hours = productivity.
Monkey types on typewriter for more time, monkey write more code. All top quality. Best code.
Pharmacist here. I definitely work the full 40 hours basically non stop and… It’s awful. I don’t think this is how humans are meant to live. If you have a job that absolutely requires the full 40 to be 100% effort, the rest of your life suffers. I believe the reason so many people are able to do 40+ hours is the downtime that’s built into most jobs.
I did 30 hours as a pharmacist for years and it was AMAZING. Like the job was still hard, but it felt like I had a portion of my life that was hard. Now that I’m stuck back to 40 it feels like I have a hard life. I barely have energy to give to my 1 year old baby on days off because I am recovering from the day before. I do the best I can but man was I in a better place at 30 hours.
This is a different discussion, but I agree with you. I think the issue you are looking at is that the way the government manages the currency has created the issue where many people NEED to work 40 hours just to get by. The government has been devaluing our wages for generations and we are on the same side, I just think we all need to realize what the actual problem is.
Which is disproved by Germany. When you compare Germany to surrounding countries, the economy of workers that now only work 35 hours per week, has not declined by comparison to neighboring countries.
Other factors are way more significant, like wealth distribution, economic environment, and quality of public services. If you look to UK they are way worse off, because they have generally fucked up and used economic thinking similar to republicans.
Also look at Denmark, we have one of the least number of yearly work hours, yet we are among the highest paid in the world. With almost no natural resources to benefit from.If you are unwilling to progress, there will be no progress.
So a roofer will be able to put on more roofs if they work less hours?
Yes, many labor jobs would have large quality improvements if their workers worked less hours
Yes! And the closer you get to zero the more we approach infinite roofs per hour, because that’s the way it works with humans, you simply multiply and divide and add and subtract, it’s really that easy, I wonder why people make it so complicated and add in completely unnecessary stuff like health and well being? /s
You can be snarky if you wish, but I am just pointing out the flaws in the idea that if you lower hours people will be as efficient.
What I’m saying is you can’t just count the beans.
Fewer work hours are recouped in a number of ways, like less sick leave and higher efficiency, maybe not 100%, but experience seems to show that a pretty significant part is. So “as efficient” is not true.Of course you can’t do this indefinitely, but you can increase efficiency most places by going down from 40.
I think you can count the beans. You’ll have less injuries better quality work and a better product or service overall.
One workplace injury over the life span of a business would save all the costs of the lower hours / same pay
Edit: I work in a large organization. Someone hurt themselves. The payout was so large that the bosses realized they could pay for more than hundreds of dollars of safety equipment per worker per year for the entire organization and still save money if it avoided one accident.
I could agree with you if we are talking about 80 hours/ week , but 40 hour is totally doable and not really even many hours to work.
As far as efficiency goes, that is an issue with companies that are enable to be inefficient by government controls and influences.
You clearly do not have an economics degree, nor do you know what you are talking about
Many workers already only work 32 hours a week and fill a chair while bullshitting the rest of the time. Many people do that because they would burn out otherwise. Cut the hours by 25% and it’s more reasonable to expect people to actually work. Right now even supervisors don’t crack down on that behavior because it’s just generally accepted that you can’t push people that hard or productivity starts to fall. Imo 30 hours/week is the sweet spot for productivity and cutting down wasted dead time.
Most supervisors don’t push that button because they don’t want anyone to question how much work they do. Because it’s the same as the rest of us. Or less.
The hardass bosses who do demand more typing and more hours simply don’t possess self-awareness.
And that would be under the government is propping up companies that are that ineffient.
Don’t know where you get that idea from. If you cut out the hours where employees sit around wasting time, you get the same productivity for less hours worked. There’s no difference besides time saved. Government has nothing to do with it, as revenue is not affected.
The government creates a hedge of regulation protection for large businesses. Also the government directly gives money via contracts, between 20-25% of the GDP is government spending, and that is just on the federal level.
Can someone explain that “with no loss in pay”?
It’s not like there is a magical way to know what you’d get paid if you worked a 40hr week, when everybody works 32hr week, and punish your employer if it’s less.
It’s not like wages are determined by the government either.
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
“(3) With respect to any employee described in paragraph (2) who in any workweek is brought within the purview of this subsection by the amendments made to this Act by the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act, the employer of such employee may not reduce the total workweek compensation rate, including the regular rate at which the employee is employed, or any other employee benefit due to the employee being brought within the purview of this subsection by such amendments.”
And yes, wages can definitely be determined by the government; see the Federal minimum-wage limit. Salary would remain the same; your hourly-wage would be increased by 1.25x.
Salary would remain the same
For somebody hired before the law is enacted.
EDIT: And minimum wage, if it’s going to be increased, will mostly affect people earning the minimum wage. Obviously.
Does the bill also include at least a 1.25x minimum wage increase to enforce this as well?
That would be logical, but still would affect only people earning close to minimum wage.
It would increase pay for some, and leave others without their jobs. Same as any other minimum wage increase.
Yes, but combined with shorter work week, which may cause some increase in the amount jobs of exactly for people earning close to minimum wage, the result may be less noticeable.
It means that full time is 32 hours per week.
I havent read the bull so I don’t know what protections it has for hourly or salary employees.
There can possibly be none.
And most things get done in the first 4-6 hours of every day, if it’s not a dumb job at McDonalds. So I’m not sure there’ll be need to hire many more people.
Is there any reason that it couldn’t use existing employees rate of pay as a benchmark and literally force them to pay accordingly while reducing hours? It’s not like that wage data is secret its reported to the government as part of withholding. Ultimately a business would have to hire to meet needs or commit to paying overtime to all its 40 hour workers.
Yes there is at least one reason: jobs that aren’t yet defined wouldn’t exist in the Big Table of Centrally-Controlled Prices. So we either don’t apply it to those, or we prevent anyone from creating any new kind of employment arrangement without first getting government approval.
This kind of thing precedes starvation and mass murder. This is very dangerous.
OK, then hiring new people they’ll pay less, and after everybody’s been rotated - for everybody.
Which is logical, I don’t get why he adds that phrase everywhere.
Since we are playing I run the world can’t I just say you can’t offer less than the average you are already paying for new people? If you don’t like it you can always close up shop and cede the market to someone else. Also wages are normally sticky. A large portion of your workforce works for someone else how will you ever attract them to work for you with smaller wages?
Incomplete article by The Hill… Actually, the more I look at it this is a bad article. The only current bill introduced to the Congress is from last year by a different Representative. Bernie put out yesterday (the 13th) that he will be introducing a bill on Thursday the 14th (2024-03-14). It’s only 0600 local time Washington, D.C. so it hasn’t happened yet. And it would be very strange to he is introducing another act in the same session (118th).
H.R.1332 - Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act since they couldn’t even link to the bill.
Congress.gov has the sponsor as Rep. Takano, Mark [D-CA-39] (Introduced 03/01/2023).
Long title: Official Title as Introduced
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to reduce the standard workweek from 40 hours per week to 32 hours per week, and for other purposes.
He also spoke earlier about Israel breaking the US law by disrupting Us Humanitarian Aid.
So that’s two things the rest of the party will ignore him on?
Everyday until closing time, forever.
Tbf they ignore him on everything and that’s why I do too. He’s been in politics forever and can’t get anything done ever. Sure it’s the fault of the party for ignoring his good ideas, but it’s also his for being so bad at politics that he can’t even get the backing of his own party. How was he ever going to beat Trump if not even the Democrats like him? He says nice things but he’s ineffectual
Bernie Sanders is an Independent, he runs in the Democratic primaries for the Democratic Presidential nomination but he sits in Congress as an Independent.
Even less effective
If doing the right thing isn’t effective then we’re truly doomed
Sometimes things that sound nice aren’t the right thing.
Nobody would be good enough.
I mean they have to be good enough to win right? And Bernie can’t, he’s proven he can’t win. So what’s the point of him but words?
In any case Bernie is old as shit, that’s why I don’t want him. I honestly laugh at the hypocrisy of his supporters calling out the age of Biden, Trump, Pelosi and McConnell, while asking for Bernie.
You misunderstand. Nobody would be good enough for YOU. You will find something else to be angry over and will project it there.
Actually, Bernie is known as The Amendment King for being able to get shit done in Congress.
Tell me you’ve never worked a day in your life without telling me.
That certainly isnt Bernie
I’ve noticed that I get the same amount of work done working 5 days a week as if I plan to only work 3/4 days and know I’ll have some free time to enjoy life. My work is really project based so as long as it gets done no one cares.
My wife has also noticed that I’m a lot more stressed when I work 5 days a week and need pretty much the whole weekend to recover.
It’s LONG overdue. Been saying this for years. Reducing the stress, increasing free time (and therefore things like family time, innovation time, etc.) would vastly overhaul our society. Productivity has risen for decades while wages remain stagnant and work-life balance, if anything, has worsened.
work-life balance, if anything, has worsened.
I don’t believe that(but that’s just my gut feeling). I think its fair to say that demand of work-life balance has increased though.
Depends on the field but since the pandemic I see folks being"connected" to work in unimaginable ways where they are constantly answering emails or working from home to complete work in their evenings and weekends. Just logging into teams at anytime on a weekend I can see at least a few people online working. This wasn’t the case pre pandemic.
Logging in on the weekend reinforces this norm. If people see you are online, it lessens any cognitive dissonance they have with the voice in the back of their head saying “this is some bullshit, this is my day off.”
There was a time when if someone wanted to reach you after hours they had to call your house and leave a message on your answering machine. now you have “bosses” that get pissy if you take 5 minutes to respond to a text in the middle of the night.
Productivity has risen for decades while wages remain stagnant and work-life balance, if anything, has worsened.
Wages are determined by balance of power.
We need this so fucking bad. As a species, not just America or the wealthy nations only. Everyone.
And this should just be a transitionary period down to a 24 or less hour work week. Fuck slaving away at shit jobs just to make billionaires.
that’s because America shits billionaires.
Yea, slaving away should be purely optional. If you love your job or you love money or you want to keep yourself distracted AND make money at the same time, by all means, knock yourself out and work 60 hour weeks.
It’s a failure of the system if people have to work full time to scrape by with the very bare necessities and live in poverty, with all the nasties that come with it. America coined the term “working poor” (obligatory meme so we’re on the same page)
Full Employment and Zero Protests go hand-in-hand.
As soon as unemployment figures start climbing (2008, 2014, 2016, COVID-2020) people hit the streets and cops start working a lot of extra overtime.
Imagine if people had a whole third weekend day to themselves. Imagine what they could spend their time doing that wasn’t entirely predicated on enriching their bosses?
Imagine citizens actually learning how politics work and taking civic responsibilities for their own interests, instead of being chained to a job for every waking moment, and so zombified they don’t even know what day of the week it is.
Happy people with stake in their own community. What a nightmare for the ownership class!
America coined the term “working poor” (obligatory meme so we’re on the same page)
It’s also very American to just fucking ignore most of the world while saying things like that.
We need this so fucking bad.
Of course we do, so do the corporations, though they don’t realize it. With happier workers you get more profits.
Call your House of Representative member and let them know that.
If we citizens don’t apply the pressure, nothing will happen.
And if your cynical about doing that, try it anyway, just as an experiment, to see what happens. Hell, even make a YouTube video about your experience doing so, for content.
Just say "Please let my representative know that I am in favor of the Bernie Sanders bill (Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act) for a 32 hour work week."
It’s just a phone call. A 32 hour work week is worth a single phone call, right?
Don’t get me wrong, I love me some Futurama, but you’re going to have to elaborate on this reply, and how it relates to my comment about contacting your house representative.
“I don’t miss twice Campers.”
I loved that line.
I was jokingly suggesting that unhappy workers are actually more productive but in reality I’m 100% with you.
“but more hours means more productivity %%”
I’m going to go with you forgot to add the /s to your comment.
The quotes provide the same meaning, basically that you are parodying the other side.
Quotes are usually reserved for actually quoting someone else (for example), and not making a statement about parodying the other side.
It’s a pretty commonly used format on many parts of the internet, I think most people would interpret it that way, especially when everybody reading will see that what is being quoted is obviously untrue.
Well I guess I’m being nuanced here, but I don’t think in this specific case that works out that way, considering what it’s replying to.
In other words I would agree with your interpretation if the reply was parodying something I said directly. Otherwise it just seems something of a non sequitur.
Anyway, I get what you’re trying to communicate towards me, I even agree that sometimes it is using the way you describe. I would just think that’s done the minority of the time, and the majority of the time quotes are used to actually quote someone.
So you’ve never read fiction?
No, in all the decades I’ve been on this planet, I’ve never read one book of fiction of any type whatsoever.
/s
Good idea. I have one little suggestion. Start the conversation with “Fuck Milton Friedman, and fuck your shares.”
Looking at the productivity gains, vs income gains since 1970, I would say that we need an 8 hour work week. We are producing well over 7 times as much stuff and economic value as we were in 1970
vs income gains since 1970
I hope you do correct for inflation.
We should produce less stuff.
Agreed. The waste factor is appalling
The amount of shit that companies produce and then just throw away because it’s cheaper than donating, is staggering. There was some report a while back about Amazon doing this. Truckloads of stuff that doesn’t sell, brand new, straight to the landfill. Stuff that could be donated to public schools or whatever. Fucking gross.
Not to mention all the food we produce, then waste.
A relative of mine used to work at a private school. The owner of the place wanted to throw an extra computer monitor in the trash. Literally just put it in the dumpster. That relative saved the monitor and now I am using it. Bought a DVI to HDMI cable and it works great. It’s a 1680x1050 situash.
That is on third party sellers. They have to pay for warehouse space after a certain amount of time. If something isn’t selling they can pay for Amazon to ship it back or destroy it. Most sellers don’t actually have a warehouse themselves, they have their products shipped directly from the manufacturer to an Amazon warehouse.
Sure, but I honestly don’t care much about the logistics or details of why. The underlying concept is the unnecessary waste. Whatever the reason it’s happening, I disagree with it.
Agreed. The problem is a business like Amazon getting SO INCREDIBLY MASSIVE and yet completely neglecting the obvious problems with “Eh just destroy perfectly good stuff” being the easiest, most convenient option.
Heck, they’re so evil I’m surprised they don’t just have a ToS that says “We sell it ourselves if you don’t wanna store it and don’t want it returned.”
But nah, filling landfills with wrecked computers, batteries, and plastics is so much more convenient this quarter /s.
They (amazon) need to be destroyed. We don’t want to store them here anymore.
When COVID shut down my state (we were considered essential) we got furloughed one day a week. I was getting paid less so I was concerned, but it was honestly the best thing to happen to me. We started a garden, I got so much more done. I was healthier and happier.
Going back to 5 days a week, and longer commute (no more COVID clear freeways), I can absolutely feel my life shortening. I’ve gained a ton of weight, and increased stress significantly.
Upvote because I am Satan and I want you to suffer! /s
I don’t see a path forward that doesn’t start with the US government making the change first. They are one of the only employers that don’t have market competition.
Some departments in the US government give you a paid time off day every week to use however you want. A lot of people would take every Friday off, or some would stash them for a longer vacation.
It’s wild to me how internally the government offers the kind of benefits politicians should’ve pushed into law a long time ago. It really is “for Me, not for Thee”.
Source: worked in one of those departments
Giving a benefit to government workers only requires a president to write an executive order.
Making a benefit into a law that affects all workers requires the House, Senate, President, and SCOTUS to all get on board.
Definitely true, but you never hear conservatives complaining about all the paid leave they get or the healthcare benefits they enjoy.
If some conservative president really wanted to walk the talk, they’d axe all those benefits for everyone.
They are walking the talk; they do not believe all people deserve equal treatment. Their worldview is inherently hierarchical.
Bullshit. Fake news. Made up.
Literally everything US politicians and billionaires do is “rules for thee, but not for me”. Even running for president.
Which jobs give you four day weeks as of now?
wow, that’s like two and a half months of vacation
I work in the Federal Government, and this isn’t true. You have alternative work schedules (4/10s, 5/4/9, maxiflex, etc.) but you’re still going to work 80 hours unless you take leave. You gain annual leave every pay period and the amount is dependent on how long your federal service has been. But when you start (1-3 years) you only get 4 hours per pay period.
Maybe you’re seeing people who have long federal service (15 years) that gain 8 hours/pay period use their leave. That’s their choice but they’re still working 40 hours on paper regardless.
Some departments in the US government give you a paid time off day every week to use however you want. A lot of people would take every Friday off, or some would stash them for a longer vacation.
Nope.
Source: worked in one of those departments
If you did, you had no idea what was going on.
An agency can’t just “give” someone twice the leave accrual as the max. People were probably doing 4 days a week, 10 hours a day.
And you just didn’t understand
As a European libertarian, americans and people in some far eastern countries work at their jobs way too much. It’s harmful in every kind of way imaginable. I don’t understand why it’s done.
I get that some profession may benefit from it, but having standard office personnel sit at their desk 12 hours every day? What the fuck. I refuse to believe this improves company profits in 90% of the companies.
I don’t understand why it’s done.
Useful idiots proud to work for their overlords.
or y’know people trying to support and feed themselves and/or their families and hoping to somehow scrounge up enough savings to be able to lose it all for medical reasons or on a house
We’re discussing why they choose to structure society that way.
These arguments have been going on for generations, and Americans tend to be useful idiots proud to work for their overlords.
yes because the modern worker who is in the group that would be most directly affected by Sanders’ proposal were involved in building the current work culture in america and totally have a choice about participating in it today.
…what? Are you being sarcastic?
I think you spend too much time on these forums and you’re playing leapfrog with yourself.
Try to be more direct and clear about what you want to say.
Own your argument!
Ask questions if you’re confused. Follow your own advice before giving it out.
The first thing I asked was a question…
You are clearly not trying to “discuss anything”. Making glib generalizations and dismissing major reasons why people work excessive hours shows you would rather victim blame than actually have a discussion. And if you believe most Americans are “proud to work for overlords”, then you are buying into the overlords propaganda.
I’m self employed.
There’s an infinite amount of work for me to do, but like most professions its intellectually, emotionally and mentally taxing.
Honestly, I can’t do much more than 4 hours of real actual work per day.
That’s more than most employees do in a day, and often they have less say in the impact of it.
Real actual work you say?
Im working 40, and in recent memory went thru long stretches of 60+, and also 0, when i was privileged enough to take a bit of extra time between jobs.
In my “free” time, i work on the art my heart wont let me not make. When working 40, i can manage an extra 10 hrs (maybe) on a good week doing the shit i actually feel im supposed to do. When i worked 65, i hardly did shit some weeks, other weeks id feel proud of 3 hrs. Youd think i could then manage 60, or 50, or at least 40 when unemployed then, right?
Lol, try 25 as a stretch goal. When u actually believe in ur work and want to give problems the time they deserve and the details the attention they need, you find that you get burned out pretty damn fast. Any more and the effort slips.
Granted, im not counting breaks in that number. If i work 4 hrs one day, i might do it in some 45 minute chunks, 1 ninety minute chunk, with numerous 15 minute breaks and 1 lasting between 90-120.
I get that ymmv, but im typically extolled (read: exploited) as a very hard worker in all my jobs, and we’re talking about the difference between working on the things that my soul demands versus what is typically rote, menial BS.
That’s an interesting summation and more or less my experience.
Like I can rack up 60 hours doing “stuff”, but the complex stuff where I’m really producing the most value is capped at 20 or 25 hours a week.
Same here. I did a complete carreer change from STEM (robotics engineering) into visual arts, and I’m happier than ever, but the intense mental work required means I do ~4 hours of actual developed work a day, then spend the next 4-6 hours doing the art equivalent of menial work (fixing the quality of small lines, slightly tweaking colours etc)
Hey that’s interesting! I have a degree in computer science and work as a software developer but also a masters in visual arts (photography). I never managed to break free from my developer gig, because of the financial stability it provides, but I already burned out, recovered and feel it’s an endless cycle. Like you, doing art made me so happy and it bothers me every day I can’t seem to get my life turned around in that direction.
Do you have any tips in that regard? How did you get started? Did you transition softly or just quit your job there and then? And what then? Did you have network? Can you live off your art?
I have so many questions, please point this fellow STEM in the right direction to break free :)
I’m sorry to say that I don’t have a lot of advice to give. I just got so fed up one day, that I decided the risk of starving to death wasn’t enough to stop me from changing fields.
How did you get started?
I built a small portfolio, anything I could get together and had some level of quality really. As artists we’re often harsh on ourselves, but the average person interested in commissions and freelance projects will be surprisingly undiscerning of your flaws, so don’t be too picky. Just make sure they’re finished art pieces, that’s what clients care most about. Then I made a profile in every social network/ freelance site I could think of.
Did you have network?
Nope, as we say in Brazil, I just “exposed my face to be slapped”.
Can you live off your art?
Barely, but yes - and the payout increases over time, as you get more comfortable, skilled and learn which corners you can cut without affecting the artwork. Keep in mind my cost of living is probably significantly lower than yours if you live in America or Europe.
I honestly don’t recommend following my footsteps - being more patient and building your artistic profile over a period, say one year, is almost certainly a better bet. Also, please don’t just quit without having the cash to sustain yourself for a while, in case things don’t pan out well.
What the fuck. I refuse to believe this improves company profits in 90% of the companies.
It doesn’t. Hundreds of industry studies have been done, and they all point to the same conclusion. 40 hours of work is the absolute maximum you can squeeze out of a worker before you start to see productivity and quality take a sharp nosedive. Doesn’t matter if you’re a factory worker or an office drone, fatigue will set in and give increasingly diminished returns for every hour over that. 40 hour work weeks only became the standard across the United States because of Henry Ford actually listening to the people doing these studies.
I think part of the reason we haven’t shifted more towards a more balanced 30 hour work week despite the absolutely massive increase in productivity thanks to computerization and automation is because management positions attract individuals who strongly believe that more effort = more results, and that probably rings true for managerial positions where the most alpha-minded ones who work extra hard above and beyond the job’s expectations are the ones to typically get the promotions and thus become industry leaders themselves in time.
Consider how much time people spend on Facebook or TikTok or whatever while on the job. Consider how much time is spent “looking busy” when in reality you might just be dragging out the task you are on so that you are not assigned more busywork. This is all a product of people having jobs that demand they be present and paid for 40 hours worth of labor, but a great deal of it is “performative labor” where they are not actually producing, but can’t afford to clock out early because wages are based on how long you are at work, and rarely commission based, so there’s no incentive to produce more for the same pay so long as you are meeting expectations/quotas.
Many people work 12h shifts but that’s not super common in office jobs.
It’s been repeatedly shown to decrease company profits. As people work longer hours they amount of stuff they get done declines rapidly as they get tired. Their error rate also dramatically increases. This causes a rapid decline in overall productivity.
The issue is people believe that working longer hours is more productive in those cultures. Sadly people usually make decisions based upon unfounded beliefs not provable facts.
People also stress out and burn out more easily, which takes a toll on their health, which not only further reduces productivity, but also increases otherwise unnecessary medical costs
A coworker “above me” (we don’t have titles at this job so we can’t determine our value) just said the other day: “I don’t get this generation. Imagine calling out because you don’t feel well in my time? You went to work because you needed it, you cough and people know to stay the fuck away from you. If you called out you would just get fired and the job would keep chugging.”
That’s viewed as a GOOD place to work at by some fucking insane people… America is the land of the blind slave.
“That’s how you get pandemics.”
