Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Add to inflation because businesses will have to hire more people or pay more overtime to get the same work done.
For those who rely on 40 hours wages they may have a harder time surviving on 32 hours.
We are already in a labor shortage.
Those on salary will be even more overburdened than they are now.
There are 32 hour/week jobs available for those who want to look for that specifically.
Yeah, its just another one of those ideas that sounds great, until it's thought out. I know in my profession, it will just give companies more of a reason to offshore more work.
I have friends that voluntarily work a 32 hour week and are quite happy with those hours. I know many others that work 4/10's. I fully support compressed work schedules if they're feasible and amendable to employees and management. What I don't support is the federal government getting involved in the mix.
What does Pramila Jayapal or anyone else in Congress know about how much money the average American worker needs to support themselves or their families? The article doesn't specify if the Fair Labor Standards Act will be revised to reflect the overtime requirements for anyone working over 40 hours a week. Will this be reduced to 32 hours a week? If so this will impact payroll costs in both the private and public sector. I don't believe it's all together a bad idea but a lot of details need to be worked out and presented before I'd support it.
Congress has no authority to mandate the workweek in the private sector. It could however, change the threshold for OT pay, for those paid by the hour.
Reportedly, the average work week right now is 34.4 hours.
As an aside, many clinical hospital employees work three 12 hour days.
Got a couple of unmotivated generations as-is. 32 hours of pay will force many to take a second job losing that benefit. Or will employers be forced to pay overtime after 32 hours. That means every business would have to sync up the schedules to do business with each other.
In the end this is as much about the party people getting their fantasy of a 3 day weekend fulfilled. What happens if the employer breaks up their time off.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...eek/ar-AARzDfT ( rogressives in Congress are lining up behind a bill that would shrink a regular week of work from 40 hours to 32 — bringing the four-day work week to America.
The Congressional Progressive Caucus just endorsed the aptly named "32-Hour Workweek Act," according to a statement from Rep. Mark Takano, the Democrat representing California's 41st district. The caucus, comprised of nearly 100 legislators, is a key progressive voice and has made its power known during recent infrastructure negotiations) MY OP what a bunch of morons )
I've looked twice, and nowhere in that otherwise link-filled article do I see a link to the actual bill filed. Color me shocked.
The links I DID click and read were all written by journalists without an economics background, most of whom are classic Millenials who've never reported for a 9-5 job anyway.
"Wages have gone down for 5 decades" is BS - it's based on wages as a % of GDP. We're much more efficient and productive and use non-labor to produce goods than we did in the 1950's (when the decline began). Furthermore, their own chart shows that wages by their measure rose over the last 5 years.
They talk about countries experimenting with a shorter week, and finding no change in productivity .... errr, every place that does this is using GOVERNMENT jobs. And as someone who had a government job 30 years ago, I can assure you there's plenty of lollygagging - even institutionalized - in government office jobs.
Jayapal? She worked 2 years in the LBO area of PaineWebber as an analyst, and then less than a year in sales before becoming an activist.
Takano? He was a school teacher for 12 years, other than his political advocacy roles.
I'm not usually supportive of Progressive agendas, but this may be one idea I can get behind.
Can you PP's share your reasons for thinking it's a bad idea? I'm genuinely curious.
Losing money, inefficiency… some businesses can do this with no problems, but not all can.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
