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.
That's where you're wrong though, working less than 40 hours a week isn't automatically lazy, it just means some people prefer to have more time to do other things. And that doesn't mean watch tv and vegetate.
If I can live comfortably, working 4 day weeks or 6 hours a day in a 5 day week (hell, if I could pull it off, 6 hours a day in a 4 day week would be great), and then have lots more time left over to do the things I like, what's the problem with that? As far as I can tell it only means I've been smart and managed to get into a job that allows me to pursue what I like and find interesting instead of slaving around until I fall over dead from it.
People work hard through their entire life, so they can enjoy a comfortable retirement, enjoying a walk in the sun or sitting at the docks looking at the ocean, other people work less, and do that exact thing their entire life. Who's the smarter one?
Well there appears to be evidence that this has worked for some businesses in Norway, and it may not be a bad idea, but I think we need to look at the sociological differences between our societies (and you alluded to this in your first post) that may cause this to not work as well/work better/be the same in the US versus Norway. I don't know much about Norwegian culture, but if they have the same mindset as you posted above (one I personally agree with), I can see how they would be extremely productive in that amount of time so they can get off early and enjoy life. I think we would see the same response from a lot of Americans. There are also a lot of Americans who have the attitude that Hawkeye and ZGACK expressed (And there's nothing wrong with that attitude, we're all different in our approach to life. Their hard work is commendable) and I think that attitude may be more prevalent in the US than in other nations. This would certainly not be conducive to a short work week being implemented here successfully. And if it were to be implemented, I would look at maybe a 30 hour work week, not 21.
I guess I personally lean towards being against this, just because I don't think it is the right solution for every business and every industry. I don't think it would be a bad idea for some businesses to adopt this policy, by providing full time benefits to 30-hour a week employees in order to see what kind of results they get. I can see how, in some industries, more work can be accomplished in 6 hours than in 8 hours, just because it feels so much shorter, you're willing to work harder. One other concern though - once 6 hours became the "norm," would we all go back to our old levels of productivity because the novelty of the work day "feeling much shorter" would wear off?
Personally, I think doing away with night shift jobs, would be the best option. It not only has detrimental effects on most peoples physical bodies, but it also throws your mental abilities into the gutter as well.
For some jobs, like mine, I feel that working 40 hours a week is needed. However, I think that the best way for many of those 40 hour a week jobs to happen, is to allow the employee to work that 40 hours, whenever they want.
So, if you want to work, non stop for 3 days (including sleep) and not work the other 4 days of the week, that'd be fine. If you'd rather work 6 hours a day, for 7 days a week, then that would be fine to.
The fact is, biologically, we are not all at our best at 8 or 9 in the mourning. And others are best at 7 in the evening.
I think this would be a great way to increase productivity, decrease stress, improve quality of life, among many other things. We would have more time for family and to do chores, cook healthy meals, and just enjoy life more. I think this would be a much better idea than to let people retire at age 40, which there was a thread about not too long ago. HOWEVER, 21 hours just doesn't seem like enough to keep somebody busy, in my opinion we should start by going to 30 hours and then see how that works out. What do you guys think??
I read this posting, and the following questions leaped immediately to mind:
1. How does a 21-hour work week "increase productivity?" If you couldn't get the job done in 40 hours, how are you going to do it in 21?
2. Does the reporter who filed that story honestly believe that any employer is going to pay someone the same salary for practically half as much work time? If people are having a difficult time in the present economy, how will slicing their salary in half make things any better?
3. How is it that nobody seemed to have a problem with the 40-hour work week until the current generation? It begins to sound as though there's a lot of people running around who really don't want to do any work at all, and they'll stop at nothing to invent a justification.
Now honestly, isn't this just a case of some bunch of people (who don't do any actual work themselves) sitting around a table throwing ideas around--and one of them said, "Hey, I think you got something there!"
Maybe those rigid work hours per week don't make sense anymore, regardless of the number. I mean, there are phases when there is a lot of work to be done and then there are times when people are bored to death.
I think people should spend a lot more time with their families rather than with their colleagues.
People work hard through their entire life, so they can enjoy a comfortable retirement, enjoying a walk in the sun or sitting at the docks looking at the ocean, other people work less, and do that exact thing their entire life. Who's the smarter one?
Totally agree. We only live once so why spend your life making somebody else money?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,020,628 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Personally, I think doing away with night shift jobs, would be the best option. It not only has detrimental effects on most peoples physical bodies, but it also throws your mental abilities into the gutter as well.
For some jobs, like mine, I feel that working 40 hours a week is needed. However, I think that the best way for many of those 40 hour a week jobs to happen, is to allow the employee to work that 40 hours, whenever they want.
So, if you want to work, non stop for 3 days (including sleep) and not work the other 4 days of the week, that'd be fine. If you'd rather work 6 hours a day, for 7 days a week, then that would be fine to.
The fact is, biologically, we are not all at our best at 8 or 9 in the mourning. And others are best at 7 in the evening.
For some industries, abolishing night shift work isn't practical (hospitals, police, fire, etc). I do think that having 24/7 retail stores and restaurants are a bit excessive though.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,020,628 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
I think people should spend a lot more time with their families rather than with their colleagues.
Exactly. Our children suffer the most when both parents have to work excessive hours.
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.
