What do you think the odds are that the 32 hour work week bill will get passed?

[tvguy]

Does seem odd to be talking about giving people more time off when when have a huge labor shortage. Where are you going to find the people to cover the 8 hours that other worker no longer is working?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Does seem odd to be talking about giving people more time off when when have a huge labor shortage. Where are you going to find the people to cover the 8 hours that other worker no longer is working?

I think it makes more sense when you look at the reasons for shortages. It's such a multi-faceted thing not just one thing but in part work/life balance, work environment, pay, benefits, etc are a part of the reason why people aren't necessarily jumping at this job over that. The other part is a shift in industries. You may have had a restaurant worker who left during the bulk of the pandemic and shifted to a different industry, same for the hotel industry, etc.

Will it help with the worker shortage? I'm not sure but I could see something being done adjusting to approaches to employment.

 

[Julie's Haircut]

A snowball's chance in the hot place.

 

[dez1978]

Your response of they are generally seasonal only relates to one of the examples I put forth. Also I look around at those close to me that are doing all of those things, other than the brick layer, and no, very few are in the physical shape to do these jobs. I certainly am not, nor the guy I'm currently working with and his bad knees, or 90% of our overweight maintenance guys or the ones who have various non-visible ailments. But all we as a society do now is take one particular selection of people and virtue signal our outrage over what they are going through. First it was the poor fast food, restaurant, and grocery store workers who were out there risking their lives to provide your essentials. What about those who risked their lives and couldn't stay home because you (general population you) wanted fancy new clothes or wanted to build a new patio while you were off, or bought a new car, furniture, and multitude of other things that everyone was out mingling with everyone else more than normal at a time they were screaming for everyone to stay home? Why only the restaurant owners then. Why only the medical workers now? Who cares about the restaurant workers now? I don't know a single person who was out of work for more than 3 weeks, every person I know were risking their lives going to work and not a single one of those people were doing anything "essential" as the narrative was.

You are correct about society and how they react to things. The only people I personally know who were out of work for any amount of time other than restaurant employees were those who have chosen to be. Everyone else I know was back to work or just never stopped. Heck, my kid tested positive for covid last week, but I'm required to come to work anyway. People here are burned out from working 6 12 hr shifts a week to keep their co workers safe. Personally I've never been outraged over any of the poor essential workers out there and I am one of them. Even if every single non essential place had closed, there still would have been hundreds of thousands of ppl who were working in hospitals and prisons etc, who couldn't stay home. I really didn't get the outrage over any of it.

Why do people choose to do a job they are physically not in the shape to do? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just don't understand it. I wouldn't work where I work if I couldn't handle it 40 hrs a week. Especially right now when there are many other jobs out there.

I suppose when I think of the types of jobs you mention, most of those around here are in construction so they are seasonal. There are weeks/months at a time when it's too cold to pour concrete, lay bricks etc. The jobs in the extreme heat here would be seasonal as well, as really, there are only 2 months out of the year that its extremely hot.

Burnout in the workplace is generally NOT referred to just hours worked, the amount of hours you work can directly contribute to it but it's not the definition of it. I can see how that might make you view the situation a certain way if you are only thinking about it as in "meh 40 hours ain't nothin'"

Oh I know there are certain jobs, like I mentioned earlier, like in the medical field or prisons that can be very mentally draining. But again, I just don't think that 40 hrs a week is that much and if you can't deal with the mental strain of your job 40 hrs a week, it's not the job for you. The last year, even 40 hrs a week in a hospital could be very draining for sure.

But what about your job is so bad that 40 hours a week makes it too much that you'd get burned out enough that 8 hrs less a week would make a difference? I've had jobs I hated, where I was I supposed burned out from doing the repetitive work, but one less shift a week wouldn't have changed that. I moved on to a different job but the person who took that one thrives on the repetitiveness of it and loves it. I guess I just don't get it. If it's the work itself, or the environment (harassment, negativity etc) changing the definition of full time to 32 hours isn't going to make a difference in that. If it's the physical ability to do the job, I can understand that leading to burnout, but that's an issue for the employee to address that has nothing to do with 32 hrs vs 40. You either ask for accommodations or move on to something else. The employer has to make reasonable accommodations for you if it's a medical condition, but sometimes there isn't a reasonable accommodation to be made. None of these things changes with the change of a 32 hr work week. So other than hours worked, I don't see how anything that leads to burn out is going to be helped by this change. Which leads me back to 40 hours isn't that much and perhaps another job exists out there that you'd be happier with.

I absolutely understand there has to be a balance between profits and employee satisfaction, and that lots of businesses could and should do better. There are thousands of places out there who could do better for their staff. But there are also several just trying to stay afloat. Or who have a ton of revenue coming in, but barely any profit. But again thats something we (in general) don't take into account. We see that this business has 7 million a year in revenue but don't take into account what is left after paying everything, just see that revenue and say oh they can afford more.

 

[Skywalker]

The 40 hour work week was established by the trades and factory unions and have been the norm for around a hundred years. Some physical work has been largly automated and while brick laying, as an example, is hard work it isn't harder work in 2021 than it was in 1949. I'm not sure why we are all of a sudden trying to shorten that work week or move the posts on OT all of a sudden.

Well part of it might be that we are more enlightened now about employee wellness in general. A brick-layer in 1949 who admitted to burn-out and stress, and wanted better work-life balance? He'd be laughed off the job site. And then out of town.

 

[GrumpySue]

Many years ago, in 2008 when the housing bubble tanked the stock market, the company I worked at decided to put everyone on a 4-day work week instead of laying off people to try to get past the troubled times. We all panicked and thought, "Oh no, cut in pay, how will I survive ???". Well it lasted a year and after a year NOBODY wanted to go back to a 5 day week. You adjust your spending, and you REALLY appreciate that extra time every week, it is worth WAY MORE than the extra money.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Oh I know there are certain jobs, like I mentioned earlier, like in the medical field or prisons that can be very mentally draining. But again, I just don't think that 40 hrs a week is that much and if you can't deal with the mental strain of your job 40 hrs a week, it's not the job for you.

We're probably never going to agree on this part but I would probably suggest looking up more into this. Quite honestly and with no disrespect meant a lot of your comments throughout the pandemic related to your work sounds like work burnout and mental stress and exhausting to deal with. I wouldn't tell you to just take a hike and go elsewhere. That's just part of the problem and a contribution to the mess that is today's society of work work work. The concept that workers are deserving of consideration into things is frowned upon still and people generally construe that to mean they are whining and should suck it up buttercup. We have a ways to go before the prior generations open up to the ideas that the way the workforce was of the past doesn't mean it was the right mentality to have. It's generally considered that at this moment in time older millennials (well millennials in general but older has a bigger say or so the analysts say) and gen z have control of the workforce and you can tell not everyone likes that..

 

[JimMIA]

If you watch the theatrics going on in Washington, you'd be amazed they ever pass anything.

I thought it was great that they passed an interim funding bill to keep the government operating until I realized that it was only for two months! So later this month we'll have a whole new round of comedy over nothing.

Unfortunately, all parts of the political spectrum have learned that fighting over straw issues and actually doing nothing brings in much more money than working things out.

Congress -- all 535 members in both parties -- has just become a clown show. It's a bunch of 80 year-olds playing with their spit...impossible to respect.

 

[kdonnel]

I thought it was great that they passed an interim funding bill to keep the government operating until I realized that it was only for two months! So later this month we'll have a whole new round of comedy over nothing.

There are two issues at the moment, the second being the debt limit. While the spending can has been kicked two months down the road, the debt limit can is just 17 days away.

 

[Toolulu22]

I'd imagine there will have to be some exceptions for certain fields like schools and hospitals.

Actually, it could be done for schools. A scheduling jigsaw for Administrators to manage, but 4 days does not necessarily mean that everyone would work the same 4 days. I teach science, and we already have some shared classes where one person teaches the class and another teacher teaches lab. Extend this out and courses can be cotaught, blocked to fit a new scheduling day, or other option. Last year taught us about flexible scheduling. At the elementary level, a coteaching situation- or some sort of day 5 specials block with reading, maybe quiz or test.

 

[JimMIA]

There are two issues at the moment, the second being the debt limit. While the spending can has been kicked two months down the road, the debt limit can is just 17 days away.

Right, and right now that is more fun to fight over than fix. In a couple of weeks, they'll huff and puff and extend it for 60 days.

Hard to believe we pay 500+ people huge salaries and virtually unlimited expenses for such sorry work. It's not even good comedy.

 

[tvguy]

I think it makes more sense when you look at the reasons for shortages. It's such a multi-faceted thing not just one thing but in part work/life balance, work environment, pay, benefits, etc are a part of the reason why people aren't necessarily jumping at this job over that. The other part is a shift in industries. You may have had a restaurant worker who left during the bulk of the pandemic and shifted to a different industry, same for the hotel industry, etc.

Will it help with the worker shortage? I'm not sure but I could see something being done adjusting to approaches to employment.

I think the thing I kind of find interesting is how many businesses would rather do less business.....but cutting hours or in the case of restaurants, not opening for a couple of days a week. Although they are offering mind boggling incentives and pay.

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

I think the average person would be for it IF they did t have to take a paycut, and if none of the services or items they are used to being available 7 days a week stay available 7 days a week.

But realistically that won’t happen. We are already seeing people scream about price increases that are occurring due to wage hikes.

 

[Colleen27]

I don't think anyone thinks the primary function of a school is child care but it isn't an accident that the school week and work week closely line up for most standard jobs. The schools are part of an echo system and need to operate in it. The pandemic showed us how changes in the model of education delivery significantly impacted the work force, specifically females in the work force. The people in the school district need to do a better job of funding so nothing has to be cut. Around me that means voting for levies. I've never voted against a school levy, at least not as an adult that knew better.

ETA: I'm talking about younger kids here that need a parent at home with them. If you are talking about junior high and high schools, which locally are where extracurriculars get cut the most, then it is less if an issue. Once a kid is old enough to be home alone it doesn't matter as much.

It isn't an accident, but I don't think it is an inevitability either. And I don't think the problems are as insurmountable as opponents of changes present them as. I think a lot of the reason things continue as they are is because of a vocal minority that opposes change on principle, regardless of the change - after all, our academic calendar is also based around the needs of an agrarian society that we haven't been in nearly a century, but efforts to better align schools with the realities of a post-industrial society almost always fail. The pandemic was a different situation, with school just *gone* for months. But a four day week? That's a shift from needing 2 hours of daycare a day, 5 days a week, to needing 10 hours of daycare one day a week. It just isn't that big a change, and if it meant that schools didn't have to put art and music and band on the chopping block (or cross their fingers and hope the voters will support a levy to keep them), it would be worth adapting to IMO.

Why do people choose to do a job they are physically not in the shape to do? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just don't understand it. I wouldn't work where I work if I couldn't handle it 40 hrs a week. Especially right now when there are many other jobs out there.

People take the jobs they can get. Watch any conversation about college costs and you'll see loads of people who think kids these days should pick a trade rather than taking out student loans... but most of those people aren't thinking about what it is like being a 50+ tradesperson in a physically demanding job with absolutely no skills that could land a job more suited for an aging body. People commit to these fields when they're young - late teens or early 20s, mostly - and the work doesn't feel that hard. But most of us have 45+ working years in our lifetimes and our overall fitness tends to change pretty drastically from the start of that window until its end.

 

[JimMIA]

But a four day week? That's a shift from needing 2 hours of daycare a day, 5 days a week, to needing 10 hours of daycare one day a week.

Your math here is a bit off. The math doesn't negate the logic of what you're saying, but day care would be more expensive than your estimate. Our experience with our kids has been more hours of day care than you're using -- but using your numbers:

• Five day work week: day care 2 hours X 5 days = 10 hours per week
• Four X 10 hour work week: day care 4 hours X 4 days = 16 hours per week.

You'd be off that 5th day and presumably would do fun things with your child on your day off. If not...another few hours of day care added to the already 6-hour increase.

To amplify further, here's what we actually experienced in real life. DW worked 8X5 = 40 hour work week, but she had almost an hour commute each way. And of course, we weren't paying for day care only during the commute -- we were paying 10 hours per day.

This real-life example would actually save a couple of hours of day care per week.

• Five day work week: day care 10 hours X 5 days - 50 hours per week
• Four day work week: day care 12 hours per day (10 + 2 commute) X 4 = 48 hours per week

 

[China Expat]

zero odds

 

[Babs Johnson]

About 25 years ago my supervisor was complaining about the work ethic of some of the employees. I replied, "Gee, and I was going to ask for every Friday off this summer, at 80% of weekly pay."

He responded, "Don't ask today."

I was serious. I wanted to work 4 days for 80% of my salary, but he wouldn't go for it.

 

[fla4fun]

My last job was four 10-hour days, to make a 40 hour week. I loved it. It’s going to be difficult to go back to five 8 hour days. It was especially nice because my three days off were weekdays, so I could take care of things without missing work to do it.

 

[kanerf]

Another issue with this. If you are only working 32 hours per week, you are part time. What incentive does your employer have to give you benefits? No health care, no vacation, no retirement.

 

[tvguy]

Another issue with this. If you are only working 32 hours per week, you are part time. What incentive does your employer have to give you benefits? No health care, no vacation, no retirement.

Actually, for many employers 30 hours is the minimum threshold for benefits. Not all, but it is not uncommon.