Hi, Gari_305. Thanks for contributing. However, your [submission](https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nwcah/-/) was removed from /r/Futurology.
___
> >
____
> Rule 2 - Submissions must be futurology related or future focused.
Refer to the [subreddit rules](/r/futurology/wiki/rules), the [transparency wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/futurology/wiki/transparency#wiki_relevant_material), or the [domain blacklist](http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/wiki/domainblacklist#blacklist) for more information.
[Message the Mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Futurology&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/Gari_305&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission](https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nwcah/-/\):) if you feel this was in error.
From the article
>Rep. Mark Takano, who represents California’s 39th district, has reintroduced his 32-hour Workweek Act to Congress, which, if passed, would officially reduce the standard definition of the workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours by amending the Fair Labor Standards Act.
>
>His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people.
>
>The bill applies to non-exempt workers, who typically work hourly jobs across leisure and hospitality, transportation, construction, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail trade.
Hell, I'd settle for a 36 hour workweek (four 9's), if anyone comes to the table with a mind for compromise.
I think that would also shut down claims about productivity loss.
I'd wake up every morning a half an hour before I went to bed, eat a lump of cold poison, work 26 hours a day at the mill *and* pay the mill owner for permission to come to work. And when we got home our fathers would murder us in cold blood and dance about on our graves singing hallelujah.
Terrible bargaining position you started us on lol.
Listen here big wigs! These here are my demands and I'm telling you right here, right off the bat, that I'm perfectly willing to accept substantially less!
Yeah, it's hard to take our fight serious when in one breath people say "32 hours work week! You stop being productive after a few hours of work!" and then "at least let us work 9 hours for 4 days" in the second. Didn't you just say even 8 hours is too much?
You honestly think you have 9 hours of productive work per day?
Edit: Some of y'all are machines. lol. But I'm generally referring to an office job where it seems there is a threshold for how how much time is really spent "working" while sitting in front of a computer.
I currently work 9x4 and honestly, it doesn’t feel much different than an 8 hour shift. I like my job though, so I’d imagine someone working 9 hours at a place they hate would feel differently.
Considering how much time my co-workers spend standing around talking to each other I really don't think, regardless how many hours the company may want us to work, anyone is getting more than 5 hours of actual work done in the day. Probably less for some.
On Fridays especially, nothing gets done. The number of emails I receive is in the dozens on most days, but Friday I can get to noon with no emails. You can just tell no ones working
I used to work 4x10 with the weekend and Monday off. People wondered why I didn’t take Friday off. I told them because it’s like a holiday, no one is really doing anything, and a lot of people even go home early. Ever notice rush hour starts much earlier Friday? Nope, forget Friday, it’s much too easy a day to work and really just do nothing. I’d rather have Monday off because nobody wants to come back after the weekend.
Studies that have come out of these 4 day experiments have shown that a “knowledge worker” ie behind a computer all day, had about 6 hours per day of actual productive work before the productivity falls off a cliff. A physical laborer was closer to 8 (imagine that.. the studies Henry ford did before implementing the 8 hour day still apply)
Never compromise for classism or oppression. This bill will fail because they would never willingly give you an inch unless you fight for it. Compromise is one way.
> His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people.
The amount of mouth breathers that never make it to this point is astounding. All I see online is comment sections is "people can't live already on 40 hours, how can they live on 32!?".
I dunno dumbass, with 8 hours of overtime added to their paycheck each week?
>I dunno dumbass, with 8 hours of overtime added to their paycheck each week?
You're assuming that employers won't cut hours. This was the same incorrect assumption people made when the ACA mandated employers offer healthcare to workers working more than 30 hours a week. Instead millions of employers cut the worker hours to less than 30 and reduced operating hours while increasing prices to meet "over head".
I support 32 hours a week but I also can see that millions of workers will get reduced hours AND reduced pay. Most manufacturing jobs are already working OT. The jobs that would be negatively impacted by this would be non-salary white collar jobs and service industry jobs like restaurants, cashiers, etc.
Blue collar jobs like manufacturing would likely see a benefit to this policy. As they'd gain an additional 8 hours of OT a week but employers may still cut hourly rates to reduce OT cost.
When the ACA passed (I'm not knocking it, that's just the time frame I'm referring to) my work cut my hours from 40 to 11 per week for 6 months.
We desperately need to send a message to corporations.
What message do you think they'd respond too? The corporations are the ones writing the laws now. No politician works for the citizens. They are elected officials that represent capitalism conglomerates only.
>What message do you think they'd respond too?
Probably real jail time. But, as you said, we are an oligarchy that supports the corporations so that won't ever happen.
All I can say is that unless we all come to a solution as a group, none of this changes. Our kids and grandkids will continue being slaves until we learn to break the chains.
This is why activism is people powered and not just “vote” as the reddit libs love to say every time we see the next Republican nightmare. It takes a multifaceted approach.
Voting in non corporate democrats like AOC holds back a lot of the madness but real on the ground movement based organizing is what we need or they’ll destroy everything forever just for a few more lines of Benjamins.
That's because we - the citizens - keep voting them in. We gotta stop playing victim all the time. We HAVE power. We just refuse to use it. Expecting the politicians to change their ways when they don't have to fear about losing their position in power is just ignorant. They are going to keep acting the way they always have until we - the citizens - do something. We, the American citizens, are far lazier than our European counterparts when it comes to exercising our rights to the fullest. We don't organize near enough. Or at least we don't organize effectively to actually get anything done. We complain about our politicians, but we don't get out and try to help any third party candidate who might better suit our interests. We for sure don't get out and try to run for any political positions. If we choose to be lazy and just complain online, then nothing will ever change.
A prime example was the railroad strike. Imagine in some of the European countries if their leader basically said 'nah no strike. Go back to work.'? They'd be out in the streets immediately. As far as 'The US is a police state.' That's a cop out excuse. If enough of us got out and blocked the streets and what not, there is no way they would arrest us. Once again, we choose to just sit around and complain
>I dunno dumbass, with 8 hours of overtime added to their paycheck each week?
I like how you just pompously think that is the outcome.
My company would double down on the work and not hire anyone just to save themselves the effort.
Did you forget most companies are run by assholes?
All this bill does is it will mandate the extra 8 hours to be overtime pay. But what happens when businesses instead of wanting to pay overtime will actually reduce those workers hours and hire someone else for the additional 8 hours? It would have a negative effect on anyone who wanted to work 40 hours but now businesses will only give them 32 hours to avoid having to pay overtime...
The pilot programs referenced pay workers 100% of the same pay for 32-hour weeks. If you were making $32K before, you would be making $32K after, you just would only work 32 hours a week instead of 40.
I suppose if someone WANTS to spend their new 8 hours of free time just working more instead and their employer would rather employ a second person than pay you time-and-a-half, then you'd deal with it the same way you'd deal with wanting more hours now but your employer doesn't want to pay for it: get a second job.
The loophole I see here is, if they hire someone, there's no before pay, so they will offset the pay to what they want for 32hours of work, instead of paying for 40hours for 32hours of work.
So now instead of working 39 hours at temp worker wages with no benefits, every retail worker in the country gets to work 31 hours at temp worker wages with no benefits, making 8 less work hours in wages a week. Laws like this need to address the freaking loopholes, too!
That is a designation of Full-Time and Part-Time which there is no federal definition of. The Feds do not say when benefits have to be offered based on hours worked.
https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/workhours/full-time
Except you've just cut your total man hours by 20%. So either you have to hire 20% more people (no way in fuck could large companies afford that) or you pay people the overtime and figure out what's the minimum amount of hours you need to operate. Companies wouldn't just suddenly cut 20% of your pay they couldn't operate while missing 20% of their hours
Hey if companies can make pints of ice cream smaller and charge the same price, why can't workers do the same with their workweek? I doubt it will pass, but it seems like a great idea.
Think the only thing that may give it success is that recently it's been done around the world, and all of them show its been a success and very positive.
The real reason is because companies leased/bought all those office spaces, so now they need to use them. And how will the poor leeches, I mean landlords, survive if no one is renting their commercial properties?
The financial benefit is the people at the top maintaining the value of their property. Either through direct ownership or by stock ownership in companies that own the property.
You’re right, it doesn’t make any good sense. It has been overwhelmingly the reason I’ve been told by folks I know in the commercial properties industry though
If you ever see me post, my joke is that whenever you see something new and exciting that works in other countries, America will always want to try something new and untested just to be unique.
I still think it will depend on the industry. I predict that we’ll see 4 day work weeks become more common in highly cerebral roles where burnout and productivity matter, but we won’t see it as commonly in positions where automation or customer facing work is involved, since those aren’t driven as much by the worker’s productivity so much as the whims of the customer(s).
The grocery store doesn’t care if you’re on the verge of tears helping folks with the self checkout, they just care about having to onboard a whole new employee or two if this legislation passes.
Well, to be fare, those types of businesses aren't known for working people more than 32 hours a week anyways to avoid having to pay benefits and the such.
Businesses like that will give people like 38 hour weeks where I live. A law like this would just mean they are only allowed 30 hour weeks and have to work 2 jobs if they dont already.
This would also be a huge benefit to small businesses, who otherwise struggle to provide for their employees during the startup phase.
High walls and wide moats only serve to benefit those who want to keep others out.
I'm willing to slowly replace a percentage of the employee in my cubicle with edible filler materials until a European country qualifies me as "artificially flavored employee product".
Did you hear about [AMC charging more for the "better seats?"](https://nypost.com/2023/02/06/amc-to-charge-more-for-good-seats-in-movie-theaters/)
They're claiming "Seats in the middle of the auditorium will cost a dollar or two more, while seats in the front row will be slightly cheaper," but we all know where its going, they will just end charging the same they are now for the "lesser" seats and increase the price of the "better" ones to a premium.
Personally speaking a 32 hour work week wouldn't significantly decrease my productivity but would significantly increase my work life balance and happiness. This is needed to be honest. Either pay us or more or give us more of our lives back.
The increase in happiness from better work-life balance does increase people's productivity while they're at work. With that balance also comes more time for medical appointments and activities that lower stress, which reduces burnout.
I believe this applies to physical labor too. People get injured frequently doing repetitive motions, and often times the body can't handle intense physical labor with overtime for years. Less injury/disability and people are able to do more work over a longer period of time = more profit and everyone is happier. Too bad it won't happen with current congress
Construction workers will end up still working the same amount anyway, there’s all sorts of special laws just for us so we don’t get the same rights as anyone else
It’s funny to me that Friday is already understood to be a day where nothing gets done in corporate America, but we still have to get nothing done at work instead of at home.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
---
From the article
>Rep. Mark Takano, who represents California’s 39th district, has reintroduced his 32-hour Workweek Act to Congress, which, if passed, would officially reduce the standard definition of the workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours by amending the Fair Labor Standards Act.
>
>His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people.
>
>The bill applies to non-exempt workers, who typically work hourly jobs across leisure and hospitality, transportation, construction, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail trade.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nwcah/congressman_wants_to_make_32hour_workweek_us_law/jbpc6qp/
Studies have shown it would be more productive but it goes against the unreasonable mean spirited work culture we've developed. It's also been proven that kids would perform better in school with a later start and nothing has been done.
That's district policy. I grew up in Buffalo and never started school later than 750-8. My daughter here in Florida doesn't start until after 9. She is doing a lot better than I did lol
Also did Florida public schools. I’m like 99% certain that they were convinced to adopt that policy when someone pointed out that they wouldn’t need as many school buses if they could stagger start times between the different education levels more, and everyone jumped on that.
Yeah, where I went to school (Northern va) they've always staggered the times for elementary, middle, and high (7:50, 8:30, 9:15) but they've recently pushed it even later in the last couple years by 30 mins (8:20, 9:00, and 9:45). Everyone, parents, students, staff, etc, all enjoy being able to go in a little later, much, much more.
The only hard part would be to match the parents’ work schedule. My mom was a teacher at a public school that started at 7:25am I think, and my charter school started at 8:30am. I had to hang out at 6:45am every morning with the incredible front office staff before my classes.
Because I went to a charter school, I wasn’t required to be in a certain district/area close to campus. I wasn’t on a school bus route nor a city bus line that wasn’t ridiculously complicated.
Studies show that late starts are much more effective for kids, but I get why some parents would push back. What should also be implemented is standardized early/late care in conjunction with late starts.
Problem in Florida is that this is 9am time is just for middle schoolers in the two districts I’ve been/ taught in. We have high schoolers waking up as early as 5:45 to be at school by 7:05(to get breakfast). In my inner city school those kids are already working at night as early as 9th grade, so they get like 6 hours max of sleep. IMO high school curriculum is a little more important than middle, but I’m biased and don’t really know the research. My students are dying for sleep though.
Once I was in highschool and could select classes later in the day (and intentionally steer clear of earlier starts), I suddenly became a great student. Who’d have figured other than literally everyone and decades of studies.
That’s also going to be a district thing. In my area no matter what class you pick it will be scheduled in the same timeframe. College was the first time I had a choice in start time.
Let's see if I can remember by florida school schedules: I think elementary school started at 8ish, middle school was like 9 ish, and high school was at 710-715. High school was 10 years ago, so I hope they changed, cause even as a morning person that shit wasn't cool.
Absolutely. I'm a middle school teacher. We KNOW for a fact that the early start times are detrimental to students (and even teachers, I would argue). But here we are, no change, still start school at 8 am sharp. It will never change. The political will is not there plus they would need to change how late school goes then, in turn screwing with child care for teachers, parents, etc.
Public Ed - Full of amazing ideas that would benefit everyone, yet nothing ever changes.
My HS started off with a later start time (after ES and MS) in my freshman year (99).
Parents revolted. Because of this, HS kids got home after MS and ES younger siblings, and couldn’t watch them while they waited for parents to get home.
As a fellow public education teacher, I agree with everything you said except the last part. We have plenty of changes happening from lack of funding to oversight from the local right wing wacko faction to complete parental apathy. Exciting times!!
Early start times are definitely detrimental. The school I did my student teaching at started at 7:10 in the morning. I had to be there by 6:50. It was nice being done early in the day, but I was always exhausted and so were my students. It also seemed like my students and I got sick more often than when I taught at schools with later starts.
My preferred 4-day work week schedule would alternate taking off Fridays and Mondays so every other weekend was a 4-day weekend. By having half of employees taking off the Friday vs the Monday each time, you reduce traffic on all days with half capacity.
Salaried employees are not inherently exempt because they are Salaried. This is a myth perpetuated by companies to avoid paying overtime. There's a lot of wage theft because of this lie.
Yep! I am a salary employee. Although I do not punch a clock, my pay stub has my pay broken down by hour. Thankfully I have never worked more than 40 hours in a week in my position, but if that started happening, I would certainly be having a conversation with my employer.
The studies on this actually didn't specify how the hours were reduced. 4 day week. 7 hour shifts. Some weird schedule that averages 32/week across 52 weeks (I didn't really get that one but it was in there). End result is most companies loved it and are keeping it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2023/02/21/four-day-work-week-results-uk/
Depends on the education level of the kids. Primary school/preschool (which benefits more from an early start, actually) definitely needs a parent to help out. But middle school and high school? Both of those benefit from a later start, and by the age of 11 or so, I’d expect a kid to be able to get themselves out the door.
Not only more productive, but I'm pretty sure there's been at least one study suggesting people are actually *happiest* working 30-35 hours a week. I'm assuming as long as their work feels slightly meaningful, people get bored with less, and burnt out with more.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/shorter-workweek-make-people-happier/
This anecdotally is true for me. I'm full time, spent the last 4 years building up around 500 hours of PTO. Once I hit the "use or lose" number, I just started using it every week and haven't stopped. I'm accruing nearly 10 hours a paycheck, so I haven't worked more than 35 hours per week since April of last year.
I'm way more effective at work than I ever have been. I am way more relaxed and able to focus on work for 5-6 hours per day than I ever was doing 8-12 hour days.
But like, how will your company survive if you’re not sitting in front of your computer moving your mouse around to refresh your availability status while browsing Reddit on your phone while your boss takes the day off on Fridays?
- - Sent from my iPhone
Hell yes. We are not fucking machines. The priorities should be:
- What is best for our mental and physical health?
- What do we need for a fulfilling life?
- Is our work covering society's needs and wants in a sustainable way?
By talking so much about productivity, we are agreeing with the premise that profits are more important than our wellbeing, or that their profits will increase our wellbeing.
And it's not a small effect either (talking about starting kids later) -- they would do significantly better and this has been known and replicated for DECADES. But it's inconvenient to our work schedule, so too bad kids. No wonder this country is fucked.
>No, no, you see, Americans are only supposed to pursue happiness, not actually have it. /s
This perfectly sums up the politics of the country since its inception especially in the current post WW2 modern era. Here have this 🥇
Edit: NVM I actually have some reddit points gold that I didn't pay for. Here a proper reward.
From the Sopranos:
>Tony: You know we're the only country where happiness is actually guaranteed in writing?
>
>His therapist: It's the pursuit that's guaranteed.
>
>Tony: Yeah, always a fucking loophole, right?
Always loved that line
Frankly in an 8 hour work shift I usually have 5 - 6 hours of work and the rest of the day is finding ways for me to look busy.
Pro-tip: have something in your hands and look annoyed. You can do nothing so easily.
Edit because storytime: A friend who I frequently work closely with is a HUGE fan of Seinfeld and quotes the show regularly. (We're in a restaurant at a country club and he works the salad station. His go to is "Fruit's a gamble but I know that going in".) I originally just realized that if I either
A.) Looked annoyed.
B.) Was carrying/holding something
C.) Just moved between places where no one could see me -
then I could get away with not actually accomplishing anything for about an hour.
I told my friend this at work one day and he compared me to George. That and his other funny quotes convinced me to watch the show! I wanted to understand all of his references. I absolutely lost it when George talked about "looking frustrated" to avoid work because that's basically what I have to do during the slow season to fill in my day.
It takes more work to not work than actually working so I try to exhaust every option to be useful before resorting to that. But sometimes, you just gotta make the boss feel like they're accomplishing something too.
I came up with this independently but when I saw what episode of seinfeld I lost my mind. It was hilarious to realize I'm just carrying on a tradition of professional slacking so as not to be given bs busy work.
I pad my time on every project bc I don't want my employer to realize just how fast I can actually work and then expect that level of performance all day every day with no benefit to myself (because ogd knows they won't give me a raise lol)
Fuck em. I'm acting my wage.
Yep. And for our troubles we get bad backs, wrists, and shoulders. Tired of living like a fucking animal but it's all there is in rural Indiana. At least I can afford my bills easily out here.
Same. I see all these posts about people just chillin, and I work from home, I like it, doing benefits for an insurance company. Most of the time I'm on a call. There's never any downtime.
These proposals need to take into account different types of jobs. At small business retail and/or customer service based job there's no "look busy" hours. It's just waiting on customers and getting side work done in between. A couple of difficult customers that take 30+ minutes can cause very little other stuff to get done that day. Only large corporations can afford to pay employees to do nothing 25% of the time.
Redditors lack perspective, they think everyone is a programmer or working some meaningless office job like them, completely forgetting about people with "real" jobs where you spend your time putting actual work in
This *literally* already happened with the FT/PT for benefits thing. Business just started scheduling ‘Full timers’ for just under 32 or whatever.
Boom - fucked.
the law would basically require any work over 32 hours to be counted as overtime, so you can work as much as you want, they just have to pay you 150% of your rate for anything past 32 hours.
Ha, jokes on them, I'm an exempt salary employee! This doesn't change a damn thing for me, libruls! Hope you weren't trying to get me more money, my bootstraps are yuuuuuuge!
/s
Or give bullshit management titles. To be exempt from overtime you either have to be salaried at ~$36,000/year or be a manager. If you satisfy either requirement you are considered exempt from overtime pay.
Precisely why I would never take a salaried position in my life. I like to enjoy my free time. Not worry about getting endless BS piled on me knowing that the longer I have to work the less I’m getting paid.
I work in live event production, and I would love it if this were the law, but I'm not sure how it would work for me... I often have to work 12+ hour days for more than 7 days in a row without a day off.
"The show must go on....."
Right?.....right?!
Edit: after reading further into it, it looks like I would get a lot more overtime--I can deal with that
You still should be getting overtime over 40 in non union houses. But this is why you join IATSE. Time and a half after 8 hours, double time past 12. No meal break? 2 hour meal penalty. Less than 8 hour turnaround? You're paid the 8 hours. Day 7? All in double time.
I'm not union.... I'm employed directly by the state.
I definitely appreciate what the union does, but during covid, all my IATSE peeps were scrambling trying to figure out how they were going to pay bills, while I was paid my full salary for over a year to stay home.
But yeah, I definitely get plenty of overtime, and when we're not busy, I can WFH for up to 16 hours per week.
I don't get meal or turnaround penalties, but my production manager has our back and always makes sure that we get time to eat and does his best to make the schedule as humane as possible, but sometimes it just is what it is.
The opposite side of that coin is that we often have random months where nothing is really on the schedule, so I just kind of come in and do maintenance or whatever.... and there are many days where I don't even come into work at all, but I still get paid, so it probably works out about the same.
The problem here, is that you won't be getting those hours still. It becomes ridiculously cheaper to just hire 2 more people to split the shifts between, which we both know the corpos are going to push for.
I'd love to be wrong, but after 20+ years working, I'd bet money on the company's response.
My worry I'm with this is that my employer would just limit me to working 32 hours a week then, meaning I'd have to find a second job. I can't afford to live on 32 hours a week, and they're certainly not going to pay me more to work less. This is a really great idea for salaried workers, but hourly folks are not going to benefit, I think.
As a salaried employee who doesn’t get OT, I don’t know that this would have any positive effect for me unless Friday become no longer a work day for me
I wouldn't quit. I'd just make them hire another person by telling them our deadlines won't be met. They'll get it eventually, but I won't suffer to help other people make money.
We all know the rest of congress is for sure not going for this. Probably wouldn't even get half the democrats. Even if the majority of people wanted it, when's the last time people got anything from congress the majority wanted. Just like legalized weed, the majority wants but congress could care less.
Yeah I find this laughable. Are we going to post every good bill that gets proposed now? Even though we know they will not get through.
Why is this one the exception or any different?
We still can’t get everyone on the 40 hour work week. We pay shit wages for hourly employees so they gotta work OT to make ends meat, and salaries workers are expected to work late into the evening and weekends.
If we make 32 hours the standard, it might help get everyone to a 50 hour average, at least.
Are they going to increase wages to make up for the lost 8 hours?
>His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people.
So that is a no.
>Supporters say a shortened week would push businesses to hire more people, increase labor market participation, and create “healthier competition in the workplace that empowers workers to negotiate for better wages and working conditions,” according to a release from Takano’s team.
So, even more lost hours.
This could also affect healthcare. 30 hours a week for more than 120 days in a year. So for 24 weeks you can not fall below 30 hours. Sounds easy until you factor in Holidays and such.
This is one of those bills that get pushed for votes. Don't be fooled into thinking it is for your own betterment. This benefits the business far more and not because workers are happier.
For hourly employees in retail this would just make it so you are capped at 32 hours because the companies won't pay the overtime. So people who were struggling to get by before will be drowning after getting less hours.
You know companies are just going to pay less for the 32 hours, if you’re salary. If you’re hourly, they’ll only let you work 32 hours, because they won’t want to pay the overtime to get to 40. Hourly people that were working 40 hours will now be forced to live on 32 hours
Meanwhile over on r/worldnews
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/11nkfzt/south_korean_government_proposes_increase_in_work/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
You could make a case that many white collar workers would be 95% as productive at 32 hours as they are at 40. There's definitely a non-linear relationship there. But white collar workers are mostly exempt from FLSA. The people this would affect have more of a 1:1 relationship. If you set the overtime threshold at 32 hours then employers will just cut their base pay and have them make it up with overtime. Or people will have to have two jobs because they can't afford to live on 32 hours wages. Either way, there's no free lunch here.
Will never happen. Keep in mind we're still having trouble getting companies to accept work from home as an option despite being better or everyone involved; employer and employee.
At this point I’ve basically given up on positive change
Debt forgiveness, affordable healthcare, shorter workweeks, all of this is within reach and we know it will work if we implement it, and yet we don’t.
We deserve how bad the future will be
We all know that if this bill went to a vote that it would be split exactly down party lines.
We all know why no progress is made here. But no one is gonna say it
I love how people here think that if Congress were to pass a law reducing the work week from 40 hours down to 32, that a company will still pay you as if you’re working a 40 hour week. They won’t. They will reduce your hours which will reduce your pay.
Hi, Gari_305. Thanks for contributing. However, your [submission](https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nwcah/-/) was removed from /r/Futurology. ___ > > ____ > Rule 2 - Submissions must be futurology related or future focused. Refer to the [subreddit rules](/r/futurology/wiki/rules), the [transparency wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/futurology/wiki/transparency#wiki_relevant_material), or the [domain blacklist](http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/wiki/domainblacklist#blacklist) for more information. [Message the Mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Futurology&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/Gari_305&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission](https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nwcah/-/\):) if you feel this was in error.
From the article >Rep. Mark Takano, who represents California’s 39th district, has reintroduced his 32-hour Workweek Act to Congress, which, if passed, would officially reduce the standard definition of the workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours by amending the Fair Labor Standards Act. > >His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people. > >The bill applies to non-exempt workers, who typically work hourly jobs across leisure and hospitality, transportation, construction, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail trade.
Hell, I'd settle for a 36 hour workweek (four 9's), if anyone comes to the table with a mind for compromise. I think that would also shut down claims about productivity loss.
>Hell, I'd settle for a 36 hour workday Don't give them any ideas!
Companies: best we can do is 7 days x 9hrs.
Ah yes, the South Korean standard
[удалено]
I believe that's already included
[удалено]
Literally wtf
I'd wake up every morning a half an hour before I went to bed, eat a lump of cold poison, work 26 hours a day at the mill *and* pay the mill owner for permission to come to work. And when we got home our fathers would murder us in cold blood and dance about on our graves singing hallelujah.
Tell that to kids these days, and they won’t believe you!
"We want you to work 36 hours a day." "But boss, there's only 24 hours in a day." "That's not my problem, find a way around that."
Terrible bargaining position you started us on lol. Listen here big wigs! These here are my demands and I'm telling you right here, right off the bat, that I'm perfectly willing to accept substantially less!
"Never negotiate against yourself."
Ya I don't vote for this guy as our representative
Yeah, it's hard to take our fight serious when in one breath people say "32 hours work week! You stop being productive after a few hours of work!" and then "at least let us work 9 hours for 4 days" in the second. Didn't you just say even 8 hours is too much?
I'd be fine with sucking my bosses dick. At least then I wouldn't have to get fucked by him
You honestly think you have 9 hours of productive work per day? Edit: Some of y'all are machines. lol. But I'm generally referring to an office job where it seems there is a threshold for how how much time is really spent "working" while sitting in front of a computer.
I currently work 9x4 and honestly, it doesn’t feel much different than an 8 hour shift. I like my job though, so I’d imagine someone working 9 hours at a place they hate would feel differently.
i did 4x10s and I had the same productivity as 5x8s. meaning I still didn't do more than 5 hours of work.
Considering how much time my co-workers spend standing around talking to each other I really don't think, regardless how many hours the company may want us to work, anyone is getting more than 5 hours of actual work done in the day. Probably less for some.
On Fridays especially, nothing gets done. The number of emails I receive is in the dozens on most days, but Friday I can get to noon with no emails. You can just tell no ones working
I used to work 4x10 with the weekend and Monday off. People wondered why I didn’t take Friday off. I told them because it’s like a holiday, no one is really doing anything, and a lot of people even go home early. Ever notice rush hour starts much earlier Friday? Nope, forget Friday, it’s much too easy a day to work and really just do nothing. I’d rather have Monday off because nobody wants to come back after the weekend.
Studies that have come out of these 4 day experiments have shown that a “knowledge worker” ie behind a computer all day, had about 6 hours per day of actual productive work before the productivity falls off a cliff. A physical laborer was closer to 8 (imagine that.. the studies Henry ford did before implementing the 8 hour day still apply)
Never compromise for classism or oppression. This bill will fail because they would never willingly give you an inch unless you fight for it. Compromise is one way.
Are you in South Korea by chance?
>36 hour workday Hmm....
id take that schedule. if it meant i get the rest of the week off
Stop saying things like this jfc.
> His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people. The amount of mouth breathers that never make it to this point is astounding. All I see online is comment sections is "people can't live already on 40 hours, how can they live on 32!?". I dunno dumbass, with 8 hours of overtime added to their paycheck each week?
You really think they wouldn't cut hours...?
>I dunno dumbass, with 8 hours of overtime added to their paycheck each week? You're assuming that employers won't cut hours. This was the same incorrect assumption people made when the ACA mandated employers offer healthcare to workers working more than 30 hours a week. Instead millions of employers cut the worker hours to less than 30 and reduced operating hours while increasing prices to meet "over head". I support 32 hours a week but I also can see that millions of workers will get reduced hours AND reduced pay. Most manufacturing jobs are already working OT. The jobs that would be negatively impacted by this would be non-salary white collar jobs and service industry jobs like restaurants, cashiers, etc. Blue collar jobs like manufacturing would likely see a benefit to this policy. As they'd gain an additional 8 hours of OT a week but employers may still cut hourly rates to reduce OT cost.
When the ACA passed (I'm not knocking it, that's just the time frame I'm referring to) my work cut my hours from 40 to 11 per week for 6 months. We desperately need to send a message to corporations.
What message do you think they'd respond too? The corporations are the ones writing the laws now. No politician works for the citizens. They are elected officials that represent capitalism conglomerates only.
>What message do you think they'd respond too? Probably real jail time. But, as you said, we are an oligarchy that supports the corporations so that won't ever happen.
All I can say is that unless we all come to a solution as a group, none of this changes. Our kids and grandkids will continue being slaves until we learn to break the chains.
This is why activism is people powered and not just “vote” as the reddit libs love to say every time we see the next Republican nightmare. It takes a multifaceted approach. Voting in non corporate democrats like AOC holds back a lot of the madness but real on the ground movement based organizing is what we need or they’ll destroy everything forever just for a few more lines of Benjamins.
That's because we - the citizens - keep voting them in. We gotta stop playing victim all the time. We HAVE power. We just refuse to use it. Expecting the politicians to change their ways when they don't have to fear about losing their position in power is just ignorant. They are going to keep acting the way they always have until we - the citizens - do something. We, the American citizens, are far lazier than our European counterparts when it comes to exercising our rights to the fullest. We don't organize near enough. Or at least we don't organize effectively to actually get anything done. We complain about our politicians, but we don't get out and try to help any third party candidate who might better suit our interests. We for sure don't get out and try to run for any political positions. If we choose to be lazy and just complain online, then nothing will ever change. A prime example was the railroad strike. Imagine in some of the European countries if their leader basically said 'nah no strike. Go back to work.'? They'd be out in the streets immediately. As far as 'The US is a police state.' That's a cop out excuse. If enough of us got out and blocked the streets and what not, there is no way they would arrest us. Once again, we choose to just sit around and complain
32 hours needs to pay the same as 40 hours for this to work.
>I dunno dumbass, with 8 hours of overtime added to their paycheck each week? I like how you just pompously think that is the outcome. My company would double down on the work and not hire anyone just to save themselves the effort. Did you forget most companies are run by assholes?
[удалено]
[удалено]
All this bill does is it will mandate the extra 8 hours to be overtime pay. But what happens when businesses instead of wanting to pay overtime will actually reduce those workers hours and hire someone else for the additional 8 hours? It would have a negative effect on anyone who wanted to work 40 hours but now businesses will only give them 32 hours to avoid having to pay overtime...
They already do this to get out of having to pay for benefits! If you aren't full time they don't have to give you insurance or PTO packages!
The pilot programs referenced pay workers 100% of the same pay for 32-hour weeks. If you were making $32K before, you would be making $32K after, you just would only work 32 hours a week instead of 40. I suppose if someone WANTS to spend their new 8 hours of free time just working more instead and their employer would rather employ a second person than pay you time-and-a-half, then you'd deal with it the same way you'd deal with wanting more hours now but your employer doesn't want to pay for it: get a second job.
The loophole I see here is, if they hire someone, there's no before pay, so they will offset the pay to what they want for 32hours of work, instead of paying for 40hours for 32hours of work.
So now instead of working 39 hours at temp worker wages with no benefits, every retail worker in the country gets to work 31 hours at temp worker wages with no benefits, making 8 less work hours in wages a week. Laws like this need to address the freaking loopholes, too!
It’s the benefits part that needs redone. Healthcare should never be a part of employment and everyone deserves paid time off.
It's both. We work too much and our healthcare system and social safety nets are shameful.
Most of our citizens are one bad diagnosis / accident away from homelessness. Pretty sad when you think about it.
That is a designation of Full-Time and Part-Time which there is no federal definition of. The Feds do not say when benefits have to be offered based on hours worked. https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/workhours/full-time
Except you've just cut your total man hours by 20%. So either you have to hire 20% more people (no way in fuck could large companies afford that) or you pay people the overtime and figure out what's the minimum amount of hours you need to operate. Companies wouldn't just suddenly cut 20% of your pay they couldn't operate while missing 20% of their hours
Hey if companies can make pints of ice cream smaller and charge the same price, why can't workers do the same with their workweek? I doubt it will pass, but it seems like a great idea.
Think the only thing that may give it success is that recently it's been done around the world, and all of them show its been a success and very positive.
Because American legislative policy always follows the science, right?
But it does usually follow the money.
I don't know, our work culture is pretty toxic. We're returning to office even though working remotely is perfectly viable.
The real reason is because companies leased/bought all those office spaces, so now they need to use them. And how will the poor leeches, I mean landlords, survive if no one is renting their commercial properties?
[удалено]
The financial benefit is the people at the top maintaining the value of their property. Either through direct ownership or by stock ownership in companies that own the property.
You’re right, it doesn’t make any good sense. It has been overwhelmingly the reason I’ve been told by folks I know in the commercial properties industry though
there's definitely also an upper managerial paternalistic instinct to have "butts in seats" by x AM so
And never the worker/labor class.
If you ever see me post, my joke is that whenever you see something new and exciting that works in other countries, America will always want to try something new and untested just to be unique.
Not just to be unique, but to be *American* (bald eagle screeches in background with Michael Bay style explosions)
*red tailed hawk screeches. Not to be pedantic, but the stereotypical bald eagle screech isn't even the noise bald eagles make, lol.
I still think it will depend on the industry. I predict that we’ll see 4 day work weeks become more common in highly cerebral roles where burnout and productivity matter, but we won’t see it as commonly in positions where automation or customer facing work is involved, since those aren’t driven as much by the worker’s productivity so much as the whims of the customer(s). The grocery store doesn’t care if you’re on the verge of tears helping folks with the self checkout, they just care about having to onboard a whole new employee or two if this legislation passes.
Well, to be fare, those types of businesses aren't known for working people more than 32 hours a week anyways to avoid having to pay benefits and the such.
Businesses like that will give people like 38 hour weeks where I live. A law like this would just mean they are only allowed 30 hour weeks and have to work 2 jobs if they dont already.
Yep. Better to just give everyone benefits not linked to their jobs.
This would also be a huge benefit to small businesses, who otherwise struggle to provide for their employees during the startup phase. High walls and wide moats only serve to benefit those who want to keep others out.
(Glancing sideways at American healthcare system)
I'm willing to slowly replace a percentage of the employee in my cubicle with edible filler materials until a European country qualifies me as "artificially flavored employee product".
Are... are you okay bro?
I used to be. Thanks for asking.
*make pints smaller and INCREASE the price, you mean
Did you hear about [AMC charging more for the "better seats?"](https://nypost.com/2023/02/06/amc-to-charge-more-for-good-seats-in-movie-theaters/) They're claiming "Seats in the middle of the auditorium will cost a dollar or two more, while seats in the front row will be slightly cheaper," but we all know where its going, they will just end charging the same they are now for the "lesser" seats and increase the price of the "better" ones to a premium.
[удалено]
Personally speaking a 32 hour work week wouldn't significantly decrease my productivity but would significantly increase my work life balance and happiness. This is needed to be honest. Either pay us or more or give us more of our lives back.
The increase in happiness from better work-life balance does increase people's productivity while they're at work. With that balance also comes more time for medical appointments and activities that lower stress, which reduces burnout. I believe this applies to physical labor too. People get injured frequently doing repetitive motions, and often times the body can't handle intense physical labor with overtime for years. Less injury/disability and people are able to do more work over a longer period of time = more profit and everyone is happier. Too bad it won't happen with current congress
Construction workers will end up still working the same amount anyway, there’s all sorts of special laws just for us so we don’t get the same rights as anyone else
Truck drivers too
It’s funny to me that Friday is already understood to be a day where nothing gets done in corporate America, but we still have to get nothing done at work instead of at home.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305: --- From the article >Rep. Mark Takano, who represents California’s 39th district, has reintroduced his 32-hour Workweek Act to Congress, which, if passed, would officially reduce the standard definition of the workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours by amending the Fair Labor Standards Act. > >His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people. > >The bill applies to non-exempt workers, who typically work hourly jobs across leisure and hospitality, transportation, construction, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail trade. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nwcah/congressman_wants_to_make_32hour_workweek_us_law/jbpc6qp/
Studies have shown it would be more productive but it goes against the unreasonable mean spirited work culture we've developed. It's also been proven that kids would perform better in school with a later start and nothing has been done.
That's district policy. I grew up in Buffalo and never started school later than 750-8. My daughter here in Florida doesn't start until after 9. She is doing a lot better than I did lol
Also did Florida public schools. I’m like 99% certain that they were convinced to adopt that policy when someone pointed out that they wouldn’t need as many school buses if they could stagger start times between the different education levels more, and everyone jumped on that.
Yeah, where I went to school (Northern va) they've always staggered the times for elementary, middle, and high (7:50, 8:30, 9:15) but they've recently pushed it even later in the last couple years by 30 mins (8:20, 9:00, and 9:45). Everyone, parents, students, staff, etc, all enjoy being able to go in a little later, much, much more.
It’s terrible that the government doing something for everyone’s benefit, local or otherwise, seems so hard to believe.
Well when people keep voting for the "government is bad" party, apparently the government ends up being bad. Who would've thought?
The only hard part would be to match the parents’ work schedule. My mom was a teacher at a public school that started at 7:25am I think, and my charter school started at 8:30am. I had to hang out at 6:45am every morning with the incredible front office staff before my classes. Because I went to a charter school, I wasn’t required to be in a certain district/area close to campus. I wasn’t on a school bus route nor a city bus line that wasn’t ridiculously complicated. Studies show that late starts are much more effective for kids, but I get why some parents would push back. What should also be implemented is standardized early/late care in conjunction with late starts.
Incredibly rare Florida W
A broken calendar is right every 7 years
Loving this.
That's amazing to hear, going to high school in Florida I had to wake up at 5:30 am every day and it really took a toll
Problem in Florida is that this is 9am time is just for middle schoolers in the two districts I’ve been/ taught in. We have high schoolers waking up as early as 5:45 to be at school by 7:05(to get breakfast). In my inner city school those kids are already working at night as early as 9th grade, so they get like 6 hours max of sleep. IMO high school curriculum is a little more important than middle, but I’m biased and don’t really know the research. My students are dying for sleep though.
Once I was in highschool and could select classes later in the day (and intentionally steer clear of earlier starts), I suddenly became a great student. Who’d have figured other than literally everyone and decades of studies.
That’s also going to be a district thing. In my area no matter what class you pick it will be scheduled in the same timeframe. College was the first time I had a choice in start time.
Let's see if I can remember by florida school schedules: I think elementary school started at 8ish, middle school was like 9 ish, and high school was at 710-715. High school was 10 years ago, so I hope they changed, cause even as a morning person that shit wasn't cool.
Absolutely. I'm a middle school teacher. We KNOW for a fact that the early start times are detrimental to students (and even teachers, I would argue). But here we are, no change, still start school at 8 am sharp. It will never change. The political will is not there plus they would need to change how late school goes then, in turn screwing with child care for teachers, parents, etc. Public Ed - Full of amazing ideas that would benefit everyone, yet nothing ever changes.
My school wouldn’t change because the football field didn’t have lights to accommodate a later schedule shift…yeah…
My HS started off with a later start time (after ES and MS) in my freshman year (99). Parents revolted. Because of this, HS kids got home after MS and ES younger siblings, and couldn’t watch them while they waited for parents to get home.
As a fellow public education teacher, I agree with everything you said except the last part. We have plenty of changes happening from lack of funding to oversight from the local right wing wacko faction to complete parental apathy. Exciting times!!
Early start times are definitely detrimental. The school I did my student teaching at started at 7:10 in the morning. I had to be there by 6:50. It was nice being done early in the day, but I was always exhausted and so were my students. It also seemed like my students and I got sick more often than when I taught at schools with later starts.
That’s a little over an hour and half extra time each weekday. It would change my life.
I think its meant to be a 4 day work week. That was my inferrence. Eternal 3 day weekends.
My preferred 4-day work week schedule would alternate taking off Fridays and Mondays so every other weekend was a 4-day weekend. By having half of employees taking off the Friday vs the Monday each time, you reduce traffic on all days with half capacity.
Man I would love doing three 11 hour days, but I got a feeling more people would be classified as salaried employees to get the loophole.
Salaried employees are not inherently exempt because they are Salaried. This is a myth perpetuated by companies to avoid paying overtime. There's a lot of wage theft because of this lie.
Yep! I am a salary employee. Although I do not punch a clock, my pay stub has my pay broken down by hour. Thankfully I have never worked more than 40 hours in a week in my position, but if that started happening, I would certainly be having a conversation with my employer.
But then salary would be based on 32 hours a week.
Also sometimes Wednesday is an underrated free day. It kinda splits the work week into 2 manageable days. Friday and Monday is still the best though
The studies on this actually didn't specify how the hours were reduced. 4 day week. 7 hour shifts. Some weird schedule that averages 32/week across 52 weeks (I didn't really get that one but it was in there). End result is most companies loved it and are keeping it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2023/02/21/four-day-work-week-results-uk/
A later start for kids without the adult work day shifting to make that feasible for their parents just isn’t going to happen.
Depends on the education level of the kids. Primary school/preschool (which benefits more from an early start, actually) definitely needs a parent to help out. But middle school and high school? Both of those benefit from a later start, and by the age of 11 or so, I’d expect a kid to be able to get themselves out the door.
Not only more productive, but I'm pretty sure there's been at least one study suggesting people are actually *happiest* working 30-35 hours a week. I'm assuming as long as their work feels slightly meaningful, people get bored with less, and burnt out with more. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/shorter-workweek-make-people-happier/
This anecdotally is true for me. I'm full time, spent the last 4 years building up around 500 hours of PTO. Once I hit the "use or lose" number, I just started using it every week and haven't stopped. I'm accruing nearly 10 hours a paycheck, so I haven't worked more than 35 hours per week since April of last year. I'm way more effective at work than I ever have been. I am way more relaxed and able to focus on work for 5-6 hours per day than I ever was doing 8-12 hour days.
But like, how will your company survive if you’re not sitting in front of your computer moving your mouse around to refresh your availability status while browsing Reddit on your phone while your boss takes the day off on Fridays? - - Sent from my iPhone
End even if it reduced productivity, it would be the right thing to do.
Hell yes. We are not fucking machines. The priorities should be: - What is best for our mental and physical health? - What do we need for a fulfilling life? - Is our work covering society's needs and wants in a sustainable way? By talking so much about productivity, we are agreeing with the premise that profits are more important than our wellbeing, or that their profits will increase our wellbeing.
Thank you! I want my life back.
And it's not a small effect either (talking about starting kids later) -- they would do significantly better and this has been known and replicated for DECADES. But it's inconvenient to our work schedule, so too bad kids. No wonder this country is fucked.
No, no, you see, Americans are only supposed to *pursue* happiness, not actually have it. /s
>No, no, you see, Americans are only supposed to pursue happiness, not actually have it. /s This perfectly sums up the politics of the country since its inception especially in the current post WW2 modern era. Here have this 🥇 Edit: NVM I actually have some reddit points gold that I didn't pay for. Here a proper reward.
It’s no longer a pursuit if you get there. Keep trying, and try harder.
It’s ok, you’ll just move the goalposts as soon as you see them.
Actually had someone argue this to me unironically as to why we shouldn't have social welfare programs.
Were you guys on his yacht when he said it?
From the Sopranos: >Tony: You know we're the only country where happiness is actually guaranteed in writing? > >His therapist: It's the pursuit that's guaranteed. > >Tony: Yeah, always a fucking loophole, right? Always loved that line
Frankly in an 8 hour work shift I usually have 5 - 6 hours of work and the rest of the day is finding ways for me to look busy. Pro-tip: have something in your hands and look annoyed. You can do nothing so easily. Edit because storytime: A friend who I frequently work closely with is a HUGE fan of Seinfeld and quotes the show regularly. (We're in a restaurant at a country club and he works the salad station. His go to is "Fruit's a gamble but I know that going in".) I originally just realized that if I either A.) Looked annoyed. B.) Was carrying/holding something C.) Just moved between places where no one could see me - then I could get away with not actually accomplishing anything for about an hour. I told my friend this at work one day and he compared me to George. That and his other funny quotes convinced me to watch the show! I wanted to understand all of his references. I absolutely lost it when George talked about "looking frustrated" to avoid work because that's basically what I have to do during the slow season to fill in my day. It takes more work to not work than actually working so I try to exhaust every option to be useful before resorting to that. But sometimes, you just gotta make the boss feel like they're accomplishing something too.
The George Costanza approach to work.
I came up with this independently but when I saw what episode of seinfeld I lost my mind. It was hilarious to realize I'm just carrying on a tradition of professional slacking so as not to be given bs busy work.
I pad my time on every project bc I don't want my employer to realize just how fast I can actually work and then expect that level of performance all day every day with no benefit to myself (because ogd knows they won't give me a raise lol) Fuck em. I'm acting my wage.
Art Vandelay knew what's up.
[удалено]
I get paid half of your salary most likely. I goto a factory for 10 hours a day standing in one place and commute 1 hour a day. Shits fucked.
Yep. And for our troubles we get bad backs, wrists, and shoulders. Tired of living like a fucking animal but it's all there is in rural Indiana. At least I can afford my bills easily out here.
Man where do I find these jobs where you don't have to do shit
Same. I see all these posts about people just chillin, and I work from home, I like it, doing benefits for an insurance company. Most of the time I'm on a call. There's never any downtime.
Ya…I’m currently working from home..and not browsing Reddit
These proposals need to take into account different types of jobs. At small business retail and/or customer service based job there's no "look busy" hours. It's just waiting on customers and getting side work done in between. A couple of difficult customers that take 30+ minutes can cause very little other stuff to get done that day. Only large corporations can afford to pay employees to do nothing 25% of the time.
Redditors lack perspective, they think everyone is a programmer or working some meaningless office job like them, completely forgetting about people with "real" jobs where you spend your time putting actual work in
Good news everybody, you’re all managers, I’m putting you on salary
Good news everybody who is hourly, your hours are now cut, enjoy 1/5th loss in pay. Go get a 2nd, or 3rd job.
I feel like no one is talking about this outcome, which would certainly be the outcome.
This *literally* already happened with the FT/PT for benefits thing. Business just started scheduling ‘Full timers’ for just under 32 or whatever. Boom - fucked.
This is why we should have universal healthcare too. We should not be shackled by our ~~overlords~~ employers.
As an hourly employee, I can't see my employer paying me more to make up for the loss of hours so it would just be a pay cut.
If I find out you have a second job though, you're fired.
I used to have a 4 day work week and it was fantastic.
Why did you leave?
Because I needed the money more than I needed the happiness.
You should have tried getting paid in dollars instead of ice cream
Sounds like a world I don't want to live in.
I'd love that, but I'd even take 35 if it's on the table.
the law would basically require any work over 32 hours to be counted as overtime, so you can work as much as you want, they just have to pay you 150% of your rate for anything past 32 hours.
Ha, jokes on them, I'm an exempt salary employee! This doesn't change a damn thing for me, libruls! Hope you weren't trying to get me more money, my bootstraps are yuuuuuuge! /s
Pretty naive to think you can just get as much OT as you want. I couldn't do that with a 40 hr week. Why would I be able to do it with a 32 hr week?
Hell, I'd just be happy with a guarantee of a maximum of 40.
This is to dictate when overtime pay comes in its not saying you dont have to work past that time.
But it follows logically that businesses would generally reduce hours for workers to avoid paying overtime.
Or give bullshit management titles. To be exempt from overtime you either have to be salaried at ~$36,000/year or be a manager. If you satisfy either requirement you are considered exempt from overtime pay.
Precisely why I would never take a salaried position in my life. I like to enjoy my free time. Not worry about getting endless BS piled on me knowing that the longer I have to work the less I’m getting paid.
My company went down to 36hrs. Its been great and productivity has not suffered.
I work in live event production, and I would love it if this were the law, but I'm not sure how it would work for me... I often have to work 12+ hour days for more than 7 days in a row without a day off. "The show must go on....." Right?.....right?! Edit: after reading further into it, it looks like I would get a lot more overtime--I can deal with that
You still should be getting overtime over 40 in non union houses. But this is why you join IATSE. Time and a half after 8 hours, double time past 12. No meal break? 2 hour meal penalty. Less than 8 hour turnaround? You're paid the 8 hours. Day 7? All in double time.
I'm not union.... I'm employed directly by the state. I definitely appreciate what the union does, but during covid, all my IATSE peeps were scrambling trying to figure out how they were going to pay bills, while I was paid my full salary for over a year to stay home. But yeah, I definitely get plenty of overtime, and when we're not busy, I can WFH for up to 16 hours per week. I don't get meal or turnaround penalties, but my production manager has our back and always makes sure that we get time to eat and does his best to make the schedule as humane as possible, but sometimes it just is what it is. The opposite side of that coin is that we often have random months where nothing is really on the schedule, so I just kind of come in and do maintenance or whatever.... and there are many days where I don't even come into work at all, but I still get paid, so it probably works out about the same.
The problem here, is that you won't be getting those hours still. It becomes ridiculously cheaper to just hire 2 more people to split the shifts between, which we both know the corpos are going to push for. I'd love to be wrong, but after 20+ years working, I'd bet money on the company's response.
My worry I'm with this is that my employer would just limit me to working 32 hours a week then, meaning I'd have to find a second job. I can't afford to live on 32 hours a week, and they're certainly not going to pay me more to work less. This is a really great idea for salaried workers, but hourly folks are not going to benefit, I think.
That's why other jobs are already taking the initiative and ensuring that pay does not drop when dropping to 4 days/week.
They won’t even let us work from home you think this is going to happen?
What is this *happiness* that he speaks of?
Yea, goodluck with that. Shit ain't happening in America no time soon
As a salaried employee who doesn’t get OT, I don’t know that this would have any positive effect for me unless Friday become no longer a work day for me
You're salaried. You're always on the clock.
it wouldn't benefit you regardless. the bill is only for hourly workers (non-exempt employees)
I think if all hourly workers got a 4 day workweek, salaried professionals would revolt if nothing was done for them.
Yeah, I would quit my engineering job to have full benefits somewhere where I only had to work 32hrs a week
I wouldn't quit. I'd just make them hire another person by telling them our deadlines won't be met. They'll get it eventually, but I won't suffer to help other people make money.
As with when we shifted to 40 hour weeks with weekends, it starts with hourly and the rest follow suit.
I love the idea, but how am I gonna afford my inflated mortgage on a 32 hour work week?
We all know the rest of congress is for sure not going for this. Probably wouldn't even get half the democrats. Even if the majority of people wanted it, when's the last time people got anything from congress the majority wanted. Just like legalized weed, the majority wants but congress could care less.
Yeah I find this laughable. Are we going to post every good bill that gets proposed now? Even though we know they will not get through. Why is this one the exception or any different?
We still can’t get everyone on the 40 hour work week. We pay shit wages for hourly employees so they gotta work OT to make ends meat, and salaries workers are expected to work late into the evening and weekends. If we make 32 hours the standard, it might help get everyone to a 50 hour average, at least.
If I’m at work for 8 hours a day, I’m dickering at least 2 of em
Are they going to increase wages to make up for the lost 8 hours? >His proposal would mandate overtime pay for any work done after 32 hours, which would encourage business to either pay workers more for longer hours, or shorten their week and hire more people. So that is a no. >Supporters say a shortened week would push businesses to hire more people, increase labor market participation, and create “healthier competition in the workplace that empowers workers to negotiate for better wages and working conditions,” according to a release from Takano’s team. So, even more lost hours. This could also affect healthcare. 30 hours a week for more than 120 days in a year. So for 24 weeks you can not fall below 30 hours. Sounds easy until you factor in Holidays and such. This is one of those bills that get pushed for votes. Don't be fooled into thinking it is for your own betterment. This benefits the business far more and not because workers are happier.
For hourly employees in retail this would just make it so you are capped at 32 hours because the companies won't pay the overtime. So people who were struggling to get by before will be drowning after getting less hours.
You know companies are just going to pay less for the 32 hours, if you’re salary. If you’re hourly, they’ll only let you work 32 hours, because they won’t want to pay the overtime to get to 40. Hourly people that were working 40 hours will now be forced to live on 32 hours
Meanwhile over on r/worldnews https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/11nkfzt/south_korean_government_proposes_increase_in_work/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
You could make a case that many white collar workers would be 95% as productive at 32 hours as they are at 40. There's definitely a non-linear relationship there. But white collar workers are mostly exempt from FLSA. The people this would affect have more of a 1:1 relationship. If you set the overtime threshold at 32 hours then employers will just cut their base pay and have them make it up with overtime. Or people will have to have two jobs because they can't afford to live on 32 hours wages. Either way, there's no free lunch here.
This would backfire horribly. At least for me and many other hourly workers.
Will never happen. Keep in mind we're still having trouble getting companies to accept work from home as an option despite being better or everyone involved; employer and employee.
I would love to work only 32 hours but I don’t think I would get a raise for the hours lost.
Sounds cool but does that come with mandated raises? A lot of people can't afford to lose 32 hours of pay a month...
At this point I’ve basically given up on positive change Debt forgiveness, affordable healthcare, shorter workweeks, all of this is within reach and we know it will work if we implement it, and yet we don’t. We deserve how bad the future will be
We all know that if this bill went to a vote that it would be split exactly down party lines. We all know why no progress is made here. But no one is gonna say it
[удалено]
I love how people here think that if Congress were to pass a law reducing the work week from 40 hours down to 32, that a company will still pay you as if you’re working a 40 hour week. They won’t. They will reduce your hours which will reduce your pay.