Ask HN: Would you switch to a 4-day-a-week schedule if you could?

[bwb]

#1 - Would you switch to a 4-day-a-week schedule if you could? Why or why not?

#2 - Would you do it if it also meant you made 80% of your current comp? Why or why not?

Someone asked something similar about 4 years ago, but I wanted to see how the sentiment has changed and what you think :).

[be_kul]

Just one thing: In the 50s and 60s working weeks were 6 days in Germany (east and west). In the 70s this was reduced to 5 days (40 hours), and later, in the early 80s, in West Germany even to 35 hours/week. All this was possible without reduction of wages because working productivity had grown fast enough to compensate companies for the "lost" working time. Can anyone really imagine that working productivity grew significantly LESS than it had between c. 1945 and 1980 during the last 40 years? So, where did all the extra gain go in the mean time? Higher wages? Nope. Higher pensions? Nope. longer holidays? Nope. Lower prices? Nope. They all developed over the last 40 years in a speed that kept them more or less on the same relative level than in the 1970s/80s. The only thing that grew MUCH faster was the income of the rich… So, we should not ask, IF we wanted to work 1 day less per week, but WHY we are not doing so already? Would the rich be or at least feel much poorer than now? Does anyone of these people really know the difference between 100000000000 and 10000000000 (given, they could even pronounce these numbers correctly ;-))?

[maerF0x0]

We get paid not for value, but for replacement cost.

Therefore we do not get paid for productivity but for market rates. Obviously having a high value allows the company the freedom to pay us more, but all else equal the lower cost employee will should hired

[uranium]

Yup. Did it. I'm so fortunate to have been able to afford it, and it's been awesome.

When my first child was born, I dropped down to 3 days a week, at 60% pay/vesting/etc., but full medical (Google was awesome about it). After a few years, I moved to a new position that I felt really passionate about (Makani at Google[x]), and went up to 4 days a week to make that possible. After a few years there and the birth of another child, I left Alphabet and now work 2 days a week at Elemeno Health (who are hiring for a full time Lead Engineer, BTW; see https://angel.co/company/elemeno-health/jobs).

It's really life-changing. I've been able to be a much more involved parent than I ever could have working full time. My wife also works part-time [more like 80%] and it's such a big plus.

If you want to try it, and can find a supporting company, true work-life balance is amazing. You may have to pick the right projects, that are well-suited to a reduced duty cycle, but with the right fit, it works great.

[zer0sand0nes]

How does that work?

Do u have to build a large reputation in that company so that they let you do whatever you want?

Or do you apply for these 2 days a week jobs that offer medical and all that?

[bwb]

That is awesome, thank you for sharing! Since you mentioned picking the right projects... if other people are doing 5 days a week, how do you find the right project and stay on top of it if you are out 1 or 2 days a week?

[B_Throwaway]

By law, in the Netherlands, employees are allowed to reduce their work hours. Allegedly, unless there is a clear, critical business need for you to work the entire week, the company is not allowed to deny your request.

I would love to work fewer days per week, and use the extra time to focus more on my personal development & side projects. However, at my current level of discipline, I'd be fooling myself if I said I would use the time productively.

That said, the idea is still very tempting and I intend to do it in the next couple of years. In the meantime, I fully enjoy all of my 24 PTO days and make use of our policy for getting 5 extra unpaid days without justification.

[B_Throwaway]

The most common cases are people working 4 days every, or every other week. This seems to be popular with new parents.

I know of only one instance of a 3-day work week. The guy, a developer, is using the other days for graduate studies.

[nerpderp82]

I'd like to merge Netherland law into Washington state law, this sounds like an excellent idea.

[coreypreston]

Give yourself some credit, you might not use it productively initially, but once that was out of your system...

[anthonyoconnor]

1. Yes and I did about a year ago. I think I'll find it hard if I have to go back to 5 days a week. It's really nice to have long weekends every week. I've time to work on other things and take days to go hiking or skiing. It makes the work week really fly by as well. Some downsides are having to catch up on everything you missed on your day off, so it can suck up time. Also it takes people a while to realize that this is a permanent thing and to stop inviting you to meetings on a Friday. I would highly recommend that you pick the same day every week and stick to that. I picked Fridays and marked my whole calendar as out of office that day. Otherwise its too hard for others to manage if you take a Monday off one week and a Thursday the next.

2. Yes. I did this too. Although technically I negotiated to reduce to a 32 hours week instead of a pay increase. But I have the option of going back to a 5 days week with a 20% pay increase. Software engineers generally earn pretty good wages so I'd prefer to have the time than the extra money.

[tbyehl]

1: Yes. I would like to not work on Wednesdays. Having a split work week sounds way better to me than 3-day weekends and two vacation days still buys me 5 days off.

2: Maybe. Have my hours been reduced by 20%? My workload? Will we have 25% more staff?

Any place I've worked that contemplated allowing people to go on a 4-day schedule expected 10-hour days, which ends up being appealing to very few.

[polygotdomain]

1. Yes. In a second. I find it tough to do all of the things I want to do with the activities I have outside of work with the amount of free time I have available.

2. Yes. Less pay for less work makes sense to me. My productivity would likely go up, but at the same time, I'm just more concerned about not having my work take over my life. If 80% of my pay is what it takes to get there, then it's a trade off I'm willing to make.

[michannne]

#1) Yes, definitely. The industry where I work does not require me to be on-call. Anything I have access to do is not immediate, and can only be done after business-hours. Further, I am completely comfortable with indirect chats, and digital meetings. Despite this, along with the fact that our company is only a few years old, we can't work from home - at all. It feels incredibly restrictive, especially considering the fact that many employees work around this rule. It feels like management doesn't trust us to do our work. Having just an extra day would make things so much easier

2) Maybe if I lived in Europe, but I'm in the US, and I quite like being able to afford a decent home + benefits

[blaser-waffle]

I did 4x10 at a previous job. I wouldn't say more got done, but the 3 day weekends were nice. The 10 hour days just dragged on, and productivity died after around hour 7. Since a big part of this was mostly just babysitting / being in the data center, that's not a huge deal. I read a lot of slashdot then. Dodging the traffic was nice too.

I don't know if I'd do it now, though. 9-5 with a reasonable commute isn't bad. I don't want to get home at 8 and "start my day" a couple hours before bedtime.

Would I take an 20% paycut? Nah.

[colanderman]

Absolutely on both accounts. I've been taking Fridays off the past few weeks and LOVE it. I have so many personal projects; having 50% more free days each week gives me so much more time to pursue them (in addition to the normal house, social, and family maintenance that typically fill up weekends).

20% off current comp also means I'm still comfortably middle-class. So it would be a huge net gain to my quality of life. (If I didn't have a software engineer's salary I would not be saying that!)

[aianus]

> Would you do it if it also meant you made 80% of your current comp? Why or why not?

That would not be a fair discount because the number you see on your paycheck is not the full amount the company is paying to employ you. They also pay for benefits, payroll taxes, equipment, office space, management overhead, etc.

The all-in cost of an employee is closer to 150% of the number on your W2. So assuming your output goes down 20% you should be giving up 30% of your W2 salary to compensate your employer for that loss, not 20%.

[bwb]

That is not correct and I want to make sure you get the correct info. One of the larger companies I ran was 130+ people operating in about 12 states. The companies average tax rate on an employee's salary is ~20% depending on the state (~18% to ~22% depending).

So 20% on the salary. *And, that amount goes down relative to salary changes.

After that, if the company is paying for 100% of health care that can have a big impact of course but I wouldn't roll that into this.

Equipment, office space, overhead is separate from salary. I do not suggest bundling those together as it creates a false view of the costs of these type of decisions.

I understand what you are trying to say but I think it is not how I would look at it with my CFO hat on.

[Spooky23]

No way. 150% overhead is the cost of a fully funded pensioned employee. It’s usually close to 130% of pay at a good company, and 120% at a shitty one.

[patatino]

On my last job instead of a raise, I asked to switch to 90% with the same pay and got it, that was awesome.

On my current job, I work 80% because we have a daughter now and like the extra day with her. I also work from home, which adds more time for her on working days.

I think right now, the most important thing I can do is spend time with my kid, soon kids ;) It is only a couple of years until they also start going to kindergarten and school and also have a schedule.

[acheron]

I did something like that for awhile when my first child was born. Went to 30 hours a week, done in three 10-hour days, spending Monday and Friday home with my kid. 75% salary/vacation time, same medical/everything else. I did that for a few years and it was really great. Had to go back to full time eventually because the extra 25% salary ended up being needed, but yeah it was great while it lasted.

[rcarmo]

Yes. I did that for a few months back when I was told I had to spend my vacation days or lose them (PTO was supposed to be convertible to cash under local law, but I didn't want the hassle).

So I took almost three months of Fridays off, and it was _by far_ the most productive and happy time I had - remote work and flex time was nice, but having a clear separation between work and personal time was even better.

[wolco]

If it was optional and the company offered optional Saturdays at 20% more to balance out everything.

There are a lot of advantages to a free business day.

[neilsimp1]

Yes. I already sorta do. My current schedule is nine longer days, with the tenth day off. I work enough time in the first nine days to make up for the tenth day. It's not exactly the same as a four-day work week though. I would jump on that in a heartbeat.

I immediately noticed an improvement to my overall happiness when switching to my current work schedule.

[klogilmo]

1. Yes I totally would love it and think all Americans should go to a 10-hour, 4-day work week. Two days off is not enough. The Europeans have far more vacation time than us. What's disheartening is that we spend more days at work than not - at least this would even the playing field a little. It feels like your whole life is there then. I would be in favor of someone starting a movement to change this across the U.S. 2. Officially my answer is yes because I value the time off with my family. However, I would argue that a 4-day work weeks can save companies money (i.e. don't have to pay utilities on the 5th day the business is closed) and therefore the cut isn't needed. And I'm still working the same amount of hours, so why cut?

[tonyedgecombe]

For anything creative or intellectual ten hours makes no sense at all, those extra two hours at the end of the day will be the least productive.

Americans should have more days off but not by squeezing the existing work into a shorter period.

[bwb]

Would you ever want to do less than 40 hours, so 4 days of 8 hours for 32 hours a week?

[troyvit]

#1 - I guess I would not make the switch. Usually I lose a day's worth of work every week doing things that don't directly contribute to my role and so I need all 5 days to recover from that. In that way I guess I already work a 4 day week, I just spend 5 days doing it.

[farisjarrah]

Those things that don't directly contribute to your role are still part of your job and you should be paid to do them. The onus should be on the company to streamline your processes so they don't waste everyones time.

[jborichevskiy]

Back when I was working full time - absolutely. The reduction in pay would be expected.

I suspect I'd be happiest with 2-3 days a week, with the rest of the time being put into education/personal projects (with a proportional paycut).

[mjens]

I DID switch to 4 days for 80% pay, starting in June when my kids got out of school. There aren't a lot of people who do what I do. I went in and asked, and they said they would do anything to keep me.

[wikibob]

What...do you do?