Ask HN: Why don't we have 3 day weekends yet?

[tropicalfruit]

After covid, and the temporary transition to remote (for some), it seem that switching from 5 days to 4 days would be an arbitrary decision, with very little real impact. (Of course I'm referring to jobs done in typical 5 day week).

For those who say it would lead to a decrease in productivity. Well that is only relative to the 5 day week. And the 5 day week, only exist because of some archaic reasons. It is not some law ingrained in the universe.

And beyond that we can see that increases of productivity has not led to increase of leisure time, maybe the opposite.

And we know many people who work barely a fraction of the week, yet need to maintain this kind of presenteeism. It seems absurd. Will we be trapped in this irrational mindset forever, or just until a certain generations dies out?

[sokoloff]

In some places in Europe, after some period of employment, you can demand of your employer to let you work 80% of hours for 80% of pay. I have team members in Europe on this schedule and it works out well for everyone.

Based on that experience, I'd also be open to such an arrangement for employees based in geographies where that's not legally required, but is legally and practically permitted. My guess is that most people are working a 5-day workweek because they're most comfortable doing that, from both a "well, all of my friends are doing that anyway, so I wouldn't have anyone to hang out with" as well as from a "I'm working for my financial future and working only X hours per week is unlikely to give me the same career trajectory as working 25% more hours per week" perspective.

[sudden_dystopia]

They aren’t just going to give you a free day off. There would be a commensurate decrease in your pay. I don’t find the 5 days/week to be “irrational”, “irrational” to whom? It’s completely rational from an employers perspective that they have a job to fulfill and it requires employees to complete the job. If they have people working 4 days /week, they need coverage for the other days. It’s not rational for the customers either, who want everything now. I think you need to get out of the Silicon Valley bubble and see what most people do for work. Insurance claims and other service type things don’t just happen 4 days/week, meaning they would have to hire more workers to accommodate. What will end up happening, is they will just make everyone part time. Be careful what you wish for.

[dfxm12]

They aren’t just going to give you a free day off. There would be a commensurate decrease in your pay.

This is the realist view, and it shows the power imbalance between employee and employer. It's easy for those with the power in this relationship to say "if you want to reduce work, expect reduced pay". However, worker productivity has risen for decades and compensation/hours worked haven't budged anywhere close to match. Employers will always say "meet me in the middle" while taking a step backwards.

Employers in the US can get away with it because workers are replaceable. The government has their back. Most of the (paltry) welfare benefits from the government have work requirements, so you have to take jobs with bad pay (and you'll be fired if you complain). Individual workers have no power in this relationship. Even recent fed policy is put in place to promote unemployment because workers were gaining just a little ground.

[just-ok]

The OP notes they’re referring explicitly to jobs with a 5 day work week, so your comments re: service industry, etc. are valid, they’re already excluded.

Irrational might not be the right word; arbitrary is pretty accurate, though. If productivity and output change minimally, why should expectations or pay? Let’s be honest, the typical 5-day office job work week the OP is referencing has a LOT of downtime.

[jrumbut]

No one from September 2019 would believe you if you told them about the work from home policies in place right now for millions of people who were expected to be seated at their desk at 9:00 (or 8:30) until 5:00 three years ago.

The world isn't static, tradeoffs can change.

[swagasaurus-rex]

> they will just make everyone part time.

The implicit threat here is withdrawal of benefits - specifically health care insurance

[flawn]

A/B Weeks would be interesting but also kinda detaching one half of workers from the other half.

[bowsamic]

Why did you analyse the situation from everyone's perspective except the worker's?

[thombat]

Many customer-facing occupations provide for extended opening hours, Saturdays and even Sundays. Personally I'd be thrilled if half the organizations I deal with went beyond Mon-Fri 9-5, and to do so they'll need some extra staff.

[it_citizen]

One thing I didn't realize until recently is that working 4 days instead of 5 does not slash your salary by a fifth given that your tax bracket will also be lower.

[codegeek]

"And we know many people who work barely a fraction of the week, yet need to maintain this kind of presenteeism."

I don't disagree with you necessarily but the people who game it now, will game it with 4 day week as well. Slackers are always going to slack. 5 day or 4 day.

[Freak_NL]

I do. My wife works four days a week, and so do I — our weekend starts on Friday. That's actually more than our parents worked back when husbands worked full time and the wives did the household and perhaps some part time work on the side. There is no way we're going to do five days, and in the current economy employers have little choice but to accept it — at least in countries like the Netherlands where there is no real downside to working part time if you can make do with a lower salary, and both parents of children can work at the same time due to childcare being heavily subsidised.

Presenteeism is blight on society and ruins many a fine country and its people (Japan, the US, etc.).

[throwaway22032]

I know people who work 1 day, 2 days, 3 days, 4 days, 5 days, 6 days, 7 days and all sorts of other schedules.

9-5 5 day office jobs aren't everything that's out there, they're not even probably "most jobs". Shift work and contract work are obvious counter examples.

[photochemsyn]

A lot depends on the industry in question. For some things, a 24/7 presence is really needed - network management, many manufacturing processes, power plant and grid operation, etc.

Moving to shorter working hours simply requires hiring more people to keep those things up and running. Now if hourly wages remain the same then labor costs don't change much and it might even improve hourly productivity (as tired people make more mistakes). However, will the resulting decrease in income for the workers be worth it to them, in terms of having more free time?

To maintain income levels, there would have to be a raise in hourly wages, resulting in an increase in labor costs, which would have to be balanced by a reduction in shareholder dividends and executive salaries and bonuses.

That's the answer to the question. Corporations have been doing everything they can to cut labor costs since the 1970s (global outsourcing and automation) while directing the profits to relatively small group of executives and shareholders, and won't change direction willingly.

[jrochkind1]

I've been working a 4-day work week for 80% of what would otherwise be my salary for much of my career, through several different jobs.

With different ways of it coming about, sometimes I start the job like that, sometimes I negotiate into it after being there a bit. The first time it happened it was what my employer actually wanted... but now I love it and it would be hard to go back.

I wish more employers were open to it.

I realize not everyone has the luxury to take 80% of the salary they _could_ be making, and still take care of what they consider necessary expenses... but a lot of software engineers do.

At this point I don't understand how anyone has the "luxury" to work 5 days a week and still have enough time to take care of what needs taking care of without going insane!

I am fully confident I am a more "efficient" worker at 4 days than 5, I get done probably 95% of what I would at full time, for 80% of the salary. It's actually a great deal for the employer. I wish employers were universally open to it.

[Grim-444]

How did you arrive at 3 days? Why not 2? Why not 1? Why work at all when we can just print ourselves money until it all collapses? Do you own a business where you've allowed your employees to work different sized workweeks and were able to evaluate the changes in productivity? What data do you have to back up any of your viewpoints that's more substantive than just believing whatever people on reddit or elsewhere on the internet told you is true?

[iandanforth]

If you'd like to learn more about the four-day work week there is plentiful material. For relatively recent studies I'd start here:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=four+day+work+week&hl=e...

[_oghd]

the fact that you have to have owned a business to be allowed to have an opinion about working productivity to so fucking telling about capitalist ideology

[LittlePeter]

On a side note, has anyone ever negotiated an effective raise by asking for 100% salary for an 80% employment?

- "We're sorry but your salary range is above what we are willing to offer."

- "I am prepared to accept your upper range salary for 80% employment."

- "Deal!"

[wlonkly]

In my experience, hiring managers and recruiters are given specific knobs they can turn. Salary, of course, and a few knobs around equity. Things that aren't presented to the hiring managers are next to impossible to change: vacation time is a big one, but also working hours, because that's all in company policies that are written to apply to all.

[Apreche]

I do have a three day weekend. This weekend is actually a four day weekend because of Labor Day on Monday. I negotiated for it. See here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32544658

If enough other people do the same, eventually it will become expected, and more people will get it without having to fight. Either negotiate it yourself, or join a union to negotiate for it on your behalf. It's not just going to be handed to you on a silver platter just because there are good arguments for it.

[triyambakam]

Do you find it socially challenging to work alongside people who still work 5 days a week though? Do you feel that they are jealous?

[coding123]

I also have a 4 day weekend this week, but we didn't negotiate directly. Instead people were quitting because we all got pay cuts (in the form of not getting raises for 2 years). I wonder if this long weekend is a good time to prep the old resume.

[deathanatos]

> For those who say it would lead to a decrease in productivity. Well that is only relative to the 5 day week.

I mean, yeah? That's not a logical argument against it; compared to a 5 day week, a naïve view of it is that that's a 20% productivity loss¹.

> It is not some law ingrained in the universe.

It's not … but I'd also like the work, as I need to make ends meet. What I would prefer is raise … which is why I'm not at all clear why people are so hot on this shorter workweek.

Implicit, I think, in your post, is the assumption that an employer isn't going to go "yes, you can work 80% of the standard week for 80% of the standard week's pay". And why would I take that deal?

¹(yes, I know there are other, better arguments for a 4d week.)

[mouzogu]

i think it's a matter of perspective, this is why i said its relative.

80% of 5 days sure. but if we had 3 days weekend, then in 20 years or 30 years, 4 days would be considered 100% of your productivity.

in the same way people thought you cannot do your job remotely, but we saw how easy it was actually, despite the issues some extroverts and managers have with it.

[ml_basics]

> And beyond that we can see that increases of productivity has not led to increase of leisure time, maybe the opposite.

Something that is often overlooked when this is debated is the fact that people are living longer, but not retiring much later. Combined with the fact that people generally start working later due to longer studies, taking the long view over a full life time, I think we are experiencing a decrease in the fraction of time spent working.

Example with rough-and-ready numbers: 100 years ago, the median male in the UK might have started working aged 14, worked until 65, and died shortly after. In contrast, today they might start working aged 20, retire at 65, and live until 80.

[panzagl]

What I want to know is how 'salaried' turned into ">=40 hours a week"

[pwinnski]

It was the other way around. Works weeks were 48 hours or more until Henry Ford enacted a five-day 40-hour week in his factory in 1926[0]. Later, in 1939, laws were passed that officially established the new only-40-hour week as the norm, with 32 hours as the official mark of full- vs part-time, and anything over 40 being deemed "overtime."

At least in the United States, that's the trend.

0. https://www.truthorfiction.com/henry-ford-invented-the-5-day...

[mouzogu]

yes i think you put it more succinctly what i was trying to say.

[clumpthump]

What does productivity have to do with wages, hours, or conditions?

The labour movement, which got us the weekend and the 8-hour workday, has had its power greatly diminished. That is why we don't work less.

[missedthecue]

It is my understanding that religion, not unions, gave us the two day weekend.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/08/where-t...

[gmac]

If we take this over a longer timeframe (as in Keynes' famous prediction, say), then one reason may be: we do actually have a lot more leisure than we did a century ago, but we've largely "chosen" to take it as a lengthier retirement instead of a shorter working week. See: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ecca.12439

[overlordalex]

To maybe throw the question back - what have you done to make 3 day weekends a reality?

The way the post is worded right now seems to be phrased in a way that 3-day weekends are blindingly obvious, but if you look at the history of labour rights I dont see why anyone expects it to just happen without a massive amount of organising

[pwinnski]

Most advances in labor rights came about as a result of hard work: blood, sweat, and tears. Not, it turns out, this particular one!

The five-day work-week came about because Henry Ford declared it to be so in 1926, and wasn't made any sort of law until 1939.

Ultimately, the decision to move to four-day work weeks can only be made by CEOs or equivalents, and while some have, most haven't. At my previous company, the head of HR proposed it, the CTO agreed, and it went to the CEO, who said no. He didn't want the CTO org to have benefits the rest of the company didn't have, and didn't want to extend a four-day work week to all departments.

When they continue to have trouble filling open job positions because they aren't competing will in the market, perhaps he'll change his mind.

https://www.4dayweek.com

[dsugarman]

>The way the post is worded right now seems to be phrased in a way that 3-day weekends are blindingly obvious

Seems like all anti-work propaganda (ie: r/antiwork) to me, there's no meat. You could turn this post into an inductive proof saying it is so obvious that having X-1 days is better than X days of work until you get smacked in the face trying to hand wave that 1->0 will have no impact on productivity.

[leshow]

I don't think framing this as someone's individual responsibility is at all fair or realistic.

[henryfjordan]

Productivity has risen 61% since 1979: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/. 40 hour work weeks have been the standard. Wages only rose 17% in that same period. The capitalists have been able to bank the other 44%.

A 3-day work week (aka 40% less productivity if you assume a perfectly linear relationship between time working and productivity) would still mean a nice little gain for the capitalist compared to 1979 numbers.

If you've worked, you've contributed to that 44% productivity gain. Why should you need to revolt or organize to get what you've already worked for? Capitalists are taking a larger and larger share every year. Is that ethical?

I get that pragmatically many aspects in life are a power struggle, but "throwing the question back" is really a way of putting the burden of fixing an unfair system back on the victim.

[mouzogu]

i think if i tried anything i would just be left to fall on my sword alone.

[sgjohnson]

Because in macroeconomics productivity is (almost) everything.

Yes, sure, we can debate all day over “how people are going to be more productive and hate their jobs less if there’s a 4 day working week”, but that’s only applicable to office drones.

If we’re going to get a 4 day working week, it’s going to be by (some) employers doing it as a perk/experiment.

No reasonable legislature anywhere is going to make it a reality any time soon.

Or you can always negotiate yourself 20% less hours for 20% less pay.

[egypturnash]

Please allow me to answer your question in the form of some more questions.

Why are all the bosses trying so hard to get everyone back in the office?

Why are people working from home being subjected to all kinds of "productivity tracking" that results in things like special cradles to put your mouse in to keep it moving around so you look like you're at the computer when you're actually staring off into space thinking about work stuff, at the bathroom, or slacking off in the many ways nobody would care about if you were doing that slacking at work? [1]

Why doesn't your job have a union that can decide that 3-day weekends is a thing they want to negotiate with your bosses for?

Why is modern life structured so that we spend most of our waking hours at work, with little to no room to make social connections elsewhere?

How much more money does your boss make than you do? Why?

Why has the US minimum wage only barely begun to budge past the $7.25/h it was set to in 2009, despite that being below poverty lines for most of the country?

1: https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/21/great-taylors-ghost/#soli...

[ceeplusplus]

> Why has the US minimum wage only barely begun to budge past the $7.25/h it was set to in 2009, despite that being below poverty lines for most of the country?

Nobody actually gets paid $7.25/h. Amazon pays $15/h or more nationwide. That's a baseline. In HCOL areas shitty big chain jobs like Target/Chipotle/Starbucks pay $18-22/h and restaurant servers make 25-30. Making those numbers bigger just enriches landlords unless you vastly increase the amount of housing in HCOL areas.

[BurningFrog]

I got 4 day weeks by asking my employer, and I know others who have done the same.

Employment is a mutually consensual relationship, and communication is key to make it good.

[ratherbefuddled]

We went from 5x7.5 to 4x8 without reducing pay. 4 months into it and so far it's working on all fronts. No loss of momentum or productivity, no reduction in client billing, happier and more effective people.

We had to get much smarter about how to organise time, work asynchronously and write things down to a better level - but it is the way forward make no mistake.