I'm not completely sure a 4-day work week is a good thing -- from a Bernie/socialist/anarchist-type perspective -- but my gut says 'yes, at least a little bit, and on a massive scale, that is probably worth spending some time on.'
My primary argument in favor of the 4-day is it would allow relatively powerful white collars workers to engage more in the political system, possibly education and organizing generally -- just because they'll/we'll have more time. That's the theory. I could use to do some research generally on time off, and specifically, on the history of the weekend, to see if that happened in the past.
So, could we use a 4-Day advocacy org?
* 10 hour days leave more chance for productive time. That's one less day of "take an hour in the morning to try to wake up and get the gears turning", one less scrum.
* Having a weekday off to do chores for places that are normally closed weekends is fantastic. Doctors appointments, haircuts, etc. Some I could do on sick leave, but it's nice to not have to.
* Working a longer day than most also means timing the commute is easier. I'm less likely to start or end in rush hour.
Overall I could never see myself going back to a normal 8-hour workday.
What happens when some % of employees say that they'll happily take a pay cut to work 4 days, and others say that they would only do 4 days if it doesn't result in pay reduction and if that's not possible they'd rather keep working 5 days a week? It feels like it opens the door for employers to give everyone a 20% pay cut and dress it up as empowering people to do more impactful stuff with their free time.
I'm seriously.
Bucky Fuller calculated that we would have the technology and automation to retire after a career of only two years or so, having paid for the expenses of the rest of our lives in that brief period, and that this level of tech would be reached by some tine in the 1970's. The tech arrived right on time, but the awareness of the possibility of a new kind of lifestyle and civilization has not grown with it.
So I wonder if any of this is really necessary in a remote world. I -- perhaps stupidly -- always put in my 40 hours....
Some companies doing a 4-day work week still measure themselves against the 5-day/40hr work week, which feels suboptimal and not the point.
I'd bet in a world where a 4-day work week was normal, then I'd bet there'd be a similar ask HN to start a 3-day work week advocacy org.
If...
Output = Productivity * Time
Then to reduce the amount of working time by 20% requires an increase in Productivity to maintain the same output, and therefore earnings and wealth (certainly at socialte level)
How does the 4 day working week movement hope to achieve this simply by working less? (I.e. without the traditional capital investment in machinery to allow workers to operate more efficiently)
Does being more relaxed or having more time off really achieve that?
Also what about competition with other societies? China's 996 culture seems completely nuts and too far the other way, but damn are they prepared to work hard!! There's a danger they will just out-compete (in terms of overall output), which doesn't seem desirable
As for the benefits for a 4 day week:
https://4dayweek.io/post-a-job (I really need to move this to a separate page...)
I think 40 hours is way too much time if you want to spend time with your family.
I think if you were going to start and advocacy org, you'd probably want to work out if it's something, at a basic structural level, that capitalism can budge on. If not, that doesn't mean you can't still push, it just means you can expect a lot more resistance than you would get for a normal common-sense adjustment to legislation.