Why don't we have 3 day weekends yet?

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.

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.

"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.

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.).

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.

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.

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.

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?

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!"

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.

> 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.)

> 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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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...

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.

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.

You can negotiate a 4 day workweek for yourself if you have the right skill level or are willing to accept the market wage.

We live in a plutocracy. This can't exist without monopolizing the waking life of the working class, because free time gives rise to thought and rebellion. It's better to have workers output N units of work in 5 days rather than 4 days, simply because it does a better job of dominating and controlling our lives.

If you have more time off then you have more time to find better uses for yourself than being beholden to the corporate world. Your employer doesn't want you to think like that so they don't want to give you more time to think about doing better things with your life.

The few times during the 20th century the working class had a realistic change to enact such a change it prioritized higher wages instead. Now it doesn't have enough power anymore and reduced working hours isn't a very popular idea anyway.

Because society has decided it does not want to.

I mean... If you increase work productivity there's basically two things you can do: Increase free time or increase consumption. Increasing free time is not a popular position. It is widely seen as a given that "increasing consumption" and "economic growth" are good things by itself that don't need any further justification (while of course society could strive for "free time growth" instead). Switzerland had a referendum on reducing work time not so long ago. It failed.

I say this noting that I disagree with the popular position here, but I can't avoid seeing that this is what most people seem to want.

Maybe it's because I live in Sweden but I know a lot of people in the company that I work at that work between 50-90%. I myself plan to go down to 80% sometime in the near-ish future (current plan is 2025). Definitely not the norm tough.

The 40 hours split into 5 days is so ingrained into American culture that anything different wouldn't be seen as normal. I had a job I loved that we did 40 hours in 4 days. It was nice having that extra weekday off.

I wonder if the issue is the folks who do have unofficial 3 day weekends ... don't "officially" have them and don't want to expose that "hey we're doing that already"?

I worked at a place where it was painfully obvious that the only folks showing up (when everyone was in the office) on Fridays consistently were the tech support guys. Try and get a hold of anyone else? Chances are nope ...

So some folks have it already and sure as hell don't want to fight for it if they've got it without asking already.

My country has plenty of companies that offer 2 1/2 day weekends ON PAPER. The reality is that unpaid overtime is endemic here and you are likely to work as much there as you would at a place with a regular workweek. I don't want a 4 day workweek where I'm working dozens of hours for free every month. I'd rather see the government use their absurdly high taxes to chase those companies. We can think of a 4 day workweek after that's fixed.

I've never had a full workday of getting absolutely nothing done. Maybe working 1 day less per week would boost productivity even in the long run, but there would be no going back, so I imagine employers are hesitant to take the risk.

It's also because we consume more. Instead of working less than our great-great-grandparents, we drive big cars, live in huge houses, etc.

> 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.

But it is ingrained in the profit metrics of the company so are you okay taking a 25% or so compensation hit (the extra 5 is due to benefits not scaling down)?

Currently working at smallish startup (~20 people) that gives every other Monday off. Been enjoying it, especially during summer.

It's very simple: if you can do five days' worth of work in only four days, you can do even more if you maintain the same level of productivity over five days.

A more interesting approach would be to combine the following:

* Unlimited holidays (offered by more and more companies)

* No difference within week and weekend days - you choose your free days whenever you want

* Fully remote, async work

Euronews has a breakdown you might be interested in: https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/06/06/the-four-day-week-w...

This is likely going to be controversial. I am all for more time off. But the way the world is evolving, to maintain its competitiveness, America cants really afford to be slacking any further. Ultimately, it’s the work of the people that transforms a country and I am afraid, America is working less harder!

The entire idea of week days is arbitrary.

Days are rotations of Earth around its axis, years are orbits of Earth around the Sun and months almost match lunar cycle. Weeks of seven days are just something somebody came up with a long time ago.

Ancient Egyptians, ancient Chinese and pre-Napoleon French revolutionaries used ten day weeks.

I would find a weekend of any length welcome at this point in my death march project, tbh.

For some of my colleagues, including me, a 4-days workweek would only make sense if kids got a 4-days school week. I don't think I'm ready to make such a change and reduce my kids' education and socialization by 20%.

See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32544315 - Ask HN: Anyone working 4 day week here, as an employee?

I work 70 hours a week. Surely you wouldn’t outlaw my ethic?

And if a run a company, surely I could require my employees to work 5 days, 40 hours?

The solution is to let business owners switch to 4 day weeks and then let the free market sort it out.

Because most people equate value with output instead of focusing on outcomes and impact, and output is easiest to measure in hours worked (it's not actually, but people incorrectly think it is)

If you can't develop a business that sustains itself with 4-day work weeks, why are you expecting anyone else to?

From what I understand though, some companies are indeed trying 4-day work weeks.

Because the more people work, the more stuff is produced.

The more stuff is produced, the more of it there is. The more of it there is, the less it costs. There is more to go around.

Well then it sounds like a great idea for a start up. You could corner the market on people who only want to work four days a week.

Because everyone keeps arguing against their own interests by rationalizing the status quo. Including in the comments here.

My last job was 60% time. I only committed three days a week to it. The roles are there - you just need to ask for them.

People have chosen to pick the easier battle of remote work instead of pushing for shorter work days or weeks directly.

Because 5 (or 6 or 7) day workweeks, all-nighters, crunch-time, etc are all badges of honor to far too many people.

You really have to understand why weekends were created in the first place.

How would an increase in leisure time increase GDP?

Why not a one day weekend? How is three days any less absurd and arbitrary than two?

Frankly, given where we are at as a society in terms of labor and productivity relative to demand, it seems like now isn’t the time to be pumping the brakes. The basis of fully automated luxury communism has not yet been delivered and won’t be for a while; Europeans will likely freeze this winter and even in the US, if I call 911 I’m lucky if the wait time is less than 10 minutes. We still need humans working, as much as it pains me to say it.

Maybe a better approach than specifying an arbitrary number would be to have full flexibility.

Example: I work hourly at a software company. Some days I work 12 hours. Some days I work 3.5. If I’m not going to be productive that day, I just don’t work (this is to my employer’s benefit, because I’m paid by the hour). If I’m on a roll, I keep on rolling. Some days I plan for 9 hours then leave at 6 because my focus is shot. Others I think it will be 5, then leave after 10.

I get to use my time as I see fit, the employer doesn’t deal with me wasting time in the office unproductively, and on net I think I’m as productive if not more than my coworkers.

In jobs where you need time-based coverage, an Lyft-like bidding system to get a wage premium would probably make sense and let people self-sort based on desire to work and schedule preferences.

Why replace one arbitrary system with another?

This feels like a rhetorical question, you've clearly got an answer you're satisfied with.

Soon!

https://www.4dayweek.com/

Because there would be an increased chance you would unionize

it’s not “we” it’s “you” that are trapped in this mindset. i’ve worked 4 day weeks for 6 years now. i started after being annoyed that my dentist is only open 4 days

why are we not getting 1 day weekend. With services such as amazon, drive pickups we should be more efficient and generate a bigger value instead of becoming dumber.

A lot of folks are paid by the hour or by the day and would not enjoy getting their hours cut to 32 per week or something. Especially because various laws and regulations create expectations around "full time" and "part time" employment based on the number of hours worked.

Even if the number of hours were cut back per employer, a lot of folks would need a supplemental part-time job to make ends meet.

I guess what I'm saying is that the average HN commenter probably doesn't wear steel-toed boots or a uniform to work.

We do in Europe. It's the future.

Network effects.

The same reason we dont' have universal base income.

Because that contradicts the capitalist mode of production and thus the bourgeoisie ideology associated with it.

Because it’s a bad idea

More time you have without purpose the more idiotic people will be. Less hours spent working daily though might lead to more creativity.