The Scottish Government is to launch a £10 million pilot scheme in order to trial a 4 day working week.
No firm date has yet been fixed as to when the pilot scheme will begin.
4 Day Working Week
A recent survation poll found that 64% oif people in the UK were in favour of a 4 day working week, with only 13% against. The polling was commissioned by the 4 day week campaign, who are campaigning for a 32-hour working week with no reduction in pay.
The poll comes in the wake of an announcement by the Scottish Government that they will be launching a £10 million pilot scheme in order to trial a 4 day working week in order to determine the workability of reducing the working week to 4 days. No cut in pay will be involved. No start date for the pilot has yet been announced.
Spain has already launched a national 4 day working week trial earlier this year. The scheme will last 3 years, and the hours of those taking part has been reduced to 32 hours per week, with no cut in pay. Over 200 companies are taking part. To ensure that there was no cut in pay, the Spanish Government is paying that element of employees salaries relating to the hours lost.
A similar trial in Iceland between 2015-19 proved a success in terms of a increase in productivity. And when Microsoft carried out there own trial in Japan back in 2019, they found that one of the benefits of reducing the working week was a 40% increase in productivity. Unilever is carrying out a similar trial in New Zealand
Research into home working and hybrid working has also found that there were productivity increases by reducing the amount of time worked in an office environment
The Cases For And Against A 4 Day Working Week
Those in favour of a 4 day working week point to the following benefits:-
- As Microsoft found in their trial in Japan bace in 2019, reducing the working week to 4 days can boost productivity, as workers focus upon achieving the same objectives in less time during a compressed working week. Moreover, as new artificial intelligence (AI) technology is introduced, workers will be able to do the same amount of work in less time. That is, it is proposed that instead of job losses, employers should instead use the benefits of AI to reduce hours and the working week
- Improved health, both mental and physical, as there is more quality family time, and time to recuperate, socialise, and exercise. As leisure time increases, there would also be boost to tourism
- Lower unemployment. With each employee working reduced hours, many employers will look to expand their work forces to make up for the hours lost
- The environment
Nevertheless , those against the idea of reducing the working week to 4 days argue the following:-
- Whilst it may be possible to obtain the necessary productivity increases to enable workers to produce what used to be done in 5 days, in just 4 days, that would not be possible across the board. Sectors of the economy where it may not be possible, that are often cited, include the emergency services and the hospitality sector
- Customer satisfaction may suffer. An experiment in Utah back in 2011, for instance, found that customer complaints increased, as they found that access to services reduced
- Many of those against argue that this is not a matter for Government's to get involved in. It is instead an issue for employers to address given their owen circumstances
- The focus should be on flexible working, opponents argue, as opposed to a one size fits all approach in the form of a 4 day working week
- Not all trials into a 4 day working week have proved a success. Julian Jessop writing in The Spectator, for example, argues: "It has been suggested that some Icelandic civil servants have been able to complete all their work in a shorter week. But perhaps this just says a lot about the inefficiency of the Icelandic public sector. It is hardly a great vote of confidence in how things are done now in Scotland to suggest that this could easily be replicated here. And if we are looking for lessons from elsewhere, France’s attempts to cut the working week are widely recognised as a costly failure, especially for public services."
- Trials have found that in some cases, the costs involved in reducing the working week were too expensive. A scheme involving 68 Swedish Nurses, for example, found that the 17 extra nurses had to be employed at a cost of 12m kroner (£1.4 million)
Reaction
Following the Scottish Government's decision to trial a 4 day working week, Joe Ryle, a campaigner with the 4 Day Week Campaign, argues that: "The four-day week with no loss of pay is a win-win for workers and employers. The time has come to wave goodbye to the outdated 9-5, 5 days a week model and it’s in nobody’s interests to go back to the old ways of working after the pandemic. Spain and Scotland have both recognised that the four-day week represents the future when it comes to changing working patterns and Boris Johnson should follow their lead."
However, economist Julian Jessop contends: "Supporters of a four-day week often argue that it could level the playing field between those who can work longer hours and those with other responsibilities, such a homemakers, who are often women. But this is really an argument for more flexible working in general, rather than a one-size-fits-all policy dictated by the government.....Lower-paid workers in customer service roles are perhaps the least likely to benefit from a four-day week. Could someone in hospitality or social care easily look after 25 per cent more clients every day? Do they really waste a lot of time in pointless management meetings?"
