Dr Izabela Florczak is a scientist at the Department of Labour Law and a Vice-Dean for International Cooperation and Projects of the Faculty of Law and Administration at the University of Lodz.
The topic of the 4-day working week, which has heated up the media, political and social discussions in recent days, also has not escaped the attention of scholars studying labour law, human resource management or economics. Indeed, the way the work is organised in an economy affects its productivity and competitiveness. What is more – in a global world with interconnected supply chains, the way in which individual links in the chain function can (depending on how important that link is) go unnoticed or be of fundamental importance.
When considering where the discussion on the 4-day working week came from in the first place, we should note several phenomena:
- In today's global world of work, there are gigantic disparities in employees' rights. In countries with high labour law standards, menstrual leave is introduced, the rights of working animals are recognised (as exemplified by the Dutch Vakbond voor Dieren – Trade Union for Animals). On the other hand, in countries where labour law standards are not respected at all, the phenomena of child labour or so-called modern slavery occur on a massive scale. As an aside, it should be added, for the sake of consistency with the facts, that in countries with highly developed social standards, violations of labour rights are not at all rare.
- It is in countries where social standards are high that the discussion is beginning on the need to move from the "live to work" to "work to live" attitude.
- Generation Z, which is just entering the labour market, will force numerous changes in its approach to work organisation with its attitude.
- Changes in the organisation of work will also be forced by the artificial intelligence development. Although, in this respect, any predictions should be treated with caution, based on those made at the beginning of the industrial revolution. John Keynes, in his essay Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren published in 1930, predicted that within a century, humanity would have reached a level of technological development at which it would be sufficient for each person to work... three hours a day. These predictions, as we know, did not come true.
Taking into account the above briefly presented circumstances, we should consider whether a 4-day working week is a good idea, focusing primarily on whether it is a realistic idea to implement or a utopian fantasy.
Let's start with the fact that testing of a 4-day working week in countries such as Sweden, Canada and Iceland has been successful so far. These tests covered either individual enterprises or specific sectors of the economy.
Using this argument immediately makes the counter-argument valid – each economy is different and operates in different social realities. Indeed, not all standards introduced in one industry will work in another. Can we imagine a 4-day working week in agriculture, where animals have to be fed every day? Of course not. Therefore, in this case, applying the formula of 4 days of work to 3 days of rest causes the need to employ additional people, which affects production costs.
An argument that is often used in the discussion on the 4-day working week concerns increasing the efficiency of employees working in the 4:3 system. However (as in the case of agriculture) not all work can be accumulated in a shorter time. There are many examples: doctor, firefighter, police officer... Therefore, there are jobs that can be accumulated without the need to employ additional employees and those that cannot be accumulated.
This, in turn, may lead to polarisation in the labour market. There will be, on a larger scale than currently, privileged sectors of the economy (and professions) in which the introduction of the 4:3 system will be easy, and those in which it will require the employment of additional employees, increasing costs (often incurred by the state budget).
Another important topic in the discussion about the 4-day working week is productivity. If employees maintain 100 percent of their productivity of a 5-day week in 4 days, doesn't this indicate poor work organisation? Do employees overwork themselves on 4 days or do they work unproductively on 5 days? The statement that efficiency is maintained in the 4:3 system should be supplemented with a search for the reasons for this state of affairs.
There is something missing from the considerations on a 4-day working week – will this model of activity also cover nurseries, kindergartens and schools? After all, in the past years of real socialism, Saturday lessons were the norm (as were working Saturdays...).
As a result of the challenges posed by Herbapol in Poznań and 45 German companies (introducing a 4-day working week), our knowledge of the 4:3 model will soon be even richer and more complete, allowing us to rely more on available data than mere projections of the future.
Text: Dr Izabela Florczak, Department of Labour Law at the Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Lodz
Edit: Communications and PR Centre, University of Lodz
Photo: Bartosz Kałużny, Communications and PR Centre, University of Lodz