TED2022 April 2022
The case for a 4-day work week
The traditional approach to work needs a redesign, says economist Juliet Schor. She's leading four-day work week trials in countries like the US and Ireland, and the results so far have been overwhelmingly positive: from increased employer and customer satisfaction to revenue growth and lower turnover. Making the case for a four-day, 32-hour work week (with five days of pay), Schor explains how this model for the future of work could address major challenges like burnout and the climate crisis -- and shares how companies and governments could work together to make it a reality.
Transcript (English)
I've been studying work since the 1980s, and I've never seen anything like what's happening today. Pandemic-fueled anxiety is surging around the world. In the US, more than half of all employees report feeling stressed a lot of the day. Job quits are at record levels, running at four million a month. People are burning out.
In response, a growing number of companies are offering a four-day, 32-hour week, but with five days of pay. Now, it's not a new idea, but the pandemic has turbocharged it. Employers are realizing that if they can rethink where people work, they can also rethink how many days they're on the job.
Sounds pretty great, but is it realistic? Well, actually, yes. Unlike policies in which one party profits at the expense of another, the four-day week can benefit workers, companies and society, and it can even be a gateway for addressing climate change.
But first, let's talk about the workplace. For nearly a decade, companies and governments have been experimenting with shorter hours with no cuts in pay. While the results do vary, the research shows that people are less stressed, value their jobs more and have better lives outside of work. In most cases, they are as productive in four days as they are in five. Companies can also see benefits through lower turnover and a higher-quality applicant pool. Less burnout reduces health care costs, mistakes and poor service. With colleagues, I'm studying four-day week trials now in progress in the United States and Ireland, with summer start dates for the UK, New Zealand and Australia. We have thousands of employees participating.
Healthwise, an education company, didn't wait for our trial to begin. In June, their employees were quitting in droves. By August, they'd implemented a four-day week. Six months later, CEO Adam Husney reports that people are dramatically happier and have never been more productive. Resignations and sick days are down, revenue has grown and customer satisfaction scores are outstanding. Healthwise employees are spending their Fridays off doing family activities like sports or errands. One mother of young children reported that now she can occasionally manage a guilt-free pedicure. The four-day week can help with self-care and managing the daily stresses of systemic racism, sexism and classism.
Now a key part of the model is that in return for the gift of a day off, people are willing to squeeze all their productivity into four days. So while they may be spending less time at work, they're not necessarily doing less work. The secret sauce is work reorganization, cutting out the least productive activities. Meetings are a prime target. Yes, I see everyone nodding. Most companies reduce their frequency and length and the number of attendees. At Healthwise, people save time by messaging colleagues rather than making phone calls, which inevitably includes some social chatting. They shifted personal tasks, like doctor's appointments, to the off-day. And yes, the pace of work at the office does go up. "Let's be honest," one explained, "I'm not goofing off or looking at Facebook, which I was." But people have adapted and they prefer getting their downtime as a whole day off rather than in snippets.
Government initiatives have similar findings. In 2015, the city of Reykjavik and then the National Government of Iceland started offering 36 and 35-hour weeks, eventually enrolling more than 2,500 employees. The results have been remarkable. Physical and mental stress went down while work ethic, job satisfaction, work-life balance, energy levels, all improved. Productivity and service quality stayed the same or got better, and the trial was revenue-neutral. Today, roughly 85 percent of all Icelandic employees are either on or eligible for these schedules. The governments of Spain and Scotland have announced four-day week trials in which they'll be subsidizing the fifth day's pay.
Now one reason for these successes is that with reduced work time, each hour typically becomes more productive. Norway and Denmark, the two European countries with the shortest average hours of work at about 1,380, have outsized productivity. France and Germany are similar. In contrast, the long-hours countries like the UK and Italy have much, much lower productivity. The US historically led the world in productivity and would likely do better now if its work time weren't so high. While tech firms comprise the biggest group adopting four-day reduced hours schedules, companies are also making the switch in banking, PR, marketing and design, nonprofits, consumer goods, even a restaurant chain.
But it's also true that doing 100 percent of the work in 80 percent of the time isn't feasible everywhere. Manufacturing was sped up decades ago. Many teachers and flight attendants need to slow down, not intensify. And of course, health care workers on the front lines of the pandemic need to work less, not more.
(Applause)
Thank you, health care workers.
Here, another government effort is instructive. In 2014, the city of Gothenburg in Sweden gave nurses at one of its facilities a six-hour day. As expected, the nurses' health and overall well-being improved, as did productivity and patient care. But in this trial, they hired new staff for the hours that weren't being covered. The striking finding was how much lower sick pay and unemployment benefits helped offset those additional salaries.
Now the Swedish case raises a bigger, more existential question. How much time should we be dedicating to work? In many countries, jobs are getting more, not less demanding. And scarcity thinking, the idea that even rich countries need to tighten their belts, has taken hold. But really, we should be heading in the opposite direction as digitization and artificial intelligence offer the chance to reduce work time. Amid pandemic fatigue, we should be doubling down on restoring the quality of life and our social fabric, especially in wealthy countries where we already produce enough for everyone to have a good standard of living.
And this path has the added benefit of addressing the climate crisis. "How so," you may ask. Well, with the four-day week, there's the obvious impact of less commuting. But if we use productivity growth to continue to reduce hours of work just by a couple of percent a year, we can create a longer-term dynamic of decarbonization. Research by me and others has shown this time and again across countries, across states, across households. One reason is that when people are time-stressed, they tend to choose faster and more polluting modes of travel and daily life activities. In contrast, when people get time rather than money, they tend to have a lower carbon footprint. But the bigger reason has to do with the size of the economy. By opting to work less, countries are choosing not to expand production to its max, thereby avoiding additional emissions. Carbon success stories like Germany and Denmark tend to have low annual hours. France and the Netherlands are also low on both carbon and work time. The four-day week is a down payment on a new way to live and work. And yes, we're going to need government help if we're going to move beyond the innovative companies that already see its virtues. But as the three-day weekend spreads, we can realize everyone deserves a right to free time. And that brings the logic of a universal basic income squarely into view. Because without financial support, low-earners can't afford to take that fifth day off.
There's a lot of talk these days about the future of work and the opportunities that it offers. But there's more at stake here than opportunity. We have an imperative. An imperative to face the challenges of our current moment. The pandemic, burnout and depression, inequalities of race and income, the climate crisis. A four-day week addresses each one of these.
For now, we're starting company by company. But as momentum builds and it becomes universal, we'll have made the transition from scarcity thinking to appreciating the true wealth that we possess. Our ingenuity, our compassion and our humanity.
Thank you.
(Applause)
Helen Walters: Juliet, thank you so much. I have a very practical question for you. So you mentioned in the talk that people were taking Friday off. Is the recommendation that people all take the same day off, or is this something that people can take, kind of, any day they want off? What's the ideal mechanism to have in place here?
JS: Every company does it the way that works for them. And that's one of the things in our trial. We do coaching, and we work with the companies before they start to figure out are they a company that can shut down for one day? Do they need to have 24/7, you know, customer service available? So really, it depends, and we're seeing every type.
HW: Juliet, thank you so much.
(Applause)
This piece was adapted from a TEDxUniversityofNevada Talk.
机器译文：
一周工作4天
经济学家Juliet Schor说，传统的工作方式需要重新设计。她正在美国和爱尔兰等国家领导每周4天工作制的试验，迄今为止的结果非常积极:从提高雇主和客户满意度到收入增长和降低营业额。以每周工作四天、32小时(五天带薪)为例，肖尔解释了这种未来工作模式如何应对职业倦怠和气候危机等重大挑战，并分享了企业和政府如何共同努力使其成为现实。
文稿：
我从20世纪80年代开始研究工作，我从未见过像今天这样的情况。新冠肺炎疫情引发的焦虑情绪正在全球蔓延。在美国，超过一半的员工表示每天都感到压力很大。失业人数创历史新高，每月400万人。人们正在精疲力竭。
作为回应，越来越多的公司提供每周工作4天、32小时的工作时间，但5天带薪。现在，这不是一个新想法，但大流行使它更加强大。雇主们意识到，如果他们可以重新考虑员工的工作地点，他们也可以重新考虑员工的工作天数。
听起来不错，但现实吗?实际上,是的。与一方以牺牲另一方利益为代价的政策不同，四天工作制可以造福工人、公司和社会，甚至可以成为应对气候变化的一个途径。
但首先，让我们谈谈工作场所。近十年来，企业和政府一直在尝试在不减薪的情况下缩短工作时间。虽然结果各不相同，但研究表明，人们的压力更小，更重视自己的工作，工作之外的生活更好。在大多数情况下，他们在四天内的效率和在五天内一样高。企业还可以从较低的人员流动率和更高质量的申请者中获益。减少职业倦怠可以减少医疗成本、差错和糟糕的服务。我和同事们正在研究美国和爱尔兰实行的四天工作制，英国、新西兰和澳大利亚实行的是夏季开学。我们有数千名员工参与其中。
健康智慧，一家教育公司，没有等到我们的试验开始。6月份，他们的员工纷纷辞职。到了8月，他们实施了四天工作制。六个月后，首席执行官亚当•哈斯尼报告称，人们的幸福感显著提高，工作效率也达到了前所未有的水平。辞职和病假减少了，收入增长了，客户满意度得分也很高。健康方面的员工会把周五的假期花在家庭活动上，比如运动或跑腿。一位有小孩的母亲说，现在她偶尔可以做一次没有负罪感的足疗。四天工作制可以帮助你自我照顾，并管理来自系统性种族主义、性别歧视和阶级歧视的日常压力。
这个模式的一个关键部分是，作为对一天假期的回报，人们愿意把所有的生产力都挤在四天里。所以，虽然他们可能工作的时间更少，但他们的工作并不一定更少。秘诀就是重新组织工作，剔除那些效率最低的活动。会议是一个主要目标。是的，我看到大家都在点头。大多数公司会减少出席的频率、时间和人数。在Healthwise，人们通过给同事发信息而不是打电话来节省时间，这不可避免地包括一些社交聊天。他们把个人任务，比如医生预约，转移到休息日。是的，办公室的工作节奏确实提高了。“说实话，”其中一人解释道，“我不是在游手好闲，也不是在看Facebook，我是在看。”但人们已经适应了，他们更喜欢一整天的休息，而不是零碎的休息。
政府的倡议也有类似的发现。2015年，雷克雅未克市和后来的冰岛国家政府开始提供每周36小时和35小时的工作时间，最终招募了2500多名员工。结果是显著的。身体和精神压力都下降了，而职业道德、工作满意度、工作与生活的平衡、精力水平都提高了。生产率和服务质量保持不变或有所改善，试验的收入没有变化。如今，大约85%的冰岛员工都有或有资格享受这些时间表。西班牙和苏格兰政府宣布试行四天工作制，他们将补贴第5天的工资。
这些成功的一个原因是，随着工作时间的减少，每个小时通常会变得更有效率。挪威和丹麦是平均工作时间最短的两个欧洲国家，平均工作时间约为1380小时，但它们的生产率高于其他国家。法国和德国的情况类似。相比之下，英国和意大利等工作时间较长的国家的生产率要低得多。美国的生产力历来领先世界，如果工作时间不那么长，现在可能会做得更好。虽然采用缩短工作时间4天工作制的企业中，科技公司是最大的群体，但银行、公关、营销和设计、非营利组织、消费品，甚至是连锁餐厅的企业也在进行这种转变。
但同样的事实是，在80%的时间内完成100%的工作并不是在任何地方都可行的。制造业在几十年前就加快了速度。许多教师和空乘人员需要放慢脚步，而不是加强力度。当然，在大流行前线的医护人员需要减少工作，而不是增加工作。
(掌声)
谢谢你们，医护人员。
在这方面，政府的另一项努力具有启发性。2014年，瑞典哥德堡市为其一家机构的护士提供了每天6小时的工作时间。正如预期的那样，护士的健康和整体福祉得到了改善，生产力和病人护理也得到了改善。但在这次试验中，他们雇佣了新员工在没有被覆盖的时间工作。令人震惊的发现是，较低的病假工资和失业福利在多大程度上抵消了这些额外工资。
现在，瑞典的案件提出了一个更大、更存在的问题。我们应该花多少时间在工作上?在许多国家，工作岗位要求越来越高，而不是越来越低。稀缺性思维，即即使是富裕国家也需要勒紧裤腰带的想法，已经根深蒂固。但实际上，我们应该朝着相反的方向前进，因为数字化和人工智能提供了减少工作时间的机会。在大流行疲劳期间，我们应该加倍努力恢复生活质量和我们的社会结构，特别是在富裕国家，我们已经生产了足够的产品，使每个人都有良好的生活水平。
这条道路还有解决气候危机的额外好处。你可能会问:“怎么会呢?”在四天工作制下，通勤时间减少的影响显而易见。但是，如果我们利用生产率的增长来继续减少每年百分之几的工作时间，我们可以创造一个长期的动态脱碳。我和其他人的研究一次又一次地在不同国家、不同州、不同家庭中证明了这一点。原因之一是，当人们时间紧张时，他们倾向于选择更快、更污染的旅行和日常生活方式。相比之下，当人们有时间而不是金钱时，他们的碳足迹往往更低。但更重要的原因与经济规模有关。通过选择减少工作，各国选择不把生产扩大到最大，从而避免了额外的排放。像德国和丹麦这样在碳排放方面取得成功的国家，其年工作时间往往较低。法国和荷兰的碳排放和工作时间都很低。四天工作制是一种新的生活和工作方式的首付。是的，如果我们要超越已经看到其优点的创新公司，我们将需要政府的帮助。但随着三天周末的延长，我们可以认识到每个人都应该有自由时间的权利。这样一来，全民基本收入的逻辑就一目了然了。因为如果没有经济支持，低收入者就无法享受那第五天的假期。
现在有很多人在谈论工作的未来以及它所提供的机会。但现在面临的不仅仅是机遇。我们有一个命令。我们必须面对当前的挑战。流行病、倦怠和抑郁、种族和收入不平等、气候危机。四天工作周解决了上述每一个问题。
现在，我们是一家一家地开始。但随着动力的建立，它变得普遍，我们将完成从稀缺思维到欣赏我们所拥有的真正财富的转变。我们的独创性，我们的同情心和我们的人性。
谢谢你！
(掌声)
海伦:朱丽叶，非常感谢你。我有个很实际的问题要问你。你在演讲中提到人们周五休假。是建议所有人在同一天休假，还是说人们可以在任何一天休假?这里理想的机制是什么?
夏:每个公司都是按照自己的方式来做的。这是我们试验的内容之一。我们提供辅导，我们与这些公司合作，在他们开始弄清楚他们是一家可以倒闭一天的公司之前?他们需要全天候的客户服务吗?所以，这要看情况，我们看到了每一种类型。
HW: Juliet，非常感谢你。
(掌声)