Studies indicate that a shorter workweek can increase productivity and reduce fatigue. For supporters of the proposal, the change could also bring benefits to the environment: working five days a week is a common practice in the Western world, but it hasn’t always been the case.
During the Industrial Revolution, workers often worked in factories more than 70 hours a week. That only changed with the rise of unions and concerns about exploitation, which led to calls for an hourly limit.
In 1926, Henry Ford became one of the first employers to implement a five-day, 40-hour workweek in his automobile factories. He believed his employees would be just as productive in less time if they had two days off. His experiment was a success: productivity soared, other companies followed suit, and the five-day week was here to stay.
But 100 years later, a campaign to further shorten the week – to four days – is gaining momentum.
Four-week pilot trials have been conducted in recent years in different corners of the world, such as Japan, New Zealand, Ireland, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States and Iceland.
The results have been extremely positive, with improvements in employee health and well-being, as well as increased productivity. Several studies have also suggested there may be benefits for the planet.
Work less for the climate?
Juliet Schor, an economist and sociology professor at Boston College in the US, says there are clear links between the climate footprint and working hours, at least in high-income countries.
“What we found is that countries with long working hours have high carbon emissions and countries with short working hours have lower carbon emissions,” Schor said.
A paper he co-authored in 2012 analyzed Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries between 1970 and 2007 and concluded that a 10 percent reduction in working time could reduce the footprint carbon content of 14.6%.
Another study, conducted in 2021 by the British environmental group Platform, predicted that by switching to a four-day working week by 2025, the UK could reduce its emissions by 20%, or about 127 million tonnes. That’s more than Belgium’s entire carbon footprint.
Where would these savings come from? According to the study, one day less working time can reduce energy use in the workplace, reduce emissions from commuting and encourage sustainable lifestyle changes.
But setting aside a four-day weekly load, simply working more from home — as many people have become accustomed to doing during the pandemic — can also lead to similar commuter emissions savings.
Four-day work week: the trial by fire
To determine the impact of a four-day workweek, Schor conducted research on two recent pilot projects in the UK, the US and Ireland. Approximately 3,500 employees from 91 companies in various sectors took part in the six-monthly tests. London-based non-profit organization 4 Day Week Global, the Autonomy think tank, the University of Cambridge and Boston College were enlisted to oversee the tests.
Employees received the same salary and were asked to maintain the same productivity in reduced working hours. Simply put, the results showed that most workers were as or more productive, less likely to get sick, healthier and happier. At the end of the trials, over 90% of companies chose to keep the scheme, while 4% chose to abandon it.
Schor says it is difficult to calculate the total emissions impact of the pilot projects. It’s an area the researchers hope to study more closely in future tests.
What they found, however, was that commute time decreased by about half an hour a week, reducing the emissions of such journeys.
Transport accounts for the majority of greenhouse gas emissions in the US, UK and EU, accounting for over a quarter of the total.
“Especially in the United States, we have seen a reduction in commuting,” Schor said. Not only were people commuting less, but they were less likely to drive to work when they went to work.
But what about free time?
Even if workers commute less and workplaces conserve energy, any climate benefits will ultimately depend on what people do on their day off. If employees decide to take a road trip or take a plane, this could increase emissions.
“We asked people how they are spending this day off and it doesn’t appear to be carbon intensive,” says Schor. “Are they just flying somewhere, especially to countries like Ireland and the UK where there are all those cheap European flights? It doesn’t seem like it’s happening.”
Instead, research so far has shown that most people stay close to home and devote their free time to hobbies, household chores and personal care. Schor says there has also been a shift towards more sustainable lifestyles.
How realistic is a four day week?
Recent trials have spanned a range of industries, from factories to design firms, healthcare and non-profit organizations. While many opted to give employees Fridays off, others had staggered models to ensure each day was busy. But reducing working hours hasn’t worked for everyone.
Mark Roderick and the 40 employees of his engineering and industrial supply company Allcap joined the process in the UK last year. But due to the very nature of the business, resources ended up being very scarce.
“Many times, people come to us because we have what they need in stock that day. We’re like a store. We can’t just say, ‘We’re closed on Fridays,'” she says. “We process orders around the clock, and these things have to get done, or else they add up quickly.”
During the pilot phase, the company gave workers a fortnightly break. But, according to Roderick, this made the employees even more stressed, as they also had to take over their colleagues’ work when they were off duty.
As a result, they discontinued the schedule at the company’s three main trading locations, but implemented the four-day week at the engineering center, where production follows different schedules.
“There, that meant people were more rested, less stressed and made fewer mistakes,” he says, adding that there was energy savings as well.
“It’s a very energy-intensive business unit. So, for me, it was easier to say, ‘Nobody comes on Fridays and we don’t care about anything,’” he says.
More studies in sight
Schor says more research is still needed on how shorter working hours affect emissions and energy consumption. Until now, the focus has mainly been on worker productivity and well-being.
In the coming months, other countries are expected to conduct pilot projects on the topic, such as South Africa, Europe, Brazil and North America.
There is no doubt that working patterns are changing. The coronavirus pandemic has led us to rethink the way we work, showing alternatives for flexible arrangements. And in many industries, the advent of new technologies like artificial intelligence is also creating new possibilities.
For Schor there is no doubt: one way or another, the four-day week is the future.
Source: Terra
Rose James is a Gossipify movie and series reviewer known for her in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the latest releases. With a background in film studies, she provides engaging and informative reviews, and keeps readers up to date with industry trends and emerging talents.
