|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by KSUowls |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I think that some of the 4 day work week trials were actually 32 hour, not people lengthening the days. I would generally think that this would need to be a uniform schedule, ie: everyone is 9-5 or 9-7 whatever the case. Having people come in early/late does make things difficult, though it is manageable (speaking as someone whose team is split between eastern and central time zones). Generally though, while this is certainly a different branch of the topic, imo the idea of a 40 hour work week is completely antiquated. I'm hired and paid to do a job, not occupy a chair for 40 hours a week Granted part of the job is being available when people need you, but the whole standard should be re-evaluated. Some weeks I put in 60 hours because we have deadlines, projects, or quarterly reports. Other weeks, I'm just watching the clock for half the week, and responding to emails. Now, while it is a particular pet peeve of mine when people do not respond to my e-mails and therefore I am extremely prompt in responding when I receive them, I also recognize that very few of them actually require immediate attention.
It's a fair point about scheduling meetings being more difficult, but I don't think that it as hard as you may think. My company has effectively had a 4 day work week for the last 2 years, specifically pertaining to meetings not actual work week. About 2 years ago our president put out a general directive for "no meetings on Thursdays". Meetings do still occur during those times, but that's mostly out of convenience, because people would rather schedule some time on a Thursday instead of 4pm on a Friday. So, 90% of all meetings are scheduled during the other 4 days of the work week. This would take some discipline from people, so that 4pm on Thursday does not become the new "Friday", but I do think that people would find it more palatable when they have a bit more than a brief 2 day weekend to look forward to.
Also, I'm sure that I'm not the only one who experiences this, but as a manager my life is consumed with meetings. Many of which should really be a 2 minute phone call instead of blocking off half an hour. And going back to timeliness, there have been few meetings throughout my career where a business decision/processes or even individual contributor's routine would be impacted by having a meeting a week later because everyone's calendar this week was full.
One idea that I have heard toyed with was 4 full days and half day on friday (36 hour work week). Which to me is a happy medium. It doesn't require flexing schedules with half the people off Monday or Friday, but it still addresses the issue of there just being a lot of unnecessary time "at the office" in a standard week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.5 days would be a fair compromise, as long as those 36 hours pays like 40.
Let's face it, on a regular monday-friday job, how much do people want to do after lunch on a Friday? You're half checked out already just looking ahead to the evening. Same with Monday mornings. You're just spending that morning readjusting back after being off for the weekend.
Maybe to make it easier, everyone just works from home a specific day of the week. Fridays probably make the most sense since it would be stuff discussed during the week/saved up until Friday to be dealt with.
I think we've gone into this talk on OS before, but if it ever becomes 4 day work weeks (not wfh, just 4 days working, regardless if its 8 hours or 10 a day), which one would people most prefer taking off?