That’s what freaks me out about the last presidential elections. Seems the number one requirement to be a front runner is to be at least 70 at Election Day. Ideally even 80 as the democrats seem to be willing to demonstrate.
Misleading headline. In the article she did not "call for a debate" on it. She was asked about it and said it's not in the current plans
'“Until now, the trend has been toward shorter working hours as productivity has increased,” she told reporters in Harpsund, Sweden. “I believe that in the future, though not in the next few years, the development will be similar: improvements in productivity and technology should show up as improvements in the conditions for ordinary workers, including shorter working hours.”
The Finnish government isn’t currently working on a four-day week, she said.'
Actually the title is correct, she said the matter should be able to be discussed, and should be discussed. That qualifies as calling for a debate. Not what the previous clickbait articles said, this one is absolutely correct.
If you work less I have to pay you less. Or be able to find someone who will not work less. But that can't be allowed to happen because social welfare state.
So the debate is really about "do we agree to increase tax on enterprises and empower the state to redistribute even more wealth?"
1) People should reap benefit of automation.
2) Less urge to generate bullshit work to fill in 40+ hours.
3) Could force employers to think of more equalized distribution of work. So a few more people can get a job and overworked people can get some leisure.
The real problem is that another country with lesser ethics will work their workers into the ground and out-compete your country in terms of productivity. Then, they'll get to effectively make all the labor rules because they'll have so much more money and can leech your workers away for higher salaries.
The real solution here is to prevent worker-leeching but that seems incredible draconian (and you'd have to get every single country to agree to it).
I worked a strict 35 hour week in Germany for a while and I think this was the most productive environment I have ever worked in. People had energy to actually work during working hours and management didn’t waste any time with indecision. And we managed to be the world market leader in our industry with a 35 hour week.
Sure, I will get more done in five than four days. I also get more done in six or seven days per week over five, but with diminishing returns and more and more impact on my non-work life.
As a programmer I have the luxury of willingly taking a pay cut to have an additional day off per week if I want to and usually in a position to negotiate for it.
I don't know the Finnish economical situation well enough of how feasible a four day week would be short term. But I don't see much difference to reductions of work hours/days in the past.
Here's a prediction. If we reduce the work week to 3 days, or to 20-24 hours, economic forces and the hedonic treadmill will push people to have 2 jobs just to keep up.
23 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 62.3 ms ] threadhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20086446
- https://newsnowfinland.fi/politics/how-finlands-fake-four-da...
'“Until now, the trend has been toward shorter working hours as productivity has increased,” she told reporters in Harpsund, Sweden. “I believe that in the future, though not in the next few years, the development will be similar: improvements in productivity and technology should show up as improvements in the conditions for ordinary workers, including shorter working hours.”
The Finnish government isn’t currently working on a four-day week, she said.'
Source: https://twitter.com/MarinSanna/status/1163372847894544384
If you work less I have to pay you less. Or be able to find someone who will not work less. But that can't be allowed to happen because social welfare state.
So the debate is really about "do we agree to increase tax on enterprises and empower the state to redistribute even more wealth?"
https://newsnowfinland.fi/politics/how-finlands-fake-four-da...
1) People should reap benefit of automation. 2) Less urge to generate bullshit work to fill in 40+ hours. 3) Could force employers to think of more equalized distribution of work. So a few more people can get a job and overworked people can get some leisure.
The real solution here is to prevent worker-leeching but that seems incredible draconian (and you'd have to get every single country to agree to it).
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21973638
I assume manufacturing jobs will need to be 5 days or America will be even less competitive and the same for service jobs, gigs.
I wonder what jobs will actually benefit from a four day work week.
As a programmer I have the luxury of willingly taking a pay cut to have an additional day off per week if I want to and usually in a position to negotiate for it.
I don't know the Finnish economical situation well enough of how feasible a four day week would be short term. But I don't see much difference to reductions of work hours/days in the past.