As part of his Labor Day message to workers in the United States, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday re-upped his call for the establishment of a 20% cut to the workweek with no loss in pay—an idea he said is “not radical” given the enormous productivity gains over recent decades that have resulted in massive profits for corporations but scraps for employees and the working class.
“It’s time for a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay,” Sanders wrote in a Guardian op-ed as he cited a 480% increase in worker productivity since the 40-hour workweek was first established in 1940.
“It’s time,” he continued, “that working families were able to take advantage of the increased productivity that new technologies provide so that they can enjoy more leisure time, family time, educational and cultural opportunities—and less stress.”
While I like this idea, this is not the argument union leadership should be making to achieve this goal:
Our union’s membership is clearly fed up with living paycheck-to-paycheck while the corporate elite and billionaire class continue to make out like bandits," said Fain in a statement last week. "The Big Three have been breaking the bank while we have been breaking our backs
A change in hours does nothing to address pay discrepancies and you need to pick one lane and fight for it and get it, then attack the other direction.
This. Too many different issues get conflated and then focus is lost and nothing changes
I tell people time and time again that work starts at 9 and end at 3pm, everything after is shuffling paper and killing time.
I started working a 6:30am-2:30pm job and it’s life changing. The first hour is just getting settled, I spend lunchtime organizing my calendar and Emails, and I still have time for a full day of activities after work.
i wish i could do that, but my body is not programmed for such early rising. i tried and it is a wonder i didnt crash my car on the way to work
It’s definitely not for everyone! I’m one of those weirdos who wakes up super early every day naturally. My partner, on the other hand, naturally sleeps til 10 or 11.
I am super jealous. Imagine finishing work and have time to hang out with your friends and family. Living the dream.
Being up that early (for me) means I need to be in bed by 10pm, so home by 9. Most of my friends are not available at 3pm and usually stay out until 10-11. It can lead to feeling very isolated in my experience.
I’m not OP but I worked a 6-3 job for a year or so, gladly swapped it out for a 10-7pm, get to sleep in and stay put late.
But it’s all about preferences and priorities.
I think that the stage of life you’re in would also play a huge part in what hours you’d prefer. When I was single, I’d prefer later hours like you so I could have a more relaxed morning. Now that I’m married with kids, however, an earlier schedule would mean more family time. Especially as school events are often scheduled for the early evening.
I’m single and I enjoy the early work because it means I have more time after work to do things with friends (or go to the gym or whatever)
I guess if your friends are available before normal work hours end, it makes sense.
Most definitely. Most of my life was external to my home, so having others available at the same time was important. I’d probably feel much the same as you if I had a family.
Well, jobs are different. It’s just that sometimes you get too tired to do anything effectively an hour or two before your work technically ends.
I’m hoping the push for a 32 hour week gains enough traction that we could actually feasibly negotiate a 9-day sprint (2 week period) as the “middle ground”, at least until the next wave of negotiations pushes further.
Gimme every other monday off, that way I’m always working toward either a long weekend or an early weekend
I just negotiated one Monday a month off and it’s nice. Two would be better, of course. Three day weekends should be standard. It’s like that meme said: “One day for chores/errands, one to day to socialize, one day to stay in bed all day like you’ve got some Victorian wasting sickness.”
that’s exactly what I work, and my employer has been pushing to remove that in our pay negotiations. they backed down to making it “optional” but it sounds like all new hires wouldn’t be on the 9 day fortnight system.
sad how things are getting worse not better
This would DOUBLE my effective free time. It would improve my life so much.
I think he is taking too big of a chunk off. If this were to be phased in with 4-day work weeks at 10 hours a day with 2 breaks could be a starting point. Companies get the same amount of production hours and save 20% on building costs, energy, etc.
I would absolutely love to only work 32 hours a week instead of 40, 45 or 50.
I would also love four weeks vacation a year, full healthcare coverage and a unicorn in my backyard please.
I have basically this in the UK
Except for the unicorn, your last paragraph is my reality. Oh and it’s five weeks vacation, actually. My wife even has six. Sick days not included. Those are all part of the universal health care we have.
38h work week btw. Rarely overtime.
EU?
Sounds a whole lot like Norway, presuming their wife is 60+ years
It’s like this in all Scandinavian countries.
-
6-7 weeks paid vacation.
-
Free healthcare (except dental. Also we still pay for prescription drugs, just not insane prices).
-
37 hours per week.
-
Almost equal parental leave (you’re forced to take a month off work, paid of course, mothers a bit more, but then split is as you want).
And then keep in mind that we pay 40-60% taxes depending on income.
When we had our son, I had 2 weeks time off from work. HR sat me down and told me “by law, we can’t fire you until you take one day over the 2 weeks of unpaid time off. You are so lucky! You used to get zero time off. I remember when we had our baby, I worked until midnight while my wife was in labor.”
Then I was fired 3 months later for “subpar performance” and they noted I seemed fatigued and frequently forgot things. Like, no shit I had 3 hours of sleep per day for months.
We pay about 25-30% in taxes IIRC but health insurance bleeds you dry. We just incurred $4500 medical debt because my wife had to go to the hospital. $100,000 student loan debt. $35,000 child birthing costs, of which $8500 was out of pocket.
Yeah, all of those expenses would’ve been covered by the taxes where I live. Even the student debt - we get about $900 per month while studying and education is free.
Y’all need some democratic socialism
-
I have 35 days on my current job but it’s the first time. Normally it’s been 30. I’m in Sweden.
And we don’t work no 40 hours here. People come in around 9 and leave around 16 with an hour lunch break and a lot of talking and slacking during the day. This is in IT and it’s been like that on every IT job I’ve ever had.
Nobody can or want to focus for 8 hours per day their entire lives, that’s madness. We are humans. I usually focus for maybe 4 hours to get something done but I don’t push myself to work more then necessary. My salary doesn’t go up with more work produced.
Man that sounds so great. Currently work weeks are varying between 40,45 and 50. PM. I’m up to about 2 1/2 weeks vacation a year working for a small business. But at least they let me take it, unlike my friend who works at AWS who hasn’t had a vacation in 5 years.
Family also pays $2400/month in health insurance payments, although 2/3 of that is covered by our employer. $6,000 deductible.
I have 5 weeks vacation and universal health care. I’m just pushing for the 32 hrs now.
Some of those things are possible. Why not try to get them?
How?
I asked our company owner, and such healthcare plans simply do not exist in the US.
The unicorn comment makes me think you’re being a sarcastic ass.
The rest of your comment is 100% doable. At least, lots of other countries are doing it.
I was just kidding about the unicorn, as living in the US it seems just about as likely to get a unicorn as getting universal healthcare or vacation.
😅🦄
Anyway, my son loves unicorns and I grew up watching my little pony so whatever
Fair enough.
It’s depressing that you’ve been convinced that full healthcare coverage is as unrealistic as a unicorn in your backyard.
I don’t know why you throw the unicorn in there as if the rest of your comment is some crazy idea. Most of Europe functions extremely well under the work conditions you described, why is America somehow incapable of having the quality of life our European cousins have?
Fun fact: government-based healthcare of any sort is great for employers and employees, and results in more money for both
This assumes a “worst-case implementation” resulting in UK level taxes and just a change to who manages insurance/payment, and is true for both a public option and single-payer system.
Oh please. Would that ever work, besides the dozens of countries and corporations that have managed without issues?
Besides what would you do with the unicorn poop
Clean fuel for the furnace
Some organic fertilizer for the garden, of course!
In France I work 32 hours, have 7 weeks holiday and awesome healthcare.
I have cows in place of a unicorn though.
I mean they have to raise the retirement age and had (are having?) Protests about it the whole year didn’t they
“Have to”? That’s obviously more than up for debate, especially considering how many people protested.
God forbid they consider increasing taxes for the rich instead.
It’s 64, that’s lower than the US has ever been
That’s just because they are whining
Republicans have told me that there’s no way the country can survive that
They lied.
I work 35 hours a week, have six weeks of holiday plus bank holidays and universal healthcare. It’s not impossible.
The vacation period is a minimum standard in the EU.
Beyond the daily and weekly rest periods, your staff has the right to at least 4 weeks of paid holidays per year. You cannot replace these holidays with a payment unless the employment contract has ended before the staff member has used up all their annual leave.
In the UK minimum holiday entitlement is 28 days. I am always appalled at how badly the US allows it workers to be treated. I really wish the US would start thinking more about working to live and not living to work.
If people who are negatively affected by it would stop voting for people who make it a campaign promise to never offer these things, we can’t get anywhere
Apart from the mystical horse, those aren’t fantastical things. France has a 35 hour work week, many countries have 4 weeks vacation as the norm, and most rich countries have full healthcare coverage. These are policy choices, not impossible dream worlds.
In Europe, 4 weeks is the absolute minimum, many countries have higher mandated minimums and people get often extra on top. There are many things wrong in Europe, but the vacation policy is decent.
Err, what is your main criticisms about Europe?
Regarding employment.
It’s pretty much given that the pension system of many countries will collapse, so young people are paying into a system which they either won’t be able to use or will be heavily disadvantaged. IMHO the pension system should be (at least partially) privatized, but it’s of course too late, damage is done.
Income is taxed too heavily and wealth too little. These days it’s pretty much impossible to buy a house for many families even though the population doesn’t grow and new houses are being built. You can’t amass wealth with work, only woth inheritance.
Some worker protection laws should be weakened, specifically laying off people is often pretty much impossible which makes people allocation inefficient and companies conservative.
It’s sad that over here in America people are conditioned to think they are fantastical things.
The issue I see with this is the prices of things, if you had to pay some one 40 hours of wages for only 32 hours of work plus having to hire someone to fill that extra hours (if you can even find someone) will mean prices will probably increase.
Don’t get me wrong only working 32 hours a week sounds amazing but as someone who works 60 hrs per week and still struggles to pay bills it’s not something for me
If you’re working 60hrs per week and still struggle to pay bills, that means they are not paying you enough! Any job should be sustainable with giving only a reasonable amount of your time. (40 hours per week is not reasonable, it is unbalanced with living your life)
I feel like $40 per hour is plenty enough. But income tax sucks when you rent out your house sooo.
It’s exactly for someone like you. You should be able to afford your bills without working yourself to death, that’s the point.
But if I have time off I spend more money
It’s not something for 90% of workers, these policies only help the rich, not the poor
So he calls essentially for a 25% raise across the board for everybody. In some fields this doesn’t matter much. Office workers will probably achieve just as much or in some cases perhaps more in 32 hours than in 40 hours. Some other fields, perhaps less so.
If this would happen, it would directly lead to increased unemployment in some fields, and probably and increased inflation that might eat the benefit anyway in the end.
Still, even if I’m a bit skeptical, I’m all for lessening the hours we work, and all for spreading the productivity to more people and not just the top. I just think that the workers will need to take at least part of the hit to make this a realistic goal. Or perhaps robots and AI just need to take over all those jobs where number of hours correlate strongly to the amount of output.
You’re getting down voted for expressing legitimate concerns, and nobody is giving reasons why they disagree with you. I thought we left this kind of interaction behind with reddit.
Anyways, any major shift will have downsides, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t viable in the long term.
You’re getting down voted for expressing legitimate concerns, and nobody is giving reasons why they disagree with you. I thought we left this kind of interaction behind with reddit.
Settings => Show scores => disable ftw :)
They’re using a lot of the same arguments the right uses to attack minimum wage and it’s generally untrue.
In places minimum wage has gone up, we haven’t seen staggering unemployment or inflation compared to similar places without minimum wage changes.
Going to a 32 hour work week should spur the job market if employers want the same number of work hours anyway. And more money and free time for the 90% is good for economic growth as we’re the ones who spend money rather than hoarding it.
So, I suspect the reason most people aren’t bothering to argue is that this same conversation has played out so many times for so many of us that we can’t be bothered with tited talking points being rehashed.
That’s a fair point, people would be making the same amount of money anyway and have more room to spend it. It would also decrease the likelihood of overtime due to penalty rates, and potentially increase the job slots as more people would need to work to fill the lost time for some jobs.
I suppose like anything, the best way to do it is gradually.
I have the same kind of reaction, just in the opposite direction.
I’m fine with campaigning for higher salaries, I’m fine with campaigning for shorter work week, but I’m allergic to the combination of both, because it’s usually accompanied by claims that the productivity won’t go down as a result, which is simply delusional and reeks of populism.
There’s been studies showing shorter work weeks produce more. People work better when they’re less stressed/happier/less tired.
Sorry if that reeks of populism. I think you’re point of view reeks of authoritarianism tbh.
Because science shows less is more, when it comes to work and school. The only reason to continue the 40 hour work week is so capitalists can keep workers in their place.
And that’s not right.
I have looked up some of those studies in the past and they measured productivity by the company revenue which seems incredibly flawed.
The studies were limited to office workers too. There’s no way a truck driver can cover the same distance 25% faster.
I’ll have to read those studies more closely. And I hear you on the truck driver argument. That said, I’m sure less stressed/less tired truck drivers cause a lot fewer accidents. Which may have an impact on insurance premiums for companies that are in that business.
I guess my point is economic impact can be measured in various ways and it’s possible that everyone working less (and the 10% paying the other 90% of us a fair wage), will be a net benefit for society and the health of the individuals in society, and thus, a net benefit for the economy.
As a non-office worker (worked in food service my whole life), I’ve seen the direct effects on mental and physical health caused by being overworked and under paid. And those negative effects certainly spill over into the quality of service, as well as the potential for a accidents at work.
I know that’s anecdotal, but I think it also is a very reasonable observation that passes the common sense test anyway.
Anecdotal evidence: I work in software. We get more work done after time off, and much less work done near the end of a 5day work week, our data shows.
I’m curious how that applies to different fields.
Time is not directly proportional to productivity.
I’m an SWE too, and my anecdote is that I certainly can’t do work in 4 days what I’m currently doing in 5 days.
My point wasn’t that 4 days outputs more work than 5 It was that the average output per day decreases with a longer work week, though one or two people we work with manage to be pretty consistent.
Also I think that 4 days of productivity is enough.
Our most effective co workers have had special work hours and agreements. Some worked 4 days on 3 days off, some work 3 hours less a day. They are the ones who consistently pushed out good stuff, were the least distracted, and had the space to occasionally work extra if they felt like it. The only reason they could do that was because they didn’t rely on the 5 day work week to keep themselves afloat.
I wish I could be in that boat but unfortunately my wage means I have to work all 5 days to support myself and family comfortably.
My point wasn’t that 4 days outputs more work than 5
Good, but many do claim exactly this to support the “32 hours with no loss in pay”.
Our most effective co workers have had special work hours and agreements.
I can believe that, but the causation is often the opposite - they are the most effective, thus they have the biggest leverage to negotiate better conditions for themselves. At least that’s what I’ve seen.
My job, I notice I’m often somewhat off-flow after a vacation or an unexpected day off. But I also drop off significantly after six hours. RN I do work 32 hrs: 3x 6-hr days and 2x 7-hour days, more or less.
The extra money comes from the management not robbing their employees blind.
Sounds great. He should do something about it.
He can’t, but workers can.
Our fate rises or falls by our capacity to join in solidarity.
He still supports Biden…The same Biden who forced railroad workers to stop being on strike. Biden who wrote the crime bill that exploded our prison population. Biden who supports every war we’re involved in, all of which are illegal. Biden who was in favor of segration back in the day
Bernie had two primaries rigged against him in a row and didn’t say anything about it. Speaking as a disabled person, I appreciate what he has to say about a lot of things, but what good is he if he’s just going to cave in and do the same shit as the rest of them? He keeps saying that Biden is his friend. Well Bernie has some shitty friends.
Could you remind me, what was the alternative to Biden again?
Abstention. Voting the lesser evil is a downward spiral.
a gun to our collective head or else we wouldn’t have voted for him
No matter who you vote for, the same shit happens. We don’t live in a democracy
I understand the dislike of some of Biden’s choices and policies and also disapprove of some of them, but let’s not pretend these are on the same level as the buffoon’s.
There is no difference between the two parties…except for what they pretend to care about.
An actual leader who isn’t one foot in the grave
Yeah, this guy goes on like we had a real choice. It was literally Biden or the fascist who will make things even worse. What choice did we have?
Are you rejecting a call to build organized labor across the country because you have a grudge against one man for endorsing another man?
He’s never actually going to fight for anything. keep a close eye on the issue. As soon as the democrats encounter on obstacle they’ll declare that they “don’t have the votes” and then say “vote blue no matter who!” and then continue to do nothing even if they win.
The call is to build organized labor across the country, giving workers the power to shape society toward our interests, not to expect the ruling class to offer voluntary concessions that have no benefit to them.
I’ve heard all this before. It never works.
what I mean by that is that all these politicians talk about doing good things, but they never actually do anything. They just keep saying “we don’t have the votes yet” and then they give up, because they never actually wanted to fix anything.
Again, I think you are misunderstanding the message.
The speech is not giving a promise that Bernie Sanders will make gains on behalf of workers.
Rather, it is giving encouragement to workers to make gains for ourselves, by building our own power against the oligarchs.
32hr week is fine, but what does he mean by no loss in pay?
The mandated work week is something a central regulator controls, and the pay is not.
The drop in productivity because of working 32hrs instead of 40hrs will be much less than 20%, that’s for sure. Maybe there’ll be no drop at all. That doesn’t always translate to no drop in pay.
If by 32hrs we mean 4 days, then it frees that day for other workers (if we imagine any job with a physical workplace). The pay is a result of the balance of interests. It will become less.
And personally I’d say 35hr week is a better idea - as in 5 days of 7hrs .
Lmao garbage take. Please never be put in charge of anything important.
I’ve been responsible for some relatively important things from time to time, and that’s just as likely to happen in future.
While your reply is not very convincing and recursively makes me think I’d not entrust to you anything I really want done in a satisfactory way at least.
Well of course you wouldn’t want me making decisions, as they wouldn’t have the same garbage thought processes yours would.
I don’t think my thought processes are garbage. They at least have evolved past the mistakes most people here do.
Anyway, you haven’t provided any argumentation, just came here and started throwing feces. I don’t argue with monkeys, at least not after I fully realize I’m talking to one.
Nice contribution to the thread.
Same to you?
We make gains by organization not legislation.
Read the excerpts of the speech quoted in the article. All is plainly said.
I was with you until:
And personally I’d say 35hr week is a better idea - as in 5 days of 7hrs .
I think the idea is to free up an entire extra day, allowing travel, an extra day to run errands, etc. For many, there is basically no difference between working 8 hours or working 7 if they still have to commute, get dressed and get their brain wrapped around whatever is going on in work mode.
Yes, with 4 days, 8 hours the idea is what you described.
With 5 days, 7 hours the idea is that you don’t work effectively anyway in the last 1-2 hours, not doing many useful things, adding to depression and also obviously still using that time, so it’s better to get some rest or social activity or take a walk instead.
I work an 8 hour day and do that anyway. You are mandated a lunch and 2 breaks. Take a walk during that time. Another whole day off is a far better way to refresh yourself completely.
Yes, to each his own. Which is why I’d like both to be valid options.
(Also in my country you are mandated 1 big break for lunch only, but nobody generally looks wrong at you for going to the bathroom, for some coffee, to smoke etc.)
True… realistically knowledge workers are only productive for a few hours at a time. The rest of an 8 hr+ day is just wasted pretending to be busy.
Getting them out of the work environment gives a good chance to reboot and come back fresh.
And personally I’d say 35hr week is a better idea - as in 5 days of 7hrs .
No thanks! I’ll stick with The Bern on this one.
Depends on the purpose. If you want for the shorter week to be normalized - then surely yes.
And if you want that “no loss in pay” - then my idea is better to that end.
Bernie is advocating for a 4 day work week with no loss in pay, and you’re arguing against your own best interest before anyone has even objected. Why? I’m not interested in a 7 hour day. 7 hours, 8 hours, it makes very little difference. But 4 days vs 5 days is a major quality of life improvement.
Bernie is advocating for a 4 day work week with no loss in pay
Yeah, sure, and I’m advocating for long power lines with no loss in power. Bernie doesn’t explain how’s he (even algorithmically) going to evaluate which pay is “no loss in pay” and how is he going to enforce it.
That’s not really true though. The majority of workers in the US are non-exempt full-time employees, which means employers are required to pay overtime for anything over 40 hours. Lowering that threshold will mean those 8 extra hours are more valuable and will hold wages steady.
Corporations will just cut everyone’s hours to 32 and replace the loss with automation. Ask any min-wage worker if they’re ever allowed to clock over 40. Crap most can’t even get 32 because then they’d have to give them health insurance.
They do that anyway, but the whole wage market shifts upward because of the non-exempt regulations. The whole reason we even had a middle class to loose was the labor laws established from union strikes and labor reform in the early 20th century. The only reason you have a weekend is because of those laws. Regulation like this is the first step toward improving labor down the board.
ofc we should also raise min wage and/or establish universal benefits to head off automation and other productivity improvements, but those are bigger reforms.
I didn’t consider overtime. Just what the title says - 32hr week with the same pay as 40hr week with all other things unchanged.
With this interpretation - yeah, but then Bernie’s mention of “no loss in pay” doesn’t make sense, it happens automatically.
Oh wahhhh, you can’t have risky sex and abort babies now. So fucking sad for your plight.
For the sake of comparison…
1940 median US male salary was $956. Women earned about 62¢ on the dollar to men.
Adjusted for inflation, that’s about $21,800.
Median US income (overall) in 2023 is $42,800.
You mean to tell me productivity has gone up 4.8x, and I don’t even see 2x the increase in salary.
Put otherwise, if my hours are worth nearly 5x to you, why aren’t they even worth 2x to me?
My old place could really do this.
I can only see this happening hand in hand with Medicare For All and the decoupling of healthcare from full time employment.
Service jobs, which are currently 80 percent of US employment, require the same amount of hours with actual people present, e.g. you can’t wait more tables, or answer more customer service calls, in 20% less time.
Removing the cost of healthcare from employers will allow them to allocate some of the savings towards employee salaries instead of healthcare insurance.
Removing the cost of healthcare from employers will allow them to allocate some of the savings towards employee salaries instead of healthcare insurance. Or just, y’know, keep the savings. On the bright side, it would mean you no longer depend on your job for healthcare, so people would have more freedom to quit.
Allow them to allocate some of the savings towards employee salaries? Why would they do that when they could pocket the difference like they have been doing to all other cost savings and productivity boosts?
How are the employers going to pay for the additional employees to work those 8 hours, while paying the existing employees the same salary for working 8 less hours?
The money has to come from somewhere.
P.s. Not all employers have CEOs making millions in bonuses. Nearly half of employees in the US work for small businesses , including single person businesses.
I’m not an economist but I bet that the answer is going to be similar to how employers now pay for the additional employees to work ever since work weeks got made to be 40 hours and not 60 or whatever back during the 1800s.
40 hours a week isn’t some magic number.
Maybe this is stupid question but…single person business just mean it’s one person doing everything right? In those cases, how would changing the standard full time to 32 hours affect them in any way?
They wouldn’t be changing their own salary or have to change anyone else’s salary unless I’m missing something
ETA: small business just means less than 500 employees, I’m sure a good number of them could still afford it. And an easy (and admittedly imperfect) solution could be just adding an exception for small businesses.
Nobody is saying you should have to do 40 hours work in 32 hours - rather the company hires more people to cover those hours.
This only works out in 9 to 5 jobs. There are ao many people out there that work very different hours. Many career fields that work a lot longer shifts wouod not be able to simply work less. It just doesn’t work that way.
Firefighters work 48 or 72 hours a week depending on the week. We can’t just say, ok cool. You work 32 hours a week now.
You don’t understand… After 32 hours it’s overtime pay instead of after 40
That’s totally understandable, but the “standard” work week is 40 hours. He’s just saying to change the standard. So if you’re job isn’t standard hours, it would probably just mean a little more overtime pay. Still a benefit to those people
The point is, why is 40 hours the standard? What makes that the standard? Who says it’s the standard?
Lobbyists for the 1%…ohhhhh…right…and now the real issue comes about.
This is the opposite of where the 8 hour day/40 hour week came from. In the US, it was fought for and won by various pro labor groups and unions in the early 1900s and became part of US law under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
