this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
452 points (99.3% liked)

Canada

7200 readers
302 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

No Canadian companies involved in a shortened workweek trial intend to revert back to a five-day week, new research from 4 Day Week Global shows.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This works for many businesses, but sadly cannot work for certain industries like manufacturing, steel making, petroleum refining. etc. These are 24/7, 365 operations and running less than that actually costs them money. However, you're usually well compensated in these industries in my experience

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That's why they have shift workers. Reduce the shift hours to be the same as a 4 day week. Its not hard

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But then you need to hire more staff. I think part of the sell is that it's no more cost for the employer, since workers get more done in less time. That might not be true for many operational jobs.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It could also lead to better productivity and less turn over with employees which would be a net positive in the end. When I did labour jobs 2 days off was not enough for me to recover, 3 days off would have been better for my body and mental health and maybe I would've stuck around longer.

And these were the same excuses used when we went to 40 hours a week and the world kept on turning.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The issue is that these sorts of fields are notorious for not liking to hire more than they have to. They'd rather overwork their existing staff than hire more.

I knew a guy who worked as a machinist, and basically everybody in his company worked 60+ hours every week all year, and the company compensated proper overtime the entire time. The company basically paid double wages for 50% extra labour, and that's presuming that the employees even did 50% extra work for being tired all the time. The guy quit the job because he couldn't take it after a few years, so in the end the company had to hire more help anyways.

It's an issue of culture as well as many other things, and few people want to go against tradition.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

not liking to hire more than they have to

A strong desire to save money seems a widespread phenomenon.

'Market Forces' will ensure these companies starve, since the first shop that CAN adapt will steal the best workers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The mill I work in is already set up with shift work....they work 1st shift (week 1), 2nd shift (week 2), 3rd shift (week 3), and then go on long weekend 4 days off. My department runs 21 turns (we are the plant bottleneck by design), meaning 3 shifts of 8 hours, 7 days a week. Most people dont work 7 days straight unwillingly, but regardless of that fact, you need to keep running. Not running is losing money, losing money gets corporate to shut you down, getting shut down means you have no job and the company doesn't care either way

There is a trade off when dealing with continuous operations. You run into the issue of, "Not running costs more money than running and paying people overtime." Moving to a 4 day week just means you would likely get forced more into overtime so we can keep steel flowing, not that you get more free time.

Also from the salary side of things, I just spoke to 4 other process engineers and all of us immediately agreed that we cannot get the work done required of us + do the extras of being a floor process engineer in only 4 days. We could get our "requirements" done, but then all of the extra work that we perform would cease. It would actively hurt the company and its profitability, which in turn hurts our job stability. Its really not as cut and dry as people want to make it seem in all instances

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

all of us immediately agreed that we cannot get the work done required of us + do the extras of being a floor process engineer in only 4 days.

  1. the plural of 'anecdote' isn't 'data'.
  2. most/all 4-day-work-week experiments collected statistical data showing a strong trend suggesting the extra rest time made both the rote/repetitive work cleaner and the knowledge/expert work faster.

Unless your shop is a weeeird outlier, you stand every chance of coming out of a 4dww trial working more efficiently, more rested, more reliably, more effectively. That's actually a very common theme in all this, that any 'loss' in time or money is eaten up by better work done more effectively when we're not so tired we're microsleeping all day and wondering where we are and where we were.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Also to your other part about "it's not that hard"

It actually is. We cannot get enough bodies in the mill to not work everyone at full time. We pay 18 year olds 6 figures to operate a mill and we still cannot get enough bodies to come anywhere close to working a 4 day week.

It straight up doesn't work that simply when you're running enormous 24/7 operations in critical industry. Thats like all the football fans on the couch yelling at the coach "JUST DO X". Really easy to say "do X" but the application becomes extremely difficult. Yeah in an office, sure....in a refinery where you create base stock products that allow hundreds of other major plants to run to produce all the basic products you use every single day? Not gonna work that way

This isn't some machinist shop that takes orders. it's a multi billion dollar full rip steel mill/refinery/plant/etc. that loses LOTS of money when it's not at full capacity. That has lasting knock on effects on other industries for example when base manufacturing can't keep up

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You have salary workers like process engineers for example. Working less than 5 days regularly just isn't acceptable. I would not be effective in my job if I only had 4 days a week to get everything done. Also someone always has weekend coverage on "off" days for salary or holidays. So you're still "working"

Also many plants have minimum hour requirements in their union contracts where we have to run X days minimum a week or we still pay. There is more to the puzzle than just the office sector.

You have shifts and shift workers yes but again, the mill basically needs to run 24/7. so lots of people get forced for OT, or willingly take it

Edit: I love the downvotes with no refutement. I am not talking from no experience here. I actively work as a process engineer in a steel mill and actively deal with these problems DAILY. Moving to a 4 day week changes nothing in 24/7 operations. You have to run all of the time, end of sentence (or your mill is getting shut down, and you all lose your jobs...nobody in the mill wins there). The compensation is through the roof and most people end up pulling in tons of overtime. I dont know many other jobs that an 18 year old can pull in an EASY 6 figures with no form of education past high school. The hourly guys make WAY more than any of us salary folk (me and other engineers have spoken candidly with guys on the floor, and they pull in well over 100,000 with no overtime), and on top of that, there are guys who get legitimately pissed when they can't get enough overtime or work more hours cuz they want that money

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We tried to bargain 4 day work weeks years ago at a place I worked, and it was a scheduling nightmare.

Objectively, since we needed to have doors open and responders/equipment operators on site 5 days a week, it would have meant hiring something like 30% more people.

Non-ojectively, when management brought these concerns forward, our position was "that's a management problem".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

hiring something like 30% more people.

I bet it was ( 5 / 4 or ) 25% more.

Having that one day when external coordination is impossible is why absolutely no business is ever open from Sunday to Thursday or Tuesday to Saturday since they all failed. Except they are.

If you need some scheduling help, you may want to buy a computer and have it help the crunching. At the famous fast food restaurant a while ago, we used tools to ensure adequate coverage against workload; and your problem sounds the same except with one fewer variable. It was 35 years ago, so it probably works as an app on your watch, now.