4-day work week – fantasy or future?

On the first day, light and darkness, as well as the earth and the sky, were created. Then, the waters were separated from the sky. On the third day, lands, seas, and vegetation appeared, and on the fourth day, stars, the Sun, and the Moon shone in the sky. If this biblical story of the beginning of the world were to include a record of a four-day work week, no living creature would have ever walked on our planet. Unless, of course, God managed to complete the work planned for the fifth and sixth days, involving the creation of animals and humans, earlier.

Of course, this is a joke, but it illustrates the real ongoing discussion about whether it is possible to shorten working hours without serious consequences for productivity. In the context of advancing automation and digitalization, is the 40-hour work system already outdated? Given the increasing problems with mental health, should we change the balance between work and rest? Is it possible and profitable from an economic perspective? And is it feasible for us to achieve more in less time? Today, such questions resonate much more loudly than they did a few or several years ago.

4-day work week in Poland

In the first half of 2024, the Polish government announced plans to work on shortening working hours. The Ministry of Family, Labour, and Social Policy has reported analyzing two possible options: introducing a four-day work week or reducing the working week to 35 hours. The new regulations are to be implemented by the end of the current parliamentary term, by 2027 at the latest. For now, these are merely loose declarations, unsupported by any binding deadlines or concrete actions, as commissioning the Central Institute for Labour Protection to analyze work efficiency in terms of hours worked per week can hardly be considered substantial action.

The path to realizing this concept is still long and bumpy, especially since the idea of a four-day work week is not new in Poland. As early as 2020, the All-Poland Alliance of Trade Unions (OPZZ) advocated reducing working hours from 40 to initially 38 and eventually 35 hours per week. At that time, the government decided that the proposal required thorough economic analysis, and it was at this stage that the OPZZ’s proposal stalled. Further steps were also not taken on the draft bill submitted in 2022 by parliamentary opposition. This bill aimed to reduce working hours to 35 per week while maintaining the pay for 40 hours of work.

Why should it be different this time? Primarily, because the proposed changes to the Labour Code are being put forward not by trade union representatives or members of the parliamentary opposition, but by the government itself. Additionally, the topic of a four-day or 35-hour work week has gained significant media attention, sparking lively reactions from both employees and employers. The fact that there are so many, often extreme, opinions in this debate likely indicates that the prospect of change is not as distant as it was with previous attempts to modify the working system.

Europe tests, Poland overworks

Excessive haste in implementing new regulations is not advisable, as it is not a situation where Poles need to catch up with Western countries. Currently, the only country in Europe that has decided on a four-day workweek is Belgium. For the past two years, Belgian citizens have been able to choose whether they want to work four or five days a week. In other countries on the continent, there are no such top-down regulations, which does not mean that attempts to reduce working hours are not being made. Recently, Scotland decided on a 12-month experiment introducing a four-day workweek for civil service employees. More and more companies are switching to a similar system in France, which has had a 35-hour workweek for over 20 years. Meanwhile, in recent years, the Spanish government has encouraged small and medium-sized enterprises to reduce working hours through special subsidies.

A more flexible approach to working hours is also being tested in Germany, where over 70 percent of those surveyed by the Forsa Institute declared that they would like to have the option of working only four days a week. This result is not surprising, as our western neighbors do not rank among the most hardworking nations in Europe. According to Eurostat data from 2022, a German spends an average of 34.4 hours per week on professional duties (which is still more than, for example, a Dutch or Austrian). A Pole, by comparison, spends nearly 40 hours. This is the third-highest result in Europe, just after Greeks and Romanians. We work a lot, although the raw data does not explain whether this state is due to labour code regulations or simply because we have too much work or work too slowly.

The less time at work, the better?

Given such a high average weekly working time, transitioning to a 35-hour or four-day workweek seems quite a radical step. It's no surprise, then, that there is considerable caution in making such decisions and a desire to test similar solutions. The Ministry of Labour has explicitly stated that it will monitor companies that decide to reduce their employees' working hours. There is no shortage of such entities on the Polish market. This year, Herbapol announced a gradual transition to a four-day workweek. In the first quarter, each employee had one Friday off per month. In the second quarter, it was two Fridays, in the third, it will be three, and by the end of the year, Herbapol will be operating on a 32-hour workweek. This will be done while maintaining the current salaries of employees.

IT companies operating in Poland, such as Spadiora and Senuto, have also decided on a four-day workweek. Meanwhile, Tradedoubler and the strategic-creative agency Kava opted for a six-hour workday (but with a five-day week). Kava introduced this solution as a six-month test. After the test period, the company did not revert to the previous format. The reasons for maintaining the six-hour workday included higher profits, a greater number of completed projects, and no overtime among employees.

The New Zealand company Perpetual Guardian, one of the first in the world to trial a four-day workweek in 2018, also noted many benefits from reducing employees' hours. For two months, 240 employees worked 32 hours a week while receiving pay for 40 hours. During this time, it was observed that employees were more willing to come to work, did not arrive late, and did not leave early. The company's productivity increased by 20 percent, and the employees' assessment of work-life balance improved from 54 to 78 percent.

Even earlier, in 2017, pilot programmes testing a four-day workweek were introduced in Iceland. The research group consisted of nearly 1 percent of legally employed workers. Participants in the experiment rated their well-being higher, felt healthier, experienced lower stress levels, and complained less about burnout. Similar findings were noted during Microsoft's experimental four-day workweek in Japan in 2019. In addition to health and well-being benefits for employees, there were also positive economic changes: electricity consumption decreased by 23 percent, and printer paper usage dropped by 59 percent. 

In 2022, the non-profit organization 4 Day Week Global studied over 30 companies from Europe, the U.S., and Canada for six months, which had reduced their employees' working time to 32 hours per week. The findings in this case were similar to those from other studies: better employee productivity, improved well-being, lower risk of stress and burnout, energy savings, and greater environmental care (employees commuted to offices less frequently). 

A four-day week isn't for everyone

Considering all these studies and experiments, a four-day workweek should be considered beneficial for both employees and employers. However, this idea cannot be implemented everywhere. In creative industries, marketing, or IT, planning and executing a reduction in working hours is much easier than in large manufacturing plants or companies based on customer service. Shops or markets, for instance, cannot operate only four days a week. Implementing a four-day workweek in such places requires increased employee rotation. More rotation means more employment, and more employment means higher costs. A few years ago, a six-hour workday was tested in Sweden. Despite many noticeable benefits, the idea was abandoned due to significant costs. 

Besides the question "can it be done?", the key question is "how to do it?". Many employees and employers already express concerns about the need to condense five days of work into four. It's like trying to fit into trousers at least one size smaller than what we usually wear. While it can be done, the comfort of wearing them is questionable. Similarly, our mental comfort might suffer. An increased workload could lead to greater stress, faster burnout, reduced efficiency, and result in delays or overtime. Everyone loves long weekends, but we all know how difficult it is to return to work after such a break. In a four-day system, this feeling would accompany us every week, which could cause a decrease in concentration and motivation at work.

The faster the world moves, the less we work

Or perhaps we are simply afraid of change itself? The eight-hour workday, which is still in effect in most companies, has been around for over 100 or 150 years (depending on the country and region). During this time, we have explored space and harnessed atomic energy. We continue to develop technology and increasingly rely on artificial intelligence. Yet, we still work eight hours a day, five days a week. Perhaps we have reached a point where the concept of work needs to be redefined to match the current reality and the available tools that systematically make our work easier and more efficient.

The work system in human history developed late. For most centuries, there were no regulations, standards, limitations, or reliefs. This led to exploitation, slavery, and widespread abuse. Whether for oneself or for someone else, people worked a lot and for long hours. In ancient times, when a significant portion of people were engaged in farming, the rhythm of work was dictated by the seasons. They worked from dawn till dusk and rested after dark. In summer, farmers and craftsmen worked longer, while in winter – when darkness fell sooner – there was more free time. In practice, this often meant a 16-hour workday.

Working hours did not decrease even with the advent of the first machines and the development of industry. It seemed that technological progress would benefit people and make them work shorter and more efficiently. However, in the era of large factories and manufacturing plants, exploitation of the workforce continued regularly. Only the 19th-century industrial revolution forced the first serious changes in centuries, resulting in the creation of the foundations of labour law and the regulation of working hours. 

Britain turned out to be the pioneer of the new order, where industry was developing most dynamically. However, it was not immediately that an eight-hour workday with employee access to holidays was established. From today's perspective, the initial changes might seem almost bizarre. For example, regulations from 1833 limited the work of children aged 9 to 13 (!) to eight hours a day and women to ten hours. It was only in the mid-19th century, and outside Europe, in Australia and New Zealand, that the working time for all was legally regulated to eight hours a day. Workers in other parts of the world had to wait longer, some even until the beginning of the next century.

In Poland, an eight-hour workday was introduced in 1918. However, it is worth remembering that for the next several decades, until the 1980s, a 48-hour workweek was in force. The first free Saturdays were introduced in the 1970s, initially six and then twelve per year. In 1981, the demand for all Saturdays off was one of the main demands of the striking "Solidarity" movement. And that was the last significant intervention in working time in our country.

Why eight hours?

For over 40 years, we have been working according to the same scheme: 40 hours a week and eight hours a day. But why eight hours? To find the answer to this question, we need to go back to 1810. That year, Welsh reformer and socialist Robert Owen demanded a ten-hour workday. This was not just theoretical, as Owen implemented the work system he advocated in his own factory in New Lanark. The results were more than satisfactory, so in 1817, Owen took it a step further and called for an eight-hour workday, based on simple arithmetic: eight hours of work, eight hours of rest, and eight hours of sleep. Owen's idea was quickly picked up by workers' unions, not just in the British Isles. 

More than 200 years have passed since Robert Owen's proposal was implemented, and we still rely on 19th-century calculations, which often do not match 21st-century realities. Sometimes, working more, we are paid for eight hours, or conversely, we spend an hour or two on effective work but expect a full eight-hour wage. Tim Ferriss, in his book "The 4-Hour Workweek," calls the prevailing work system an anachronism. David Allen, in "Getting Things Done," writes about waste. Meanwhile, economic psychologist Tim Clapham wrote two years ago in the "Dziennik Gazeta Prawna" that the standard of working five days a week for eight hours a day "does not correspond to the current development of society."

We use three and a half hours out of eight 

Theory is one thing, but in this case, practice does not deviate from it. A study conducted on two thousand office workers in the UK showed how we „use” the eight hours at work. The respondents spent over an hour reading news sites, more than three-quarters of an hour browsing social media, 40 minutes gossiping with colleagues, over 20 minutes looking for a new job and taking smoking breaks, and spent several minutes texting, making private phone calls, and eating snacks. Adding up all these "extra" activities, it came to about four and a half hours. Thus, the effective working time was only three and a half hours.

The mentioned study was conducted a few years ago, so it can be assumed that the discrepancies between actual and pretended work have increased. Certainly, the time spent on social media at work has increased. However, the message remains unchanged: we do not fully utilize the time allocated for professional duties. Mainly because eight hours is an imposed limit, not a realistic time calculated based on our work activity. A "Harvard Business Review" report revealed that 96 percent of employees need flexibility to reliably perform their tasks. Only 40 percent of respondents said their employer provides this flexibility. 

Finding flow 

Could a four-day or 35-hour workweek guarantee us such flexibility? There is no certainty, but the chances would certainly be greater than with the current time frame. Perhaps the secret to finding flow lies in reducing working hours. This term was created in 1975 by psychologist Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi based on observations of artists who were so engrossed in their work that they ignored the need to eat, drink, or sleep or simply did not feel them. Of course, it is not expected of an employee to ignore basic needs, but it is certainly a highly desirable and helpful state for performing tasks and duties. 

To achieve flow, it is necessary to maximize concentration, feel ease of engagement in the task, combine action and awareness, and have strong control over the task being performed. All this cannot be achieved if the task is not significant and engaging. What can promote experiencing flow? Corporate culture, remote or hybrid work, work-life balance, and rational employee time management.

Who really wants to work less?

Will introducing a four-day workweek make us feel flow, or will it make us feel overwhelmed by duties and tasks that need to be completed in even less time than currently? Opinions on the variants considered by the Ministry of Labour are still strongly divided. In a survey conducted this year by IBRIS for Radio Zet, over 47 percent of Poles supported the idea of shortening working hours. However, almost 40 percent expressed a negative opinion on this matter. The results of a survey organized by ClickMeeting are also ambiguous. 43 percent of respondents said that a four-day workweek would increase our productivity. However, 29 percent believed it would not affect productivity, and 19 percent thought we would become less efficient at work.

The Polish Economic Institute decided to look at the opinions of employers themselves. The survey was conducted on a sample of 1,500 companies (1,000 medium-sized and 500 large) operating in various sectors. More than half of the respondents said that switching their company to a four-day workweek was impossible due to the specifics of their industry. One-third of the surveyed companies do not plan changes in this regard, although they consider them feasible. Only one in twenty medium-sized and one in twelve large companies reported full readiness to switch to a four-day workweek.

It is not the case that employees want to work less while employers are against it. There is no full agreement in either group, showing how much effort and observation will be needed before we can dismantle or even crack the monumental five-day workweek.