Jump to content

      














Photo

2017 BC General Election + subsequent fallout


  • Please log in to reply
2606 replies to this topic

#2601 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 12,658 posts

Posted 27 May 2020 - 09:03 AM

Won't work for anyone involved in the actual serious, necessary work of society. Shipping and freight, agriculture, energy, designing and manufacturing bombs and missiles to keep us one step ahead of the chinese

 

It's remarkable to contemplate but many of the men and women that build missiles also wouldn't mind an extra day to take the kids to ballet class or go on a camping trip, even if it means working 10 hour days. It's about productivity. People don't apply for jobs at the bomb factory because they want to stick it to the Chinese Communist Party. They apply because the working conditions are better than the factory next door.


  • Brayvehart likes this

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#2602 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher
  • Member
  • 13,568 posts

Posted 27 May 2020 - 09:30 AM

10 hour days are not productive.  8 and 6 and 4 hour days are much more productive.



#2603 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 12,658 posts

Posted 27 May 2020 - 09:36 AM

^Robert Dunsmuir would have hated you.


"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#2604 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher
  • Member
  • 13,568 posts

Posted 27 May 2020 - 09:42 AM

It has been proven that when workers switch to a six-hour day, there is a marked reduction in absenteeism, worker health in addition to improved productivity. Human resources experts say the concept of a shorter working day is only effective when the workers stay focused for the entire six hours.

 

 

https://onlinemaster...rter-work-week/



#2605 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 5,624 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 27 May 2020 - 09:45 AM

What added costs would be borne by taxpayers in a 4 day work week scenario vs 5 days? Wages would be the same, no?

 

Many businesses operate on a 5 day business cycle. I'm not talking retailers and restaurants but operations like trades ie plumbers, roofers, movers and professional organizations like Lawyers, Accountants, Dr's & Dentists. 

 

They cant simply switch employees to 4 x 10 hour days or have 4 x 8 hour days with 1 x 8 hour day to cover. Costs of training and remittances are a factor as well as continuity of services.

 

You cant get a construction crew to work 4 x 10 hour shifts as they work in stages and have numerous projects on the go at any 1 time. For most business they have an income flow that cant be increased or adjusted at will. A law firm may work by billable hours but you'll find many of these places are already working late into the evenings several times a month...factor in tax season and the 14 hour days x 7 days for the 4-6 weeks prior...trades work when the work is there and deadlines are always a thing.

 

Imagine an early stage software development company only working 4 days a week...darwinism would rear its ugly head so quickly. 



#2606 GetLisaSomeHelps

GetLisaSomeHelps
  • Member
  • 234 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 27 May 2020 - 10:18 AM

 It may work in public sector jobs where the added costs are borne by taxpayers ie the faux Flex Friday’s etc

 

what added costs would exist in those public sector jobs? this is what I was referring to, but you answered about the added costs many private sector employers would face...

 

asking because my personaly stance is it would be a net benefit to have all those cushy government employees going in 4 days vs 5 but not if there will need to be a bunch of extra hires which my understanding is there would not have to be.


Edited by GetLisaSomeHelps, 27 May 2020 - 10:27 AM.


#2607 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 5,624 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 27 May 2020 - 11:59 AM

what added costs would exist in those public sector jobs? this is what I was referring to, but you answered about the added costs many private sector employers would face...

 

asking because my personaly stance is it would be a net benefit to have all those cushy government employees going in 4 days vs 5 but not if there will need to be a bunch of extra hires which my understanding is there would not have to be.

 

Example would be flex Fridays. By starting x minutes early and taking x minutes less for breaks you earn x # of days off in a period. There is no way to truly measure if the productivity of those extra minutes consistently achieves a similar output of working say a 7 hour day. If the employer has to bring in an extra employee to cover those flex days then that employee is due all the vacation and other benefits of the employee they are replacing. So in effect there may be a situation where the employer is paying 11 employees to do 10 employees job.

 

If, for example you cancelled flex days and had employees start x minutes later and took all breaks then would productivity change?

 

Another example; Like I said not every job can operate on just 4 days a week. The person may only work 4 days but the role may require 5 days. So would employees be willing to take a 20% reduction in wages as well as a 20% reduction in benefits and pension as the role requires a 5 day presence not a 40 hour presence compressed into a shorter 4 day week


Edited by rjag, 27 May 2020 - 12:00 PM.


 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users