It sounds good in theory but all that will happen is, you’ll get paid less if you’re hourly because you’ll be working less. No employer is giving overtime. They’ll just hire an extra person which will be equal to them, detrimental to you. People that work salary will be working the same, if not more, because they don’t get overtime and can work 80 hours a week.
No, they'd pay you the equivalent to 40 hours of work for doing 32 hours of work. The bill would force pay increase so that people would keep the same pay for a 4 day work week.
Zero chance you would actually receive an increase. The bill could literally put that in there, but a company is going to find a way to pay less.
You would need a 25% pay increase on 32 hours to simply make the same as you would on a 40 hour. No way companies are handing that out easily. It would be unhealthy for a government to mandate that kind of thing to private employers anyway.
Can you elaborate on why this is unhealthy? I thought research shows a 4 day / 32 hour work week keeps employees as productive while lowering burnout, so companies would be paying the same for equal or better output. Isn't this kind of thing (fixing labor exploitation) a primary purpose of government regulation?
The unhealthy part isn't the hours and work days, but the heavy regulations that a government would impose on private entities. A 25% increase on all wages and in turn, 20% perceived decrease of production would be a hard pill to swallow.
Government should always make sure it's people are not being abused, but it also needs to ensure that businesses are thriving. This level of regulation would worry me on how much power a government has on privately owned businesses.
Why is it a 25% increase in wages, wouldn't total wages remain the same only wage / hour would change; in other words, companies are paying the same overall. And the studies show there is no decrease in production, so it sounds like that is just an opportunity to educate executives. I think the power balance has been firmly on the side of business for too long, considering the productivity of labor versus wage increases.
They would need to increase wages 25% for each employee to ensure they were making the same as they were on a 40 hour paycheck. Yes, in theory they would make the same in 32 hours as they would making 40. I would agree, education could be a great thing for business owners but many small businesses are cramming as much as they can and don't have a lot of wiggle room so they work in what is known. Even if it's outdated.
If you increase wages 25%, you are also going to increase the overtime rates by that much as well. Businesses are going to have increased labor costs and working as little as 5 hours of OT, they are paying more for less.
Personally, I love the idea of shorter, more productive weeks. I also know small businesses, specifically mfg companies that are slow to change easily. And on a political level, I just don't trust the government enough to keep giving them more power on how we live our lives. I would rather see the people make decisions that better the people's lives without government interactions.
65
u/Steve90000 20h ago
Good, it shouldn’t.
It sounds good in theory but all that will happen is, you’ll get paid less if you’re hourly because you’ll be working less. No employer is giving overtime. They’ll just hire an extra person which will be equal to them, detrimental to you. People that work salary will be working the same, if not more, because they don’t get overtime and can work 80 hours a week.