Four-Day Workweek

In the labor world, the constant search for a balance between productivity and quality of life has led to the evolution of working hours. From the concept of the 8-hour workday proposed by Robert Owen to the implementation of the four-day workweek, the way people work has undergone remarkable changes. In this article, we explore the historical origins of these transformations, their evolution over time, and the experiences accumulated around the four-day workweek.

A Bit of History: Transformations in the Workday

In 1810, Robert Owen introduced the concept of the 8-hour workday under a simple premise: 8 hours of work, 8 hours of recreation, and 8 hours of sleep. This idea was later adopted by President Andrew Johnson in 1868 through the “Ingersoll Act,” which applied to federal office employees and public works laborers. This led to the so-called “Haymarket Affair,” where on May 1, 1886, industrial workers demanded that the benefits of the “Ingersoll Act” be extended to their sector. Due to the tragic events that occurred on that day and the days that followed, this date became historically significant and is now known in many countries as Labor Day.

On the other hand, the five-day workweek has its earliest roots in religious traditions:

• The Jewish “Sabbath” or “Shabbat”, and
• The Christian Sunday day of rest.

The first to implement it on a broad scale was Henry Ford in 1922, establishing a 40-hour, five-day workweek with highly satisfactory results.

The Big Change: The Four-Day Workweek

Since those events, much has changed. Today, these workers’ achievements have become normalized and incorporated into the legal systems of most countries, albeit with different nuances. In recent years, the spotlight has been on pilot programs implementing four-day workweeks, which could represent a major transformation in workplace culture in the future.

Advantages of the Four-Day Workweek

Supporters of the four-day workweek argue, in short, that it leads to greater productivity and improved employee well-being, which results in:

• Greater commitment.
• Lower resignation rates.
• Reduced absenteeism.
• Greater willingness to make additional efforts.

Although several pilot programs have been carried out by major companies around the world—including giants such as Google and Bolt—we can focus on the results of a recent experiment published by the digital newspaper “Business Insider”. This experiment involved 33 companies and was conducted under the direction of the organization “4 Day Week Global,” in partnership with academics from Harvard Business School, the University of Oxford, and the University of Pennsylvania.

The results were excellent. According to the survey conducted among participating companies, most reported higher revenues and improvements in employee health and well-being. Meanwhile, workers reported a significant improvement in their quality of life and mental health, as well as a better workplace environment.

Additionally, implementing these measures often leads organizations to adjust their internal culture to become more efficient in time management. As a result, many companies eliminated, reduced, or limited the frequency and duration of team meetings, while employees sought new ways to focus on their work in order to increase productivity.

Challenges and Disadvantages

However, the reduction of the workweek is not without its critics, who point to several issues that should be carefully analyzed:

• Cost for the company: The standard model applied involves reducing the number of working days without modifying salaries, meaning that employee productivity must compensate for these unchanged costs.
• Possible salary reduction: Another model involves reducing the weekly working hours with a proportional adjustment to salaries. This makes the proposal less attractive to employees, who may not agree with such changes to their working conditions.
• Not applicable to all sectors: Industries such as healthcare, education, and hospitality face significant challenges when attempting to implement a shorter workweek.
• Workload: Questions arise regarding how employees will manage the same volume of work in fewer days. This could be achieved either through increased efficiency or by extending daily working hours, which may not be desirable.
• Loss of competitiveness: Some argue that reducing the workweek could lead to decreased competitiveness if companies are unable to respond quickly to unexpected market conditions, especially when competitors continue operating under five-day work schedules.

Legislation in Paraguay and the Future

With regard to the legal framework in Paraguay, nothing prevents employers and employees from mutually agreeing to modify working conditions by reducing weekly working hours. However, if there is any modification to salary, the agreement must justify the reason for the reduction (such as reduced workload or responsibilities). Otherwise, it could be considered a waiver of an acquired right by the employee without just cause.

Currently, some companies are adopting pilot programs in this regard. The most well-known example is UNILEVER, where administrative staff enjoy one week per month with a four-day work schedule, without any salary reduction.

Only time will tell whether the reduction of the workweek has come to stay and become a new standard for working practices—at least in certain sectors—just as previous labor reforms did at the beginning of the 19th century.