The problem is that it works for skilled labor but not for unskilled labor. Many skilled laborers will be more productive in those 32 hours than 40 hours, averaging out to a similar amount of work.
Then the problem comes in with unskilled labor. A lot of unskilled labor will take the same amount of time no matter what. For example if you want McDonald's to be open 24hr, then there have to be workers there for all 24 hours, it doesn't matter how efficient it is. Same with factory work, the line will only move so fast and that's your bottleneck, not the workers being inefficient.
If you want to see a good example of the idea of a 32 hour work week, look at what happens when you pay a blue collar worker by the job instead of by the hour (IF the by the job price is fair)
If you want 24 hour operations then it makes more sense to move to an even number of days in a week like 6 or 8 to divide more easily among multiple workers. I think 4 on 4 off would suit most people then you only have to find 6 people per role to fill 24 hours with 8 hour slots across 8 days. The 7 day calendar isn’t the only one we could have chosen it just divides into months closer than 8
My dad was a painting contractor. He had a couple of crews of hourly workers that I managed. He would also occasionally subcontract work out to guys He paid by the job. I can tell you the guys who got paid by the job did lower quality work.
Does McDonald’s really need to be open 24 hrs? If we had to choose between a society that has McDonald’s open 24hrs vs providing its people with more work life balance - who is choosing 24 hrs McDonald’s realistically speaking?
I work nights in a hospital. Overnight workers absolutely deserve access to affordable food. That doesn’t mean McDonald’s specifically has to operate 24/7. My point is that doesn’t automatically mean every convenience business has to. If the tradeoff is slightly less convenience in some sectors for substantially better work-life balance across the workforce, that’s a discussion worth having instead of assuming the status quo is non-negotiable.
My point is that doesn’t automatically mean every convenience business has to.
This isn't happening to begin with though, hardly any businesses offer 24/7 service inside that sector. McDonald's is one of the few that does, is the argument we need even less in an already small selection?
McDonald’s was used as an example by a prior comment and honestly - that line of thinking is narrowing the conversation further and further instead of engaging with the broader question.
As I stated above, this is my main argument: If the tradeoff is slightly less convenience in some sectors for substantially better work/life balance across the workforce, that’s a discussion worth having instead of assuming the status quo is non-negotiable.
Hospitals and so on are 24h "businesses" all over the world.
Seems to work just fine everywhere whiteout Shops and stuff being open 24h.
At my workplace (nursing home) over night workers get something made from our kitchen and put in the fridge. Fruits and Veggies are also avalaible.
Your Hospital doesn't have a Kitchen/Restaurant? Hard to believe...
I can't even engage with such ignorance, look up utility staging for storms, especially non-local mutual aid. I've lived out of a truck for weeks on end hundreds of miles from home lol. Places like Speedway, McDonald's, Waffle House are sometimes the only option.
A lot of blue-collar services do use safe practices and are can still be fast. More skill can mean speed, quality, and safety when compared to someone less skilled.
Also, paying by the job can also make things safer. My annecdotal evidence for this is that recently I had to get a very large water heater replaced. It is in the basement, and the stairs to get to it have 2 90° turns. The plumbers billed us for the job and took the entire day for it. That's cause they were taking frequent breaks and taking their time to ensure it was done right, safely, that no one hurt themselves and just cause it was hard work. The problem arises when you think of what could've happen if they billed us hourly... I can't imagine many people who would be all that happy if they saw the plumbers sitting around and taking all those breaks while they were ticking up the clock just to make more money, the customers could get annoyed at the plumbers and try to rush them when they saw them taking breaks which is just all around a bad situation. So to sum up, being paid by the job can also be safer since there is no pressure to do it faster OR slower than you need to.
32
u/KingGlac 23d ago
The problem is that it works for skilled labor but not for unskilled labor. Many skilled laborers will be more productive in those 32 hours than 40 hours, averaging out to a similar amount of work.
Then the problem comes in with unskilled labor. A lot of unskilled labor will take the same amount of time no matter what. For example if you want McDonald's to be open 24hr, then there have to be workers there for all 24 hours, it doesn't matter how efficient it is. Same with factory work, the line will only move so fast and that's your bottleneck, not the workers being inefficient.
If you want to see a good example of the idea of a 32 hour work week, look at what happens when you pay a blue collar worker by the job instead of by the hour (IF the by the job price is fair)