3 day week to end unemployment

hawkwind23

curious to hear some views on something ive been thinking about.

would an end to the current 40 hour week end unemployment?
perhaps start off with a 32 hour week , 4/3 sort of thing.
would this mean that the percentage of unemployed would have employment under those conditions?

also cap the highest salaries and keep a minimum wage so that the average wage comes down to a more meaningful figure.

if the working week was reduced then there should be more opportunity for the unemployed to work and contribute.

and if the highest salaries were capped then the median wage would make most "industrial" jobs at least seem worthwhile.

pie in the sky or viable?

Godge

Pie in the sky. How would you limit wages in the private sector?

Would it apply to rugby players? Would it apply to Denis O'Brien?

Blowfish

Pie in the sky.

If you cap the work week without a corresponding decrease in salary, you'll simply have lots of companies going out of business.

If you cap the work week and have an equivalent reduction in pay, you'll have mass emigration and personal insolvency. Also, if you calculate it that you end up with the same total numbers of hours worked as before, you haven't actually improved the economy at all, simply shifted the wealth around. Furthermore, given that companies hire the best person for the job, introducing more people means that they now have to hire those less skilled and less qualifies to fill the positions, hence making the company less efficient overall.

hawkwind23

Godge wrote: »

Pie in the sky. How would you limit wages in the private sector?

Would it apply to rugby players? Would it apply to Denis O'Brien?

it would be limited in the same way it has been allowed to escalate to the ridiculous sums payable now. however that happened , i presume by the will of those earning it!
in my case by the will of the majority against it!


in point 2 , it is obvious sports persons are vastly overpaid esp when massive corporate sponsorship and global tv coverage are involved.
dunno how that can be changed , i suppose try to keep sport a sport and not a corporate marketing exercise, if that element was out then the wages would fall drastically.
then with the fall in tv coverage and hype the fan would not be as inclined to fund the profits with tv packages , shirts , tickets and merchandise.


why would a reduced working week not be beneficial? and why has it not happened so far? has it ever been tried in any western country?

hawkwind23

Blowfish wrote: »

Pie in the sky.

If you cap the work week without a corresponding decrease in salary, you'll simply have lots of companies going out of business.

If you cap the work week and have an equivalent reduction in pay, you'll have mass emigration and personal insolvency. Also, if you calculate it that you end up with the same total numbers of hours worked as before, you haven't actually improved the economy at all, simply shifted the wealth around. Furthermore, given that companies hire the best person for the job, introducing more people means that they now have to hire those less skilled and less qualifies to fill the positions, hence making the company less efficient overall.

ok , that makes sense i guess.

i feel its impossible to create jobs ever again and the unemployment figures are going to keep rising and rising until we breakdown and become bust.
i feel something needs done and something radical!

woodoo

I'd love a 3 day week but i couldn't afford it.

Milk & Honey

Something like that was tried in France a few years ago. It was not a success.

hawkwind23

googled the french one , i would agree with what they expected from it

The main stated objectives of the law were twofold:
To reduce unemployment and yield a better division of labor, in a context where some people work long hours while some others are unemployed. A 10.2% decrease in the hours extracted from each worker would, theoretically, require firms to hire correspondingly more workers, a remedy for unemployment.[citation needed]
To take advantage of improvements in productivity of modern society to give workers some more personal time to enhance quality of life.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1859891.stm bbc story on it.

why didnt it work in the end?

Stheno

hawkwind23 wrote: »

why didnt it work in the end?

Dunno, but as a practical example here, in the IT industry with the current shortage of skilled and experienced people that they have, cutting everyone to a three day week would cause havoc, as it simply would not be possible to hire other people for some of the roles which are very specialised.

hawkwind23

ok , maybe a 3 day week is too much , so 32 hour week and 4 days.

with specialist skills such as IT i feel its a much better system to have the new recruit be trained by the other staff , much better learning these skills in the work place than spending 3 years in college learning next to nothing.
maybe a bit haphazard for a year but id be very confident you would have a much more skilled and competent workforce through hands on teaching than letting the colleges deliver training.

miss.aok

at least your thinking of ideas, i like that.

Stheno

hawkwind23 wrote: »

ok , maybe a 3 day week is too much , so 32 hour week and 4 days.

with specialist skills such as IT i feel its a much better system to have the new recruit be trained by the other staff , much better learning these skills in the work place than spending 3 years in college learning next to nothing.
maybe a bit haphazard for a year but id be very confident you would have a much more skilled and competent workforce through hands on teaching than letting the colleges deliver training.

Agreed to the extent that after college new staff should be trained by more senior staff but in areas like consulting, there is no substitute for experience

Sending a 24 year old grad with one years experience into some areas of IT as a consultant is pointless

Those areas of IT are the ones with shortages now. I work in consulting and we do a min. 40 hour week excluding breaks, cut that down and you'd simply stop the company earning, decreasing their turnover, reducing their taxes, etc. etc.

And there is a shortage in my area, so they'd not be able to backfill.

hawkwind23

miss.aok wrote: »

at least your thinking of ideas, i like that.

thanks , i worry about my kids and myself when im elderly so think about these things

just dont know anything about economics being from a trades background but maybe that helps in some ways!

hawkwind23

Stheno wrote: »

Agreed to the extent that after college new staff should be trained by more senior staff but in areas like consulting, there is no substitute for experience

Sending a 24 year old grad with one years experience into some areas of IT as a consultant is pointless

Those areas of IT are the ones with shortages now.

do you mind me asking about IT?

just how understaffed is it? i would like to move from construction into IT but dunno how valid my skills are and after teaching in a college would have zero confidence in learning anything there except the bit of paper to say im qualified !

i can fix just about anything in windows and can set up a network in the home.
i can design simple websites and host them using joomla
have experience with linux due to installing it and messing around when id no windows disk.
can do some JAVA work from the console but really just getting to terms with that but programming seems to be where its at.

i think if i could get a job doing basic IT , maybe first or second line support i could learn a hell of a lot from the guys id be working with.
from the skills i have from enjoying messing around , do you think i could bluff some basic IT work?

Stheno

hawkwind23 wrote: »

do you mind me asking about IT?

just how understaffed is it? i would like to move from construction into IT but dunno how valid my skills are and after teaching in a college would have zero confidence in learning anything there except the bit of paper to say im qualified !

i can fix just about anything in windows and can set up a network in the home.
i can design simple websites and host them using joomla
have experience with linux due to installing it and messing around when id no windows disk.
can do some JAVA work from the console but really just getting to terms with that but programming seems to be where its at.

i think if i could get a job doing basic IT , maybe first or second line support i could learn a hell of a lot from the guys id be working with.
from the skills i have from enjoying messing around , do you think i could bluff some basic IT work?

Not at all, possibly best to take it to pm and not derail the thread.

In a nutshell, given what you've said, study for a qualification like CompTia or even Microsoft MCPs (can't remember what they are called now) and that will give you some advantage.

The big gap in IT is in seriously experienced and qualified individuals with up to 10-15 years experience, that's where my company are finding it hard to get applicants, and going on the amount of emails I get via linkedin etc it's the same industry wide. I've about 15 years experience in my field.

one of the problems is that due to the recession people are less likely to move due to loss of security. The usual figures bandied around are approx. 2000 unfilled positions

Slurryface

hawkwind23 wrote: »

curious to hear some views on something ive been thinking about.

would an end to the current 40 hour week end unemployment?
perhaps start off with a 32 hour week , 4/3 sort of thing.
would this mean that the percentage of unemployed would have employment under those conditions?

also cap the highest salaries and keep a minimum wage so that the average wage comes down to a more meaningful figure.

if the working week was reduced then there should be more opportunity for the unemployed to work and contribute.

and if the highest salaries were capped then the median wage would make most "industrial" jobs at least seem worthwhile.

pie in the sky or viable?

Pie in the sky, cap salaries and the brightest and best just move, minimum wage is just plain anti-competitive and should be scrapped as a matter of urgency.
You plan seeks to reward the least innivotave least hard working sections of society by robbing those who actually do something to create wealth in the economy.

JustinDee

Wouldn't work. Its not my perogative to share my job and salary with anyone else. Hierarchy of needs is only satisfactory is efforts are rewarded. Not gifted.

For a start, work on existing productivity factors such as sick leave. Would it be a strange coincidence if it transpires that most sick leave takes place on a Monday or Friday?

Dannyboy83

hawkwind23 wrote: »

googled the french one , i would agree with what they expected from it

The main stated objectives of the law were twofold:
To reduce unemployment and yield a better division of labor, in a context where some people work long hours while some others are unemployed. A 10.2% decrease in the hours extracted from each worker would, theoretically, require firms to hire correspondingly more workers, a remedy for unemployment.[citation needed]
To take advantage of improvements in productivity of modern society to give workers some more personal time to enhance quality of life.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1859891.stm bbc story on it.

why didnt it work in the end?

It's still in practice in France.
One of my colleagues was telling me his father works 5 days - IT specialist - the fifth day is a day in lieu but they don't clock in on the fifth day, or they clock out after the 6th hour everyday, but continue to work. Something along those lines.
Basically they comply on paper but anybody in a skilled role circumvents it (and is expected to).

I think their salary is unchanged, but those days in lieu cannot be taken.
Bueaucratic madness, LOL

So, unworkable in practice and circumvented.

Dannyboy83

hawkwind23 wrote: »

do you mind me asking about IT?

just how understaffed is it? i would like to move from construction into IT but dunno how valid my skills are and after teaching in a college would have zero confidence in learning anything there except the bit of paper to say im qualified !

i can fix just about anything in windows and can set up a network in the home.
i can design simple websites and host them using joomla
have experience with linux due to installing it and messing around when id no windows disk.
can do some JAVA work from the console but really just getting to terms with that but programming seems to be where its at.

i think if i could get a job doing basic IT , maybe first or second line support i could learn a hell of a lot from the guys id be working with.
from the skills i have from enjoying messing around , do you think i could bluff some basic IT work?

You probably know more than a lot of Level 1 Support people already.

Problem is, a lot of people have to start out in Support to get their foot in the door and there is a lot of competition for these roles, especially from graduates.

Their degree will work in their favour - but you can distinguish yourself by getting real world experience (unpaid if nec.) and those certs.
Funny thing about IT is that a lot of people tend to come into it through something else, so to a lot of these people, a computer science degree holds little value - they look for people with experience.

My cousin's husband packed in construction after the crash, realizing he had no choice but to retrain.
He retrained in OOP through FAS iirc, got a decent job last year.
It can be done and IT is probably one of your best chances to do it.

donkey balls

From my experience working in the transport industry(were long hours are the norm) a three/four day working week 32hrs per week could easily be done within two days,Not everyone especially bus&truck drivers can clock in for an eight hr day many a time I have started work at 0600 and finish at 2100 which would be considered a normal days work.

dsmythy

hawkwind23 wrote: »

it would be limited in the same way it has been allowed to escalate to the ridiculous sums payable now. however that happened , i presume by the will of those earning it!
in my case by the will of the majority against it!

So people would have a say in how much others earn? No thanks. If you are working 40 hours a week and doing overtime to get more money for you and your family how would you like it getting cut to half what you were earning before thanks to the government stepping in and telling you others must work. Not for me.

TwoTokeTommy

Viable within some sectors I reckon.

I work in accounting (practice) where you already have some of that going on. eg people working a 3 day week. This type of work is quite easy to break up and share around.
If you wanted create incentive's for employers, perhaps tinker with employer PRSI rates.

TwoTokeTommy

Slurryface wrote: »

Pie in the sky, cap salaries and the brightest and best just move, minimum wage is just plain anti-competitive and should be scrapped as a matter of urgency.
You plan seeks to reward the least innovative least hard working sections of society by robbing those who actually do something to create wealth in the economy.

A lot of lip service is paid to the notion that "the brightest & best will move away" (to some fairytale neverland) if their wages are capped or taxed too much...

Breaking news!!! We're already paying "the boys" top dollar and getting a very poor return, whether you look to politics, banking, law etc.

Let them go.

We need a fair society. We have a greed society.

imitation

I can think of 2 good reasons against the 3 day week from an office workers perspective

First of all, 3 days just doesn't feel like a significant amount of time to get anything done, it would be very easy to come in, faff about and go home and enjoy your 4 days off.

The second problem is the man month myth, if one man takes one month to complete a task, a second man doesn't mean it will get done in half a month (to me it seems you might get a job done in 70% of the time with 2 people instead of one). The cause is simple, having to try and communicate tasks and organize things drags everything down.

It might work better for simpler jobs, but it doesn't solve the core of the problem, that these type of jobs, manufacturing etc have disappeared. The effect would actually be worse as workers would earn less, especially when they are one of the groups most under pressure.

To me the real solution is to try and attract back this kind of business, or to encourage smaller production company's, like in Japan and Germany.

bk

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

A lot of lip service is paid to the notion that "the brightest & best will move away" (to some fairytale neverland) if their wages are capped or taxed too much...

Over night you would lose the entire IT industry (all the Googles, Facebooks, amazons etc.).

IT jobs are in major demand, I have 10 years experience myself. Cut my wages in half and I'd leave the country tomorrow and probably get a pay increase. Us, Cananda, UK, most of Europe are all desperately looking for experienced IT people.

Almost every IT person would leave Ireland under this circumstances and the IT companies would follow as they couldn't attract people to come to Ireland and anyway most of them have offices around the world and can easily ramp down Ireland and ramp up Northern Ireland, Scotland, Switzerland, etc. to take on the exodus of skilled people form Ireland.

The same would happen to the pharmaceutical industry, it would just take longer as they actually do some real manufacturing here.

This is what they mean by "the brightest and the best would move away" not the fat cat top bankers, etc. But the young middle class college graduates who earn a decent wage, but pay the majority of taxes working in IT, pharma and financial services.

These industries are the back bone of the Irish economy, not banking and building and all that nonsense. It is the continued success of these industries that things aren't as bad as they could be (think Greece and riots, etc.).

Yes we may have high unemployment, but at least we continue to have relatively very high social welfare, unemployment payments, old age pension, etc.

Lose these industries and their taxes and watch what happens when unemployment, old age pension are cut in at least by half. Watch the riots on the streets.

TwoTokeTommy

bk wrote: »

Over night you would lose the entire IT industry (all the Googles, Facebooks, amazons etc.).

IT jobs are in major demand, I have 10 years experience myself. Cut my wages in half and I'd leave the country tomorrow and probably get a pay increase. Us, Cananda, UK, most of Europe are all desperately looking for experienced IT people.

Almost every IT person would leave Ireland under this circumstances and the IT companies would follow as they couldn't attract people to come to Ireland and anyway most of them have offices around the world and can easily ramp down Ireland and ramp up Northern Ireland, Scotland, Switzerland, etc. to take on the exodus of skilled people form Ireland.

The same would happen to the pharmaceutical industry, it would just take longer as they actually do some real manufacturing here.

This is what they mean by "the brightest and the best would move away" not the fat cat top bankers, etc. But the young middle class college graduates who earn a decent wage, but pay the majority of taxes working in IT, pharma and financial services.

These industries are the back bone of the Irish economy, not banking and building and all that nonsense. It is the continued success of these industries that things aren't as bad as they could be (think Greece and riots, etc.).

Yes we may have high unemployment, but at least we continue to have relatively very high social welfare, unemployment payments, old age pension, etc.

Lose these industries and their taxes and watch what happens when unemployment, old age pension are cut in at least by half. Watch the riots on the streets.

I said it would work in some sectors, never said anything about IT. Obviously where you have a shortage of workers in a sector, it doesn't suit, so don't touch IT.

Taxing people who earn a decent wage at reasonable rates is separate to applying punitive taxation to those on high incomes, so again this should not be a problem.
*Side note: Afraid of the wealthy leaving with their billions? Change the tax code & treaties with other nations. eg, Irish citizens being liable to Irish tax on their worldwide income, scrap the residency rules (for high earners at the very least).

TwoTokeTommy

imitation wrote: »

I can think of 2 good reasons against the 3 day week from an office workers perspective

First of all, 3 days just doesn't feel like a significant amount of time to get anything done, it would be very easy to come in, faff about and go home and enjoy your 4 days off.

The second problem is the man month myth, if one man takes one month to complete a task, a second man doesn't mean it will get done in half a month (to me it seems you might get a job done in 70% of the time with 2 people instead of one). The cause is simple, having to try and communicate tasks and organize things drags everything down.

It might work better for simpler jobs, but it doesn't solve the core of the problem, that these type of jobs, manufacturing etc have disappeared. The effect would actually be worse as workers would earn less, especially when they are one of the groups most under pressure.

To me the real solution is to try and attract back this kind of business, or to encourage smaller production company's, like in Japan and Germany.

I work in an office, 5 days a week. Plenty faffing about on those horrid mondays, friday evenings, etc
Come in focused for 3 days, stay a little later maybe. I did that while on a year back to college. Worked fine.

Clever planning and allocate of work, along with clear and concise communication (all basic things already expected in an office environment) should mean far less lost productivity than you are assuming.

People seem quite negative and very quick to make excuses against OP's ideas; my what a healthy breeding ground for innovation.

bk

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

I said it would work in some sectors, never said anything about IT. Obviously where you have a shortage of workers in a sector, it doesn't suit, so don't touch IT.

Oh, and therefore we have to leave pharma and financial services alone too for the same reason.

Sure now you have eliminated most of the well paying jobs from these scheme. So it is really only going to be low paid more manual type of workers who this will effect.

People on minimum wage will now get their already small salary cut in half, great!!

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

I work in an office, 5 days a week. Plenty faffing about on those horrid mondays, friday evenings, etc
Come in focused for 3 days, stay a little later maybe. I did that while on a year back to college. Worked fine.

So you are going to do Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, so who is going to do Monday, Friday and Saturday?

Will those who do the less attractive days get paid more?

And if you come in only 3 days, won't people just flaff about on the Tuesday and Thursday instead? It is sort of human nature.

The reality is non of this does anything to solve the root cause of the unemployment problem.

You see there is actually no shortage of jobs for experienced people in Ireland, if you have IT, science, accountancy, fluency in another language, you can get a job no problem. All these skilled industries are crying out for people.

The problem in Ireland is that the building trade employed a very large number of semi and un-skilled people *. The building trade is now gone and most of these people are out of work. And we already pretty much killed off manufacturing in Ireland, the other industry that tended to employ such people in the past.

The solution to this problem is tow fold:

1) Up-skill those who are capable and willing to do so. Get them to fill the many open job positions out there.

BTW one of the best software engineers I've ever met was a builder, who went back to college as a mature student to learn computer science. However it isn't for everyone, there will always be some people who aren't academically inclined.

2) Re-build manufacturing industries in Ireland so jobs can be found for those un-skilled people.

* Obviously skilled architects, solicitors and auctioneers, etc. also lost jobs in the industry, but they should have an easier time finding work in other areas (e.g. financial services, etc.).

doolox

Look to your strengths and you will get some work. I do not believe that politicians should be in charge of doling out work hours as suggested by the OP. I'd hate the French scenario where one is declaring 32 hours work but is actually working more.

I have never worked an unpaid hour in my life for a large company and never would.

I work for myself now in a totally unrelated sector and enjoy what I do. It suits me better than what I did unhappily and mediocrally for 30 yrs........

Today only the best and most passionate in their work will get and retain their jobs, people who would do the work without pay if circumstances would allow. All the other semi luke warm or time servers will be leeched out of the system as every penny now has to be accounted for and every action justified at the lower and middle levels.

The top levels will still bluff their way through golden circles, influence and corruption the way it always was no matter who is in power.

People need a good supporting family, a novel idea and the persistance to see it through. It helps if you have your main house nearly paid off, full time 40 hr jobs are really only for people who are looking for a mortgage and other loans. I do not think there is really any other good reason for doing 40 hr or more weeks for a faceless set of corporate bureaucrats and drones that infest modern multinational corporations.

If you are lucky enough to have a bit of land and can build your own house ( keep it small and simple and let the Jones' go to hell....) then you can dispense with the conventional jobs market entirely and go the freelance self employed route from the start.

Alternatively buy a wreck and do it up using your own resources and pay for materials as you go, people are in too much hurry to have the "ideal home" straight away. This will cost you in time and interest payments and the obligation to work long hours for the faceless ungrateful bureaucrats mentioned above.

There is a growing trend towards contingent, non conventional and agency working which accounts for about 30% of work in California.
Other structures exist where piece work is allotted and collected on a casual basis, Bennetons network of casual textile artisans come to mind, many car parts in Japan are made by small family owned workshops which survive by creating niches and using secret ways to keep ahead of the competition. Small suppliers however face a huge pressure from the large scale buying power and bargaining power of large multinational corporations.

Large increases in oil prices, increasing unrest in Far East mnfg locations ( Foxconn riots etc ) seem to indicate that mnfg will return to Europe in some form but Ireland does not have the large scale markets near enough to exploit these circumstances.

Agriculture and food demand worldwide is set to increase by 30% by 2030, according to the news from the ploughing festival. Ireland should be able to exploit our rich resources in water, dairy and meat products etc to meet some of this demand. Why are all meat packing jobs being done by Brazilians in Ireland?? With 450,000 unemployed this is incongruous to say the least.

Other sectors on the increase are care of the aged and children. There will be huge increases in demand for people in these areas but it is not suitable work for everybody as it demands great patience, attention to detail and discipline for moderate or low reward.

Those of advanced years looking to re skill and upgrade their quals should look at the payback time left. This is my situation, I am too old to do a fulltime degree from scratch, 4-5 yrs full time education would leave 5-6 yrs to get work to pay back the time money and effort involved, if I can get a job.

Far better to make small adjustments in skills and abilities while earning at the same time. Universities and IT's in Ireland are not flexible enough or cheap enough to suit a lot of people who do not qualify for free fees or are not willing to idle about until they qualify ( 1 yr on JA for example).

The government should teach people marketing and interpersonal skills at a basic level to all people so that self employment becomes less daunting.

Sir Pompous Righteousness

It's like trying to cure obesity by increasing the weight at which someone is officially considered obese.

johnnyskeleton

hawkwind23 wrote: »

Blowfish wrote: »

Pie in the sky.

If you cap the work week without a corresponding decrease in salary, you'll simply have lots of companies going out of business.

If you cap the work week and have an equivalent reduction in pay, you'll have mass emigration and personal insolvency. Also, if you calculate it that you end up with the same total numbers of hours worked as before, you haven't actually improved the economy at all, simply shifted the wealth around. Furthermore, given that companies hire the best person for the job, introducing more people means that they now have to hire those less skilled and less qualifies to fill the positions, hence making the company less efficient overall.

ok , that makes sense i guess.

i feel its impossible to create jobs ever again and the unemployment figures are going to keep rising and rising until we breakdown and become bust.
i feel something needs done and something radical!

How about reducing the cost of living and wages across the board? This starts with balancing thr governments books, particularly reducing any disincentive to work in social welfare.