On Jan. 8, the Guardian reported that the New Economics Foundation (NEF), a think-tank based out of the UK, announced their intention to host a forum to discuss their idea of a cure for Britain’s economic woes: a shorter work week.
The original study, published by the NEF in February 2010, recommends a three-day working week—or around 20 hours per week, per worker—as a solution to the job crisis currently sweeping the country. A four-day weekend, the NEF claims, would mean employers would have to hire more workers, thus creating more jobs. It would also boost productivity, because workers would have more time to take care of their health and wellness, which would maximize working capacity as well as creating job growth. Guilt-ridden parents would have more time with their kids, adult children would take care of their parents and we would all become masters of the vegetable patch, growing our own food to supplement the mass-produced grocery store goodies. (So it’s a greener solution, too, by the way.)
On the Guardian’s website, the reaction is mostly outrage. The primary concern seems to be that if their minimum wage is currently 5.52 pounds per hour, how is one supposed to raise a family on 100 pounds per week? A valid concern, considering that when I was living in the U.K. a can of beans cost about 75 pence, or almost one hour’s worth of work. (Start digging, everyone. Those veggies aren’t going to grow themselves!)
However, the issue regarding financial compensation for a shorter workweek is addressed in the study, which declares that minimum wage must increase, and the cost of housing must go down; both, they suggest, would be adjusted by the government. The publishers of this study are real, live economists, and they have thought through that little snag.
I, for one, am amazed that a group of economists, of all people (no offense), have come forth with such a rosy view of humanity. The study assumes that people would do wholesome, productive things with their four-day weekend, such as growing vegetables in their backyard during their free time. Whereas many, if not most people I know, would take advantage of the extra pyjama time to watch that one extra season of How I Met Your Mother that’s been eluding them for so long.
It is clear that the current economic system—particularly in Britain, but also in Canada and the United States—must change. The common person is breaking under the strain of too much debt, unaffordable living costs and unattainable education fees, and perhaps the NEF has the right idea for a solution. But in this time of disillusionment and cynicism, it is hard not to receive this idea with laughter, at worst, and tentatively supportive bemusement at best: A system that actually thinks highly of humanity and imagines us using our extra free time more productively? What?
If their plans works, and does everything this merry group says it will, it would revolutionize people’s lives in a major way. It would require a mutual letting go of feelings of productivity at work, a conscious decision to drop out of the rat race and trust that one’s neighbor won’t leave one gasping for breath in their dust. Perhaps the arrival of Occupy—and for Britain, the London riots—is a signal that humanity is ready to take a leap of faith.
Recent Comments