Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
The American work culture can be viewed as a set of guidelines that describe the typical working regimes of American citizens. Typically, the concept is related to the American efforts of promoting inclusivity and diversity in the workplace, and always reaching for the top positions. As the 40-hour workweek proved to be efficient for companies and beneficial to employees, the schedule had been maintained in most workplaces. The advantages of the standardized system of working hours include corporations being able to organize their workload without jeopardizing its quality.
On the other hand, a novel perspective suggested reducing the number of hours to improve the employees pace of the day , as it made caregiving and personal development easier (Pinsker 6). Moreover, several countries began adjusting to workweeks of fewer than 40 hours as the benefits of this idea became evident. In that way, the 35-hours of work in France became symbolic of its laid-back culture and refined the principle of job creation (Alderman 8). At the same time, it practically presented issues for those who worked more than one job (Alderman). As more international companies began adjusting to minimal working hours, the advantages and disadvantages of the changes became critical for discussion.
Furthermore, while there are a few alternatives of the reduced regime, the 32-hour schedule serves as the compromising version between the minimal and maximum workweek options. Hence, this paper aims to evaluate the prospects of a 32-hour working schedule (with benefits and full pay) by demonstrating its ability to promote productivity and employee well-being.
First Supporting Paragraph
First of all, reduced working schedules have generally proven to be beneficial, while the four-day workweek has improved an employees emotional state specifically. Logically, splitting 32 hours for a week means that only four days are required for full-time working. The main positive outcome resulting from such a schedule includes improved well-being of employees. In that way, a shorter week translated to increased well-being of employees among a range of indicators, from stress and burnout to health and work-life balance (Villegas and Knowles 2). Consequently, following the regime continuously allows employees to enjoy the process and maintain adequate mental health.
Moreover, the idea of decreased stress levels in the workplace suggests that overall burnout probabilities for workers can become significantly lower. This phenomenon can be observed as ones physical shape is inevitably linked to their emotional condition. The article emphasizes the physical ability of employees performing well due to improved mental health (Villegas and Knowles 5). This idea highlights the importance of inducing a balanced work schedule that allows for a stable mental state. For example, a job that requires increased emotional concentration, such as that of an HR manager, calls for more balance to maintain the mental strength needed to work with people. Hence, implementing a four-day (32-hour) workweek significantly improves ones well-being, leading to better productivity.
Second Supporting Paragraph
Second of all, a 32-hour workweek with retained full pay can aid a company or any institution in increasing productivity and efficiency. This idea becomes evident through examples of companies that operated with reduced schedules during the pandemic. Having less time to complete tasks optimizes daily routines by limiting unnecessary habits and activity. Moreover, the 32-hour schedule allows 100% of the pay for 80% of the time&as long as workers give 100% productivity (CNBC 0:41). It can therefore be suggested that the setup provides enough resources for a company to stay successful, while the employers receive the same benefits as with a regular five-day working week. In this case, the term productivity is bidirectional, as the employees work ethic reflects the overall atmosphere of the workplace and vice versa.
Furthermore, in the case of an 8-hour workday four time a week, the emphasis is placed on the time and not the place or setting in which the tasks are carried out (CNBC). Its all about working smarter, not longer : the main point of staying productive is to focus ones attention on the workload, not seek unnecessary engagements (CNBC 1:34). For example, setting a few goals for the day to focus on in the time available would lead to more advantageous developments. Additionally, in many corporate jobs, the transportation and additional daily errands that are not part of ones job still affect their work efficiency. By reducing the time required for such errands, an employee can focus on their work-related tasks instead. Hence, the 32-hour workweek significantly aids in increasing the productivity of individual employees and their workplaces overall.
Counter-argument
Although the supporting arguments have clearly demonstrated the advantageous aspect of a 32-hour workweek, critics may argue that the concept involves its own complications. The main problem can arise from stress accumulation as the number of tasks exceeds the provided time (Dembe). It can be suggested that the standardized five-day workweeks had previously been prioritized for a reason. Hence, while the four-day period may seem fitting for a certain type of employees or job, it cannot be accurately applied to the schedules of demanding and time-dependent careers, such as in healthcare and law areas. The current low relevancy of the 32-hour workweek to major professions emphasizes the validity of this counter-argument.
At the same time, it is essential to understand the progressive nature of the novel work schedule: the pandemic has demonstrated the ability of multiple fields to go online, most maintaining the work-from-home routine even now. The implementation of the discussed workweek has undisputable beneficial outcomes for the efficiency of companies and businesses, while the stable mental state it promotes can aid in relating this system to stress-related careers. Therefore, even healthcare and law-related jobs can achieve positive outcomes by only working four days a week.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the paper has outlined the main advantages of a 32-hour workweek by focusing on its effects on the employees wellbeing and productivity. Consequently, the reviewed articles included research that illustrated improved mental health and the ability to lead a balanced lifestyle as major results of the work schedule. Moreover, the eight daily hours of work and three weekend days provide sufficient resources for a company or institution to operate efficiently while paying the same staff salaries. Reducing work time also leads to each task being performed with more attention to detail, and therefore, higher quality. In the process, the skills of time-management and organization are perfected as well. As some researchers have noted, this move proves to be smarter for many businesses especially in difficult circumstances such as the pandemic. While some may argue that the workweek may need to be revised for certain career fields, its current positive influence suggests wider applicability in the future.
Works Cited
Alderman, Liz. In France, New Review of 35-Hour Workweek. The New York Times, 2014, Web.
Dembe, Allard. Why a Four-Day Workweek Is Not Good for Your Health. Ohio State News. The Ohio State University, Web.
Man behind Four-Day Workweek Explains How the Balance Works . YouTube, uploaded by CNBC, 2019, Web.
Pinsker, Joe. Kill the 5-Day Workweek. The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 2022, Web.
Villegas, Paulina, and Hannah Knowles. Iceland Tested a 4-Day Workweek. Employees Were Productive and Happier, Researchers Say. The Washington Post.WP Company, Web.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.