5 ms·

The idea is good in principal but its going to be gamed to death. Some people derive satisfaction from their work ! Others don't. Also will the pay be the sa

The idea is good in principal but its going to be gamed to death. Some people derive satisfaction from their work ! Others don't. Also will the pay be the same ? Call me a cynic but knowing business owners they will never accept lower hours for same pay. They will spend all their time figuring out how to game it. All these solutions, studies seem like busy work for though leaders who have nothing better to do. The best solution is quite simple - Universal Basic Income. It can't be gamed as easily and by definition it costs less and gives everybody more freedom at the same time. Normally I feel like rules that restrict freedom ( like you can ONLY work 40 hours ), you have to be skeptical.

perfunctory 7y ago
The same logic could be applied back in the day when 40-hour week was introduced. Yet somehow we managed. There is no reason we can't do again.
- wrong_variable 7y ago
  I never said the introduction of 40-hour week was bad. Its just more economically efficient to have UBI.
rq1 7y ago
You need to take into account the added value of productivity gains: who’s getting it? If I have a better yield for a given task, then I will provide exactly what my employer asked me for the price we agreed. Eg. That means that if we agreed for 8h * 5d for a given task, and manage to do it in 8h * 3d, I obviously won’t work more. At least not before discussing the share of my productivity gains added value. Being zealous is the best way to get fooled. Another thing, these 40h or even 35h in France won’t limit your freedom, you can obviously work more: it’s a disguised pay raise. I think also that’s not ideal if applied uniformly. The price of some goods and services will mechanically rise, and you might end up “richer” but everything got expensive at the same time. It should be bound to the marginal cost of production or the derivative of the price wrt quantity. If you’re sublinear then you’re good to go. Otherwise it’s simply a no no. Sorry if there’s some mistakes, I’m typing on my phone.
NikkiA 7y ago
> Also will the pay be the same ? Historically, no, in the 70s a 3 day week came with a 3 day pay.

perfunctory 7y ago

The same logic could be applied back in the day when 40-hour week was introduced. Yet somehow we managed. There is no reason we can't do again.

wrong_variable 7y ago
I never said the introduction of 40-hour week was bad. Its just more economically efficient to have UBI.

rq1 7y ago

You need to take into account the added value of productivity gains: who’s getting it? If I have a better yield for a given task, then I will provide exactly what my employer asked me for the price we agreed. Eg. That means that if we agreed for 8h * 5d for a given task, and manage to do it in 8h * 3d, I obviously won’t work more. At least not before discussing the share of my productivity gains added value. Being zealous is the best way to get fooled. Another thing, these 40h or even 35h in France won’t limit your freedom, you can obviously work more: it’s a disguised pay raise. I think also that’s not ideal if applied uniformly. The price of some goods and services will mechanically rise, and you might end up “richer” but everything got expensive at the same time. It should be bound to the marginal cost of production or the derivative of the price wrt quantity. If you’re sublinear then you’re good to go. Otherwise it’s simply a no no. Sorry if there’s some mistakes, I’m typing on my phone.

NikkiA 7y ago

> Also will the pay be the same ? Historically, no, in the 70s a 3 day week came with a 3 day pay.