I've been studying work since the 1980s,
and I've never seen anything like what's happening today.
Pandemic-fueled anxiety is surging around the world.
In the US, more than half of all employees report feeling stressed
a lot of the day.
Job quits are at record levels, running at four million a month.
People are burning out.
In response,
a growing number of companies are offering a four-day,
32-hour week,
but with five days of pay.
Now, it's not a new idea,
but the pandemic has turbocharged it.
Employers are realizing
that if they can rethink where people work,
they can also rethink how many days they're on the job.
Sounds pretty great, but is it realistic?
Well, actually, yes.
Unlike policies in which one party profits at the expense of another,
the four-day week can benefit workers, companies and society,
and it can even be a gateway for addressing climate change.
But first, let's talk about the workplace.
For nearly a decade,
companies and governments have been experimenting with shorter hours
with no cuts in pay.
While the results do vary,
the research shows that people are less stressed,
value their jobs more
and have better lives outside of work.
In most cases,
they are as productive in four days as they are in five.
Companies can also see benefits through lower turnover
and a higher-quality applicant pool.
Less burnout reduces health care costs, mistakes and poor service.
With colleagues,
I'm studying four-day week trials now in progress in the United States
and Ireland,
with summer start dates for the UK, New Zealand and Australia.
We have thousands of employees participating.
Healthwise, an education company, didn't wait for our trial to begin.
In June, their employees were quitting in droves.
By August, they'd implemented a four-day week.
Six months later,
CEO Adam Husney reports that people are dramatically happier
and have never been more productive.
Resignations and sick days are down,
revenue has grown
and customer satisfaction scores are outstanding.
Healthwise employees are spending their Fridays off
doing family activities like sports or errands.
One mother of young children reported that now she can occasionally manage
a guilt-free pedicure.
The four-day week can help with self-care
and managing the daily stresses of systemic racism,
sexism and classism.
Now a key part of the model
is that in return for the gift of a day off,
people are willing to squeeze all their productivity into four days.
So while they may be spending less time at work,
they're not necessarily doing less work.
The secret sauce is work reorganization,
cutting out the least productive activities.
Meetings are a prime target.
Yes, I see everyone nodding.
Most companies reduce their frequency and length
and the number of attendees.
At Healthwise,
people save time by messaging colleagues rather than making phone calls,
which inevitably includes some social chatting.
They shifted personal tasks, like doctor's appointments,
to the off-day.
And yes, the pace of work at the office does go up.
"Let's be honest," one explained,
"I'm not goofing off or looking at Facebook,
which I was."
But people have adapted
and they prefer getting their downtime as a whole day off
rather than in snippets.
Government initiatives have similar findings.
In 2015, the city of Reykjavik
and then the National Government of Iceland
started offering 36 and 35-hour weeks,
eventually enrolling more than 2,500 employees.
The results have been remarkable.
Physical and mental stress went down
while work ethic, job satisfaction,
work-life balance, energy levels, all improved.
Productivity and service quality stayed the same or got better,
and the trial was revenue-neutral.
Today, roughly 85 percent of all Icelandic employees
are either on or eligible for these schedules.
The governments of Spain and Scotland have announced four-day week trials
in which they'll be subsidizing the fifth day's pay.
Now one reason for these successes
is that with reduced work time,
each hour typically becomes more productive.
Norway and Denmark,
the two European countries with the shortest average hours of work
at about 1,380,
have outsized productivity.
France and Germany are similar.
In contrast,
the long-hours countries like the UK and Italy
have much, much lower productivity.
The US historically led the world in productivity
and would likely do better now if its work time weren't so high.
While tech firms comprise the biggest group
adopting four-day reduced hours schedules,
companies are also making the switch in banking,
PR, marketing and design,
nonprofits, consumer goods, even a restaurant chain.
But it's also true
that doing 100 percent of the work in 80 percent of the time
isn't feasible everywhere.
Manufacturing was sped up decades ago.
Many teachers and flight attendants need to slow down, not intensify.
And of course, health care workers on the front lines of the pandemic
need to work less, not more.
(Applause)
Thank you, health care workers.
Here, another government effort is instructive.
In 2014, the city of Gothenburg in Sweden
gave nurses at one of its facilities a six-hour day.
As expected, the nurses' health and overall well-being improved,
as did productivity and patient care.
But in this trial,
they hired new staff for the hours that weren't being covered.
The striking finding was how much lower sick pay
and unemployment benefits helped offset those additional salaries.
Now the Swedish case raises a bigger, more existential question.
How much time should we be dedicating to work?
In many countries,
jobs are getting more, not less demanding.
And scarcity thinking,
the idea that even rich countries need to tighten their belts,
has taken hold.
But really,
we should be heading in the opposite direction
as digitization and artificial intelligence
offer the chance to reduce work time.
Amid pandemic fatigue,
we should be doubling down on restoring the quality of life and our social fabric,
especially in wealthy countries where we already produce enough
for everyone to have a good standard of living.
And this path has the added benefit of addressing the climate crisis.
"How so," you may ask.
Well, with the four-day week,
there's the obvious impact of less commuting.
But if we use productivity growth to continue to reduce hours of work
just by a couple of percent a year,
we can create a longer-term dynamic of decarbonization.
Research by me and others has shown this time and again
across countries, across states, across households.
One reason is that when people are time-stressed,
they tend to choose faster and more polluting modes of travel
and daily life activities.
In contrast,
when people get time rather than money,
they tend to have a lower carbon footprint.
But the bigger reason has to do with the size of the economy.
By opting to work less,
countries are choosing not to expand production to its max,
thereby avoiding additional emissions.
Carbon success stories like Germany and Denmark
tend to have low annual hours.
France and the Netherlands are also low on both carbon and work time.
The four-day week is a down payment on a new way to live and work.
And yes, we're going to need government help
if we're going to move beyond the innovative companies
that already see its virtues.
But as the three-day weekend spreads,
we can realize everyone deserves a right to free time.
And that brings the logic of a universal basic income squarely into view.
Because without financial support,
low-earners can't afford to take that fifth day off.
There's a lot of talk these days about the future of work
and the opportunities that it offers.
But there's more at stake here than opportunity.
We have an imperative.
An imperative to face the challenges of our current moment.
The pandemic, burnout and depression,
inequalities of race and income,
the climate crisis.
A four-day week addresses each one of these.
For now, we're starting company by company.
But as momentum builds and it becomes universal,
we'll have made the transition from scarcity thinking
to appreciating the true wealth that we possess.
Our ingenuity,
our compassion
and our humanity.
Thank you.
(Applause)
Helen Walters: Juliet, thank you so much.
I have a very practical question for you.
So you mentioned in the talk that people were taking Friday off.
Is the recommendation that people all take the same day off,
or is this something that people can take, kind of, any day they want off?
What's the ideal mechanism to have in place here?
JS: Every company does it the way that works for them.
And that's one of the things in our trial.
We do coaching, and we work with the companies before they start
to figure out are they a company that can shut down for one day?
Do they need to have 24/7, you know, customer service available?
So really, it depends, and we're seeing every type.
HW: Juliet, thank you so much.
(Applause)