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)