Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
That would be a good poll. I'd be fine with 5%.
That seems entirely dependent on tax
My first job out of college was 37.5. basically you were there for 8 but lunch counted.
Does it? I think most of us can come up with a number regardless of tax implications. I would take pretty close to a 20% hit to only have to work 4 days
Many in our office work what they refer to as “compressed schedule”. You basically work 45 minutes longer every day for 9 days and get the 10th day off. I’d say about 50% of my staff are on this type of setup.
I'm looking it in the context of someone giving a percentage right after you posted. If I'm at a point where a 10% pay cut is all at the same rate, then fine, it's not overly relevant. If that sort of cut results in me going to a lower tax bracket where a chunk of the cut actually results in greater take home pro rata, then that's different. Obviously I'm talking from a different tax jurisdiction, but I'm in a spot where I'm in no immediate rush to try to upgrade my pay in a new job on account of I've only just started hitting a new rate
I’m already part time, so working less days overall makes little difference. But I’d take a 20% cut, if my 7-shift blocks were guaranteed to be two threes, with a decompression day in between, plus one less hour/day.
Yeah. School doubles as daycare for many too and having a different math teacher every Friday I just see don’t see being very effective. While maybe this would help keep teachers in the field and attract more new teachers, there is a huge shortage now and you would need a lot more staff to try to schedule that fifth day and still deliver meaningful instruction.
Yes I'm familiar with 9/80. And 4-10. I worked 9/80. Ours was 8.. 9 hour days. (9.5 with lunch) and 8 hour (8.5) on the 9th day. Worked that for 10 years before I went 4-10s.
Couldn’t they stagger the teachers. Half do a Mon - Thu, other half do a Tue - Fri? Obviously you need to get creative with scheduling
The kids would have twice as many classes on Tuesday-Thursday but half as much timr would be one model.
Of course it is.
Texas already has four day districts. Not sure how they are doing, I expect it's a disaster.
One giant gym class all day long on Fridays.
All of my excess PTO as is just goes to manufacturing long weekends anyway.
That sounds like terrible management.
Good lord no.
I'm conflicted on it. I agree its probably a bad idea for the government to get involved. However I like the idea on its face and think there is a lot of positive data supporting a reduced work week. The problem is that the majority of companies won't go for it unless incentivized.
Is this answer because you don't think the government should be involved at all in defining when OT kicks in, or because you think 40 (or some other number) is the appropriate number?
The problem is you're applying the theory across the board. There are so many businesses and jobs that are production, performance, or service industry based where this model would certainly not work unless the pay is also reduced by the same rate. And even if payroll is reduced by the same rate you're not considering that the cost of overhead is remaining the same.
When I was a kid, the US and EU were in comparable places in terms of wealth. Now there is a fairly massive gulf between us. Let's not jump off that bridge just because our buddies did.
I don't think that answers the question, unless you're saying you just think 40 (or some other number rather than 32) is the appropriate number.
I know this isn't feasible for all industries. Tip based jobs probably don't have any room. Production would need to eat some of the costs. They probably won't like that, but it's time to relook at some things.
Sure, as a whole EU does not compare but there are plenty of countries in the EU that have more or similar wealth per capita as the US.
And on the more important mean wealth metric the US ranks 3rd only behind those global economic powerhouses Switzerland and Luxembourg. No other EU countries sniff the US's collective wealth.
Because mean is a better measure collective wealth, i.e. the wealth of the entire system. Beyond that I'm not gonna take the political bait.
Who made the investments in the infrastructure and technological advancements allowing the productivity to increase 400%?
Hold hostage? No, we are talking about the possibility of workers having the same productivity in a shorter work week
I can guarantee that in my role, I would get the exact same amount of work done in a 4/10 situation as in a 4/8 situation
We certainly work more than many European countries. We also work less than many Asian countries
Yeah, the convo has moved onto comparing ourselves to europeans. I was thinking historically in the US b/c bagel was earlier talking about productivity improvements while wages remained flat.
This ties in with the noncompetes going away. There are places that don't have them already like Cali, and the lack of noncompetes has made software startups much easier to do.
