I worked for a place which allowed a high amount of “leave without pay”.
There was a limit based on years with the company but a new employee got 3 weeks paid leave and up to 9 weeks unpaid. You pay the company the unpaid time x salary and then they give it back to you when you use it.
It worked out pretty well so if I was sick I could take the day off or if a coworker was sick and came to work, I could leave. I tend to keep a cold twice as long as other people.
I was able to take 3 one month vacations or every Friday off for a long time or somewhere in between.
Never heard of that, but that’s really a moonlighters dream.
Here I am planning how to use every single one of my vacation days strategically so I can grow my $1k/mon business to $10k/mon. If I had up to 2 months unpaid it would be a game-changer.
Is this a sign for the old 20th Century economy, or a peek over the horizon at the new 21st Century economy? I suspect it's mostly the latter, but with a heaping scoop of status quo and denial.
That is, for years there's been chatter about the 4 day work week, perhaps the tipping point is coming? Maybe X aggregated 40 hr week hours are better off distributed based on a 32 hr week?
Side note: A couple of dev gigs ago, I negotiated every other Friday off (with a pay adjustment). It was inspiring. Mind you, not everyone can swallow a pay cut, but if you can I'd say it worth trying. See how your health spectrum improves, etc.
Lot of folks are already doing this with remote simply without the pay cut.
It's fair when someone is able to accomplish the expectations before the allocated time but a lot of individuals are not equipped or built for remote and don't meet expectations but cut their hours.
I'm pro remote but don't think a lot of individuals are equipped to be able to effectively do it. What I see and when talking to leaders in other companies it is about 20% truly justify the remote and the other 80% would be more effective in the office.
Meanwhile many of us have cut the commute out of our day, resulting in hours of extra butt-in-chair per day/week. Additionally, we spend much less time at the (proverbial) water cooler. And for anybody who needs to actually think to work effectively, a private home office is much better than the racket of an open plan office filled with people in zoom meetings.
What is “effectively” in this context? Is it the same level of efficiency (provided efficiency can be defined for the given type of work) as working in the office?
The company is trying to extract as much as possible for as little pay as possible. They obviously want workers to be as efficient as possible. However, I see no problem with workers pushing back against this and doing as little as possible for as much pay as possible. Why should the company be at the winning end of this tension? The state of the labor market over the last 4-5 decades has favored the company. Perhaps it is time it favored labor.
Yeah. I accepted adjustment in pay as their default for everyone else was the typical 40 hrs. But it was well worth it.
That said, a 4 day WW can work anywhere. It ceratainly not remote-only. My general sense is, most managers/leaders can't imagine beyond the status quo so they stick with ehat they know. Yeah, I know. Not actually leadership then :(
Taking a 20% pay cut has never been an issue for me and I doubt it’s an issue for most software engineers who are pulling six figures even at 80% their “full” salary. The issue is getting a “manager” to agree to it. I would suppose the crux is that MiddleManager doesn’t give a shit about the company’s payroll expenses and would rather not have to explain to anyone else, higher up or otherwise, why I’m never at work on Fridays. I think people underestimate how shitty others are when they’re jealous and/or perceive someone as working “less” than they are. Coworkers will absolutely ruin an arrangement like you getting a 4-day workweek if they can, even if you’re making proportionally less money.
So unfortunately it seems the buy-in must come from the C-level, where the IQ tends to be the lowest in an organization.
The 4 day work week won't take off because it gives employees a benefit and not an employer. The employers will see the 5th day as added productivity and get us to work it. I don't know of anyone who benefits from productivity. Sure, we keep boosting productivity but that just means we can do more work. Until we divorce ourselves from capitalism we won't see the benefits. They said we'd get down to four day weeks in the 70s. That didn't happen but productivity went up.
I am a cloud solution architect in Germany and since April I switched to a 4 days work week (Fridays off) for a 20% pay cut (actually less than that since now I pay a bit fewer taxes). The way I think about it is it’s 50% more free time each week for about 17% pay cut, which for me is a great deal.
Readit News
There was a limit based on years with the company but a new employee got 3 weeks paid leave and up to 9 weeks unpaid. You pay the company the unpaid time x salary and then they give it back to you when you use it.
It worked out pretty well so if I was sick I could take the day off or if a coworker was sick and came to work, I could leave. I tend to keep a cold twice as long as other people.
I was able to take 3 one month vacations or every Friday off for a long time or somewhere in between.
Here I am planning how to use every single one of my vacation days strategically so I can grow my $1k/mon business to $10k/mon. If I had up to 2 months unpaid it would be a game-changer.
I could also work and bank comp time up to 80 hours (no overtime, 99% of the time). Use comp time like vacation time but no pay.
That is, for years there's been chatter about the 4 day work week, perhaps the tipping point is coming? Maybe X aggregated 40 hr week hours are better off distributed based on a 32 hr week?
Side note: A couple of dev gigs ago, I negotiated every other Friday off (with a pay adjustment). It was inspiring. Mind you, not everyone can swallow a pay cut, but if you can I'd say it worth trying. See how your health spectrum improves, etc.
It's fair when someone is able to accomplish the expectations before the allocated time but a lot of individuals are not equipped or built for remote and don't meet expectations but cut their hours.
I'm pro remote but don't think a lot of individuals are equipped to be able to effectively do it. What I see and when talking to leaders in other companies it is about 20% truly justify the remote and the other 80% would be more effective in the office.
That said, a 4 day WW can work anywhere. It ceratainly not remote-only. My general sense is, most managers/leaders can't imagine beyond the status quo so they stick with ehat they know. Yeah, I know. Not actually leadership then :(
Their employer keeps paying them, so the amount of work they are doing is about right.
So unfortunately it seems the buy-in must come from the C-level, where the IQ tends to be the lowest in an organization.