Premettiamo innanzitutto che su di un tema di questa delicatezza e complicatezza contabile si resterebbe molto perplessi a commentare sulla sola base di un generico annuncio.
In estrema sintesi, settimana lavorativa di quattro giorni di sei ore l’uno, a stipendio invariato.
«The current working week in Finland is eight hours per day, five days per week»
«People deserve to spend more time with their families, loved ones, hobbies and other aspects of life, such as culture»
«It is entirely possible to be happier and more productive and environmentally friendly at work.»
«It might sound too good to be true, but it could be the norm in a few years»
«It is entirely possible to be happier and more productive and environmentally friendly at work. It might sound too good to be true, but it could be the norm in a few years»
«Reducing the length of the working week boosts productivity.»
«When, in August, Microsoft Japan tested a four-day week, productivity work shot up by about 40%.»
«Reducing working hours is also good for the natural environment»
«According to some analyses, a shorter working week could also lead to a significant cut in our carbon footprint as employees produce less carbon emissions getting to work, use fewer resources at work and have more time to cook and shop instead of relying on takeaway food delivered in plastic containers.»
«Although a shorter working week has many benefits, it is not a magic solution.»
«Gothenberg dropped its six-hour-day experiment because of increased costs.»
* * * * * * *
Scusandoci per la ripetizione, gli elementi forniti sono troppo scarni per un commento decente.
Alcune considerazioni emergerebbero spontanee, ma tutte in forma dubitativa.
– Fino a tanto che non sia disponibile il piano operativo, ben poco potrebbe essere detto nel merito della questione, tranne qualche aspetto metodologico.
– Nel piano operativo ci si aspetterebbe che fossero riportati dati statistici e stime che mettano in luce i pro ed i contro di una scelta così impegnativa.
– Se il benessere delle persone sia importante, ciò non dovrebbe escludere il computo economico della sostenibilità di tale scelta.
– Consideriamo molto pericoloso l’avvallo oppure il diniego sulla base di esempi molto particolari. Questo fu a suo tempo un errore in cui incorse Jospin. La generalizzazione di un caso particolare al tutto è sempre quanto mai pericolosa e foriera di errori anche grossolani.
– Se vi sono lavori svincolati dalla permanenza in ufficio. Galileo fece la scoperta del pendolo in una Chiesa e Newton delle leggi della gravità sotto un albero in campagna. Molti altri lavori hanno invece una resa che dipende strettamente dal numero di ore lavorate: una catena di montaggio ovvero di assemblaggio potrebbe essere un esempio caratteristico. La resa di un muratore dipende altresì dal numero di ore impiegate al lavoro. La produttività di questi lavori dipende più dalle tecniche utilizzate che dall’orario.
– Vi sono infine lavori che per loro natura non ammettono riduzioni di orario senza nel contempo un aumento del personale: si pensi solo al corpo dei vigili del fuoco oppure al personale di un pronto soccorso.
* * * * * * *
La Finlandia presenta molti gravi problemi, a nostro sommesso parere ben più cogenti.
Finland’s Prime Minister Sanna Marin plans to introduce a four-day work week and six-hour workdays to provide a flexible working week.
Sanna Marin, Finland’s Prime Minister calls for a four-day working week and six hour workdays for companies across the country. The aim is to provide the Finnish workers with a flexible working week and allow them more time with their families.
“I believe people deserve to spend more time with their families, loved ones, hobbies and other aspects of life such as culture. This could be the next step for us in working life,” said Marin who leads a centre-left coalition with five other parties which are all led by women. Marin, the leader of the Social Democratic Party who took over as Prime Minister in December 2019 called for a test run of the new working schedule on the occasion of the 120th anniversary of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in Turku. “It is important to allow Finnish citizens to work less. It is not a question of governing with a feminine style but offering help and keeping promises to voters,” says Marin who is the youngest female head of state in the world and the second-youngest head of state. She had advocated for a shorter work week when she was the Minister of Transport. Finland already has a Working Hours pact of 1996 which allows workers to adjust their working hours by starting or finishing up three hours early or later. Its neighbouring country, Sweden has shown encouraging results with implementation of six hour workdays. Swedish employees have reported being happier, wealthier and more productive. Even customers have reported being more satisfied. Companies like Microsoft have also experimented with shorter work weeks. At Microsoft Japan, in August 2019, 2,300 employees were given every Friday off for one month. The results showed a 40 percent increase in productivity as meetings were more efficient. Some experts also suggest that shorter working weeks can be beneficial to the environment. Philipp Frey, agenda contributor at the World Economic Forum believes that the four-day work week could be critical in saving the planet. “Our current working time and lifestyle models are deeply intertwined with a fundamentally unsustainable economy,” he said in June 2019.
He added, “This demands us to endure long commutes due to overpriced housing and eat carbon-intensive, frozen foods since we lack the time to prepare decent quality meals ourselves.”
Reduced working hours, as promised by the new Finnish PM, can boost productivity and cut carbon emissions. Here’s the evidence behind the idea.
Finland’s new prime minister, 34-year-old Sanna Marin, has announced plans to introduce a four-day week. It sounds quite glorious, doesn’t it? However, critics of reduced working hours, such as the Tory MEP Daniel Hannan, think the idea is bonkers. He believes we could all work four-day weeks, but we just don’t want to.
Reducing working hours is also good for the natural environment. According to some analyses, a shorter working week could also lead to a significant cut in our carbon footprint as employees produce less carbon emissions getting to work, use fewer resources at work and have more time to cook and shop instead of relying on takeaway food delivered in plastic containers.
Although a shorter working week has many benefits, it is not a magic solution. The Wellcome Trust backtracked on plans for a four-day week, saying it would be “too operationally complex”. Gothenberg dropped its six-hour-day experiment because of increased costs. Bosses worry a shorter working week will create staffing challenges and make it harder to serve customers, while employees worry that working less will make them look lazy. These challenges are not insurmountable. Indeed, reduced working days are nothing new. Since the industrial revolution, the number of hours worked has been falling. When working hours in Britain were cut from about 54 hours a week to 48 hours a week in 1919, it had no effect on productivity and competitiveness. Kellogg’s, the US cereal manufacturer, successfully operated a six-hour working-day policy for many years in the middle of the 20th century. It was only dropped because management wanted the firm to have work practices like other companies. It is entirely possible to be happier and more productive and environmentally friendly at work. It might sound too good to be true, but it could be the norm in a few years.