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.
我從 1980 年代 就開始研究工作制度了, 但我從沒看過現今正在發生的狀況。 疫情激起的焦慮在全世界都在惡化。 在美國,超過半數的受僱者表示 一天中很多時候會感受到壓力; 辭職量達到破紀錄的高峰, 每個月有 400 萬; 人們筋疲力盡。
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.
作為回應, 越來越多企業主動提出每週四天、 共 32 小時的工作, 但支付五天的薪水。 這不是一個新點子, 但疫情加速了它的實現。 雇主發覺如果他們可以 重新思考人們工作的場所, 那他們也能重新思考需要工作幾天。
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.
聽起來很好,但這務實嗎? 其實,是務實的。 與一些需要一方犧牲 另一方才能受益的政策不同, 四天工作制對於 員工、企業和社會都有好處, 它甚至可以成為 應對氣候變遷的方式。
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.
但首先,我們來談工作場所。 最近十年, 企業和政府實驗 縮短工時,但不減薪。 儘管結果有些差異, 但研究顯示人們壓力減輕, 更看重自己的工作, 在工作之外有更好的生活。 多數情況下, 人們在四天內的生產力跟五天相當。 企業也可以從更低的轉職率 和更高品質的應徵者群體中獲益。 減少工作過勞降低了健康照護的 開支、錯誤、低品質服務。 我和同事正在研究美國和愛爾蘭 四天工作制的實驗進行情況, 英國、紐西蘭、澳洲的實驗 夏季就要開始。 我們的研究有數千名受僱者參與。
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.
教育公司 Healthwise 沒有等我們開始實驗。 六月時,他們的員工成群地辭職; 八月時,他們實行了四天工作制。 六個月後, 執行長亞當.哈斯尼報告, 員工快樂程度大幅增加, 生產力是前所未有地高, 辭職和病假數目都減少了, 營收有所成長, 顧客滿意度表現優異。 Healthwise 的員工利用星期五的休假 從事運動和家務等家庭活動。 一個小朋友的母親說, 她現在偶爾可以享有 沒有罪惡感的足部護理。 四天工作制有助於自我照護, 處理根本性種族、性別、階級歧視 每天造成的壓力。
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.
這個模型一個關鍵之處是 作為對多一天休假的回應, 人們願意在四天內發揮所有生產力。 因此,雖然他們可能 花比較少時間在工作, 完成的工作量卻不見得會減少。 祕訣就在於工作重整, 去除最沒有生產力的活動, 而會議是最主要的目標。 沒錯,所有人都在點頭。 多數企業減少了 會議次數、長度、參加人數。 在 Healthwise , 大家為了節省時間, 選擇私訊而非打電話給同事, 其中當然也會有一些社交對話。 他們把門診預約等個人事務 改成在假日去做。 確實,辦公室裡的工作步調加快了。 「老實說,」一位員工解釋說: 「我現在不會摸魚或看臉書, 但以前我會。」 人們已經適應了, 他們偏好有一整天的休息時間, 而不是忙裡偷閒。
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.
政府的新措施有同樣的發現。 2015 年,雷克雅維克市、 隨後冰島國家政府也跟進, 提供每週 36 和 35 工時的選擇, 最後吸引到超過 2,500 位職員。 結果令人驚豔: 身體心理壓力減少, 職業道德、工作滿意度、 工作與生活的平衡、 體力強度都變好了; 生產力和服務品質持平或上升, 而且這項實驗沒有損害利益。 今天,冰島大約 85% 的受僱者 正在採用或可以選擇這種工作制。 西班牙和蘇格蘭政府 宣布開始實驗四天工作制, 在實驗中政府會補貼第五天的薪水。
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.
這些成功案例的一個原因 是因為在減少工時的狀況下, 一般而言,每小時變得更有生產力。 挪威和丹麥這兩個歐洲國家 擁有最短的平均工時, 每年約 1380 小時, 卻有最高的生產力; 法國和德國也是如此。 相較之下, 工時較長的國家, 例如英國和義大利, 生產力卻低落非常多。 在歷史上美國的生產力領先世界, 如果工時不要那麼高, 就可能會做得更好。 科技公司是四天低工時工作制 最大的採用群體, 但其他企業也開始轉變, 例如銀行業、公關、行銷、設計、 非營利組織、民生用品, 甚至是連鎖餐飲店。
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.
不過的確, 用 80% 的時間做 100% 的工作 在有些地方行不通。 製造業在幾十年前就已經加速; 許多教師和空服員 需要慢下來,而非更密集; 當然,疫情前線的醫事人員 需要減少而非增加工作。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
Thank you, health care workers.
謝謝你們,醫事人員。
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.
在這方面,政府有 另一項有啟發性的措施。 2014 年,瑞典的哥特堡市 讓一間機構的護理師 一天工作六個小時。 不出所料,護理師的健康 和整體幸福感都增加了, 生產力和病患照護品質也一樣。 但在這個實驗中, 他們聘請新的職員 填補沒有人負責的時間。 驚人的發現是 較低的有薪病假和失業補貼 可以抵銷多出來的薪資。
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.
瑞典的案例引起一個 更大、更存在主義的問題: 我們應該花多少時間工作? 很多國家工作日漸艱辛,沒有減輕。 而缺乏性思維—— 即使是富國也要勒緊褲帶的想法—— 站穩腳跟。 但實際上, 我們應該往反方向前進, 因為數位化和人工智慧 創造了減少工作時間的機會。 在防疫疲勞中, 我們更應該加倍努力 恢復生活品質和社會結構, 尤其是富裕的國家, 我們已經有足夠的生產, 人人都能享有不錯的生活水準。
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.
縮減工時還附帶 應對氣候危機的好處, 「怎麼做?」你也許會問。 隨著四天工作制的施行, 很明顯的影響是通勤量變少了。 但如果我們利用生產力的增長 繼續減少工作時數, 每年只要少幾個百分點, 就可以達成長期的動態脫碳。 我和其他人的研究 屢屢顯示同樣的結果, 橫跨各國、各州、各個家戶。 其中一個原因是當人有時間壓力, 就會傾向於選擇更快、更汙染的 交通方式和日常生活活動。 相較之下, 如果擁有的是時間而非金錢, 人就會傾向於減少碳足跡。 但更大的原因和經濟規模有關: 藉由選擇少工作一點, 國家也是在選擇 不要把生產擴充到極限, 從而避免額外的碳排放。 像德國和丹麥這些減碳成功的國家 通常有較低的全年平均工時; 法國和荷蘭也有低的碳排放和工時。 四天工作制是通往 新生活與工作方式的首付。 沒錯,我們會需要政府的幫助, 才能把四天工作制推廣到 已看見它的價值的創新企業以外。 然而隨著週休三日的傳播, 我們會意識到人人 都應該擁有自由的時間。 這讓全民基本收入的理念 直接變得顯而易見, 因為如果沒有財務上的支持, 低收入者就負擔不起第五天的休假。
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.
近期有很多關於工作的未來 和其所提供的機遇的討論, 但還有比機遇更要緊的事情。 我們有個當務之急: 面對此時此刻的挑戰。 疫情、過勞、蕭條、 種族與所得不平等、氣候危機。 四天工作制可以處理每一個問題。
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.
目前我們從一間又一間的企業開始, 但隨著推動力的積累、 四天工作制變得普遍, 我們會成功從缺乏性思維 轉向珍惜我們所擁有的真正財富: 我們的機智、同情心、人性。
Thank you.
謝謝你們。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
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?
海倫.華特斯: 茱麗葉,非常感謝你。 我想問您一個很實際的問題: 你在演講中提到人們在星期五休假, 你建議所有人都在同一天休假, 還是每個人可以選擇 想要的日子休假呢? 理想的施行制度是什麼?
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.
茱:每間企業都會用 適合自己的方式執行, 這是我們實驗的變因之一。 我們提供訓練, 在實行前與企業合作, 以探究這間企業 可不可以多休一天假, 顧客服務需不需要 24 小時全年無休。 所以其實要看情況, 我們每一種都有遇過。
HW: Juliet, thank you so much.
海:茱麗葉,非常感謝你。
(Applause)
(掌聲)