While browsing through one of our local papers I came across a local MEP’s rallying cry for a four-day working week. This is nothing but a growing echo originating from MEPs who are comfortably set up at the European Parliament, in Brussels where the disconnect between the European Union and its citizens is at its most manifest. Moreover, the EU’s propensity to throw money down the drain is nowhere better manifested than in this utterly toothless (and, hence, useless) institution.
But back to the main subject of this piece. Of course, we all love long weekends when one of our many public holidays falls on a Friday or a Monday. Many Maltese also take advantage of bridging – booking leave on a Friday if the public holiday falls on a Thursday, for example. This perfectly understandable and reasonable practice provides one or two four-day breaks without eating too much into one’s paid holiday leave.
Much has been said about the ‘why’ a four-day week would be great – more time off, better quality of life and even increased production. Although some tests, most notably those in Iceland, have gone well, some crucial questions remain unanswered. For example, when one speaks about a four-day week – what does it mean exactly? Will the hours remain at the standard 40 or would we effectively be working 20 per cent less?
Each of these comes with serious caveats. If we are to cram 40 hours into four days, that translates into… well, one doesn’t have to be a mathematician to calculate that we will face 10-hour days. Should this be the case, most of the advantages advocated by those in favour of such a move would disappear instantly.
Working 10-hour days would necessitate a long weekend to rest and recover – akin to sleeping less during the week only to wake up at midday on weekends. Life, and good healthy practices, do not work like that. We all know, or should know, that moderation is key. Moreover, working 10-hour days would leave much less quality time.
Eight hours of sleep, plus an hour commuting and 10 at work leaves just five hours for everything else – be it bodily functions, personal hygiene and eating – not to mention going to the gym or picking the children up from after-school activities. People will be cramming much more into a shorter day or into their weekends, both of which are harbingers of increased stress.
On the other hand, working for eight hours a day, four days a week, produces other serious issues.
First and foremost is related to salaries. Are we willing, or even able, to forfeit 20 per cent of our income? Only in some form of parallel universe can one expect to work less and earn the same wage. In fact, here lies the core issue; it is people who live and work in a universe (the EU parliament) that is parallel to that inhabited by us mere mortals who come up with such notions as the four-day week.
These people are quick to think of the what and the why without giving any thought to the how. Let’s recap – the justifications for the four-day week discussed previously provide the why for this idea. The four-day week is the what… simple. The spanner in the wheels is clearly and obviously the how.
Are we willing, or even able, to forfeit 20 per cent of our income?- Timmy Gambin
Within the Maltese context, the situation is more complex due to a large section of the population that works for the state. These workers enjoy half days in the summer months and somewhat make up for it in the winter. I have absolutely no idea what gymnastics would have to be implemented to sort that out but I am sure it will be no easy task.
Another equally challenging conundrum that would need to be solved is that of schools and other educational institutions. Just as in the working world, we would have to cram the current curricula into four-day weeks or simply reduce them, or easier still – just reduce the teaching loads and, hence, learning outcomes.
And hence lies the major issue. But before I expand on this issue let me remind the reader of recent developments in technology and social realities that facilitate working from home as well as flexible hours – two initiatives that one finds in both the private and government sectors.
These opportunities were inconceivable until relatively recently. Not all jobs provide such opportunities. Just as those working in the catering industry know that they work when most others are not (including holidays and feast days) there are some jobs or careers, such as nursing or policing, for example, that simply do not permit working from home.
Back to the issue. The major threat that the EU would be exposing itself to is accelerated decline. Whereas Asian nations such as Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea place emphasis on dedication (of time and effort) to one’s education and, subsequently, employment, in Europe we are toying with the idea of more leisure time. Whereas I have absolutely nothing against leisure time, too much of it leads to idleness, and that can only be a bad thing. Bad because we risk becoming lazier and more stupid than our global competitors.
We cannot moan about cheap imports and being overtaken by nations that were until recently considered to be lagging while simultaneously undermining Europe’s future prospects.
We need to wake up and debate whether it’s time to start dismantling the sense of entitlement that large swathes of European society find itself tangled in. A step in the right direction would be to knuckle down and simply work harder. It’s either that or watch (in slow motion) an ageing EU become a parody of itself.
Timmy Gambin is a professor of Maritime Archaeology at the University of Malta and head of Heritage Malta’s Underwater Cultural Heritage Unit.