Luyện đọc

For many decades, working five or even six days a week was seen as the norm. About 100 years ago, Henry Ford (founder of Ford Motor Company) proposed giving workers Saturday and Sunday off with full pay. However, with modern technology, changing values, and a greater focus on work-life balance, that lifestyle is becoming less relevant. Employees and companies alike are beginning to question whether spending most of one’s week at work is still necessary or productive.

Supporters of the four-day workweek argue that this model brings many obvious benefits to employees. They feel more satisfied with their jobs, more relaxed and more motivated to contribute. Having an extra day off helps them balance work and personal life, giving them the opportunity to care for their family, relax or pursue personal interests. This not only improves mental health but also contributes to increased productivity when they return to work.

Despite its positive potential, the adoption of a four-day workweek also comes with its fair share of concerns, particularly financial ones. In Japan in 1988, when several technology firms experimented with shorter work schedules, they reported a slight drop in productivity during the initial months and a noticeable rise in operational expenses. Businesses in the service or retail sectors may struggle to maintain continuous operations with reduced staffing. To compensate, they may have to hire more people, leading to increased costs in salaries, training and management. For smaller companies, this can easily become a major challenge in terms of budgets and ability to maintain operations.

A shortened workweek does not always bring a sense of relief. In fact, many employees worry that the workload will be compressed, making the four-day workday more stressful than usual. The compressed schedule can increase psychological and physical pressure, causing work efficiency to decline rather than improve. Concerns that “compressing work into shorter hours” may be counterproductive to the original goal.

One of the biggest barriers to changing working patterns is the stability of long-standing habits. The five-day workday structure affects not only the office workers but is also closely linked to the education system, public services and many other social activities. From schools, government agencies to shopping or entertainment centers – all are operating on this time frame. Adjusting the entire system like this will not be easy and is likely to face opposition from many sides. In France in 2000, when the government introduced a nationwide reduction of working hours, numerous companies discovered that employees continued to follow their old patterns, such as staying late or taking work home.

Another issue raised is fairness between labor groups. While office workers may benefit from the new work schedule, professions that require physical presence such as police, fire or emergency services have few options. They cannot simply reduce the working day without ensuring continuity in work. This could widen the gap between occupational classes and create divisions in society.

Given the potential difficulties, some experts suggest more flexible approaches instead of shortening the work week. Models such as remote working, job sharing or flexible working hours are considered more suitable in some cases. These solutions give employees more control over their time without putting pressure on businesses to change the entire operating structure. Thereby, the goal of work-life balance can still be achieved without creating many barriers.