The 8-hour workday is inefficient: is this model still in line with the times??

A study shows that office workers work only 3 in 8 hours. Are the 6-hour day and the 4-day week an answer to the productivity problem??

  • share
  • forward
  • Share

The eight-hour day – he common full-time work model in Germany, which has been enshrined in law since 1918. But how desirable is the maintenance of this concept? The appropriateness and benefits of the eight-hour day are debatable. In terms of productivity, this working time model seems to have rather run its course, but considering the salary, eight hours of work per day is necessary for most to experience the month without financial worries. How contemporary is the eight-hour day?

Study: Employees work only 3 hours in 8 hours of working time

Two hours and 53 minutes – that’s how long an employee in the UK works on an average eight-hour workday. A study from the U.K. obtained this result by finding just under 2.000 employees working in the office surveyed. But how do the employees surveyed occupy themselves for the other five hours and seven minutes?? The combination of distraction factors can look varied, but typically include reading the news, checking social media, eating, talking to colleagues about non-work topics, smoking. But just under one in five also looks for new jobs during working hours.

The 8-hour workday is inefficient: Is this model still in line with the times??

Social media, reading the news, talking to colleagues – the top three office distractions. Screenshot

8-hour day: The opposite of efficiency?

According to this result of the British researchers, an eight-hour day means exactly the opposite of productivity. Long workdays are therefore highly inefficient for both employees and employers. Concentration on the part of employees is a particular problem. Most people find it difficult to work in one piece – and eight hours is simply not possible. Every brain has certain cognitive resources that need a break after an individual period of concentration.

The study shows that long working days do not bring out the best in employees. Particularly at the end of the day, performance drops, according to the Industrial psychologist K. Anders Ericsson. Further, he tells Business Insider that continuing to work above the concentration limit brings negative repercussions:

If you’re pushing people well beyond that time they can really concentrate maximally, you’re very likely to get them to acquire some bad habits.

Whether the result of this survey, that employees in the office spend just under three hours a day on their work, is representative remains questionable. But for sure, no one spends the full eight hours in the office working, instead hanging out on social media, chatting with colleagues or extending their lunch break a little bit. Procrastination is probably a permanent feature of many people’s daily working lives. Here, of course, the focus is on office jobs; people who work in retail or construction are more likely to spend eight hours doing their jobs.

4-day workweek should not be the answer to the unproductiveness of the eight-hour day

It’s not lost on employers either that employees who work less are more productive and happier. Companies in Cologne and New Zealand have switched to a so-called 4-day week in response to this finding. Employees still work eight hours a day, but only four times a week instead of five. The important thing is that the salary and the number of vacation days remain the same. The companies that have switched to this working time model report positively about the consequences of the change. Nadine Mohr, the head of an agency in Cologne, emphasizes that her employees are more relaxed and creative in their workday.

Although employees are relieved with this working time model, the eight-hour day with its unproductive phases remains. That’s why experts emphasize that the solution is not to minimize the eight-hour workday, but rather to minimize the daily Number of hours reduced from eight to six.

In Sweden, the government has already tried to reduce daily working hours. Workers who work in nursing homes have been allowed to work six hours a day instead of eight. While this required hiring additional workers, employees confirmed that their quality of life improved immensely. Less stress and more time for family have been key factors, he said.

Working time models in upheaval – the world of work in a state of reorientation

But what is really better now?? 6-hour day or rather the 4-day week? Amazon has been testing both options since 2016, but has not yet published any data on them. So whether employees are more productive or feel a higher quality of life is still an open question and no distinction can be made. The fact that the world of work is currently in a state of upheaval in terms of time models is shown by the current examples of companies that have already dared to take the step towards a change in favor of productivity and satisfaction for all. The eight-hour day within the 40-hour week wobbles and becomes ever more untimely. True to the motto "less is more", the working world is heading in the direction of efficiency and work-life balance. Also the Industrial psychologist Ericsson is certain:

Employers may actually be getting much more out of their employees, if they only work 50 or 75 percent of the current work hours.

Since 2017, Maja has been supporting the editorial team of OnlineMarketing.en. She dedicates herself primarily to the career magazine with the topics around jobs and career, but also writes about digital marketing.

  • share
  • share
  • forward
  • Share
  • share
  • share
  • share
  • Save

Sign up now for our HR Update and receive exciting articles, interviews and background reports from the field of human resources on a regular basis.

Comments from the community

Hi Maya,
Science and various practical examples confirm again and again that an eight-hour day and a 40-hour week are not effective. I always wonder why most companies (CEOs) go against the facts and stick to this outdated working time model from industrialization, when employees were still treated like serfs (gives a deep insight..).
And: Does your employer have onlinemarketing?.de at least changed, if nevertheless in the editorship is clear, how one works effectively? ;-) I am in the same boat..

If only because of the environmental debate, the rotten 40-hour slave system should finally be reformed. The waste of resources and exploitation of nature, animals and people has reached proportions that are no longer sustainable. Unfortunately, many from the older cohorts don’t realize this because, like stoic work robots, all they know is work – their seemingly sole purpose for being. They don’t seem to have any hobbies, and that’s what makes people creative in the first place. Most work is pointless and useless anyway and a waste of time and occupational therapy, much could be automated by PCs and robots, but then people would be freer, but the slave system does not want free creative people.

With my father in law it was not only the work but the family that described his life. As soon as they were all undressed there was only quarrel with the woman. I think women of this generation tended to have more hobbies, even if they were just as employed etc..
In any case, he should not go to her on the sack, so he looked for hobbies to fill his life.

I mean, that shows what kind of hole you fall into, imagine how many of this generation become pensioners and then stand there without anything in life. This has also other consequences, because so these people often have to vegetate and Schwups haste a new care case and we all know how caregivers are overburdened. A person with fine hobbies that he or she does regularly will have more of them in old age and will still be active for a long time. Should also help against dementia I have heard. Maybe that explains why in traditional life models the woman often lives longer and is much fitter. Or nature just hates men. But hey, there is also only everything unscientific herumgerate what I do here. So who puts my word on the gold scale?

Agree with you one hundred percent. From eight hours in the office I work when it comes up two, the rest of the time I bum around, z.B. on the Internet on this page.

First of all we are x-times more productive by progress and technology anyway. So even a 6-hour day is still a lot.
The best would be to set up a 4.5 hour day and for that but in a 2-shift system.
The one in the half hour comes sooner and takes up the work process of the one who was already there for the 4 hours and you still exchange about the essential and done so far.

Consider that at such times there is always travel involved. So 4.5 hours quickly become 6 and more and that is again borderline for the well-being and motivation.

I myself have 8-hour days through, 7-hour days and 6, as well as 5 hour days.

And can say quite clearly.. 8 hour days are torture.
Who has experienced once over a certain time 5 and 6 hours day, this does not want to miss any more. The joy of life increases significantly, since one simply then also lives his own life and not constantly any other idiologies and desires must follow and then like a robot without own life stands there. Because 2 days on the WE are nothing at all, of which already on Sunday at the latest in the afternoon nothing more is over and the thunderclouds of Monday draw up..

With 5 hours one is really in a good mood. One knows the 5 hours I pull through and one is there also substantially more with the thing. And then the freedom beckons in the 2. Day half, so it should be at least.
But I had a short way home, I have to add, which improves things a lot more than if you had to drive an hour home.

I also had a 7 hour day for a year. Unfortunately this is absolutely mieserabel and no real improvement to 8 hours, since one must still also keep a break, the day is thereby nevertheless completely broken.
A first noticeable improvement of the situation was then the 6 hours day, which I had also lived through for 1 year.
Thus no break was necessary and thus one wins immediately 2 hours, which already permit clearly more possibilities. Nevertheless, one notices the 6 hours at a stretch simply above all then from the 5. hour are rather only absitzen, because it is enough after 4-5 hours of intensive work simply also and one has done anyway enough.

The best variant are ca. 5 hours per day. With that you achieve an enormous amount of time in the day and it feels like a very good ratio of "I did something during the day and now I still have enough energy and joy for my own life".
Nevertheless, as I said, I would also economically and socially aim for the 4.5-hour day with a 2-shift system.

This should be the best for everyone.
The question is, how one now in a money system, this practically converts and the people enough money leaves. One considers thereby.. we are on average 10x as productive as 35 years ago. So from the earned value should not be a problem. But we have also built a class system and this lives nowmal from the fact that many people have to work rather for free all day, so that few have all the more and suppress the shift this worked out so that it remains so..

This is all possible anyway and will have to be our future. Because the progress will leave us no choice, unless we want here slave conditions, poverty everywhere, high crime rates, absolute wealth concentration with an always small layer and in the end wars and impoverishment.
So this is what we are slowly heading towards, because the power centers are simply not ready to stop the redistribution and to justly involve everyone again and thus to liberate them..

So I see this right?

Workers sit around and do everything but work but the 8-hour day is to blame?

Not the lack of will of the workers to do something or something like that?

I can’t remember in any job I’ve ever had that I’ve had the time to surf a site or anything like that. I’ve only ever seen colleagues who do exactly that and accordingly the work is left lying around, which then had to be done by others.

If people are paid according to "work" and not according to "hours" it looks completely different.

it may well be that the lack of will/motivation can result from the sometimes outdated 8-hour model. Perhaps less work would be left undone and perhaps less procrastination would take place if employees could look forward to an early end to their working day or shorter weekly hours per se. Of course, there are many more factors involved, but the 8-hour day is definitely one that can be easily reconsidered – and this is also shown by practice.

Dear greetings!

had once started an apprenticeship in the office and that was a pure disaster I was ready at 12 o’clock (start of work at 8 o’clock).30) at 12 was in our office brief chaos always, because everyone came to one. I sat with my 2 work colleagues there and hab teilweibe their work voluntarily taken over, because it was just too little to do and the only constantly chatting, smoking or private affairs to clarify were too.If they had to work concentrated for 60 minutes, they were totally exhausted and whining.I don’t work really fast but I had to work so slow and constantly pretend to go to the toilet, constantly overstay my break (the others did too) and I sat there from 1 pm and had to chat with the others about boring topics and hoped that maybe the phone would ring once. I can understand that sometimes the others are not finished but if they take a break every 20 minutes that is clear. I had already taken over the work of the Ausgelernten have made and was constantly at 13 clock with everything ready and although I felt every hour break have made. I broke off the training was just too boring for me and just never had anything to do from 13 o’clock (hightlight was when I won the argument about making coffee, kitchen stuff).

There are people who prefer to work concentrated and long hours without distraction and then enjoy earlier end of work and there are people who are only chatting and lame at work. There are certainly exceptions but in each office in which I was and times with the people have talked, was confirmed to me that. I prefer to be stressed until 1/14pm and have more time for that than to be dawdling around for 8 hours

You could have used the time more effectively by taking a spelling course.

I agree with you. The spelling course would have helped her for sure, especially since she works in an office……Maybe she should have had another friend look over what she writes here and how…………………

Interesting that the two commentators, who also have the same first name, themselves need to catch up in German spelling. After "in that" you don’t use the verb in the indicative. "Maybe" is spelled with two "l "s and excessive use of punctuation does not show a sound knowledge of punctuation, which is part of spelling. I don’t even want to start with comma splitting. I recommend the good old saying: He who sits in a glass house, should not throw around good advice. You could come back again.

Ralf 1
Hello Adnan, thanks for the advice.

One notices you are really not long here, your execution is the simple explanation of the situation.
But the German language is even more tricky.
I completely lost tense and mode in the rush of the morning routine.
Actually, the sentence should end with the auxiliary verb "tust".
The sentence then ends correctly …by taking a spelling course.

According to my reading experience, this is the correct answer to the author’s sophisticated rhetoric.

For Mona this means, no indicative, we are rather in the subjunctive II and by joining the verb also becomes a predicate.

Oh Adnan, this is all not so easy for you.
The word "tust" is also a regional phenomenon here in the Rhineland. You don’t have to learn that, wherever you come from, unless you want to become active in the Rhenish carnival.

Overall, this is my very first comment in any forum, ( With this reply two)
I know now why and will go back to my quiet corner.
From now on continue to be silent and enjoy.

@Mona: Ha, that’s good. But I think that especially after "by" you write the verb in the indicative; so here "occupy". That would be the mode of possibility. But I am not sure. I am not so long in Germany.

I do not know where this study was made ? (berlin in the kifferkiez. ) anyway, of the office people I know, our office is still the "laziest" and we work depending on the order situation on average 6 hours (can also be more).. and as I said, most other offices tend to work 7-12 hours, or even more for some people-

I only heard about shorter working hours… yes it’s true you could do most of the work in 1/3 to 1/2 the time, but then the quality suffers a lot.
may be possible in some industries, but since here is generalized I think the article eimfach just for bullshit

In your office this looks like bad work organization and poorly trained management staff.
As is well known, the Royal Navy in the Second World War has already determined that a sonar guest at the screen does not yield usable results for more than 4h.
Probably it is with you in such a way that you must do completely simple tasks like paper punching and the like. Yes, that one can do very well also 12h long.

And I still work 12 hour days

Middle class with bad middle management? Independently? In a clinic? In social work under an employer who (intentionally) negotiates badly in the sense of the employees, while the board members pay themselves fine salaries?

Exactly sooooo I see it also .

Honestly, it’s ridiculous how offices are sometimes worked, everyone who is constantly busy during working hours should be kicked out.
Unbelievable what is partly howled here, first world problems I only say there, and if it turns out that you create more in 6 hours than in 8 hours, the employers should simply cut the working time and the salary in parallel, a little pressure on the employees, and who does not like that can go to stamp with pleasure.

Exactly, since they work only 37.5% of the time, 62.5% of the employees are superfluous and belong dismissed. Assuming 30% office jobs, we would then have – measured against 40 million jobs – 12 million more unemployed people. And you are a very smart one..

I say only one thing, shift work, 40 h week and then only 6 h / day? Ever thought about how many days off in the month are then still in it. Lord let brains rain from heaven!

You don’t seem to have much of a brain either… It’s about switching from a 40h week to 30 (6*5=30), with the same pay and the same vacation days. Where is the problem?
Yes, it wouldn’t work in some industries, but that’s up for debate here.

If I would work at my hometown, the 5 days / 6 hours variant would be my choice.
But since I have 50 kilometers one way to my workplace every day, I would prefer the 4 days / 8 hours variant. Every working day costs me about 8,-€ only in gasoline (depreciation&) (not including additional costs) and 2 hours lifetime. That is in an average working month 160,-€ of gasoline and 40 hours or almost 2 days of life time.

As a studied Arbeitswissenschaftlerin I can only say, this study brings nevertheless no new realizations, already in the 1970 -ziger and 1980- ziger years and probably also still earlier, we stated that employees, who exercise office activities and 6 hours per day work in these 6 hours more effectively, than their colleagues, who work 8 hours.
But I ask the question: Do all those who have commented today on the best working hours on this subject, vacation? I guess they only confirm the results of the study. But please do not forget, there are not only these office jobs, there are incredibly many activities, where no "bumming", is possible, also flexitime or similar wishes will remain dreams. I don’t have to list them all now, because I assume that the commentators are smart enough to think about this for themselves.

Full my opinion …. I work a 7 day rolling week shift system, I can’t afford to have a "chat" with my colleagues or to overstay my break. I am ONLY in production, but without ours you would not need office workers and vice versa…. In general, I’m hearing a bit much talk about office here, …..who makes the produktieven part of the economy, which goes on the bones (in the true sense of the word) ??

Clearly, the 6h day is more effective, only the fewest AG implemented, although the work would be distributed even more equitable .

To the point!

I think there I would be still rather for an unconditional basic income. Unconditional basic income would ensure that more people with a half-day job are happier or voluntarily switch to a half-day job, without slipping for it to the edge of the existential unemployment. Experiments with the topic have already shown that for most people not much changes, except a general rest and the knowledge to never be completely destitute. I

As long as there is the caste of freeloaders (rulers and politicians), this bGE will not come, although this system has incredible potential in terms of progress, science, education and much more. One would invest in things time, which one always wanted or can. So to say, to make the hobby to the profession, the effectiveness would make an insane leap upwards.

I have been working 4 days a week for 4 years and find this working time model optimal. The gain in quality of life is great. With this change I learned to understand the meaning of life work balance and I never want to work 40 hours again! I can’t say if it has made me more effective but for my personal life it has been one of the best decisions I have made in my life.

Both models, 4x 8h or 5x 6h, have their advantages and disadvantages. The "classic" working day of 8h is currently like an "open execution" until retirement / death – only the other way around that you get out for "free time" and drive in to work … You live to work and that just makes unhappy. Then still the horrendous charges/taxes to it as well as a policy that passes by the citizen, it gangelt where it goes and finished is the existence as a cow that you can milk continuously and fleece until it no longer gives milk (consumes labor) and at the minimum dahinexisitert! When I had to work 8 hours, I was totally unhappy and the meaning of life for me forfeited! I have reduced to 5h/day and now I have a good work-life balance, at work I have more motivation, I work more than before with 8h and sometimes I stay voluntarily longer than I have to because the pressure is missing. The earnings are logically less than full-time but also the cold progression does not hit so. Between 8h and 6h are 25% time but with the money it was only 15% difference – the other 10% got bankrupt states, incompetent politicians and ailing banks – great "deal" – and for this you waste your precious lifetime which is to be considered as a finite resource … Going to work is part of it – no question but it must also be worth it and above all the personal freedom and quality of life should be preserved as well as possible with a decent work-life balance. In the end, the employer and the employee profit equally from this.

I start at 6:30 and work until I’m done. Forwarding agency delivery. That means on average from 6:30 to ca. 15:00 without a break. Why do I earn less than those in the office when they post each other Youtube links. There the companies should start and pay what is worked then earn those who keep the jobs of the company by productivity and pay also what they earn.

A well-known dilemma in the logistics industry.
High performers, which are just drivers, are squeezed out in a puny way.
The time will come, which will clearly relativize the wage/salary level.
This is also shown by the shortage of drivers that has occurred for some time now.
Regretfully the wrong time to work in this industry and even be appreciated.
Since I work on the same side, however in the office/operatives it is also with me nearly 70 std. the week. And these are filled with work and stress.
Some may think it’s my own fault with the hours, but I like my job and I get paid accordingly.
Many greetings

With all due respect, working 70 hours a week is above all a personal decision. If one works as much as two normal workers, why not hire one more person?? The employer is pleased this voluntary personal sacrifice of course.

If you read the linked original article, you can see that the author has not understood an important point: The 2000 employees were asked how you assess your productivity SELF, resp. an own estimation, how many hours they work PRODUCTIVELY.
So the opening sentence is wrong; the study did not find that employees only work 3 hours.
Whether one is in a position to be able to assess this objectively is one question. The other question that arises from this, what does "working productively" versus "working" mean??
The fact that the rest of the time is wasted on the listed activities does not mean that it is wasted.
Nevertheless, I see it also in such a way that the 8-hour day is not particularly productive. A more generous break regulation would also be conceivable. In the time you can then learn English, Mrs. Hansen ;)

It is a pity that the actual statement of the study is reinterpreted in this way for the sake of sensationalism… (but meanwhile it is no longer a rarity in the media, see also the NO2 measurement "at" the Oldenburg Marathon).

If I have 1.5 hours to get there and 1.5 hours to get back, then I take the 4-day week. If I have only 30 minutes way, then the 6 h week.

The truth is that the 8-hour model was established at a time (the beginning of the 20th century) when work. Jhd.) where the work was much more ineffective. Both in factories and in the office as well as in the trade etc. The truth is that the 8-hour model was established at a time (in the early 20th century, work became incredibly efficient, mainly due to machines and computerized work). Accordingly, the reduction of working hours to 6 hours a day would be the logical conclusion.

Especially in physically very strenuous jobs (in care, educators, primary school teachers, in the factory) this would create more jobs, which cost more in the first moment, but afterwards also contribute noticeably to an increase in purchasing power and thus the economic product of the country.
Sometimes, however, one thinks that having happy, satisfied and healthy citizens is not the goal of politics. At present, it seems to be there only to increase the profit maximization of individual private companies… a great pity, because the social cohesion of society is endangered this way.

Only: in the care, educators, teachers
the personnel supply is completely in the Miesen. I myself work in the clinic as a nurse. We could recruit more, but the ceiling has been exhausted.

I can only absolutely agree with the comment. Especially the final paragraph should actually move more people. When I think about the events in politics, I often think about the fact that many earlier "advanced civilizations" must have perished in a similar way: in egomaniacal complacency of the "leaders" and prosperity-sated, depressive lethargy of the people.
I am curious whether our population, in view of constantly new burdens, will once again find the strength to revolt against the unscrupulous maximization of profits. Maybe we should have tried more than the green traffic light arrow from the GDR after all…

the GDR did not go bankrupt ?
I wonder what MiG means by this, that a constitutional state should have taken more lessons from an undemocratic communist regime, which has run such a mismanagement, that finally the whole state has been destroyed

that’s almost like saying that we should have learned something from the Nazis, because productivity was so high there

However, I agree that the Germans have become so wealthy that most of them live in resignation, decadence and laziness instead of doing something useful.
This is a fundamental problem of the industrialized countries and this is also the reason why empires like Rome have crumbled. People become lazy when they no longer have to fight for survival.
Hartz IV is the worst, because there are many who abuse it in order not to have to work and to be financed by the working people by tax.
Except for those who are dependent on Hartz IV because they are unable to work.

But when children arrive at secondary schools and say they want to go on "Hartz IV" later, I wonder if the parents are not giving the children the wrong picture of life and if it is not already too late to stop the decadence and laziness.

One can add also the falsified sick notes of the oh so overloaded employees.

As a doctor you so often have to give people a sick note, which you then regret on the same day, because you happen to see the lady/the gentleman again in the Lidl, all dressed up.
To all those who do this, the doctors are not stupid, they know when you are faking it and they can check your headaches and stomach aches and gastrointestinal problems for truth with a few tests if they want to.

This can have serious consequences for you, because of sickness fraud and refusal to work :)

If the employees and the employers would be more honest to each other, then a comfortable working time and a reasonable workload could be achieved together without big problems.
However, most employees are not willing to do this, because then they would have to admit that the student assistants are abused as personal babysitters and that the break went longer and the accidental illness on vacation was just to extend the vacation by a week.

Flexible working hours would be a start.
How obtuse are we humans, who oh so gladly hold on to outdated working time models. Every morning traffic jam. Every afternoon traffic jam. In the morning between 7 and 8 o’clock all stand in the traffic jam on the way to the office, starting from 16:30 again on the way home. So much lost life time just because you are supposed to be "present at core hours". Complete nonsense.

– read at work. Accurate article

I work 8.5 hours a day, sometimes 9. If you then add 1.5 hours break then you are at work for almost 11 hours.

What I also don’t think is right is that the report only refers to office workers who have every Saturday off.

I work in the. Retail and have almost every 3 months times a Saturday off.
Overtime, irregular working hours, no fixed days off and then such long working days. I would be happy if they would just change some laws in this regard and abolish the work and non-work days, because:
Even if one has a day off in the week and Saturday must work the vacation with a 6 day week in many enterprises is counted. So e.g. 30 days become not 6 weeks, but 5 weeks of vacation.

I am generally for the 6 hour day, in the service sector especially, because the change and the digitalization simply demand much more from the employees.

And if the weekly working days are reduced from 6 to 5, then the 30 days of vacation are also reduced to 25 days. Do you think this will remain the same?

. A study from ***Great Britain*** obtained this result by finding nearly 2.000 employees, who work in the office, surveyed.

My critical attention lies on Great Britain! But we live and work here in Germany, what is this generalization?? The title and large parts of the article suggest that we are in Germany, but because of the basis of the study we are actually "talking" about Great Britain!

I simply claim without a sound basis, that in Germany more than 2 hours are necessary. and 58 minutes on an 8 hour day.-day is worked effectively. The state-sponsored intensification of work and maximization of profits without sparing the human resource has certainly worked to the benefit of the employer. Take a look at the national economies, in all areas UK is worse than D, where may be the reason?

Why is the number of burnt-out employees and mental illnesses constantly increasing in Germany?? Definitely not because in an 8 hour working day only 3 hours. is being worked on..

Ask in a hospital administration if they work 3 hours a day in the office. work and use the rest privately or in the judiciary etc. pp., my experiences are completely different. Especially in the hospital it is rather the rule to come and go later, so much for 3 hours. Work. And if we move from the office to the service industry, care, crafts, IT, speak the restl. working environment change, it becomes clear that here with us the clocks tick already much too long clearly differently! A rethinking must come, but one that the poverty spiral not still further upward screws..

Due to job-related stress with subsequent burnout and significant health and financial losses, I went from 38.5 to 32 hrs. but 4 days a week x 8 hours., Fridays additionally free (6.5 hours).-day) which brought a clear recovery effect with itself. This would not have happened to me if I had only worked 3 hours. would have had to work every day..

Write an article with a survey in Germany as a basis, everything else is comparing apples with oranges and in my eyes again one of the countless articles that only cause one thing: dumbing down the people!

A year ago I reduced my workload from 40 to 30 hours per week for health reasons (multiple hearing loss with permanent damage due to permanent stress). I still work from Monday to Friday, but only 6 hours a day. Financially it was already a big restriction but alternativlos. After one year I can draw a good conclusion and say for me personally that the improvement of the quality of life is immense. I can’t see any difference in the amount of work I do, so I get just as much done in 6 hours as in 8 hours. And yet I still have time to do private things on the side. That this is not possible in every company, I am well aware and I am also anything but dissatisfied that I am offered this opportunity in my company. Especially in the media industry this is not necessarily to be taken for granted.
I would be happy if the general working world would embrace the concept of the 30 hour week, if it is possible to. I can at least recommend it to everyone.

And this raises the question: Why are you so terribly grateful to your employer now, when you can do the same amount of work in 6 hours as you did before in 8 hours, but are paid much less for it?? There is something wrong..

Since many employers are as mentally limited as you are, there is no option in many companies to change to a 30-hour week. He is possibly. grateful that the employer has made this alternative possible for him – regardless of his salary. Gratitude can also be shown in a win-win situation. Gratitude is not coupled to the fact that negative consequences arise on the side of the Gedankten.

I have had exactly the same experience.

Such a crappy comment function. Have just written a detailed comment. Forgot to check the box and everything was gone.
Too bad

Now I do not write this anymore.
In short, very good article.
In today’s world people work too much and are exploited.
No wonder that more and more people collapse and no longer come clear.

Lol, that’s why I always put everything written in the cache with one click before I send – takes ca. 2 seconds.

… such a "rubbish". The article generalizes the actual situation of the employees. Years of savings in the personnel sector and digitalization have steadily increased the pressure of work. We employees are caught in a network and have to do our work continuously. Time to drink coffee, to talk with colleagues about private life, to visit private homepages in the net or just to put feet on the desk is simply impossible in a well managed company. The majority of employees try to complete their workload within the 8 hours, which usually only succeeds with voluntary (unpaid) extra work. Shifting work to 4 days or 6 hours a day is not possible for most employees if they want to be successful and productive in the system. This comment was written after work.

Hmm, who already has closing time at 10:51h, but now really does not need to complain about high workload :-D

Ever heard of shift ?

The fact alone that 19 % are officially (those who dare to say so, documented will to turn away can lead to dismissal by the employer) sitting on packed suitcases& looking for other jobs during working hours shows that personal hygiene fails. With a correspondingly employee-friendly market situation, the result would be 19 % fluctuation!

There are actually still companies in which the employees are quite satisfied and have a high level of identification with the company. Studies testify there quite other efficiency!

The positive experiences of companies that are experimenting – even the experimenting itself shows that they tick differently – is the success rather due to the better personnel hygiene that prevails there incl. the better working conditions of the employees. Job satisfaction?

I see the frightening efficiency rather in connection with a lack of job satisfaction and thus the bar 8 hours a day is simply wrong.

And what exactly is the issue missing?

I have to confess, that’s how I’ve felt with every office job I’ve started so far. I look for intense 3 – 4 hours of work time, the rest of the day I "sit" because I have to and I already work only 4 days/week. That does not mean that I have only one task, I am girl for everything and I am head office, accountant, personnel officer, project manager and go on building sites. For me overtime is superfluous. I can easily do my work in less than 8 hours, it always depends on how much you get distracted and how you prioritize your work. Of course, my boss would like to see me be there even more, because I would like to see more money because of the responsibility and what I do, but he makes it depend on the time and not on the performance. I do not think that is fair.

"But he makes it dependent on time and not on performance. I think that is not fair."

Fairer is not possible at all. Because only the time is not manipulable for humans. It is the same for all and all have only one lifetime.

Performance, on the other hand, is individual and highly manipulable, as well as extremely subjective and corrupt.

It is anything but fair when a manager who "earns" hundreds of thousands or millions of euros a year, because of his incompetence and destructiveness – rivets in pinstripes – to which quite a few employees fall victim, possibly the company is driven to the wall, also receives a compensation of millions, while the baker who gets up at 3 a.m. so that we have fresh rolls in the morning, can hardly afford his own bread. Whereby the baker surely works twice as much time really (hard) as the manager who swings from event to event.

Also, it is never the achievement of an individual, if something is created and achieved.
Only individuals are partly extremely favored, while those who really use their working time constructively and meaningfully, get an appel and an egg.

there is only one just, fair "payment" and this is measured without doubt by the life-time.

It is because people are simply structured differently and uniquely in each case,
that is not considered in this article. I work – just as you probably do :))
according to the so-called Pareto principle, we create in 20% of the time 80% of the work and are afterwards
The working world here is simply no longer up to date,
just as being a species-appropriate MENSCH has nothing to do with being a species-appropriate human being.

The whole work system was once well thought after the war, but is derailed to a power and oppression system, which suppresses any freedom and creativity and so in the long run harms itself; Just as the party system, religion system, … for the conscious MENSH outdated and it needs fulfilling and LebensFreude-bringenende alternatives.
This already exists, as I recently read in the brand eins issue 2 Wirtschaft neu denken/Neue Arbeit (rethinking the economy/new work).

Very right. Today’s working conditions are much more like a slave system than anything else.

The perfidious thing is that it would be much simpler, easier and more effective to change the system in a way that all people and the environment participate positively. There would be only profits-r, no losses.

Dear Ms. Hansen,

please, before you spread such nonsense here, learn first of all your craft! To take as a basis for such an article a data base of ridiculous 2000 office workers out of millions of such in Europe alone, is simply ridiculous.
This is a typical example for an article without foundation, which was written, so that one brings irgenetwas to paper/online.
The article is a waste of working time – sorry

Dear Mr. Welz,

please read the article correctly and deal with statistical surveys yourself.
"Whether the result of this survey, that employees in the office spend just under three hours a day on their work, is representative remains questionable."The author does not claim to be representative.
In addition, 2000 people are a solid sample for a study and can be quite representative of the population. Maybe you should be clear about what a population is in this case. I am sure that you would then also understand that neither the author nor the authors of the study would claim in the slightest that the study is representative for all professions and countries.

It is your comment that is "foundationless". Well, actually not, after all it is based on her huge cluelessness about inferential statistics.

If you want to inform yourself about the topic, I will gladly give you some reading tips.

Hello Hr. M.S.
Are a right g’scheidhaferl gell? Translation from the Bavarian: Intelligenztopf.
So the same smart aleck as the author
No further comment..

Who has absolutely no plan any more and feels lost on planet earth, simply answers to everything "Klugscheisser!" and thus openly confesses its own stupidity.

"No further comment…"

After two completely insubstantial, contentwise also still wrong and thus totally superfluous comments, this is a correct decision

Incompetent bosses don’t see "performance" and productivity, they only see how long someone is "present" at the workplace. And only that counts for such people.

The hard-working, productive and valuable employee is then judged worse than the incompetent and "cyclist" who serves his time and artificially stays longer at his place without achieving anything useful.

must smile right away. have worked too effectively myself (ages ago). colleagues told me then I should not make "so fast", that would mess up the "quota.
i myself have never been a fan of ineffectiveness. why work 6 hours when you can do it in three?. but if i only get paid by attendance? what should i do… tell the boss: i can do in three hours what the others do in 6. i would like to be paid for 5 hours and leave after three hours. a time gain for me and a financial incentive for the boss. well at least that’s what I thought. result: i got fired :(

New working time models should urgently be researched in more detail.
I have had experiences that applied exactly to these types of situations. The boredom partly ate me up and pulled me down in such a way that I had no energy left for the actual remaining activity. It is very exhausting when you have to develop strategies for artificially dragging out your activities. This "boreout" has developed into a "bornout" for me, because I was only upset about small things and was constantly brooding. Interestingly, most of those affected do not talk about it. This topic is still stigmatized in our society. Some of my colleagues were also afraid of negative consequences. I myself have raised the issue with superiors. I couldn’t find a remedy for it, because my boss felt the same way :-)
I have also had similar experiences after a change of job. This topic needs more discussion!

I always read such articles with an extra portion of fascination while my eyes glide over the words "40-hour week". At this moment I keep thinking about my (contractually agreed) 45-hour week and imagine how it would feel to drop the pen after exactly eight hours.
Someday, when I’m having a particularly rebellious day, I might just do that just to feel that feeling. :-)

A half-sentence exposes the article as work-life balance nonsense:
"To do this, it was necessary to hire additional workers."
Mr. Gutz’s comment is more to the point: Determine the weekly working hours!

Reading comprehension! The additional workers had to be hired in this case, because it is about the elderly care and accordingly someone must always be present. One could now argue that a reduction of hours in this application is therefore not reasonable, but: If the quality of care (better reputation of the home and thus increased popularity) and the health of the employees (less absenteeism and thus further cost reduction) improves, it pays off again. Quite apart from the ethical perspective.

I am in favor of the 45-hour week. This increases efficiency, reduces compacted working and
reflects the overtime situation.

But if then please also with a constant salary..!

Why constant? Ten to twenty percent less should then be enough – to compensate..

Part of the time not spent on the actual work is spent in supposedly unproductive exchanges with colleagues. Even though this may be a private matter, this time brings the team together and is therefore, in my opinion, very important for every company.

The opposite should not be more rare. Private conversations among work colleagues lead to a split in the team. And now?..

If you have 6 hours and work only 3 after the study, you still have more than enough time to talk to your colleagues. In addition, one can do this then also in the won spare time. Personally, I prefer more freedom and the possibility to choose with whom I talk to "forced" conversations with colleagues. ;-)

Well, I have heard that so-called boring jobs exist in huge numbers.
At the moment I’m doing an internship in a care facility and can enjoy a full 8-hour day………
It would be nice to have an adequate payment – maybe for the job title:
Analog Health and Senior Nursing Specialist
Tender Loving Inpatient Care Manager

+1 "Like" for "Tender Loving Inpatient Care Manager."

How about assigning a certain amount of work (weekly workload) to the employees, which they can then accomplish in 6 hours a day when working intensively. But then they are completely free to decide when they go to work. The main thing is to get the work done by the end of the week! That is surely only possible with office work!
Something like this would certainly motivate employees because they would then be free to decide about their free time and job. And they would work effectively at least 6 hours instead of only 3 hours.

Good approach, but not really to be implemented. Certain core times must exist. Many things must be coordinated with other colleagues and also customers/suppliers, etc. must be able to reach the employee..

This principle is exploited in reverse, a trust employment contract with a nearby screw manufacturer all. These then have to come to work partly on Sunday because the workload is not manageable… Therefore, I am personally no longer a fan of such approaches

Sign up now for our HR Update and regularly receive exciting articles, interviews and background reports from the field of human resources.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: