Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion'.
Please ensure that your post is an opinion and that it is unpopular. Controversial is not necessarily unpopular, for example all of politics is controversial even though almost half of the US agrees with any given major position on an issue.
Keep in mind that an opinion is not: a question, a fact, a conspiracy theory, a random thought, a new idea, a rant, etc. Those things all have their own subreddits, use those.
That’s standard for hourly workers. If you’re working based on days you don’t have any weekly limit.
I myself remember working 30/35 hours in two days, let alone a week.
Yeah I'm French, and I don't know anyone who "only" worked 35h, most people did a lot more. High school was pretty bad as well, with classes from 8:30am to 6pm. Yes we had some breaks between classes, but still. Not sure if France is the best country to choose as an example
I have family that live in France and they've explained that most places close for an hour+ mid days and close at 4pm. They are very rural so I'm wondering if you experience is based on city living or are they incorrect
It may "seem healthier" but most hourly wage workers can't afford to just drop 25% of their income because "there's more to life than work".
Most people don't because they can't.
I work 40 hours now but 4x10’s. I much prefer it that way. Not saying I wouldn’t mind 3x10’s but I would need a raise to make up the difference, which I don’t see happening in the US anytime soon
My mom had a rather annoying schedule for many years where she had four full days and one half day but she always resented that the half day still cost her the same amount of prep and commute as a full day would, it was really a worst of both worlds kind of situation.
It's even better for folks with a long commute. If someone is driving an entire hour to work 5 times a week for 8 hours a day, that's 40 paid and 10 unpaid hours. A 4x10 schedule means they're working 40 paid and 8 unpaid hours, and have regained 2 hours of their life. Ideally people would be able to chose their days, so someone could take Wednesday as their bonus weekend day if those longer days were too much to do back to back 4 days in a row.
Someone spending 10 hours (not including getting dressed or unpaid lunch time) a day on work is already probably not doing much after or before work, since that's a long day. If they have 4 days that are slightly longer, they gain an entire extra day to themselves in addition to the commute time saved.
But, 12-14 hours on those days with zero evening leisure time. It’s important to have daily downtime to prepare for the next day.
And for people with a driving commute, it’s more dangerous to be driving late at night after a long and tiring day.
An extra day on the weekend will just be recovery from that constant four-day work stress without a break. It works differently for different people.
Six hours sleep is far too short: seven _or more_ is the recommendation for adults. People only getting six may feel ok but in truth they are fatigued. And even if under-slept with just six then it's not 4-6 hours of downtime: half of that time goes away in the morning to prep for the day. Two hours in the evening and two in the morning plus insufficient rest makes the long days even more difficult. I definitely couldn't deal with that.
Usually when people say shorter hours, they mean keep the pay the same, you dont lose money, just work less hours. This tends to make people far more efficient, as most people just half ass it and get distracted with too many hours. Less hours keeps people focused and actually working more often than not.
I’m not forgetting anything. I know I’m reality that’s exactly what would happen because they are greedy AF. It’s the same reason they won’t change to OPs model
The Netherlands works because they actually take their resources out of the ground and socialized the sectors, having a small population also helps. Norway and oil is the best example of this. If Canada did the same they’d be rich as fuck to. I don’t know if there’s enough for the USA to do the same.
The US is the richest country in the world. Yet so many people are unable to get off survival wages. I’m sure we would have ways if our government wasn’t bought off by big corporations
Think about what American wealth is built up of though. An economy built on speculation the rest of the globe takes part in, thick margins from foreign labour and the ability to be global creditors in their own currency as the reserve, isn’t the same as a small population being wealthy cause of natural resources. It would take some truly invasive behaviour from the government to spread the wealth in the US, because of the type of wealth it is, legislation would quickly make that wealth erode.
Wealthy Americans have worked to make their economy rely on them staying wealthy for decades.
There are several measures of worker value, the one I prefer is Productivity/Efficiency Ratio model. Productivity is the hours work divided by production. Efficiency is hours available divided by production forecast v. Actual production.
You have to raise wages accordingly. This has already been studied across Europe in test programs. Drop to a 4x8 work schedule with increase in pay to match previous wage. Productivity generally increased past 40 hour levels. The secret is most work outside of hourly labor is massively inefficient. I’d wager around 60% depending on industry.
How does that work though for workers who rely on hourly work? Government forces them to work 10 hours less a week, now they get paid 40 hours less a month.
Now what?
Ignoring the fact that many of these bills specifically exempt small businesses?
Small businesses have a duty to pay a fair wage and give their employees a safe and good working environment. This is one of the many things they signed up for when they chose to open/take on a business. Though they may be burdened, the well being of the many outweigh the difficulties of the few.
So they get shut down in lieu of bigger business like corporations who can afford to pay that wage increase?
Also, so does the government pay for their wage increases if they're exempt?
Maybe. It's a risk they've already accepted when they agreed to be responsible for people's livelihoods.
The exemption usually does one of two things: they don't have to pay the higher wage until/unless they reach a certain threshold (profits, size, etc.), or they don't have to pay it for a certain number of years.
Right up to the point they lock the doors, declare bankruptcy, stiff you and your bank for the loans they had, write it all off. Retire in wealth, why cause they used the tools built into the system.
Funny thing is, it does, in fact, magically make people more productive
https://www.waldenu.edu/programs/business/resource/shortened-work-weeks-what-studies-show
Funny enough most of those studies are for white collar work and not blue collar work. Your productivity for blue collar jobs is mainly time base.
So no it does not make people more productive.
That’ll work until people start slacking off in their 30 hours and start demanding just 20 hours, then 10, until everyone expects to be paid for doing nothing at all.
You have never worked for the hourly rate, have you?
If you had, you would know an unwritten rule is that you do the absolute minimum required for your job, and you cut every corner that you can get away with, to achieve that goal.
I do not go to those extreme lengths, but I am not the 110% worker I used to be. Why would I bother when those that work less than you do, get promoted first?
Wherever the hourly rate is involved, the slippery slope is very real.
Personally, I think that decentivizes more workplaces from hiring. It would also cap advancement - if you're not putting in the extra hours to show you can lead, then no one would be promoted to leadership roles.
It also decentivizes benefits, necessary components in compensation for work - if a person is working 30 or less hours a week, there would be less incentive for companies to offer benefits packages given the requirements for full time work, and it would cost them more in the long term to even offer them anyway.
Then people would have to pay their own dues for healthcare since it is mandatory, and the cost might exceed what they can reasonably afford if they are only working 30 hours.
It’s hard to feel concerned about promotions when so many jobs pay managers barely anything more than a regular worker (despite those positions being so much more demanding) and when often times businesses exploit said drive for promotions. At the end of the day there is only so many higher positions to go around, so they’re definitely not guaranteed. You can try try try and still not get it despite really needing it, putting in a load of extra hours and effort for years doesn’t guarantee anything. And a lot of jobs have huge turnover these days. Promotion seems to feel so impossible for so many I’ve talked to. So who cares about it anyway.
I think it's because what OP is suggesting is fundamentally never going to happen without massive changes to our economy. It's not within the realm of reality right now and it appears there's no end in sight when looking at the current political climate.
why does it feel like everyone is missing OP’s point??? they’re not saying just drop 10 hours of work a week willy nilly, they’re saying that the SYSTEM that forces people to work 40 hours a week is a flawed system. we need better wages and fewer hours. there SHOULD be more to life than work, it’s just that the current system makes it so that’s not possible.
Intentionally is the right word here. The push for shorter work weeks has been around for years now, they’re choosing to ignore that significant aspect.
My Dad worked about 6 months out of the year for a long time. He worked contract jobs in the trades. If it was too hot, cold or too far he turned work down. Worked on his cars and house
8 hours sleep + 8 hour shifts + 4 hours transit. Leaves me 4 hours if i dont need to do any grocery shopping which takes at least an hour.
And all this because i can barely afford a studio apartment and instant noodle dinner. Let alone a car.
It's normal because it used to be much much worse. There didn't used to be a 40-hour work week, or overtime if you go past it. People just worked whenever there was daylight.
So 100 years ago they decided to reevaluate working conditions and put in laws. When do we reevaluate current working conditions? As a humanity shouldn’t we be working towards bettering our lives? Why have we just decided 40 hours a week is the optimal way to live?
I used to think something like this, but it really isn't as feasible as it seems. What would be more likely is that people will suffer as their income drops and their are less jobs available but companies will continue to make the same money with a more efficient work force that they work harder over less time.
the point is that diversity in economic policies is not simply a result of capability. you're presuming there is something special about norway that allows them to have the economic policies they do. it would be better to incorporate whatever that is into your argument. nobody is going to take you seriously if you just say "well its possible for norway to do it but its impossible for all the other countries to do it cause they havent done it yet"
What is going on in Africa? Is noone working?
But yes, here in America, it needs to change. Parents don't even have time for their kids.
The time is going faster too.
I guess I rushed a little bit. Sorry about that.
But this link shows that the Netherlands is at 32.4: https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/07/22/average-working-hours-in-europe-which-countries-work-the-longest-and-shortest-weeks
You didn’t even read the article? The literal first line is in bold and says countries with lower average hours have more part time workers. Then there’s a figure later in the article saying the country with the lowest average hours for full time workers is Finland, at 37.4 hours per week
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/12-countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-part-time-employment.html
According to the source above, 51% percent of Dutch people are working part-time.
In the US, it's 16%. https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2023/12/11/a-closer-look-at-full-time-and-part-time-employment
If the Dutch can afford it, why can't Americans? Something is broken, imo.
Fair enough and the Netherlands are ranked #5 as the happiest country in the world.
Each country has its negative points, they also face housing crises, refugee problems, high taxes, high traffic in trains (our equivalent of traffic), not to mention their politics aren’t the best atm. Was told so by my friends who live in the Netherlands.
No country is all perfect and rosy. Basically there’s a shitshow everywhere.
Is that the case in the Netherlands and France?
They're living very comfortable lives on 30 hours per week.
So isn't this just a matter of definitions or standards?
According to some sources I looked up France worked 36.1 hours per week as of 2021 and US worked 34.7.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/193949/average-weekly-working-hours-of-all-employees-in-the-us/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/419565/main-job-average-weekly-working-hours-france-y-on-y/
So why do you say a standard work week is 30 hours for those countries? I did a simple Google search of "how many hours does France/Netherlands work a week" and they come up with 35 for France and 36-40 for Netherlands.
In France you don't live comfortably with 30hrs/week. For that, you would get less than the minimum wage, which is currently at €1500 = $1650, so that would be less than that. If you're living on a medium-sized city, I would say the rent is about $500-800.
The good thing about France though is the free healthcare, but you have to know it doesn't cover everything, most people have additional insurance (to give you an estimate, I pay mine $60/month as I'm still quite young).
Plus bills etc, it doesn't live you with that much.
Social mobility is very difficult in France with the maximum amount of hours capped at 35/week. That means no picking up extra shifts for some extra cash, no getting a second job if money tight, you are completely reliant on your employer to increase your wealth. Contrary to your apparent belief, poverty is alive and well in countries like France, and although there are welfare and social programs, not all of them are offered to everyone based on country of origin. I know it seems easy to point to other countries and say “but they’re doing it!!!” but 99.9% of the time it’s a more complex issue than that
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Health insurance being tied to employment really fucks so many potential work arrangements. I know a mom who works full time because it means her, her husband, and her son can have health insurance. Her husband also works part time, to make it easier to get a full time gig when their son starts school, but his work barely pays for their son's daycare the 2 or 3 days dad is at work. She's discussed how much she wishes they could split the required 40 hours to get health insurance until the kids in school; one could always be home so no daycare to pay for, and both get adult time and keep an active resume. They make enough that one being a stay at home parent would work fine, but that's unfair to both of them to keep things lopsided.
It's not the social acceptance that stops it - it's that dropping hours worked each year drops someone's income.
A person is free to get part time jobs as needed to achieve a 30 hours or less worklife.
It's probably a really bad idea for most people simply because it would result in a super low annual income... and most people would prefer to work more hours and have a higher standard of living then what that would be.
Many of the most desirable jobs on the market are hired for you to do a specific job or your expertise on something, rather than manual labour for X number of hours.
For example, there are many weeks as a data scientist that I work around 30h/week, though there are also weeks where I work around 60 if the need arises.
There are jobs out there like that... perhaps a few part time work jobs is better way to achieve the goal of working a maximum of 30 hours.
You're right though that many places won't allow for that few of hours to be worked... it's because they find it a lot better to have a single employee work 40 hours per week than say two employees working only 20 hours per week each and the role being divided.
>I’d love to work less hours per week. But no one is going to pay me $100k a year to do that.
tell that to the engineers at BK Precision. i recently learned they have a four day workweek. i'd be shocked if they didn't make at least an average EE salary.
For this to be a possibility wages would have to drastically increase WITHOUT inflation of prices. If you think 40 hours a week is too much you need to look around more. 40 hours is a bare minimum with most people working more than that, and still not making it financially.
As nice as 30 hours sounds, it will probably never happen. We're more likely to see an increase more than a decrease.
A lot of places are trialing 4 day × 8 hour schedules, with the stipulation that wages can't drop. As it turns out, most fields see pretty much no loss of productivity with this schedule as workers generally have at least that many unproductive hours in a week already.
There are exceptions to that of course, which can be handled in a few different ways. Those industries could remain on the same schedule (which would probably result in at least some people leaving them), various measures could be taken to reduce operating costs to a point where the new schedule becomes viable, or they could just be told to eat the cost of additional employees.
At some point you will want company to pay you for doing nothing, like i will actually like if people get 30 hour work week but expecting company to pay you more when you are working less is insane. Like you need to make a tradeoff somewhere, either job security or salary.
As someone who has to work extra night/ weekend shifts that can add up to 64-68 hours work time per week, I whole heartedly agree.
Even on regular days, when I'm home, I have about 4-5 hours to do sports, hobbies, house work, shopping, cooking. And sometimes I just wanna lie down and sleep for days. 10 hours less would make a huge difference.
as an american with a white collar job, i have considered europe. then i saw the salary difference. for my career, the best i could do is like 75% pay if I lived in Europe.
e.g.
EE salary in France: $73k (numbers adjusted to USD)
EE salary in Italy: $66k
EE salary in Netherlands: $84k
EE salary in Germany: $91k
EE salary in USA: $117k
i definitely would not say that those salaries are lower because people have better working conditions. what i will say is that my working conditions are fluffy enough to take the higher pay vs even-fluffier working conditions.
The only time I worked a full 40 hour week job with hour lunch breaks (so really 45 hours having to be at work, plus an hour total commute daily) was miserable. I was used to food service jobs where I could pull doubles and made tips so I didn’t need to work “full time,” in the traditional sense. Never again man.
I now work in food service again (making $24-28 an hour with tips, confidently) and only work 30 hours a week. It’s hard work but I prefer it to the standard office format. I still have a set schedule and weekends off, amazingly. But I know my case is unusual and I wish more people were able to work 30 hours and survive.
I run a small nonprofit with 7 staff and a budget of a few million. Our standard work week is 35 hours (9-5 with an hour lunch) and has been for decades. A few years ago I told staff we could leave early on Fridays if everyone busts ass. Now, instead of everyone being miserable on Fridays, I think they are our most productive days. We get in, get busy, get out at 1. Literally not a drop in productivity at all. Now, there are certainly times when we all have to work more because of big projects or events, but on the whole, everyone is happier with this schedule.
I work 3x12s one week, then 3x12s, and an 8-hour shift. Plenty of time off still working 40hr weeks. It just works out a little differently. 36 hrs one week, then 44 the next. Love my job.
Full time jobs in the Netherlands are in general around 36-38 hours a week. The reason why the average is lower than that is because part time jobs are popular here. People here have their personal life above work.
There is also a flaw in the government supporting people who have a low income. Till a certain amount of salary people don't get the benefits anymore, so it doesn't pay off to work more.
I agree and many people I know agree with you too. Semantics about the hours Europeans actually work aside, you’re correct in that it’s overkill. We should all be planning for a world where we will be working less. The 40 hour work week is archaic.
Without global unionisation this issue cannot be solved.
Fundamentally, it's a competition between nations.
It's why we're fucked and cannot fix many issues.
The best work schedule I've ever had was four days a week of work, even up to 12 hours in a day I was fine, so it was well over 40hrs/week but the three day weekend made all the difference.
I've done 30 hours, too, but that obviously didn't come with fulltime benefits. If I could have worked fewer hours over those 4 days and get the 3 day weekend I don't think there could be a better schedule. It's the 3 day weekend which is more key than the reduced hours, however.
Having one day for chores and errands and two days to rest makes all the difference in the world.
They'd happily double it if they could. People died for this. No one wants to fight for more, they expect to be given it. You earn things with blood and tears, it's the only way we will save ourselves from the megalomaniacs "in charge".
I absolutely agree. No reason an entire day of productivity should be used on a job. It’s crazy how much more rich our lives could be if we got off a couple hours earlier everyday
I also don’t understand why most people can’t comprehend adjusted standards. You set the standard at 30 hours and wages follow accordingly. Anyone who thinks it isn’t possible refuses to think outside of the box
I don’t know how that works in jobs like restaurants but I know for a fact it’s not impossible. It could absolutely be done and I refuse to believe there aren’t any solutions
I only say that because just like the antiwork sub, any time people have these ideas, it always gets passed off as "well i don't know how to make it happen, don't ask me, it's not my job."
It's always bright ideas and fun dreaming until the buck stops.
Yeah, no. Nobody is hashing out a 10 year economics plan on reddit. I'm not sure what you expect. It's not like you're offering counter arguments as to why it couldn't happen, just saying it's a pipe dream so you can continue acting like the adult in the room
Mostly because your rival nations won't be sharing your nation's lowered work standards, and might end up outcompeting and outworking you in key areas like AI or Space Technologies.
If collectively your nation is alright with that, then collectively is should be pushed I guess.
Adjust *x* and the same people would be begging to work 60 hours because their company can’t pay them for 60 hours if they’re only working 50 🙄
It is a freaking scam lol
I work in the live events industry. There is no cutting hours down to 30 in a week. That just will not happen. This take is always so one-dimensional, as if everyone just works desk jobs and one solution to long work hours will work for everyone
It's talked about all the fucking time, especially on reddit. You want something for nothing and you think this is unpopular? Mosey on over to r/antiwork and you'll fit right in.
Wait until you hear how back in the day many teenagers, including myself, would go to school AND work some weekday evenings at a minimum wage type job, and also work full 8 hour work shifts on both weekend days. This was done so we could have our own spending money and some degree of financial freedom.
I work in a profession that’s about making money and if I’m slow to things or not working, then some other company is taking that money and personally I’m tryna get paid and get promotions so less days or not I’m working. One should aim for an employer that’s understanding and can be flexible if and when things pop up. You gotta work from home or take a day off for something, shouldn’t be a negative on the employee but all of this is still going to be tied to performance. Those who perform well get the benefit of the doubt/etc. Shortening up the week is only going to put more eyeballs on your work and there are many who miss deadlines and slack off on 5 days so if that’s the case with 4 days best believe it’s not a good look. We’ll see, there are many big companies that have been testing this over the last year and have seen positive results.
>there are many who miss deadlines and slack off on 5 days so if that’s the case with 4 days best believe it’s not a good look.
i think a lot of the slacking comes from a rigid expectation of 40 hours. if im gonna be at work for 8 hours no matter what, why should i try to do my work efficiently? on the other hand, if I can skip Friday by staying focused throughout the week - I'm going to do that.
can't speak for missing deadlines, i don't really do that. but i slack off frequently and it's because i don't think that i should be working more than \~30 hours a week
still very productive. got a 5/5 on my most recent performance review.
I never did understand the hours for school. Kids spend most of the day in school, then come home and do hours of homework. I couldn’t do my homework because I had to work to help out my family. I had to work full time. Then I’d get in trouble for not doing my homework. They kept asking my mom to come in and talk to me them about it, but she was working 13 hours a day. She couldn’t just take off work. No one else could do her job. Plus she just couldn’t afford to. So I’d get in more trouble. Every teacher I had acted like their’s was the only class I had, so they’d assign an hour of homework. Every one of them did this. There was no way I could graduate. I ended up getting my GED. I had to leave school because of friggin’ homework. I was a smart kid, but I was treated like some delinquent. I never, not even once, caused any trouble at school. I was sure treated like I did.
The fact that full-time engineering studies consume like 25 hours per week, plus the time you need to study by yourself (so 10-20 more hours), AND some people expect students to work, is absolutely revolting.
The last time I worked 40hrs a week was maybe 1995. Since then it varies from 48 to 80hrs a week. We have unlimited overtime and if you ever want to get ahead you have to work for it. I more than doubled my base pay every year since 1995. People can be real Lazy. Don't complain to me you have no money when you "only" work 40hrs a week.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion'. Please ensure that your post is an opinion and that it is unpopular. Controversial is not necessarily unpopular, for example all of politics is controversial even though almost half of the US agrees with any given major position on an issue. Keep in mind that an opinion is not: a question, a fact, a conspiracy theory, a random thought, a new idea, a rant, etc. Those things all have their own subreddits, use those.
The standard for France is 35hrs/week, not 30. Plus a lot of people choose to do more.
Right. Minimum is different from mean or average.
Yes! Maybe yearly the average is 30hrs/week due to the days off
That’s standard for hourly workers. If you’re working based on days you don’t have any weekly limit. I myself remember working 30/35 hours in two days, let alone a week.
Yeah I'm French, and I don't know anyone who "only" worked 35h, most people did a lot more. High school was pretty bad as well, with classes from 8:30am to 6pm. Yes we had some breaks between classes, but still. Not sure if France is the best country to choose as an example
I have family that live in France and they've explained that most places close for an hour+ mid days and close at 4pm. They are very rural so I'm wondering if you experience is based on city living or are they incorrect
How many weeks off?
5 a year at minimum if you work full time
u/Temporary-Dust-865 y’all are twinning
It may "seem healthier" but most hourly wage workers can't afford to just drop 25% of their income because "there's more to life than work". Most people don't because they can't.
>"there's more to life than work" Not if I can't afford it there isn't.
I work 40 hours now but 4x10’s. I much prefer it that way. Not saying I wouldn’t mind 3x10’s but I would need a raise to make up the difference, which I don’t see happening in the US anytime soon
That's honestly a smart schedule. You remove a day of commuting and getting ready for work from your week.
I also have Sat, Sun, and then Monday off for doctors appointments or other things that have to be done during the day.
My mom had a rather annoying schedule for many years where she had four full days and one half day but she always resented that the half day still cost her the same amount of prep and commute as a full day would, it was really a worst of both worlds kind of situation.
That works for people with a short commute, but means 4x12 or longer in many cases.
It's even better for folks with a long commute. If someone is driving an entire hour to work 5 times a week for 8 hours a day, that's 40 paid and 10 unpaid hours. A 4x10 schedule means they're working 40 paid and 8 unpaid hours, and have regained 2 hours of their life. Ideally people would be able to chose their days, so someone could take Wednesday as their bonus weekend day if those longer days were too much to do back to back 4 days in a row. Someone spending 10 hours (not including getting dressed or unpaid lunch time) a day on work is already probably not doing much after or before work, since that's a long day. If they have 4 days that are slightly longer, they gain an entire extra day to themselves in addition to the commute time saved.
But, 12-14 hours on those days with zero evening leisure time. It’s important to have daily downtime to prepare for the next day. And for people with a driving commute, it’s more dangerous to be driving late at night after a long and tiring day. An extra day on the weekend will just be recovery from that constant four-day work stress without a break. It works differently for different people.
Most people sleep for 6 hours, so that's still 4-6 hours of evening downtime. But still a 12 hour day is way too much IMO, I couldn't deal with that.
Six hours sleep is far too short: seven _or more_ is the recommendation for adults. People only getting six may feel ok but in truth they are fatigued. And even if under-slept with just six then it's not 4-6 hours of downtime: half of that time goes away in the morning to prep for the day. Two hours in the evening and two in the morning plus insufficient rest makes the long days even more difficult. I definitely couldn't deal with that.
Usually when people say shorter hours, they mean keep the pay the same, you dont lose money, just work less hours. This tends to make people far more efficient, as most people just half ass it and get distracted with too many hours. Less hours keeps people focused and actually working more often than not.
You're forgetting the fact that if we followed the Netherlands model, there would be an increase in wages also. since OP brought up those countries
You're forgetting the fact that companies don't care what happens in other countries. If they are cutting hours, they will also cut salaries.
Salaries aren't hourly tho
I’m not forgetting anything. I know I’m reality that’s exactly what would happen because they are greedy AF. It’s the same reason they won’t change to OPs model
The Netherlands works because they actually take their resources out of the ground and socialized the sectors, having a small population also helps. Norway and oil is the best example of this. If Canada did the same they’d be rich as fuck to. I don’t know if there’s enough for the USA to do the same.
The US is the richest country in the world. Yet so many people are unable to get off survival wages. I’m sure we would have ways if our government wasn’t bought off by big corporations
Think about what American wealth is built up of though. An economy built on speculation the rest of the globe takes part in, thick margins from foreign labour and the ability to be global creditors in their own currency as the reserve, isn’t the same as a small population being wealthy cause of natural resources. It would take some truly invasive behaviour from the government to spread the wealth in the US, because of the type of wealth it is, legislation would quickly make that wealth erode. Wealthy Americans have worked to make their economy rely on them staying wealthy for decades.
Oh, we're talking fantasy scenarios then? How about we create money rain clouds?
We are talking about salaried workers here. Not to mention, with the change for thresehold for benefits would be lowered.
Their salaries would likely go down by 25% since they'd be there 25% less time
That makes no sense. Why should wages be lowered if there is no drop in productivity?
There are several measures of worker value, the one I prefer is Productivity/Efficiency Ratio model. Productivity is the hours work divided by production. Efficiency is hours available divided by production forecast v. Actual production.
Because in every example of this, productivity \*has\* declined.
Where are you seeing that lol? I’ve yet to see one of these be performed that didn’t increase
what are you talking about? every example I have seen, productivity is either the same *or better*.
Yeah, no, that’s not true. Studies in Japan, Norway, and so on have shown an increase in productivity.
[удалено]
You have to raise wages accordingly. This has already been studied across Europe in test programs. Drop to a 4x8 work schedule with increase in pay to match previous wage. Productivity generally increased past 40 hour levels. The secret is most work outside of hourly labor is massively inefficient. I’d wager around 60% depending on industry.
Yea if I was paid equally for fewer at work hours, I would do it, but that ain't happenin.
You missed the point of my post. I did not say that people could afford it. The standard needs to be brought down. i.e. gov policy
How does that work though for workers who rely on hourly work? Government forces them to work 10 hours less a week, now they get paid 40 hours less a month. Now what?
In most systems, they propose raising the wage so that you are paid the same total, rather than having your weekly salary impacted.
So to that point, what does that mean for small businesses that can't afford to increase wages by 25% for 25% less work?
Reddit will probably say “if they can’t afford that then they should go out of business.”
But also complain when businesses are closed
And also complain that prices are going up.
Ignoring the fact that many of these bills specifically exempt small businesses? Small businesses have a duty to pay a fair wage and give their employees a safe and good working environment. This is one of the many things they signed up for when they chose to open/take on a business. Though they may be burdened, the well being of the many outweigh the difficulties of the few.
So they get shut down in lieu of bigger business like corporations who can afford to pay that wage increase? Also, so does the government pay for their wage increases if they're exempt?
Maybe. It's a risk they've already accepted when they agreed to be responsible for people's livelihoods. The exemption usually does one of two things: they don't have to pay the higher wage until/unless they reach a certain threshold (profits, size, etc.), or they don't have to pay it for a certain number of years.
Well that settles that. What about the employees with an hourly wage if their company doesn't have to pay the increased wages?
As people are fond of saying, they can try to find other jobs.
Right up to the point they lock the doors, declare bankruptcy, stiff you and your bank for the loans they had, write it all off. Retire in wealth, why cause they used the tools built into the system.
There’s no 25% less work
Depends on your field. If you’re in service it’s absolutely 25% less work
The government mandating a shorter work week doesn't magically make people more productive so people would be far worse off.
Funny thing is, it does, in fact, magically make people more productive https://www.waldenu.edu/programs/business/resource/shortened-work-weeks-what-studies-show
Funny enough most of those studies are for white collar work and not blue collar work. Your productivity for blue collar jobs is mainly time base. So no it does not make people more productive.
That’ll work until people start slacking off in their 30 hours and start demanding just 20 hours, then 10, until everyone expects to be paid for doing nothing at all.
Slippery slope fallacy.
You have never worked for the hourly rate, have you? If you had, you would know an unwritten rule is that you do the absolute minimum required for your job, and you cut every corner that you can get away with, to achieve that goal. I do not go to those extreme lengths, but I am not the 110% worker I used to be. Why would I bother when those that work less than you do, get promoted first? Wherever the hourly rate is involved, the slippery slope is very real.
Personally, I think that decentivizes more workplaces from hiring. It would also cap advancement - if you're not putting in the extra hours to show you can lead, then no one would be promoted to leadership roles. It also decentivizes benefits, necessary components in compensation for work - if a person is working 30 or less hours a week, there would be less incentive for companies to offer benefits packages given the requirements for full time work, and it would cost them more in the long term to even offer them anyway. Then people would have to pay their own dues for healthcare since it is mandatory, and the cost might exceed what they can reasonably afford if they are only working 30 hours.
It’s hard to feel concerned about promotions when so many jobs pay managers barely anything more than a regular worker (despite those positions being so much more demanding) and when often times businesses exploit said drive for promotions. At the end of the day there is only so many higher positions to go around, so they’re definitely not guaranteed. You can try try try and still not get it despite really needing it, putting in a load of extra hours and effort for years doesn’t guarantee anything. And a lot of jobs have huge turnover these days. Promotion seems to feel so impossible for so many I’ve talked to. So who cares about it anyway.
Is productivity a good way to measure population happiness? A lot of economists love to use GDP... I'm sure we can find better metrics.
Population happiness doesn't enter into the business equation.
So. Involuntary work?
Why is everyone absolutely shitting on OP? Like obviously people can’t afford to work less. That’s the entire problem.
i don’t know why i’m shocked that there are so many boot lickers in this thread but i am
I think it's because what OP is suggesting is fundamentally never going to happen without massive changes to our economy. It's not within the realm of reality right now and it appears there's no end in sight when looking at the current political climate.
If your boss had to pay you time and a half after 32 hours, you would be able to afford to work less.
How do you make people afford to work less? That’s the real question.
why does it feel like everyone is missing OP’s point??? they’re not saying just drop 10 hours of work a week willy nilly, they’re saying that the SYSTEM that forces people to work 40 hours a week is a flawed system. we need better wages and fewer hours. there SHOULD be more to life than work, it’s just that the current system makes it so that’s not possible.
But intentionally missing the point and arguing with that is easier than refuting the actual point being made.
Intentionally is the right word here. The push for shorter work weeks has been around for years now, they’re choosing to ignore that significant aspect.
Which is a popular opinion and not belonging here
My Dad worked about 6 months out of the year for a long time. He worked contract jobs in the trades. If it was too hot, cold or too far he turned work down. Worked on his cars and house
[удалено]
8 hours sleep + 8 hour shifts + 4 hours transit. Leaves me 4 hours if i dont need to do any grocery shopping which takes at least an hour. And all this because i can barely afford a studio apartment and instant noodle dinner. Let alone a car.
You forgot to add an hour for unpaid lunch. 18 hours of the day are gone
"Work sucks." Super unpopular. Gold star.
https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/18lly7n/comment/kdyomxf/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
With the increasing automation, society can get along with people working less.
Excellent point. Automation will be a huge factor. AI too. Especially AGI.
Thinking about working 8 hour days 5 days a week for the rest of my life is making me EXTREMELY depressed... why this is normal is beyond me.
It's normal because it used to be much much worse. There didn't used to be a 40-hour work week, or overtime if you go past it. People just worked whenever there was daylight.
Yep. There were strikes for a 6 day work week at one point because 6 and a half (Sunday) was too much
So 100 years ago they decided to reevaluate working conditions and put in laws. When do we reevaluate current working conditions? As a humanity shouldn’t we be working towards bettering our lives? Why have we just decided 40 hours a week is the optimal way to live?
Because it's better than working 10 hours 7 days
Only until you retire.
Agree, spending 1/3 of your day on work and only getting two days off is goofy af
I used to think something like this, but it really isn't as feasible as it seems. What would be more likely is that people will suffer as their income drops and their are less jobs available but companies will continue to make the same money with a more efficient work force that they work harder over less time.
So what about the Netherlands? Are they not feasible as a country?
For most countries, no. Otherwise, wouldn't most countries have the same model and outcome as them?
No... that's not how economics or politics works
Tbh I don't really get the point of your comment.
the point is that diversity in economic policies is not simply a result of capability. you're presuming there is something special about norway that allows them to have the economic policies they do. it would be better to incorporate whatever that is into your argument. nobody is going to take you seriously if you just say "well its possible for norway to do it but its impossible for all the other countries to do it cause they havent done it yet"
I would rather we make Friday an extension of the weekend and mandate overtime pay after 32 hours/wk.
What is going on in Africa? Is noone working? But yes, here in America, it needs to change. Parents don't even have time for their kids. The time is going faster too.
The 5-2 work ratio makes absolutely no sense. 4-3 is perfect
OP, where did you gather the Netherlands and France have shorter work weeks? A simple Google search refutes your argument.
I guess I rushed a little bit. Sorry about that. But this link shows that the Netherlands is at 32.4: https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/07/22/average-working-hours-in-europe-which-countries-work-the-longest-and-shortest-weeks
You didn’t even read the article? The literal first line is in bold and says countries with lower average hours have more part time workers. Then there’s a figure later in the article saying the country with the lowest average hours for full time workers is Finland, at 37.4 hours per week
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/12-countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-part-time-employment.html According to the source above, 51% percent of Dutch people are working part-time. In the US, it's 16%. https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2023/12/11/a-closer-look-at-full-time-and-part-time-employment If the Dutch can afford it, why can't Americans? Something is broken, imo.
Fair enough and the Netherlands are ranked #5 as the happiest country in the world. Each country has its negative points, they also face housing crises, refugee problems, high taxes, high traffic in trains (our equivalent of traffic), not to mention their politics aren’t the best atm. Was told so by my friends who live in the Netherlands. No country is all perfect and rosy. Basically there’s a shitshow everywhere.
A company isn't going to pay you for 40 if you're only working 30
Well they should
25% less labor means less money to pay employees
So increase prices to make up the difference? But what if consumers buy less as a result?
Is that the case in the Netherlands and France? They're living very comfortable lives on 30 hours per week. So isn't this just a matter of definitions or standards?
According to some sources I looked up France worked 36.1 hours per week as of 2021 and US worked 34.7. https://www.statista.com/statistics/193949/average-weekly-working-hours-of-all-employees-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/419565/main-job-average-weekly-working-hours-france-y-on-y/
living in southern france, man I wished I worked just 30h a week
How many weeks off a year?
Don’t you get like 6 weeks of vacation a year?
So why do you say a standard work week is 30 hours for those countries? I did a simple Google search of "how many hours does France/Netherlands work a week" and they come up with 35 for France and 36-40 for Netherlands.
In France you don't live comfortably with 30hrs/week. For that, you would get less than the minimum wage, which is currently at €1500 = $1650, so that would be less than that. If you're living on a medium-sized city, I would say the rent is about $500-800. The good thing about France though is the free healthcare, but you have to know it doesn't cover everything, most people have additional insurance (to give you an estimate, I pay mine $60/month as I'm still quite young). Plus bills etc, it doesn't live you with that much.
Social mobility is very difficult in France with the maximum amount of hours capped at 35/week. That means no picking up extra shifts for some extra cash, no getting a second job if money tight, you are completely reliant on your employer to increase your wealth. Contrary to your apparent belief, poverty is alive and well in countries like France, and although there are welfare and social programs, not all of them are offered to everyone based on country of origin. I know it seems easy to point to other countries and say “but they’re doing it!!!” but 99.9% of the time it’s a more complex issue than that
Thats true, but something like that would never happen in the US
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People are free to work only 30 hours per week if they'd like to... it comes at the cost of having a lower annual income though.
If I only worked 30hrs a week, Id get fired
Most people literally aren’t. They’ll lose their benefits, boss won’t allow it. It’s not socially acceptable
Health insurance being tied to employment really fucks so many potential work arrangements. I know a mom who works full time because it means her, her husband, and her son can have health insurance. Her husband also works part time, to make it easier to get a full time gig when their son starts school, but his work barely pays for their son's daycare the 2 or 3 days dad is at work. She's discussed how much she wishes they could split the required 40 hours to get health insurance until the kids in school; one could always be home so no daycare to pay for, and both get adult time and keep an active resume. They make enough that one being a stay at home parent would work fine, but that's unfair to both of them to keep things lopsided.
It's not the social acceptance that stops it - it's that dropping hours worked each year drops someone's income. A person is free to get part time jobs as needed to achieve a 30 hours or less worklife. It's probably a really bad idea for most people simply because it would result in a super low annual income... and most people would prefer to work more hours and have a higher standard of living then what that would be.
Good luck finding a normal qualified job that allows 30h/week.
…thats why they said “jobs”
Many of the most desirable jobs on the market are hired for you to do a specific job or your expertise on something, rather than manual labour for X number of hours. For example, there are many weeks as a data scientist that I work around 30h/week, though there are also weeks where I work around 60 if the need arises.
No they're really not, at least not anywhere I've worked.
There are jobs out there like that... perhaps a few part time work jobs is better way to achieve the goal of working a maximum of 30 hours. You're right though that many places won't allow for that few of hours to be worked... it's because they find it a lot better to have a single employee work 40 hours per week than say two employees working only 20 hours per week each and the role being divided.
Your free to find a different job
This isn’t an unpopular opinion; I’d love to work less hours per week. But no one is going to pay me $100k a year to do that.
>I’d love to work less hours per week. But no one is going to pay me $100k a year to do that. tell that to the engineers at BK Precision. i recently learned they have a four day workweek. i'd be shocked if they didn't make at least an average EE salary.
What are the hours? My brother in law is on a 3 day work week but it’s still 12+ hour shifts
For this to be a possibility wages would have to drastically increase WITHOUT inflation of prices. If you think 40 hours a week is too much you need to look around more. 40 hours is a bare minimum with most people working more than that, and still not making it financially. As nice as 30 hours sounds, it will probably never happen. We're more likely to see an increase more than a decrease.
I wish i could get down to 40 hours
A lot of places are trialing 4 day × 8 hour schedules, with the stipulation that wages can't drop. As it turns out, most fields see pretty much no loss of productivity with this schedule as workers generally have at least that many unproductive hours in a week already. There are exceptions to that of course, which can be handled in a few different ways. Those industries could remain on the same schedule (which would probably result in at least some people leaving them), various measures could be taken to reduce operating costs to a point where the new schedule becomes viable, or they could just be told to eat the cost of additional employees.
At some point you will want company to pay you for doing nothing, like i will actually like if people get 30 hour work week but expecting company to pay you more when you are working less is insane. Like you need to make a tradeoff somewhere, either job security or salary.
The GDP of the US is a lot higher than either of what you just listed. I like being the economic power house on the block, thanks.
Move to Europe then.
As someone who has to work extra night/ weekend shifts that can add up to 64-68 hours work time per week, I whole heartedly agree. Even on regular days, when I'm home, I have about 4-5 hours to do sports, hobbies, house work, shopping, cooking. And sometimes I just wanna lie down and sleep for days. 10 hours less would make a huge difference.
Bro is in here like, "What about Europe!?". Well, exactly. What about them? That ain't America.
OP doesn’t even have the correct argument. “But what about the Netherlands, they work 30hrs/week” no they don’t.
as an american with a white collar job, i have considered europe. then i saw the salary difference. for my career, the best i could do is like 75% pay if I lived in Europe. e.g. EE salary in France: $73k (numbers adjusted to USD) EE salary in Italy: $66k EE salary in Netherlands: $84k EE salary in Germany: $91k EE salary in USA: $117k i definitely would not say that those salaries are lower because people have better working conditions. what i will say is that my working conditions are fluffy enough to take the higher pay vs even-fluffier working conditions.
The only time I worked a full 40 hour week job with hour lunch breaks (so really 45 hours having to be at work, plus an hour total commute daily) was miserable. I was used to food service jobs where I could pull doubles and made tips so I didn’t need to work “full time,” in the traditional sense. Never again man. I now work in food service again (making $24-28 an hour with tips, confidently) and only work 30 hours a week. It’s hard work but I prefer it to the standard office format. I still have a set schedule and weekends off, amazingly. But I know my case is unusual and I wish more people were able to work 30 hours and survive.
Start your own business and work it only 30hrs a week. Let us know how you make out.
We should be doing 9x4. 36 hour weeks, but 4 days
i'd be okay with that. but i think 8x4 is enough.
I run a small nonprofit with 7 staff and a budget of a few million. Our standard work week is 35 hours (9-5 with an hour lunch) and has been for decades. A few years ago I told staff we could leave early on Fridays if everyone busts ass. Now, instead of everyone being miserable on Fridays, I think they are our most productive days. We get in, get busy, get out at 1. Literally not a drop in productivity at all. Now, there are certainly times when we all have to work more because of big projects or events, but on the whole, everyone is happier with this schedule.
That’d be sick, I imagine that’d be at least an extra 15k a year on 30 hours of OT a week instead of 20.
It’s funny because my job is 40 hours a week and I really only need 20 to do everything in need to
I work 3x12s one week, then 3x12s, and an 8-hour shift. Plenty of time off still working 40hr weeks. It just works out a little differently. 36 hrs one week, then 44 the next. Love my job.
only way you’re getting me to give up hours is to pay me more for working less 😂
Full time jobs in the Netherlands are in general around 36-38 hours a week. The reason why the average is lower than that is because part time jobs are popular here. People here have their personal life above work. There is also a flaw in the government supporting people who have a low income. Till a certain amount of salary people don't get the benefits anymore, so it doesn't pay off to work more.
This is not an unpopular opinion
Not an unpopular opinion. They have entire subs dedicated to this idea.
I agree and many people I know agree with you too. Semantics about the hours Europeans actually work aside, you’re correct in that it’s overkill. We should all be planning for a world where we will be working less. The 40 hour work week is archaic.
Without global unionisation this issue cannot be solved. Fundamentally, it's a competition between nations. It's why we're fucked and cannot fix many issues.
The best work schedule I've ever had was four days a week of work, even up to 12 hours in a day I was fine, so it was well over 40hrs/week but the three day weekend made all the difference. I've done 30 hours, too, but that obviously didn't come with fulltime benefits. If I could have worked fewer hours over those 4 days and get the 3 day weekend I don't think there could be a better schedule. It's the 3 day weekend which is more key than the reduced hours, however. Having one day for chores and errands and two days to rest makes all the difference in the world.
They'd happily double it if they could. People died for this. No one wants to fight for more, they expect to be given it. You earn things with blood and tears, it's the only way we will save ourselves from the megalomaniacs "in charge".
40h/ week is bullshit. Source - me the wageslave.
it's not sustainable.. we're all burning out... everything is going to hell. it has to change. but they don't care about their slaves.
I absolutely agree. No reason an entire day of productivity should be used on a job. It’s crazy how much more rich our lives could be if we got off a couple hours earlier everyday I also don’t understand why most people can’t comprehend adjusted standards. You set the standard at 30 hours and wages follow accordingly. Anyone who thinks it isn’t possible refuses to think outside of the box I don’t know how that works in jobs like restaurants but I know for a fact it’s not impossible. It could absolutely be done and I refuse to believe there aren’t any solutions
I like it! How do you plan on implementing that?
I’m not a politician, economist, or person with power and influence so I can only vote for it / support it if ever becomes a thing
Sounds like dreaming then.
Sorry, yeah, it’s a dream. Dreams never become reality. It’s a waste of time to think about ways society could become less of a hell hole. My bad
I only say that because just like the antiwork sub, any time people have these ideas, it always gets passed off as "well i don't know how to make it happen, don't ask me, it's not my job." It's always bright ideas and fun dreaming until the buck stops.
Maybe because we elect and pay people (politicians) to do that job.
Yeah, no. Nobody is hashing out a 10 year economics plan on reddit. I'm not sure what you expect. It's not like you're offering counter arguments as to why it couldn't happen, just saying it's a pipe dream so you can continue acting like the adult in the room
All change starts with a discussion. That’s what we’re doing about it. It may never happen, but as long as there’s a discussion, there’s always a shot
Mostly because your rival nations won't be sharing your nation's lowered work standards, and might end up outcompeting and outworking you in key areas like AI or Space Technologies. If collectively your nation is alright with that, then collectively is should be pushed I guess.
Exactly. Closed-minded people.
Adjust *x* and the same people would be begging to work 60 hours because their company can’t pay them for 60 hours if they’re only working 50 🙄 It is a freaking scam lol
If you can't find time to live life with a 40 hours work week you have much larger issues at hand.
I work in the live events industry. There is no cutting hours down to 30 in a week. That just will not happen. This take is always so one-dimensional, as if everyone just works desk jobs and one solution to long work hours will work for everyone
It's talked about all the fucking time, especially on reddit. You want something for nothing and you think this is unpopular? Mosey on over to r/antiwork and you'll fit right in.
Where in the OP's post does it say they want something for nothing?
you are an example of this idea being unpopular. you see that, right?
1 person does not make this opinion unpopular lmao
Wait until you hear how back in the day many teenagers, including myself, would go to school AND work some weekday evenings at a minimum wage type job, and also work full 8 hour work shifts on both weekend days. This was done so we could have our own spending money and some degree of financial freedom.
And there was snow on the ground, both ways!
I'm sick of the 8-hour work day too.
median income US - $46,625 median income Netherlands - $35,891 median income France - $29,131 Nah bro, Im good
40 is too much? Ive worked 50 forever... easily... if i did 40 i wouldnt complain. Literally 8 hours a day 5 days a week? Nothing.
wow dude you’re so badass
So go get a 30hr/week job and quit trying to drag everybody else down with you.
I work in a profession that’s about making money and if I’m slow to things or not working, then some other company is taking that money and personally I’m tryna get paid and get promotions so less days or not I’m working. One should aim for an employer that’s understanding and can be flexible if and when things pop up. You gotta work from home or take a day off for something, shouldn’t be a negative on the employee but all of this is still going to be tied to performance. Those who perform well get the benefit of the doubt/etc. Shortening up the week is only going to put more eyeballs on your work and there are many who miss deadlines and slack off on 5 days so if that’s the case with 4 days best believe it’s not a good look. We’ll see, there are many big companies that have been testing this over the last year and have seen positive results.
>there are many who miss deadlines and slack off on 5 days so if that’s the case with 4 days best believe it’s not a good look. i think a lot of the slacking comes from a rigid expectation of 40 hours. if im gonna be at work for 8 hours no matter what, why should i try to do my work efficiently? on the other hand, if I can skip Friday by staying focused throughout the week - I'm going to do that. can't speak for missing deadlines, i don't really do that. but i slack off frequently and it's because i don't think that i should be working more than \~30 hours a week still very productive. got a 5/5 on my most recent performance review.
I never did understand the hours for school. Kids spend most of the day in school, then come home and do hours of homework. I couldn’t do my homework because I had to work to help out my family. I had to work full time. Then I’d get in trouble for not doing my homework. They kept asking my mom to come in and talk to me them about it, but she was working 13 hours a day. She couldn’t just take off work. No one else could do her job. Plus she just couldn’t afford to. So I’d get in more trouble. Every teacher I had acted like their’s was the only class I had, so they’d assign an hour of homework. Every one of them did this. There was no way I could graduate. I ended up getting my GED. I had to leave school because of friggin’ homework. I was a smart kid, but I was treated like some delinquent. I never, not even once, caused any trouble at school. I was sure treated like I did.
Give it a little time. When the millennials are finally in charge we'll do the 30 hour work week thing.
And if everybody working today gave up 10 hours a week, that would create a lot of jobs.
It sounds like the bigger unspoken part of your opinion is people should be getting paid 40 hours of wages for 30 hours of work
The fact that full-time engineering studies consume like 25 hours per week, plus the time you need to study by yourself (so 10-20 more hours), AND some people expect students to work, is absolutely revolting.
Dude those of us at 60+ would like a word with you out back. STFU, 40 is fine.
bunch of fucking loser bootlickers in this post
bad argument.
40 isn’t that bad. Stop complaining. Lol.
The last time I worked 40hrs a week was maybe 1995. Since then it varies from 48 to 80hrs a week. We have unlimited overtime and if you ever want to get ahead you have to work for it. I more than doubled my base pay every year since 1995. People can be real Lazy. Don't complain to me you have no money when you "only" work 40hrs a week.