When less is more: Shortening the workweek would create jobs and stimulate the US economy

[marmar]

from the Guardian UK:



When less is more
Shortening the workweek would create jobs and stimulate the US economy – and give workers the benefits other countries provide

Dean Baker
guardian.co.uk, Monday 26 January 2009 18.30 GMT


It is important that some version of President Barack Obama's stimulus package gets approved by Congress as quickly as possible. The package will be an important first step toward stopping the downward slide of the economy.

However, the package is only a first step. As Obama's own economic team's analysis showed, the package would still leave us with 7% unemployment two years from now (roughly the current rate), even if things go relatively well. And it is easy to imagine scenarios that are worse than the baseline assumed in this analysis – for example, a collapse of the banking system due to a tidal wave of bad debt or a run on the dollar resulting from our chronic trade deficit. In short, we should be constructing plans to boost the economy that go beyond this stimulus package.

I have already written about one possibility: health insurance. The government can quickly provide a boost to demand by awarding generous tax breaks to employers for covering workers who do not already have insurance and for making current policies more generous. These tax breaks can be coupled with the opening of Medicare to anyone who wants to buy in, thereby getting a jump start on Obama's health insurance programme.

The other obvious way to provide a quick boost to the economy is by giving employers tax incentives for shortening their standard workweek or work year. This can take different forms. An employer who currently provides no paid vacation can offer all her workers three weeks a year of paid vacation, approximately a 6% reduction in work time.

Alternatively, employers may cut the standard workweek, say from 40 hours to 36 hours, a 10% reduction in work hours. Employers could also adopt policies such as offering workers paid sick leave. If this averaged five days a year, this would come to a reduction in hours of 2%. They could even offer paid parental leave. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/jan/26/business-us-economy-worker-benefits

[Captain Hilts]

1. Yes, but in England, health insurance isn't linked to employment, so the costs of more employees...

working shorter hours isn't so great as it is in the USA.

[Dawgs]

2. Sounds good but I doubt it would help much.

IMO.

[SheilaT]

3. I believe that the 40 hour work week

-- down from a standard 60 hour work week -- was to put more people to work during the Depression.

My mother was in training to become an RN at the time, and about half way through they went from 12 hour shifts to 8 hour shifts.