|
Four-day work week may not work
for some
By Amanda
Mears
October 14, 2008 | As the economy sinks into a dismal
abyss, Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman has offered a solution
to those feeling the repercussions of rising gas prices.
That is, if you work for the government.
By enforcing mandatory four-day workweeks for government
employees, Huntsman said he hopes to alleviate the amount
of energy used by Utahns who commute to work every day.
According to a USA Today article by Larry Copeland,
so far the response has been positive. The change, according
to Huntsman, has both personal and environmental benefits.
By closing 1,000 state buildings an extra day per week,
Utah hopes to save about $3 million in utility costs
during the one-year trial. Not mention the employees
that now get to enjoy a permanent three-day weekend.
A three-day weekend alone, that is, while the rest
of the general public continues the daily grind Monday
through Friday.
While 10-hour work days spanning four days a week
might be helpful for some, there could be certain snags
along the way. For instance, parents may now have to
change their child-care routines and commuter routes
to deal with the changing work schedule.
The guise of allowing parents to spend more time with
their children is not even a logical argument, considering
that most children are at school on Friday. Instead,
said a CNN article about the new change, parents now
find themselves spending less time in the evening with
their kids. They are too tired to help kids with homework
or attend extracurricular events, the article said.
The Department of Commerce, apparently aware of the
fatigue employees are facing due to waking up earlier
and staying up later to get everything done, has even
started passing out energy drinks and caffeinated sodas.
When substances are needed in order for government workers
to stay awake, it may be a clear indicator that this
new system is not in everyone's best interest.
And what about regular community members who now have
one less day to use state services? Is rearranging everyone's
routine really a logical step towards helping our environment
and economy?
What it boils down to is this: changing the typical
workweek for government employees is a very permanent
fix to what could end up being a temporary problem.
Once people have set their schedule to accommodate this
new workweek, it will be very hard to go back. Even
worse, since this new system is undergoing a one-year
trial run before being set in stone, it seems like a
lot of people will be changing their entire lives just
for this little governmental experiment.
Until there is solid evidence that one less day of
commuting will really make an impact on the lives of
employees, the drastic disruption a four day workweek
will cause should not be mandatory.
Another question that arises is that of the future
of the American work industry. Is this the beginning
of a revolution in the workplace? It only seems logical
that other companies will follow the government's lead
to makeeveryone's lives easier and possibly reduce the
nation's carbon footprint. If this change is put into
effect, the public will need to consider how this change
will drastically alter their personal lives.
After implementing this system in August, many individuals
have complained about the toll a brutal 10-hour shift
can take on their everyday lives. This stress of four
extremely long shifts seems unnecessary when the public
can take other steps to reduce their carbon footprint.
Take carpooling, for example. If the government was
to set up a system calling on employees to cut down
their transportation by relying on a carpooling network,
it would seemingly have the same effect as cutting one
day of transportation a week.
And that way, everybody wins.
NW
MS |
