Question

In the spring, a consultancy published the results of a six-month trial of the four-day working week involving sixty firms. Participating employees kept their full salaries while working thirty-two hours instead of forty. Of the sixty firms, thirty-eight reported that output was essentially unchanged, fourteen reported an increase, and eight reported a decline. Staff turnover fell at more than half of the firms, and sick leave fell at forty-four. The report’s authors describe these figures as “decisive”. Critics are less certain. Every participating firm volunteered, and several had already experimented with flexible hours; a sample so self-selected, they argue, tells us little about how a bakery, a hospital or a call centre would fare if the shorter week were imposed. The authors concede the point but note that none of the eight firms reporting a decline abandoned the experiment. Whether that reflects satisfaction or merely the cost of reversing a contractual change is a question the report does not address, and one that only a longer trial, with a randomly chosen control group, could settle. The authors’ observation that none of the eight firms with falling output abandoned the trial is ambiguous because it

Accepted Answer

could reflect satisfaction or the cost of reversing the change

Answer

proves that output later recovered in those eight firms

Answer

conflicts with the figures on staff turnover at those firms

Answer

shows that the firms were forced to continue

The authors’ observation that none of the eight firms with falling output abandoned the trial is ambiguous because it

«Мәтінмен жұмыс» тақырыбынан тағы