It’s been over 100 years since our class won a general concession in the reduction of working days from six per week to five. With Artificial Intelligence tools being rolled out across white collar sectors and next generation robotics in manufacturing, it is vital that trade unions step up the campaign for a four day week with no loss in pay.
Central to our argument has to be the epidemic of mental health issues linked to workplace stress. But, as tube workers in the RMT pointed out during their recent strike over pay and working conditions, fatigue is also a concern, especially in manual industries.
There has been slow progress on this issue. The Four Day Week Foundation says the number of companies making a permanent reduction has risen from 18 in 2022 to more than 230 today. However, some of these firms are quite small and niche. One of the ‘notable’ successes it lists on its website is CMG Technologies, which employs just 28 workers, including management.
Benefits for the bosses?
The approach of most unions and the TUC itself has been to open negotiations by stressing the benefits of a four day week to the bosses. Insofar as union members can point to a possible reduction in sick leave and a happier workforce, this is fair enough, but the trend, particularly among the bureaucracy is to go much further than this.
For example, South Cambridgeshire County Council became the first local authority in Britain to adopt a four-day week last July after a two year trial. During this period staff performed 100% of their work in 80% of the time, an increase in the intensity of labour of 25%.
Over time this is likely to prove unsustainable if not for all workers, then certainly for some, perhaps those who are more vulnerable to mental or physical stress. I would argue that unions should not sign off deals that guarantee such productivity gains either across the board or in individual cases.
Another cause for concern is trading off a reduction in working days by compressing the hours per week into fewer days, for example working four 10-hour days instead of five eight-hour days. This is likely to produce a win-win for the bosses but produce no benefits at all for workers, suffering fatigue, reduced recovery time between shifts and a drastic reduction in social or family recreation.
Injuries at work, including fatal ones, are concentrated in the last two hours of work due to tiredness. Anyone who has done night shifts, such as four days on, four days off, will recognise the wear that this causes after a year of two. Again it is unsustainable.
Follow the RMT, not Aslef
At the heart of the RMT dispute I mentioned earlier is Transport for London’s attempt to impose on all drivers a four day roster with no reduction in hours. The craft union Aslef accepted this deal years ago, but RMT organises the majority of drivers on the Underground.
RMT is 100% right to hold out. Already suffering shift patterns that mix up 4am starts and 1am finishes, with drivers not knowing their hours sometimes until a day in advance, this can be a matter of life and death. Equally they are right to include their demand for a four day, 32 hour week in their pay claim.
But we need to generalise and extend this approach. Our demand should be: for a four day week, with no loss of pay, no extension to the working day, and no intensification of work. We should refuse to implement the introduction of AI and other new technology until this is agreed. We should demand it immediately. And we should take strike action to win.
We’ve waited a century. We’re waiting no more.
