Great Britain: The four-day week acclaimed after a test with companies







Photo credit © Reuters


by Sarah Young

LONDON (Reuters) – Dozens of British employers piloting the four-day working week have mostly decided to stick with it after a pilot hailed as a breakthrough by campaigners for a better work-life balance professional and private life.

Employees at 61 UK companies worked an average of 34 hours over four days between June and December 2022, while earning their current wages. Of this number, 56 companies, or 92%, have chosen to continue in this way, including 18 on a permanent basis.

The trial, carried out by Autonomy, a UK-based research group, alongside a group of academics and with support from the New Zealand-based group 4 Day Week Global, followed a total of 2,900 employees from various sectors.

The majority of participants said that productivity had been maintained. Staff have seen an improvement in their work-life balance, limiting the number of resignations or absences.

However, UK businesses as a whole do not yet seem so enthusiastic about changing their policy to a four-day week.

The Chartered Institute Of Personnel And Development (CIPD), which represents human resources professionals, found that very few of its employer members foresee any change in the organization of activities in the next three years. Two-thirds of them don’t even foresee any change over the next decade.

(Reporting by Sarah Young, with contributions by David Milliken, French version Dina Kartit, editing by Kate Entringer)












©2023 Thomson Reuters, all rights reserved. Reuters content is the intellectual property of Thomson Reuters or its third party content providers. Any copying, republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. “Reuters” and the Reuters Logo are trademarks of Thomson Reuters and its affiliated companies.



Source link -87