The 4 Hour Work Day Campaign

Imagine a single measure that could provide a solution to the three most important aspects of our society today:an unstable economy, environmental degradation and poor quality of life of the population. That is what the 4 Hour Work-Day can provide, and much more. It can even set the path to transition into a new economic model, a model that has incentives to respect people and the environment at the same time. It is time for us to organize and fix once and for all what governments and politicians are unable to fix, by supporting the Global Campaign to institute the 4 Hour Work-day worldwide.

The campaign’s proposal is this: “To reduce the work-day from 8 hours to 4 hours a day without reducing income, through a peaceful and democratic Global Strike.” The transition to the 4 hour work-day will be implemented through periodic reductions of half an hour each month to let the markets adjust, so in 8 months, we would accomplish a 4 hour work-day. But the reduction of working hours would not stay there. A re-evaluation every 10 years will be performed to analyze increases in productivity and if we find that productivity has indeed increased (which is what most likely will happen with the rapid advancements in technology) then another reduction will be applied in proportion to the amount that productivity has increased. That means that, if we find that a 2% average annual increase in productivity occurs, then 30 years after we accomplish the 4 hour work-day we would be working about 2 hours a day only.

The idea of work-time reductions is not something new. John Maynard Keynes, for example, wrote an essay in 1930 called: ”Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren“, where he predicted that the work-day would be reduced to 3 hours a day by 2030. Bertrand Russell and Paul Lafarge also had writings referring to reducing the work day as well, In Praise of Idleness (1932) and The Right to Be Lazy (1883) respectively.  More recently, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) published an article in January 1986, advocating for the 4 hour work-day.  Juliet Schor, economist, professor of Sociology at Boston College and author of many books including “The Overworked American” and “Plenitude”, argues for work time reductions as a measure to stabilize the world wide economy, protect the environment, and provide a better quality of life for the population. Along with her, the New Economics Foundation (NEF) released a report in 2010 called “21 Hours” calling for a 21 hour work-week as a way to revert the economic crisis and set the path for a more steady state of the global economy. In fact, on January of 2012, Juliet Schor participated in a conference organized by NEF and the London School of Economics where they argued in favor of work time reductions. As you can see, the idea of a 4 hour work-day has been discussed for a long time and it is time to implement it.

And why a strike? you may ask. The 4 hour work-day campaign asks for a peaceful and democratic Global Strike to implement the 4 Hour Work-day worldwide. That is the way it was achieved when we reduced the work-day from 16 to 12 hours a day in the mid 1800’s and again in the early 1900’s when we reduced it from 12 hours to the current 8 hours a day. It would be naive to request that you write your politicians to do it. This measure would not be discussed in any Congress or Parliament at all unless we put pressure on them. It goes too much in favor of the people and against corporations and conventional economics. This measure needs to be imposed by the people going on strike and pressuring the world leaders with the message that we are not going to move forward until this measure is applied worldwide. These are the reasons why we need to reduce the work-day to 4 hours a day (or its equivalent in weeks or months, 20 hours a week, 2 weeks a month, 6 months a year):


An Economy that works for the people and not the people working for the economy

The overall economy becomes healthier by work time reductions. First of all, full employment will be achieved. Imagine, for example, that you have 10 people that depend on oranges to survive and you have 5 oranges only (in this example, oranges are an analogy of the current 8 hour paid employment). These 10 individuals will compete among each other to be able to grab one of the precious oranges. They will improve their speed, run faster, learn how to avoid obstacles better, anything they can improve in order to get one of the oranges. It doesn’t matter how efficient and productive each individual becomes, there will always be 5 people who would not be able to get an orange. Instead, we can do what any rational group of individuals would do in this situation: Split the oranges in half! That way, all 10 individuals will have an orange to survive. Why haven’t we done this to solve our unemployment issue? The employed are working long hours and the unemployed are watching them, without a job nor income.  Why are we not splitting the number of hours for work from 8 to 4? This way, Full Employment will be achieved and everyone could have an opportunity to get a job and a decent income.

Second, Aggregate Demand is the Achilles’ heel of our economy and Full Employment will translate into an increase in Aggregate Demand. The 4 Hour Work-Day means a reduction in the hours of work, NOT A REDUCTION IN INCOME. This means that if your monthly income is $2000 a month working 40 hours a week, your income will remain the same, $2000 a month, but now working 20 hours a week only. How will work-time reductions be financed then, since the employers will now have to cover two salaries instead of one? Having the majority of the population employed, with decent income, will increase the number of buyers or consumers in the economy. This will increase Aggregate Demand, which will produce more sales and revenues for businesses. This increase in revenues will enable them to afford the higher labor costs they would face in a 4 Hour Work-Day world. If you think about it, this is the first step to eradicate poverty. Billions of dollars are spent every year to decrease poverty levels to no avail, and here we have in the 4 Hour Work-Day a proposal that could eradicate poverty completely and that has ZERO cost.

Another way of financing work-time reductions will be by taking increases in productivity to reduce the work-day instead of producing more output. For example, imagine you produce 1000 shoes in one day (8 hours). Then, productivity increases or a machine is invented that can help you produce the same amount of shoes but now in half a day (4 hours). You have 2 options: you can either work the same 8 hours and produce 2000 shoes or you can take the increase in productivity and produce the same amount of shoes you were producing before (1000) but work half the day only, 4 hours. This means that we would take the increases in productivity to reduce the work-day instead of producing more output.

Back to Top


An Economy that Respects the Environment

As you can see from reading the last paragraph, the 4 Hour Work-Day will be a tremendous help for the environment because it will help utilize the technology in a much more responsible way instead of producing more and more output. In fact, Economists have identified what is called the “Rebound effect” of  technology, where the environmental benefits of the new technological improvements, which are supposed to help the production processes become more efficient and utilize less resources, are being counteracted by our capitalistic, unlimited-growth, profit-seeking mentality to use more resources. Let’s go back to the shoes example. Let’s say in order to make the 1000 shoes we utilize 500 lb. of leather, but, with the new machine, now we can produce the 1000 shoes not only in half the time but utilizing half the amount of leather as well, 250 lbs. The fact that we are now using less resources sounds great, but the capitalistic economic model does not translate that gain into working less and using less resources. The Firm not only keeps it the same way it is (working 8 hours) but it will also invest in purchasing 2 more machines in order to get more revenue (hence, profit). That means that now, with 3 machines, we produce 6000 shoes in an 8-hour day (1000 shoes per half day per machine) and utilize a total of 1500 lbs of leather (250 lbs per machine, times 6). That’s right! We end up utilizing more resources. This is the “Rebound effect”: The technology that helped us become more efficient and utilize fewer resources is now utilizing more resources because we are choosing the wrong path, to produce more, instead of the other option, which is to use the increases in productivity to finance work time reductions in order to produce the same output and increase the leisure time for the population. This concept is particularly important when we talk about a No-Growth economy or a steady state economy. The conventional economic view is that we need to grow every year, and it is usually measured in terms of GDP growth. Many economists are starting to realize that it is not possible to continuously grow every year (especially since we have a finite planet) and they are advocating for a no growth economy. By looking at the example of the shoes, a very important element of the No-Growth economy is work time reductions. Without it, we would choose the other option, which is to produce more output.

Back to Top


An economy that improves the psychological well being of the population

A 4 Hour Work-Day will increase the amount of leisure time people have, which could be spent on things people love doing, like playing sports, reading a book, hiking, etc. It could also be spent connecting more with family and friends, or maybe connecting with people in the local community, strengthening what economists call “Social Capital.” This aspect will improve the psychological well-being of the population.

Additionally, as we mentioned earlier, reducing working hours to 4 hours a day and giving everyone the opportunity to work would be the first step to eradicate poverty from the face of the earth. It would also reduce crime because people (especially young adults) would be less likely to choose the criminal path if they are able to get a decent job. On that point we should also add the fact that both parents would be more likely to be present at home instead of working all day and they could become more active participants in raising the children.

Another detrimental aspect that could be diminished by implementing the 4 hour work-day is that it would reduce income inequality, because today, increases in productivity are going towards producing more output. Most of those profits from that increase in output are going to the 1% and all the employee gets is more hours of work.

Honestly, the list of benefits from a 4 hour work-day is enormous. Check out our section about benefits to read more about how the 4 Hour Work-day can and will improve society.
Back to Top


An economy that promotes a shift in values

A reduction of the work-day to 4 hours a day (or 20 hours a week) will begin a switch in the value system we have in place. Patterns of consumption that are carbon intensive will be slowly replaced with activities that have lower carbon footprints. For example, people who work longer hours are more likely to choose to eat out instead of cooking healthier meals at home, or to buy produce (mostly shipped from other regions or countries) instead of growing their own food right in their own backyard, or to buy a car and spend money in gas instead of using public transportation (or even better, riding a bicycle). Reducing the working time will encourage people to move away from these patterns of consumption that have high carbon footprints, and gravitate toward activities that are more self-sufficient and less dependable on the system. The Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) published a study this past November of 2012 which concludes that countries with shorter work hours tend to have lower ecological footprints, carbon footprints, and carbon dioxide emissions (Schor et. al, 2012)

Current models that are being developed, models that focus on sustainability and a symbiotic relationship between human beings and the environment, will become more popular in a society that is only required to work 4 hours a day, since people will have more leisure time to spend on these activities. Permaculture, sharing programs, open-source technologies, time banks, etc., are activities and models that currently exist, but they could become mainstream in a society that is more self-sufficient and enjoys more leisure time.

Not only will we be able to see a shift from Consumerism to Sustainability by reducing the work-day to 4 hours a day. We will also have the right environment for values like Individualism and Competition to be replaced with values of Collectivism and Cooperation respectively. Imagine that you are a doctor who loves being a doctor and would not want to be restricted to 4 hours a day. You could work 4 hours per day to get the same income you’ve been getting, and during your leisure time, you could continue doing what you love doing and offer medical services to people who cannot afford it or lack health insurance. Or what about the engineer who loves being an engineer and can offer services during his/her leisure time to help nonprofits build houses for the poor people who somehow have lost their home due to economic reasons or an environmental disaster. Volunteering to help others in need could also increase if leisure time increases.

Back to Top


An Improved Democracy

The 4 hour work-day is not the panacea. Even though it will solve many issues we have with our economy, the environment and society, all problems will not be eliminated. Whether it is monetary reform, shutting down the Federal Reserve, War, corporate takeover of government, Wall Street’s abusive practices, etc., these issues that affect our society are without a doubt a battle between injustice and freedom, between the people and the oppressor. However, in a society that only requires people to work 4 hours a day, people will have more time to become more engaged with the problems that affect their community, country or the entire world, and become more active citizens. People will have more time to educate themselves about current issues and explore possible solutions, and will also have more time to educate others about these solutions, to engage the public and to massively assist to protest against the injustices of our current economic system. Think about how much stronger the voice of the people would be if we had more time for activism, or be more active participants in organizations that look for the benefit of society, like the Occupy Movement, GreenPeace, Human Rights Groups, and many more organizations. Imagine how many more people would attend a protest at Wall Street if we were not working all day. We could be capitalists for 4 hours a day and active citizens for the rest of the day. That is what a true democracy should look like. We have the system generating a self defense mechanism so to speak that makes it harder to become active participants in our community because we get back home so tired from working long hours that all we have energy for is to watch TV, which is brainwashing us more into consumerism. The 4 hour work-day then can REDEFINE THE CONCEPT OF DEMOCRACY and can unleash the strongest power on earth: The people.

Back to Top


An Economy that Boosts the Open Source Movement
Many people believe that the Open Source Movement is going to set up the foundation for the future sustainable Economy. Having the population required to work less and less and enjoy more leisure time will give the Open-Source Movement the boost it needs to become mainstream. It will begin to slowly liberate millions of creative minds trapped in monotonous and repetitive jobs and give them the time to focus on what they love doing, on figuring out things that can benefit all of us and not just a corporation that sells the products. The 4 hour work-day can make the open-source movement grow rapidly, and the best of all is that it will do it without compromising people’s income.
Back to Top


An Economy that serves as a transition plan into a better model

One could argue that Capitalism worked 40-50 years ago, but currently, it is clearly out of control, and the 4 Hour Work-day could help transition into a new model that is more respectful for people and the environment. Buckminster Fuller once said that “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Throughout history, systems have never been replaced in one month or one year. As B. Fuller said, they have become obsolete and replaced by another system that took over. The Merchants, for example, started to gain more power than the Feudal Lord and that (along with other factors) lead to the disappearance of Feudalism. But it didn’t happen in a couple years. It took some time for that to happen.

We all know the term “Planned Obsolescence”, a term that our “wonderful” system has brought to us that deliberately makes things to break down or become obsolete easier and faster so we have the need to purchase a new item, creating unnecessary waste. Well, how about we give this system a taste of its own medicine. Let’s deliberately plan for this system to become obsolete: a “Planned Obsolescence for our current economic model.” If we consider that having a society that is only required to work 4 hours a day would mean that:

  • The path towards a No-growth economy will be developed; It will increase the amount of leisure time people have, which can be spent doing what they love doing;
  • It will enable people to become more active citizens (thus redefining democracy);
  • It will begin to switch our value system from competition to cooperation and from individualism to collectivism; and
  • Full Employment will be achieved and future productivity reevaluations will keep reducing the work-day,

…then we would set the path for a new system to rise and slowly replace the current negative system we have. Which new system would that be? That would be up to us. We are already seeing a shift to better value systems and models like time banks, permaculture, growing your own food, open-source systems, models that focus more on the symbiotic relationship between human beings, resources and the planet. The 4 hour work-day would provide the right environment for those models to spread and expand even faster, creating a better system for society. In essence, we would set the path to build an Economy that works for us and the environment and not that forces us and the environment to work for the economy. The 4 hour work-day will trigger the beginning of a new era in human history.

Back to Top


What can I do?

Help us promote this campaign. The internet is the best tool we have to spread this message all over the world. Like us on Facebook and share it with friends and family. The more we share it the quicker this information spreads. As a matter of fact, do it now before you forget. It will only take 5 seconds.

Organize a local chapter in your area, to speak with your local Unions prepare for a synchronized Global Strike.

You can also sign the petition on to Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, the largest union in the world with 170 million members, to call for a peaceful and democratic Global Strike to implement the 4 Hour Work-day.

If you have any new and creative idea on how to help the campaign, let us know.

Back to Top


Do your own research

Whether you want to help promote this idea or want to learn more about it, you can start doing your own research. We have a video titled “The 4 Hours Explained in 1″ which will give you a good introduction about this campaign. We also have a section where you can do your own research and find many articles, videos and journals that support the 4 Hour work-day.


Back to Top


It is time to organize and really make an impact in this world. Let’s not wait for politicians to do it because they are not able to do it. How long have we been waiting for them to fix the environmental problem? How many times do we need to see the Climate Summits end where they started, with NO SOLUTION? How many times do we need to see the United Nations talk about reducing poverty and seeing most of the money budgeted for it spent on just paperwork with no change whatsoever in reducing poverty levels? The 4 Hour Work-day is a single solution that would not only eliminate poverty, but it will  have zero cost. It will also set up an economy that will take care of the environment and people at the same time. We need to organize and take care of this planet since people in power are not doing it. We owe it to ourselves and to the future generations to come. So please, go now and spread this message through social media channels that a campaign has started. This movement will grow as fast as WE can make it grow. Like Margaret Mead said “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has”.


In solidarity,


The 4 Hour Work-day Campaign


14 responses to “The 4 Hour Work Day Campaign

  1. ross kirby

    fantastic, sooner the better
    ross australia

  2. Dan Maris

    Yes – fantastic campaign. You have all my support, though I think a four day week, to be followed in due course by a three day week, would be of most practical benefit to people. Famously, in the UK production actually went up during a statutory three day week back in the 1970s.

  3. Sounds great, though raises questions like “how do you ensure that the time thus saved will only be put to constructive purposes, and not destructive [like drugs, drinking, gambling] uses” or that “the labourers who thus save four hours will not deploy these to becoming smaller capitalists themselves”

    You have my [and my NGO’s] in-principle support in so far as it does seem to offer a mission to enhance universal human happiness.

    • Thank you for your comment Hasan. People can do whatever they want with their time. But I find it hard to believe that people will choose alcohol and drugs due to having more leisure time. It’s probably due to having a stressful way of living working all day and lots of bills to pay, or fear of loosing your job that people choose drugs or alcohol, to forget about problems and relax in a quick way, with no effort. It is like that argument that people will become more lazy in a 4 hour work-day world. I don’t believe so. people have hobbies and passions that sometimes are not able to pursue because of lack of time. Spending time with family and kids, friends, learning new skills, languages, music, reading books, etc…. the list is huge. Robert Skidelsky, british economists and author of a three-volume biography of Keynes wrote in an article the following passage about leisure:

      “Let us state firmly that we are not in favor of idleness. What we wish to see more of is leisure, a category that, properly understood, is so far from coinciding with idleness that it approaches its polar opposite. Leisure, in the true, now almost forgotten sense of the word, is activity without extrinsic end, “purposiveness without purpose,” as Kant put it. The sculptor engrossed in cutting marble, the teacher intent on imparting a difficult idea, the musician struggling with a score, a scientist exploring the mysteries of space and time—such people have no other aim than to do well what they are doing. They may receive an income for their efforts, but that income is not what motivates them. They are engaged in leisure, not toil.

      This is an idealization, of course. In the real world, extrinsic rewards, including financial rewards, are never entirely out of mind. Still, insofar as action proceeds not from necessity but from inclination, insofar as it is spontaneous, not servile and mechanical, toil is at an end and leisure has begun. This—not idleness—is our ideal. It is only our culture’s poverty of imagination that leads it to believe that all creativity and innovation—as opposed to that specific kind directed to improving economic processes—needs to be stimulated by money.”

      The whole article can be read here: it is worth reading it. It’s about how Keynes’ prediction of a 3 hour work-day by 2030 makes sense and why we will not get to it in a natural way.

      Thank you for your support. By the way, what is your NGO about? What’s its name?

  4. Terrific message cheers for transmitting over it. In realism in apiece of the articles of this blog there is something to acquire.

  5. With recent exponential advancement in technology, all human labor is becoming completely obsolete. Doctors and lawyers and teachers and telemarketers are being replaced by database systems. Factory workers and restaurant workers and ditch diggers are being replaced by machines and robots and robots operating machines. Repairing robots is robot work. Google has a car that drives itself and is licenced and on the road in 3 states. Way before 2030, we will have a zero hour work week whether we want one or not, because NO ONE will have a job. NOW is the time to start thinking beyond capitalism. We need a new “Star Trek like” system of distribution of goods and services that will replace capitalism in the post labor world we are FAST approaching. There are three factors of production; labor, capital and resources. When labor becomes obsolete, then so will capital, because there won’t be any demand in the market when no one has jobs and a very few own everything. In this case, we the people have the right and the duty to abolish a system that has become tyrannical toward our pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. We should institute a system that tracts supply and demand as a technical process without the use of money nor servitude. This is how the internet and 3D printing works. We humans demand. The system supplies. Simple.

  6. William Cross

    This is wonderful! Utterly magnificent! Because being born in a world that goes the way it goes now, is no different than being born in prison. Only difference is, that the bars are invisible which is horrible unto itself since we are slaves who don’t even know they are. No more little hidden influential parasites controlling the many, simply vile and digusting and playing on for far too long! The world should have been different since Nikola Tesla came into being. No more! Indeed Lawrence, WE HUMANS DEMAND! And let the capitalists choke on these three capitalized words! And besides, why do 4 hours? Let’s move to 3,2 or 1 hours already, the faster the world will change, the better, we are prolonging our freemdom, because freedom should have been true freedom about a century ago.

    • Yes, the idea is to keep reducing the work-day with revaluations every 10 years. That means that if productivity increases (which it will) the work-day will be reduced as well, based on that productivity increase. Thank you for commenting.

  7. Pj

    I am in full support of this system. I think it’s a fair balance between “screw the system” and “well, it is what it is” Both mentalities are what’s driving us crazy. The extremes are what’s controlling us. A middle ground (as usual, Greeks were right in their practice of temperance), would be the first and most beneficial step to creating a world where tyrannical corporations are made less malevolent. There will always be the greedy guy, and the foolish guy who gives to the greedy. But I’m time, things would balance out well. I like this article.

  8. Zachary Schramm

    After reading through this it seems like a lovely idea, but it did provoke a question. I’m part of a family of farmers, college educated farmers. I myself am still in college. I’m simply unclear as to how a four hour work day could be applied to the farming industry. I’m aware that new technologies are finding their way into the industry, but that does not eliminate the need for human labor. Just as well, when the weather is poor there is less work to be done and when the weather is fair there is more work to be done. That is something that cannot be controlled, but has to be compensated for by adjusting the hours of labor. I’m not familiar with all of the industries around the world or even in the United States, but I would assume there are other industries that would ask the same question. How would the four hour work day be incorporated into labor intensive, time sensitive industries?

    • Thank you Zachary,
      The answer to your question is to hire more people. Let’s say that labor intensive means to work 12 hours a day instead of the regular 8. Well, the number of hours will be the same 12 hours (let’s assume also that technology will not reduce the number of hours, which in real life, it all) but the number of people performing those 12 hours could be 3 people working 4 hours each. You will still have 12 hours of labor per day that is required to do the job, but each person will work only 4 hours. Now, you might say, “but that would mean a total of 3 salaries instead of 1, because the pay would not be reduced” and yes, there will be higher labor costs, but also, the economy will be doing better because if full employment is achieved and everyone has a job and decent pay, then aggregate demand will increase (more buyers in the market) and move the economy. This translate into more sales for businesses, which also means more revenue and the ability to afford the higher labor costs. This will apply to farmers too.

      The 4 hour work-day campaign could also be called the 20 hour work-week campaign, or the 2 week work-month, or even the 6 month work-year campaign. The beauty is in its flexibility. So even for jobs that are time consuming, like programming for example (which usually you want to keep going more than 4 hours to write a complicated script) then you can work 8 hours each day monday through friday, but for 2 weeks, and then have the other 2 weeks of the month off. It’s a matter of adjusting accordingly to the time the job requires. Thanks for posting.

  9. Cheryl

    I like the idea in theory – and I know it could increase productivity. However, aren’t you just advocating that we put everyone on part-time work instead of full time, but pay them the same? This is the same “job creation” numbers game the government plays, counting $6/hr at 7-11 for 5 hours a week as a “job” they “created.” What would be better is to actually reduce business hours, not work hours. Instead of 9-5, do 11-3. No double shifts.

    The other problem with your splitting shifts idea is that 50% of our population is not unemployed. For employers to be able to handle doubling their salary costs, they would have to have at least close to double their revenues. Getting rid of 10% employment will not do this.

    You’re also not accounting for those in society who refuse to work for whatever reason, living on social programs. You’re forgetting about those who are absolutely unemployable – they have no skills. You’re forgetting the disabled, the elderly, etc.

    You’re also not taking into account that there are already people doing this. They’re business owners – they start a business, work 10-20 hours a week, build an income based on value (not hours), and often hit 6-7 figures. Oh yeah, and they’re the ones taking over many of the internal “jobs” from companies.

    A more pure form of capitalism is the future – value is the only thing money compensates for, no one ever has to sell an hour of their life away. Businesses get everything they need from other businesses, every person becomes CEO of themselves.

    Total freedom, fair wages (you’re paid based on your value, so if you are of immense value, you get paid well – if you are of little value, you get paid little.) Minimum wage will still be there to protect the most marginalized citizens from being paid $0.20 for a day’s worth of their work.

    We don’t need more structure – we need less. Let capitalism take over (in a good way).

    • Thanks for posting Cheryl. Let me make some points to clarify a little bit.

      1. I don’t see how reducing business hours will solve any problem.

      2. When two people are competing for one job, the employer has more bargaining power. But when two employers are competing for one person, the bargaining power then switches towards that person, the employee. This will be one of the consequences of a 4 hour work-day: the worker will have more bargaining power to determine decent wages and working conditions.

      3. $6 an hour working for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week gives an annual income of $12480. What the 4 HOur work-day campaign proposes is for that person to still earn $12480 a year but working 4 hours only. And because of point number 2, those $6/hr will be likely to be even higher.

      4. There is no 50% unemployment rate according to common unemployment statistics, but keep in mind, those statistics only report people who are actively looking for a job. It doesn’t count the ones who have given up because they cannot find work, or the underemployed, people who would love to work more hours but all they can get is a part-time job. It doesn’t count students who choose not to work because of school. They could easily get a full-time job with full pay in a 4 hour work-day world if they wanted to. And what about stay-at-home parents? Moms mostly, but you can find some dads too. This is a huge part of the population and they could also get a job if they wanted to and form a 2 income family without neglecting their kids or getting super stressed out. They could easily share more responsibilities at home as well, as each parent will work only 4 hours and be more available not only for household tasks, but for parenting and improving their relationship with their spouses. As you can see, there are many many people who would love to work but for one reason or another, they are not able to.

      5. I am not sure where you get that business owners work 10-20 hours a week. Just google “how many hours to business owners work” and you will find several articles saying the opposite, that they work long hours. This one for example shows a survey among entrepreneurs stating that it is in the 50-60 hour range.

      The goal of the 4 hour work-day campaign is to reduce the work-day and give people decent jobs and decent income. This translates into more sales for companies, and this increase in revenue will enable companies to cover the higher labor costs. They will still report profits, they will still be competitive (because every company will be on the same boat) and both, companies and workers will be in a much better position.

      • Cheryl

        Thank you for taking the time to reply! I will definitely have to respectfully disagree, as an experienced entrepreneur, business growth expert, etc. – you’re basically advocating doing what hostile employers are doing to their staff already (no more full time jobs), but doubling wages. This will pretty much only result in inflation, thus requiring two part-time jobs to make ends meet – along with the original issues I presented (yes, those actually exist.)

        And where do I get 10-20 hours per week for entrepreneurs? From myself and my clients. We all do it. We lead successful businesses, too. The statistics you commonly see on sites like that are from one of two categories of business owners – the mom n pop person who doesn’t have the knowledge, capital, or ability to scale their business and thus has to work in it every waking hour (essentially owning their own job), or the venture-backed startup entrepreneur, who has dozens of very rich, very intimidating bosses (aka investors) breathing down their necks – essentially meaning they have a low-paid, high-pressure job (and in this case, they don’t even own it.)

        You probably only work 10-20 hours per week effectively – the rest of the time, if you earn an hourly wage, you’re basically getting paid to take up space (sad but true.) Scientific research has shown that human productivity caps at around 5 hours per day, using the 60-60-30 system (Google *that* if you want to be enlightened.)

        Our economy needs a readjustment from the 8-hour work day, for sure – but it is to a value-centric job environment. The more value you bring, the more you get paid. Everyone is essentially self-employed and works for as many companies at a time as they can comfortably serve. Then people can stop selling their lives, and the more value you bring to the table, the more you’ll make – instead of what you’re doing, which is essentially demanding $20+/hr for a coffee waitress (plus tips..)

        Oh, and all of those who are unemployed but not officially listed as unemployed? That still isn’t 50% of the population, and aside from that, a large percentage of them are elderly, disabled, stay at home parents, or those who choose not to work (the minority, but they do exist.)

        So under your system, we’re going to double employment expenses and staffing requirements for businesses, drive inflation through the roof and require everyone to have two jobs, *and* to make it work we have to force the elderly and the infirm to go hold down a couple of jobs, too.

        I’m sorry, but go talk to any economics or business professor and they’ll give you the same answer – this idea is nice in theory, but would be absolutely disastrous in practice.