Rationale in Support of Alternative Work Schedules

¶ … Compressed Workweek

One of the harsh realities of working life in the 21st century is the inordinate amount of time people must spend preparing for and commuting to and from work. In some cases, this may amount of several hours each day which, over the course of a 5-day workweek, may equal or exceed 2 or 3 days of actual work hours. In response to this issue and the need to better align worker presence on the job with organizational goals, a growing number of organizations of all sizes and types have implemented a "compressed work week" which telescopes the traditional 5-day, 8-hours a day schedule to a 4-day week, 10-hour a day schedule. Although the attractiveness of the compressed workweek varies by individual and organization, the benefits, including personal preferences due to child care needs, attendance at school, personal health and others have been shown to be sufficiently compelling that nearly 40% of all organizations in the United States have adopted this approach in recent years. To identify these benefits, this paper provides a review of the relevant peer-reviewed and scholarly literature concerning the compressed workweek, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.

Review and Analysis

At the fin de siecle, it has been estimated that the average worker spent about 53 hours a week on the job (Smith 1999). By 1938, though, the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act established a standard workweek of 40 hours for nonsupervisory employees of companies that were engaged in interstate commerce (Smith 1999). Since that time, increased concern about workers' health resulted in the passage of a wide range of federal and state statutes and collective bargaining agreements that included another standard: the 8-hour day (Smith 1999). According to Smith, "Under these provisions, many persons were guaranteed overtime pay for hours worked in excess of this daily standard. The logical outgrowth of these regulations was a third implicit standard, the 5-day workweek. The 5-day workweek is even more prevalent than is the 40-hour week" (8).

Despite the prevalence of the 5-day workweek, there have been some alternatives introduced over the years, with the common approach being the so-called "compressed workweek" which is typically defined as working 40 hours in 4 to 4-1/2 days (Smith 1999). According to Messenger (2004), "A 'compressed workweek' involves placing a set number of hours of work into a smaller number of days; e.g., instead of working 40 hours in 5+ 8-hour days, a 'compressed workweek' might involve working the same number of hours in 4+ 10-hour days" (174). The latter approach involves a schedule consisting of 4, 9-hour days and 8 hours worked every other Friday (Arbon and Facer 389). Indeed, increasing numbers of organizations of all sizes and types are recognizing the advantages of a compressed workweek. By 2008, more than one-third (37%) of organizations in the United States were using a compressed workweek schedule, with the health (57%), nonprofit services (45%), and government (45%) industries representing the largest percentages of organizations that have adopted this alternative work schedule (Arbon and Facer 389).

Certainly, the desirability of a compressed workweek will vary from worker to worker, depending on individual preferences and unique lifestyle considerations, but the advantages of this alternative schedule are clear to many workers. For instance, Arbon and Facer report that, "Compressed workweeks seem to be garnering much attention recently as organizations contemplate ways to save money, increase efficiency, and improve the work-life balance of employees" (390). As noted in the introduction, compressed workweeks also reduce worker commute time, a fact that also translates into fewer carbon emissions. In this regard, Thoreson and Johnson note that, "The overarching benefits of implementing a flexible workplace program are an increase in employee morale, decrease in commute times for employees, environmental conservation, and cost savings" (22).

A study by conducted by Catalyst, "The Next Generation: Today's Professionals, Tomorrow's Leaders," indicated that improving the work-life balance is an especially important aspect of compressed workweeks for many younger workers. For instance, reporting on the results of the study, the editors of the Journal of Accountancy emphasize that, "In addition to placing great importance on their careers, both men and women Gen-Xers also placed high value on personal life, and were seeking effective ways to manage their lives" (Exploding Generation X Myth 39). In fact, more than two-thirds (67%) of the workers surveyed by Catalyst reported that they would prefer a compressed workweek (Exploding Generation X Myth 39). There were a number of reasons cited by the Catalyst study respondents for preferring a compressed workweek, including (in descending order) the following:

To meet child care responsibilities (cited by 79% of women and 68% of men);

The ability to attend school (37% of women and 47% of men);

Personal health (41% of women and 44% of men); and,

Personal reasons unrelated to family (31% of women and 39% of men) (Exploding Generation X Myth 40).

Many organizations have some strictly pragmatic reasons for offering alternative work schedules such as the compressed 40-hour, 4-day workweek. By providing their workers with alternative work schedules these organizations expect to be regarded as an "employer of choice," thereby attracting and retaining high quality workers. In this regard, Kopelman and Prottas report that, "Employers seek to provide benefits and policies to enhance employee perceptions that the employer invests in and cares about its employees. The rationale is that by offering these benefits and policies, employees will perceive that their organization is supportive of employees' lives outside of work" (232). This perception of superior work-life balance by the employer is then expected to translate into enhanced worker commitment and loyalty in ways that improve organizational productivity and profitability (Kopelman and Prottas 232).