I know that’s the idea, but I can’t imagine a lot of companies being eager to effectively pay their employees the same for 20% “less work”. I know it’s a good idea, I just have no confidence in companies. Just look how many of them forced people back to offices during the pandemic despite the safety, cost, and productivity benefits of working from home.
I agree, but that is true for working remotely as well, and look how few companies still offer that now. Most companies don’t like to make changes that make their employees lives better, even if there is no downside.
I believe I read elsewhere that pay and everything else stayed the same which was the point of the trial. The businesses didn’t expect to like it but were so impressed with the results that they went ahead and kept it. It was an unqualified win for all parties.
AFAICT it really is as good as it sounds like, no gotchas.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
I know that’s the idea, but I can’t imagine a lot of companies being eager to effectively pay their employees the same for 20% “less work”. I know it’s a good idea, I just have no confidence in companies. Just look how many of them forced people back to offices during the pandemic despite the safety, cost, and productivity benefits of working from home.
They are doing more work in less time (and are happier) the tests show.
I agree, but that is true for working remotely as well, and look how few companies still offer that now. Most companies don’t like to make changes that make their employees lives better, even if there is no downside.
Not 20% less work, 20% less time.
Again, I agree. I just don’t think suits will see it that way
Of course they won’t, but that doesn’t mean that that’s what’s being discussed in these articles.
The suits are seeing it that way. Even if you don’t read the article, it’s in the headline my guy. They’re keeping the 32h work weeks
It’s not in the headline that they are paying the same salary though, which was the question.
It doesn’t say they were paid less, and it talks about the same output, so the logical inference is that the salaries stayed the same.
I believe I read elsewhere that pay and everything else stayed the same which was the point of the trial. The businesses didn’t expect to like it but were so impressed with the results that they went ahead and kept it. It was an unqualified win for all parties.
AFAICT it really is as good as it sounds like, no gotchas.
The headline makes it sound like a large number of companies, but it’s actually only a handful.
Call it a KPI, trend it up. Boom suit support