The Issue

I write to you as someone who genuinely believes in the need for a ground-shifting change in the societal norms of work, of transitioning from the conventional 40-hour workweek to a more balanced 16-hour, four-day workweek — four hours per day, four days per week. For many of us, the reality of working 40 hours each week significantly impacts our mental health, strains our personal connections, and limits our ability to engage in meaningful activities and community participation.

Redefining work-life balance isn’t merely an individual choice; it’s a collective call. It’s about the health of our society, the sustainability of our lifestyles, the strength of our connections, and the welfare of our communities at large.

Numerous studies verify this belief. According to the World Health Organization, longer work hours lead to poorer mental health, resulting in a 33% increased risk of stroke and a 13% increased risk of heart disease. Additionally, research by the Melbourne Institute Worker Paper found that a 25-hour work week is the optimal for over 40s for best cognitive function.

It’s time our societies adopted a framework that values mental well-being over exhaustion, where we could fruitfully contribute with improved productivity while also enjoying our lives outside work. Let’s advocate for a 16-hour, four-day workweek worldwide — four hours per day, four days per week — placing human well-being at the forefront. We are not made to function in constant exhaustion and stress, but in balance and wellness. When we work better, we live better.

Why We Should Rethink the Eight-Hour Workday

Around 200 years ago, the first industrial revolution took place in Great Britain. This period marked a significant shift in the world’s economy, enabling mass production and consumption. Factories operated 24 hours a day to maximize output and profits, resulting in grueling working conditions. Employees often worked 10 to 16 hours a day, 6 days a week, leaving little time for family or personal life.

Amidst these harsh conditions, a man named Robert Owen emerged, campaigning for a more balanced life for workers. His slogan was, “Eight hours labor, Eight hours recreation, Eight hours rest.” While his rationale for eight hours wasn’t based on any scientific study, it divided the 24-hour day into three equal parts dedicated to work, leisure, and rest.

Despite Owen’s efforts, the norm of long working hours persisted until the labor movement in Chicago, known as the “40-hour week movement” or “the short-time movement.” This social movement aimed to regulate the length of the working day and prevent worker exploitation.

The turning point came when the Ford Motor Company decided to experiment with an eight-hour workday while maintaining the same pay as longer shifts. Contrary to expectations, this experiment did not fail. Instead, it led to increased production and doubled profit margins within two years. Happy, well-rested employees contributed to the company’s success, demonstrating the benefits of a shorter workday.

This success story led to the widespread adoption of the eight-hour workday, which eventually became the standard. However, this schedule, which was a more humane approach to work 200 years ago, may no longer be relevant today.

In the present day, much of our work is mental and creative rather than physical. The pandemic has given us an opportunity to reconsider our work habits and improve our workplace interactions. Given the advancements in technology and increased efficiency, it’s worth questioning whether the eight-hour workday still makes sense.

So why do we continue to still work our whole days away? It’s time to rethink and explore other ways of organizing our lives. The eight-hour workday is not set in stone, and questioning it could lead to innovative changes that better suit our modern world.

Why 4 Hours a Day, 4 Days a Week?

I believe we should take that question further by considering a four-hour workday, four days per week — a 16-hour standard workweek.

This would give people three days each week outside of work, while also allowing them to have meaningful time remaining in the four days that they do work.

Too often, we rush through our lives because work consumes the majority of our days. We rush to get ready for work, rush through our mornings, spend most of the day at work, rush home, take care of our responsibilities, sleep, and then do it all over again.

We can become so focused on getting to work, staying at work, and preparing for the next workday that we struggle to simply be present in our own lives.

We should have time to live, not just enough time to recover from work before returning to it.

We should have time to sit with the people we love without constantly watching the clock. We should have time for our parents, grandparents, partners, friends and communities. We should have time to experience life and make memories rather than continually postponing living until the weekend, our next vacation, or retirement.

And for parents especially, childhood does not wait.

Our children grow up while we are working. There are only so many first steps, bedtime stories, afternoons at the park, school events, family dinners, conversations, birthdays and ordinary moments that we will ever have with them while they are young.

Those years cannot be earned back later.

People should not have to look back and realize that they spent most of their children’s childhood rushing out the door to work and spending most of their waking hours away from them.

Work should support our lives. Our lives should not have to revolve around work.

A four-hour workday could allow people to meaningfully participate in the workforce while still having a substantial portion of their day available for their families, education, exercise, caregiving, appointments, household responsibilities, personal interests and communities.

And a four-day workweek would give people three days each week in which work is not controlling their schedule.

The Goal Is Not to Cut People’s Pay

A 16-hour workweek should not mean workers simply lose 60% of their normal weekly income.

The goal should be to reduce the standard number of hours people are required to work without simply reducing their normal weekly compensation and benefits in proportion to those hours.

Otherwise, many people would simply have to find second and third jobs to survive, defeating the entire purpose of a shorter workweek.

The goal is to rethink how the benefits of productivity, technology, automation and artificial intelligence are shared.

If technological advancement allows society to accomplish more in less time, one of the benefits should be time returned to people.

The exact economic and legal structure necessary to protect wages and benefits across different industries deserves serious research, discussion and testing. A transition of this magnitude could also be phased in rather than occurring overnight.

But the difficulty of changing something should not prevent us from asking whether something better is possible.

So, join me in calling for a worldwide standard of a 16-hour, four-day workweek — four hours per day, four days per week — that promotes a healthier, more meaningful life.

Let’s redefine work from draining to sustaining.

Please sign this petition to help catalyze a societal shift towards a more balanced work and life paradigm — one in which technological and economic progress gives people something incredibly valuable:

More of their lives back.