Reduced working hours in the labour market - what are the consequences?

The “4-day work week” is a model where employees work fewer hours while retaining the same pay and benefits. The model has been praised for promoting work-life balance, reducing stress and increasing overall job satisfaction. 

In a study from 2023 by Cambridge University examined the impact of a 4-day working week among 61 UK companies over 6 months. These were primarily companies in the knowledge services sector, e.g. marketing agencies were included in the study. The results showed that the reduction in working hours did not have a negative impact on productivity. On the contrary, it increased by an average of 1.4 per cent during the period. At the same time, employees experienced less stress, fewer sick days and fewer resignations.

Among Danish companies following the model is Copenhagen-based IT company IIH Nordic, which introduced the model in 2017. According to CEO Henrik Stenmann, they have since had happier employees and found it easier to attract and retain highly specialised labour. You can read more about this in our blog post here.

Researchers also point out that the 4-day working week can have a positive impact on the environment because employees spend less time commuting back and forth, thereby reducing CO2 emissions. 

However, it is important to emphasise that not all industries can benefit from the model. It depends on the individual company and institution and their specific workflows. For example, it's hard to imagine the model being suitable for the care, health and nursing sector, because reducing their working week would not allow them to treat the required number of patients.

Another more recent trend in the labour market is “loud quitting”. This type of resignation differs from the traditional and quieter resignation, which is done with plenty of notice, in that the employee instead leaves their job abruptly and in a dramatic way. The employee publicises their resignation and job dissatisfaction on social media, for example, or by confronting their employers publicly.

The trend is rooted in the current debate on work/life balance. For many loud quitters, the loud resignation is about drawing public attention to inappropriate working conditions in order to change the norms and culture surrounding the pressurised and competitive workplace. In our blog post here you can read more about the consequences of this phenomenon for both the employee and the organisation.

Another current trend unfolding right now is “Quiet Quitting”, which refers to a more subdued form of protest against work. It's not an actual quitting - rather a quiet rebellion against the overriding work identity, and a move towards a work effort where you “only” do what is absolutely necessary. Often as an attempt to assert that they have a life outside of work. The employee becomes less committed to work. As an offshoot of this phenomenon, the #Iazygirljob has emerged. It refers to the fact that more and more Gen Zers are choosing a job that requires minimal effort, but where they are paid a good salary and where there is a lot of flexibility to maintain a work-life balance. They refuse to take a job that requires them to sacrifice their quality of life. 

Both quiet quitting and #lazygirljob can lower productivity in the workplace because disengaged employees are often less resourceful and less motivated. To counter these trends and prevent them from happening, employers should help create a positive workplace that offers opportunities for personal and professional development, good leadership, and an appropriate workload. At the same time, employees should look for opportunities for development, encourage open communication with their manager about career goals and working conditions, and self-reflect on the cause of any lack of motivation and how it can be regained. You can read more about quiet quitting in our blog post here.