Tangle - Should we have a 32-hour workweek?

Starting point is 00:00:00 Can Indigenous ways of knowing help kids cope with online bullying? At the University of British Columbia, we believe that they can. Dr. Johanna Sam and her team are researching how both Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth cope with cyber-aggression, working to bridge the diversity gap in child psychology research. At UBC, our researchers are answering today's most pressing questions. To learn how we're moving the world forward, visit ubc.ca forward happens here. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown.

Starting point is 00:00:40 When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu.

Starting point is 00:01:11 It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCcellvax.ca. From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tango Podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode,

Starting point is 00:02:05 we're going to be talking about the 32-hour workweek. That's right, the 32-hour workweek. That's right. The 32-hour workweek. Everybody wants that, right? Everybody wants the 32-hour workweek. We're going to break down the proposal, why some people don't want it, a little bit of policy wonky economic stuff, and then, as always, my take. Before we jump in, those of you who are also newsletter subscribers, I want to apologize. Yesterday, we sent our newsletter twice because the first edition, we had copy and pasted the quotes from left-leaning sources into what the right was saying. A lot of people, for the first 10 minutes this newsletter was out, were very confused or pissed off, one or the other. I also want to remind you that we have our brand new video up on our YouTube channel of my Zionist take for a ceasefire in Gaza. I think this is one of the more important

Starting point is 00:02:52 things that I've written in a long time. I was excited to turn it into a podcast and now a video. If you want to support us and support our growing YouTube channel, which is coming up on 10,000 subscribers, very stoked about that, please go give it a listen, subscribe to the channel, which is coming up on 10,000 subscribers. Very stoked about that. Please go give it a listen, subscribe to the channel, watch the whole thing. Even if you just let it run in the background, I don't care. It's good for the algo. Good for the algo, as the kids say. We need the algorithm, the YouTube algorithm to love us. So go check that out, Tangle News on YouTube. And with that out of the way, we'll jump in with some quick hits. First up, the Federal Reserve left interest rates unchanged and signaled that cuts are still likely within the year, although significant interest rate cuts are less likely. Number two, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah

Starting point is 00:03:46 el-Sisi in Cairo as part of talks with Arab officials to seek a ceasefire in Gaza. Separately, Israel's military operation in Gaza's largest hospital facility, al-Shifa, entered its fourth day. Number three, Judge Scott McAfee, who is presiding over the criminal case against former President Donald Trump and his 14 co-defendants in Georgia, permitted the defense to appeal his decision to allow Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis to remain on the case. They now have 10 days to file an application to the appeals court. Number four, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the Democrat from New York, declined a request from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Senate Democrats this week. And number five, Reddit began trading on the New York Stock Exchange after raising $748 million in its initial public offering on Wednesday.

Starting point is 00:04:36 The move marks the first social media IPO since 2019. 19. Interesting story here. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced new legislation to reduce the work week from 40 to 32 hours without loss of pay. Sanders is joined by California Senator LaFunds, a butler and and Riverside County Congressman Mark Tucano, who introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives. The 32-hour workweek act would also require overtime pay for days longer than eight hours, and overtime double the regular pay for days longer than 12 hours. One of the issues that we have got to talk about is stress in this country. The fact that so many people are going to work exhausted physically and mentally. And the fact

Starting point is 00:05:32 that we have not changed the Fair Labor Standards Act. This was in 1940. Last Wednesday, Senator Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont, introduced a bill to the Senate to federally mandate a 32-hour workweek. Sanders' bill is the Senate companion to a bill introduced by Representative Mark Takano, the Democrat from California in the House, the 32-hour workweek act, which would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to reduce the standard workweek from 40 hours to 32, lowering the maximum hours threshold for overtime pay for non-exempt employees. The proposal follows the United Auto Workers strike in the fall,

Starting point is 00:06:11 where one of the labor demands was for a 32-hour workweek. Takano, a senior member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, credits technological advances, especially in artificial intelligence, with increasing efficiency enough to allow workers to put in less time to produce the same results. We have choices to make as a society about whether we are going to allow technology to put us in the service of it or whether it really serves all of us. And I mean all of us, Takano said. Sanders garnered attention for his bill last week with a hearing in the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which he chairs. He said the proposed work-time reductions would be phased in over four years. Do we continue the trend that technology only benefits the people on top, or do we demand that these transformational changes benefit working people, Sanders asked. The proposal faced

Starting point is 00:07:00 both support and opposition in the hearing. If this policy is implemented, it would threaten the millions of small businesses already operating on razor-thin margins, in part because they are unable to find enough workers, said Senator Bill Cassidy, the Republican from Louisiana. Employers would be forced to eliminate full-time positions in favor of part-time ones. A recent survey from Morning Consult found that 87% of employed U.S. adults would be interested in a four-day workweek. However, the Senate bill is not likely to gain the necessary 60 votes to pass the divided Senate, nor is Takano's bill expected to pass a Republican-controlled House. The 32-hour workweek faces stiff opposition not just from most Republicans, but also some financial experts who say that the proposed changes could hurt blue

Starting point is 00:07:45 collar workers and manufacturing industries. Other economists, though, argue that a shortened workweek would improve worker productivity. A recent pilot study of 61 companies in the United Kingdom found that a four-day workweek significantly increased employee morale, decreased burnout, and improved employee retention. 92% of companies who participated in the pilot program voluntarily adopted a 32-hour workweek. Some economists have cast doubt on the results of the UK study, noting that it wasn't peer-reviewed and participating companies only shortened the workweek by only 7% on average. Others suggest that these pilot programs tend to only include employers who were already inclined to try a shorter workweek, limiting the accuracy of their findings. Today, we'll take a look at

Starting point is 00:08:29 the arguments about the proposal from the right and the left, and then I'll give my take. We'll be right back after this quick commercial break. First up, we'll start with what The Right is saying. The Right opposes the proposal, arguing that it's out of touch with economic reality. Some say it would cause costs to rise for everyone. Others suggest working fewer hours won't make workers happier. National Review's editors wrote about Bernie's 32-hour work week. What is Sanders' plan to contribute to the great human endeavor of becoming wealthier while working less? Does he have an idea for the next automobile, a better management strategy, or the power loom for the 22nd century, the editors asked? No, Sanders wants

Starting point is 00:09:22 to write words on a page and have a couple hundred people vote for it. That is Sanders' idea of progress. Pass a law that says everyone gets paid the same for doing less work, and then it happens. We could easily produce 1950s levels of output only working a few hours per week, but that would mean 1950s levels of technology, of poverty, of housing, of air conditioning, 1950s levels of food quality and variety, and it turns out nobody really wants that. So we keep working and innovating so we can be better off, not just as well off, the editors wrote. Maybe if you're an 82-year-old socialist who has only worked in politics your entire life, you lose touch with what it means to be a

Starting point is 00:10:01 productive member of society. In PJ Media, Rick Moran asked, would reducing the workweek to 32 hours make workers happier? There's no doubt this would be a popular piece of legislation with many workers, and Sanders surprisingly makes some good points about why the change would be beneficial, Moran says, but there's absolutely no empirical evidence that a shorter workweek relieves stress and makes workers happier. However many hours an employee puts in, the work has to get done. I doubt whether relieving stress levels would be measurable. Work has, indeed, changed radically.

Starting point is 00:10:35 There's a lot less physical exertion, and in fact, machines do most of our heavy lifting and thinking. To relieve stress, I suggest looking at home life as well. There are far more stressors at home than in most workplaces, and a 32-hour workweek isn't going to fix that, Moran added. This proposal would sound the death knell of American economic supremacy. Let's make sure we understand that before taking the leap to a 32-hour workweek. All right, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying.

Starting point is 00:11:19 The left is mixed on the proposal, with supporters arguing it's a necessary move amid record wealth inequality. Some disagree, saying companies will make this change themselves if it's truly in workers' best interest. Others say the proposal's growing popularity shows our changing societal values. In the Washington Post, Senator Bernie Sanders and United Auto Workers President Sean Fain made the case for a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay. Today, American workers are more than 400% more productive than they were in the 1940s. And yet, despite this fact, millions of our people are working longer hours for lower wages. In fact, 28.5 million Americans now work over 60 hours a week, and more than half of full-time employees work more than 40 hours a week, Sanders and Fain said.

Starting point is 00:12:04 Despite these long hours, the average worker in America makes almost $50 a week less than he or she did 50 years ago after adjusting for inflation. Think about all the incredible advancements in technology, computers, robotics, artificial intelligence, and the huge increase in worker productivity that has been achieved. What have been the results of these changes for working people? Almost all the economic gains have gone straight to the top while wages for workers are stagnant or worse, Sanders and Fain wrote. While CEOs are making nearly 400 times as much as their average employees, many workers are seeing their family lives fall apart. This should not be happening in the United States of America in 2024. In Inc. Magazine, Suzanne Lucas said no matter how popular

Starting point is 00:12:42 this bill seems, the chances of it becoming law are slim to none. Sanders says he wants to pass this four-day workweek bill to force companies to share profits with their employees and bring Americans into line with other wealthy nations, Lucas wrote. Employees in other countries may look like they work a lot few hours per week. Workers in Copenhagen, Denmark, for instance, clock in at 1,380 hours per year, which is a dramatic difference. But they also have a standard 37-hour work week, with an average of 33 hours per week actually worked, a 3.4-hour difference. Why is the overall number so much lower? Vacation.

Starting point is 00:13:17 Danes are entitled to a minimum of five weeks of vacation per year for full-time employees. Most Europeans enjoy real-time off like this. U.S. law doesn't have mandatory vacations, although some states require paid sick time, Lucas said. Many people want to work fewer hours, but businesses tend to want full-time employees to work 40 hours. If this is truly better for everyone, companies will adopt it on their own. No new law needed. Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. own. No new law needed. And for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News.

Starting point is 00:14:13 Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. In the New York Times, Binyamin Applebaum called the 32-hour workweek the magic number. Americans spend too much time on the job. A shorter workweek would be better for our health, better for our families, and better for our employers, who would reap the benefits of a

Starting point is 00:14:53 more motivated and better-rested workforce. Other countries may seek an advantage in the global marketplace by wringing every drop of labor from their workers. American companies have to be more productive, and that means taking better care of their workers. Though the 40-hour workweek may feel like an immutable law of nature, it's barely a century old. American workers fought to establish the eight-hour workday around the turn of the last century, campaigning on the catchy slogan, eight hours for work, eight hours for rest, eight hours for what you will, Applebaum wrote. The revival of the idea partly reflects a shift in societal priorities. Americans have become more protective of their health, more inclined to define themselves in terms of their lives outside of work,

Starting point is 00:15:34 and perhaps more willing to accept leisure as a substitute for higher pay. All right, that is it for the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. So I just don't see how a 32-hour workweek can happen. Sanders' proposal is not going to make it through a divided Senate, even though Democrats are in the majority there, and Takano is essentially dead on arrival in the House. The federal government isn't going to enact a 32-hour workweek, and I don't think it should, but that doesn't mean the idea is without merit either. Let's start with what the proposal gets right. Workers are more productive now and are getting paid less. Sanders isn't pulling those numbers out of thin air. According to the St. Louis Fed, worker productivity since 1955 has increased by about 400%. And over the same time period, the average inflation-adjusted income has decreased despite income inequality

Starting point is 00:16:36 dropping in the last year. It's also true that other countries do require fewer hours per week. Denmark, for example, has a 37-hour workweek, as well as more maternity leave and paternity leave in a culture where more paid time off is expected. And there is evidence to suggest that companies that enact a four-day workweek can maintain the same level of productivity with happier and healthier employees. In simple terms, the proposal makes sense. Technological advances have helped workers make productivity gains and have helped companies make more money, but the amount that workers get paid per time worked hasn't increased. Instead of fixing that by making hourly pay go up, why not keep the pay the same and then make

Starting point is 00:17:15 the number of hours go down? Workers who make enough would be happier because they would spend less time at work. Those who don't make enough would have more time for a second job. And if companies get the same level of productivity, what's the problem? Well, that brings us to what the proposal gets wrong. First off, I don't see how this helps with worker wages. If we make it so full-time workers are making the same amount a year but are just working less, how is that putting more money in the pocket of most Americans? You could argue that it frees them up for more part-time work, but like Sanders said, a lot of people who need the money are already working second jobs. I can see the argument that working less is just better for health and stress levels, and that's fine, but I don't think you can really argue it's better for

Starting point is 00:17:57 the average person's bottom line. In fact, it might be worse. A shortened work week might make sense for white-collar workplaces, but I don't see how it makes sense for manufacturing or construction companies. Imagine a construction company where 50 employees are paid a fixed amount for 40 hours a week. If suddenly that company has to pay the same employees for 32 hours of work instead, what do you think will happen? Either 50 employees are going to get 8 hours of overtime pay, increasing the cost of construction at a time when housing prices are already at all-time highs, or 100 employees are

Starting point is 00:18:29 going to work 20 hours a week, meaning 50 people lose their benefits while 50 newer, less efficient workers are brought on, also without benefits. Either way, an increase in housing costs or a decrease in worker benefits isn't a good outcome. The UK pilot study of 61 companies that was quoted a lot among supporters reflects this problem too. Of those companies, seven were in manufacturing and construction, and none of the construction companies were quoted or showcased in the report. Meanwhile, only one manufacturing company, a craft brewery, was highlighted. That study also had other problems. First off, it isn't definitive. Other studies have shown that the length of the workweek isn't behind most workplace issues.

Starting point is 00:19:10 It also wasn't peer-reviewed. It was financed by an organization called Four Day Week Global, meaning its methods are likely biased. It included only organizations interested in adopting a four day workweek, biasing its results further, and it only collected data about stress levels at the workplace. While trying to mitigate stress is a worthy cause, there's not much evidence that the number of hours we work is a significant driver. About 75% of U.S. adults reported experiencing stress in their lives. On Scandinavian countries, where it's more common to work fewer hours, it's closer to 80%. Simply put, I don't think legislating a top down 32 hour work week is going to be a magic bullet to eliminate stress. I don't think it makes for smart policy, and I don't think it's going to be good for every industry or even every

Starting point is 00:19:55 company in the industries where it can work. I know that with the amount we have to do every week at Tangle, I'm not exactly chomping at the bit to try it out. But I could see it working for a lot of other places. Advertising agencies, law firms, even small businesses and storefronts. If you can actually achieve the same amount of productivity for less work, then you should by all means try it. And I think Sanders and Takano mainstreaming this issue and making it part of a broader discussion could result in the change coming faster to those workplaces where it could make sense. Then, maybe down the road, it would make sense in more and more industries. I just don't think we're there now. Like another signature Sanders position, the $15 minimum wage he ran on in 2016, I think it's a nice talking point that makes sense for

Starting point is 00:20:40 some industries, but wouldn't make sense as a matter of overarching federal policy. A 32-hour workweek could be great for certain jobs, but I think it could be bad for a lot of others and could be disastrous for some. Until more U.S. companies try this out across every sector, there just isn't reason to support making this top-down change. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Ray in Staunton, Virginia. Ray said, why do so many people want to increase the tax on the rich? One, the top 1% already pay over 42% of the taxes.

Starting point is 00:21:27 Two, every time they increase this tax rate, the amount collected actually goes down. That sounds like a no-win. So a lot of the issues we cover have kind of moderate positions to stake out that take elements from each side of a debate. Some issues are ones where moderate positions are still very possible, but having a cohesive viewpoint makes it hard to meet in the middle. Abortion is one of those issues. Taxation is another. If you believe that we are better off with less government, that means you want to see lower taxes, smaller government, and fewer investments in government services and entitlement

Starting point is 00:22:00 programs. If you believe in more government, that means more taxation, more government, and more investment in government services and entitlement programs. I you believe in more government, that means more taxation, more government, and more investment in government services and entitlement programs. I think that's where your second point actually provides a really good visualization. There's an economic concept called the Laffer Curve, which says that the more you tax a population, the less prosperous the people are, meaning that over time, the less you can actually get from them. It also means the opposite. The less you tax a population, the less you can actually get from them. It also means the opposite. The less you tax a population, the less you get in taxes. So in theory, there's a happy medium of ideal taxation. But every increase in taxation past that point gives diminishing returns and actually hurts the population. I don't disagree at all with that. And to be honest, I'm more ideologically

Starting point is 00:22:41 prone towards smaller government and less taxation. But I also understand the point of view of people who disagree with me, and I think their best point answers your first question. Why tax the rich when the top 1% earn 22% of income but make up 42% of our tax revenue? First off, it's not really a bad thing that we tax richer people more because the same idea behind the Laffer curve for the government is also at play for individuals. Every extra tax dollar you earn past a certain point gives diminishing returns, and it's better to put a higher tax on the dollars people need less. Second, despite income inequality going down in 2023, it's still extremely high in historical terms, and a more progressive tax policy is a pretty good tool for addressing it. From my point of view, the big question is how to effectively tax the ultra-wealthy,

Starting point is 00:23:29 those who amass their fortunes not from salaries, but from stock benefits and investments. Those are hard to tax, and they should be, but in a country where the 400 richest people own as much wealth as the bottom 60% combined, and where their fortunes are almost unimaginable, you're going to see a lot of popular interest in progressively taxing people who earn significantly more in a year than most people will ever see in a lifetime. All right, that is it for your questions answered, which brings us to our under-the-radar section. This week, Meta said it will be shutting down CrowdTangle, no relation to us, an analytics tool used by journalists and researchers to see what's going viral on Facebook and Instagram. CrowdTangle was a driving force behind the controversy over

Starting point is 00:24:15 Facebook's algorithm in the lead-up to the 2020 election, with journalists leveraging its data to show the site was promoting hyper-political content. The move comes despite Meta facing calls for greater transparency in how it handles content moderation, and the company says it will offer improved research tools like its new Meta content library to address these concerns. But news publishers, journalists, or anyone with commercial interests will not be granted access to that data and will have to rely on third-party tools to analyze Meta's platforms.

Starting point is 00:24:45 Axios has the story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. Alright, next up is our numbers section. The vote in the Senate in 1933 in favor of a bill that shortened the workweek to 30 hours was 53 to 30. The bill didn't make it any further, the workweek to 30 hours was 53 to 30. The bill didn't make it any further, but set the stage for the adoption of the 40-hour workweek in 1940. The average annual working hours for non-farm U.S. workers in 1929 was 2,316, according to analysis by Our World and Data. The average annual working hours for non-U.S. farmworkers in 1994 was 1,808. The average annual working hours for non-U.S. farmworkers in 2017 was 1,757. The approximate increase in the U.S. worker output measured in goods and services between 2000 and 2022 was 60%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Starting point is 00:25:40 The approximate increase in hours worked between 2000 and 2022 was 10%. The percentage of employed U.S. adults who said they'd be interested in a four-day workweek if remote work is allowed all or nearly all of the time was 75%, according to a 2023 Morning Consult poll. And the percentage of employed U.S. adults who said they'd be interested in a four-day workweek without the option of remote work was just 51%. said they'd be interested in a four-day work week without the option of remote work was just 51%. And finally, our have a nice day section. Stupid table, $100. That was the title of a post for a coffee table a woman was trying to sell on Facebook Marketplace. Too high for her couch, too low for anything else. And it reminded her of her ex, whom she had just gotten out of a

Starting point is 00:26:24 relationship with. Her inbox got flooded with support. As the marketplace community suggested, she'd just solicit $1 donations from people and then destroy the table. In the end, what was an angry and bitter post turned into a cathartic outpouring of love. Thank you for the 1,000 plus sweet, hilarious, and inspiring messages. Maybe this table wasn't so stupid after all, she said. Sunny Skies has this kind of ridiculous but nice story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. As always, if you want to support our work, you can go to readtangle.com and consider becoming a member. We're going to be back here tomorrow with an interview with Andy Slavitt, longtime Obama administration official who also joined the Biden White House during COVID response.

Starting point is 00:27:16 Somebody who's been around the block a bit. Should be a pretty interesting conversation. If you want to get a transcript of that conversation in your inbox, you have to be a Tangle member. Paid subscribers only for that tomorrow, but we're going to publish it here on the pod too. And so we'll see you then. Have a good one. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Wall. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Bailey Saul, and edited and engineered by John Wall. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady.

Starting point is 00:27:49 The logo for our podcast was designed by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go to retangle.com and check out our website. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown.

Starting point is 00:28:28 When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada,

Starting point is 00:28:47 which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

Tangle - Should we have a 32-hour workweek?

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.