Ever feel like you need just one more day on the weekend to regroup and relax? Imagine you got one every week—and helped the environment by doing so.
That’s the idea behind the four-day work week, which allows employees to work 10 hours a day instead of the typical eight, in exchange for a perpetual three-day weekend. While that’s reason enough to support the four-day schedule, the bigger benefit involves cleaner air and trimmed energy use.
How so? Imagine the impact if California’s entire work force avoided its Friday commute. According to Telework Research Network, greenhouse gases would be reduced by 8 million tons, or the equivalent of taking almost 1.5 million cars off the road for a year. It would also save about 15,000 people from traffic-related injury or death. And employees could gain back the equivalent of 4.3 vacation days per year—just by not commuting on Fridays.
It may not be as simple as that, as not everyone with a free Friday would stay home the entire day. But consider the case of Shannon Lucier, who negotiated a four-day work week at her previous full-time job as an artist in San Marcos. Her office was a 45-minute drive from her home in San Diego, and staying home one day a week significantly reduced her carbon footprint.
“The work schedule affected my attitude, increased my productivity, saved gas, saved time and even my sanity,” says Lucier, who often spends her Fridays catching up on personal errands, such as doctor’s appointments and renewing her driver’s license. “These are things I would have to otherwise take a day off work for—losing money and disrupting the office.”
California: Not Setting the Example
The national conversation over a four-day week actually fizzled in late 2008 as gas prices fell, but was resurrected last year when Utah started requiring 80 percent of its state government workers to follow the schedule. The result: a 13-percent cut in that state’s energy use. Apply a similar program to California, and millions of dollars would be shaved from the state budget. Not to mention, more than 190,000 state workers could skip their Friday commute. So far, no one in state government has proposed such a plan.
An even easier option would be to shift schools to a four-day school week. California is one of only 17 states that allow school districts to consider a four-day week for students and teachers, yet only two public school districts have implemented the schedule. For a state with the lowest per-capita energy consumption, that’s not exactly setting an example. Consider the environmental impact if, each Friday, every public school in California took its school buses off the road, didn’t prepare cafeteria meals, turned off the lights and air conditioning . . . you get the idea.
Not everyone thinks the four-day school and work week is a win-win. Critics point to child-care complications and less consumer spending (think one less lunch and train ticket bought for the week). But research shows vast improvements in employee productivity and satisfaction, and in one survey from a four-days-a-week California private school, 90 percent of parents said they liked the switch.
It’s Up to Us
If the state won’t lead the charge for a four-day work week, perhaps private employers will. With companies everywhere seeking to shed costs instead of jobs, the prospect of cutting energy bills by one-fifth (while increasing employee productivity) should at least spark an interest in the alternative schedule. There’s just one little problem.
California’s labor laws are murky when it comes to employees working longer than eight hours in one day. Typically, any Californian who works longer than that is entitled to overtime pay—a rule that has greatly deterred the four-day work week from gaining popularity here. But a new law, which went into effect May 2009, allows workers to approach their employers about a four-day week—while agreeing to forgo any overtime pay. Companies, on the other hand, cannot impose such a schedule on employees.
That means it’s up to you. It’s up to you to show your boss the environmental and productivity advantages. If your speech falls on deaf ears, you do have a viable Plan B: Suggest a day of telecommuting instead.
With work-from-home and remote capabilities better than ever, the idea of asking everyone to convene at a central location every day sounds almost archaic. Allowing employees to work from home one day a week—assuming the work can be completed remotely—is generally as eco-friendly as a shortened week. Yes, electricity will be used from home, but the ditched commute and unused commercial lighting make up for it.
The Taproot Foundation, a San Francisco-based organization that connects corporate pro-bono programs with needy nonprofits, started allowing its employees to telecommute about two years ago. Now most of its 50 employees work from home about one day a week.
“We can’t leave it to the government to address environmental issues,” says Aaron Hurst, president and founder of the Taproot Foundation, which also discourages driving by locating its six offices near public transportation stops. “As a nonprofit, we have a responsibility to play a leadership role in this.”
Hurst says several employees began exhibiting a stronger commitment to the organization once he implemented the environmental policies. But more importantly, they have inspired the foundation’s corporate and nonprofit clients to consider developing their own.
And that’s likely how the culture of 9-to-5, five days a week will be challenged. One organization inspires another, which educates another.
Eight million tons of greenhouse gases should be worth the conversation.
—Christina Galoozis
What We’d Save
The total environmental savings if California’s work force worked four days a week, or telecommuted every Friday:
• 44 million barrels of oil valued at more than $3.5 billion (based on $80/barrel)
• $3 billion at the pumps or $194 per consumer (based on $3.50/gallon)
• Reduce greenhouse gases by 8 million tons, the equivalent of taking almost 1.5 million cars off the road for a year.
• Reduced wear and tear on our highways by more than 18 billion miles a year, saving communities $300 million in highway maintenance.
Source: the Telework Research Network
—CG
Christina Galoozis is a Chicago-based writer and editor who writes about sustainability, parenting and small-business issues.
Photo courtesy Steven Depolo
1 Trackback