To think 'Full time' should mean less hours?

Smart objectives have been in existence for decades. For some places. Others will not be aware of them at all.
You are paid for the grade you are and the hours you work. Your objectives are a blend of aims and outcomes.

Thanks for recommending this book I've just bought the audiobook!

I would also recommend Fully Automated Luxury Communism by Aaron Bastani

But wouldn’t they then need to pay someone else to make up the output? If not, some of the hours you’re being paid for aren’t actually necessary and then you work talking yourself out of a job…

And how long before they work out that if AI can do 20% of your job it can do all of it and then bye bye job? People used to work a 6 day week. Now 5 is common but apparently now so many 'can't cope' with that, despite having almost every bloody thing automated and on an app now? Shopping - online, washing- machines and dishwashers, admin, all on apps and standing orders and auto renew subscriptions. Even my remortgage event couple of years takes no more than 2 conversations and a few emails. Things take as much time and headspace as you let them.

I'm a teacher. Single parent to two ND kids. More 'Get shit done' and less naval gazing really helps.

In the private sector ‘full time hours’ typically means ‘work as many hours as is necessary to get the job done’.

So this logic wouldn’t work, sadly.

Sorry op, I am a pedantic nitwit - it should be fewer hours, not less as hours is a countable noun.

I know what you mean. It’s really unfair that wages aren’t keeping up with inflation but I don’t think working fewer hours is how we will solve society’s problems. We need to be more productive as a country, not less. It’s growth that we need to get us out of this mess, not everyone doing less work though it would be lovely to have more time.

Doesn’t the pension contribution make up for the lower wage?

Yes stealth quitting
we are all doing it in my team as not sustainable any other way

Largely, this isn’t true though – you are paid to get a job done and reach a target. The hours it takes to do that are arbitrary.

I know. I had smart objectives in the last century. They had no connection with the hours worked, not even a tenuous one.

I thought some organisations (private sector) already do this? Maybe go and work for one of them?
There is no chance it will happen in the public sector. I’m full time in public sector at 37.5 hours. There are flexible working options but nobody I work with has enough time to do all their work as it is- so it would not work to allow people to keep their salaries at the same level for fewer hours. I manage most of the things on your list already - but admit I am not juggling wraparound care as my children are older.

Contracts don’t offer pay rises, based on inflation or anything else. If the organisation can fill vacancies and retain most people then they don’t need to pay more.

That ignores morale and performance, which often aren’t measured, and the extent to which pay affects those things is debated.

South Cambridgeshire District Council has done it for years. Productivity has risen.

I imagine it could work in some departments at LAs - but not in the patient facing teams in the NHS as the staffing costs would increase to cover the same volume of appointments etc.

People feeling underpaid affects morale and performance. If people feel fairly paid, extra pay does not impact morale or performance.
Morale in my company is through the floor because pay rises are tiny as they have no issues recruiting people. But they have big issues retaining experienced staff.

NHS is separate to the LA, so not affected.

Lack of productivity in the public sector already costs the tax payer approximately £80-84bn annually, or 3% of GDP. I know there are some roles/parts of the public sector that are stretched and flat out but we all know of parts that are not.

AI has a cost too - and it will get increasingly expensive as we become ’hooked’ on it; this is built into pricing models.

Economics simply doesn’t work the way OP would like it to unfortunately. A better question would be how can we equip workers to have the right systems, processes, skills and attitudes to fully utilise their own and their role’s potential to achieve the required outcomes?

Lack of productivity in the public sector is largely driven by a lack of investment. I have worked in the public sector and now in the private sector doing the same job, they are worlds apart.

In the public sector I had old software and cheap IT equipment. The poor systems meant everything took much longer. I used a scanner a lot. In the public sector this meant using a photocopier to scan that often broke and always had people waiting to use it. In the private sector I now use a decent scanner on my desk. No waiting, never breaks.

It's lots of things like that that reduces productivity. I achieve more in the private sector and don't actually work as hard. Because we are given the tools to do our job. Rather than constantly having to make do.

Came on to say this.

If councils can use AI to replace some of your work they will look to replace to all of it very quickly. I wouldn’t be so keen on that being an option.

My desk job cannot be replaced by AI.

For now. But it’s developing quickly. Or perhaps your hours could be reduced to a day a week with the right processes. Lots of people think AI is so great but it’s a threat to most jobs that don’t have a people element to them.

Obviously output would then be lower…

Not necessarily. In places where they trialled a 4 day week, productivity actually went up. They also benefited from less sickness and absence.

It was highly criticised. Even by this Government. Key services failed. Of course the staff were happy not to have to go into work for five days.
Measuring work, the Council said they had met all their work requirements, but this is absurd. They did not. And in any event, in that environment there is always work to do. In a Council you are not like a factory where you are churning out widgets. And that is it. The work is far more fluid and measuring it less rigid.
What people knew was that there was nobody to contact, nobody answered the phone to handle queries, nobody was there one day out of the five.
Rent and council tenants were a significant problem. Sometimes with vulnerable people left high and dry.
This Labour Government wrote to the Council explaining they were unhappy.

In many jobs you are contracted for your hours. You are paid for your time.
The assumption being that hopefully people have some initiative and if one task is completed, there is always work to do.

Certainly in many jobs completion of a task and reaching a target is very fluid and not a rigid one. You are paid for your time. And expected to do a job of work within it.