Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think 'Full time' should mean less hours?

187 replies

Foreverbear · 07/11/2026 16:24

I keep thinking this.

Full time in my organisation is 37 hours (public sector) but like many places the pay hasnt kept up with inflation. They cant afford to pay more, I get that. But people arent happy and if they cant afford to increase salaries, why not just reduce the number of hours equivilent to a full time salary?

That way our hourly pay would go up without increasing the wage bill.

Obviously output would then be lower, but I feel like in a lot of areas this could we where we could start to lean into AI to cover the shortfall, or just accept that service levels will drop and prioritise.

If people had the same salaries but more time (say 30 hours working week instead of 37), they could use the extra time to do a whole load of other things that would benefit society as a whole or save the individual money:

  • Use public transport to commute
  • Not have to reply on wraparound care
  • Proper homecooked meals instead of quick dinners out of exhaustion
  • Excercise or other hobbies good for mental health
  • A side hustle if they want/need more money.

Am I batshit to think this could work in some organisations and make people much happier??

OP posts:
BeLemonMoose · 08/11/2026 09:35

Monty36 · 08/11/2026 09:31

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.

In every job I have had you are paid for your time and to meet targets. Targets matter and failure to hit them more than once or twice will lead to disciplinary. They are not optional.

Dicedpumpkin · 08/11/2026 09:37

The link between hours and output really fascinates me as we arent machines that just consistently output stuff. I dont even output the same day to day.

I think it works better for some jobs than others.

SomeoneIsWrongOnTheInternet · 08/11/2026 09:41

BrinkWomanship · 08/11/2026 08:44

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?

What does ‘lack of productivity’ in the public sector’ even mean? The facts are that we are working a damn sight harder than people were in the 00s and 90s, and that was a damn sight more than in the 60s. In the NHS more people are going through the system being treated in less time, with more acuity and fewer staff. That’s why things like a weeks stay in hospital after childbirth, for mumps, having your tonsils out or for a broken leg are all laughable dreams nowadays. Maternity units now are closing. Whatever the government says in their facts and figures is a lie, everyone who actually works knows this.

You cannot keep just demanding more work for less from public sector workers forever. Already Band 1 on the NHS has gone and I think the Band 2 on the NHS is going as soon as the new minimum wage increase comes in. I am already being paid the same as cleaners for very skilled work which requires me to engage in a year long training package with courses and qualification requirements and pathways, how much longer do you think I’m going to keep reading about how the median wage is now nearly £40k while watching the minimum wage go up and being treated like dirt by the public and media? What kind of people do you want to attract into the NHS? More foreigners with less and less ability to communicate? The tide has turned on cheap foreigners because they are causing social problems. The youngsters i work with are already angry and getting more so. There is talk of healthcare staff striking, because we are not your slaves.

topcat2014 · 08/11/2026 09:42

Trainspotter12 · 07/11/2026 16:39

I can do all my work in about one day a week, it’s actually surprisingly draining given that I have to still be there the rest of the time.

Being underemployed is grim!

BeLemonMoose · 08/11/2026 09:44

SomeoneIsWrongOnTheInternet · 08/11/2026 09:41

What does ‘lack of productivity’ in the public sector’ even mean? The facts are that we are working a damn sight harder than people were in the 00s and 90s, and that was a damn sight more than in the 60s. In the NHS more people are going through the system being treated in less time, with more acuity and fewer staff. That’s why things like a weeks stay in hospital after childbirth, for mumps, having your tonsils out or for a broken leg are all laughable dreams nowadays. Maternity units now are closing. Whatever the government says in their facts and figures is a lie, everyone who actually works knows this.

You cannot keep just demanding more work for less from public sector workers forever. Already Band 1 on the NHS has gone and I think the Band 2 on the NHS is going as soon as the new minimum wage increase comes in. I am already being paid the same as cleaners for very skilled work which requires me to engage in a year long training package with courses and qualification requirements and pathways, how much longer do you think I’m going to keep reading about how the median wage is now nearly £40k while watching the minimum wage go up and being treated like dirt by the public and media? What kind of people do you want to attract into the NHS? More foreigners with less and less ability to communicate? The tide has turned on cheap foreigners because they are causing social problems. The youngsters i work with are already angry and getting more so. There is talk of healthcare staff striking, because we are not your slaves.

Edited

Yes I jumped to private sector and my job is way easier

SomeoneIsWrongOnTheInternet · 08/11/2026 09:50

I wish i could do all my work for the week in one day. Who is employing you to do that where? It wont be frontline NHS or in the immediate support services.

Didimum · 08/11/2026 09:54

Monty36 · 08/11/2026 09:31

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.

You’re misunderstanding me. The current system is that in all jobs you are contracted hourly. The actual reality is that you/the organisation is trying to meet a target – whether that is X profit made, X patients seen, X units moved – whatever.

Hours worked is arbitrary to a target being met. And really bloody arbitrary when all these targets seem to be coincidentally and satisfactorily appeared to be seen to be met at 37 hours, regardless of specific industry or specific target.

The actual, tangible elements you are working with are a target and the productivity of your workers. When studies have evidenced that productivity peaks, plateaus and wanes at a certain number of hours a week, it’s time to move on from the archaic system of ‘contracted hours’.

Monty36 · 08/11/2026 09:54

BeLemonMoose · 08/11/2026 09:35

In every job I have had you are paid for your time and to meet targets. Targets matter and failure to hit them more than once or twice will lead to disciplinary. They are not optional.

Well yes, of course you are expected to achieve and not just turn up and sit there !

BeLemonMoose · 08/11/2026 09:56

Monty36 · 08/11/2026 09:54

Well yes, of course you are expected to achieve and not just turn up and sit there !

I was responding to the claim targets are flexible if you don't meet them. Not in my experience

OneNewLeader · 08/11/2026 10:03

There was a study that supported people reducing to 4 days a week (in predominantly office based jobs) that showed a minimal decline in productivity. But for many businesses/orgs they have a mixed workforce, some on shifts, who do work/ are needed for all the hours they are paid for. So how would that work?

lazyarse123 · 08/11/2026 10:04

I'd be wary of wanting AI to do part of a job because it won't be long before it's doing all of it. Then you'll have all the time you want but without the money.

Monty36 · 08/11/2026 10:30

BeLemonMoose · 08/11/2026 09:35

In every job I have had you are paid for your time and to meet targets. Targets matter and failure to hit them more than once or twice will lead to disciplinary. They are not optional.

Indeed.

CeciliaMars · 08/11/2026 10:43

As a teacher who uses every second of my working day to get jobs done, I'm always interested by the notion that companies can go down to 4-day weeks and people can get the same amount of work done in 4 days as they were previously doing in 5. Doesn't that mean there wasn't enough work to spread over 5 days to start with and people were not working at capacity?

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 10:51

Hopefully, AI will replace all you public sector slackers and the insane council tax rises will stop.

Foreverbear · 08/11/2026 10:51

For my work specifically, yes we have targets and deadlines that we are absolutley expected to meet or else there is a big problem. But meeting those arent the entirety of my job - we also have 'slower time' things we are working towards with less pressure on when they are acheived and a backlog of things that would be brilliant to get done but not the top priority by any stretch. We have busy periods when are all killing ourselves to meet said targets and then once a certain date is passed we move into a different phase of work that is less intense, then move back into hectic mode again. It was very similar in my last role actually even though that was in the private sector.

I am not suggesting for one minute that we abandon our deadlines and responsibilities to our customers, those kinds of tasks would have to be prioritised during the hours worked.

But why should we all put up with being paid less to deliver the same? Surely if they are cutting our pay in real terms then they shoud look at ways of cutting the workload accordingly. Better tech, etc.

Obviously I know im living in la la land and this will never happen because capitalism. Its not about a happier, productive workforce or fairness and never will be. But if I was in charge its what I would do!

OP posts:
Foreverbear · 08/11/2026 10:52

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 10:51

Hopefully, AI will replace all you public sector slackers and the insane council tax rises will stop.

I wondered when the 'public sector is full of slackers' crew would pitch up 😂

OP posts:
RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 10:54

Foreverbear · 08/11/2026 10:52

I wondered when the 'public sector is full of slackers' crew would pitch up 😂

So if you can do the job in less hours. Do that and then the council can not replace the next one of you that leaves, thus saving us, your bosses money?

Foreverbear · 08/11/2026 10:57

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 10:54

So if you can do the job in less hours. Do that and then the council can not replace the next one of you that leaves, thus saving us, your bosses money?

Not the full scope of the current job, no. But they cant afford to pay the full scope anymore, clearly as seen in our real terms pay cuts. Hence I think the scope and therefore hours should decrease so that pay per hour remains at the same level.

OP posts:
SomeoneIsWrongOnTheInternet · 08/11/2026 11:06

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 10:51

Hopefully, AI will replace all you public sector slackers and the insane council tax rises will stop.

Nice wind up. You won’t get computers doing the job for you at no cost. You will actually have to pay the real cost of the production of energy and of the water that they require, and then double because the American companies have complete control of the means of production, and then double again because no one else can afford anything and the economy collapses.

As for public sector ‘slackers’ … well as I said it’s a wind up. But I wish you would come into the hospitals and send your kids to school with labels on so that we could actually commit the crime of which we are constantly accused against you and yours, and get away with it because the police, law courts and all council staff are similarly unbothered.

DeftGoldHedgehog · 08/11/2026 11:09

YANBU. Many employers have gone down to four days successfully.

intrepidpanda · 08/11/2026 11:13

LongDarkTeatime · 07/11/2026 18:47

  1. No where did it say it was just NHS (read the history, that was the 1st accusation)
  2. No where did it say everyone works in the NHS
  3. the original comment solely gave an example from A4C and the possible impact of the OP’s suggestion on the NHS. Discussing THAT is the point of this thread.
Edited

Go on read the opening words of her post. Hate that

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 11:15

SomeoneIsWrongOnTheInternet · 08/11/2026 11:06

Nice wind up. You won’t get computers doing the job for you at no cost. You will actually have to pay the real cost of the production of energy and of the water that they require, and then double because the American companies have complete control of the means of production, and then double again because no one else can afford anything and the economy collapses.

As for public sector ‘slackers’ … well as I said it’s a wind up. But I wish you would come into the hospitals and send your kids to school with labels on so that we could actually commit the crime of which we are constantly accused against you and yours, and get away with it because the police, law courts and all council staff are similarly unbothered.

Edited

I am talking about the town hall slackers, not the hospital workers or teachers. I have seen how hard the latter work.

IDontHateRainbows · 08/11/2026 11:18

shuggles · 07/11/2026 18:05

@IDontHateRainbows Sounds great but for those o us struggling to get all the work done in a normal 5 day 37 h week , would this not just lead to a backlog of work? And my employer can't afford to take on any more staff meaning it wouldn't lead to job creation.

They could afford to employ you for 37 hours and have you work more hours than that, but they're just greedy and they don't want to.

Your manager receives a performance-related bonus for cutting costs, such as getting staff to do work above and beyond their normal contracted hours.

well they don't as it's public sector and I am a manager myself so definitely no bonus! and yes they should be employing 2 or 3 people to do my job but being public sector this would only be funded by tax increases.

I know the image of public sector is everyone sitting around talking about what they watched on telly and doing sod all, but it's not true where I work.

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 11:59

I worked at a town hall once. So much time spent form filling to get more biscuits.

BIossomtoes · 08/11/2026 12:23

RaggedRocks · 08/11/2026 11:59

I worked at a town hall once. So much time spent form filling to get more biscuits.

I expect they made you redundant pretty swiftly if that was the extent of your duties.

Swipe left for the next trending thread