More Councils to trial 4 day week for 5 days pay

[mrsm43s]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/green-party-four-day-working-week-lambeth-council-lewisham-hackney-b1299448.html

So what do you think about this? Apparently in South Cambs, the trial was successful leading to cost savings snd improved staff satisfaction, and is now a permanent arrangement.

Personally, I'm all for it, but must admit it's because I work for a local authority, and the more councils that adopt this, then the more likely I am to benefit from it in the future. That said, as a Council tax payer, I can understand people being upset at ever rising CT bills when staff are being handed a free day off a week.

Would it? Remind me who bailed them out in 2007. That’s where avarice got us.

Had they not been recapitalised, people would have lost their homes, and businesses would folded - it would have been carnage.

Please don’t be so simplistic.

There's always dead weight to cut

My DD is an investment banker at GS... No way they do 4 day weeks

Of course not - that’s my point.

Your DD will be pulling the hours, waiting for her year end chat etc. Some will not make the cut.

The public sector should be run along similar lines.

Well if you are a resident joining the long queue at the civic centre for one of the services (including emergency housing etc) you might think differently.

As each public facing staff member will be there 20% less so face to face services will drop 20%.

What is the matter with people?

What if it spreads to teachers? Doctors?

Or is it just local authority admin staff who can’t manage to be efficient over 5 days and need to be paid for a day off?

It makes sense that in a function which requires employment of locums to cover a full staff rota and which only has sufficient recruitment and retention to have 60% of full time posts filled, could reduce their overall expenditure this way if the locum cost is more than double the contracted-employee cost.

Full staff would be 10 people working 35 hrs per week (350 total hours) being paid £50,000pa each so total would be £500,000pa if only they could recruit and retain that many.

Actual staffing is 6 people working 35hrs per week being paid £50,000pa and 4 vacancies covered by an ever-shifting tide of locums which cost £120,000pa per vacancy to cover what with higher locum pay and additional admin costs so total for staffing is £780,000pa

If by reducing hours for a "full time" staff member to 28hrs while retaining pay they are able to recruit to a full department of 10 employees then they can get 280hrs per week of work for that £500,000 and can halve the number of locums they use to fill the remaining 70hr pw of unstaffed time so the total is only £740,000 - that's a £40,000 saving and worth doing.

But if the Locum cost is only £100,000 per vacancy rather than £120,000 the maths doesn't work out - 6x35hrs per week staff plus 4x vacancies covered with locums costs £700,000 and 10x 28hrs per week staff plus 2x remaining fte hrs covered by locums also costs £700,000

In departments where locums are not used, but there's just an understaffed team and an ever-growing case workload, there's no savings to be made there but if they have a similar vacancy rate, then 6 staff members struggling to provide a service with 210 staffed hours per week of effort would certainly be happier and less likely to burn out and quit if they were instead 10 staff members working 28hrs per week each and contributing a total of 280 staffed hours per week. But would retention and job satisfaction be just as good if the job was just given a 25% pay rise but number of vacancies cut, so that they have 8 full-time 35hr per week staff members giving that same 280 staffed hours per week between them?

My DH works in a field of consulting. Private sector and public sector clients. He says there's so much wastage in the public sector.

On the surface this seems fine. As long as all working days are covered and the work actually gets done. Tax payers should not be lacking in any way though.

I have a relative in my extended family who works for a County Council. Fulfils their job description faultlessly over the 5 day contract.

BUT works all the time from home (or holiday cottages or visits to friends houses) and ‘just needs to move the mouse around regularly’ while they get on with their own stuff, and this year has managed to establish and run a private business alongside the LA job.

Meanwhile racking up entitlement to a great cast iron Defined Contribution pension.

Local authority workers, other than those at the bottom of the pay scales, haven’t been given proper pay rises in line with their skills for years and years. This is a substitute for better pay (councils can’t afford that) and a way of retaining staff. Retaining staff is much cheaper than frequenting having to recruit and retrain.

Not read full thread, but what research has shown (in other countries I think) is that when workers have better work life balance, they are happier and more productive, achieving 5 days worth of productivity in 4 days rather than 5.
would need not everyone to have the same day off though to maintain continuity of service.

I wish my work would do it. I never have anything to do. Our industry partners all finish at midday so there’s not even anyone to have meetings with anyway 🤷‍♀️

Because it just shows that either they had too many staff in the first place or staff were not working hard enough. Absolutely ridiculous when council tax is so high and services are so poor already. As a taxpayer, I don’t really care about ‘staff morale’ in an already low stress job for the most part, they should be looking at ways to improve services or reduce costs first and foremost, not give staff a 4 day week when the vast majority of taxpayers don’t get that themselves.

I agree with you.

You do realise you’re talking about humans right?

And humans who’ve chosen to dedicate their working lives to a public service job, rather than one motivated purely by greed? Not that they are the only ones who have, but they have.

No one chooses local a local authority career because it’s easy (because it isn’t) or because they have no other option - public sector jobs usually have very rigorous application processes.

The way people talk about public sector workers is horrible - “dead weight to cut” - and taking about motivating them with more stress and more workload is just nasty.

Ive thought about this question and I think the reason its a good idea - not just for councils but across the board is this - is that people’s quality of life should improve as society moves forward, not get worse.

This means more leisure without becoming poorer.

Many businesses now do a four day week for full pay too (it’s the pay for the role not pay for “five days” as such) so there must be commercial value in it too.

I don’t know quite how it would work with schools but I’m sure they could work it out.

Imagine paying for someone else's 3 day weekend

Exactly. Perhaps avarice isn’t so admirable after all.

No idea what you are trying to say.

No matter.

Try harder. It’s hardly difficult.

How would you know? You’ve barely been here five minutes.

The wealthier people are the better their lives are right? And GDP growth increases well being?