Conference 7.286::digital

    
    
    Nice work if you can afford it.
    
    

    
    But I guess that's just it. There are probably PLENTY of people in
    Digital-US who COULD afford to live on less, and who MIGHT like the
    opportunity to work a shorter week or a shorter day.
    
    But if that option isn't discussed, we'll never know, will we!
    

re: .0

>	involving salary cuts averaging about 7 percent for people 
>	choosing a four-day week.

What's missing here? Reduce the workweek by 20 percent but the payroll
by only 7%? Can't be right, can it?

-Jack

    I believe 'job-sharing' already exists here in U.S. We have a few
    people in Acton doing it. On the other hand, I feel it is just
    adding insult to injury. A very slow bleeding, rather than a fatal
    blow.
    
    /Bob

    
        Re:  .3
    
        Yeah, I noticed that too, the 7% salary reduction for a 4-day 
        week.  But like Will Rogers, I only know what I read in the 
        papers.
    
        Speculation-alert:  Maybe that was meant to be an incentive, 
        or maybe each 4-day workday is a bit longer.
    
        Maybe someone in the company knows the details.
    
        I'd still consider the key word in that plan to be "option", 
        meaning "voluntary".  Involuntary work-sharing wouldn't work.
    
    
        Peter
    

    
    I've known many folks here at Digital-US that have worked far less than
    four days in a five day week.  They retained 100% of their salarys!
    Ken Olsen was reported to have been asked; "How many people work at
    DEC?" He responded;
    
      "About 1/2 of them..."
    
    Jon
    

From a global point of view (let's have a look from a space ship) the worldwide
reduction of working time is the only chance for humans to survive in long term.

The reasons are the increasing productivity, the increasing number of workers
and the limitation of resources!

But the mess is that no SINGLE country and no SINGLE company can afford a 
working time reduction, because it's products are getting more expensive 
than these of the competitors. 

Currently the companies in the rich countries bypasses their cost problem 
through production in cheap salery countries. But who will buy the products 
in the near future, if the workers who are producing the things do not earn 
the money to buy them?

So, what can we do?

Bernhard  

    I think .7 is right - under certain circumstances the French government
    subsidises the employer so that the salary cuts are smaller than the
    cut in the working hours. The idea behind this is that paying the
    subsidy is much cheaper than taking care of the unemployed. Also, if
    I'm not mistaken, the current working hours in France are now 39/week,
    the proposed 4-day week has 32 hrs so the cut in time is about 18%.
    
    The Digital and HP plans have been on a voluntary basis, and I doubt
    whether they've been subsidised yet.
    
    The WV plan (nothing has been decided yet) does propose a 28 hour week
    but the starting point would be a 36 hour week (maybe 35). Many
    different models are being discussed, including working normal hours
    and taking longer vacations etc.
                                   
    There are many studies around which say that part-time employees tend
    to be more productive, so in many cases the loss in productivity might
    be less than the decrease in wroking hours. Also, many European
    countries have a fairly steep tax progression curve, so a say 20% loss
    in gross pay doesn't necessarily mean a 20% loss in take-home pay.
    

	This is also a 2-year deal.

	After 2 years, if you want to continue on 4 days, you have to take
	the full 20% cut, or you can choose to go back full time on full pay.

	I saw this first on Livewire on VTX, and it also has been discussed in 
	other notes conferences, so it's not "secret".

	Heather   

  I agree, why can't we do this here? One reason that is often cited for not
putting people on reduced hours is that the company doesn't save anything per
employee on health and life insurance, which comprise a high percentage of the
total overhead per employee. Also, does the office shut down one day a week to
accommodate people on a 4-day week or do you have 4/5 of the workforce there
5 days a week? The former doesn't work if some people are still on a five-
day week, and the latter is awkward for people whose day off doesn't fall on
a Monday or Friday.
  People can reduce their time to 30 hours a week (I think) and still be con-
sidered full-time employees for benefits purposes. I know of only a few people
who have done this.

    
    For the first two years ,volontary people that choose to work 4/5
    days a week will get 92.8% of their full time salary.
    That means 80% salary + a bonus.
    After the period ,the salary drop to 80%.
    This is possible because the company can reduce significantly 
    its insurrance contributions (that are particulary high in France).
    According management ,this program has saved 92 jobs of the last
    layoff.
    Claude 

    
        Yes, according to Personnel Policies and Procedures, employees 
        who work 30 hours or more are eligible for the same types of 
        benefits, although some vary.  For example, full medical and 
        dental, but pro-rated holiday and vacation pay.
    
        So you can make your own deal with your manager.  But taking it 
        past the personal decision for those of us who would consider 
        that choice, I'd want to see it tied specifically to saving jobs 
        for others.  This is the shining example that the plan in France 
        offers us, and an example for the future.
    
        Peter
    

    Has there been any thought to pro-rating the amount of health, medical
    and life insurance Digital contributes for a part time employee?  
    
    Right now if you go below 30 hours a week, you lose the major benefits
    outright.  It seems fairer to have the employee contribute more to
    the insurance cost if he/she is working less than 40 hours.  It also
    may help some folks who want to work less than 30 hours but can't
    afford to pay for benefits on their own.
    
    Marie

    While working for Hewlett Packard in the early 80's I gained first hand
    experience with going to a reduced number of workdays.  They
    implemented a mandatory plan that the entire facility shut down every
    other Friday.
    
    This was a cost reduction effort to save jobs and was in force for
    about 6 months.  I wasn't too keen on the idea at first but when the
    program ended I sure missed that 3 day weekend every other week!  This
    plan did reduce costs enough to avoid layoffs at the time.  The plan
    was effective in my opinon becuase it was mandatory.  There were no
    issues with conflicting work schedules.  No one had to work around
    someone elses availabilty since we all had the same day off.
    
    Jerry

>. Also, does the office shut down one day a week to
>accommodate people on a 4-day week or do you have 4/5 of the workforce there
>5 days a week? The former doesn't work if some people are still on a five-
>day week, and the latter is awkward for people whose day off doesn't fall on
>a Monday or Friday.


	You could use flexible working practices - where many people don't 
	have a full-time desk at all.

	This enabled us to fit 700+ people into a building with less than 500
	seats.
	...................and this was on a 5-day Mon-Friday week.

	It meant we could close other offices and save bulding costs.

	Heather