[How about this book] How to Get Closer to the '4-Day Workweek'

[Asia Economy Reporter Seo Mideum] Ancient Greeks and Romans believed that work brought little value or benefit. Work itself was considered bothersome, tedious, and detestable. Adam Smith defined work as "hard and troublesome," stating that it had no merit other than contributing to wealth creation.

Later, a work ethic based on religion emerged. It created reasons to work beyond money. People were encouraged to work hard on earth with the promise of a better life beyond the grave, but this too failed to assign a positive meaning to work itself.

In modern society, the meaning of work itself has gained attention. If the work matches one’s potential and satisfies deep inner desires, people could continue even if the work did not provide material abundance.

There are various perspectives on work, but the author of this book, David A. Spencer, focuses on the error of viewing work as either entirely bad or entirely good, and argues that "work must be transformed to have a positive impact on human life."

One way to achieve this is by reducing working hours. The author agrees with the view that by lessening work, the joy of work and more free time can coexist, improving overall quality of life. He states, "I support a future vision where working hours decrease and the quality of work and life improves." However, reducing working hours is not as easy as it seems. As the author says, "Unless there is a significant change in power, the possibility of working less is slim."

Nevertheless, labor environments are shifting with the times. According to the author, countries like Germany and the Netherlands have realized reduced working hours while maintaining living standards. Many private companies have successfully implemented a four-day workweek. The author argues, "The four-day workweek will help promote goals such as gender equality and ecological sustainability, beyond just reducing unemployment and underemployment."

However, COVID-19 poured cold water on this trend. Unemployment rose, workloads increased, and new threats emerged for workers. So-called "essential workers," who could not work from home, had no choice but to work overtime in harmful environments.

The debate during the COVID era naturally shifted toward "building back better," focusing on constructing a better and more resilient future. This means restoring the pre-pandemic system, which the author calls an "empty echo." He also insists on structural reforms that enable high-quality work.

So why aren’t more high-quality jobs increasing? The author points to power inequality. In capitalist societies where workers have weak voices, work is often imposed rather than chosen. It is true that many do what they can rather than what they want. The author explains, "Employers maintain low-quality jobs because it allows them to accumulate more profits." He emphasizes the need for collective action to expose the roots of power inequality in society, increase the supply of high-quality jobs, and raise awareness about the necessity of equitable distribution.

Automation is also a factor that reduces the amount of work. While some fear automation will not only reduce work but eliminate jobs, the author predicts it is more likely to transform the quality of work rather than reduce its quantity. There are two main reasons. The author states that automation requires large-scale investment, and it is difficult to suddenly abandon existing labor-intensive methods when investment levels are limited. He also cites the example of smartphones, arguing that science and technology create new jobs.

Among the various elements emphasized in the book, the author highlights securing ownership as key. The degree of inequality changes depending on who owns and controls science and technology. He says that giving workers company shares can mitigate the threats posed by automation, and increasing their influence over technology development and control can impact not only reduced working hours but also improved work quality.

Conceptually, this sounds plausible, but it is less feasible in capitalist societies. Therefore, the author focuses on the roles of labor unions and the state. Historically, unions have led efforts to reduce working hours, and if they apply pressure with state support, they can compete with management. He also argues that if the government provides subsidies or low-interest loans to help workers buy shares and offers education services on finance and management, this is entirely possible. Additionally, he suggests that the state could hold shares in private companies and participate in decision-making on profit-sharing with workers.

The author advocates for a future workplace where working hours decrease while the quality of work and life improves. The translator said, "Just as the six-day workweek became a thing of the past, I look forward to the day when the five-day workweek will only be seen in history books."

Making Light Work | Written by David A. Spencer | Translated by Park Ji-sun | Saenggakui Chang | 296 pages | 17,000 KRW

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.