If we're going to work 40 hours a week, we sould be offered options of 5x(9 to 5), 4x(8 to 6), 3x(7am to 8pm+) and then have scehdules made accordingly. As long as coverage is present when needed, companies can afford that flexibility in scheduling.
As a side benefit, less money is spent on transportation, less time is spent commuting, and more free time becomes available. If overtime is needed beyond those hours at those schedules, it can be managed.
If money is still an issue and hours need to be cut for all 3 options, the savings I mentioned above still make it worth it for both sides.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
That's nice overview.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
During my time in the work-force, I have worked all shifts from time-to-time. 1st, 2nd, and 3rd shifts each had there pros and cons. Many times, especially while working for the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center laundry, I would have to do swing-shift from time to time.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Working extra long shifts while having to work 5 days a week is brutal no matter what jobs we have. On occasion it may be necessary, and some professions require that. But if we're talking about redistributing 40 hours a week, then doing extra long shifts may be worth it.
It may also mean hiring more staff or personnel to ensure that coverage is maintained, and that may or may not result in a cut in hours worked. Either way, that may work out well for everyone concerned.
Besides, we're in a time now when we have ways to make up for fewer hours working. Look no further than CRYPTOCURRENCY.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I had to do those rolling 12-hour shifts once. That didn't last long. Talk about a hit to your body clock and sleep cycles!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta