The Four-Day Work Week—Saving Energy at the Expense of Children?

Just before the Fourth of July holiday weekend, the State of Utah announced that beginning August 4, its state employees will switch to four ten-hour day work weeks in an effort to reduce state energy costs and reduce the cost of commuting for its employees. Other counties and municipalities have proposed similar fixes for soaring energy costs. For childless employees, this means longer days, and in many instances, welcomed, recurring three-day weekends. For employees with children, the four day week may appear, at first glance to be a model for the world to emulate—a vehicle for enhanced quality time for families. But is it? Four ten-hour days does not represent a shortening of the work week, only a shift of where the hours occur. Moreover, this is a workplace shift in a society where available child care options have not shifted, and are largely available in a 9 to 5, five day a week structure, with late fees often assessed for pick up after 6 p.m. Consider these scenarios for couples with children facing ten-hour days of the new four-day weeks.   

Scenario One. For all single parents and many families where one parent works night or irregular shifts or already works 10-hour or longer days. If you work a new 8 am to 6 pm day, instead of a 9-5 day, and you drive 20-30 minutes from your office to your child care center or provider, you may reach your child at 6:20 or 6:30 p.m. If your care provider has a 6:00 p.m. end time at which point hefty late fees apply, then under the new four-day week system, you will trade your one-day-less-commute gas savings for child care late fees. In addition, you will experience significant four-day-a-week stress about whether you will make the six o’clock pick up time. You will also be met with hungry cranky kids who may have been dropped off at 7 or 7:30 a.m. and may not get home with you until nearly 7:00 p.m. In this scenario, the benefit, if one exists, is a shift to four miserable family week days in exchange for three quality weekend days, instead of the current system of five moderate family days and an unencumbered two-day weekend.  The longer four days may also mean that the fifth week day is now filled with errands and appointments that previously were accomplished piecemeal on the way to or from work.

Scenario Two: For two-career couples where both parents have flexible schedules. Parent number one handles the morning family shift, managing morning drop-off at day care or school, and often departing for work after 8:30 a.m., arriving at work by 9 am. This parent, in order to work a ten hour day, does not depart work until 7 p.m., arriving home around 7:30 or 8:00 p.m. Parent number two skips the morning shift to arrive at work early enough (8 am) and working until 6 p.m., then departing for child care pick up or relief to arrive by 6:30 p.m. or thereabouts (sometimes incurring late pick up fees after 6 p.m.)

Under both scenarios, children are in day care, or before and after school care, for ten-hour days, four days a week. With a commute, even a modest one, parents are logging eleven or twelve hour days. We have to wonder why our society can’t devise more creative solutions to an energy crunch—alternative forms of energy; jobs located near living centers and schools; on site child care centers; affordable family housing in range of employment centers; work from home technologies that can be monitored, require accountability and eliminate hours and energy lost to commuting. What appears to be a family-friendly four-day week plan dissolves under scrutiny. It still demands forty-hour on site work weeks. Perhaps states, cities and commuters all conserve energy by implementing a four-day week. Too bad those savings comes at the expense of their non-voters—the children. Utah, and some of the other municipal pioneers, may be compelled or motivated to spend some of the energy dollars saved on developing telecommuting initiatives and supporting on-site day care at government facilities.