Re:Should people over 40 work a three-day week?
by notacoward on Monday August 08, 2016 @03:39PM
(#12250340)
It's not necessarily better to have fewer employees working longer. When I cut back to part time, I thought it ended up being a pretty good deal for everyone.
* For them, a lot of my value is in what I know rather than what I do. Let's say it's half and half. So they were getting somewhat less of that first half (direct hands-on work) but darn near all of the rest (ability to solve certain problems or make certain connections instantly instead of spending half a day).
* For me, a significant part of my job's value is not salary but other benefits, plus the ability to tap into the collective resources of a team to get things done.
Thus, even though the deal was nominally 75% of the hours for 75% of the salary, each side was really getting way more than 75% of the value from that relationship (compared to when I was full time). In the end, neither of us were so easily or cheaply replaced. Employees aren't as fungible as many seem to think.
* For them, a lot of my value is in what I know rather than what I do. Let's say it's half and half. So they were getting somewhat less of that first half (direct hands-on work) but darn near all of the rest (ability to solve certain problems or make certain connections instantly instead of spending half a day).
* For me, a significant part of my job's value is not salary but other benefits, plus the ability to tap into the collective resources of a team to get things done.
Thus, even though the deal was nominally 75% of the hours for 75% of the salary, each side was really getting way more than 75% of the value from that relationship (compared to when I was full time). In the end, neither of us were so easily or cheaply replaced. Employees aren't as fungible as many seem to think.