Work-life balance has always been a struggle.
維持工作和生活的平衡一直是件難事。

But an increased concern for workers’rights paired with the power of automation has created a shift.
但是，在自動化影響下，勞動者權(quán)利愈發(fā)受到重視，這導致了一個轉(zhuǎn)變。

Certain industries don’t require as many working hours anymore, and the global trend–especially in Europe–leans toward a four-day workweek.
一些行業(yè)已經(jīng)不再需要那么多的工作時間，從全球趨勢來看-尤其是歐洲-更傾向于每周工作四天。

Does it work? Can people accomplish the same amount in four days as they can in five?
這能行嗎？人們可以在四天內(nèi)完成五天的工作量嗎？

And if so, why isn’t everyone doing it?
如果可以，為什么大家不都這樣做？

Let’s look at what we know so far to see how effective the four-day workweek really is.
來看看目前為止所我們所了解的，為期四天的工作周多么有效。

?

THE FOUR-DAY WORKWEEK IS AN IDEA AHEAD OF ITS TIME
四天工作周是領(lǐng)先時代的想法

In 1930, during the Great Depression, e conomist John Maynard Keynes predicted that we’d all have a 15-hour workweek “within 100 years.”
1930年，大蕭條時期，經(jīng)濟學家約翰·梅納德·凱恩斯曾預測，“100年內(nèi)”，我們都將每周只工作15小時。

In his own time, Keynes saw the rise of industrialization and assumed the trend toward more efficient work methods would continue. Once a worker earned enough to pay for their necessities, he suggested, they’d opt to spend more time at home or in leisure, reducing the workweek to only two or three days.
在他的時代，凱恩斯看到了工業(yè)化的興起，并認為更有效率的工作方式會繼續(xù)出現(xiàn)。他說，一旦工人掙到足夠的錢購買必需品，他們就會在家庭和休閑上投入更多時間，把每周的工作時間減少到兩三天。

As an attractive fantasy to beleaguered workers throughout the century, the idea never quite left the public consciousness. Even Richard Nixon, during his vice presidency in 1956, predicted that the four-day workweek was coming “in the not too distant future.”
一個世紀以來，勞動者飽受困擾，這個幻想很有吸引力，未曾在公眾意識中消失。即便是理查德·尼克松，他在1956年擔任副總統(tǒng)期間也曾預測，為期四天的工作周會“在不太遙遠的將來”出現(xiàn)。

The idea remained just an idea for close to a century, until 1998, when France enacted the first of its two “Aubry” laws that reduced the national workweek to 35 hours instead of 39, with excess hours counting as overtime. (In subsequent years, revisions have eroded much of the original laws.) Their aim was to reduce their 12% unemployment rate (at the time) through work sharing, but the success of the legislation got other countries revisiting their standard work schedules.
近一個世紀以來，這個理念都只是一個想法。直到1998年，法國頒布了兩部“奧布里”法律中的第一部，將全國每周39小時的工作時間減少到35小時。超出時間算作加班。（隨后的幾年中，原版法律不斷被修訂，很多內(nèi)容被更改。）他們的目標是通過分擔工作量降低（當時）12％的失業(yè)率，而立法的成功也讓其他國家重新審視自己的標準工作時間表。

With the tech disruption evident in the 21st century–similar to the “conveyor belt” tech disruption of the 1920s that ushered in the five-day workweek–the idea continues to snowball. Even business mogul Richard Branson supports the shift to a shorter workweek, stating in a blog post:
20世紀20年代的出現(xiàn)的“輸送帶”顛覆性技術(shù)，迎來了為期五天的工作周，于此類似，隨著21世紀顛覆性技術(shù)的出現(xiàn)，這個想法繼續(xù)膨脹。商業(yè)大亨理查德·布蘭森也支持這一轉(zhuǎn)變，縮短每周的工作時間，他在一篇博文中說：

By working more efficiently, there is no reason why people can’t work less hours and be equally–if not more–effective. People will need to be paid more for working less time, so they can afford more leisure time. That’s going to be a difficult balancing act to get right, but it can be done.
通過提高工作效率，人們沒理由不在更短的時間內(nèi)做完同樣多甚至更多的工作。人們要在工作時間縮短的情況下獲得更高的報酬，來支付更多的休閑開支。要達到這個平衡其實很難，但卻可以實現(xiàn)。

Different countries in Europe are already experimenting and implementing shorter workweeks in varying degrees. But the conversation got louder earlier this year, when a New Zealand firm conducted a formal experiment.
不同的歐洲國家已經(jīng)在不同程度上在嘗試和實施縮短每周的工作時間。今年年初，這場對話變得愈發(fā)響亮。新西蘭的一家公司正式進行了一次實驗。

?

NEW ZEALAND STUDY ABOUT THE FOUR-DAY WORKWEEK
新西蘭對每周四天工作日的研究

The Perpetual Guardian is an estate management firm that deals in wills, trusts, and EPAs–a fairly unassuming and conventional company, perfect for capturing a work experience close to the norm.
Perpetual Guardian是一家物業(yè)管理公司，經(jīng)營遺囑、信托和可信賴商業(yè)業(yè)務——這是一家相當?shù)驼{(diào)傳統(tǒng)的公司，非常適合作為樣本，衡量常規(guī)的工作體驗。

In March and April 2018, the firm ran an experiment that reduced their workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours, for all of its 240 employees, while still paying the same salaries. They hired a pair of researchers to record the results quantitatively, and what they found shows positive support for the four-day workweek:
2018年3月和4月，該公司進行了一項實驗，將240名員工每周的工作時間從40小時減少到32小時，并支付相同的工資。他們聘請兩位研究員對結(jié)果進行量化記錄，結(jié)果證實了四天工作周的有效性：

24% more employees felt they could successfully balance their work and personal lives. Stress decreased by 7% among everyone involved. Overall work satisfaction increased by 5%. But above all, “their actual job performance didn’t change when doing it over four days instead of five,” in the words of Jarrod Harr, the Auckland University of Technology human resources professor who jointly oversaw the experiment.
24％的員工感覺他們可以成功地平衡工作和個人生活。所有參與者的壓力都下降了7％。總體工作滿意度提高了5％。但最重要的是，一同參與監(jiān)督了這次實驗的奧克蘭理工大學人力資源教授杰羅德·哈爾說“用四天取代五天工作日，他們的實際工作表現(xiàn)沒有變化”。

As reported, with the benefit of an extra free day, employees were exceptionally motivated to meet productivity requirements. This motivation inspired workers to devise better work habits and to waste less of their work time, to say nothing of the improvements in their mood. “Supervisors said staff were more creative, their attendance was better, they were on time, and they didn’t leave early or take long breaks,” noted Harr.
據(jù)報道，因為多了一天休息日，員工格外積極地滿足生產(chǎn)要求。這個動機激勵員工形成更好的工作習慣，減少工作時間的浪費，更不用說，他們的情緒也有所改善?！肮芾碚哒f，員工們更有創(chuàng)造力了，他們的出勤率更高，準時上班，而且沒有早退或長時間休息，”哈爾說。

The study seems to offer evidence for what many already predicted: Productivity isn’t influenced by just time–employee mentality also plays an influential role.
這項研究似乎為很多人的預測提供了證據(jù)：生產(chǎn)力不僅受時間的影響——也受員工的心態(tài)的影響。

?

（翻譯：Claire）