The four-day workweek: pros, cons, and alternatives for HR teams

Executive overview

The traditional 40-hour, five-day workweek is not a natural law — it was a deliberate business decision by Henry Ford in 1926, later codified into US labor law. Recent large-scale trials of a 32-hour, four-day week show strong employee satisfaction and maintained productivity, but the model creates real operational complications for many organizations.

The core question is not whether employees want shorter weeks — they do — but whether the model is viable for your specific workforce, and what alternatives deliver similar benefits without the structural overhaul.

The four-day week is a low-cost benefit with meaningful retention upside, but hourly workers, PTO complexity, and seasonal demand make it unworkable for many organizations — targeted flexibility often delivers the same outcome.

History of the US workweek

• Pre-industrial labor followed seasonal rhythms, averaging under 40 hours annually.
• The industrial revolution pushed factory hours to 70 hours/week by 1850, and nearly 100 by 1890.
• Henry Ford introduced the 40-hour, five-day week in 1926 — motivated by productivity and worker purchasing power, not altruism.
• The Fair Labor Standards Act (1938) codified 44 hours, reduced to 40 shortly after.

Advantages of the four-day week

• Low-cost benefit: minimal direct cost to the organization while functioning as a recruiting differentiator without salary inflation.
• Supports underrepresented groups: working parents save on childcare, people with disabilities face fewer demands, people of color report fewer microaggressions.
• Retention improves: some trial organizations reported zero resignations during the six-month pilot period.

Drawbacks to consider

• Hourly workers: non-exempt employees may require 25% pay increases, and overtime exposure complicates the economics significantly.
• PTO accounting becomes complex mid-transition; mishandling accrued time creates legal exposure.
• Service-industry businesses open seven days already face scheduling strain when shifting to four-day shifts.
• Seasonal peaks (e.g. Q4, tax season) make year-round shortened weeks impractical for many teams.
• Productivity pressure over fewer days can accelerate burnout rather than prevent it for some employees.

Alternatives that deliver similar benefits

• 4×10 model: four ten-hour days keeps total hours at 40; a 4×9 variant yields 36-hour weeks — longer weekends without losing a full day of output.
• No-meeting day: designate one day per week with zero scheduled meetings to enable deep focus and reduce Zoom fatigue.
• Summer Fridays: offer full or half-day Fridays during slower periods as a morale signal without year-round commitment.
• Flexible hours: let employees choose start times, lunch length, or remote days — same weekly hours, better personal fit.
• Generous or unlimited PTO: gives employees agency over their own rest days, which may suit them better than a fixed schedule.