đź“° Curated Industry Article
This is a summary of a full article from a trusted financial publication. Click “Read Full Article” below to read the complete story.
A shorter workweek could give Americans more time outside the office, but how many hours would workers actually choose if their pay depended on it?
As lawmakers debate a proposal to make 32 hours the standard workweek, the question of how much people want to work — and how much they need to earn — is taking on new significance.
Must Read
- You’re probably eligible to save money on car insurance. Compare rates for your ZIP code with this free — and fast — tool from Money.
- These 6 hacks can help retirees save money on things they’re already buying.
- A $10,000 investment 10 years ago would be worth over $30,000 today. It wasn’t a stock. See how investors are adding gold to their IRAs with Goldco’s free guide.
Research from Duke University economists found that the “optimal” workweek is 37 hours, less than the expected 40-hour workweek, which was set in 1940 under the Fair Labor Standards Act. And despite the “norm,” according to a Gallup report, the average full-time employee in the U.S. reported working a roughly 43-hour workweek in 2024, down only slightly from 44.1 hours in 2019.
The push for a 32-hour workweek
A bill introduced in Congress last month looks to shorten the standard workweek, in an attempt to address wealth inequality, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) introduced the latest version of the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act, which would prevent employers from cutting pay or benefits while allowing workers to earn overtime at 32 hours. While this proposal wouldn’t allow employees to choose their allotted hours, it might bring about better work-life balance due to scheduling flexibility. Employers would decide how the 32 hours should be divided and whether employees can work extra hours for additional pay.
Proponents argue that the country’s standards should reflect how AI has increased productivity in the workplace. Critics, on the other hand, express concern that higher labor expenses for businesses could drive up prices and negatively impact the job market overall.
The debate also raises questions about how a shorter workweek would affect workers’ paychecks and household finances. Under the proposed legislation, employers would generally be required to pay overtime when employees work more than 32 hours in a week, rather than the current 40-hour threshold. The bill would gradually phase in the change over several years, giving businesses time to adjust their staffing and operating costs.
For workers, a shorter standard workweek could mean more time outside the office without sacrificing weekly earnings, assuming employers maintain existing pay levels. But the effects could vary by industry and occupation.
Businesses that depend on hourly workers or require around-the-clock staffing may need to hire additional employees or pay more overtime to maintain operations. Those costs could also affect consumers if companies pass them along through higher prices.
Whether a shorter workweek becomes the new standard or remains a policy debate, the challenge will be balancing workers’ demand for more time with the financial realities facing both employees and employers.
Never miss a Money story.
- Join 700,000+ readers who get the latest financial news and advice delivered daily for free. Subscribe to our newsletters.
đź’ˇ What This Means For You
[afc_dynamic_insight]
ANNUITY FACTCHECK
Your Financial Security Starts Here
Whether you’re exploring fixed, variable, or indexed annuities — we provide the clear, unbiased information you need to protect your future.
đź“° This article is sourced from a trusted financial publication. AnnuityFactCheck shares this for informational purposes only. Always consult a licensed financial advisor for personalized guidance.
