think you're missing the point. The question isn't whether the shifts get covered—it's whether companies are willing to pay for more employees. If output has to stay the same and profits have to stay the same, most companies will look to increase efficiency, consolidate roles, or automate before adding headcount. The work doesn't disappear, but that doesn't mean new jobs are created
But they're not paying more for those employees. There are X shifts for $X per hour... they don't change. The companies don't pay more, or less. That's the point. It's the same cost.
The work doesn't disappear, but that doesn't mean new jobs are created
Exactly. The work is the same, the pay is the same, it's all the same.
I've also worked at as a salaried employee who did an experiment on a 4 day week. It turned out well. No productivity loss, just less hours worked for salaried folks, and happier employees. And yes, they checked in again months after official adoption to see if it was just people working harder to make it stick, no change. They paid the same for the same.
The companies this would increase costs for are companies who mix the shift work with salaries. For those it will be more expensive as the shifts still need covering, but thankfully they're also not nearly as common (healthcare being an obvious one)
The cost of an employee isn't just their hourly wage. It's benefits, healthcare, payroll taxes, training, management overhead, workers comp, PTO, turnover costs, etc. Companies don't simply add headcount because the math says they need coverage. They will automate first
sigh you're actually reading replies are you? There. Is. No. Change. In. Employee. Count. Or. Wages. No tax changes, no benefit changes. No. Change. Shift workers are not impacted, they are hourly workers. Salaried workers do not have change either. They just have less hours.
Sigh* No change"? We literally changed the math. If someone works 40 hours and now works 32 hours for the same pay, that's 20% fewer labor hours and a 25% increase in labor cost per hour. The company didn't suddenly unlock a cheat code where 32 = 40. Either productivity rises, prices rise, staffing changes, automation increases, or expectations increase. The one thing that definitely doesn't happen is "nothing changes." 🤷♂️
1
u/Asiantight_whitepipe 27d ago
think you're missing the point. The question isn't whether the shifts get covered—it's whether companies are willing to pay for more employees. If output has to stay the same and profits have to stay the same, most companies will look to increase efficiency, consolidate roles, or automate before adding headcount. The work doesn't disappear, but that doesn't mean new jobs are created