The 4-Day Workweek: What it is and How to Make It Work

I’ve been hearing more teams ask about the four-day workweek lately, and a recent proposal in Washington state is one reason it’s back in the spotlight. Rep. Shaun Scott, a Democratic Socialist from Seattle, has sponsored a new bill proposal: House Bill 2611. It would redefine the standard workweek from 40 to 32 hours, effective in 2028, with overtime pay required beyond 32 hours. 

But some companies aren’t waiting on legislation to explore a 4-day work week. Instead, they’re compressing 40 hours into four 10-hour days. Scott’s new 4-day workweek proposal goes a step further by reducing the week to four 8-hour days.

Either way, making it work requires redesigning expectations so outcomes matter more than time at a desk.

What I’ve seen is that the schedule itself is the easy part. The hard part—and the part that actually determines whether it works—is how the team plans, communicates, and coordinates the work. That’s where the right team building habits can make the difference between “we tried it” and “we made it stick.”

“The average knowledge worker loses two to three hours per day to overly long meetings, to technology-driven distraction, to the one quick question that turns into a 10-minute conversation…and all of the stuff piled together makes it very difficult to stay on task…” 

~ Alex Soojung-Kim Pang

What a four-day workweek actually looks like

When people talk about a four-day workweek, they’re sometimes talking about two very different setups. It’s important to avoid confusion and misaligned expectations when discussing these options with employees and managers alike. 

Option #1: Four 10-hour days with a compressed 40-hour week

This model keeps total weekly hours the same and redistributes them across fewer days. Employees work longer days, but they gain an extra day off each week.

What this means: 

From a pay perspective, nothing changes. Salaries stay the same, benefits remain intact, and overtime rules usually don’t shift. The tradeoff shows up in workload pacing. Ten-hour days require more sustained focus and energy, which can work well for some roles and be exhausting for others. 

Coverage is often easier to manage because total labor hours haven’t changed. The employee experience often hinges on how manageable longer days feel, especially for those with long commutes or caregiving responsibilities.

Option# 2: Four 8-hour days with a reduced 32-hour standard week

This model shortens the workweek while the workday stays the same. Employees work fewer total hours, and the expectation is that work is redesigned around outcomes rather than time spent.

What this means: 

Pay expectations need to be clearly defined here. In some cases, pay stays the same for fewer hours. In others, reduced hours come with adjusted compensation. Workload pacing becomes critical, because some teams can’t simply squeeze five days of work into four without creating burnout or after-hours spillover. 

Coverage often requires more intentional scheduling, especially in roles that support customers or clients throughout the week. For employees, this model typically represents a deeper shift in quality of life, but only when priorities, meetings, and workflows are redesigned to support it.

Which model is best?

In both models, the success factor isn’t the calendar. It’s whether you can align expectations, protect focus time, and coordinate work in a way that makes the schedule sustainable rather than stressful.

Why the 4-day workweek appeals to teams right now

What I hear most often from teams isn’t a demand for flexibility at any cost. It’s a desire for sustainability. People want to do good work without feeling like work slowly takes over everything else.

More time without disappearing from work

The four-day workweek shifts the conversation in a useful way. Instead of asking how many hours someone is online or visible, it asks whether the work that matters actually gets done. For many teams, especially knowledge-based roles, that reframing feels overdue. Commitment starts to look less like time logged and more like results delivered, collaboration improved, and energy sustained over the long term.

As mindfulness consultant Alex Pang notes, “It’s really easy for three o’clock to turn into four o’clock. It’s a lot harder for Thursday to turn into Friday.” 

Less time commuting and lower commuting costs

One fewer commute day each week makes an immediate difference for many employees. Less time spent in traffic means more usable time overall, even before you factor in the extra day off.

There are practical savings, too. Fewer commute days can lower fuel costs, reduce vehicle wear and tear, and ease the stress of daily travel. If a four-day schedule became more common, it could also reduce road congestion, especially in metro areas where traffic volume is driven by standard workweek patterns.

These benefits don’t depend on whether a team chooses compressed hours or reduced hours. They show up simply because people are commuting less often or at different times, which is one of the most tangible changes employees notice right away.

The benefits of changing the workweek

While it may seem counterintuitive, companies can see substantial benefits from adopting a shorter workweek. Employees may be driving the push, but it’s not a zero-sum game. There are tangible gains for companies that thoughtfully implement this mode. 

A weekday off can reduce last-minute absences

One of the most practical benefits appears quietly but has a significant impact. When people have a weekday off, they can schedule appointments, handle errands, and address obligations that need to happen during business hours. 

That translates into fewer midday absences, last-minute sick days, and urgent call-offs. Over time, that consistency makes scheduling easier and reduces disruptions. It’s a small structural change that removes a surprising amount of friction from the week.

Retention and morale gains

When a four-day workweek works, people tend to stay. The key detail is that these gains don’t come from “doing less.” They come from doing work differently.

In the UK’s largest four-day workweek trial, which followed 61 companies and nearly 3,000 employees, 92% of participating organizations chose to continue the four-day schedule after the pilot ended, while reporting maintained or improved productivity and lower burnout levels. These results were strongest in teams that reduced unnecessary meetings and measured success by outcomes rather than hours worked.

Healthier boundaries in a remote or hybrid world

In distributed teams, flexible stop times don’t always protect personal time. It’s easy for the workday to stretch, especially when there’s no shared signal that work is done.

A full day off creates a clearer boundary. Research summarized by the American Psychological Association shows that teams who protect recovery time experience reduced stress and improved well-being without a corresponding drop in performance. This is particularly true in knowledge-based and project-oriented roles, where work can be evaluated by results rather than time spent.

Implementation details shape whether the changes stick

What’s happening in the U.S. shows that structure matters more than intent. 

Four-day workweek pilots tracked by 4 Day Week Global highlight a range of approaches designed to preserve coverage while changing schedules.

Some organizations stagger days off across teams. Others rotate off days or adjust service windows so clients and customers are still supported throughout the week. Companies that planned for coverage and coordination reported stronger outcomes than those that simply removed a day from the calendar.

Where pilot programs struggled, the problem was the same: the schedule changed, but the work structure did not.

The downsides leaders need to plan for

Reduced or compressed workweeks can offer real benefits, but they aren’t a cure-all. Teams can get excited about the idea and overlook practical risks that can stall the effort before it really starts. These are the issues that need to be addressed early. You can reduce the risk by testing the concept and using gradual escalation if it succeeds. 

Compressed weeks can create fatigue

Longer days change how work feels. Ten-hour shifts can be especially challenging for caregivers, people with long commutes, and those in roles that require sustained focus or physical stamina.

For some employees, the extra day off is worth it. For others, the longer days drain energy and make the week feel heavier, not lighter. This model works best when leaders account for who is carrying that load and whether the role truly supports longer days.

Reduced weeks can fail if the workload stays the same

If a team moves to a 32-hour work week, but expectations remain at 40 hours, the results won’t be positive.

Work might spill into evenings or off days. Trust will erode fast. What was meant to improve balance will end up feeling like pressure. Reduced-hour models only work when priorities are tightened and work is redesigned, not when the same volume is squeezed into less time.

Customer coverage and fairness issues show up quickly

Customers don’t stop needing support because a schedule changes. Neither do internal stakeholders.

If coverage plans aren’t clear, gaps will appear. Fairness becomes an issue, too, especially when some roles can shift schedules easily and others can’t. Teams need transparency around why schedules differ and how coverage decisions are made, or resentment can build up.

Where does a four-day workweek fit best?

Not every role adapts the same way. Understanding how a four-day model fits into different fields helps set realistic expectations.

Quota-oriented and project-based work

Office-based, creative, and professional roles often adapt more easily. When work can be measured by deliverables, deadlines, or project milestones, it’s easier to focus on outcomes instead of hours.

These teams tend to have more flexibility. It should be easier to overhaul meetings, protect focus time, and coordinate work in ways that support shorter weeks. As long as everyone feels comfortable with the schedule, it’s likely to work fairly well. 

Roles that require bodies in the building

Healthcare, hospitality, emergency services, manufacturing, and retail face a different reality. Presence is part of the job, and sometimes requires 24/7 coverage.

A four-day workweek can still work, but it requires more intentional staffing decisions. Staggered schedules, rotating days off, and adjusted service windows become more important and harder to balance. Without careful planning, the work can become more stressful instead of less. 

Strengthen collaboration during your transition

A four-day workweek can succeed, but only if teams change how work happens. It doesn’t work just because a day disappears from the schedule. 

When timelines shift, communication matters more than ever. Expectations need to be shared. Trust has to be reinforced. That’s where we see our team building programs make a real difference. Stronger collaboration and clearer norms help teams turn a schedule change into a sustainable way of working instead of a short-lived experiment.