We all know that the real unemployment figures aren’t near 10%, they are really closer to 25% when you count people who have given up looking, run out of benefits, or are other wise not “in the system.”  So why not spread the work that is available around to everyone who wants to work?

One way to put everyone back to work quickly would be to cut the work week by that same 25%, or to create a mandatory 30-hour work week.

Wouldn’t it be better to get people working again than to extend more unemployment benefits and keep paying for more government subsidies for food stamps and housing on more and more people who are still out of work when those benefits run out?

In spite of political resistance, a 30-hour work week could result in more than just a drop in unemployment. It could also help bring hourly wages back up as we reach a fully employed level again, companies will have to offer higher wages to keep the good workers they have from leaving, or to recruit their replacements.  Shorter work weeks across the board would bring less stress and better health to the average worker, and the potential to lower health care costs as well.  With more free time, employed people could be out enjoying a little recreation and stimulating the economy. (An activity unemployed folks can’t afford, even if they do have the time.)

The economy is not the only reason we should be considering a 30-hour work week though.  In “What’s wrong with a 30-hour work week?” Don Fitz explains how 40-hour (and longer) work weeks came about because of a labor shortage following the Black Plague.  Now, with a surplus of labor, that same “white protestant work ethic” is killing our planet.  Our increased hours cause harm to use as individuals (stress/health) and to our planet (an over abundance of consumerism and JUNK products that are using up resources and spewing pollutants into our air and water).

There is no doubt that some will criticize the idea of a 30-hour work week as a socialist agenda.  But is the idea of putting people back to work without pay better?

Which reminds me… if the answers to our economic woes are to contribute more time and money to charity and volunteer work, then wouldn’t it make sense if more people had both more time and more money to start with?