By Chris Walker
This article was originally published by Truthout
“A 32-hour workweek is not a radical idea,” Senator Sanders said.
Amid growing concerns about technological advances and stagnant worker pay, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and Rep. Mark Takano (D-California) introduced a bill earlier this month to reduce the workweek to 32 hours.
“The 40-hour workweek was established in law nearly 90 years ago. Since then, cell phones, the internet, and now AI have increased worker productivity, but the profits have been largely concentrated at the top by billionaires and corporations,” Takano explained in a statement.
The Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act — a reintroduction of a bill the California lawmaker sponsored in 2021 — would phase out the 40-hour workweek over the next four years, reducing that number by two every year until it reaches 32 hours. Much like the current standard for the 40-hour workweek, the bill stipulates that federal overtime rules would kick in as soon as someone works over 32 hours in a given week, requiring time-and-a-half compensation if they exceed that amount.
The bill also sets daily overtime limits and rules. If a person works over eight hours in a given workday, they would be paid time-and-a-half of their hourly wage for the additional hours. They would also be paid double their normal wage for every hour worked beyond a 12-hour day.
Finally, the bill forbids employers from reducing “the total workweek compensation rate…or any other employee benefit” that employees currently receive — meaning, workers who see their hours eventually reduced to 32 hours per week would have to be paid the same weekly rate they received at 40 hours per week.
Technology is a strong driver for why the bill is necessary, its sponsors contend.
“At a time when artificial intelligence and robotics will radically transform our economy, it is imperative that the financial gains from this new technology benefit working families, not just a handful of billionaires and corporate CEOs,” Sanders explained. “One important way to do that is through a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay or benefits.”
The Vermont senator also dismissed the idea that a 32-hour workweek was too drastic of a change, adding:
A 32-hour workweek is not a radical idea. What’s radical is that, despite an explosion in technology and productivity over the last fifty years, millions of workers are working longer hours for lower wages while nearly $80 trillion in wealth has been redistributed from the bottom 90 percent to the top 1 percent.
Americans are largely supportive of changing the number of hours in a workweek. In a Data for Progress poll published in March 2024, for example — shortly before AI began threatening to reshape workplace norms — nearly 6 in 10 respondents, 57 percent, agreed with the poll’s statement that a 32-hour workweek would “reduce stress levels and allow Americans to enjoy a better quality of life.” Only 34 percent of respondents disagreed.
This article was originally published by Truthout and is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Please maintain all links and credits in accordance with our republishing guidelines.
Editor’s Note: At a moment when the once vaunted model of responsible journalism is overwhelmingly the play thing of self-serving billionaires and their corporate scribes, alternatives of integrity are desperately needed, and ScheerPost is one of them. Please support our independent journalism by contributing to our online donation platform, Network for Good, or send a check to our new PO Box. We can’t thank you enough, and promise to keep bringing you this kind of vital news.
You can also make a donation to our PayPal or subscribe to our Patreon.