Bernie: ''Moving to a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay is not radical"

[Donkees]

Moving to a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay is not radical. What's radical is that over $50 trillion in wealth has been redistributed from the bottom 90% to the top 1% over the past 50 years. It's time that the financial gains from new technology benefit workers, not the 1%.

Link to tweet

[tazkcmo]

1. More "leisure time" equals more economic activity.

Want to spur the economy? Give everyone an extra day to go for a coffee, a movie, buy supplies for a repair/project or a whole bunch of other activities.

[peppertree]

2. True - but elites are (with exceptions) no longer interested in the economy

They want a monopoly not only on money - but on happiness itself. They want even simple pleasures to become luxuries.

It's no longer economics - it's egomania.

[tazkcmo]

6. True. nt

[markodochartaigh]

17. No longer satisfied

with a goose that lays golden eggs, they decided to roast the goose.

[jimfields33]

25. Places like DMV, post Office, medical offices and other

Places would be open 4 days a week instead of 7 hours a day? That might work. Have a Tuesday to Friday or Monday to Thursday work hours. I think the populous would be ok with it.

[MichMan]

3. How does a business that needs to be open 5 days a week to meet their customer's needs survive?

Hire a whole 2nd crew for just 1 day a week?

[Aristus]

4. I keep hearing that the private sector is a hotbed of innovation and can-do spirit.

If this is actually the case, then I'm sure all those intrepid, no-holds-barred, super-patriotic, flinty, tough, overcome-all-obstacles entrepreneurs can figure it out.

[ret5hd]

5. maybe pay OT?

geez, you would think the smartest, most talented, dedicated, altruistic, saintly, hard working, forward thinking, most superior in our society would be able to come to some solution to this dilemma.

“Oh God, please help our country in this time of dire need…”they” are taking my barely-post-pubescent coal miners and milliners from us! Oh God, what shall we do??? We, your truly faithful, shall be reduced to peasantry and only a single yacht! A SINGLE YACHT! My heart beseeches you Oh Lord! Save us from these heathens!”

[Donkees]

8. Require overtime pay at time and a half for workdays longer than eight hours ...

The Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act would:

• Reduce the standard workweek from 40 to 32 hours over four years by lowering the
maximum hours threshold for overtime compensation for non-exempt employees.

• Require overtime pay at time and a half for workdays longer than eight hours, and overtime
pay at double a worker’s regular pay for workdays longer than 12 hours.

• Protect workers’ pay and benefits to ensure that a reduction in the workweek does not cause
a loss in pay.

The Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act is endorsed by: AFL-CIO, UAW, SEIU, AFA-CWA, UFCW,
International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), 4 Day Week Global,
WorkFour, and the National Employment Law Project (NELP).

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/32-Hour-Workweek-Act_Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

[MichMan]

11. Bernie said nothing about overtime; just a 32 hour workweek

[ret5hd]

12. yeah? and right now we have a 40 hr workweek.

did Bernie say something about banning OT?

[Donkees]

21. Overtime excerpt:

The Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act would:

• Reduce the standard workweek from 40 to 32 hours over four years by lowering the
maximum hours threshold for overtime compensation for non-exempt employees.

• Require overtime pay at time and a half for workdays longer than eight hours, and overtime
pay at double a worker’s regular pay for workdays longer than 12 hours.

• Protect workers’ pay and benefits to ensure that a reduction in the workweek does not cause
a loss in pay.

The Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act is endorsed by: AFL-CIO, UAW, SEIU, AFA-CWA, UFCW,
International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), 4 Day Week Global,
WorkFour, and the National Employment Law Project (NELP).

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/32-Hour-Workweek-Act_Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

[MichMan]

22. I was thinking of UAW president Fain who wanted 32 hours a week max for all workers for more leisure time

[Donkees]

27. He mentioned overtime beyond the 32 hours in this sept 2023 excerpt:

I haven't kept up, or watched today's hearing yet.

Published Tue, Sep 19 2023

The UAW is calling for the introduction of a four-day, 32-hour workweek, at the same rate of pay, and overtime pay for anything beyond that.

“Our members are working 60, 70, even 80 hours a week just to make ends meet,” said UAW president Shawn Fain on a Facebook Live event last month. “That’s not a living. That’s barely surviving, and it needs to stop.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/19/why-uaw-auto-workers-want-a-32-hour-workweek.html

[WhiskeyGrinder]

7. Depends on the business, but staggered schedules are a thing.

[TexasBushwhacker]

9. As it is, you have businesses open 7 days a week

that somehow figure out how to get things covered with people only working 5 of those days.

[meadowlander]

10. Stagger the shifts.

We have the technology.

Presumably the business has at least two people working there - the owner and at least one employee for it to be an issue.

Person A works from 8-1 M-F and Person B works 12-6 M-F.

Or Person A works 8-6 M-W and 8-12 Th and Person B works 8-6 W-F and 1-6 Tu.

In reality, most businesses will have more employees than this and will cover more hours but "how can we cover our working hours" isn't a reason not to shorten the work week. Hire more people and offer more flexible hours. Most companies since the 1970s don't primarily use an all-hand-on-deck 9-5 work week anyway.

[MichMan]

14. "Hire more people and offer flexible hours"

Sure, it is hard enough to hire people as it is. Where are all these extra workers going to come from?

I take it you never worked in a manufacturing plant

Production is dictated by keeping machines running efficiently as much as possible.

If a machine produces one widget every 5 minutes, the machine can make 12 widgets per hour and 96 per 8 hour shift. Most plants I worked in ran 3 eight hour shifts a day with maintenance on the weekends. That means in 1 week, each machine can make 1440 widgets per week. Reduce the workweek to 32 hours and that means a machine sits idle for 24 hours a shift and therefore only produces 1152 widgets.

How will they make up the missing 288 widgets ? I guess they just need to buy a bunch of extra machines and hire more people. Greedy fuckers

[ColinC]

19. The same way places that need to be open 24 hours survive

Pay overtime or hire more people. Not rocket science.

[meadowlander]

37. I have actually worked in manufacturing plants

When I was in college I worked at a temp agency that used to send me out to various factories for various lengths of time to cover exactly the types of gaps in production you are describing. I spent two months working in a ski pole factory full time to cover a surge in orders (was given an offer to come on permanent full time but had to go back to school). I also worked part-time a few days a week in a factory that made the racks on the front of buses to hold bicycles and a short-term stint in a cardboard box factory (the pits - my hands were so stiff and covered in papercuts at the end of the day I could barely move them). All three factories had shift work with different options available, employed part-time staff, had multiple different machines doing different stages of production at different times, and in none of them would a machine have sat idle because of a 32 hour mandated work week. They would just hire part-timers or temps or adjust the workflow.

[MichMan]

38. Part timers and temps for one day a week

I bet there are dozens of unemployed people lined up wanting that kind of deal. They would all need a significant amount of training on safety and work instructions. Then the next week you get a whole new batch of temps needing the same thing.

Most people only work at temp agencies because they can't find regular jobs somewhere else. With unemployment so low and everyone hiring, how would temp agencies find people ?

Wonder how much scrap and defective parts get made because of inexperienced part timers working 1 day a week ? Do you realize how much expense and time is spent on customer complaints if just one defective part gets shipped? My customers didn't care that you shipped 50,000 good parts, just that one bad one got out. I would spend days and days writing and implementing corrective actions.

[meadowlander]

41. It worked great for me.

Paid for my trip to Europe in combination with two other part-time jobs I was working that summer. Temping provided a lot of flexibility around my other part-time jobs that had fixed schedules. Believe it or not, it didn't require that much training to line up ski pole shafts with the grips and tips and then pull a lever. I figured it out in less than two minutes. And the amount of scrap and defective parts made because of this temp were zero. I helped design a safer and more efficient assembly process and improved some of the protocols which is what you can get when you have more diversity and outside perspectives coming into your workforce. And even though you are a "temp" or a part-timer it doesn't mean you change jobs every week. As I said, I was at one place for two months and had the option to stay longer if I wanted to.

Not everyone wants a full time job or is in a position in life with their other responsibilities to work one. People with kids or who are caring for older relatives often can't manage to be away for a full 40 hours a week. Very often students are looking for part time work. Some people want or need to gradually reduce the numbers of hours they work as they approach retirement. Some people have disabilities or health problems that set limits on the number of hours they can work that might be less than 40. There's no reason that a full-timer is inherently more competent at their job than a part-timer or temp would be. Plenty of the full-timers at the factories I worked at were fuck ups and plenty of the temps worked as hard or harder (trying to prove themselves so they could get a full time offer) and did an equivalent or better job.

The point is that employers have options and even now most of them don't stick strictly to three eight hour shifts a day with only full time permanent staff.

[MichMan]

43. Not every single manufactured component is comparable to a ski pole.

Ever thought that maybe a $300,000 injection molding machine producing automotive brake system components might need a little more skill and training? Press the wrong button and crash the $100,000 mold and you just shut down production for a couple weeks. Send out a bad part and potentially risk someone's life?

How much do you think Ford would charge if you shut down their pickup truck assembly line for 2 weeks or they had to institute a recall?

[meadowlander]

78. But let's not fool ourselves

the every factory job requires a PhD either. Most manufacturing jobs are designed so that anybody can do them specifically so that they don't have to pay people that much and it's easier to recruit. I'm not saying every job in a factory could be done by a temp off the street with two minutes training. I didn't do welding or operate a fork lift. But the majority of shift work assembly jobs in the majority of factories don't require hours and hours of training to get right.

[NickB79]

99. Temps are a great way for management to screw over union employees

We're a union shop, but management at our facility started pulling that crap, using temps wherever possible to get away with not hiring more permanent workers. They'd staff us at bare-bones levels, give us our 40 hr/wk our union contract guaranteed us, then bring in temps at much reduced pay. It got to the point that in the last contract negotiation, we demanded and won that any overtime was to be offered to union employees first, and only if it weren't filled by volunteers within a reasonable timeframe was management then allowed to bring in temps. Suddenly, another dozen permanent positions magically appeared and were filled, because a lot of us union guys want to work that OT for time and a half, but the company doesn't want to continually pay time and half. We have far fewer temps now.

And when we do get temps these days, the quality of work they offer is....underwhelming to say the least. My facility is cultured dairy processing, and while you don't need guys with college degrees for most of positions, you do need guys who at least understand and care that skipping sanitation steps could lead to a salmonella or listeria outbreak that could kill people. Dairy is such an unforgiving food to work with when it comes to microbio issues.

Or, you get a situation like at the Jenni-O turkey processing factory my mom works at, about a decade ago. A poorly trained temp crawled inside a machine to clear a jam without following lockout/tagout procedures, and someone reactivated the machine with him inside. He didn't survive.

[redqueen]

53. I have and staggered shifts make this possible now. nt

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

16. They hire how many workers they need at 32 hours a week to

be open the days and hours they need to be open.

Sort of like shift work in places that are open more than 8-5 Monday through Friday.

[Voltaire2]

48. How do businesses open 7 days survive?

[druidity33]

51. What?...

It's called staggering shifts. People work four days a week. Put them on a rotation schedule. Maybe Seniority gets Fridays. You do, however, need to hire enough employees to up the workforce by 10-15%. It's not really that complicated.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

95. "... up the workforces by 10-15%. It's not really that complicated."

You do, however, need to hire enough employees to up the workforces by 10-15%. It's not really that complicated.

With a corresponding increase in labor cost of 10 to 15 percent.

[druidity33]

112. I think the point is...

some of these companies are making record profits. We're talking 200% more than what they were making pre-pandemic. A 10-15% additional cost in labor is likely a bargain.

[MichMan]

114. His proposal would apply to every single employer in the entire US in every sector.

And most are not all making 200% record profits. Small mom & pop businesses, non profits; every single one of them would have to comply. Not every single employer is run by billionaires owning yachts, & private jets.

Guess what. If I run a small business and I'm told I have to pay everyone working 32 hours, 40 hours pay, I would make sure no one ever works 32 hours a week ever again. I would just cut their hours to 30 instead.

[druidity33]

126. You know as well as I do...

that "small" businesses will be exempt from this measure. That likely includes franchises (aka BK, McD, etc), small grocery chains (like the one i worked for that was exempted from other SB regulations), and any other employers that have less than around 200 employees. This is exactly the type of proposal a Union would make during contract negotiations.

Let me guess... you don't think Unions are good for business?

[MichMan]

142. His proposal says nothing about exempting any business

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/32-Hour-Workweek-Act_Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

[newdayneeded]

55. if there's 6 people there,

3 work Monday through Thurs, the other three work Tues thru Friday.

or Wednesday thru Saturday if need be.

[Layzeebeaver]

73. no - you hire enough resources to cover 1 extra day a week that allows all shifts to operate 4 days

It's simple math and shift/resource planning.

Makes for happier workers

Happier workers make for a better customer experience

A better customer experience yields more revenue.

[MichMan]

75. If you read my post, that is what I said

"Hire a whole 2nd crew for just 1 day a week?"

[Layzeebeaver]

107. that;s not what you said...

or at least what you said is not what I said.

let's forget it. I believe that businesses can hire appropriately to support at 4 day week.

[MichMan]

108. Reread post #3

I literally cut and pasted from it

[Layzeebeaver]

110. I think we need to clarify things here...

I understand what you wrote, and I disagree with it.

You suggested to “Hire a whole 2nd crew for just 1 day a week?”

I said… “no - you hire enough resources to cover 1 extra day a week that allows all shifts to operate 4 days”

There is a HUGE difference between...

A) Hiring a whole crew for just 1 day a week

Vs.

B) Hiring just enough resources to cover one extra day a week

Again, this is simple math and shift design - that's all.

We all need to forget the 5 days in a 7 day week working paradigm - it's a 4 day work schedule across 7 days. Forget the weekends. Weekends are a synthetic construct.

If we move to a 4 day working within a 7 day elapsed timespan, then business can operate 7 days a week. its better for everyone.

You want to go to church? Pick a day and make the church accommodate it. Are they going to close their doors to you if you really want to go on a Wednesday?

[MichMan]

111. No, you stated that wasn't what I said, when it was a direct copy and paste from the post you replied to.

edit: then you edited your post after I called you out on it

[Layzeebeaver]

127. whatever, the content is the content and the intent is the intent

I stand by my position.

I think I understand what you are saying, but I still could be not reading it or comprehending it correctly.

[SarahD]

77. What businesses would those be?

[Angleae]

90. Stagger the workers days off (some on Monday, some on Friday)

[Orangepeel]

96. We didn't always have a 40 hour work week. Businesses adjusted

[House of Roberts]

13. If I was working four eights from Monday through Thursday,

I'd find a shop that would hire me for Friday and Saturday also. I worked for most of my time as a CNC machinist. Some shops worked a day shift four tens from Monday through Thursday, also a night shift, then would put on a Friday through Sunday shift doing three twelves and paying them for forty hours.

Companies that spend money for a quarter of a million dollar CNC mill aren't going to settle for 32 hours of operation a week to pay off the note.

[MichMan]

15. The lack of knowledge here about manufacturing is sad

Machines need to operate efficiently as many hours a day as possible to make them profitable

[ColinC]

24. I work at a 24 hour operation. Staggered shifts and OT do the trick

Of course if they could force more people to work 24 hours a day, I wouldn’t put it past them. The question you are presenting was asked before the 40 hour work week with the exact same concerns. It was even harder then though because they were going from a 7 day work week and cutting down 2 whole days -forcing businesses to make even bigger changes to their operational needs than Bernie is asking of businesses now.

[doc03]

33. Exactly, I worked in a steel mill for 40 years, the mill had to work 24/7 to show

a profit. A 32-hour week would require hiring an entire new shift.

[David__77]

28. That's a matter of implementing multiple shifts, which is hardly new.

Of course, having more workers working the same total number of hours is more costly, in different ways. Ultimately, it's a matter of social preferences. Do people want to on average work 60 hours a week, 50, 40, 32, etc. It's not as if it comes from natural law.

[meadowlander]

39. Right.

If you want to keep a machine running the full 168 hours a week, that's not inherently more divisible by 40 than it is by 32.

[MichMan]

42. 8 hours of work for 80 hours a week pay would be popular I suppose

[ret5hd]

45. 40 hours of work...

for 8 hours pay would be popular with you, right?

[MichMan]

47. If I got paid $200 per hour, sure!

[Voltaire2]

62. Nobody but you is proposing that.

The same idiotic argument is made against raising the min wage - why not 250/hr.

[MichMan]

72. I never said it was being proposed. My reply was in response to the post I quoted below.

"Ultimately, it's a matter of social preferences. Do people want to on average work 60 hours a week, 50, 40, 32, etc. It's not as if it comes from natural law."

My reply was regarding what I would like personally, and that it also might be popular with others

[MichMan]

18. Just boost the minimum wage to $30 per hour

With a 10% annual increase. Why make it so complicated?

[calguy]

29. Yeah, easy peasy

If you don't mind paying an extra 30-40% more for everything you buy, since companies will have to hire many more workers to make up for the lost production. Reality is a bitch sometimes, ain't it?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

60. How about not paying an extra 30-40% for greedflation?

[calguy]

64. Cool... but tell me exactly how you plan on doing that.

If there was a way to do it, it would have already been done.
This is another naive proposal from Bernie, totally detached from reality, just like everything other hair-brained idea he's ever come up with.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

65. Yeah, Social Security and FDR's entire New Deal was naive and never attainable.

[calguy]

66. You're dodging the question about how you plan to give everyone an extra day off

and not affect the economy in negative ways. The truth is, it's a pie-in-the-sky that sounds good at first, but totally ridiculous when you actually start thinking about how it would be achieved.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

67. I didn't dodge a fucking thing. Excess profits for non-producing CEOs. See above.

[calguy]

69. Okay, smart guy.

Get back to me a year from now and let me know how it all worked out.... lol

[Hermit-The-Prog]

71. Well, lol just destroys all arguments for ending extreme wealth disparity.

[calguy]

74. Whatever you say, Einstein

Come back to me in a year and let me know how it's working out.

[progressoid]

102. Worked out well in trials in the UK.

UK four day work week: The results so far

The majority of employers who took part in the project say they've seen productivity levels maintained, and improvements in staff retention and well-being. Business revenue stayed broadly the same, there was a 65% reduction in the number of sick days and 71% of employees reported lower levels of burnout.

The pilot project ran between June and December 2022 and was based on the 100-80-100 model: this means workers got 100% pay for working 80% of their previous hours in exchange for a commitment to maintain 100% productivity.

Of the 61 companies that took part, 56 say they will continue trying out the four-day week following the pilot, while 18 say they will make the change permanently.

...https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/03/four-day-work-week-uk-trial/

4-day work week trial yields overwhelming success in U.K., researchers say

Revenue grew 1.4 percent over the course of the trial for 23 companies that provided adequate data — weighted for the size of the business — while a separate 24 companies saw revenue climb more than 34 percent from the same six-month period a year earlier.

For Platten’s, “I don’t think we were really measuring it in terms of profitability,” Wainwright said. “That’s not really it for us. We wanted to measure it in productivity. And actually, the productivity has gone through the roof.”

For all those who participated in the trial, there was a drop in the likelihood of employees quitting, down 57 percent compared with the same period a year earlier, as well as those calling out sick, down 65 percent from a year ago, according to the findings....

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/4-day-work-week-trial-yields-overwhelming-success-in-u-k-researchers-say

[Hermit-The-Prog]

130. This works better than chaining children to machinery? Weird!

[Abolishinist]

83. Please show me where Starbucks, for example,

made 24.56 billion in profit for fiscal year 2023.

Thanks!

[Hermit-The-Prog]

85. SEC, investor.starbucks.com, yahoo, macrotrends, etc.

[Abolishinist]

86. And if one takes the time to actually look at the numbers,

Last edited Sun Mar 17, 2024, 12:38 PM - Edit history (1)

they will find the $24.56 billion represents NET REVENUE minus PRODUCT & DISTRIBUTION COSTS, not PROFITS.

https://investor.starbucks.com/press-releases/financial-releases/press-release-details/2023/Starbucks-Reports-Q4-and-Full-Year-Fiscal-2023-Results/default.aspx

[Hermit-The-Prog]

88. You may want to look again. Starbucks says their net revenue was $36 billion.

[Zeitghost]

93. 36 Billion

Was gross revenue.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

115. I quoted Starbucks. If you know better, report them to the SEC.

Consolidated net revenues up 12%, to a record $36.0 billion, or 14%, excluding a 2% unfavorable impact from foreign currency translation

[ProfessorGAC]

124. All Accurate, Except...

...this subthread started with a claim of $>24 billion in profit.
That is inaccurate. Logically, do you believe they're running at a nearly 70% net margin?
Their EBITA was $10.2 billion with an administrative load of $4.47 billion, so a pretax income of $5.65 billion.
That's a long way from more than $24 billion.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SBUX/financials/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACix_MmOpWTvNTQxeTi_E9p6ZDBvGfVJJjYlbdvkEcP2DdZyPrJq3Q2eiR8uz8ugRIiLUIFI_MiHKKvVix0u7JmRdFHoqE32IOzG3fMH0-Txmp_ZlNL7qRH4AOQ4SDwnvf7rnO-0TVokx3H4MN6Sf3ApvE_p_o3WygQULiBpTQq2

[Hermit-The-Prog]

125. Gross profit is roughly $24 billion

Starbucks annual/quarterly gross profit history and growth rate from 2010 to 2023. Gross profit can be defined as the profit a company makes after deducting the variable costs directly associated with making and selling its products or providing its services.

* Starbucks gross profit for the quarter ending December 31, 2023 was $6.445B, a 9.16% increase year-over-year.

* Starbucks gross profit for the twelve months ending December 31, 2023 was $25.108B, a 12.52% increase year-over-year.

* Starbucks annual gross profit for 2023 was $24.567B, a 12.01% increase from 2022.

* Starbucks annual gross profit for 2022 was $21.933B, a 7.93% increase from 2021.

* Starbucks annual gross profit for 2021 was $20.322B, a 28.43% increase from 2020.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SBUX/starbucks/gross-profit

Anyone wanting more details of SBUX for fiscal year 2023 can read
https://s22.q4cdn.com/869488222/files/doc_financials/2024/ar/fy23-annual-report.pdf

The 'meme' talks about "profit", which matches "gross profit" in the above summary by macrotrends. It's not a lesson in reading SEC reports or even accounting 101. (It is a simplistic view of bookkeeping that doesn't even consider costs of wages and salaries beyond the face amounts). It is intentionally dramatic and simple to get people to think about inequity.

The point is that Starbucks could provide wages sufficient to end the dependence of its employees on tips and it would still be profitable enough to continue its growth. It also suggests that other corporations could share more of the wealth with the employees who create it.

[ProfessorGAC]

128. My Error

The numbers i used were quarterly, not annual.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

129. Ah, but neither of us considered page 67 (71 in the pdf)...

" Amortization expense for short-lived intangible assets was $21.5 million, $192.7 million and $223.4 million duriing fiscal 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. "

This changes everything!

I used to try to read every SEC report for every stock I owned. It quickly became clear that, if I persisted, that's all I would have time to do and my brain would eat its way out to escape.

[Zeitghost]

131. Where did they say this?

Because every single financial website on the internet that publishes their audited financial statements lists 36 billion total (gross) revenue, 9.8 billion gross profit and 4 billion net profit.

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SBUX/financials/

[Hermit-The-Prog]

132. link to Starbucks press release...

https://investor.starbucks.com/press-releases/financial-releases/press-release-details/2023/Starbucks-Reports-Q4-and-Full-Year-Fiscal-2023-Results/default.aspx

[Zeitghost]

133. That shows total revenues of 36 billion

Operating expenses of 30.5 billion and net income (profit) of 4 billion.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

136. See upthread. Tired of this. It's lounge time.

[Zeitghost]

138. I've read it all

The initial claim is still completely wrong. Starbucks made 4 billion in profits last year.

[Abolishinist]

97. Several things. For whatever reason, the meme you posted

used the number for Net Revenues minus Product and distribution costs, which for 2023 would be $35.97 billion - $11.41 billion = $24.86 billion.

Profits for Starbucks are nowhere close to any of these numbers. For fiscal 2023, the net income was $4.12 billion. Mulitplying 400,00 employees time $11,000 totals $4.4 billion, which would essentially wipe out their profit for the year, NOT leave them with $20 billion. And of course there is the cash flow aspect of this as well, the ramifications of which that whomever put this out is either too stupid to understand or don't care.

So in the end, the meme posted is a crock. I have no doubt ALL of the other numbers mentioned are just as ridiculous.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

116. You've jumped from net revenue to net income while ignoring gross profit.

[Abolishinist]

134. Gross Profit is merely a number on the way down

from Revenues to Net Income. Do you not understand how completely inaccurate the meme is?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

137. Do you not understand it's not for submission to the SEC? It's lounge time.

Please hire someone to do your taxes.

[Abolishinist]

139. First of all, YOU'RE the only one bringing up the SEC.

This conversation is about (a) the meme you posted, which when combined with your intro of "How about not paying an extra 30-40% for greedflation?" generated (b) rebuttals to the content of the meme, specifically Starbucks, and (c) your inability to understand the fatal flaw of said meme.

It's one thing to advocate for higher wages, another to out and out mislead people.

I'm guessing the "please hire someone to do your taxes" is a snark, but we do actually have a CPA firm prepare ours due to it being rather complex. And many decades ago I was the corporate controller of a manufacturing firm with 150 employees, so I do know my way around financial statements.

[Bonx]

92. Why stop at $30?

[Oopsie Daisy]

20. Pie in the sky. It will NEVER happen.

Thanks for playing.

[MichMan]

23. Schools open for 4 days a week

20% less instruction time.

Maybe we can just hire more teachers and stagger their schedules. It will be tough at first, but teachers, parents and kids will get used to starting at 5 am some days and finishing at 5 pm on others.

[calguy]

26. Another outlandish proposal from Bernie

I got news for ya, Bernie... it ain't never gonna fly. This is one of the many reasons you would have been absolutely slaughtered if you would have somehow won the nomination for president.

[DemocraticPatriot]

117. I was waiting for the explicit "Bernie hate" to make it self known

in this thread!!!

Congratulations, you 'win'.


PFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTTT

[Skittles]

119. right?

I'm curious how 24 hour coverage would work....

[marble falls]

30. Bernie's right.

[Xavier Breath]

31. No it isn't, Bernie.

[doc03]

32. People I know that work minimum wage jobs are only aloud to work

18 hours a week forcing them to work two or three jobs. Instead of cutting hours they should make
employers pay for full time work. We just managed to calm inflation, that would make it worse again
and we already have a labor shortage.

[maveric]

34. If you're paid hourly at 40 hrs a week and they cut your hours to 32 hours...

How would you not lose pay? Would your employer raise your pay?
I may be dense but that’s how I see it.

[MichMan]

35. Bernie says work 32 get paid for 40

[calguy]

81. Bernie's said a lot of crazy things over the years.

None of which has ever happened, or could ever happen. It's hard to even take this new crazy idea seriously.

[vanlassie]

84. I worked for Aetna and they increased our hours from 35 a week to 40

with no increase in pay, about a year after the facility opened. I heard not one squeak of protest from coworkers, and wondered if they were too stupid or too scared to protest.

[ecstatic]

36. There are jobs that have 32 hour per week schedules

Why try to force every business into that format? Not to mention the overtime costs that he casually references as if every business is swimming in dough?

[MichMan]

40. Pass this proposal and you will see a lot of manufacturing get outsourced to Mexico, India and Asia

The solution I keep seeing here is just hire a bunch of more people like that is so easy. Of course they all want benefits etc. etc.

Does anyone believe Bernie would support employers hiring part time temps with no benefits? Of course not.

I worked in smaller to medium sized manufacturing plants for decades. Somone buying 200,000 widgets a year will move their business elsewhere for 50 cents a piece cost savings.

[Patton French]

44. Whether or not it's "readical" it ain't happening. NT

[MichMan]

46. When is it scheduled to be voted on in the Senate? n/t

[Voltaire2]

49. All the same arguments were made against the 40 hour week.

Somehow we not only managed, we thrived.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

52. Huge lack of imagination in this thread, wow.

[redqueen]

54. Right?

Private industry: Workplaces breed innovation!

People: Let's switch to a four day work week so people can spend more time enjoying their short lives with their loved ones, and less time making other people rich.

Private industry: There's no possible way we could ever figure out how to do that!

[WhiskeyGrinder]

56. nah it's the posters defending the interests of private industry that are cracking me up

[Voltaire2]

58. We laugh at the magats worshipping billionaires

and yet here is a thread with the vast majority of posts expressing the ideology of the same owning class.

[MichMan]

70. I missed the part in Sen Sanders bill where it stated it only applied to businesses owned by billionaires

Are all other businesses, including small local businesses exempt?

[JI7]

94. Most businesses are not run by billionaires or even millionaires

Many have the owners already working there themselves overtime.

[pecosbob]

91. The residual Bernie hatred as well.

[Voltaire2]

57. For a business that operates 168 hours a week (24/7)

Instead of 4.2 people per week at 40 hrs this would be 5.25 people per week at 32 hrs. I think capitalism can survive.

It might survive better if it were regulated so that the priority was to insure that people thrive.

[MichMan]

59. You are suggesting that the business just go out and hire 25% more people

Given that unemployment is under 5%, where are all the additional employees going to come from?

If the goal is to increase wages by 25 %, why not pass legislation towards that in the first place?

[Voltaire2]

61. Correct. 25% more jobs. Oh the horror!

They would have to share more of the surplus with the workforce.

And as far as where the people come from - well we have a whole lot of people who would be happy to immigrate here and work. That would not only provide a lot of new workers, it would fill the SS trust fund back up.

[progressoid]

76. They wouldn't need to hire more people. Here's how it worked in the UK recently

UK four day work week: The results so far

The majority of employers who took part in the project say they've seen productivity levels maintained, and improvements in staff retention and well-being. Business revenue stayed broadly the same, there was a 65% reduction in the number of sick days and 71% of employees reported lower levels of burnout.

The pilot project ran between June and December 2022 and was based on the 100-80-100 model: this means workers got 100% pay for working 80% of their previous hours in exchange for a commitment to maintain 100% productivity.

Of the 61 companies that took part, 56 say they will continue trying out the four-day week following the pilot, while 18 say they will make the change permanently.

...https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/03/four-day-work-week-uk-trial/

4-day work week trial yields overwhelming success in U.K., researchers say

Revenue grew 1.4 percent over the course of the trial for 23 companies that provided adequate data — weighted for the size of the business — while a separate 24 companies saw revenue climb more than 34 percent from the same six-month period a year earlier.

For Platten’s, “I don’t think we were really measuring it in terms of profitability,” Wainwright said. “That’s not really it for us. We wanted to measure it in productivity. And actually, the productivity has gone through the roof.”

For all those who participated in the trial, there was a drop in the likelihood of employees quitting, down 57 percent compared with the same period a year earlier, as well as those calling out sick, down 65 percent from a year ago, according to the findings....

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/4-day-work-week-trial-yields-overwhelming-success-in-u-k-researchers-say

Obviously, this won't work for every job sector. Hell, the five day, 9-5 model doesn't even work for every sector. But this can and does work.

[MichMan]

79. Explain how it works in manufacturing when production is dictated by machine cycle times?

I worked my career in small and mid sized manufacturing plants.

The machine that makes widgets can produce one every 5 minutes, or 12 an hour. In a 24 hour day with three 8 hour shifts , that one machine can make 288 widgets. In a 5 day week total widget production for each machine is 1440. If the available work time is reduced one day a week, that means production is short 288 widgets a week. The production constraint is machine cycle time.

Each machine has three operators; one to load, one to unload and do some work and one to inspect and the workflow is such that they can keep up with the 5 minute cycle time. Adding a bunch more workers isn't going to make that machine run any faster, nor can it make any more than 288 widgets a day. Doesn't matter how happy or productive they are, they cant produce any more widgets than the machine is capable of.

[progressoid]

82. Which is why I said, "Obviously, this won't work for every job sector."

In my experience, it would have worked well. I worked for a couple decades (10 of those as a manager) in a lab. We were open 60 hours a week so we had overlapping schedules. I'd estimate that actual production only happened for about 36 hours a week.

Our production was limited by two things: The efficiency of the workers and the limitations of the equipment. Rarely did we put the equipment to it's limit. If I had a more creative boss, we might have implemented such work policies. I guarantee that given the chance, we would have found ways to work more efficiently and finished the work in less time. The employees would have jumped at the chance to have a three day weekend, even if it meant working harder. As it was, there a lot of finding ways to pad out the day. As a manager, it was frustrating to say the least.

[Johnny2X2X]

87. Yes

There's data out there that suggests 32 hour work weeks are more productive in a lot of fields. Obviously, with manufacturing, machine cycle times divtate output, but there is evidence defects are reduced significantly with shorter hours.

But for mental and creative tasks, 32 hours is better than 40 hours for everyone involved.

What's crazy is how engrained into society working long hours is. There are too many stubborn managers that will ignore the data and still work their employees to death even if it hurts their bottom line.

[MichMan]

106. How are hairdressers, plumbers and auto mechanics more productive working 32 hours vs 40?

It takes a certain amount of time to cut & style someone's hair, install a new plumbing fixture, or to replace brake components.

How are they able to speed up & increase their productivity by 20-25% by getting more work done in 4 days vs 5? If it actually takes an hour to cut and style a person's hair, how can a hairdresser just do it in 45 minutes with the same amount of care and quality?

[Jose Garcia]

63. He should operate his Senate office like this to demonstrate how well this will work

[MichMan]

68. Sen. Sanders must think business owners are pretty stupid

If I owned a business (which by the way, I never have) why would I ever pay an employee 40 hours of wages for 32 hours of work, when I could just reduce their hours to 30 max. per week and just pay them for the 30 hours instead. Those additional 2 hours would actually cost 10 hours in wages, so no one in their right mind is going to do that.

Of course, my employee who needed their 40 hour paycheck to pay their rent and grocery bill, now has to go out and find another part time job.

What would consumer's reactions be when people you hire like auto mechanics, plumbers, electricians, landscapers etc. tell you that your 3 hour charge to fix your plumbing is now being billed at 4 hours, just because.

[calguy]

80. Pesky little details that are easy to ignore...

when naive people are only thinking about permanent three-day weekends with no economic consequences.

[DemocraticPatriot]

118. What Sanders is arguing for, is a 'living wage'.

You seem to be against it..... and many other Democratic ideals, from my observations of you.

I too, am a "Michigan man", but your representation of such is embarrassing to me.

Much of Europe seems to be getting along on a 32-hour work week now....
Are we not as good as Europe?

Sanders stated outright--- 32 hours paid at a rate the same as 40 hours.
That does not mean, that everyone would have to aquire a second job---
but that they would be paid more fairly for the job they already have,
and not have to live their entire life for the sake of their employer.

So all your arguments that "now these people will have to get another job to make up the difference" are totally ignoring the initial argument, and totally non-sensensical.

[MichMan]

121. If he wants a living wage, just introduce legislation to increase the minimum wage

Last edited Sat Mar 16, 2024, 08:52 AM - Edit history (1)

to $25-30 per hour instead of some convoluted scheme like this. It would be so much simpler than trying to be clever with something like this. Mandating that labor costs for every business go up 25% would likely cause inflation to shoot right back up to double digits. Do you think that is what the public wants?

This is a ridiculous pie in the sky proposal that has no hope of passing. Where are all the other supporters in Congress, and when is the Senate going to pass it? How many congress members are going to make this a big campaign promise? Is President Biden supporting it? One would think a brilliant idea like this would have dozens and dozens of fellow congress members all promoting it.

Mandating a 32 hour work week does nothing for people who are working part time. I already explained a likely consequence of how employers would respond. Also, I dont believe that the rest of the world is all on a 32 hour workweek, and the United States is some outlier.

Claiming anyone that doesn't get behind this is therefore against a living wage is disingenuous. I can't believe I was foolish enough to waste so much time debating something like this particular proposal by Sanders. I should know better.

[NYC2ATL]

98. I think this is a spectacular idea.

Long past due.

[honest.abe]

100. I dont need a 32 hour work week.

I need equality in pay.

[BlueTsunami2018]

101. This wouldn't work in my field of construction.

We’re paid by the hour based on production. 32 hours of work equals 32 hours of pay. I wouldn’t mind doing five days of one of those days was all time and a half. But that’s not happening.

I’ve always liked Bernie but I don’t see how this would ever fly.

[calguy]

103. Most of his ideas never fly

[BlueTsunami2018]

109. Yeah, it's a lot of pie in the sky stuff but some of it is plausible.

Single payer healthcare could work. Holding corporations accountable, changing the tax rates and stuff like that.

[Skittles]

120. he's also a factor in how we got Trump

yup

[oldsoftie]

104. So if I make 100 widgets a week@20 a day, now I'm supposed to make 25 a day?

Without sacrificing quality? Safety? Sure, what could go wrong.

[Oneironaut]

141. Most work isn't directly measurable anymore.

That line of thinking only works in factories. In desk jobs, lots of people do things with no measurable value. IT is a good example.

It’s easy to fudge output in IT project-related jobs. Agile is an attempt to measure work that isn’t easily quantified, but, it doesnt work particularly well imo.

In reality, no one in those jobs consistently works 40 hours. At least some of it is just giving face-time / presence. For that reason, if you cut hours to 35, for example, you wouldn’t see a loss in productivity.

In reality, in jobs where safety matters, you want workers well-rested and not overworked. Otherwise, you get engineering disasters in the name of profit.

[Jacson6]

105. For hourly workers it would certainly mean a loss in pay.

If a California Fast Food Worker is working 32 hours a week @ $20 per hour that would be $320 per week. They would lose $160 per week. The business can't afford to make up the difference. I'm sure for workers in a bank this would be nice, but for the average worker this could make them homeless.
You are talking about a 20% pay cut for the working class.

[pansypoo53219]

113. tinkle down + zombie reagan must die.

[AZLD4Candidate]

122. But Sean Hannity and Larry Kudlow don't like it so it must be bad.

[PufPuf23]

135. Sounds like a great plan for those actively working (and I support).

Concern for those on fixed incomes (old and disabled) who will fall farther behind without commensurate adjustments in income to maintain their often already precarious economic well-being.

[TBF]

140. Back in the early 90s I worked in a law firm that had 35 hour work weeks -

It was an old blue chip type firm that did things the way they wanted to. One thing they liked was 7- hour days. For staff that meant anything over 35 hours was at time and a half, except for Sundays which was double time. At the time it was one of the largest firms in the world, but after all the mergers (and they also merged eventually), I'm sure those kinds of perks are long gone.

Bernie is right, as always, something has to give when inequality gets so out of line. We can do it peacefully or it will eventually be a violent situation. So, the choices that make sense are better workweeks (allowing folks more leisure time - or time to work on their own gigs they might have), and/or tinker with tax policy. What we have now is unsustainable for most.

[leftstreet]

143. DURec