Boston residents seem enthusiastic about the idea of a national 32-hour workweek reintroduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Rep. Mark Takano of California, but expressed concern about how it would be implemented.
Residents from Fenway, downtown and Jamaica Plain interviewed cited more opportunities for income, a better work-life balance and less stress as reasons for supporting the proposed bill. But they expressed skepticism about the economic impact it would have on supporting their families, workers and their communities.
“I think it would be great for us to push back against this culture of being productive absolutely all the time, which I think ironically makes us less productive in the long run,” said Aaron Mueller, 30, a resident in downtown Boston.
Sanders and Takano recently reintroduced the “Thirty Two Hour Workweek Act,” something they had proposed going back as far as 2021. According to their proposal, which suggests gradually changing the typical 40-hour work week to 32 hours over four years, people would work reduced hours while still earning the same pay and benefits of a 40-hour work week. The proposal would also lower when employees could become eligible for overtime pay and double their wages after 12-hour shifts.
In introducing their proposal, the two Democratic lawmakers cited success stories of a 32-hour work week from elsewhere in the world. A pilot study conducted in the United Kingdom in 2022 found that over 70 percent of the 3,000 workers included in the study reported being more satisfied with their time and less burnout, while the businesses that participated in the study saw an average increase in revenue of 35 percent.
When Sanders last introduced the bill, in 2024, Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy — who lost his Senate seat in the primary earlier this year — slammed the idea, saying it would “will destroy employers, forcing them to either ship jobs overseas or dramatically increase prices to try and stay afloat.”
Residents interviewed for this article cited more opportunities for income, a better work life balance and less stress as reasons for supporting the proposed bill, saying they hope its implementation will streamline productivity in the workplace and quality of life.
While some residents said a 32-hour workweek would help modernize outdated labor standards, others expressed concerns about changing traditional social norms.
“Throughout most of humankind, people worked far more than 40 hours a week. What are you going to do [for] that extra 8 hours?” said Beacon Hill resident Paul Cohon.
Meghan Napier, 37, a Jamaica Plain resident, disagreed, calling the standard 40-hour work week “arbitrary” and “outdated.”
“During the workweek, you have to commute, come back, do all this stuff, so you don’t have time to do all the day-to-day things,” she said. “I think I would almost just need a day to do just like errands that I can’t get done during the week.”
Similarly, Kervins Boutin, 25, a Boston-area resident on a visit to Jamaica Pond, said the additional time could create more opportunity to pursue productive interests that could also benefit their communities.
“People with freed-up time usually like to put it towards something productive,” he said. “People are able to take on healthier sort of entrepreneurial roles and schedules.”
Despite differing opinions about how a 32-hour workweek would affect workers and the economy, Boston residents largely agreed that more time outside of work could improve their quality of life.
For some, that extra day could mean more time with family, pursuing interests or catching up on responsibilities.
“It just gives you more time to catch up on life,” said Fenway resident Mary Clang.
This story is part of a partnership between The Chelsea Record and the Boston University Department of Journalism’s Newsroom program.