The really unfortunate thing is that this is simply not a change that corporations will make on their own accord. It's game theory; without top-down labor regulation, companies that remain on five-day workweeks will have greater productivity than four-day work weeks. So it's everyone or no one.
You assume companies are actually effective at maximizing productivity, and make rational decisions towards that goal. But, for example, I work in an open-office environment, and studies have pretty conclusively shown open-office environments are bad across the board: disease, stress, worker unhappiness, and productivity. Yet, the fad has caught on in SV.
All of Dilbert is a testament to companies not being effective at maximizing productivity.
It's a big change. Big changes scare people, and people would rather assume the simple view that if four days is good, five must be better. Another mythical man-month.
In fact, if five is so clearly better than four, why not six? The first company to do it would have an advantage while the rest caught up!
You're not wrong. But I think companies are addicted to simple metrics, despite our industry's ballyhooed trust in data, and so face time trumps efficient use of time. My point was that it will take legislation at the top, whether pushed through via collective bargaining or other means, to force companies to adopt a four day week schedule.
