The 40 Hour Work Week

Author: Mike Scaletti

The 40-hour work week has long been the gold standard of full-time employment in America and much of the Western world. Rooted in the hard-fought labor reforms of the early 20th century, it was once celebrated as a landmark victory for workers’ rights, a humane alternative to the grueling, often dangerous, and largely unchecked hours of the Industrial Age. In the factories and mills of the late 1800s and early 1900s, 10- to 16-hour days were common, and weekends were a rare luxury. The transition to a 40-hour standard was nothing short of revolutionary, bringing predictability, rest, and a new sense of dignity to working life.

Yet today, the world in which this framework was conceived bears little resemblance to our current reality. The digital revolution, globalization, automation, and the rise of knowledge work have fundamentally reshaped how, when, and where work gets done. Employee expectations have shifted, too, no longer is the primary measure of a “good job” simply a steady paycheck; people are seeking balance, meaning, flexibility, and mental well-being. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated these trends, prompting millions to rethink not only how much they work but why they work at all.

Against this backdrop, many are asking: Is the 40-hour work week still serving us, or has it become a relic of a bygone era that no longer matches the pace, pressures, and possibilities of modern life?

In this comprehensive exploration, we take the position that the 40-hour work week is indeed outdated for much of today’s workforce. However, this is not a black-and-white argument. We acknowledge its historical importance and the protections it once afforded, while examining current research, productivity data, and lived experiences from across industries. We will explore why this model persists, the forces driving calls for change, and practical, evidence-based alternatives that can better serve both employers and employees in the 21st century.

The History of the 40-Hour Work Week: How We Got Here

The 40-hour work week wasn’t always the norm, nor did it arrive without a long and often grueling fight by workers and advocates. In the late 1800s, industrial workers in the U.S. and Europe often endured 10- to 16-hour days, six or even seven days a week, in hazardous conditions that took a severe toll on health and family life. The push for shorter hours was driven by both humanitarian concerns and the belief that rested, healthier workers would actually be more productive and engaged.

Early labor movements organized marches, strikes, and political campaigns demanding an eight-hour day, a rallying cry that became central to the labor reform agenda. Notably, the Haymarket Affair of 1886 in Chicago, which began as a peaceful rally for the eight-hour workday, underscored both the passion of the movement and the resistance it faced.

The watershed moment came in 1926, when Henry Ford shocked the business world by adopting a 40-hour, five-day work week for his employees. Ford’s decision was not purely altruistic, he recognized that giving workers more leisure time would also turn them into better consumers, boosting the broader economy. This forward-thinking move quickly gained traction, inspiring other employers to follow suit.

By 1938, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) cemented the 40-hour work week as the legal standard in the U.S., with overtime pay mandated for hours worked beyond that threshold. This legislation was revolutionary for its time, aligning perfectly with the economic and industrial realities of a manufacturing-based economy. It offered a protective boundary against exploitation and helped standardize working conditions nationwide.

However, while this model was well-suited to an era dominated by assembly lines and predictable production schedules, it has remained largely unchanged even as the global economy has shifted toward services, technology, and knowledge-based work. Today’s workplaces operate in a far more interconnected, digitized, and flexible environment, raising the question of whether a rigid 40-hour structure still reflects how, and how well, work is done.

The Case for Change: Why the 40-Hour Work Week Feels Obsolete

1. Technology Has Changed Everything

We live in an age where digital tools, artificial intelligence, and cloud-based collaboration platforms allow for unprecedented levels of productivity, creativity, and automation. A task that once took hours, sometimes days, can now be completed in minutes with the right software and systems in place. Knowledge workers can share documents in real time across continents, automate repetitive tasks with a few clicks, and leverage AI to draft, analyze, and refine work at speeds never before imaginable. Yet paradoxically, the expected output for many roles has increased, not decreased, leading to a sense that technology’s potential to free time has instead expanded the scope of work.

According to a 2023 report by Owl Labs, 48% of remote or hybrid workers feel they’re more productive at home than in an office, suggesting that traditional time-on-task models no longer apply universally. Digital workflows mean that results often matter more than the specific hours spent, raising the question: why do we still cling to arbitrary hour-based expectations in so many industries? This reliance on outdated models risks ignoring the very efficiency gains technology delivers.

2. Burnout Is on the Rise

Employee burnout is no longer a background issue, it’s a growing crisis with measurable costs to both people and businesses. The World Health Organization officially recognized burnout as an occupational phenomenon in 2019, describing it as a syndrome resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed. The pandemic years only intensified this, blurring the lines between work and personal life and pushing many beyond sustainable limits.

• A Gallup survey found that 76% of employees experience burnout at least sometimes.

• 28% report feeling burned out "very often" or "always."

Chronic fatigue, disengagement, and reduced cognitive performance are not compatible with long-term success. These statistics highlight a deep misalignment between expected work hours and the human body’s and mind’s ability to sustain peak performance. When workers are mentally exhausted, the outcome is predictable: absenteeism rises, mistakes multiply, turnover accelerates, and organizational culture suffers.

(For more insights, see our post on Mental Health at Work)

3. Work-Life Balance Is More Than a Buzzword

Modern professionals increasingly prioritize work-life integration over rigid compartmentalization. This shift is not just a generational preference, it’s a response to the realities of dual-income households, demanding caregiving roles, and the recognition that personal well-being is directly tied to professional performance. In fact, 65% of workers say they'd take a pay cut for a job that better supports their mental well-being, according to a 2024 SHRM study. Flexible scheduling, remote options, and outcome-based evaluations are now seen as competitive advantages in recruitment and retention.

For dual-income households, working parents, and caregivers, the inflexibility of a 9-to-5 schedule can be not only impractical but exclusionary, limiting opportunities for talented individuals who cannot conform to traditional time blocks.

4. The Global Shift Toward Flexibility

Countries like Iceland, Sweden, and New Zealand have piloted shorter work weeks (e.g., 32 hours) with no loss in productivity. In many cases, output actually improved, and job satisfaction soared. These initiatives demonstrate that fewer hours do not necessarily mean less work gets done, in fact, they often lead to better focus and more efficient processes.

A landmark trial in the UK involving over 3,300 workers across 70 companies found that 92% of businesses decided to continue with the four-day workweek after the pilot concluded. The result? Less stress, reduced absenteeism, better recruitment, and in some cases, increased profitability. For organizations willing to experiment, these models point toward a future where time is valued differently, measured not just in hours worked but in the quality and impact of the work produced.

Why the 40-Hour Work Week Persists

Despite mounting evidence, the 40-hour standard hasn’t vanished. Why does such a long-standing framework still command loyalty in boardrooms, HR departments, and even among some employees? The answer lies in a blend of operational needs, legal protections, and deeply ingrained cultural values.

1. It Provides Structure and Predictability

For many industries, especially those reliant on customer service, logistics, manufacturing, hospitality, or healthcare, a standard work schedule isn’t just tradition, it’s the backbone of operations. Consistent hours allow for precise shift planning, smooth handoffs between teams, predictable service delivery, and easier coordination with vendors, clients, and regulatory requirements. For employees, it can offer a sense of routine that supports personal planning, childcare arrangements, and financial stability. Predictability also reduces scheduling conflicts, which can be vital for industries where coverage is non-negotiable.

2. It Protects Workers from Exploitation

Ironically, the 40-hour week originated as a safeguard against overwork and exploitation. By defining a legal ceiling, it created a clear boundary between standard work and overtime, ensuring employees were compensated for extra hours. In countries or industries with weaker labor laws, removing or altering this limit without strong replacement protections could backfire, opening the door for employers to demand more hours without additional pay. In a worst-case scenario, workers could end up both working longer and earning less. Without thoughtful restructuring, a shift away from fixed hours could morph into a culture of constant “on call” availability, which erodes rest and personal life.

3. Economic and Cultural Inertia

Change is inherently disruptive, and the shift away from the 40-hour model requires not only new policies but new mindsets. Many companies simply don’t know how to design, track, or manage output-based or flexible-hour systems without fearing a drop in productivity. There’s also the influence of entrenched cultural values: in many workplaces, busyness is equated with worth, and long hours are worn as a badge of honor. For some executives, the visible presence of employees during traditional business hours still feels synonymous with accountability, even if metrics tell a different story. This cultural inertia, combined with the cost and complexity of implementing new systems, means many organizations cling to the familiar, even if it’s no longer optimal.

What Should Replace the 40-Hour Week?

Rather than proposing a one-size-fits-all alternative, we suggest multiple models tailored to different industries, business cycles, and individual roles. The idea is to create structures that align more closely with actual work demands, employee well-being, and measurable outputs rather than clinging to a uniform 40-hour template.

1. Output-Based Work

Judge employees by what they produce, not the hours they log. In this model, deliverables and measurable results replace the clock as the primary performance metric. It’s especially effective in creative, tech, and knowledge-based fields where quality and innovation matter more than time spent. For instance, a software developer could be evaluated on the number of successfully deployed features and their quality, rather than the exact hours they were coding. This approach requires clear goal-setting, transparent communication, and trust between employers and employees, but when done right, it can boost motivation and satisfaction.

2. Flexible Hours with Core Availability

Allow workers to choose when they work, as long as they are available for team collaboration during designated core hours (e.g., 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.). This model blends autonomy with accountability, giving people the freedom to manage their energy levels and personal obligations while maintaining a guaranteed overlap for meetings, brainstorming sessions, and decision-making. For example, an employee might start early and finish by mid-afternoon, while another works later in the day, both meeting during the overlap to coordinate effectively.

3. 4-Day Work Weeks or Reduced Hours

As seen in global trials, reducing weekly hours can improve focus, reduce absenteeism, and boost morale. The emphasis here isn’t on doing less work, but on working more efficiently, streamlining processes, minimizing unnecessary meetings, and prioritizing high-impact tasks. Organizations experimenting with 32-hour weeks often find productivity holds steady or even increases. Employees return from their extended weekends more energized and creative, which benefits both output and retention.

4. Seasonal or Cyclical Scheduling

Some industries (e.g., tax preparation, education, retail) naturally have peaks and valleys in workload. Rather than maintaining the same weekly hours year-round, schedules could be adapted to match real demand. During peak seasons, hours might temporarily increase with corresponding pay, followed by lighter schedules in off-peak months to allow for rest and professional development. This model not only aligns labor costs with business needs but also helps prevent burnout by acknowledging natural cycles of intensity and recovery.

Actionable Advice for Professionals and Employers

For Job Seekers and Employees:

• Advocate for flexibility during interviews, and be prepared with specific examples of how you’ve thrived in flexible or non-traditional schedules.

• Track your productivity and present evidence when negotiating, metrics, project outcomes, and client feedback can all help you make your case.

• Prioritize employers who emphasize outcomes over hours, and look for companies whose job descriptions highlight autonomy, remote options, or project-based deliverables.

• Consider contract, remote, or hybrid roles if your industry allows, as these often offer more room to customize your working hours to fit your life.

• Research a company’s track record with flexible work policies by reading employee reviews, connecting with current staff, and reviewing any public statements they’ve made on work-life balance.

• Build skills that enhance your ability to succeed in flexible environments, time management, self-motivation, and digital communication tools are key.

(See our latest Job Listings to find flexible opportunities.)

For Employers and Managers:

• Start with pilot programs to test changes in working hours or scheduling before implementing them company-wide.

• Invest in outcome-tracking tools and performance metrics that focus on quality, efficiency, and results rather than time spent online or in the office.

• Train leaders to manage by results, not presenteeism, and encourage them to reward innovative approaches that increase productivity without increasing hours.

• Survey employees regularly to measure burnout, engagement, and satisfaction with current schedules, and act on that feedback.

• Offer training to help employees adapt to new work models, such as remote collaboration skills or self-management techniques.

• Communicate the goals and benefits of flexible scheduling clearly, so employees understand how changes align with both their needs and the company’s objectives.

Where The Job Shop Stands

At The Job Shop, we believe the future of work is flexible, intentional, and human-centered, shaped by policies and practices that place people and their potential at the center of business strategy. We’ve already seen companies we work with thrive after implementing remote options, four-day work weeks, staggered schedules, and revised performance metrics that focus on outcomes rather than hours.

In our role as a staffing agency, we’ve witnessed firsthand how forward-thinking organizations attract top talent by challenging outdated norms and adopting more adaptive approaches. These businesses tend to see stronger employee engagement, lower turnover, and a more resilient culture capable of weathering economic and industry shifts. For job seekers, aligning with employers who value flexibility often leads to greater career satisfaction and long-term growth.

We encourage both job seekers and employers to actively assess whether their current work structures support or hinder success. That means asking tough questions, running small-scale experiments, and being open to reimagining the traditional work week entirely. Sustainable change happens when both sides of the employment equation are committed to building a system that works for everyone.

For related reading, check out:

• Empower Your Team

• Ways to Deal With Work Stress

• 5 Job Hunt Trends

Final Thoughts: Redefining Success in the Modern Era

The 40-hour work week helped shape the modern workforce, providing a structure that supported economic growth, social stability, and clearer boundaries between professional and personal life for decades. Yet, as industries evolve and societal priorities shift, its time as a universal standard may be drawing to a close. Today’s conversations about the future of work are no longer just about economic output, they are equally about ethics, emotional well-being, equity, and how to design systems that empower people to thrive.

As we collectively reckon with what work should look like, not just economically, but ethically and emotionally, we must prioritize well-being, purpose, and effectiveness over outdated ideals of productivity. That means rethinking the metrics by which we measure success, re-evaluating the assumptions that have governed work for generations, and being willing to experiment with structures that may better serve both organizations and individuals.

Whether you’re a hiring manager, job seeker, entrepreneur, or CEO, the question isn’t just "Is the 40-hour work week outdated?" The deeper, more urgent question is: What does meaningful, sustainable work look like for you, your team, and your organization, and how can you start building it today? The answer will vary by industry, culture, and personal values, but the process begins with open dialogue, willingness to innovate, and a shared commitment to balance and purpose.

Let’s not simply inherit the future of work, let’s design it together.