[debevv]

I'll repeat a comment I saw here on HN some time ago about the productivity issue: if an asteroid were to hit the earth in one month, and there were a team of NASA engineers working to stop it, would you rather say them to work 4 days per week, or 6-7?

[jjcon]

I guess I'd rather live on a planet where most people didn't have to work like their life was in dire jeopardy all the time...

[ojkelly]

Working in a crisis (crunch, etc) mode 100% of the time is not healthy or sustainable.

People can stretch to meet a deadline, or avert a crisis—but they need time to recover afterwards. The extra effort and productivity comes at a cost that needs to be repaid for their health and wellbeing.

The purpose of the 4 day week trials around the world has been to evaluate if there’s a measurable drop in productivity, and it seems overwhelmingly there hasn’t been.

[Chirono]

Stretch the timelines out a bit. Say the asteroid is two years off (a fairly typical startup runway). I would much rather know the planning, decisions and execution of the one thing that could save my life were done by well rested and level headed individuals, not stressed out sleep deprived people more prone to missing details and making mistakes.

[onion2k]

I make web apps for a living. Why would anyone use a human-race saving, rocket-science complexity, literally life and death situation analogy to determine my working conditions?

I mean, if those scientists are successful they'll be getting a congressional medal of honor, millions of dollars in speaking fees, and probably given their choice of job in space science afterwards. Am I getting those things for pushing some HTML?

[Philip-J-Fry]

I'd like to see them round up as many engineers as possible and rota them on a healthy 24/7 schedule. There comes a point where you just can't be productive for 7 days a week. If 4 days is proven to be productive, then put them on a 4 day rota. Otherwise, the status quo of 5 days.

Some of the greatest ideas are conceived when away from work with just time to think on your own. We always need breaks and rest.

[aeze]

6-7 for the month, then take the next several months (or longer) off.

[idlehand]

Most people have working lives spanning decades, so maximizing the output of any one month is generally counterproductive.

However, if you have a well-rested, happy and productive team that has adequate time for leisure and recreation, you can turn up the pace for those exceptional months that are really make or break.

But if you try to get people to run at that pace continuously, you'll get a lot of resignations and a few heart attacks at 50.

[lmm]

4 days/week, and I'd want them to be getting good catered food and the best sleeping quarters money can buy. Not working when you're tired and fucking up makes a lot more difference than squeezing out a little more.

[notacop31337]

> comparing planetary extinction to shipping widgets

[dilyevsky]

Zero. Everyone is going to die anyway