Papers · Articles

The 22-Hour Work Week: Productivity, Automation, and the Redistribution of Time

A. C. Applebee, L. N. Combe · 2026

Abstract

This paper examines the economic, health, social, and environmental evidence for a 22-hour standard work week. We synthesise data from large-scale reduced-hours trials (Iceland, N=2,500; United Kingdom, 61 companies; Microsoft Japan; Perpetual Guardian, New Zealand), productivitycompensation divergence data (Economic Policy Institute), automation displacement research (Frey & Osborne, 2013; OECD, 2016), the Results-Only Work Environment experiment at Best Buy, and meta-analytic health data on overwork mortality (Kivimaki et al., 2015; WHO/ILO, 2021). Our central finding is that the barrier to a sub-25-hour work week is distributional, not technological. Labour productivity has increased approximately 400% since 1950 across OECD countries. Between 1979 and 2023, net productivity in the United States grew 64.7% while hourly compensation for typical workers grew 14.1%. The gap – roughly 50 percentage points of productivity growth – represents value created by workers and captured by capital. Multiple large-scale trials confirm that reducing hours by 20-25% maintains or improves productivity in knowledge and service work. Overwork is associated with 745,000 deaths per year globally. Care work is structurally incompatible with a 40-hour paid work week. Shorter work weeks correlate with lower per-capita carbon emissions. The 22-hour work week is not utopian.

Download PDFCite