The reading passage says that many employees want to work four days a week rather

than five days and discusses several benefits of the four-day workweek. However, the listening

audio says absolutely the opposite. Each one doesn’t take into account all the critical factors in

deciding and looks at the problem from particular points of view.

Firstly, the author describes that the companies which provide their employees with the

so-called option would gain increased profits since their employees would make fewer costly

errors. He says the reason is that employees’ work hours would decrease so that they would feel

more rested and alert. The professor contradicts it and says that companies would spend more

money on training and medical insurance for their increased workers, as they need more

employees to do the same amount of work. Moreover, he states that increased employment

would require more offices and computers; thus, the total cost increase dramatically.

Secondly, the passage says that this policy primarily affects the country. It says this could

solve the significant unemployment problem. Since workers would work less in a week under

this policy, some new employees would have to be hired to output the same amount of work as

the time workers were working full time. However, the professor indicates that companies

might force their workers to do the same job in fewer days. So this policy will not only decrease

the unemployment rate but may also make workers find their job unpleasant.

Thirdly, the passage expresses that fewer work hours in a week would allow employees

to spend more time with their families and on their personal interests. However, the professor

agrees with the possibility of improving life quality. Still, he also expresses that this could

reduce their life quality in the long run. he adds that working a shorter week can harm

employees’ chances to advance their careers.