On the manager side, I've got several people working 4 days for 80% pay (in Europe, where this is common). If someone approached me wanting 80% for 4 days in the US, I'd do it happily as long as HR/Benefits said it was OK. If someone was a strong performer and wanted 60% for 3 days, same situation: I'd do it happily. (And in doing so, I'd think the company was getting at least a fair deal, if not a net benefit, especially if it kept a reliable, senior, experienced person.)
Less than that and it would be very situational whether I'd think there was enough benefit to the company to cover the overhead of having such a low-percentage employee. There's a cost of coordination and benefits overhead; at some point, the fixed weekly drag of just keeping up with company news and team progress takes over. Very few places would pay 2.5% for 1 hour per week as an extreme example...
I am a manager in Europe too and would (and have) offered people 3 and 4 days a week, for 60%/80% pay, as well.
I think it's a good deal for the company, I mean people are tired on Fridays and tend not to do much, so if you can pay them 80% for their good days, and make them happier and more loyal as a result, I think it's a good deal.
That's fine when I've run my own companies, but when working for others, even when I'm the manager and supposedly have final say, it's been very difficult to convince higher-ups. There's a feeling if they only want to work 4 days a week they must want to slack off, or not really "love" the company enough. A stupid attitude imho.
Comments
On the manager side, I've got several people working 4 days for 80% pay (in Europe, where this is common). If someone approached me wanting 80% for 4 days in the US, I'd do it happily as long as HR/Benefits said it was OK. If someone was a strong performer and wanted 60% for 3 days, same situation: I'd do it happily. (And in doing so, I'd think the company was getting at least a fair deal, if not a net benefit, especially if it kept a reliable, senior, experienced person.)
Less than that and it would be very situational whether I'd think there was enough benefit to the company to cover the overhead of having such a low-percentage employee. There's a cost of coordination and benefits overhead; at some point, the fixed weekly drag of just keeping up with company news and team progress takes over. Very few places would pay 2.5% for 1 hour per week as an extreme example...
I am a manager in Europe too and would (and have) offered people 3 and 4 days a week, for 60%/80% pay, as well.
I think it's a good deal for the company, I mean people are tired on Fridays and tend not to do much, so if you can pay them 80% for their good days, and make them happier and more loyal as a result, I think it's a good deal.
That's fine when I've run my own companies, but when working for others, even when I'm the manager and supposedly have final say, it's been very difficult to convince higher-ups. There's a feeling if they only want to work 4 days a week they must want to slack off, or not really "love" the company enough. A stupid attitude imho.