Yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod: gwybodaeth gan bartneriaeth gymdeithasol

1. Ym mis Ebrill 2023, sefydlwyd Gweithgor dan nawdd Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu i ystyried materion sy’n ymwneud ag wythnos waith 4 diwrnod.

2. Mae’r Gweithgor yn ymateb partneriaeth gymdeithasol i alwadau am beilot o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod mewn gwasanaethau cyhoeddus datganoledig. Mae'r Gweithgor yn gyfrwng i archwilio'r goblygiadau ymarferol, y goblygiadau o ran pobl a’r goblygiadau o ran darparu gwasanaethau.

3. Fe wnaeth y Gweithgor gwrdd ar wyth achlysur a sefydlodd bedwar is-grŵp i fwrw ymlaen â ffrydiau gwaith penodol. Cafodd y Gweithgor gonsensws ar ei ddiffiniad o wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, gan gynnal cyfres o drafodaethau manwl a chasglu tystiolaeth gan ymarferwyr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, academyddion a Llywodraeth yr Alban.

4. Daeth y Gweithgor i’r casgliad bod yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn ffordd flaengar ac arloesol o weithio sy’n haeddu cael ei ystyried ymhellach. Ar sail y dystiolaeth a gafodd, ynghyd â’i drafodaethau ei hun, mae’r Gweithgor yn rhybuddio yn erbyn cynllun peilot o’r brig i lawr sy’n cael ei osod ar gyflogwyr a gweithwyr. Mae’r Gweithgor yn credu’n gryf bod rhaid i unrhyw gynllun peilot sy’n cael ei roi ar waith yn llwyddiannus fod yn seiliedig ar y canlynol:

1. presenoldeb cyflogwr neu gyflogwyr sy’n barod i dreialu’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod; a bod:
2. y cyflogwyr hynny’n trafod, yn ymgynghori ac yn negodi gyda’u gweithlu a’u hundebau llafur, y gwaith o gynllunio, gweithredu a gwerthuso unrhyw gynllun peilot.

5. Prif argymhelliad y Gweithgor yw bod cyflogwyr yn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig, undebau llafur a Llywodraeth Cymru yn gweithio drwy Gyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu, gyda'r nod o nodi sefydliad neu sefydliadau sy'n barod i dreialu'r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, gan adeiladu ar yr hyn a ddysgwyd yn yr adroddiad hwn a natur amrywiol gwasanaethau cyhoeddus sy'n cynnwys gweithrediadau 24/7.

6. Mae'r Gweithgor yn ymwybodol bod unrhyw symudiadau i wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn cael eu gwneud yn deg ac mewn ffyrdd sy’n osgoi creu gweithlu dwy haen lle nad yw pawb yn elwa ar wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn yr un ffordd. Yn ogystal â’r casgliadau a’r argymhellion a nodir yn yr Adroddiad hwn, mae’r Gweithgor wedi datblygu set o egwyddorion y dylid eu hystyried wrth gynllunio a chyflwyno unrhyw gynllun peilot yn y dyfodol.

Gweithgor Wythnos Waith 4 Diwrnod

7. Cafodd y Gweithgor ar yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod ei sefydlu ym mis Ebrill 2023 ac roedd yn dilyn trafodaeth a chytundeb yng nghyfarfod Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ar 27 Ionawr 2023 ac yng nghyfarfod Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ar 29 Mawrth 2023.

8. Mae gan y Gweithgor gylch gwaith eang a nodir yn ei Gylch Gorchwyl. Mae’r rhain yn cynnwys y canlynol:

• Ystyried cryfder y sail resymegol a’r sylfaen dystiolaeth sylfaenol ar gyfer cynllun peilot 4 diwrnod yn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig.
• Gwerthuso’r cyfleoedd, y risgiau a’r rhwystrau sy’n gysylltiedig â chynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod.
• Gwneud argymhellion ar ba mor ymarferol, addas a derbyniol yw cynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod mewn gwasanaeth cyhoeddus datganoledig neu wasanaethau yng Nghymru.

9. Mae’r Gweithgor yn cael ei gadeirio gan Reg Kilpatrick (Llywodraeth Cymru) ac mae ganddo gynrychiolwyr o Lywodraeth Cymru; Unsain, GMB, ac undebau llafur PCS; cynghorau Powys, Sir y Fflint a Bro Morgannwg; Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru, Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Hywel Dda ac Ymddiriedolaeth GIG Felindre.

Pam sefydlwyd y Gweithgor

10. Roedd y galwadau am gynllun peilot o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig yn sbardun allweddol ar gyfer ffurfio’r Gweithgor.

11. Dechreuodd hyn gyda Dadl mewn Cyfarfod Llawn ar yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod a gynhaliwyd ym mis Medi 2021. Roedd cynnig yr wrthblaid (a drechwyd) yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i sefydlu cynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yng Nghymru; roedd gwelliant y Llywodraeth (a gariwyd) yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i wneud y canlynol:

“Ystyried y cynnydd a wneir drwy gynlluniau peilot mewn gwledydd eraill ac archwilio’r gwersi y gall Cymru eu dysgu.”

12. Cafodd rhagor o alwadau am gynlluniau peilot eu gwneud mewn adroddiad a gomisiynwyd ac a gyhoeddwyd gan Gomisiynydd Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol yn 2022. Fe wnaeth hyn ennyn diddordeb y wasg a diddordeb gwleidyddol, er enghraifft Cais peilot wythnos waith pedwar diwrnod ar gyfer gweithwyr Cymru - BBC News.

13. Ym mis Ionawr 2023, cyhoeddodd Pwyllgor Deisebau’r Senedd adroddiad ar yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod a oedd yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i wneud y canlynol:

“Datblygu cynllun peilot i leihau oriau gwaith o fewn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig, heb leihau cyflogau gweithwyr. Dylai’r cynllun peilot hwn gael ei dargedu at rannau o’r sector cyhoeddus datganoledig lle mae’n fwy realistig disgwyl na fydd cynhyrchiant yn cael ei effeithio’n negyddol gan leihau oriau gwaith staff…… [a bod] … asesiad cadarn a diduedd o’r cynllun peilot hwn yn cael ei gynnal.”

14. Cyfeiriwyd at y bwriad i ffurfio’r Gweithgor Wythnos Waith 4 diwrnod yn ymateb ysgrifenedig Llywodraeth Cymru i adroddiad y Pwyllgor Deisebau; ac wedi hynny, cyhoeddwyd sefydlu’r Gweithgor yn y ddadl yn y cyfarfod llawn ar adroddiad y Pwyllgor Deisebau a gynhaliwyd ar 10 Mai 2023.

15. Mae’r Gweithgor yn fecanwaith ar gyfer delio â mater cymhleth, lle mae rhywfaint o ddisgwyliadau ar Lywodraeth Cymru i weithredu, ond lle mae modd herio’r dystiolaeth, mae’r goblygiadau’n ansicr, ac mae’r math o ddarpariaeth yn aneglur. Mae’r Gweithgor yn adlewyrchu dymuniad i ystyried y materion hyn mewn partneriaeth gymdeithasol.

16. Mae’r Gweithgor wedi cyfarfod wyth gwaith yn ystod 2023 ac eleni hyd yma. Cynhaliwyd y cyfarfodydd ar 26 Ebrill, 26 Mai, 6 Gorffennaf, 28 Medi, 14 Tachwedd, 15 Rhagfyr, 16 Ionawr, a 22 Chwefror. Mae pob cyfarfod wedi bod yn adeiladol ac yn gynhyrchiol.

17. Mae’r Gweithgor wedi hwyluso trafodaethau ac allbynnau sydd wedi hybu dealltwriaeth o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod a’r cyfleoedd, yr heriau, y risgiau a’r manteision yng nghyd-destun gwasanaethau cyhoeddus datganoledig. Ceir crynodeb o bob cyfarfod a’i ganlyniadau allweddol isod.

Cyfarfod 26 Ebrill 2023

18. Roedd cyfarfod cyntaf y Gweithgor yn canolbwyntio ar gytuno ar ddull eang o weithio a thrafod a mireinio Cylch Gorchwyl y Gweithgor. Nododd y Gweithgor fod angen dod i ddealltwriaeth ar y cyd o’i ddiffiniad o wythnos waith 4 diwrnod a sefydlu ffrydiau gwaith i fframio a llywio rhaglen waith y Gweithgor.

19. Bu’r Gweithgor hefyd yn trafod ‘Papur Trosolwg’ a gynhyrchwyd gan swyddogion Llywodraeth Cymru. Roedd y papur yn briffio’r Gweithgor ar y materion cymhleth a rhyng-gysylltiedig sy’n berthnasol i archwiliad y Gweithgor o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod. Roedd y papur hefyd yn crynhoi gweithgarwch sy’n gysylltiedig ag wythnos waith 4 diwrnod ar lefel y DU ac yn rhyngwladol.

Cyfarfod 26 Mai 2023

20. Cynhaliodd y Gweithgor drafodaethau sylweddol ar ddiffinio’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod a nodi a thrafod ffrydiau gwaith arfaethedig.

21. Bu’r Gweithgor yn trafod ac yn ystyried diffiniadau amgen o wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, gan sicrhau consensws ar ddiffiniad sy’n seiliedig ar y model sy’n cael ei alw’n ‘100-80-100’, ond nid yn union yr un fath.

22. Mae’r model ‘100-80-100’ yn dynodi sefyllfa lle mae gweithwyr yn derbyn cyflog o 100% am 80% o’u horiau cytundebol arferol, yn gyfnewid am ymrwymiad i gynnal cynhyrchiant o 100% o leiaf.

23. Roedd y Gweithgor yn teimlo bod angen addasu’r pwyslais ar gynhyrchiant yn y model ‘100-80-100’ traddodiadol i fodloni gofynion cynnil sefydliadau’r sector cyhoeddus. Yn benodol, teimlai y byddai ‘darparu gwasanaethau’ yn ddangosydd mwy priodol na ‘chynhyrchiant’. 

24. Cytunodd y Gweithgor ar y diffiniad isod i ddisgrifio wythnos waith 4 diwrnod:

“Mae wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn golygu peidio â lleihau cyflog na cholli buddion, ynghyd â gostyngiad o 20% i oriau arferol y contract, tra’n cynnal y lefelau presennol o ddarparu gwasanaethau.”

25. Cytunodd y Gweithgor y dylai ei raglen waith gael ei lunio’n seiliedig ar bedair ffrwd waith eang y cytunwyd arnynt. Dyma nhw:

1. Goblygiadau i Weithwyr
2. Goblygiadau i Gyflogwyr a Darparu Gwasanaethau
3. Tegwch, Ecwiti a Chanfyddiad
4. Fframwaith Dylunio a Gwerthuso Cynllun Peilot.

Cyfarfod 6 Gorffennaf 2023

26. Cytunodd y Gweithgor y dylid sefydlu is-grwpiau i fwrw ymlaen â’r ffrydiau gwaith y cytunwyd arnynt yng nghyfarfod mis Mai ac ystyried sut gallai ei ddull gweithredu ar gyfer wythnos waith 4 diwrnod gysylltu ag egwyddorion ‘Un Gwasanaeth Cyhoeddus Cymru’.

27. Cytunodd y Gweithgor ar gadeiryddion ar gyfer pob un o’r is-grwpiau a dull gweithredu ar gyfer eu haelodaeth. Cytunodd y Gweithgor y byddai cadeiryddion yr is-grwpiau yn cael eu tynnu o’r Gweithgor, fel y byddai llawer o aelodau’r is-grwpiau.

28. Roedd y Gweithgor hefyd yn cydnabod natur y dasg a byddai'r ymrwymiad amser yn golygu bod angen i bob is-grŵp gael ei ategu gan aelodau o'r tu allan i'r Gweithgor. Roedd y Gweithgor o’r farn y byddai hyn hefyd yn helpu i ehangu’r ystod o syniadau, gwybodaeth a phrofiad sy’n gysylltiedig â’r gwaith hwn.

Cyfarfod 28 Medi 2023

29. Cafodd y Gweithgor yr wybodaeth ddiweddaraf gan bob un o’r is-grwpiau ac roedd yn pwyso a mesur y cynnydd. Cytunodd y Gweithgor fod hwn yn ddarn cymhleth o waith, gyda llawer o ryngddibyniaethau a’r potensial ar gyfer rhai canlyniadau anfwriadol – gan anwybyddu’r manteision posibl sylweddol.

30. Daeth y Gweithgor i’r casgliad bod angen mwy o amser i gwblhau ei waith a byddai’r Gweithgor a’i is-grwpiau yn parhau i gyfarfod yn ystod yr hydref ac yn chwarter cyntaf 2024.

Cyfarfod 14 Tachwedd 2023

31. Myfyriodd y Gweithgor ar y drafodaeth yng Nghyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ar 8 Tachwedd a derbyniodd wybodaeth ar weithgareddau’r is-grwpiau.

32. Nododd y Gweithgor y llyfrgell dystiolaeth yr oedd swyddogion wedi’i chasglu. Fe wnaethant hefyd drafod ffyrdd y gellid crynhoi rhai o’r negeseuon allweddol. Cytunodd y Grŵp i ystyried a ellid defnyddio offeryn deallusrwydd artiffisial at y diben hwn.

Cyfarfod 15 Rhagfyr 2023

33. Cafodd y Gweithgor dystiolaeth gan Dr David Frayne, a rannodd ei wybodaeth a’i brofiad fel Aelod Cyswllt o felin drafod Autonomy, fel cyfrannwr at ‘Fap trywydd wythnos waith fyrrach Cymru’ ar gyfer Comisiynydd Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol, ac wrth gynnal ymchwil ansoddol ar gynllun peilot 4 diwrnod y sector preifat a gynhaliwyd yn y DU.

34. Trafododd y Gweithgor weithgarwch yr is-grwpiau. Bu hefyd yn trafod amserlenni a oedd yn arwain at gyfarfod Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ym mis Mawrth a’r dull gweithredu ar gyfer cyflwyno canfyddiadau’r Gweithgor.

Cyfarfod 16 Ionawr 2024

35. Derbyniodd y Gweithgor dystiolaeth gan Ruth Lewellyn, Cyfarwyddwr Cynorthwyol Cartrefi Cymoedd Merthyr. Rhoddodd Ruth gyflwyniad i’r Grŵp ar brofiad Cartrefi Cymoedd Merthyr o weithredu wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, y gwersi a ddysgwyd a’r canlyniadau.

36. Adolygodd y Gweithgor ei drafodaethau hyd yma a thrafododd ei gyfeiriad a’i ddull o lunio ei adroddiad terfynol.

Cyfarfod 22 Chwefror 2024

37. Yn ei gyfarfod olaf, fe wnaeth y Gweithgor gymryd tystiolaeth gan swyddogion Llywodraeth yr Alban (mae Llywodraeth yr Alban wedi cyhoeddi cynllun peilot yn y sector cyhoeddus ar sail treial presennol o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod sy’n cael ei gynnal gan South of Scotland Enterprise Agency).

38. Bu’r Gweithgor hefyd yn trafod drafft o’i Adroddiad Terfynol a’i Argymhellion cyn eu cwblhau a’u cyflwyno i Gyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ym mis Mawrth.

39. Sefydlodd y Gweithgor bedwar is-grŵp, pob un yn cael ei gadeirio gan aelod o’r Gweithgor fel a ganlyn:

• Goblygiadau i Weithwyr: Sharon Carney (Cyngor Sir y Fflint)
• Goblygiadau i Gyflogwyr a Darparu Gwasanaethau: Bethan Thomas (Unsain)
• Tegwch, Ecwiti a Chanfyddiad: Bethan Thomas (Unsain)
• Dylunio a Gwerthuso Cynllun Peilot: Amanda Jenkins (Ymddiriedolaeth GIG Felindre)

40. Roedd y Gweithgor yn bwriadu i’r is-grwpiau gyfarfod dros fisoedd yr haf i gynnal momentwm. Fodd bynnag, er gwaethaf ymdrechion gorau i gynnull yr is-grwpiau, roedd argaeledd aelodau dros dymor gwyliau'r haf yn her anorchfygol.

41. Cynhaliwyd cyfarfodydd cyntaf yr is-grwpiau ym mis Medi 2023. Yr eithriad oedd yr is-grŵp Dylunio a Gwerthuso Cynllun Peilot, ar ôl i’r Gweithgor benderfynu na ddylai'r is-grŵp hwn gyfarfod oni bai fod penderfyniad cadarn wedi’i wneud i fwrw ymlaen â chynllun peilot.

42. Roedd cyfarfodydd cychwynnol yr is-grwpiau yn canolbwyntio ar ymgyfarwyddo’r aelodau hynny o’r tu allan i’r Gweithgor â natur y dasg. Bu’r cyfarfodydd cychwynnol hefyd yn trafod ac yn mireinio’r Cylch Gorchwyl ar gyfer pob is-grŵp.

43. Fe wnaeth bob is-grŵp ddelio â’i waith yn y ffordd a oedd yn gweddu orau iddynt hwy – gyda rhai’n cyfarfod yn amlach ac yn fwy rheolaidd nag eraill. Roedd achos hefyd lle cyfarfu dau is-grŵp ar y cyd, gyda’r ‘Cymhlethdodau i Weithwyr’ a’r is-grwpiau ‘Cymhlethdodau i Gyflogwyr a Darparu Gwasanaethau’ yn cynnal gweithdy hanner diwrnod ar y cyd ar Ionawr 11, 2024.

44. Cyfarfu Cadeiryddion yr is-grwpiau ar wahân o bryd i’w gilydd i bwyso a mesur y gwaith ar draws yr is-grwpiau, i bennu camau gweithredu, ac i gadw llinellau cyfathrebu ar agor er mwyn lleihau’r risg o ddyblygu neu hepgor. Roedd gwaith yr is-grwpiau, ynghyd â thrafodaethau’r Gweithgor, yn sail i gasgliadau ac argymhellion yr Adroddiad hwn.

45. Mae’r daith a gymerwyd gan y Gweithgor (a’i is-grwpiau) dros yr 11 mis diwethaf wedi bod yn daith ddysgu. Drwy’r dystiolaeth a gafwyd gan ymarferwyr, academyddion a Llywodraeth yr Alban, mae’r Gweithgor wedi darganfod ac archwilio haenau o gymhlethdod a chanlyniadau buddiol nad ydynt bob amser yn amlwg ar lefel yr wyneb.

46. Er bod amrywiaeth barn yn y Gweithgor, roedd y gwahaniaethau’n bennaf ar bwyntiau o bwyslais, yn hytrach nag ar bwyntiau o egwyddor. Er enghraifft, nid oedd unrhyw aelod o’r Gweithgor yn gwrthwynebu cysyniad yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod mewn egwyddor. Fodd bynnag, roedd amrywiaeth o safbwyntiau o hyd ynghylch sut a phryd y gellid gweithredu wythnos waith 4 diwrnod a’r amgylchiadau a fyddai’n ofynnol er mwyn i hyn ddigwydd yn effeithiol.

47. Daeth y sefyllfa cyllid cyhoeddus heriol yn nodwedd gynyddol o drafodaethau. Roedd hyn o ran yr effaith ar led band sefydliadau i ystyried treialu wythnos waith 4 diwrnod ac i edrych ar faterion sy’n ymwneud ag ail-ddylunio swyddi a'r llwyth gwaith gan fod llai o oriau ar gael, ond hefyd pryderon ynglŷn â’r canfyddiad o sut y byddai symudiadau o’r fath yn gweithio gyda’r cyhoedd yn gyffredinol ar hyn o bryd.

48. Yn ei drafodaethau ysgogol, roedd y Gweithgor yn gallu rhannu’r safbwyntiau gwahanol hyn, herio tybiaethau, a ffurfio consensws eang ar ei gasgliadau a’i argymhellion. Wrth wneud hynny, cyflawnodd y Gweithgor ei amcan i ystyried yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod drwy lens partneriaeth gymdeithasol a rhoi ystyriaeth wrthrychol, gadarn a difrifol i’r mater.

49. Daeth y Gweithgor i’r casgliadau canolog canlynol:

(i) Nid yw'r Gweithgor yn cytuno â'r rhai sy'n dadlau mai cysyniad delfrydol ond anaddas yn sylfaenol yw’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, ac na ellir byth ei weithredu ar raddfa fawr. Fodd bynnag, mae'r Gweithgor hefyd yn rhybuddio yn erbyn y farn gwbl groes, sy'n awgrymu mai'r ewyllys i ddarparu'r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod ar gyflymder a graddfa yw'r cyfan sydd ei angen. Nid yw’r naill safbwynt na’r llall yn llwyddo i daflu goleuni ar gymhlethdod y materion na natur y dulliau gweithredu posibl. Mae'r Gweithgor yn credu bod fframio deuaidd o'r ddadl rhwng y rhai sy’n hybu a’r rhai sy’n gwrthwynebu wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn ddiangen ac yn rhy syml.

(ii) Mae’r Gweithgor yn credu bod yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn ffordd flaengar ac arloesol o weithio, sy’n haeddu ystyriaeth bellach gan gyflogwyr yn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig a’u hundebau llafur cydnabyddedig. Mae’r Gweithgor o’r farn bod manteision clir i wythnos waith 4 diwrnod (gan dybio ei bod yn ganlyniad ymgynghori a negodi rhwng cyflogwyr a gweithwyr).

(iii) Ar sail y dystiolaeth a ddarparwyd i’r Gweithgor a’i drafodaethau, mae’r Gweithgor yn pennu’r manteision i wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, gan gynnwys:

• Cydbwysedd gwell rhwng bywyd a gwaith: Mae oriau contract byrrach, heb leihau cyflog, yn newid yn ffafriol y cydbwysedd rhwng cyfran yr amser y mae gweithwyr yn ei dreulio yn y gwaith, gan alluogi gweithwyr i gydbwyso eu cyfrifoldebau yn y gwaith â’u bywyd y tu allan i’r gwaith.
• Llai o risg y bydd gweithwyr yn gorflino ac felly iechyd corfforol a meddyliol gwell: Mae oriau gwaith byrrach yn helpu i atal gorflino ac yn rhoi mwy o amser i weithwyr orffwys a gwella, gyda llai o flinder a lefelau is o straen.
• Recriwtio gwell, cadw staff a sicrhau boddhad mewn swydd: Mae mabwysiadu wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn darparu ar gyfer cynnig unigryw sy'n gosod y cyflogwr ar wahân i eraill. Mae hefyd yn rhoi cynnydd effeithiol i weithwyr yn y gyfradd tâl fesul awr (gan eu bod yn gweithio llai o oriau heb leihau cyflog). Nodwyd yng nghyfarfodydd y Gweithgor sut roedd cyflogwyr wedi defnyddio’r ddau ffactor hyn i helpu i recriwtio a chadw gweithwyr.
• Mwy o gynwysoldeb: Roedd y Gweithgor o’r farn y gallai gostyngiad sylweddol yn oriau arferol y contract gael effaith drawsnewidiol ar y gweithlu, gan arwain at fwy o gynhwysiant i weithwyr sydd â chyfrifoldebau gofalu yn benodol.
• Gwell cynhyrchiant a pherfformiad sefydliadol: Clywodd y Gweithgor sut roedd y manteision uchod wedi cyfrannu at lefelau gwell o gynhyrchiant a gostyngiadau mewn absenoldebau salwch. Roedd y Gweithgor yn cydnabod y gydberthynas rhwng llesiant a chynhyrchiant, gan gydnabod bod gweithwyr sydd wedi cael digon o orffwys, sy’n hapus ac sydd â lefelau uchel o foddhad yn eu swydd yn debygol o fod yn fwy effeithiol yn eu rolau.

(iv) Mae’r Gweithgor yn cydnabod bod risgiau posibl i gyflogwyr, i ddarparu gwasanaethau ac i weithwyr. Fodd bynnag, mae’r Gweithgor yn mynegi eu bod yn hyderus y gellir rheoli a lliniaru’r risgiau hynny, os caiff Wythnos Waith 4 Diwrnod ei chynllunio’n briodol, ac os caiff ei chynllunio a’i gweithredu drwy ymgynghori’n llawn â gweithwyr a’u cynrychiolwyr undeb llafur.

(v) Mae’r Gweithgor yn ystyried bod y risgiau i’w rheoli a’u lliniaru yn cynnwys y canlynol:

• Risgiau cydraddoldeb: Y risg o ehangu’r anghydraddoldebau presennol rhwng grwpiau o weithwyr, hynny yw gweithwyr swyddfa o’u cymharu â’r rheini sydd ar y rheng flaen, yn enwedig mewn gweithrediadau 24/7. O ystyried gwahanol nodweddion rhywedd, hil a nodweddion eraill gwahanol weithluoedd yn y sector cyhoeddus, mae potensial am effeithiau negyddol a gwahaniaethol ar nodweddion gwarchodedig penodol. Mewn rhai amgylchiadau, efallai y bydd hawliau gweithwyr i fudd-daliadau lles hefyd yn cael eu rhoi mewn perygl.
• Risgiau ariannol: Y risg y gallai fod angen i gyflogwyr dalu costau recriwtio gweithwyr ychwanegol os oes angen y rhain i lenwi bylchau yn y ddarpariaeth o wasanaethau ar ôl lleihau oriau gwaith. Er enghraifft, dywedodd un aelod o’r Gweithgor y byddai gweithredu wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn eu sefydliad nhw’n golygu y byddai angen recriwtio 179 o swyddi cyfwerth ag amser llawn ychwanegol er mwyn parhau i ddarparu gwasanaethau.
• Oriau heb eu datgan a risgiau’n ymwneud â dwysedd gwaith: Y risg o gynnydd mewn oriau gwaith heb eu datgan, wrth i weithwyr geisio gosod yr un llwyth gwaith mewn nifer llai o oriau gwaith. Neu, mae’r risg o gynnydd mewn dwysedd gwaith, wrth i weithwyr wasgu’r un llwyth gwaith i nifer llai o oriau.
• Risgiau datblygu’r gweithlu: Y potensial i'r amser a neilltuwyd ar gyfer dysgu a datblygu gael ei wasgu gan gyfuniad o bwysau’n ymwneud â llwyth gwaith a llai o amser gweithio.  
• Risgiau o ran darparu gwasanaethau: Y pryder eang ynghylch sut y gellid cynnal gwasanaethau 24/7 wrth leihau oriau gwaith a pheidio â chynyddu nifer y staff, ynghyd â’r tensiwn posibl rhwng canolbwyntio ar arbed amser er mwyn cyflawni’r gwaith a gwasanaethau cyhoeddus sy’n canolbwyntio ar bobl lle mae ansawdd y gwasanaeth yn aml yn dibynnu ar yr amser llafur a neilltuwyd. Er enghraifft, bu’r Gweithgor yn meddwl am yr arfer o ‘wasgu ymweliadau’ mewn gofal cymdeithasol, lle mae gan weithwyr gofal cartref ormod o ymweliadau i’w gwneud mewn un diwrnod, sy’n golygu nad yw cleientiaid yn cael y gofal o ansawdd y mae ganddynt hawl iddo.
• Risgiau personol: Y posibilrwydd o gostau personol ‘cudd’ am oriau gwaith byrrach, fel gwresogi cartref yn ystod oriau a fyddai fel arall wedi cael eu treulio yn y gwaith neu gostau gwneud gweithgareddau hamdden yn ystod yr amser rhydd ychwanegol. Yn fwy difrifol, roedd yn cydnabod y gall y gweithle fod yn lloches ac yn seibiant i rai gweithwyr am wahanol resymau.
• Risgiau rheoli tîm: Mwy o risiau o ran rheoli timau sy’n gweithio amserlenni shifft fwy cymhleth i gynnal y ddarpariaeth. Gall cynnal cyfathrebu ac ymgysylltu fod yn fwy heriol ac efallai y bydd rhai gweithwyr hyd yn oed yn teimlo dan bwysau i gadw mewn cysylltiad pan nad ydynt yn y gwaith.

(vi) Mae’r Gweithgor o’r farn y dylid osgoi cynllun peilot o’r brig i lawr sy’n cael ei orfodi ar gyflogwyr a gweithwyr. Er mwyn gwireddu’r buddion yn effeithiol ac er mwyn rheoli risgiau gweithredu, mae’n hanfodol bod unrhyw gynllun peilot yn cynnwys cyflogwyr parod a bod y cyflogwyr hynny wedi ymrwymo i weithio gyda gweithwyr ac undebau llafur, gan eu cynnwys yn llawn yn y gwaith o gynllunio, gweithredu a gwerthuso unrhyw gynllun peilot.

(vii) Mae’r Gweithgor yn cydnabod bod unrhyw gynllun peilot yn annhebygol o gynnwys pob gweithlu sector cyhoeddus datganoledig a phob gweithiwr yn y gweithluoedd hynny. Yn anochel, byddai rhai carfanau o weithwyr a chyflogwyr yn cael eu cynnwys, ond ni fyddai eraill yn cael eu cynnwys. Fodd bynnag, mae’r Gweithgor yn rhybuddio yn erbyn dull gweithredu a fyddai’n creu rhwyg clir rhwng ‘y rhai sy’n cael gweithio’r wythnos 4 diwrnod’ a’r ‘rhai sydd ddim yn cael gweithio’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod’, gyda gweithwyr rheng flaen, er enghraifft, yn enwedig y rhai hynny sydd mewn swyddi shifft a swyddi sy’n delio â’r cyhoedd, yn cael eu gwahardd yn barhaol.

(viii) Mae’r Gweithgor yn amheus ynghylch pa mor ddefnyddiol yw cynllun peilot diogel, hynny yw cynllun peilot sydd ond wedi’i dargedu at swyddogaethau sy’n hawdd eu haddasu ar gyfer wythnos waith 4 diwrnod. Er y gallai dull o’r fath gynnig ffordd hawdd, heb llawer o risgiau, o ddarparu cynllun peilot, mae’r Gweithgor yn teimlo na fydd yn darparu llawer o dystiolaeth yn y pen draw o’r gallu i dyfu i amgylcheddau gwaith ehangach. Yn ychwanegol, mae perygl y gallai dull o’r fath beri rhwyg.

50. Mae’r Gweithgor yn gwneud yr argymhellion canlynol ar sail y casgliadau uchod:

Argymhelliad 1

Dylai cyflogwyr yn y sector cyhoeddus, undebau llafur a Llywodraeth Cymru, drwy Gyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu, ddyblu eu hymdrechion i ganfod sefydliad neu sefydliadau sy'n barod i dreialu'r Wythnos Waith 4 Diwrnod.

Argymhelliad 2

Os bydd unrhyw gynllun peilot o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn cael ei roi ar waith mewn gwasanaeth cyhoeddus datganoledig, dylid ystyried yr wyth egwyddor ganlynol:

1. Ni ddylid gorfodi cynllun(iau) peilot a rhaid iddynt fod yn ganlyniad cyflogwr neu gyflogwyr parod a’u gweithluoedd.
2. Rhaid i’r cynllun(iau) peilot fod yn ganlyniad ymgynghori a negodi rhwng y cyflogwr/cyflogwyr perthnasol, gweithwyr a’u hundeb(au) llafur, wedi’u dylunio, eu gweithredu a’u gwerthuso mewn partneriaeth gymdeithasol lawn.
3. Ni ddylai cynllun(iau) peilot roi telerau ac amodau gweithwyr a/neu eu hawliau lles mewn perygl.
4. Rhaid i’r cynllun(iau) peilot ganiatáu ar gyfer y graddau mwyaf posibl o sybsidiaredd ac amrywiad o ran dyluniad, gweithrediad ac amserlen y cynllun peilot, gan adlewyrchu anghenion ac amgylchiadau lleol.
5. Rhaid i’r cynllun(iau) peilot nodi’r canlyniadau a fwriadwyd yn glir a disgwyliadau’r cyflogwr a’r gweithwyr y cytunwyd arnynt ar y cyd.
6. Rhaid i degwch a chyfiawnder fod yn sail i'r cynllun(iau) peilot ac ni ddylent wreiddio anghydraddoldebau presennol na dod yn ffynhonnell newydd o rwyg.
7. Rhaid i gynllun(iau) peilot beidio â mandadu na gwneud rhagdybiaethau ynghylch sut y dylai gweithwyr dreulio oriau rhydd newydd nad ydynt yn rhai gwaith.
8. Ni ddylai’r cynllun(iau) peilot gael eu cynnal heb ddigon o amser paratoi – mae hyn yn angenrheidiol er mwyn galluogi cyflogwyr a gweithwyr i baratoi eu hunain, ac ar gyfer cyfathrebu â defnyddwyr gwasanaethau a rhanddeiliaid.

Argymhelliad 3

Ystyried manteision a chostau cynnwys arbenigedd allanol yn y gwaith o ddylunio a gwerthuso unrhyw gynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn y dyfodol.

Argymhelliad 4

Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru a Phartneriaid Cymdeithasol nodi diffiniad y Gweithgor hwn bod “wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn golygu peidio â lleihau cyflog na cholli buddion, ynghyd â gostyngiad o 20% i oriau cytundebol arferol, wrth gynnal y lefelau presennol o ddarparu gwasanaethau”, gan hefyd gydnabod y gall sefydliadau amrywio’r diffiniad hwnnw mewn ffyrdd sy’n gweithio iddyn nhw.

Argymhelliad 5

Dylid ystyried defnyddio’r term ‘wythnos waith fyrrach’ neu ‘ddiwrnod gwaith byrrach’ yn hytrach nag ‘wythnos waith 4 diwrnod’. Mae’r olaf yn cael ei ddefnyddio’n eang gan ffynonellau gwleidyddol a'r cyfryngau, ond efallai na fydd yn helpu dealltwriaeth y cyhoedd. Mae’n aml yn cael ei gamddehongli’n eang ac yn cael ei gymryd yn ei ystyr llythrennol i olygu cau ar un o 5 diwrnod yr wythnos waith draddodiadol, sydd o bosibl yn gallu arwain at bryderon anghywir ynglŷn â mynediad at wasanaethau a’r ddarpariaeth o wasanaethau.

1. Cefndir

1.1 Mae Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu yn strwythur partneriaeth gymdeithasol deirochrog sy’n cynnwys Llywodraeth Cymru, undebau llafur a chyflogwyr ar draws y gwasanaethau cyhoeddus datganoledig yng Nghymru.

1.2 Mae’r Gweithgor hwn ar yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod wedi’i sefydlu yn dilyn trafodaeth a chytundeb yng Nghyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu (27 Ionawr) ac yng nghyfarfod Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu (29 Mawrth). Mae’r Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol yn gyfrifol am gyflawni rhaglen waith Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ac mae wedi sefydlu’r gweithgor hwn i ddod ag arbenigedd perthnasol ynghyd.

1.3 Yn gyffredinol, mae wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn golygu wythnos 32 awr heb golli unrhyw gyflog na buddion. Mae galwadau wedi bod am gynllun peilot o’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig yng Nghymru. Mae’r rhain wedi cynnwys y canlynol:

• Adroddiad Pwyllgor Deisebau’r Senedd ar ôl casglu tystiolaeth (O Bump i Bedwar?
  P-06-1247 Cefnogi treialon wythnos waith pedwar diwrnod yng Nghymru - senedd.cymru).
• Gwaith a gomisiynwyd ac a gyhoeddwyd gan Gomisiynydd Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol (Dyfodol Addas i Gymru Map trywydd wythnos waith fyrrach).
• Dadl y Senedd yn y Cyfarfod Llawn.

1.4 Mae Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu wedi penderfynu bod yr wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn arwain at ystod o ystyriaethau y mae’n rhaid eu harchwilio mewn partneriaeth gymdeithasol.

2. Pwrpas a chylch gwaith

2.1 Sefydlir y Gweithgor hwn ar sail Gorchwyl a Gorffen.  Bydd yn darparu ei adroddiad terfynol a’i argymhelliad i gyfarfod Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ym mis Tachwedd 2023.

2.2 Bydd y Gweithgor yn gwneud y canlynol:

• Ystyried cryfder y sail resymegol a’r sylfaen dystiolaeth sylfaenol ar gyfer cynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn y sector cyhoeddus datganoledig.
• Diffinio ei ddealltwriaeth o wythnos waith 4 diwrnod.
• Gwerthuso’r cyfleoedd, y risgiau a’r rhwystrau sy’n gysylltiedig â chynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod, gan gynnwys canlyniadau anfwriadol posibl a'r effaith ar ddarparu gwasanaethau, cynhyrchiant, dwysedd gwaith ac adnoddau.
• Asesu a yw’r wythnos waith 4 diwrnod yn mynd rhagddi orau drwy drafodaethau ar lefel leol (hynny yw trafodaethau unigol â chyflogwyr a’r gweithlu) yn hytrach na thrwy gynllun peilot cenedlaethol.
• Gwneud argymhellion ar ba mor ymarferol, addas a derbyniol yw cynllun peilot wythnos waith 4 diwrnod mewn gwasanaeth cyhoeddus datganoledig neu wasanaethau yng Nghymru.

2.3 Wrth wneud ei waith, bydd y Gweithgor yn ymwybodol y byddai angen cyflawni unrhyw gynllun peilot o fewn yr adnoddau ariannol a staffio presennol.

2.4 Os bydd cynllun peilot yn cael ei argymell, bydd y Gweithgor yn ystyried y canlynol:

• Graddfa ac amserlen unrhyw gynllun peilot.
• Pa garfannau o gyflogwyr a gweithluoedd fyddai’n cymryd rhan?
• Mae’r goblygiadau o ran tegwch ac ecwiti a diogelu yn erbyn y cynllun peilot yn ffynhonnell arall o anghydraddoldeb, anghyfiawnder a rhwyg.
• Sut byddai’r cynllun peilot yn cael ei werthuso – gan gynnwys yr effaith ar weithluoedd a darparu gwasanaethau.

3. Aelodaeth a Chadeirydd

3.1 Mae aelodaeth y Gweithgor wedi’i nodi yn Atodiad A ac mae’n seiliedig ar enwebiadau a ddarparwyd gan aelodau Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu.

3.2 Rhaid i o leiaf chwe aelod, yn cynnwys dau o Lywodraeth Cymru, dau o gyflogwyr a dau o undebau llafur, fod yn bresennol yn y cyfarfodydd er mwyn iddynt gael eu hystyried yn rhai â chworwm.

3.3 Efallai y bydd y Gweithgor yn cytuno i wahodd mewnbwn ychwanegol gan bobl eraill nad ydynt yn aelodau, er mwyn cynorthwyo neu ychwanegu at drafodaethau’r Grŵp. Ni fyddai’r rheini sy’n darparu mewnbwn ychwanegol o’r fath yn cael eu hystyried yn aelodau o’r Grŵp.

3.4 Bydd y Gweithgor yn cael ei gadeirio gan Reg Kilpatrick (Judith Cole fydd yr eilydd).  Gofynnir am Ddirprwy Gadeirydd o blith aelodau'r Gweithgor nad ydynt yn aelodau o Lywodraeth Cymru.

3.5 Mae disgwyl i aelodau’r Gweithgor gael yr awdurdod dynodedig i adlewyrchu a chyfleu safbwyntiau a barn y grŵp cyfansoddol y maent yn ei gynrychioli mewn perthynas â’r gwaith hwn.

4. Amlder a'r dulliau o gyfarfod

4.1 Bydd y Gweithgor yn cwrdd o leiaf bum gwaith yn fisol, ac eithrio egwyl yn ystod mis Gorffennaf a mis Awst, pan fydd argaeledd yr aelodau’n debygol o fod yn gyfyngedig.

4.2 Cynigir bod y Gweithgor yn cyfarfod ym mis Ebrill, mis Mai, mis Mehefin, mis Medi a mis Hydref, cyn iddo gyflwyno ei adroddiad a’i argymhellion i gyfarfod Cyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu ym mis Tachwedd. Fodd bynnag, gall y Gweithgor gytuno i gyfarfodydd ychwanegol yn ôl yr angen.

4.3 Bydd gwaith yn cael ei wneud y tu allan i gyfarfodydd gan aelodau a chyda nhw yn ôl yr angen, er mwyn cynnal cynnydd a sicrhau’r gwerth gorau o gyfarfodydd.

4.4 Bydd pob cyfarfod yn cael ei gynnal mewn fformat hygyrch ac fel arfer, bydd cyfarfodydd yn cael eu cynnal ar-lein. Fodd bynnag, os bydd y Gweithgor yn dymuno cwrdd wyneb yn wyneb, gwneir trefniadau i sicrhau bod cyfarfodydd o’r fath yn cael eu cynnal mewn fformat hybrid sy’n caniatáu i aelodau ymuno ar-lein os ydynt yn dymuno gwneud hynny.

4.5 Yn unol â’r ffordd o weithio mewn partneriaeth gymdeithasol, bydd yr egwyddor o sicrhau consensws cyffredinol ymysg aelodau’r Gweithgor yn cael ei mabwysiadu.

5. Ysgrifenyddiaeth

5.1 Bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn darparu ysgrifenyddiaeth i’r Gweithgor o’r Gyfarwyddiaeth Partneriaeth Gymdeithasol, Cyflogadwyedd a Gwaith Teg. Bydd yr ysgrifenyddiaeth yn trefnu cyfarfodydd, yn dosbarthu papurau ac yn darparu cofnod o drafodaethau ac unrhyw gamau gweithredu. Caiff papurau eu dosbarthu o leiaf 7 diwrnod gwaith cyn unrhyw gyfarfod o dan unrhyw amgylchiadau oni bai am y rhai mwyaf eithriadol.

6. Trefniadau llywodraethu

6.1 Bydd y Gweithgor yn rhoi’r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i’r Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol am gynnydd ac yn darparu drafft o’i adroddiad a’i argymhellion i’r Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol i’w ystyried. Os caiff ei gymeradwyo gan y Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol, bydd yr adroddiad a'r argymhellion yn cael eu rhoi i Gyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu i'w cymeradwyo'n ffurfiol. Os na chaiff yr adroddiad ei gymeradwyo gan y Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol, dylid rhoi gwybod i Gyngor Partneriaeth y Gweithlu am y rheswm dros hyn.

6.2 Mae’r cylch gorchwyl hwn yn dod i rym yn syth ar ôl i’r Gweithgor gytuno arno. Gellir diwygio, amrywio neu addasu’r cylch gorchwyl yn ysgrifenedig gyda chytundeb y Gweithgor.

7. Gwrthdaro rhwng buddiannau, cyfryngau

7.1 Bydd rhaid i unrhyw wrthdaro rhwng buddiannau gael ei ddatgan ar ddechrau pob cyfarfod. Mater i’r grŵp fydd penderfynu a yw datganiadau o’r fath yn atal aelod rhag cyfranogi ymhellach yng ngwaith y grŵp.

7.2 Gall dogfennau fod yn destun ceisiadau mynediad at wybodaeth a wneir o dan Ddeddf Rhyddid Gwybodaeth 2000. Os derbynnir ceisiadau o'r fath, dilynir gweithdrefnau Rhyddid Gwybodaeth safonol Llywodraeth Cymru.

7.3 Rhaid i aelodau’r Cyd-bwyllgor Gweithredol gytuno ar unrhyw gyfathrebu â’r cyfryngau neu â thrydydd partïon ynghylch gwaith y grŵp.

(The longer form published reports and articles from which this summary is drawn were provided to the Working Group).

Summary

The 4-day work week (4DWW) is an alternative working arrangement that reduces the weekly working hours of employees from 5 to 4 days, without affecting their salaries or benefits. The 4DWW has been proposed to improve the well-being, productivity, and sustainability of workers and organisations, as well as to address the social and environmental challenges of the 21st century.

However, the empirical evidence on the effects and implications of the 4DWW is still scarce and fragmented. This paper summarises and analyses recent research and evaluation reports from different countries and sectors that have experimented with the 4DWW, to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge and practice on this topic. The paper covers evidence from Portugal, South Africa, Iceland, South Cambridgeshire District Council, and New Zealand (Perpetual Guardian), as well as additional evidence from a Senedd Petitions Committee and Autonomy.

Overall, these pilots, as well as the Autonomy report on AI and shorter working hours, concluded that a shorter work week (e.g. the 4DWW) has positive impacts on both workers and businesses. The studies found improvements in workers' mental health, work-life balance, productivity, and satisfaction, as well as benefits for businesses such as increased revenue and reduced absenteeism and resignation rates.

However, there were also challenges, including pushback on the ability to complete existing volumes of work within a shorter timeframe, lack of viability across some sectors (especially for low-paid, low-security jobs, or vital services such as the health sector), and working against an established culture and pattern of a 5-day working week. Alternative models, such as a shorter working day, might be more deliverable and realistic. The role of the trades unions is seen as crucial important to securing equitable conditions for workers in different industries – particularly where employers have little incentive to improve working conditions.

NB. 4 Day Week Global is involved in several of these pilots (highlighted). There may be inherent biases as a result. That said, they will also have learned a lot of these lessons of what’s working/not working.

Evidence

Portugal: 4-day week pilot project

The Portuguese pilot project on the 4-day week

The document describes and evaluates the second phase of the 4-day week pilot project in Portugal, which started in June 2023 and involved 41 companies and more than 1,000 workers who reduced their weekly hours without wage cuts.

The companies that took part in the pilot are representative of the business structure in Portugal, with a majority being smaller companies, but also include medium-sized companies and larger companies. They include a kindergarten, a social centre, a research centre, a stem cell bank, entities from the social sector, manufacturing, and many training and management consulting companies.

The preparation and evaluation of the trial

The companies that joined the pilot project received support from the project coordinators and the 4 Day Week Global organization, which provided training sessions, platforms, and questionnaires to help them design and implement the 4-day week. The workers' effects were assessed by comparing surveys before and after the trial, as well as with a control group of workers from 14 companies that did not reduce their working hours. The surveys covered aspects such as mental health, work-life balance, productivity, and satisfaction. The effects obtained in the experimental group of 21 companies were compared with the results of a control group, made up of workers from 14 companies that decided not to test the four-day week

The implementation and challenges of the 4-day week

The companies adopted different formats of the four-day week, depending on their sector, size, and needs. Some opted for a uniform model of 4 days a week, while others chose a 9-day fortnight, alternating a 4-day week with a 5-day week. Some also coordinated the day off on Fridays, while others created mirror teams or shifts to ensure a continuous operation. The companies also made organizational changes to improve efficiency and communication, such as reducing meetings, creating blocks of work, or adopting new software. The main difficulties faced by the companies were defining productivity metrics, managing holidays, and changing the internal culture to avoid wasting time.

The benefits and satisfaction of the 4-day week

The companies and workers reported positive impacts of the 4-day week on stress levels, mental health, work-life balance, and motivation. The workers also reduced their weekly hours by 11.3%, from 41.1 to 36.5 hours on average, and spent more time on family, hobbies, and personal care. The frequency of negative mental health symptoms decreased significantly, as well as the levels of work exhaustion. The percentage of workers who found it difficult to reconcile work and family responsibilities fell from 46% to 8%. Most workers would only move to a 5-day week job if they received a pay rise of at least 20%.

Workers think that the 4-day week has had a positive impact on their performance. Around 40% say that it has improved meeting deadlines, executing projects, relationships and attracting clients. Creative work has improved for more than 70% of relevant workers, and more than 85% of care workers say their performance has improved. Only a minority of workers say that their ability to meet deadlines, carry out projects or relate to clients has worsened because of the change.

The reasons for not starting the trial

Some companies that expressed interest in the pilot project decided not to start the trial, mainly due to the timing, the lack of approval from headquarters, or the difficulty with clients. Some of them had other ongoing projects, were moving premises, or had lost some key employees, so they decided to postpone the start of the test. Some of them also faced resistance from their international headquarters or had contracts with clients that required a 5-day week availability.

The next steps of the project

The final report, scheduled for April 2024, will present the main findings and recommendations of the project. The final report will also include the experiences and testimonies of the employers and workers who participated in the pilot project.

4 day week pioneer pilot in South Africa

The document is a report of the first 4 Day Week Pilot Program in South Africa

The report presents the results of a 6-month trial of the 4-day week initiative in 28 organizations across various sectors and sizes in South Africa and Botswana, conducted by 4 Day Week Global and local partners. The business sectors that were involved in the 4 Day Week Pilot Program in South Africa were social services and law enforcement, healthcare or social assistance organizations, finance and insurance industry organizations, and other services except public administration. The trial took place for a period of 6 months from March to August in 2023.

The pilot program involved quantitative and qualitative research methods

The research team collected baseline and endpoint data from 470 employees using surveys, and conducted interviews with managers and employees to gain insights into the implementation and impact of the 4-day week. The surveys measured various indicators such as work time, work intensity, work stress, work ability, work-life balance, life satisfaction, mental health, sleep quality, exercise frequency, travel time, and environmental awareness. The interviews explored the motivations, challenges, and outcomes of the trial from different perspectives.

The results show positive effects on business performance, employee well-being, and sustainability

The process for gathering metrics for the 4 Day Week Pilot Program in South Africa involved collecting baseline data in March and endpoint data in September by the research team. Success in the 4 Day Week Pilot Program in South Africa was measured through various metrics, including:

• A 10.5% average increase in revenue over the course of the trial period.
• Productivity was positively impacted by the trial, both from an employee and company perspective.
• Employee well-being was measured subjectively, with significant changes in work-life balance, satisfaction with time, and life satisfaction.
• Rates of stress and burnout dropped for a significant number of people.
• There was a reported increase in the frequency of exercise for 35% of people during the trial period.
• Resignation rates decreased by 11% during the trial, and the number of sick and personal days taken by employees also decreased during the trial, with a 9% weighted decrease in absenteeism.
• Sleep was also positively impacted, with a third of participants experiencing less sleep problems during the trial, and 36% reporting that they slept more hours.

The results were consistent with prior research in other regions, demonstrating the universal applicability of the 4-day week policy.

The 4-day week needs leadership and commitment

The successful implementation of the 4-day week depended on the clear communication, planning, and leadership of the managers and owners, as well as the buy-in and engagement of the employees. The trial also involved learning and adapting along the way, and addressing some challenges and unintended consequences.

Some of the challenges included dealing with client expectations, managing leave arrangements, ensuring work coverage, and maintaining work quality. Some of the unintended consequences included increased work intensity, reduced work time flexibility, and increased work-life conflict for some employees.

The 4-day week has different implications for different groups of employees

The trial revealed that the 4-day week had different implications for different groups of employees, depending on their personal and professional circumstances. Some employees used their extra day off for education, entrepreneurship, or volunteering, while others simply relaxed and rested. Some employees faced more work pressure and less flexibility, while others felt more motivated and creative.

South Cambridgeshire District Council

A Corporate Peer Challenge process took place at end October 2023 to review and drive further performance improvement. It focused on 5 core themes, i.e. local priorities and outcomes, organisational and place leadership, governance and culture, financial planning and management, and capacity for improvement.

Following the pandemic and a prolonged period of difficulty recruiting to a number of job vacancies the council initiated a 4-day working week pilot, where colleagues work 80% of their contracted hours with no reduction in pay or benefits. The pilot of the 4-day working week has attracted a significant amount of media attention and concerns from the Minister for Local Government at DHLUC with him instructing the council to cease the pilot.

The peer team were mindful of the 4-day working week arrangements and ensured the focus remained on the 5 core areas of the Corporate Peer Challenge process. Therefore, validation and a robust review of the 4-day working week was not part of the Corporate Peer Challenge scope.

GPT-4 (4 Day Week): Great Britain edition

The main goal of the paper

The paper is not an evaluation, but more of a think piece, which offers a vision of an equitable route for the deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) in the pursuit of greater productivity. It builds upon leading analyses of the potential impacts of new AI technologies, specifically Large Language Models (LLMs), which can generate natural language and perform complex tasks. It analyses the potential eligibility for a 4-day work week across local authorities in Great Britain, driven by AI-enhanced productivity gains over the next decade.

The data sources and methods used

The paper uses data from the UK Census, the Annual Population Survey, the Department for Education, and other sources to estimate the potential impact of AI on productivity and working hours across different occupations and regions. This dataset was updated with long-term employment projections for Great Britain. The paper also uses a crosswalk tool called ASPECTT, developed by Autonomy, to match the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) codes for UK occupations with the Artificial Intelligence Exposure Indices (AIOE) built by Felten et al., as used by the IMF. This index measures how various occupations are impacted by generative AI.

The 2 scenarios considered

The paper considers 2 scenarios: one where AI leads to a 20% reduction in working hours, enabling a 4-day work week, and another where AI leads to a 10% reduction in working hours, enabling a shorter work week. The paper assumes a 1.5% annual productivity increase due to AI, as estimated by Goldman Sachs in their study on the topic. The paper also uses O*NET's AI exposure evaluations, which were utilised by the IMF in their own analysis. The calculations are based on a 32-hour full-time equivalent for a 4-day work week, and a proportional reduction for a 10% shorter work week.

The paper finds that, by 2033, 20% of the UK workforce (8.8 million workers) could have a 4-day work week, and 88% of the workforce (27.9 million workers) could have at least a 10% reduction in working hours, if AI is used to augment their productivity.

The paper also identifies the local authorities with the highest and lowest potential for working time reduction. The paper finds that the City of London, Kensington and Chelsea, Westminster, Elmbridge, Richmond upon Thames, Wandsworth, St Albans, and Wokingham are among the local authorities with the highest proportion of workers that could work 4-day weeks within the next decade. The document does not provide specific information about the occupations that have the highest potential for working time reductions.

The paper also finds that Gwynedd, Torridge, Allendale, Pembrokeshire, Copeland, Barrow-in-Furness, Northeast Lincolnshire, Blaenau Gwent, Kingston upon Hull, and Boston are among the local authorities with the lowest proportion of workers that could work 4-day weeks within the next decade. It does not expand on the reasons for this conclusion.

It posits that a shorter work week, enabled by AI-driven productivity gains, can offer several benefits to workers. These include avoiding mass unemployment, reducing widespread mental health illnesses, and physical ailments associated with overwork. It can also create significant additional free time for democracy, leisure consumption, and social cohesion in general.

It suggests that a shorter work week, enabled by AI-driven productivity gains, can offer several benefits to businesses. These include improved staff health, loyalty, and retention, and reduced sick days, which could boost performance for businesses. The gains accrued through better work-life balance could give a significant boost to performance.

The main recommendations of the paper

The paper recommends that public and private sector employers take advantage of the opportunity to use AI for good and improve the lives of workers by implementing a shorter work week.

The paper also suggests that a robust industrial strategy and a strong worker voice are needed to ensure the equitable and sustainable deployment of AI in the workplace. It argues that a shorter work week is a way of tangibly delivering benefits to workers whose workflow has been augmented by these new tools.

Perpetual Guardian’s 4-day workweek trial: Qualitative research analysis 

Trial overview

The report describes the qualitative research findings from Perpetual Guardian's reduced working hours trial, which aimed to evaluate the impact of a 4-day workweek on employees and the organisation. Perpetual Guardian is a New Zealand-based company that specializes in estate planning, providing services such as wills, trusts, and investment advice. The report is structured into 3 parts:

• The impact of reduced working hours on workplace dynamics
• The impact on non-work lives, and
• On the future of reduced working hours.

Workplace dynamics

The trial resulted in various improvements in workplace behaviours, relationships and environment, such as increased intellectual engagement, innovation, collaboration, trust, focus, goodwill and motivation. Some challenges and frustrations were also reported, such as increased stress and pressure, workload incompatibility, skill variation and lack of significant innovation. The improvements were attributed to the planning discussions prior to the trial, the micro-initiatives to work smarter and more efficiently, the increased level of teamwork and information sharing, the upskilling and cross-training opportunities, the sense of voice and empowerment, and the shared commitment to the trial's purpose. The challenges were mainly related to the difficulty of completing work tasks within a shorter timeframe, especially for teams or individuals with higher workloads, more complex roles, or less flexibility.

Non-work lives

The trial enabled employees to have more time and quality in their personal lives, such as accomplishing tasks, participating in family life, restoring and reconnecting, learning and contributing, and exploring and imagining. Few employees reported struggles or concerns with the additional time off, such as existential questions or boredom. The benefits of the trial included having more time to do chores and errands during the week, freeing up the weekends for leisure and social activities, being more involved and supportive of children and extended family members, having more time for oneself to relax, reflect, or pursue hobbies and interests, having more time for formal or informal study and professional development, having more time for volunteer and community work, and having more time to try new things and imagine new possibilities.

Future of reduced working hours

Most employees expressed their hope and support for the reduced working hours to become an ongoing reality, as long as they met the agreed productivity measures. Some managers preferred other flexible working arrangements or had some caveats for the implementation of the reduced hours.

Two main areas of feedback were clarifying the expectations of the additional time off and investing in organisational development. Some employees and managers had different perspectives on whether the time off should be seen as a day of annual leave, a flexible working day, or an optional bonus. Some employees and managers also suggested that more training, support and resourcing would be needed to ensure sustainable changes and benefits, such as more advanced information technology, more structured guidance and training on lean management principles, and more organisational redesign and investment.

Going public: Iceland’s journey to a shorter working week June 2021

Iceland's experiments with shorter working hours

The report describes 2 large-scale trials of reducing working hours in Iceland, which involved more than 2,500 workers from various sectors. The trials aimed to improve work-life balance and productivity and were successful in both aspects.

Key stats and background of Iceland

The report provides some key statistics and contextual information about Iceland, such as its population, GDP, working hours, and productivity. It also highlights the country's poor performance in work-life balance compared to other Nordic countries, and the growing demand for shorter working hours from civil society and unions.

According to the document: Here are some key stats about Iceland:

• Population (1 January, 2019): 356,991
• Land area: 102,775 km2
• Official language: Icelandic
• Working population (Q4 2019): 196,700
• Workforce participation (15–64 year olds): 87% — highest within OECD
• Unemployment: 3.4% — 6th lowest within OECD
• Total GDP (2018): 2.8 trillion ISK / 17.6 billion GBP / 22.7 billion USD
• GDP per person (2017): 46,981 USD — 6th highest of OECD countries, higher than other Nordic countries

The trials involved a wide range of workplaces, including offices, playschools, social service providers, and hospitals. The trials were conducted by both Reykjavík City Council and the Icelandic national government. The workplaces involved in the trial were diverse and included service centres, child protection services, accountancy departments, police stations, and directorates of internal revenue and immigration, among others.

The report shows that they had positive effects on both employees and businesses. Workers reported improved work-life balance, reduced stress, more time for family and hobbies, and better cooperation at work. Service provision and productivity remained the same or improved across most workplaces, and some workplaces saw increased efficiency and customer satisfaction.

The benefits included less stress at home, greater time spent with family and friends, increased time for oneself, greater time for chores and domestic activities during the working week, men in heterosexual partnerships taking on greater domestic responsibilities, positive effects on single parents, more exercise, and wider social wellbeing. These effects were profound and sustained over the trials’ long time span. The data was collected through a range of indicators including wellbeing, performance, and work-life balance. This was done through both qualitative and quantitative data, providing a holistic picture of the trials’ effects on workers and their organizations.

The trials of shorter working weeks in Iceland showed that businesses benefited from the reduction in working hours. Productivity and service provision remained the same or improved across most trial workplaces. This means that businesses were able to maintain or even increase their output while providing their employees with a better work-life balance. The benefits to businesses were measured through the maintenance or increase of productivity and service provision across the majority of trial workplaces.

There were no significant negative outcomes mentioned in the trials of shorter working weeks in Iceland. The report states that the trials led to historic contracts that guaranteed shorter working hours for tens of thousands of workers in Iceland, covering about 86% of the working population. The report also notes that the trials have received positive feedback from politicians and civil society, and that they can serve as a model for other countries that want to pursue working time reduction.

Petitions Committee: 27 June 2022

Evidence heard from:

• Joe O'Connor, Global 4 Day Week
• Mark Hooper, Petitioner
• Shavanah Taj, TUC Cymru

The committee heard that a 4-day working week could have benefits for workers, including improved work-life balance, increased productivity, and reduced carbon emissions.

The TUC supports a 4-day working week based on asking workers what they want. Shavannah Taj noted:

“technology is changing, and as technology increases productivity, we want to see the profits that then come about as a result of that shared equally and fairly with workers, and that includes less time at work. Now, of course, just like with the real living wage campaign, the four-day work is a simplified approach to improving workers' terms and conditions.”

“…the TUC … did a bit of research and we know that eight in 10 workers want to reduce working time in the future, with 45% of workers opting for a four-day working week. I think the four-day working week campaign should then be seen within the wider context of trade unions' work to reduce working hours for the same overall levels of pay.”

Joe O’Connor noted that 4 Day Week Global is a not-for-profit organisation that supports companies to trial or transition to a reduced hour, productivity-focused approach. The organisation is currently coordinating a series of pilot programmes internationally, with 160 companies and roughly 8,000 employees participating in the first six months of this year alone.

The benefits of the 4-day work week

There is a body of evidence that suggests that reduced work time can lead to improved worker well-being, reduced burnout, reduced stress, and better work-life balance. From an employer perspective, companies that have implemented the 4-day work week have reported that they have been able to maintain or improve business performance or productivity. what these companies are managing to achieve is that they're using the four-day work week as tool to align individual employees' interests and the company's interests, and to provide a real sharp focus not on the number of hours that people are spending in the office, at the desk or on the clock, but actually on the results that are being achieved and the output that's being produced.

The 4-day work week might also provide a competitive edge for companies in terms of recruitment, retention, and quality of life. E.g. companies doing this because maybe they can't compete in the top 1% of compensation, but the four-day work week means they can compete in the top 1% of work weeks. We've (4 Day Week Global) seen lots of examples, such as Atom Bank in the UK, who have done this and have reported that their job applications have gone up 500%, giving them a huge edge when it comes to recruitment.

The challenges and the role of government

The 4-day work week is not equally accessible to all sectors of the economy, and some industries may face more barriers than others. In tech, in finance, in ICT and software, that this has really become a huge growing trend, to the point at which it might become the norm or the standard in a matter of years. Government can play a role in supporting trials, facilitating legislation, conducting research, and engaging with stakeholders to ensure that the benefits of this transition can flow to all segments of society.

He noted that the 5-day work week didn't happen overnight in every country in every industry in parallel; this was a long, 20 to 30-year process. Before legislation was introduced to make this mandatory across the economy, it was a gradual process, through unions winning this through collective bargaining processes, pioneering business leaders like Henry Ford introducing this in his own firm.

The benefits of a 4-day work week

A 4-day work week can improve productivity, employee well-being, and environmental sustainability, according to the document. They claim that reducing work time by 20% can lead to a 16% reduction in carbon emissions, as well as lower costs for recruitment, training, and sick leave. It also states that a four-day work week can enhance work-life balance, gender equality, and mental health for employees.

The challenges and opportunities of implementing a 4-day work week

Joe O’Connor noted that some sectors, such as healthcare, may face difficulties in adopting a four-day work week without increasing staff or costs. However, he also suggested that a government-led program could help to address these challenges and explore the broader impacts of this policy on the economy, society, and environment. E.g. spending less on recruiting, retraining and upskilling staff, because you've a lower level of turnover, if you've reduced your sick leave bill, if you've less single-day absenteeism. These all contribute to better chance of better patient and learner outcomes due to lower levels of unplanned disruptions.

The global movement towards a 4-day work week

Joe notes examples of countries and regions that have launched or are planning to launch trials of a 4-day work week, such as Spain, Scotland, New Zealand, and the UAE. It argues that this is a timely opportunity for Wales to join this movement and become a leader in this space. He also suggests that Wales could learn from these experiences and tailor its own programme to suit its specific needs and goals.

Petitions Committee: 11 July 2022

Evidence heard from:

• Professor Abigail Marks, Professor of the future of work and director of research at Newcastle University Business School
• Cheney Hamilton, Find Your Flex, member of the all-party parliamentary group on the future of work
• Dr Will Stronge, Autonomy
• Louisa Neale, The Future Generations Commissioner for Wales’s Office

Abigail Marks contribution

The challenges of implementing a 4-day week: She expressed her doubts about the feasibility and desirability of a 4-day week in the UK context. She argues it not viable across all sectors, especially for low-paid and precarious workers who are already struggling with work insecurity and low wages. She also cautions that a four-day week could lead to more work intensification and overwork, as workers would have to cram more tasks into fewer hours, and that employers need to take responsibility for reducing workload and increasing flexibility before considering a shorter working week.

The need for infrastructure and universal basic income

She suggested that a 4-day week would require a significant change in the social and economic infrastructure of the country, including the introduction of a universal basic income (UBI) to ensure equality of opportunity and access to reduced working hours. She also says that the current low levels of trade union density and surplus labour force make it difficult to negotiate and implement a shorter working week, as workers have little bargaining power and employers have little incentive to improve working conditions. She points out that the 5-day week was achieved through trade union campaigns and collective action, which are lacking in the present situation.

The alternative of a 6-hour day

She noted that a 6-hour day might be a more realistic and beneficial option than a 4-day week, as it could reduce work input and increase well-being without creating more pressure and inequality. She refers to the Gothenburg trial of a 6-hour day for nurses, which showed positive impacts on health, productivity and patient care. She also says that other forms of flexibility, such as outcome-based working and remote working, need to be embedded before the 4-day week. She stresses that the 4-day week is an idealistic vision, but not a fit for the current work environment.

Cheney Hamilton contribution

The limitations and drawbacks of a 4-day week

Cheney criticised the 4-day week as a limited and insufficient solution to the challenges of the future of work. It does not go far enough to address the issues of overwork, work insecurity, automation, cost of living, and access to work. She also says that the 4-day week is not flexible, inclusive, or realistic for many sectors and workers, especially those who are low-paid, precarious, or platform-based. Cheney Hamilton did not provide any specific evidence or data to substantiate her claims, but rather presented her opinions and observations based on her experience and conversations with businesses.

The alternative of outcome-based working

She proposed outcome-based working as a better alternative to the four-day week, as it focuses on the outputs and results of work rather than the hours and inputs. She also says that outcome-based working can help businesses reduce costs, increase productivity, and compete with digital workers, as well as help workers increase their wealth, well-being, and skills.

The need for organisational change and universal basic income

She argued that the organisational change required may not be feasible or desirable for many businesses and sectors. It would increase the overheads and staff costs for businesses and create inequality for workers who cannot afford to work less. She does not believe it addressed the impact of automation and the loss of jobs that it may entail. It would require introducing a universal basic income that would supplement any working income and provide a basic level of security and dignity for all.

Will Stronge contribution

The challenges and solutions for different sectors

He acknowledged different sectors have different challenges and needs for implementing a shorter working week, e.g. healthcare and education, would need greater investment and employment to reduce working hours without compromising service quality. He argued that the shorter working week is not a silver bullet, but a part of a broader strategy to improve the quality of work and life.

He challenged the claim that the UK has low unemployment, and says that there is a lot of hidden underemployment and low-quality work that could be improved by a shorter working week. He says that the shorter working week is not a rigid or fixed model, but a flexible and adaptable one that can suit different needs and preferences.

Petitions Committee Report - From Five to Four? - P-06-1247 Support trials of a four-day week in Wales

Published January 2023

The petition, which collected 1,619 signatures, argued that a 4-day week would boost workers' well-being, productivity, and the environment, citing successful trials in Iceland and other countries that are planning or implementing similar pilots.

Most of the committee members were in favour of developing a pilot to reduce working hours within the devolved public sector, with no loss of pay for employees. They argued that this could be a valuable part of the solution to address overwork, improve well-being, and enhance Wales' attractiveness to workers.

They acknowledged the need to address the practical barriers and concerns raised by some witnesses, and to involve the workforce and its representatives in the development of the pilot. One committee member was opposed to a 4-day week, as he believed it was not realistic or viable across all sectors and would create division and injustice in society. He also questioned the evidence for improving productivity and the competence of the Welsh Government to implement such a scheme.

The committee made four recommendations to the Welsh Government, which are:

1. To develop a pilot to reduce working hours in targeted and discrete areas of the devolved public sector, where productivity can be maintained or improved without increasing staff numbers.
2. To liaise with organisations that have run or participated in similar pilots, and to learn from their experiences and best practices.
3. To require participating organisations to meet certain criteria, such as taking a flexible approach to how employees reduce their hours, developing plans to avoid overwork and address practical challenges, and securing agreement from trade unions or employee representatives.
4. To ensure a robust and impartial assessment of the pilot, which includes analysis of the economic, social and environmental impacts of the pilot.