Thousands of Workers Tried Four-Day Workweeks. Many Reported Less Burnout and Better Sleep

Last updated on 9 SEP 2025

There’s a question many of us carry quietly through our days, tucked between morning commutes and late-night email checks: Is this really how it’s supposed to be? Five days on, two days off if we’re lucky. The grind is so normalized that exhaustion has become a badge of honor, and burnout is practically built into our schedules. We drink coffee to stay alert and use weekends to recover, only to start the cycle all over again.

But what if the problem isn’t our lack of resilience what if it’s the system itself?

Around the world, thousands of workers recently stepped into an experiment that dared to ask that very question. They didn’t get a raise. They didn’t win the lottery. What they got was time an extra day off each week. A four-day workweek, with no pay cut and no catch. And the result wasn’t just more rest. It was better sleep, clearer minds, stronger focus, and, surprisingly, more productivity.

This isn’t a fantasy or a fringe movement it’s part of a growing, evidence-backed reconsideration of how we work and live. And it’s already reshaping what we think we know about success, balance, and the true cost of a 40-hour week.

The Hidden Toll of the Traditional Workweek

The five-day workweek wasn’t always standard it was once a radical idea. In the early 20th century, as industrialization transformed economies, labor reformers fought hard to limit grueling six- or seven-day work schedules. When Henry Ford introduced a 40-hour, five-day week for his factory workers in 1926, it was considered generous. Nearly a century later, that “modern” model has become rigid, deeply embedded in our cultural DNA yet increasingly misaligned with the needs of today’s workers.

While the structure may seem benign, its effects tell another story. Chronic exhaustion, deteriorating mental health, and a growing sense of imbalance have quietly become accepted side effects of professional life. In 2021, the World Health Organization recognized burnout as an “occupational phenomenon,” not a personal failure. But the normalization of burnout persists. Many people describe their weeks as a blur of deadlines, digital overload, and relentless productivity pressures often with little time left for recovery or reflection.

And the data is damning. Studies have shown that long work hours are linked to increased risks of anxiety, depression, cardiovascular disease, and sleep disorders. A 2021 analysis published in Environment International found that people working 55 hours or more per week had a 35% higher risk of stroke compared to those working 35–40 hours. Even moderate overwork, when sustained over years, chips away at well-being in ways we’re only beginning to fully quantify.

The consequences aren’t just physiological they’re deeply psychological. “When we accept constant fatigue as the price of ambition, we mistake survival mode for normalcy,” says Dr. Wen Fan, a sociologist at Boston College and co-author of a major global study on four-day workweeks. Her research suggests that it’s not a lack of discipline or resilience driving widespread workplace burnout it’s the way work is structured.

This structure often leaves little room for what psychologists call psychological detachment the ability to mentally disconnect from work during off-hours. Without it, rest is incomplete. You might leave the office or log off, but your brain is still parsing emails or anticipating tomorrow’s challenges. This sustained mental engagement disrupts sleep, strains emotional regulation, and slowly depletes energy reserves.

Perhaps most revealing is how many people don’t even recognize how overextended they are until they experience something different. In the recent four-day workweek pilot, participants across six countries reported immediate and measurable improvements in sleep, energy, and mood after reducing their work hours by just 20%. These weren’t subtle gains; they were consistent across cultures, sectors, and job roles. Even small reductions in work time yielded noticeable benefits.

A Global Experiment in Working Less

A landmark global study led by Boston College researchers Dr. Wen Fan and Dr. Juliet Schor put the concept to the test on a scale rarely seen before. Nearly 2,900 employees across 141 organizations in six countries (the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, Ireland, and New Zealand) shifted to a four-day, 32-hour workweek for six months, with no loss of pay. The participating companies, which spanned a range of industries from tech to education to manufacturing, were given two months to prepare by restructuring workflows, reducing low-value tasks, and eliminating time-wasting meetings.

This wasn’t just a feel-good initiative. The goal was to determine whether a systemic reduction in hours could deliver meaningful improvements in well-being without sacrificing organizational performance. Workers were surveyed before the pilot began and again six months in, with metrics focused on burnout, sleep quality, mental health, and overall job satisfaction. A control group of employees at companies that maintained the traditional five-day schedule provided a point of comparison. The results were striking.

• 67% of workers reported reduced burnout
• 41% said their mental health had improved
• 38% experienced fewer sleep problems

And the benefits didn’t stop there. Employees who cut their weekly hours by at least eight saw the most dramatic improvements, but even those who reduced their schedules by just a few hours experienced noticeable gains. These were not vague impressions they were statistically significant and echoed across companies, countries, and job types.

According to Dr. Schor, the findings exceeded expectations. Workers not only felt better rested and more mentally clear, but also more in control of their time and lives. “They feel recovered when they come to work on Monday morning,” she told CNBC Make It. “They feel more eager to do work. They feel like they can get it done.” That emotional shift of no longer dreading Monday turned out to be a key indicator of deeper changes in well-being.

The study adds to a growing body of evidence supporting the four-day week, including the widely cited 2022 U.K. trial involving over 3,000 workers at 73 companies. There too, most employers reported stable or improved productivity and decided to retain the shorter schedule permanently.

Why Productivity Didn’t Suffer It Improved

Despite working fewer hours, 52% of employees in the Boston College-led trial reported being more productive than they were under the traditional five-day schedule. This wasn’t about simply cramming more tasks into a tighter window. It was about a strategic shift in how work was approached.

Before the new schedule took effect, participating organizations spent two months rethinking their workflows. Teams trimmed non-essential meetings, streamlined communication, and eliminated habitual inefficiencies that often pass unnoticed in the rhythm of a longer workweek. In many cases, the time gained wasn’t the result of cutting corners but of cutting noise.

Dr. Juliet Schor, who has studied labor patterns for decades, was struck by just how dramatic the productivity gains were. In an interview with CNBC Make It, she shared that one of the biggest surprises of the trials was the emotional clarity participants felt: “They feel on top of their work and their life… they’re not stressed out.” That mindset shift of feeling in control, not behind translated into sharper focus and stronger performance.

This supports what psychologists have long understood: that a well-rested mind is a more capable one. Sleep quality, which improved for 38% of participants, plays a critical role in cognitive function. Regions of the brain responsible for attention, decision-making, and problem-solving such as the prefrontal cortex and default mode network are especially vulnerable to sleep deprivation. By reducing work hours and promoting better rest, the four-day schedule indirectly enhances brain function, particularly in the areas most vital to workplace success.

Motivation also played a key role. The promise of an extra day off served as a powerful incentive for workers to stay focused and work more intentionally. Researchers refer to this as the “100–80–100” model: 100% of the output, in 80% of the time, for 100% of the pay. That stands in contrast to compressed schedules that simply condense 40 hours into four longer days an approach that doesn’t offer the same mental or physical relief.

Rather than working harder, employees were working smarter. Email notifications were silenced during deep work hours. Meeting agendas were tightened. Low-value tasks were re-evaluated or eliminated altogether. The result wasn’t just fewer hours it was better hours.

It’s also worth noting what didn’t happen: productivity didn’t come at the cost of intensified effort. Workers didn’t describe themselves as rushing more or feeling squeezed. As Schor explained, the pace of work didn’t simply speed up to meet the shorter schedule. Instead, work was redesigned to be more efficient, allowing for the same or even better results with less stress.

As one participant in the UK’s 2022 trial put it, “I get more done in four days than I used to in five. And I leave work with energy, not depletion.” That kind of shift doesn’t just benefit the individual it transforms team dynamics, morale, and ultimately, business outcomes.

The Ripple Effects of More Time

With an extra day each week freed from deadlines and digital demands, workers reported stronger family bonds, more time for exercise and hobbies, deeper rest, and a greater sense of autonomy. These outcomes, though harder to quantify than productivity metrics, may be the most important. As Dr. Wen Fan, one of the lead researchers on the global trial, observed: “The well-being effects are fairly uniform across companies, across nations, across employees.” The change in time structure didn’t just improve how people worked it reshaped how they lived.

One of the clearest benefits was to sleep, a cornerstone of physical and mental health. Nearly 4 in 10 workers said their sleep quality improved, a finding that researchers tied to increased psychological detachment the ability to mentally disconnect from work during off-hours. In a traditional workweek, many people carry their jobs home in their heads: thinking about tasks left undone, or anticipating tomorrow’s stress. But with more time to rest and reset, employees in the trial found it easier to truly switch off. They not only fell asleep faster but experienced deeper, more restorative rest throughout the week not just on weekends.

This improvement in sleep, in turn, fueled emotional regulation, better decision-making, and even stronger immune function. Studies in neuroscience confirm that chronic sleep deprivation impairs the brain’s prefrontal cortex, the region responsible for attention, planning, and impulse control. By simply giving workers more time to decompress, the four-day week acted as a low-cost, high-impact health intervention.

The ripple effects extended to relationships as well. Parents reported being more present with their children. Partners had more time for each other. Community engagement increased, with some workers using their extra day for volunteering, caregiving, or creative pursuits that had long been sidelined. In a culture that often equates busyness with value, these shifts offered a powerful reminder: Time is not just for labor it’s for living.

And that margin of time what one expert called “breathing space” may be more essential than ever. Rates of anxiety and depression have surged in recent years, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. While therapy and medication have their place, structural changes like reduced working hours address the root cause: chronic overload. They create room for prevention, not just treatment.

What’s more, this isn’t just about individual wellbeing. A healthier, more rested workforce benefits everyone. When people feel good, they’re more likely to communicate effectively, solve problems creatively, and show up for their communities. As Dr. Brendan Burchell of the University of Cambridge noted, the benefits of shorter workweeks “are not just felt at work they follow people home.”

A Shift That’s Already Happening

Take Belgium, for instance. In 2022, the country passed a law allowing employees to compress their 40-hour week into four longer days without losing pay. While this “compressed schedule” differs slightly from the reduced-hours model adopted in many trials, it reflects a shared recognition: that people need more flexibility and rest to thrive. Iceland has taken things even further, rolling out shorter workweeks for the majority of its public workforce following a successful national pilot. Lithuania, too, has adopted progressive policies, enabling public sector employees with young children to work 32-hour weeks at full pay. Meanwhile, in Dubai, government workers now enjoy a four-day summer schedule.

These are not isolated reforms they are part of a broader reimagining of how time and labor intersect in modern life. And it’s not just governments leading the charge. Businesses, especially smaller or more agile companies, are turning to the four-day week as a recruitment and retention strategy. In an era where employees increasingly prioritize well-being, flexibility, and purpose, offering an extra day off is no longer just generous it’s strategic.

“Companies are realizing that work-life balance isn’t a bonus, it’s a baseline,” says Dr. Juliet Schor, who has studied labor models for decades. As one of the lead researchers in the global trials, Schor notes that many organizations chose to continue the four-day model after the pilots ended not because of idealism, but because it worked. Productivity stayed steady or even improved, and employee turnover dropped dramatically, in some cases approaching zero.

What’s especially notable is how the momentum is being driven from multiple fronts—public policy, private enterprise, and even cultural shifts. Fridays, long considered the soft landing into the weekend, are evolving into unofficial days off in many workplaces. “We’re already seeing less work happening on Fridays,” Schor points out. “The transition is organic we just need to formalize it.”

Technological advances may also accelerate the shift. As artificial intelligence and automation increase efficiency, the need for human labor hours is declining in many sectors. This opens up a critical question: should these gains lead to job losses, or to shorter, more humane work schedules? Schor and other economists argue for the latter. “If people are getting more productive, the fair outcome is not to lay off workers it’s to give them back time,” she explains.

This isn’t just a trend. It’s the early stages of a global recalibration a recognition that the way we structure work can, and must, evolve with the realities of modern life. The four-day workweek isn’t a utopian dream. It’s a practical, tested, and increasingly common-sense step toward a future where productivity and well-being are not at odds but aligned.

The Barriers Ahead And Why Some Companies Still Resist

One of the biggest hurdles is control. According to Dr. Juliet Schor, this reluctance often mirrors what we’ve seen with return-to-office mandates: “There’s a sense in which companies have to give up control if they’re giving people more time back,” she explains. “Management doesn’t like that.” For some leaders, fewer hours can feel like a loss of oversight, even if performance metrics remain strong. The shift requires not just logistical adjustments but a fundamental change in mindset.

There’s also the issue of risk aversion. Many business leaders still see the five-day model as safe and familiar. A four-day schedule, by contrast, can feel radical even if data suggests otherwise. Without enough precedent or peer adoption in their sector, executives may be reluctant to test a model that feels like a gamble, especially in industries built on tradition, such as finance or law.

Another challenge is structural complexity. Not all businesses operate in environments where work can easily be reorganized. Industries that rely on continuous coverage, like healthcare, logistics, or customer service, may face real obstacles in reducing hours without sacrificing service. While many organizations in the trials successfully used restructured shifts and efficiency strategies, this kind of overhaul requires planning, resources, and willingness to experiment qualities not all companies are ready to invest in.

There are also economic anxieties. Although the four-day trials required no pay cuts and indeed, the preservation of salary was a condition of participation some business leaders worry that offering the same pay for fewer hours could erode profitability, especially in lean-margin sectors. This fear persists despite evidence that happier, more engaged employees are often more productive and less likely to quit factors that can lower recruitment and retention costs over time.

Cultural inertia plays a role as well. In many workplaces, “being busy” is still equated with value. There’s a lingering belief that long hours signal dedication, even if they don’t produce better results. Shifting that cultural narrative from time spent to value delivered requires not just policy change but a redefinition of what success looks like.

Finally, there’s the matter of legislative support or lack thereof. While some countries are beginning to enshrine shorter weeks into law, many others leave it entirely to the discretion of employers. This creates a fragmented landscape where forward-thinking companies may take the leap, but others wait on the sidelines. As Schor points out, major labor reforms like the Family and Medical Leave Act in the U.S. only gained traction after many companies had already implemented similar policies voluntarily. The four-day week may follow a similar trajectory, with early adopters paving the way for wider legislative change.

The Future of Work Starts with a Pause

The four-day workweek trials didn’t just yield productivity boosts or better sleep. They sparked a larger, more human conversation: What kind of lives are we designing when we structure our time around relentless output? And what becomes possible individually and collectively when we choose to do things differently?

Time has always been our most precious resource, yet for many, it’s been devoured by schedules that prioritize presence over performance, and busyness over balance. In reducing the workweek, we’re not just carving out space for rest we’re restoring time for relationships, creativity, community, and care. We’re making room for the parts of life that are often pushed to the margins by endless deadlines.

This shift isn’t about laziness, nor is it a utopian fantasy. It’s a reimagining grounded in real-world data, embraced by diverse organizations across the globe, and proven to be not only viable, but transformative.

Of course, the four-day week won’t be a perfect fit for every sector or team. But its success in so many contexts invites us to ask better questions: How much of our current work structure is truly necessary? What are we sacrificing in the name of tradition? And how can we design systems that prioritize not just economic output but human flourishing?

As the conversation evolves, so too should our definition of productivity. Perhaps it’s not just about what gets done during the week, but how people feel while doing it and who they get to be when the workday ends.

The future of work isn’t about pushing people to their limits. It’s about building something sustainable, meaningful, and humane. And maybe, just maybe, it starts with one less day at the office and one more day to be fully alive.

About Juicing For Health