budget director shalanda young and treasury secretary janet yellen testified on president biden's 25 budget request and bcommittee hearing live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3, c-span now our free mobile video appr online at c-span.org. >> get contact information for members of government right in your hand when you preorder your copy of c-span's 2024 congressional directory. with bio and contact information for eveou the 118th congress, porn information on congressional committees, the president scabby, federal the congressional directory cost $32.35 plus shipping and handling and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. scan the code on the right or go to c-spanshop.org to preorder your copy today for delivery this spring.

>> gop lawmarsushack against senator bernie sanders proposal for a 32 hour during hearing saying such a mandate what hurt workers and crushed small business. the vermont independent chairs the health, education, labor and peions committee. the hill reports the proposal would also pay 1.5 times the workers regular salary for work days longer than eight hours and double four days longer than 12 hours. the senate hearing is an hour half. >> [inaudible conversations] >> okay. all right. are you ready to go?ap

the senate committee on health, education, labor and pensions will come to order. this has been a shortened week so think you're going to see hearings taking place all overoe senators drifting in and out but i want to thank all of our panelists for being with us. this morning we are going to be talking about an issue that is very rarely discussed in the halls of congress or the senate, and that is the need to reduce the standard workweek in the united in fact, the last time as we understand this and held a hearing onld the subject was in the year 1955x i think maybe tot discussion at that hearing the senate heard from walter roosa,

who was at that point ahead of the united auto workers and congress of industrial and regas one of the great labor leaders of his time. and this is what walter said at ■

later, despite an explosion as we all know in technology and massive increase in worker productivity, nothing has changed. think about that. huge transitions which seen in the economy but in terms o chan. why we have not discussed this issue for a long time in congress, this needless to say an issue. in '18 86, one of the central planks of the trade union movement in america an eight hor workday with a simple and straightforward demand, quote, eight hours for work, eight hours for for what you are willing. that was back in '18 86.ericansk and tired of working 12 hour days for six or seven days a week with very little time for

rest, relaxatio families. they pe government, and they achieved real after decades of struggle. in 1916, president woodrow wilson signed legislaon intght r work day for railroad workers. six years later, the ford motor company became one of the first major employers in america to establish a five day work week for autoworkers. here's something i believe that most people in our country do not know. in 1933, the united states senate overwhelmingly passed legislation to estab a week by f 53-30. that was 1933. while l failed as a result of a decision from corporate america, a few years later,

president franklin delano roosevelt signed the fair labor standards act into law and a 40 hour workweek was established in 19, myri in 1940. unbelievably, 84 years later, despite massive growth>ñ worker -- technology in worker productivity, millions of workers are working longer hours for low wages. because this is not an issue we talk about enough. today in america,americans, 18%e i'm in now worked over 60 hours a week, and 40% of employees in america now work hours a week. we were talking about a four hour work week 80 years ago and that's what people today, despite the explosion of technology, working today. the sad reality is that

americans now work more hours than the people of any other wealthy nation. we will talk about what that means to the lives of ordinarys0 in 2022 in the united states -- and i hope people hear this, logged 204 employees in japan. 279 more hours than workers in the united kingdom and 470 more hours than workers in germany. despite these long hours, the avag america makes almost $50 a week less then he or she did 50 years ago after adjusting for inflation. no let that sink in for a moment. think about all of the extraordinarynges in technology that we have seen over the last 50 years. computers, robotics, artificial intelligence, and the huge

increase in worker productivity that has been achieved during that time. in factories and warehouses, machinery did not exist then or were only used in primitive forms. there were no checkout counters that utilized barcodes. as a result of the extraordinary technological transformations that we have seen in recent years, american workers are now over 400% more productive than they were in the 1940's. extraordinary. technology has made working people far more productive, and what has been the result of all that productivity increase for working people? almost all of the economic gains of that technological trsfight to the top while wages for workers have remained stagnant or even worse.

while times as much as their average employees, workers throughout the country are seeing their family life fall apart as they are more and more time at work, and missing their kids birthday parties, little league, baseball games and just■y their families. and what stresses them out even further is that after spending all of tir te at work, many of them still are living paycheck-to-paycheck and cannot take care of their basic needs. at a moment in history when artificial intelligence and robotics, and i hope we all understand the jobs that people have todayin't going to be there in many cases in 15 years. the economy is going to be transformed by artificial intelligence and robotics. the question we are asking today is a pretty simple question, do we continue the trend that technology only benefits the people on top, or do we demand

that these transformational changes benefit working people, and one of the benefits must be a lower work week, 32 hour workweek. this is not a radical idea. friends, the seventh largest i■n world, has a 35 hour work week and is considering a 32 hour workweek. norway and denmark are working about 37 hours and belgium has already adopted a four day work week. what we are going to hear■y work week. what we are going to hear today is there are companies all over our country and all over the world that have adopted the 40 hour work week. you know what they found? they found that productivity actually went up becausers were able to focus on because workers were able to focus on their work. there were not exhausted. they were happy to go to work. so talking about today is of enormous importance. who benefits from the exploding technology? wealthiestpl

phenomenally well or working people who are falling further and further behind? with that let mehi give the mic over to senatoras you chair san. a three to work week with no loss in pay my staff has volunteered to be the test case for that. water? it's free money if you will. no loss in pay but you are a lot less. but in reality there is no free lunch. ones who would pay, not get paid extra. the government mandated at 32 hour workweek workweek requiring businesses to least an extra 25% per hour would frankly destroy some employers. they would ship those they woule

to replace those workers for whom they have increased expense. expense. or they would dramatically increase pricescr to mak to taln economics leading to inflation. this wouldti be napalm upon the fire if this poses and committed it would threaten millions of small businesses operating on a razor find enough workers. now they've got the same workers but only for three-quarters of the time and they have to hire more. in fact, there's even an incentive for them to down so thery make everybody part-tie and then didn't they donate certain which are certain requirements required for full time. if a wants to try at the beach are workweek for themselves, federal law allows it. we don't havems to mandate it. we will hear from a b thinks itd

for the business can makes them more competitive, go for it. we think that's a good thing. but by the way,ote that the chair has not done that with his staff. why? because there'ser a certain amot of work required for the continuity of the work. basic. now if the business needs to maintain a 40 hour work week to remain competitive, not just locally but globally, a government mandated 32 hour workweek would be catastrophic. government should not be in a basis of undermining and employers ability to keep the doors open with unreasonable and perhaps unconstitutional mandates. the chair fickle he says the nation in the world. we are. how did we achieve it? american work ethic the second to none. and we have balanced weer don't have people as they do in china working 80 hours a week but we have that balance. this disrupts that balance and weil status of being the world's wealthiest nation if we kneecapped the

american economy with something which purports to be good for the american worr will lead to offshoring of jobs seeking for a lower-cost labor force. now, there is a reason that no other country has mandatory 32 hour workweek. when japan shortened its workweek from 46 to 30 hours between 1980-1996 between 1980-1996, economic output plummeted 20%. belgium as a true nose has a four-day work week but those workers workn those four days. now, and i and other technologies have the potential to dramatically increase economic productivity. ihinke shoul bipartisan hearing on the potential impact ofn an eye on the american economy. if we havean this, my gosh, , im atic and i see one of dr. schor, you are not digested wendy to explore it. my office published a white paper and in rfi to stakeholders last year now this committee

should approach ai and impacts upon health, education, and la next steps the feedback. but a mom and pop restaurant is not releasing increase prodti f ale finding enough people to fill shifts,, and it would require them to pay for a 40 hour w hours of work, how will the turnout for the mom-and-pop restaurant? hospital staffing shortages, we talked about that. threatening public health. why are we passing along to exacerbate that shortage? uawte push for 32 are workweek. it didn't happen. but now i don't think the federal government should mandated frankly just to kind of placate a democratic political base. frankly, this seems as an exercise tond help the uaw lay the groundwork t for future negotiations. f if the uaw wishes to discuss this we should do so, they should sargaining table. by the way, i apologize if this should give anyone false hope

but a mandatory 32 hour workweek is bad policy. i' n even democrats unanimously support this, but it with the biden administration is heading. they're up for a tough reelection and then maybe more than willing to use executive authority to do something which does not come which actually has bipartisan opposition. there's been a concerning pattern from democrats of prioritizing policies to helpe d businesses, the workers and the businesses themselves. recently the biden administration proposed a new overtime rule dramatically increasing overtime pay threshold by 55%. that will result in layoffs and the result in more inflation. the biden administration released a new joint employable threatening the viability of the franchise model that employs over 9 million workers and has empowered people who have a dream of becoming a small

erbusinessperson to become a sml business person and oerse would notrw have. .. independent contractor rule jeopardizes the ability of 27 million americans work as independent contractors, with the flex ability to pick their own hours and work for multiple businesses, but their independence and protection from forced unionization has made restricting this freedom a top priority. these policies hurt the american worker and contribute they contribute to inflation. as i said, i'm excited to work with thete chair on the hearingo discuss a.i. and new technologies our technology. there is bipartisan interest but we are working instead(c upon a bill will neveril pass congress

and detrimental for americans. wi t yield. >> we have a knowledgeable panel. panelist for being with us today. we will begin with the international president of the united automobile workers. he is a 29 year member of the and started as an electrician and led the uaw in negotiating a story contract which substantially waged -- raised wages and benefits for the workers of that union. thanks for being with us. >> good morning, chairman sanders, dr. cassidy, and members of the committee. i'm here to talk about one of the most important issues to any union leader, any working-class person, any us senator, any human being. and that is our time.

as president of the united auto workers, i represent 400,000peos industries, and 600,000 retirees. and i know when my members look back on their lives, they never say “i wish i had worked more.” when people reach the end of their lives, they never say “i wish i'd made more money.” what they wish for is they wish they had more time. that's what work does. we are paid for our■ñ when we were, we are sacrificing time with other people, friends, and other things we wish to do. but time, like every precious resource in our society, is not given freely to the working class. since the industrial revolution, we have seen the productivity of our society skyrocket. with the advance of technology, one market is now doing what 12

workers used to do. more profit can be squeezed out of every hour, everyinute, every second. there was a time when this phenomenon was supposed to lead to workers getting their time back. getting some of their lives back. nearly 100 years ago, the spoke of the future of workers' time. his worry was that with all the gains in productivity, we wouldn't know what to do with ou he predicted a 15-hour work week. 100 years ago. in my own union, i go back intol fight for the 30-hour week, an idea that was alive and well for -- back in the 1930's and 1940's. but today deep into the 21st , century, we find these ideas unimaginable. e longer hours.

we have workers working seven days a week, 12 hours a day. there are union, union or not, working multiple jobs, they are leaving to workgg paycheck-to-paycheck. we find workers today later in their 60's, 70's, and 80's because they cannot afford to retire. deaths of despair from addiction and suicide, of people who don't feel a life of endless, hopeles. asquence of advances inl despaiz technology, workers have been sacrificed at the altar of greed and they've been stripped of their dignity. we have a mental health crisis we talked about a lot in this

country, but we never talk about the causes of that. there have been studies done, increases in stress from working seven days a week, 12 hours a day, your sacrifice of family life and things you want to pursue, is because of increasing cortisol levels which lead to heart disease, cancer, strokes. given all those enough to get to retire, typically they have worked themselves to death their entire life, they face the replacements, hip replacements, shoulder surgeries and the rest of their lives figuring out how they will survive. it is sad to say t in 1933, the u.s. senate passed legislation to establish a 30 hour work week, but due to te opposition that legislation failed. but in 1940, resident franklin delano roosevelt signee fair labor standards act establishing the 40 hour workweek. 84 years ago 40 hour week was

established. since÷■ then, we've had a 400% increase in productivity, but nothing has changed. that why in our victory campaign we had our stand up strike, we raised the flag forte and that's why 75% of americans in her contract■at fight becausy are all living the same reality. who is going to act to fix epidy work? are the employees going to act? will congress act? how can working-class people take back their lives and take back their time? many in this room will say people just don't want to, or working-class people are lazy. but the truth is, working-class people aren't lazy, they are fed

up. they are fed up behind and stripped of dignity as wealth and equality -- inequality spirals out of control. that in america, three families have as much wealth as the bottom 50% of citizens in this nation. america is better than this. i want to cse there is an epiden this country a people who don't want to work. people who can't be bothered to get up every day and contribute to our society. but instead want to freeload off the labor of others. but those are not blue-collar people. those aren't working-class ■hpele. it's a group of people who are never talked about for how little they actually work and produce and how little they contribute to humanity. the people i'm talking about are the wall street freeloaders, the masters of passive income.

those who profit off the labor of others have all the time i we this country run, the people who build the products, contribute the labor have less an less times for themselves, their families, and for their lives. so our reunion will continue to fight for the rights of working-class take back their lives and take back their time and we ask you to stand up with the american workers and suppo usen. sanderss is an economist at boston college. she is a lead researcher for four day week global trials of instituting four day weeks with five days pay. she has been researching work time since the author of the book, the overworked american. thank you for being with us. >> thank you, good morning, i'm

honored to have this opportunity to support the 32 hour work week act. we are here today because for 84 years, there has been no ■5 workweek. since 1950, the productivity of the american worker has risen to 400%, yet full-time employee still logged an average of 41.9 hours a week. annual hours even rose in the 1990'sthese trends depart from e steady reduction in hours between 1870 in world warfrom ty countries. the average american is on the job 400 more hours a year than in germany, 200 more than in and the u.k. and more than the average japanese. this is despite the u.s. historically being the global leader in world's first five-dak country. this was the situation when the

pandemic hit, which brought with ry levels of stress and burnout, resignation and historically high job response, an increasing number of employees are shifting to a water day, 32 are week with no reduction in pay. i was asked to lead research on their experiences and in for date week global. ngo callet they include all sectors, health-care care, mom-and-pop restau construction, retail, non-profits, it, finance, and professional services, and even a police department in golden, colorado. in the u.s., 78 percent of these are small businesses with 50 or fewer■m employees, which is similar to the u.s. economy. our results have been extremely

positive for both workers and the companies. we have 26 well-being measures for more than 3600 employees, every one of which registers improvemen from baseline to the end of the trial. nearly 60% of employees experienced better work-family balance, anxiety, sleep problems, fatigue, physical and mental health improved for 40% of workers. 69% of employees have lower burnout scores. it is fins tell us the n one person reports that had it not been for the pilot, i wouldn't have had the time or the availability to get medical appointments and procedures which ultimately led to the early detection of something that might've proved fatal. that something was cancer. in our statistical modeling, we find that the larger the worktime reduction, the greater the increase in well-being.

ep problems and less fatigue or one reason. but the second is that a majority of employees register an incree they are more energiz, focused, and capable, partly as a result of organizationwide changes in work culture and processes. in response to methodological criticism, i will just say here that time, across place, and industry and contain a large number of variablesfor employert important number is 91%. that's■= the fraction of compans who have continued with a four day week after at least one full year. in the u.s. and canada, only two comp back to a five day schedule. their performance metrics reveal why.

resignation spell 22%, absenteeism decline 39%, revenue increased an average of 30%. some companies report that quality of service improved. after losing 50% of their inpatient nurse leaders during the first two pandemic years, temple university hospital gave them a four day week. patient outcomes improved and voluntary turnover fell to zero. if the u.s. adopts a four day week, 32 hour week, it is likely y productivity will rise. that has been the experience of both workers and management in our trials. it has what scholars have concluded from past reductions in worktime and it of course wealth -- with international comparisons come w=thr productivity are those with the shortest working hours. i began rhyme remarks by

referencinthe fact that so littt productivity increase has been put toward reducingzx hours has left american workers suffering from burnout and stress with families in special jeopardy. the pandemic. given the current robust rates of u.s. productivity growth, the promise of further large increases from artificial intelligence and the fact that over the last 84 years the standard workweek has been unchanged, it is now time for a 32 hour week. thank you. sen. sanders: thank you very much. our next witness is john lehman, chief strategy officer at kickstarter and co-founder of a nonprofit. he successfully introduced the four day work week at his company in 2022 and supports employers, unions and

policymakers advancing the 32 hour work week. thanks for being with us. >> good morning. as the chiefs strategy officer at kickstarter, i bring a unique perspective to this panel, having input minute and experienced a four day work week in our country 118 employees. our journey began during the pandemic, a period that completely upended traditional work norms and demonstrated how ingrained and potentially outdated some of our assumptions are around work. the pandemic also clarified that families and loved ones is the most valuable thing that we have. kickstarter is a data driven company and we studies and success stories demonstrating that a four day work week benefit both businesses and employees. we also recognize some common sense around how a four day work week could work. hours worked as a factor in

productivity not determinate. efficiency, focus, and employee retention are all equally or more critical. people arekers are already finding ways to rest at work. they're surfing the internet, they're just slowing down, they are stepping away just to get the energy to get to the work day. ■i would rather just give people back their time so they can properly rest. in april 2022, we initiated a six-month pilot. to maintain or improve overall productivity. to do that, the bargain we made with our employees was simple. they would get back an extra daa week, retaining the same salary and benefits and in exchange, we expected them to manage their time effectively, showp to work er week rested and ready to go, and get the job done. we were not going to scale back our ambitions or ougoals to the four day work week. the result of our pilot were clear. our goal achievement rate soared from 62% to5%.

customer response times, satisfaction rating stayed the same. employee retention increased from 8 toall while reducing avee weekly working hours by nine hours a week for each employee. e decision to stick with the four day work week and have kept it for two years. the most profound change has employees. in just two years, we've been able to return new -- nearly 10,000 days, more than 27 years. those are years of spending time with family and their children, volunteering in their counities, learning new skills, and taking care of their health. the value of that time is priceless a ubeen the greatest r transition to a four day work week.

the five-day workweek was established 84 years ago in the u.s.. critics back then also predicted doom. they worried that a week and would destroy the american economy. instead helped launch just to the front of a global pack. entire indtrs, the american middle-class became the envy of the world and the week and became a time when families and communities came together. with ai looming on the horizon, it's time for a much-needed update. the studies echo what we learned at kickstarter, that when piloted, the four day workworks. all 35 north american companies that piloted the four date workweek with us in 2022 have kept it. if it didn't work, for-profit companies would abandon it. you don't need theories or advanced data. you just need to see that the coanies that this tend to

stick with it. this is not just tech companies, these are manufacturing companies, health care facilities and pleas to perms that are making this transition. it can and must benefit all workers in our society. that's why the bill introduced by the chairman is so important. it would ensure that we are defining a new standard for weekly that benefits all,he■) m. with the opportunity we have now, it's important to ensure all american workers and our society reap the dividends. the four day work week is an issue backed by data that americans of all stripes in poll after poll sate matters to them. wiit affords the opportunity to deliver a boost to our economy and happiness to every american worker, to strengthen american families and communities the original weekends did just that, and it's time to do it again. sen. senter cassidy, do

you want to introduce your witnesses? >> a professor of the practice of data in st. louis, she is a senior fellow at harvard university and m.i.t. researcher and statisticiano discovery channel shows and is featured in a number of publications. what is most interesting is that she studied at the cordon bleu. so we axley cook something more than pancakes. we a>> chairman sanders, dr. cassidy, thank you so i am a statistician and we've heard a lot of statistics thrown around. so i'm here to make some sense of these and make sure we are analing them property.

proponents of the 32 hour workweek often point to statistical studies, work weeks can lead to increased productivity and improved employee well-being. claims based upon week and since this tickly -- statistically flawed data sets. there are significant flaws and limitations. it take a brief look at some of the studies to understand the statisticalinsurmountable doubte proposal for sustainability in the american work economy. many of the news headlines tout=@ing the studies discuss te stress or happiness levels of workers who work less time. inevitably, over the short term, rt pilot projects, it is not inconceivable to imagine that having -- happiness levels increase. the question end at no work?

statistical studies, long-term statistical studies ■lhave sho t increase over time, it goes back to the same level. for example, the sdymandatory rw a return to the same level of happiness after seven years. if you want to stressed out, just see what happens when their employers lay them off to hire part-time workers instead or have tclose their doors because they cannot make enough revenue. another major flaw in the studies is the self-selection bias. for example, the companies that choose to participate in some of the studies like the four day able tobal study are companies be adapted to a shorter workweek already, who can remove wasted hours. specifically only companies that are able to adapt to shorter

work weeks that tend to participate, cutting out they say extraneous meetings, coffee breaks, having more independent work i'm going to zoom. however, over 70% of th>e s. with their hands. they don't necessarily have extraneous meetings or to cut out. so statistically you cannot apply this type of cutting of hours across the entire economy. also given the types of potentiy capable of cutting their workweek, we could see a divide of the richor having to take on three part-time jobs in order to pay the bills. we also potentially did older eressarily physicallyo the same amount of work in a shorter time. this happened to the great detriment of that population during the great depression. in terms of increase

productivity by shortening the week, the statistics just aren't there and there are specific shutting -- studies that show the opposite. economic output fell by 20%. another largely touted study in iceland had a pilot program cutting the workweek by about four from 2015-2019. the results were blasted all over the headlines as an overwhelming success. what is not reported on i goverr taxpayers have to shell out almost $30 million extra a year toigmore heah-re because of this experiment. in spain where there is a pilot program, the companies that participate get access to a multimillion government bond in order to participate. microsoft tested a four day work week by shutting down its japan office every friday for the

the statistical claim is that this resulted in a 40% increase in productivity. correlation is not necessarily causation. productivity increased over a very short period of time during a low producvity overall productivity was already at a 75 year low. there is no statistical evidence to mandate of a 32 hour workweek. in fact, there is clear evidence against it. if it works for some companies in some sectors, that is great. but it cannot be applied to all sectors. thank you. >>■a next is mr. roger king, implement counsel at the hr policy association which represents the chief human resource officers of neahe is hr

relations attorney, spending more than 40 years, he began at eight law school as a council for this committee. he tell me he was a peer with angus king, one of our colleagues and he worked with a very young teddy kennedy and others. thanks for being here, mr. king. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, dr. cassidy, memos of the committee. it is indeed a distinct honor to come back before this committee again. i had great experiences here working with fritz mondale, ted , and angus king and i used to go out for an adult beverage with th commi(áttee. so thank you again for having me back. i am appearing here on behalf of the hr policy association. we represent approximately 10%

of the private sector workers in this country who are corporate members. to start the discussion about mandating 32 hours, over eight hours, over 12 hours, these are concepts that have consequences. this prosaly works if you reduce eight hours of work week and have the workers have the same levelf productivity that they had at 40 hours. it just doesn't work in many industries. it doesn't work economically, it doesn't work operationally. what we have is what i call a productivity gap where we have work that is not yet getting done for the 32 hour workweek situation. how do you feel that gap? as you mention, senator cassidy,

the inflationary impact of this type i noted this week that the u.s. bureau of labor statistics said that we have inflation at 3.2%, picked up from january. our core inflation is 3.8 or more. ■the 2% target rate for the fed. this is bad policy as a results to the consumer. what do i mean by that? uctivity gap by cutting back hours are making some adjustment to your business, you pass on added costs to th■te you have t. the other important point i'd like to makething we are hearing from workers today. they want as much flexibility as possible, as to!4 how, en, an where they perform work.

the proposal of the chairman, in all due respect, e with that fl. workers today want to be able to spend more time with their families. ÷÷i certainly agree with the witness on that point. they also want to select when, where, and how they work. let's goo the history of the fair labor standards act, and has been mentioned already numerous times. if you go back and look at the history of the new deal andfrans an issue in this proposal, it was to increase the number of jobs in the country. the evidence was clear, that proposal was put in place by the congress to increase the number of who come to the workplace. what we are seeing today in the proposal of the chairman creates a real problem for our country.

we already have a tremendous shortage of workers. indust a industry doesn't have enough workers today. this proposal for many employers will cause even further worker shortages. the flexibility factor is a problem. we do command the chairman and this committee hearing on the impact of ai, it is considerable. senator cassidy, your suggestion for a bipartisan discussi is excellent and we would welcome that. there's no question ai can increase productivity. and there is no question that increased wealth can's what i cd wealth. and we agree that workers and employers alike should share in that wealth. but the way to go about that is let the market determine that distribution of wealth. if the union can negotiate a 32

hour workweek, so be it. if he can convince the to■zpanies in this country to do it, so be it. but let the market determine how the distribution of wealth is gog to occur. finally, as an overall point, we commend the committee are starting a discussion about the fair labor standards act. in the country. chairman, you're absolutely correct, we need to re-examine it, the amountgation that occurs regarding the fair labor standards act is way over the top. we need to address more clarity in the statute. i've listed in my testimony a number of problems with the 32 hour workweek. i would close with this comment, i just saw the senator's bill last night, and it is even more extreme than i had thought we were going to be discussing today. the requirement to pay overtime over eight hours will be a

significant economic adverse impact on many companies, and the requirement to pay double over 12 hours, i think the only state in the country that does that is california. from our perspective, that is quite extreme. one last point on example just to bring this■g home, health cae employers in this country generally employ registered nurses for three 12 hour shifts. they to three workdays, but they are 12 hour shifts, and that works, by and large. this proposal would require and 32 hours, four additional hours of overtime. in addition it would require overtime over eight. that will have a very negative impact on the health care community in this country and cause health care expenses to go up. lth care community is to get more nurses, more workers into the employment

stream, not toat will cripple employers and cause incremental cost. thank you very much. sen. sanders: thank you very much to all the panelists. t me just briefly respond to mr. king's statement about letting the market decide who from a transition to advanced technology. for the last 50 years, the market has done just that, and the result has been there has been a $50 trillion transfer of the top 1%. the bottom■t so after those 50 years, there are millions of workers today who are worse off, but we have re income at wealth inequality than we've ever had in the history of the country.

so i am not quite in favor of letting the market decide. that may begin thenot to offende because we only have a few members here and it is an important subject. i don't want to talk about ■statistics, we've heard a lot f statistics. you have been with the union for over three decades, no doubt as president you've met thousands of workers and thousands of retirees. tell the american people what it's like to work on a factory floor, in some cases -- i learned this recently, there are people today in america who are working seven days a week, 12 hours a day, unbelievable. but talk about the impact on the life of a worker mentally, is doing the hard work day after day, year

after year. what happens to that person? >> i find irony and some of the statements i've listened to, but the typical life of aworker, anr not, it axley works for nonunion because they have less rules that govern the workplace. typically many typical schedules and manufacturing are 12 hours ■schedules, and they are seven days a week. a lot of these places run around the clock. when you're standing on concrete floors 12 hours a day, stevan -- seven days a week year after year, there's a lot of wear and tear on a person's body. as i say,en they age, they end up in their older working years come in up getting near replacements, hip replacements, shoulder surgeries. i just find irony in some of

this, mentally the stress of working seven hours a day, when you don't get to see your kids, you don't get to go home and have dinner with your kids, you don't get to make sure they are getting their homework done or spend quality time with family. even if you don't have a family, if you have quality time for yourself. sacrificed you are working 12 hours a day, either sleep or time with family, something else is sacrificed.wee day. i find irony in some of the comments made by mr. king as far as the shortage of worke.v i don't believe we have a shortage of workers in this country. i think covid made people wake up and r■vealize wha i working r $12 an hour at 12 hours a day and multiple jobs just to get by. the shortage of workers we see don'be shortage, i believe it's the fact that people woke up and decided i'm not going to leave my home for

$12 an hour when i can even afand also going back to letting the market determine this, it's in talking point about passing costs onto to the consumer. i've witnessed inflation last four years thawa by workers, it wasn't caused -- it was caused by, two words, corporate greed. it■< is consumer price gouging. we've got to get focused on the reality here. sen. sanders: thankwe are the wn the history of the world, and yet we have people who are stressed, yet we are working longer hours as i underthen any.

how does that happen? the reason for the long hours in this country have to do with the kinds of things we've been talking here today, and the fact the american worker has not had enough power in the market to reduce hours. buth other aspects as well. one of the things we know from economic studies is that when inequality increasesworking hou. so the rise in inequality in the united stateswhich she referred to earlier, is one of the primary causes of longer working hours in the united states. >> five. from your perspective, this is u have implemented it. talk a little bit about the

impact it has had some of the transition to a four day work week in your company, the impact that it has had on the workers there. brexfor our workers. i have been told that this is one of the most impactful things they have experienced in their lives because a lot of these■m workers are able to spend time with their kids. they are learning new skills. someone who works for me learn how to use ai on his days off and is much more efficient a result. they are learning new skills that are not related to work. they are just participating in communities and volunteering. senator sanders: our workers more focused when they come back? >> yes. workers are much more focused. they are better rested. ■4áthey are dedicated to the tak at hand in a different way, and teams stay together longer. theh more robust because you are not bringing people out. you are not having to deal with turnover costs. senator sanders: talk about

turnover. one of the great costs to businesses is a lot of turnover and having to train new workers. what do you think the impact of a 32 hour workweek would be on them? shocking how much it changed turnover and what impact that had on our productivity. that means people have longer tenure. we don't deal with hiring. the costs of hiring, the time of hiring someoour goals don't get- people want to work. the notion that, i don'tnow, americans are lazy, that some people seem to have, it's inaccurate. people want to work in a way that it's balanced with the rest of their lives and they will stay in those jobs longer if the job is balanced with the rest of their lives. senator sanders: thanks very much. senator cassidy? >> i yield to senator braun. >> thank you before i got here,

37 years spent running an enterprise that would encompa that scrappy navigation of how hard it is when you are signing the front side of a paycheck to get a little business to ever get beyondt. as we grew into a regional and then national company, things change as you evolve and we have had discussions before. i am a proponent of high wages and good benefits. i have en want to be able to nee and bargain but there is such a big difference in terms of that dynamic and then wrapping it with mandates. that would never enable most of what compres our economy which would be small businesses, mainstream ones to be in a position to where they would have to live with some type of even what we are talking about

and i think even for most business owners, if they can, they are going to weave that into what they are able to offer their employees. and we have had the conversation. big corpatplaces where they havd the market, i think there is a legitimate discussion of how you spreadalth within between employees and public companies and a lot of times, professional management, that would seem to, you know, rake in levels of pay that i never thought were possible. what i want to get back to is how i do with trying to do anything from this place that there to where i just don't think they could survive. i think that it is a legitimate

issue to tabout voluntarily and if you are good at what you do, and you are going to keep employees, you will want to weave it in. it is a legitimate issue to bargain for at that highest level of large workforces. that is as far as you can go. ke your's, mr. leeland. he would not be in business if you are not open xfor almost ani am aware of including my wife's business in our downtowth now n5 years. it just would not work. keep that in mind. i want to start with this particular question. i want to focus on how this would work and with small businesses. i am not worried about big corporations. they generally are going to land on their feet anyway and i believe they ought to be negotiated with for all the things you might do to improve

the position of a worker there. but what about mainstreet and small business? we will start with you. mr. king. >> part me. sorry. >> i sho this point. i think it's really important to note that so many of these studies that have been done in these pilots that have shown inedis that it is self-selection. these companies are choosing to be part of this. they are able to cut out extraneous meetings and able to shorten coffee breaks. they are able to go to remote >> i never heard of anything you just mentioned in a small business. that just is not there. we try and do it so we don't run out of question for mr. leeland. mr. king, would you weigh in on that? >> good to see you again, senator.

this doesn't work for small business, for any type of business. if you can't measure productivity correctly that productivity gap satisfied, the proposal that the chairman is putting in legislation today would require overtime, overrate . it would require overtime over 32. it would require overtime doubletime, over 12. so a small business needs to have flexibility obligations in their committee. they employer needs them sometimes more than any, sometimes less and you know that from your business. the bill we are talking about here today interferes with that flex ability. it just is not sound policy. >> thank you. mr. leeland, would you agree that your business has certain characteristics that probably made it securely or to you being

le to do that or do you honestly believe that would be transferable into the multitude of busesially out on main street? >> our business has characteristics that are not unique but lend themselvestowaro a four day work week. however, the pilots that dr. sure has worked on show that this is possible across multiple industries. different. the transformation looks different but we have seen manufacturing, construction, health care, police departments all do this successfully. >> thank you. thank you. senator murphy. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i think this is a really important conversation to have regardless of where you stand on this issue and i think the fundamental question herth askil this wealth gone that has been gathered in this economy from these mas been going to

workers? if the uaw and other unions have to fight tooth and nail just to be able to g incre? i will tell you something we have not talked about yet. a lot of that money is going to trust funds.k into inherited wealth. and at some point, you know, we should have a conversation about that a little bit moretee and a. here is a stunning piece of data . for the first time last year, the majority wealth for new billionaires -- these were people who became billionaires in 2023 -- came not from their but through inheritance. it is the first time ever that that has happened. 1000 billionaires are expectedjj down $5.2 trillion worth of wealth to their heirs in the next 20 years. and so, you hope that if the

money isn't going to the workers, it is at least being recycled back into the economy. it is just not true. a lot of thaton down to kids whu know, in previous ages, would not have been able to enjoy that level of benefit i wanted to talk to you just a little bit about leisure time. you have talked about this alread you really importantly talk about the importance that your faith plays ine. this is a pretty wild thing happening in america today. 2070% of americans belong to a religious institution, but today, that number is 50%. this has been a pretty precipitous decline in the ability or willingness of americans to go to church or to a religious institution on a regular basis and i think that has■% our

society, but there are a lot of reasons for that. one of them is that americans just have less free time. hours to get the same standard of living for your family that 40 hours would have gotten you a few decades ago, you don't have time to go to wednesday night bible study. you might not have the ability to even attend church services on you can talk about church if you want or if you don't want, but it is just true that some of the leisure time activities, some of the institutions that americans found value and meaning in our less accessible when youave to work these long hours. i would love to hear your thoughts on that. >> i mean, you know's one of the things we talk about with the 32 hour workweek when we put that in our contract talks was the fact that we wanted to create worklifebecause it's juss

country, we are the most productive -- i mean, sadly, i say, not proudly, we are the most productive nation in the world which means our people are working more and more hours with less and less people and you know, this is -- it is worklife balance. when you are working multiple jobs to live paycheck-to-heworking seven day2 hours a day, something else is sacrificed in that. ends up happening. you have to sacrifice, you know, the ability to go to church, something else to do on a sunday.e you get a sunday off wn you have not slept all week and spend the whole day sleeping. that is the reality a lot of workers face on some of the schedules they work. and you know, the thing to me that i think -- i hear all this -- we have heard my whole■í.nisd

for people, trickle-down economics and all those type things but to me, we have to focus -- i do believe congress has an obligation on spending priorities and regulations and that may be an ugly word to people who represent business but you know, the point of this it should be done to create more jobs. more jobs at a better rate of pay that people have more free timeif government is going to it in business, the trillions of dollars we invest in business that our tpayers invest in business, those benefits should be going to working-class people , not strictly business, and that is the problem. all this money goes to business but down to benefit working-class people. >> listen, i agree with you. i think we should have an interest in leisure time. i think we should have an interest in making sure that people are able to find value outside of work. i'm glad they do but a lot of

people find more value by the institutions by the social clubs and churches that they affiliate and spend time with outside of work but that is just less accessible for people today and that should be a public policy interest of the united states i appreciate this hearing allowing us to talk about that. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator cassidy? although weso i will ask you to be tight with your questions. i totally agree with you. i was in a hospital for the uninsured. folks ron johnson decent pay. i agree with that. there is a little bit of confusion in what you are saying and i want to put out that confusion. when you say people are working longer to work more money, if you just cut them down to 32 hours a week, they are still making the same money so for them to grow their inme to eithk

overtime and/or take a second job. and yes, there's companies that work 24/7 but the they work 40 hours a week or 41.3 hours per week. so i think we have to be kind of clear on that and lastly, of course, productivity is not more hours to make the same money. productivity is more work per by machines in which case there's less wear and tear on the body, not to say that there's not wear-and-tear on the body. we thi o whole point. when you mention that decreasing hours worked peeproductivity, il sense to me. when i go to spain and go to mcdonald's, they don't have somebody at the front desk to take my orderer. they have a machine that i push a button on and it dispenses it and our department of labor has said that if we raise minim wage, there will be a net loss of jobs because people automate

in order to decrease their labor cost. how would, if you a speaking would raising the labor costs by having fewer hours worked per week for the same salary be any differen raising the minimum wage in terms of an incentive for net loss of jobs by replacing workers with automation? >> yes, thank you for that questi.let me just respond. two points. resting no increase in second job holding in our studies, by the way. the impacts that we are seeing .vhere are not labor displacing because people are able to make up that productivity in the four days that they had in the five days. >> that surprises me. intuitively -- i am a doctor -- so intuitively, when i read about the nurses working shorter

hours, i will just say that according to the pennsylvania hospital association, 3 of our impositions -- of our positions are unfilled and the hospital spent the $5 million5o for nurse overtime because of a nursing shortage. so i am not reear that because they work less hours but they had to pay more for overtime. >> these are for their nurse managers because the other nurses are on these three-day schedules and so forth. so -- and this was put into place two years after the pandemic started. so the nurse managers are working less, not the rns themselves. >> correct, because they are not on i am almost out of time. i'm going to move. we are going to get a health bill. my staff is wking 80 ho■s a week. any time they call me on a saturday or sunday or monday on

a holiday, they are fully prepared. when you all have a big crunch tiadline has to hit and you have to move. people still only work 32 hours? >> no, it is a norm. it is a question of what is your standard work week? >> that is all i was going to check. i look at france's unemployment rate among tlike 17%. it's pretty amazing. for the next group, it's likeor. they have other labor laws as well but you had mentioned that this kind of sugar high of mores away but also that there is a lots of work as workers need to go and that please ? >> i think it is the same kind of ideas right when covid hit. we areh all banking bread and doing whatever we are doing and as covid went on longer, at home

or, you are sitting in your bed longer. it shows in the long-term to normal. we just see that happen all over again with people. i think we see it clearly in terms of unemployment rates in the same way. >> the other things that occur, the disruption in the economy, etc., did more to dtappiness tht you work a little less? indeed, there may be a loss of a job because of the impact upon you. >> what happened in france as people lost their jobs. >> just to make the point, there is nothing to prevent a baseness like mr. lee lind or temple university hospital or a select group of employees to have a policy which would be 32 hours a week so there's no reason for a mandate per se. companies can do that, just to make that point. >> absolutely, senator. . let's give flexibility to

workers and to employers. don't have government come in and directly in the opposite position of where we should be going. now, as for as the number of workers available in this we need to get more people back into the workforce for sure. study after study shows even if we did that, and i'm lookingt . chamber of commerce study, we would still have 3 million jobs open in this country. this proposal is going in the wrong direction. flexibility is what we need. >> first of all, i want to ask you this. you had mentioned -- i did not the association versus causation. you say that when there's more inequality, that people work longer hours. i did not quite understand that relationship. is that an association or causation? >> these are done with

macroeconomic studies so we believe they are causation but they are not controlled experiments. comment? >> if you do not have a controlled extremity, you cannot c statistics. >> i once gave a vaccine to somebody who became pregnant. just because it happens at the same time, it is not a causation. it is an association. >> these are highly sophisticated studies once gavei really would disagree with the idea that we can only know something if we have experiments. >> i am out of time. >> because people need to work more hours to keep up. because there is a comparative dimension to the way people's sense of -- >> i am notmilk costs more becay else is making more but that is another story. yes. king forward all

day, it's a great group of analysts.ç ... >> you talk a little bit about the different ways that peopleff have a shorter work week, takine day, a time each month off. what are some of the pros, and can concisely quick, i answer question, the pros and cons are the? >> yes, the majority in our studies, and thank you by the way, really wonderful to see you, are doing full days off. so over 90% of our studies are

doing full days off and that ular way too do this than shorter daily hours. although there's a little bit of variion. one thing we look at in our studies with whether or not having three consecutive days had a bigger impact on well-being, and we're surprised that it doesn't. in some of the people are taking those wednesdays off to get a break in the middle of the week. >> interesting. better or worse for small businesses? >> yeah, great question, thank you. over 70% of the businesses in our u.s. and canada sample have so i think this is proving to be an especially appealing thing for small businesses. and it t may have to do with stress thats of they're saying among their employees. i mean, one of the things were seeing is the t small number of, we are trying to figure out

what's,in among them, and so far the only thing we can say is wee that the ones who don't stop our. >> interesting. when is mayor when i first became mayor of denver in 2003 wewe had the worst budget recession ever and one of the stopgap measures we did was we compelled allve city employees o take friday afternoons off unpaid. needless to say, that was the perfect that nobody likes when on a tight budget to havet the end of the month. but people really liked it and you know, to the state that's come to get people that front y of february, we saw an increase in sales at that local resta, which is interesting and other retail sales went so there some accessory benefit. mr. leland, i'm going toki skip past you although i can't tell you how to set up in two of the chief vision officer for kickstarter because i i admiro much of what you'll have done.

i want to go to dr. vittert just because i found compelling that she was in 2018 the coolest person in scotland and that her television show liberties great american cookbook, which, is a still showing us out? >> it is. >> still showing a scotland. >> i need all the viewers i can get. >> we want to makee want to promote that. when i wasn' mayor and working through that and t a look this p last night whenlo i saw because it's not a common income interesting she seems to the left of mr. leland because her brother leland better was a journalist, , internationally successful and admired journalists with fox. he's based in denver when he first became mayor, so he schooled me or the educated me within the schoolfnk about these things. anyway, dr. vittert, one argument in favor ventilating a 32 hour worklz■" week is that te tech advances like theyy are going to make such a dramatic increase. how realistic do you think that

is and win with this productivity increases begin to show or begin to have benefit?■& use the wordi and don't necessarily know what that means. and as someone who works in this space, we don't know yet abilities ai is going to give us or machine learning. we are still trying to figure out what those words even really mean, so to say that there's going to be this explosion of productivity and wealth, we just don't know yet, and no one is saying -- i am certainly not saying -- it is above my pay gradeare in that. but mandating the reduction to a 32 hour work week is not the way to do that. >> got it. >> i hear that. same question to you because i think you talked a little bit more -- you have got into ai on a little bit of a deeper level. what is your feeling on that? >>■ tremendous opportunity for everybody, absolutely, but the

issue of distribution of wealth, the wealth dividend senator,■ from what we are really talking about here. i would point the committees intention to chart one in my testimony. ve gone similarly -- tracked similarly for decades. now, there have been gaps in different industries. there's been tim lags, senator, but market will solve this issue. surveying will negotiate hard for 32 hours, i am sure. others will have a take for 32 hours. we see work. but let the market decide this. don' this on employers. or employees. >> got it. great. go over just for a minute. when you were negotiating -- i introduced this notion of a 32 hour workweek. i■ mean, you have talked firsthand with large employers and large groups of employees.

ultimately, it was not inclu but were some of the concerns -- unique concerns we have not heard before that were raised by the employers and■' what do you think it would take to get those employers to move? i think in terms of the 36 hour work week that we tried w■9 may. it is roughly a 10% pay raise. that is the way to think about doing something like that. the level of appreciation of people having that friday afternoon off was palpable. you could feel it. what is your sense on that? >> i think it is just a fear of change, doing something different. i mean, you look at -- there are studies that have been done when especially factory workers in manufacturing, when they work anything after 10 hours, typically, they are not as productive. the wear and tr th day, there have been a lot of studies done on that that productivity

actually drops off so there are benefits to shorter working nd as a person who has stood on a line as an 18-year-old, i can vividly remember putting there. it is monotonous work, doing it over and over and over, and literally after two hours of that, you are just -- youw, your mind is wandering off. imagine doing that for 12 hours a day, seven days a week, having some semblance of worklife balance, but unfortunately, with the advances in technology, companies choose to eliminaob and squeeze more and more people, the remaining people, working more and more hours. and that just does not work. >> i appreciate that. i have many more questions which i will throw in in writing that i yield back to the chair. thank you all for being here. >> thank you. senator■i -- without objection.

mr. king, you can inform your clients that my legislation probably will not be passing tomorrow. >> they will be glad to hear that. >> i am glad to hear that. >> the point of this hearing is to raise at the congressional level something that has not been dis decades after decades. i think as all of us have understood, we are living in a difficult moment in american history. inequality then we have ever had before. senator murphy made the interesting point that for the billionaire class, now a ty of that wealth is being not earned by any but being transferred to children, ea iome, if you like. we are seeing ceo's making

350 times more than their woerpeople in america are living paycheck-to-paycheck. we have the highest level of childhood poverty of almost any major country on earth. many o older people are finding it hard to retire. so we have got to start asking some fundamental questions. this is an extraordinarily wealthy country.three people on- according to the rand corporation over the last 50 years, the rand corporation is not exactly a socialist organization -- over the last 50 trillion has gone from the bottom 90% of the top 1%. so in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, the vast majority of our people are struggling to put food on the table. they are living under incredible stress. ■nour life expectancy is significantly lower than other countries and for working-class

people, they live 10 years fewer than you were if you are upper-class. these are issues that have got to be discussed. i'm not suggesting that a 3chanf the issues that we have got to talk about is stress in this country, the fact that so many peo work exhausted physically and mentally. and the fact that we have not changed the fair laboract. this was in 1940, we came up with the 40 hour workweek, 1940. who is going to deny that the economy has not fundamentally and radically changed over that period of time? so to suggest that we have to ta in place 84 years ago does not make a lot of sense to me. so let me just conclude by thanking all off it's been a good discussion. i hope discussion continues, and thank you all very much for being herehe today.

for any senator who additional questions, questions for the record, will be due in ten business days. i ask unanimous consent to enter or work week and including a statement from congressman the conductd and business owners across the country. the committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] naud"f [inaudible conversations]

>> since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span have provided complete coverage in from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a seat to out issues are debated and the cited with no, no interruption and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> get contact information for members of government right in the palm of your hand when you preorder your copy of the c-span's024 congressional directory with bio and contact information for every house and senate member of the 118th tanfet, federal agencies and state governors. the congressional directory cosd

handling, and don't purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. scan the code on the right or go to c-spanshop.org to preorder your copy today for delivery this spring. the house will be . >> this year c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other.nce 1979 we have n your primary source for capitol hill providing announced unfiltered coverage of government. taking you to of theolicy ind de support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting. powered by cable. >> c-span is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening,x in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings

from the u.s. congres courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episode "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv