The four-day week: promise, proof, then policy

The Opposition's four-day work week pitch is bold; government caution is warranted. Lea Hogg cuts through the noise: treat the four-day week as R&D. Run targeted pilots, link policy to productivity, and publish the data—output per hour, turnover, sick days, SLAs. Game Lounge's experience hints at what could work in Malta's context; the next step is evidence, not ideology.

---

When Alex Borg, leader of the Opposition, proposed a four-day working week in Malta's public sector, it sparked a nationwide debate on labour and productivity. The government responded cautiously. As Parliamentary Secretary for Social Dialogue, Andy Ellul explained: "The government's responsibility is to find a balance between the rights of workers and the productivity of employers."

This is more than a political debate. It is a test of whether Malta, a small, service-heavy economy with known productivity constraints, can adopt the globally discussed 100-80-100 model: 100% pay, 80% hours, 100% output.

Drawing on international trials and local business realities, Malta's path to a four-day work week hinges on precision. To understand what works, I analysed multiple international studies. I spoke with Malta-based CEO Richard Dennys, who has trialled the four-day workweek for two consecutive years at his company.

Global evidence: encouraging but conditional

The UK pilot from June to December 2022, across 61 companies and 2,900 workers, provides a striking example: 92% of firms continued with the model after the trial, 71% of participants reported reduced burnout, and average revenue rose by around 1.4%. Stress dropped by 39% and staff turnover fell by 57%. Analysts caution, however, that sectoral differences, national labour-market structures, and careful realignment of processes are crucial to replicating such success.

Richard Dennys

Closer to home, the Malta Employers' Association has expressed caution, with Finance Minister Clyde Caruana highlighting the need for careful assessment before adoption. Yet local innovators are testing the waters: Richard Dennys, CEO of Game Lounge, a Tier 1 iGaming affiliate, has found that measured output, rather than office hours, is the accurate metric of productivity. His experience offers locally grounded insight into what a four-day workweek might realistically look like on the island.

What works in Iceland is not a universal solution

Iceland's public-sector trials between 2015 and 2019, covering roughly 2,500 workers, reduced weekly hours from 40 to 35–36 while maintaining pay. Productivity remained stable or improved, stress dropped, and workers reported better work-life balance. About 86% of Icelandic employees subsequently gained the right to reduce hours.  

These trials relied on careful organisational adjustments and benefited from Iceland's coordinated economy, welfare system, and labour-market structure. Malta's service-heavy economy, reliance on foreign workers, and fixed-location sectors make direct replication unlikely.

Any attempt to shorten hours must therefore be paired with process redesign, careful measurement, and sector-specific adaptation.

Malta's reality

Malta faces structural challenges: labour shortages, reliance on foreign workers, and lower productivity per hour than some EU peers. The Malta Employers' Association warns that a "shift to a four-day work week would have significant negative effects, including productivity, output, labour costs and international competitiveness." Finance Minister Clyde Caruana echoed: "A shorter working week is not feasible under current conditions. When productivity goes up, I would consider it, but not now."

Without sectoral differentiation, careful pilot design, and rigorous measurement, a blanket policy risks creating a two-tier labour market, undermining morale and competitiveness.

Four-day week in practice

Game Lounge provides a practical example. CEO Richard Dennys ran a pilot from July to August 2024 and repeated it this year. Employees kept full pay while working eight fewer hours per week. Dennys reports that 97% of employees were happier, and 98% felt equally or more productive. "Balance isn't just about hours worked; it's about how that time is spent," he explains.

Dennys cautions that long-term data is needed: "Only with a full year of results can we truly understand the impact." He also notes that not all sectors can adapt: "If you have to be physically located somewhere, in restaurants, shops, fields, you can't necessarily make that day more efficient."

Policy lessons: measured, targeted, transparent

Malta should neither rush nor dismiss the four-day work week. Knowledge-intensive, digitally enabled firms are most likely to benefit, as Richard Dennys demonstrates. Structured pilots should be time-bound and measured against productivity, well-being, turnover, and sick days. Public-sector implementation needs to be carefully calibrated to avoid creating a two-tier labour market.

Policy must link to productivity. Malta's €100 million investment in technology and employer support points the way. In sectors like manufacturing, tourism, or healthcare, a four-day work week may require shift redesign, automation, or compressed hours while maintaining five-day coverage.

Transparency is key: framing trials as structured experiments with clear metrics builds trust among workers, employers, and policymakers. Dennys notes: "Yes, and it's fantastic for staff retention, because they really like it. We have so many positive stories about what people do with their Fridays."

Verdict: ambitious but grounded

The four-day work week is no longer fringe. It is a credible model, but not a one-size-fits-all solution. Malta's Opposition proposal is ambitious but under-specified; the government's caution is justified. The balanced path is a credible, visible pilot drawing on firms like Game Lounge, social partners, and transparent monitoring.

As Dennys puts it: "When people feel valued and trusted, they're more motivated to bring their best selves to work." Malta's challenge is to measure outcomes, not just hours. Done right, the debate is less about shorter weeks and more about smarter work. Done poorly, it risks becoming just another headline promise in a tight labour market.

---