[Not that I don't agree that many places would be better off with 4 day work weeks. But many wouldn't, and the prospect of paying people the same even when some people work in jobs where their productivity is very much directly in proportion to the time the work... is just pretty much nuts.]
It's not a 20% raise. This is the same pay for the same amount of work. It just cuts mandatory hours "on the clock" when no work is actually getting done.
Workers are still 100% responsible for the same full week of work and can be fired if they don't do it.
> "The idea is that employees work 80% of the time for 100% of the pay and maintain 100% productivity. It comes down to working more efficiently, including cutting back on unnecessary meetings."
As someone in North Carolina I'm glad I don't have to wake up to headlines of the state government pretending to try to pass strange utopian wishful thinking laws every few weeks. Not that we're perfect either, but the scope of ambition of CA politicians is so very, very, cute.
Has that California law requiring female board members (or else a punitive fine) for CA HQ'ed companies been struck down by the courts yet? I would be flabbergasted if that law survived the courts. Y'all have it strange out there.
The US is supposed to be a "free market" of governments. Don't like the government in California? Go to another state. Don't like that businesses are leaving your state? Vote for someone else.
If you say that losing any businesses -- regardless of the potential benefits -- is unacceptable, then you essentially have a completely stagnant state.
If all the US states are stagnant like that, and there is no innovation in legislation, then we end up with problems that we never even try to solve.
California's economy is not going to die whether this bill passes or not (although it certainly will not).
As you note: it certainly will not pass. I wouldn't have posed that rhetorical question for a 'innovative' law that had realistic prospects of passing.
And die? Who said die? The hyperbolic proposals cause harm without providing a benefit to the public. Sure, it's not going to kill the economy. But it's not arguably in our interest to antagonize the economy with over the top proposals that won't fly.
Plus there are plenty of problems the legislature could be solving. ... DOA legislation is a distraction and takes time away from more realistic proposals.
> Don't like the government in California? Go to another state. Don't like that businesses are leaving your state? Vote for someone else.
Expressing unhappyness with the actions of the legislature is very much a part of that process.