In April 2014 the city of Gothenburg, Sweden's second-largest city, announced that it would test a six-hour working day for some municipal staff on full pay. The aim was simple: find out whether shorter days would mean fewer sick days, better health and staff who worked more effectively in the hours they were there. The best-known result came from an elderly care home called Svartedalen, where assistant nurses worked six-hour shifts for almost two years. Sick leave fell and staff reported feeling better, but the trial was expensive and the city ended it in 2017.
How the Gothenburg plan was meant to work
The idea was championed by Mats Pilhem, the Left Party deputy mayor responsible for the proposal. The design was a comparison: one group of staff would move to six-hour days with no cut in pay, while a similar group stayed on standard hours. After the trial, the city would compare the two groups' sick leave, health and wellbeing.
Pilhem argued that in jobs such as social care, the problem was not a shortage of staff but the tiredness that builds up over a long shift. He told The Local that the city hoped six-hour staff would take fewer sick days and feel better both mentally and physically. He also pointed to a car service business in the Gothenburg area that had already moved to shorter shifts.
Why critics were sceptical
Opposition politicians saw the plan as an election-year gesture, since Sweden voted in September 2014. They also pointed to earlier experiments, as reported at the time:
- In Kiruna, in the far north, around 250 municipal staff reportedly worked six-hour shifts for 16 years before the scheme was dropped in 2005, after a review found no clear health benefit.
- A trial in one hospital department in Stockholm was reportedly abandoned after staff in other departments resented the arrangement.
- A scheme for childcare workers was said to have been scrapped because it raised costs.
Pilhem rejected the election charge, saying the project had been in preparation for a long time and that opponents of shorter hours would always object.
The Svartedalen care home trial
The trial that drew world attention began on 2 February 2015 at Svartedalen, an elderly care home on the island of Hisingen. Assistant nurses switched from eight-hour to six-hour days while keeping full-time pay. To cover the lost hours, the city hired extra nurses, 14 at first and about 17 by the end.
By October 2015 the trial involved 64 full-time and 16 part-time assistant nurses and cost about 8 million kronor a year. An early report described staff as less stressed, and residents said they had more time with staff and more activities. The city extended the trial to the end of 2016 so researchers could gather reliable data, and it ended in early 2017.
What the results showed
The final evaluation, led by researcher Bengt Lorentzon, compared Svartedalen with a control group of nurses on normal hours. Its main findings, as reported in April 2017, were:
- Sick leave: Svartedalen nurses took 4.7% fewer sick days over the trial, while sick days in the control group rose by 62.5%.
- Health and energy: staff on six-hour days said they were less tired, felt healthier and had more energy at home.
- Quality of care: the researchers linked better staff wellbeing to higher-quality care and more activities for residents.
- Cost: the extra staff cost about 12 million kronor (around 1.3 million US dollars) over the trial period.
The study did not try to calculate long-term savings from healthier workers or lower unemployment, which supporters argued would offset much of the cost. Critics replied that the city could not afford to expand the model across all its care homes. The council chose not to continue.
Myths and misunderstandings
"Sweden has adopted a six-hour day." It has not. The standard full-time week in Sweden is still 40 hours. Six-hour days exist only in individual workplaces and local trials.
"The trial failed." Not quite. On its own measures of health and sick leave, Svartedalen did well. It ended because of cost and politics, not because the results were poor.
"Shorter hours always raise productivity." The evidence depends on the job. In desk or creative work, people can often finish the same tasks in fewer hours. In care work, where a resident needs someone present around the clock, shorter shifts usually mean hiring more people.
What other workplaces can take from it
Several small Swedish firms and some private companies have kept six-hour days, and a Toyota service centre in Mölndal near Gothenburg has run one since 2002, reporting higher profits. Interest in shorter working time has since moved to the four-day week, tested in the UK, Iceland and elsewhere.
For employers, the Gothenburg experience suggests a few practical lessons. Measure sick leave and turnover before and after any change. Decide in advance who pays for cover in round-the-clock jobs. Run trials long enough to see real health effects, and be clear that the aim is better work, not just fewer hours.
Sources: SVT Nyheter Väst (October 2015); Bloomberg via The Jakarta Post (April 2017): the Svartedalen results; Wikipedia: Six-hour day; original 2014 reporting by The Local and the Daily Mail.
Related:- Swiss To Pay Basic Income 2,800$ Per Month To Every Adult
- World's 100 Richest earned enough in 2012 to End Global Poverty 4 Times over
- The Money Masters (Documentary): How Banks Create Money Out Of Thin Air
- Hidden Secrets of Money: A Video Argument About Debt and the Monetary System
- A Wealth-Inequality Video From the 2013 Archive
- José Mujica's Modest Lifestyle During His Presidency
- The Man Who Lives Without Money
- A Circulated Bulgarian Mortgage-Protest Story From 2013
COMMENTS