“Four-day workweeks are absolutely necessary for the advancement of the general public’s quality of life.” This statement from presidential candidate Lee Jae Myung may be ambitious, but it is not entirely out of the blue. The policy in question has been on the rise globally for the past few years, with certain domestic and international companies experimenting with a four-day workweek system.

Many proponents of the four-day workweek mention the need for wolibal (pronounced wo-la-bel) — a Korean abbreviation of the term work-life balance. The younger generations in particular seem to have discovered the exhilarating experience of enjoying life, with a survey by the Korean government showing that almost 20 percent more people in their 20s were likely to spend time on recreational activities than their parents’ generations. Therefore, many suggest that the four-day workweek is merely the latest extension of this shifting paradigm, pointing to examples of other countries successfully introducing four-day workweeks. This argument certainly does hold merit, with trials in Iceland, the United Kingdom (UK) and New Zealand showing decent results.

It is not entirely clear, however, whether Korea is ready to institute such a policy. The work environment in Korea is different from the ones in said countries, and blindly following those examples without proper adjustments could result in dire consequences. One of the biggest concerning points is the difference in free time. In Korea, the younger generations have more free time than the older ones due to the latter still being part of the overworked backbone of Korea’s rapid economic recovery during the 20th century. A Harmonised European Time Use Survey (HETUS) by the British government showed that young adults in the UK had far less free time than people in their parents’ generations, however, with a staggering difference of almost 1.5 hours per day between people in their 20s and 50s. Considering how they — younger workers who have longer to work and thus are more affected by labour policy changes — are the main benefactors of a shorter workweek, it is not clear whether the policy would have the same effects in such a dissimilar environment. It certainly would allow more free time for Korean youngsters, but whether this would be as effective as it was in the UK, or if it would even have a positive effect at all, is doubtful at best.

In fact, the argument that a four-day workweek has a positive effect was not always a given in previous trials all the time. A trial involving New Zealander trust company Perpetual Guardian showed how while some employees managed to adjust to the new schedule, others reported discomfort, being conditioned to five-day workweeks. This became a problem due to having to finish the same amount of work within a shorter timeframe, even resulting in some sectors of the company opting out of the trial mid-way. Managing Director Andrew Barnes explained that it was important to “pick the appropriate time to do a four-day week trial,” and that the aforementioned sectors had mistimed the trial to “the busiest time of the year.” With Korea still struggling to overcome the massive impact that the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has dealt to its economy, it is surely not yet an “appropriate time” to delve into such an endeavour. Not only is the risk of the policy backfiring present, even if it does succeed and provide more free time to employees, it is doubtful whether that time would be spent fruitfully amidst the pandemic.

Yet the point here is not that four-day work weeks are something to be rejected forever. The global trend seems to be shifting towards shorter labour hours, meaning the issue is not about if, but instead when and how the policy should be implemented. The Korean work environment is not prepared for such a drastic change, however, nor are the economic effects of the pandemic fully over. All the signs indicate that it is not yet time, for now.