It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours

In many business departments, the question of to what pattern should employees work during the week, has become a contentious issue of debate and caused quite a stir among business managers. Different people may give various types of responses to this question based upon their social experiences. However, when it comes to me, I conspicuously declare that working in a consistent yet gradual pattern has several advantages in comparison with other option. Among the most predominant reasons in support of this contention, reducing work stress, and having better yields could be picked out for further analysis.

To commence with, a consensus has yet to be reached; however respecting the importance of enjoyable work condition, many scholars have asserted that the mental pressure that working in a little span of time could provide is significant to bear. When employees work long hours in a day they have to cope with numerous issues in little time period and this could conduce to stress and other mental problems. Although the perspective of working only three days a week in kind of appealing, the pressure it could provide outweighs its benefits. A brief assessment in this area discloses this proved fact that employees resent their work environment after practice working three days a week for long hours and hence being in unfavorable condition would lead them to psychological disorders. A vivid example can be given to shed light on what was elaborated above. According to the results of a recent research conducted in Oxford University, the amount of mental patient who worked long hours a day at offices was approximately twice with that of who worked shorter hours.

Beside the aforementioned point, the lowered yields that are due to working extended hours a day should not be underestimated. When employees work several hours a day they increasingly get exhausted; hence the productivity they offer will decrease. What is more, since the position and salary that individuals attain are connect directly to their performance, lower yields eventually reduce their salaries if not get them fired. Many scholars elaborate this idea by emphasizing this indisputable fact that, although it is generally presumed that working long could focus one's attention to work and thus enhance the yield, the practical prevalent pattern of business activity forms a distinctive voice. To be more impartial, many insightful minds asserted that having an extensive free time could aid people clearing their minds and therefore prepare them to do an efficient job in their office. But when we look at this issue providently, the trivial benefits of first approach can be overlooked by its undeniable disadvantages.

To put it in a nutshell, although many sophisticated people may think otherwise, I reiterate that the pivotal role of working consistently and gradually must be underscored. Back to the beginning controversial question, I cite a clear bias in favor of this indispensable fact that, responsible decision must be made aimed at paving the road for employees to cope with their jobs problems. To recapitulate, not only practicing the second approach could help workers avoiding mental problems, but it could also benefit them with higher yields that could lead to better job positions and salaries