Kevin O’Leary believes in doing your work whenever you want so long as you deliver on time | Credits: Instagram/ @kevinolearytv
Kevin O’Leary, the sharp-tongued investor from Shark Tank, made waves this week by calling the four‑day workweek “the stupidest idea I have ever heard.” Even more sarcastically regarding the notion of a 32-hour work week, O’Leary said, “I think we should let the French go to a two-day workweek and then kick their ass internationally.”
The 70-year-old billionaire dismissed the concept on Fox News, declaring there’s “no such thing as a work week anymore” in the digital era.
O’Leary champions outcome‑driven efforts and remote work, insisting deadlines matter more than clocked hours. He acknowledged that the traditional 9-to-5, five-day-a-week work schedule is no longer what it used to be. In fact, with 40% of his staff working remotely around the world, he admitted he doesn’t care when his staff does their work, as long as it gets done on time.
“There’s no such thing as a workweek anymore anyway on a digital economy, post-pandemic,” he added. But his outburst comes against mounting global momentum. Pilot programmes, including Microsoft’s 2019 Japan experiment, recorded a remarkable 40 per cent rise in productivity and significant utility savings.
Four-day week outcomes are positive
Across Europe, where it is said to increase productivity and worker well-being, and in Iceland, where large-scale trials were run, the outcomes have been entirely positive. In Germany, it resulted in positive gains. France introduced pilot schemes for working parents last year. At the same time, in the UK, several firms, including Atom Bank, established a 100:80:100 model—80 per cent hours for 100 per cent pay—showing that productivity held steady under new conditions. UK Research and Innovation found that it reduces stress and illness, increases worker retention and shows no loss of productivity.
In the United States, the idea has reached Capitol Hill. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced the Thirty-Two-Hour Work Week Act, aiming to remove one day from the workweek without reducing pay, backed by Rep. Mark Takano and members of the progressive caucus.
California, Hawaii, Maryland, and Vermont focus on pilot programmes and task forces to evaluate real-world benefits for public employees.
Supporters argue that a shorter week cuts burnout boosts morale, and fuels productivity across the board. A 2022 UK trial found employee turnover dropped 57 per cent, sick days fell 65 per cent, and 92 per cent of participating companies decided to keep the system.
77% of Gallup survey respondents are in
For workers, a four-day workweek is more than just about having a longer weekend; it’s about providing extra flexibility and work–life balance, while also minimising burnout. According to a survey by Gallup, some 77 per cent of workers say a four-day workweek, even if it still means working 40 hours, would have a favourable impact on their wellbeing.
Critics, including O’Leary, warn that a mandate would overly restrict businesses and diminish client service. Small businesses fear hidden costs and the loss of overtime pay. Service industries worry about coverage gaps. Republican lawmakers question whether it harms sectors that still rely on human hours.
Congress remains gridlocked. The Sanders bill has bipartisan opposition and faces claims that it would overburden employers. Progress is slow, but state‑level experimentation continues. Trials in public sectors and private firms push the conversation forward.
In this landscape, O’Leary’s dismissals echo a stubborn resistance to change. He argues that remote, project-based performance matters more than the number of days worked. But as world markets test and report broad benefits, critics of reform face growing evidence on the other side. The four‑day week now stands less as fluffy idealism and more as a potentially transformative shift backed by data and real‑world results. Elliott’s waves of change may yet overrun his cynicism.
