The passage concludes that the shortened workweek policy would benefit both the individual employees and companies. However, the professor in the lecture holds a completely different opinion against the passage.
First of all, the passage claims that the shortened workweek will increase company profits. However, the professor argues that the shortened workweek policy will forces companies to spend more on hiring more staff. There are some additional costs of hiring new employees, such as training and medical insurance, as the amount of training expense and medical insurance expense is same for four-day workers and five-day workers. Also, the office space and computer equipment for the new staff are costly too.
More over, the passage expects that the overall employment will be improved because the companies need to hire more staffs to complete the work. The professor disagrees with this point because hiring new employees could be costly as mentioned above. Also, in order to save the cost, companies may force their employees to work over time or increase their expectation that the employees should take the same amount of workload even they prefer the shortened workweek.
Finally, the passage claims that the shortened workweek will improve the life quality of employees because they will have more free time working only 4 days a week. While it is undeniable the life quality of employee will be improved, the professor argues against the passage as it will also put their careers at risk. Employees who choose to work four days a week may lose their job credibility in front of the manager. Also, when it comes to promotion, there is good chance that the employees work with shortened week is less possible to get the chance than their colleagues who work for normal length of week.