The listening passage objected on the mandatory policy, which requires that companies should offer an option to their employees to work four day a week.
First of all, the reading passage says that shortened week would increase company profits. However, listening passage says that this would not increase company profits rather companies would have to spend much more on the new employees. For example hiring more employees and giving them training and medical benefits. The cost of things like medical facilities given to the employees would be same whether they work for four days or five. In addition to this adding more employees needs more office space and more computers. Thus, these additional costs would cut into the companies profit.
Secondly, work four day a week would not increase employment and companies might choose to ask their employees to do overtime to make up the difference because hiring more employees would be costly for them. In addition, companies would raise their expectation from the employees that they should do more work. If this happens there will be no additional jobs and the current work environment will be more unpleasant, as the professor says.
Finally, the lecture says the more free time given to the employees at home will risk to the quality of their life. For example, companies would not give promotions to those employees who work for four days a week as on management position there needs employee who work for five day a week. Further more, working four day a week will effect on the employees career and reduce their chances of getting job when the economy is down.