Question 1) If this kind of system is so profitable and useful then why isn’t it more widely used? 2) What a?

[Muhammad]

Many organizations were downsized during the recession of 2008-2009. Thousands of employees
have been laid off in days. It was a matter of time that the whole organizations were dissolved and
every one was demanding bail out package from government. What more could be worse those
governments themselves were out of money and in fact governments were thinking how to bail out
themselves. It was chaos! Among one of them was Z-S Manufacturing.

Z-S manufactures electronic tubes of television. Z-S was also feeling the heat of recession as its
operating time was reduced by 60 % during this recession. It seems that they have no choice other
than organizational restructuring which means laying off the employees. The news of
organizational restructuring has built the tension between labor and management. Employees have
stopped working and the organization was facing continuous loss. The CEO, Mr. Bill, was against
the restructuring and believed that employees were the assets of an organization rather than an
expense. Therefore, he came up with an innovative plan.

He suggested a job sharing system, which later came to be called as “Switch Shift System”. This
system proposed to change the complete shift after some days. Some senior organization members
predicted that this system could lead the organization towards even greater financial crisis.
Nevertheless, Mr. Bill believed and respected the basic human principle (secure and respectable
job) would overcome the costs.

Under the system, a team worked for four days, from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm and another team worked
the night shift for four days, from 9:00 pm to 9:00 am. After four days, another two teams will take
over two shifts and previous teams will have four days off. This means rest of 3 days and 1 day of
paid training.

Initially, employees opposed to the Switch Shift System because they thought that their wages will
be reduced because there will be no overtime. However, they accepted the system as situation got
worse.

The Switch Shift System started to show positive results. There was a huge jump in the productivity
of the employees. Employees who didn’t have time for long rest now they had enough time for
continuous learning and development and all this was happening without halting the production
lines or firing any one. As a result of this system, profits were doubled from U.S. $342 million to
U.S. $684 million. But, this system reduced working hours by 150 hours per year and salaries were
increased by 8 %.

[simplicitus]

I know nothing about the details of the system or the company, but treating your employees well does improve the bottom line:
http://www.alternet.org/story/148975/hig...m_line_too
http[://www.portfolio.com/business-news/2010/05/19/harvard-publishes-study-that-shows-treating-workers-well-boosts-bottom-line

On the other hand, in most U.S. companies, the executives don't care about the bottom line; they care what is good for themselves rather than anyone else, including the company:
http://www.propublica.org/article/the-su...r-own-firm
which is exactly what economics predicts would happen:
http://www.economyandsociety.org/events/..._Elite.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E...nt_problem

In some other countries, where there is less manager turnover, the interests of the management are more aligned with those of the company as a whole and so companies treat their employees better, there is less employee turnover, and workers are more productive.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/0...americans/

You can see this when Japanese corporations open plants in the U.S. and Europe and the Japanese owned plants are more productive than those owned by the Americans or the Europeans:
http://ja-jp.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=64668829737
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-ar.../403/nummi
http://wardsauto.com/ar/nissan_most_productive/