MP Doran's proposal follows a proven trend A 4-day workweek is not about doing less work, it is about working differently

GREAT BAY--MP Egbert Doran on Friday asked the government of St. Maarten to explore a 4-day work week 𝘱𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘵 initiative for the civil service, a suggestion that firmly follows global trends. However, as he might have expected, this structure is not quite understood by the local population. Hence, we suspect, this was the premise for his recommendation to the Prime Minister that the government initiate a 𝘱𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘵 program, in which phase the feasibility, practicality and other government legal obligations can be explored.  

𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭:

A four-day workweek does not automatically mean less pay, because the standard calculation of wages is based on total weekly hours, not on the number of days those hours are spread across. In St. Maarten, the legal standard is a 40-hour workweek. That can be organized as five days of eight hours, or four days of ten hours. As long as the employee continues to work 40 hours per week, their salary remains the same.

This is why discussions about a four-day workweek are framed around compressed hours rather than reduced hours. The idea is not that workers perform less work, but that their schedule is reorganized. They still deliver the same number of hours, meet the same obligations, and earn the same pay.

Where pay changes could come into play is if Government or Parliament decides to go beyond compression and legally lower the standard workweek to, for example, 32 hours while keeping salaries unchanged. That would be a policy decision requiring amendment of the Labour Regulation 2000, because it would reduce the legal workweek without reducing pay.

Advocates of the four-day workweek point to mounting global evidence that shorter working weeks deliver better productivity, stronger employee well-being, and long-term economic resilience. Trials conducted in the United Kingdom in 2022 involving nearly 3,000 workers across 61 companies found that 92% of participating businesses chose to continue after the pilot, citing steady or improved productivity alongside reduced burnout, higher morale, and lower absenteeism. Similarly, in Iceland, large-scale national trials between 2015 and 2019 demonstrated that a four-day week reduced stress and exhaustion significantly, while output remained stable or even increased.

Companies that adopted this model also reported improvements in recruitment and retention. In New Zealand, the financial services firm Perpetual Guardian introduced a four-day week in 2018 and later made it permanent after finding that staff reported higher job satisfaction, improved work–life balance, and greater focus at work. Japanese tech giant Microsoft ran a similar experiment in 2019 and saw a 40% boost in productivity. Across sectors and countries, the results show a consistent pattern: fewer working days do not mean less output; in many cases, they mean smarter, more effective work.

For small island states like St. Maarten, the benefits could be especially impactful. A healthier workforce with more time for family and community engagement translates into stronger social cohesion. Lower burnout means fewer sick days, reduced healthcare costs, and more motivated civil servants. From a tourism and service perspective, well-rested and satisfied employees are also better ambassadors for the country. The global evidence suggests that a four-day workweek is not a risk but an opportunity to work smarter, strengthen families, and protect the nation’s reputation as both a workplace and a destination.

𝐀 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝

Critics of the four-day workweek often point to inefficiencies in government service, long lines, slow responses, and unclear processes, as reasons why reducing workdays would make things worse. But the reality is that these problems are not caused by the number of days employees work; they are the result of poor structures, ineffective leadership, and unhealthy work cultures. In fact, many of the issues citizens complain about, excessive workloads, lack of control, unclear job expectations, absence of recognition, toxic environments, and weak accountability, are exactly the kind of problems a well-structured four-day workweek can help address.

When designed carefully, a four-day schedule forces organizations to confront inefficiency head-on. To succeed, ministries must clarify roles and expectations, streamline processes, and make better use of digital tools to reduce red tape. They must also invest in leadership training and foster cultures that reward performance rather than time spent behind a desk. This restructuring not only makes services more responsive but also boosts morale: employees who feel recognized, supported, and less burned out are proven to deliver better results. Global evidence from Iceland, the UK, and New Zealand shows that shorter workweeks increase focus and efficiency because employees work smarter, not longer.

A four-day workweek is therefore not about doing less work; it is about working differently, with accountability built into the system. For Sint Maarten, this could mean addressing long-standing inefficiencies while at the same time improving staff well-being and public confidence. With the right structure, the very frustrations that have weakened government service for years could be turned into opportunities for reform, making the four-day week a catalyst for smarter governance rather than a risk to it.

𝐀𝐫𝐮𝐛𝐚'𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞

Aruba’s labor law currently sets limits on daily and weekly working hours: typically 8 to 8.5 hours per day, 40–45 hours per week, with overtime requiring formal approval and higher pay rates

Any shift to a four-day workweek, by definition compressing those hours into fewer days, would still need to comply with these limits. For example, a schedule like “four 9-hour days” (totaling 36 hours) is feasible, but must not cause violations of maximum daily or weekly thresholds

Employers must also maintain mandatory rest periods, such as 12-hour rest per day, one full day off per week, plus regulated meal and break times. Overtime remains strictly regulated, both in terms of when it may be used and how it must be compensated, often at 150 % or higher of the standard hourly rate

A shorter workweek pilots must ensure that no “hidden” overtime is forced or unpaid, especially when shifting hours across fewer days.

𝐒𝐭. 𝐌𝐚𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐂𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬

Civil servants are not governed by private-sector labour law. Their terms are set by the National Ordinance on Substantive Civil Servant Law, commonly called the LMA, and by implementing national decrees that regulate concrete elements such as duty and work schedules for specific services. Moving the entire civil service to a four-day week would therefore require amending or adopting the relevant national decrees under the LMA that establish service-wide or sector-specific working time rules.

Existing examples show that Government regulates work and duty hours for particular groups, such as the Fire Department and the Police, through national decrees. A general four-day regime would need a comparable legal instrument that clearly defines schedules and service coverage.

To introduce a four-day workweek, Government must follow a clear legal and policy pathway. The Council of Ministers would first set the policy and rely on the delegation in the LMA (National Ordinance on Substantive Civil Servant Law) to issue an implementing decree on work and duty hours. If that delegation proves insufficient, the matter would require a National Ordinance, triggering a full parliamentary process. Because the change carries broad social and economic implications, the Social Economic Council (SER) would be expected to advise, while the Council of Advice would review any draft for constitutional and legal conformity before adoption.

Once finalized, measures can take the form of either a National Decree, adopted by the Council of Ministers and published in the National Gazette, or a National Ordinance, submitted by the Governor to Parliament for debate and approval before enactment. In the case of an Ordinance, there is a further constitutional safeguard: the Ombudsman has six weeks to petition the Constitutional Court for review, and implementation may be delayed until that process is completed.

𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫: 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥

No statutory change is strictly required to allow a four-day, 40-hour schedule. Employers can adopt 4×10 (work 4 days for 10 hours) arrangements that respect the Labour Regulation, rest periods, and timetable rules. However, individual employment contracts or collective labour agreements must be amended if they currently fix different hours or schedules. Since 2022 reforms tightened the ability to unilaterally change employment conditions under the Civil Code, the cleanest path is consent via contract addenda or a sectoral CLA.

If Government wishes to lower the statutory standard to 32 hours without pay loss, or to mandate compressed schedules more broadly, it would need to amend the Labour Regulation 2000 through a National Ordinance. That would trigger the same advisory, parliamentary, promulgation, and potential constitutional-review steps described above.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜

Public skepticism about a four-day workweek is understandable. Many people already find government services slow, inconsistent, or bogged down by bureaucracy. The fear is that reducing the number of official working days could make matters worse, leaving citizens facing even longer waits for permits, payments, and public assistance. For the public to support such a change, government must first acknowledge these concerns and commit to reforms that improve efficiency.

A four-day workweek does not have to mean less service, it can mean better service if managed properly. Government must invest in staff training, performance standards, and modern tools like digital platforms to ensure that productivity is maintained or improved. Rotating schedules, clear accountability for output, and stronger internal monitoring would allow offices to remain open five days a week, even as civil servants work four. By demonstrating that shorter weeks can go hand-in-hand with faster, more reliable service, government can build public confidence.

This is also why it is advisable to begin with a smaller, clearly defined part of a ministry rather than imposing the change across the entire civil service at once. MP Egbert Doran did exactly that during his tenure as Minister of VROMI, piloting a shortened workweek at the VROMI Yard. The results showed positive effects on productivity, efficiency, and staff morale.

A similar phased approach today would allow government to fine-tune schedules, measure outcomes, and show tangible improvements before expanding to other departments. The message must be clear: this initiative is not about giving civil servants an extra day off, but about rethinking how work is organized so that both employees and the public benefit.

‍