The article literally says they didn't take a pay cut, I'm not sure where they are saving on labor expense. I support the freedom to independently judge when it is appropriate to be available for work while being committed to succeeding. 32 hours, 24 hours, 60 hours, whatever.. it's best to do what it takes when duty calls. It's important to find balance between work and family as well as manage mental and physical health. Requiring 40 hours is the problem, maybe a model where nobody is required to work Friday however they are expected to stay on top of their work would meet in the middle effectively.

There is a whole can of worms regarding tax law, full time, part time, benefits eligible, etc that I don't totally understand. The other piece of this puzzle is how can we alter our laws to promote more flexibility for companies, especially as it pertains to full time hourly workers and benefits.