The Real Reality of Construction Projects with Two Days Off Per Week

Starting this fiscal year, all construction projects contracted by the Tokyo Metropolitan Government Bureau of Construction have adopted a “two-day weekend” schedule. Since this is technically a pilot program, contractors have the option to participate or not; however, our company is also implementing the two-day weekend schedule as a way to gain experience.

There are mixed opinions even within internal meetings, and implementing it on the ground is difficult, but for now, I feel that, depending on the engineers’ skills and approach, it might not be impossible after all.

So, drawing on the insights of our own engineers and craftsmen, as well as those from neighboring companies, I’d like to share the reality of construction projects that operate on a two-day weekend schedule.

Is a two-day-off construction schedule easy for experienced engineers?

First, regarding the Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s definition of a “two-day weekend,” it is not limited to having two days off in a single week. It is sufficient to have at least eight days off over a four-week period. In addition, unscheduled closures due to rain, snow, or other reasons may also be counted toward the two-day weekend requirement.

I find this approach to be very constructive. After all, when planning a project schedule, we typically consider the overall project timeline on a monthly or weekly basis; however, depending on the type of work, delays can inevitably occur, or quality control standards may require that certain tasks be completed on a specific day, making it very difficult to adjust the schedule based solely on a weekly basis.

If this includes monthly closures and site closures due to rain and other factors, achieving a two-day weekend shouldn’t be too difficult for an engineer with a reasonable amount of experience.

However, the reality is not quite that simple…

Problems with Construction Projects with a Two-Day Weekend

There are two main issues with construction projects that operate on a two-day weekend schedule.

The first issue is the increased workload for engineers. Any engineer can easily imagine this.

Just because a site is closed doesn’t mean you can simply take the day off. First, you must submit a monthly site closure plan; next, you must submit a site closure notification for each day and for any unscheduled closure days; and finally, you must submit a site closure report upon completion of the work. This means you must prepare and submit these documents using a different form from the standard progress reports you normally submit.

If you look at the content alone, it seems like an extension of the process management we do on a daily basis, so it doesn’t seem that difficult; however, in public works projects, most engineers are assigned exclusively to the job site.

In other words, it means an additional burden will be placed on us as we prepare various documents after the on-site work is completed—whether during overtime, on Saturdays, or on days when the site is closed due to rain or other reasons. While this isn’t difficult for veteran engineers, I’d be lying if I said I didn’t feel some frustration on a personal level.

Ultimately, engineers are the only ones who can’t take a break. What’s more, due to the current shortage of engineers, young engineers are being entrusted with on-site responsibilities at an early stage, which undoubtedly adds to the burden for these young professionals who are already under a great deal of mental strain.

On days when the site is closed, work is carried out at other sites or on private construction projects.

The second issue is that even on days when construction sites operating on a two-day-off-per-week schedule are supposed to be closed, workers are actually continuing to work on other sites or on private-sector projects, so they are not actually taking the day off. Since this arrangement is the result of a consensus between the companies and the workers, it is unlikely to be resolved easily.

First, from the companies’ perspective, the circumstances differ somewhat between general contractors and small and micro-sized businesses.

General contractors with a large volume of orders can easily adjust their days off with other job sites, and at private-sector construction sites, a two-day weekend is practically irrelevant.

On the other hand, small and micro-enterprises have a limited number of engineers, and the volume of orders fluctuates significantly between slow and busy periods. As a result, they want to use ingenuity and work on their days off to shorten project timelines so they can prepare for the next order as soon as possible.

As for the craftsmen themselves, if you look at it purely in terms of salary, it’s a world where “you only make money when you’re on the job.” That means during the slow season, when there’s no work, they can’t go to work even if they want to, and if the number of jobs drops until the busy season, it becomes a matter of survival.

However, small and medium-sized enterprises—especially micro-sized local construction firms—receive an overwhelmingly small number of orders during the off-season. In fact, it would be more accurate to say they receive none at all.

Consequently, this could even lead to the problem of skilled workers seeking employment at general contractors. The greatest advantage of local construction companies is their ability to respond to emergencies such as snow removal and earthquakes, but in reality, they are increasingly unable to do so.

The top priority should be “smoothing out construction orders over the year.”

So, let’s consider what possible solutions there might be for promoting a two-day weekend at construction sites, from the perspective of those on the job site.

Although opinions were raised at the “Inter-Ministerial Liaison Meeting on Work Style Reform in the Construction Industry” held last August, the following three points will likely be considered as potential solutions.

1. Revision of Construction Schedule Estimates
2. Review of Expense Calculations
3. Annual Averaging of Construction Contracts

Regarding “1. Review of Construction Schedule Estimates,” it is difficult to distinguish between creative solutions and schedule dumping. As for “2. Review of Cost Calculations,” while it would ideally be best to allow for the assignment of multiple engineers, determining the appropriate number is difficult because it is ultimately up to the contractor.

That leaves “3. Leveling Out the Annual Distribution of Construction Contracts,” which is likely the only reform that can be implemented quickly. First, by leveling out the distribution of construction contracts, the outlook for securing orders will improve to some extent, thereby reducing the practice of cutting construction schedules—which leads to long working hours.

Next, since jobs will be created throughout the fiscal year, craftsmen will no longer need to work excessively during peak seasons; as the mindset of those involved changes, the adoption of a two-day weekend will accelerate. This will also help prevent the exodus of craftsmen.

However, for that to happen, the contracting authority would need to finalize the design and budget for the first or second quarter during the previous fiscal year. Of course, bureaucrats and government officials might face their share of challenges in implementing this, but from my perspective as an engineer, it doesn’t seem all that difficult.

If the client changes, construction sites will also switch to a two-day weekend.

Construction sites should adopt a two-day weekend schedule, and they likely will eventually. However, it’s not right that, as is currently the case, the burden falls on the engineers.

I don't mean to speak ill of craftsmen, but to put it bluntly, even if you have 100 craftsmen, the job site won't get anything done if there isn't a single engineer.

I feel that we should create a system that places greater emphasis on engineers.

Furthermore, in order to achieve a two-day weekend as soon as possible, since these are public works projects, the change must ultimately come from the contracting authorities.