Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Working time
View on WikipediaThis article needs additional citations for verification. (August 2021) |

| Part of a series on |
| Organized labor |
|---|
Working time or laboring time is the period of time that a person spends at paid labor. Unpaid labor such as personal housework or caring for children or pets is not considered part of the working week.
Many countries regulate the work week by law, such as stipulating minimum daily rest periods, annual holidays, and a maximum number of working hours per week. Working time may vary from person to person, often depending on economic conditions, location, culture, lifestyle choice, and the profitability of the individual's livelihood. For example, someone who is supporting children and paying a large mortgage might need to work more hours to meet basic costs of living than someone of the same earning power with lower housing costs. In developed countries like the United Kingdom, some workers are part-time because they are unable to find full-time work, but many choose reduced work hours to care for children or other family; some choose it simply to increase leisure time.[4]
Standard working hours (or normal working hours) refers to the legislation to limit the working hours per day, per week, per month or per year. The employer pays higher rates for overtime hours as required in the law. Standard working hours of countries worldwide are around 40 to 44 hours per week - but not everywhere: from 35 hours per week in France[5] to up to 60 hours per week in nations such as Bhutan. Maximum working hours refers to the maximum working hours of an employee. The employee cannot work more than the level specified in the maximum working hours law.[6]
In advanced economies, working time has declined substantially over time while labor productivity and real wages have increased.[7] In 1900, American workers worked 50% more than their counterparts today.[7] The World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization estimated that globally in 2016 one in ten workers were exposed to working 55 or more hours per week and 745,000 persons died as a result of having a heart disease event or a stroke attributable to having worked these long hours, making exposure to long working hours the occupational risk factor with the largest disease burden.[8]
Hunter-gatherer
[edit]Since the 1960s, the consensus among anthropologists, historians, and sociologists has been that early hunter-gatherer societies enjoyed more leisure time than is permitted by capitalist and agrarian societies;[9][10] for instance, one camp of !Kung Bushmen was estimated to work two-and-a-half days per week, at around 6 hours a day.[11] Aggregated comparisons show that on average the working day was less than five hours.[9]
Subsequent studies in the 1970s examined the Machiguenga of the Upper Amazon and the Kayapo of northern Brazil. These studies expanded the definition of work beyond purely hunting-gathering activities, but the overall average across the hunter-gatherer societies he studied was still below 4.86 hours, while the maximum was below 8 hours.[9] Popular perception is still aligned with the old academic consensus that hunter-gatherers worked far in excess of modern humans' forty-hour week.[10]
History
[edit]This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2021) |


The Industrial Revolution made it possible for a larger segment of the population to work year-round, because this labor was not tied to the season and artificial lighting made it possible to work longer each day. Peasants and farm laborers moved from rural areas to work in urban factories, and working time during the year increased significantly.[12] Before collective bargaining and worker protection laws, there was a financial incentive for a company to maximize the return on expensive machinery by having long hours. Work schedules as long as twelve to sixteen hours per day, six to seven days per week were practiced in some industrial sites.[13][14]
Over the 20th century, work hours shortened by almost half, partly due to rising wages brought about by renewed economic growth and competition for skilled workers, with a supporting role from trade unions, collective bargaining, and progressive legislation. The workweek, in most of the industrialized world, dropped steadily, to about 40 hours after World War II. The limitation of working hours is also proclaimed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,[15] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,[16] and European Social Charter.[17] The decline continued at a faster pace in Europe: for example, France adopted a 35-hour workweek in 2000. In 1995, China adopted a 40-hour week, eliminating half-day work on Saturdays (though this is not widely practiced). Working hours in industrializing economies like South Korea, though still much higher than the leading industrial countries, are also declining steadily.
Technology has also continued to improve worker productivity, permitting standards of living to rise as hours decline.[18] In developed economies, as the time needed to manufacture goods has declined, more working hours have become available to provide services, resulting in a shift of much of the workforce between sectors.
Economic growth in monetary terms tends to be concentrated in health care, education, government, criminal justice, corrections, and other activities rather than those that contribute directly to the production of material goods.[citation needed]
In the mid-2000s, the Netherlands was the first country in the industrialized world where the overall average working week dropped to less than 30 hours.[19]
Gradual decrease
[edit]
Most countries in the developed world have seen average hours worked decrease significantly.[20][21] For example, in the U.S in the late 19th century it was estimated that the average work week was over 60 hours per week.[22] Today the average hours worked in the U.S. is around 33,[23] with the average man employed full-time for 8.4 hours per work day, and the average woman employed full-time for 7.9 hours per work day.[24] The front runners for lowest average weekly work hours are the Netherlands with 27 hours,[25] and France with 30 hours.[26] In a 2011 report of 26 OECD countries, Germany had the lowest average working hours per week at 25.6 hours.[27]
The New Economics Foundation has recommended moving to a 21-hour standard work week to address problems with unemployment, high carbon emissions, low well-being, entrenched inequalities, overworking, family care, and the general lack of free time.[28][29][30] Bill Schaninger writing for McKinsey & Company has put forward a similar proposal of a 20-hour workweek.[31] Others, such as the historian Rutger Bregman, have argued that a 15-hour work week is reachable by 2030 and British sociologist Peter Fleming has proposed a three-day work-week.[32] Actual work week lengths have been falling in the developed world.[33]
Factors that have contributed to lowering average work hours and increasing standard of living have been:
- Technological advances in efficiency such as mechanization, robotics and information technology.
- More women participating in the workforce and fewer homemakers
- Dropping fertility rates leading to fewer children needing support
Recent articles[34][35] supporting a four-day week have argued that reduced work hours would increase consumption and invigorate the economy. However, other articles state that consumption would decrease, which could reduce the environmental impact.[36][37][38] Other arguments for the four-day week include improvements to workers' level of education (due to having extra time to take classes and courses) and improvements to workers' health (less work-related stress and extra time for exercise). Reduced hours also save money on day care costs and transportation, which in turn helps the environment with less carbon-related emissions. These benefits increase workforce productivity on a per-hour basis.
Workweek structure
[edit]The structure of the work week varies considerably for different professions and cultures. Among salaried workers in the western world, the work week often consists of Monday to Friday or Saturday with the weekend set aside as a time of personal work and leisure. Sunday is set aside in the western world because it is the Christian sabbath.
The traditional American business hours are 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, representing a workweek of five eight-hour days comprising 40 hours in total. These are the origin of the phrase 9-to-5, used to describe a conventional and possibly tedious job.[39] Negatively used, it connotes a tedious or unremarkable occupation. The phrase also indicates that a person is an employee, usually in a large company, rather than an entrepreneur or self-employed. More neutrally, it connotes a job with stable hours and low career risk, but still a position of subordinate employment. The actual time at work often varies between 35 and 48[citation needed] hours in practice due to some employers counting breaks as part of the 40 hours and others not. In many traditional white collar positions, employees were required to be in the office during these hours to take orders from the bosses, hence the relationship between this phrase and subordination. Workplace hours have become more flexible, but the phrase is still commonly used even in situations where the term does not apply literally.[citation needed]
Average annual hours per worker
[edit]The following list is the average annual hours worked by participants in the labor force of the OECD member states.[40] As of 2022, Colombia, Mexico, and Costa Rica ranked the highest number of hours worked per year. Greece ranked the highest In EU with 1886 average hours per year, while Germany ranked the lowest with 1340 average hours worked respectively.[41][42] Japan and Canada ranked lowest amongst non-European countries.
| Code | Country | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 | 2020 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUS | Australia | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1853 | 1852 | 1808 | 1778 | 1751 | 1683 | 1707 |
| AUT | Austria | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1675 | 1632 | 1552 | 1495 | 1400 | 1443 |
| BEL | Belgium | ... | ... | 1883 | 1707 | 1663 | 1589 | 1578 | 1574 | 1575 | 1481 | 1525 |
| BGR | Bulgaria | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1640 | 1659 | 1645 | 1644 | 1605 | 1618 |
| CAN | Canada | ... | ... | 1925 | 1827 | 1797 | 1787 | 1745 | 1715 | 1712 | 1644 | 1686 |
| CHL | Chile | ... | ... | ... | ... | 2422 | 2263 | 2157 | 2070 | 1994 | 1825 | 1962 |
| COL | Colombia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 2194 | ... | 2405 |
| CRI | Costa Rica | ... | ... | ... | ... | 2358 | 2362 | 2352 | 2243 | 2148 | 1913 | 2149 |
| HRV | Croatia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1922 | 1926 | 1942 | 1827 | 1834 | 1810 |
| CYP | Cyprus | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1926 | 1847 | 1845 | 1824 | 1698 | 1837 |
| CZE | Czechia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1900 | 1803 | 1799 | 1751 | 1705 | 1754 |
| DNK | Denmark | ... | ... | 1845 | 1577 | 1441 | 1466 | 1451 | 1422 | 1407 | 1346 | 1371 |
| EST | Estonia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1884 | 1913 | 1785 | 1763 | 1654 | 1770 |
| EU27 | European Union | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1678 | 1652 | 1632 | 1607 | 1513 | 1570 |
| FIN | Finland | ... | 1967 | 1918 | 1732 | 1671 | 1650 | 1613 | 1585 | 1555 | 1531 | 1498 |
| FRA | France | 2351 | 2188 | 1993 | 1806 | 1645 | 1558 | 1532 | 1540 | 1519 | 1402 | 1511 |
| DEU | Germany | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1466 | 1432 | 1426 | 1401 | 1332 | 1340 |
| GRC | Greece | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1976 | 1998 | 2025 | 1931 | 1935 | 1728 | 1886 |
| HUN | Hungary | ... | ... | ... | 2348 | 2082 | 1932 | 1834 | 1766 | 1746 | 1660 | 1699 |
| ISL | Iceland | ... | ... | 1954 | 1688 | 1665 | 1696 | 1637 | 1528 | 1511 | 1435 | 1449 |
| IRL | Ireland | ... | ... | 2335 | 2123 | 2081 | 1933 | 1883 | 1721 | 1771 | 1746 | 1657 |
| ISR | Israel | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1904 | 2033 | 1966 | 1957 | 1895 | 1783 | 1891 |
| ITA | Italy | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1850 | 1811 | 1777 | 1718 | 1559 | 1694 |
| JPN | Japan | ... | ... | 2243 | 2121 | 2031 | 1821 | 1775 | 1733 | 1719 | 1598 | 1607 |
| KOR | Korea, Republic of | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 2163 | 2083 | 1908 | 1901 |
| LVA | Latvia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1728 | 1666 | 1692 | 1663 | 1577 | 1553 |
| LTU | Lithuania | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1630 | 1659 | 1697 | 1673 | 1595 | 1624 |
| LUX | Luxembourg | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1602 | 1550 | 1517 | 1514 | 1427 | 1473 |
| MLT | Malta | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 2246 | 2167 | 2136 | 1955 | 1827 | 1881 |
| MEX | Mexico | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 2174 | 2105 | 2150 | 2140 | 2124 | 2226 |
| NLD | Netherlands | ... | ... | 1809 | 1556 | 1454 | 1464 | 1434 | 1420 | 1426 | 1399 | 1427 |
| NZL | New Zealand | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1809 | 1836 | 1815 | 1755 | 1753 | 1739 | 1748 |
| NOR | Norway | ... | ... | 1835 | 1580 | 1503 | 1457 | 1406 | 1395 | 1392 | 1369 | 1424 |
| OECD | OECD | ... | ... | 1966 | 1893 | 1860 | 1825 | 1793 | 1772 | 1764 | 1687 | 1751 |
| POL | Poland | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1869 | 1855 | 1831 | 1862 | 1766 | 1814 |
| PRT | Portugal | ... | ... | 1963 | 1849 | 1806 | 1770 | 1750 | 1746 | 1732 | 1613 | 1635 |
| ROU | Romania | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1853 | 1877 | 1841 | 1786 | 1795 | 1808 |
| RUS | Russian Federation | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1982 | 1989 | 1976 | 1978 | 1874 | 1874 |
| SVK | Slovakia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1816 | 1769 | 1805 | 1754 | 1572 | 1622 |
| SVN | Slovenia | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1710 | 1697 | 1680 | 1687 | 1515 | 1619 |
| ESP | Spain | ... | ... | ... | 1936 | 1763 | 1753 | 1724 | 1706 | 1694 | 1577 | 1643 |
| SWE | Sweden | 1824 | 1718 | 1565 | 1382 | 1423 | 1486 | 1453 | 1484 | 1466 | 1424 | 1440 |
| CHE | Switzerland | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 1713 | 1690 | 1611 | 1577 | 1495 | 1528 |
| TUR | Turkey | ... | ... | 2086 | 1957 | 1866 | 1937 | 1936 | 1877 | 1811 | ... | 1732 |
| GBR | United Kingdom | ... | ... | 1775 | 1619 | 1618 | 1558 | 1544 | 1507 | 1525 | 1367 | 1531 |
| USA | United States | 1968 | 1952 | 1907 | 1816 | 1833 | 1832 | 1794 | 1772 | 1783 | 1767 | 1810 |
Trends over time
[edit]
By region
[edit]Asia
[edit]India
[edit]Indian labour law has, in theory, offered protection to labour rights. However, the average office worker, women and the IT sector are unofficially forced to work overtime without overtime pay. The software billionaire CEO Narayana Murthy recently stated, "Somehow our youth have the habit of taking not-so-desirable habits from the West. My request is that our youngsters must say – ‘This is my country. I want to work 70 hours a week’. This is exactly what the Germans and Japanese did after the Second World War".[43][44] This sparked a national debate with many male CEO's strongly supporting 70-hour workweeks to boost productivity and cover losses due to the Corona Pandemic.[45] A 70-hour workweek translates to working approximately 12 hours a day, for six days a week, a phenomenon unofficially occurring in the IT industry.[46] Women in all workplaces are at risk of overwork despite the existence of work laws. Many women already worked much more than 70 hours a week - at both the office and their homes. Anna Sebastian Perayil, a 26-year old a young Chartered Accountant (CA) from Kerala, had started working in the E&Y Pune office on 18 March 2024, but her premature death within 4 months on 20 July 2024 due to stress caused by overwork, presenteeism, exhaustion and fatigue has re-ignited the debate about toxic work culture in India.[47] Since the pandemic began, various Indian CEOs have repeatedly advocated for this work culture.[48]
South Korea
[edit]South Korea has the fastest shortening working time in the OECD,[49] which is the result of the government's proactive move to lower working hours at all levels and to increase leisure and relaxation time, which introduced the mandatory forty-hour, five-day working week in 2004 for companies with over 1,000 employees. Beyond regular working hours, it is legal to demand up to 12 hours of overtime during the week, plus another 16 hours on weekends.[citation needed] The 40-hour workweek expanded to companies with 300 employees or more in 2005, 100 employees or more in 2006, 50 or more in 2007, 20 or more in 2008 and a full inclusion to all workers nationwide in July 2011.[50] The government has continuously increased public holidays to 16 days in 2013, more than the 10 days of the United States and double that of the United Kingdom's 8 days.[51] Despite those efforts, South Korea's work hours are still relatively long, with an average 1,874 hours per year in 2023[52]
Japan
[edit]
Work hours in Japan are decreasing, but many Japanese still work long hours.[53] Recently,[when?] Japan's Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) issued a draft report recommending major changes to the regulations that govern working hours. The centerpiece of the proposal is an exemption from overtime pay for white-collar workers.[citation needed] Japan has enacted an 8-hour work day and 40-hour work week (44 hours in specified workplaces). The overtime limits are: 15 hours a week, 27 hours over two weeks, 43 hours over four weeks, 45 hours a month, 81 hours over two months and 120 hours over three months; however, some workers get around these restrictions by working several hours a day without 'clocking in' whether physically or metaphorically.[54] [citation needed] The overtime allowance should not be lower than 125% and not more than 150% of the normal hourly rate.[55] Workaholism in Japan is considered a serious social problem leading to early death, a phenomenon dubbed karōshi, meaning death from overwork.[56]
Mainland China
[edit]China adopted a 40-hour week, eliminating half-day work on Saturdays.[57]
Work hours have reportedly been falling for about three decades due to rising productivity, better labor laws, and the spread of the two-day weekend. The trend has affected both factories and white-collar companies that have been responding to growing demands for easier work schedules.[58][59]
The 996 working hour system, as it is known, is where employees work from 09:00 to 21:00, six days a week, excluding two hours of lunch & nap during the noon and one hour of supper in the evening.[60][61] Alibaba founder Jack (Yun) Ma, and JD.Com founder Richard (Qiangdong) Liu both praise the 996 schedule, saying such a schedule has helped Chinese tech giants like Alibaba and Tencent grow to become what they are today.[62][63]
Hong Kong
[edit]Hong Kong has no legislation regarding maximum and normal working hours. The average weekly working hours of full-time employees in Hong Kong is 49 hours.[64] According to the Price and Earnings Report 2012 conducted by UBS, while the global and regional average were 1,915 and 2,154 hours per year respectively, the average working hours in Hong Kong is 2,296 hours per year, which ranked the fifth longest yearly working hours among 72 countries under study.[65] In addition, from the survey conducted by the Public Opinion Study Group of the University of Hong Kong, 79% of the respondents agree that the problem of overtime work in Hong Kong is "severe", and 65% of the respondents support the legislation on the maximum working hours.[66] In Hong Kong, 70% of surveyed do not receive any overtime remuneration.[67] These show that people in Hong Kong concerns the working time issues. As Hong Kong implemented the minimum wage law in May 2011, the Chief Executive, Donald Tsang, of the Special Administrative Region pledged that the government will standardize working hours in Hong Kong.[68]
On 26 November 2012, the Labour Department of the HKSAR released the "Report of the policy study on standard working hours". The report covers three major areas, including: (1) the regimes and experience of other places in regulating working hours, (2) latest working time situations of employees in different sectors, and (3) estimation of the possible impact of introducing standard working hour in Hong Kong.[69] Under the selected parameters, from most loosen to most stringent, the estimated increase in labour cost vary from 1.1 billion to 55 billion HKD, and affect 957,100 (36.7% of total employees) to 2,378,900 (91.1% of total) employees.[64]
Various sectors of the community show concerns about the standard working hours in Hong Kong. The points are summarized as below:
Labor organizations
[edit]Hong Kong Catholic Commission For Labour Affairs urges the government to legislate the standard working hours in Hong Kong, and suggests a 44 hours standard, 54 hours maximum working hours in a week. The organization thinks that long working time adversely affects the family and social life and health of employees; it also indicates that the current Employment Ordinance does not regulate overtime pays, working time limits nor rest day pays, which can protect employees rights.
Businesses and related organizations
[edit]Generally, business sector agrees that it is important to achieve work–life balance, but does not support a legislation to regulate working hours limit. They[who?] believe "standard working hours" is not the best way to achieve work–life balance and the root cause of the long working hours in Hong Kong is due to insufficient labor supply. The managing director of Century Environmental Services Group, Catherine Yan, said "Employees may want to work more to obtain a higher salary due to financial reasons. If standard working hour legislation is passed, employers will need to pay a higher salary to employees, and hence the employers may choose to segment work tasks to employer more part time employees instead of providing overtime pay to employees." She thinks this will lead to a situation that the employees may need to find two part-time jobs to earn their living, making them wasting more time on transportation from one job to another.[70]
The Chairman of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, Chow Chung-kong believes that it is so difficult to implement standard working hours that apply "across-the-board", specifically, to accountants and barristers.[71] In addition, he believes that standard working hours may decrease individual employees' working hours and would not increase their actual income. It may also lead to an increase of number of part-timers in the labor market.
According to a study conducted jointly by the Business, Economic and Public Affairs Research Centre and Enterprise and Social Development Research Centre of Hong Kong Shue Yan University, 16% surveyed companies believe that a standard working hours policy can be considered, and 55% surveyed think that it would be difficult to implement standard working hours in businesses.[72]
Employer representative in the Labour Advisory Board, Stanley Lau, said that standard working hours will completely alter the business environment of Hong Kong, affect small and medium enterprise and weaken competitiveness of businesses. He believes that the government can encourage employers to pay overtime salary, and there is no need to regulate standard working hours.[73]
Political parties
[edit]On 17–18 October 2012, the Legislative Council members in Hong Kong debated on the motion "legislation for the regulation of working hours". Cheung Kwok-che proposed the motion "That is the Council urges the Government to introduce a bill on the regulation of working hours within this legislative session, the contents of which must include the number of standard weekly hours and overtime pay".[74] As the motion was not passed by both functional constituencies and geographical constituencies, it was negatived.[75]
The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions suggested a standard 44-hour work week with overtime pay of 1.5 times the usual pay. It believes the regulation of standard working hour can prevent the employers to force employees to work (overtime) without pay.[76]
Elizabeth Quat of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), believed that standard working hours were a labor policy and was not related to family-friendly policies. The Vice President of Young DAB, Wai-hung Chan, stated that standard working hours would bring limitations to small and medium enterprises. He thought that the government should discuss the topic with the public more before legislating standard working hours.
The Democratic Party suggested a 44-hour standard work week and compulsory overtime pay to help achieve the balance between work, rest and entertainment of people in Hong Kong.[77]
The Labour Party believed regulating working hours could help achieve a work–life balance.[78] It suggests an 8-hour work day, a 44-hour standard work week, a 60-hour maximum work week and an overtime pay of 1.5 times the usual pay.[67]
Poon Siu-ping of Federation of Hong Kong and Kowloon Labour Unions thought that it is possible to set work hour limit for all industries; and the regulation on working hours can ensure the overtime payment by employers to employees, and protect employees' health.
The Civic party suggests "to actively study setting weekly standard working hours at 44 hours to align with family-friendly policies" in LegCo Election 2012.[79]
Member of Economic Synergy, Jeffery Lam, believes that standard working hours would adversely affect productivity, tense the employer-employee relationship, and increase the pressure faced by businesses who suffer from inadequate workers. He does not support the regulation on working hours at its current situation.[80]
Government
[edit]Matthew Cheung Kin-chung, the Secretary for Labour and Welfare Bureau, said the Executive Council has already received the government report on working hours in June, and the Labour Advisory Board and the LegCo's Manpower Panel will receive the report in late November and December respectively.[81] On 26 November 2012, the Labour Department released the report, and the report covered the regimes and experience of practicing standard working hours in selected regions, current work hour situations in different industries, and the impact assessment of standard working hours. Also, Matthew Cheung mentioned that the government will form a select committee by first quarter of 2013, which will include government officials, representative of labor unions and employers' associations, academics and community leaders, to investigate the related issues. He also said that it would "perhaps be unrealistic" to put forward a bill for standard working hours in the next one to two years.[82]
Academics
[edit]Yip Siu-fai, Professor of the Department of Social Work and Social Administration of HKU, has noted that professions such as nursing and accountancy have long working hours and that this may affect people's social life. He believes that standard working hours could help to give Hong Kong more family-friendly workplaces and to increase fertility rates. Randy Chiu, Professor of the Department of Management of HKBU, has said that introducing standard working hours could avoid excessively long working hours of employees.[83] He also said that nowadays Hong Kong attains almost full employment, has a high rental price and severe inflation, recently implemented minimum wage, and is affected by a gloomy global economy; he also mentioned that comprehensive considerations on macroeconomic situations are needed, and emphasized that it is perhaps inappropriate to adopt working-time regulation as exemplified in other countries to Hong Kong.[84]
Lee Shu-Kam, Associate Professor of the Department of Economics and Finance of HKSYU, believes that standard working hours cannot deliver "work–life balance". He referenced the research[which?] to the US by the University of California, Los Angeles in 1999 and pointed out that in the industries and regions in which the wage elasticity is low, the effects of standard working hours on lowering actual working time and increasing wages is limited: for regions where the labor supply is inadequate, standard working hours can protect employees' benefits yet cause unemployment; but for regions (such as Japan) where the problem does not exist, standard working hours would only lead to unemployment.[85]
Francis Lui, Head and Professor of the Department of Economics of Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, believed that standard working hours may not lower work time but increase unemployment. He used Japan as an example to illustrate that the implementation of standard working hours lowered productivity per head and demotivated the economy. He also said that even if the standard working hours can shorten employees' weekly working hours, they may need to work for more years to earn sufficient amount of money for retirement, i.e. delay their retirement age. The total working time over the course of a lifetime may not change.[86]
In 2012, Lok-sang Ho, Professor of Economics and Director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies of Lingnan University, pointed out that "as different employees perform various jobs and under different degrees of pressures, it may not be appropriate to establish standard working hours in Hong Kong"; and he proposed a 50-hour maximum work week to protect workers' health.[87]
Taiwan
[edit]In 2018, Taiwan had the world's 4th longest work hour and 2nd in Asia, with the average number of work hours hit 2,033 hours. There had been reduction in the work hours by 122 from 2008 to 2018.[88]
Malaysia
[edit]Since 1 September 2022, the weekly work hour in Malaysia was reduced from 48 hours to 45 hours after it was promulgated in the Dewan Negara.[89]
Singapore
[edit]Singapore has an 8-hour normal work day (9 hours including lunchtime), a 45-hour normal working week, and a maximum 48-hour work week. If the employee works no more than five days a week, the employee's normal working day is 9 hours and the working week is 44 hours. Also, if the number of hours worked by the worker is less than 44 hours every alternate week, the 44-hour weekly limit may be exceeded in the other week. However, this is subject to the pre-specification in the service contract, and the maximum should not exceed 48 hours per week or 88 hours in any consecutive two week period. In addition, a shift worker can work up to 12 hours a day, provided that the average working hours per week do not exceed 44 over a consecutive three-week period. The overtime allowance per overtime hour must not be less than 1.5 times the employee's hourly basic rates.[90]
Europe
[edit]In most European Union countries, working time is gradually decreasing.[91] The European Union's working time directive imposes a 48-hour maximum working week that applies to every member state except Malta (which have an opt-out, meaning that employees in Malta may work longer than 48 hours if they wish, but they cannot be forced to do so).[92] A major reason for the lower annual hours worked in Europe is a relatively high amount of paid annual leave.[93] Fixed employment comes with four to six weeks of holiday as standard.
France
[edit]France experimented in 2000 with a sharp cut of legal or statutory working time of the employees in the private and public sector from 39 hours a week to 35 hours a week, with the stated goal to fight against rampant unemployment at that time. The Law 2000–37 on working time reduction is also referred to as the Aubry Law, according to the name of the Labor Minister at that time. Employees may (and do) work more than 35 hours a week, yet in this case firms must pay them overtime bonuses. If the bonus is determined through collective negotiations, it cannot be lower than 10%. If no agreement on working time is signed, the legal bonus must be of 25% for the first 8 hours, then goes up to 50% for the rest. Including overtime, the maximum working time cannot exceed 48 hours per week, and should not exceed 44 hours per week over 12 weeks in a row. In France the labor law also regulates the minimum working hours: part-time jobs should not allow for less than 24 hours per week without a branch collective agreement. These agreements can allow for less, under tight conditions. According to the official statistics (DARES),[94] after the introduction of the law on working time reduction, actual hours per week performed by full-time employed, fell from 39.6 hours in 1999, to a trough of 37.7 hours in 2002, then gradually went back to 39.1 hours in 2005. In 2016 working hours were of 39.1.[citation needed]
United Kingdom
[edit]The maximum working week in the United Kingdom is 48 hours a week on average, which is typically averaged over 17 weeks. Workers have the choice of opting out of the 48-maximum week. There also exceptions to the maximum working week including – but not limited to – being in the armed forces, emergency services or police.[95] This was established in 1998 by the Working Time Regulations 1998.[96]
Mexico
[edit]Mexican laws mandate a maximum of 48 hours of work per week, but they are rarely observed or enforced due to loopholes in the law, the volatility of labor rights in Mexico, and its underdevelopment relative to other members countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Indeed, private sector employees often work overtime without receiving overtime compensation. Fear of unemployment and threats by employers explain in part why the 48-hour work week is disregarded.[97]
Colombia
[edit]In June 2021, the Colombian Congress approved a bill for the reduction of the work-week, from 48 to 42 hours, which will be implemented in several stages, from 2023 to 2026.[98] In accordance with it, articles 161 to 167 of the Substantive Work Code in Colombia provide for a maximum of 42 hours of work a week, distributed in 5 or 6 days, at the discretion of the employer (as of July 2024, the work-week is 46 hours). Also, the law notes that workdays should be divided into 2 sections to allow a break, usually given as the meal time which is not counted as work.[99] Typically, there is a 2-hours break for lunch that starts from 12:00 through 13:00.
Spain
[edit]The main labor law in Spain, the Workers' Statute Act, limits the amount of working time that an employee is obliged to perform. In the Article 34 of this law, a maximum of 9 hours per day and 40 hours per week are established.[100]
Employees typically receive either 12 or 14 payments per year, with approximately 21 days of vacation. According to Spanish law, Spain holds what is known as the Convenios-Colectivos, which stipulates that different regulations and laws regarding employee work week and wage apply based on the type of job.[101] Overall they rank as the 13th highest in regard to international GDP growth.[102][103]
According to a study of the OECD Better Life Index, 4% of Spanish workers work more than 50 hours per week, compared to an average of 11% of workers in OECD countries.[104]
Working hours are regulated by law. Mandatory logging of employee working time has been in place since 2019 in an attempt by legislators to eliminate unpaid overtime and push for more transparency of actual working hours.[105][106] Non-regulated pauses during the workday for coffee or smoking are not permitted to be documented as working time, according to a ruling by The Spanish National Court in February 2020.[107]
Traditional mid-day break
[edit]However, one of the interesting aspects of the Spanish work day and labor is the traditional presence of a break around lunchtime. It is sometimes mistakenly thought to be due to siesta, but in fact was due to workers returning to their families for the main midday meal. That break, typically of 1 or 2 hours, has been kept in the working culture because in the post-civil-war period most workers had two jobs to be able to sustain their families. Following this tradition, in small and medium-sized cities, restaurants and businesses shut down during this time period of 2–5 for retail and 4–8 for restaurants. Many office jobs only allow one hour or even a half hour breaks to eat the meal in office building restaurants or designated lunch rooms.
A majority of adults emphasize the lack of a siesta during the typical work week. Only one in ten Spaniards take a mid-day nap, a percentage less than other European nations.[108]
Australia
[edit]In Australia, between 1974 and 1997 no marked change took place in the average amount of time spent at work by Australians of "prime working age" (that is, between 25 and 54 years of age). Throughout this period, the average time spent at work by prime working-age Australians (including those who did not spend any time at work) remained stable at between 27 and 28 hours per week. This unchanging average, however, masks a significant redistribution of work from men to women. Between 1974 and 1997, the average time spent at work by prime working-age Australian men fell from 45 to 36 hours per week, while the average time spent at work by prime working-age Australian women rose from 12 to 19 hours per week. In the period leading up to 1997, the amount of time Australian workers spent at work outside the hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays also increased.[109]
In 2009, a rapid increase in the number of working hours was reported in a study by The Australia Institute. The study found the average Australian worked 1855 hours per year at work. According to Clive Hamilton of The Australia Institute, this surpasses even Japan. The Australia Institute believes that Australians work the highest number of hours in the developed world.[110]
The 38 hour working week was introduced in 1983.[111]
The majority of full-time employees in Australia work additional overtime hours. A 2015 survey found that of Australia's 7.7 million full-time workers, 5 million put in more than 40 hours a week, including 1.4 million who worked more than 50 hours a week and 270,000 who put in more than 70 hours.[112]
United States
[edit]In 2016, the average man employed full-time worked 8.4 hours per work day, and the average woman employed full-time worked 7.8 hours per work day.[24] There is no mandatory minimum amount of paid time off for sickness or holiday but the majority of full-time civilian workers have access to paid vacation time.[113]

By 1946, the United States government had inaugurated the 40-hour work week for all federal employees.[114] Beginning in 1950, under the Truman Administration, the United States became the first known industrialized nation to explicitly (albeit secretly) and permanently forswear a reduction of working time. Given the military-industrial requirements of the Cold War, the authors of the then secret National Security Council Report 68 (NSC-68)[115] proposed the US government undertake a massive permanent national economic expansion that would let it "siphon off" a part of the economic activity produced to support an ongoing military buildup to contain the Soviet Union. In his 1951 Annual Message to the Congress, President Truman stated:
In terms of manpower, our present defense targets will require an increase of nearly one million men and women in the armed forces within a few months, and probably not less than four million more in defense production by the end of the year. This means that an additional 8 percent of our labor force, and possibly much more, will be required by direct defense needs by the end of the year. These manpower needs will call both for increasing our labor force by reducing unemployment and drawing in women and older workers, and for lengthening hours of work in essential industries.[116]
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average non-farm private sector employee worked 34.5 hours per week as of June 2012.[117]
As President Truman's 1951 message had predicted, the share of working women rose from 30 percent of the labor force in 1950 to 47 percent by 2000 – growing at a particularly rapid rate during the 1970s.[118] According to a Bureau of Labor Statistics report issued May 2002, "In 1950, the overall participation rate of women was 34 percent. ... The rate rose to 38 percent in 1960, 43 percent in 1970, 52 percent in 1980, and 58 percent in 1990 and reached 60 percent by 2000. The overall labor force participation rate of women is projected to attain its highest level in 2010, at 62 percent."[118] The inclusion of women in the work force can be seen as symbolic of social progress as well as of increasing American productivity and hours worked.
Between 1950 and 2007 official price inflation was measured to 861 percent. President Truman, in his 1951 message to Congress, predicted correctly that his military buildup "will cause intense and mounting inflationary pressures." Using the data provided by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erik Rauch has estimated productivity to have increased by nearly 400%.[119] According to Rauch, "if productivity means anything at all, a worker should be able to earn the same standard of living as a 1950 worker in only 11 hours per week."
In the United States, the working time for upper-income professionals has increased compared to 1965, while total annual working time for low-skill, low-income workers has decreased.[120] This effect is sometimes called the "leisure gap".
The average working time of married couples – of both spouses taken together – rose from 56 hours in 1969 to 67 hours in 2000.[121]
Overtime rules
[edit]Many professional workers put in longer hours than the forty-hour standard. In professional industries like investment banking and large law firms, a forty-hour workweek is considered inadequate and may result in job loss or failure to be promoted.[122][123] Medical residents in the United States routinely work long hours as part of their training.
Workweek policies are not uniform in the U.S. Many compensation arrangements are legal, and three of the most common are wage, commission, and salary payment schemes. Wage earners are compensated on a per-hour basis, whereas salaried workers are compensated on a per-week or per-job basis, and commission workers get paid according to how much they produce or sell.
Under most circumstances, wage earners and lower-level employees may be legally required by an employer to work more than forty hours in a week; however, they are paid extra for the additional work. Many salaried workers and commission-paid sales staff are not covered by overtime laws. These are generally called "exempt" positions, because they are exempt from federal and state laws that mandate extra pay for extra time worked.[124] The rules are complex, but generally exempt workers are executives, professionals, or sales staff.[125] For example, school teachers are not paid extra for working extra hours. Business owners and independent contractors are considered self-employed, and none of these laws apply to them.
Generally, workers are paid time-and-a-half, or 1.5 times the worker's base wage, for each hour of work past forty. California also applies this rule to work in excess of eight hours per day,[126] but exemptions[127] and exceptions[128] significantly limit the applicability of this law.
In some states, firms are required to pay double-time, or twice the base rate, for each hour of work past 60, or each hour of work past 12 in one day in California, also subject to numerous exemptions and exceptions.[126] This provides an incentive for companies to limit working time, but makes these additional hours more desirable for the worker. It is not uncommon for overtime hours to be accepted voluntarily by wage-earning workers. Unions often treat overtime as a desirable commodity when negotiating how these opportunities shall be partitioned among union members.
Brazil
[edit]Brazil has a 44-hour work week, normally 8 hours per day and 4 hours on Saturday or 8.8 hours per day. Jobs with no meal breaks or on-duty meal breaks are 6 hours per day. Public servants work 40 hours per week.
Lunch breaks are one hour and are not usually counted as work. A typical work schedule is 8:00 or 9:00–12:00, 13:00–18:00. In larger cities, workers eat lunch on or near their work site, while some workers in smaller cities may go home for lunch.
A 30-day vacation is mandated by law. Holidays vary by municipality with approximately 13 to 15 holidays per year.
Other
[edit]See also
[edit]- Annual leave
- Business day
- Critique of work
- Effects of overtime
- Four-day workweek
- Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930
- Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919
- Hours of Work and Manning (Sea) Convention, 1936
- Human capital
- Karōshi
- Labour market flexibility
- Labor rights
- Occupational burnout
- Occupational stress
- Overwork
- Paid time off
- Refusal of work
- Right to rest and leisure
- Saint Monday
- Short-time working
- Six-hour day
- Soviet calendar
- Sunday scaries
- Three-Day Week
- Universal basic income
- Wage slavery
- Waiting for the Weekend
- Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957
- Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921
- Workism
- List of countries by average annual labor hours
References
[edit]- ^ "Annual working hours per worker". Our World in Data.
- ^ "Employment by sex and weekly hours actually worked (thousands)". ILOSTAT explorer. International Labour Organization.
- ^ Joshanloo, Mohsen (September 2023). "A New Index of Perceived Job Quality in 116 Countries: Associations with Working Hours and Other National Characteristics". Social Sciences. 12 (9): 492. doi:10.3390/socsci12090492. ISSN 2076-0760.
- ^ Woods, Judith (1 May 2012). "More and more workers join the part-time revolution". The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on 2022-01-12.
- ^ "French labor laws". Expatica. Retrieved 2022-06-27.
- ^ Ho, Lok Sang (20 November 2012). "Setting maximum work hours first". China Daily.
- ^ a b Kopytov, Alexandr; Roussanov, Nikolai; Taschereau-Dumouchel, Mathieu (2023). "Cheap Thrills: The Price of Leisure and the Global Decline in Work Hours". Journal of Political Economy Macroeconomics. 1 (1): 80–118. doi:10.1086/723717. ISSN 2832-9341.
- ^ Pega, Frank; Nafradi, Balint; Momen, Natalie; Ujita, Yuka; Streicher, Kai; Prüss-Üstün, Annette; Technical Advisory Group (2021). "Global, regional, and national burdens of ischemic heart disease and stroke attributable to exposure to long working hours for 194 countries, 2000–2016: A systematic analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury". Environment International. 154 106595. Bibcode:2021EnInt.15406595P. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2021.106595. PMC 8204267. PMID 34011457.
- ^ a b c Hans-Joachim Voth (2000) Time and work in England 1750–1830, Chapter 5, Comparisons and conclusions pp. 242–45
- ^ a b Farb, Peter (1968). Man's Rise to Civilization As Shown by the Indians of North America from Primeval Times to the Coming of the Industrial State. New York City: E. P. Dutton. p. 28. LCC E77.F36.
Most people assume that the members of the Shoshone band worked ceaselessly in an unremitting search for sustenance. Such a dramatic picture might appear confirmed by an erroneous theory almost everyone recalls from schooldays: A high culture emerges only when the people have the leisure to build pyramids or to create art. The fact is that high civilization is hectic, and that primitive hunters and collectors of wild food, like the Shoshone, are among the most leisured people on earth.
- ^ Cohen, Yehudi (1974). Man in Adaptation: the cultural present. Aldine Transaction. pp. 94–95. ISBN 0-202-01109-7.
In all, the adults of the Dobe camp worked about two and a half days a week. Because the average working day was about six hours long, the fact emerges that !Kung Bushmen of Dobe, despite their harsh environment, devote from twelve to nineteen hours a week to getting food. Even the hardest working individual in the camp, a man named =oma who went out hunting on sixteen of the 28 days, spent a maximum of 32 hours a week in the food quest.
- ^ Juliet Schor (1991) The Overworked American, pp. 43–seq, excerpt: Pre-industrial workers had a shorter workweek than today's
- ^ Chase, Eric. "The Brief Origins of May Day". Industrial Workers of the World. Archived from the original on 2019-10-02. Retrieved 2009-09-30.
- ^ "The Haymarket Martyrs". The Illinois Labor History Society. Archived from the original on 2008-05-09. Retrieved 2009-09-30.
- ^ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 24
- ^ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 7
- ^ European Social Charter, Article 2
- ^ "FTP link". ftp.bls.gov (FTP).[dead ftp link] (To view documents see Help:FTP)
- ^ "Working time in the European Union: the Netherlands". Eurofound.europa.eu. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Insee – Travail-Emploi – Soixante ans de réduction du temps de travail dans le monde". Insee.fr. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Evolution de la durée du travail en France et dans le monde – Direccte". Lorraine.direccte.gouv.fr. Archived from the original on 2014-05-02. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Hours of Work in U.S. History". Economic History Association. 2010-02-01.
- ^ "United States Average Weekly Hours". Bsu.edu. Archived from the original on 2014-12-10. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ a b "American Time Use Survey Summary". Bls.gov. 2017-06-27. Retrieved 2018-06-06.
- ^ "Gapminder World". Gapminder.org. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Gapminder World". Gapminder.org. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Countries where people work least". nbcnews.com. 2012. Retrieved 2015-02-09.
- ^ Coote, Anna; Franklin, Jane; Simms, Andrew (February 2010). 21 hours: Why a shorter working week can help us all to flourish in the 21st century (PDF). London: New Economics Foundation. ISBN 9781904882701. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 February 2016. Retrieved 18 October 2016.
- ^ Stuart, H. (January 7, 2012) "Cut the working week to a maximum of 20 hours, urge top economists" The Guardian
- ^ Schachter, H. (February 10, 2012) "Save the world with a 3-day work week" Globe and Mail
- ^ Schaninger, Bill. "Re:think: The 20-hour workweek - McKinsey & Company". mckinsey.com. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved 13 December 2023.
- ^ Veal, Anthony (24 December 2018). "It's time to put the 15-hour work week back on the agenda". The Conversation. Retrieved 13 December 2023.
- ^ Gapminder Foundation (2011) "Gapminder World" graph of working hours per week plotted against purchasing power- and inflation-adjusted GDP per capita over time gapminder.org
- ^ "Business: On the Way to a Four-Day Week". Time. 1971-03-01. Archived from the original on July 15, 2010.
- ^ Janice Peterson (2008-06-09). "Study finds four-day work week optimal". Heraldextra.com. Archived from the original on 2011-06-16. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ Anders Hayden (2012-06-11). "Working Less for a Sustainable Future". CommonDreams.com.
- ^ Hayden, Anders (1999). Sharing the Work, Sparing the Planet. Zed Books. ISBN 1896357288.
- ^ Frey, Philipp (2019). "The Ecological Limits of Work: on carbon emissions, carbon budgets and working time" (PDF). Autonomy Research. Retrieved 2019-09-09.
- ^ "nine-to-five job".
- ^ OECD. "Average annual hours actually worked per worker". stats.oecd.org. Retrieved 2017-12-30.
- ^ "Who works the longest hours? - BBC News". BBC News. 21 May 2012. Retrieved 2015-07-15.
- ^ Stewart, Heather (8 December 2011). "Who works the longest hours in Europe?". The Guardian. Retrieved 2015-07-15.
- ^ Chawla, Payal. "What male CEOs like Narayana Murthy don't get about working women and the youth". IndianExpress – via indianexpress.com.
- ^ "India debate on 70-hour workweek: Illegal or road to greatness?". cnbc.com. 2023-11-06. Retrieved 2023-11-28.
- ^ "NR Narayana Murthy: Why Indians are debating a 70-hour work week". BBC. 2023-11-01. Retrieved 2023-11-28.
- ^ "Average to poor work life balance: Indian IT sector employees forced to work 50 hours a week". msn.com. 2023-11-21. Retrieved 2023-11-28.
- ^ "After EY Pune CA Death, MNC Employee's X Post On Working 17 To 18 Hours, Attending 5 AM Meeting Draws Reaction". Jagran. 2024-09-19. Retrieved 2024-09-19.
- ^ "Shantanu Deshpande: Bombay Shaving Co CEO criticised for 18-hour workday advice". BBC. 2022-08-31. Retrieved 2023-11-28.
- ^ OECD. "Average annual hours actually worked per worker". Stats.oecd.org. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ 주5일근무제 : 지식백과 (in Korean). 100.naver.com. Archived from the original on 2012-07-14. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "[시사이슈 찬반토론] 대체휴일제 부활 옳을까요". Hankyung.com. 2013-04-26. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Yearly working hours for S. Koreans fall by 200, but remain far longer than OECD average". yonhap news. 3 March 2024. Retrieved 2024-03-03.
- ^ Justine Underhill (2015-08-20). "The 100 hour work week in Japan". finance.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2016-03-14.
- ^ Measures for Working Hours – Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 2012-11-12
- ^ Japan– Labour Standards Law ILO, 2012-11-12
- ^ "The young Japanese working themselves to death". BBC News. 2 June 2017.
- ^ (in Chinese) 中華人民共和國勞動法 Archived 2013-05-29 at the Wayback Machine – 中華人民共和國中央人民政府, 2005-08-05
- ^ Phillips, Tom (6 October 2015). "How hard does China work?". The Guardian.
- ^ "China's young warm to the West's work–life balance". Archived from the original on 2022-12-10.
- ^ Yuan, Li (22 Feb 2017). "China's Grueling Formula for Success: 9-9-6". WSJ – via The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ "China's work ethic stretches beyond '996' as tech companies feel the impact of slowdown". South China Morning Post. 2019-01-29.
- ^ "Jack Ma defends China's 996 tech work ethic". South China Morning Post. Apr 12, 2019. Retrieved Jul 28, 2019.
- ^ "China's JD.com Boss Criticises 'Slackers' as Company Makes Cuts". NDTV Gadgets 360. Retrieved Jul 28, 2019.
- ^ a b Report of the Policy Study on Standard Working Hours Labour Department, HKSARG, retrieved on 2012-12-10
- ^ Prices and Earnings Archived 2015-09-24 at the Wayback Machine UBS, 2012-11-07
- ^ Oxfam Hong Kong releases survey on Minimum Wage and Standard Working Hours Oxfam Hong Kong, Retrieved on 2012-12-10
- ^ a b (in Chinese) 工黨「父親節」工時問卷調查報告 工黨,2012-06-17
- ^ Standard work hours still years away: Tsang China Daily, 2010-10-15
- ^ Policy Study on Standard Working Hours Archived 2023-05-18 at the Wayback Machine Labour Department, HKSARG, retrieved on 2012-12-10
- ^ (in Chinese) 大失預算-最低工資曾衝擊業界 港股王 – 蘋果日報,2012-10-08
- ^ Chamber chief suggests labor import SCMP, 2012-10-08
- ^ (in Chinese)Investigate choices beyond standard working hours Shu-kam Lee, Cho-yiu Ng, retrieved on 2012-11-30
- ^ working hours could derail Hong Kong's economy, warns government adviser SCMP, 2012-12-03
- ^ Council Meeting (Agenda) 17 October 2012 Legislative Council Commission, HKSARG, retrieved on 2012-12-10
- ^ Voting Results Legislative Council Commission, HKSARG, retrieved on 2012-12-10
- ^ (in Chinese) 工聯會宣布十大工作重點 Archived 2013-06-16 at the Wayback Machine 香港成報,2012-10-10
- ^ (in Chinese) 民主黨2011/12施政報告建議書 捍衛核心價值 縮窄貧富懸殊 | 民主黨 民主黨,2011-10-11
- ^ (in Chinese) 勞工 – 工黨 Labour Party Archived 2012-04-19 at the Wayback Machine 工黨,2012
- ^ Social welfare and livelihood Archived 2013-04-12 at archive.today Civic Party LegCo Election 2012, retrieved on 2012-11-12
- ^ {{in lang|zh}} 盡快落實制訂標準工時 林健鋒,2011-06-23
- ^ LegCo rejects standard work hours proposal Archived 2013-03-25 at the Wayback Machine China Daily, 2012-10-19
- ^ City Digest, October 19,2012 SCMP, 2012-10-19
- ^ (in Chinese) 標準工時雖動聽 政治現實恐難容 Archived 2013-05-26 at the Wayback Machine HKET, 2012-02-27
- ^ 城市論壇 標準工時徵建議 勞資官民齊集思 on YouTube (in Chinese)
- ^ Lee, S.K. et al. 2012. Standard Working Hours or Flexible Working Hours – Policy alternatives to facilitate Work–Life Balance, Hong Kong: Ovis Press.
- ^ (in Chinese)「標準工時」會否僵化勞動市場? 雷鼎鳴,2010-12-08
- ^ Business / Opinion Setting maximum work hours first. China Daily, 2012-11-20.
- ^ Everington, Keoni (27 September 2019). "Taiwan has 4th longest working hours in world". Taiwan News. Retrieved 29 September 2019.
- ^ "Kerja 45 jam seminggu kuat kuasa 1 Sept" [45 Hours Weekly Work Starting 1 September]. Sinar Harian (in Malay). 11 August 2022. Retrieved 16 November 2022.
- ^ Hours of Work & Time – Ministry of Manpower – Government of Singapore, 2012-05-04
- ^ OECD. "Average annual hours actually worked per worker". Stats.oecd.org. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ "Working time limits (the 48-hour week) : Directgov – Employment". Direct.gov.uk. 2009-08-01. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ "No-vacation nation USA – a comparison of leave and holiday in OECD countries – Page 2, Paragraph 1 – Introduction" (PDF).
- ^ "La durée individuelle du travail - Ministère du Travail". dares.travail-emploi.gouv.fr. Retrieved Jul 28, 2019.
- ^ "Maximum weekly working hours". gov.uk. Retrieved 13 December 2023.
- ^ "Understanding the Working Time Regulations". Acas. Retrieved 13 December 2023.
- ^ "The Countries Where People Work the Longest Hours". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 2021-10-26.
- ^ "Colombia: working week lowered from 48 to 42 hours". Planet Labor. 2021-06-23. Retrieved 2021-08-18.
- ^ "Jornada de trabajo máxima en Colombia". Gerencie.com. 2014-07-10. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ Ginès i Fabrellas, Anna; Luque Parra, Manuel (January 2016). "WORKING TIME AND FLEXIBILITY IN SPAIN" (PDF) (IUSLabor 1/2016): 54–65. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 October 2017. Retrieved 30 April 2020.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ "Guide to Employment law in Spain". Spanish Living. 2018-11-01. Retrieved 2019-08-02.
- ^ "Jobless record". doi:10.1787/702131842121.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ "Spain - OECD Data". theOECD. Retrieved 2019-08-02.
- ^ "OECD Better Life Index". Retrieved 30 April 2020.
- ^ "Why Spanish employees may have to start clocking in and out once more". El País. 13 May 2020. Retrieved 30 April 2020.
- ^ "Spain introduces new working hours law requiring employees to clock in and out". Idealista. Retrieved 30 April 2020.
- ^ "La Audiencia Nacional avala descontar del tiempo de trabajo las pausas para fumar o tomar un café" (in Spanish). El Mundo. 11 February 2020. Retrieved 30 April 2020.
- ^ "Spanish stereotypes: They love siestas". The Guardian. Retrieved 30 April 2020.
- ^ Bittman, Michael; Rice, James Mahmud (2002). "The spectre of overwork: An analysis of trends between 1974 and 1997 using Australian time-use diaries" (PDF). Labour and Industry. 12 (3): 5–25. doi:10.1080/10301763.2002.10722021. S2CID 143708776. Retrieved 2020-11-15.
- ^ "PM – Australians work longest hours in the developed world". Abc.net.au. 2004-11-19. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ "Australia's industrial relations timeline". Fair Work Ombudsman. Retrieved 2022-01-15.
- ^ Martin, Peter (29 October 2015). "The 38-hour week a rarity among full-time workers, new data shows".
- ^ "73 percent of all civilian workers had access to paid vacations in March 2016". Retrieved 2018-04-25.
- ^ California Assembly Concurrent Resolution 11, Cal. Resolutions 1946, Ch. 19
- ^ "NSC-68, Beginning Section VI". Mtholyoke.edu. Archived from the original on 2010-10-10. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ "Harry S. Truman: Annual Message to the Congress: The President's Economic Report". Presidency.ucsb.edu. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ "Average weekly hours and overtime of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted". Employment Situation. United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved 17 July 2012.
- ^ a b "A century of change: the U.S. labor force, 1950–2050" (PDF). Monthly Labor Review. May 2002. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ "Productivity and the Workweek". mit.edu. Retrieved 2011-02-17.
- ^ Steven E. Landsburg (9 March 2007). "The Theory of the Leisure Class: An economic mystery: Why do the poor seem to have more free time than the rich?". Slate. Retrieved 2008-01-28.
- ^ "Working in the 21st Century". U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved 2016-10-02.
- ^ Kuckes, Niki. "Legal Affairs". Legal Affairs. Archived from the original on 2010-12-14. Retrieved 2011-01-31.
- ^ "The State Bar of California". www.calbar.ca.gov. Archived from the original on January 4, 2009. Retrieved Jul 28, 2019.
- ^ "What do the terms exempt and nonexempt mean?". Retrieved 2008-01-28.
- ^ "elaws – Fair Labor Standards Act Advisor". Archived from the original on October 4, 2002. Retrieved 2008-01-28.
- ^ a b "Overtime in California FAQ". Retrieved 2008-01-28.
- ^ "Exemptions from the overtime laws". Retrieved 2015-03-17.
- ^ "Exceptions to the general overtime law". Retrieved 2015-03-17.
- ^ Robert Levine (1997). "A Geography of Time". Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-02892-6. Retrieved 2007-11-17.
- ^ Pitt, David (1970). Tradition and economic progress in Samoa: A case study of the role of traditional social institutions in economic development. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-823156-3.
(...) findings generally agree on an average of about 28-30 hours work per week for an adult male village worker.
Further reading
[edit]- Anna Coote, Jane Franklin, Andrew Simms. (2010), 21 Hours. Why a Shorter Working Week Can Help Us All to Flourish in the 21st Century.
- Bunting, Madeleine, (2004), "Willing Slaves: How the Overwork Culture is Ruling Our Lives", HarperCollins.
- Contensou, François and Radu Vranceanu, (2000), "Working Time. Theory and Policy Implications", Edward Elgar, Cheltelham, UK, ISBN 1-85898-996-5.
- Chung, Heejung, Marcel Kerkhofs and Peter Ester, (2008), "Working Time Flexibility in European Companies", European Foundation.
- de Graaf, John, (2003), "Take Back Your Time", Berrett-Koehler, ISBN 1-57675-245-3
- Fagan, Colette, Ariane Hegewisch and Jane Pillinger, (2006), "Out of Time: why Britain needs a new approach to working time flexibility", [1], TUC
- Hunnicutt, Benjamin Kline, "Free Time : The Forgotten American Dream," Temple Press, 2013.ISBN 9781439907153
- Klamer, Ute, Ton Wilthagen, Heejung Chung, Anke Thiel, (2008) "Take it or leave it: flexible working-time arrangements and the synchronization of business cycle and life cycle"[permanent dead link] (as part of the European Foundation project "Flexibility and Security over the lifecourse")
- Lebergott, Stanley, (2002), "Wages and Working Conditions", Lebergott, Stanley (2002). "Wages and Working Conditions". In David R. Henderson (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Economics (1st ed.). Library of Economics and Liberty. OCLC 317650570, 50016270, 163149563
- Lee, Sangheon, Deirdre McCann and Jon C. Messenger, (2007), "Working Time Around the World'. Trends in working hours, laws and policies in a global comparative perspective". London: ILO/Routledge.
- McCann, Deirdre, (2005), "Working Time Laws: A global perspective", ILO, ISBN 92-2-117323-2
- McCarthy, Eugene J. and William McGaughey, (1989), "Nonfinancial Economics: The Case for Shorter Hours of Work", Praeger
External links
[edit]- The Guardian, August 20, 2005, "Work until you drop: how the long-hours culture is killing us" (UK focus)
- The Guardian, 17 February 2010, 21 hours: a new working week?.
- Evans, J., D. Lippoldt and P. Marianna (2001), Trends in Working Hours in OECD Countries, OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers n° 45, OECD, Paris.
- Hart, Bob 'Working time and employment' Routledge Revivals, 2010.
- Explanation of Working Time Limits (48 hour week) in the UK and how the opt-out works
- Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) resources on the UK Working Time Regulations Archived 2010-12-29 at the Wayback Machine
- OECD Average annual hours actually worked per worker
Working time
View on GrokipediaDefinitions and Concepts
Core Definition and Components
Working time, or hours of work, constitutes the duration during which employees are required to be available to their employer and perform assigned duties or tasks.[13] This encompasses activities directly contributing to production or service delivery, excluding periods of rest or personal time not under employer control, such as unpaid meal breaks unless contractually integrated into work duties.[14] International standards, as established by the International Labour Organization (ILO), cap normal working hours at eight per day and 48 per week prior to overtime, providing a benchmark for legal limits across member states.[14] Key components of working time include normal or standard hours, defined as the contractual baseline for full-time employment, typically ranging from 35 to 44 hours weekly depending on national regulations and industry norms.[6] Actual hours worked represent the realized time spent in productive labor, calculated as total annual hours divided by employed persons, which the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) uses to compare labor inputs across economies.[6] Overtime comprises additional hours beyond the normal threshold, often compensated at premium rates, while exclusions such as weekly rest periods (at least 24 consecutive hours) and annual paid leave reduce effective annual working time.[1] In economic analyses, working time also factors in non-standard elements like on-call availability or preparatory activities (e.g., tool maintenance), provided they occur under employer direction.[15] Distinctions arise between paid and unpaid labor within working time metrics; for instance, self-employed individuals' hours are included in aggregate statistics if economically active, but unpaid domestic work is excluded from formal definitions.[16] These components underpin labor productivity calculations, where hours serve as a denominator against output, though variations in measurement—such as inclusion of training time—can affect cross-country comparability.[17] Empirical data from ILO and OECD frameworks emphasize that working time excludes idle waiting unless remunerated and employer-mandated, ensuring focus on value-creating effort.[2]Measurement Challenges and Standards
The International Labour Organization (ILO) establishes core standards for measuring working time through resolutions adopted by the International Conference of Labour Statisticians (ICLS). The 19th ICLS in 2013 updated earlier definitions from 1962, defining "hours actually worked" as encompassing all time spent completing tasks to produce goods or services, including effective hours, overtime, short rest periods during work, and time at the workplace for work-related duties such as tool maintenance or waiting for materials, but excluding longer meal breaks, commuting, and non-work activities like personal errands.[18] This framework emphasizes the job as the unit of measurement, aligning with broader international statistical standards for employment to ensure consistency in labor force data.[16] National statistical offices, such as those contributing to ILOSTAT, are encouraged to apply these concepts in labor force surveys to facilitate cross-country analysis, though implementation varies.[15] Common measurement methods include household-based labor force surveys, which rely on self-reported data from individuals on usual or actual hours worked over a reference period (typically a week); to estimate average monthly hours, weekly hours are multiplied by 4.33 (derived from 52 weeks per year divided by 12 months), useful for standardizing comparisons across periods.[19] Establishment surveys aggregate employer records of scheduled or paid hours. Time-use surveys or diaries, where respondents log activities in real-time over a day or week, offer higher accuracy for capturing irregular patterns but are resource-intensive and less frequent. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) computes average annual hours worked by dividing total hours actually worked by the number of employed persons, prioritizing trend analysis over absolute level comparisons due to methodological divergences.[6] Administrative data from payroll or social security systems provide objective records in formal sectors but often exclude informal, self-employed, or gig work, where boundaries between work and personal time blur, particularly post-2020 with remote arrangements.[20] Challenges arise from definitional inconsistencies, such as varying inclusions of travel time for work tasks or unpaid preparatory activities across countries, complicating international comparability; for instance, some nations' surveys emphasize "normal" contractual hours, while others focus on actual effort, leading to discrepancies in reported averages. Self-reporting introduces biases, including recall errors from short reference periods (underestimating sporadic overtime) or social desirability pressures to report standard hours, with studies showing survey estimates can deviate from diary data by 10-20% due to cyclical work patterns or postponed logging.[21] Underreporting is prevalent in informal economies, where up to 60% of global employment occurs without records, and in high-overtime cultures, as evidenced by discrepancies between household surveys and administrative data in OECD countries. Nonresponse bias further skews results, with longer-hour workers less likely to participate, potentially inflating perceived reductions in working time. Efforts to mitigate these include harmonized guidelines from the OECD and ILO, but persistent gaps undermine policy evaluations, such as productivity-hour correlations.[22][23]Historical Evolution
Pre-Industrial and Anthropological Baselines
Anthropological studies of hunter-gatherer societies reveal that adults typically allocated 20 to 40 hours per week to subsistence tasks such as foraging, hunting, and food processing, affording considerable leisure for social interactions, play, and rest.[24] Among the !Kung San of southern Africa, Richard Lee's 1960s ethnographic data indicated roughly 20 hours weekly on direct food acquisition, though this excluded preparatory activities like tool maintenance and childcare.[25] Observations of the Agta foragers in the Philippines yielded an average of 24 hours per week in out-of-camp labor for adults, with men's foraging efforts around 30 hours and women's lower at 20 hours, highlighting gender differences in task division.[26] These patterns underscore a baseline where caloric needs were met efficiently without year-round intensive labor, though variability arose from environmental factors and group-specific technologies. Marshall Sahlins's 1972 conceptualization of hunter-gatherers as the "original affluent society," positing 15 to 20 hours of weekly work based on select cases like the !Kung and Australian Aboriginals, has been critiqued for methodological limitations, including incomplete accounting of indirect labor and overreliance on non-representative samples affected by modernization.[27] Subsequent cross-societal analyses, drawing from dozens of groups, estimate averages closer to 30 to 45 hours when incorporating evening processing and seasonal intensives, challenging the minimalism narrative while affirming relatively low demands compared to later economies.[28] A 2019 study of Agta labor transitions to market integration found baseline male work at approximately 45 hours per week, rising with commercialization, suggesting endogenous incentives already approached modern levels in some contexts.[29] Pre-industrial agrarian baselines in Europe featured pronounced seasonality, with labor concentrated in planting and harvest peaks offset by winter idleness and ecclesiastical holidays numbering over 100 annually, including saints' days and Sundays.[30] English manorial records from the 14th century document servile tenants fulfilling obligations on about 175 days per year, equivalent to roughly 1,400 to 1,750 annual hours assuming 8 to 10 hours daily.[4] During post-plague wage surges in the same era, peasant workdays may have dipped to 150 annually, as higher bargaining power allowed selective participation amid labor shortages.[31] Daily durations aligned with daylight, spanning 10 to 14 hours in summer but contracting sharply in off-seasons, yielding effective weekly averages of 40 to 60 hours during active periods.[32] These estimates, however, often capture only formal feudal duties and may undercount household production, animal care, and self-provisioning on personal plots, which extended total effort.[33] In non-European contexts, such as early modern Japan or Ottoman domains, similar agrarian cycles prevailed, with rice or grain harvests demanding 12-hour days over 2 to 3 months, but annual totals moderated by monsoonal or ritual breaks. Overall, pre-industrial baselines reflected adaptive responses to climatic and subsistence constraints, yielding annual hours comparable to or below industrialized norms when holidays and downtime are factored, though intensity varied by crop type and tenure arrangements.Industrial Era Transformations
The Industrial Revolution fundamentally altered working time by imposing standardized, extended factory schedules that supplanted the irregular, seasonal patterns of pre-industrial agriculture and artisanal labor. In early 19th-century Britain, textile mill operatives commonly worked 12 to 16 hours daily, six days a week, exceeding prior craft hours which averaged shorter daily stints but included more idle periods; this shift prioritized machine utilization over human rhythms, leading to widespread exhaustion.[34][5] Similar conditions prevailed in U.S. factories, where manufacturing workweeks reached 70 hours or more by the 1830s, driven by capitalist imperatives to maximize output amid rising mechanization.[5] Worker agitation against these grueling durations spurred the Ten Hours Movement in Britain during the 1830s and 1840s, which mobilized short-time committees among textile operatives to lobby Parliament for limits on shifts for women and youth, arguing that prolonged labor impaired health and family life without proportional productivity gains. The Factory Act of 1847 restricted women and those under 18 in textiles to ten hours daily, a concession extracted amid strikes and parliamentary debates where manufacturers warned of economic ruin, yet enforcement via inspectors gradually curbed excesses.[35][36] Preceding reforms, the 1833 Factory Act had capped children aged 9-13 at nine hours and mandated partial education, reflecting evangelical and utilitarian pressures to mitigate child exploitation evident in parliamentary inquiries.[36] Across the Atlantic, U.S. mechanics and laborers launched shorter-hours campaigns from the 1820s, targeting a ten-hour day through petitions and strikes, influenced by British precedents and fears of deskilling under factory discipline. President Martin Van Buren's 1840 executive order mandated ten hours for federal manual workers, a partial victory amid broader union efforts like the National Labor Union, though state-level adoption varied and full compliance lagged until later decades.[5] These transformations, blending coercive legislation with organized resistance, reduced average workweeks from over 60 hours by the 1870s in leading industries, as rising wages enabled tradeoffs favoring leisure, evidenced by econometric reconstructions showing no output collapse post-reform.[5][37]20th and 21st Century Shifts
In the 20th century, average annual working hours per employed person in industrialized economies declined substantially, from approximately 2,500 to 3,000 hours around 1900 to between 1,500 and 2,000 hours by the late 20th century, driven by productivity improvements, legislative reforms, and rising real wages that shifted the income-leisure tradeoff toward more leisure.[38][39] This reduction was uneven across regions; for instance, U.S. manufacturing workers' annual hours fell from about 1,908 in 1950 to 1,704 by 1979, reflecting a 10.7% decrease amid post-World War II economic expansion and union negotiations for shorter weeks and paid leave.[5] European countries often achieved steeper declines through statutory limits, such as France's 35-hour workweek legislated in 2000, contrasting with the U.S.'s more market-driven 40-hour standard established by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.[6] The decline correlated with technological advancements and capital deepening, enabling output growth without proportional hour increases, as evidenced by OECD data showing sustained per-worker hour reductions into the 1980s and 1990s despite service sector shifts.[3] However, aggregate household labor supply did not decrease equivalently in many developed nations, as rising female labor force participation offset per-worker reductions, maintaining or increasing total family work hours mid-century.[40] By century's end, average OECD annual hours stabilized around 1,700-1,800, with the U.S. averaging higher (about 1,780) than the EU average (around 1,570), attributable to weaker entitlements for vacation and part-time work in the U.S.[6][20] Entering the 21st century, formal working hours per worker showed minimal further decline in most OECD countries, hovering near late-20th-century levels amid globalization and information technology diffusion, though total effective hours blurred due to unpaid overtime and always-connected devices.[12] The gig economy's expansion, facilitated by platforms like Uber and Upwork, introduced flexible but often irregular schedules, with U.S. gig workers reporting average weekly hours comparable to traditional employees (around 35-40) yet facing income volatility without standard benefits.[41] Remote work, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020, increased in prevalence—reaching 20-25% of U.S. workers by 2023—but empirical studies indicate mixed effects on total hours, with some evidence of extended availability offsetting reduced commuting time.[42] Experiments with reduced hours, such as four-day workweeks trialed in the UK and Iceland (2015-2019), demonstrated maintained or improved productivity for 2,500+ workers, supporting causal links between shorter hours and output efficiency via reduced fatigue, though scalability remains debated.[43] In contrast, overwork persists in high-pressure economies like Japan, where annual hours exceed 1,600 despite government caps, linked to cultural norms and karoshi (death from overwork) cases numbering over 200 annually pre-2020 reforms.[44] Overall, 21st-century shifts emphasize qualitative changes—flexibility, non-standard employment—over quantitative reductions, with data underscoring that productivity gains, not hour cuts alone, sustain economic growth.[3]Economic Frameworks
Labor Supply and Leisure Tradeoffs
In the standard neoclassical model of labor supply, individuals allocate their fixed endowment of time between market work and leisure to maximize utility derived from consumption goods and leisure time. Consumption is financed by wage income, creating a budget constraint where total income equals the wage rate multiplied by hours worked, assuming no non-labor income for simplicity.[45] The marginal rate of substitution between leisure and consumption equals the wage rate at the optimal point, balancing the value of an additional hour of leisure against the forgone earnings.[46] A change in the wage rate generates two opposing effects on labor supply: the substitution effect and the income effect. The substitution effect arises because a higher wage increases the opportunity cost of leisure, incentivizing individuals to substitute away from leisure toward more work hours, as the relative price of leisure rises.[47] Conversely, the income effect operates through higher real income, allowing individuals to achieve the same utility level with less work if leisure is a normal good, potentially reducing labor supply.[48] The net impact depends on which effect dominates; at low wage levels, the substitution effect typically prevails, yielding an upward-sloping labor supply curve, while at higher wages, a dominant income effect can produce a backward-bending curve where hours worked decline.[49] Empirical estimates of labor supply elasticities reveal that uncompensated (total) wage elasticities are often small or positive but vary by group and context, with evidence of backward bending more pronounced among certain demographics. For instance, studies of Canadian female workers using econometric models found negative elasticities, implying a backward-bending supply curve, particularly for married women balancing family responsibilities.[50] Aggregate data, however, frequently show limited bending, as income and substitution effects approximately offset, yielding near-zero long-run elasticities around 0.1-0.3 for prime-age workers.[48] These findings hold after controlling for fixed costs of work and intertemporal optimization, though selection into employment complicates interpretation, with extensive-margin responses (participation) often exceeding intensive-margin (hours) adjustments.[47]Productivity Correlations and Causal Links
Cross-country data from the OECD indicate a negative correlation between average annual hours worked per employed person and labor productivity, measured as GDP per hour worked in purchasing power parity terms. In 2023, OECD countries averaged approximately 1,700 hours worked annually, with labor productivity around USD 70 per hour; nations like Germany (1,340 hours) and Norway (1,410 hours) exhibited higher per-hour output (USD 80+), while the United States (1,811 hours) and Mexico (2,137 hours) showed lower figures despite longer hours.[51][52] This pattern holds over time, as evidenced by long-term datasets linking reduced hours with rising per-hour productivity amid technological and organizational advances.[53] At the individual and firm level, empirical studies reveal diminishing marginal productivity from extended hours, driven by fatigue and cognitive decline. A daily analysis of call center agents found that performance peaked at moderate shift lengths (around 6-8 hours) and declined sharply beyond 8 hours, with productivity per hour falling by up to 20% after prolonged work due to error rates and output slowdowns.[8] Similarly, occupational health research links longer hours to reduced effective working time, as non-productive activities (e.g., breaks, recovery) increase disproportionately, yielding a net negative impact on output.[54] Causal evidence from policy reforms supports these correlations, though effects vary by context and implementation. Portugal's 2016 reduction of standard hours from 44 to 40 per week, applied to public sector firms, resulted in modest productivity gains (1-2% per hour) without proportional employment losses, attributed to better worker focus and reduced absenteeism; private firms showed smaller or neutral effects due to wage adjustments.[55] Conversely, France's 2000 Aubry laws mandating a 35-hour week led to initial hourly productivity increases (estimated 2-3%) in affected sectors, but total output stagnated as firms hired more workers and output per employee fell, highlighting substitution effects rather than pure efficiency gains.[56] Experimental trials, such as Sweden's 2015 nurse scheduling reduction from 39.5 to 35 hours, demonstrated improved self-reported productivity and error reduction, though generalizability is limited by small samples and healthcare-specific demands.[57] Microeconomic models and panel data further elucidate causal mechanisms, emphasizing human capital depreciation from overwork. Longitudinal firm studies show that hours beyond 40-50 weekly correlate with 5-10% productivity losses per additional hour, mediated by sleep deprivation and stress, independent of selection biases.[58] While technological complementarity can amplify short-term output from longer hours in knowledge-intensive roles, physiological limits—e.g., circadian rhythms constraining sustained attention—impose long-run ceilings, as confirmed by lab experiments on cognitive tasks.[59] These findings underscore that while total hours drive aggregate output in labor-abundant economies, optimizing per-hour productivity requires balancing work with recovery, with causal benefits most pronounced in routine or fatigue-prone occupations.[60]Market Incentives and Wage Structures
In competitive labor markets, wages tend to reflect the marginal revenue product of labor, which diminishes as additional hours are worked due to fatigue and reduced efficiency, creating incentives for firms to optimize total hours across workers rather than extending individual schedules excessively. Empirical analyses of call center data show that productivity per hour declines sharply after eight hours daily, with output falling by approximately 20% for hours beyond that threshold, prompting firms to weigh overtime costs against hiring alternatives.[8] [60] Overtime wage premiums, often set at 1.5 times the regular rate in regulations like the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, raise the marginal cost of extended hours, discouraging firms from relying on long shifts and instead favoring broader employment to meet demand. Studies indicate this structure encourages work-sharing, with elasticities near unity between standard and actual hours, leading to higher total employment in response to hour restrictions without proportional output losses.[61] [62] Some firms circumvent these incentives by reclassifying non-managerial roles with inflated titles to exempt workers from overtime eligibility, thereby avoiding premium payments while maintaining extended hours.[63] Piece-rate wage structures, where compensation ties directly to output rather than time, align worker incentives with firm productivity goals, reducing moral hazard and promoting efficient hour choices by rewarding marginal contributions over mere presence. In contrast, fixed salaried pay decouples remuneration from hours, potentially leading to overwork if monitoring is lax, though market competition pressures firms to adjust structures toward performance-based elements to curb shirking. Cross-national evidence reveals that higher wage levels correlate with shorter average hours, as income effects reduce labor supply while substitution effects from productivity gains favor leisure over marginal time.[64] [65]Health, Productivity, and Societal Impacts
Physiological and Psychological Effects of Duration
Extended working hours, particularly exceeding 55 per week, elevate the risk of ischemic heart disease by 17% and stroke by 35% relative to standard 35-40 hour weeks, based on a 2021 WHO/ILO systematic review and meta-analysis of 194 prospective cohort studies involving nearly 400,000 participants.[66] These risks contributed to an estimated 745,000 deaths from stroke and heart disease in 2016, marking a 29% rise since 2000, with effects persisting after adjusting for confounders like smoking and socioeconomic status.[66] Physiologically, such durations induce chronic stress responses, including elevated cortisol and sympathetic nervous system activation, which correlate with hypertension and endothelial dysfunction in longitudinal studies.[67] Prolonged exposure also disrupts sleep architecture, reducing deep sleep stages and increasing fatigue-related biomarkers like C-reactive protein, as evidenced in meta-analyses of shift and overtime workers.[68] Musculoskeletal disorders arise from sustained durations without adequate recovery, with meta-analytic evidence linking over 48 hours weekly to higher incidence of back pain and repetitive strain injuries due to cumulative biomechanical loading and diminished tissue repair.[69] In extreme cases, durations beyond 60 hours heighten vulnerability to metabolic disruptions, including insulin resistance and obesity, through mechanisms like reduced physical activity and altered circadian rhythms, per cohort data from occupational cohorts.[70] Psychologically, average weekly hours above 50 correlate with heightened stress reactivity and depressive symptoms, as shown in a 2023 prospective study of over 2,000 workers where longer durations predicted increased psychological distress via autonomic imbalance.[67] Burnout risk escalates nonlinearly with hours, mediated by sleep deficits; for instance, healthcare workers exceeding 48 hours weekly exhibit 20-30% higher emotional exhaustion scores, according to a 2021 Japanese cohort analysis adjusting for job demands.[71] Among young adults aged 20-35, durations over 52 hours associate with doubled odds of depression and suicidal ideation, independent of income or education, in a 2020 cross-sectional study of 12,000 employees.[72] Cognitively, overtime impairs executive function and attention; automotive workers logging 10+ overtime hours weekly showed deficits in vigilance tasks equivalent to 0.1-0.2 standard deviations below controls, per a 1996 controlled trial.[73] Midlife cognitive decline accelerates with chronic long hours, as the Whitehall II longitudinal study (1985-2004) found civil servants working 55+ hours had 1.5-2 times greater vocabulary and reasoning test deterioration over 5 years, attributable to vascular and inflammatory pathways rather than selection bias.[74] Neuroimaging evidence from 2024 pilots indicates structural changes, such as reduced gray matter in prefrontal regions linked to decision-making, in those averaging 52+ hours, suggesting adaptive but maladaptive remodeling from sustained cognitive load.[75] These effects compound with age, with meta-analyses confirming dose-response relationships where each additional 10 hours weekly raises impairment risk by 10-15%.[76]Empirical Evidence on Optimal Hours
Empirical analyses of historical and contemporary data reveal diminishing marginal returns to working hours, with productivity per hour declining after thresholds typically around 40-50 hours per week, though total output may peak higher in certain physical tasks before fatigue sets in. In a study of British munition workers during World War I, output rose proportionally with weekly hours up to about 49 hours, beyond which the marginal product of labor fell sharply; total weekly output reached a maximum at approximately 63 hours, after which it declined due to exhaustion and errors.[77] This pattern underscores a nonlinear relationship where extended hours yield progressively less additional value, influenced by the need for recovery.[78] Modern evidence from knowledge-based roles reinforces these findings. A panel analysis of Dutch call center agents showed that a 1% increase in daily hours produced only a 0.9% rise in output (measured by calls handled), attributed to rising average handling times from fatigue; effective productive time averaged 4.6 hours per day, with stronger diminishing effects for less tenured workers.[60] Similarly, econometric models from German labor data estimate an optimal weekly duration of 37 hours for balancing output and efficiency, beyond which gains taper.[79] Health metrics impose additional limits on feasible optima. A multicohort study across Europe linked working 55 or more hours weekly to elevated risks of 50 health conditions, including a hazard ratio of 1.35 for stroke and 1.17 for ischemic heart disease relative to 35-40 hours, based on over 85,000 participants followed for nearly 11 years.[80] Systematic reviews confirm modest but consistent increases in cardiovascular events from very long hours (55+ per week), though causation remains correlational and moderated by factors like age and occupation.[81] Reduced-hour trials, such as four-day weeks maintaining 100% pay and output, have correlated with lower burnout and higher job satisfaction in controlled pilots, suggesting potential for sustained productivity at 32-35 hours without output loss.[82] Overall, no universal optimum exists, as it varies by task type—physical labor tolerating higher peaks for total output, while cognitive work favors shorter durations to preserve hourly efficiency and mitigate health costs—but evidence converges on thresholds below 50 hours weekly for long-term viability.[8]Broader Economic and Family Outcomes
Reductions in average annual working hours across OECD countries have historically correlated with rising GDP per capita, as productivity per hour increases allow for higher output with fewer labor inputs, particularly beyond middle-income development thresholds where hours begin to decline.[83][84] In empirical analyses of OECD nations, prolonged working hours exert a net negative effect on overall economic development, with the impact more pronounced in less developed members where excessive hours hinder efficiency gains and human capital accumulation.[85] Experimental trials of shorter workweeks, such as four-day models, have shown maintained or enhanced organizational productivity in some cases, alongside reduced operational costs from lower absenteeism, though aggregate GDP effects remain context-dependent due to fixed overheads and startup inefficiencies in compressed schedules.[86][87] Longer working hours contribute to elevated work-family conflict, which in turn correlates with increased parental stress, depression, and diminished psychological resources for child-rearing among employed parents.[88][89] Studies indicate that nonstandard or extended schedules reduce synchronous time parents spend with children, potentially impairing family cohesion and child emotional development, as quality family interactions—facilitated by shorter work durations—support better mental health and behavioral outcomes in offspring.[90][91] Among working women, prolonged hours specifically strain marital and familial relations, leading to higher reported conflict and lower satisfaction, though causal pathways often intersect with post-divorce labor supply increases where mothers expand hours by about 8% and fathers by 16% to compensate for household disruptions.[92][93] Broader family structure stability benefits from reduced hours, as excessive work demands exacerbate the tradeoffs between labor supply and fertility decisions; however, policies enforcing shorter weeks without addressing underlying incentives may inadvertently suppress fertility rates by altering family investment dynamics.[94][95] Children in intact, two-parent households with parents maintaining moderate hours exhibit superior long-term outcomes in health, academics, and earnings compared to those affected by parental overwork or divorce-induced hour escalations, underscoring the causal role of available parental time in mitigating adverse intergenerational effects.[96][97]Legal and Institutional Frameworks
International Guidelines and Treaties
The International Labour Organization (ILO), a specialized United Nations agency founded in 1919, has prioritized working time regulation since its inception, adopting the first global labor standard on hours of work that year to mitigate exploitation in industrial settings.[1] These conventions establish maximum limits while allowing flexibility for overtime, shifts, and national variations, influencing labor laws worldwide even among non-ratifying states through soft law mechanisms like guidelines for multinational enterprises.[2] ILO Convention No. 1 (1919), titled Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, restricts daily hours to eight and weekly hours to forty-eight in industrial undertakings, with provisions for averaging over periods up to three weeks and exceptions for shift systems or temporary exigencies like repairs.[98] Ratified by 52 countries and entering into force on June 13, 1921, it marked the initial international benchmark against prolonged labor, though many ratifications have since been denounced in favor of updated standards.[99] Building on this, Convention No. 30 (1930), Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices), applies similar caps—eight hours daily and forty-eight weekly—to non-industrial sectors, excluding managerial roles and permitting extensions under collective agreements or emergencies.[13] Convention No. 47 (1935), Forty-Hour Week Convention, advances further by mandating reductions to forty hours weekly without wage reductions where feasible, entering into force on June 23, 1957, and emphasizing continuous efforts to shorten hours across employments.[100] Non-binding recommendations reinforce these treaties; Recommendation No. 116 (1962) on Reduction of Hours of Work promotes progressive cuts to approximately forty hours weekly, prioritizing wage maintenance and productivity gains to boost employment opportunities.[101] ILO guidance for businesses, including the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises, encourages transitioning from forty-eight to forty hours as national conditions allow, integrating rest periods and overtime safeguards.[102] Beyond ILO instruments, no overarching United Nations treaty specifically governs maximum working hours, though broader human rights frameworks indirectly support reasonable limits via protections against forced labor and fair conditions.[103] Ratification varies—higher for foundational conventions like No. 1 but lower for ambitious reductions like No. 47—reflecting tensions between worker protections and economic competitiveness in developing contexts.[104] These standards collectively frame international norms, with compliance monitored through ILO supervisory bodies rather than enforcement mechanisms typical of trade treaties.National Regulations on Limits and Overtime
In the European Union, Directive 2003/88/EC sets a maximum average weekly working time of 48 hours, including overtime, calculated over a reference period not exceeding four months, with provisions for individual opt-outs in member states. This framework also requires a minimum daily rest period of 11 consecutive hours and a weekly rest of 24 uninterrupted hours, plus breaks during shifts exceeding six hours. National implementations vary; for instance, many countries enforce stricter daily limits around 8 hours, while overtime premiums are determined by domestic laws, often starting at 25-50% above regular rates.[105][106] The United States Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) mandates overtime compensation at 1.5 times the regular rate for non-exempt employees working more than 40 hours in a workweek, but establishes no upper limit on total hours, focusing instead on pay protections for eligible workers. Exemptions apply to certain salaried professionals, executives, and administrative roles meeting specific salary and duties tests, with enforcement emphasizing record-keeping over hour caps. State laws may impose additional restrictions, such as daily overtime triggers in California after 8 hours.[107][108] France's Labor Code designates 35 hours as the standard weekly duration for full-time employment, with overtime accruing beyond this threshold subject to premiums of 25% for the first 8 hours and 50% thereafter, alongside potential compensatory rest. Collective bargaining agreements frequently adjust effective thresholds upward, and total annual hours are capped at 1,607 in some sectors, though actual compliance often exceeds nominal limits due to flexible arrangements.[109] Japan's Labor Standards Act limits statutory working hours to 8 per day and 40 per week, requiring overtime premiums of at least 25% for excess time, rising to 50% on rest days and holidays, with a monthly cap of 45 hours (extendable to 100 in exceptional cases under agreements). Reforms since 2019 have tightened enforcement against excessive overtime to address health risks, mandating premium rates of 50% for hours exceeding 60 per month in aggregate.[110][111] In China, the Labor Law prescribes a standard 8-hour workday and 40-hour workweek, with overtime restricted to no more than 3 hours daily or 36 hours monthly, compensated at 150% of regular wages on weekdays, 200% on rest days, and 300% on statutory holidays. Alternative systems like comprehensive or flexible hour calculations apply in certain industries, but violations remain common despite caps, particularly in high-pressure sectors.[112] Other nations exhibit similar diversity; Australia's National Employment Standards limit ordinary hours to 38 per week with "reasonable" overtime negotiated individually, often at 150-200% premiums. In developing economies, regulations frequently align with International Labour Organization Convention No. 1 (1919), capping daily hours at 8 and weekly at 48, though enforcement varies widely due to informal sectors.[113][44]| Country/Region | Standard Weekly Hours | Overtime Premium (Weekday) | Maximum Overtime Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| European Union | 48 (average, incl. OT) | Varies by member state (typically 25-50%) | No absolute cap; opt-outs allowed |
| United States | 40 | 1.5x regular rate | No limit |
| France | 35 | 25% (first 8h), 50% after | Varies by agreement |
| Japan | 40 | 25%+ | 45h/month (extendable) |
| China | 40 | 150% | 36h/month |
Compliance, Enforcement, and Evasion Patterns
Enforcement of working time regulations typically occurs through national labor inspectorates, which conduct workplace audits, impose fines for violations, and require recordkeeping of hours under frameworks like the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), enforced by the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division.[114][115] Internationally, the International Labour Organization (ILO) promotes inspection guidelines emphasizing routine checks and penalties, though implementation varies by resource availability in inspectorates.[116] Compliance rates differ markedly by economic development; for instance, observance of legal limits exceeds 97% in countries like Luxembourg and the Netherlands, but falls to 24.5% in the Republic of Korea, per an Effective Working-Hour Regulation Index correlating enforcement strength with GDP levels.[44] Globally, approximately 22% of workers—equivalent to 614 million individuals—exceed 48-hour weekly limits despite prevailing legal standards, with over one-third regularly working such extended durations, indicating systemic non-compliance beyond formal sectors.[117][44] In the European Union, implementation of the Working Time Directive shows partial adherence, with only select nations achieving national compliance in specific industries like aviation, where violations persist due to opt-outs and monitoring gaps.[118] Actual hours often surpass statutory caps, as in Peru (49.2 hours versus a 48-hour limit) and Chile's domestic work sector (59.3 hours), underscoring enforcement challenges in service and household roles with limited oversight.[44] Evasion patterns predominantly manifest in informal economies, where self-employment serves as a proxy for unregulated work, enabling circumvention via undeclared hours, disguised contracts, or off-the-books overtime to avoid premiums and limits.[44] In developing regions, over 50% of informal workers in countries like Indonesia (51.2%) and Bolivia exceed 48 hours weekly, driven by poverty traps and weak regulatory reach covering only formal employment.[44][119] Sectoral evasion includes transport (e.g., Senegal's taxi drivers at 14-18 hours daily) and security (e.g., Jamaica at 72 hours weekly), where informality facilitates voluntary long hours for income necessity amid absent protections.[44] Collective bargaining and social dialogue mitigate evasion in formal settings, but informal dominance—prevalent in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America—perpetuates non-observance, with unpaid overtime affecting 33-50% of workers in nations like Russia and China.[44]Global Patterns and Variations
Trends by Economic Development Stage
In economies at early stages of development, characterized by low per capita income and predominant subsistence agriculture or informal labor, average annual working hours per worker often exceed 2,000, driven by labor-intensive production methods and limited mechanization. For instance, in many low-income countries in sub-Saharan Africa, workers log approximately 2,100 to 2,300 hours annually, reflecting the necessity of extended labor to achieve minimal output in sectors like farming where productivity per hour remains low.[3] This pattern stems from causal factors including weak enforcement of labor standards and high underemployment, which compels individuals to extend hours rather than face income shortfalls, though actual effective hours can vary due to seasonal idleness in agriculture.[120] As economies transition to middle-income status, often through industrialization, working hours typically peak before beginning a gradual decline, aligning with a mild bell-shaped curve relative to GDP per capita. Upper-middle-income nations like Mexico and Colombia report averages of 2,100 to 2,400 hours per year, higher than in low-income peers due to formal manufacturing demands and urbanization pulling workers into longer shifts without proportional productivity gains.[7] Empirical data indicate this elevation results from structural shifts toward wage labor and export-oriented industries, where firms maximize output via extended schedules amid competitive pressures, though recent trends show modest reductions as regulations strengthen.[121] In high-income, developed economies, average annual hours have stabilized at lower levels, typically 1,300 to 1,800, as seen across OECD countries where technological advancements and capital-intensive production enable higher output per hour, reducing the need for prolonged labor. For example, Germany averages 1,340 hours, while the United States stands at about 1,790, supported by statutory limits, generous leave policies, and a shift toward service sectors emphasizing efficiency over duration.[6] These trends reflect causal mechanisms like rising wages outpacing productivity demands, fostering leisure as a normal good, with cross-country data confirming a downward trajectory post-2000 as development matures.[3]| Economic Stage | Example Countries | Avg. Annual Hours (Recent Est.) | Key Driver |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low-Income | Ethiopia, Nigeria | 2,100–2,300 | Subsistence labor intensity[3] |
| Middle-Income | India, Mexico | 2,000–2,400 | Industrialization peaks[7] |
| High-Income | Germany, USA | 1,300–1,800 | Productivity & regulations[6] |
Regional and National Disparities
Significant disparities in average working hours characterize global patterns, with annual hours per worker ranging from under 1,400 in parts of Western Europe to over 2,200 in select Latin American nations as of 2023. These differences stem from variations in statutory limits, enforcement, cultural attitudes toward labor, and economic necessities, such as reliance on informal sectors in developing economies where productivity per hour remains lower, necessitating longer durations to achieve comparable output. OECD data indicate that while the member average stood at 1,752 hours, Mexico topped the list at 2,207 hours, reflecting a 48-hour statutory week and prevalent overtime practices.[6][122] In Europe, particularly the EU, workers average around 1,571 hours annually, with Germany at 1,343 hours and the Netherlands even lower due to part-time prevalence and robust vacation entitlements averaging 25-30 days plus public holidays. This contrasts sharply with North America, where the United States records 1,811 hours, driven by fewer mandated holidays (typically 10 days) and a cultural emphasis on productivity through extended presence. Canada aligns closer to the U.S. at about 1,685 hours, though with slightly stronger union influences in some sectors.[6][7][38] Asia exhibits pronounced national variations within the region; Japan averaged 1,598 hours in recent years, tempered by karoshi prevention laws capping overtime at 45 hours monthly since 2019, yet cultural pressures sustain long hours in practice. South Korea similarly reports around 1,901 hours, though 52-hour weekly caps introduced in 2018 have moderated extremes. In contrast, developing Asian economies like India often exceed 2,000 hours informally, lacking comprehensive data but evidenced by 48-hour norms in manufacturing. Latin American disparities amplify this, with Colombia at 2,405 hours per ILO estimates, linked to economic informality and weaker enforcement.[3][15][38]| Region | Approximate Average Annual Hours (Recent Data) | Key Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Western Europe | 1,300-1,500 | Germany (1,343), Netherlands (~1,400)[122][7] |
| North America | 1,600-1,800 | USA (1,811), Canada (1,685)[6] |
| East Asia (OECD) | 1,500-1,900 | Japan (1,598), South Korea (~1,900)[3] |
| Latin America | 2,100-2,400 | Mexico (2,207), Colombia (2,405)[122][38] |