I have already offered one quote from my 2011 book The Courageous State today. Let me offer another now as it seem to be topical:
Maximum working hours
Work is important. Fair pay is important. But so too is life beyond work. The simple fact is that when people work less they also consume less, their carbon footprint is smaller, but their quality of life is usually higher. Of course, for some working too long is about avoiding poverty and that is why measures to improve benefits and to reduce tax on the poorest are essential and that is why an increase in the minimum wage is also vital. For others, though, working too long is about excess hours to consume more goods that they really do not need.
In both cases the impact is extraordinarily harmful. Family life, relationships, interaction with the wider community, any participation in society, and an opportunity to realise a person's meaning are all foregone to the sacrifice of time to work for cash.
Few countries, bar the French, have really addressed this issue properly, which is why the French example of setting a maximum number of hours that a person may work is so refreshing. A Courageous State has to say that work is vital, but you can always have too much of a good thing and that working for too long is harmful: a cap on working hours is essential.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Not much point having a 35-hour week as maximum hours, if people can work several hundred hours overtime?
This country, reluctantly and with provision for avoidance, adopted the European Working Time Directive into Health and Safety legislation, and also negotiated the infamous opt-out to avoid it!
Of course, the opt-out was not mandatory…but not signing it was an own-goal and generally meant you wouldn’t get the job you applied for (opt-out signing being generally in the application paperwork) or didn’t last long in the job you were in…
Plus, of course, unless you are going to introduce a much higher basic wage, you will be cutting needed income from families. Many (and I mean many) men/women are working two or three times that 35-hours to get a really low income…
You many need to read the book as a whole
I would recommend it
But then I would, wouldn’t I?
It’s on my list.
But being an “industry” based person…..it wouldn’t work…..neither did the 48-hour working week.
Quite simply…the employers ignored it, and still ignore it. Enforcement was nil, mainly because the enforcing authority was cut to the bone, and further.
Still, I live in hope!!
I refer you to that standard industrial phrase, much favoured by employers: “where are you working tomorrow then John”
And that’s why we need strong unions too
I’m in a union Richard. UNITE.
The largest.
It has served me well.
But most are not, and very many employers are aggressively against union membership.
Not surprisingly the very large employers are worse.
Funnily enough, the labour party, until recently, has been drifting towards an anti-union stance.
So much so that there was talk of halting union funding directed towards labour..
I am heavily pro unions
I was a member of Unite
I am now in the UCU
I am 50/50 unions as they and the Labour movement have done wonders for the betterment of ordinary people , but ordinary people we are and I think those who are in charge of Labour now have forgotten that. The majority of the electorate are these days not that politicized – we just want a common sense party , sadly there does not seem to be one. Oh well , must’tn grumble.
A shorter working week has always been a key objective of social reformers. At the start of the 20th century the 12 hour day and 7 day week were the norm in Britain, so we have already come a long way, but how far could this go? The arguments for a shorter working week in the longer term are almost overwhelming. Just to list a few:
– Global population growth plus automation (robots and AI) make a massive labour surplus likely in every country around the World in the next 10-20 years
– Studies show that productivity is higher on a 3 day working week than on current patterns
– Absence cover becomes far easier to manage with a bigger pool of part-time workers
– Childcare (and care for the elderly/disabled) could be easily be time-shared by couples
– Time to participate in sports and team exercise would help address the new adult health crisis
– Time to take part in adult skills training and education while still working
– Building more connected local communities would be enhanced with time for people of working age using key skills to volunteer work with local schools and colleges, sports clubs, local conservation, community policing, territorial army, hobbies and clubs, etc
The list could obviously go on, but two problems stand out:
1) How can a shorter working week be funded ? Hourly pay rates would have to increase by two-thirds to move from a standard 40 to a 24 hour week. Given the need to remain Globally competitive this is unlikely to happen any time soon. A better alternative would therefore be to subsidise wages with a universal basic income, paid for by taxes on the growing wealth of companies, high earners, and inherited wealth. Potential problems with labour immigration could be limited by only offering this benefit to full citizens of a country (migrant workers would not qualify, but would still receive free healthcare and other “hardship” benefits).
2) Employers are notoriously bad at coping with flexible schemes such as job sharing and part time working. This is largely because they don’t know how to manage people effectively, and do not invest enough in skills training. Too many businesses rely on a small pool of “experts” to perform key roles, but fail to understand that this undermines resilience of their business. Proper use of AI “expert” systems and training should be able to spread the skills and knowledge needed across a bigger pool of people, which will ultimately accelerate business progress.
3) Workers must become happier to live on a “sufficient” income rather than choosing to increase their hours to maximise take-home pay. The key to this is to generate a greater sense of financial security through free healthcare, education, and pensions, combined with affordable housing and a progressive tax system which provides a proper safety net for ordinary citizens at every stage of life.
Such ideas may seem very aspirational today, but with a growing Global workforce, combined with warnings that 40% of existing roles may be replaced by automation in the next 10-20 years, we will need a radical re-think of work and pay in the future. Simply imposing a shorter working week today may not be as popular with voters as the Labour leadership imagine, particularly if the additional jobs created go to immigrant workers. If we are to have a viable strategy for a shorter working week it needs to be part of a clearer long term vision which provides lifestyle benefits and income security for ordinary working people.
Robert P Bruce – author http://www.TheGlobalRace.net
The coming wave of Artifical Intelligence-based automation will make the Maximum Working Hours issue one (among several) that is central and critical to preserving living standards and preventing economic collapse.
A cynic would say that with AI/automation, many people will become surplus to requirements.
Passengers in the ship of state, or parasites.
Nature has a habit of removing useless organisms from the biosphere!
Although mankind is doing a better job….what price life if there is so much surplus to requirements?