Starting from today, French employees are required to ignore their work emails after 6PM according to a new labor agreement. It's no exception if you check emails on your smartphone or if you are employed at such fast-paced companies like Google, Facebook, Deloitte, and PwC. French people, who already favored the 35-hour work week introduced in 2000, seem to welcome the change.
http://www.theguardian.com/money/shortcuts/2014/apr/09/french-6pm-labour-agreement-work-emails-out-of-office
With this news, I would like to ask if you think a 35-hour work week is beneficial for an economy. The main reason that France adopted this policy was to reduce unemployment. Employers must hire more workers to run their businesses since each employee works 5 hours less. 35- hour work week may help people achieve work-life balance and actually become more productive. I believe people used to work 6 days a week in America and now only 5 days. What is your take on this matter?
Ps: Proponents of shorter work week: http://www.shorterworkweek.com/econeffect.html.
Personally, I think the number of hours people work is less important but rather how productive the workers are. Having a shorter work hour week forces companies to come up with effective ways to be more productive within a short period of time. However, i am still unclear on how that will positively impact employment.
ReplyDeleteThis could have a nice impact on the unemployment rate. It would really effect the people who work hourly wage jobs, which are typically jobs given to middle or lower class workers. This change could help these people, and the nation overall.
ReplyDeleteI know 5 hours might not seem like a lot of time, but several questions come to mind after reading this. First, how is this law going to be regulated and what would be the punishment for workers checking their email after 6 pm? Is somebody going to be punished for doing something productive? Second, could this actually reduce productivity? For jobs where 80 hour weeks are normal (e.g. consulting), cutting this in half could really hurt an employee. And if no other person has the same expertise, it may be hard to find a suitable and productive replacement.
ReplyDeleteokay, I wrote a nice thoughtful response, and an internet error killed it. I'll just say this instead:
ReplyDeleteI suspect the new law won't have that much effect for those it would most adversely affect (finance, business, tech, etc...). I worked in France last summer and almost no one in the office observed the 35hr/week law (I averaged ~55hrs, for example). I think if it was implemented in the US (extremely unrealistic), the enforcement mechanism would need to be very flexible. The 35 hr/week enforcement is great for many on hourly jobs (like Jacob mentioned), but terrible for those who work in industries where 60+ hr/week is standard (consulting, finance, law, etc...).
@ Dorothy: Imagine a company has 80 hours to fulfill. There are 3 people in the job market. If each can work 40 hours, only two out of three will be hired. But the 35-hour work week makes it possible for the third person to get on board (to work 10 hours), thus reducing unemployment.
ReplyDelete@ Sanjay: I read the article and it looks like the 6PM policy aims at preventing employers from invading privacy and off-work time of employees past 6PM. I agree that regulation can be complicated and I doubt they are going to be strict about it.
@Rasheed: Distinction between hourly jobs and "industry-intensive" jobs like you, Jacob and Sanjay suggest would be a good idea when it comes down to implementing 35 hour weeks. Nevertheless there's a concern that working 80 hours/week would not be sustainable and actually counter productive. I recommend this interesting post from Guy Kawasaki http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140324113914-2484700-let-s-stop-the-glorification-of-busy
PS: did you press sign out instead of publish Rasheed, I did it twice already. Why does that button have to be there...
I think it sounds like a good solution for unemployment because it allows companies to hire more workers. However, this may lead to a decrease in the wage of each individual. For America to implement such a plan, it has to consider the trade-off that individuals are willing to accept in place of helping someone find work.
ReplyDeletePotentially this could be a good solution for unemployment. However, I think the idea is more complex than what it looks like. Reducing the working hours would not only have an impact in companies, but it would also have an impact in lifestyle, satisfaction, household dynamics, and other aspects of a worker's environment. I do not know if US is ready to have a shift in this area! what do you guys think?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dorothy that worker productivity is much more important than how many hours you work. I've heard that many studies show that getting more time to sleep and relax makes you more productive overall.
ReplyDeletei think a 35-hr work week can be both productive and counter-productive for reasons discussed above. a decrease by 5 hours can greatly enhance the chance of an unemployed to be employed and for companies to channel their money to hiring new employees. the flip side, as Ly and others mentioned, "industry sensitive" jobs in consulting, healthcare, legal, etc. would not be as attractive or lucrative. for some people the five hours of pay may be the deciding factor whether one is able to pay their car insurance or rent on credit or not. maybe if the government could counter balance the reduction in pay then this would sound like a pretty sweet law.
ReplyDeleteI also think it might be a good idea because not only will it reduce unemployment rates, it will also improve productivity and in the long run, economic growth for the country.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sanjay. Economic theory tells us that workers, overall, are used in the industry and job in which they will be most productive. When you limit the time they are allowed to work, other who will likely be much less productive must be brought in to perform the same tasks. In many cases, I think this would lead to a lot of inefficiency.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the above statements even though they may be conflicting views on whether a 35 hour work week is beneficial because it decreases unemployment or harmful by giving jobs to less qualified candidates and decreasing earning ability. I wonder how this 35 hour work week would affect areas that are highly specialized? For example research positions are usually done by researchers who are irreplaceable in their ability to conceptualize new ideas.
ReplyDelete