WORKING TIME REDUCTION IS COMMON THREAD THROUGH HISTORY

Working time is a dilemma. Especially for executives. We asked Franne Mullens, a VUB sociologist working extensively around time and working time, for advice. We have learnt from the interview that she is aware of the changes happening in the world in this regard like no other. But she also often refers to the 30-hour working week project she helped coordinate and monitor at women’s organisation Femma Wereldvrouwen.

Working time has decreased over the last decades, yet we always feel that things are getting busier. Why is that?

Mullens: “During the industrial revolution, people worked more than 70 hours per week. It was no exception for men, women and even children to work up to 16 hours per day, 6 days a week. In the early 20th century, the 8-hour working day was introduced. It was a real breakthrough. After World War II, the two-day weekend and the 40-hour working week were introduced. But the working time per family has increased since the 1970s. Because women (re)entered the labour market, often part-time, and a family easily worked 70 to 80 hours a week.”

Working time doesn’t always match the private time of many employees. Try picking up your kids from school at 3:20 pm…

Mullens: “We have noticed that working time is very focused on the breadwinner’s model, in which men went to work and women stayed at home. Which is really strange, because for a very long time that model didn’t exist. It emerged in the 1950s, but disappeared again in the 1970s, when ever more women entered the labour market. But aside from that, adjusting working time to school hours is not ideal either. Firstly, because not everyone has children, so there are people who don’t have to go pick up their kids. Everyone’s needs for working time reduction are different. For some people, this might be per day, for others per week, per month or per year. And there are people who would rather retire sooner. The Femma project also showed me that even though mothers like to adjust their working hours to school hours, they mostly opt for one day off per week because of the choices made by colleagues and time constraints. On this day off and on days they’re working from home, they try to be at the school gate on time. Moreover, they can also spend the time off with their children. Me-time sometimes falls by the wayside, which isn’t ideal either.

If we all find a solution that works for us personally, does that solve the problem?

Mullens: “I’m afraid it doesn’t. We need to think collectively, but also take into account that different companies have different realities. For some companies, permanent availability will be important, while in other companies, it is more interesting to combine all days off in collective leave. But allowing everyone to take this time off as they see fit will be rather exceptional. But that doesn’t need to be a disaster. After all, this far-reaching individualisation of working hours results in many cases in self-exploitation, because many people are still working during that time off. That is why sometimes, working time reduction in collective moments is a more interesting alternative. No e-mails come in and you don’t feel bad about not working whilst other people are solving your problems.”

 

“Employees are allowed to claim their share of the increase in productivity”

 

Many people say that working time reduction results in increased workload. It often results in employees having to do the same work in less time.

Mullens: “This was recently an issue in New Zealand. A company had put its employees in charge of working time reduction. They had to figure out themselves how to get the work done in less time. This resulted in more stress and the request to work more hours again. At Femma and in some other experiments in the UK I monitored, they tackled this issue in a better way. The company also paid attention to working conditions. Extra employees were recruited at Femma and some tasks were outsourced. In the UK, meetings were also held to raise awareness of workload. These meetings aren’t all necessary and efficient.”

Working time reduction with wage retention is also a sensitive topic.

Mullens: “It doesn’t make sense economically. Moreover, employers are always in a competitive, and often international, environment. It is difficult to be the first or the only one to take a leap. Agreements per sector, or even on a national level can be a solution in this regard. But the best argument in favour of working time reduction with wage retention is history. Since the industrial revolution, working time has decreased more than once. And it has never been at the expense of the economy or profits. And that has a lot to do with the increase in productivity. Work happened faster: less time was needed to do the same amount of work. Even now, productivity is still rising. Yet working hours haven’t changed for the last 30 years. The increase in productivity is not at all converted into extra time or remuneration for employees. Employees should claim a bigger share of these gains. Given the current labour market scarcity, this seems like a negotiable topic to me.”

Are there any differences between expectations from men and women regarding working hours? And the reduction?

Mullens: “Working hours are entirely based on the breadwinner’s model. Tailored to the needs of men, if you will. Because the unpaid work that historically, but also still today, is primarily performed by women is constantly overlooked in regulations on working time. Things are slowly changing and men are also taking up their roles at home. Working time reduction can be a lever to complete that evolution. But then men have to use the freed-up time to take up household chores. That is where cultural patterns, which are very much ingrained, get in the way. The image of the ideal employee is still stereotypically male: the totally committed employee who is always available and doesn’t need to worry about the kids. The new generation sees this differently and in a more balanced way. But it remains to be seen whether things will actually change. Because in the workplace, people quickly fall back into these persistent patterns anyway. It is difficult to make different choices individually. Working time reduction can play an important role in this regard, but will not automatically change everything.”

Never Work Alone 2023 | Author: Nouchka Roelants | Image: Daniël Rys