As labour mobility and globalisation come into the workplace, longer working hours arise to meet employer demands. But in the past two decades, discussions of whether long working hours equates to productivity have risen. 

 

According to the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) most recent study Working Time Around the World: Trends in working hours, laws and policies in a global comparative perspective, about 22% of the global workforce (approximately 614 million workers) are working more than 48 hours a week.

 

Surprisingly, the long working hours culture started in America. The Guardian’s archive found the catchphrase “24/7” already popular with Americans adecade ago, before everyone had mobiles and laptops. Spurred by over-achievers and a culture where teamwork in units is encouraged, working overtime became the norm.

 

Comparing the late 1970s to the late 2000s, the Centre for American Progress reported 38% of professional men worked 50 or more hours per week, rising from 34% previously. For women, 14% of professional-managerial women work more than 50 hours per week, with 32% of professional-managerial single mothers also doing the same.

 

Employees generally feel the actual time needed to get the job done is often less than the set working hours. So what should be done to prevent employees from leaving the workforce altogether? In the last few years, ‘workplace flexibility’ (four-day workweeks and other flexible work arrangements) has cropped up in some companies and public sectors jobs.

 

Last December, The New York Times revealed that the revolutionary four-day workweek in the Netherlands is now rather common, even among professionals in law, banking and health sectors. Factors such as rising unemployment, high costs and low productivity have pushed the rise of flexible and part-time working hours.

 

After the 2008 economic crisis, The Institute for the Study of Labor revealed that, in 2009, only five out of 33 Organisation For Economic Cooperation and Development countries had no short-time work schemes. The result of having a short-time work option helps employers reduce work hours in order to compensate for costs without having to lay off employees. 

 

The benefits of a shorter workweek and stronger work sharing between colleagues are obvious. Employees have a better work-life balance and spend less on childcare. Commuting time and costs are also cut down. A Florida State University survey of its 800 full-time employees showed 33% of its employees would quit if they found a job closer to home.

 

However, greater work flexibility also comes at a price. The New York Times article revealed Dutch women worked an average of only 24 hours a week, hence earning 27% less than men, and 57% of women are considered financially dependent.

 

And how does it affect employers? Critics claim that squeezing five days of work into four 10-hour days will not increase productivity and in fact could produce more stress. But more flexibility does not necessarily mean working less. Radboud van Hals, who leads talent recruitment in the largest Dutch insurance company Achmea, manages a 40-hour week by working at home in the mornings in order to have breakfast with his family. Employees at his office have smart phones, laptops and lockers instead of a designated desk. As competition for talent increases, flexible work schedules become a powerful tool to attract and retain talent in the labour market.

 

For Asia, the implementation of a healthy work-life balance is still in its infancy, as Singapore and Macau still have no legislation on minimum wage laws, while Hong Kong will only implement them this year. International Labour Organisation (ILO) figures show that in 2008, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore topped the longest working year list, with South Koreans working on average 2,315 hours. Americans, on average, work 1,792 hours per year while Germans only work 1,391 hours per year.

 

But employee mindsets are slowly changing. Since 2006, non-profit organisation Community Business has conducted an annual survey on the work life balance of Hong Kong’s working population. The 2010 survey reveals actual working hours are 48.7 per week (up from 48.4 in 2009), exceeding ILO’s standard by 21.8%. Additionally, 77.7% of employees believe negative impacts like continuous fatigue, insufficient time with family and poor health are due to poor work-life balance. It found that 57% of employees think flexible work arrangements are important aspects in joining or staying with an organisation. Compared to 2009, a significant increase, from 30.1% to 39%, of employees said they would leave their current job for better work-life balance.

 

Such figures suggest that employers no longer have the iron fist in determining an employee’s work-life schedule. In an age where ideal work-life balance is regarded as a necessity rather than a luxury, employers will eventually need to reorganise working hours to allow for flexibility so as to retain top talent.