How satisfied are employees with their working hours?
Jörg Hofmann: The majority of employees are quite satisfied with their working hours.
Employers say the same thing …
…but they’re drawing the wrong conclusions. They say that’s why we don’t need binding rules. Our findings show that the opposite is true. Employees are satisfied where rules apply, where collective bargaining agreements are in place, and where works councils do a good job. If we want to continue shaping the rules governing working hours in the future, we must take into account the changes brought about by the digitalization of the workplace just as much as the changing lifestyles and needs of employees. And we also see that not everyone is satisfied today. There are tensions in many areas, including in today’s world of work.
Employers criticize that these requests have nothing to do with the reality of the workplace. How meaningful are the results?
Very meaningful—after all, we didn’t ask employees about their wishes. We asked them about their actual working hours and where they see their interests in this regard. It is the unions’ job to articulate these interests. Otherwise, working hours will become a “wish list” dictated by employers.
Is satisfaction with working hours evenly distributed among employees?
No, conditions vary; for example, the proportion of dissatisfied employees is significantly higher among shift workers. In fact, when we take a closer look at the results, there are major differences—between individual companies and between sectors. For instance, employees in IT, research and development, or those who work remotely are generally more satisfied than shift workers, field staff, or managers.
With such diverse sectors and working conditions, is there even a common denominator for good working hours?
Yes, and that is the key finding of the survey: Whether employees are satisfied or dissatisfied with their work hours, the same factors influence this across the board. Whether they’re shift workers or purchasing agents—the same principle applies to everyone: People want work schedules that fit their lives. The survey demonstrates this very clearly. They are significantly more satisfied with their work schedules when their actual working hours roughly match their preferred schedule, when their work hours are predictable, when they can occasionally work shorter hours for a while, and when they can come in later or leave early without any problems. Employees are dissatisfied with their work hours when they have excessively long workdays, when they have to work on weekends too often, when their work hours are unpredictable, and when performance requirements put them under time pressure. The fact is: People work under different working conditions. But we can apply the same strategies everywhere to improve those conditions. For example, we can examine what needs to change so that work schedules become predictable for everyone.
For everyone? Even in shift work?
Yes, even in shift work, the predictability of work schedules can be improved. Changes to the shift schedule or additional shifts are often announced at too short notice. Longer notice periods can improve predictability. And not every scheduling error made by sales has to be borne by production. When flexibility is simply taken for granted, efforts to plan properly wane. That’s why flexibility must also come at a cost. Not necessarily money, but time off in lieu. This also applies to sales staff: The calendar makes it clear—when there’s a trade show, it’s obvious that overtime will be required. So why is staffing kept so thin that compensatory time off isn’t possible?
Employers argue that they need this flexibility because they have to react quickly to the market.
That’s true. The demands for flexibility toward customers have increased. Employers are trying to shift the uncertainties of the market solely onto employees. And this hits hardest those employees who have no way of balancing flexibility demands through self-determined work schedules. Working a little longer in the evening is more feasible if you can then do your shopping in the morning and aren’t forced by the time clock to start work at a fixed time.
What options do shift workers have to have more control over their own time?
For example, if they can decide for themselves when to take their days off. And there’s also flex time in shift work—the survey shows this as well.
Aren’t these things that have to be regulated individually in every company?
No. It’s not possible without a framework established through collective bargaining and co-determination at the company level. But we must also acknowledge that, in many areas, employers have succeeded in recent years in eroding our successful working-time policy—which focused on reducing working hours and setting limits on flexibility through co-determination, as well as establishing the costs of flexibility through overtime, shift, and weekend premiums.
Yet 35 hours is the desired workweek for the vast majority of employees across all sectors organized by IG Metall. The reality—as the survey also shows—is often different: actual working hours are significantly above 35 hours, even in companies covered by regional collective bargaining agreements.
And the ability to offer 40-hour and overtime contracts has led to a situation where, today, over 30 percent of employees in companies in the metal and electrical industries covered by regional collective bargaining agreements no longer have a 35-hour contract.
What does this mean for IG Metall’s working hours policy?
The results make it very clear: We should not let employers take the 35-hour workweek away from us. That is obviously what they are trying to do. They have never come to terms with this weekly working time.
The 35-hour week was and remains a crucial milestone in the emancipation of workers in our industries and in meeting their needs for secure employment and self-determined lives—for everyone. The 35-hour week has propelled the German metal and electrical industry forward in international competition: because competitiveness is achieved through dedicated and innovative workers, not through cost accountants.
However, we must break through the employers’ mantra—full-time plus overtime plus flexibility plus pressure to perform—with a working hours policy that focuses on self-determined working hours and a redistribution of total working hours throughout one’s life. We want to implement a working hours policy that makes industrial work sustainable and attractive for the future. For women, too.
That is why we advocate that the productivity gains from digitalization should not be reflected solely in rosy balance sheets, but should instead be invested in good jobs with good working hours.
What does this mean?
I mean: We must bring actual working hours back in line with contractual working hours. This includes increasing staffing levels. And we need to ensure that employees have the right to choose working hours below the 35-hour mark.
Nor should we allow employers to abuse 40-hour and overtime contracts to divide the workforce into “top performers” and rank-and-file employees.
What happens next with the results of the employee survey?
The 681,241 employees who participated have, first and foremost, a right to be informed about the survey’s results. We have compiled the results for all companies with 200 or more employees, and in some cases for individual departments as well. And with these results, we are now launching an information and discussion campaign within the companies. Our works councils are extremely interested in the results. After all, the survey naturally serves as a valuable guide for concrete works council work and provides insights for the works council’s platform ahead of the 2018 works council elections.
And what does this mean for the 2018 collective bargaining round?
We will, of course, now also use the survey results as the basis for our collective bargaining discussions. What will we demand in 2018? What is our medium-term collective bargaining strategy? Our conference on working time policy in June should provide an initial answer.
Can policymakers also learn something from the survey?
The survey sends a clear message to policymakers that fairness must prevail, even in the digital workforce of tomorrow. And that includes clear legal rules and limits on working hours.
