When employees work more for the same pay, the need for staff decreases. Longer working hours therefore often mean job cuts through the back door. Shorter working hours, however, can secure jobs.
Currently, employers want to extend working hours—for example, from 35 to 40 hours a week—while maintaining the same pay—citing the crisis as the reason. But if employees in companies that are not operating at full capacity were to work even longer hours, a large portion of the workforce would become redundant. In fact, when there is not enough work, working hours must be reduced so that everyone has enough work.
Working shorter hours—not longer—saves jobs. IG Metall has demonstrated this in hundreds of companies where working hours have been reduced, for example, under collective bargaining agreements aimed at job security, as well as through other collective bargaining measures.
“Cutting jobs while demanding longer working hours is a complete contradiction,” says, for example, the chair of the general works council at the automotive supplier ZF. “At many ZF locations, working hours have already been reduced, and employees were required to take mandatory days off (T-ZUG). We won’t solve the current challenges if everyone suddenly starts working 40 hours. On the contrary. We had to reduce working hours—and in doing so, we essentially cut hours rather than jobs.”
International studies also confirm that working shorter hours safeguards jobs. The OECD concluded, based on data from 19 countries during the 2008–09 crisis, that short-time work programs played a decisive role in preserving jobs, particularly in Germany. According to the Institute for Employment Research (IAB), shorter working hours also helped secure jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic.