The necessity of increasing working hours to augment productivity has been recently debated in the public domain. Certain successful industry leaders have stated that a 70-hour work week is necessary for the growth momentum to be maintained. Highly successful entrepreneurs who have built enterprises, generated jobs and wealth are being held up as examples. With the advent of the knowledge economy and carry-on mobile devices, the concept of fixed working hours has become blurred. The work-from-home culture, which gained traction during the lockdown, has further effaced the boundaries of the workspace.
In earlier decades, workers could drop their tools to retire for the day. Labour union activism and consequential legislation ensured the rights of workers to prevent exploitation through overwork. However, the hustle culture has changed the game. The glorification of extreme work—the celebration of CEOs who sleep in an office cubicle or do not sleep at all—has fuelled this trend.
In coffee shops across the globe, it is common to see employees hunched over their laptops, their eyes glued to the screen, their ears plugged. They perhaps do not even smell the coffee that they have ordered. The fierce competition for jobs, the desire to gain better rewards and personal success drives them. While there is perhaps a digital log maintained of the hours clocked, there is no record of the opportunity cost. Further, there is prospective burnout and circadian rhythm imbalance which also has to be reckoned with.
It is necessary to analyse the nature of rewards that accrue from the extra work put in by employees. Without doubt, wealth is created and there is a benefit to society. Perhaps, C-suite employees are rewarded in direct proportion to the increased production of goods and services. Some benefits also trickle down to workers. However, the human cost of the additional working hours is to be factored in.
Recently, a proposal by the Karnataka government to increase IT employees’ workdays to 14 hours was met with protests. This ostensibly sought to match global timings and meet international competition. Even if additional compensation is offered, such terms are bound to have an adverse personal cost for the employees. They would be required to reallocate personal and family time to work demands.
The effect of stress caused by long working hours brings the focus on work-life balance. Some industry heads have suggested that work commitments should be the most important aspect of an employee’s time. It is unclear whether the increased hours will translate into productivity and improved quality. Rather, productivity may be enhanced by constraints as it could foster the optimal use of resources. Spending longer hours at work without involvement or dedication is counter-productive. Breaks from work help in divergent thinking and creative problem-solving. The fact that people are looking not merely at numbers either in terms of remuneration or working hours, but seek job satisfaction, must be borne in mind.
Changes in the workplace being brought about by use of AI are also significant. Many employers have deployed AI to streamline processes, resulting in lower costs and increased productivity. The flip-side is the potential reduction in manpower. This can be a source of concern to the workforce, as the future is riddled with uncertainties. Strategic planning to tackle the prospect of employee redundancy, with the use of AI through upskilling and reskilling, is the need of the hour.
Working long hours beyond a fixed schedule has been the norm in several professions, including academics, defence, medicine and bureaucracy. Those who have chosen such professions are conscious that they have to be available at all times to deal with situations that may require their attention or response. Employee benefits, leave, adequate remuneration and a certain degree of job security help deal with such demanding circumstances.
Toxic workplaces, where there are steep demands on the time and energy of employees, breed stress and anxiety, leading to physical and mental health challenges. This is bound to impact long-term productivity. It is incumbent upon those seeking to implement longer work hours to take note of the ground realities. Many youngsters who are working harder than the earlier generations, be they entrepreneurs or employees, are also making plans to retire early, even by the age of 40. While this would mean the freedom to pursue other interests, it could also result in a loss of experience and mid-level leadership skills for the workforce.
One of the most workaholic nations in the world, Japan, is looking at a shorter working week of four days. Workers are being allowed a choice of working styles based on varied circumstances. The Japanese language has the term karoshi for death from overwork. Among other consequences of overwork is a fall in the country’s birth rate, which has led to a reduction in the viable workforce of the future. The lessons of the Japanese experience are too valuable to be ignored. Work schedules must be sustainable in the long term.
In his essay In Praise of Idleness, Bertrand Russell said, “The individual, in our society, works for profit; but the social purpose of his work lies in the consumption of what he produces.” Only when workers get adequate time to themselves would the economy be able to produce and consume in good measures.
(Views are personal)
Geetha Ravichandran
Former bureaucrat and author, most recently of The Spell of the Rain Tree