An Ambitious Phenomenon Lacking Support of Masses - Research Paper Example

?An Ambitious Phenomenon Lacking Support of Masses Introduction Working hours is a very complex and critical issue in social sciences because it can have far reaching affects on human nature, life and can exert extensive impact over the national and international economics. The multifaceted and vital nature of working hours issue in national life has many implications ranging from economic to domestic and legal to ethical etc. The history of the tissue is as long as the history of humanity and the decisive factor to settle the issue must be viewed in relation to contemporary culture, religion, ethical, economical and social settings. The first and far most important consideration in this connection however, remains the worker and his needs. The needs are subjective and may have a variation of meanings for various cultures and individuals. The technological advancement and a change in human life style have a profound impact on working hour averages in first world countries like United States of America. The fast pace life of these social setups require specialized solutions for issues like maximum hours that an employee should work to earn his livings and to ensure the maintenance of social system. Despite being personal in nature the issue is no more a private concern and living societies have to address it in a collaborative and collective manner. The communal effect of the issue makes it a candidate for legal authenticity and legitimacy. However, Fleck (2009, p.3) has wisely inquired, “The number of hours individuals work stimulates debate on the quality of life in an international context: do some societies live to work while others work to live?” 40-Hours Week a Balanced Approach The human history in terms of labor rights protection has not been very bright. Specially extended working hours from the emergence of industrial revolution have received the stanch criticism of social reformists. “The widespread poverty and harsh labor and living conditions of the working class spurred those interested in economic and social reforms to develop new ideas to change how the industrial society functions” (Weiner, Mark & George, 2008, p.36). Apart from any idealist stance we have to acknowledge that the standard of 40-hours week is a not only acceptable but a balanced approach to address the concerns of all stakeholders. The presence of two extreme end workers in this age of globalization; those working more then 40-hours a week and a majority working below this limit, still suggest that 40-hours work week is the balanced, wise and practical approach to the issue. However, there is a need to bridge the gap between two extreme end workers. Amendments and improvements should be suggested to bring into effect a harmonized system with more comforting arrangement for the working class while keeping the working hours cap at 40-hours a week. A Social Indicator A debate on the suitable limit for maximum working hours is essentially a debate on the standard of life people enjoy not only in local context but in the context to other nations of the world. The international organizations constantly review their statistics in this regard to establish the living conditions in a society and issue reports that are largely referred to gauge the standard of life in a particular region of the world. It may be surprising for many people that American workers work more hours than their European counterparts. “The OECD data series showing that U.S. workers work more hours per year, on average, than their European counterparts appears to be slightly inflated because of differences in sources and methods, but the difference is nonetheless real.” Fleck (2009, p.27). Despite some inherent biases, the comparison has international acceptance and should be honestly used to learn our lessons as liberal nation. “The evidence presented in this article confirms that biases are inherent in data sources used to measure hours worked.” Fleck (2009, p.27). We have to decide whether the Fair Labor Standards Act 1938 can still govern the working hour parameters or it should be reviewed for some amendments that can adapt this 70 years old act to the changed circumstances. Do Americans work too hard? Average working hours for the American workers in the duration of 1980-2006 were calculated to be 35.6 hours per week. (Fleck, 2009, p.27). According to Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2008 this average shrunk even further to 34.46 hours per week per employed person. (BLS, 2010, p.16). The average is quite less than the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, which standardized 8 working hours a day and 40 hours a week. (Newton, 2007). Technological advancements are a major contributor towards bringing down working hours averages and the averages presented above will further go down in future. These averages provide some very important inferences and it is evident that despite being considered hard working, Americans are actually working less than 40-hours a week and we can observe a constant declining trend in these averages. But these averages are only one face of the picture and we have some other statistics which are of vital importance for our thesis. In the U.S., 85.8 percent of males and 66.5 percent of females work more than 40 hours per week. It is yet unbelievable that 18.1 percent of American workers, are working for more the 48 hours a week. (ILO, 2007). Working-Hours and Productivity Increased productivity is the major argument of those who take a stance to reduce working hours to a varying number of hours and days. While principally agreeing to the argument I think that the 40-hours a week work standard does not harm the productivity statistics. The state that have implemented 35-hours work week have not be able to increase the productivity to the level where it can be cherished by others. Many researchers have criticized the reforms that regulated the work hours to 35-hours a week. France is the biggest example where a law was enforced in 2000 to reduce the working hours to 35-hours a week to overcome the unemployment statistics and to ensure better division of available work among its habitants. But the policy was criticized by economists, “Yet many economists have labeled the policy an 'irrational ideology' and have argued that imposing further restrictions on an already highly regulated labor market will result in even greater inefficiencies and may actually worsen France's unemployment problem.” (CEPR, 2000). Another example is China that is working on 5-days a week plan with only 7 holiday and 7-14 days vacation per year still getting phenomenal growth in world economy. With a regulation of 44-hours a week China is still managing highest productivity. Recession or no recession the Chinese economy has grown leaps and bound to that of U.S. economy while work hours continue to ascend in time. “After falling consecutively throughout 2009, hours of work began to increase again in the first and second quarters of 2010 in almost all sectors with the exception of agriculture, forestry and fishing.” (ILO, 2010). Lump-of-Labor Fallacy Another idealist slogan raised by shorter work week supporters is the reduction of unemployment ratio that can the materialized by reducing work hour cap to 35-hours a week or even lesser then that. The argument seems to have no real revolutionary thought at all, rather it is looks an immature argument to create more employments by actually slicing the share of already employed workers. More often than not economist have referred this misconception as Lump-of-Labor Fallacy, “the lump-of-labor argument implies that there is only so much useful remunerative work to be done in any economic system, and that is indeed a fallacy.” (McGaughey, 2007). The economic growth and activity is the best solution to reduce the unemployment. Gauging Support for Shorter Work Week There is no prominent support for shorter work week in America and masses along with economist and industrial unions have remained unconvinced over the issue. We can trace few serious efforts in American history for legislating shorter work week since the approval of Fair Labor Standards. “The last serious effort to win a shorter workweek through federal legislation was made in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It received three days of hearings in the House Education and Labor Committee in October 1979 but failed to attract a Senate sponsor. Then, in April 1985, Rep. Conyers introduced a bill calling for a 32-hour workweek. It had even less support.” (McGaughey, 2007). Especially first decade of 21st has not unveiled any progress in this direction and there not much support for the argument in the public. Conclusion While government intervention is a necessity to restrict the upper limit of working hours, it predominately remains a personal choice of an individual. 8-hours work for a day is a well thought out strategy and 70 years of this strategy have proved its worth as a workable and progressive strategy. Work plan for less than 40 hours has remained under consideration of economists and socialist reformer but a majority of the domain specialist could not reach a consensus over the issue. The low acceptability of the shorter work week in intellectual circles has contributed towards it inadequate support from public domains. Secondly, the level of it success in the countries where it is experimented has not been encouraging for others. Two major indicators that can prove the success of shorter work week have not shown extraordinary increase in productivity and reduction in unemployment and practically these theories proved inefficient. Allied benefits like reduced energy consumption, better family care, quality time for leisure, increased job security etc are good to some extend but the overall impact has not yielded the results that can win the confidence of decision makers. The impact to make the change successful can only be made if shorter work week wins the support across the board and the collective intellect of masses accept it as their new governing labor framework. As this is not the case so far, 40-hours work week has retained the public confidence and acceptability at larger scale. It is important to understand that comfort and ease that shorter work week has to offer is secondary in the sense that meeting the end needs has remained the first priority of the work force in every age and businesses are meant to make business not the leisure. Works Cited Weiner Jerry, Mark Willner and George Hero. Global History: The industrial Revolution to the Age of Globalization. USA: Barron’s, 2008. Print. Web Publications BLS “Charting International Labor Comparisons.” bls.gov, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Web. 05 May, 2011 CEPR, “Reducing the Working Week: A Free Lunch or Irrational ideology?” cepr.org, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Web. 06 May, 2011 Fleck E. Susan. “International comparisons of hours worked: an assessment of the statistics.” stats.bls.gov, United States Department of Labor, Web. 06 May, 2011 ILO “Working time around the world:  one in five workers worldwide are putting in "excessive" hours -- new ILO study spotlights working time in over 50 countries”, ilocarib.org.tt, International Labor Organization, Department of Communications and Public Information, Web. 06 May, 2011 ILO “ILO report sees “volatile and uneven recovery” across economic sectors in 2010”, ilocarib.org.tt, International Labor Organization, Department of Communications and Public Information, Web. 07 May, 2011 McGaughey William Jr. “Shorter Workweek: History & Arguments For and Against”, shorterworkweek.com. Web. 07 May, 2011 Newton Aaron. “The 4 Day Work Week.” groovygreen.com, Groovy Green, Web. 06 May, 2011 Read More