Do we all work too much? Too little?

Work time never ceases to be a topic of vigorous debate. But what does research have to say on the matter? LMU researchers examine the issue through the lens of different disciplines.

Overtime is often not worthwhile

Enlarge

“More and more employees in Germany – around 40 percent as things stand – work part-time. Among OECD nations, only Austria, the Netherlands and Switzerland have higher percentages. In the debate about what has been termed a ‘part-time lifestyle’, it is often alleged that part-time workers are not fully committed. On the other hand, many of those concerned point to good reasons such as childcare or the need to care for relatives.

From an economic perspective, the moral side of the debate misses the point. In a free society, people should not have to justify the choice to work less and accept a lower income. But problems arise when government rules compel companies to offer part-time arrangements, or when tax and transfer systems distort decisions about work.

The problem is that, for many people, working overtime is hardly worthwhile because higher incomes are burdened more heavily by taxes, social security contributions and the revocation of benefits. Studies show that, for some families, more than 95 percent of any extra income is taken away. So, if you want more full-time employment, you need first and foremost to eliminate such disincentives.”

Professor Clemens Fuest is President of Economics at LMU and President of the ifo Institute.

Part-time work for all? Why not?!

Enlarge

“Everyone depends on care. It begins with food and human relationships, extends to caring for those who are ill or otherwise in need of support and does not end with taking care (sic!) of our own health. Care is therefore fundamental not only to social life but also to the functioning of the economy. Without care there is no workforce. Yet care does not sustain itself. On the contrary, contemporary societies often place considerable obstacles in its way: time is scarce, financial resources are limited, and social recognition remains unevenly distributed.

These tensions are visible in everyday life. Nursing staff often lack the time even for a short conversation with patients. Childcare institutions operate under rigid temporal regimes. Families experience the daily friction between intense time pressure and the need to sustain relationships of affection, attention, and responsibility. Such experiences are not anecdotal exceptions. They are symptoms of a social order that prioritizes economic profit over human needs. One striking indication of this priority is that paid employment continues to function as the central gateway to rights, income, recognition, social participation, and – ultimately – personal autonomy.

In this light, it is hardly surprising that the phrase “part-time lifestyle” is often used in a derogatory way, as if it was a frivolous egoistic luxury. Yet this rhetoric obscures a simple empirical reality: for very many people, paid part-time employment is the only pragmatic way to reconcile employment with the demands of care. Looking after children, supporting elderly parents, caring for sick relatives, and maintaining one’s own household require time and attention. Without part-time work, these responsibilities would often entail substantial financial and legal disadvantages.

For well-known historical and ideological reasons, the burden of care continues to fall disproportionately on women. In Germany, only about eight percent of fathers work part-time, compared to nearly 68 percent of women. This disparity is no coincidence. It reflects a deeply institutionalized pattern of gender inequality whose consequences extend across taxation systems, pension entitlements, insurance coverage, career opportunities, and psychological well-being. Over the course of a lifetime, these disadvantages accumulate and solidify.

If this diagnosis is correct, the conclusion is straightforward: care should no longer be treated as a private “compatibility problem” that individuals—more precisely, women—must somehow manage individually. Instead, institutional arrangements could be reconfigured so that everyone can assume responsibility for care during particular phases of life without incurring structural disadvantages.

Part-time work for all? Under many life circumstances, this would not only be reasonable. It would be a rational and socially just response to the centrality of care in human life.”

Professor Paula-Irene Villa Braslavsky holds the Chair of General Sociology and Gender Studies at LMU.

Will we all soon have less to do because of AI?

Enlarge

“I see the assumption that we will all soon have less to do because of AI as too short-sighted. Yes, AI can handle tasks such as writing reports, preparing presentations and answering standardized inquiries. But most job profiles involve the complex interplay of analytics, evaluation, responsibility and human interaction.

AI delivers fast input. But ordering that input, validating it and assuring its quality remains in human hands. In consulting contexts, for instance, less time is needed to produce slides and do research. However, people are expected to use the time this saves to acquire more projects, provide more intensive client care or tackle more complex matters.

In other words, both demand and the available capacity often increase in parallel with the use of AI. At the same time, new fields of responsibility emerge – from prompt design and data quality management to the development, management and governance of proprietary LLMs.

Accordingly, it is rare for AI to replace someone’s work entirely. It rather shifts the focus of the tasks, responsibilities, skills and roles that are assumed.”

Professor Anne-Sophie Mayeris Professor of Digital Work at LMU.

All hands on deck! Work in Japan – a role model for Germany?

Enlarge

“When Sanae Takaichi took office as Japan’s Prime Minister last October, she promised to “work, work, work, work, work”. Her five-fold oath became ‘word of the year’ in Japan. But it also kindled fears that the few labor policy advances achieved in recent years might quickly be rolled back.

People in Japan generally work long hours. Comparison across OECD countries places Japan third, with 1,508 work hours per working-age person per year, whereas Germany ranks 29th. Moreover, 15.2% of full-time employees in Japan work 49 hours or more per week, against just 4.6% in Germany.

Since a 2018 reform, the number of permissible overtime hours per month has been limited to 45 in Japan. By agreement with the employer, however, up to 100 overtime hours are still possible. And while employees are now obliged to take at least five days’ vacation per year, only 65% of the allotted number of vacation days are actually taken on average.

Right now, Japan’s labor policy reforms are seeking to minimize dangers such as karōshi (death due to overwork). On the other hand, efforts are needed to combat a labor shortage as the impact of demographic change worsens. Women, foreign workers, robots and even senior citizens are increasingly being integrated in the labor market.

In Japan’s aging society, it seems that all hands are needed on deck – starting with those of the prime minister. At the present time, these trends are leading to a restructuring of the world of work, although it is not yet clear which direction this will take.”

Professor Gabriele Vogt holds the Chair at LMU’s Japan Center.