Update the excessively rigid working hour system

Home > Opinion > Columns

print dictionary print

Update the excessively rigid working hour system



Lee Jungmin
 
The author is a professor of economics at Seoul National University. 


Working hour regulations determine how we work. The rule of eight hours a day and 40 hours a week has long shaped labor norms. As such, these regulations must evolve in tandem with technological advancements. If working hour policies remain outdated, they risk diminishing efficiency and stifling innovation. Just as remote conferencing technologies have advanced dramatically over the past five years, labor laws should no longer be predicated on the assumption of a physical office space. This is why calls for reforming Korea’s working hour system are growing louder as technological advancements accelerate and global competition intensifies.
 
For decades, scholars across disciplines — including economics, business and law — have criticized Korea’s working hour system for being excessively rigid. Yet, despite these critiques, the system has remained largely unchanged. In fact, the recent introduction of the 52-hour workweek has only added another layer of inflexibility.
 
Most economists take issue with the operational rigidity of the 52-hour workweek. Since 2020, the Korean Economic Association has conducted regular surveys of its top scholars, including past recipients of its economics research awards, journal editors and former association presidents, to gather expert opinions on key economic issues. In a May 2023 survey on the 52-hour workweek, 89 percent of respondents agreed that the policy should be made more flexible by allowing exceptions based on industry, job function and economic conditions. The main concern was the system’s rigidity.
 
How Korea’s system differs from others
Why is the 52-hour workweek considered so rigid? In Korea, working hours are calculated on a weekly basis, and any total exceeding 52 hours per week is deemed illegal. For example, if an employee works 48 hours one week and 56 hours the next, the latter week’s hours would constitute a violation. No other advanced economy enforces such a strict weekly limit.
 
Office buildings in downtown Seoul have their lights turned on around evening rush hour in November, 2023. [NEWS1]

Office buildings in downtown Seoul have their lights turned on around evening rush hour in November, 2023. [NEWS1]

 
Germany, for instance, restricts daily work hours to eight, but it measures compliance based on an average over six months or 24 weeks. Japan, which introduced caps on overtime in 2018, imposes a monthly limit of 45 hours and an annual ceiling of 360 hours, but it does not enforce a weekly cap. Moreover, Japanese employers and employees can negotiate higher limits by mutual agreement.
 
In contrast, Korea requires weekly work hours to be checked for legality, with violations subject to criminal penalties. The United States imposes no legal cap on total overtime hours. While U.S. law mandates that overtime be compensated at 150 percent of the regular wage, the white-collar exemption allows high-income professionals and office workers to be excluded from this requirement. Japan has a similar system in place under its "highly professional" exemption, which frees specialized workers in fields like research and development (R&D) from overtime restrictions.
 
Why do the United States and Japan avoid imposing strict working hour regulations on professionals? Because such regulations are not only impractical but also fundamentally meaningless for these workers. Creative problem-solving — an essential trait for professionals — does not follow a rigid timetable.
 
Take Archimedes, the ancient Greek mathematician and inventor. He famously discovered the principle of buoyancy not at his desk, but in a bathhouse, after observing how water overflowed when he submerged himself. For knowledge workers, the boundaries between work and leisure blur; their ideas can emerge anywhere, at any time. No one knows when or where they will have their own “Eureka!” moment.
 
From an employer’s perspective, measuring work hours for R&D personnel is both challenging and unnecessary. These employees’ productivity is not directly tied to the number of hours they spend at their desks. Evaluating their performance based on mere physical presence — the “seat-warming metric”— is entirely misguided. In reality, the most efficient workers often put in fewer hours. If performance is the true measure of success, then professionals should be granted greater autonomy over their work schedules.
 
A red-eye robot in the dark turns and looks at the camera. [SHUTTERSTOCK]

A red-eye robot in the dark turns and looks at the camera. [SHUTTERSTOCK]

 
This is precisely why tech companies like Google refer to their headquarters as a “campus” and provide cafes and swimming pools. It is also why they emphasize workplace autonomy. Instead of focusing on time constraints, they prioritize creative freedom, ensuring that innovation can happen on its own terms.
 
More flexibility does not mean more total hours
Every policy has its advantages and drawbacks. But increasing flexibility in the 52-hour workweek — at least for high-tech R&D personnel — offers more benefits than risks. Crucially, allowing greater flexibility does not undermine the original purpose of the policy, which is to reduce total work hours.
 
As mentioned earlier, the biggest issue with the 52-hour workweek is its rigid weekly calculation. Adopting a more flexible unit of measurement — whether monthly, quarterly or yearly — would not impact the overall reduction of working hours.
 
Moreover, the proportion of tech workers in the overall labor market is relatively small. According to 2022 statistics, Korea’s corporate work force includes approximately 400,000 science and technology professionals. If we estimate that about 5 percent of them are engaged in cutting-edge innovation and new product development, this translates to around 20,000 key personnel.
 
People use a space and facilities designed for a so-called workcation in Busan on March 26, 2023. [SONG BONG-GEUN]

People use a space and facilities designed for a so-called workcation in Busan on March 26, 2023. [SONG BONG-GEUN]

 
High-tech R&D personnel, unlike low-skilled workers, operate in environments where their basic rights — such as health protections and work-hour autonomy — are relatively well safeguarded. That said, safeguards should still be put in place to prevent abuses. For instance, limits should be imposed on night and holiday work due to its higher health risks. Companies should also enhance workplace infrastructure by expanding access to on-site medical facilities and rest areas.
 
Recently, I watched footage of a humanoid robot walking through a bustling Chinese city. China’s advancements in AI, autonomous vehicles and other high-tech industries are advancing at a staggering pace.
 
MIT economist Daron Acemoglu has warned that Korea faces three major structural challenges: aging demographics, weak domestic consumption and competition from China. The solution, he argues, lies in high-tech innovation.
 
We know the path forward, and we know time is of the essence. But progress remains stalled. Korea’s political gridlock, like the thick smog that clouds the sky, obscures the road ahead. The outdated working hour laws in dire need of reform show no signs of change. And that is truly frustrating.
 
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff. 
Log in to Twitter or Facebook account to connect
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
help-image Social comment?
s
lock icon

To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.

Standards Board Policy (0/250자)