Parties promise workweek changes as companies struggle amid tariffs
The conservative ruling People Power Party has adopted a 40-hour, 4.5-day workweek as one of its campaign pledges ahead of the June 3 presidential election.
Under this pledge, employees would need to work one extra hour per day Monday through Thursday, increasing the workday from eight to nine hours. On Friday, employees would then work 4 hours only, according to the scheme.
The current statutory minimum of 40 hours per week would be maintained, while the number of workdays could be reduced to 4.5 through what the party calls "flexitime."
Shortening the workweek was first proposed by Rep. Lee Jae-myung, former leader of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea, in a speech at the National Assembly in February. But Lee took a step further by saying that Korea should move to a 4-day workweek after going through a transitional 4.5-day workweek.
Considering that the presidential front-runner has emphasized the system numerous times since, it is likely to be reflected in Lee's election pledges.
The People Power Party has said that its pledge meets both goals — maintaining the current total number of work hours while providing a "work-life balance effect" to employees — while it argues that of the Democratic Party is populist in that it proposes to cut work hours without reducing employee pay.
Despite the persuasiveness of the explanation, the pledge to increase days off could appear inappropriate as companies worry about their survival amid the steep tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.
The ruling party made the pledge abruptly as election day draws near. It does not suit a conservative party that has advocated for labor system reform.
It is desirable for the workweek to be operated depending on the characteristics of industries and companies. The way people work and their work hours is not the same, for example, as certain jobs might require continuous production and others might have intermittent schedules with particular deadlines such as research projects at high-tech startups. Each company has its own way of operating. Be it a four-day or 4.5-day workweek, the point is to leave it up to individual companies to decide whether to adopt it or not. Otherwise, corporate competitiveness could be undermined.
The workweek is one of the key issues regarding labor reform, but both parties should sufficiently review and discuss the situations companies face and labor productivity.
If the Democratic Party's plan is implemented, the total number of work hours will decrease, which could potentially bring down the performance of certain companies. Meanwhile, the People Power Party's pledge could result in workers incurring overtime.
Reducing the workday or work hours without ensuring that productivity remains unaffected or improved threatens to weaken the competitiveness of companies. Currently, South Korea's hourly labor productivity ranks low among the 38 member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. It was 33rd in 2023.
Meanwhile, the country ranked fifth in the OECD in the longest average annual hours worked in 2022. The nation's working population is also declining due to the low birth rate and rapid aging.
Some economists forecast that if labor productivity does not improve, the potential growth of Korea would fall into a zero-percent range 15 years later. To revive the Korean economy, some say its policies should be focused on growth rather than on distribution.
A 4-day workweek or even a 3-day workweek should be introduced if such a system is needed to accelerate growth, but some say that is illusory right now.
The reality is that little progress has been made in raising productivity. Some say the 52-hour workweek should be flexibly applied, because they argue it is too rigid. Problems due to the seniority-based wage system still remain. Against this backdrop, there are some who believe a 4-day or 4.5-day workweek might result in strengthening the position of those regular employees of large companies who already receive relatively higher salaries.
Now is the time to consider carefully how to improve labor productivity and the effects on the declining population rather than simply pledging to change or reduce the distribution of work hours over the workweek to win over workers.
The 4.5-day or 4-day workweek could be just the beginning of competition in populist pledges in the runup to the presidential election. As election day approaches, costly populist campaign promises to the whole nation could see a resurgence. The rival parties should consider these issues thoroughly rather than frantically try to win the election.
