Context:

• This article is based on an Editorial “The problem with the ‘70 hours a week’ line” which was published in the Hindu. Recently, Infosys Founder Narayan Murthy urged the youth to work at least 70 hours a week to improve India’s productivity and growth.

Enhancement of Productivity

Economic Growth: Economists believe that enhancing productivity is the key to long-term economic growth. 

• Required Factors: Productivity improvement is influenced by three interrelated factors: 
  • The pace and extent of technological diffusion in an economy
  • The quality of human capital 
  • The efficacy of public investment

What are the problems associated with working 70 hours a week?

• Exploitation: It is an example of exploitation by industrialists for their own profits by preaching virtue. 
• Violation: It violates International Labor Standards (ILS).
• Misinterpretation of Working Hours in Advanced Economy: It was said that extended working hours helped advanced countries such as Germany and Japan to succeed. But on the contrary, advanced countries have witnessed a continuous decline in working hours. 
  • Example: Advanced countries like Germany, Japan, etc. steadily decreased their working hours. In more productive economies, workers work less, while in the less productive poorer economies, workers have to work more to compensate for lower productivity.

Also Read: Ethical Perspective on Working 70 Hours in a Week

Significance of International Labor Standards 

• Market Access Requirement: The International Labor Standards is increasingly becoming necessary for gaining market access in advanced countries and for companies to participate in supply chains. 
  • Non-adherence to ILS could, therefore, seriously affect the aspirations of Indian industry to expand their presence in global markets.
• Free Trade Agreements: Advanced countries are insisting on the inclusion of the ILS in bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs). Thus, the FTAs India is currently negotiating with the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom, both including the ILS.
• Role in Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF): The ILS is also central to the implementation of the IPEF, a 14-country grouping for promoting economic cooperation in the region led by the United States of which India is a part. 
  • Working Conditions: It also includes the ILO’s Fundamental Conventions, including “acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages and hours of work”. It means Indian companies can participate in the supply chains among IPEF members only if they respect labour rights.

Global Supply Chain Regulations

• EU Member-States: They used “Supply Chain Due Diligence” and the “Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, 2023”, obliging companies to implement due diligence processes to address such issues.
• France: By enacting the Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law, 2017, French companies must establish a “plan of vigilance” to “identify risks and forestall serious infringements of or harm to human rights and fundamental freedoms, personal health and safety”. 
• Germany: By enacting the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act, 2022, it is mandatory for German companies with 3,000 or more employees to monitor and act on violations of human rights, which is applicable regardless of whether the activity was performed in Germany or abroad.

The Path Ahead

• Sync Efficiency & Working Hours: Working hours tend to decrease when incomes rise and people can afford more things that they enjoy. 
• Innovation: The level of productivity of a country depends on the strength of its innovation system,  which India needs to be worked upon.
  • In countries that have stronger innovation systems as compared to that of India’s, private sectors have much higher shares. For instance, in 2020, the private sector’s share was 79% in Japan and Korea, 75% in the United States, and 67% in Germany and the UK. 
• Strengthen Labour Rights: With the developed world veering towards strict enforcement of ILS across global supply chains, India needs to strengthen labour rights.

Conclusion:

Advocating for 70 hours a week may hinder rather than enhance productivity, violating international labor standards and jeopardizing India’s global economic prospects, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach to work hours and a focus on innovation and labour rights.