Easing the strict application of the 52-hour workweek

Through the momentum of the Supreme Court ruling, the government must come up with a creative proposal to fix the workhour limit that can please both employers and employees.

The latest Supreme Court ruling has paved the way for a relaxation of the rigid 52-hour workweek. The highest court on Monday overturned the lower courts’ rulings, which upheld the strict punishment for employers’ violations of the 52-hour workweek based on eight hours of work per day from Monday through Friday and an extra 12 hours of work when the need arises, as stipulated by the Labor Standards Act.

The case was appealed by an owner of a flight cabin cleaning company, who was charged for violating the Labor Act by forcing an employee to work for three consecutive days before getting one day off. The bench on the top court returned the case to the lower court by disagreeing with the eight-hour-per-day basis. The justice ruled that the statutory limit is not infringed if total weekly work hours do not exceed 52 hours.

The ruling can allow some flexibility in applying the stringent 52-hour workweek, which has been enforced since 2018. For instance, a software company can now have programmers work for two to three days overtime and let them take a rest for the remaining days in the week. The move can support competitiveness in industries demanding concentrated work. The uniform 52-hour workweek raised concerns over rigidity as it did not account for the differences in working among industries. Put differently, the workhour schedule can suit office tasks that run on constant patterns, but it cannot fit software or tech companies that need intense concentration to develop programs. The Supreme Court ruling can help create more creative work schedules for high-tech and start-up enterprises.

However, the government backtracked on its push to extend the workweek up to 69 hours by setting overtime limits on a monthly or quarterly basis after the idea faced public resistance. The government also has not made any progress in presenting an alternative idea to address the dilemma. If not for the top court’s ruling, many companies would have had to endure torture by hope.

Through the momentum of the court ruling, the government must come up with a creative proposal to fix the workhour limit that can please both employers and employees. As some fear the ruling can hurt the health of workers in case the minimum rest period is not guaranteed, the government must find a solution that can ensure industrial competitiveness without risking workers’ health.