The House of Representatives today approved on second reading a House Bill No. 309 seeking to reduce the weekly work schedule for employees in the private sector.
Voting via voce, the House approved the bill authored by House Ways and Means committee chairperson Albay Rep. Joey Salceda, which seeks to allow employees in the private sector to work for 35 hours a week maximum as an alternative work arrangement.
“Length of stay in the workplace does not necessarily equate productivity, and we have known that now to be true in the age of work-from-home,” Salceda said.
“Flexibility in workplaces accommodated the special needs of families, mothers, and older workers. Shorter worker hours saved on utility bills, and resulted in fewer cars on the road during rush hours,” He added.
Salceda also stressed that his reforms seek to break down so many false assumptions about productivity line the tyranny of the college degree, or the belief that all skilled jobs need a diploma and the idea that you need to stay in the workplace for eight to ten hours a day, and then lose all hope of rest in traffic.
However, under the bill the employers may implement a 35-hour workweek scheme, provided that terms and conditions agreed upon are not less than the minimum labor standards set by law.
The employer shall ensure that employees working for 35 hours a week shall:
- receive rate of pay, including overtime, night shift differential, and other similar benefits
- have the right to rest periods
- be provided by the employer with written information on the terms and conditions of the 35-hour working week scheme and the responsibilities of the employees
In cases of conflict between employers and employees on the said alternative working arrangement, the bill states that differences should be resolved under the grievance mechanism of the company.
However, for those without grievance machinery or whose mechanisms are inadequate, the grievance shall be referred to the Department of Labor and Employment.
Salceda clarified that this is an “alternative working arrangement,” and does not necessarily force all workplaces to make this shift, however, will result in productivity and quality-of-life gains wherever adopted.
The average working hours of employees in the Philippines have been unchanged for decades, the solon noted. From the 1980s to the end of the last millennium, a number of European countries, such as the Netherlands in the 1980s and France in recent years, have shortened work weeks as a policy tool for lowering unemployment.
Thus, he said some of the most globally productive economies like Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany have work weeks with far fewer hours than the average work hours in the Philippines.
“This shows that it is possible to reduce working hours without weakening their economies,” and that “increasing productivity does not merely rely on the number of hours put in, but also on the overall workers’ welfare aside from investments in emerging technologies,” Salceda pointed out.
Salceda cited a 2018 global survey where the Philippines placed second to Greece among 145 countries in terms of “most stressful work environment.” It scored 58%, well above the global average of 35%.
To address anticipated changes in the labor market, and the increasing strain from commuting, Salceda said it is crucial that legislation has to be formulated to transition to a shorter work week without reduction in pay.
In a paper defending the proposal, Salceda quoted the report of Autonomy (2019), in particular, with various “case studies which demonstrate that shorter work weeks (and greater worker control over working time) can mean fewer sick absences, fewer in-work accidents and higher motivation on the job.”
The nature of future jobs, he said, are likely to change and displace current jobs that involve a lot of repetitive and codifiable tasks. Government should thus prepare the landscape for work-sharing, and alternative work patterns such as telecommuting, and working less than the current eight hours-a-day norm.