# Society: 32 Hour Work Week?



## vachecow

Does anyone know anything about France's 32 Hour work week???   Seems a little short to me...........how does their economy keep up??     


Or mabe they have the secret to life........4 day weekends


----------



## Focalist

As I understand it, France has a standard *35*-hour working week, though many 32-hour deals have been concluded too. 

Here's one article on the subject. 

All that _I_ know is that the UK (following US practice, as usual) has the longest working week (and year) in Europe, yet significantly lower worker productivity than does France.

F


----------



## Tormenta

I just read the article and all I can say is "good for the French".  This does not seem to affect French economy in a negative way , and If it works for them, I see nothing wrong with not having to work 44 hours a week!!  

 


Tormenta


----------



## ishatar

It was reported recently that the American workers have the best overall productivity BUT the French have the best productivity per hour.
The law was voted in a time where there had been great productivity improvements, but the firms wouldn't raise our salaries. So it was only fair to lower our work time in compensation. 
In certain field of industry, the work time had already been lowered to 36 hours a week, and even 34 sometimes, because working more wouldn't cause any additional gains. Some firms really appreciated the measure, because they could demand more flexibility from their employees in return. Finally, in certain cases the firms would need more work force due to this work time sharing policy and it is estimated that 300,000 jobs were created.
In conclusion, is it good to work in France!


----------



## lercarafridi

vachecow121 said:
			
		

> Does anyone know anything about France's 32 Hour work week???   Seems a little short to me...........how does their economy keep up??
> 
> 
> Or mabe they have the secret to life........4 day weekends




Yes, I also hear that the French civil service enjoys a stunning 25 hour work week, i.e. they work 5 hours a day Monday to Friday. That is why when unions outside the public sector began discussing the current 35 hours with their employers, the civil servants were frightened to death that the ministries were going to enforce those 35 and so they would have to work two hours more a day. What a fright!


----------



## valerie

Lercarafridi,

I do not think french civil service enjoys 25 hour work week, it may be true in some work place in the police or in education, but not as a general rule (remember hospital staff, for example). For example, University profesors have between 12 and 16 teaching hours, but then they do research, or other activities.

Anyway, SPANISH civil servants are neither a model of hard working, and often enjoy la jornada intensiva, working only during mornings (till 2 or 3).


----------



## lercarafridi

valerie said:
			
		

> Lercarafridi,
> 
> I do not think french civil service enjoys 25 hour work week, it may be true in some work place in the police or in education, but not as a general rule (remember hospital staff, for example). For example, University profesors have between 12 and 16 teaching hours, but then they do research, or other activities.
> 
> Anyway, SPANISH civil servants are neither a model of hard working, and often enjoy la jornada intensiva, working only during mornings (till 2 or 3).



A friend of mine works for the Department of Foreign Affairs in Paris and she told me about this. At the same time I read a report in a newspaper, based on letters to the editor, where public clerks were harshly disparaged for unfulfilling their schedule and therefore their duties. Besides there was a sarcastic comment on how much time they use for the noon break, some do not even go back to work. I am no being critical on French servants, I am just echoing what I have heard first hand. Neither I am, tacitly, disregarding Spanish ones for I know they can be careless either. So please, do not take it personally.


----------



## valerie

Lercarafridi,

Just some remarks: 

1- It is a different thing that all the civil servants enjoy a 25h work week, and that some may be negligents with their work. 

2- When you read articles in newspapers, this is not first-hand information.

3- Perhaps you are not aware of it, but smashing civil servants in France is a favourite sports for those 'liberals' and other MEDEF friends, apart from being highly demagogic. (1)

4- I'm not saying civil servants do not enjoy specific advantages, and I'm not saying some of them do not abuse of it. This is true, but as we say in French, attention à ne pas jeter le bébé avec l'eau du bain   

5- I'm not taking it personally, I am far from being a civil servant, and I do work much more than 35 h a week.     (but sshh, a lot of them on this forum too   )

6- I beg the pardon to anybody who might have been offended by this mail, but this was too much for me.

(1) 'liberals': libéraux: those who are in favour of complete economic freedom, those who believe the invisible hand will solve everything for the goodsake of everybody. 
MEDEF: this is the biggest french companies' boss organisation , who lobby the liberals, obviously.
These guys also own most of the french press (with some notable exception, as Le Monde. See what's happening to Le Figaro these days), so interpretation of articles there always has to take into account this parameter.


----------



## lercarafridi

valerie said:
			
		

> Lercarafridi,
> 
> Just some remarks:
> 
> 1- It is a different thing that all the civil servants enjoy a 25h work week, and that some may be negligents with their work.
> 
> 2- When you read articles in newspapers, this is not first-hand information.
> 
> 3- Perhaps you are not aware of it, but smashing civil servants in France is a favourite sports for those 'liberals' and other MEDEF friends, apart from being highly demagogic. (1)
> 
> 4- I'm not saying civil servants do not enjoy specific advantages, and I'm not saying some of them do not abuse of it. This is true, but as we say in French, attention à ne pas jeter le bébé avec l'eau du bain
> 5- I'm not taking it personally, I am far from being a civil servant, and I do work much more than 35 h a week.     (but sshh, a lot of them on this forum too  :
> 6- I beg the pardon to anybody who might have been offended by this mail, but this was too much for me.
> 
> (1) 'liberals': libéraux: those who are in favour of complete economic freedom, those who believe the invisible hand will solve everything for the goodsake of everybody.
> MEDEF: this is the biggest french companies' boss organisation , who lobby the liberals, obviously.
> These guys also own most of the french press (with some notable exception, as Le Monde. See what's happening to Le Figaro these days), so interpretation of articles there always has to take into account this parameter.







			
				valerie said:
			
		

> Lercarafridi,
> 
> 
> Awesome post Valerie. Thanks for being so informative. Yet…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1- It is a different thing that all the civil servants enjoy a 25h work week, and that some may be negligents with their work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Negligence is being careless, and that includes leaving at 1.30 instead of at 3 or 3.30 and therefore some of the tasks which should had been done on Mon are done on Tue or even Wed, and so public service slows down and citizens get disappointed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2-	When you read articles in newspapers, this is not first-hand information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> By first hand I meant what this woman told me, she is a civil servant, so she knows what she is talking about. I mentioned the letters as a back up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3-	Perhaps you are not aware of it, but smashing civil servants in France is a favourite sports for those 'liberals' and other MEDEF friends, apart from being highly demagogic. (1)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What do MEDEF initials stand for?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4-	I'm not saying civil servants do not enjoy specific advantages, and I'm not saying some of them do not abuse of it. This is true, but as we say in French, attention à ne pas jeter le bébé avec l'eau du bain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What an interesting sentence! –I guess- Could you please provide a suitable translation? Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5- I'm not taking it personally, I am far from being a civil servant, and I do work much more than 35 h a week.   (but sshh, a lot of them on this forum too
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ok, you are not a civil servant, but you are French, are not you? So I apologise if you were personally touched by my words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (1)	'liberals': libéraux: those who are in favour of complete economic freedom, those who believe the invisible hand will solve everything for the goodsake of everybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The invisible hand? I thought laisez faire was the key to welfare and progress, at least in the developed world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (3)	MEDEF: this is the biggest french companies' boss organisation , who lobby the liberals, obviously.
> These guys also own most of the french press (with some notable exception, as Le Monde. See what's happening to Le Figaro these days), so interpretation of articles there always has to take into account this parameter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I know about biased media. However, I am talking about facts, not opinions or tendencies.
> Thanks again.
Click to expand...


----------



## ishatar

Outside France, I notice civil servants are easily critisised.
In France this happens rarely because administration is part of France's core. It ensures prosperity and social cohesion. If a U.N. study ranked our healthcare system first in the world, it's thanks to the civil servants who ensure that the high standards fixed by the government are met. Our civil servants may have many previleges, but not everybody can become one. Success rates for civil service exams are very low. Plus, the grading system assures the civil servants are unremetting and hard-working: well marked people get better bonuses and assignments.
I know, I know. All I'm saying here is foreign to the American "give-me-my-tax-cut" mentality, but in France it works.


----------



## CrazyFroggy

The goal of the former socialist government  was to drecrease unemployment by sharing work. They thougth that you create jobs by working less….. Roughly speaking, the law says you can’t work more than 1586 hours a year, and each company had to negociate the way to apply it (The system is sligthly different for executives). The workers could work less and earn the same thing. But the counterpart is that the wages were blocked during  several years. If the companies  hired workers, they could get some financial advantages.

But what happened:
- The productivity per hour rised (as Ishatar wrote, it’s the best in the world… but bad for overall productivity)
- Unemployment did not decrease
- The pressure (stess, taxes…) on working people is higher
- It’s was big « gaz plant » to put into practice those rules.

In my company for instance we where 75 people in 1999 and  we are 100 now. Our turnover increased between 20 and 30% the last four years. We benefited very much from tax cuts and advantages becauses we hired workers… But none of them was employed because of this law ! …but because the company was dynamic and invested for growth.

The current « conservative »government tries to change this law, and there has already been some agreements in companies like Bosch, with trade unions, to comme back to 39 hours or more. So the trend is certainly not 32 hours, despite what some french-bashers claim ;o)

But we have not the « privilege » of 35 hours. Germany did it before – in a better way I think – when some companies (steel, cars..) had some problems in sales. And some agreements with the trade unions were taken not to fire people, and to share work in  companies like……General Motors (Opel in europe)whaere workers sometimes did 32 or 30 hours a week

In my opinion, this law was a big mistake and this government had a dogmatic way of thinking on that problem.
- It’s wrong and utopian to think that you create jobs by sharing jobs
- You create jobs by working more, creating value, and therefore new jobs
- It’s a mistake to prevent people to work more if they want to, and because sometimes they need it
- It would have been much better  to facilitate part time jobs for people who want it.
- This rules are so constraining that some companies hesitate to hire workers, or to create new activities.

Ca y est! Ca c'est fait!


----------



## lercarafridi

ishatar said:
			
		

> Outside France, I notice civil servants are easily critisised.
> In France this happens rarely because administration is part of France's core. It ensures prosperity and social cohesion. If a U.N. study ranked our healthcare system first in the world, it's thanks to the civil servants who ensure that the high standards fixed by the government are met. Our civil servants may have many previleges, but not everybody can become one. Success rates for civil service exams are very low. Plus, the grading system assures the civil servants are unremetting and hard-working: well marked people get better bonuses and assignments.
> I know, I know. All I'm saying here is foreign to the American "give-me-my-tax-cut" mentality, but in France it works.



Public paper work is a staple pillar in most European large countries: UK, Italy, Spain, Germany, etc. The health care system can be at the top yet it does not mean that public service related to that area is either, what is more, French public hospitals are far from being efficient as proven by the 2003 collapse due to the heat wave. I do believe French doctors to save the system. 
I do not know what unremetting means.
“give me my what? Would you please explain that. Thanks.


----------



## valerie

Lecafridi,

What do MEDEF initials stand for?
*Mouvement des Entreprises de France*


*Jeter le bébé avec l'eau du bain*: This means litterally: throw the baby as well as the bath water, in other words, depreciate the whole because one part is bad, here depreciate all civilservants because some of them are careless. Is there a saying in English to say that?


*The invisible hand*? I thought laisez faire was the key to welfare and progress, at least in the developed world.

This is a phrase used by Adam Smith, an economist who theorized the free market. It means that any individual is moved by self interest, but an invisible hand (later called market) makes the individual contribute to the general interest. In other words, market do self regulation, and no intervention in name of public good is justified.


----------



## valerie

lercarafridi said:
			
		

> I do believe French doctors to save the system.



I do not know exactly what you mean there, but actually, if they do not save the system, I hope they can save some people...


----------



## lercarafridi

valerie said:
			
		

> Lecafridi,
> 
> What do MEDEF initials stand for?
> *Mouvement des Entreprises de France*
> 
> 
> *Jeter le bébé avec l'eau du bain*: This means litterally: throw the baby as well as the bath water, in other words, depreciate the whole because one part is bad, here depreciate all civilservants because some of them are careless. Is there a saying in English to say that?
> 
> 
> *The invisible hand*? I thought laisez faire was the key to welfare and progress, at least in the developed world.
> 
> This is a phrase used by Adam Smith, an economist who theorized the free market. It means that any individual is moved by self interest, but an invisible hand (later called market) makes the individual contribute to the general interest. In other words, market do self regulation, and no intervention in name of public good is justified.




Actually I can only think of this right now: 
Mother hold her little daughter fifteen minutes under water.
Not to make her any troubles, only see the funny bubbles.

But I will try to find out another one which fits better.


Yes, democracies became strong and powerful owing to private investments, did not they?


----------



## ishatar

> - You create jobs by working more, creating value, and therefore new jobs


Do we produce not enough?
Since 1960, the number of university students has been multiplied by 7, billions are spent each years in continouous training (la formation continue, pour ceux qui connaitraient une meilleure traduction), robots and computers help us in virtually every field. As a result, our productivity has dramatically raised. We produce 70% more with 10% less workers. But in the meantime, the active population has raised by 17%. Therefore, there is a 28% gap between the available work and the work need.
Due to this job shortage, the work is already shared, whether we want it or not:
- 3 million people don't work at all.
- 4 million people work only during a part of the week or a part of the year (part time work, temp work).
- 19 million people work full time (and sometimes too much).

In the United States, some people work 42.5+ hours a week, but the average work time is 33.7 hours a week, because many bad jobs require 10 hours a week only. The Invisible Hand, too, can cause RTT (work time drop).

Is the current work sharing desirable? 
The answer lies in another question: how good it is for the consumption?

Precarious workers don't consume, they can't. Salaries who are worried for their future don't consume either, they save their money. How will the consumption be revived with so high an unemployment and so many precarious jobs?

_We benefited very much from tax cuts and advantages becauses we hired workers… But none of them was employed because of this law ! _ you say, but would you have hired these workers were it not for the tax cut? 400 French firms of all sizes have dropped the work time of their employees down to 32 hours and have created 10 to 15% new full time, undeterminate length jobs without lowering their productivity, thanks to the tax cut.

So there.

However,



> - Unemployment did not decrease
> - The pressure (stess, taxes…) on working people is higher
> - It’s was big « gaz plant » to put into practice those rules.



1/ Yes, because the second "Aubry" law changed the rules: it was possible for firms to benefit from tax-cut without creating any new jobs. Big mistake. 300,000 new jobs is already something though.
2/ Yes, because firms that dropped pause time, training hours and time-off, dropping the work time to 37 instead of 35, were still granted tax-cut. Second big mistake.
3/ Yes. Because the work time abatement should have been spread differently depending on the need of specific lines of business. For exemple: one week out of six, two four-days week for five weeks, one year off out of nine year (these are random figures but you got the idea). Instead they pitched on a fixed 35 hours a week allotment. Third big mistake.


Plus, I think the current government would have been better off retaining the financial advantages for the firms that create new jobs instead of canceling them and granting new tax-cut to the have-mores for no particular reason.


----------



## valerie

Hey Lacafridi, Ishatar and Crazyfroggy, 

shall we try not to convert this forum into a political one?

I can say that, perhaps I have been the first one to open the Pandore box (?)


----------



## ishatar

Actually I'm preparing a coup to overthrow Kellog and control wordreference, but shhh....


----------



## CrazyFroggy

Je jette l'éponge! J'ai du sortir mon anglais de compétition et y passer bcp de temps. Mais le sujet est passionnant.
au fait...vendredi j'aurai fait environ 55 heures - 2 heures sur wordreference.

CF


----------



## CrazyFroggy

Just one thong read today in "Les Echos":
The AmCham (American Chamber of Commerce in France) explains today in its report: "Les handicaps traditionnels de la France restent les même: Organisation rigide du travail et fiscalité désavantageuse"....


----------



## valerie

By the way, if someone feels like re-reading the thread and correcting my English, please do I will be very happy. (Mon Anglais de compétition ne me rapporte que peu de médailles...  )


----------



## lercarafridi

valerie said:
			
		

> I do not know exactly what you mean there, but actually, if they do not save the system, I hope they can save some people...



I wanted to say French physicians are rated among the best in Europe and so are French medicine schools, and therefore French citizens can be upset with the general negligence in the health service regarding bureaucracy yet their disappointment is somehow soothed by the competence of doctors.


----------



## vachecow

However, is it not true that 2 summers ago many people died as a result of the understaffing of French hospitals?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/09/08/France.report/


----------



## lercarafridi

vachecow121 said:
			
		

> However, is it not true that 2 summers ago many people died as a result of the understaffing of French hospitals?
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/09/08/France.report/



According to the web page you provided the casualties were due to careless and insensible families rather than illiterate doctors. Families headed for beaches and the countryside ignoring their elderly. I even read that some relatives of the dead were phoned back to Paris by health officials but they complained and claimed they were on holidays and it would be a big bother for them to pack up and return, so they stayed until late August and that is why many corpses were laid out in the morgue until their relatives were back in town to see to them. However it must be said in the health authorities´ defence that the heat wave was the gravest in more than one century and they were caught by surprise and as is reported in that web site many European countries suffered a similar problem, mainly in northern Europe.


----------



## ishatar

lercarafridi said:
			
		

> the heat wave was the gravest in more than one century and they were caught by surprise



Actually our climat is normally very mild, therefore it was a great shock when we discovered that, yes, air conditioners can be needed sometimes. 

As for the efficiency of our healthcare system, I have read again recently that the most advanced treatment are mostly located the US, but our healthcare was still the best because it was alvailable for everybody and was of high standards.


----------



## jacinta

valerie said:
			
		

> Hey Lacafridi, Ishatar and Crazyfroggy,
> 
> shall we try not to convert this forum into a political one?
> 
> I can say that, perhaps I have been the first one to open the Pandore box (?)




Bon jour, Valerie;

I am not going to join in on this conversation.  I am just offering a few corrections.  In English the saying is "to open Pandora's box".  We also say "No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater".  That is commonly used in English.


----------



## valerie

thank you Jacinta


----------



## lercarafridi

valerie said:
			
		

> Hey Lacafridi, Ishatar and Crazyfroggy,
> 
> shall we try not to convert this forum into a political one?
> 
> I can say that, perhaps I have been the first one to open the Pandore box (?)



Is this growing political? I thought it was just dealing with the efficiency in the French health care system. All I wrote about so far was the capacity of reaction by French officials before an unexpected slap in their faces and considering France one of the top countries in Europe I guess should the wave strike any other country the consequences would have been even worse. 
I never meant to prompt any national feeling when this French topic came to the forum. Anyway, I am not fond of discussing politics either yet I assume it is ruling our lives and we cannot ignore it. Right now the European constitution is being signed in Rome and it is going to be an essential reference for the 25 nations.


----------



## valerie

lercarafridi said:
			
		

> Anyway, I am not fond of discussing politics either yet I assume it is ruling our lives and we cannot ignore it.



Actually that was my point when I originally entered in this discussion, and in France 35 hours working per week IS a big political subject. I agree with you we should not ignore it, al least if we do not want to be ingenuous. Nevertheless this forum is primarily a linguistic one, and I would not like people getting to hands (?) on politics here


----------



## vachecow

valerie said:
			
		

> . Nevertheless this forum is primarily a linguistic one, and I would not like people getting to hands (?) on politics here



Sorry, i was just curious~~~~~it was actually my first post, so I wasn't really sure>>>>>>>>>>>>>I think you meant to say _"and I do/would not like people getting their hands on politics here" _


----------



## lercarafridi

> and I would not like people getting to hands (?) on politics here


[/QUOTE]

Do you mean fist fighting? Punching or brawling? Would you please explain the meaning of that expression? Thanks. If what I just wrote is what you meant, be sure I will never go that far defending my position. 
Liberté egalité  fraternité!!!  :


----------



## valerie

Well, I have to recognise it  , when I do not know sufficient English, I just try to 'anglicize' some french word or phrase, and sometimes, it works (at least nobody complains  )

En arriver aux mains (which I anglicized as 'getting to hands') means: as a last resort, and after a lot of hot discussion, to defend one's arguments with your fists


----------



## vachecow

see, i though you meant "getting their hands on", like working or debating over politics........speaking of which, the election is almost over


----------



## valerie

Last time, we had election during one month more quite unexpectedly, if I remember well


----------



## vachecow

yup.....right now its 4 in the morning "my time" and it looks as if that may happen again


----------



## Encolpius

17 years have passed and still no 32-hour work week France, right?


----------

