Kevin Rowan column
Nov 13 2006 By Kevin Rowan, The Journal
The decision last week to preserve UK's opt-out of the European Union's Working Time Regulations was more about political posturing than a necessary protection of economic interests.
The UK has retained an exemption to the 48-hour working limit, whereby individuals can sign a waiver so that this law does not apply to them.
The regulations were introduced as it is a known fact that long hours lead directly to increased health risk.
There is also evidence to show hourly productivity rates decline with long hours. It's not good for individuals or business.
The UK still has a long hours problem but the trend shows steady decline in working hours. Ending the opt-out would have increased the rate of decline, potentially saving thousands of workers from ill health.
There would be no economic damage. The Government's Labour Force Survey shows only 800,000 to a million workers would have to alter work patterns. Since 1998 the number of people working over 48 hours a week has declined 17.5%.
And the opt-out wouldn't prevent employees working longer than the 48 hour limit. Employers clearly need this facility occasionally. The rules simply require it to be managed in a way to allows workers to recover and excessive hours to be averaged out.
The real reason Government stuck to its guns in the Council of Ministers last week may never be known.
Despite considerable pressure from European partners, with France leading the way, and regardless of evidence that demonstrates ending the opt-out would not harm industry but would provide health and safety benefits to people, the Government said `non, non, non' in a style reminiscent of other, more belligerent Governments of recent times.
The European Union offers the most effective way for UK citizens to face the challenges of globalisation.
Collectively the EU is bigger than China or the USA. The Lisbon Agenda commits member states to introducing measures to increase productivity and innovation, to ensure that workers and businesses within the EU are able to compete globally.
I fail to understand how working people beyond what is healthy, productive, and what is good for business, can help in those challenges.
What we really need our Government to understand is that by placing workers at the heart of the competitiveness agenda, by investing in the welfare, wellbeing and capacity of workers, and by acting collectively within the EU, the UK is much more likely to be able to make globalisation an opportunity instead of a threat.
