It's About Time - working less hours - Industry Overview

Workers are surprised to discover the many benefits to working less hours.

Facing job loss combined with increased overtime in many locations, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union (CEP) decided to look more closely at hours of work. The result has been the publication of two studies, widespread education in the union, a resolution to Convention and a campaign to reduce hours of work. Representing 150,000 workers in the private sector, the union has decided that this issue is central in obtaining a better standard of living for members and also in fighting back against a business agenda of continuous downsizing. The union has learned a lot over the last five years.

OVERTIME

The CEP carried out a major study of hours of work in the B.C. pulp and paper industry. It produced three controversial results that questioned traditional wisdom on overtime.

* Is overtime caused by emergency situations?

Most overtime is not used for emergencies, but to cover for vacations, statutory holidays, sickness and other leave. Downsizing has reduced the number of workers to the point where there are not enough workers to cover for negotiated time off. Over half of workers in the mills estimated that from half to all of the overtime could be replaced with full-time workers.

* Is overtime cheaper than hiring more workers?

It's cheaper for employers to use overtime than pay for additional workers and their benefits package, right? Wrong. The CEP study found that employers would save money by reducing overtime and hiring more workers. An economist analysed the relative costs, including everything from benefits and payroll taxes down to training and tools. To put it simply, in BC pulp and paper mills overtime costs double the straight time rate (this includes time and a half pay, the cost of a banked overtime arrangment, call in and meal tickets). By comparison, what does it cost to hire a new worker? It costs the straight time rate and less than another 50 percent to cover all the benefits and other expenses -- in other words less than time and a half. Where overtime is costing double time, replacing overtime with more workers is a substantial saving. In a situation where overtime costs time and a half, replacing overtime with new workers would be a no-cost proposition.

* Are workers willing to reduce overtime?

This is a hot issue and the CEP has heard all about how you can't touch overtime because our members want the money and how difficult it would be to propose taking it away. There is a stereotype that every worker is taking all the overtime available, but it is a stereotype. The real story is more mixed. We found a pattern of a minority of workers (5-15 percent) who work all the overtime they can, but there is a similar proportion who never work overtime, while the majority are spread through the middle, working some and refusing some. Also, there is no point refusing overtime individually, because it simply goes to the next in line, but if it's a question of saving or creating jobs a large majority of CEP members wanted to give it up. It was a surprise for many, but 73 percent of our members in BC mills said they were willing to give up overtime in order to create jobs.

SHORTER REGULAR HOURS OF WORK

* Workers on shorter hours love it.

In a study of locals that had negotiated a reduction in their regular hours of work, the CEP found huge enthusiasm for the reduced work time. Many times CEP members said that if employers ever threatened the additional time off that they had gained, there would be an automatic strike.

To give just one example, at Sarnia in southern Ontario there are a number of petro-chemical plants on 37 1/3 hours per week. The day workers at these plants work 40 hours most weeks, but take a Friday off work every three weeks to bring their average down to 37 1/3. This gives them a long weekend and sometimes a four day weekend when combined with a statutory holiday. These Fridays are called Happy Fridays and are marked on the calenders with happy faces. Because there are so many workers in the community with Fridays off, community events like picnics and tournaments are organised on those days and everyone in Sarnia (a community of 20,000) knows about Happy Fridays.

The front line supervisors at the rubber plant also get Happy Fridays, but one year upper management was contemplating cutting them out as a cost saving measure. The supervisors went straight to the union, asking to unionize and get help to fight this and, as the union president explained, "They gave them their Fridays back in a hell of a hurry."

* Schedules are critical.

General talk of reduced hours of work is an abstraction. What can make it attractive are the details about the time off and the impact on schedules. Scheduling, or how work time is organized, is very important in workers' lives and looking at shorter hours opens up opportunities for better schedules. Often workers are interested in blocks of time away from work but sometimes, and especially for shift workers, shorter hours offer other improvements. For example, proposing a move from 40 or 42 hours to 37 1/3 hours a week could mean a long weekend every third week for day workers, as in the Sarnia example given above. For shift workers working 12 hour shifts, moving to 37 1/3 hours could mean working only 3 shifts instead of 4 in a row, taking every 9th week off work entirely, or more weekends at home. These changes are significant. It's important to get specific about what shorter hours would actually look like.

* Shorter Hours, No Loss in Pay?

If you read the CEP resolution below, it does not say that shorter hours will be negotiated with no loss in pay. Shorter hours of work is a benefit to workers to be negotiated like any other. In negotiations, it may be appropriate to trade for it in the same way as increased wage rates, better pensions or any other improvement. There are situations in which workers are prepared to take less pay in order to get more time off.

The CEP has negotiated different arrangements. When the energy workers moved from 40 to 37 1/3 hours, it was with no loss in pay. On the day that the change was implemented, the hourly rate was increased, so that there was no reduction in pay.

The pulp and paper workers in Quebec are a different example. They moved to 37 1/3 hours in 1974, after a 4 month strike in the whole eastern Canada pulp and paper industry. The workers in Quebec refused to return to work without a reduction in hours. Wages were not increased to compensate, but one additional worker had to be hired for every 8 production workers in the mills. As these new workers came into the entry level jobs, many workers had to be promoted up the ladder, getting an increased pay rate. However, pay rates are negotiated for eastern Canada on an hourly basis, so workers in Quebec on 37 1/3 hours are paid less than their counterparts in Ontario and Atlantic Canada, who are still working 40 or 42 hours. It is important to note that mill workers in Quebec have no interest in changing their arrangement.

Bell Canada is an interesting example. In 1994, 12,000 technicians moved from 38 hours to 36 hours a week, taking the cut in pay. They also moved to a 9 hour day and a 4 day week. Initially this was done reluctantly in order to avoid lay-offs and for just one year. The workers liked it so much that they didn't want to lose it. They discovered that the loss in pay was small given marginal tax rates, and felt that they were more than compensated with the 3 day weekends. The employer felt very differently and cancelled the arrangement at the end of the year, despite strong efforts by the union to maintain it.

WHY MOVE TO SHORTER HOURS?

Research continues to show that families are under pressure because of long hours worked by both partners. In surveys, half of all workers say that they do not have time for their families and friends and one-third describe themselves as "exhausted" by the effort to balance work and home. An important study by Statistics Canada linked long hours to poor health. It showed that workers who worked more than 40 hours a week smoked more, drank more, gained weight and were more depressed than those on shorter hours -- all factors that lead to serious health problems. We also know that long hours lead to fatigue and increase the risk of accidents at work.

There are one million unemployed in Canada and the unemployment rate among young people aged 15 to 24 is 13 percent. Meanwhile, one out of every five full-time workers are working more than 40 hours as their regular working hours. In addition, 20 million hours of overtime (both paid and unpaid) are worked every week - the equivalent of 500,000 full-time jobs.

Shorter hours of work is about being against the "extended, flexible hours, let's compete, lean and mean" philosophy of business corporations. More time off is about better health and safety, and improved family and social life. Socially, it's about less unemployment, more jobs for young people and a better community life.

Julie White is an independent researcher who worked with the CEP on their studies of working time.

CEP Resolution on Hours of Work

WHEREAS the CEP and the broader union movement have struggled for shorter hours of work, both to create employment and for the well-being of workers;

WHEREAS the CEP has stressed the importance of the reduction of working time at the 1994 Convention in the policy documents entitled "Reduction of Working Time" and "Working Families";

WHEREAS the polarization of hours has lead to increased inequality between workers with long hours and those who have too few hours of work;

WHEREAS hours of work, shift work and scheduling are issues of importance to CEP members and have been the subject of negotiations in all sectors of the union;

WHEREAS overtime has increased while the number of jobs has declined in many CEP industries;

WHEREAS longer hours of work is part of a strategy by employers, combined with more part-time work and contracting Out, to decrease regular full-time work in favour of a flexible work force;

WHEREAS the CEP has been at the forefront in negotiating shorter hours of work and has carried out groundbreaking research in this area;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the CEP reaffirms its commitment to making reduced hours of work a union priority, both for the welfare of workers and to create employment;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, as a priority of the union, hours of work issues will be incorporated into the on-going publications, education, conferences and other activities of the union;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the union will continue its program of research, expanding it to include all areas where our members work;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the union will undertake to further educate and inform our members about questions related to hours of work, including a national conference on hours of work, shift work, scheduling and overtime;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the union will commit resources and a budget for research, publications, campaigns, education, conferences and negotiations on the issue;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the union will establish hours of work committees in various areas and/or regions as appropriate in order to further these goals;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the union will bring reduced overtime and shorter hours of work to the bargaining table with employers as appropriate in each sector, with the objective of increasing the number of regular full time jobs;

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the union will lobby the provincial and federal governments to adopt legislation to reduce overtime and standard weekly hours.

COPYRIGHT 2001 Briarpatch, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2001 Gale Group