Europe
German industrial bosses push for return to 40-hour working week
Some of Germany’s biggest industrial bosses are reigniting the debate over longer working hours.
Nearly 40 years ago, German metalworkers secured a 35-hour working week by winning one of the most contentious disputes in the country’s post-war history.
According to a report in the Financial Times (FT), prominent companies, including Mercedes-Benz and toolmaker Stihl, have demanded that employees work 40 hours a week without additional pay, arguing that high labour costs are undermining the country’s competitiveness.
Speaking to the Handelsblatt newspaper earlier this summer, Martin Brudermuller, chairman of the supervisory board of Mercedes-Benz Group, said, “By international standards, labour here has become too expensive,” arguing that the country had lost its “productivity advantage over key competitors.”
“We must seriously consider returning to a 40-hour working week,” Brudermuller said.
Labour costs in Germany are among the highest in the EU. Hourly labour costs in the manufacturing sector stand at 49.50 euros, which is 47% above the EU average of 33.70 euros and triple the cost of 15.60 euros in Hungary.
Although German employees are more productive than their Eastern European counterparts, unit labour costs, which measure worker productivity, have risen significantly faster since 2023 compared with previous years, according to a study by the IMK, a think-tank funded by German trade unions.
The calls to return to a 40-hour week have come ahead of industrial unions starting their latest wage negotiations in October.
The 35-hour working week was phased in over more than a decade following a dispute in 1984.
In that dispute, tens of thousands of metalworkers in former West Germany staged a seven-week strike to secure shorter working hours.
Today, the 35-hour working week is the collectively agreed standard for approximately one-fifth of German employees, concentrated in sectors such as automotive, engineering, iron, and steel. Across all sectors, the average weekly working time is 37.8 hours.
Germans work fewer average annual hours than employees in almost all other OECD economies. However, this comparison is heavily skewed by the country’s high rate of part-time employment.
What has turned a decades-long debate into an urgent issue of competitiveness is the deepening crisis in the German manufacturing sector.
Having peaked in late 2017, German industrial production has fallen by more than 15% as manufacturers have been hit by back-to-back energy price shocks stemming from anti-Russia sanctions, intensifying competition from China, US tariffs, and the profound shift towards electric vehicles.
According to Marcus Berret, global managing director of the consultancy Roland Berger, high labour costs were once offset by Germany’s other attractive features for employers, such as political stability, strong infrastructure, a skilled workforce, and dense industrial clusters.
However, these advantages have begun to erode as the cost gap with countries in Eastern Europe and beyond has widened:
“When it comes to labour costs, we are not talking about a 10% or 20% gap [with rival economies]. In some cases, we are talking about a three- or fourfold difference.”
So far, manufacturing employment in Germany has declined at a much slower pace; despite the sharp drop in output, approximately 6.5 million people continue to work in the sector.
However, Berret predicts further job losses:
“If I piece together the information I have from individual companies, I estimate that the number of people employed in manufacturing will drop to below 5 million.”
Currently, around 12,000 to 15,000 manufacturing jobs are being lost each month, and major employers such as Volkswagen have already indicated that many more positions in Germany will need to be eliminated.
Economists argue that longer working hours may become inevitable for employees who manage to keep their jobs.
Martin Werding, a member of the German Council of Economic Experts, says that the mechanisms manufacturers once used to compensate for high labour costs, such as relying on temporary agency workers who could be laid off during periods of weak demand, are no longer sufficient.
“Today’s challenges have grown so large that this flexibility is no longer enough,” Werding said.
A shift from 35 to 40 hours without additional pay would increase working time by 14% without changing weekly wage costs. Werding added that the debate over working hours is “far beyond symbolic politics.”
With more than 2.2 million members, IG Metall, Germany’s largest and most powerful trade union, rejects the claim that factories are bound by a rigid 35-hour working week constraint.
Nadine Boguslawski, head of collective bargaining at IG Metall and a member of the Mercedes supervisory board, stated that agreements with employers already provide companies with significant flexibility to increase or reduce working hours.
“A rigid 35-hour working week, as is sometimes portrayed, simply does not exist in the companies I know,” Boguslawski said.
She added that IG Metall remains open to finding tailored solutions for struggling companies.
At the heart of the debate lies a fundamental disagreement between unions and employers over whether longer working hours destroy jobs by distributing a fixed amount of work among fewer people, or protect jobs by making German factories more competitive.
Boguslawski argued that one of the main reasons IG Metall fought hard for the 35-hour working week in the 1980s was to “bring more people into employment” by sharing available work among more people:
“If you reverse this and increase weekly working hours to 40, you generally need fewer workers, regardless of whether those additional hours are paid or unpaid.”
However, economists such as Werding argue that the volume of available work is not guaranteed and depends on the competitiveness of firms.
They suggest that if lower labour costs per unit of output make German factories more competitive, companies can retain production and jobs that would otherwise move abroad or disappear.
It remains unclear whether the push for longer working hours will make it onto the negotiating agenda between unions and employers this autumn.
Gesamtmetall, the metal industry employers’ association, declined to comment on calls to abandon the 35-hour working week, citing “internal deliberations.”
Berret worries that the political and public debate has not yet caught up with the scale of the crisis facing German industry.
“Many people are living in a different reality regarding what lies ahead of us,” Berret said.
Europe
Most EU citizens reject fast-track Ukraine accession, poll finds
An opinion survey conducted across the European Union has revealed that 53% of bloc citizens oppose admitting Ukraine to the EU through an accelerated process in the coming years.
According to the study carried out by the Bertelsmann Foundation, 47% of EU residents support the idea of fast-track membership.
The most pronounced opposition to rapid accession was recorded in Romania at 60%, followed by Germany at 59%, and France and Poland at 57% each.
The lowest resistance to Ukraine’s accelerated membership was found in Sweden at 31%. This figure stood at 37% in Spain and Portugal, and remained at 43% in the Netherlands.
Domestic support for the process remains exceptionally high; 83% of the public in Ukraine want to join the bloc as soon as possible.
Europeans differ over defence contributions and strategic benefits
The survey also examined perceptions regarding the defence of the continent. Some 58% of Ukrainians believe that their “resistance against Russia’s military campaign protects the entire continent and the EU as a whole.”
In contrast, 29% of bloc citizens share the view that the EU and its member states contribute more to defending the union than Ukraine does.
While 23% of participants view the efforts of both sides as equal, the share of those who consider Ukraine to be the bloc’s “primary protector” remains at 16%.
The study also indicates that low expectations concerning the tangible benefits Ukraine would provide to the bloc contribute to the limited support for its membership.
Only 14% of surveyed Europeans believe that this accession will make the EU stronger and more influential on a global scale. Meanwhile, the proportion of respondents who anticipate that Ukraine’s entry will increase the bloc’s resilience was measured at 11%.
Timetable debate persists in the negotiation process
Ukraine applied for membership immediately after Russia’s military intervention and gained candidate status in 2022.
The accession process encompasses a 33-chapter reform package organised under six clusters, which aims to guarantee democratic and economic standards.
Formal accession talks began in June 2024. The negotiation process, which had long been blocked by Hungary, made progress after Peter Magyar took office as the country’s prime minister.
Magyar also succeeded in having the term “accelerated accession” for Ukraine removed from EU texts.
Magyar argued that a contrary approach would send the wrong message to Western Balkan nations, such as Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, and North Macedonia, which have worked towards membership for years.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has called for the membership process to be completed by 2027, stating that this would provide a fundamental security guarantee for both Ukraine and Europe.
On the other hand, circles within the bloc that oppose rushing the process insist on the complete fulfilment of all conditions, including anti-corruption measures.
Meanwhile, the EU Ambassador to Ukraine, Katarina Mathernova, points to 2030 as a likely accession date.
For membership to take place following the completion of negotiations, all 27 EU member states must grant unanimous approval.
So far, only the first of the six chapter clusters, covering fundamental values and principles such as the rule of law, human rights, and the judiciary, has been opened for Ukraine.
Europe
NATO unveils 32-nation defence strategy to counter adversaries
NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) Alexus Grynkewich has unveiled a new defence strategy aimed at rendering any attack against an alliance member entirely futile.
Speaking at the Warsaw Security Forum, Grynkewich said the concept, titled the “Theory of War”, is designed to prevent hostile elements from infiltrating NATO territory and waging conflict there.
Arguing that they aim to reassure the one billion people living within the alliance’s borders, Grynkewich maintained that they also wish to send a message to adversaries such as Russia that NATO is prepared for a potential invasion.
“If we are attacked, we are ready to fight even tonight,” Grynkewich said.
Three-stage defence plan enters into force
Approved by all 32 alliance members, the plan combines land forces and conventional weapons systems with advanced technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles, counter-drone systems, and artificial intelligence.
Lessons drawn from ground and air combat in Ukraine, as well as current conflicts in the Middle East, play a decisive role in shaping the strategy.
According to Grynkewich, the new defence doctrine rests on three fundamental phases that form the core of NATO’s approach:
The first pillar of the plan, the “block” phase, focuses on preventing hostile forces from seizing allied territory.
In this context, NATO ground components will engage directly with attacking units, restrict their manoeuvrability, and neutralise forces attempting to breach alliance borders.
Should the assault continue, the second phase (“blunt”) will come into play, deploying autonomous systems requiring minimal human intervention alongside advanced sensor networks to slow the momentum of the attack and wear down advancing forces.
These systems will detect threats in real time, combining capabilities across different operational domains to halt the adversary’s advance.
The final stage, the “break” phase, will target not the attacking units directly, but the operational warfighting system that sustains them.
Command centres, supply chains, and logistics routes will be struck using long-range precision strike systems and sensor networks, eliminating the adversary’s ability to sustain military operations.
“Enemy commanders will not be able to direct their troops, their supply lines will be severed, and their logistics vehicles will be destroyed,” Grynkewich said.
Strategy aims to defend borders rather than gain territory
Noting that NATO has no intention of acquiring territory and that the strategy is entirely defence-oriented, Grynkewich said, “We have no plan, intention, or ambition beyond protecting our citizens and our territory.”
Stating that he considers the likelihood of a direct attack on alliance territory to be low, the commander nevertheless stated that they would respond without hesitation to any attempt targeting allies.
Addressing questions regarding US commitment to the alliance, Grynkewich recalled that Washington reaffirmed its adherence to Article 5 at the NATO summit in July.
Article 5, which forms the cornerstone of NATO’s collective defence principle, stipulates that an armed attack against one ally is considered an attack against all members.
Europe
Germany detains two Turkish suspects over Polish Starlink arson
Polish authorities have announced that German police detained two Turkish citizens suspected of setting fire to a Starlink station near Warsaw last month.
Tomasz Siemoniak, Poland’s minister coordinating the special services, told a news conference in Warsaw on Monday that Poland has requested the suspects’ extradition and has “no doubt” that Russian secret services were behind the arson attack.
“It should also be noted that Russian intelligence agencies are increasingly turning to people linked to the criminal underworld,” Siemoniak said at the press conference.
In a post on X, Prime Minister Donald Tusk described the incident as another “act of hybrid warfare” and said those responsible for the sabotage would be brought to justice in Poland.
Interior Minister Marcin Kierwinski said the two Turkish citizens would be charged in Poland with carrying out an act of sabotage on the orders of a foreign intelligence agency.
Power supply equipment at a Starlink ground station serving Eastern Europe, including Poland and Ukraine, caught fire on the night of 23 September.
The incident did not cause a major disruption to internet service. The blaze, however, completely destroyed the station’s electrical system and backup generator.
Poland, a key transit route for Western aid to Ukraine, has faced a series of suspicious incidents recently.
Numerous cyberattacks have targeted public utilities, including water and energy infrastructure as well as hospitals.
In addition, damage to a railway line between Warsaw and the Ukrainian border was attributed by officials to Russian sabotage.
In late July, a Russian missile also landed in Poland.
-
Europe2 weeks agoLe Pen proposes German-style debt rule to soothe French bond market
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russia hold multi-billion-dollar talks on Lukoil foreign assets
-
America2 weeks agoUS AI spending needs 9% of GDP by 2032 to justify capital boom
-
Europe2 weeks agoFrance and Germany urge EU market kill switch against trade threats
-
Europe2 weeks agoOver 500 former European diplomats urge EU sanctions on Israel
-
Europe1 week agoBill to drop NATO membership goal submitted to Ukrainian parliament
-
America2 weeks agoFlavio Bolsonaro leads Lula as Brazil election heads to run-off
-
Middle East2 weeks agoCIA report warns Israel faces growing risk of civil conflict
