(de-news.net) – Germany’s working-time reform proceedings have exposed differences within the governing coalition over how much flexibility to allow. While the CDU/CSU and employers favor broader access to weekly working-time limits, the SPD, trade unions, and some opposition parties insist that any changes must preserve worker protections and comply with EU law.
The proposed changes to working-time laws have caused a significant rift within Germany’s ruling coalition, exposing differing interpretations of the coalition’s labor-policy commitments. Plans put forward by Labor Minister Bärbel Bas that would provide a flexible weekly maximum working-time framework exclusively through collective bargaining agreements were rejected by members of the CDU/CSU parliamentary bloc. Marc Biadacz, the bloc’s labor-policy spokesperson, argued that the Union supports granting all workers, regardless of whether they are covered by collective bargaining agreements, the option of being subject to a weekly rather than a daily working-time limit. In addition, he maintained that trust-based working arrangements should be available across all sectors of the economy and that requirements for documenting working hours should remain administratively simple and practical for both employers and employees.
Gitta Connemann (CDU), the Federal Government’s Commissioner for Small and Medium-Sized Businesses, echoed criticism emerging from within the CDU by describing the proposed reform as inconsistent with the coalition agreement. She argued that, by introducing limits based on weekly working hours, reducing bureaucratic burdens, and preserving trust-based working-time arrangements, the coalition had explicitly committed itself to greater flexibility in the labor market. According to her assessment, millions of employees and a substantial share of Germany’s Mittelstand would be excluded from the benefits of the reform if the planned flexibility were restricted to workers employed under collectively bargained contracts. Concerns were also raised that stricter requirements for recording working hours could impose additional administrative obligations on companies and increase compliance costs, particularly for smaller firms with limited resources.
By emphasizing labor protections and compliance with European legal requirements, the SPD advocated a more cautious and measured approach to reform. According to Jan Dieren, the purpose of the proposed changes was to provide workers with greater freedom in organizing their schedules, thereby making it easier to balance professional responsibilities with family life and other personal commitments. At the same time, he argued that any amendment to working-time legislation must remain fully consistent with the EU Working Time Directive, particularly with respect to its provisions concerning mandatory daily rest periods. The coalition agreement, he noted, calls for reform rather than the abolition of the existing eight-hour workday framework, and the SPD maintains that removing current safeguards could expose employees to substantially longer working days and weaken established protections against excessive working hours.
Flexibility vs. protection
Different positions were adopted by the opposition parties, reflecting a broad spectrum of views on labor-market regulation. The Greens stated that they were open to discussions about increasing flexibility in working-time arrangements, but they insisted that the eight-hour workday should remain in place as an important safeguard for workers’ health and well-being, especially in physically demanding occupations and industries. In contrast, the AfD argued that a comprehensive redesign of the current framework was unnecessary, contending that existing legislation already provides an appropriate balance between individual freedom and worker protection. The Left Party categorically rejected the proposal, asserting that additional flexibility would undermine long-established labor standards and increase the risk of excessively long shifts. Heidi Reichinnek, the party’s leader, warned that allowing employees to work longer hours than are currently permitted could have negative consequences for family life, health, and workplace safety, thereby weakening protections that have been developed over many decades.
Employer associations adopted a markedly different perspective on the issue. Gesamtmetall, the association representing metalworking companies, argued that the Labor Ministry’s proposal departed from the commitments set out in the coalition agreement and represented a return to outdated regulatory approaches. Particular criticism focused on the provision that would allow weekly maximum working-time arrangements only in companies covered by collective bargaining agreements. Under the proposal, the ministry would permit collective bargaining partners to replace daily limits with weekly ones, but it does not intend to abolish the eight-hour workday as a general principle. The government emphasized that the document remained at an early stage of development and was therefore still subject to discussion and revision. While employers have advocated broader deregulation and greater flexibility, trade unions and the Marburger Bund, the union representing physicians, have warned that longer working days could increase employee workloads and, in some sectors, create risks for safety, service quality, and overall working conditions.
Following consultations with labor-market stakeholders, the coalition agreement between the CDU/CSU and SPD calls for the introduction of a weekly maximum working-time framework in place of a daily one, provided that such changes remain consistent with European legal standards. The agreement also commits the government to implementing electronic working-time recording systems in a manner that minimizes bureaucratic burdens, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises, while preserving the possibility of trust-based working arrangements where these comply with EU law. Furthermore, the agreement explicitly states that no employee should be compelled to work longer hours against his or her wishes, underscoring the principle that any increase in flexibility should remain voluntary rather than mandatory.
Under the EU Working Time Directive, member states are required to impose limits on weekly working hours. Averaged over a reference period that may extend up to twelve months, total working time, including overtime, must not exceed 48 hours within a seven-day period. Separate provisions apply to night work, where the average working time may not exceed eight hours during any 24-hour period. These requirements form an important legal framework within which national governments must design and implement any reforms to working-time regulations, ensuring that greater flexibility remains compatible with minimum standards for worker health, safety, and rest.
Audio: FreeTTS
