Kommentar: Die 35-Stunden-Woche ist kein Modell für eine Krise

The 35-hour workweek is not a model for crisis prevention. Tariff-related claims lack the necessary economic foundation and prove ineffective, as demonstrated by the ongoing debate. Prominent entrepreneurs, including Nikolas Stihl, Martin Brudermüller, and Martin Herrenknecht, argue for a return to the 40-hour workweek while maintaining the same monthly salary.

The German Metal and Electrical Industries Union (IG Metall), however, opposes this proposal, threatening a major labor strike during autumn tariff negotiations in the metal and electrical industries.

The issue revolves around whether the affected industries can still afford the 35-hour workweek. A closer examination of company layoffs within the metal and electrical sectors reveals the precarious state of Germany's industrial landscape. While the term "deindustrialization" should be used with caution, estimates suggest that up to 20,000 jobs are lost each month, primarily in the automotive sector and its suppliers. The scale of job cuts at companies like Volkswagen, Porsche, and Mercedes-Benz is staggering.

Stihl, a prominent entrepreneur, aims to halt this "bleeding" by advocating for a return to the 40-hour workweek. However, he acknowledges that layoffs and longer working hours are interconnected. By reducing labor costs, companies can preserve existing jobs that might otherwise disappear due to declining demand.