Flexibilisation of working time: does too much law kill the law?

Labour law is a living and constantly evolving body of law. It must constantly adapt to changes in the economic, social and political situation of a country, or even a continent.

However, important topical issues such as working time must not be rushed through with ill-considered legal reforms.

With the likely future government coalition between the liberal DP party and the Christian Social Party CSV, the question of a pure and simple reduction in working time seems to have been ruled out for the time being.

However, there is nothing to stop companies reducing their working hours even now. 

A number of Luxembourg companies have recently gone ahead by using existing legal means through social dialogue. So at present, there is no urgent need to legislate in this area.

The political parties mentioned above seem to want to move towards making working time more flexible rather than reducing it.

This desire is certainly laudable, but we must not lose sight of the fact that the Labour Code already contains a multitude of instruments for making working time more flexible.

For example, it is possible to spread weekly working hours over 5 days or less, extending normal working hours up to 9 hours a day, without the total working hours exceeding the normal weekly working hours in force in the company concerned.

Tools such as work organisation plans and flexitime regulations can also be used to make working time more flexible.

Added to these are part-time working, time savings accounts and teleworking, the latter also being a form of organisation and therefore of flexibilisation of working time.

Finally, new forms of extraordinary leave and the concept of "flexible working arrangements" have been introduced into the Labour Code as part of the transposition of the European directive on work-life balance for parents and carers. These include the possibility for employees to adjust their working arrangements by working flexible hours, reducing their working hours or working remotely for a fixed period of up to one year.

So, before legislating any further, wouldn't it be a good idea to encourage the social partners to make the most of existing resources because, as the saying goes, "too much law kills law"?