Such exploitation runs against the Directive's original intention: to protect workers from the health and safety consequences of overworking.
To this end, the Directive provides that workers in all sectors, public or private, must not work longer than 48 hours a week, including overtime. The Directive also specifies requirements for rest periods, breaks and no less than four weeks' paid holiday per year.
However, in 1993, the UK negotiated an opt-out which allows Member States not to apply the limit to working hours under certain conditions: prior agreement of the individual, no negative fall-out from refusing to opt-out, and records kept of working hours of those that have opted out.
The opt-out, and in particular the UK's use of the opt-out, was one of the main concerns raised in a recent Commission report into the operation of the Directive. Figures quoted by the Commission show that around 16% of the UK workforce works over 48 hours per week – up 1% from the early 1990s.
The Commission is now carrying out a review of the Directive, and in particular the opt-out, and is expected to propose changes to both in the near future. Forewarned is forearmed, and the UK Government is now seeking the views of employers and employees in preparation for its negotiations with Brussels.
Announcing the consultation yesterday, Employment Relations Minister Gerry Sutcliffe stressed that the Government was committed to retaining the opt-out in order to protect employee choice and workplace flexibility, but was also determined to make sure it was being used correctly.
"The DTI gets many letters from workers asking us to keep the opt-out, but some parties have raised concerns that some people are pressured into signing the opt-out," said Sutcliffe. "Such action is illegal, as the opt-out must be signed voluntarily under current employment
legislation."
"However, we are open to ideas on how the operation of the opt-out can be improved - that is why we are seeking views now, so that they can be taken into consideration as we move forward with the European Commission's review of the Working Time Directive," he added.
The DTI's consultation does not set out any proposals, but does offer ideas and options people may want to offer views on. It covers three main areas of discussion:
Responding to the launch, Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress, commented that it was hard to take the consultation seriously. He said: "The Minister's statement makes it clear that the government has made its mind up to resist an effective crackdown on Britain's long hours culture."
He added, "The government should stop defending the indefensible and end the UK opt-out of the 48 hour working week."
Robyn McIlroy, an employment specialist with Masons, the international law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, commented:
"It was always envisaged that the opt-out would be reviewed in November 2003 and, over the last year, many UK organisations who make use of the opt-out have become concerned at prospect of its removal or restriction.
"Principally, employers are concerned that removing the ability of individual workers to opt-out of the limit on weekly working time will reduce flexibility and impact on the ability of organisations to meet deadlines. In industries where lucrative overtime work is commonplace, workers too may become concerned that the removal of the opt-out will affect them financially. So it will be interesting to see the submissions from employer organisations and unions in this consultation exercise.
"Clearly there are pros and cons for retaining and removing – or at least restricting –the opt-out. On the one hand, removing the opt-out may lead us away from the long-hours culture that is becoming increasingly common in the UK. On the other hand, any measure which restricts competitiveness and the ability of business to make profits must impact on salary levels and, in the current economic climate, UK workers may feel that is too high a price to pay for increased leisure time."
The closing date for the consultation is 22 September 2004.