Imagine a world where your work tools lock you out after 50 hours of activity each week, where emails sent after 5:30 PM are held until 8:00 AM the next day. Would you welcome those restrictions? These measures, though seemingly stringent, could be the key to addressing overwork, a primary contributor to inefficiency, burnout, and the gender pay gap.
Overwork has long been glorified in many industries, particularly in high-paying jobs where the pressure to exceed expectations is the norm. But the evidence is clear: excessive work hours do more harm than good. Not only do they lead to inefficiency and burnout, but they also perpetuate inequalities in the workplace, with research showing that men and women are not equally rewarded for the same amount of extra effort.
This article explores the idea of implementing strict work hour limits to promote fairness and reduce the negative impacts of overwork, drawing on recent studies and expert opinions. Could this be a solution to one of the workplace’s most persistent issues?
In 2024, a study published in Social Psychology Quarterly titled "Gender and the Disparate Payoffs of Overwork" shed light on a troubling phenomenon: overworking men are often rewarded more than overworking women. The study involved 230 participants who evaluated two professionals—one working 60 hours per week and the other working 40 hours. Both professionals had the same rating and gender, yet evaluators consistently favoured the individual who worked longer hours.
What’s even more concerning is that when the 60-hour professional was male, evaluators favoured him 91.8% of the time. However, when the 60-hour professional was female, she was only favoured 83.9% of the time. This discrepancy suggests a deeply ingrained bias: evaluators may perceive women’s extended work hours as a sign of inefficiency rather than dedication.
Dr. Christin Munsch, the lead author of the study, notes that these biases are difficult—if not impossible—for individuals to counter on their own. Instead, the responsibility falls on organisations to establish and enforce limits on work hours, ensuring that everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed without succumbing to the pressures of overwork.
The Case for Capping Work Hours
Long work hours are often seen as a badge of honour, a testament to one’s commitment and ambition. But as experts in organisational psychology and economics have pointed out, this culture of overwork is not only unsustainable but also counterproductive.
The benefits of limiting work hours are manifold. Research has shown that reducing work hours can lead to increased productivity, better mental health, and improved work-life balance. Moreover, it can help address the gender pay gap by ensuring that men and women are evaluated based on their contributions rather than the number of hours they clock in.
One compelling case study is that of Boston Consulting Group (BCG), where researchers Leslie Perlow and Jessica Porter introduced a policy requiring associates to take one full day off each week. Despite initial resistance, the experiment proved successful, with employees reporting higher satisfaction and no significant drop in productivity. This demonstrates that with the right support and accountability measures in place, limiting work hours can have a positive impact on both employees and the organisation.
The Role of Technology in Enforcing Limits
In today’s digital age, the line between work and personal life is increasingly blurred. The expectation to be “always on” is facilitated by the very tools designed to enhance productivity, such as email, Slack, and Microsoft Teams. However, these tools can also be repurposed to help enforce healthy work habits.
Companies are increasingly turning to electronic surveillance to monitor productivity, but what if these tools were used to prevent overwork instead? Imagine a system where employees are automatically logged out after 50 hours of work or where after-hours emails are held until the next business day. Such measures could help enforce boundaries and ensure that employees are not overextending themselves.
While some may argue that this level of surveillance could erode trust, it could also be seen as a protective measure—one that prioritises employee well-being and fairness.
As Dr. Munsch points out, the costs of doing nothing are too high.
“This is never going to be easy, but we have to do better.”
Dr. Munsch
Addressing the Gender Pay Gap Through Work Hour Limits
The gender pay gap is a complex issue with many contributing factors, but overwork is undoubtedly one of them. By capping work hours and enforcing limits on after-hours communication, companies can create a more level playing field. This would not only help close the gender pay gap but also promote a healthier work environment for all employees.
The research by Munsch and her colleagues highlights the need for organisational change: “Evaluators are more suspicious that women’s long hours stem from…an inability to complete work in a timely manner.” By removing the emphasis on hours worked and instead focusing on outcomes, organisations can mitigate these biases and ensure that employees are rewarded fairly.
Overwork is a pervasive issue that not only affects individual well-being but also perpetuates inequality in the workplace. By implementing strict work hour limits and encouraging a healthier work-life balance, companies can address the root causes of burnout, inefficiency, and the gender pay gap.
It’s time for organisations to take responsibility and lead the way in fostering a more equitable and sustainable work environment.
“The cost of doing nothing is too high—for people, their families, our health, and aged care systems.”
Dr. Munsch
By setting and enforcing these limits, we can create a workplace culture that values quality over quantity, ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to thrive.