Will it be necessary to work more to finance the bill of the crisis?

Will it be necessary to work more to finance the bill of the crisis. The debate was launched then quickly closed by Medef. However, it is still relevant ...

Yes and for an easy-to-understand reason: the restart of the activity will be slow and above all we can see that the productivity of the employees will be weighed down by sanitary measures: whether on a building site, an automobile assembly line or in a bank office, barrier gestures, distances between people, multiple precautions will lower productivity and increase costs. In short, it would not be absurd to compensate for these losses in productivity by an increase in working time which would at the same time support purchasing power: this is what several economists but also the opposition are proposing. The Republicans thus suggest moving to 37 hours.

But for now, the government does not want it ...

He feels that now is not the time to put the subject on the table. But that does not prevent opening the debate. The Montaigne Institute publishes a study this morning with several shock proposals to increase working hours: for example by suppressing Thursday of the statutory Ascension or even by sacrificing days of vacation to All Saints' Day even if it means restoring them afterwards. In the same vein, days of RTT could be temporarily removed to support the rebound in activity. We can also imagine, when activity resumes, that it will be necessary to work overtime but that it could be paid later so as not to weigh on companies weakened by the crisis. In short, we will have to be imaginative, this is the message of many economists, so that our economy starts again in good conditions. And we will have to tackle taboos like working time. This debate is just beginning.