keeptheoptout

Arguments For Removing The Opt Out

The removal of the opt out is supported by the EU and some UK organisations based on the following arguments.

	Long working hours are bad for work-life balance, health, productivity and safety.
	Those who work more than the European Working Time Directive’s 48 hours per week have little time left for education and training. If this problem is not addressed then it is likely to set up a vicious circle of underinvestment and low skills perpetuating the use of long hours.
	Britons work longer hours than almost all their European counterparts according to a research project by The Work Foundation. The UK government has led a minority group of European ministers which on 2 June 2005 successfully blocked moves to end the UK 'opt-out' from the European Working Time Directive’s 48 hour ceiling on the working week.
	The TUC and charity Working Families called for the individual opt-out to be abolished, claiming that family life is being damaged by long working hours and that six years after the introduction of the Directive, there are still more employees working over long hours than there were in 1992.
	The Parliament states "The revision of the directive is worrying millions of workers and this vote is an opportunity to reconnect with citizens, said the rapporteur Alejandro CERCAS (PES, ES). The 48 hour working week was established in the first ILO convention. The idea to "work to live and not live to work" has been achieved, "we cannot go backwards". The opt-out abrogates this law and will lead to social dumping. In addition, surveys show that it harms health and safety at work, and makes it very difficult for people to reconcile work and family life. The proposed Council compromise makes "the opt-out a permanent general rule", said Mr Cercas."