Proposals of 70 hours work week suggestion of the Infosys icon Shri Narayan Murthy.

What an older person says with respect to an issue is not necessarily always correct. However the view that is expressed by an old person must be respected even when the view is found not that much fit to be worked upon. While setting aside such view,care should be taken that it must not offend the one offering such suggestions.

 It could be done best by ignoring it or to say the least; by avoiding any such questions in terms of "why" and "what for".

I am referring to a proposal made by Respected shree Narayan Murthy sir who goes to advocate 70 hours work week for youths.

*******************************************************

 Such types of unreasonable suggestions only serve to encourage over-enthusiastic but less enlightened profit-passioned employers. They will feel emboldened to set more unfavorable conditions for their employees.

 Needless to say it will amount to their exploitation in a veiled manner.

*************************************************

Besides, raising hours of work doesn't ipso facto raise work productivity. Productivity depends more upon an urge for creativity rather than working for employers for late and long hours.

In fact the long hours of work militates creativity and people start counting hours than output. 

Afterall scientific theory of management stops to apply at a certain point.

 On the contrary it may prove counter productive.

 Instances of "hire new ones" to "fire old ones" will be on the rise under the garb of non- fulfillment of targets. 

Employees will feel themselves to be working under an undefined duress. The unhealthy competition among the peers will develop undue mental pressure upon them to prove themselves that they are physically fit to deliver higher hours. This pressure will further prevent them from attending to their health issues including those of their families.

A new version of corporate supported management anarchy may ensue in the organizations. Work environment will become continuously charged with negative vibes of opportunistic competitions.

Also; with the enhancement of working hours or working days there is no guarantee that instances of "short charging" will not increase.

Therefore,such prescriptive suggestions are detrimental to "work-life balance" of an employee.

An employee doesn't work for mere money only and that too at the cost of fulfillment of demands from him by his being a member of the society. The society expects from him to discharge the responsibility associated with social/family events that range from birth to marriage ceremony to funeral rites.

This 70 hours a week formula will make an employee a cog in the wheel. He will become asocial further to an annoying degree to his near and dear ones.

An already strained social relations in the present economic world will nosedive further.    

      New complications will arise on the surface. Husband-wife relations, Father-son relations etc. to cite a few will worsen further. 

Being aware that joint family having now become merely a historical fact,the unitary family even will tend to disintegrate further into a fragmented ones in view of the unseen pressure imposed by higher working hours or more working days.

        Social and family responsibility driven participation will constrict further to give rise to development & widening of emotional cracks in such relationships.

Also the legal aspects of such enhancement in working hours have not been considered while advocating this prescription.

*******************************************************

Besides, before welcoming this idea it's necessary to pore over the health aspects of an employee subjected to the implementation of this idea.

Today mental health is more under challenge than its physical counterpart in a tension ridden work environment.

 Don't you feel that mental health has become a larger issue to be tackled now in the society than it used to be in the past??

*******************************************************

The cost-benefit analysis,I believe, will suggest that social cost will dwarf the economic benefits associated with this move or suggestions.

 I hold that the social cost of this suggestion has also not been considered. The quality of life(QoL) heavily depends upon social participation and discharge of socio-familial responsibilities. 

The quality of Work life (QWL) too in all probability will suffer. You will have less time even in your work place be it an office or factory to visit canteen or library to refresh,recreate, regenerate or update yourself with higher work hours bondage. 

It appears that Mr Murthy has focused his eyes only on economic benefits. He needs to go beyond that to see the social cost of such move or suggestions.

But then who cares for the social cost in this ecosystem of profit-multiplying passion that rules the corporate world? 

At least the private sector world does not have much concern for the social cost for reasons not far to seek. The vision of the corporate world is limited to profit-multiplication and wealth maximization. 

The near "immeasurable" and "not easily visible character" of social cost help them pursue their profit goals in a more free and drastic way.

We need to feel that true economics always keeps social issues within its purview. Also a true economics is that which takes into account the hidden cost besides the visible economic benefits.

I know what I have said in the lines above may not go down well among those who prefer to pose themselves progressive without actually being so.

R.R.Prabhakar.

31.10.2023.