Why It Matters Labour Hours
Summary
We have determined the number of hours people in your neighbourhood work.
Interpretation
All Economically Active Residents
| Dataset | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Walulel Percentage (%) of full-time workers who work for 49 hours or more per week | This tells you the percentage of all the people in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work long full-time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of full-time workers who work for 31 and 48 hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the people in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work average full-time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of part-time workers who work for 16 to 30 hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the people in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work “job-share/flexiwork” part time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of part-time workers who work for 15 hours per week or less | This tells you the percentage of all the people in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work casual part time hours. |
All Economically Active Females
| Dataset | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Females who work full time for 49 or more hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the females in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work long full-time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Females who work full time for 31 to 48 hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the females in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work average full-time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Females who work part-time for 16 to 30 hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the females in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work “job-share/flexiwork” part time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Females who work part-time for 15 hours per week or less | This tells you the percentage of all the females in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work casual part time hours. |
All Economically Active Males
| Dataset | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Males who work full time for 49 or more hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the males in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work long full-time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Male workers who work full time for 31 to 48 hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the males in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work average full-time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Males who work part-time for 16 to 30 hours per week | This tells you the percentage of all the males in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work “job-share/flexiwork” part time hours. |
| Walulel Percentage (%) of Males who work part-time for 15 hours per week or less | This tells you the percentage of all the males in your neighbourhood who are part of the labour force (i.e. aged 16 to 74 and economically active), and who would be considered to work casual part time hours. |
Why the metric matters from a commercial inhabitants perspective
Whether or not there is a high proportion of part timers or full timers in a postcode will tell you a great deal about the flexibility which the residents seek. Part-timers accordingly seek more flexible goods, services and accommodation whereas full-time workers are more likely to be people who have a mortgage, so the former group are likely to appreciate more flexibility in service provision.
The number of hours worked also has an impact on disposable income and consumption behaviour with longer hours being related to high-end services and products.
Why the metric matters from a residential inhabitant’s perspective
Residents’ working hours will affect their presence in the neighbourhood. Longer working hours means reduced opportunities for social interactions and engagement in community activities. People in part-time and occasional work have more time to invest in their surroundings what creates an amenity value in the area. It is worth noting that the data about hours worked cannot be related to income. Although people in lower skilled jobs tend work more paid hours, those in managerial positions usually work more unpaid hours.
General commentary
The split by full-time and part-time working age employees in London in 2015 was 77.8 per cent and 21.7 per cent respectively. The 8-year trend shows the vast majority of roles are in full-time, permanent work that’s higher skilled (70 percent) – so generally attracting higher wages.
London has the UK’s highest proportion of workers in full-time employment each working an average of 38 hours per week. In fact Londoners spend about three weeks more at work a year than the rest of the UK, according to statistics from the Office for National Statistics in 2017 which show the average working week in London is 33 hours, the longest since the 2008 financial crisis. London’s younger demographic than the UK average, high cost of living and concentration of higher-skilled work creates a culture of longer hours.
Once unpaid overtime is taken into account, one in four Londoners is working more than 48 hours a week, with finance workers, corporate lawyers and teachers among the professions most frequently having to put in these extended unpaid hours.
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development estimates that more than half the workforce now works flexibly whether this entails working from home or part-time. Reasons cited tend to be that this is a way of coping with soaring hours and pressures of roles in London. For example, a study which looked at GPs’ working patterns revealed what a high proportion of them were working part-time across both sexes. In fact very few were working more than four days per week. Part-time work was found to be a route to retirement in some cases but the trend was even stronger among the next generation of GPs. A minority of those surveyed expected to work full-time even straight after qualifying, and only 10 percent wanted to do so a decade after qualifying. The most common reason cited was the intensity of the role.
Increased automation is continually cited as a way of reducing working hours. Universal basic income is increasingly being spoken about as a response to concerns that jobs may be threatened by such automative processes.
(Photograph: Moritz Poll, Wikimedia Commons)
Trivia
If you’re looking to head towards a more European working week then working for HRH may not be for you. Buckingham Palace recently advertised a role to be her chauffeur, and although it paid £23-24,000 per annum and meals were included, it is a 48 hours-per-week role.
History
Records from the establishment of Roman London confirm that a seven day working week was normal because there were many more festival and feast days and without sick pay, payment protection policies, etc, people simply worked when possible.
Following the industrial revolution, work ceased to be seasonal and limited by daylight hours, as it had been. In the 19th century, the majority of working class people worked between 14 to 16 hours a day, six days a week at the behest of factory owners keen to maximise their profits. It was not unusual for the working day to begin at 5am, including for children.
Legislation introduced in the early nineteenth century regulated the working hours of children in workhouses and textile factories to 12 hours a day. They were poorly enforced and adhered to so over the next decades, further pieces of legislation followed and had an impact on workers’ conditions over a period of time.
In 1833, the Factory Act banned children under 9 from working in the textile industry, and the working hours of 10-13 year olds was limited to 48 hours a week, while 14-18 year olds were limited to 69 hours a week, and 12 hours a day. Government factory inspectors were appointed to enforce the law.
In the early twentieth century, trade unions and reformers lobbied parliament to consider the social and health costs of long hours and the economic value of leisure. The eight-hour day and the 48-hour week was recommended by government in 1919 and The Factories Act 1937 limited the working hours of women and young people (under 18s) to no more than 9 on any day and 48 in any week. The hours of adult men remained unregulated.
The practice of factories closing on Sundays was instituted in the 1920s and this spread to stipulations about shops, theatres, etc by the implementation of the Shop Act of 1950 which was an attempt to ensure observance of the Christian sabbath. By 1994 this was repealed by the Sunday Trading Act because attendance of church was waning and businesses had been legally or illegally trading on Sundays. During the debate about the repeal of the Act in the Commons, as recorded in Hansard, it was amusingly observed: The law is still littered with anomalies. It is possible to get a gin and tonic on a Sunday, but it is impossible to buy tea bags. It is possible to buy a fresh chicken on a Sunday, but it is impossible to buy a fresh egg. That must be the first occasion in the history of this country when the chicken comes before the egg. It is possible to buy a cigarette lighter, but not a fire lighter, which gives a new definition of the words “holy smoke”. It is possible to have a fish lunch at Wheeler’s, but it is impossible to go to a fish and chip shop to buy that most delectable British dish.
The Working Time Regulation 1998, implemented the EU Working Time Directive and was brought in to ensure protections for workers in relation to the number of hours they could work per week by law of 48 hours, and a minimum amount of leave they must be afforded. Of course, this was not always adhered to but legislation does set a tone of what should be considered a cultural norm in that country.
Bank holidays and paid leave also had to be vehemently campaigned for – only in the late nineteenth century did workers gain an extra four bank holidays on top of Christmas and Good Friday and workers had no paid leave except for these bank holidays. It took until 1938 to give senior workers one week of paid leave per annum, and even in 1993 when the EU Working Time Directive stipulating four weeks’ annual leave was agreed on 23 November 1993, the United Kingdom abstained from the vote, continuing to leave it to individual and collective bargaining in the work place. Finally, in 1998, the Labour government in the UK implemented the EU Working Time Regulations granting workers four weeks paid annual leave.