1. Quick overview
The German debate about changing the working time law centers on one sharp question: will the move from a strict eight-hour day to a weekly framework mean that workers are pushed into very long single workdays — up to 13 hours — or is the reform mainly about giving employers and employees more flexibility while keeping clear protections?
Employer President Rainer Dulger has been widely quoted saying, “Nobody will be forced into 13-hour days.” That sentence sums up the employers’ and government’s public line: the reform replaces a daily cap with a weekly limit while keeping EU rules, rest times and safeguards in place.
2. What the proposed reform would change
Under current German law, the normal working time is limited to eight hours per working day, with exceptions allowing up to ten hours if a later compensatory reduction is provided. The planned reform would shift the legal reference from a daily maximum to a weekly one: an average cap of 48 working hours per week, in line with the EU Working Time Directive.
That means single workdays longer than ten hours could become legally possible in individual cases, provided those longer days are balanced by shorter days or compensatory time off within the agreed reference period so that the average weekly limit is respected.
3. Employers’ and government’s position
Government and business stress that the change is about redistributing hours within a week, not increasing total working time. They argue the reform can help with flexibility, seasonal peaks and better work–life balance when used properly.
Employer assurances and the famous quote
Rainer Dulger, the employers’ representative, said in media interviews that “nobody will be forced into 13-hour days” and called fears of mass long workdays “unfounded.” Officials point to remaining protections such as EU limits and mandatory rest periods to underline that the reform is not intended to force extreme daily schedules.
4. Concerns from unions, opposition and critics
Unions including the DGB, dbb and ver.di, along with opposition parties and health experts, worry that removing a strict daily cap increases pressure on workers. They fear that, even if long days are formally voluntary or balanced over a week, employees will feel compelled to accept them in practice.
Examples cited by critics
- Media calculations show shifts of 12 hours plus breaks could be feasible under some proposals.
- In extreme scenarios, critics say a single week could temporarily reach very high totals if compensatory time is taken later.
- Even “voluntary” longer days may become de facto compulsory under workplace pressure.
Critics highlight possible health and safety consequences: longer single shifts and intensified weekly workloads can lead to fatigue, higher sickness absence and reduced ability to reconcile family and private responsibilities.
5. Legal safeguards that remain
Several legal protections would remain central under the reform: an average 48-hour weekly limit, mandatory breaks, and an 11-hour uninterrupted minimum rest period between working days. These limits derive from the EU Working Time Directive and are repeated in reform drafts.
How rest times work in practice
A concrete example: if a worker finishes at 22:00, an 11-hour rest rule means the earliest legal start the next day is 9:00. This is a clear, enforceable boundary that limits how a long workday affects the next day.
Practical constraints also exist in labour law: employers cannot simply lengthen contractual hours at will. Contracts, collective agreements, works council agreements and company rules all shape what is possible. In many cases a change requires agreement, a contract amendment or, if contested, a formal change notice or change dismissal procedure.
6. Time recording and enforcement
The reform proposals also foresee stronger and mostly electronic time recording. Courts (EuGH and national labour courts) have already stressed that employers must record start, end and duration of working time; drafts would tighten this with same-day electronic documentation and retention obligations.
Expanded time tracking aims to make excessive hours and misuse visible and sanctionable. Authorities could impose fines for violations, and reliable records would help workers, unions and regulators check compliance with weekly limits and rest periods.
7. What this means for workplaces and workers
For many employers — especially in construction, hospitality, care and seasonal businesses — a weekly framework can make scheduling easier and better match fluctuating demand. For workers, the outcome depends heavily on workplace governance: clear contracts, strong works councils, collective agreements and transparent time recording reduce the risk of pressure and misuse.
Key practical advice: employees should watch contractual terms, consult works councils or trade unions when schedules change, and insist on documented compensatory time off where long shifts occur. Employers should set clear rules, respect rest times and maintain reliable, auditable time recording systems.
8. Bottom line and what to watch next
Formally, the promise that “nobody will be forced into 13-hour days” reflects the combination of EU limits, rest rules, contract law and co-determination that remain in place. Substantively, much will depend on how the rules are written, implemented and enforced at company level.
Important keywords to remember
- Eight-hour day
- 48-hour weekly limit
- 13-hour day (public concern)
- Minimum 11-hour rest period
- Electronic time recording
- Contracts, collective agreements, works councils
- Compensatory time off
Observers should watch final legislative text for any explicit daily limits, how the reference period for averaging is defined, the strength of time-recording requirements, and measures to protect vulnerable groups. These details will decide whether flexibility comes with real protection or whether long single-day workloads become more common in practice.
