40-hour Workweek: A Handout from Employers That Won’t Improve Workers’ Lives

ByMarat Barca

This article by Marat Barca originally appeared in the March 11, 2026 edition of Rebelión.

It is important to note that the demand for a 40-hour workweek was first raised by the International Workingmen’s Association, a workers’ organization founded in 1864 and led by the founding fathers of scientific socialism, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. In their writings and public speeches, they defended the limitation of working hours as a necessity to curb labor exploitation and the increase in capital profits, advocating for free time for workers. Therefore, when the group in power today announces the enactment of the 40-hour workweek as a product of the employers’ goodwill, we must pause and reflect on this news.

Reducing the workweek was already a long-standing demand. Mexico is the only country in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that had not modified its working hours since the 48-hour workweek was established in the 1917 Constitution. Why is the measure being enacted now, and why will it not take effect until 2030, the year of the presidential elections in Mexico? This initial question should prompt us to consider what lies behind it. Logically, if companies currently operate under a 48-hour workweek as a mandatory requirement for employees, how can we understand that, through a legislative measure, capital will now passively allow 8 hours of surplus value extraction to be lost? Let’s examine some aspects we should consider to form a more informed opinion.

One initial response is that, under the 40-hour workweek, Mexican workers will normalize working more than 48 hours, since their pay will now be higher, thus denying them their right to rest, as is currently the case. The motto of capital in cahoots with the Mexican state is: if you want to earn more, you have to work more. If we examine the calculations, this principle is not fulfilled. In the scenario of the 40-hour workweek initiative, if a worker were to work 9 extra hours per week at double pay, they would receive 1,206 pesos more per month than they would under the mandatory 48-hour workweek. Furthermore, it is important to note that the reform now includes 12 hours of overtime pay at 200 percent, whereas the previous law only allowed for 9 hours.

Any Mexican worker knows that, in most cases, overtime is mandatory; it’s not optional, as they’ve tried to make us believe. All it takes is for the shift supervisor to order, “We have orders to fulfill, or we need to recover from financial difficulties!” for the worker to work longer hours than their regular shift, under threat of disciplinary action or dismissal. Furthermore, during economic recessions or health crises like the one that occurred globally in 2020, overtime is considered recovery time due to the economic shutdown.

When analyzing the implementation of the work schedule reform, it is essential to consider the environment and production conditions in which Mexican workers operate. Work intensity is linked to the strain on the workforce, while productivity is related to scientific and technological development. It is widely known that Mexico’s economy is dependent on foreign imports and technologically underdeveloped. Multinational corporations with foreign capital, possessing the real capacity to modify working hours, employ a limited number of workers. What prevails in labor relations is the increase in the intensity of workdays and the non-payment of overtime, a condition for increasing profit margins. In other words, the Mexican worker’s desire to work only 40 hours per week will not be fulfilled by a presidential decree.

Finally, the global trend indicates that if we only improve working hours while leaving other conditions unchanged, we will face implementation problems. Many companies in Mexico, especially small and medium-sized businesses with capital investment that employ the largest number of workers, have been forced to reduce or suspend operations to save costs, and those workers who remain employed have been forced to extend their working hours.

Reducing working hours is absolutely necessary. According to a statement published on May 21, 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) warned that long working hours caused 745,000 deaths from stroke and ischemic heart disease (narrowing of the coronary arteries, a proven health problem caused by prolonged work hours). In this regard, clinical studies related to overwork conducted by the group of experts have shown that working nine hours a day increases the risk of mortality by 3.7 percent and the risk of cardiovascular events by 6.9 percent.

The reduction of the workweek to 40 hours, far from being a workers’ victory resulting from the struggle of Mexican workers, is presented as a calculated concession from the political powers that be. Beneath the mirage of a long-postponed social right lies the trap of normalizing even longer workdays through overtime pay, deepening exploitation and denying the right to rest. In a country like Mexico, where the intensity of labor replaces investment in technology and overtime is de facto mandatory, this measure does not address the root of the problem: a dependent economy that survives at the expense of its workforce.