The pledge of a 4-day workweek, the polarization of the labor market and overwork issue

Michelle Jang (KILSH)

May 5 2025

中文    한국어    日本語

4.5 day workweek? or 4 day workweek?

With the early presidential election on June 3 just over a month away, the ruling and opposition party presidential candidates are rushing to release their pledges. Among them, there are pledges to reduce working hours, such as implementing a 4.5-day workweek or a 4-day workweek, aimed at the votes of office workers like me.

The 4-day workweek was piloted by companies in Europe and the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, and was introduced by several domestic companies one after another, becoming a hot social issue. However, when the pandemic ended and the economic downturn began, the companies that had introduced the 4-day workweek reverted to the 5-day workweek, citing the economic downturn as the reason, and the topic quietly disappeared as if it had never happened.

However, as it was announced as a key pledge of the ruling and opposition parties in this presidential election, social interest is being rekindled.

Working hours and wage gap between regular and non-regular workers

According to the '2024 June Employment Status Survey Results' announced by the Ministry of Employment and Labor on April 29, the average monthly working hours of regular workers were 162.2 hours, a decrease of 12.3 hours from the previous year, and the average monthly working hours of non-regular workers were 105.8 hours, a decrease of 5.1 hours from the previous year. On the other hand, the total hourly wage of regular workers increased by 11.7% year-on-year to 27,703 won(USD $19,93), but the total hourly wage of non-regular workers was 18,404 won(USD $13.24), a decrease of 4.7%, less than half of the increase in regular workers' wages. In conclusion, it was found that regular workers enjoyed more benefits from reduced working hours and increased wages than non-regular workers. Regarding these survey results, the Ministry of Employment and Labor explained that the widening wage gap by employment type last year was temporary, but experts analyzed that the dual structure caused by the rigidity of the domestic labor market became more prominent due to the recession.

Deepening polarization in the labor market and overwork issue

The polarization of the labor market is manifested in various aspects such as employment types and wage income, and the polarization structure of working hours is also becoming increasingly severe. Technological advancements have led to the automation of manufacturing production processes, and low-educated, low-wage workers who were engaged in simple manual labor are gradually experiencing fewer job opportunities and are being pushed out to part-time or daily jobs, suffering from employment instability and economic difficulties. On the other hand, highly educated, high-wage workers are working in professional service industries such as technology, finance, medicine, and law, and are facing the problem of death from overwork due to excessive workload and long working hours. 

According to the Statistics Korea announcement in February, the number of part-time workers last year was 8.81 million, accounting for 30.8% of the total employed population of 28.576 million. During the same period, the number of part-time workers working less than 17 hours a week increased by 10.2% from 2013 to 2.5 million. Workers who work less than 15 hours a week are classified as ultra-short-time workers, and they are not subject to the Labor Standards Act’s weekly holiday allowance, annual leave, and retirement allowance provisions, and are not required to join employment, health, or national pension plans, except for industrial accident insurance. Ironically, ultra-short-time workers are also found to suffer from overwork. In the case of ultra-short-time workers, since one job alone does not provide enough income to make a living, they often work two or three jobs at the same time, which ultimately leads to overwork.

Meanwhile, the 'Semiconductor Special Act' proposed by the ruling party in November last year was intended to strengthen the competitiveness of the domestic semiconductor industry and support innovative growth. The bill included provisions exempting semiconductor R&D workers from the 52-hour workweek cap and overtime pay regulations, drawing strong criticism from civil society and labor groups that it was an exceptional provision that encouraged death from overwork in order to reduce corporate labor costs.

What about the problem of fixed night work, which is gradually expanding, especially in the logistics and delivery platform industry? Night work is a class 2 carcinogen as defined by the World Health Organization, and it seriously worsens physical and mental health to the extent that workers themselves can feel it. Nevertheless, many daily workers are forced to do night work for economic reasons. However, there is still no legal regulation to limit such night work.

Issues to be resolved before introducing the 4-day workweek

The politicians have not responded to the above labor issues so far, and now, a month before the presidential election, they are promising to introduce a 4.5-day workweek or a 4-day workweek as a pledge to solve the problem of long working hours, which feels like a flashy event pledge to garner votes, which is disappointing. Of course, it is necessary to gradually reduce working hours to the OECD average level in the long term. However, before discussing the introduction of a 4-day workweek, shouldn’t we first examine the current polarized and fragmented labor market problems in various ways and make efforts to solve them one by one? In this situation, if a 4-day workweek is hastily introduced, there is concern that the current polarized labor market structure will become even more severe and fragmented. Many workers are still unable to fully enjoy the current 5-day workweek, and it is clear as day that they will be alienated again if a 4-day workweek is introduced.