Reducing the maximum working week to 37.5 hours has become one of the most relevant employment debates in recent years. Beyond the headline, what matters for a company with shifts is understanding the 'how': how the operation would be covered, how the impact would be measured, and what levers exist to maintain service without burning out the team.
1) What happened with the 37.5-hour proposal in 2025
In 2025, the debate reached parliament, but the legislative process did not advance as planned. On 10 September 2025, the proposal was returned to the government after amendment motions were approved, halting its processing. That does not mean the topic has disappeared: it means that, at a regulatory level, it did not consolidate through that particular route.
For HR and Operations, the practical reading is: there was no automatic change in the maximum working week through that initiative, but it became clear that there is social and political pressure to put it back on the table, whether through new proposals, social negotiation, or sector-level agreements.
2) Why it could come back (and in what formats)
The reduction in working hours could return as a new legislative initiative, as a partial reform linked to other measures (such as digital time recording), or as progress through collective agreements. In fact, many companies in certain sectors already operate with fewer than 40 hours per week through collective bargaining.
This creates a mixed scenario: even if there is no general law, there may be changes by sector or by company. Preparing is not 'guessing the Official Gazette'; it is building adaptability: knowing how many hours are actually worked, where they are concentrated, and what part is inefficiency versus genuine coverage need.
3) Impact on shifts: a simple example in a 24/7 operation
Imagine a centre that needs 24/7 coverage with a minimum of 5 people per shift. If today you cover it with 40-hour contracts and tomorrow the maximum working day is reduced, the number of hours available per person decreases. If nothing else changes, you will need to redistribute schedules, increase staffing, or adjust the service.
Preparation starts with basic numbers: weekly coverage hours needed, contracted hours available, and actual overtime. With a recording and planning system, you can simulate scenarios (37.5h, 38h, 4 days) and see the impact before it becomes an emergency.
4) Levers to absorb the reduction without losing service
The most undervalued lever is demand-based planning: adjusting coverage by time slot instead of always repeating the same pattern. Many operations have overcoverage during quiet hours and undercoverage during peaks. Correcting this reduces overtime and improves service even without increasing staffing.
Another lever is 'non-human' productivity: processes, tools, and the elimination of administrative tasks. For example, digitalising requests, automating approvals, and avoiding rebuilding schedules every week frees up middle management hours and reduces errors that generate rework.
5) Preparation checklist (without waiting for official changes)
First, measure: actual clock-ins vs schedules, overtime, incidents, and absenteeism. Second, define rules: shift changes, corrections, hour banks, and rest periods. Third, simulate scenarios: what happens if you reduce 1 hour per person per week and where coverage breaks down.
The win-win approach is clear: if a working hour reduction arrives, a prepared company adjusts with data, not improvisation. And even if it does not arrive, preparation delivers immediate benefits: fewer conflicts, better coverage, and less overloaded teams.