Ethical Issues Relating to the Health Effects of Long Working Hours

Introduction

The article is about the Ethical Issues Relating to the Health of Long Working Hours

among employees and written by Allard E. Dembe. According to the author, numerous

studies have confirmed that long working hours and shift work raises the chances for workers

to be injured, to be fatigued, stressed, and to suffer from medical ailments, such as

hypertension, diabetes, cancer, and heart disease. Even more concerning, the fatigue, stress,

and health problems created by excessive working hours can have spillover effects for

employees such as diminished performance, mistakes in judgment, and errors in performing

work activities. These overflow effects are perhaps most worrisome when the affected

worker is employed in a position that is critically endanger public safety and welfare, such

as employee working in health care, law enforcement, air traffic control, nuclear power

generation, fire-fighting team or emergency services. However, long work hours are more

common among high earning professionals and among certain occupational groups, such as

academics, health care workers, business owners and managers, and emergency service

workers to meet up the society needs. One recent study found that 62% of high-earning

professionals work more than 50 hour per week (Hewlett and Luce, 2006). They might also

end up jeopardizing others in the community as well.

Summary

This article reviews the history of concerns about long working hours and the current

scientific evidence regarding its effects on the worker’s health. The ethical implications of

irregular shift work and long work-hour schedules are considered. Relevant ethical

considerations involve mandatory or unpaid overtime and the possibility of employer cruelty,

the political basis for government regulation of working hours, potential limits on voluntary

assumption of risk, societal benefits accruing from the equitable distribution of available

working hours, gender-based inequities related to working hours, and employer

responsibilities for protecting individuals who are not employees from the spillover effects of

demanding work schedules. In addition, studies show that fatigue-related errors made by

employees working in these kind of demanding schedules can have serious and adverse

repercussions for public safety.

Issues

The health effects of long working hours and shift work

Most evidence indicates that employees who engage in overtime work, working 12 or

more long hours per day, or else working 60 or more long hours per week can badly have an

effect on their health and well-being. Obviously, working in such schedule and condition

increases the levels of tiredness and stress among the employees. Research of studies have

found that long working hours increases the risk for hypertension and cardiovascular disease

(Hayashi et al., 1996; Liu et al., 2002; Nakanishi et al., 2001; Yang et al., 2006) . Other

studies have detected relationships between long hours at work and musculoskeletal injuries

(Lipscomb et al., 2002; Trinkoff et al., 2006), diabetes (Kawakami et al., 1999), and

chronic infections (Mohren et al., 2001). Evidence also suggests that overtime and extended

work schedules can lead to depression and other and psychological conditions (Glass and

Fujimoto, 1994; Shields, 1999). Meanwhile, unconventional shift work including night

shifts, evening shifts, and rotating shifts, have also been shown to potentially endanger

workers’ health. Working in these kinds of shifts can disrupt circadian rhythms and sleep

patterns, resulting in stress, fatigue, and impaired performance among affected workers (A °

kerstedt et al., 2002b; Costa, 2003; Harrington, 2001; Hughes and Stone,

2004;Knutsson, 2003). Studies have also shown that unconventional shift work can increase

the risk of suffering sleep disturbances (A° kerstedt, 2003; DeMoss et al., 2004; Lee, 1992),

digestive problems (Caruso et al., 2004; Segawa et al., 1987), cardiovascular disease

(Bøggild and Knutsson, 1999; Kristensen, 1989), particular types of cancer, (Davis et al.,

2001; Hansen, 2001; Schernhammer, 2003), and reproductive problems (Axelsson and

Rylander, 1989). Furthermore, studies have shown that demanding work schedules, and

particularly unconventional shift work, can have a substantial effect on workers’ moods,

behaviours, and social relationships (Scott, 2000). People working in unconventional shifts

are more likely addicted to alcohols and tobacco use (Kivima¨ki et al., 2001; Trinkoff and

Storr, 1998), feelings of isolation and depression (Scott and LaDou, 1990), and stumble

upon family problems (Colligan and Rosa, 1990; Simon, 1990; Staines and Pleck, 1984).

Limits to voluntary assumption of risk

There are many workers who choose to work overtime shifts and appreciate the

opportunity, because it provides them an opportunity to earn extra wages. Workers in

industries in which wages or salary base on performance goals, for example commission

sales, software development, and investment banking, will normally choose to work long

hours to meet their financial targets. The decisions to work voluntary overtime schedules are

consistent with utility maximization assumptions in which employees seek longer hours to

gain higher wages. Nevertheless in the health care and other public-service industries, the

rationale for preventing substantial harm to an individual through voluntary assumption of

incrementally increased risk related to working long hours is supplemented by additional

ethical obligations not to harm others. Previously, criminal charges were filed against a nurse

in Wisconsin for administering a wrong drug which caused the death of a 16-year-old

pregnant patient. The nurse had voluntarily worked two following eight-hour shifts and was

scheduled to start another 8-hour shift at 7:00 AM the following morning (Wright, 2007).

Effects on the welfare of others

Employees’ long working hours can create other kind of problems with miscellaneous

indirect effects far from the workplace. For example, fatigue-related human errors in job

performance can result in product safety and production mishaps. Product recalls and quality

defects in the electronics and automobile manufacturing industries have been attributed to

workers’ extended schedules (Japan Press, 2006; Pfesser, 2001). It has been estimated that

production shutdowns and productivity losses caused by worker fatigue costs the U.S.

economy approximately $55 billion annually (Circadian, 2000). Besides, long working

hours can exert a variety of negative effects on worker’s family and community. Employees

working long hours report high levels of stress and work–family conflict. Marital

relationships can be impaired as the result of working long hours. For example, a study by

Grosch et al. (2006) found that employees working more than 48 hour per week were

significantly more likely to have disruptions in family life compared to those working

ordinary hours. A survey conducted by Cornell University’s Institute for Workplace

Studies (1999) found that the risk of divorce increases as a purpose of the number of hours

worked per week. The Cornell study also found that high levels of work–family conflict

jumped dramatically for people working more than 50 hour per week. In addition, evidence

suggests that children suffer when their parents work long hours (Lehmkuhl, 1999).

Inequitable distribution of employment opportunities

Mainly, most employers are cost efficient. The cost efficiency for the employer is the

result of incrementally reduced costs for recruitment and training, benefits, organizational

overhead, and related employment costs. Top management strive to sustain the

manufacturing with the existing workers. Meanwhile, gender-based inequities could result a

greater proportion of women (especially whom with young children and with other care-

giving responsibilities) than men who generally prefer part-time assignments and shorter-

hour shifts. Long work hours also could be burdensome for older employees and as a result

drive some elderly workers into early retirement (Keese, 2006).

Conclusion

The author’s opinion is that there are sufficient grounds for considering overtime and

long working hours (e.g., an average of more than 12 per day or 60 per week) to be a known

health and safety hazard in the workplace. Consequently, the writer believes there is an

ethical obligation to protect the affected workers. In theory, much could be accomplished

through voluntary efforts of employers and workers to develop work scheduling guidelines to

ensure adequate rest breaks and recovery time between shifts, along with reasonable

limitations on accumulated work time during a standardized period such as a week or month.

But is that enough? Generally, when a new threat to occupational safety and health is

recognized and verified through scientific investigation, then state and federal agencies, such

as the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, the National Institute of Occupational

Safety and Health, Mine Safety and Health Administration, and other agencies have moved

forward with rule-making activities, determination of permissible exposure limits, and, if

needed, enforcement under the general duty clause until such time as specific standards are

promulgated. In the end, the writer believe that the ethical considerations regarding long

working hours are to be thought of as questions about the type of society we want to create. A

basic tenet of employment in most societies is that employees should have the freedom to

choose whether or not to work, what occupation to pursue, and how much work to undertake.

If the pressure to work dangerously long hours begins to infuse employment relationships, or

if workers to work beyond their capabilities or to work hours that they consider to be

inappropriate and unacceptable, then some of the basic rights and privileges in our society are

in jeopardy of being eroded. If people voluntarily take on demanding work assignments that

compromise family relationships and that are harmful to our children, then our entire social

and community will be imperfect. A rational society will ensure that suitable jobs are

available for as many people who want to work as possible, and that the jobs are safe and

properly compensated, allowing not only for a beneficial work life, but also for a life that has

time for rest, health, family, leisure activities and the achievement of one’s personal values.

Reflection

I truly agree with the author’s point of view and statements. I do believe that every

human being have their own method to lead their cycle of life, as well as managing their

work environment including rights in taking and making decisions. Formerly there are many

labour unions and worker activities support a shorter standard workweek or workday, which

believe to enhance unemployment and create a more fair distribution of wealth and resources.

However, many business leaders and economists have opposed enacting regulations to limit

the working hours, fearing by doing so would interfere with efficient market processes, and

stifle economic growth. Therefore, I suggest that perhaps if the government and private sector

higher up the wages or salary of employees’, rest, holidays and limit’s the working hours,

certainly the ethical issues relating to the employees health will be solved. Thus, it will also

motivate the workers to thrive in their job or workplace. Besides, it will open up new

opportunity to the unemployed and the society will not be imperilled.