By PEDRO HENRIQUE M. ANICETO*
By combating the 6x1 scale, we are not only providing better living conditions for workers, but also laying the foundation for a stronger and fairer economy.
The discussion about ending the 6x1 work shift, which is currently being discussed in the National Congress through the Proposed Amendment to the Constitution (PEC) authored by Congresswoman Erika Hilton, is at the heart of a necessary transformation in labor relations in Brazil. The current model, which imposes six consecutive working days followed by a single day of rest, reflects a logic of capitalist exploitation, where workers' time is expropriated in the name of maximizing production and profits.
This model, characterized by the intensification of work and the precariousness of living conditions, is deeply rooted in a context of structural inequality that limits the well-being of the working class. The proposal to reduce working hours, which aims to reduce this exhausting workload without implying a reduction in wages, emerges as an alternative not only to guarantee better living conditions for workers, but as an economic strategy aligned with Kaleckian theory, which considers income redistribution as an essential factor for sustainable and inclusive economic growth.
From a Marxist perspective, the working day in capitalism is one of the main means of extracting surplus value, that is, wealth generated by the worker and appropriated by the capitalist without corresponding compensation. The 6x1 scale, by extending working hours without increasing wages, represents an extraction of absolute surplus value, that is, a more intense exploitation of the worker's time without compensation in terms of well-being.
Marx, when addressing the capitalist production process, argues that the labor force, like any commodity, is subject to the dynamics of intensification of production to maximize capital profit. However, this intensification, when imposed by long working hours and precarious working conditions, not only compromises the health and quality of life of the worker, but also, over time, weakens the very basis of production, by exhausting the physical and psychological conditions of the workers.
The proposal to reduce working hours without reducing wages, as advocated by the PEC, seeks to reverse this dynamic, redistributing working time and, therefore, promoting a more balanced reorganization of class relations in Brazil.
Furthermore, Kaleckian theory provides an economic framework for understanding the impacts of a measure such as reducing working hours on the broader economy. Michał Kalecki, influenced by Marxist criticism, proposed a reading of capitalism that recognizes power asymmetries between social classes as determining factors for economic performance. For Michał Kalecki, the dynamics of economic growth are profoundly influenced by the distribution of income between capital and labor.
In his analysis, he argues that income distribution directly affects aggregate demand, that is, the level of consumption and investments that sustain economic growth. Reducing the working day, by providing more free time and, consequently, increasing workers' purchasing power, can result in a substantial increase in the demand for goods and services. Since the working class has a greater marginal propensity to consume, this increase in the wage bill would have a positive multiplier effect on the economy, stimulating production and, consequently, creating more jobs.
Thus, from a Kaleckian perspective, reducing working hours would not only be a measure of social justice, but a strategy to stimulate economic growth by strengthening internal demand, which is crucial for the economic recovery of Brazil, which is going through a serious crisis of inequality and stagnation.
It is important to note that the proposal to reduce working hours, despite being seen as an improvement in workers’ conditions, faces substantial resistance from business and conservative sectors. Critics, such as those who support the neoliberal agenda, argue that reducing working hours would result in a drop in productivity and an increase in production costs, compromising Brazil’s competitiveness in the global market. These arguments, however, disregard the complex dynamics of the real economy.
As Michał Kalecki notes, competitiveness depends not only on a supposed reduction in costs, but also on the ability to generate aggregate demand and improve workers’ living conditions. Criticism of the PEC proposal, which associates the reduction of working hours with a drop in productivity, ignores the fact that excessive and exhausting working hours, such as the 6×1 scale, actually generate a vicious cycle of falling per capita productivity.
Workers’ physical and mental exhaustion leads to increased indirect costs such as absenteeism, occupational illnesses and low work engagement. Rather than boosting competitiveness, continuing long hours harms the economy’s overall performance by reducing efficiency and innovation.
The resistance of the business class to the reduction of working hours also reflects the logic of maintaining the status quo, where capital seeks to preserve its capacity to extract surplus value without redistributing the fruits of productivity. However, the view that reducing working hours would represent an unsustainable cost for companies does not take into account the empirical evidence from countries that have implemented shorter working hours, such as Germany and France, and obtained positive results for both workers and the economy.
International experience shows that reducing working hours can actually boost competitiveness by increasing worker motivation and improving their health, which translates into greater efficiency and lower turnover in the workplace. By providing more free time without affecting pay, redistributing working hours has the potential to create a virtuous cycle of growth, where productivity gains are shared more equitably, stimulating consumption and generating more jobs.
In the Brazilian context, where informality and precarious work are structural characteristics of the market, the proposal to reduce working hours without reducing wages represents a historic opportunity to reconfigure class relations and promote more inclusive and sustainable development. Brazil is facing a profound inequality crisis, where exhausting working hours are prevalent in the most vulnerable sectors, such as commerce and services, which concentrate a large portion of the black and low-income population.
Reducing working hours, by increasing workers’ free time and guaranteeing decent wages, not only improves their living conditions, but also has a direct impact on the redistribution of wealth, which is essential to combating economic and social inequalities. The proposal, therefore, should not be seen simply as a labor measure, but as a long-term economic strategy that aims to reverse the logic of expropriation of workers’ lifetimes and, at the same time, foster an economic cycle of sustainable and inclusive growth.
Finally, the PEC currently being processed in Congress is an opportunity to move towards a new configuration of labor relations in Brazil, where the redistribution of working hours translates into redistribution of income, stimulating the domestic economy and strengthening the working class. This proposal is not only a demand for social justice, but a smart economic strategy that aims to increase aggregate demand and generate a virtuous cycle of growth and job creation.
By combating the 6x1 scale, we are not only providing better living conditions for workers, but also creating the foundations for a stronger and fairer economy, where the worker's lifetime is valued, and not exploited for the benefit of capital accumulation.
*Pedro Henrique M. Aniceto is studying economics at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF).
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
