Why is it that Europeans (on average) work fewer hours than their American counterparts?

I suspect that higher worker productivity and a higher value placed on family and leisure time, allows for fewer work hours without compromising company profitability.

They’re probably a case of “differed from, not differing.” My guess is that Americans as a group developed workaholism, and the Europeans didn’t.
Of course, in some of those countries, many people work two jobs, one more official than the other.

Look into the Gini coefficient. Check the map. The lower the number more equitable distribution of wealth.

France: 32.7
Germany: 27
United States: 45
Mexico: 47.9
China: 47

And I would bet a lot of the hours spent up to 1960 were used for repairing the damage done from WW2

@johnpowell
I dunno if that has anything to do with the volume of vacations, though.

@Nullo :: If people make more for the same job they can afford more time off.

@johnpowell
This is assuming that they make more for the same job, and not less. Doctors Stateside, for instance, earn six figures. Doctors in Italy are State employees and are accordingly paid less.

@Nullo :: Good job picking a edge case. I’m thinking more of bricklayers, electricians, manufacturing, and your (typical) service job. You know, the jobs 90% of the people do.

Last I checked in around 2002 the CEO of GM made about 438 times what the person on the assembly line made.

Assembly = ~50K per year
CEO = ~22 million per year

You don’t find that often in Europe.

“Family Values,” I think, mean different things in each place. Here in the U.S., “family values” is something people wish to preach to other families, and in Europe, it’s something you show by spending time with your family. ;)

Seriously, though, it sounds like you’re looking for a social history of the last 400 years crammed into a Fluther answer.

Cultures enact policies that reflect the values held by their people. In the U.S., there’s that crazy protestant work ethic, combined with the rise of employers that have embraced scientific management and the willingness to treat people like machines. People respond in kind by realizing they’re disposable and work harder and give up more all the time, just for the privilege of keeping their job. (Like, if 40h is a normal week, some superstar is going to work 50. Then people have to start working 50 to not look lazy. And then suddenly 50 is the new normal and everyone is expected to do it. Then the superstar needs to work 60…)

In Europe, I don’t think things have gone that far yet. Things like “being closed on holidays” is a social norm in the U.S., but if the market warrants it, businesses will be open, screw the employees who want to see their families. In Europe, being closed on the holidays is law, so employees probably don’t feel “lazy” for wanting to not work that day. In U.S., there’s always been that “frontier” mentality of, “If you don’t like it, go somewhere else and start your own business”—even though there’s no frontier anymore. In Europe, they had to try harder to all get along, even after those crazy Puritans left for the frontier because they didn’t like it.

Mmm, Wal*Martization.

Because their Socialist overseers force them against their will to accept better hours for more pay, childcare, and national health care. Thank God in America we are free to be tired, broke and sick.

The US has had more of a true free market economy which on it’s own provided the perfect playing field for work harder longer…. make more money. I saw this trend explode in the late 60’s early 70’s when stores started staying open on Sunday’s. Prior to that the lower and middle classes were not so far apart and were more content with their working class status. Once the mindset changed in the late 6’s with parents prodding their kids to get an education and make a better life for themselves…the upward ladder climb began.

Work work work….and more work for more money.

@Cruiser :: So are you saying everyone that if everyone simply worked harder we could all be well off and own a home, have tolerable healthcare, retirement, stability, and the Americone Dream?

If you think that everyone can do well if they work hard prepare to pay 8 bucks for that Whopper at Burger king.

Or you are advocating some sort of restrictions on pay.

@johnpowell I am not advocating anything…simply stating my own observations. If I can make 6 figures a year…anyone for the most part can…if they want and choose to do so. I was a product of my parents pushing me to be better than the guy in front of me. It took me 45 years to do it…but I achieved my goals. How? I worked my ass off, I studied, I put in the time. Interesting part is there were numerous paths I could have taken and at least 3 others would have allowed me to achieve the same end goal.

I also have noted throughout my life how my friends who have achieved the “American Dream” all took similar paths. Nobody gave us what we have….we all worked our a$$es off to get here. The other half of my child hood friends made different choices for better or for worse.

No other place in the world offers such freedom of choice and opportunity…sad part is I may be soon talking in past tense about all my comments here and above.

coz we know how to have fun!!!

I suspect it has something to do with the adoption of socialist policies by basically every European state… even conservative types just accept many socialist ideas as being basic human rights.

@johnpowell
I picked that case because it’s the one that I know the most about. I knew a doctor, but I did not know any bricklayers, plumbers, or electricians.

I’ve worked in Europe, Asia, and the U.S. Asian workers work longer and harder hours than in the U.S. Europeans do indeed work fewer hours than we do here. They are no less productive and their product quality is equal or better than the in the U.S.

One thing I notice is that the greater the power and the pay difference between management and workers, the longer the workers hours, and the lower their pay. The reasons for this are, in my opinion, pretty simple. For the last 30 years American industry has been fighting unions and transferring out of the country. When you have a culture that looks at the employees as temporary and as “human resources”, you have no compunction against abusing them. After, the long term plan is to move production to a place where you have even more control over even lower paid employees. Another reason is that “American” corporations time frames have shortened. They no longer look at 20 years or even 5 years down the road. If a project or upgrade doesn’t pay off well in 6 months or a year, it is not attractive.

Maybe some of this has to do with the idea that we are a relatively new country and some of the culture is still thinking that we have to fight the world. The European culture has been around for thousands of years and they figure that they’ll be around for another couple thousand so what’s the hurry? Europeans industry is built on sustainability, not expansion. Many are even nationalist, they care about their country, even though they are part of the European Union.

Since the 70’s the U.S. corporate goal has been to expand and acquire,and place sustainability, their country, and their employees are a distant second in their considerations. The bigger the corporation the less the concern with non-management employees, the greater the concern for extreme profits and power. They don’t consider that this will ultimately case the demise of the company because the corporate leadership is well paid and protected.

The present U.S. system is very close to the feudal system in the middle ages. The kings protected and grew their territory by conquest. The Noble’s and knights did their dirty work and were well compensated. The surfs were property and easily replaced. They were convinced that their lives, family, and health belonged to their king. Not much difference between them and the hourly non-union employee whose health care comes directly from corporate headquarters.

Europeans, at least the ones I’ve met, work much fewer hours than we do in America. I attribute this to cultural differences. They also seem to have better health care systems so it would seem that while America is focusing on maximizing profit at the expense of its people (and the “illegal immigrants” of other places) by eliminating the middle class and turning the poor folks into what is essentially slaves, Europe still tries to put people first.

In my industry (mechanical engineering), you work 40+ hr weeks, get yelled at for taking lunches an hour long even though it is your lawful right to do so, and are expected to work overtime without compensation. Obviously, I quit. I may move to Europe one day if I can handle the cold weather.

@Cruiser re: ” If I can make 6 figures a year…anyone for the most part can…if they want and choose to do so.”

Yeah, that’s it. Us workin’ po’ folks just really don’t want success or money. We prefer to live paycheck to paycheck, hoping something doesn’t go terribly awry, ever. We like the thrill it gives us – the adrenalin rush. Yeah, WTF ever.

Re: “The US has had more of a true free market economy which on it’s own provided the perfect playing field for work harder longer…. make more money.”

Ironically, since products and labor are but commodities in a completely free market economy, working extra hard and overproducing is a ticket to ruin. Back in the late 1800s when the farmers on the great plains were overproducing grain, the glut of grain overshot the demand and crashed the price. The only way for farmers to earn enough to pay their bills, then, was to keep overproducing to make more money, and work hard… crashing the market with even more grain. Then, to make ends meet, they had to (you got it) grow more grain! And this is what the market does with commodities.

And that’s why capitalism works best with a little socialism on the side, like a garnish. Farmers produced themselves into a big hole (and would still do so today), but only with price supports can they really make a fair price. That’s why, back then, chicks were killed before they could glut the market with cheap chicken, and milk was poured out at the side of the railroads – to reduce the supply and keep prices up. Yes, even though people are starving. You could give it to them – but there goes your market.

@laureth I gave you a “Great Answer” because you seem to be one of the few that unrestrained capitalism is a great danger to our personal freedom. It invariable causes cycles of boom and bust. The present climate in the U.S. has been manipulated to make many people think that socialism = communism = dictatorship. Of course that is completely false. Big business in Europe and the U.S. supported Hitler because is was a “free trader too”. Of course labor and small business suffered a bit.

@laureth My answer had nothing to do with farmers overloading a commodity into market thereby ruining the pricing structure of that market by working too hard. Get real here. My answer was to highlight the ability to make choices and further your self and be rewarded however you so desire by making choices in your life and also applying yourself in such a way through extra hard work you can achieve almost any goal you set before yourself. I was once young and angry like you…for me an empty check book was a huge motivator to never let that ever happen again. It was my choice to work hard and make something of myself…not yours. You do what you see see fit for your future. Farming would be a great occupation and there are a lot of very wealthy farmers out there who work very hard for their keep. If you re-read my original answer I worked my a$$ off now 28 years in this line of work to get to where I am…it did not come easy.

Again if I can do it so can anyone else. I am smart not special.

@laureth I believe @laureth used farmers as an example or what happens in a unregulated market. His, and my point is that unregulated capitalism is just as bad or even worse than unregulated socialism. Like most issues, the answer lies somewhere towards the center.

@Ron_C I like your even keel answer but would also argue an unregulated “Free Market Economy” would regulate itself quite well…always has and always would if Gov would steer clear of meddling in it. Of course certain regulations are needed to protect elements of our economy with relation to preserving international trade abilities or national interests…otherwise the going up and coming back down cycles have always “balanced” itself as we have witnessed in the last 20 years. But IMO it is these very regulations you and others here speak of and of course greed that has made this last bottoming out so painful and lasting.

@Cruiser we have had the “unregulated capitalism” lesson. Depression is always the result. There were depressions in the 1800, 1900, and now in the 2000. Ironically, we avoided depression for a very long period after the crash in ‘29 because of new banking and stock market regulations. Reagan and finally Bush came along and rescinded those regulations, then surprise, surprise, a crash.

When you allow anyone to declare themselves a bank, when you remove the wall between investment and commercial banks, and when you allow a totally unregulated derivatives market you insure a crash. Allowing the stock market to become nothing more than off-track betting you defeat it’s purpose. Further when you give tax incentives for companies to move off shore you erode your countries economic base. How can you have a country if the only jobs are in fast food restaurants or as day traders?

@Ron_C your examples are precisely why we should eliminate much of these regulations. Free market cycles historically have lasted an average of 17 years. The up down cycle is the natural cause and effect of inflation and deflation based on the transfer of and growth of wealth created from growing economies and after time it will correct itself. But this last “real” cycle has lasted much longer than it should have because of regulations set in place to attempt to further preserve the wealth that was created. GWB started this early in his term and yes unregulated banking practices was the nucleus of this latest “correction” but this too was “allowed” and even encouraged by the demands placed on policy makers to make available loans and credit to their constituents by grassroot organizations like Acorn without much forethought to the consequences. Well we propped up our economy far too long and even these desperate attempts to stimulate our economy by borrowing more money we don’t have from the taxpayers has only amplified and delayed the inevitable crash I believe we have yet to see and feel the full effect of.

I for one like freedoms and the risk reward afforded by this fine country we live in and if anyone doesn’t like or have the stomach for the thrill ride a relatively unregulated economy can provide, seek out the safe haven of a socialized economy but not here on this soil please!

@Cruiser the economy does indeed cycle. The other fallacy is that wealth will trickle down to the lower strata. What we have seen was that wealth accumulates at the top and if, in the real world, it was reinvested in manufacturing and building, money would probably indeed circulate as you describe.

The problem, this time, was that the money that “trickled up” was used to increase the wealth of the wealthy using stock manipulation, trade in worthless securities, and essentially defraud retirement and other funds.

Then low interest rates were used to make bad loans and soak up any money that remained at the lower levels of our society.

This is capitalism just like the way that the robber barons used to create and hold their wealth. That is the problem. It would have never occurred if we had responsible banking regulation. It would never have occured if business schools included a strong ethics programs. There will always be cheaters and crooks. In the past they knew they were crooks, now business schools are teaching the ways to make as much money as possible without mentioning that there are social costs involved with these practices.

The irony is that the bankers and traders think that they are just doing a job, nobody seems to care about the consequences of their actions. When they do think about it they see that the people that caused the problem are making tremendous bonuses without paying any price for their cruel and immoral practices.

@Ron_C Regulations responsible or otherwise will do nothing to stop the inherent nature of greed and the pursuit of wealth the quickest easiest way possible. Stricter laws and penalties will do what no regulation could do to stop the Bernie Maddofs of the world. The slap on the wrist fines they get along with the threat of a few years in a white collar minimum security prison does IMO very little to provide incentive to not steal the unwitting public blind. Increasing the fines and penalties along with hard time in the county lockup would do far more to bring down the rate of unbridled abuses in our business and financial community than any regulation ever could.

@Cruiser So, you think that people who go to school to become social workers, teachers, police officers, firefighters, administrative assistants, or those that didn’t have access to higher education, or chose to continue a family farm, – or any other relatively low wage profession – don’t work their asses off?

Or, are you saying that those people could (and should) all make the choices you’ve made so they can get the best out of a free-market economy? If so, who will put out that fire at your house, grow your food, and teach your children? Not to mention the fact that if everyone did the same thing you do, your profession would become undervalued. There are bigger issues to consider, here. I truly don’t understand this kind of viewpoint.

@Cruiser I didn’t say that the law will stop the Bernie Madoff’s of the world but I am saying that the movers and shakers need to know where the line is drawn and like you said face real hard time when they cross it. I think it is strange that you can go to a more severe prison and spend longer time there than if you steal $10 million dollars for the teacher’s pension fund.

I think that stock fraud, ponzi schemes, insider trading, and other forms of grand larceny should have as severe a penalty as for rape and murder. Those people ruin hundreds or thousands of lives, not just one or two. Sentencing should be based on the number of people harmed. For instance Madoff should have received the death penalty. He is responsible for as many deaths as your typical serial killer. Worse the people usually suffer before they die. I think there should be a special, harsh, prison for the people that designed derivatives and that sold them.

Many modern Americans are under the impression that the amount of hours they work at their job corresponds to their self-esteem.