The complexities of overtime work, and implications on the family
>I refer to the letter by Miss Tan Seow Wei (the Sunday Times, 27-07-2008) which referenced my comments on overtime work in Singapore that were earlier published in the Straits Times. I applaud Miss Tan for speaking out for the many employees who are in similar situations, and thank her for highlighting the implications of work on family life.
My comment, that "people with no life would have time for overtime" must be contextualised within the larger discussion on work-family dynamics in my interview (with Li Xueying) on the low birth rate in Singapore. In that interview, I highlighted the constraints on young adults' time and in particular, on how demands of paid work impinge on personal and family time. Data surfaced from surveys and qualitative interviews reveal patterns of "overwork" where employees report spending significant time on overtime work, both with and without additional compensation. One sociological perspective on the notion of overtime work is that family time or personal time is treated by employers as surplus work time. If an employee is expected to do overtime on a regular basis, then the assumption must be that the employee has "no life" and no other responsibilities outside of the office, thus the ease with which he or she can be expected to extend work beyond normal hours at the office.
People engage in overtime work for various reasons. Some do so because it is a personal choice - either to advance their career, accumulate surplus for future plans, or simply because they enjoy their work. As long as it is a free choice, and they choose to invest in work more than in other aspects of their lives, it is indeed their prerogative.
However, there are many - employees like Miss Tan - who do not have a choice. They have to work overtime because the salary from normal work is just insufficient. Or perhaps the demands of their job cannot be reasonably completed within the normal work hours. And there are others who abide by a work culture which sends strong signals that if you do not demonstrate commitment to your job through voluntary overtime work, you may risk losing out on promotional prospects or even losing your job.
Paid work is a critical aspect of everyday life in our society. Unless you are blessed with wealth, we all have to work to support ourselves and our families. In the discourse on marriage and parenthood decisions, we recognize that if you take time off to invest in growing a family, you will have to take time out from paid work. We can learn to work efficiently so that more can be accomplished in the work day, but we cannot will the day to have more hours. So as long as our society accepts overtime work as the norm, we are entrapping our young adults in a mathematical impossibility - always trying to squeeze more time from each day for family responsibilities without compromising on the number of hours spent at the office.
As we look towards creating a culture that encourages investment in family, it is critical that we relook the nature and expectations of paid work in our society. First, we must ensure that the compensation system is fair - where the salary drawn from a full-time job will be able to sustain a reasonable lifestyle. This will alleviate the need for employees to depend on paid overtime work as essential supplementary income. Second, we must scrutinize job demands to validate that the expectations are reasonable and can be completed in a normal work day. Third, organizational culture must embrace the importance of employees' personal and family time. If overtime work is necessary to meet critical deadlines, these requests should be made in advance. This important gesture signals that employees have a life after office hours, and alternative arrangements must be facilitated if they have to spend extra time at the office. Finally, as a society, we must continue to evolve a culture that respects investment in family, so that our young adults will favour growing family just as they favour growing careers.
Personally, I believe Singapore has come a long way. There have been important and significant changes in the way we position the family, and we are moving progressively towards a better work-life balance. However, Miss Tan's letter tells us clearly that a lot more must be done. My comment on overtime work was truncated in the original Straits Times report (Insight, 12-07-2008), and again in the Sunday Times (20-07-2008). Thus, the true essence of my intent was lost. I apologise to Miss Tan and to those in situations similar to hers, as there was never an intent to trivialise their commitment to family. On the contrary, I was articulating my frustration at the ease with which we seem to invoke overtime work. Perhaps the intent of the reports was to provoke critical insight to the work-family discussion. I thank the Editors for highlighting this important issue, and for allowing this opportunity for clarification.
