Working hours: Government propagates old-boy worldview – Transformation is different – ​​a column

One could almost be grateful to Chancellor Friedrich Merz (69) and his CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann (47) for initiating the discussion: How much work is needed for how much prosperity, who is responsible, and how can Germany's productivity and competitiveness be brought forward again? But then: almost grateful.

At times, it seems as if the spokesmen of New Old Work are primarily conducting the discussion with themselves: clarifying here, backpedaling there, praising young people for their hard work here, criticizing them for their demands there. The conclusion: We all have to work more for our prosperity – but no one has to feel like they're being targeted, and when in doubt, they can point the finger at any other vaguely demographically defined group. In any case, one problem seems to be our work-life balance.

Questions remain. To ask just one very obvious one: What, if not a balanced individual work-life balance, is a sign of prosperity? And to follow up with a more fundamental question: Why, in 2025, are people still receiving attention, political responsibility, and a reputation for economic competence who understand productivity as a linear function of working hours and progress primarily as an increase in output? If LBBW CEO Rainer Neske (60) has an even better idea than the abolition of a public holiday discussed in March and, at the end of May, calls for the abolition of—you guessed it— two public holidays—why is that a headline and not a punchline?

Once again: It is fundamentally good that the importance of work and the shaping of its framework are being discussed. However, as in almost all transformation discussions, the scope for solutions remains narrow. Despite the discursive ramp-up, the political and creative imagination remains regrettably limited. Once again, no desirable future scenarios are being outlined that go beyond "securing our prosperity." Instead, "The Danes can do retirement until 70 too!" is seen as a good argument, and carefully cherry-picked statistical data around questions of care work and equality serves as a sound data basis.

This is the point at which a column entitled "Forward always!", appearing here for the 50th time, must repeatedly encounter: the stubborn insistence, which affects all areas of design and also blows through this discussion, to be an industrially positioned supernation for all time, whose business model and operating system have always been sustainable and only need a few clever digital updates.

However, the fact that software-based value creation, data-driven structural change, and a general technological paradigm shift are challenging the performance and competitiveness of Germany's core industries has been ignored for several legislative periods. There may have been ambitions in other directions within parts of the "traffic light" coalition. But even there, strong forces of inertia prevailed, and a belief in old strengths and recipes dominated. The CDU and CSU do not have a monopoly on this—they merely supplement it with patriarchal meritocracy.

The discussions about the future that should actually be taking place are unfortunately being sidelined by the ideologically driven propagation of one's own old-boy worldview – disguised here as a call to tackle things together. This is particularly tragic because such discussions would certainly also include additional work, productivity, overtime, flexibilization, and retirement models. However, this is done in the spirit of communicating change and a vision that replaces the worn-out ideas and promises of industrial capitalism. Anyone who truly wants to shape the transformation, who wants to position the economy and society for the future, should recognize the radical changes in the world, promote the knowledge society – and, at the same time, truly bring work and life into balance across society as a whole.

In any case, what's currently on offer won't ensure progress and competitiveness—and we haven't even talked about artificial intelligence and decision automation yet. We don't want to overwhelm the discourse with science fiction.