WORKING TIME: WHY MORE MEANS LESS

In round terms, there is a 5% loss in productivity for every five hour increase in the length of the working week. The more prolonged the period of overtime working, the greater the loss in productivity.

This is one of the principal findings in the latest study in labour productivity published by the CIoB.

It confirms the conclusions of research carried out by the US Business Roundtable and by the European Construction Institute. The ECI states that overtime as a variation on normal day work is the most widely used pattern. It is the first resort of contractors seeking to speed work. But it is the least effective. 'Scheduled overtime working does not contribute to improved performance,' it concludes.

And 'there is a danger that its use to overcome problems in the short term will reinforce the industry's overtime culture, inflate construction costs, and inhibit long term improvements in performance.'

That 'overtime culture' is defined in terms of an average construction working week of 45 hours, even in a period of recession. In some sectors, notably civil engineering, the average is still above 50 hours. That, in turn, indicates 60 or 70 hour weeks being quite common.

European legislation to limit working hours may yet force a radical rethink of this pattern.

The ECI suggests that shift working can provide a viable tool for reducing project timescales, including double day shifts and rolling shifts. At the same time, it is pointed out that there are frequently practical constraints on the use of more flexible working patterns.

'It is virtually a truism that productivity reduces during overtime working as fatigue takes its toll,' commented the FCEC's David Chapman.

'However, the nature of the job will dictate the working pattern. Opencast coal mining can usually accommodate shift working. But with road works, for example, you are frequently restricted in the hours you can work. It is not like manufacturing. You just have to make use of the time available. Then again, you have to weigh up the additional managerial and supervision input that goes with shifts.'

Chapman's case is vividly illustrated by the recent court ruling which refused to allow contractors to work extra hours on the Jubilee line. By the same token, client pressure has accelerated innovative working patterns in the engineering construction sector. And the high average level of hours worked on UK sites must raise serious doubts.

George Henderson, TGWU chief, adds that there is a pay dimension here. 'If you pay low basic rates, the men themselves demand the long hours of overtime in order to get their earnings up to a reasonable level,' he said. 'An example was the Thames Barrier project where men were working up to 12 hours a day. We said that was unreasonable. And three eight-hour shifts were introduced. This lead to a strike over lost earnings. But the union stood firm against the action, and rightly so.'