During the parliamentary consultation debate on the planned reform of working time organisation, DP President Carole Hartmann welcomed the fact that the government is preparing an action plan to strengthen collective agreements in Luxembourg, in line with the country’s obligations under European Union law.
The MP and Mayor of Echternach stressed that both employees’ day-to-day realities and the circumstances of businesses are constantly evolving and that the legal framework must evolve accordingly. She noted that the traditional nine-to-five working day is no longer the norm and argued that working time arrangements should better reflect the diverse needs of today’s workforce.
While Luxembourg’s labour law provides employees with a high level of protection, she argued that it no longer adequately meets the growing demand for greater flexibility, particularly when it comes to reconciling work and family life. Although some issues can be addressed through collective agreements, the legal framework itself also needs to be modernised in order to eliminate legal uncertainty. In her view, several key aspects of labour legislation require reform.
First, the maximum daily working time should be allowed to increase at the employee’s request or through a collective agreement. The DP places particular emphasis on social dialogue within companies, where employers and employees should be able to negotiate fair and balanced arrangements. Such flexibility would need to be enabled by labour law, without introducing a general extension of the working day. Any such arrangement would always require the employer’s agreement.
Regarding rest periods, Luxembourg law currently requires a minimum of 11 consecutive hours of daily rest and 44 consecutive hours of weekly rest. The DP believes it would be worth considering a system that is more closely aligned with the EU standard of 35 hours of weekly rest. In smaller businesses, such flexibility could be granted only at the employee’s request and with the employer’s consent, while in other cases it could be regulated through collective agreements. This would allow the two weekly rest days to be scheduled more flexibly—for example, on Wednesdays and Sundays instead of the traditional weekend.
On work breaks, Carole Hartmann pointed out that current labour law only provides for one unpaid break during the working day. The DP could envisage allowing additional breaks, provided that clear limits prevent working days from becoming excessively long. Such a change could enable employees, by agreement with their employer, to work from home in the morning before travelling to the office later in the day. This would reduce time spent commuting during peak traffic hours and help ease congestion. Under such an arrangement, the journey from home to the office would count as an unpaid break rather than working time.
Carole Hartmann also emphasised that the DP does not see these forms of flexibility as unilateral decisions by employers. They should always be based on mutual agreement between employer and employee. Collective agreements remain the preferred instrument for establishing such arrangements. Where no collective agreement exists, an individual agreement should be negotiated between the employer and the employee.
Finally, she stressed that the DP’s objective is not to prescribe specific solutions, but rather to encourage a constructive dialogue between the social partners on how Luxembourg’s labour legislation – the Code du Travail – can better reflect today’s realities by combining greater flexibility with robust employee protection.
