By FMTeam The recent debate over Larsen & Toubro’s (L&T) proposed 90-hour workweek has garnered significant attention, with INSEAD graduates voicing their concerns about the policy’s implications. The policy, which suggests increasing work hours as a path to organizational productivity and innovation, has sparked a wider discussion on work-life balance, employee rights, and fair compensation in the corporate world.
The graduates raised five pointed questions in response to the proposal, challenging its practicality and ethical implications. The controversy highlights the growing tension between traditional corporate expectations and modern workforce demands for fairness and flexibility.
The Controversy: L&T’s 90-Hour Workweek Proposal
The issue began when a statement from L&T suggested that a 90-hour workweek could be an effective approach to boost productivity and innovation. While the proposal is not official policy, the idea has generated widespread backlash, particularly from employees, corporate professionals, and academic institutions.
INSEAD Graduates’ Response
Graduates from INSEAD, one of the world’s leading business schools, have raised five critical questions challenging the 90-hour workweek proposal:
- “If I give you 90 hours, will you give me 90 hours’ pay?”
- The graduates questioned whether the increased workload would be met with proportional compensation, highlighting the imbalance between employee contributions and remuneration in extended work schedules.
- “Where’s the evidence that this works?”
- They demanded data to back the claim that longer work hours lead to higher productivity, pointing out studies that indicate diminishing returns and burnout beyond a certain threshold of work.
- “What about mental health and well-being?”
- With workplace mental health gaining increasing recognition, the graduates emphasized the detrimental effects of excessive working hours on employees’ physical and emotional well-being.
- “How does this align with modern workplace values?”
- The group pointed to the global shift toward work-life balance, hybrid models, and flexible schedules, questioning how such a policy fits with contemporary workplace culture.
- “How do you retain talent with such policies?”
- Finally, they raised concerns about employee retention, arguing that demanding work schedules could push top talent toward companies offering better work-life balance and progressive policies.
Corporate and Public Reactions
L&T’s proposed 90-hour workweek has ignited a storm of reactions across industries and social media platforms. Critics argue that the idea is outdated and regressive, ignoring the realities of a modern workforce that values flexibility and well-being. Supporters, however, view it as a potential pathway to driving discipline and maximizing output in industries requiring high levels of commitment.
Labor rights organizations have also criticized the move, citing potential violations of labor laws and ethical concerns. In India, the legal workweek typically stands at 48 hours, with provisions for overtime regulated under the Factories Act.
Productivity vs. Burnout Debate
The controversy has reignited a long-standing debate about the relationship between work hours and productivity. Research from global organizations, including the International Labour Organization (ILO), suggests that longer work hours often lead to burnout, reduced efficiency, and increased health risks.
Countries like Japan, known for their culture of overwork, have experienced declining productivity and a rise in health issues, leading to national reforms aimed at reducing work hours.
The Bigger Picture: Changing Work Cultures
L&T’s proposal stands in stark contrast to the evolving corporate ethos, where flexibility, work-life integration, and employee satisfaction are considered essential for long-term success. Many companies globally are experimenting with reduced workweeks, such as the four-day workweek, to enhance productivity and attract top talent.
In India, the tech and startup sectors have already embraced hybrid and flexible work models, making the 90-hour workweek idea seem misaligned with the broader trend.
What’s at Stake for L&T?
L&T is one of India’s largest conglomerates, with a legacy of innovation and engineering excellence. However, the backlash over the workweek proposal poses reputational risks. It could alienate younger professionals and skilled talent, who are increasingly prioritizing workplace culture and flexibility when choosing employers.
For a company striving to compete on the global stage, adhering to modern workplace norms will likely be key to retaining its position as a leader in the industry.
Conclusion
The controversy over L&T’s 90-hour workweek highlights a deeper divide between traditional corporate practices and the modern workforce’s expectations. While the company’s intent to drive productivity may be genuine, the proposed approach has raised serious questions about its feasibility, fairness, and alignment with global workplace standards.
As the debate continues, L&T—and other companies considering similar measures—must weigh the costs of overburdening employees against the benefits of adopting progressive, employee-centric policies. Ultimately, the key to long-term success may lie in fostering innovation through balance, not burnout.