The Mystery of Why a Complete Two-Day Workweek Doesn't Necessarily Mean You're Not Violating the Labor Standards Act

Last time, I touched briefly on the Labor Standards Act and wrote about why a complete two-day workweek is the modern standard.

In that context,
An employer shall not have a worker work more than 40 hours per week, excluding break times. (Labor Standards Act, Article 32, Paragraph 1)
An employer shall not have a worker work more than 8 hours per day, excluding break times, for each day of the week. (Labor Standards Act, Article 32, Paragraph 2)

In other words, I explained that there is a principle that working hours must be no more than 40 hours per week and no more than 8 hours per day.

Therefore, if you implement a "complete two-day workweek" where you work 8 hours a day for 5 days and take the remaining 2 days off, there should be no legal issues... right?

Here, I would like to introduce a curious case where, despite strictly ensuring two days off every week, you somehow end up violating the Labor Standards Act.

What "per week" effectively means is "per month"

First, there is something you need to know.
40 hours per week is a rule that is viewed on a monthly basis.
The standard wage payment period is one month. You cannot pay every two months (I will explain why on another occasion).

So, to be precise, it is better to say 40 hours per week.

The working hours that fit within this range change depending on the month.
January, March, May, July, August, October, and December have 31 days, so
31 ÷ 7 × 40 = up to 177 hours (fractions are rounded down).
April, June, September, and November have 30 days, so
30 ÷ 7 × 40 = up to 171 hours.
February is 160 hours (165 hours in a leap year).

Therefore, if a daily shift is 8 hours,
22 days in a 31-day month (176 hours),
21 days in a 30-day month (168 hours),
and exceeding 20 days in a 29 or 28-day month means
you will exceed 40 hours per week.

Therefore, if you were to work 22 days in a 30-day month,
the working hours would be 176 hours, which exceeds the 171-hour limit for a 30-day month, so you would be in violation of Article 32, Paragraph 1 of the Labor Standards Act.

Even with a complete two-day workweek, you can exceed the statutory working hours

Now, let's get to the main point.
Is it really possible to exceed the statutory working hours as described above while implementing a complete two-day workweek?

The conclusion is, it happens quite normally.

Most recently, last month, June 2023.
Let's assume a company has fixed days off on Saturday and Sunday.

The number of working days would be 22.
Since June is a 30-day month, if the number of working days exceeds 21, you will exceed 40 hours per week. (Assuming an 8-hour workday with no short-time shifts).

Perhaps because this point is quite misleading, it is not uncommon for people to believe that a company with a complete two-day workweek cannot be in violation of the Labor Standards Act.
It is a complicated matter, but in this case, Article 32, Paragraph 2 of the Labor Standards Act (up to 8 hours per day) is not violated (to take an extreme example, even if you work 23 or 24 days, you are not violating Article 32, Paragraph 2 of the Labor Standards Act). However, when viewed on a per-week basis, it exceeds 40 hours, so you end up violating Article 32, Paragraph 1 of the Labor Standards Act.

So, what should be done?

Not a complete two-day workweek, but a complete nine-day-off-per-month system

I will teach you the easiest way (in my opinion).

Fix the number of days off per month at nine.By doing this, you will never exceed 40 hours per week.

Sometimes I am asked how many working days should be set for a certain month, but thinking in terms of the number of working days is confusing because it fluctuates.
In that respect, if you set a rule of "nine days off per month," there is no need to worry, making management extremely easy.
(It is also acceptable to set it to eight days only for February in non-leap years.)

I will write about the details on another occasion, but in reality, it is absolutely, positively easier (or rather, necessary) to manage working hours and working days on a yearly basis. With this method, you can properly determine the number of days off as nine per month, and 108 days per year (or 107 if February is eight days). I really recommend doing this.

Therefore, if you are unsure how to schedule shifts, please try "setting nine days off per month."
Of course, there is the argument: "Since the only days off are Saturdays and Sundays, what do I do if there are only eight Saturdays and Sundays?" I will explain that on another occasion as well. For now, if you cannot get nine days off just by using Saturdays and Sundays, please give employees one day off on a weekday on a rotating basis.
Labor management is by no means easy. That is precisely why adopting a simple method is beneficial for a company.

What about the welfare industry?

I have written at length up to this point, but in our world of welfare, we cannot schedule shifts as neatly as the calendar suggests.
Many industries, including the welfare industry, cannot take time off according to the so-called "calendar." That is why it is necessary to create rules that are suitable for such industries.
Next time, I would like to talk about shifts in the welfare industry.

That is all for today. Thank you very much.