Make it work for you

T MAY be the excuse longsuffering commuters have been waiting for, as new research suggests that working fewer hours each week can be good for your health, protect the environment and even boost the economy.

A group of economists believes the working week should be reduced from an average of 40 hours to just 30 and cite Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, among others, as examples of countries that have shorter working weeks but no less productivity among workers.

Anna Coote, head of social policy at the New Economic Forum think-tank, which compiled the research, explained: “Having too little time to call our own can seriously damage our health and well-being, our family life, friendships and communities.

“No one should be made to work long and unsocial hours to make ends meet.” The authors of

argue that there is no correlation between average paid working hours and the strength of a country’s economy.

A quarter of all sick days taken are due to work-related problems.

Economists argue that, with a shorter working week, staff would be less likely to call in sick, be more productive, and this would create jobs for the unemployed.

A shorter working week would mean less money, but the authors claim that this would in turn be good for the environment.

The report says: “People have been working long hours to earn money to buy stuff that’s made and used in ways that inflict profound and irreversible damage on the ecosystem on which all life depends.

“It’s clear that time, money, consumer goods and planetary boundaries are interdependent. That’s a very good reason to think again about time and to change the way we value and use it, whether it is traded or not.

“Time is not just money. It is far more precious than that.”

The spare time could also be used to care for the elderly, an evergrowing issue as the ageing population increases, it suggests.

However, with the economy still experiencing low growth and unemployment still high, the strain on workers to put in longer hours remains high.

A recent survey by a life insurance group found that a third A STUDY found that getting a mammogram every other year instead of annually did not increase the risk of advanced breast cancer in women aged 50 to 74, even in thosewho use hormone therapy or have dense breasts; factors that increase cancer risk.

The findings, released by researchers at the University California, San Francisco, said women should have mammograms every other year starting at the age of 50 rather than having annual tests starting at the age of 40.

The controversial recommendations to delay the start of mammogram