Exploring the promoting effect of working time reduction on life satisfaction using Germany as a case study

With growing attention to individual rights and work-life balance, working time has emerged as a key determinant of life satisfaction alongside income. Prior research has documented relationships between working hours and life satisfaction, including cultural differences (e.g., Americans working longer than Europeans) and possible non-linearities (e.g., inverted U-shaped relationships). Gendered patterns are notable: women often prefer part-time work to accommodate caregiving and personal interests, while men more often work full-time or overtime to provide for families or pursue career success, implying potential cross-partner effects on well-being. Despite Germany’s prominence in European research, comprehensive examinations of the direct effect of working hours on life satisfaction, the mediating role of health, and cross-partner effects in Germany are limited. This study aims to: (1) assess whether reduced working hours promote life satisfaction in Germany; (2) quantify health’s mediating role in the worktime–life satisfaction nexus; (3) examine how income levels shape preferences for working hours; and (4) test cross-partner effects of working hours among partnered couples.

Overtime work generally reduces life satisfaction, with distinctions between mandatory and voluntary overtime. Mandatory overtime may yield extra income and achievement but often increases work-life imbalance and stress, reducing satisfaction; voluntary overtime can raise well-being in some contexts (e.g., employed fathers in Australia). Cross-country differences are pronounced: French employees may be satisfied with longer hours, while British employees prefer shorter weeks, shaped by welfare and tax systems. Part-time work supports work-life balance, especially for women; households with children benefit when women can work fewer hours. Cross-partner effects have been documented: husbands’ full-time work may increase wives’ happiness, and cultural norms influence these dynamics (e.g., Korea, US/UK time-use findings). Overall, expectations for partners’ work hours reflect local culture and income, with leisure time often more critical for men’s life satisfaction in some studies.

Data and sample: The study uses the European Social Survey (ESS) Round 8 (2016–2017), focusing on Germany due to its large population and strong trend toward reduced working time. After excluding refusals, no answers, and “don’t know,” 2852 valid respondents are retained overall, with final estimation samples around 2488–2489 depending on model specification. Germany’s average annual working hours declined from 1973 (1970) to 1376 (2016). Variables: Dependent variable is self-reported life satisfaction (“All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays?”), treated as ordinal with five levels. Key independent variables are weekly paid and unpaid working hours. Controls include gender, age, education, social inclusion, income, and health status. Model: Ordered probit is employed to account for ordinal outcomes and unobserved heterogeneity; ordered logit is used for robustness. The latent index model y* = βX + ε is estimated via maximum likelihood with thresholds α1 < α2 < α3 < α4 partitioning five satisfaction levels. Marginal effects (dy/dx) are computed to interpret changes in probabilities for each satisfaction category. To assess mediation by health, the study compares OLS specifications with and without the health variable and follows Mo (2001) to decompose the effect of worktime on life satisfaction into direct and indirect (via health) components. Additional analyses: (1) interactions between working time and income-group dummies (low-, mid-, high-income), centered to mitigate multicollinearity; (2) disaggregation of working hours into four categories (1–30, 31–40, 41–50, 50+ hours) and gendered, cross-partner regressions to test partner effects; (3) robustness checks replacing life satisfaction with happiness and using ordered logit.

- Working time is negatively associated with life satisfaction in Germany. In ordered probit (Model 1), the coefficient on worktime is −0.0023 (p<0.10); in OLS, it is −0.0018 (p<0.05) without health (Model 2) and −0.0013 (p<0.10) with health (Model 3), indicating that including health attenuates the direct effect of worktime. - Mediation by health: Worktime negatively affects health (−0.0022, p<0.05), and health positively affects life satisfaction (0.2181, p<0.01). The mediated effect via health is −0.0005; given a direct effect of −0.0013, approximately 27.78% (~28%) of the total effect operates through health. - Marginal effects: A one-standard-deviation decrease in worktime (16.4218 hours) reduces the probabilities of being very unsatisfied, unsatisfied, and fairly satisfied by about 0.16%, 0.16%, and 1.15%, and increases the probabilities of satisfied and very satisfied by about 0.49% and 0.82%, respectively. - Income heterogeneity: Interaction models show that for low-income individuals, the interaction worktime×low-income is negative and significant (−0.0091, p<0.01), indicating they prefer fewer hours; for high-income individuals, worktime×high-income is positive and significant (0.0060, p<0.01), indicating preference for longer hours; mid-income interactions are not significant. - Cross-partner effects and hour-categories: Considering all hour ranges (1–168), wives’ life satisfaction rises when husbands work fewer hours; the effect is stronger when wives work part-time (1–30 hours). For under-employed husbands, wives’ longer hours can increase husbands’ life satisfaction, consistent with specialization within households. - Controls: Income, age, social inclusion, and health are positively associated with life satisfaction; gender and education are not significant in the main models. - Robustness: Results are consistent when replacing life satisfaction with happiness (worktime −0.0022, p<0.10) and when using ordered logit.

Findings support that, in Germany, shorter working weeks enhance life satisfaction, aligning with European preferences for leisure and work-life balance, higher taxation, and cultural norms relative to the US. The analysis shows that health is a key pathway through which working time affects life satisfaction, underscoring the importance of avoiding excessive hours that elevate stress and harm well-being. The heterogeneous preferences by income reveal that high-earners may derive additional utility (monetary and non-monetary, e.g., status, autonomy) from longer hours, while low-earners value reduced hours more. Cross-partner dynamics suggest household specialization and complementary roles: wives’ well-being benefits when husbands work fewer hours (especially if wives work part-time), whereas under-employed husbands’ well-being can increase when wives work more hours, consistent with theoretical models of household labor allocation. Overall, life satisfaction reflects a balance between positive effects of additional income and achievement from longer work and negative effects of reduced family time, stress, and health risks. Cultural and institutional contexts shape this balance, with Europeans tending to value the process and leisure more than Americans, and with social inclusion and health playing significant roles.

This study, using ESS 2016–17 data and ordered probit models, shows that reduced working time is associated with higher life satisfaction in Germany. Health is a significant mediator, explaining about 28% of the worktime–life satisfaction link. Preferences vary by income: high-earners tend to prefer longer hours, low-earners shorter hours, and mid-earners show no clear preference. Cross-partner effects are confirmed: shorter hours for husbands raise wives’ life satisfaction, and longer hours for wives can raise under-employed husbands’ life satisfaction. Robustness checks using happiness as the outcome and ordered logit models support the findings. Policy implications include limiting excessive working hours, enforcing overtime compensation, and adopting flexible work arrangements while considering gender differences. Future research directions include addressing endogeneity (e.g., fixed-effects approaches), identifying threshold effects of working hours on life satisfaction via threshold models, and exploring additional mediators such as social trust, safety, and digitalization.

- The cross-sectional design limits causal inference and raises potential endogeneity concerns (e.g., reverse causality between well-being and working hours). - Self-reported measures (life satisfaction, health, worktime) may introduce reporting bias. - Generalizability is limited to Germany’s institutional and cultural context. - Threshold effects of working hours on life satisfaction are not identified in this study. - The analysis focuses mainly on health as a mediator; other potential mediators (e.g., social trust, safety, digitalization) are not modeled explicitly.