The 35-hour workweek suggestion comes from a working group appointed by the centre-left Social Democrats.
The group is one of several such bodies tasked with developing new policy proposals for the party ahead of the 2026 election.
READ ALSO: ‘Reassess your cultural background’: Key tips for foreign job hunters in Sweden
Annika Strandhäll, former climate minister and spokesperson for the proposal, emphasised the potential benefits at a press conference.
“We want to prove that a reduced full-time measure is both possible and positive for society,” Strandhäll said.
“We believe that by shortening working hours, more tasks will need to be shared among more people. With Sweden’s high unemployment rate, a large reserve of labour is available to fill those roles.”
She explained that the proposal is rooted in the belief that a shorter workweek could lead to a more sustainable working life and improved health for workers, among other things.
A pilot research project
The working group has laid out a plan to test this reform through a research project involving 5,000 workers, who would work 35 hours per week for a year.
This trial, targeting public sector workers employed in the welfare state, will aim to gather data on the impacts of shorter working hours.
Based on the findings, the group will look into ideas for gradually introducing a 35-hour workweek across all sectors by 2035.
“We believe it’s important to implement this gradually over a reasonable period. When you look at our entire reform package, it creates more opportunities for more people to enter the labour market,” Strandhäll told the Swedish news bureau TT.
She also highlighted that studies on similar reforms, such as those conducted in France, showed positive social effects.
“This is a natural step to take if you look at how to create a more sustainable working life. We believe that this is something that Swedish wage earners want,” she said, according to the national broadcaster SVT.
Criticism and concerns
However, the proposal has already sparked criticism, particularly from the Liberal Party and Swedish business leaders.
Johan Pehrson, the leader of the Liberal Party (Liberalerna), said that reduced working hours would inevitably lead to lower productivity.
“If you work less, you also get less done. There is no getting away from it,” Pehrson told SVT.
He warned that the proposal could result in a loss of 250 billion kronor in tax revenue, a sum exceeding the combined costs of Sweden’s judiciary and defence sectors.
Swedish businesses share Pehrson’s concerns.
In a report published earlier this summer, the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) suggested that such a reduction in working hours could lead to an 8.1 percent decrease in GDP.
“Swedes already have some of the shortest annual working hours in the OECD, yet the debate over reducing work hours has resurfaced. According to the report, cutting the workweek from 40 to 35 hours could lead to a long-term reduction in GDP by 509 billion kronor per year -equivalent to 8.1 percent of GDP or 46,000 kronor per person annually,” the organisation pointed out on its website.
The current framework
Today, around 80 percent of white-collar and 74 percent of blue-collar workers in Sweden are employed in roles requiring 40 hours of work per week.
The regulation of working hours in the country is governed by the Working Hours Act (Arbetstidslagen), which outlines the maximum number of hours an employee can work each week.
Under the current legislation (i.e., the “regular working time and on-call time” provisions, Section 5 of the Working Hours Act), a standard full-time workweek is set at a maximum of 40 hours.
Other proposed changes to working life
Strandhäll’s working group, which has been active throughout the year, is one of eleven groups tasked with developing new policy proposals for the Social Democrats ahead of the next parliamentary election.
Another notable proposal from this group is the introduction of a “security pension,” which would allow workers to retire after 40 years of work regardless of their age.
The proposals presented on Friday are not the Social Democrats’ final policy but will serve as a foundation for discussion at next year’s party congress.
Please whitelist us to continue reading.
Rare L decision by SD,without increase in productivity this is impossible to implement
It seems like what the Social D’s are saying is that room would be made in the job market for more people to accomplish the same amount of work. This should lower the number of people on the dole & add tax payers.
It seems like the detractors are seeing the loss of 12.5% productivity per working person and they’re not seeing those hours replaced by anyone. This, not surprisingly, leads to economic catastrophe, per their descriptions.
Am I missing something (not rhetorical – I often do 😉 )?
Sounds like typical Strandhäll populism, perhaps to woo Vänsterpartiet and appease the left of her own party. But Centerpartiet, whose support the social democrats have needed in the past, are dead against shortening working hours. The idea would also go against the ‘Swedish model’ where working hours and salaries are the realm of the unions directly with employer organisations. SKR (Swedish Municipalities & Regions) would also be against the move. So, good luck to Strandhäll, she’ll need it.
Assuming that employers would have to hire staff to fill the 12.5% reduced working hours to maintain production levels, then their payroll costs would also increase by 12.5% for same said productivity. How will this be financed? Also, the theory of using unemployed workers to fill the created vacant jobs sounds fine, but in practice it’s difficult to replace qualified professionals with (at least in part) reluctant unemployables. Many sectors are already screaming for qualified staff.