Working hours in Colombia

From Keynes’s dream to democratic recession

In 1930, economist J.M. Keynes predicted that, because the world would be much richer in the future, his grandchildren would work only 15 hours a week.

I wish this democratic premonition would resonate enough, so allow me, before addressing the issue related to the reduction of working hours, to express my concern, because today the world is showing a democratic setback, an authoritarianism that advances year after year and is becoming a trend.

The latest report from the non-governmental organization Amnesty International, published on April 21, 2026, describes a world of: “voracious predators, brutal looters hunting for unjust trophies.”

The “democratic recession,” a term coined by Professor Larry Diamond, is a fatality that reveals a degraded, low-quality form of democracy.

According to the document, this degradation is explained by “rapid and aggressive concentration of power” and by contempt for checks and balances.

72% of humanity, according to this NGO, lives under an autocracy. These are troubling figures, not because they are new, but because they have already lasted for more than a decade.

Today, authoritarian impulses also nestle in consolidated democracies. In Europe, parties that question fundamental rights are thriving.

A poll published in November found that in Spain, nearly a quarter of young people believe that an authoritarian regime can sometimes be preferable.

This situation demands that democrats and progressive sectors join forces in pursuit of a greater and better democracy so that Rights and Social Welfare become a reality.

The 8-hour day: a trade union struggle

History tells us that the significant social unrest in Europe during the second half of the 19th century had reached the United States, and that, in this context, trade union and left-wing political organizations gathered around the Eight-Hour Association to call for a mobilization for the establishment of 8 hours of work, 8 hours of study, and 8 hours of recreation per day.

Workers massively embraced this goal, to the point that the march on April 25, 1886, in Chicago gathered nearly 30,000 demonstrators.

The massive mobilization on April 25 led to another call for May 1, 1886, which was attended by 50,000 workers, launching a general strike across the United States to demand the working day.

At that time, workers at the McCormick harvesting machine factory had been on strike since February, and employers hired strikebreakers to counter the strike, which led to a violent confrontation with the police, who tried to violently disperse the strikers by shooting at them, resulting in a tragic toll of six deaths.

Amid this grief, union leaders called for another demonstration the next day, which was proceeding calmly until the hated inspector John Bloomfield appeared with a contingent of 180 policemen intending to break up the mobilization.

At that moment, a bomb was thrown that wounded 66 policemen. It was never known who threw the bomb, but an immediate harsh repression was unleashed against the union leaders, who were arrested and accused of having perpetrated the attack.

They were found guilty. Seven were sentenced to the gallows, and one to 11 years in prison.

Since then, May 1st has been established as International Workers’ Day, in homage to the Chicago martyrs and their fight for the 8-hour workday.

The ILO in the process of reducing working hours

Without a doubt, the regulation of working time, through limits on daily and weekly hours, is a fundamental pillar of labor law.

Since its founding, the ILO has promoted these limits with the aim of protecting workers’ health and safety and reconciling work and personal life.

In accordance with International Labor Standards, each country should advance, through Social Dialogue, toward an organization of working time that balances the needs of the worker and the demands of the productive sector, in a context of profound technological, social, and environmental changes.

In 1919, Convention No. 1 established a maximum of 8 hours per day and 48 per week for industry, with the main objective of preserving workers’ health and safety.

By the mid-20th century, most countries had set this legal limit in their national regulations.

But over time, the importance of reducing working hours was understood, and the pursuit of a 40-hour work week was taken up with greater urgency, as recognized by Convention No. 47 of 1935.

In Latin America, legal limits of 48 hours per week still predominate, but progress is being observed in this regard, despite the low ratification of the relevant conventions.

ILO instruments to reduce working hours

As I have been affirming, working time and its organization are essential aspects of working conditions, and therefore have been a central axis of the ILO’s work since its inception.

It is worth noting that the impact of working hours on workers’ health and safety was recognized in ILO Convention No. 1, adopted in 1919, the year this institution was created.

This convention enshrines the principle of an eight-hour day or forty-eight-hour week for industrial workers, and includes a limited number of specific exceptions that allow for the extension of normal working hours.

Subsequently, in 1930, ILO Convention No. 30 was finalized, extending these limits to commercial sector employees and office workers in industry.

Then a consensus was reached on ILO Convention No. 47 on the forty-hour week, adopted in 1935, and Recommendation No. 116 on the reduction of working time of 1962.

These instruments propose taking measures, according to each country’s circumstances, to gradually reduce the working day to 40 hours per week.

The path forward for working hours

In Europe and North Asia, this debate began decades ago.

In Latin America, union action has placed this objective as essential and demands the application of the ILO Recommendation to limit the “normal” workday to 40 hours, linking it to mental health, productivity, and well-being.

As an illustration, I recall the status of the 40-hour path.

Ecuador and Venezuela are the only Latin American countries that have established a 40-hour workweek.

Chile began its 42-hour workweek on April 26.

Colombia begins its 42-hour workweek on July 15.

In Mexico, the constitutional reform placed the issue at the center of public and business discussion.

In Argentina, the new Labor Modernization Law allows extending the daily workday from 8 to 12 hours, showing a direction opposite to the regional trend of reducing hours.

The rest of the region moves between 42 and 48 legal hours.

Colombia and its process towards the 40-hour workweek

We recall that in Colombia, the 1930s were crucial regarding working hours.

At that time, Law 129 of 1931 and Decree 895 of 1934 were created, establishing a 48-hour workweek.

With this framework, in 1935, Convention No. 47 of the International Labour Organization on the 40-hour week was welcomed, which: “declares itself in favor of the principle of the 40-hour week, applied in such a way that it does not imply a decrease in the workers’ standard of living.”

Since then, there were no modifications until the approval of Law 2101 of 2021.

Law 2101 of 2021 modified the working day

This law orders the reduction of the workweek from 48 to 42 hours, progressively over time, without reducing workers’ wages or affecting their acquired benefits.

The first reduction, from 48 to 47 hours, took effect on July 15, 2023.

The second, from 47 to 46 hours, took place on July 15, 2024.

The third, from 46 to 44 hours, took place on July 15, 2025.

The last, from 44 to 42 hours, is scheduled for July 15, 2026.

New working day without salary reduction

The reduction of the working day was established without reducing workers’ wages, which generated several opinions:

First, that it increases unit labor costs. Indeed, in Colombia this increase has been 2.1% in 2023, 2.2% in 2024, and 4.5% in 2025.

Second, that it improves workers’ well-being and health and facilitates harmony with their personal and family life.

Other aspects, such as employment, informality, productivity, and wages, are matters of discussion.

For example, it is argued, on the one hand, that increased labor costs could discourage hiring.

But on the other hand, that a shorter workweek could lead to more employment because a greater number of workers would be needed to compensate for the reduced hours.

Likewise, improvements in workers’ health and well-being could lead them to put more effort into their work, which in turn would result in higher productivity.

Alternatives contemplated in Law 2101 of 2021

Despite the above, there is consensus that, to avoid negative effects on employment, it is advisable to accompany the reduction of working hours with complementary policies such as:

Gradual implementation and labor adaptability.

The latter can include hybrid work and flexible working hours.

Providing subsidies to companies that maintain or increase their payroll can also be a complementary policy.

These and other alternatives have been contemplated in Law 2101 of 2021 and partly in the recently approved Labor Reform.

Not all sectors will be under the same rule

According to the opinion of the Ministry of Labor, within the framework of the Law, some people will have to continue working more than 40 hours per week.

The announcement is part of the progressive application of Law 2101 of 2021, which reduced the workweek from 46 to 44 hours as of July 15, 2025.

The Government commented that the obligation to work more than 40 hours is not generalized, but depends on the type of contract and the nature of the employment. Among the groups that will continue with a workday longer than 40 hours are:

Public sector workers, whose schedules are defined by specific rules and do not yet adjust to the reduction of Law 2101.

Minors with work authorization, who must comply with special rules.

Jobs in exceptional activities, where the nature of the operation requires extended shifts, such as transportation, health, or surveillance.

This means that while most private employees will see relief in their weekly hours, others will have to maintain longer workdays, with the incentive that any additional hour beyond 44 will be counted as overtime.

Surcharges and extra pay: how the new labor law impacts

It is worth noting that in Colombia, lost rights were revived with the approval of a Labor Reform in 2025, which introduced adjustments that modified the structure of surcharges and extra payments.

Since the entry into force of Law 2466 of 2025, the night surcharge began to apply from 7:00 PM onwards. Previously, the night shift started at 9:00 PM.

Pay for work on Sundays and holidays will gradually increase until reaching 100% in 2027.

This means that if a worker must work more than 40 hours per week, each additional hour will have a higher value for companies, which will compensate for work above the established workday.

The evolution towards reducing the working day is positive.

In Colombia, with the reduction of the maximum legal weekly hours, a reduction in the hours actually worked by employees of formal private companies is observed.

No job losses are recorded, even though the Minimum, Vital, and Moving Wage has risen on average well above 10% in the last three years.

Employment of formal salaried workers grew at an annual rate of 4.9%.

Even so, we are far from the 40-hour workday proposed by the ILO and, even more so, from the 15 hours per week longed for by Keynes in the 1930s.