Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2602.03884

Nota de Política Pública: Quanto de produtividade precisamos para reduzir a jornada de trabalho?

Abstract

Brazil's working-time debate is no longer only a choice between keeping the 44-hour week and moving directly to 36 hours. Alternatives around 40 hours, a five-day schedule and phased transitions are also on the table. This policy note asks a simple question for that choice: how much more productive would the economy need to become for each option not to reduce output in the short run? To answer, I combine Brazilian data on hours worked, informality, firm size and sectoral composition with a model of adjustment between formal and informal employment. The main result is that a move to 40 hours requires a productivity gain of about 2 percent. A direct move to 36 hours requires a much larger jump, between 6.6 and 8.2 percent, which is high relative to Brazil's recent productivity record. Informality also rises in the 36-hour scenario, by about 1.6 to 1.9 percentage points, but the main cost comes from fewer formal hours worked. The exercise does not say whether the reform should or should not move forward; it shows that size, timing and transition instruments change the arithmetic substantially. For policymakers, the message is direct: a phased route, with a stop near 40 hours, requires a much smaller productivity target than an immediate jump to 36 hours.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Victor Rangel. 2026-05-02. Nota de Política Pública: Quanto de produtividade precisamos para reduzir a jornada de trabalho?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.03884

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Local Media and the Shaping of Social Norms: Evidence from the Ebola outbreak

Media's influence on norms and behavior is widely recognized. Less is known about the role played by media being local. I examine this in a high-stakes context, the Ebola outbreak in Guinea. I exploit quasi-random variation in access to radio and the timing of a public-health campaign aired on community radio. I find that 12-17% of Ebola cases could have been prevented if places with access to a neighboring community radio station had instead had their own. Impacts are driven by radio being local rather than by ethno-linguistic belonging. Local media facilitates coordination in behaviors observed and sanctioned locally.

econ.GN

Productivity Shocks and Input Misallocation: A Decomposition

This paper asks how much input misallocation productivity uncertainty generates and at which stage of input decisions it arises. I separate revenue productivity by when each component is revealed and trace each into the gap between an input's marginal revenue product and its price. In six European countries, shocks revealed after an input is committed account for 20 percent of capital gap dispersion and 5 percent of labor gap dispersion. An unanticipated one percent rise in productivity raises the capital gap by 0.92 percent and the labor gap by 0.19 percent, because most of the shock passes into the wage.

econ.GN

When Do Type-Specific Wages Buffer Distributional Incidence in TANK?

When do relative wages buffer the unequal incidence of aggregate shocks? I derive a consumption-gap decomposition and a present-value condition for partial offset in a TANK model. An extension separates wage-setting demand elasticity from substitution between labor segments and allows each segment to contain both financial types. With a zero inherited wage gap and a same-sign discounted wedge, substitution above one gives offsetting earnings reallocation; substitution below one gives amplification. The channel disappears when financial types have identical segment exposure. Numerical experiments assess these mechanisms, shock persistence, policy feedback, and aggregate-IRF matching. In the nested perfect-alignment monetary benchmark, the peak consumption gap is about two-fifths smaller under type-specific wages than under the common-wage closure. These are conditional model comparisons, not empirical effect estimates or welfare rankings.

econ.GN