Malta Chamber: Four-day work week would hurt Malta's 'low productivity' economy
Chamber warns against Alex Borg's proposal as it calls out 'populist narrative'
The Malta Chamber has joined employers in expressing concern about Alex Borg’s pledge to four-day work week trials.
In a statement on Wednesday, the Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry warned that a four-day work week would have “significant negative effects in several key areas, including productivity, output, labour costs, and international competitiveness.”
“Sectors that rely heavily on physical presence or high hourly output – such as manufacturing, hospitality, health and care homes – would face immediate challenges,” it said, noting that Malta’s economy currently relies on “foreign labour and low productivity.”
Ignoring that "could worsen labour shortages and ultimately harm national productivity," it said, highlighted concerns for sectors such as manufacturing, hospitality, health and care homes as especially relevant.
The warning follows one issued by the Malta Employers Association earlier this week, as well as criticism of the proposal made by Employment Minister Byron Camilleri.
Speaking during a televised interview last week, Nationalist Party leader Borg said that he would like to trial a four-day work week within certain public sector departments.
“If we see an increase in efficiency, productivity and returns, then we will give the private sector incentives to introduce a four-day work week,” Borg said.
The PN had already floated a similar proposal in 2022, calling for incentives to be introduced to encourage private companies to trial a four-day work week.
In its statement, the Malta Chamber said that the implementation of any such project needed careful analysis.
“Before any policy or pilot program is introduced, a comprehensive national socio-economic study is essential to assess the short and long-term impacts across all Malta’s economic sectors. Such research would capture the interconnectedness of Malta’s different economic sectors, something which an ad-hoc isolated pilot programme cannot,” it said.
The Chamber implied the proposal was "populist" - a word also used by the MEA to criticise it.
“As election frenzy start building up, political parties should steer away from descending into the traditional populist game of which party or candidate promises the most – ultimately, unsound measures and irresponsible proposals will be borne by taxpayers,” it said.