Why Vietnam can’t seem to move to a 40-hour work week

While many countries are debating a four-day work week, or even shorter working hours, the question of a standard 40-hour work week remains unresolved in Vietnam.

For years, one of the first things I have asked before accepting a job is about working hours. In my experience, most foreign direct investment (FDI) companies in Vietnam phased out Saturday work long ago. A five-day, 40-hour work week is treated as a basic management standard, not an employee benefit.

What is notable is that these companies have not become less efficient as a result. On the contrary, they tend to operate with stable systems, strong discipline, and sustained productivity. This reality often contrasts with the common argument that domestic businesses cannot afford shorter working hours because they are « still struggling. »

If many FDI firms have operated effectively on a 40-hour week for years, the issue may lie less in capacity and more in entrenched management habits.

Globally, the discussion on working hours has evolved. Many economies have moved beyond debates over the 40-hour threshold and are now asking a different question: how can the same amount of work be completed in less time? The focus has shifted from extending hours as a form of risk avoidance to improving efficiency and outcomes.

In Vietnam, however, the debate has dragged on without fully addressing a core issue, how labor productivity is created.

From an economic perspective, productivity is measured by value generated per hour worked. When working hours are the denominator, increasing hours does not necessarily raise productivity. In many cases, it produces the opposite effect: longer hours are used to compensate for low efficiency, rather than prompting improvements in processes, organization, or technology.

When labor is relatively inexpensive and abundant, businesses often delay investment in automation, machinery, and digital systems. Output targets can be met by adding shifts or working extra days instead of rethinking how work is done. Over time, this approach constrains productivity growth across the wider economy.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence have further exposed this imbalance. Tasks that once required hours, such as reporting, data aggregation, preliminary analysis, or drafting documents, can now be completed in minutes. Technology has reduced workloads, but the question remains: how is the saved time being used?

Continuing to rely on long working hours in this context risks wasting the benefits of technological progress and slowing the transition to more efficient work models.

Reducing working hours, therefore, is not simply a matter of employee welfare. It is also a management signal. When working time is limited, each hour becomes more valuable. Businesses are encouraged to streamline operations, reorganize workflows, and invest more seriously in technology. Employees, in turn, tend to work with greater focus rather than measuring contribution by time spent at the workplace.

The issue is not whether a 40-hour work week is too short. The more pressing question is why, after many years, productivity challenges in Vietnam are still often addressed by extending working hours rather than by improving how work is organized and performed. In an economy undergoing structural transformation, valuing labor means enabling workers to create more value in less time, not asking them to stay longer.

By An Truong Hoang – VnExpress.net – February 15, 2026