The rate of workers whose death from an excessive workload is recognized as an occupational hazard significantly jumped when they were forced to work an average of 52 or more hours a week. Even a government agency concluded that a work week of 52 or more hours increased the risk of death from too much work.

If the government’s new work hour policy allowing up to 69 hours of labor a week (based on a six-day work week) is passed, workers can be forced to face bigger threats.

According to the data from Basic Income Party legislator Yong Hye-in based on the status of work-related deaths from cerebral and cardiovascular diseases based on weekly work hours in 2019-2022, which she received from the Korea Worker’s Compensation and Welfare Service, on April 5, 73.3% of deaths from “overwork” or too much work were recognized as an occupational hazard when the worker had worked an average of 52-60 hours a week for twelve weeks prior to the illness. This was nearly double the rate of deaths recognized as work-related when the worker worked 48-52 hours a week (38%).

According to the data, the rate of deaths from “overwork” recognized as an occupational hazard showed a close correlation with working hours when the work week consisted of 52 or more hours. When workers worked an average 56-60 hours a week for twelve weeks prior to the disease, 83.7% of their deaths were seen as work-related, while the rate rose to 92.2% when they worked 60-64 hours a week. When the work week lasted for 64 or more hours, 91.5% of the deaths were recognized as an occupational hazard, similar to the rate in a 60 to 64-hour work week.

The correlation between the rate of deaths from “overwork” recognized as an occupational hazard and working hours was not clear when the work week was shorter than 44 hours. The rate was 9.3% when workers worked on average less than 32 hours a week for twelve weeks prior to the illness and 13.0% when they worked 32-36 hours a week. However, the rate dropped to 8.5% when workers worked 36-40 hours a week and bounced back up to 15.6% when they worked 40-44 hours a week.

If businesses are allowed more flexibility by providing a wide range of overtime management periods from a month, a quarter, six months, to a year, it would allow them to have workers concentrate their labor at a particular period. Unfortunately, the rate of deaths from an excessive workload recognized as occupational hazards was extremely high in such circumstances as well.

According to the data lawmaker Yong received, 72.8% of deaths from sudden or short-term “overwork” were recognized as an occupational hazard (33 of 45 applications were approved). “Sudden overwork” refers to an excessive workload due to a rapid change in working environment and due to abrupt and unpredictable tension, agitation, fear, and surprise related to work 24 hours prior to the disease. “Short-term overwork” refers to cases where working hours or workload suddenly increase by 30% or more compared to the usual a week prior to the disease.

Yong Hye-in said, “The statistics on occupational hazards related to death from an excessive workload confirm that no matter what supplementary measures they release, expanding working hours to more than the current maximum of 52 hours a week cannot stop the increasing risk of death from ‘overwork.’” She called for the government to “stop going against the history of shortening work hours and stop trying to extend work hours, which workers oppose.”