In October 2023, NR Narayana Murthy, co-founder of Infosys—one of India’s leading IT services companies—sparked a heated debate when he suggested that Indians should work 70 hours per week to boost the country’s productivity and economic growth.

His remarks triggered widespread discussions about work-life balance and employee well-being in Indian workplaces.

Despite the controversy, Murthy stood firm.

“I don’t believe in work-life balance… I have not changed my view; I will take this to my grave,” he reiterated during an interview with CNBC-TV18 in November, a year after the uproar seemed to have settled.

Last week, a similar statement by SN Subrahmanyan, chairman of Larsen & Toubro (L&T)—one of India’s largest multinational conglomerates specializing in engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC)—rekindled the debate.

While addressing employees, Subrahmanyan was questioned about the company’s practice of working on Saturdays.

His response, however, went a step further:

“I regret I am not able to make you work on Sundays. If I can make you work on Sundays, I will be more happy because I work on Sundays. What do you do sitting at home? How long can you stare at your wife? Come on, get to the office and start working.”

Subrahmanyan also shared an anecdote about a conversation he had with a Chinese individual who remarked that China could surpass the United States because Chinese workers typically clocked 90 hours a week compared to the 50-hour workweeks of Americans.

Using this as an example, he urged his employees: “If you want to be on top of the world, you have to work 90 hours a week. Get going, guys.”

L&T chairman SN Subrahmanyan’s statement sparks outrage

Subrahmanyan’s comments sparked widespread reactions from industry peers and mental health advocates alike.

Prominent Indian actress and mental health advocate Deepika Padukone, who leads The Live Love Laugh Foundation, described the remarks as “shocking,” emphasizing the responsibility of senior leaders to set a more balanced tone.

Anand Mahindra, chairman of the Mahindra Group—one of India’s largest business conglomerates and a major player in the automotive industry—offered a measured response:

“We need to focus on the quality of work, not the quantity. It’s not about 40 hours, 70 hours, or 90 hours. What matters is the output and the value it creates.”

Mahindra further noted that significant impact could be achieved even within 10 hours of focused work.

In response to the backlash, L&T defended its chairman, issuing a statement that read:

“At L&T, nation-building is at the core of our mandate. For over eight decades, we have been shaping India’s infrastructure, industries, and technological capabilities.”

We believe this is India’s decade—a time that calls for collective dedication and effort to drive progress and achieve our shared vision of becoming a developed nation. The Chairman’s remarks reflect this larger ambition, emphasizing that extraordinary outcomes require extraordinary effort.

What do precedents in Japan, China, and South Korea say?

Subrahmanyan and Murthy are not alone in advocating for longer work hours to boost economic growth.

However, the experiences of developed Asian economies highlight the severe consequences of such practices.

In Japan, excessively long working hours have taken a significant toll on employees’ health and well-being, with many cases leading to suicide.

This phenomenon, known as “karoshi,” translates to “death from overwork.”

In 2023, approximately 2,900 people in Japan committed suicide due to work-related issues.

Recognizing the gravity of the situation, the Japanese government introduced the “Work Style Reform Law” in 2018 to curb excessive overtime.

As a result, government data showed that by 2022, only 9% of workers clocked more than 60 hours per week—a figure that has halved over the past two decades.

The younger generation in Japan also appears to be reevaluating priorities.

According to the Japan Research Institute, only 30% of young Japanese now consider climbing the corporate ladder important.

For many, a fulfilling job and the joy of collaboration have taken precedence.

Source: The Tokyo Review

Subrahmanyan’s admiration for Chinese work culture, however, overlooks its pitfalls.

China’s tech and startup sectors have popularized the grueling “996” culture, where employees work from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week—totaling 72 hours weekly.

This practice, while widespread, violates Chinese labor laws, which mandate a 40-hour work week.

Major companies like Huawei, Alibaba, and ByteDance have faced widespread criticism for endorsing this relentless schedule, which has been linked to burnout and declining mental health.

In South Korea, one of the countries with the longest working hours globally, the phenomenon of “gwarosa” (death by overwork) claims numerous lives annually.

Recently, the South Korean government faced backlash after proposing to increase the maximum weekly working hours from 52 to 69.

Millennials and Gen Z workers strongly opposed the move, forcing the government to reconsider.

Reflecting on these examples, Gaurav Bhagat, Managing Director at Consortium Gifts, told Invezz:

While countries like South Korea and Japan historically adopted such intensive work cultures, they have since pivoted toward promoting work-life balance after witnessing the toll on productivity and mental health.

The mental health toll

India ranks among the most overworked countries globally, with workers logging some of the longest hours.

According to the International Labour Organization, the average Indian employee works 46.7 hours per week.

Additionally, 51% of India’s workforce clocks 49 or more hours weekly, placing the country second in the world for extended working hours.

A 2024 Deloitte survey highlighted the consequences of this intense work culture.

It revealed that 56% of Indian employees identified burnout as their primary concern, while 70% expressed a preference for employers who prioritize mental health and wellness initiatives.

The financial impact of poor mental health is also staggering. Deloitte’s 2022 Mental Health Survey found that Indian employers lose approximately $14 billion annually due to absenteeism, lower productivity, and employee attrition linked to mental health challenges.

Vidya Khan, a psychologist, hypnotherapist, and somatic energy coach, outlined the progressive effects of overwork on mental and physical health.

“Overwork compromises sleep, increases stress, and leads to a rise in cortisol levels,” she said to Invezz.

“This creates hormonal imbalances, reduced connection with loved ones causing oxytocin disparities, neglected self-care resulting in chronic illnesses, and lower levels of endorphins and serotonin. Ultimately, it disrupts neurological, hormonal, digestive, physiological, and immune systems.”

Khan warned that if these issues remain unaddressed, they could lead to “a massive collective burnout pandemic in the coming years.”

Staffing companies can offer valuable insights that serve as a barometer for understanding employer preferences when it comes to selecting the ideal candidates.

Avsar, a recruitment service provider reveals that “flexibility”, along with strong work ethic and adaptability are the top pre-requisites for clients looking for employees.

“While flexibility is important, particularly in dynamic industries, it is equally important that employees can manage their workload efficiently without needing to work excessive hours. The qualities that clients seek include professionalism, resilience under pressure, and a proactive approach to problem-solving,” Navneet Singh, founder and CEO, of Avsar, told Invezz.

Why top leaders can work long hours, but employees cannot

Despite the clear link between longer work hours and declining mental health, top leaders often dismiss these concerns when asking employees to work longer hours.

When challenged, they frequently cite their example of putting in such hours, positioning it as a norm.

However, what often goes unacknowledged is the well-structured support systems that ease their burden, as well as their generous compensation for the time spent.

Sanjeev Sanyal, economist and member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, addressed this point on X:

“Only very senior managers can sustain 80-hour work weeks because systems are built to sustain them (not just the pay, but secretaries, assistants, etc.). The rest need a life.”

Subrahmanyan, for instance, received an impressive Rs 51 crore in remuneration for FY24, marking a 43% increase compared to FY23.

In contrast, the average salary increase for non-managerial employees at L&T for FY24 was just 1.74%, even as managerial remuneration increased by 20.38%.

L&T attributed the increase in managerial compensation to higher profits and increased commission rates, according to their latest annual report.

The median salary of employees, however, only rose by Rs 1.44 lakh annually over the last five years.

Source: The Economic Times

In an editorial for The Economic Times, Harsh Goenka, chairman of RPG Enterprises, emphasized the compensation disparity to highlight the challenges of implementing a 70- or 90-hour workweek.

He acknowledged that while such statements come from a place of “deep commitment to India’s progress,” they may not align with the values of today’s workforce.

“While top executives and owners often earn significant financial rewards, the majority of employees do not enjoy similar benefits. This disparity makes it difficult to justify extended workweeks for all,” Goenka said

Legally, Indian labor laws also support work-life balance. The Factories Act of 1948 and state-specific Shops and Establishments Acts cap working hours at 48 per week, requiring overtime pay at twice the regular wage for non-exempt employees.

“These provisions are critical in safeguarding the well-being of the workforce, particularly for blue-collar employees, and must remain intact. For white-collar employees, the conversation is evolving,” said Simantika Mukherjee, Group CHRO of Tribeca Developers, a prominent real estate developer in India.

How to increase productivity and spur growth without risking burnout

Industry leaders and sector experts widely agree that the era of equating long hours with productivity is behind us.

Bhagat suggests that instead of simply increasing the number of hours worked, India should focus on boosting productivity through skill development, technology integration, and fostering a culture of innovation.

“In my experience, businesses that invest in employee wellness and upskilling see a 35% higher retention rate and a 20% increase in output. The future lies not in working harder, but smarter—creating an environment where ambition and well-being coexist,” Bhagat, also a consultant and TEDx speaker, said.

Goenka concurs, adding that rather than prescribing a fixed number of hours, leaders should focus on cultivating a culture of excellence that enables employees to thrive on their own terms.

“India’s growth story demands dedication and effort, but it also requires a workforce that is motivated, creative, and mentally healthy,” Goenka says.

The post L&T chairman’s 90-hour work week idea: is India ready to adopt it as a norm? appeared first on Invezz

In a historic move, the Biden administration announced on Tuesday plans to remove Cuba from state sponsor of terrorism list.

This decision comes just days before former President Trump begins his new term.

This significant shift aligns with Cuba’s pledge to release over 500 prisoners, laying the groundwork for a potentially positive future detente in US-Cuba relations as Trump’s inauguration looms.

These actions mark a notable turning point, indicating an opportunity for both nations to reopen diplomatic dialogue and partnership, following decades of strained relations—assuming the incoming Trump administration is open to resuming talks with Cuba.

Reversal of Trump’s restrictions on Cuba

President Biden’s proposed changes directly challenge the restrictions imposed by the Trump administration, which labeled Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism.

This designation, made toward the end of Trump’s first term, effectively halted any efforts at reconciliation.

Now, Biden seeks to shift US diplomatic relations with Cuba, drawing on strategies similar to those used during the Obama administration.

If Biden’s proposed changes are enacted, they will significantly undermine much of Trump’s restrictions, which have already worsened Cuba’s economic hardships.

The relaxation of these sanctions aims to address humanitarian concerns, particularly the island’s chronic shortages and struggling economy.

Legal changes and congressional review

In addition to removing Cuba from the terrorism blacklist, the Biden administration plans to reverse Trump’s 2017 executive order that prohibited financial transactions with certain Cuban military and government-affiliated companies.

This effort is designed to improve economic relations and provide much-needed support to Cuba’s private sector, which has long suffered under the weight of the US embargo.

However, it is essential to recognize that these changes are not guaranteed. They must undergo a review by Congress, which holds the authority to shape laws concerning US-Cuba relations.

The Congressional review process will be closely monitored, particularly with the presence of lawmakers like Senator Marco Rubio, a vocal critic of the Cuban regime, who has long supported the Cuban-American community and its stance on communism.

Intent to reengage with Havana

The decision to remove Cuba’s terrorist designation signals the Biden administration’s intent to reengage with Havana and open new channels for diplomatic dialogue.

Experts believe that resuming talks could foster conversations on critical issues such as human rights, economic reform, and regional stability.

Cuba’s decision to release over 500 prisoners complicates the situation further.

While this move signals an attempt to address internal challenges, its reception in the U.S. will largely depend on the willingness of the new administration to negotiate and the steps that follow.

The White House’s statement, lifting the terrorist label from Cuba, indicates that the Biden administration is adopting a more flexible stance.

This shift paves the way for discussions that have been stalled for years, potentially addressing fundamental issues like human rights and economic change.

The harsh rhetoric and strained relations between the Trump administration and Cuba will likely influence how these new measures are implemented and received by the incoming Trump government.

The legacy of tense US-Cuba relations remains a significant factor in the context of these changes.

Equally important will be Cuba’s response to recent developments and its promises to reform its judiciary.

How the Cuban government handles these commitments will be pivotal in shaping the future of US-Cuba relations.

As the world watches closely, the next few days could prove critical in determining the trajectory of US-Cuba ties.

With an increased willingness to engage in dialogue and collaboration, US-Cuba relations may begin to open a new chapter, one focused on cooperation rather than antagonism.

The post Biden signals policy shift on Cuba sanctions days before Trump’s inauguration appeared first on Invezz

The Bank of England (BoE) should act promptly to reduce interest rates to counter signs of a weakening British economy, according to Alan Taylor, the institution’s newest Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) member.

Speaking at Leeds University on Wednesday, Taylor emphasized the need for pre-emptive measures to support a soft landing for the economy as inflation pressures ease.

An economics professor, Taylor had already voted for rate cuts in November and December.

In November, the BoE lowered its benchmark interest rate to 4.75%, but the December meeting saw most of the MPC opting to steady rates.

Taylor, however, remains convinced that further reductions are necessary.

“We are in the last half-mile on inflation, but with the economy weakening, it’s time to get interest rates back toward normal to sustain a soft landing,” Taylor said, emphasizing the importance of adjusting monetary policy to shifting economic conditions.

UK inflation eases, but risks remain

Recent data supports Taylor’s stance, showing Britain’s headline inflation rate fell to 2.5% in December from 2.6% in November.

Core inflation, closely monitored by the BoE, also declined faster than expected.

However, Taylor warned that while inflation risks have diminished, the potential for an economic downturn has increased, making it crucial to take preventive action.

“Right now, I think it makes sense to cut rates pre-emptively to take out a little insurance against this change in the balance of risks, given that our policy rate is still far above neutral and would remain very restrictive,” he said.

Gradual policy shifts

The BoE has already reduced interest rates twice since August, but its approach has been more cautious compared to other central banks, given the persistent inflationary pressures earlier in the year.

Taylor argued that the inflation outlook for 2024 has improved, with price growth slowing faster than anticipated.

Sterling reacted negatively to the publication of Taylor’s speech, weakening by about a third of a cent against the dollar.

This market movement reflects the heightened sensitivity to signals of further monetary easing.

Taylor’s comments highlight a growing division within the MPC about the future path of interest rates. While some members advocate caution to ensure inflation is fully under control, Taylor and others believe the focus should now shift to supporting economic growth.

With inflation nearing target levels and economic risks mounting, Taylor’s push for rate cuts signals a potential pivot in the BoE’s monetary policy strategy, aiming to strike a balance between stability and growth.

The post Alan Taylor urges BoE to cut interest rates in response to signs of a weakening UK economy appeared first on Invezz

In a pivotal development aimed at ending over 15 months of devastating conflict, Israel and Hamas have reached a phased agreement to bring an end to the war in Gaza.

The deal, which could lead to a ceasefire as early as January 19, 2024, includes provisions for a gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces, the release of hostages taken by Hamas, and the freeing of Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.

Negotiations, which were finalized on Wednesday, have been ongoing for months and involved key mediators, including officials from Egypt, Qatar, and the United States.

Following the announcement, US President Joe Biden confirmed the deal, marking a significant step toward peace after months of violence that has left tens of thousands of Palestinians dead and displaced millions.

Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal

The agreement, which has not yet been officially announced, will initiate a six-week ceasefire period, with Israeli forces beginning to pull back from Gaza.

As part of the deal, Israel will release Palestinian prisoners in exchange for hostages taken by Hamas, bringing hope to families on both sides who have been enduring the horrors of the war.

Affected communities in Gaza celebrated the news, despite the continued Israeli airstrikes in the region.

The deal’s first phase will see the release of 33 Israeli hostages, including all women, children, and men over 50.

A second phase is expected to commence by the 16th day of the ceasefire, which will include the release of all remaining hostages and a permanent ceasefire agreement.

The final phase will focus on returning the bodies of deceased individuals and rebuilding Gaza, with international bodies such as the United Nations overseeing the reconstruction efforts.

Qatari mediators, who played a crucial role in facilitating the agreement, expressed hope that the ceasefire would foster stability not only in Gaza but across the wider Middle East.

In the streets of Tel Aviv, families of Israeli hostages expressed both relief and optimism.

While the ceasefire has been hailed as a major step forward, political challenges remain.

One of the key sticking points is who will govern Gaza post-war.

Israel has ruled out any involvement by Hamas, while also opposing any role for the Palestinian Authority.

These complex political dynamics, along with the enormous task of rebuilding Gaza, will require cooperation between Israel, the Palestinians, Arab states, and international organizations.

The deal is set against a backdrop of political pressure, with US President-elect Donald Trump signaling that he would use the ceasefire as a foundation to expand the Abraham Accords — agreements that normalized Israel’s relations with several Arab countries during his first presidency.

Trump has repeatedly called for a swift end to the conflict and has been instrumental in pushing the negotiations forward.

The ceasefire deal’s potential to de-escalate tensions in Gaza could provide relief not only to the Palestinian and Israeli populations but also to the broader Middle East, where the conflict has already sparked unrest in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq.

Additionally, tensions between Israel and Iran have escalated as a result of the war, with concerns of further regional conflict.

As the situation continues to unfold, international leaders are hopeful that this ceasefire marks the beginning of a lasting peace.

Belgian Prime Minister Alexander de Croo expressed his relief, stating, “After too many months of conflict, we feel tremendous relief for the hostages, for their families, and for the people of Gaza. Let’s hope this ceasefire will put an end to the fighting and mark the beginning of a sustained peace.”

However, the road ahead remains complex, with many unresolved issues surrounding Gaza’s future and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the region.

The successful implementation of this ceasefire, alongside efforts to provide aid and rebuild Gaza, will require sustained international cooperation.

The post Israel and Hamas reach historic ceasefire deal to end Gaza war and free hostages appeared first on Invezz

As spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) mark their first anniversary and Ethereum ETFs reach the six-month milestone, the cryptocurrency market is gearing up for a potential wave of new offerings.

With pro-crypto Donald Trump set to assume the presidency, market participants anticipate a friendlier regulatory environment that could pave the way for additional cryptocurrency ETFs.

Trump’s public endorsement of Bitcoin has already had a noticeable impact.

According to Nicholas Elward, head of institutional product and ETFs at Natixis Investment Managers, Trump’s stance has bolstered confidence in crypto investments.

“As a result, all signs point toward more positive developments for cryptocurrency ETFs in 2025,” Elward wrote in a note.

This optimism extends to spot ETFs—funds that hold actual cryptocurrencies rather than futures.

Asset managers such as 21Shares, Bitwise, WisdomTree, and Canary Capital have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to launch ETFs tied to popular digital assets like XRP, Solana, Hedera, and Litecoin.

New SEC chair Atkins expected to make it easier for ETFs to gain approval

The SEC’s approach to crypto regulation has been a significant barrier to ETF approvals.

However, with SEC Chair Gary Gensler stepping down on Inauguration Day, analysts expect a shift in tone.

Trump’s nominee for the role, Paul Atkins, has criticized the SEC’s strict stance on digital assets.

This change could ease the path for crypto ETFs to gain approval.

Despite the optimism, regulatory challenges remain. Dom Harz, co-founder of blockchain network firm BOB, told Barron’s “The momentum we’re seeing with Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs is just the tip of the iceberg.”

For Harz, “there are regulatory hurdles to overcome” before XRP and Solana ETFs are approved.

But “we will see increased movement towards single-asset ETFs across the board in 2025, especially for well-known tokens with strong brands,” he said.

Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs maintain dominance

While there is excitement about new ETFs, Bitcoin and Ethereum remain the cornerstones of the market.

Bitcoin funds, according to JPMorgan analysts, have more than $100 billion in assets while Ethereum ETFs have $12 billion.

The iShares Bitcoin Trust leads the pack with over $45 billion in assets, and the Grayscale Ethereum Trust dominates the Ethereum ETF space with $4.6 billion.

In contrast, analysts estimate that Solana ETFs may attract only $3 billion to $6 billion in net new assets while XRP funds may get only $4 billion to $8 billion in investments.

JP Morgan analysts said,

We don’t see a next wave of cryptocurrency [ETF] launches as being meaningful for the cryptoecosystem given much smaller market capitalization of other tokens and far lower investor interest.

Harz acknowledged the disparity, noting that Bitcoin and Ethereum have established themselves as dominant ecosystems.

Still, crypto ETFs present a valuable entry point for novice investors, providing exposure to volatile assets without requiring direct ownership.

Opportunities for institutional winners

The evolving crypto ETF landscape is poised to benefit major market players.

Firms like Coinbase, BlackRock, and market maker Virtu have already profited from Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs and are likely to see further gains if new ETFs are approved.

While demand for second-tier tokens may be more limited, the combination of a pro-crypto administration and a potentially less restrictive SEC has created a cautiously optimistic outlook for 2025.

Bitcoin and Ethereum will likely retain their dominance, but the market is ready for diversification, with institutional players well-positioned to capitalize on the next wave of crypto ETFs.

The post Why Trump’s presidency could lead to the launch of more crypto ETFs appeared first on Invezz