Sebastian Dullien thinks little of the Union’s economic wing’s recent push for part-time work. “If you want to increase the number of hours worked across the economy as a whole, a ban on part-time work could backfire,” says the economist and head of the Institute for Macroeconomics and Economic Research (IMK) the taz. He is not alone with this opinion. Trade unions and the opposition also reject the abolition of the right to part-time work.
“In the future, the legal right to (bridge) part-time work should only apply if there is a special justification,” says one of the applications from the SME and Economic Union (MIT) for the CDU federal party conference in February, which is also available to taz. MIT cites raising children or caring for relatives as special reasons. A legal entitlement to part-time work for “lifestyle” reasons, as MIT puts it, should no longer apply. The application also stipulates that social benefits such as basic security, child allowance and housing benefit for part-time workers should only be granted if there are special reasons.
This is justified by the current economic situation: “In view of the shortage of skilled workers, this part-time lifestyle is an increasing problem that is putting a strain on our economy,” it says in the application. “We therefore have to adapt part-time arrangements to the economic realities.”
Almost 17 million part-time In the third quarter of 2025, 40.1 percent of employees in Germany worked part-time the Institute for Work and Career Research. That corresponds to 16.97 million people. There is a clear difference between the genders: almost every second woman does not work full-time, while the figure for men is just under 12 percent.
Motive “Lifestyle part-time”, as the CDU medium-sized business representative calls it, plays a minor role. According to the Federal Statistical Office Only 27 percent of part-time employees opt for reduced hours out of their own desire. 73 percent have other reasons. Women most often mention caring for children or relatives (29 percent). Men most often cite training and further education as a reason (23 percent).
The term “lifestyle” in particular causes excitement. “Defaming the right to part-time work as a ‘lifestyle’ is disrespectful to millions who are raising children, caring for relatives or simply trying to balance work and life,” says Left Party leader Ines Schwerdtner to the taz. The choice of words alone shows “how brazen and detached some parts of the Union have said goodbye to people’s hard everyday lives”.
Clear words also come from IG Metall. This is an “absurd debate” that she is “horrified” about, said IG Metall chairwoman Christiane Benner indignantly at the annual press conference of Germany’s largest individual union on Monday in Frankfurt am Main. “It doesn’t help the economy when the economic union’s wrong-way drivers discredit part-time workers,” she said.
There are numerous studies that show that many people would like to work longer part-time hours. This especially applies to women. But unwilling employers, a lack of daycare and nursing places as well as false incentives such as spouse splitting stand in the way. It is the general conditions that are not right. “In our opinion, the economic union is pursuing a Stone Age style of politics against its better judgment,” said Benner.
And the coalition partner SPD is not necessarily amused by the idea either. “The SPD is firmly committed to maintaining the right to part-time work,” said General Secretary Tim Klüssendorf on Monday in Berlin. The aim is to create more offers for early childhood education and childcare places. “Changes to spouse splitting would also be a good way to create incentives for women to take up other employment relationships.” However, this topic did not make it into the coalition agreement.
Why should you be allowed to decide whether you want to buy chocolate ice cream or vanilla ice cream, but not whether you want to work 30 or 38 hours a week?
Sebastian Dullien, economist
There were even dissenting voices in the Union. CSU boss Markus Söder said on Monday that a general restriction on part-time options would be “the wrong approach”. Incentives must be created “to make it worthwhile to work”. This is about tax incentives, not restrictions on part-time options.
The Economic Union’s initiative is part of a series of proposals intended to encourage people to work more: active pensions, tax exemption for overtime, and the abolition of the eight-hour day. The idea behind it: More work should stimulate the economy. In this context, CDU leader Friedrich Merz repeatedly emphasizes that hard work must pay off again. As if he wants a society like the 1950s again, in which the father is the sole earner and works overtime while the mother stays at home.
In fact, the proportion of part-time workers is at an all-time high. According to the Institute for Labor Market and Occupational Research (IAB), it was 40.1 percent in the fall. Nevertheless, the total number of hours worked increased slightly to 15.7 billion hours. The trend towards more part-time work is not only due to the wishes of the employees, but above all because of the current economic downturn. Particularly in industry, where full-time jobs dominate, the number of employees fell by 2.2 percent.
Abolition counterproductive
The abolition of part-time work could also backfire when it comes to the issue of a shortage of skilled workers. There are people “for whom it is simply too much for their health or mental health to work full-time under the current working conditions,” warns economist Dullien. If you take away their part-time option, they could drop out of the job market entirely. The same applies to second earners in high-earning households. “Here, too, it is to be expected that people will drop out of working life entirely if they are deprived of the opportunity to work part-time,” says Dullien.
And the economist is also bothered by something fundamental about the debate: “In any case, it is somewhat strange that those who usually value individual decisions and oppose state intervention now want to make full-time mandatory,” Dullien said. “Why should you be allowed to decide whether you want to buy chocolate ice cream or vanilla ice cream, but not whether you want to work 30 or 38 hours a week?” (with dpa)