[Time on the AI Battlefield: Trapped by the 52-Hour Workweek]
② Survey of 30 AI Companies
83.3% Say "Uniform 52-Hour Workweek Needs Improvement"
Eight out of ten domestic AI companies believe that the 52-hour workweek is disrupting their AI development work. The AI industry points out that managing work hours on a uniform weekly basis makes it difficult to respond to rapidly changing situations, which in turn undermines the competitiveness of AI technology. There is a growing call to reform the 52-hour workweek, which slows down research and development, in order for South Korea to become a top-three global AI powerhouse.
According to a survey conducted by The Asia Business Daily between December 8 and 12 among companies in the Yangjae AI Special Zone in Seoul, 24 out of 30 responding companies (80%) said that the current 52-hour workweek was causing disruptions to their work. Only six companies (20%) said they were unaffected.
An AI industry official commented, "In innovative industries, workloads are not consistent, and the level of immersion varies greatly depending on the project. When developing new services, periods of intense focus are required, followed by more relaxed phases. However, the 52-hour workweek fails to reflect the nonlinear nature of this work, ultimately resulting in missed opportunities as a side effect."
The survey found that 63.3% of responding companies were unable to comply with the 52-hour workweek and were working overtime. Park Jooyoung (37, alias), who has been running an AI startup for three years, said, "Trying to work around the system often means I end up working from home. In reality, I am working, but I can't openly acknowledge it, which is very frustrating."
The main reason for overtime was "immersion in technology development work to survive in the competition," cited by 56.7% of respondents. This was followed by "meeting project deadlines" (36.7%) and "collaborating with countries like the United States and Europe with different time zones" (6.7%). Not a single respondent cited overtime due to a supervisor's instruction. Another AI industry insider noted, "Restricting work hours by day, week, or month doesn't suit performance-oriented workers. Forcing employees to leave work during periods of deep focus undermines work efficiency and causes companies to fall behind."
Among the surveyed AI companies, 83.3% said the 52-hour workweek should be improved. The main issues cited were ▲inadequate response to rapidly changing situations (30.0%), ▲slower technology development (23.3%), and ▲difficulty maintaining immersion and continuous research (20.0%). Some companies (6.7%) also cited the burden of increased labor costs.
On the other hand, companies that did not see the 52-hour workweek as a significant problem most frequently cited "having sufficient manpower" (50%) as the reason. An AI industry insider, requesting anonymity, said, "Even though we pay additional wages for overtime, startups-where technological capability is vital for survival-feel a significant burden and sense of responsibility." Another insider explained, "I've seen many cases where employees who want to immerse themselves in research without worrying about work hours lose motivation because of legal work time limits."
Recently, there has been a growing trend of AI startups relocating their headquarters overseas. Domestic AI startup CEOs expressed envy. One startup CEO said, "In Silicon Valley, there are many job postings looking for people to change the world together and work 80 hours a week. I believe that working intensively is the only way to achieve innovation, but as a CEO, I have to be very careful about saying such things."
Kim, who has been running an AI startup for nearly ten years, said, "Even remote workers based overseas are subject to the 52-hour workweek if they are employed by a domestic corporation, which creates overtime issues. Even though we pay annual salaries in the hundreds of millions of won, I have to ask employees not to work on weekends to avoid potential lawsuits or other problems in the future."
Large corporations operate a variety of welfare programs to manage their AI workforce. An official at an AI research lab run by a major company said, "Because the 52-hour workweek limits how much we can increase salaries, the company instead runs separate health management programs and other initiatives. For research and development positions, we also apply expanded flexible work arrangements, such as starting work in the evening."
The AI industry believes that even if overtime beyond the 52-hour workweek is allowed, employee voluntariness should take priority, and workers' rights to refuse overtime must be fully guaranteed. They want decisions about work arrangements to be left as much as possible to the autonomy of each company. The most frequently cited prerequisite for allowing overtime was "guaranteeing workers the right to refuse overtime for voluntary agreement and choice" (40%). This was followed by "adopting a non-inclusive wage system that rewards work based on actual hours worked" (20%), "mandatory health checkups after a certain number of work hours to ensure health rights" (20%), and "strict supervision by the Ministry of Employment and Labor to prevent abuse" (10%). Other opinions included, "It should be possible as long as there is an agreement between employer and employee," and "Leave it up to autonomy."
An HR manager in the AI industry said, "Overseas companies have clear performance-based rewards, so only those who want to work harder remain, which leads to corporate growth. In contrast, in Korea, conflicts over overtime frequently arise between employees and management on the ground."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
