All of this is true and interesting, and I am the last person to argue against statutory provisions to improve work life balance.
But my point is a very different one. The number of workers whose statutory rights are protected by IGM or other unions is falling. The working reality of an increasing number of German workers is that, they are employed on temporary / casual contracts which are designed to circumvent statutory labour provisions / agreements. A very similar thing is happening among civil service employees. E.g. a shrinking number of teachers are still Beamten afforded all the protection while and an increasing number of people doing the exact same work are just employees with minimal pension etc.
My point is that, in Germany (as in amy other countries), a two class employment system is emerging in which some peoples’ rights are strong and well protected while others are exposed to the full force of an unprotected labour market.
My argument is not that IGM is wrong to make the case for 28hr week but, that they are wrong to ignore that a shrinking number of people are protected through them.
The issue is less, whether or not young people want to join the union and more, whether or not their working reality is recognised and represented by the union i.e. whether / how the union can protect those with casual / temporary contracts.
