It seems to me that the spirit of long working hours stems from the idea that a worker is an interchangeable 'machine' with a capacity to provide effort and the

It seems to me that the spirit of long working hours stems from the idea that a worker is an interchangeable 'machine' with a capacity to provide effort and the idea that more time spent (literally) at the coal face will yield a better return on capital. This holds true in an industrial context where there is a large pool of workers, the work is low skilled and unions are weak. A workers ability to provide time is the only concern that the employer has. Where I live, in the North of England, this factory mentality still casts a long shadow over working conditions and practice. I think a 40 hour week is way too long to actually have a balanced life and I've consistently burnt-out where the pressure to work 50/60 hours a week is strong. I'm not surprised that DavCam is wanting to keep the 48-hour opt-out - if you are an investor / owner of capital, do you care about the long term well being of the people making effort to give a return on your capital over a short term (5 years) when people are interchangeable? You simply want to increase the return on your investment.