In Korea, the flextime policy is causing controversy because of the benefits and risks.Some people agree with it because workers can manage their time more effectively. Other people disagree with it because the policy isn’t suitable for all jobs.


Many workers are experiencing a lot of discomfort in balancing the actual working conditions between home and their work. In particular, employees in Korea can’t enjoy their lives because they have to work late into the evenings and on weekends. In addition, they must get approval from their workplace before taking a vacation. The balance of life is often disrupted by work, and they are fed up with busy working schedules. As a result, employee dissatisfaction is amplified, and work efficiency goes down. There is a new policy that can increase work efficiency and help people manage their work-life balance called flex-time. The flex-time policy is a good method to make companies flexible, so people can manage their private time. Many people hope to institute the policy, and so do I. I support this policy based on three reasons.
First, if the flex-time policy is used, people can have a superior work environment and make better use of their time. Some people work better at night, and some work better in the morning. While it may seem minor, it is more efficient when people work their most optimal hours. Furthermore, it is an era where self-development is essential, even after getting a job. Therefore, if working hours are flexible, the time and scope of self-development can be increased.
Second, this policy can improve the responsibility of employees ' participation in the work and management of their decisions. In order to implement a flex-time policy, individuals must structure their own schedules. If employees create their own schedules, they will be more responsible for their work. Their ability to determine when to go to work and to decide when to leave will increase their judgment and accountability. As a result, workers who work passively before will be actively determined to do their jobs.
Third, the policy can benefit companies as well as increase worker satisfaction. Problems such as worker turnover, frequent absenteeism, overtime work, and weekend duty are solved. As a result, employers gain more efficient businesses with happy employees who work hard. This helps companies reap greater profits. Flex-time is a policy that can benefit both workers and employers.
In conclusion, through the flex-time policy, employees and employers both win. Employees gain a more balanced life, and employers gain more efficient, profitable businesses. To improve quality of life, companies should adopt theflex-time policy.

● Opinion from a reader (Noh Hye-ji, Department of Chinese Studies)
The flex-time policy can increase work efficiency because people can concentrate on what they want to do after they finish their work. There are some people who want to spend more time at home and others who want to travel. When I become get a job, I think I can work more efficiently if the flex-time policy is implemented.



Many workers agonize about how to maintain a balance between their work and personal lives. Lately, this problem has received more attention, so a flextime policy has been introduced as a solution to the problem. Flextime is a scheme in which workers can choose their working hours as long as they do not exceed statutory working hours. Workers can modify their hours to address infant care, self-improvement, and division of household labor, working earlier or later as needed. However, the flextime policy is not suitable for all jobs and can be harmful to the sense of community at work. For those reasons, I disagree with the introduction of flextime.
First, the flextime policy is not a suitable policy for all jobs. If a company needs employees to work regular schedules, working at different times can increase non-operation expenses and the quality of customer care can decrease. For example, if some workers want to work during the day and others at night, then the company will suffer a loss because more electricity will be used. Besides that, other non-operation expenses will increase. Also, occupations like money managers have some exclusive customers. They should be available when their customers expect them to be available. Then they can provide the services their customers desire. However, with a flextime policy, customers may not be able to meet their money managers because their managers’ schedules may be inconvenient for them. Therefore, the customers’ satisfaction will decline. Obviously, this policy is not suitable for all jobs.
Second, flextime can be harmful to a sense of community at work. Trust is important in business. The less time workers meet, the more trust and team work will fall short because of the policy. In addition, company leaders will have difficulty developing their employee’s sense of community and belonging without regular meetings and face-to-face communication. In addition, employees’ concentration on work will be disrupted because other employees arrive at different times while some employees are working. Then, if trust and cooperation decrease, efficiency will also decline.
The flextime policy may have a positive response from workers because they can have flexible work schedules and an unconstrained working environment. However, this policy is not suitable for all jobs, and it can be harmful to developing a sense of work community. I think instituting this policy now is premature without a plan to deal with these problems.

● Opinion from a reader Hur Ji-hyun (major in Public Administration)
A flexible working hour system is not fit for all jobs. Train companies and airlines need employees to work straight shifts. Therefore, I think that it is essential for companies to have workers with regular schedules. For example, if a company needs to hold an emergency meeting to solve an urgent problem, flextime employees will not be there. Also, because employees will not always be at work, customers will have complaints and think they can’t be trusted.