Not in the slightest – in fact it serves to strengthen the case for true balance.

Finance Minster Nicolas Sarkozy estimates (in an article in Le Figaro and subsequently reported in the UK media) that the system has cost the state £10 billion and has demoralised millions of workers.

The mistake made by the French government is a common one, and one that should be heeded here. There is a big difference between restricting the time people are allowed to spend working and helping them achieve a balance between work and the rest of their lives.

The issue of balance is not solely concerned with the number of hours a person works. There are those who work relatively long hours and do not suffer the all too familiar effects of work-related stress. There are those who work part time and suffer a great deal.

Clearly the problem is more complex than the number of hours one works and this one-size fits all solution of a 35-hour week was destined never to be the panacea it was hailed to be.

We need to move beyond the numbers game if we are to avoid the same mistake here. Looking at the bigger picture shows us that it is the intensity of the working day that is at the route of the problem. People suffer work related ill health when they overwork. In other words when people cannot keep control of their working time and it spills into all others areas of their lives they experience stress – no matter what the length of their working day is supposed to be.

People need greater control and choice. Certainly one aspect of control is the ability to adjust the historic 9 to 5 to suit today’s more complex lifestyles, but it is not the only form of control. It is not even the most important.

When people feel overwhelmed by their workload they need a way of dealing with it that allows them to fulfil their professional obligations while at the same time safeguarding or even restoring their private lives. Adjusting their working hours seldom addresses this. Instead the Work Life Balance Centre has found success by helping people recognise the choices and behaviours that have led them to the particular problems they are facing, and then constructing a way to make different choices and select different behaviours in the future.

This means we have to tackle both the psychological and the practical aspects of what is happening at present. Helping people understand the link between how they think, what they do, and how in control they feel is an important aspect of our work and underpins everything we do.

Step by step we help people learn to identify the route they have taken to where they are now, the cost of being there (in terms of health, family, lifestyle etc) and how to bring about the changes they want to make to live the life they most desire.

While organisational policy and procedures have their place they are often too removed from the source of the problem to be of immediate and effective help. The same is true of national policies, especially one as blunt as a maximum working week. Now that this has been recognised we can get on with the real work with undiluted effort and concentrate on making a difference where it counts most – by restoring a sense of control and a wider spectrum of choice.

Julie Hurst - Work Life Balance Centre