Mexico’s proposed reduction of the maximum ordinary workweek to 40 hours has moved quickly and has triggered an intense debate, in part because a 40-hour week does not necessarily mean two weekly rest days.
For company leadership and human resources teams, the priority is to understand the purpose of the proposal and to anticipate operational decisions before the topic turns into avoidable friction around shifts, coverage, and incremental costs that are not supported by productivity gains.
The reform was approved by the Mexican Senate on February 11, 2026, and has been sent to the Chamber of Deputies for review. Because the proposal has been framed at the constitutional level (even though that is not technically necessary), approval by the Deputies would still need to be followed by approval from a majority of the state legislatures and Mexico City, as well as publication. Public versions of the transitional provisions point to a phased approach that keeps the 48-hour limit in 2026 and reduces it by two hours per year beginning in 2027, reaching 40 hours in 2030.
In parallel, the debate has concentrated on two points. First, whether the reform does or does not incorporate a second mandatory weekly rest day. Second, whether the design leaves room for part of the reduction to be offset through overtime, which could shift costs without meaningfully changing the workload in certain operations.
Experience in other jurisdictions suggests that work time reductions tend to perform better when paired with work redesign and measurement, rather than treated as a purely arithmetic change.
Separately, markets tend to absorb the constraint through higher staffing levels, different shifts, or tighter overtime management. The difference is whether that adjustment is implemented through governance and evidence, or through reaction.
Finally, several employer organizations in Mexico have emphasized the need for a viable and gradual transition that protects formal employment and allows companies to adjust shifts and processes with predictability. In that line, Coparmex has supported an orderly path and has stressed the importance of clear implementation rules, including the treatment of overtime within defined limits, while Concanaco Servytur has insisted that the transition should be designed so it does not place disproportionate pressure on the formal sector.
What questions are worth asking in connection with the proposed reform?
Which legislative text is actually on the table and what does it imply for weekly rest, distribution of working time, and overtime?
Before building scenarios, it is worth identifying the final text, or at least the most likely final text, of the reform. The detail matters because a reform that only sets a weekly maximum is implemented differently than one that also sets a day-by-day distribution or relies on a broader overtime framework.
Can your operation absorb a true reduction in hours, or does it require constant coverage?
A variable load office environment faces different scenarios than manufacturing, logistics, retail, or service operations with tighter time windows. The most useful diagnostic is to identify coverage critical processes and distinguish them from processes that can be reorganized through productivity initiatives, digitization, or role redesign.
What is your baseline scenario and what does it mean for shifts, productivity, and labor cost?
As a starting point, four routes tend to emerge as the most straightforward to implement a potential reallocation:
a) Reorganize shifts across five days, with adjustments in staffing and schedules to preserve coverage;
b) Operate six days with shorter daily hours, while protecting rest and managing fatigue;
c) Use overtime in a narrowly defined way for real peaks, supported by controls and evidence, and avoid turning it into a permanent structure; and
d) Redesign processes to reduce rework and raise output per hour.
What changes, in cost and control, if the model relies on overtime?
From a labor law standpoint, overtime is typically capped at an equivalent of nine hours per week under general rules. The initial overtime hours within that threshold are paid at double time, and overtime beyond that threshold is paid at triple time. From a tax standpoint, a portion of overtime pay may be exempt for the employee within statutory limits and, where such exemption applies, the employer will typically face limited deductibility on the exempt portion. The decision is therefore not only about premium pay cost, but also about traceability and tax efficiency.
Is your timekeeping framework ready to support compliance without friction?
If the debate results in heightened recording requirements, traceability becomes the core issue. What is recorded, who approves exceptions, how overtime is documented, and how change is managed through front line supervisors? Without structure, adjustments tend to occur reactively, with higher risk of turnover, absenteeism, or conflict.
From a legal standpoint, the adjustment is typically implemented through concrete instruments as needed on a case by case basis. That may include updating working conditions and schedules in individual employment agreements where appropriate and, where there is a union, aligning the change through the collective bargaining agreement and the applicable internal process for negotiating changes to working time, shifts, rest days, and overtime premiums. In parallel, it is advisable to review the internal work rules, or equivalent policies, so that timekeeping, overtime authorization, and payroll support are aligned and do not depend on informal supervisory practices.
At FMB, we support executive teams and human resources functions in transition plans that combine compliance with operational continuity, with particular attention to orderly shift documentation, employment evidence, and third-party controls where the operation depends on contractors or service providers.
Sources consulted:
Initiative to amend Article 123, Senate InfoSen PDF
https://infosen.senado.gob.mx/sgsp/gaceta/66/2/2025-12-03-1/assets/documentos/Iniciativa_Art%C3%ADculo123_CPEUM.pdf
Executive announcement on gradual implementation
https://www.gob.mx/presidencia/prensa/presidenta-claudia-sheinbaum-anuncia-proyecto-de-reforma-para-la-implementacion-gradual-de-la-jornada-laboral-de-40-horas
“Legal certainty for business decision-making”