Humans are usually redundant

In conclusion, long working hours are necessary for human beings.

In Indonesian writing culture, humans are mentioned often. This is not the case in written English.

🇮🇩

Let’s try a quick test. Which of the following sentences is NOT about working hours and humans?

  1. Long working hours are necessary for human beings.
  2. Long working hours are necessary.
  3. Long working hours are necessary for ants.

Hopefully you chose number 3. In any discussion of working hours, and indeed of many other topics, we’re usually talking about human beings, unless otherwise specified.

The only time we really need to mention humans is when we have a need to contrast them with non-humans:

redundant humans

If I'm describing a manufacturing process from assembly to shipping, I would simply write:

Finally, goods are packaged ready for distribution.

In this case there is no need to mention the people/robots doing the packaging (often referred to as the doer or the agent). Notice I used passive voice (to be + V3) in order to achieve this.

However, if I'm writing about automation and the threat to employment, I might write:

In the automated process, goods are no longer packaged by humans. There are now robots for this purpose.

Here it is reasonable to mention the doer, or agent, since the doer - in this case robots - plays a key role in a social shift from human-powered to automated labour.