This week the U.S. House of Representatives passed House Resolution 768, expressing support for the designation of the month of October as “National Work and Family Month.”  It is a simple resolution that does a few good things:

• Recognizes the importance of balancing work and family to job productivity and healthy families;
• Recognizes that an important job characteristic is a work schedule that allows employees to spend time with families;
• Supports the goals and ideals of `National Work and Family Month’, and urges public officials, employers, employees, and the general public to work together to achieve more balance between work and family; and
• Requests that the President issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe `National Work and Family Month’ with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Nearly everyone understands that our work force is dramatically different than it was decades ago.  The findings included in the House Resolution also make the point that “85 percent of United States wage and salaried workers have immediate, day-to-day family responsibilities outside their jobs and job flexibility allows parents to be more involved in their children’s lives.”

Unfortunately House Resolutions have little teeth – they are good talking points and certainly help to bring attention to important issues.  But Congress needs to take this resolution one step further and actually support and pass policies that back up these ideas, without imposing new mandates on our businesses.

For one, we need more flexible work arrangements – as the Resolution suggests.  Many families struggle to balance work and family, making sure they have enough time off to care for a sick child or attend a soccer game.  We need to give private sector hourly employees the option to take time off in lieu of overtime wages, a benefit that our federal government employees have enjoyed for three decades. 

Working families, men and women, will continue to re-shape and re-define our workforce.  We need to make sure that our laws can keep up with the changes.  What do you think?

Congress is at it again, using the excuse of the swine flu to mandate paid time off.  This time the pig’s nose is under the tent.  And, this is the way to thank small business during National Small Business Week!?

On Monday congressional Democrats introduced legislation that would mandate employers to give workers seven paid sick days a year.  They argue that the outbreak of the swine flu has made it necessary to require employers to give their employees time off, suggesting that employers and employees aren’t able to make the determination when they should stay home.

Let’s see if we can follow this logic?

Swine flu + Inability for workers to take time off = People coming to work with swine flu = We need mandated paid time off.

But doesn’t this make more sense?

Swine flu + Inability for workers to take time off = Employers realizing it’s not profitable or productive to have employees coming to work with swine flu = Employers will voluntarily offer more flexible schedules.

Unfortunately this debate isn’t going to go away soon.   The bill has 100 co-sponsors and a hearing will be held in the House Education and Labor Committee on June 11^th.  This bill has been introduced before and this time there is going to be a push to include it in the health care reform package that the President wants to sign this year.  

This proposal is the wrong solution – increasing costs and mandates on our small businesses won’t help kick start the economy.  Instead, let’s look for policies that empower the employer and the employee.  Let’s support legislation that allows employees the flexibility to take time off in lieu of overtime pay.  We need policies that work for working families, not mandates that hurt our economy.

Mother's Day is a time to celebrate family whether it is being a daughter, wife, mother, sister, aunt or grandmother.  We need to celebrate the tremendous impact women are having in our communities, on our economy and within our families.

This Mother's Day our policy makers can give all mothers, especially working moms, a lasting gift – policies that make balancing work and family easier.

More and more women are successfully balancing work and family – many because they have to, some because they want to.  In 1955 only 27 percent of mothers in the workforce had kids under the age of 18, today that number is over 70 percent. 

For the first time in our country's history women outnumber men in the US workforce.  And, despite tough economic times, women business owners, remain optimistic about the future and are more inclined to expand their business.

Unfortunately while the demographics of our workforce are changing, our current laws and public policies are not.  Many of our labor policies are too outdated and too stringent for our 21^st Century workforce. 

One of the best gifts we can give mothers is more time.  More time with family, more time to run errands, more time to attend a soccer game or care for a sick parent.   But right now our federal laws make it more difficult for employers to offer working parents the flexibility they need in today's workforce.

Federal laws prevent private sector employers from providing working parents the type of workplace flexibility that could allow families more time to care for an elderly relative or meet the needs of their kids.  Legislation is needed to allow employers to offer their employees the option of taking "comp" time in lieu of overtime pay.  This is a benefit that federal employees have enjoyed for over three decades.  It is time to let all employees have this option.

In addition to flexible schedules, mom's need more flexible benefits.   Working parents, especially women, are forced to make difficult choices when it comes to their careers.  Many parents have to chose between a full-time position with full benefits but a 9-5 (or longer) straight jacket schedule versus taking a more flexible, part-time position but forgoing many of the benefits.   Policy makers should make it easier for employees to trade taxable wages for workplace benefits like health care or retirement.  Policy makers should realize that our tax code makes this difficult.   

Most of the new, small businesses started in the US are run by women.  We need policies that encourage our small businesses to invest in their employees, communities and grow their business.   Policymakers should think twice about expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act (as is being proposed) and reduce the urge to increase taxes on small businesses.  The President's budget would increase taxes on those making $250,000 or more a year.  Many small businesses who report income from sole-proprietorships, partnerships, and S-corporations on individual tax returns would be subjected to this tax increase. 

Finally, we need more portable benefits.  Policy makers should allow people to carry their health insurance from job to job (even while they are unemployed or temporarily out of the workforce) and allow small businesses to cross state lines to purchase a health care plan that works best for their employees.

The best gift our lawmakers can give mothers this Mother's Day is to recognize we need to update our labor laws to reflect the many changes we have seen in the workplace.  Those policy changes should be flexible, personal, voluntary, portable and above all fair.  I hope by Mother's Day 2010 we will make some progress on these important issues and allow Mom the flexibility she needs .

Monday, September 1, 2008

NEESE: Past time for comp time

Terry Neese

COMMENTARY:

American workers are being challenged. The economy is taking its toll with increased layoffs and increased hours and work for those who have jobs.

The government´s ability to help workers is limited, but it can do one thing – get out of the way!

Unfortunately, for many, our labor laws – originally crafted to protect the family and the work ethic – now obstruct both persistence and energy. Our ability to meet workers´ needs in the face of an ever-diverse work force unfortunately has changed dramatically in the decades since most of our labor laws were written in the 1930s.

Between 1950 and 2000, the labor force participation rate of women between 25 and 55 years of age more than doubled. Today, more than 75 percent of these women are in the labor market. Fewer than 12 percent of mothers with children under age 6 were in the labor force in 1950. Now, more than 60 percent are working. Read the rest of this entry »

Neese Challenges House Majority Leader on Workplace Flexibility

Terry Neese, a Distinguished Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, says a four-day work week proposal from U.S. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md) won’t help most Americans. Hoyer has asked the U.S. Office of Personnel Management to analyze the transition to a four-day work week for federal employees.

“There are 1.8 million federal employees and 154 million workers in the U.S.,” Neese said. “That means there are about 152 million people who, because of arcane labor laws, don’t have the same opportunity for a flexible work week.”

To contact Terry Neese, call the National Center for Policy Analysis at 972-308-6481.

Terry appeared on FOX's American Newsroom on Monday, July 28th, at 8:30 CDT.  Listen to her discuss the University of Minnesota study that showed eating meals together lowers teenage girls' liklihood to use alcohol or drugs.  Terry explains that this demonstrates the importance of a flexible workplace so that parents are able to be home in order to eat meals with their families. 

 On July 10^th, the Oklahoman covered a hearing held by Rep. Mike Shelton, where he suggested a more flexible work-week to cut down on commuting costs (Read the article here).  Making a flexible work week optional does a lot more than decreasing workers' gas costs though.  As such, the National Center for Policy Analysis has advocated for more flexibility in the workplace through congressional caucus briefings, publications and research, and most notably our president and CEO Dr. John Goodman's book, Leaving Women Behind, co-authored by Kimberly Strassel and Celeste Colgan.  Read the rest of this entry »

by Terry Neese

Our founding fathers believed in the American Dream, where all were given the opportunity to succeed through hard work.  Benjamin Franklin said that "energy and persistence conquer all things" Unfortunately, for many, our laws, that were originally crafted to protect the family and the work ethic, now prevent that principle being true today. 

Today, despite the evident and abundant blessings of liberty, America's labor laws aren't working well — for men or women. They simply don't reflect the needs of today's workers.

Beth Shulman, in her 2005 book, The Betrayal of Work, had some harsh words about today's reality: "For generations, Americans shared a tacit understanding that if you worked hard, a livable income and basic securities were to be yours. That promise has been broken and as a nation, we are living a lie."

Has the American dream become a lie?  That's harsh, but working hard is no longer enough to provide for you and your family.  Even those who work hard are having a hard time gaining basic security while they labor in the fields of the modern economy. If enough policymakers remember the principles behind our great country, and more important, the people composing it, proposals pending in Congress might, just might, be able to restore Benjamin Franklin's American dream.

For Americans, the value of work is unchanging. The satisfaction that comes from working hard and seeing a tangible result is at the center of our identities as humans.  Dignity, achievement, mutual benefit from a fair exchange in a free economy — these  needs of the American people never change. Our ability to meet those needs in the face of an ever diverse workforce unfortunately has changed dramatically since most of our labor laws were written in the 1930s.  Between 1950 and 2000, the labor force participation rate of women between 25 and 55 years of age more than doubled.  Today, more than 75 percent of these women are in the labor market.  Fewer than 12 percent of mothers with children under six were in the labor force in 1950.  Today, more than 60 percent are working. 

Today, those rigid labor laws function in ways that can deny the opportunity to attend a child's soccer game or take a parent to the doctor one week and make up the hours the following week. Women and men need the ability to bend schedules in order to care for aging parents or, increasingly, even an aging spouse.

The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) has worked on such reforms for many years.  In "Leaving Women Behind," John Goodman, with Kimberley Strassel and  Celeste Colgan, acknowledged the needs of our changing workforce and began a push to reform labor laws. I continue to work with political leaders to promote the sensible reforms offered in the book. 

Our major economic institutions – including tax law, labor law, and employee benefits law, as well as Social Security, and retirement policies – reward families with a full-time worker and a stay-at-home spouse and punish every other arrangement. Today's employers and employees find it difficult to make any other arrangement, even though circumstances have changed.

In the Twenty-first Century economy, women and men need adaptable and flexible work schedules to allow the time and energy required to give adequate care to our children, and to support the quality of life our retired parents and loved ones need and deserve in the land of the free.  Our laws need to go back to when they allowed hard work to accomplish responsibilities both at work and at home.

One answer to the dilemma is compensatory time, better known to federal workers as "comp time." In 1995, a poll from the Employment Policy Foundation and Penn/Schoen Associates found that if they had the choice, three out of every four American workers would choose comp time instead of overtime wages. It's not surprising that support for the idea reaches 81 percent among working women, many of whom bear the primary responsibility for caregiving.

Many lawmakers have opposed making such changes in the private sector. But in 1978, Congress took an important and needed first step to change the rules to allow this flexibility for federal government workers. A recently proposed bill, H.R. 6025, would allow such flexibility and alternatives to the 40-hour work week for parents with children and caregivers for the elderly. It could shift the private sector toward greater use of compensatory time for employees who choose to take advantage of it.

There have been some recent rule changes to the overtime laws that applied to supervisory personnel. While welcome, these changes still exclude the private sector workers who most need the benefits comp time arrangements give to busy and stressed workers and their families.

America needs policies that work for people who work. American women – and all American workers — need flexibility, portability, and security in labor law and the provision of benefits.

Such reforms would be worth celebrating, in the grand tradition of our foremothers and forefathers. For a more perfect union, it's past time for comp time. 

The rigid 40 hour work week, originally set forth by the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, was designed to protect employees…Yet it is now hurting both employees and employers.  Primary caregivers, of children or elderly family, often are unable to work the required 40 hours during the 8-5 slot allowed each week.  If unable to work full-time (according to these standards), one is often required to purchase his/her own benefits with after-tax dollars.  If attempting a full-time schedule, productivity and personal satisfaction (both at work and at home) go out the window along w/ their sanity as they attempt to balance work and family responsibilities.

But not only do we need these changes to take place, they have proven profitable for the businesses that have undertaken them on their own!

A recent study by the Families and Work Institute (see http://www.familiesandwork.org/site/sloanbizresults.html) shows that giving employees more flexibility in their workplace increases employee satisfaction, translating into high retention, lower turn over, higher levels of engagement while at the office, and even fewer days skipping out of the office!  Moreover, it boosts productivity, reduces business costs, and even increases profits.  Want the numbers?

According to the study, the Houston accounting firm PFK Texas gives employees choice in work hours, workspace, and even future work plans.  The result?  Their turnover has decreased to a startling low 12%!  The firm has doubled in the meantime and experienced a revenue growth of 8% per year since making the changes. 

The Washington D.C. office of Capital One takes advantage of home offices, wireless laptops, Blackberrys…etc.  Their employees often choose flexible arrangements that work for their own personal situation.  The company spends less money on office costs while simultaneously getting more productivity out of their employees! 

The bottom line simply is this: giving employees flexibility in the workplace means better results for all involved. 

Why can't we?  You tell me…