Introduction

1Today fully 70 percent of families with children are headed by two working parents or by an unmarried working parent. The “traditional family” of the breadwinner and homemaker has been replaced by the “juggler family,” in which no one is home full-time. Two-parent families are working 10 more hours a week than in 1979 (Bernstein and Kornbluh).

2To be decent parents, caregivers, and members of their communities, workers now need greater flexibility than they once did. Yet good part-time or flex-time jobs remain rare. Whereas companies have embraced flexibility in virtually every other aspect of their businesses (inventory control, production schedules, financing), full-time workers’ schedules remain largely inflexible. Employers often demand workers be available around the clock. Moreover, many employees have no right to a minimum number of sick or vacation days; almost two- thirds of all workers—and an even larger percentage of low-income parents—lack the ability to take a day off to care for a family member (Lovell). The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 finally guaranteed that workers at large companies could take a leave of absence for the birth or adoption of a baby, or for the illness of a family member. Yet that guaranteed leave is unpaid.

3Many businesses are finding ways to give their most valued employees flexibility but, all too often, workers who need flexibility find themselves shunted into part-time, temporary, on-call, or contract jobs with reduced wages and career opportunities—and, often, no benefits. A full quarter of American workers are in these jobs. Only 15 percent of women and 12 percent of men in such jobs receive health insurance from their employers (Wenger). A number of European countries provide workers the right to a part-time schedule and all have enacted legislation to implement a European Union directive to prohibit discrimination against part-time workers.

4In America, employers are required to accommodate the needs of employees with disabilities—even if that means providing a part-time or flexible schedule. Employers may also provide religious accommodations for employees by offering a part-time or flexible schedule. At the same time, employers have no obligation to allow parents or employees caring for sick relatives to work part-time or flexible schedules, even if the cost to the employer would be inconsequential.

5In the 21st century global economy, America needs a new approach that allows businesses to gain flexibility in staffing without sacrificing their competitiveness and enables workers to gain control over their work-lives without sacrificing their economic security. This win-win flexibility arrangement will not be the same in every company, nor even for each employee working within the same organization. Each case will be different. But flexibility will not come for all employees without some education, prodding, and leadership. So, employers and employees must be required to come to the table to work out a solution that benefits everyone. American businesses must be educated on strategies for giving employees flexibility without sacrificing productivity or morale. And businesses should be recognized and rewarded when they do so.

6America is a nation that continually rises to the occasion. At the dawn of a new century, we face many challenges. One of these is helping families to raise our next generation in an increasingly demanding global economy. This is a challenge America must meet with imagination and determination.

Background: The Need for Workplace Flexibility

7Between 1970 and 2000, the percentage of mothers in the workforce rose from 38 to 67 percent (Smolensky and Gootman). Moreover, the number of hours worked by dual-income families has increased dramatically. Couples with children worked a full 60 hours a week in 1979. By 2000 they were working 70 hours a week (Bernstein and Kornbluh). And more parents than ever are working long hours. In 2000, nearly 1 out of every 8 couples with children was putting in 100 hours a week or more on the job, compared to only 1 out of 12 families in 1970 (Jacobs and Gerson).

8In addition to working parents, there are over 44.4 million Americans who provide care to another adult, often an older relative. Fifty-nine percent of these caregivers either work or have worked while providing care (“Caregiving”).

9In a 2002 report by the Families and Work Institute, 45 percent of employees reported that work and family responsibilities interfered with each other “a lot” or “some” and 67 percent of employed parents report that they do not have enough time with their children (Galinsky, Bond, and Hill).

10Over half of workers today have no control over scheduling alternative start and end times at work (Galinsky, Bond, and Hill). According to a recent study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 49 percent of workers—over 59 million Americans—lack basic paid sick days for themselves. And almost two-thirds of all workers—and an even larger percentage of low-income parents—lack the ability to take a day off to care for a family member (Lovell). Thirteen percent of non-poor workers with caregiving responsibilities lack paid vacation leave, while 28 percent of poor caregivers lack any paid vacation time (Heymann). Research has shown that flexible arrangements and benefits tend to be more accessible in larger and more profitable firms, and then to the most valued professional and managerial workers in those firms (Golden). Parents with young children and working welfare recipients—the workers who need access to paid leave the most—are the least likely to have these benefits, according to research from the Urban Institute (Ross Phillips).

11In the US, only 5 percent of workers have access to a job that provides paid parental leave. The Family and Medical Leave Act grants the right to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the birth or adoption of a child or for the serious illness of the worker or a worker’s family member. But the law does not apply to employees who work in companies with fewer than 50 people, employees who have worked for less than a year at their place of employment, or employees who work fewer than 1,250 hours a year. Consequently, only 45 percent of parents working in the private sector are eligible to take even this unpaid time off (Smolensky and Gootman).

12Workers often buy flexibility by sacrificing job security, benefits, and pay. Part-time workers are less likely to have employer-provided health insurance or pensions and their hourly wages are lower. One study in 2002 found that 43 percent of employed parents said that using flexibility would jeopardize their advancement (Galinsky, Bond, and Hill).

13Children, in particular, pay a heavy price for workplace inflexibility (Waters Boots). Almost 60 percent of child care arrangements are of poor or mediocre quality (Smolensky and Gootman). Children in low-income families are even less likely to be in good or excellent care settings. Full-day child care easily costs $4,000 to $10,000 per year—approaching the price of college tuition at a public university. As a result of the unaffordable and low quality nature of child care in this country, a disturbing number of today’s children are left home alone: Over 3.3 million children ages 6–12 are home alone after school each day (Vandivere et al.).

14Many enlightened businesses are showing the way forward to a 21st century flexible workplace. Currently, however, businesses have little incentive to provide families with the flexibility they need. We need to level the playing field and remove the competitive disadvantages for all businesses that do provide workplace flexibility.

15This should be a popular priority. A recent poll found that 77 percent of likely voters feel that it is difficult for families to earn enough and still have time to be with their families. Eighty-four percent of voters agree that children are being shortchanged when their parents have to work long hours. . . .

Proposal: Win-Win Flexibility

16A win-win approach in the US to flexibility . . . might function as follows. It would be “soft touch” at first—requiring a process and giving business an out if it would be costly to implement—with a high-profile public education campaign on the importance of workplace flexibility to American business, American families, and American society. A survey at the end of the second year would determine whether a stricter approach is needed.

17Employees would have the right to make a formal request to their employers for flexibility in the number of hours worked, the times worked, and/or the ability to work from home. Examples of such flexibility would include part-time, annualized hours,¹ compressed hours,² flex-time,³ job-sharing, shift working, staggered hours, and telecommuting.

18The employee would be required to make a written application providing details on the change in work, the effect on the employer, and solutions to any problems caused to the employer. The employer would be required to meet with the employee and give the employee a decision on the request within two weeks, as well as provide an opportunity for an internal appeal within one month from the initial request.

19The employee request would be granted unless the employer demonstrated it would require significant difficulty or expense entailing more than ordinary costs, decreased job efficiency, impairment of worker safety, infringement of other employees’ rights, or conflict with another law or regulation.

20The employer would be required to provide an employee working a flexible schedule with the same hourly pay and proportionate health, pension, vacation, holiday, and FMLA benefits that the employee received before working flexibly and would be required thereafter to advance the employee at the same rate as full-time employees.

21Who would be covered: Parents (including parents, legal guardians, foster parents) and other caregivers at first. Eventually all workers should be eligible in our flexible, 24 × 7 economy. During the initial period, it will be necessary to define non-parental “caregivers.” One proposal is to define them as immediate relatives or other caregivers of “certified care recipients” (defined as those whom a doctor certifies as having three or more limitations that impede daily functioning—using diagnostic criteria such as Activities of Daily Living [ADL]/Instrumental Activities of Daily Living [IADL]—for at least 180 consecutive days). . . .

22Public Education: Critical to the success of the proposal will be public education along the lines of the education that the government and business schools conducted in the 1980s about the need for American business to adopt higher quality standards to compete against Japanese business. A Malcolm Baldridge—like award⁴ should be created for companies that make flexibility win-win. A public education campaign conducted by the Department of Labor should encourage small businesses to adopt best practices of win-win flexibility. Tax credits could be used in the first year to reward early adopters.

Works Cited

Bernstein, Jared, and Karen Kornbluh. Running Faster to Stay in Place: The Growth of Family Work Hours and Incomes. Washington: New America Foundation, 2005. New America Foundation. Web. 22 May 2008.

Galinsky, Ellen, James Bond, and Jeffrey E. Hill. Workplace Flexibility: What Is It? Who Has It? Who Wants It? Does It Make a Difference? New York: Families and Work Institute, 2004. Print.

Golden, Lonnie. The Time Bandit: What U.S. Workers Surrender to Get Greater Flexibility in Work Schedules. Washington: Economic Policy Institute, 2000. Economic Policy Institute. Web. 18 May 2008.

Heymann, Jody. The Widening Gap: Why America’s Working Families Are in Jeopardy—and What Can Be Done About It. New York: Basic, 2000. Print.

Jacobs, Jerry, and Kathleen Gerson. The Time Divide: Work, Family and Gender Inequality. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2004. Print.

Lovell, Vickey. No Time to Be Sick: Why Everyone Suffers When Workers Don’t Have Paid Sick Leave. Washington: Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2004. Institute for Women’s Policy Research. Web. 20 May 2008.

National Alliance for Caregiving and AARP. Caregiving in the U.S. Bethesda: NAC, 2004. National Alliance for Caregiving. Web. 20 May 2008.

Ross Phillips, Katherin. Getting Time Off: Access to Leave among Working Parents. Washington: Urban Institute, 2004. Urban Institute. Web. 21 May 2008. New Federalism: National Survey of America’s Families B-57.

Smolensky, Eugene, and Jennifer A. Gootman, eds. Working Families and Growing Kids: Caring for Children and Adolescents. Washington: The National Academies P, 2004. Print.

Vandivere, Sharon, et al. Unsupervised Time: Family and Child Factors Associated with Self-Care. Washington: Urban Institute, 2003. Urban Institute. Web. 21 May 2008. Assessing the New Federalism 71.

Waters Boots, Shelley. The Way We Work: How Children and Their Families Fare in a 21st Century Workplace. Washington: New America Foundation, 2004. New America Foundation. Web. 22 May 2008.

Wenger, Jeffrey. Share of Workers in “Nonstandard” Jobs Declines. Briefing Paper. Washington: Economic Policy Institute, 2003. Economic Policy Institute. Web. 18 May 2008.

¹Annualized hours means working different numbers of hours a week but a fixed annual total. [Editor’s note]