|
|||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Keeping Work/Life Programs
It's still too early to tell just what effect, if any, this recession will have on corporate America's evolving commitment to work/life balance. What is becoming clear to both employers and employees are the ramifications of cutting those programs -- something employers learned from the 2001 recession. Though actual numbers aren't in yet, Jackie James, research director for the Boston College Center for Work & Family, says she's hearing from the center's membership of more than 100 HR leaders nationwide that, unlike work/life cuts in the previous downturn, "there's no drastic pulling back at this point." Though most of her members say they aren't asking for, or getting, anything new in workplace-flexibility or job-sharing programs -- or even more ancillary perks such as on-site daycare or fitness centers -- "many are now preparing to go before top leadership in a very proactive way to argue that work/life offerings already in place be spared" the cost-cutting ax. And from all indications, top leadership seems more willing to buy that argument today -- because of both morale and cost reasons. "Right now, the concept of morale as a bottom-line issue is changing with the changing generations," she says. "To date, the big multinationals are the ones that tend to really get it. We'll see where all this goes in time." "In particular," says Bruce Segall, director of marketing for Sirota Survey Intelligence in Purchase, N.Y., "the availability of flexible-work arrangements is expected to rise this year" because of the savings they represent to companies. Or as Jim Bird, CEO of Atlanta-based consultancy WorkLifeBalance.com, puts it, "workplace flexibility makes money and saves money." Such flexibility would include shorter work weeks, telecommuting and job sharing. He adds that this will be especially true in the larger, better-performing companies within the better-performing industries, such as healthcare and medical services. Even some of Sirota's clients in the harder-hit financial, technology and manufacturing industries "are not only continuing their [work/life] support, but are increasing their offerings," Segall says. Examples include increasing 401(k) matching, adding wellness programs and launching large-scale flexible-work arrangements. Bird sees many of the larger U.S. companies "trying not to abandon these programs [but] looking for ways to continue to show a commitment [to work/life balance] across the company" without it costing an arm and a leg. "It's at the larger organizations where there's been a realization of the bottom-line benefits to keeping work/life initiatives," he says. At the same time, "we are seeing steps they're taking to limit expenditures," Bird says. "It's early still," he adds. "A lot of companies have kind of been holding their breath, kind of putting things on hold for now. But at least at this point, there's not the rush to do what they did in 2001 in terms of slashing programs and perks. "The reason for that is there has been more recognition and buy-in over the last eight years [by employers], more of an acknowledgement that [workplace flexibility and other work/life benefits] are a real bottom-line, concrete issue," he says. Just as employers are reluctant to cut work/life programs that have become more proven and accepted in the last eight years as boosts to motivation, productivity and employer brands, so too are employees trying harder than ever to bring some balance to their lives. In an online survey conducted by FedEx Office in November, nearly half (47 percent) of more than 500 full-time U.S. workers said better work/life balance would be even more important to them in 2009, compared to 2008, recession or no. Nearly nine in 10 (86 percent) of respondents to the Finding Better Balance survey said they plan to actively pursue this balance in 2009. With companies looking to cut costs, now is the perfect time for forward-thinking employers and balance-seeking employees to sit down at the negotiating table and come up with some plans that make sense for all parties, experts say. "This kind of environment does present options on both sides," says Rebecca Mazin, human resource consultant and president of Recruit Right in Larchmont, N.Y. "I'm seeing employers offering cuts to the work week, without pay, to save costs," and employees agreeing to such plans to help their companies avoid layoffs. "Employees I know, both as clients and as friends, are doing a good job right now lobbying with their bosses about the value of their work and their job," Mazin says. "Certainly, as we all know, this is not the best time to try and negotiate a brand-new reduced work-time schedule. But it might be a good time to market a reduced work week with some pay cuts, not necessarily full cuts per hour, but lesser cuts in keeping with the value of what will be accomplished overall" for telecommuting or four-day-work-week arrangements, she says. Bottom line, she says: Employers will be just as happy to discuss cost-cutting, layoff-avoiding approaches in this downturn as employees will be to spend more time with their families and keep their jobs intact. "What's different about these discussions this time around," Mazin adds, "is that the notion of working from home is not being viewed as just a temporary thing anymore; it's now a serious and permanent work option. It's now commonly accepted. Most all of us have high-speed and wireless capabilities at home. That wasn't the case in 2001." Needless to say, with layoff and unemployment figures increasing daily, it does remain to be seen just how willing employers will be -- on a large scale and through time -- to work with employees on cost-cutting alternatives to downsizing. "Most of our members understand the importance of these alternatives," says James. "There are ways to figure which program [or person] is less risky to let go. Most have cost-benefit-ratio formulas and methods, and we're telling those who do to definitely use them. "The costs of turnovers are still out there," she says. "Most organizations don't want to lose valuable employees," noting that studies show that voluntary turnover occurs after layoffs as employees leave "due to the morale issues and work struggles in keeping things going with less staff."
February 4, 2009 Copyright 2009© LRP Publications |
||||||
Print
Email
Write to the Editor
Reprints
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
© Copyright 2010 LRP Publications. All rights reserved.
|
||||