Employee Benefits from Alternative Work Arrangements
Background
Various alternative work arrangements exist for use in
businesses and other types of organizations; included among the options are
compressed work weeks, flexible work schedules, telecommuting, and job sharing.
This case focuses on alternative work arrangements in general rather than on a
particular one exclusively; however, telecommuting does receive additional
attention.
The case revolves around the potential advantages and
disadvantages that are associated with alternative work arrangements, and the
factors that are contributing to an increased use of various alternative work
arrangements by employers. With respect to the various advantages and
disadvantage that are identified in the case, the positives seem to outweigh
the negatives. Organizations that offer flexible working arrangements are, and
will continue to be, employers of choice. Employees consistently rank flexible
schedules high on their list of desired benefits; employers who are reluctant
to offer these popular perks will find themselves falling short in the bidding
wars for talent. The case identifies three underlying factors that are driving
the movement toward the increased utilization of alternative work arrangements
in many different workplaces. These factors are: (a) the needs, desires, and
expectations of workers for greater flexibility at work; (b) fuel costs and
fuel consumption associated with commuting, and the related carbon footprint
impact; and (c) the restrictive impact of the 2008-2009 economic recessions on job
opportunities.
The case concludes by pointing out that many nations have
experimented successfully with various flexible work programs and some
countries have enacted legislation promoting alternative work arrangements. It
then poses the question: “Will the United States government and American
businesses be adequately prepared to meet future economic challenges, at least
in part, by embracing the movement toward increasing use of alternative work
arrangements?”
Alternative Work Arrangements: Possible Solutions for a
Plethora of Problems?
Alternative work arrangements, such as compressed work
weeks, flexible work schedules, telecommuting, or job sharing, can have
positive and negative consequences for employers and employees. In general,
alternative work arrangements can generate beneficial outcomes, particularly
for employers, such as increased employee retention, loyalty and morale; higher
productivity; improved recruiting of highly qualified workers; decreased employee
tardiness and unscheduled absences; and maximum use of facilities and
equipment. “On the employees’ side, telecommuting–one type of alternative
work arrangement–has favorable effects on perceived autonomy, the resolution
of work” family conflicts, job performance, job satisfaction, and the
experience of stress. What is more, it does not harm perceived career prospects
or the quality of workplace relationships. On the downside, however, are the
challenges associated with making these programs work for both employer and
employees: handling issues regarding employee training, work monitoring, and
performance evaluation; maintaining lines of communication with bosses and
coworkers; and changing the attitudes of managers who might be uncomfortable with
anything other than traditional working arrangements.
On balance the positives seem to outweigh the negatives.
Organizations that offer flexible working arrangements are, and will continue
to be, employers of choice. Employees consistently rank flexible schedules high
on their list of desired benefits; employers who are reluctant to offer these
popular perks will find themselves falling short in the bidding wars for
talent.
Although alternative work arrangements can be highly
beneficial for both employers and employees, we need to ask the question: What
seems to be the underlying factors that are driving the movement toward the
increased utilization of alternative work arrangements in many different
workplaces? One factor reflects the needs and desires of workers. Many people
today are seeking flexibility at work. Parents may want more time for family.
Students hope to fit employment into a busy class schedule. And some people
look for work after retirement. Whatever their situation, they’re not alone in
wanting a job that’s a better match for their lives.
Younger workers and those nearing retirement age are two
particular segments of the workforce that can be meaningfully targeted by
employers offering various alternative work arrangements. Younger workers are
entering the workforce with different expectations than previous generations of
workers. Whereas their parents were work-centric, most members of Generations X
and Y give priority to their personal lives; or at the very least they desire
to balance their work lives and personal lives. Sharif Khan, vice-president of
human resources at Microsoft Canada, says, “Gen X and Gen Y are coming
into the workplace with the expectation that they’re going to be treated as
individuals, [who] want to be able to fit their life and their work together
comfortably, as opposed to focusing on work and dealing with life after the
fact.
Another important demographic group in the workforce
consists of those individuals nearing retirement. Baby Boomers are reaching
retirement age. While many Boomers may choose to stretch their retirement date
based on some combination of lifestyle choice and recent market developments,
many are opting for less-demanding positions or reduced workloads. “By
2020, 16 percent of the U.S. population will be age 65 and over, up from 12
percent in 1999.Yet leaders of many organizations ignore aging workforce issues
despite the potential problems they see coming, and some damage seems likely to
occur before the issues receive appropriate attention.[T]he size of the Baby
Boomer demographic group exceeds current graduating classes, and replacing
their experience will be a challenge for most firms.
Increasingly, business and governmental organizations are
adopting alternative work arrangements for economic reasons. For example, a May
2008 poll conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management indicated that
18 percent of responding organizations offered telecommuting in order to help
employees with rising fuel costs. Four months later, with fuel prices
continuing to soar, the percentage of organizations offering the telecommuting
option had risen to 40 percent. In October 2008, when gasoline prices were
peaking, Ann Bednarz, writing in Network World, reported that [g]as shortages
in the Southeast United States are prompting companies to consider expanding
their telework programs so employees can conserve fuel. Other options workers
are weighing include greater use of carpools and public transit, along with
alternative scheduling arrangements such as four-day work weeks.
In addition to the dramatic increase in fuel costs in the
summer and autumn of 2008, concerns about global warming and long commutes have
fostered interest in alternative arrangements. Moreover, two recession-related
factors could lead more employees to seek out long-distance telecommuting
options for at least part of their time on the job. First, the slow housing
market limits people’s ability to move to new jobs. Consequently, rather than
physically commuting a long distance for a new job, part-time, long-distance
telecommuting could be an option. Second, the weak job market that has been
caused by the recession appears to be increasing the number of commuter
marriages wherein the spouses work in different cities. Here too, part-time, long-distance
telecommuting might be a viable option.
Many nations have experimented successfully with various
flexible work programs; and indeed, some countries have enacted laws to make
alternative work arrangements more accessible to employees. Although the United
States has not enacted such legislation, the demographic and economic changes
that are occurring may result in alternative work arrangements laws that
“could play an important role in preparing the U.S. economy for the
future.
Will the U.S. government and American businesses be
adequately prepared to meet future economic challenges, at least in part, by
embracing the movement toward increasing use of alternative work arrangements?
This case was written by Michael K. McCuddy, The Louis S.
and Mary L. Morgal Chair of Christian Business Ethics and Professor of
Management, College of Business Administration, Valparaiso University.
Discuss these:
1. How can employees benefit from alternative work
arrangements? How can employers benefit from alternative work arrangements?
2. What are some of the possible negative outcomes for
employers and/or employees regarding alternative work arrangements?
3. What types of factors are influencing organizations to
consider using alternative work arrangements? Explain how alternative work
arrangements can address the problems/issues that are raised by these factors.
4. Should the availability of alternative work arrangements
to employees in the United States be mandated by law? Why or why not?
