Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26080538
label
FMLA [Family and Medical Leave Act]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26080538
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
FMLA [Family and Medical Leave Act]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Margaret “Maggie” Williams' Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26080538
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-2194630-20130359S-Seg2-014-002-2015
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
29c4d7508188b79b
ocrText
Ellen Co-President Galinsky you would
G Shought Families and Work Institute this
330 Seventh Avenue
New York, New York 10001
EG
(212) 465.2044
Fax (212) 465.8637
5
fill NEW ISSUES
Families and Work Institute
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Friends of the Families and Work Institute
FROM:
Ellen Galinsky and Dana E. Friedman
RE:
The National Study of the Changing Workforce
DATE:
September 9, 1993
We are very excited about our latest research project, The National Study of the
Changing Workforce, and we hope that you have seen or heard some of the extensive media
coverage the report has received since its release on September 3rd. As a friend of FWI, we
wanted to share a pre-publication copy of the Highlights of the study with you, and a sampling
of the press coverage.
The National Study of the Changing Workforce is a nationally representative study of
close to 3400 workers across the country, funded by fifteen sponsors who helped guide its
progress. This is a longitudinal study which we plan to repeat every four years. We believe that
we have a ground-breaking story to tell about the attitudes and lives of American workers today.
We released the study to the media at a press conference in New York on September 1.
There has already been enormous public and media attention. The comprehensiveness of the
study provided many different angles for journalists. The New York Times and Wall Street
Journal both plan to do a series of stories on a range of topics. The page one stories in The
Chicago Tribune, The Boston Globe and The Miami Herald concentrated on the ever-present
work ethic. The lead Labor Day editorial in The Washington Post focussed on job security and
flexibility. The television news coverage has also been extensive: Good Morning America,
Sunday's Today Show, CBS Evening News, CBS Up to the Minute, CNN, and ABC's Nightline,
covered several issues, including the effects of stress, especially after downsizing. The more than
two dozen radio shows were brief, but call-in shows have convinced us that we have struck a
resonant chord for today's workers.
330 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York 10001 (212) 465.2044 Fax (212) 465.8637
Families and Work Institute, page 2
Both the Highlights and a more in-depth report we are calling the Sourcebook, will be
published in October. However, these reports are just the beginning. Our next step will be to
raise funds so that we can prepare additional reports based on the data, such as one on the
contingent workforce, including part-time workers, temporaries, and independent contractors. We
would also like to write a report on gender differences, on older and younger workers, and on
the stress factors for working parents.
We are proud to share these findings with you, and hope that you are as enthusiastic about
their possibilities as we are. We are eager to hear your reaction to the report, as well as your
ideas for subsequent work. Please feel free to let us know if you would like to receive additional
information about the study or if you have any questions.
EG/DEF
Chicago Tribune
Final
50c
Friday, September 3, 1993
147th Year No 246 c Chicago Tribune
4 Sections
M
Times change, many job attitudes don't
By Mike Dorning
spouse.
And it includes several chal-
ries of questions on contacts with
TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
Those findings are among the
lenges to popular wisdom.
members of "ethnic and cultural
results of a broad-ranging poll by
For example, according to this
groups other than your own."
NEW YORK-Another work-
the New York-based Families and
survey, younger employees are no
Nor is the new man more will-
place myth may be shattered.
Work Institute that posed more
more eager than their older peers
ing to pick up a broom than his
Women do not appear to be
than 1,200 questions to Americans
to work with people of other eth-
father.
noticeably more sympathetic as
on attitudes toward their jobs,
nic and cultural groups.
Among dual-income families.
bosses than men, according to a
families and personal lives.
Overall, 52 percent of workers
younger men did not significantly
national survey of 3,400 workers
Based on telephone interviews
said they would prefer to work
differ from older men in their
released Thursday.
conducted during 1992, it portrays
with "more people like you,"
own reports of the responsibility
But supervisors, male and
a nation of workers buffeted by
while 34 percent said they would
they take for such household
female. who actively care for a
the recession, stretched for time
prefer "more people different from
chores as cooking. cleaning, shop-
child are considered more suppor-
for themselves and struggling to
you." The rest expressed no pre-
ping or paying bills.
tive by their employees. And so
balance the demands of work and
ference. The question was posed
Younger men were more likely
are managers with a working
family life.
in the survey at the end of a se-
SEE SURVEY, PAGE e
Survey
strongly agree that they try to do
their jobs well, "no matter what it
takes." By contrast, she noted.
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
only 28 percent strongly agreed
to spend time doing home repairs.
that they would be willing to
But older families generally have
work harder in order for their
higher incomes, making it easier
company to succeed.
for them to hire someone to do re-
pairs, noted James T. Bond, senior
"They're resilient. They're not
researcher for the survey.
broken by this. They still care
about doing a good job," said
The study's examination of dif-
Ellen Galinksy, co-president of the
ferences between male and female
Families and Work Institute.
management styles was based on
nine scales designed to measure
Employees are complaining
empathy.
that their workload has grown too
large. Forty-three percent of work-
Employees were asked such
ers said the demands of their job
questions as whether their super-
are "excessive."
visor is supportive during
troubles at work and whether
Asked how work life has affect-
they felt comfortable discussing
ed them at home, 40 percent said
personal problems with the super-
they had left housework undone
visor.
because of their job.
Among the study's other find-
Asked which of 20 considera-
ings:
tions were "very important" to
The effect of the recession has
their decision to accept their last
permeated the work force much
job offer. workers ranked the posi-
more deeply than unemployment
tion's effect on their personal and
numbers suggest.
family life second. with 60 percent
Forty-two percent of workers
citing it as a consideration. "Open
said their company had perma-
communications" ranked first,
nent layoffs during the previous
mentioned by 65 percent. Job se-
year. and 17 percent felt during
curity ranked eighth (54 percent
the 1992 interviews that it was
cited it) and salary 16th (35 per-
likely or very likely they would
cent cited it). Bond noted that
lose their jobs during the follow-
often there are only small
ing year.
variations in salaries open to any
individual worker.
Loyalty to employers conse-
quently appears to be fading, even
Seven percent-or one in 14-
while workers view strong job
of working Americans said they
performance as "an insurance
care for an elderly relative, friend
card," said Ellen Galinsky, co-
or spouse. Within the next five
president of the Families and
years, 18 percent of all workers
Work Institute.
expect to take on responsibility
Some 57 percent of workers
for the care of an elderly person.
The Boston Blobe
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
Worker poll shows family, fringes gain favor
By Tom Mashberg
81/2 hours at work and 6 more hours
Managers with families of their own.
GLOBE STAFF
of commuting, chores and children.
for instance, are far more patient
A similar majority say they have
with employees who lose job time
in
American workers are sacrificing
seen a co-worker lose a job in recent
because of child-related problems.
fatter paychecks and the fast track
years, and are deeply nervous about
And when it comes to cooking, clean-
for more fun on the job and more
the economy and their own job secu-
ing, shopping and child care, women
time with their families, according to
rity.
in two-income couples are four times
a major survey of life in the Ameri-
The survey of 3,381 workers na-
more likely than men to carry the
can workplace.
tionwide, by the New York-based
load.
Three in five employees say they
Families and Work Institute, con-
But the most profound finding.
feel "used up" by the end of the day
firms some trends that have been
labor specialists and workers say. is
GLOBE STAFF CHART
- a day that piles up an average of
chronicled informally for years.
WORK, Page 20
- and
home life over be money and po
sponsibility
The pattern Marks -** 1.. Vane
Metirath a 30-year-old data analyst
with Hale \ Dorr in Boston. She
and she could easily earn more than
her $0,000 .1 year as an executive
secretary In another office. But the
law firm's inage benefits emergen-
? on-ster day care. flexible work
hours and a computer terminal in
Worker poll family, fringes gaining
the home have kept her III place for
seven years.
"Let" face II. data analysis is
pretty dry." -he said. "I used to be a
career-first person I wanted to be
a flight attendant but I've changed.
I seek fulfillment from family.
Punctuating the changes in
McGrath's life was the survey's find-
ing that ST percent of American
workers live with at least one family
member It percent have roommates
and just 9 percent live alone). Ac-
cording to the Bureau of Labor Sta-
tisties, the number of workers who
have with family members is 15
GLOBE STAFT
percent higher than it was in a 1990
Denise Coppola, a legal secretary for Hale & Dorr, retrieves her daughter Cristina, 6, from the on-site
survey. before recession and down.
emergency day care facility that the law firm offers as a fringe benefit for working parents
sizing rippled through the American
workforce. foreing many children
") in .4 less joyful atmosphere; I've
and parents to live together (i) cut
put my ambitions aside in favor of
costs.
my family life. and my husband
work,
A result. the survey said, is that
he's wonderful. but I'm the one who
Percent of workers who considered these reasons very important" in deciding D
finding time for spouses. children.
sweeps the house."
take their current job. Satery ranked below other factors.
parents or partners is becoming a
Open communications
priority.
Momentum growing
Effect on personal/fermily -
60%
"It's a profound new path after
The survey found that the fam-
quality
59%
15 turbulent years in the workplace."
ily-first trend is gaining momentum
Control over work content
55%
among younger men. About one-
FRIDAY.
said Ellen Galinsky. who directed
third of men under 40 said they
job security
54%
the survey. "For years, people were
would consider giving up both pre-
Family supportive policies
46%
living and breathing their careers.
motions and pay increases in favor of
Friege
1
43%
Now they're saying. I just won't put
a better home life twice the num-
Control of work achedule
aside my family life.
I
Randi Pleskow of Needham. a
ber of men who felt that way five
25%
THE BOSTON GLORE
35-year-old mother of three who
years ago.
trained'as a pediatric surgeon. says
"I used to think rd put up with
Percent of men and women in femilies who take the greater
she took the path of fewer hours de-
endless hours forever." said John
responsibility for household work
spite her original ambitions of be-
Costello. an engineer with Polaroid
MEN
coming well-known. even famous. in
Corp. in Waltham who has declined
Cooking
81%
the field of gastroenterology.
offers of better pay from other com-
"I guess [ fit the bill exactly."
panies. "I once saw myself as a man-
Repairs
MEN
91%
14%
said Pleskow, who now works a flexi-
ager. Now I manage my family
ble schedule as a researcher at the
MEN
Costello, 38. says he took the job
Cleaning
78%
New England Medical Center in
at Polaroid for reasons big and
Boston. "I turned my whole career
MEN
small. The office is within biking dis-
Shopping
87%
around: I could earn twice the mon-
Lance of his Belmont home. and the
MEN
company even installed new show-
ers. More importantly. he said. his
bosses have children and never
SOURCE
1
and
1
seoul when he needs a morning off.
G ORI STATE CHAT
"I work a half-day last week." he
Specialists said the survey's re-
he said. "I've had fun, but don't fre
said. "It's viewed more positively
sults offer other insights into a work
like 1 gave up all the traditional n'
here. and believe me I've seen it
force where the presence of women
wards. 1 can get those here."
viewed negatively elsewhere. It's not
has risen from 40 percent to 48
He also gets to enjoy a bit 0
that I've dropped my career. I'm do-
percent in 15 years. Not since the
quirkiness. Like the day a co-worker
ing well here and the fringe benefits
Department of Labor's Quality of
raised a French flag in the lunch-
are great. But family is first."
Employment Survey. conducted in
room and declared one of the table.
According to the survey. that
1977. they say, has such a broad-
a French-only zone. Even the food
view is gaining among managers, but
based survey been conducted of
was French.
IS not as universal as workers would
workers' lives.
"It's the kind of thing that add;
like. Forty percent of the working
The discoveries included changes
extra appeal," he said.
parents questioned said they still felt
in the work environment. Workers
More employee control
they were breaking unspoken rules
are crediting their employers with
Browne said this type of work.
of the workplace by taking time off
more flexibility and with trying to
place approach, which can give em.
from the job to care for their chil-
make the workplace more open and
ployees control over their own hours.
dren.
comfortable.
work teams and even their spots on
Open dialogue praised
the assembly line. has angered
A
Asked why they had taken their
unions.
"I wouldn't say all employers
most recent jobs. 65 percent of those
"The survey points up the weak-
have caught on Lo this," said Whit
surveys cited open communications:
ened position of unions." he said.
Browne, a Wakefield consultant who
60 percent cited the effect on family
noting that they now represent only
helps businesses with employee
life: and 59 percent management
15 percent of the labor force.
needs. "But the ones who listen are
quality. Only 35 percent of workers
"They're ceding almost everything
learning that simple things like on-
rated salary as very important.
to managers."
site child care work wonders for mo-
"A lot of this stems from the psy-
Still. the heart of the survey was
rale."
chologists that total-quality and
its focus on the way employees bal-
In day care. at least, companies
team-management stuff. said
ance work and family concerns. De-
seem, to be coming around. The sur-
Browne. "If people buy into it then
spite the big changes in attitude and
vey noted that parents with young.
they have huge motivational re-
smaller changes in the office place.
sters tend (1) miss a week more each
wards. They feel like they've practi-
66 percent of employed parents with
year due to absenteeism than work-
cally signed the products they've
young children surveyed said they
ers without children.
made."
still lacked time at home with their
As a result. more and more com-
It was that kind of environment
children.
panies are investing in day care.
that drew Michael Berry, a Cam-
Deirdre Mailing. a dental hygien-
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Mass-
bridge father of two. to Thinking
ist in Medway and new mother. said
achusetts yesterday opened its first
Machines Corp., a high-tech firm
her key was finding a likable place
day-care center. in Quincy. with
near his home that tries to keep the
and a livable schedule. and not wor-
spaces for 20 children. The company
man light. Like many workers in
rying too much about advancement
said it received nearly 70 applica-
the survey, Berry said he did not
above all else.
tions and hopes to expand (.) in
give up the urge (1) get ahead. He
"I've been told that I could make
spaces in the new few weeks.
just work his ambition to a new set-
more money elsewhere." she said.
Sure it a response." said Susan
ting
"But we have a great group of girls
beahy. a spokeswornan for the giant
here and we work well together. W.
with insurer. our workers will us
I took a pay cut very willingly
make time for our kids. Who needs
NYSE, 2C
BUSINESS
SECTION
AMEX, 5C
FRIDAY,
NASDAQ, 5C
SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
The Miami Herald
WHAT AMERICA'S WORKERS SAY
These are some of the findings of the Familles and Work Institute study
on the attitudes of America's work force:
Study says workers
Workers feel significant job
Responding to why they took
Insecurity. Besides the 20 percent
their most recent job, 65 percent of
who fear losing their jobs, 42 percent
workers cited open communications,
feel burned out
have survived downsizing in their
60 percent the effect on personal or
companies and 28 percent have seen
family life, 59 percent the nature of
cutbacks in managers over the past
the work and 59 percent the man-
WORKERS, FROM 1C
year.
agement quality. Only 35 percent of
said Burke Stinsory, a
At the end of the work day, 42
workers rated salary as a very impor-
spokesman for American Telephone & Telegraph
percent of employees feel "used up"
tant reason for taking the job.
Co.
and 40 percent feel tired when they
SOURCE: Associated Press
It shows that when workers are given more free-
get up for work in the morning.
dom to take care of family concerns. productivity
docs not suffer. he said. To the contrary, "employ-
ees feel like they are being treated fairly and want to
give back at least what they have received," Stinson
Study shows 'used up' worker
said.
The study, based on hourlong interviews with a
national sample of 3.381 workers. paints a portrait
NEW YORK - (AP) - A five-
find out worker feelings so they can
of a hard worker who feels burned out from balanc-
year study of the American work
begin to address their problems.
ing work and family life yet cares intensely about
force has come up with findings that
"We think we can use it to help us
performing well on the job.
most working people already know
identify the needs of our employees,
That employee cares more about the quality of
too well - many feel burned out by
especially in the areas of benefits and
the work environment than money or professional
the end of the day, they don't have
job satisfaction," said Judd Everhart,
advancement.
enough time with their families, and
a spokesman for Xerox Corp., one of
Employees want to change the balance between
they fear they will be laid off.
the sponsors.
work and personal life. shifting time and energy to
The study released Thursday by
The study "validates what we have
themselves and their families. the study found.
the Families and Work Institute was
known in our hearts for a long time,"
Young workers. especially those with children.
commissioned by 15 companies and
would rather make sacrifices in their education,
foundations that said they needed to
PLEASE SEE WORKERS, 3C
careers and jobs than in their personal and family
lives.
S 'vey Says E ployees
25c
Sections
News/Editorials
Teday's Contents: Page A2
Less Willing to Sacrifice
ABUDES Comics
Metro/Obituaries
Sports/Classified
Business
Style/Television
Inside: Weekend
Prices May Vary Areas Outside
Metropolitan Washington (See Box on A2)
page 2
Workers Putting More Emphasis on Personal Lives
By Barbara Vobejda
hance their personal lives, except when it
Washington Post Staff Writer
comes to giving up pay.
Workers do not perceive differences be-
A "different kind of worker" is emerging
tween their male and female supervisors,
from the strained business climate of recent
but bosses with significant child-care re-
years, according to a national survey of the
sponsibilities are seen as more supportive
American work force, which described em-
than those without such responsibilities.
ployees who are growing less willing to
Work problems are more likely to spill
make sacrifices for work and who want to
over into home life than are personal prob-
shift the balance to devote more time and
lems to spill over and cause strains at work.
energy to their personal lives.
The study concludes that companies will-
The five-year study released today by the
ing to give workers more flexibility and con-
New York-based nonprofit Families and
trol and otherwise improve the quality of
Work Institute found that workers are still
loyal, but they are more committed to doing
their jobs well than they are to their em-
"Workers' commitment is
ployers. Employees said they place as much
value on the quality of the work environ-
more to themselves than
ment-support, open communication and
flexible scheduling-as they do on salary or
to their employers.
advancement.
The study, timed to coincide with the
Perhaps more surprising
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
Labor Day weekend, linked the changing
worker attitudes to downsizing, fears about
is the high value that
job security and the intense focus on com-
petitiveness of the 1980s and '90s.
workers place on the
More than 40 percent of those surveyed
said they had experienced downsizing, near-
quality of their own
ly 20 percent say they fear they will lose
work."
their jobs and 42 percent said they often
- Families and Work Institute survey
feel "used up" by the end of the workday.
"Yet out of this turmoil a different kind of
the work environment can enhance produc-
worker has emerged," the study reported.
tivity and loyalty.
"Workers' commitment is more to them-
"These findings suggest there is an op-
selves than to their employers
Perhaps
portunity for aligning workers' needs with
more surprising is the high value that work-
workplace goals," the study said. "What
ers place on the quality of their own work."
helps workers also seems to help the work-
Workers are most willing to work hard
force be productive."
and care about the success of their company
Chip U'Ren, associate general manager
when they have good relationships with
for Salt River Project, an Arizona utility
their supervisors, do not have to choose
that helped sponsor the study, said the find-
between work and personal responsibilities
ings "validate what was intuitively known.
and feel they have an opportunity to ad-
There is a direct impact on employees'
vance, said Ellen Galinsky, co-president of
effectiveness on the job when you allow
the Families and Work Institute, a research
them to also manage their personal lives
center for workplace issues.
more effectively."
The survey of about 3,400 randomly se-
He said companies can introduce such
lected workers across the country was
programs without great expense, including
discounted child-care programs, flexible
sponsored by more than a dozen large com-
No. 272
work schedules, job sharing, and dependent
panies and foundations, including American
care accounts that set aside tax-free dollars
Express, AT&T and IBM.
Today: Hazy sunshine, hot, humid.
Low 74. Wind southwest 8-16 mph.
for child care.
But encouraging corporate managers to
Weather
late storm likely. High 94.
Saturday: Mostly cloudy, humid,
thundershowers. High 85.
Yesterday: Temp. range: 75-94.
Among other findings:
AQI: 95. Details on Page B2.
Nearly 90 percent of workers live with
focus on these worker demands may be dif-
other family members and nearly half are
ficult in a constrained economy, said Faith
caring for dependents. Employees with chil-
A. Wohl, director of human resources ini-
16TH YEAR
dren are under more stress and worry that
tiatives for the Du Pont Co., another spon-
they are not coping as well as their col-
sor of the study. At the same time, she ar-
leagues without children.
gued that companies need to realign their
Men are just as likely as women to say
approach to keep work problems from in-
they would make career trade-offs to en-
fringing on employees' personal lives.
A22 MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1993
THE WASHIN
The Washington Post
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
Labor Day 1993
A
T A TIME when the country's biggest
panies whose names are household words. The
companies are abruptly laying off longtime
Family and Work Institute, a research organiza-
employees by the thousands, it's not sur-
tion, recently carried out a study of American
prising that Americans' thinking about jobs and
working people's views of their jobs and their
job loyalty is changing. Labor Day this year is
options. Of the several thousand people it inter-
distinguished by the realization that the present
viewed, two out of every five had been through a
churning in the job market is not temporary but
corporate downsizing, and one of every five now
probably will continue.
fears being laid off.
For most of the past half-century, large corpo-
If the big companies can no longer offer old-
rations provided much of the middle class with a
high degree of security-including a tacit prom-
style job security, what can they offer employees
ise that the employee who performed well would
to obtain the kind of commitment and coopera-
stay on the payroll until retirement. In the past
tion that high productivity requires? The insti-
decade's epidemic of mergers, reorganizations
tute's study had a lot to say about that. Employ-
ees want a little more time to themselves and
and productivity drives, that promise has all but
vanished. It's uncertainty rather than actual un-
more flexibility to take care of personal concerns.
employment that is generating the growing sense
Half live in two-income families, and half have
of insecurity in this country.
dependents-usually children, but increasingly
Unemployment is, fortunately, falling. The
often elderly parents. The strong implication is
great American job-creating machine, stuck in
that the successful companies will be the ones
neutral for several years, is now back at work.
that become most adept at accommodating em-
During the past year the labor force has grown
ployees' personal responsibilities.
by a million people, but the number of jobs
That leads to a paradox. To maintain a highly
increased by 2 million. The result was that
competitive market economy with fast reflexes,
unemployment came down by a million, and the
capable of shifting labor quickly from one indus-
unemployment rate fell from 7.6 percent of the
try to another, government is going to have to
labor force in August 1992 to 6.7 percent last
play a bigger role. It is going to have to provide
month.
much of the security that the big corporations
That's a remarkable achievement and reassur-
once did, as people bounce from one employer to
ing. So why do consumer surveys continue to
another. You can see that shift beginning to
show high levels of uneasiness and caution?
happen in the Clinton administration's plans for
Part of it is that earnings aren't moving much.
universal health insurance. Pensions will come
There has been some increase in average com-
next.
pensation during the past year, but most of it has
Instead of promising lifetime jobs and benefits,
been in fringe benefits-particularly the soaring
employers will compete for good people by offer-
costs of health insurance. Cash wages and sala-
ing congenial working conditions for those who
ries haven't quite kept up with inflation, and that
need flexibility. For most of the 119.7 million
has hurt.
Americans who have jobs, this Labor Day comes
But the larger cause of this mood is the
at a tense and unsettling time-but not an
succession of announcements of layoffs by com-
unhopeful one.
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.
MARKETPLACE
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
BI
WORKPLACE
Work-Force Study Finds Loyalty Is Weak,
Divisions of Race and Gender Are Deep
BY SUE SHELLENBARGER
stead. employees under 25 show no
where they grew up with people of differ-
Staff Reporter of THE WALL. STREET JOURNAL
greater preference than older employees
ent ethnic and cultural backgrounds.
NEW YORK broad new survey of
for working with people of other races,
"The workplace is the main social arena'
American workers depicts a work force
ages or ethnic groups. Just over half of
for racial and ethnic interaction. the study
that has little loyalty to employers and is
surveyed workers of all ages said they
says. "Perhaps even more than school. it is
deeply divided by race and gender.
prefer working with people of the same
the front line in our nation's efforts" to as-
The study. the most comprehensive
race. sex. gender and education.
similate diverse workers. "and it's unlikely
look S0 far at employees' lives. also
we will succeed unless employers
reflects broader-than-expected con-
assume strong leadership.
fliet between work and family life.
Perceptions in the Workplace
The study also reflects wide-
It suggests that workers place high
Reasons considered "very important" in deciding to take current job
spread perceptions of racial and
value on flexible scheduling. atten-
sexual discrimination in the
tion to personal needs and manage-
65%
workplace. Asked to rate their
ment recognition for work well
own chances for advancement
done-and that they are willing to
Effect on Family/
60%
against those of members of
Personal
make tradeoffs, including chang-
other racial and ethnic groups.
ing jobs, to get them.
of
59%
employees of all kinds agreed
The privately funded National
58%
that minority workers' chances
Study of the Changing Workforce
were poorer than those of non-
by the Families and Work Institute,
58%
minority workers. (White men
the first installment of a planned
and white women rated minori-
quadrennial survey of U.S. work-
Control Over
55%
Work
ties' chances of advancement
ers' attitudes about their work and
higher than minority workers
personal lives, dwarfs similar ef-
New
55%
did.) Minority men and women
forts since a 1977 federally funded
54%
and white women also rated
Quality of Employment Survey.
white men's chances of advance-
The institute. a nonprofit New York
53%
ment higher than white men did
research and consulting concern,
themselves.
held hour-long telephone inter-
50%
Perceptions of discrimination
views with a nationally representa-
tive sample of 2,958 wage and
50%
take a heavy toll on job perfor-
mance. the study suggests. More
salaried workers on issues ranging
46%
from relationships with their boss-
than one-fifth of minority work-
es to household chores.
ers reported that they had been
Fringe
43%
discriminated
Less Loyal to Employers
Control of
38%
against by their
The results paint a picture of
Work
What Does Success
current employ-
American workers less loyal to em-
37%
Mean to You?
ers. Those beliefs
ployers than in the past. That isn't
correlated with a
surprising: 42% of those surveyed
Salary/Wege
35%
Personal satislaction
from doing a good job
higher tendency to
had been through downsizing. 28%
Access to
feel "burned out,"
33°
had seen management cutbacks at
Earning the respect or
a reduced willing-
their companies, and nearly 20%
No
Other
Offers
recognition of others
32%
ness to take initia-
said they fear being fired.
Getting ahead or advancing
tive on the job and
The study was financed by 15
26%
in job or career
a greater likeli-
companies and foundations: Salt
Size
of
River Project, a Phoenix utility:
Employer
18°c
Making a
hood of planning
good income
to change jobs,
Sears, Roebuck & Co.'s Allstate In-
Source: Study of the Changing Workforce,
Families and Wark institute
Feeling my work
the study showed.
surance unit: American Express
is important
And despite a
Co.; American Telephone & Tele-
20-year flood of
graph Co.: Commonwealth Fund;
Having control over work
women into the
DuPont Co.: General Mills Foundation: In-
Employees who had greater
content and schedule
work force. wo-
ternational Business Machines Corp.; John-
experience living or working
men managers
son & Johnson: Levi Strauss & Co.; Merck
with people of other races, ethnic groups
surveyed were more than twice as likely
& Co.; Mobil Corp.: Motorola Inc.; the
and ages showed a stronger preference
as men to rate their career-advancement
Rockefeller Foundation; and Xerox Corp.
for diversity in the workplace. But few
opportunities as "poor" or "fair," with
The study challenges the notion that
employees have such experience. The
39% choosing those labels, compared with
younger workers are better equipped to
study shows that even workers under 25
16% of men. In contrast, 84% of men rated
cope with a more diverse workplace. In-
had little contact in the neighborhoods
Please Turn to Page B8, Column 5
Work-Force Study Finds Loyalty
Is Weak, Some Divisions Are Deep
Continued From Page B1
Employees also assigned great impor-
their promotion chances "good" or "excel-
tance to benefits they thought would help
lent," compared with 60% of women.
them achieve a better balance between job
Women who said they saw little oppor-
and personal life. About one-quarter of
tunity for career advancement also tended
employees without flexible scheduling or
to be less loyal, less committed and less
the right to work at home said they would
satisfied on the job, the survey showed.
change jobs to gain those opportunities;
The study explodes some popular stere-
47% of those who lacked the right to
otypes about gender roles, however. Most
time off to care for sick family members
workers surveyed didn't see much differ-
said they would take a cut in pay or
ence in the way men and women manage,
benefits to get it.
for instance - though women managers
Such nontraditional benefits also conre-
were viewed as a little more sympathetic to
late with greater feelings of loyalty and
family or personal problems. On other
commitment to helping the employer suc-
criteria, including keeping workers in-
ceed, the study shows - though traditional
formed, offering recognition and support
benefits, such as health insurance, don't
and being fair, men and women managers
have the same impact.
were rated the same.
The survey reflects surprisingly broad
"Despite myths to the contrary, there is
conflict between workers' job and family
no difference, as judged by workers, be-
responsibilities. Nearly half of those sur-
tween men and women supervisors," says
veyed have responsibility for caring fbr
Chip U'Ren, associate general manager of
dependents, whether elderly or disabled
Salt River Project, one of the sponsors of
relatives or young children. And 87% ne-
the study. The finding should help compa-
ported having at least some day-to-day
nies "find ways to
break through the
family responsibilities at home, suggest-
glass ceiling," he says.
ing that work-family policies such as
flexible scheduling and dependent-care
The survey also disputes the notion that
help "shouldn't be viewed as special assis-
an emerging generation of 20-something
tance for a small group of workers, but as
males will help out their employed part-
general assistance for virtually all em-
ners by doing more chores at home. Men
ployees," the study says.
under 25 aren't any more likely to help with
The results "make you catch your
cooking, cleaning, shopping or bill-paying
breath," says Faith Wohl, director of has-
than their older counterparts, the study
man resource initiatives for DuPont, an:
shows. The only area in which younger
other sponsor of the study. The results sup-
men surpassed older men was in doing
gest work-family programs should be
repairs around the house.
broadened and integrated with quality im-
Not unexpectedly, surveyed employees
provement efforts, she says. "Ultimately,
expressed greater commitment to their
what makes your company family-friendly
jobs than to their employers. While 57%
is to be worker-friendly," she says.
strongly agreed with the statement, "I
When work and family clash, a
always try to do my job well, no matter
worker's family is more than three times
what it takes," only 28% strongly agreed
more likely to suffer than his or her job
that they were "willing to work harder
performance. the study shows. When prob-
than I have to help my [employer] suc-
lems erupt at work, employees reported
ceed."
that they were far more likely to give up
But employees also said they placed
time with their families, leave housework
high value on the quality of their work
undone or experience bad moods than to
environment, suggesting that efforts to
refuse overtime or business travel. cut
improve communication, reduce work-
their output or quarrel with their bosses.
family conflict and create a more support-
Two-thirds of surveyed employees with
ive environment might rekindle flagging
children said they lack adequate time with
loyalty. Surveyed employees who had
them. "Especially for workers with chil-
changed jobs in the past five years. for
dren, the picture is of individuals in grid-
instance, said they rated such workplace
lock," says Dana Friedman. co-president
characteristics as open communications,
of the institute. "People feel strongly about
management quality and impact on family
doing a good job at work. They also yearn
life even higher than pay in choosing an
to spend more time with their families but
employer.
arrive home exhausted."
FIRST IN DAILY R
COVER STORY
Workers
want to
get a life
By Julia Lawlor
USA TODAY
There's just one problem
with working for a living:
There's no time left for a
life.
Dallas lawyer Barry Zis-
man, 55, complains of being
under constant pressure on
the job, which eats up 67
hours of his week. His goal:
"To be able to retire before
I die."
Hairdresser/bartender
By Anne Ryan, USA TODAY
Brenda Parsons, 35, of Ra-
PARSONS: Two jobs keep
cine, Wis., logs 65 hours a
her busy 65 hours a week.
week between her day and
her night jobs. Her pay-
checks barely cover rent,
Part-time
utilities and food, and give
work on rise, 2B
her just one day - Sunday
- to rest. "I have no life,"
she declares.
As the Labor Day weekend arrives, the truth is many U.S.
workers are stretched to the limit. The National Study of
the Changing Workforce, a landmark survey of 3,400 work-
ers released today by the Families and Work Institute, finds
workers, especially those with children, are in "gridlock."
Overburdened by increasing demands at work, the study
finds many feel cheated of time for themselves and their
families.
Though still firmly committed to doing their jobs well,
workers also hunger for a work environment that allows
them to balance work and family needs. Many are willing
to sacrifice money and advancement to gain more control
over their jobs and schedules.
"Workers want to change the equation," says Ellen Ga-
Please see COVER STORY next page
2B FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3. 1993 USA TODAY
COVER STORY
Office toil spoils workers' life time
Continued from 1B
to people on the East Coast. At the
Part-time jobs on the rise
end of the day come dinner meet-
linsky of Families and Work Insti-
ings. Then he often returns to the of-
tute, a New York-based private re-
One in seven workers in indus-
fice, sometimes staying on the phone
search organization. "They want to
trialized nations is working part
until 1 a.m. with clients in Asia.
devote more time to their families
time, says a new study by the In-
For "mental health purposes,"
and friends and to their own pursuits
ternational Labour Organization.
Brown tries to take one weekend day
and less time to their jobs and ca-
Most of those 60 million part-tim-
off to be with his wife and two young
reers."
ers are women and many are
children, though some of that time
The study, conducted in 1992, is
without benefits.
he must spend reading professional
the first since a 1977 U.S. Labor De-
The study shows:
journals. The pace, he admits, is get-
partment survey to examine the
Part-time work grew be-
ting to him. Says Brown: "I have one
work lives and attitudes of employ-
tween 4% and 7% from 1979 to
or two more years I can do this."
ees in companies of all sizes, from
1990 in the industrialized world,
When Lynn Bignell and her part-
corner drugstores to the Fortune 500.
except Greece, Portugal and Swe-
ner started their New York execu-
Results cannot be compared with
den. In the European Common
tive search firm 21 years ago, a cli-
the 1977 study because different
Market, part-time work jumped
ent demanding a résumé from them
types of workers were surveyed. But
By Garry McElwee
28% between 1983 and 1988, com-
had to wait for the mail. With the fax
the '92 survey points to a different
ZISMAN: This lawyer's goal is to be
pared with a 2.4% increase in full-
machine, they want it now. "It has
kind of worker emerging from the
able to retire before 1 die.
time employment
created such pressure," Bignell says.
turmoll of the last decade, when so
The most rapid growth in
"They'll say, 'Just fax me what you
many employers struggled to stay
pire to the boss' position, up from
part-timers was in the Nether-
have. I don't need it to look good.
competitive by restructuring and cut-
63% in 1985.
lands, at 33% of all employees, up
That doesn't work for me."
ting jobs. The new worker is less loy-
The greatest drop was seen among
from 16% in 1979.
An experience Bignell had recent-
al to an employer, the study shows,
younger workers: Only 26% of 18- to
About two-thirds of all part-
ly trying to carve out more free time
and more focused on doing the job
29-year-olds aspired to the boss' job,
time workers are women, ranging
for herself illustrates just how hard
well to avoid being fired or laid off.
down from 41% in 1985. Roper also
from 90% in Belgium and Germa-
that is.
Among the findings:
found a decline in personal fulfill-
ny to 65% in the U.S.
Bignell decided she deserved a
42% of all employees work for a
ment on the job. The greatest drop
- Julia Lawlor
Friday off this summer. So one
company that had reduced its staff
occurred among executives, profes-
Thursday night, she swept a messy
the previous year, among those in
sionals and those under 30.
pile of papers off her desk into two
firms with 500 or more workers, it
Many workers would love to cut
spend more than 49 hours a week on
shopping bags and carted them off to
was 53%.
back. But with jobs scarce, they're
the job, up from 20% in 1980.
her country house in Connecticut
80% said their jobs require them
afraid to even ask.
In her 1991 book, The Over-
She spent Friday morning sorting
to work very hard; 65% said they
"The trend in the workplace is
worked American, Harvard econo-
papers on her dining room table,
must work very fast; 42% felt "used
moving in the other direction," says
mist Juliet Schor estimates the aver-
much of Friday afternoon on her ter-
up" by the end of the workday. One-
Faith Wohl, head of DuPont's work
age U.S. worker puts in 164 more
race talking business on the portable
third felt they did not have a "sup-
and family initiatives. "Managers
hours of paid labor a year than he or
phone and Sunday night in the car
portive" work culture. The average
ask me, 'What's a part-time schedule
she did 20 years ago - an extra
sorting more papers as her husband
workweek for full-time employees:
when I need people to work 60 hours
month of work.
drove back to the city.
44.3 hours; 26% worked more than
a week?' The workplace is becoming
The leisure squeeze hits high- and
"Aren't these the years I'm sup-
50 hours, 10% more than 60.
harsher, and there are higher expec-
low-wage workers alike, from secre-
posed to be sitting back and delegat-
87% live with family members,
tations in terms of hours you put in
taries and laborers to lawyers, doc-
ing?" she asks.
including parents, spouses, unmar-
and how hard you work."
tors and accountants.
Delegation is one answer. But
ried partners or children. Two-thirds
In the not-so-distant past, some
"I see high performers taking the
Schor suggests other approaches,
of those with children under age 18
predicted advancing technology
jobs of three people," says Peller
too.
said they don't have enough time to
would allow us to switch to a four-
Marion, a San Francisco psycholo-
For some workers, the solution
spend with their children; half said
day workweek. Instead, we're work-
gist who advises executives. "They
will be to gain personal time by de-
they don't have enough time to spend
ing more than ever to make ends
are working like dogs. The only free
manding compensatory time off. in-
with their spouse. Workers with chil-
meet. The number of people work-
time they have is in the shower."
stead of extra pay, when working
dren were less satisfied overall and
ing two or more jobs has skyrocket-
What gives, Marion says, is their
overtime. Employers. she says,
felt they were not coping as well as
ed: In 1991, 6.2% of the U.S. work-
personal lives. "A lot are divorced or
should be required to pay part-tim-
childless workers.
force - more than 7 million people
have never been married," she says.
ers at the same rate they pay full-
Among many workers surveyed.
- held at least two jobs, up from
"They can't sustain a relationship.
timers, SO that more people can af-
the desire to ease the time gridlock
4.9% in 1979. And it now takes two
They say, 'If this is success, why do I
ford to work a reduced schedule.
translated into a greater willingness
workers in a family to maintain a de-
feel like a boiled chicken?' The
And workers should be allowed to
to give up money and career ad-
cent standard of living.
trend is only the toughest, most hard-
choose whether they want high per-
vancement for more free time: 34%
Currently. more than 60% of all
core people who can juggle a lot of
formance rewarded with a pay raise
were willing to make "a lot" of sacri-
U.S. households depend on two in-
ambiguity are going to be in these
or with more time off.
fices to devote more time to their
comes, compared with 46% in 1969.
lean, mean organizations."
But none of these solutions seem
families, such as foregoing raises
Then there's overtime. Employers
Technology and an expanding
workable to Dallas attorney Zisman.
and promotions; 60% of workers un-
are working people longer hours to
global marketplace have added to
"I'd like to Llow down," he says.
der age 25 with children were willing
avoid hiring more staff and paying
the workload and piled on stress.
"There are a lot of things in life that
to do so. A poll of workers released
the high cost of health and pension
San Francisco attorney Robert
interest me. Work is low on the list.
last year by the Roper Organization
benefits. The average workweek for
Brown, 44, loves his job and says he
But clients want you when they want
found other signs of declining ambi-
manufacturing employees is now the
doesn't mind his 12- and 14-hour
you. If you say I want to work half
tion: 70% of those surveyed said
highest it's been since 1966, at 41.4
days, although they're taking a toll.
time,' suddenly they won't want you.
they'd rather keep their job than as-
hours. Today, 26% of all workers
He's in his office at 7:30 a.m. to talk
And they'll get somebody else."
The Philadelphia Inquirer
Section C
now
AMEX
C2 NYSE
C3
-19.00
-0.05
Dividends
C8
OTC Philadelphia
C7
+0.58
Business
Futures
C5
PhilE listings
C5
Mutual Funds
C6 Produce
C5
NASDAQ
C7 Sales & Farrings
C8
NASDAQ Small Cap
C5
Treasury Bills
C2
N.Y. Bonds
C2 U.S. Securities
C2
Friday, September 3, 1993
Happy with pay, willing to work, employees want better life
A study looked at nearly 3,000 wage and salaried workers. Forty-two percent reported feeling burned out by the day's end.
By Murray Dubin
place and whether they offer workers the
downsizing and 28 percent have seen cut-
Other findings of the study include:
Fifty-nine percent thought their house
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
right benefits.
backs in the number of managers in the past
Eighty-seven percent of workers live with
hold income "adequate" and 20 percent said
The American worker is content with the
These are some of the findings released
year.
Many feel burned out - 42 percent
family members or partners. "That's higher
it was "quite adequate "That's not what I
pay and wants to do quality work.
yesterday by The National Study of the
feel used up by the end of the workday
than I thought, said Galinsky. "The assump-
heard in the last presidential election." said
But, at a time of increasing cutbacks and
Changing Workforce, an examination of
Yet with all this, workers are extremely
tion was never that high. It means that
Galinsky. surprised at the responses. She said
downsizing. workers feel more loyalty to
nearly 3,000 wage and salaried workers con-
resilient and take a tremendous amount of
personal issues are not the issues of the few.
that the perception of adequate income
themselves than to their companies and
ducted by the Families and Work Institute,
pride in their work."
but of the many."
seemed to have little relation to the actual
want better working conditions and an en-
based in New York.
She added that a positive social climate at
Asked "What success means to you?" 52
income of the respondents or to their family
hanced lifestyle.
"Workers have seen a lot of change and
work - one with communication. support
percent said that it was personal satisfaction
size.
All that, says a new national study of work-
insecurity." said Ellen Galinsky, institute co-
and flexibility - is what workers want, "but
from doing a good job and 30 percent said it
Male and female supervisors were rated
ing men and women. appears to mean that
president.
is not necessarily high on the agenda of some
was earning the respect and recognition of
similarly. Employees with supervisors of the
corporations need to look again at the work-
"Forty-two percent have experienced
companies."
supervisors and/or peers.
See WORKERS on C2
THE PHILADELPHIA IRER
Friday, September 3. 1993
Workers seen seeking
Why Workers
Choose a Job
improved lifestyles
Percentage of workers considering 3
reason "very important" in deciding
to take a job with their current
employer.
WORKERS from C1
proves that the "work-family field
same sex as themselves do not rate
is bigger than we thought. What
Reason
Percent
their bosses any differently than
resounded loudest for me was the 87
Open communications
65
workers who have supervisors of
percent figure on Page 36."
Effect on
the opposite sex.
Referring to the 87 percent who
Workers under 25 are no more or
personal/family life
60
live with family members or part-
less likely than older men and
ners, Wohl said, "Benefits, policies
Nature of work
59
women to prefer working with a
and programs designed 10 help
Management quality
59
diverse workforce. "That surprised
workers balance their work, per-
me," said Galinsky. "It was contrary
sonal and family lives should not be
Supervisor
58
to my expectation."
viewed as special assistance for a
Gain new skills
55
Employees with children are un-
small group of workers. but as gen-
Control over work content
55
der more stress and feel they are
eral assistance for virtually all
not coping as well as employees
workers."
Job security
54
without children. "Especially for
Another result that surprised her
Co-worker quality
53
workers with children. the picture
was that three times as many work-
Stimulating work
50
is of individuals in gridlock," Ga-
ers said that work problems spilled
linsky said. "People feel strongly
over into family life as the reverse.
Job location
50
about doing a good job at work: they
"We've worked to keep a lot of
Family-supportive policies
46
also yearn to spend more time with
problems from home from spilling
Fringe benefits
43
their families, but they arrive home
over into the workplace. Keep the
exhausted."
problem out there," she said.
Control of work schedule
38
The study, which was conducted
"We haven't looked at what prob-
Advancement opportunity
37
in 1992, consisted of hour-long tele-
lems the work environment are cre-
Salary/wage
35
phone interviews with a randomly
ating in the home. It might play out
selected national sample of work-
as drug abuse, teenage alcoholism
Access to decision makers
33
ers.
and increasing divorce. And then it
No other offers
32
Faith Wohl, director of human-
gets reflected back in the work-
Management opportunity
26
resource initiatives for DuPont Co.,
place.
one of the corporate sponsors of the
"I think it demands change about
Size of employer
18
five-year-project, said that study
how we think about the workplace."
SOURCE. Families and Work Institute 1993
The Record
SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
Friend of he People 11 Serves
50c
Work ethic is alive and weary
Americans take jobs to heart, study finds
JOB BURNOUT
"In the past three months how often have you felt
By ADAM GELLER
ing pressures and priorities,
heaval of recent years has shaken
mined as ever to work hard and do
Emotionally
Used up at
Tired when
Burned out
Frustrated
Staff Writer
they've embraced the American
many employees, causing uncer-
their jobs well, but their commit-
drained from
the end of
you get up in
or stressed
by your job?
It's not easy being an American
work ethic in new ways, making
tainty and burnout. The study was
ment is to self and family first,
your work?
the workday?
the morning
by your
and have to
work?
worker.
hard work a personal rather than a
conducted by the Families and
before employer, the study said.
face another
Co-workers are laid off and no
corporate goal.
Work Institute, a New York-based
The institute's "National Study
40%
42%
day on 40%
42%
one knows who'll be next. Working
Those are the conclusions deliv-
non-profit research organization.
the job?
39%
of the Changing Workforce," con-
parents find it tough even to patch
ered in a major study released to-
34%
"Out of this change, we feel a
ducted over five years, is based on
33%
30%30%
together makeshift solutions to
day that focuses on work and how
different kind of worker has
27%
29%
30%
31%
interviews with 3,700 men and
29%
child care and chores. The added
25%
it affects family life, relationships
emerged," Ellen Galinsky, the
women across the country. Re-
stress stokes tempers and extin-
with employers and colleagues,
FWI's co-president, said at a New
searchers worked with sponsors -
guishes personal energy. And
and corporate productivity.
York news conference. "Their fo-
including the American Telephone
bosses and benefits don't always
The report, billed as the most
cus is on what they can control,
& Telegraph Co., Johnson &
offer much support.
comprehensive ever to examine
since there is so much change go-
Johnson, and Merck & Co. Inc. -
But even as workers struggle to
links between work and family life,
ing on around them."
cope with these drastically chang-
concludes that the economic up-
American workers are as deter-
See WORK ETHIC Page A-8
Never/Rarely
Sometimes
Often/Very Often
AF
A-8 THE RECORD
FROM PAGE ONE
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
WORK ETHIC: Americans seeking satisfaction with jobs
put and provide the benefits and
From Page A-1
SOME OF THE REASONS CONSIDERED
leeway to manage life outside the
PERSONAL MEASURES
to design a study that would help
office. Large numbers of workers
them better understand what their
"VERY IMPORTANT" IN DECIDING TO TAKE
OF SUCCESS IN WORK LIFE
said they would consider changing
employees were thinking.
JOB WITH CURRENT EMPLOYER
a job if a new employer offered to
1992 National Study of Changing Work Force
"They told us of the conflicts
cover some of the costs of child
WHAT DOES SUCCESS MEAN TO YOU?
[between work and family] in un-
Open Communications
65%
Job Location
care. "Flextime" arrangements
forgettable voices," said Faith
50%
also are much sought after, the
Personal satisfaction from doing a good job
Wohl, director of human resources
Effect on Personal/ Family Life
60%
Femily-Supportive Policies
46%
study says.
52%
initiatives for Du Pont, one of the
Nature of Work
59%
Fringe Benefits
43%
"It's very clear that work-family
project sponsors. "I think we bet-
Supervisor
ter start to pay attention."
58%
Advancement Opportunity
37%
assistance is not for the few. It's
Earning the respect or recognition of supervisors and/or peers
for most of us," FWI Vice Presi-
Many of the study's findings
Job Security
54%
Salary/Wage
35%
30%
dent James T. Bond said at the
testify to trends whose existence
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
RICH RAINEY/STAFF ARTIST
news conference.
Getting ahead or advancing in job or career
until now has been based on anec-
The institute's study also looked
dotes and supposition. It is no se-
ing adequate child care and taking
supposed, the FWI reports. In-
at how the growing diversity of
22%
cret, for example, that many com-
care of elderly parents. Job pres-
stead, workers have adjusted to
American society is being met in
panies have been cutting jobs. But
sures are carried home by workers
the uncertainties of the workplace
the workplace. The conclusion,
Making a good income
the study shows that 42 percent of
left short of time to complete
by making individual accomplish-
however, troubled researchers,
21%
all workers have seen such cut-
household tasks or without the en-
ment a priority.
who found that more than half of
backs in their factories and offices,
ergy for family activities.
For example, more than half of
all workers said they preferred to
Feeling your work Is Important
and 28 percent have seen manag-
"In the end it comes back to the
those surveyed said they measure
work with people like themselves.
ers cut from the ranks.
success in terms of personal satis-
12%
workplace," the study says. "The
The study also concluded that
: The study also showed that four
major predictors of conflict in bal-
faction gained from doing their job
workers perceive job opportunities
of every 10 workers feel burned out
ancing work and family life con-
well, rather than by pay or job ad-
Having controi over work content and schedule
for white men to far outnumber
by their jobs, saying they feel
cern the quality of the work envi-
vancement. That's good news for
those for women or minority men.
6%
"used up" by the end of the day. In
ronment: workload, autonomy on
employers concerned about work
About one in every four workers
addition, the great majority of
the job, and relationships at work.
quality, because even though
said they had been discriminated
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
KEVIN O'NEIL/STAFF ARTIST
workers say their job requires
No wonder that a prime consider-
workers feel less allegiance to their
against in the workplace.
them to work very hard and very
ation of workers when taking a job
companies, their level of personal
The increasing ties between
fast.
is, 'What effect will this job have
responsibility is high, the study
work and personal life come even
are still almost always the respon-
The FWI plans to continue
Those workplace pressures are
on my personal and family life?'
says.
as the traditional roles of men and
sibilities of women, said Bond,
tracking such attitudes every four
layered on top of the demands of
But the focus by workers on per-
Still, this increasing "self-ethic"
women in the home remain rela-
who joked, "The more women
years, interviewing the same work-
home and family life. Large num-
sonal concerns has not under-
means today's workers are seeking
tively unchanged, the study shows.
change, the more men stay the
ers to make accurate comparisons
bers of workers worry about find-
mined the work ethic, as might be
jobs that allow more personal in-
Cooking, cleaning, and shopping
same."
possible.
Tribune Tempe
Sept. 3, 1993
page Al
Study shows
How workers spend their time
families come
ACTUAL
PREFERRED
before careers
12
11
11
By Michele McDonald
Tribune writer
10
Sell
2
20%
10
Americans may take their jobs as
Family
Family
23%
seriously as ever, but they are not willing
and
and
9
friends
to forsake family life to climb the career
3
9
friends
ladder, according to a national work-
43%
Job/career
47%
lob/career
force study released today.
8
37%
4
30%
Touted as a landmark project, the
8
National Study of
the
Changing
FAMILIES FIRST:
7
5
7
5)
Workforce
Priorities changing
6
6
revealed
that
in America / A10
workers want more flexible hours and
THE
more time for their personal lives and
families. A study concentrating on the
Southwest is slated for release later this
year.
Are employees overworked?
Although money is always a concern,
the first question most workers ask
In the past 3 months, how
themselves before accepting a new job
SOME-
VERY
often have you felt
NEVER
RAREL
TIMES
OFTEN
OFTEN
is, "What effect will this job have on my
personal and family life?" according to
Emotionally drained from your work?
15%
25%
34%
14%
13%
the study.
"Workers take pride in working hard
Used up at the end of the workday?
8%
17%
33%
22%
20%
and doing a good job, but they are less
willing to make sacrifices for their
Tired when you getup in the morning
and have to face another day on the job?
9%
21%
30%
21%
19%
employers' benefit," said Jan Miller, Salt
River Project senior research engineer.
Burned out or stressed by your work?
15%
27%
29%
15%
15%
SRP is the study's only Arizona sponsor.
The project, the first of its kind in 16
Frustrated by you job?
13%
26%
31%
15%
14%
years, reflects the turmoil in America's
workplaces. About 42 percent of the
3,718 people interviewed in 1992 by the
Families and Work Institute said their
company permanently reduced the work
Who does the chores?
force. And 28 percent reported cutbacks
100%
91%
in the number of managers.
87%
81%
The employees left are working
80%
78%
harder and faster. As a result, more
workers are facing burnout - 42 per-
63%
cent say they often feel "used up" by
60%
day's end.
Families pay the price for the rigorous
40%
35%
pace. "By and large, work problems are
more likely to spill over into the home
20%
15%
than family problems are to encroach
14%
12%
upon work life," Miller said.
7%
100%
The study shows that more Americans
0%
are juggling work and family. Nearly 90
Coking
Repairs
Cleaning
Shopping
Paying bills
Please soe Work / A10
Employed men
Employed women
Continued
Source: National Study of Changing Workforce
MARK WATERS/Tribune
Tribune Tempe
Sept. 3, 1993
Working too much
Work eats up one-third of week
MEN
WOMEN
OVERALL
Hours at work
48.8
41.7
for a living
Hours commuting
4.1
3.1
3.6
Total
52.9
44.8
48.91
More than half of those surveyed agreed
their supervisor is supportive when they have
a work problem, and 51 percent reported the
manager accommodates them when they
percent of workers live with another family
have personal or family problems. Nearly
member, and three-quarters of married
60 percent said their boss is understanding
workers' spouses also hold down a job. But
when they discuss family or personal matters
even if both spouses are employed, women do
affecting work.
87 percent of the household chores.
Male and female supervisors are similar in
In light of increased demands on the
both management style and support of family
American family, employees are willing to
issues, the study reyealed.
help each other mesh home and office respon-
Discrimination and equal opportunity play
sibilities. Sixty-seven percent of those
crucial roles in the company's work environ-
responding said they would not feel resentful
ment, Bond said. Even if discrimination is
if they had to occasionally work extra hours
perceived and not real, it will hamper pro-
to accommodate the personal or family needs
ductivity, according to the study.
of co-workers. About 55 percent disagreed
Fifteen percent of workers say they have
that employees have to choose between
been discriminated against at their current
advancing their careers or devoting attention
job, and 27 percent claim they have
to their family or personal lives.
experienced discrimination sometime during
"Some businesses have stepped in to
their career.
address this issue by offering flexible time
The Changing Workforce study cannot be
and leave programs, as well as dependent-
compared with the 1977 study conducted by
care assistance," Miller said.
the U.S. Department of Labor because the
The company-sponsored projects may help
labor survey was not as encompassing, Bond
employees stop taking work problems home,
said For the studies to be compared, the 1977.
but the overall quality of the workplace is
survey would have to be reanalyzed, he said.
paramount to any program, said James T.
Still, the current survey shows a work force
Bond, vice president with the Families and
that is showing no signs of returning to single-
Work Institute. Employees with autonomy
income families where the bread winner
and support from co-workers and supervisors
would work at one company for life, Bond
are both more productive and happier than
said.
those in poor working situations, he said.
"I think we're in a new era," he said.
THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC
Sept. 3, 1993
page A1
OVERWHELMED BY WORK
By Frank Turco
The Arizona Republic
A
merican workers, many of them so
28 percent said they had scen cut-
Quizzed about houschold chores,
drained by the end of the day that
backs in the number of managers;
81 percent of the women said they did
they're still weary the next morn-
24 percent said the company's top
most of the cooking, 87 percent said
ing as they face another workday, strive to
management had changed; and
do a good job anyway and would work
they did the shopping, and 78 percent
even harder if necessary.
18 percent said their employer had
the cleaning.
They long, however, to shift more of
been acquired by or had merged with
More than half the respondents
their time and energy from work to
another company.
said they measure success at work by
themselves and their families.
That turmoil, according to re-
the personal satisfaction they get from
Also, many believe that the quality of
searchers, raised fears among many
doing a good job. About one-third
their work environment - whether they
workers. Eighteen percent of those
said they gauge it by the respect they
have good bosses, open communications
who took part in the survey said they
carn from their supervisors and peers.
and a degree of control over their work -
expect to be laid off temporarily this
Only 21 percent said they measure
now is more important than the amount of
year, and 17 percent said they expect"
money they make.
it by how much money they are paid.
to lose their jobs entirely.
Those are among the major findings of
Many workers apparently are
an extensive study of the nation's changing
"Workers have scen a lot of change
looking for more out of their work:
and feel a lot of insecurity," said Ellen
"
Galinsky, study-project director and
H
"They want quality in their own
work, in their work environment and
co-president of the institute.
Workers want quality in their
in their relationships at home and
Still, she said, workers are ex-
work," Galinsky stressed.
own work, in their work
tremely resilient and take a tremen-
Asked why they had taken their
environment and in their
dous amount of pride in their work.
most recent job, many of the workers
relationships at home and work.
Of those questioned, 99 percent
answered in terms of work-environ-
said they always try to do their jobs
ment issues, such as open communica-
ELLEN GALINSKY
well, and 90 percent said they were
tions on the job, effects on personal
WORKER-STUDY DIRECTOR
willing to work harder to help their
and family life, the nature of the
company succeed.
work, the quality of managers and
work force, the first such look since 1977
However, 42 percent cautioned that
supervisors, and having control of
at how U.S. workers feel about their jobs
they were "used up" at the end of the
their work.
and personal and family lives.
workday, and 40 percent said they
Pay ranked 16th among 20 choices
The study, conducted by the New
were tired in the morning before
the survey participants were given.
York-based Family and Work Institute,
heading off for another day on the job.
"Monetary rewards to spur perfor-
was sponsored by 15 corporations and
foundations nationwide, including the
The survey supports earlier studies
mance and foster loyalty will have
that found that in dual-earner fami-
limited impact if the quality of jobs
Phocnix-based Salt River Project.
C.M. Perkins, SRP general manager,
lics, women continue to carry the load
and work life are poor," said James T.
at home, doing most of the cooking,
Bond, the study's senior researcher.
said the results of the ambitious study and
another regional survey in which the utility
cleaning and shopping. Men still do
Study participants also said they
would like to redirect some of their
is taking part will be used to assess the
most of the home, repairs and the
work time to themselves and their
compensation and benefit programs it
household-bill paying."
families.
offers its 4,800 employees.
"At SRP, we view these issues not as
Continued
secondary to the operation of our business,
but as fundamental to our entire manage-
ment philosophy," Perkins said.
The study, based on interviews with
more than 3,700 men and women, was
Public & Communications Services'
done in 1992, a year in which companies
throughout the country were laying off
workers, merging and changing ownership.
Daily News Service
Forty-two percent of those questioned"
said they worked for a company that had
Newspaper clippings for Sept. 3, 1993
reduced its work force in the past year;
E A { ZONA REP BLC
Sept. 3, 1993
They said that on average, they
The perception of discrimination
in the workplace is the development of
devote 37 percent of their lives to
or unequal opportunity in one's
a constructive social climate.
their jobs or careers, and they would
workplace seems to exact a toll on
"But it is not necessarily high on
like to see that reduced to 30 percent.
workers' attitudes and behavior.
the agenda of some companies," she
Also, they said they would like to
Workers are more likely to
added. "Overall, most workplaces are
increase the time they spend on
sacrifice time for themselves than time
only beginning to respond to what
themselves to 23 percent from 20 per-
for work and family, with apparent
employees say they want."
cent, and the time they spend with
negative consequences for personal
In addition to the SRP, the survey
family and friends to 47 percent from
well-being.
was sponsored by American Express
43 percent.
Most workers say they want to
Co., Motorola Inc., Allstate Insurance
The workers also placed a high
work with people like themselves, but
Co., AT&T, the Commonwealth
value on both traditional fringe
those who have experienced more
Fund, DuPont Co., the General Mills
benefits, such as medical insurance,
diversity in their workplaces tend to
Foundation, IBM Corp., Johnson &
and some more contemporary employ-
prefer it.
Johnson, Levi Strauss & Co., Merck
ce-assistance programs, such as flexi-
Galinsky said the survey points out
& Co., Mobil Corp., the Rockefeller
ble time and dependent-care help.
that the key to making improvements
Foundation and Xerox Corp.
And many said they would be willing
to give up salary or even change jobs
to obtain some of those benefits.
Other key findings include:
Continued
When employees have more au-
tonomy in their jobs and more control
over work schedules, they are more
satisfied and committed workers.
By and large, men and women
don't manage differently.
Highlights
The National Study of the Changing Workforce
by Ellen Galinsky, James T. Bond, and Dana E. Friedman
FamiliesandWorkInstitute
Study Staff
Project Director: Ellen Galinsky
Co-Project Director: Dana E.- Friedman
Senior Researcher: James T. Bond
Research Associate: Anne Morris
Data Analyst: Elizabeth Ann Peters
Production Manager: Amy Rabinowitz
Graphic Design: Sasha Frere-Jones
Word Processor: Nikolas Elevitch
Editor: Marie Van Loan
Founding Co-Sponsor: Salt River Project
Co-Sponsors: Allstate Insurance Company; American Express Company; AT&T;
Commonwealth Fund; DuPont Company; General Mills Foundation; IBM Corporation;
Johnson & Johnson; Levi Strauss & Co.; Merck & Co., Inc.; Mobil Corporation; Motorola,
Inc.; The Rockefeller Foundation; Salt River Project; and Xerox Corporation.
Additional support: Philip Morris Inc. and Ceridian Corporation.
Thanks to Deborah K. Holmes, Arlene Johnson, Barbara Norcia, Robin Hardman and the entire
staff of the Families and Work Institute whose discussion and insight have considerably enriched
this report. A special thanks to Salt River Project for believing in this project from the beginning
and taking the first step to make it possible. We are also deeply grateful for the generous donation
of equipment from IBM for data analysis and word processing.
Families and Work Institute is a non-profit research and planning organization that conducts
research on business, government, and community efforts to help employees balance their job
and family responsibilities.
Other Families and Work Institute publications:
The Corporate Reference Guide to Work-Family Programs
Public-Private Partnerships for Child Care
Beyond the Parental Leave Debate: The Impact of Laws in Four States
The State Reference Guide to Work-Family Programs for State Employees
Parental Leave and Productivity
The Family-Friendly Employer: Examples from Europe
An Evaluation of Johnson & Johnson's Work-Family Initiative
Education Before School: Investing in Quality Child Care
Copyright © 1993, Families and Work Institute, 330 Seventh Avenue,
New York, New York 10001. 212-465-2044. All rights reserved.
ii
SUMMARY
Summary
The National Study of the Changing Workforce captures the voices of U.S. workers in
response to the questions most asked by employers. It is a nationally representative study of
close to 3400 workers across this country, and it's the very first study to investigate such an
extensive range of issues.
The Families and Work Institute developed the study on the basis of input from workers and
managers at the organizations sponsoring this study: Allstate Insurance Company; American
Express Company; AT&T; Commonwealth Fund; DuPont Company; General Mills
Foundation; IBM Corporation; Johnson & Johnson; Levi Strauss & Co.; Merck & Co., Inc.;
Mobil Corporation; Motorola, Inc.; The Rockefeller Foundation; Salt River Project; and
Xerox Corporation. The study's sponsors wanted to know what workers are looking for today.
Why do workers take jobs and why do they leave? Do women and men think differently about
work issues? Do young workers differ from their older counterparts? How comfortable are
workers with the increasing diversity of the workforce? And how do workers manage their
dual responsibilities of home life and work life?
The backdrop for this study is the work environment in a period of substantial business
change. According to the National Study of the Changing Workforce:
Workers spend more than 40 hours per week on the job. Overtime and
commuting bring the total of job-related activities to more than 45 hours per
week.
Workers are witness to tremendous turmoil in the workplace. For example, 42
percent of them have experienced downsizing, and 28 percent have seen cutbacks
in the number of managers in the past year.
80 percent believe that their jobs require working very hard, and 65 percent that
their jobs require working very fast.
1
SUMMARY
And many feel they're burned out by their jobs-42 percent often feel "used up"
by the end of the workday.
Yet out of this turmoil a different kind of worker has emerged. Workers' commitment is more
to themselves than to their employers-not surprising given that SO many of them have seen
their employers downsize and co-workers lose their jobs. Close to 20 percent fear that they,
too, will be fired or laid off. Perhaps more surprising is the high value that workers place on
the quality of their own work. When asked to define what success at work means to them,
more than half talk about the personal satisfaction they gain in doing a good job. This is
undoubtedly good news to those who think that our future economic competitiveness will rest
on the quality of the work we produce.
Workers' concerns aren't just about the quality of their own work, but also about the quality of
their work environments. When those who had changed employers in the past five years were
asked about the most important factors affecting their decisions, they pointed to open
communication, quality management, and quality supervision.
There have been many recent efforts to improve productivity: re-engineering the workplace,
empowering workers, creating high performance work teams, teaching about managing
diversity, and focusing on total quality. The data from the National Study of the Changing
Workforce indicate that unless these efforts include a focus on the quality of the work
environment itself, on social relationships at work, and on the general culture of the
workplace-whether it be the corner drugstore, a factory, or an office-they may not yield
their intended effects. Workers are more loyal, more committed, more innovative, and more
satisfied with their jobs when they have more of a say in how to do their jobs and have more
control over the scheduling of their work hours. And, when there are good and supportive
relationships among workers and between workers and their supervisors, workers experience
less burnout in their jobs, are more loyal to their employers, and are more willing to work hard
to help their companies succeed. Also, when workers believe that people of their race and
gender aren't being discriminated against and have a good chance of advancing, they are more
committed, loyal, innovative, and likely to want to stay at their companies.
There are some other surprises: men and women are not seen as different in the way they
supervise workers. In addition, young workers are no more comfortable with the notion of
working with people who are different from themselves than are older workers, though
2
SUMMARY
employees with more experience in diverse work groups are more positive about working in
heterogeneous settings.
The fact that most workers have family responsibilities isn't unexpected-although the extent
to which this is true may be higher than imagined: 87 percent of workers live with family
members and 47 percent care for dependents (children, ill spouses or partners, or elders). The
economic basis for working is also apparent: on average, each worker brings in 64 percent of
his or her family's income. Perception also plays a role here: believing that one is "living
within one's means" is more important to workers' sense of well-being than the absolute
amount of their household income.
Despite massive changes in women's work outside the home, women's responsibilities within
the home have not changed much at all. This is true even in families where women contribute
half or more of the family income, and where workers are young. One area of change in men's
and women's roles lies in the care of elderly dependents. Of those providing elder care, 44
percent are men. However, women spend about twice as much time at these tasks as men and
are more likely to provide personal care ( feeding, bathing, etc.) while men spend more time
arranging for care, scheduling doctor's appointments, and checking in by phone.
Life can be difficult when members of today's labor force have children. Not surprisingly,
employees with children are under more stress and believe that they're not coping as well as
workers without children. When they do have supports, such as satisfactory, reliable child
care, employed parents feel better about themselves as parents, are less stressed, and cope
better.
By and large, work problems are more likely to spill over into the home than family problems
are to encroach upon work life. Some businesses have stepped in to address this issue by
offering flexible time and leave programs, as well as dependent care assistance. These benefits
are valued by workers; in fact, a sizable proportion of workers who don't have these programs
state that they'd be willing to make substantial trade-offs to get them. And, perhaps contrary
to expectation, except for those benefits that involve forfeiting pay (i.e., for part-time work),
men are just as willing as women to say that they'd make trade-offs. Furthermore, it is
beneficial for everyone when companies offer these work-family programs and benefits.
Companies, in particular, benefit because workers with access to a range of benefits are more
likely to want to stay at their companies and work hard to help their companies succeed.
3
SUMMARY
Because work-family problems often originate in the workplace, there is a prevailing notion
that they should be remedied in the workplace. Yet, the National Study of the Changing
Workforce reveals that primary reliance on workplace programs results in an unequal
distribution of benefits within society. Higher-income workers and better-educated workers
have far more access to health care insurance and pension plans, flexible time and leave
programs, and dependent care assistance than their less advantaged counterparts. This study
also makes it clear that how supervisors handle day-to-day work-family issues is as much a part
of being family friendly as offering specific programs and policies.
In attempting to juggle work and family life, personal time is often sacrificed. Yet, this study
finds that workers fare better when they have more time for themselves. It also reveals that
workers want to change the equation; that is, they want to devote more time to their families
and friends and to their own pursuits and less time to their jobs and careers. Young workers
say that they're more willing to make sacrifices for their personal or family lives than they are
for their jobs or education. The quality of the home environment is very important to today's
workers. When asked to define success at home, workers point to good family relationships.
They also discuss not bringing the stresses of work life into their family relationships.
In the end, it comes back to the workplace. The major predictors of conflict in balancing work
and family life concern the quality of the work environment: workload, autonomy on the job,
and relationships at work. No wonder that a prime consideration of workers when taking a job
is, "What effect will this job have on my personal and family life?"
This study concludes that workers are very concerned about the quality of their own work, the
quality of the work environment, and the quality of their personal relationships at home and at
work. These findings suggest there is an opportunity for aligning workers' needs with
workplace goals. What helps workers also seems to help the workforce be productive.
4
SUMMARY
THE NATIONAL STUDY OF THE CHANGING WORKFORCE
The National Study of the Changing Workforce, conducted by the Families and Work
Institute, is a longitudinal study of both the work and personal/family lives of the U.S.
workforce. No other study has investigated this issue with a nationally representative sample
since the 1977 Quality of Employment Survey, conducted for the U.S. Department of Labor.
And no study is as comprehensive as this one.
In 1992, hour-long telephone interviews were conducted with a randomly selected national
sample of 3,381 employed men and women, as well as 337 women who had dependent
children under 18 years old and who weren't in the labor force by their own choice. The
overall sample, then, was of 3,718 individuals. To monitor changes over time, the study design
calls for re-interviewing surviving members of the sample every four years, and adding new
cohorts of young workers at each data collection point.
The findings in this report concern only the 2,958 waged and salaried workers in the sample
(Table 1) Self-employed workers have been excluded from this report and will be the
subject of a subsequent one. The findings in this report represent only the highlights. A more
comprehensive review of the findings are included in a sourcebook published by the Families
and Work Institute.
I
The reader may notice that reported sample sizes are sometimes considerably smaller than 2,958. There
are two reasons. First, certain questions were only asked of workers who met particular conditions-such
as being married or having children. Second, some questions were only asked of randomly defined
subsamples to permit the inclusion of a larger number of questions than could reasonably be asked of
every respondent.
The reader may also notice that not all percentage distributions add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
5
SUMMARY
TABLE 1: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY SAMPLE (WEIGHTED)
SAMPLE
SELECTED SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
PERCENT
SIZE (N)
Gender:
Male
51.1%
(1512)
Female
48.9
(1446)
Age:
18-29 years old
27.1%
(797)
30-49 years old
55.9
(1640)
50-64 years old
17.0
(498)
Education:
High school or less
39.6%
(1166)
Some college
32.1
(948)
4-year college degree or more
28.3
(834)
Race/Ethnicity:
White, non-Hispanic (non-minority)
77.2%
(2276)
Minority (all other groups)
22.8
(672)
Occupation:
Managers and professionals
31.2%
(922)
Workers in other occupations
68.8
(2036)
Hourly Earnings:
Less than $7 per hour
22.7%
(527)
$7 through $15.99 per hour
51.7
(1199)
$16 or more per hour
25.5
(591)
Employer Size (nationwide):
Fewer than 50 employees
29.5%
(659)
50-499 employees
21.2
(474)
500 or more employees
49.3
(1102)
Marital/Relational Status:
Living with spouse or partner
66.5%
(1967)
Single
33.5
(991)
Employment Status of Couples:
Both employed
74.8%
(1442)
Only one employed
25.2
(485)
Dependent Care Responsibilities:
Child under 13 in home
32.4%
(960)
No child under 13 in home
67.6
(1999)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
6
BACKDROP
The Backdrop For This Study
The National Study of the Changing Workforce was conducted in 1992, a year of tremendous
change in the workplace. The following facts obtained in our study form the context for
understanding the other results:
Most significant are the numbers of workers who were part of this upheaval. As
indicated in Table 2, 42 percent experienced downsizing of the workforce, and 28
percent witnessed cutbacks in the number of managers in their organizations. In
addition, 24 percent saw a change in leadership, and 18 percent were affected by a
merger or acquisition in the past year.
Employees of larger companies were much more likely to have experienced all of
these workplace changes than employees of smaller companies.
TABLE 2: WORKPLACE CHANGES RELATED TO
ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEW WAYS OF DOING BUSINESS
EMPLOYER SIZE (NATIONWIDE)
FEWER
50
500
During the past year at their places of
THAN 50
THROUGH 499
OR MORE
employment
OVERALL
EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYEES
***
Workers experiencing downsizing or
(n=776)
(n=160)
(n=126)
(n=304)
permanent cutbacks of the workforce
42%
27%
38%
53%
***
Workers reporting cutbacks in the
(n=758)
(n=155)
(n=124)
(n=299)
number of managers
28%
12%
22%
40%
***
Workers experiencing a change in top
(n=753)
(n=155)
(n=123)
(n=296)
organizational leadership
24%
10%
15%
36%
***
Workers experiencing a merger or
(n=742)
(n=155)
(n=122)
(n=292)
acquisition
18%
10%
11%
28%
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
7
BACKDROP
Downsizing and cutbacks in management have given rise to fears of job loss. Especially in
large companies, breaking the implicit contract assuring lifelong employment has been
another significant change affecting the workforce.
Despite the trimming of managerial jobs, workers with low hourly earnings feel
most vulnerable to layoffs and job loss (Table 3).
TABLE 3: PERCEIVED JOB SECURITY
HOURLY EARNINGS
OVERALL
LESS THAN $7
$7 TO $15.99
$16 OR MORE
PER HOUR
PER HOUR
PER HOUR
Likelihood of a temporary
***
layoff over the next year
(n=2874)
(n=521)
(n=1178)
(n=573)
Very likely
7%
10%
8%
4%
Likely
11
16
12
11
Likelihood of losing your
***
job over the next year
(n=2922)
(n=519)
(n=1193)
(n=585)
Very likely
6%
9%
6%
4%
Likely
11
14
12
10
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Although workers are scheduled to work less than a 40-hour week on average,
overtime and commuting bring the total of job-related activities to more than 45
hours per week. (See Table 4.)
8
BACKDROP
TABLE 4: SCHEDULED, ACTUAL, AND
COMMUTING HOURS FOR MAIN OR ONLY JOB
OVERALL
MEN
WOMEN
Average Scheduled Hours per Week
38.5 hrs
40.6 hrs
***
36.3 hrs
(n=2800;
(n=1409;
(n=1391;
se=0.153)
se=0.196)
se=0.220)
Average Overtime/Extra Hours per Week
3.4
4.2
***
2.5
(n=2932;
(n=1495;
(n=1437;
se=0.140)
se=0.215)
se=0.175)
Total Average Hours Actually Worked per Week
41.8
44.8
***
38.6
(n=2924;
(n=1497;
(n=1427;
se=0.207)
se=0.279)
se=0.283)
Average Hours per Week Commuting To/From Job
3.6
4.1
***
3.1
(n=2908;
(n=1478;
(n=1429;
se=0.057)
se=0.090)
se=0.068)
45.3
48.8
***
Total Average Hours in Job-Related Activities
41.7
(n=2886;
(n=1474;
(n=1412:
se=0.223)
se=0.298)
se=0.306)
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Most workers reported that their jobs are very demanding: 80 percent said that
their jobs require working very hard, and 65 percent that their jobs require
working very fast. (See Table 5.)
TABLE 5: PERCEIVED DEMANDS OF JOB
Strongly
Strongly
SAMPLE
agree
Agree
Disagree
disagree
SIZE(N)
My job requires working very fast.
20%
45%
31%
4%
(2897)
I have deadlines that are difficult to meet.
9
29
56
7
(2887)
My job requires working very hard.
28
52
19
1
(2916)
I have excessive amounts of work.
12
31
53
5
(2886)
I don't have enough time to get the job done.
6
21
63
11
(2899)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
9
BACKDROP
Not surprisingly, many workers reported feeling burned out by their jobs. (See
Table (i.)
TABLE 6: JOB BURNOUT
In the past 3 months, how
Some-
Very
SAMPLE
often have you felt.
Never
Rarely
times
Often
often
SIZE (N)
Emotionally drained from your work?
15%
25%
34%
14%
13%
(2952)
Used up at the end of the workday?
8
17
33
22
20
(2950)
Tired when you get up in the morning
(2947)
9
and have to face another day on the job?
21
30
21
19
Burned out or stressed by your work?
15
27
29
15
15
(2951)
Frustrated by your job?
13
26
31
15
14
(2950)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Additional analyses reveal that workers whose organizations experienced
downsizing in the past year feel less secure in their jobs, and workers with heavy
workloads report much higher levels of job burnout than other workers.
10
KEY FINDINGS
Key Findings
WORK LIFE
O
ut of the turmoil and change of the 1980s and 1990s, a different
kind of worker has emerged. Workers' commitment is more to
themselves than to their employers. Their focus is on doing their
jobs well.
It's speculated that when individuals begin to lose control over their external environment,
they focus internally. The rapidity of change in many sectors of the economy, the layoffs, the
cutbacks, and the downsizing may have had the effect of turning workers inward to something
they can control-the quality of their own work. Furthermore, if workers are being let go, the
intent of doing one's job well is perhaps the best protection one can have.
When asked about their commitment to doing their own jobs well, 94 percent of
workers disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement, "I don't care how
well I do my job"; 99 percent agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "I
always try to do my job well"; and 98 percent agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement "When my job requires it, I work very hard." (See Table 7.)
Work Life
11
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 7: ATTITUDES TOWARD CURRENT JOB
Strongly
Strongly
SAMPLE
agree
Agree
Disagree
disagree
SIZE (N)
I don't care how well I do my job, I just want
to finish it.
2%
5%
33%
61%
2943
I always try to do my job well, no matter
what it takes.
57
42
1
<1
2953
When my job requires it, I work very hard.
54
43
3
<1
2933
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
When asked about their loyalty and commitment to their employers, fewer
workers answered positively in the extreme. As shown in Table 8, 28 percent
strongly agreed that they are willing to work harder than is required of them to
help their companies succeed as compared to 57 percent (Table 7) who strongly
agreed that they try to do their jobs well, no matter what it takes.
TABLE 8: LOYALTY AND DESIRE TO HELP EMPLOYER SUCCEED
How loyal do you feel toward your employer?
(n=2891)
Extremely
27%
Very
37
Somewhat
29
Not very
4
Not at all
2
I am willing to work harder than I have to to help my company/organization
(n=2901)
succeed.
Strongly agree
28%
Agree
62
Disagree
10
Strongly disagree
1
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
12
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
In response to an open-ended question-"What does being successful in your work life mean
to you?"-workers again emphasized the importance of the calibre of their own work.
The most frequently mentioned measure of success in work life was personal
satisfaction from doing a good job (52 percent), followed by earning respect and
recognition from supervisors and peers (30 percent). (See Table 9.)
TABLE 9: PERSONAL MEASURES OF SUCCESS IN WORK LIFE
What does success mean to you?
n=1073
Personal satisfaction from doing a good job
52%
Earning the respect or recognition of supervisors and/or peers
30
Getting ahead or advancing in job or career
22
Making a good income
21
Feeling their work is important
12
Having control over work content and schedule
6
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Implications: This focus on the self has been described
as the self-ethic (as opposed to the work ethic).
Contrary to the way the label sounds, however, the
focus of workers is on doing their best in their own
jobs. This should be good news to those who think
that our future economic competitiveness rests on the
quality of the work we produce as a nation.
Work Life
13
KEY FINDINGS
Q
uality of work life in some ways is just as important to workers
as the traditional value of money.
Perhaps because the dream of getting rich quick exists mainly in lotteries and sweepstakes
contests and not in the wages offered most U.S. workers, success at work is less likely to be
defined by workers as making a good income than in doing a good job. (See Table 9 above.)
Nor is money the primary reason that most workers take or leave particular jobs; rather, their
main concern is the quality of their work life. (See Table 10.)
Workers who had taken jobs with new employers in the past five years were asked
to rate the most important reasons for their selection. As shown in Table 10, the
top five reasons for taking jobs (based on ratings of "very important") were open
communications (65 percent), effect of the job on personal and family life (60
percent), nature of the work (59 percent), management quality (59 percent), and
supervisor characteristics (58 percent). These factors, interestingly, all have to do
with the quality of the work environment. In contrast, only 35 percent of workers
rated salary/wage as a very important reason for joining their current employer.
Other analyses were conducted to identify aspects of jobs and workplaces that predict
employees' plans to remain with or leave their current employers.
No relationship was found between workers' earnings and their plans to remain
with or leave their current employers.
These findings shouldn't be interpreted as indicating that compensation is of no consequence
to U.S. workers. Obviously, the main purpose in having a paid job is to earn a decent income
for oneself and one's family; furthermore, many workers are not offered a large range of salary
options when taking new jobs. Nor do these findings indicate that monetary rewards tied to
performance are without incentive value for the U.S. workforce. Rather, they suggest that,
today, quality of life issues figure as prominently as money in workers' definitions of success
and in their decisions to take jobs or leave them.
14
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 10: REASONS CONSIDERED "VERY IMPORTANT"
IN DECIDING TO TAKE JOB WITH CURRENT EMPLOYER
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
OVERALL
SIZE (N)
OVERALL
SIZE (N)
Open
65%
(549)
Job Location
50%
(550)
Communications
Effect on
60
(549)
Family-Supportive
46
(532)
Personal/Family Life
Policies
Nature of Work
59
(550)
Fringe Benefits
43
(542)
Management Quality
59
(551)
Control of Work
38
(552)
Schedule
Supervisor
58
(548)
Advancement
37
(549)
Opportunity
Gain New Skills
55
(546)
Salary/Wage
35
(552)
Control over Work
55
(551)
Access to Decision
33
(548)
Content
Makers
Job Security
54
(546)
No Other Offers
32
(541)
Co-Worker Quality
53
(550)
Management
26
(546)
Opportunity
Stimulating Work
50
(546)
Size of Employer
18
(550)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Implications: Monetary rewards to spur performance
and foster loyalty will have limited impact if the
quality of jobs and work life is poor.
Work Life
15
KEY FINDINGS
W
hen employees have more autonomy in their jobs and more
control over their work schedules they are more satisfied and
committed workers.
Given that the quality of work environment is very important to today's workers, the next task
in the National Study of the Changing Workforce was to identify those aspects of the work
environment that make the greatest difference in quality. We investigated job autonomy and
control over work schedules on the basis of studies showing that control over work schedules
and autonomy on the job are important predictors of mental and physical health outcomes.
Some 30 percent of all wage and salaried employees said they had complete
control or a lot of control over their work schedules, while 31 percent said they
had none. (See Table 11.)
TABLE 11: CONTROL OVER WORK SCHEDULE
SAMPLE
TOTAL
SIZE (N)
Degree of control in scheduling work hours
Complete control
16%
A lot
14
(2955)
Some
27
A little
13
None
31
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
As shown in Table 12, most workers felt they had some autonomy in their johs;
however, only 23 percent strongly agreed that they had a lot of freedom in
deciding how to do their work and 17 percent felt strongly that they had a lot to
say about what happened on their jobs.
16
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 12: PERCEIVED AUTONOMY ON THE JOB
SAMPLE
OVERALL
SIZE (N)
I have a lot of freedom in deciding how I do my work.
Strongly agree
23%
Agree
55
(2917)
Disagree
18
Strongly disagree
4
I have a lot of say about what happens on my job.
Strongly agree
17%
Agree
51
(2872)
Disagree
25
Strongly disagree
6
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Further analyses demonstrated that workers' control over their schedules and their job
autonomy (measured by averaging responses to the two questions in Table 12) are, in fact,
related to important work life outcomes.
Workers with more job autonomy and control of their work schedules are less
burned out by their work, are more satisfied with their jobs, and take more
initiative at work. In addition, workers with greater job autonomy are more
committed to doing their jobs well, are more loyal to their employers, and plan to
remain with their current employers longer than other workers.
Work Life
17
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: The trend toward worker empowerment
(more autonomy) can have a downside. Increased
responsibility can bring increased stress. Likewise, the
push for more schedule flexibility has its detractors-
those who worry that "if you give workers an inch,
they'll take a mile." Common sense indicates that both
concerns have some validity and should be addressed;
however, for most workers, these features of jobs are
strongly associated with positive benefits for the
company, such as job satisfaction and initiative.
18
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
Employees with more supportive relationships at work are more
satisfied and committed workers.
The effort to identify the features of the work environment that make the greatest difference
also led us to investigate supervisory and co-worker relationships and the social climate. Other
studies have identified these features as strongly linked to workers' mental and physical health.
We also wondered if they would be additionally associated with indicators of work
performance.
Workers were asked to rate three dimensions of the social environment in their workplaces:
relationships with their immediate supervisors, relationships with their co-workers, and the
general supportiveness of the workplace culture. Supervisor relations include nine items
representing various aspects of work management and accommodation of employees' personal
and family needs. The nine items are presented in Table 13.
TABLE 13: PERCEIVED TASK AND WORK-FAMILY
SUPPORTIVENESS OF SUPERVISORS ON THE JOB
Strongly
Strongly
SAMPLE
My supervisor
agree
Agree
Disagree
disagree
SIZE (N)
keeps me informed.
33%
49%
14%
5%
(2709)
has realistic expectations.
32
57
8
2
(2701)
recognizes when I do a good job.
32
52
12
4
(2689)
is supportive when I have a work problem.
34
53
11
3
(2678)
values differences in employee's cultures and
25
54
18
4
(2534)
backgrounds.
is fair.
28
51
15
6
(2651)
accommodates me when I have family or
42
51
6
2
(2658)
personal business.
is understanding when I talk about family or
personal matters that affect my work.
31
57
10
2
(2508)
I feel comfortable bringing up family or
21
44
28
personal issues with my supervisor.
7
(2593)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Work Life
19
KEY FINDINGS
In general, workers view their supervisors positively, though only a minority of
supervisors received the highest rating on any of the nine criteria.
Although it might seem that perceptions of supervisors' effectiveness in managing
work activity (having realistic expectations, keeping workers informed,
recognizing good performance, etc.) would be unrelated to perceptions of how
effectively supervisors accommodate and support workers' personal and family
needs, the opposite is true. Workers' ratings of job support and personal/family
support by their supervisors are strongly correlated, suggesting that competencies
in these two domains go hand in hand.
Ratings of co-worker relations and workplace culture are presented in Tables 14 and 15 below.
TABLE 14: RELATIONS WITH CO-WORKERS
OVERALL
I feel I'm really part of the group of people I work with.
(n=696)
Strongly agree
56%
Agree
37
Disagree
5
Strongly disagree
2
I look forward to being with the people I work with each day.
(n=686)
Strongly agree
36%
Agree
56
Disagree
7
Strongly disagree
2
How loyal do you feel toward your co-workers?
(n=2958)
Extremely loyal
26%
Very loyal
48
Somewhat loyal
24
Not very loyal
2
Not loyal at all
1
If I had to work extra hours occasionally to accommodate the personal or
(n=1169)
family needs of co-workers I would feel resentful.
Strongly agree
2%
Agree
13
Disagree
67
Strongly disagree
17
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
20
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 15: GENERAL SUPPORTIVENESS OF WORKPLACE CULTURE
Strongly
Strongly
SAMPLE
At my place of employment
agree
Agree
Disagree
disagree
SIZE (N)
There is an unwritten rule that you can't take
care of family needs on company time.
7%
30%
48%
16%
(2787)
Employees who put their personal or family
needs ahead of their jobs are not looked on
6
32
52
10
(2727)
favorably.
If you have a problem managing your work
and family responsibilities, the attitude is "you
4
22
60
14
(2796)
made your bed, now lie in it."
Employees have to choose between advancing
in their jobs or devoting attention to their
family or personal lives.
5
30
55
10
(2737)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
To examine the relationships between social support in the workplace and important work life
outcomes, the multiple ratings of supervisors, co-workers, and workplace culture were
averaged to form three variables representing these three dimensions of support.
Workers who have more supportive supervisors, better relationships with their
co-workers, and workplace cultures that are more accommodating of personal and
family needs feel less burned out by work, are more loyal to their employers, are
more willing to work hard to help their companies succeed, and are more satisfied
with their jobs.
Workers who perceive their supervisors as more supportive and have better
relationships with their co-workers are also more committed to doing their jobs
well.
Having a supportive supervisor and an accommodating workplace are additionally
associated with taking more initiative on the job.
Work Life
21
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: Though developing a constructive social
climate at work is not necessarily high on the
workplace improvement agenda of some initiatives,
these data reveal that it is an integral part of what
makes companies work well.
22
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
By
and large, men and women don't manage differently, according
to the workers they supervise.
There's a debate about whether men and women supervise in different ways. Our measure of
supervisory support offered an opportunity to assess whether supervisors who are male or
female are viewed differently by those they supervise in terms of management support and
work-family support.
When the supervisor ratings made by workers with male supervisors were
compared with ratings made by workers with female supervisors, statistically
significant differences were found for only two of the nine items listed in Table
15. Women in supervisory positions are perceived to be slightly more
accommodating when employees have family or personal business and to be more
understanding when employees talk about family or personal matters affecting
their work. (See Table 16.)
In all other respects, male and female supervisors were rated similarly. No
differences were found on the overall measure of supervisor supportiveness, which
averaged responses to all nine items.
TABLE 16: PERCEIVED SUPPORTIVENESS OF MALE VERSUS FEMALE SUPERVISORS
Male
Female
My supervisor
Supervisors
Supervisors
accommodates me when I have family or personal business.
(n=656)
*
(n=328)
Strongly agree
40%
45%
Agree
55
45
Disagree
5
9
Strongly disagree
1
1
is understanding when I talk about family or personal matters that
(n=615)
**
(n=316)
affect my work.
Strongly agree
27%
39%
Agree
63
48
Disagree
9
11
Strongly disagree
2
2
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Work Life
23
KEY FINDINGS
We next addressed the question: Are men better managers of men, and women of women?
Workers whose supervisors are of the same sex as themselves don't rate their
supervisors any differently than workers who have supervisors of the opposite sex.
Nor do male and female employees rate supervisors differently when they are of
the same or the opposite sex.
Finally, we considered whether supervisors-both men and women-who have the experience
of balancing work and family life might be viewed differently by those they supervise.
Employees view supervisors who currently have significant child care
responsibilities as providing more job-related support and more personal/family
support than supervisors who don't have such responsibilities. Statistically
significant differences were found for six of nine items, and for the overall
measure of supervisor supportiveness, which averaged responses to the nine items.
Workers with and without children under 13 years of age are equally likely to
agree that supervisors who have significant child care responsibilities are more
supportive than supervisors who don't have such responsibilities.
Employees view supervisors who currently have employed spouses as providing
more job-related support and more personal/family support than supervisors who
don't have employed spouses. Statistically significant differences were found for
seven of nine items, and for the overall measure of supervisor supportiveness.
Married workers with and without employed spouses are equally likely to agree
that supervisors who have employed spouses are more supportive than supervisors
who don't have employed spouses.
In sum, it isn't being male or female that matters most, but being able to "put oneself in the
shoes" of those that one supervises. From the perspective of workers, supervisors-both men
and women-who have firsthand experience juggling work and family demands are judged to
manage both work and people more effectively.
24
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: It's possible to teach supervisors to take
the perspectives of others. Supervisors might benefit
from programs designed to sensitize them to balancing
work-family issues. They might also be motivated to
change their behavior by reward systems that explicitly
recognize the importance and legitimacy of helping
workers reconcile conflicts between their work and
their personal/family lives.
Work Life
25
KEY FINDINGS
T
he perception of discrimination or unequal opportunity in one's
workplace seems to exact a toll on workers' attitudes and behavior-
whether or not their perceptions would be found to have an
objective basis.
Other features of the quality of the work environment we investigated were equal opportunity
and discrimination. Workers were asked to rate their own chances for advancement at their
current workplace, as well as the chances of white men, white women, minority men, and
minority women in general. As shown in Table 17, minority and non-minority (white, non-
Hispanic) men and women do not see eye-to-eye.
Minority men, minority women, and white women rated the chances of
advancement for white men higher than white men themselves did.
Minority men and minority women rated the chances of advancement for white
women higher than either white women or white men did.
White men and white women rated the chances of advancement for both minority
women and minority men higher than minority men and women did.
Sadly, there was one area of agreement: all workers rated minority workers'
chances for advancement lower than the chances for non-minority workers.
Regarding their own chances for advancement, minority men and minority
women gave themselves lower ratings than non-minority workers gave
themselves, with minority women rating their own chances lowest of all.
26
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 17: PERCEPTION OF EQUALITY
OF OPPORTUNITY IN OWN WORKPLACE
OVER-
WHITE
WHITE
MINORITY
MINORITY
ALL
MEN
WOMEN
MEN
WOMEN
White men's chance for advancement
(n=2836)
(n=1161)
(n=1062)
(n=320)
(n=326)
Excellent
38%
29%
42%
45%
48%
Good
39
43
37
38
31
Fair
15
19
12
12
16
Poor
8
9
9
5
5
White women's chance for advancement
(n=2864)
(n=1154)
(n=1075)
(n=309)
(n=326)
Excellent
31%
29%
30%
35%
37%
Good
35
34
36
32
39
Fair
20
20
20
19
19
Poor
15
18
15
14
5
Minority men's chance for advancement
(n=2842)
(n=1148)
(n=1045)
(n=326)
(n=324)
Excellent
27%
27%
31%
22%
15%
Good
38
42
37
33
33
Fair
22
19
19
28
32
Poor
14
12
13
17
20
Minority women's chance for advancement
(n=2828)
(n=1133)
(n=1050)
(n=313)
(n=332)
Excellent
26%
28%
29%
22%
18%
Good
32
32
34
28
29
Fair
23
21
21
29
32
Poor
19
20
16
21
21
Your own chance for advancement
(n=2900)
(n=1161)
(n=1076)
(n=327)
(n=335)
Excellent
24%
25%
24%
24%
20%
Good
37
41
35
32
30
Fair
22
18
22
27
30
Poor
17
16
19
16
20
Perceptions differed significantly (p<.0001) in every case among the four groups compared.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
In addition, workers were asked, "Do you feel that you have been discriminated against in your
current job for reasons that have nothing to do with your job performance?"
As shown in Table 18, 15 percent of workers claimed to have experienced
discrimination at their current place of employment, and 27 percent claimed to
have been discriminated against at some time during their work lives.
Work Life
27
KEY FINDINGS
Minority workers were more likely than non-minority workers to have reported
discrimination at their current organizations; however, there were no differences
by minority status in reported discrimination during all their years of working.
TABLE 18: PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE
NON-MINORITY
MINORITY
OVERALL
WORKERS
WORKERS
Percentage of workers who feel they
(n=694)
*
(n=541)
(n=153)
have been discriminated against at their
15%
13%
22%
current jobs
Percentage of workers who feel they
(n=694)
have ever been discriminated against in
27
NS
the workplace
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Further analyses were conducted to determine whether workers' perceptions of discrimination,
equal opportunity, and personal opportunity are related to important outcomes in their work
lives.
Workers who believe they've been discriminated against, and/or who feel there
are fewer chances of advancement for people of their ethnicity and gender, are
more likely to feel burned out by their jobs, to care less about working hard and
doing their own jobs well, to feel less loyal to their employers, to be less
committed to helping their employers succeed, to take less initiative on the job, to
be less satisfied with their jobs, and to plan to leave their current employers
sooner.
The same negative results are found for workers who feel that their own chances
for advancement are low.
When the relationships between perceived opportunities for personal advancement and
selected work life outcomes were examined for both men and women in management
positions, the findings paralleled those obtained for workers in general.
28
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
Managers under 50 years old who believe they have better chances for personal
advancement are more loyal employees, are more committed to helping their
employers succeed, are more satisfied with their jobs, and plan to remain longer
with their employers. The same pattern of relationships holds for both
men and women in management positions.
Women in management, however, are far more likely to see limited opportunities
for career advancement at their current places of work, lending support to the
view that there is a "glass ceiling" that prevents women from joining the
management elite. (See Figure 1.)
FIGURE 1: PERCEIVED OPPORTUNITIES FOR CAREER ADVANCEMENT AT CURRENT
EMPLOYER AMONG MALE AND FEMALE MANAGERS UNDER 50
7%
Poor
19%
9%
Fair
20%
51%
Good
34%
33%
Excellent
26%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Men (n=210)
Women (n=149)
All comparisons were statistically significant at p<.0001.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
While perceptions of discrimination and unequal opportunity may not provide sufficient
grounds for litigation, they do, nevertheless, have negative effects on workers' attitudes and
behavior.
Work Life
29
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: These findings lend support to the move
away from a narrow focus by some companies on
hiring statistics and compliance with civil rights laws
toward a broad focus on making the workplace culture
more supportive of diversity. Initiatives that alter
objective measures of fairness in hirings and
promotion are likely to have limited impact on
workers' attitudes and job performance, unless they
also affect workers' perceptions of fairness.
30
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
T
he majority of workers want to work with people like
themselves, but those who have experienced more diversity in their
workplaces tend to prefer it.
Workers were asked about the extent to which their work groups consisted of people like
themselves or people of different backgrounds, and whether they'd prefer to work with people
like themselves or different from themselves. Findings are summarized in Table 19.
Overall, 42 percent of employees worked in groups where all or nearly all of their
co-workers were of the same sex, and 52 percent worked in groups where all or
nearly all of their co-workers were of the same race as themselves.
Only 11 percent of wage and salaried employees worked in groups where all or
nearly all other workers were of the same age, and only 24 percent worked in
groups where all or nearly all their co-workers were of the same educational
background.
Just more than half, 52 percent of employees, would prefer to work with people
who are like themselves.
Further analyses examined how much experience younger workers had with people of different
backgrounds and whether or not they are more open than older workers to working with
people who are different from themselves. (See Table 20.)
Relatively few workers under 25 years of age have had a lot of contact with people
of different ethnic and cultural groups in the neighborhoods where they grew up.
By far, their greatest experience with ethnic/cultural diversity was in the schools
they attended and in the places where they worked.
Work Life
31
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 19: DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE
SAMPLE
SIZE (N)
Proportion of co-workers who are the same age
All or nearly all
11%
(697)
Three-quarters
14
Proportion of co-workers who have the same educational background
All or nearly all
24%
(672)
Three-quarters
18
Proportion of co-workers who are of the same sex
All or nearly all
44%
(697)
Three-quarters
20
Proportion of co-workers who are of the same race
All or nearly all
52%
(694)
Three-quarters
18
Overall preference to work with more people
Like you
52%
(692)
Different from you
34
No preference
14
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
TABLE 20: YOUNG WORKERS' (UNDER 25 YEARS) CONTACT WITH PEOPLE OF
DIFFERENT ETHNIC BACKGROUNDS WHILE GROWING UP
A lot or
Amount of contact with members of ethnic
Not too
quite a
SAMPLE
and cultural groups other than your own:
Not at all
much
Somewhat
lot
SIZE (N)
In the schools you attended
6%
16%
30%
48%
(249)
In the places you have worked
6
17
36
41
(248)
In the places where you socialize
10
20
41
29
(248)
In the neighborhoods where you grew up
26
29
21
24
(249)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
32
Work Life
KEY FINDINGS
Additional analyses revealed that, at this stage in their work lives, younger
workers are no more or less likely than older workers to prefer diversity in their
workgroups. Nor are there any differences in preference by gender, occupation,
compensation level, education, race/ethnicity, or employer size.
There is, however, a bit of good news for a nation whose workforce is growing more diverse
day by day: Employees of all ages who have experienced more age and racial/ethnic diversity
at their current workplaces tend to prefer more heterogeneous work groups.
Implications: The workplace is the main social arena in
which adults have substantive opportunities to interact
with people of different social and ethnic backgrounds.
Perhaps even more than school, it is the front line in
our nation's efforts to develop an effectively diverse
workforce for the 2 1st century, and it's unlikely that
we will succeed unless employers assume strong
leadership.
Work Life
33
KEY FINDINGS
PERSONAL AND FAMILY LIFE
All
workers have personal lives and relationships that they must
balance with the demands of work, and most workers have family
responsibilities at home.
The National Study of the Changing Workforce also examined the personal and family
situations of U.S. workers.
Nearly 9 out of 10 U.S. workers (87 percent) live in households with family
members-defined as persons to whom they are related by marriage or blood, as
well as partners to whom they aren't legally married. All of these workers have
some degree of day-to-day family responsibilities (Table 21).
TABLE 21: FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES OF U.S. WORKERS
OVERALL
(n=2958)
Living Situations of Workers
Live alone
9%
Live with unrelated persons
4
Live with family members
87
with husband or wife
63
with partner
4
with children under 18
42
with children under 13
32
with children under 6
18
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
50 percent of the total labor force are workers who live in dual-earner families.
(See Table 22.)
34
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 22: MARITAL STATUS AND EMPLOYMENT
OVERALL
Workers living with employed spouses/partners as percentage of
50%
all workers (n=1442)
Workers living with non-employed spouses/partners as percentage
17
of all workers (n=485)
Workers with employed spouses/partners as percentage of all
workers living with spouses/partners (n=1442)
75%
Workers with non-employed spouses/partners as percentage of all
workers living with spouses/partners (n=485)
25
Employed men with employed wives/partners as percentage of all
employed men living with spouses/partners (n=691)
65%
Employed women with employed husbands/partners as percentage
of all employed women living with spouses/partners
(n=750)
87
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
42 percent of all wage and salaried workers have children under 18 living at home;
32 percent have children under 13 (Table 23).
8 percent of workers have responsibility for the special care of and attention to an
adult 18 or over who is disabled or elderly.
In sum, almost half of the U.S. labor force (47 percent) has dependent and/or
elder care responsibilities.
Personal & Family Life
35
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 23: WORKERS WITH DEPENDENT CARE RESPONSIBILITIES
OVERALL
Workers with dependent children at home
Children under 18
(n=1233)
42%
Children under 13
(n=960)
32
Children under 6
(n=544)
18
Workers with children under 13 at home
Employed spouses/partners
(n=624)
66%
Non-employed spouses/partners
(n=205)
22
Single-parent workers
(n=120)
13
Workers with adult dependent/elder care responsibilities
(n=242)
8%
Workers with any dependent care responsibilities
[Child under 18, disabled adult, or elder]
(n=1402)
47%
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Implications: Contrary to the views of some, all
employees have commitments in their lives outside the
job that sometimes conflict with work demands, and
87 percent have some degree of day-to-day family
responsibility at home. Thus, benefits, policies, and
programs designed to help workers balance their work,
personal, and family lives shouldn't be viewed as
special assistance for a small group of workers, but as
general assistance for virtually all workers-including
those who may keep their personal and family lives at
arm's length.
36
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
A
sense of economic well-being is as much the product of living
within one's means-assuming an income adequate to cover basic
needs-as it is the product of how much money one has.
The median household income of U.S. wage and salaried workers ages 18 through
64 was $42,500 in 1991-92; 15 percent of workers lived in households with
incomes under $20,000; 16 percent, in households with incomes over $75,000.
The average worker was responsible for contributing 64 percent of household
income. Among workers living in dual-wage households, men contributed about
$6 in $10; women, $4 in $10.
When asked how difficult it would be for themselves and their families if they
didn't have paid jobs, 69 percent of workers said it would be quite or extremely
difficult, while only 4 percent said it wouldn't be difficult at all.
In order to determine the extent to which women with young children believed they needed to
work to help support their families, we examined the responses of married women with
children under the age of 6.
Among married women with children under 6 years of age, 54 percent felt it
would be quite difficult or extremely difficult for their families if they didn't have
a paid job, and only 3 percent said it wouldn't be difficult at all. Clearly, the
majority of married women with young children who are in the labor force
believe they must work in order for their families to maintain decent standards of
living.
The next question addressed was how much income is seen as "enough."
Despite great variation in actual levels of household income, 79 percent of
workers perceived their household incomes to be adequate-59 percent saying
"adequate" and 20 percent, "quite adequate." Although workers in higher income
households tended to see their family's economic situation as more adequate, the
relationship between actual household income and the perceived adequacy of
household income was not strong, and was only modestly affected by family size.
Personal & Family Life
37
KEY FINDINGS
Among workers who perceive their household incomes as adequate, single
workers without children have significantly lower incomes on average than
workers with families. Among workers with families, however, the average actual
household incomes of those who perceived their incomes as adequate do not vary
significantly in relation to family size, averaging $53,145 for families ranging from
two to five or more people.
Since the perception of income adequacy is only modestly related to actual income, we then
wondered about the extent to which these two factors are important in predicting workers'
well-being.
Workers with higher household incomes are more satisfied with their lives and
are coping more effectively than other workers; however, they are no less stressed
than workers of more modest means.
Workers who perceive their household incomes to be more adequate-whatever
their actual incomes-are even more likely than workers with higher actual
incomes to be satisfied with their lives and to be coping effectively. Moreover,
although higher actual household income is not associated with lower levels of
stress, perceived adequacy of income is.
38
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
T raditional divisions of responsibility for household labor and
child care still prevail, despite the fact that the majority of married
women have joined their husbands in the paid labor force.
As women moved into the labor force in record numbers in the 1970s and 1980s, researchers
speculated that men's share of household work and child care would increase dramatically.
Data collected over the past three decades suggest that men's share of work in the home has
increased somewhat, while women's share has decreased correspondingly. The National
Study of the Changing Workforce provides an update on men's and women's perceptions of
who takes the most responsibility.
Both employed men with employed wives or partners and employed men with at-
home wives or partners agreed that their wives took the greater responsibility for
household work, except repairs.
Both groups of men looked quite similar in the responsibility they took for
household work, with the exception that men with employed wives or partners
reported taking somewhat more responsibility for cooking and cleaning than did
men with wives at home. (See Table 24.)
Personal & Family Life
39
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 24: A COMPARISON OF THE DIVISION OF HOUSEHOLD WORK FOR EMPLOYED
MEN WITH EMPLOYED AND NON-EMPLOYED SPOUSES/PARTNERS
Who Takes Major Responsibility?
MEN-
MEN-
Men with
SPOUSE/PARTNER
SPOUSE/PARTNER
Spouse/Partner
WORKS
AT HOME
Cooking
(n=392)
(n=257)
(n=135)
I Do
11%
15%
5%
Spouse Does
75
69
**
88
50/50
12
15
7
Other
1
2
0.5
Repairs
(n=392)
I Do
91%
Spouse Does
6
NS
50/50
0.7
Other
3
Cleaning
(n=392)
(n=257)
(n=135)
I Do
6%
7%
5%
Spouse Does
70
63
*
85
50/50
21
27
9
Other
2
3
0.5
Shopping
(n=392)
I Do
10%
Spouse Does
60
NS
50/50
30
Other
0.2
Paying Bills
(n=392)
I Do
32%
Spouse Does
50
NS
50/50
17
Other
0.6
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
40
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
The division of household work reported by employed and non-employed women with
employed husbands (Table 25) is largely complimentary to that reported by employed men
with employed and non-employed wives (Table 24, above).
Employed women are somewhat less likely than non-employed women to take the
main responsibility for cooking and cleaning, but are somewhat more likely to
take responsibility for paying bills.
TABLE 25: A COMPARISON OF THE DIVISION OF HOUSEHOLD WORK
FOR WOMEN WITH EMPLOYED SPOUSES/PARTNERS
Who Takes Major Responsibility?
Women Whose
Spouse/Partner Works
EMPLOYED WOMEN
WOMEN AT HOME
Cooking
(n=506)
(n=284)
(n=222)
I Do
87%
81%
94%
Spouse Does
6
9
**
2
50/50
5
7
3
Other
2
3
1
Repairs
(n=505)
I Do
17%
Spouse Does
71
NS
NS
50/50
6
Other
5
Cleaning
(n=505)
(n=284)
(n=221)
I Do
83%
78%
89%
Spouse Does
2
2
*
2
50/50
10
15
5
Other
5
6
4
Shopping
(n=506)
I Do
86%
Spouse Does
3
NS
NS
50/50
11
Other
0.3
Paying Bills
(n=506)
(n=284)
(n=222)
I Do
58%
63%
51%
Spouse Does
23
17
**
31
50/50
19
19
18
Other
0.7
1
-
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Personal & Family Life
41
KEY FINDINGS
Despite these tendencies toward greater sharing of household work in dual-earner families,
however, few employed men with either employed or non-employed spouses take primary or
equal responsibility for the main household chores of cooking, cleaning, and shopping. (See
Figure 2.) This is why women are described as working a "second shift" at home. As Figure 3
also makes clear, men believed they were sharing household work 50/50 more than women
believed this to be the case, except for paying the bills and doing repairs.
We then investigated whether women who bring in a larger share of family income take less
responsibility for household work.
Although men whose wives contributed 50 percent or more of family income did
significantly more cooking than men whose wives contributed less, they took less
responsibility for household repairs than other men. Women, even when they
contributed as much or more to family income as their husbands, still did the
lion's share of household work. (See Figure 4.)
Finally, we wondered whether younger men take more household responsibility than older
men.
Findings from the National Study of the Changing Workforce dispute the notion
that men's lower level of responsibility for household work is generational and
that younger men are doing more than their older counterparts. The only area in
which younger men differed from older men was in taking more responsibility for
repairs. No differences were found for cooking, cleaning, shopping, or bill-
paying.
42
Personal & Family Life
FIGURE 2: COMPARISON OF WOMEN AND MEN IN DUAL-EARNER FAMILIES
WITH RESPECT TO WHO TAKES THE GREATER RESPONSIBILITY FOR HOUSEHOLD WORK
100%
91%
87%
81%
80%
78%
Percentage Taking The Greatest Responsibility
63%
.
60%
40%
35%
20%
15%
14%
12%
7%
0%
Cooking
Repairs
Cleaning
Shopping
Paying Bills
Employed men
Employed women
(n=257)
(n=284)
All findings were significant at the p < .0001 level
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
43
FIGURE 3: COMPARISON OF WOMEN AND MEN IN DUAL-EARNER FAMILIES
WITH RESPECT TO THEIR ASSESSMENTS OF SHARING HOUSEHOLD WORK 50/50
100%
80%
Percentage Saying They Share 50/50
60%
40%
31%
27%
18%
19%
20%
15%
15%
7%
4%
3%
0.4%
0%
Cooking
Repairs
Cleaning
Shopping
Paying Bills
(p < .01)
(p < .01)
(p < .001)
(p < .0001)
(NS)
Employed men
Employed women
(n=257)
(n=284)
NS = no statistically significant difference between groups.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
44
FIGURE 4: DIVISION OF HOUSEHOLD WORK IN RELATION TO WOMEN'S CONTRIBUTION TO FAMILY INCOME
100%
87%
80%
80%
76%
78%
74%
70%
68%
66%
65%
60%
52%
.
a
40%
27%
21%
22%
20%
17%
11%
12%
9%
9%
5%
3%
0%
Cooking
Repairs
Cleaning
Shopping
Paying Bills
(n=397; P < .01)
(n=397; P < .01)
(n=397; NS)
(n=397; NS)
(n=397; NS)
Women take more responsibility and contribute less than 50% of family income
Women take more responsibility and contribute 50% or more of family income
Men take more responsibility, wives contribute less than 50% of family income
Men take more responsibility, wives contribute 50% or more of family income
NS = no statistically significant difference among groups.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
45
KEY FINDINGS
We also examined the division of responsibility for the care of children.
Not unexpectedly, there were significant differences between employed men and
employed women in dual-earner families: 71 percent of women reported taking
the major responsibility for their children as compared to 5 percent of men. (See
Figure 5.)
The contrast between men's and women's perceptions of sharing responsibility is
striking: 43 percent of men in dual-earner families reported a 50/50 sharing in the
care of children while only 19 percent of women in dual-earner families made a
similar claim.
The difference between employed mothers with and without husbands was less
than might be expected: 71 percent of employed married women with employed
husbands reported taking the major responsibility for their children's care,
compared with 87 percent of single employed mothers.
FIGURE 5: GENDER AND PERCEPTIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CARE OF
CHILDREN UNDER 16 YEARS OLD IN DUAL-EARNER HOUSEHOLDS
71%
Taking major responsibility
5%
19%
Sharing 50/50
43%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Women
Men
(n=155)
(n=134)
All comparisons were statistically significant at p<.0001.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
46
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
We then compared how much time men and women in dual-earner families reported spending
on household chores and child care. (See Table 26.)
TABLE 26: HOURS DEVOTED TO CHORES AND CHILDREN BY MEN AND WOMEN IN
DUAL WAGE COUPLES WITH FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES
Workers with Employed Spouse
Workers with Employed Spouse
But No Children
and Children
Workday hours
devoted to
Male
Female
Male
Female
(n=242, se=.0698)
(n=303, se=.0853)
(n=325, se=.0932)
(n=421, se=.0768)
Chores
1.73
2.41
2.00
2.60
(n=353, se=.0933)
(n=416 se=.1070)
--
--
Children
2.59
3.75
Off-day hours
devoted to
(n=236, se=.1538)
(n=304, se=.1517)
(n=354, se=.1394)
(n=419, se=.1246)
Chores
4.39
5.31
4.67
5.36
(n=375, se=.2287)
(n=420, se=.2295)
--
Children
7.01
9.20
All comparisons were significant at the p<.0001 level
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
On workdays, men in dual-earner families without children reported spending
significantly less time (1.73 hours) on chores than women in dual-earner families
without children (2.41 hours). The same was true for days off work: men spent
an average of 4.39 hours, while women spent 5.31 hours.
Among workers in dual-earner families with children under 18, men again spent
less workday time (2.00 hours) than women (2.60 hours). Men also devoted less
time to chores on days off work (4.67 hours) than women (5.38 hours).
Furthermore, men also spent significantly less time than women caring for and
doing things with their children on both workdays (2.59 hours for men; 3.75
hours for women) and days off work (7.01 hours for men; 9.20 hours for women).
Although men don't spend equal time on household chores and child care, on average they do
make substantial contributions of time.
Personal & Family Life
47
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: Men and women in the workforce with
family responsibilities tend to have very different work
loads at home. Employed women are much more
likely than men to have the main responsibility within
their families for the most demanding household
chores-cooking, cleaning, shopping-as well as for
child care. However, men with employed wives, and
especially men whose wives contribute more to
household income, show signs of taking more
responsibility for family work.
48
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
W
orkers who are married or living with someone appear to fare
better in their personal/family lives than single workers.
Whatever the division of family work, being married or living with a partner seems to provide
support to employees.
Workers who live with spouses or partners feel more successful in their personal
and family lives than single workers. In addition, they are more satisfied with
their lives in general than other workers.
Workers who live with spouses or partners are less stressed than single workers,
and they reported that they are coping better with life's demands.
However, workers whose spouses or partners are employed are more stressed than
those (nearly all men) whose spouses and partners are not employed.
Single working parents are less satisfied with how they are doing as parents than
working parents who are married or living with someone.
Although this study did not examine the quality of marital relations in detail, other research
indicates that on balance most spouses or partners are sources of social support rather than
sources of stress. Thus, it seems reasonable that having a supportive spouse or partner at
home would have positive effects on personal well-being in much the same way that having a
supportive supervisor or supportive co-workers appear to have positive effects on work life
outcomes.
Personal & Family Life
49
KEY FINDINGS
M
en as well as women are caring for elderly dependents,
although the time spent and tasks performed differ.
The care of elders is one arena in which men are taking more of a role in family work. Of the
7 percent of workers who care for an elderly parent, grandparent, in-law, relative, friend, or
spouse, 50 years or older, 56 percent are women and 44 percent are men. The common
assumption that women are far more likely to be the caregivers is erroncous.
Although 77 percent of caregivers cared for only one elder, 23 percent had
responsibility for two or more elders.
92 percent of the elders cared for were family members-54 percent were parents;
and 15 percent were in-laws; grandparents accounted for 10 percent of the elders
cared for, while 11 percent were aunts, uncles, or other relatives. Only 8 percent
were friends and neighbors.
72 percent of the elders cared for were female. The average age of the elders was
74. Forty-eight percent of the elders fell between 64 and 78 years of age, while 34
percent were over age 80.
Most elders live near the person with caregiving responsibility: 19 percent lived
with their caregivers, and 46 percent lived 20 minutes or less from the caregiver.
Only 18 percent of elders lived over one hour away.
Overall, 69 percent of elders were in fair or poor health. Thirty-six percent were
quite able to care for themselves, and 11 percent were completely able, leaving
more than half (54 percent) who were not too able, or not able at all, to care for
themselves. (See Figure 6.)
50
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 6: ELDER'S ABILITY TO CARE FOR HIMSELF/HERSELE
(Total number of elders reported about by their caregivers=265)
Completely able
11%
Quite able
36%
Not too able
37%
Not able at all
17%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Elders received, on average, eight hours of direct personal care (bathing, dressing,
feeding) each week from the caregiver. An additional 3.7 hours of indirect care
(phone calls, shopping, etc.) were provided by the caregiver, bringing the average
total number of hours of care to 11.7 hours per week.
Men and women did differ in the amount of care they provide. Women provided
more direct care (14.2 hours per week) than men (7.5 hours per week).
Combining hours of direct and indirect care, female caregivers spent an average
of 19.9 hours versus 11.8 hours for men. (See Figure 7.)
Personal & Family Life
51
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 7: HOURS SPENT PER WEEK BY
EMPLOYED MEN AND WOMEN IN CARING FOR ELDERS
19.9 hrs in total
20
5.7
15
11.8 hrs in total
Hours per week
10
4.3
14.2
5
7.5
0
Men (n=91)
Women (n=115)
Indirect care
Direct care
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
18 percent of the U.S. workforce expects to be providing care for an aging relative
in the next five years. There are no significant differences among men and
women in anticipated caregiving. Older workers, managers, professionals and
workers who earn more are more likely to anticipate caregiving responsibilities
than other workers. (See Table 27.)
52
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 27: EMPLOYEES WHO EXPECT TO HAVE ELDER CARE
RESPONSIBILITIES WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS
SELECTED SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
PERCENT
SAMPLE
SIZE (N)
All employees
18%
(2563)
Occupation:
Managers and professionals
22%
(761)
Workers in other occupations
16
(1802)
Hourly Earnings:
Less than $7 per hour
14%
(462)
$7 through $15.99 per hour
17
(1039)
$16 or more per hour
24
(504)
Age:
Under 30 years old
10%
(730)
30-49 years old
20
(1485)
50 or more years old
26
(409)
All comparisons were statistically significant at P < .0001.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Implications: Strong demographic trends virtually
guarantee that a growing proportion of men and
women in the U.S. labor force will be faced with elder
care responsibilities-sometimes on top of child care
responsibilities. The implications of these additional
demands on workers' time and income warrant careful
scrutiny by both employers and public policymakers.
Personal & Family Life
53
KEY FINDINGS
Clearly, the benefits of having children outweigh the costs.
However, the demands of raising children while holding down a paid
job can have negative effects on the well-being of working parents-
at least in the short run.
Workers without children under 18 and workers with fewer children under 18 are
happier with their relationships with their spouses/partners.
Workers who have children exhibit higher levels of stress than workers without
children and are not coping as well as other workers.
Working parents with younger children and with fewer children are more
satisfied with the job they are doing as parents than workers with older children
and more children.
In contrast to these findings, workers with children feel somewhat more successful
in their personal and family lives than workers without children, perhaps because
having children does bring joy and fulfills deep-seated values.
Implications: These findings reflect the situation of
employed parents who generally have few supports
outside their immediate family. Conceivably, working
parents would fare better if more support were
available to them in the community or the workplace.
For example, findings presented later in this report
indicate that working parents who have more
satisfactory child care arrangements are much better
off than those who are not satisfied with the child care
they are able to find and afford.
54
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
Child care can be problematic for employed parents, and child
care problems can have far-reaching effects.
By far, most frequently cited as their main problem with child care-by 62
percent of parents-was finding high quality care.
27 percent of employed parents reported seriously considering using other
arrangements when selecting child care for their youngest child under 13. Of
those, 58 percent found no acceptable other choices.
When parents make child care arrangements, they may put together a series of
arrangements-different arrangements for different children for different days of the week.
The National Study of the Changing Workforce examined all the regular child care
arrangements families had, whether they covered work hours or not.
Parents with children under 13 managed 2.94 non-parental child care
arrangements per family for all their children (1.63 children on average). The
range was from 1 to 12 arrangements per family.
Employed parents with children under the age of 5 had 1.66 non-parental
arrangements for their youngest child, while parents with children ages 5 to 12
had 2.04 non-parental arrangements for their youngest child.
Having child care arrangements break down can also be problematic for parents.
26 percent of employed parents with children under the age of 13 had
experienced a breakdown in their usual child care arrangements in the preceding
three months; 32 percent of parents of children under the age of 5, and 20 percent
of parents with children ages 5 to 12 had this experience.
Despite these problems, 72 percent of all employed parents with children under
13 indicated that they were very happy with the quality of their child care
arrangements.
Personal & Family Life
55
KEY FINDINGS
Further analyses examined the relationships between three aspects of child care
arrangements-number of breakdowns in past three months, satisfaction with arrangements,
and annual cost of care as a proportion of household income-and important personal and
family life outcomes.
Working parents who are more satisfied with their child care arrangements are
also more satisfied with how they were doing as parents, are happier about
relationships with their spouses or partners, feel more successful in their personal
and family lives, are more satisfied with their lives in general, are less stressed, and
are coping better than parents who are less satisfied.
Working parents who experience fewer breakdowns in their child care
arrangements and who spend smaller proportions of their household incomes to
purchase child care services are more satisfied with their lives in general, are less
stressed, and are coping better than other parents.
Implications: High quality, reliable, and affordable child
care can make a positive difference in the lives of
working parents.
56
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
A
Ithough workers with children take relatively little time off work
to meet their child care responsibilities, women take more time away
from work than men because of their much greater responsibilities
for children.
One way that family or personal life affects workers on the job is through absenteeism. When
children are too ill to be cared for by their usual child care providers, when child care
arrangements break down, or when children are too upset to go off to school on their own,
family demands typically supersede job demands.
On average, workers with children under 13 years of age missed very little work
because of their child care responsibilities-taking less than one full day off, and
less than one day when they arrived at work late or left early during the preceding
three months. (See Table 28.)
Among workers with children under 13 years of age, women missed twice as
much work time as men, but still only 1.08 full days and 0.86 part days during the
preceding three months. There was no significant difference in the amount of
work time missed by single working mothers and women with employed spouses.
Nor was there a significant difference in the amount of work time missed by men
with employed wives and men whose wives were not employed.
Personal & Family Life
57
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 28: WORK TIME MISSED DURING THE PRECEDING THREE MONTHS
BECAUSE OF CHILD CARE RESPONSIBILITIES AMONG WORKERS WITH CHILDREN
UNDER 13 YEARS OLD
Overall
Men
Women
Child Illness:
Average number of days missed
0.56
0.33
***
0.78
(n=959;se=.048)
(n=475;se=.053)
(n=483;se=.078)
Average number of short days
0.36
NS
(n=956; se=.038)
Problem with Child Care:
Average number of days missed
0.12
NS
(n=959; se=.019)
Average number of short days
0.09
NS
(n=956;se=.021)
Other Child-Related Reasons:
Average number of days missed
0.18
0.09
**
0.27
(n=958; se=.023)
(n=475;se=.019)
(n=482;se=.041)
Average number of short days
0.22
NS
(m=955;se=.036)
All Child-Related Reasons:
Average number of days missed
0.80
0.51
***
1.08
(n=955;se=.056)
(n=475;se=.065)
(n=480; se=.090)
Average number of short days
0.64
0.42
**
0.86
(n=955;se=.060)
(n=473; se=.062)
(n=481;se=.101)
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
58
Personal & Family Life
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: Some amount of absenteeism due to child care
is an inevitable cost of doing business when business
depends on the labor of workers who have young children.
To the extent that employees are penalized for missing
work, they are likely to make decisions that minimize the
penalty. Thus, the fact that female employees miss more
work than male employees because of child care
responsibilities is not a problem created by female
employees, but the result of family decisions. Among dual-
earner families, the short-run opportunity costs of missing
work-lost wages or diminished chances for job
advancement-are generally greater for men than for
women who earn on average about two-thirds of what their
husbands earn.
Personal & Family Life
59
KEY FINDINGS
WORK-FAMILY BALANCE
F
amilies tend to bear the brunt of work-family conflict.
Research indicates that workers tend to bring work problems home. There is also evidence
that problems in workers' personal and family lives affect their psychological states and
behavior at work.
In the National Study of the Changing Workforce, workers were asked about spillover in both
directions-from job to family or personal life and from family or personal life to work. Their
answers to multiple questions about spillover in each direction were averaged to create overall
measures of job-to-home spillover (frequency of experiencing no personal time, no family
time, household work left undone, bad mood and no energy due to work) and home-to-job
spillover (family/personal responsibilities associated with refusal of overtime hours or travel,
lowered productivity, problems with supervisor, ètc.). Scores of both measures range from 0
to 1, with 1 representing more spillover. It should be noted that these two measures are not
entirely comparable: home-to-job spillover questions refer to the preceding year, while job-to-
home spillover questions refer to the preceding three months. In light of this difference, one
might well expect reported home-to-job spillover to be greater. In fact, the opposite is true.
As shown in Figure 8, workers reported that they are much more likely to
experience job-to-home spillover than have home-to-job spillover.
60
Work-Family Balance
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 8: A COMPARISON OF THE MEANS OF
JOB-TO-HOME AND HOME-TO-JOB SPILLOVER
Job-to-home spillover (n=814)
0.483
Home-to-job spillover (n=2594)
0.152
0
0.5
1
No
High
spillover
spillover
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
While this finding is not surprising, it is disturbing. It appears that family members and
friends must endure the stresses and problems that arise from work as well as from
personal/family life. Most workers under stress at work and/or at home need a place to turn to
in their workplaces and in their communities as well as in their families.
Work-Family Balance
61
KEY FINDINGS
W
orkers are more likely to sacrifice time for themselves than
time for work and family, with apparent negative consequences for
personal well-being.
The amount of time employees are able to set aside for themselves declines significantly as
family responsibilities increase. (See Table 29.)
Employees with no spouse or children at home manage to set aside an average of
2.84 hours for themselves on workdays and 6.55 hours on days off work. In
contrast, employees in dual earner families without children have significantly less
time for themselves on both workdays (2.11 hours) and days off (4.94 hours),
while employees with children in addition to employed spouses have even less
time for themselves -- 1.44 hours on workdays and 3.44 hours on days off.
While time for oneself decreases with greater family responsibility, time spent on
household chores increases, as does the total amount of time devoted to family
members. With the addition of children, however, time for spouse declines
significantly among workers in dual-earner families.
62
Work-Family Balance
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 29: HOURS DEVOTED TO ONESELF, CHORES, SPOUSE, AND CHILDREN
Workday hours
Workers with No
Workers with
Workers with
devoted to
Spouse or Children
Employed Spouse But
Employed Spouse and
No Children
Children
(n=718, se=.0721)
(n=561, se=.0612)
(n=652, se=.0410)
Oneself
2.84
2.11
1.44
(n=693, se=.0456)
(n=545, se=.0584)
(n=746, se=.0604)
Chores
1.61
2.11
2.34
(n=593, se=.0843)
(n=748, sc=.0715)
--
Spouse
4.17
3.32
(n=769, se=.0749)
--
--
Children
3.22
Off-day hours
devoted to
(n=679, se=.1306)
(n=542, se=. 1291)
(n=714, se=.0913)
Oneself
6.55
4.94
3.44
(n=752, se=.0959)
(n=591, 1096)
(n=774, se=.0937)
Chores
3.80
4.86
5.05
(n=607, SC=. 1700)
(n=794 se=.1537)
--
Spouse
10.76
9.62
(n=796, sc=.1667)
--
--
Children
8.16
All comparisons were significant at the p<.0001 level
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
When workers were asked about the way their work life affected them at home, the same
pattern emerged. Workers seem to skimp on household work first, then "time for self," and
finally "time for family and friends" (Figure 9).
Even so, 66 percent of employed parents with children ages 18 and under
indicated they didn't have enough time with their children and 50 percent said
they didn't have enough time with their spouse or partner.
Work-Family Balance
63
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 9: PERCENTAGE OF WORKERS' EXPERIENCING
TIME PROBLEMS OFTEN OR VERY OFTEN
Household work not done due to job (n=814)
40%
No time for family due to job (n=814)
24%
No personal time due to job (n=814)
35%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Further analyses revealed that the amount of time workers spent on themselves was related to
personal well-being.
Workers who spend more workday time on themselves are more satisfied with
their lives in general, are less stressed, and feel they are coping more effectively.
Implications: Although cutting back on time for oneself
may seem to be the only way to cope with pressing job
and family demands, findings from this study suggest
that carving out some time for oneself represents an
investment in mental health and well-being that may
well offset occasional or modest reductions in
attention to work and family.
64
Work-Family Balance
KEY FINDINGS
THE BUSINESS ROLE IN ADDRESSING
FAMILY AND PERSONAL ISSUES
This section explores the availability of personal or family-responsive initiatives; the value
employees place on these initiatives; and the links between these policies, programs and
benefits and indicators of worker satisfaction and performance.
W
orkers place a high value on initiatives developed by
corporations to help employees with their personal/family lives: both
traditional fringe benefits (health insurance and pension plans) and
more contemporary forms of employer assistance like flexible time
and leave policies, and dependent care programs.
The majority of wage and salaried workers were offered health insurance (86
percent for self, or self and family). Overall, 71 percent were offered pension
plans.
Of those workers without health insurance coverage, 52 percent would change
employers to get it, and another 9 percent might. Among those without pension
plans at work, 52 percent would or might change employers to obtain this benefit.
In addition, a majority of workers without health insurance and pension plans said
they would be willing to trade compensation or other benefits to obtain coverage.
(See Table 30.)
The Business Role
65
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 30: TRADITIONAL BENEFITS OFFERED, RATES OF PARTICIPATION,
AND TRADE-OFFS WILLING TO MAKE FOR ALL EMPLOYEES
Workers Not
Workers Not Offered
Participation
Offered Benefits-
Benefits-Would
Offered
Among Those
Would Change
Trade Salary and
BENEFIT
Benefit
Offered
Employer to Obtain
Benefits to Obtain
HEALTH INSURANCE
(n=2906)
(n=2003)
(n=161)
(n=160)
For self only
7%
80%
Yes 52%
Yes 53%
For self & family
79
Maybe 9
Maybe 9
Not offered
14
PENSION PLAN
(n=2838)
(n=2012)
(n=314)
(n=311)
71%
83%
Yes 44%
Yes 53%
Maybe 8
Maybe 6
NA indicates "Not Asked"
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
In needs assessments and work-family studies, workers typically state that flexibility is most
critical to their ability to manage responsibilities at home and at work.
Most workers said their employers make some provision for them to take time off
for childbirth and parenting (88 percent), and time off to care for sick family
members (90 percent). It is not known how generous these policies are and how
formal they are, but other research conducted by the Families and Work Institute
indicates that time and leave arrangements are largely dependent upon the
discretion of supervisors. (These questions were asked prior to the passage of the
1993 Family and Medical Leave Act, which guarantees unpaid, job-protected
leaves of 12 weeks in a year-long period for workers who have worked more than
1250 hours over the past year to employers with 50 or more employees within a
75-mile radius.)
A majority of workers (57 percent) said their employers make some provision for
part-time work.
66
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
47 percent of workers said they were allowed to take extended lunch breaks for
personal reasons, and 44 percent said they could work fewer hours one day and
make it up later.
Only 29 percent of workers reported that they could choose the times when they
began and ended the workday (flextime), while 24 percent said they were regularly
allowed to work at home.
As shown in Table 31, sizable proportions of employees without access to flexible time and
leave programs reported that they would or might switch employers, trade salary or other
benefits, or trade off job advancement to obtain them.
The Business Role
67
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 31: FLEXIBLE TIME AND LEAVE POLICY TRADEOFFS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES
Without Access
Without Access
Without Access
Who Would
Who Would
Working for
Who Would
Trade Salary/
Trade Job
Employers Who
Change Employer
Other Benefits to
Advancement to
Policy
Have Policy
to Obtain
Obtain
Obtain
TIME OFF FOR
(n=2748)
(n=131)
NA
CHILDBIRTH AND
88%
NA
Yes 33%
PARENTING
Maybe 1
TIME OFF TO CARE FOR
(n=2799)
(n=150)
NA
SICK FAMILY MEMBERS
90%
NA
Yes 47%
Maybe 7
FLEXIBLE SCHEDULE:
(n=2815)
(n=1016)
NA
(n=1010)
WORK PART TIME
57%
Yes 12%
Yes 16
Maybe 3
Maybe 3
FLEXIBLE SCHEDULE:
(n=2901)
(n=865)
NA
(n=862)
SET OWN START & END
29
Yes 26
Yes 28
TIMES
Maybe 6
Maybe 4
FLEXIBLE SCHEDULE:
(n=2864)
WORK FEWER HOURS
44
ONE DAY AND MAKE Up
NA
NA
NA
LATER
FLEXIBLE SCHEDULE:
(n=2869)
EXTENDED LUNCH
NA
NA
NA
47
BREAK
FLEXIBLE PLACE: WORK
(n=2889)
(n=869)
NA
(n=866)
REGULARLY AT HOME
24
Yes 23
Yes 22
Maybe 5
Maybe 4
NA indicates "Not Asked"
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
The percentage of workers willing to change employers in order to gain access to work-family
programs is even higher for workers with children under age 13. (See Table 32.)
68
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 32: PARENTS' AND NON PARENTS' WILLINGNESS TO SWITCH JOBS FOR
FLEXIBLE TIME AND LEAVE PROGRAMS
All
employees
Policy
without
Employees With
Employees Without
access
Children Under 13
Children Under 13
FLEXTIME
(n=865)
(n=291)
(n=574)
Yes
26%
35%
***
21%
Maybe
6
10
4
WORK PART TIME
(n=1016)
Yes
12
NS
Maybe
3
WORK AT HOME
(n=869)
(n=290)
(n=579)
Yes
23
29
*
20
Maybe
5
4
6
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
The Business Role
69
KEY FINDINGS
Dependent care benefits are available to far fewer employees than either
traditional benefits or flexible time and leave options. (See Table 33.)
Although many workers in the sample had no immediate needs for dependent
care assistance, the overall proportion of workers willing to trade salary and other
benefits to obtain dependent care benefits is substantial.
TABLE 33: ACCESS, USE, AND WILLINGNESS TO TRADE SALARY OR OTHER BENEFITS
FOR DEPENDENT CARE ASSISTANCE FOR ALL EMPLOYEES
Working For
Workers Who Make
Workers Without Access
Employers Who
Use of Policy (Among
Who Would Trade Salary
Policy
Have Policy
Those With Access)
and Other Benefits
FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT FOR
(n=2683)
(n=761)
DEPENDENT CARE
NA
28%
53%
CHILD CARE RESOURCE &
(n=2557)
(n=519)
(n=798)
REFERRAL
20
11
Yes 17
Maybe 2
ELDER CARE RESOURCE &
(n=2481)
(n=264)
(n=867)
REFERRAL
11
6
Yes 15
Maybe 2
EMPLOYER-SPONSORED CHILD
(n=2760)
(n=287)
(n=971)
CARE AT/NEAR WORKSITE
10
12
Yes 23
Maybe 3
VOUCHERS TO PURCHASE CHILD
(n=2661)
(n=108)
(n=1006)
CARE SERVICES
4
8
Yes 23
Maybe 4
NA indicates "Not Asked"
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Not surprisingly, workers who had immediate dependent care responsibilities
were more willing to trade salary or other benefits for dependent care assistance.
(See Table 34.)
70
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 34: PARENTS' AND NON PARENTS' WILLINGNESS TO TRADE SALARY AND
OTHER BENEFITS FOR DEPENDENT CARE ASSISTANCE
Employees
Policy
without
Access to this
Employees With
Employees Without
Assistance
Children Under 13
Children Under 13
CHILD CARE RESOURCE
(n=798)
(n=290)
(n=508)
AND REFERRAL
***
Yes
17%
28%
12%
Maybe
2
3
1
ELDER CARE RESOURCE
(n=867)
AND REFERRAL
NS
Yes
15
Maybe
2
ON- OR NEAR-STTE CHILD
(n=971)
(n=346)
(n=625)
CARE
***
Yes
23
37
16
Maybe
3
3
3
CHILD CARE VOUCHERS
(n=1006)
(n=357)
(n=650)
Yes
23
46
***
22
Maybe
4
5
5
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Further analyses were conducted to determine whether having greater access to these benefits,
policies, and programs is related to important work life outcomes.
Workers who are offered more traditional fringe benefits, more flexible time and
leave options, and/or more dependent care assistance are more committed to
doing their jobs well, are more satisfied with their jobs, and take more initiative at
work.
Workers with more flexible time and leave options and more dependent care
benefits feel more loyal to their employers and are more committed to helping
their employers succeed. Having greater access to traditional benefits is not
associated with attitudes toward employers.
The Business Role
71
KEY FINDINGS
Workers with more traditional and dependent care benefits, but not flexible time
and leave options, plan to remain longer with their current employers.
Implications: While traditional fringe benefits like
health insurance and pension plans are highly valued
by all employees, policies providing for more flexible
work schedules and family-related leave, as well as
programs to assist workers in arranging and
purchasing dependent care services, also have
considerable value for many workers. The findings
reported here also indicate that all three forms of
assistance are associated with more positive work
attitudes and behavior, meaning that investments in
such programs undoubtedly benefit employers as well
as employees.
72
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
A
Ithough women value flexible time and leave more highly than
men, there are no differences between men and women in the
tradeoffs they are willing to make for dependent care assistance.
Since managers sometimes view work-family programs as "women's benefits" that are of little
value to their male employees, we investigated whether women were more willing to make
tradeoffs for these programs than men. Employees who did not have access to specific work-
family programs on their current jobs were asked what tradeoffs they would make to gain these
programs. Although employees were not asked about the same types of tradeoffs for all
programs, their responses to the questions provide some indication of the degree to which
men and women value different options.
Comparisons of the tradeoffs that men and women with children under 13 years
of age are willing to make to obtain access to work-family programs suggest that
flexible work arrangements tend to be valued more highly by women than men
(Table 35), but that dependent care assistance tends to be valued equally by men
and women. (See also Table 36.)
The Business Role
73
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 35: TRADEOFFS THAT MEN AND WOMEN WITH CHILDREN UNDER 13 WOULD
MAKE TO GAIN ACCESS TO FLEXIBLE TIME AND LEAVE OPTIONS NOT OFFERED BY
THEIR CURRENT EMPLOYERS
Tradeoffs
Overall
Men
Women
Willingness to Change Employer for More
Flexible Work Arrangements:
Flextime
Yes
35%
NS
Maybe
10
(n=291)
Work at Home
Yes
29%
NS
Maybe
4
(n=290)
Part-Time Work
Yes
15%
10%
*
21%
Maybe
2
<1
4
(n=331)
(n=185)
(n=146)
Willingness to Sacrifice Advancement for
More Flexible Work Arrangements:
Flextime
Yes
36%
26%
**
44%
Maybe
4
7
1
(n=288)
(n=135)
(n=153)
Work at Home
Yes
26%
17%
*
36%
Maybe
3
4
3
(n=290)
(n=148)
(n=142)
Part-Time Work
Yes
19%
11%
**
29%
Maybe
2
2
2
(n=328)
(n=185)
(n=143)
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; = p<.001; *** = = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
74
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 36: TRADEOFFS THAT MEN AND WOMEN WITH CHILDREN UNDER 13 WOULD
MAKE TO GAIN ACCESS TO DEPENDENT CARE ASSISTANCE NOT OFFERED BY THEIR
CURRENT EMPLOYERS
Tradeoffs
Overall
Men
Women
Willingness to Change Employers for Access to
Flexible Spending Account for Dependent Care
Yes
30%
NS
Maybe
13
(n=243)
Willingness to Trade Salary or Other Benefits
for Dependent Care Benefits:
Child Care Resource & Referral
Yes
28%
NS
Maybe
3
(n=277)
On-/Near-Site Child Care
Yes
38%
NS
Maybe
3
(n=329)
Vouchers to Purchase Child Care
Yes
37%
NS
Maybe
6
(n=340)
Significance Levels: * = p<.01; ** = = p<.001; *** = p<.0001; NS = not significant.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
While women with children under 13 years old appear to be much more willing than men with
children under 13 to sacrifice earnings and advancement for flexible work arrangements, men
and women appeared to value dependent care assistance equally based on their reported
willingness to change employers in order to get flexible spending accounts for dependent care,
or to trade compensation or other benefits to get child care resource and referral services,
employer-sponsored child care at or near the worksite, and vouchers to help pay for child care
expenses.
The Business Role
75
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: Work-family programs-such as flexible
time and leave options and dependent care
assistance-do not unfairly benefit female over male
employees. On the contrary, dependent care benefits,
which have direct costs for employers that may limit
other benefit offerings, are valued equally by men and
women. While flexible time and leave options are
valued and used more by women than men, such
programs tend to impose direct costs (e.g., lost wages)
and indirect costs (e.g., diminished chances of job
advancement) on the employees who use them rather
than on employers and on the finite resources
available to support other benefits.
76
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
S
ome groups of workers have much greater access than others to
traditional fringe benefits (health insurance and pension plans),
flexible time and leave policies, and dependent care assistance.
In the United States, employers, rather than government, are mainly responsible for deciding
what fringe benefits workers receive, and what policies govern work schedules and leaves of
absence for illness, vacation, and other reasons. In our voluntary, employer-based system,
there is no assurance of equal access or of coverage for those workers with the greatest needs.
For example, although health care insurance in some form was available to 86 percent of
workers, lack of job-related health insurance was a serious problem for low-wage workers
earning less than $7 per hour-32 percent of whom were offered no coverage, even for
themselves. It was also a problem for employees of organizations with fewer than 50
employees (nationwide)-36 percent of whom were not even offered individual coverage.
To compare workers' access to traditional fringe benefits, we created a single measure ranging
from 0 to 3, with one point allocated for each of the following benefits: health insurance
coverage for self, health insurance coverage for family, and pension plan.
As shown in Figure 9, more advantaged workers-managers and professionals,
workers who earned more, and workers with more education-have greater access
to traditional benefits than other workers. Access is also greater among older
workers, and much greater among employees of larger companies/organizations
(more employees nationwide). No significant differences were found in
comparisons of men and women, minority and non-minority workers, and
workers with and without dependent care responsibilities.
The Business Role
77
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 9: NUMBER OF TRADITIONAL BENEFITS RECEIVED (MAXIMUM = 3)
All workers (n=2958)
2.3
Managers and profess. (n=922)
2.6
Other occupations (n=2036)
2.2
Hourly wage less than $7 (n=526)
1.6
Hourly wage $7 to $15.99 (n=1199)
2.5
Hourly wage $16 or more (n=591)
2.7
High school or less (n=1166)
2.1
Some college (n=947)
2.3
4-year college degree or more (n=834)
2.6
Under 30 years old (n=796)
2
30-49 years old (n=1640)
2.4
50 or more years old (n=498)
2.5
Fewer than 50 employees (n=659)
1.5
50 to 499 employees (n=474)
2.5
500 or more employees (n=1102)
2.7
0
1
2
3
Number of benefits received
All comparisons were statistically significant at P < .0001.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
78
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
Access to dependent care assistance was measured by counting how many of the following
plans were available to workers: child care resource and referral, elder care resource and
referral, employer-sponsored child care services, child care vouchers, and flexible spending
accounts for dependent care. Scores ranged from 0 to 5, with the overall average being less
than one (0.66).
As shown in Figure 10, more advantaged workers-managers and professionals,
workers who earn more, and workers with more education-again have greater
access than other workers, and employees of larger organizations have much
greater (though still quite limited) access to dependent care assistance than
employees of smaller organizations. Statistically significant differences were not
found by gender, age, race/ethnicity, or dependent care responsibilities.
The Business Role
79
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 10: NUMBER OF DEPENDENT CARE PROGRAMS RECEIVED
(MAXIMUM = 5)
All workers (n=2958)
0.66
Managers and profess. (n=922)
0.77
Other occupations (n=2036)
0.6
Hourly wage less than $7 (n=526)
0.35
Hourly wage $7 to $15.99 (n=1199)
0.67
Hourly wage $16 or more (n=591)
0.89
High school or less (n=1166)
0.52
Some college (n=947)
0.7
4-year college degree or more (n=834)
0.79
Fewer than 50 employees (n=659)
0.26
50 to 499 employees (n=474)
0.38
1.02
500 or more employees (n=1102)
0
0.5
1
1.5
Number of benefits received
All comparisons were statistically significant at P < .0001.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Access to flexible time and leave policies was measured by counting how many of the following
policies/benefits were available to each respondent: paid vacation days; choice in setting times
to start and end the workday; extended lunch hours to take care of personal business; ability to
work extra hours some days in order to take time off on other days; ability to work at home on
80
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
a regular basis; part-time work/job sharing; time off for childbirth and parenting; and time off
to care for a sick child or family member. Scores ranged from 0 to 8.
As can be seen in Figure 11, more advantaged workers-managers and
professionals, workers who earn more, and workers with more education-again
have greater access than other workers, though the discrepancies tend to be
smaller than for traditional and dependent care benefits. In addition, minority
workers report less access to flexible time and leave policies than non-minority
workers. No differences were found by gender, age, dependent care
responsibilities, or organizational size (number of employees nationwide).
FIGURE 11: NUMBER OF FLEXIBLE TIME AND LEAVE BENEFITS RECEIVED
(MAXIMUM = 8)
4.3
All workers (n=2958)
Managers and profess. (n=922)
4.9
Other occupations (n=2036)
4
Hourly wage less than $7 (n=526)
3.9
Hourly wage $7 to $15.99 (n=1199)
4.3
Hourly wage $16 or more (n=591)
4.7
High school or less (n=1166)
3.9
Some college (n=947)
4.4
4-year college degree or more (n=834)
4.7
Minority workers (n=671)
4
Non-minority workers (n=2276)
4.4
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Number of benefits received
All comparisons were statistically significant at P < .0001.
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
The Business Role
81
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: While employers generally view the
provision of fringe benefits and other forms of
assistance as a private matter to be settled between
themselves and their employees, unequal access in this
voluntary private system is of growing concern to
public policymakers, as evidenced by recent legislation
mandating family and medical leave and current
efforts to extend health insurance coverage to all
workers.
82
The Business Role
KEY FINDINGS
THE FUTURE
In the final section of this report we address the issues of the balance between work and family
that employees would like to have in their lives and the sacrifices they are willing to make to
have that balance.
O
n average, workers would like to allocate less time and energy
to work and more time and energy to themselves, their families, and
friends. Young workers seem particularly protective of personal and
family life.
Through a series of questions workers were asked to estimate what proportions of their time
and energy they actually spent on work, self, and family and friends. Then, they were asked
how much time and energy they would like to spend on these three domains.
On average, U.S. workers estimated that they actually devote 37 percent of their
time and energy to their jobs or careers. However, they would prefer to allocate
30 percent to this part of their lives.
Workers would like to spend some of the time and energy redirected from work
on themselves. While they estimate they actually devote 20 percent of their time
and energy to themselves, they would like to increase this amount to 23 percent.
Family and friends actually consume 43 percent of workers' time and energy;
however, workers would like this to increase to 47 percent. (See Figure 12.)
The Future
83
KEY FINDINGS
FIGURE 12: ACTUAL AND PREFERRED ALLOCATION OF TIME AND ENERGY
Self
20%
Family and Friends
43%
Job/Career
37%
A. Actual Time and Energy Allocation
Self
23%
Family and Friends
47%
Job/Career
30%
B. Preferred Time and Energy Allocation
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
84
The Future
KEY FINDINGS
Young workers 18 through 24 years of age raise what may be even more fundamental
questions about the relative importance of work versus personal and family life. They were
asked how willing they were to make sacrifices in their education, careers, or jobs to protect
their personal and family lives and how willing they were to make sacrifices in their personal
and family lives to further their education, careers, or jobs.
Young workers say they are much more willing to make sacrifices in their
education, careers, and jobs than in their personal and family lives (Figure 13).
Although the number of workers under 25 in the sample was fairly small (n=248),
it is worth noting that significantly more young workers with children (60
percent) than workers without children (28 percent) were willing to sacrifice
education/careers/jobs for family life.
FIGURE 13: COMPARISON OF YOUNG WORKERS' WILLINGNESS TO MAKE SACRIFICES
FOR THEIR HOME LIVES AND FOR THEIR EDUCATION/JOBS/CAREERS
7%
None
4%
17%
Not many
14%
55%
Some
48%
21%
A lot
34%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Willingness to make sacrifices in family/personal lives for education/job/career (n=279)
Willingness to make sacrifices in education/career/job for family/personal life (n=279)
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
The Future
85
KEY FINDINGS
Implications: Taken together, the responses of all
workers and young workers suggest that there is
sentiment in favor of more balanced lives, requiring at
least a modest shift of emphasis from work to self and
family. Employers might also expect young workers
to want a different balance in their lives than older
workers have chosen. It is obvious that desiring
changes and acting on those desires are quite different.
Thus, the extent to which these sentiments will be
acted upon remains to be seen-and can be assessed
when the National Study of the Changing Workforce
is repeated in 1996.
86
The Future
KEY FINDINGS
In the end it comes back to the workplace. Characteristics of jobs
and workplaces affect not only workers' attitudes and behavior at
work, but also their general well-being and their abilities to balance
work and family life. Thus, work-family solutions will be most
effective if they focus on the nature of jobs, relationships at work,
and the organizational culture.
Exploratory analyses suggest that work life has significant effects on personal and family life.
Employees with heavier workloads have more trouble balancing work with
family/personal life, experience more work-family conflict and negative job-to-
home spillover, are more stressed, and are coping less effectively than other
workers.
In contrast, employees with more autonomy in their jobs and more social support
from supervisors, co-workers, and the workplace culture are more successful in
balancing work with family/personal life, experience less work-family conflict and
negative job-to-home spillover, are less stressed, and are coping more effectively
than other workers.
Workers who feel less secure in their jobs, believe that they have experienced
discrimination in their current workplaces, or feel that workers of their own
gender or race have less opportunity for advancement report more negative job-
to-home spillover, more stress, and less effective coping than other workers.
Concluding Implications: The National Study of the Changing Workforce was designed to
investigate workers' attitudes and values about work, personal, and family lives. The findings
reveal that today's workers are very concerned about the quality of their own work and their
work environments. Most workplace improvement efforts are predicated on the assumption
that workers care about quality, and the findings presented here lend support to this
assumption.
Another purpose of this study was to determine which aspects of work, family, and personal
life affected employees and in what ways. The findings show that the most salient features of
jobs are workload, job autonomy, work schedule control, social relationships at work, and
The Future
87
KEY FINDINGS
workers having the perception of a non-discriminating, supportive culture. Not only do these
factors affect work attitudes and behaviors, but they strongly affect workers' ability to balance
work and family life.
Additionally, this study reveals that workers want to shift their focus to devote more time and
attention to their personal and family lives. A sizable proportion state that they are willing to
make sacrifices and tradeoffs to do so.
These findings argue for expanding the issues that are typically considered in the workplace
improvement efforts to include the question of how these initiatives will affect family or
personal life. They also argue for broadening the definition of work-family efforts from
dependent care to include the ways jobs are structured and designed.
Since better workplaces seem to promote more job satisfaction, more commitment, more
loyalty, harder work, and more initiative, as well as a better work-family balance, there is an
opportunity to align workers' needs with workplace goals. What helps workers also seems to
promote workforce productivity.
88
The Future
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
The response rate for the National Study of the Changing Workforce was 50.5 percent-
calculated as the ratio of the number of completed interviews to the estimated number of
eligible households approached by telephone. Since eligibility could not be determined for
individuals who refused to answer the eligibility screening questions or for calls that went
unanswered despite repeated (up to 10) attempts, it was assumed that the eligibility rate for
these households was the same as for households whose eligibility was determined. This
procedure follows the guidelines recommended by the Council of American Survey Research
Organizations.
The response rate for the sample was calculated as follows:
TABLE 37: RESPONSE RATE
4493 known eligible households
Eligibility Rate
=
=
.634
4493 eligible households + 2596 known ineligible households
Estimated
Eligibles Among
Those with
=
Undetermined
.634 (eligibility rate) X 4537 households of undetermined eligibility
=
2876
Eligibility
3718 completed interviews
Response Rate
=
=
.5045 (50.5%)
4493 known eligibles + 2876 estimated eligibles
Source: Families and Work Institute, 1993
Of those for whom eligibility could be determined, the percentage of completed interviews
was 82.8 percent.
89
APPENDIX
Because of the deliberate oversampling of Hispanics, African Americans, non-employed
women, and young workers, it was necessary to adjust proportions for these groups in the
sample by weighting. A two-stage procedure was used in constructing weights. First,
households in the sample were iteratively weighted to match their estimated distribution in the
population. Second, individual cases were weighted to account for differing probabilities of
selection within households. A third step was added after comparing selected demographic
characteristics of wage and salaried employees (who are the subject of this report) in the final
sample with characteristics of wage and salaried employees in the U.S. population as estimated
by the March 1992 Current Population Survey (CPS) conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the
Census. In this step, individual cases were weighted to bring the sex ratio for the sample into
line with CPS estimates for wage and salaried workers in the U.S. population.
90
he has a consistent record of being very concerned about the use
of striker replacements that would very well be a subject that he
would pursue, as he did with his executive order in a second term
if he is given one by the American people.
Q Is he concerned that the D.C. Circuit was trying
to clip his wings with regard to use of executive authority?
MR. MCCURRY: The President is fully confident that
his executive order met the test of law. It's an issue that he
looked at very carefully.
Q
Legislation for expanding family leave, do you
have the timing on that, and would the administration like to see
that as stand-alone legislation or attached to one of the
appropriation bills to get it done?
MR. MCCURRY: When the President and the Vice
President unveiled the President's desire to kind of go the next
step on Family and Medical Leave, when they met in Nashville in
June, he indicated they would like to see legislative action
taken by Congress. Now, the political reality, given that the
President's opponent in the Presidential campaign is against the
Family and Medical Leave act, period, the likelihood is that it
would be impossible to get action in this session of Congress.
We will have the legislative specifics ready to go by the end of
this session. If we detect any momentum for passage we certainly
would move very quickly to put that before this session of
Congress. But the reality most likely is that we will have to
present that to the next session of Congress if the President is
reelected, and make it a very high priority.
The President, again, this is a way in which families
can balance out their requirements of being successful at work,
and at the same time meeting their responsibilities at home as
they raise families. And the President considers that general
subject one that he would focus on intently in a second term.
Q Mike, let me ask a follow up question to this.
The expansion of that would include the federal requirement that
employers would have to give parents time off to attend PTA
meetings. Well, I don't know anybody --
MR. MCCURRY: Not PTA meeting, parent-teacher
conferences. It gives them the option of exercising a leave,
taking leave in order to attend parent-teacher conferences at
school. Not PTA meetings, that was not the suggestion the
President made.
Q Okay. I withdraw my question.
Q If I could follow up on that that. Does the
administration have any empirical evidence that parents cannot
take off time to attend? I mean, are you setting up a straw man
here?
MORE
#265-09/09/96
MR. MCCURRY: Parents can -- I mean, look, any parent
knows that you're very severely crimped in the amount of time
that you get both for a variety a family needs -- for vacation
time, for taking care of a medical emergency in the family. What
we're trying to do is make it easier for parents to meet their
obligations as parents, to take care of not only a situation at
school where you're having a conference with a teacher but also
if you've got a kid who's sick and who needs treatment.
It's a way of giving flexibility both to the employer
and the employee so they can more successfully balance the
requirements of working and raising a family, which is one of the
critical concerns that they have as they try to raise families
successfully.
Q I understand that, Mike, but is there any evidence
that parents are not now allowed to take off? Has the
administration come up with any evidence that they can't do it
now?
MR. MCCURRY: Many parents have to work under
situations where their ability to get time off for an emergency
situation is severely cramped. Sometimes it's difficult to just
get leave time automatically from an employer. This makes it
easier for the employee and gives flexibility also to the
employer.
Q There is legislation out there, I think by
Ballenger, that does address this issue to some degree. Why
isn't the administration --
MR. MCCURRY: Because we have concerns about other
aspects of that legislation as it relates to so-called
compensatory time.
Q
Mike, how do you enforce it if it ever gets to
that stage?
MR. MCCURRY: It's a Fair Labor Standards Act
amendment enforceable by the Department of Labor.
Q
Bob Dole has put out a two sentence statement on
Iraq. I don't know if you've seen it. But if you haven't, I'll
be happy to read it to you and wonder if you'd react to it.
"The reports of" -- this is a quote -- "The reports of
continued strife and killings in Northern Iraq to include
executions of U.S.-backed Iraqi opposition personnel, the
apparent entrenchment of Iraqi troops around Irbil, and the lack
of evidence of an Iraqi withdrawal from the north raise questions
about whether the administration's strategy has advanced U.S.
interests in the region. In Iraq, as in Bosnia, the Clinton
administration should be careful about making claims of success
that events on the ground may not substantiate, and about giving
assurances that it is unable or unwilling to fulfill because the
credibility of the United States is at stake."
MORE
#265-09/09/96
Here's
San fire the wants / Exex
Bill will later Care J
3
Q&A ON FLEXTIME
AND EXPANSION OF THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT
June 24, 1996
Flex-time Proposal:
Q:
Would the President veto the Ballenger bill?
A:
The President indicated that he would strongly oppose any bill that would allow
coercion and uses phrases like "comp-time" as cover to limit workers' choices.
Q:
Would the President veto a minimum wage increase if it included the Ballenger bill?
A.
I'm not going to get into hypotheticals. But the President has said the Congress
should pass a clean minimum wage bill, and he has indicated that he would strongly
oppose any bill that would allow coercion and uses phrases like "comp-time" as
cover to limit workers' choices.
Q:
How does flex-time differ from the Republican comp-time proposals?
A:
The President's proposal provides workers and employers with more flexibility and
choice while protecting workers from coercion through a range of safeguards. For
example under the President's proposal a worker cannot be forced to take flex-time
unless they request it in writing before performing the overtime. And workers can
use their accumulated flex-time at any time with two weeks notice, rather than
putting it at the discretion of the employer.
Q.
How does this affect public sector employees?
A.
This proposal is for the private sector, but we would certainly be willing to discuss
extending its additional protections to public sector workers.
Q:
Why do you cap the amount of flex-time at 80 hours when federal and state
government employees enjoy up to 240 hours of flex-time?
Q:
The proposal strikes a balance between providing more flexibility and protecting
workers from coercion. Based on experience with the flex-time in the private sector,
we may want to broaden it after the first four years. Under the proposal, flex-time
would sunset in four years unless extended, and a Commission would report to
Congress on its impact before it sunsets.
Q:
How does this affect unionized workers?
A:
Their collective bargaining unit would govern, but our flex-time proposal would give
unions and employers more choices in what they could negotiate.
Q:
How can small employers manage to let workers use their flex-time at any time with
only two weeks notice? Couldn't some small businesses be left with no one to
manage the store at Christmas?
A:
Flex-time would be options for both employer and employees; both would need to
mutually agree to flex-time. Some employers and employees may prefer to maintain
the current overtime policy. We are providing a new option and flexibility.
But it is important to note that flex-time is time that workers earned by working
overtime, which is why it is appropriate that workers be able to take it with two
weeks notice or with less notice if the employer is not unduly disrupted.
Q:
How does organized labor feel about this?
A:
That's a question you should ask them.
Q:
Are your trying to distant yourself from the labor unions? Is this Sister Soulja?
A:
Not at all. We strongly believe this proposal provides both employees and
employers with more choice and flexibility while protecting workers from coercion.
Some may disagree with the proposal, but that is not our intent.
Q:
Isn't this just me-too-ism?
A:
That is absurd.
1.
This President has been a leader on work and family issues right from the start.
The Family and Medical Leave Act was the first bill he signed, after
Republicans had opposed it, President Bush had vetoed it, and Republicans still
oppose it today.
President Clinton has also expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit so no parent
has to raise their kids in poverty, while Republicans have tried to cut it.
2.
Moreover, the President's proposal differs from other current proposals. The
President's proposal provides flex-time the right way: it provides employee and
employer choice. The Republican proposals provide only employer choice. The
President's proposal provides flexibility while protecting workers from coercion.
Q:
Who would be covered by flex-time?
A:
Our flex-time proposal would apply to the firms covered by the Fair Labor and
Standards Act. The FLSA covers nearly all businesses [excluding workers at
enterprises with annual gross revenues of $500,000 or less and who are also not
engaged in interstate commerce]. Certain employees, such as bonafide executives,
administrative, and professional employees are exempt from the overtime provisions
of the FLSA and would also be exempt from our flex-time proposal.
Our proposal would contain specific protections for workers especially vulnerable to
coercion from employers to accept flex-time rather than overtime pay, or vice versa.
For example, the proposal would exclude temporary, seasonal, and part-time
workers, and the Secretary of Labor could recommend excluding low-wage workers
who are vulnerable to coercion or certain occupations and industries that show a
pattern of abuse.
Q:
Are there going to be any special "carve outs" for specific industries like the
construction industry?
A:
Every industry is different, and those differences need to be taken into account. The
President's proposal gives the Secretary of Labor the authority to recommend
excluding certain occupations or industries that show a pattern of abuse. Flex-time
cannot become a tool for some employers to cut their costs by cutting their workers'
pay in a race to the bottom for new business.
Q:
How does this affect small businesses? Isn't this yet another burden on small
business?
A:
Small and large businesses have been pushing for flex-time for a long time. The
difference between our proposal and the Republican proposals is that we would
provide workers with more choices and would protect against employers' coercing
workers.
The bipartisan Commission on Leave found that the Family and Medical Leave Act
is not costly or complex to administer, and smaller businesses often found it easier
to comply than larger sites.
Family and Medical Leave Expansion:
Q:
What about the Dodd proposal to extend the FMLA to smaller businesses --
businesses with under 50 employees?
A:
We have no plans to do so at this time.
Q:
Does your Family and Medical Leave Act expansion provide an additional 24 hours
(3 days) of leave in addition to the 12 weeks currently provided under the Act?
A:
Yes, the 24 hours are in addition to the 12 weeks currently allowed under the Act.
Q:
How will you prevent workers from abusing the expansion of the FMLA to take time
off from work for inappropriate purposes?
A:
We start with the assumption that workers can be trusted to take leave only when
they need it. Moreover, few workers can afford to take unpaid leave unless they
need to. Based on experience with the FMLA to date, we don't expect it will be a
problem, but we will provide for appropriate safeguards.
Q:
Why should a worker be able to take time off from work to take a grandparent to
the doctors but not to care for a grandparent who is seriously ill? [The FMLA
allows workers to take unpaid leave to care only for a child, spouse or parent.]
A:
The recent bipartisan Commission on Leave report shows that the Act has been a
tremendous success and has not been the burden to business that its opponents
feared. As we expand the Act to cover more circumstances, we want to move
cautiously to ensure that it stays that way.
Q.
Why should a worker be guaranteed leave to take their parent to the doctor but not
to go to the doctor themselves?
A.
That's a good point, but many people currently can take paid or unpaid sick leave to
go to a doctor's appointment.
Q:
How do flex-time and the FMLA expansion interact?
A:
Workers could use their flex-time for purposes allowed under the FMLA so that
they would not have to take unpaid leave.
EXPANDED FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT UPDATE
September 9, 1996
On June 24, 1996 President Clinton announced that he would put forth a proposal to
expand the Family and Medical Leave Act to allow parents to take up to 24 hours
unpaid time off annually for 1.) child education purposes, such as parent-teacher
conferences, 2.) to tend to older relatives' health needs or 3.) to take a child to the
doctor or other routine medical practice. In conjunction with that announcement,
President Clinton announced his support for a new "employee-choice flex-time
proposal" that would allow American workers to agree with their employers to work
overtime in exchange for paid time off, instead of traditional overtime pay.
We would like to submit legislation on these proposals by the end of this legislative
session (sometime b/w September 27 and October 4) and to push hard for it in the
next Congress -- but it could possibly be put off until the next session of Congress.
Given the political climate and proximity to the election, it would have been fruitless
to try and submit legislation for passage in this session.
Q: Why did the President announce his support for these measures last month when
he wasn't going to push for them until the next session?
A: The President is strongly committed to initiatives that will strengthen American
families and make it easier for men and women to be good workers and good
parents. He thought it was important to put his support behind these efforts early and
to help draw public attention to them in anticipation of what will be his strong push
for them after the election.
FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE FACTS
In his first month in office, President Clinton delivered on his promise and signed
the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 into law. The law allows workers at
businesses with 50 or more employees to take up to 12 weeks unpaid, job-protected
leave to care for a newborn or adopted child, to attend to their own serious health
problems, or to care for a seriously ill parent. child or spouse.
A June report by the bipartisan Commission on Leave showed that the law is
working:
-- 67 million Americans, more than half of our country's workers, are now eligible.
Of those, more than 12 million have taken leave since FMLA's enactment.
-- 40 percent of all workers report that they will need to take leave for a covered
reason sometime in the next five years. The leading reason is to care for an ill
parent. -- Compliance is easy for the vast majority of businesses:
-- 9 in 10 employers found the law "easy" or "somewhat easy" to administer.
-- Compliance entails little or no cost for 89-99 percent of businesses.
Drafted: Kathy McKiernan with Andy Blocker, Leg Affairs, 6-2089
President Clinton Announces
New Family-Friendly
Workplace Proposals
Expanded Family & Medical Leave
Employee-Choice Flex-Time
June 24, 1996
Nashville Family Reunion Conference Hosted By
Vice President AI Gore
Nashville Family Reunion Conference Hosted By Vice President Al Gore, June 24, 1996
PRESIDENT CLINTON ANNOUNCES NEW
FAMILY-FRIENDLY WORKPLACE PROPOSALS:
EXPANDED FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE
EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME
NEW EXPANSION OF FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE: President Clinton's new proposal would
deepen and expand Family Leave by allowing a worker to take unpaid hours off -- with a maximum of 24
hours a year -- for child education, older relatives' health needs, and routine family medical purposes.
Current Family and Medical Leave Law. The FMLA helps families only with a medical crisis or
special limited care-giving needs, such as a birth or adoption. But working families often have to care
for children or parents in circumstances for which they cannot use Family and Medical Leave.
New Family And Medical Leave Procedures. FMLA expansion would be limited to 24 hours a
year for the following specific purposes:
SCHOOL ACTIVITIES. Participating in school activities directly related to the educational
advancement of your child, such as parent-teacher conferences or interviewing for a new school;
ROUTINE FAMILY MEDICAL PURPOSES. Accompanying your child to routine dental or medical
appointments, such as annual checkups or vaccinations;
OLDER RELATIVES' HEALTH NEEDS. Accompanying an elderly relative to routine medical
appointments or other professional services related to the care of the elderly relative, such as
interviewing nursing homes or group homes.
NEW EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME: President Clinton's new proposal would offer American
workers more choice and flexibility in finding ways both to earn the wages they need to support their families
and still find the time they need to be with them. The President's proposal would:
EMPLOYEE CHOICE. Allows employees to agree with their employers to work overtime in
exchange for paid time-off -- flex-time -- with a limit of up to 80 hours. An hour of overtime
could thus be used for 1-and-1/2-hours of overtime pay or 1-and-1/2 hours of flex-time.
FLEX-TIME FOR ANY PURPOSE WITH 2 WEEKS NOTICE. Workers could use their earned flex-time
for any reason -- as long as they give their employers 2 weeks notice.
EMPLOYEES CAN ALWAYS CHOOSE PAY OVER FLEX-TIME. Workers would maintain the right to
choose overtime pay, and even if they choose flex-time, they could still cash out any portion of
their flex-time pay with two weeks notice.
FLEX-TIME FOR FAMILY LEAVE. Employees can use their accumulated family flex-time for
family leave purposes at any time.
OPPOSE ATTEMPTS TO REDUCE WORKER CHOICE: In announcing these new family-
workplace proposals, President Clinton made clear that he would oppose any bill that allows for coercion
and uses phrases like "comp-time" as a cover for giving workers less choice in the workplace.
PRESIDENT CLINTON ANNOUNCES NEW
FAMILY-FRIENDLY WORKPLACE PROPOSALS:
EXPANDED FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE
EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME
BACKGROUND MATERIALS
Page
New Family Medical Leave Expansion
1
New Employee-Choice Flex-Time
2-3
Comparison with Rep. Ballenger's "Comp-Time" Proposal
4-5
How The President's New Proposals Would Help Typical Families
6-8
EXPANDING THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT --
TO HELP FAMILIES BALANCE WORK AND FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES
June 24, 1996
"Family and medical leave is a matter of pure common sense and a matter of common decency.
It will provide Americans what they need most: peace of mind. Never again will parents have
to fear losing their jobs because of their families."
-- President Clinton at the signing of the Family and Medical Leave Act, February 5, 1993
PRESIDENT CLINTON DELIVERED ON HIS PROMISE TO PROVIDE FAMILY
LEAVE: In his first month in office, President Clinton delivered on his promise and signed the
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 into law. The law allows workers at businesses with 50
or more employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave to care for a newborn
or adopted child, to attend to their own serious health needs, or to care for a seriously ill parent,
child or spouse.
NEW BIPARTISAN REPORT SHOWS THE LAW IS WORKING: The recent report on the
impact of the law by the bipartisan Commission on Leave -- chaired by Senators Dodd and Craig
-- shows that the law is working:
67 million Americans -- over half of workers -- are guaranteed they can take leave
from their job to care for a sick relative or a newborn child without fear of losing their
job or their health insurance.
More than 12 million eligible workers have taken leave since its enactment.
40% of all workers think they will need to take leave for a covered reason at some
time in the next 5 years. The leading reason is to care for a seriously ill parent.
Despite opponents' claims, compliance is easy and costs low for most employers:
9 in 10 employers find the law "very" or "somewhat" easy to administer
Compliance entails either little or no costs for 89%-99% of businesses
Smaller covered worksites found it easier to comply than the larger sites.
Some businesses have reported reduced employee turnover, enhanced productivity
and improved morale which they attribute to the Act.
NOW IT IS TIME TO EXPAND THE LAW TO BETTER HELP WORKERS CARE FOR
THEIR CHILDREN AND PARENTS. While the law is a major step forward, it does not
cover many situations facing working families. Today, President Clinton proposed expanding the
law to cover more family obligations to better help working families care for their children and
elderly relatives without sacrificing their work obligations. Under the proposed expansion,
workers could take up to 24 hours of leave each year to meet additional specified family
obligations, including routine doctors appointments and parent-teacher conferences. Leave could
be taken for the following purposes:
Participating in school activities directly related to the educational advancement of
your child, such as parent-teacher conferences or interviewing for a new school;
Accompanying your child to routine dental or medical appointments, such as
annual checkups or vaccinations;
Accompanying an elderly relative to routine medical appointments or other
professional services related to their care, such as interviewing nursing homes or
group homes.
1
PRESIDENT CLINTON'S NEW
EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL
TODAY, PRESIDENT CLINTON ANNOUNCES A NEW EMPLOYEE-CHOICE
FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL. President Clinton's employee-choice flex-time proposal would
help to make workplaces more family friendly by ensuring worker flexibility while
guarding against abuses by coercive or unstable businesses -- with explicit protections
against coercion. President Clinton's proposal would allow more Americans to have the
time they need to fulfill their responsibilities as both workers and as parents or grown
children of elderly relatives.
Workers could agree with their employers to receive extra paid time-off -- "flex-
time" -- instead of working overtime for cash pay. Consistent with existing law,
workers would get time-and-a-half in flex-time -- extra paid time-off -- for each hour
of overtime. There would be a limit of 80 hours that a worker could accumulate in
flex-time. And all additional overtime work -- beyond the limit -- would have to be
paid in cash.
Employees can choose to use their flex-time for family and medical leave purposes
whenever they need it. At any time, workers can use their flex-time for family and
medical leave purposes -- to care for a new born or adopted child, to attend to their
own serious health needs, or to care for a seriously ill child, parent, spouse.
Workers maintain ultimate control of when to use flex-time, as long as they
provide two weeks notice to their employers. Employees can use flex-time for any
purpose as long as the worker gives at least two weeks of notice to his or her
employer, or with less notice if the employer's operations are not unduly disrupted.
Private-sector employees may elect to cash out their flex-time for cash due as long as
two weeks of notice is given to their employer.
To protect against abuses by coercive or unstable businesses, the employee-choice
flex-time proposal includes explicit protections against coercion.
Employees and employers would have a written flex-time agreement.
President Clinton's employee-choice flex-time proposal would also require
employees and employers to agree in writing that the worker will receive flex-
time -- instead of cash pay -- before the worker performed any overtime work.
Private-sector workers can get cash for their accumulated flex-time within
two weeks of notice. With two or more weeks of notice, a worker in the private
sector can cash out their flex-time for cash due.
Protecting workers from businesses that go bankrupt. To ensure workers
receive their accumulated flex-time when their employers seek bankruptcy
protections, unpaid flex-time would receive special protection -- the same as
given to other wages -- in bankruptcy proceedings. For employees in thinly
capitalized businesses, additional protections will be included.
2
Additional protections to ensure that worker protections:
-
President Clinton's employee-choice flex-time proposal would not allow
unused flex-time to deprive a worker of unemployment compensation that
he or she has earned.
-
To ensure protections against coercion, part-time, seasonal, and temporary
workers would exempted from this proposal. The Secretary of Labor would
also be able to make recommendations to exclude low-wage workers who
are vulnerable to coercion or certain occupations and industries that show a
pattern of abuse.
Ability to collect from violators of overtime laws are improved. President
Clinton's employee-choice flex-time proposal improves the Labor Department's
ability to collect fines due from violators of overtime laws, including double
damages for certain egregious violations. This proposal also imposes civil
money penalties for violations of flex-time and for willful or repeated
recordkeeping violations.
PRESIDENT CLINTON WILL STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY BILL THAT REDUCES
WORKER CHOICE IN THE WORKPLACE. President Clinton will strongly oppose
any bill that allows employers to coerce their employees fails to protect true worker choice
and fails to guarantee that workers will receive the compensation they are due.
3
COMPARISON OF PRESIDENT CLINTON'S EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL
AND
REPRESENTATIVE BALLENGER'S COMP-TIME PROPOSAL
PRESIDENT CLINTON'S
REPRESENTATIVE
EMPLOYEE-CHOICE
BALLENGER'S COMP-TIME
FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL
PROPOSAL
To provide true employee choice,
No written agreement is necessary --
employees and employers must agree
only an understanding.
WRITTEN
in writing that compensation will be
AGREEMENT
provided as flex-time rather than as
overtime wages.
FLEX-TIME FOR
Employees may use flex-time for
No comparable provision.
FAMILY AND
family and medical leave whenever
MEDICAL LEAVE
they need it.
PURPOSES
Employees maintain ultimate control
Employers maintain ultimate control
of when to use flex-time, as long as
of when to grant their workers flex-
they provide two weeks notice to
time. Regardless of the amount of
USE OF
their employers. Workers can use
notice the worker provides,
FLEX-TIME
flex-time for any other purpose as
employers can deny use of comp-
long as they provide two or more
time if the firm claims they would
weeks of notice. They receive flex-
be "unduly disrupted."
time with less notice, but only if the
employer is not unduly disrupted.
Private-sector employees may elect to
Rather than ensuring payout within
PAYOUT
cash out their flex-time for cash due
two weeks as the President's
OF FLEX-TIME
with at least two weeks of notice to
proposal, private-sector employers
their employer.
would have up to 30 days to payout
the cash due for accumulated flex-
time.
Private-sector workers can
Employees can accumulate up to 240
accumulate flex-time for overtime
hours of comp-time.
worked (at a rate of time and a half)
in a "Flex-time Bank." There would
FLEX-TIME BANK
be a limit of 80 hours that a worker
could accumulate in flex-time. All
additional overtime work must be
compensated in cash.
4
To ensure workers receive their flex-
No comparable provisions.
time when firms enter into
bankruptcy, unpaid flex-time would
BANKRUPTCY
receive special protection -- the same
PROTECTION
as given to wages -- in bankruptcy
proceedings. For employees in thinly
capitalized businesses, additional
protections will be included.
Improves remedies against violators,
Double damages only for willful
including double damages for
violations of anti-coercion
overtime that an employee would
provisions. Civil money penalties
ENFORCEMENT
have earned, but was not permitted to
only for willful violations.
PROVISIONS
work because the worker wanted to
earn pay rather than flex-time. Civil
money penalties for violations of
flex-time and for willful or repeated
recordkeeping violations.
Unused flex-time cannot be used to
No comparable provisions on
TREATMENT OF
deprive a worker of unemployment
unemployment compensation or
FLEX-TIME As
compensation that he or she has
benefit plans. Comp-time used is
WAGES AND
earned. Flex-time pay-outs are
not treated as hours worked.
HOURS WORKED
treated as wages for health and
pension benefit plans. Flex-time
used is also treated as hours worked
for overtime accrual purposes.
To ensure protections against
No comparable provisions.
coercion, part-time, seasonal, and
EXEMPTIONS
temporary workers would exempted
FOR
from this proposal. The Secretary of
VULNERABLE
Labor would also be able to make
SECTORS
recommendations to exclude low-
wage workers who are vulnerable to
coercion or certain occupations and
industries that show a pattern of
abuse.
Flex-time provision expires in four
No comparable provision.
years. Bipartisan Commission will
SUNSET
study and report to the Secretary of
Labor and Congress prior to sunset.
5
HOW THE PRESIDENT'S FAMILY-FRIENDLY PROPOSALS
WOULD AFFECT TYPICAL FAMILIES
NOTE: These hypothetical examples illustrate how the President's proposal compares with
current law and the Ballenger bill to create "comp-time." All of these examples
assume the adoption of some proposal allowing the accumulation of flex-time or
"comp-time" in lieu of time-and-one-half pay for overtime.
1.
Expanded Family And Medical Leave For Child Education Purposes. Jane
Smith works for XYZ Inc. She has a conference scheduled with her daughter's
teacher for three weeks from today and needs four hours of time off to travel to and
from the school and meet with the teacher. Jane is willing to take unpaid leave.
Under the President's proposal, Jane can take unpaid leave to attend the
parent-teacher conference.
Under current law, Jane is not assured she can take unpaid leave to attend the
parent-teacher conference.
Under the Ballenger bill, Jane is not assured she can take unpaid leave to
attend the parent-teacher conference.
2.
Expanded Family And Medical Leave For Caring For Older Relative. While
Jane Smith is tending to her daughter's educational needs, Jane's husband John
needs to help move his grandfather from one nursing home to another. John will
need 4 hours time-off in order to do this. Because he is very involved with his
family, John has not worked any overtime this year and does not have any
accumulated flex-time. Thus, he would like to use unpaid family and medical leave
to take his son to the doctor.
Under the President's proposal, John can take unpaid family and medical
leave to move his grandfather from one nursing home to another.
Under current law, John cannot use family and medical leave to help move
his grandfather from one nursing home to another.
Under the Ballenger bill, John cannot use family and medical leave to help
move his grandfather from one nursing home to another.
6
3.
Employer-Imposed "Comp-Time." Bill Johnson and his family live on a very
tight budget. The time-and-one-half pay Bill receives for the 10 hours of overtime
he works each month provides just enough money to pay the mortgage on his
family's house. In his latest paycheck, Bill's employer inexplicably did not include
any pay for his overtime work. When Bill complains, his boss explains that this is
the new "comp-time" program and from now on Bill will get extra time off in return
for his overtime. Bill fears he will not be able to make ends meet. He doesn't
remember agreeing to accept "comp-time."
Under the President's proposal, Bill and his employer would have to had
agreed in writing prior to the overtime that he would accept flex-time instead
of time-and-one-half pay. Otherwise, Bill must be paid his time-and-one-half
in cash.
Under current law, Bill would have to be paid time-and-one-half in cash for
the overtime he worked.
Under the Ballenger bill, the employer could say that he had a verbal
agreement with Bill to give him "comp-time." That makes it Bill's word
against his employer's word.
4.
Flex-Time For Planned Family Needs. Ann's husband Bill has a heart condition
and will require heart surgery within the next few weeks. Ann wants to spend time
with Bill after the surgery to help care for him. Her family's growing financial
worries make it vital that Ann be able to use her accumulated flex-time to be with
her husband without losing a day's pay. Ann and Bill scheduled the surgery three
weeks in advance and Ann gave her employer two-weeks notice. Two days before
the surgery, Ann's employer ZYX Co. decides to change their production schedule.
In their view, Ann's absence will "unduly disrupt" the workplace operations.
Under the President's proposal, Ann can use her accumulated flextime to be
with her husband without losing pay -- as long as she gives two-weeks
notice.
Under current law, Ann is assured only of unpaid family and medical leave
time.
Under the Ballenger bill, Ann cannot use her accumulated "comp time" if it
will "unduly disrupt" her employer's operations. ZYX Co. can force her to
take unpaid leave to be with her husband in the hospital.
7
5.
Protection of Unemployment Benefits. Al Jones is a construction worker who got
laid off from Builders Inc. after it finished its latest project. He worked enough
overtime to accumulate 80 hours of accrued flex-time. Now, he wants to collect the
unemployment benefits he usually gets when his employer lays him off. This time,
however, Builders Inc. challenged Al's eligibility for unemployment insurance on
the grounds that he is still "working" because he is getting paid for his accumulated
flextime.
Under the President's proposal, Al is explicitly protected from this type of
challenge. If he's otherwise eligible, Al should get his unemployment
insurance.
Under the Ballenger bill, Al is not explicitly protected from this challenge to
his unemployment insurance eligibility.
8
Sub file Issues Minimum
CENTER ON BUDGET was
AND POLICY PRIORITIES
January 11, 1995
FOUR YEARS AND STILL FALLING:
THE DECLINE IN THE VALUE OF THE MINIMUM WAGE
By Isaac Shapiro
Overview
It has been nearly four years since the minimum wage was last raised. The
resulting decline in the purchasing power of the minimum wage compounds the
erosion in its value during the 1980s.
From January 1, 1981 to April 1, 1990 the minimum wage stood still at $3.35 an
hour. The wage standard was then increased in two steps to $4.25 an hour on April 1,
1991, but this boost made up less than half the ground that had been lost to inflation.
And since April 1991 - while the minimum wage has remained constant at $4.25 an
hour - the cost-of-living has risen another 11 percent.
As a consequence of these developments, the purchasing power of the minimum
wage is now at its second lowest level in four decades. After adjusting for inflation, the
value of the minimum wage is above its level in 1989, but is below its level for every
other year going back to 1955. The extent of the wage standard's erosion relative to its
traditional level of support has been substantial. If the value of the minimum wage
were to have the same purchasing power in 1995 as it averaged in the 1970s, it would
need to equal about $5.75 an hour.
Recent experience with federal and state minimum wage reforms suggest that a
moderate increase in the minimum wage could occur without adverse employment
effects of a significant nature. This conclusion is based on an examination of important
recent studies which used several different methodologies to assess the effects of raises
in the federal minimum wage both across the nation and in particular states, as well as
the effects of raising state minimum wages above the federal level. The conclusion is
also based on a study that updated the best analysis of the employment effects of the
minimum wage during the 1960s and 1970s with information through 1986.
For example, the studies of the federal minimum wage examined the effects of
the 90 cent increase in two increments from 1989 to 1991. One of the state studies
examined the effects of New Jersey raising its state minimum wage by 80 cents, from
$4.25 an hour to $5.05 an hour in 1992; another examined the effects of California
increasing its minimum wage 90 cents from $3.35 an hour in 1987 to $4.25 an hour in
777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 705, Washington, DC 20002 Tel: 202-408-1080 Fax: 202-408-1056
1988 (which would equal about $5.50 in 1995 dollars). All of these studies found that
the minimum wage increases did not reduce employment opportunities.
After reviewing these and other studies of federal and state minimum wage
changes in the late 1980s-early 1990s, the noted Harvard labor economist Richard
Freeman concluded:
"That moderate increases in the minimum [wage] transferred income to the
lower paid without any apparent adverse effect on employment at the
turn
of
the 1990s is no mean achievement for a policy tool in an era when the real
earnings of the less skilled fell sharply."
This analysis examines the value of the minimum wage relative to its previous
strength; summarizes the results of the recent minimum wage and employment studies;
and assesses the relationship between the minimum wage and the Earned Income Tax
Credit.¹ (The recent expansion in the EITC, while very helpful, falls well short of
offsetting the effects of the erosion in the value of the minimum wage.) The paper
begins with a discussion of the economic context in which minimum wage reforms
should be considered and a profile of minimum wage workers.
The Backdrop
The deterioration in the minimum wage has been ill-timed. This trend has
occurred at the same time as, and has helped contribute to, several other economic
trends of concern.
One corresponding trend has been a drop in the real wages of workers at the
bottom of the pay scale since the early 1970s. This drop has occurred at the same time
that wages for middle class workers have been stagnant; the wage gains that have
occurred have been concentrated among the wealthiest workers. As a result of these
divergent trends, wage inequality has grown considerably. And there is mounting
evidence that the erosion in the value of the minimum wage has contributed to the
increase in wage inequality.²
Another trend of concern has been the enduring problem of the working poor.
In 1993, some 22 million people - more than half of the poor - lived in households
1 The author would like to thank Larry Katz for his comments on a draft of this analysis.
2 See, for example, John DiNardo, Nicole Fortin, and Thomas Lemieux, "Labor Market Institutions and
The Distribution of Wages, 1973-1992: A Semi-parametric Approach," Unpublished paper, University of
Montreal, 1994.
2
with a worker. Among families with children where the householder is employed, the
likelihood of being poor has increased from 7.7 percent in 1977 to 11.3 percent in 1993.
The Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers
A large number of workers, but a relatively small fraction of the workforce, have
earnings at or near the minimum wage. This can be seen by examining wage data for
workers paid by the hour (the large majority of minimum wage workers are paid by
the hour).4
Some 4.2 million workers paid by the hour in 1993 had earnings at or
below the minimum wage.⁵ This equaled 6.6 percent of hourly workers.
An additional 9.2 million hourly workers had earnings just above the
minimum wage. These are the workers who earned between $4.25 an
hour (the 1993 minimum wage level) and the average level of the
minimum wage in the 1970s, after adjusting for inflation.⁶
Contrary to the popular stereotype, the large majority of minimum wage
workers are not teenagers. Also of interest, most minimum wage workers are not
minorities and most are women. In 1993, among workers paid by the hour with
earnings at or below the minimum wage:
Less than one in three - 31 percent - were teenagers. About one in five
- 22 percent - were 20 to 24 years old. Nearly half - 47 percent -
were aged 25 years or older.
3 A comparison of these two years is appropriate because they were at similar points in the economic
cycle and had similar unemployment levels.
4
The data on minimum wage workers paid by the hour comes from the U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Bureau has not tabulated corresponding data for minimum wage workers
paid on a salaried basis.
5 Of these workers, 2.5 million received the minimum wage and 1.7 million were paid less than the
minimum wage. Many of those paid less than the minimum wage were workers exempt from minimum
wage law, others may have been illegally paid less than the minimum wage.
6 In 1993, the minimum wage would need to have equaled $5.42 an hour if it were to have had the same
value that it averaged during the 1970s, after adjusting for inflation.
3
Although minorities are overrepresented among minimum wage workers,
an estimated 70 percent of hourly workers paid at or less than the
minimum wage were non-Hispanic whites.⁷
More than three of every five minimum wage workers - 62 percent -
were women.
Most minimum wage workers are able to escape poverty. This isn't because
minimum wage earnings are large enough to lift a family above the poverty line;
rather, this largely reflects the fact that minimum wage workers typically live in
families with more than one worker. About one in five minimum wage workers live in
poverty.
This should not suggest that the level of the minimum wage is of little economic
consequence to households with more than one wage earner. Whether the example is a
struggling moderate-income household with two earners where the minimum wage
income is essential to the family's standard of living, or a young adult trying to earn
enough to pay college tuition, these wages can be essential. An analysis of workers
affected by the increase in the federal minimum wage from $3.35 an hour to $4.25 an
hour found that minimum wage workers accounted for nearly half - 45 percent - of
their household's total earnings.⁸
Although most minimum wage workers are not poor, the wage standard is of
great importance to poor workers. The majority of poor workers have earnings at or
near the minimum wage.9 Jobs paying at or near the minimum wage are also the most
likely ones to be available to adults receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children
benefits. A stronger minimum wage would help facilitate the transition of such
families into gainful employment.
It also bears mentioning that minimum wage workers are much more likely to
be poor than other workers are. Among hourly workers paid at or below the minimum
7
Author's calculation based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data. An estimated 75 percent of all hourly
workers were non-Hispanic whites.
8
David Card and Alan Krueger, Myth and Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage,
Princeton University Press, 1995.
9
This statement is based on an examination of the wage rates paid to hourly workers in March 1992 who
were determined to be poor based on their families' income in 1991. Some 24 percent of such poor workers
had earnings at or below the minimum wage of $4.25 an hour. Another 34 percent were paid between
$4.26 an hour and $5.00 an hour; and nine percent more were paid between $5.01 and $5.50 an hour. Only
33 percent were paid more than $5.50 an hour. If the minimum wage in 1992 had equaled its average level
of the 1970s, after adjusting for inflation, it would have equaled $5.27 an hour.
4
wage in March 1992, some 22 percent were poor. By contrast, only six percent of
hourly workers earning more than the minimum wage were poor.
Value of the Minimum Wage
From January 1981 to April 1990, the minimum wage remained frozen at $3.35
an hour, despite a 48 percent jump in the cost of living. Legislation signed by President
Bush subsequently raised the minimum wage in two steps to its current level of $4.25
an hour. 10 But these raises made up less than half of the ground that had been lost to
inflation. In 1991, after the minimum wage was increased to $4.25 an hour, its value
was 17 percent below its average level in the 1970s.
Since April 1991, the minimum wage has stood still while the cost of living has
continued to rise. The purchasing power of the wage standard has deteriorated
further. Absent any increase in the minimum wage, and with continued inflation, the
value of the minimum wage will continue to fall with each passing month.
In combination, recent action and inaction with respect to the minimum wage
has led its value to drop far below two benchmarks commonly used to assess its worth.
The minimum wage falls well short of its traditional level of purchasing
power. (See Figure 1.) If the value of the minimum wage were to have
the same purchasing power in 1995 as it averaged in the 1970s, it would
need to equal about $5.75 an hour. Its value is now 26 percent below its
average value in the 1970s, after adjusting for inflation.
The real value of the minimum wage is now above its value in 1989 but is
below its value for every other year going back to 1955. In real terms, it is 35
percent below its peak value in 1968.
Absent steps to strengthen the wage floor, and even if inflation remains
moderate, in 1996 the purchasing power of the minimum wage will drop
to its lowest level in four decades.
Similarly, changes in the minimum wage have not kept pace with changes
in the wages of other workers in the economy. In the 1950s and the 1960s,
the minimum wage averaged more than half of the average wage of
private nonsupervisory workers. In the 1970s, it averaged 46 percent of
the average wage. Currently, it equals 38 percent of the average wage.
(See Table 1.)
10 This legislation passed the House by a vote of 382 to 37 and the Senate by 89 to 8. It received the
support of virtually all Democratic members and the support of about 80 percent of Republican members.
5
Value of the minimum wage, 1955-1995
Adjusting for Inflation
(In 1995 dollars)
Real minimum wage
$7
$6
$5
$4
$3
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Year
Another comparison of interest is that during the 1960s and the 1970s, the
earnings of a full-time minimum wage worker employed for the entire year typically
were enough to lift a family of three out of poverty even without considering other
sources of income. In 1995, full-time minimum wage earnings by itself will fall 27
percent below the estimated poverty line for a family of three.
In short, no matter which comparison is examined, the minimum wage currently
provides much weaker support than it traditionally has in the past.
Employment Effects
The potential effect of a minimum wage increase on employment has been the
principal argument raised in opposition to such an increase. The argument is made
that a higher minimum wage would price a large number of workers out of the labor
market. The effects are likely to be particularly harsh for teenagers, it is argued, since
such a large proportion of young workers have earnings at the minimum wage and
their jobs are among the most marginal.
While the potential employment effects of a minimum wage increase surely need
to be considered, the weight of the empirical evidence suggests that the effects of a
moderate raise from its current level are likely to be negligible. This conclusion is
6
Table 1. Value of the Minimum Wage
Purchasing Power of the
Minimum Wage as a
Minimum Wage in
Percent of the Average
1995 dollars
Nonsupervisory Wage
1960s average
$5.65
52.2%
1970s average
$5.74
45.8%
1980s average
$4.93
40.4%
Current
$4.25
37.7%
Note: The Appendix Table includes year-by-year data for 1955-1995.
based on a variety of recent studies employing different methodologies; the studies
examined the effects of raises in the federal minimum wage both across the nation and
in particular states, as well as the effects of raising state minimum wages above the
federal level.
One recent analysis updated what had generally been considered the best study
of the employment effects of the minimum wage during the 1960s and the 1970s. The
new study used information through 1986. The update found the minimum wage had
just a small effect on teenage employment; a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage
was associated with a decrease of six-tenths of one percent in teenage employment.¹¹
(In addition, the effect was not large enough to be statistically significant). The study
also found that there was no significant relationship between the level of the minimum
wage and the level of employment of adults aged 20 to 24.
More importantly, studies of the impact of the increases in the federal minimum
wage in April 1990 and April 1991 generally found that the increases did not reduce
employment. David Card of Princeton University examined the effects of the
minimum wage increase in 1990 on states with differing proportions of low-wage
11 Alison J. Wellington, "Effect of the Minimum Wage on the Employment Status of Youths: An Update,"
The Journal of Human Resources, Winter 1991. Wellington updated the study conducted by economists for
the federal Minimum Wage Study Commission, which found a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage
to be associated with a one percent decrease in the employment of teenagers and a one-quarter of one
percent decrease in the employment of young adults (20 to 24 year olds), and found no strong evidence of
any job loss for adults age 25 and over. Charles Brown, Curtis Gilroy, and Andrew Kohen, "Time-Series
Evidence of the Effects of the Minimum Wage on Youth Employment and Unemployment," The Journal of
Human Resources, Winter 1983. Many of the estimates of large job losses made during the debate over the
appropriate size of the minimum wage in the late 1980s were based on the high range of studies from the
1960s and the 1970s, often ignoring the review and update of these studies by Brown, Gilroy, and Kohen.
7
workers. This allowed Card to test if states with relatively more minimum-wage
workers fared relatively worse on the employment front when the minimum wage
increased. But this was not the case. Card reported: "Comparisons of grouped and
individual state data confirm that the rise in the minimum wage increased teenagers'
wages. There is no evidence of corresponding losses in teenage employment."
Another notable study of the impact of the recent increases in the federal
minimum wage was conducted by Lawrence Katz (of Harvard University) and Alan
Krueger (while at Princeton University). 13 Katz and Krueger examined the effects of
the increases on the employees of fast-food restaurants in Texas. They analyzed the
effects on restaurants with different levels of starting wages to test whether restaurants
with lower starting wages - that is, those expected to be affected the most by an
increase in the minimum wage - fared relatively worse on the employment front. This
theory again did not prove true. Indeed, their findings suggest that the employment
effects of the recent minimum wage increases, if anything, seem to be positive rather
than negative.¹⁴
Card and Krueger have also examined the effects of recent increases in state
minimum wage levels. These studies, too, found that the minimum wage increases did
not reduce employment opportunities. For example, when New Jersey recently raised
its minimum wage to $5.05 an hour, Card and Krueger found no evidence of a negative
effect on employment. 15 (Their study approach included comparing employment
trends in fast food restaurants in New Jersey to trends in eastern Pennsylvania, where
the minimum wage remained constant. They found that employment trends were
stronger in the New Jersey restaurants than in the Pennsylvania restaurants.)
Some recent studies of raises in the minimum wage have found that it had some
negative effect on employment. All studies, however, do not deserve equal weight,
and at least some of these other studies include methodological problems that affect
their results. For example, one of the most widely cited of these studies was conducted
12 David Card, "Using Regional Variation in Wages to Measure the Effects of the Federal Minimum
Wage," Industrial & Labor Relations Review, October 1992.
13 Alan Krueger is currently on leave from Princeton University and is serving as Chief Economist of the
U.S. Department of Labor.
14 Lawrence Katz and Alan Krueger, "The Effect of the Minimum Wage on the Fast-Food Industry,"
Industrial & Labor Relations Review, October 1992.
15 David Card and Alan Krueger, "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast Food
Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania," American Economic Review, Volume 84, Number 4, September
1994. Also, see David Card, "Do Minimum Wages Reduce Employment? A Case Study of California,
1987-89," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, October 1992.
8
by David Neumark and William Wascher. 16 Their study, however, mistakenly assumes
no teenagers are simultaneously attending school and working, when this is in fact a
common occurrence. They also use a measure of the minimum wage that skews their
findings. Card, Katz and Krueger reanalyzed Neumark and Wascher's data and
corrected for these two problems; their reestimates find that the minimum wage does
not negatively affect employment.¹⁷
Richard Freeman of Harvard University - long considered one of the nation's
preeminent labor economists - just completed a review of the recent studies of the
employment effects of the minimum wage and concluded:
"
at the level of the minimum wage in the late 1980s, moderate legislated
increases did not reduce employment and were, if anything, associated with
higher employment in some locales.
Studies based on employment across economic units such as states and counties
yield more disparate results. Most studies, however, reject the notion that the
late 1980s/early 1990s increases had adverse employment effects, and the studies
that find adverse effects prior to those increases obtain small elasticities
[meaning small employment effects] which confirm the effectiveness of the
minimum in redistributing wage income.
That moderate increases in the minimum transferred income to the lower paid
without any apparent adverse effect on employment at the turn of the 1990s
is
no mean achievement for a policy tool in an era when the real earnings of the
less skilled fell sharply."1
Freeman also observed that any net reduction in employment from a higher
minimum wage that might occur among teenagers would be mitigated by the
extremely high turnover rates of these workers. So even if a higher minimum wage
means that it will take some low-wage workers a little longer to find jobs, once they do
find a job they will benefit from the higher wages.
16 David Neumark and William Wascher, "Employment Effects of Minimum and Subminimum Wages:
Panel Data on State Minimum Wage Laws," Industrial & Labor Relations Review, October 1992.
17 David Card, Lawrence F. Katz and Alan B. Krueger, "Comment on David Neumark and William
Wascher, 'Employment Effects of Minimum and Subminimum Wages: Panel Data on State Minimum
Wage Laws", Industrial and Labor Relations Review, April 1994.
18 Richard B. Freeman, "Minimum Wages - Again!" International Journal of MANPOWER, Volume 15,
Numbers 2/3, 1994.
9
These studies do not suggest or prove that any increase in the minimum wage -
no matter how large - would have only desirable effects. But the outcomes of the
studies suggest that the labor market functions in a more complicated manner than has
been assumed by those contending that virtually any rise in the minimum wage results
in a significant decrease in employment levels. For example, a higher minimum wage
can make it easier for employers to fill vacancies and may decrease employee turnover.
Both examples suggest circumstances in which a boost in the minimum wage can boost
employment.
The studies do suggest that particularly when the minimum wage is at especially
low levels, as it is today, the employment effects of a moderate increase in the
minimum wage may be modest or negligible.
The Minimum Wage and the EITC
The recent expansion in the federal Earned Income Tax Credit has helped offset
the decline in the value of the minimum wage. But the offset has been far from
complete.
The EITC is a refundable tax credit that varies by earnings and family
composition. Legislation enacted in 1993 provided for a large expansion in the EITC;
under the new credit structure, a family with two or more children will receive an EITC
equal to 40 percent of its earnings up to $8,640.¹⁹ The legislation also established a new
credit - albeit a small one - for low-income workers without children.
Under the new law, the maximum hourly wage subsidy received through the
EITC is 40 percent, since families with two or more children with earnings of less than
$8,640 receive 40 cents in EITC benefits for each dollar earned. Minimum wage
19 The expansion for two or more children will not take full effect until tax year 1996; the figures cited
here reflect the fully phased-in EITC, but they are expressed in 1995 dollars. The EITC will remain at its
maximum level (40 percent of $8,640 - or $3,456) for families with two or more children and with incomes
between $8,640 and $11,290. Once income exceeds $11,290 the EITC will begin to decline in size. It will fall
to zero when family income hits $27,715.
The credit for families with one child is somewhat smaller. It is phased in at a 34 percent rate over a
smaller earnings range and is phased out more quickly than the credit for a family with two or more
children, falling to zero when family income hits $24,396. For childless workers, the maximum EITC is 7.65
percent of earnings and phases out completely when income hits $9,230.
10
workers living in other households will receive a smaller wage subsidy through the
EITC for each hour worked or no EITC at all. 20
The new EITC levels - while representing a significant expansion over prior
law - do not fully offset the fall in the value of the minimum wage. This is true for a
number of reasons.
Even for those few minimum wage workers who qualify for an EITC wage
subsidy of 40 percent (those living in families with two or more children with earnings
of less than $8,640 a year), the increase in the value of the EITC is less than the decline
in the value of the minimum wage.21 This can be seen by calculating the "net wage" of
a minimum wage worker.
For minimum wage earners earning the new maximum EITC per hour, the
combined value of minimum wage earnings and the EITC, minus payroll taxes, is
much less than the average combined value for comparable minimum wage workers at
the end of the 1970s. 22 The maximum net hourly pay of a minimum wage worker in
1996 (when the EITC is fully phased in) will be 12 percent below its value in 1979 23
20 For families with one child, the maximum hourly wage subsidy received through the EITC is 34
percent, which applies to such families with earnings of less than $6,160. For childless workers, the
maximum hourly wage subsidy received through the EITC is 7.65 percent, which applies to such workers
with earnings of less than $4,100.
21 AFDC benefits to working poor families have also dropped precipitously since the 1970s. If this
decline were included in the calculations in the text, the net income of minimum-wage earners would be
shown to have fallen even more since the 1970s.
22
It is standard practice to subtract out the employee's share of payroll taxes when the value of the EITC
is added in; this is done both because the EITC is designed in part to offset payroll taxes and because this is
consistent with moving from a before-tax calculation (just the value of the minimum wage) to an after-tax
calculation (adding in the EITC and subtracting payroll taxes).
23 In inflation-adjusted dollars, the maximum after-tax net hourly pay of a minimum wage worker living
in a family with two or more children and earning less than $8,640 will be $5.45 an hour in 1996, down
from $6.22 an hour in 1979. The estimates were calculated as follows. If the minimum wage remains
unchanged from current law, in 1996 its purchasing power in 1995 dollars will equal $4.11 an hour, the
corresponding maximum hourly EITC benefit for a family with two or more children will be $1.65 an hour
and payroll taxes will be $.31, yielding a net hourly wage of $5.45. By comparison, in 1979, the minimum
wage equaled $5.99 per hour, after adjusting for inflation. For a family receiving the maximum hourly
EITC benefit, the hourly value of the EITC was $.60 (the EITC equaled 10 percent of hourly earnings for
such families), and the hourly cost of payroll taxes was $.37, yielding a net hourly wage of $6.22.
Some have used the figure that the EITC raises the value of the minimum wage to $6 an hour for
certain families with two or more children. This figure differs from the $5.45 an hour calculation both
because the $6 calculation neglects to subtract out payroll taxes and because it is expressed in 1996 dollars
(continued...)
11
Furthermore, only a small fraction of minimum wage workers qualify for a wage
subsidy of 40 percent through the EITC. Minimum wage workers who do not live in
families that have two or more children and earnings of less than $8,640 will earn a
smaller per-hour EITC or no EITC at all. As a result, net hourly pay has fallen much
more than 12 percent since 1979 for the large majority of minimum wage workers.
Many of these workers are poor themselves or live in families with modest incomes. In
1995, the estimated poverty line for a family of three is $12,192; for a family of four, it is
$15,621.
In addition, unless the minimum wage is increased or indexed, the real value of
the minimum wage will fall each year, and the net wage gap compared to the 1970s
will grow. The EITC expansion is fully phased in as of 1996; under current EITC and
minimum wage law, the net income of a minimum wage earner will begin to fall from
1997 onwards. (Although the EITC is indexed to inflation, the minimum wage will fall
relative to inflation.)
The increase in the EITC does not fully offset the decline in the minimum wage
for another reason as well. The delivery of EITC payments is usually not timely;
virtually all EITC recipients receive their benefits in one lump sum payment when they
file their taxes. Although there is interest in improving the EITC delivery system, such
improvements are difficult to design, and it is unlikely that there will be much progress
on this front in the near future. By contrast, the minimum wage is delivered in a more
timely manner for struggling families - with each paycheck.
In short, the minimum wage and the EITC are best viewed as complementary
policies and not as substitutes for each other. While criticisms of the minimum wage
are typically overstated, it remains true that the EITC holds no risk of endangering
employment opportunities and is adjustable by family size. On the other hand, the
minimum wage has several advantages over the EITC - it does not raise marginal tax
rates on any workers and is received in a timely manner throughout the year. 24
Moreover, relying on the EITC alone is likely to place too large a burden on the federal
budget. A combined minimum wage/EITC approach reflects a balanced sharing of the
burden of "making work pay" between the public and private sectors.
23 (...continued)
instead of being expressed in terms of its purchasing power in 1995.
24
In addition, money received through a private paycheck is, in some ways, inherently preferable to
money received through a government program. This is true even when the program is the EITC, where
there is no stigma attached.
12
Conclusion
Restoring the strength of the federal minimum wage is appropriate. 25 The
combination of the new EITC and a minimum wage providing closer to its traditional
level of support would help "make work pay" for poor and moderate-income workers.
In addition to restoring the strength of the minimum wage, Congress should consider
indexing the minimum wage to provide for an automatic annual adjustment process
and protect against further erosion in the wage standard. 26
25
Recent news reports have indicated that the Clinton Administration is considering endorsing a
minimum wage increase of as much as $1.00 per hour. A minimum wage of $5.25 an hour in 1996 would
still be 11 percent below its average value during the 1970s, after adjusting for inflation. A minimum wage
increase to this level would be unlikely to have detrimental employment effects of a significant nature.
26 Among the advantages to indexation are that it would result in small, predictable changes to the
minimum wage to which labor markets could more easily adjust. It also would protect workers from the
long periods of erosion in the value of the minimum wage that they have experienced in recent years. If
the minimum wage is indexed, it is advisable to have changes in the wage floor be equivalent to changes in
a measure of average wages. This indexation approach means that minimum wage workers would share
equally in whatever wage progress is occurring. It also would avoid increases of inappropriate size during
periods of general wage stagnation.
13
Appendix Table. Value of the Minimum Wage, 1955-1995
Minimum Wage
Value of the
Value of the
as a Percent of the
Minimum Wage,
Minimum Wage,
Average Private
Year
Nominal Dollars
1995 Dollars*
Nonsupervisory Wage
1955
$0.75
$3.94
43.9%
1956
1.00
5.16
55.6
1957
1.00
5.01
52.9
1958
1.00
4.87
51.3
1959
1.00
4.84
49.5
1960
1.00
4.75
47.8
1961
1.15
5.41
53.7
1962
1.15
5.36
51.8
1963
1.25
5.74
54.8
1964
1.25
5.67
53.0
1965
1.25
5.59
50.8
1966
1.25
5.43
48.8
1967
1.40
5.90
52.2
1968
1.60
6.49
56.1
1969
1.60
6.21
52.6
1970
1.60
5.92
49.5
1971
1.60
5.67
46.4
1972
1.60
5.51
43.2
1973
1.60
5.18
40.6
1974
2.00
5.89
47.2
1975
2.10
5.71
46.4
1976
2.30
5.92
47.3
1977
2.30
5.56
43.8
1978
2.65
6.00
46.6
1979
2.90
5.99
47.1
1980
3.10
5.76
46.5
1981
3.35
5.68
46.2
1982
3.35
5.36
43.6
1983
3.35
5.14
41.8
1984
3.35
4.93
40.3
1985
3.35
4.76
39.1
1986
3.35
4.67
38.2
1987
3.35
4.51
37.3
1988
3.35
4.33
36.1
1989
3.35
4.13
34.7
1990
3.80
4.44
37.9
1991
4.25
4.77
41.1
1992
4.25
4.63
40.2
1993
4.25
4.50
39.2
1994
4.25
4.38
n/a
1995
4.25
4.25
n/a
*Adjusted for inflation using the CPI-U-X1.
14
CENTER ON BUDGET
AND POLICY PRIORITIES
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
CONTACT: Michelle Bazie
Wednesday, January 11, 1995
Isaac Shapiro
(202) 408-1080
MINIMUM WAGE DROPS TO SECOND LOWEST LEVEL SINCE 1955,
REPORT FINDS
The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage is now at its second lowest level in four
decades, according to a report released today by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The report - Four Years and Still Falling: The Decline in the Value of the Minimum Wage
- found that after adjusting for inflation, the value of the minimum wage is above its level in 1989 but
is below its level for every other year going back to 1955. If the value of the minimum wage were to
have the same purchasing power in 1995 as it averaged in the 1970s, it would need to equal about
$5.75 an hour. Instead, it equals $4.25 an hour.
Unless steps are taken to strengthen the wage floor, in 1996 inflation will push the purchasing
power of the minimum wage below its 1989 level, thereby hitting its lowest annual level since 1955,
the report said.
"It has been nearly four years since the minimum wage was last raised" said Isaac Shapiro,
author of the Center report. "To help 'make work pay' and to assist struggling families with minimum
wage workers, it's time to restore the strength of our nation's wage floor."
The report also examined studies of the effects of changes in the federal and state minimum
wage in the late 1980s/early 1990s on employment opportunities. These studies, conducted by several
of the nation's leading labor economists, suggest that a moderate increase in the minimum wage would
have a negligible effect on employment, the Center found. After reviewing these studies, Harvard
labor economist Richard Freeman, a noted expert in the area, concluded that these minimum wage
increases did not have "any apparent adverse effect on employment."
The Erosion in the Value of the Minimum Wage
For more than nine years from January 1, 1981 to April 1, 1990, the minimum wage remained
frozen at $3.35 an hour, the report said. Legislation signed by President Bush subsequently raised the
minimum wage to its current level of $4.25 an hour. These raises, however, made up less than half of
the ground that had been lost to inflation. In 1991, after the minimum wage was increased to $4.25 an
hour, its value was 17 percent below its average level in the 1970s.
more
777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 705, Washington, DC 20002 Tel: 202-408-1080 Fax: 202-408-1056
Minimum Wage
January 11, 1995
Page 2
Value of the minimum wage, 1955-1995
Adjusting for Inflation
(In 1995 dollars)
Real minimum wage
$7
$6
$5
$4
$3
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Year
Since April 1991, the report explained, the minimum wage has stood still while the cost of
living has risen another 11 percent.
As a consequence of these developments, the value of the minimum wage is now far below its
traditional level, said the report. Its value is 26 percent below its average level during the 1970s, after
adjusting for inflation. (See Figure.)
The wage standard has also fallen dramatically relatively to other wages, the report found. In
the 1970s, the minimum wage averaged 46 percent of the average wage of private nonsupervisory
workers. Currently, it equals 38 percent of the average wage.
"The only way to characterize the current value of the minimum wage is that it is
extraordinarily low," said Shapiro. "Even if inflation continues at a moderate pace, the purchasing
power of the minimum wage will soon drop to its lowest level since President Eisenhower's first
term."
New Studies on the Minimum Wage and Employment
The report also reviewed important recent studies that used several different methodologies to
assess the employment effects of increases in the federal minimum wage both across the nation and in
particular states, as well as the effects of raising state minimum wages above the federal level.
more
Minimum Wage
January 11, 1995
Page 3
The studies discussed in the report included those that examined the effects of the federal
minimum wage increases in 1990 and 1991. One of the state studies examined the effects of an 80-
cent increase in the New Jersey state minimum wage, from $4.25 an hour to $5.05 an hour in 1992.
Another examined the effects of a 90-cent increase in California's minimum wage from $3.35 an hour
in 1987 to $4.25 an hour in 1988. These studies generally found that the minimum wage increases did
not reduce employment opportunities.
After reviewing these and other studies of federal and state minimum wage changes in the late
1980s and early 1990s, Richard Freeman of Harvard University concluded: "That moderate increases
in the minimum [wage] transferred income to the lower-paid without any apparent adverse effect on
employment at the turn of the 1990s is no mean achievement for a policy tool in an era when the real
earnings of the less skilled fell sharply."
The Center's report echoes Freeman's observation that any net reduction in employment from a
higher minimum wage that might occur among teenagers would be mitigated by the extremely high
turnover rates of these workers. That is, even if a higher minimum wage means that it will take some
low-wage workers a little longer to find a job, once they do find a job they will benefit from the higher
wages.
"These studies do not suggest or prove that any increase in the minimum wage - no matter
how large - would have only desirable effects," said Shapiro. "But the outcomes of the studies
suggest that the labor market functions in a more complicated manner than has been assumed by those
contending that virtually any rise in the minimum wage results in a significant decrease in employment
levels. The studies suggest that when the minimum wage is at a low level, as it is today, the
employment effects of a moderate increase in the minimum wage are likely to be negligible."
Labor Market Backdrop
The deterioration in the minimum wage has come at an unfortunate time, the report said. Over
the past two decades, there has been a drop in the real wages of workers at the bottom of the pay scale,
wages for middle class workers have been stagnant, and the wage gains that have occurred have been
concentrated among the wealthiest workers. As a result of these divergent trends, wage inequality has
grown considerably. There is mounting evidence that the erosion in the value of the minimum wage
has contributed to the increase in wage inequality.
The report also found that in 1993, some 22 million people - more than half of the poor -
lived in households with a worker. Among families with children where the householder is employed,
the likelihood of being poor has increased. Some 7.7 percent of these families lived in poverty in 1977;
by 1993, some 11.3 percent did.
-
more
Minimum Wage
January 11, 1995
Page 4
Among workers paid by the hour, the Center found that workers earning at or below the
minimum wage were almost four times as likely to be poor as workers earning above the minimum
wage.
"If we want to help ensure that economic gains are shared more evenly among workers and
help families earn their way out of poverty, a minimum wage increase is appropriate," Shapiro said.
The Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers
Contrary to the popular stereotype, the large majority of minimum wage workers are not
teenagers, the report found. Nor are they minorities. In 1993, among workers paid by the hour with
earnings at or below the minimum wage:
Less than one in three - 31 percent - were teenagers. About one in five - 22
percent - were 20 to 24 years old. Nearly half - 47 percent - were aged 25 years
or older.
Although minorities are overrepresented among minimum wage workers, an estimated
70 percent of hourly workers paid at or less than the minimum wage were non-
Hispanic whites.
More than three of every five minimum wage workers - 62 percent - were women.
The Minimum Wage and the EITC
The report also found that while the recent expansion in the Earned Income Tax Credit has
helped offset the decline in the value of the minimum wage, the offset is only partial. Only a small
fraction of minimum wage workers qualify for the maximum EITC on a per-hour basis. Even for those
few minimum wage workers earning this maximum EITC, the increase in the value of the EITC has
not fully offset the decline in the value of the minimum wage. In 1996 (when the EITC expansion is
fully phased in), the maximum combined hourly value of minimum wage earnings and the EITC, minus
payroll taxes, will be 12 percent below its combined value in 1979, after adjusting for inflation. For
most minimum wage workers, the net drop is much larger.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities conducts research and analysis on a range of
government policies and programs, with an emphasis on those affecting low- and moderate-income
people. It is supported primarily by foundation grants.
####