Workplace Flexibility

Two Huffington Blog Posts on Workplace Flexibility

David Gray — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:57:00 -0400

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-gray/california-an-example-of_b_334333.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-gray/national-work-family-mont_b_305009.html

Fifth anniversary of California Paid Leave

David Gray — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:53:00 -0400

On July 1, California celebrates the fifth anniversary of its landmark paid leave legislation. Five years ago this week, California became the first state in the nation to provide wage replacement to workers who take time for family and caregiving responsibilities. Whatever one thinks of paid leave, as Washington considers its own versions, this important anniversary deserves attention and I hope that light can be shined on the importance of creative public policy to help workers balance their lives. Five years later, there are still many questions to be answered about the overall effectiveness of the paid leave program. However, it is undeniable that work family conflicts are real and growing. There is a mismatch between the needs of families and the structure of work. Workplace flexibility is needed and creative public policy is part of the solution to benefit workers, their families and employers.

Families and Workplace Flexibility

David Gray — Thu, 07 May 2009 18:29:00 -0400

Families and Workplace Flexibility

- David Gray

American families need Workplace Flexibility. There is a mismatch between the structure of work and the needs of families in America. Last fall, my wife and I welcomed our second child, a son, into the world. It is a joy, but puts pressure on any family. My mother in law moved in for a few weeks to help. As for many Americans, having extended family present made a difference for us.

President Obama is experiencing something similar as his mother in law has moved in to help care for the Obama daughters, Malia and Sasha. On November 24, 2008, Lois Romano wrote in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/23/AR2008112302555.html) that Desiree Rogers, the new White House social secretary, is "committed to making the White House a fun place for the Obama daughters."

Why does it seem like Presidential children in the White House tend to be daughters. Obama has two daughters and no boys. So does George W. Bush. So did Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson. President Clinton had a daughter and no sons.

George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan had kids of both genders, but none who lived in the White House. President Carter also had sons but the child who lived in the White House during his term was his daughter, Amy. Susan Ford's high school prom was held at the White House. Harry Truman's only child, a daughter, sang in the White House as a college student. The one enduring image of a young Presidential son in recent memory is of Caroline Kennedy’s brother, John Kennedy, Jr. playing in the Oval Office.

There was a time earlier in the 20^th century when future Presidents had sons, but they didn’t often grow up in the White House. Dwight Eisenhower and Herbert Hoover each had two boys, but they didn’t grow up in the White House. Calvin Coolidge did have two sons who were young enough to grow up partly in the White House, though they attended high school in Pennsylvania during their father’s presidency rather than in Washington. Coolidge’s younger son, Calvin, Jr., died from an infected blister he received playing tennis at the White House. FDR had four boys who reached adulthood, but the youngest was seventeen when his father moved into the White House.

In centuries past, Presidents, like most Americans, had more children than people have had in recent years, so they had a better chance of having both boys and girls. Yet since World War II, the trend of Presidential occupants with children at home has been towards girls. This is somewhat surprising as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "Trend Analysis of the Sex Ratio at Birth in the United States," found that between 1940 and 2002, 5.7 million more boys than girls were born in America.

One important component is not just gender, but age. Many Presidents had sons, but mostly they were too old to live in the White House. There have been almost as many boys (16) born to men who would go on to become President after 1945 as there were girls (19). Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush all had more boys than girls. However, none of their boys spent any significant part of their childhood in the White House.

As one thinks about the 2012 race for who will take on President, and future "father of the bride," Obama, setting aside the kids’ ages, this trend of having girls does not bode well for Mitt Romney's (five boys) presidential aspirations. Look out for Newt Gingrich though (again two daughters).

Yet when it comes to children being residents of the White House, the image Americans have in recent years has moved away from that enduring image of John Kennedy, Jr. to the presidential daughters. The Obama girls continue that trend.

The presence of the "First Mother in Law" demonstrates that work family balance issues have reached the highest level of American government. President Obama's experience should no doubt make him more sensitive to the work family balance needs of the American people.

Yet, not every family has "in laws" who can come and help. That is why workplace flexibility is so important. Americans need more control of the way and hours they work. Technology can make that possible. Creative public policy, incentives for business, creative financing for extended time off, and flexible work arrangements, can help parents care for their children and be productive members of the workforce.

Having children is a joy, but requires attention. Extended family is a blessing, but not every one has it. Public policy should help.

David Gray directs the Workforce and Family Program at the New America Foundation in Washington, DC.

Swine Flu and Workplace Flexibility: Families and Businesses Need "COGS"

David Gray — Thu, 07 May 2009 02:08:00 -0400

When the federal government considers how it prepares for national disasters or terrorist attacks, each federal agency develops a continuity of operations program, known as "COGS."

COGS helps spell out the preparedness of the agency, and the procedures it will follow to ensure the organization will continue.

These procedures often involve abilities and plans to work remotely, using technology, or flexibility in how federal workers get the job done. When I was at the U.S. Department of Labor, we had specific flexibility plans to ensure our organization could be successful if something unexpected and challenging happened.

The outbreak of swine flu in America could be the unexpected event that requires COGS for American businesses and families. Not many large, let alone medium or small companies, have plans to keep the business going in case of a major flu event in America.

What about families? If families are kept apart or stranded in different places, how would they stay involved and connected?

Workplace flexiblity can help. There is already a major and growing need for workers to have more ability to work remotely and for businesses to develop flexible work arrangements. The potential outbreak of flu in America punctuates the critical nature of workplace flexibility plans to allow workers to work from home, stay in touch with family members and be attached to work even if something terrible happens with the flu outbreak.

The federal government has allocated billions for infrastructure spending, but the potential of the flu outbreak now and other outbreaks in the future argues for major investments in electronic infrastructure now to allow for flexibility in how work gets done and in how families communicate.

American companies and families need their own COGS plan in case the worst scenarios of swine flu becomes a reality. Now is the time for government, business and the American people to work together through workplace flexibility. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.