Alternative For a Reason
Judi Casey September 8th, 2008
Today’s entry is a follow-up to our August 27th entry, Has Flexibility Gone Too Far?
WFC Resources‘ September Trend Report zeroes in on compressed work weeks. Part of Susan Seitel’s column reports on studies by Brigham Young researchers Rex Facer and Lori Wadsworth, who are specializing in evaluating compressed schedules and reporting mostly favorable reviews. And while Seitel has presented a strong business case for the option, she concludes with this paragraph:
“We’ve spent a few days now in a hunt for evidence, and we can report that all the studies seem to agree; compressed work weeks are a joy for the majority of workers. But while the Utah survey found most were positive about the arrangement, 22% said it would be “very inconvenient.” The Facer/Wadsworth study found the great majority had “strong positive experiences” with the schedule, but nearly 20% indicated they intended to look for another job in the next year. A related article says Kent State University offered a compressed schedule to 94 custodial employees and 78 took them up on it– 17% did not. This may be jumping to conclusions, but it looks to us like a compressed schedule is going to work for about 80% to 85% of employees. That means that, perhaps because of childcare or other personal pursuits, it’s not going to work for somewhere between 15% and 20%. Unless you’re ready to lose that many workers, we suggest you think carefully before making it mandatory. Alternative schedules help employees work in the way they work best, but they’re called alternative for a reason.”
