Should the Family and Medical Leave Act Be Changed - Research Paper Example

Should the Family and Medical Leave Act be changed? Robert Anthony Barnes Jr Strayer Carissa Jordan February 7, Should the Family and Medical Leave Act be changed? The U.S.A economy is more resilient than it is credited by many people. After the great recession, the U.S.A economy has been recovering tremendously. The Pew Research Center survey announced that the excellent economic recovery in the U.S started in 2009 after the great recession. In addition, this recovery meant putting more people in the U.S back to work. The Pew Research center survey iterates that since 2009 there has been an increase in non-farm payroll jobs by 5.7 percent in U.S; the employment population ratio has risen. However, in order to maintain the economic recovery, there must be consideration of the rights of the work force. Despite an increase in employment opportunities in the U.S, there has been misuse and oppression of the employed population. The Department of Labor should, therefore, prioritize on improving various federal labor laws that protect both the employees and employers who form the working force toward improving the U.S economy. One of these federal labor laws is the Family and Medical Leave Act that provides a major platform for supporting and recognizing the families of the employed population in America (Schwartz, 2009). Because of the need to improve the U.S economy through the efforts of the employed labor force, the Family and Medical Leave Act should be changed in order to motivate and improve the welfare of the employed population. After the World War II, the U.S has experienced a number of economic recessions. The first one was the deep recession which occurred in 1981 and the great recession in 2007. During that time it took a great deal of effort to regain the economy through creation of jobs. Before the 1990s, the labor market was recovered with a lot of pressure imposed on the labor force in fear of the economy collapsing again. There was a violation of workers’ rights who found it difficult to balance work with their families. These workers, especially women, did not have the power to fight for their rights. However, for that matter the Women’s Legal Defense Fund was established in 1984 to fight for the rights of women in the working environment. However, since, it was not supported by the U.S government it did not have great impact (Fraumeni et al, 1984). The Women’s Legal Defense Fund appealed a draft of legislation which transformed it to The Family and Medical Leave Act. The Act would be introduced in the Congress every year between 1984 and 1993, but was always blocked by well-funded opponents. Eventually, the act was passed in 1991 and 1992 by the Congress under the support of former U.S president Bill Clinton. The legislation was enacted in 1993 and is effective even today. The Family and Medical Leave Act mandates that employers provide workers with unpaid, yet job-protected, leave in the event of illness, military deployment, adoption or pregnancy, or a situation in which children must be placed into foster care (Armstrong, 2010). This was the first legitimate effort on behalf of political actors to ensure that workers were not exploited and maintained legislative protections to ensure that they could effectively manage life events and have the ability to balance work obligations effectively. Oppression of the labor force is highly detrimental to industry and the economy as a whole. In order to prevent a U.S. economic recession from happening again, the labor force should not be exploited or subjugated. Instead, the labor force should be motivated through the Family and Medical Leave Act in order to provide quality output, knowing that if a family event occurs, they will have a job position upon return and the legislative means by which to challenge coercion or threat of job loss when leaving to manage family-related or health-related affairs. Research has shown that policies promoting a more positive work-life balance are effective in motivating workers (Kelliher & Anderson, 2010). While it was intended for the Family and Medical Leave Act to be effective, and research shows that work-life policies can motivate workers, some changes should be made by addressing its economic, political, and inequality problems (Wimer et al, 2011). The first problem that needs to be addressed when changing the Family and Medical Leave Act is the problem that arises from the economic pressure of the country. After the U.S economic recession that happened in 1984 and 2007, people still have the fear of the situation happening again. Many American industries and companies, therefore, fail to adhere to the requirements of the act. They overwork their workers in order to get more capital, hence denying them the right to spend more time with their families. However, the solution to the problem is to campaign on the importance of employers giving leaves to their employees. These leaves improve the flexibility of employees in handling their families and their jobs. This improves the quality of their work output compared to when they experience work-related stress (Schwartz, 2009). Even more reprehensible, companies that do adhere to the Act oftentimes pull bonus programs that reward employees for excellent attendance. Offered one manager from the company Waste Management, “It has also discouraged management from creating new programs to reward employees” (Sherk, 2007, p.58). Companies concerned about the economic impact of complying with employee leave obligations continue to oppress and de-motivate workers dictates a need for changing this valuable Act. Therefore, to address economic-related concerns, the Family and Medical Leave Act should include a mandatory training program for corporate leaders which informs managers that this Act supersedes economic concerns. A suitable eight-hour seminar should be mandated, and run by human resource managers, which provides statistics and other information about non-compliance as a result of economic pressures. This will reinforce to corporate leaders that denying employees this right, in favor of securing the financial interests of the firm, is unethical and unsatisfactory for sustaining long-term employee well-being. Alvesson & Willmott (1999) assert that the modern business has eclipsed families and the moral community. By forcing managers to attend the mandated seminar, it will ensure accountability for moral and ethical behaviors that must supersede corporate profitability. The second problem is that the Family and Medical Leave Act lacks support from the government. This is a political problem because as a federal labor law, the government fails to protect it from being violated by companies at the state and local level. Most of the employers, especially in the industrial sector, tend to take advantage of their workers. They force them to work for long hours with little salaries. Sometimes workers are also forced to work under poor environments. Therefore, enforcement issues with the Act are significant and undermine its long-term effectiveness. It should also make it a mandate that frequent supervision on behalf of the Department of Labor to monitor the operations of the Act is an obligation of ensuring the Act’s viability and relevance (Fraumeni et al, 1984). Currently, civil action on behalf of an employee who argues non-compliance is the only remedy available to ensure they are compensated and judgment found in a worker’s favor. This is unacceptable and places a significant burden on the employee to prove this situation. The Department of Labor, therefore, should establish a corporate auditing and reporting system that highlights compliance efforts and the government assign champions in the Department of Labor that conducts routine interviews with employees and audits corporate activities. By allowing employees to file a formal grievance (as part of the Act’s enforcement language) with the Department of Labor, matters related to non-compliance might be correctable, faster, without the need for costly and burdensome civil litigation against their employers alleged to be non-compliant. Furthermore, government must understand the need to regularly rotate auditing teams and include this in the language. Coziness between the same auditor and the company can lead to poor auditing outcomes (Carey & Simnett, 2006). It is only through government support and changing the language to include more oversight responsibilities of the Act that it will be viable, effective and continue to serve as a motivator that contributes to staving off another recession. The last problem is inequality where generally the employers tend to favor a certain group of people in a working environment. In most cases, women are discriminated against and they must endure less-equitable working environments compared to their male counterparts on the job. There are other times when women are fired due to pregnancies instead of being given leaves. Such problems can be addressed by a well-enforced Family and Medical Leave Act because it has the power to protect against employment discrimination (Wimer et al, 2011). The problem is changing mindsets of employers to think more equitably when considering women versus male employees. There is a general belief that employing women is more expensive in the long-term because they will require more leave for pregnancies. Pregnancy discrimination for existing female workers is very difficult to prove as it occurs subtly and often is not directed toward female employees in direct and frank accusation. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes a pregnancy discrimination clause (EEOC, 1978), however this is not addressed in the Family and Medical Leave Act. As part of new enforcement obligations of the government, employers should be sent updated and recurrent brochures and other literature describing the corporate disadvantages of discriminating against women. The Family and Medical Leave Act should also refer to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964 to remind corporate leaders that there are established remedies available for women who are discriminated against in this fashion. Making a blatant reference to the Civil Rights Act can remind employers that pregnant women who believe they have been discriminated against have multiple legislative protections which, if asserted in a civil lawsuit, could be extremely costly to the corporation. In conclusion, improvement of the U.S economy has led to the violation of the rights of the labor force. This has made it difficult for the Family and Medical Leave Act to improve the welfare of the employed population. The difficulty arises from problems such as the lack of government to support the act in terms of enforcement obligations and enforcement language in the Act, the problems arising from economic pressure leading to exploitation of workers and non-compliance, and inequality as it pertain to pregnant females. The Family and Medical Leave Act needs to be properly enforced and its awareness should be enhanced in order to promote the welfare of the labor force. The Act could also be improved by having government political actors better publicly promote its mandates and intention through media and through the development of public relations strategies. This would give the Act more visibility and put it into the forefront of corporate and industry leader consciousness. It has been many years since its inception and, therefore, it is less prominent today. By giving the Act more government-supported promotion, it can remind leaders of their legal obligations, motivate employees that the government is more interested in helping their situations, and serve as a reminder (publicly) as to why it is a quality Act for ensuring economic prosperity. People often turn toward political leaders as reference groups and trust in their decision-making, therefore a positive promotion of the Act (and its potential changes) will gain more public support for its benefits and ensure more companies comply without having to face costly civil lawsuits. Government can remind corporate leaders, through public relations campaigns about the Act, that compliance is less costly than non-compliance, which will also enhance willingness to not exploit employees as a result of economic pressures. References Alvesson, M. & Willmott, H. (1999). Critical management studies. London: Sage. Armstrong, S. (2010). The Essential Performance Review Handbook: A Quick and Handy Resource for any Manager or HR Professional. Franklin Lakes: Career Press. Carey, P. & Simnett, R. (2006). Audit Partner Tenure and Audit Quality, The Accounting Review, 81(3), pp.653-676. EEOC. (1978). The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Retrieved February 14, 2015 from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/pregnancy.cfm Fraumeni, B., Gollop, F.M., & Jorgenson, D. ( 1984). Productivity and U.S. Economic Growth. New York, NY: North Holland. Kelliher, C. & Anderson, D. (2010). Doing more with less? Flexible Working Practices and the Intensification of Work, Human Relations, 63(1), pp.83-106. Schwartz, R.M. (2009). The FMLA Handbook: A Union Guide to the Family and Medical Leave Act. Cambridge, MA: Work Rights Press. Sherk, James. (2007). Use and Abuse of the Family and Medical Leave Act: What Workers and Employees Say. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/08/use-and-abuse-of-the-family-and- medical-leave-act-what-workers-and-employers-say#_ftn222 Wimer, C.C., Western, B., & Grusky, D.B. (2011). Great Recession. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation Read More