[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 6 (Tuesday, February 1, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: February 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
A CONTINGENT WORK FORCE
Mr. METZENBAUM. Mr. President, the U.S. Senate is often referred to
as ``the world's greatest deliberative body.'' I think most Senators
are fairly well informed in the affairs of this country, but sometimes
we just miss the boat.
What if I were to tell you that there is a business trend most
Senators know nothing about that affects 34 million workers, more than
one-quarter of our work force? What if I told you that this trend
leaves these workers with substantially lower wages, no health or
pension benefits, little job security, and few legal protections? And
what if I told you that this trend has a substantial impact on our
productivity, our standard of living and our competitiveness as well?
Mr. President, I think the Members of this body and all Americans
want to know more about this issue and that is why I am here today.
The problem I have described is a reality and it involves the growth
of the contingent work force. It includes millions of part-time and
temporary workers, leased employees and independent contractors. Let me
give an example of this phenomenon.
When President Clinton took office 1 year ago, he told the Nation
that to improve our competitiveness, we must invest more in our own
people, in their jobs, in their future. Twelve days later, the Bank of
America announced plans to fire thousands of full-time bank tellers and
rehire them as part-time workers. The company's action was not driven
by economic necessity. In fact, Bank of America had just earned a
record $1.5 billion in profits for 1992. But the company slashed the
hours of thousands of loyal workers, cut their paychecks in half,
terminated their health, pension, and vacation benefits. So much for
investing in our work force. Thank you, Bank of America.
But they are not alone. This heartless and cruel action was symbolic
of a much larger trend. Many U.S. businesses have been hiring part-
time, temporary, and other contingent workers to replace full-time
workers as part of a restructuring effort aimed at cutting labor and
health care costs.
As this chart shows, for example, the temporary health industry has
grown three times faster than the work force as a whole over the past
decade. Look at the difference. One has been almost a straight line
with a slight increase and the other has gone up at a meteoric rate.
Some predict the contingent workers will outnumber full-time workers by
the end of this century. But even today, the largest U.S. employer is
not General Motors, it is not IBM, it is not Ford, it is Manpower,
Inc., a temporary service firm that employs over half a million people
each year. Time magazine has concluded that the growth of the
contingent work force is the most important trend in business today and
that it is fundamentally changing the relationship between Americans
and their jobs.
Many Americans, including many in the Senate and in the House of
Representatives, are unaware of the effects of this insidious trend.
But look closely and you will realize that its implications are
staggering. Companies like Bank of America are cutting much more than
just wages and benefits. They are cutting job security. They are
cutting worker training. They are cutting opportunities for
advancement. In short, they are cutting the heart out of the American
work force. True, some workers want temporary or part-time assignments
because of other commitments or because they need a stepping stone to a
full-time job. But over 1 million full-time workers are losing their
jobs each year, including tens of thousands of white-collar workers at
previously stable firms like IBM and Procter & Gamble. And a growing
number of these workers cannot find new full-time employment.
This problem is not going away. It is insidious. It continues to
grow. The fact is most Americans know little about it, and certainly
Members of Congress have given it little heed.
Workers find themselves stuck in a holding pattern, typically without
fair wages, without benefits, without hope for advancement. Take part-
time workers as an example. As the chart shows, part-time workers earn,
on average, 62 cents for every dollar earned by full-time workers,
leaving many of their families below the poverty line; 65 percent of
full-time workers have employer-provided health care benefits as
compared to only 15 percent of part-time workers. Nearly half of all
full-time workers get pension benefits from their employers as compared
to only 10 percent of part-time workers.
These are not just numbers. These are real people. These are your
neighbors, your friends, people your children know, with whom they go
to school, people like Hilary Atkin, of San Francisco, who lost her
full-time job in 1990 and ever since has been working at temporary
jobs, living in a trailer and going without health insurance; like
Sheldon Joseph, a Chicago advertising executive who was laid off and is
now a temporary worker at a community center; like Abraham Keels, of
Cincinnati, who had worked for General Electric for 15 years when the
company laid him off and rehired him as an independent contractor with
no benefits; like Mary Meyers, who lost her job at IBM after 21 years
and now she earns $7 an hour at a Wal-Mart store in Fishkill, NY; like
Mary Rockymore, of Pittsburgh, who works two part-time jobs as a bakery
clerk and a medical secretary, but she has no health insurance for her
children notwithstanding her two jobs.
These workers want full-time jobs. The American economic system
demands it. The viability of the capitalist system requires it. But
they cannot find those jobs. They are struggling. They are decent
people trying to make ends meet. Many of them actually have to turn to
their Government for help. But the sad truth is that, like corporate
America, the Federal Government has turned its back on these workers.
For example, millions of contingent workers find themselves excluded
from workers' comp when they are injured on the job. In addition,
according to the General Accounting Office, the majority of States
exclude independent contractors and part-time workers from their
unemployment insurance programs, which are funded in part by Congress.
And millions of working Americans are excluded from the protections of
Federal employment laws like OSHA, civil rights, the National Labor
Relations Act, and our minimum wage laws.
The recently enacted Family and Medical Leave Act, for example, only
covers workers who are employed 25 or more hours per week for at least
a year. It is no accident that an increasing number of American workers
are excluded from these basic protections. American employers are
devising new strategies to allow them to hire workers without having to
worry about complying with these laws. American workers fought long and
hard for these Federal rights, but if this trend continues, we will be
right back where we were at the beginning of this century before these
statutes were enacted.
We are not talking just about the problems of the individuals who are
laid off from permanent, regular, full-time jobs and become part-time
workers. We are talking about the viability of the capitalistic system
as we know it. We are talking about the strength of our economy. We are
talking about the question of whether or not part-time workers are
going to have enough money to buy the automobiles that are coming off
the line or the new appliances that are being manufactured. The Federal
Government, as a matter of fact, has become part of the problem, as the
case of James Hudson illustrates. You may remember him. He was written
up in the Washington Post in a very large story. Hudson died of a heart
attack last year shortly after completing a 16-hour cleanup shift at
the Lincoln Memorial after the July 4 Independence Day celebration. He
had held his temporary job with the Department of the Interior with no
pension or life insurance benefits for 8 years.
After a public outcry, Congress acted to help Hudson's wife and seven
children. But that is just the family of James Hudson. There are many
other James Hudsons--more than 1,000 at the Department of the Interior
who have held temporary assignments for over 2 years and more than
450,000 Federal workers employed in temporary and part-time positions
overall.
I hope this short speech that I am making in this Chamber will alert
those who are the heads of these various Government agencies to take a
look at the propriety of their continuing to employ people on a part-
time basis and deny people the benefits they would otherwise be
entitled to as full-time employees.
If the Federal Government treats workers like disposable assets, how
can we expect business to act any differently? Ultimately, this trend
poses a substantial risk to our free enterprise system as a whole.
Henry Ford recognized that he had to pay his workers enough so they
could buy his cars, but today, as millions of workers find themselves
relegated to the contingent work force, their earnings will be slashed
and their benefits eliminated. These workers will no longer be able to
purchase the very products they are making, to buy a car or afford a
mortgage or to contribute much to the economy. It is a simple truth:
Disposable workers have no disposable income.
In addition, when companies replace full-time employees with
disposable workers to cut labor costs, these costs do not simply
disappear; they are borne by workers and by taxpayers. That is why the
National Governors Association is worried that if this trend continues,
we will create a permanent underclass dependent on Government programs.
The more contingent our work force becomes, the more dependent workers
will be on Government programs for income assistance, health care, and
retirement income.
We need a high wage, high productivity strategy to ensure U.S.
competitiveness into the next century. But that strategy cannot succeed
without long-term investment in workers' skills. We must, as Labor
Secretary Robert Reich has stated, treat our work force as our most
precious asset. The increasing use of contingent labor is a central
feature of a low-wage strategy, and it takes us in the opposite
direction. It devalues workers and breaks the work bonds that have
traditionally linked workers and employers, a critical component of a
high-productivity workplace. As British author Charles Handy said, if
you treat people as casual labor, they will respond casually.
I intend to sound the alarm on this issue. On February 8, next
Tuesday, I will be chairing a labor subcommittee conference on the
contingent work force. Participants will include Secretary Reich,
corporations such as AT&T, Hewlett Packard, and contingent workers. I
intend to seek solutions to this problem through voluntary cooperative
initiatives and enforcement of new laws and new legislation to protect
contingent workers. In light of this trend we may need to rethink many
of our traditional assumptions about work, training, pensions,
unemployment insurance, and a host of other issues.
Normally our committee structure is such that, when a committee
meets, only members of the committee, whether it is a subcommittee or
full committee, are permitted to participate. I invite all of my
colleagues to participate. It will be a conference in which you are
entitled to participate and ask questions and act as if you are a full
member of the committee because I think there is one thing that is
certain. This insidious trend is tearing at the social fabric of our
Nation, and I do not think anybody is paying attention.
Unless we start to pay attention, it will turn this land of
opportunity into a burial ground for the American dream.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah [Mr. Hatch],
is recognized to speak for up to 10 minutes.
Mr. HATCH. Thank you, Mr. President.
____________________