[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 55 (Thursday, May 1, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3894-S3895]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          VOLUNTEER PROTECTION ACT OF 1997--MOTION TO PROCEED

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the motion to proceed.
  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I thank you for this opportunity to 
spend a few more minutes helping those watching understand exactly what 
significant opportunities we are talking about with the Family Friendly 
Workplace Act. It is our effort to try to give to people who are on 
hourly working arrangements the ability to develop flexible working 
schedules--to do it in the same way as has been possible for Federal 
workers so situated for the last--well, during the 1970's, 1980's and 
into this decade of the 1990's.
  The attempt to offer the ability to work flexible schedules is a 
result of people feeling the stress of the job that tugs them away from 
their families. In order to understand the true nature of workers' 
stress and the benefit they would gain from flexible work schedules, I 
would like to read some letters that have been sent to our office. Here 
is a letter that says:

       Dear Senator Ashcroft. I'm a 29-year-old working mother. I 
     have a 2-year-old daughter and am pregnant and due in 
     November. I recently heard about your Family Friendly 
     Workplace Act. Under current law where I work does not allow 
     me to have a flexible work schedule. They are not allowed by 
     the law to let us work less than 40 hours one week and then 
     more than 40 hours the next. In my current condition, I need 
     to be able to take off for doctors' appointments. Due to the 
     fact that I have a complication in my pregnancy, I have more 
     appointments than average. If I was able to take off more one 
     week and work more the next, it would be very helpful to me 
     and other mothers in Missouri.

  That is perfectly stated. Here is another letter:

       My 2-year-old daughter is healthy but there are some days 
     she needs extra attention and some days that she is sick. 
     Some days she is just 2.

  Meaning the terrible 2's, I suppose.

       If I was able to take time I need for some mornings and to 
     make it up at lunch or the next week, it would make my life 
     much easier.

  Here is another letter:

       It's been a struggle for me to be able to arrange for 
     doctor appointments, be home when my child is ill and my 
     three children are always sick at different times. Or when my 
     babysitter has been unable to take my children because of 
     illness. Not all of us have spouses or family members who can 
     fill in for us or when we need to be there for our children. 
     My husband works out of town on many occasions and is unable 
     always to be around when needed.
       Working parents are not asking for special favors, just a 
     way to be able to meet the demands of both our jobs and 
     families. The Family Friendly Workplace Act would help solve 
     the problem of inflexibility in the workplace. Being able to 
     arrange biweekly work schedules would be very helpful in 
     meeting the needs of our families. I would be able to take 
     the time off for doctors' appointments or to leave a couple 
     hours early one day if the babysitter calls to tell me my 
     child has a fever. Being able to make that time up the next 
     week would certainly take off a lot of the pressure and the 
     stress of taking these last few hours of leave time or 
     potentially being on leave without pay.

  Here is an individual working because they need the money. When a 
little crisis arises, because flextime is not available, they have to 
leave the office without pay. She goes on to say:

       The option of taking compensatory time in lieu of monetary 
     compensation would also be very valuable to working parents 
     who just need the time off.

  Here is another.

       Presently I enjoy flexible schedules. The extra day off [I 
     have] during the week allows me to spend one-on-one quality 
     time with my 5-year old daughter. She will start kindergarten 
     this fall, which makes these girls-only days especially 
     meaningful for both of us. Additionally, I can schedule many 
     doctors' appointments as well as other appointments for me 
     and my children on this day off. This allows me to save my 
     accrued sick or vacation leave for a time when I really need 
     the sick leave or can take a well planned family vacation.
       As a supervisor, I currently have the flexibility in my 
     schedule from week to week. However, my staff are not given 
     the same opportunity, although many of them would be able to 
     utilize and benefit from it.

  Kind of interesting to me. Here is the supervisor that has the flex 
capacity, says that the staff ought to have the same thing. This is 
really the crux of what we are talking about in this bill.

       My staff are not given this same opportunity although many 
     of them would be able to utilize and benefit from it.

  She says:

       I am reluctant to exercise this advantage, however, of mine 
     because it seems unfair to me that I have something that my 
     employees do not. I understand that this bill would require 
     that this opportunity be afforded to all employees, not just 
     those in management or supervisory positions.

  Here is another letter from a constituent:

       Time with my children is very important and, unfortunately, 
     working outside the home is important, too. My children will 
     only be young once, and missing parts of their development is 
     a very important part that I can never replace. I would like 
     to better balance my family life and my work life. And I 
     think the Family Friendly Workplace Act is an excellent 
     opportunity for working parents.

  Here is a letter from a schoolteacher:

       I ask that you support the bill as I think it would be a 
     great benefit to all citizens in this country. As an 
     educator, I feel that this would allow parents time to be in 
     school with their children. Time and time again, parents 
     relate to me that they cannot come to school for conferences 
     or other meetings because they have to work. This bill would 
     allow some flexibility in the workplace.

  Another letter. I think this letter is very interesting. This writer 
used to be a Federal employee and is now working in the private sector. 
The individual writes:

       I have worked in the Federal Government with a flexible 
     schedule based on 80 hours and enjoyed it.''

  That means you work an average of 80 hours over 2 weeks.

       Now that I have left the Federal work force, I have 
     questioned why this same opportunity is not available to me 
     in the private sector. As an American, this disappoints me 
     greatly. The Government does not have enough confidence in me 
     to allow me to make a decision to not take overtime pay if I 
     exceed 40 hours a week. By pretending to protect me, they 
     have hurt me. My company cannot pay me overtime, so I cannot 
     take time off next week. I would like to see the same 
     benefits that Federal workers have, be offered to the private 
     sector.
       Another example is the vacation time,

the writer goes on to say:

       What I receive in industry isn't near that what the Federal 
     Government provides. Three-day weekends were great while they 
     lasted--even 4-day weekends allowed the family to get away 
     for a short trip, which is about all we can ever afford 
     anyhow, and I still have discretionary time for kids, doctor 
     visits, and other needs.

  Here is a letter from a schoolteacher:

       As an elementary teacher I feel parents need to have time 
     off to help in their child's classroom and attend 
     conferences. The children have the real benefit of this bill, 
     if it passes, because they will know that their parents 
     really do care about them and their progress in school.

  We will have an opportunity to debate and discuss this matter fully. 
I thank the majority leader, Trent Lott, for allowing us to have this 
time this afternoon to bring this bill forward. It is pretty clear that 
the supplemental appropriations will take precedence over this bill 
when we reconvene next week and that budget matters will have priority 
and be the subject of our

[[Page S3895]]

deliberations. But, because this measure was the next measure to come 
up after those come before us, the majority leader let us have a start 
on this important issue this afternoon.
  I look forward to the time when these other measures--which are very 
important and require our attention--will have been settled and we can 
get back to this all-important issue of allowing workers to have the 
flexibility to spend time with their families. It is as important as 
ever to allow workers in the private sector who are paid hourly wages 
to have the same benefits that Federal Government workers have had 
since 1978.
  So I thank the majority leader for giving us the opportunity to begin 
this bill now. It will be necessary for us to bring the bill down so we 
can proceed to other matters. I close by thanking my good friends who 
have helped in this measure. Perhaps the most responsible for the 
significant progress we have made is Senator DeWine of Ohio, in whose 
subcommittee this bill was heard and whose leadership has resulted in 
it being one of the first pieces of major legislation brought to the 
floor during this session of the Congress.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Stevens). The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, let me thank my colleague from Missouri 
for the excellent statement and explanation about his bill and also 
congratulate him for bringing this bill to the floor. As he stated, we 
knew as we began the debate today that we would only just get started 
and that, because of concerns about the budget and other scheduling 
matters on the floor, we would have to ask to have this bill pulled 
down temporarily. We will be back on this bill. It is a very important 
bill to American workers. It is a question of fairness. It is a 
question of equity. It is a question of really trying to bring our laws 
up to date to reflect the reality of how people live their lives today, 
the reality of the American workplace.
  It is a bill about eliminating discrimination. The current law, 
frankly, as we talked about it, does in fact discriminate against 
hourly workers who are in the private sector who do not have the 
benefit of working for the Federal Government.
  So, at this point I do ask unanimous consent to withdraw the motion 
to proceed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection the motion is withdrawn.

                          ____________________