[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 8943]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           INTRODUCTION OF THE FAMILY-FRIENDLY WORKPLACE ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                      HON. CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS

                             of washington

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 13, 2008

  Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Madam Speaker, I have tried to come up with 
legislation that would give us more than 24 hours in a day--but I have 
not figured out how to do that. So for the time being, I am introducing 
the Family-Friendly Workplace Act that aims to give working people the 
opportunity to spend more time with their families.
  Time is one of our most precious resources. We all want more of it 
and yet we only have 24 hours in a day. That means we have to figure 
out how to work a full day, run errands, pack lunches, make dinner and 
spend quality time with our kids, spouse, or elderly parent.
  One of the biggest struggles parents face is how to balance work and 
family. Being a new mom, I struggle with it every day. This bill will 
give people more flexibility so you can put in the time you need to get 
the job done, but also make sure you can make the school play, stay 
home with a sick child or care for an elderly parent.
  The perception is that working mothers and parents have a greater 
desire for workplace flexibility than other workers; the reality is 
that men and women, parents and non-parents, young and older workers 
alike place a high priority on increased flexibility at work. We all 
want more time.
  A study by the Employment Family Foundation found that 75 percent of 
workers prefer time off instead of overtime and 81 percent of women 
prefer to have that benefit.
  For many employers, flexible work arrangements are necessary to 
attract and retain quality employees. In return for offering employees 
alternative work arrangements and greater flexibility in work 
schedules, employers gain a workforce that is more productive, 
committed and focused. For example an insurance company in my home 
State of Washington saw per-employee revenue increase 70 percent over 5 
years after implementing flexible work options.
  In talking with Wayne Williams who runs Telect in Spokane, 
Washington, he told me that they are doing more to give their employees 
greater flexibility including personal days and technology to give them 
the flexibility to work from home.
  This isn't just a workforce issue, it is also a community and family 
issue.
  The bill I am introducing would allow private sector employers to 
offer their employees additional time off in lieu of overtime pay. One 
of the greatest obstacles to flexibility in the workplace is the 1938 
Fair Labor Standards Act (known as the ``FLSA''), which governs the 
work schedules and pay of millions of hourly workers. While the law may 
have been a good fit for the workforce of 70 years ago, it is simply 
not relevant to the needs of modern families.
  Our labor force isn't what it used to be. Between 1950 and 2000, the 
labor force participation rate of women between 25 and 55 years of age 
more than doubled. Today, more than 75 percent of these women are in 
the labor market. Less than 12 percent of mothers with children under 
the age of 6 were in the labor force in 1950. Today, more than 60 
percent work outside the home.
  The FLSA fails to address the needs and preferences of employees in 
the area of flexible work schedules. Although salaried employees 
typically have greater flexibility in their day-to-day schedules, 
hourly employees are much more restricted--due in large part to the 
outdated FLSA--in their ability to gain greater flexibility in their 
work schedules.
  The goal of the Family-Friendly Workplace Act is simple: to reconcile 
the overtime requirements under the FLSA with employee demands for 
increased workplace flexibility. Specifically, the bill would give 
private sector employers the option of allowing their employees to 
voluntarily choose paid compensatory time off (known as ``comp time'') 
in lieu of overtime pay. Since 1985, public sector employees have been 
able to bank comp time hours in order to have additional time off for 
vacation or other family needs. There is no justification for denying 
private sector employees an option under the FLSA which, by most 
accounts, has been successful and immensely popular with public sector 
hourly employees for over 20 years.
  To be clear, the Family-Friendly Workplace Act would not change the 
employer's obligation under the FLSA to pay overtime at the rate of 
one-and-one-halftimes an employee's regular rate of pay for any hours 
worked over 40 in a seven-day period. The bill would simply allow 
overtime compensation to be given--at the employee's request--as paid 
comp time off, at the rate of one-and-one-half hours of comp time for 
each hour of overtime worked, provided the employee and the employer 
agree on that form of overtime compensation. The bill contains numerous 
protections to ensure that the choice and use of comp time is a 
decision made by the employee.
  Since we can't do anything about adding more hours to the day, I hope 
my colleagues will join me in supporting something that gives us a 
little more flexibility in how we spend that time--the Family-Friendly 
Workplace Act. We need to respond to the growing needs of workers who 
want to better integrate work and family. Let's allow working women and 
men to decide for themselves whether paid time off or extra pay best 
fits their needs and that of their families.

                          ____________________