    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1996, Book I)]
    [May 16, 1996]
    [Pages 741-749]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks During Panel I of the White House Conference on Corporate
    Citizenship
    May 16, 1996

        The President. Thank you very much, Father O'Donovan, for giving
    those assembled here in 5 minutes the essence of what I got in the 4
    years in my Georgetown education. [Laughter] When I was a student, I
    came to this magnificent old hall many times to hear other people say
    things I thought were very wise. I never imagined I would be here so
    many times myself in this position, but I am delighted to be back.
        This is a peculiarly American event we're about to have today. And
    I'm glad that the business students from Georgetown are here, the law
    students, the undergraduate students. I understand this is the day after
    finals; that shows the level of devotion to this topic--[laughter]--that
    I hope the rest of us can match.
        I also want to thank the business leaders who are here and the labor
    leaders who are here. There's a remarkable collection of people here
    from large, medium, and small companies, men and women, different racial
    and ethnic backgrounds, people who represent different kinds of unions
    and different work organizations, all committed to discussing this very
    important topic today of citizenship in the workplace.
        As the nature of work and the nature of the workplace changes
    dramatically and we move so rapidly into the 21st century, what do we
    owe each other in the workplace? What do employers owe employees? What
    do employees owe employers? What, if anything, should the Government do
    to help to deal with the new challenges that we face?
        We are here today for two reasons: First of all, because there are
    some very profound changes taking place, and if we respond to them
    properly, we get very good results. But even in the good results we see
    some paradox: our economy in the last 3\1/2\ years, a deficit that's
    less than half of what it was when I became President, low inflation,
    8\1/2\ million new jobs, a 15-year high in homeownership, all-time highs
    in exports and small business formation. But still, according to studies
    done by both the Business Roundtable and the AFL-CIO, high levels of
    uncertainty in our work force, people uncer-

    [[Page 742]]

    tain about their job security, whether they can get an increase in
    income even if they work harder, whether they can maintain access to
    health care and retirement for their families, and people wanting more
    genuine participation in their jobs, in their work force, in building
    their own future.
        The Government plainly has some big roles to play in reducing the
    deficit, having good trade policies, promoting our economic interest
    around the world, investing in technology and research in areas that
    it's obviously important for a public investment as well as the private
    investment. There are certain tax incentives the Government has provided
    traditionally and that I hope will provide again--the incentives for
    research and experimentation, the incentives for companies to help to
    finance the education of their own employees, indeed, I would like to
    see expanded to give a little extra help to small businesses in that
    regard.
        There are certain regulatory changes the Government ought to make.
    The Vice President's worked very hard to work with our agencies in
    getting rid of 16,000 of the 80,000 pages of Federal regulations and
    changing the way we work with the private sector to make the workplace
    safe and the environment clean. There are some things we have to do to
    help people become more employable even if they don't have specific job
    security, in terms of improving access to educational benefits and
    creating greater portability for health care and retirement.
        And we know that Government should do these things, but we also know
    that most of the action has to be in the private sector. Just as I
    always say when discussing education, the great magic of education will
    never be in Washington or any State capital. It's what goes on in the
    classroom between the teacher and the child. The great magic of the
    American system of free enterprise is what goes on in the private
    sector. Indeed, one of the things that I like best about the job figures
    of the last 3\1/2\ years is that the percentage of new jobs being
    provided by Government is the smallest it's been in 20 years or more.
    And the Federal Government is almost a quarter of a million people
    smaller than it was when I became President, and overall, we are relying
    more and more on private sector job growth. And that, I think, is a good
    sign. But what that means is that the mutual responsibility that
    employers and employees feel toward one another and toward the larger
    society is becoming even more important.
        I would just like to mention a couple of things that I do not think
    we will discuss today, because I think they are illustrative of the way
    that we can deal with these issues. I have been very, very impressed
    with the work that the private sector has done with our administration
    and especially with the Vice President in trying to find new and
    economically efficient ways to protect the environment: the auto
    companies working with us to develop a new generation of cars that can
    get triple the car mileage that we take for granted as the ceiling
    today; all the companies that have worked with us to--in the Project XL
    where we say you agree to meet certain high environmental standards,
    take the thick EPA rulebook and throw it away. And we've got a long line
    of people that want to get into that particular project.
        But it's working. This is exciting. The companies that have worked
    with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration say, if we
    involve our workers and ourselves in a joint effort to make the
    workplace safer, we ought to get to decide how to do it if we can do it
    more efficiently and get better results. These are achieving good social
    ends as well as good ends within the workplace.
        I want to say a special word of thanks to the entertainment
    companies that worked with us and that are now hard at work in
    developing their own rating systems for television programs, for
    violence and other contents that may be inappropriate for children--no
    Government involvement at all except our agreement to work with them in
    the passage of the law that requires the V-chip to go in to the
    television.
        These are very encouraging things. We got some indication yesterday
    that we may even wind up with an agreement with the private sector in
    this effort that we've been so intensely involved in to try to curb the
    teenage smoking, when Philip Morris and the U.S. Tobacco Company
    indicated that they would agree to legislation to limit sales of tobacco
    to children and to reduce advertising of tobacco that affects the
    Nation's children. And I want to thank them for that.
        I have to say, in all candor, I believe we should do more because,
    under the proposal, kids in this country would still be confronted with
    Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man on bill-

    [[Page 743]]

    boards and stores and all the magazines. And we know 3,000 children
    start smoking every day and 1,000 of them are going to die early because
    of it. So I don't think it's enough. But I do believe that it's an
    indication that there may be some way that we can agree on legislation
    to do this. If all of the tobacco companies will voluntarily accept
    legislation containing the limits that will be as effective as what
    we're proposed--I will say again, we believe it's better to have the
    companies come forward and ask for legislation. And the FDA has made
    perfectly clear that they will stop their efforts to impose regulation
    if we can have a joint agreement on a legislative solution.
        These are the kinds of things that I want to do more of in dealing
    with the larger problems of society.
        But to come back to the main point, the workplace itself has to
    produce a profit, has to produce a vibrant free enterprise system for
    America, and what the relationships are in this new economy between
    employers and employees will have a great deal to do with that. The
    business leaders who came from all over this country today to be a part
    of this received a letter from me in which I suggested that there were
    at least five elements of corporate citizenship that we ought to
    consider as we move through this period of dynamic change.
        First of all, since almost all families have all the adults--whether
    there are two or one in the family--working, workplaces should be more
    family-friendly. We shouldn't ask our working people in America to
    choose between being productive workers and being good parents.
        Secondly, health and retirement security are profoundly important.
    And the nature of benefits, health and retirement benefits tied to the
    job, has been changing rather dramatically in the last several years.
    How are we going to continue to ensure health and retirement security?
        Thirdly, safe and secure workplaces.
        Fourthly, employees that know that they are invested in. How can we
    continue to develop the capacity of the employees of this country? One
    business executive, unrelated to this meeting, wrote me a letter saying
    that he had gone out of his way to invest more in the education and
    training of his employees once he realized they were less likely to be
    with him for a lifetime. He said, ``I felt that I owed even more than I
    ever had before to them to make them employable if for some reason they
    had to leave our company.''
        And finally, the issue of partnership in the work force. One of our
    participants said today, in a very moving statement, that he had talked
    to a man who worked in a factory--one of his company's factories--who
    had been elected head of his local PTA and was prominent in the society
    in every other way. But he said it was only recently that his company
    had decided to let him participate from the neck up. For years and years
    and years, at work, he'd only participated from the neck down. Everybody
    else in his community wanted him from the neck up, just his company
    didn't. That was a profound statement, I thought. And more and more of
    our companies are looking for ways to let people participate from the
    neck up. When people feel that they're on the same team, it's a lot
    easier to take the bad news along with the good.
        So these are the things that I hope will be discussed today. The
    companies that we will hear from up here are being showcased for one
    reason: They have done all of these things in ways that I believe prove
    that you can do the right thing and make money, that you can be
    successful in the American free enterprise system by having better and
    stronger relationships and ties with your employees. Every company
    represented out here in this audience today has another story like that
    to tell.
        I hope that--I'm going to do my best just to stay out of the way and
    let them talk and then let all of you talk, hoping that some good ideas
    will come out of this because I believe the power of example to change
    the behavior of Americans is enormous. We have seen it in case after
    case after case. And I think that the coverage of these issues, on the
    whole, has been concentrated in negative examples when something bad
    happens to people, which then may be translated as a general rule. What
    I want to see us do is to elevate the good practices that are going on,
    show how they are consistent with making money and succeeding in the
    free enterprise system, and hope that we can reinforce that kind of
    conduct that so many of you have brought to bear in your own companies
    and with your own employees.
        Let me say that I know that this is not an issue that can be solved
    in a day or a year, and that this is not a question of finding an
    answer. What we have to do is to join together

    [[Page 744]]

    in a great journey as Americans, to continue to deal with these issues
    as we go through this dynamic economy. And I have given a lot of thought
    to what we could do to sort of signal that we're going to do this over
    the long run.
        And today I have an announcement to make that I think reflects the
    spirit of what we are doing and will help us to continue to do it year-
    in and year-out forever. I asked a number of business leaders, led by
    John Bryan, the CEO of Sara Lee, and Larry Bossidy, CEO of Allied
    Signal, to come together to develop an award, totally financed and
    operated out of the private sector, not a Government award, to honor
    every year outstanding corporate citizenship. It would operate something
    like the Malcolm Baldrige Award does, that recognizes businesses for the
    quality of their products or services. This award will celebrate
    business for the quality of their relationship to their workers and
    their communities.
        The award, as I said, will be created and managed entirely by the
    private sector, and its criteria will be based upon the five principles
    of corporate citizenship I mentioned earlier. These leaders will seek
    the advice of members of the business community, workers and their
    representatives, and others, including educators. It will be presented
    every year by the President of the United States, and it will be called
    the Ron Brown Corporate Citizenship Award.
        We are honored to be joined here by Alma Brown. Thank you for coming
    today. Bless you, my friend. Stand up. [Applause] If there ever was a
    person who thought you could do well and do good at the same time, it
    was Ron Brown. And I can't think of a better way for us to honor him by
    continuing this work.
        Let me end by saying now, we're going to spend the rest of this day
    listening to you, trying to come to grips with these issues. We know
    that a lot of them are very difficult, that the facts will be different
    from industry to industry, sector to sector, company to company. But we
    also know that this country cannot become what it ought to be, we cannot
    make this transition into the 21st century unless we create opportunity,
    unless we all go forward with a sense of personal responsibility, as
    Father O'Donovan said, and unless the end result is the community of
    America is stronger.
        We have always believed that free markets and free enterprise made
    our whole country stronger, and we have always believed as Americans
    that we can find a way to correct the problems of the system so that it
    could thrive. That really is the whole story of the United States in the
    20th century, and I suppose the conversation we're having today will
    help to tell the story of the United States in the 21st century. We need
    to give the right answers, and I think we will.
        Thank you very much.
        Our first panel will deal with the questions of family-friendly
    workplaces, safe and healthy workplaces, and health and retirement
    security. We'll start with the question of families, and I'd like to
    begin by calling on Kenneth Lehman, the co-CEO of Fel-Pro, Incorporated,
    a third generation, family-owned automotive supply manufacturer in
    Skokie, Illinois. I'd like to ask him to tell the Fel-Pro story and why
    such a small company provides such extensive family benefits to its
    workers and whether this undermines or contributes to its success in the
    marketplace.
        Mr. Lehman.

    [Mr. Lehman stated his company's philosophy that a work force which was
    treated fairly and decently would be loyal, diligent, quality- and cost-
    conscious, and customer driven. He gave examples of Fel-Pro's family-
    responsive programs and cited a university study linking such programs
    to increased employee productivity and company profitability.]

        The President. Thank you very much.
        I would like to illustrate--this is all something all of you know,
    but I think it's worth just putting the facts out there. These family-
    oriented policies are much more important today than ever before because
    60 percent of the mothers in this country with children under 6 are in
    the work force--60 percent; 76 percent of all the mothers with school-
    age children are in the work force; and 12 million families in America
    are exclusively maintained by working mothers. So these numbers
    require--give a little greater resonance, perhaps, and meaning to the
    presentation that's just been made.
        I'd like to now call on Fran Rogers to talk a little bit about her
    company and what she's done with Work/Family Directions.

    [Ms. Rogers, chief executive officer, Work/Family Directions, Inc.,
    cited her personal experience as a working mother who was not considered
    a serious employee due to accommodations she

    [[Page 745]]

    made for her asthmatic child. She described her efforts to manage her
    own small company and support her employees, and praised the benefits of
    flexible management policies for larger businesses as well.]

        The President. Thank you.
        I'd like to make two brief points. First of all, I think the odd
    concept of all these things as tools that other people use to make the
    most of their own lives and their family lives is a very helpful way of
    looking at this, because most people just want you to make it possible
    for them to make the most of their own lives.
        I also should point out that, since Fran didn't explicitly say this
    for fear that at this meeting she'd look like she was hawking business,
    this company, Work/Family Directions, is based in Boston, they employ
    about 250 people, and they provide work and family referral services to
    larger companies, including child and elder care referrals, adoption
    referrals, and a number of other services. So she's seen this from the
    perspective, as she said, of both smaller companies and larger
    companies.
        We should say the size of each of these companies, because I think
    that's important. Fel-Pro has about 1,700 employees, I think. Is that
    right?
        Mr. Lehman. With 2,000 in the Chicago area and 800 in other places.
        The President. Yes, but in the Chicago area, it's about 2,000.
        Mr. Lehman. Yes, we have about 2,000.
        The President. Now, our next panelist is famous to all of us who
    have children who love the environment and some of us who like to get
    out and around ourselves. Yvon Chouinard is the founder of Patagonia.
    And among other things, Patagonia devotes one percent of its sales to
    environmental projects and initiatives, something which, when Chelsea
    and I go Christmas shopping every year, she always reminds me when we
    decide what to do. [Laughter] So I'd like to ask Mr. Chouinard to tell
    the story about his work-family benefits program and how it's worked
    into Patagonia's history.
        Mr. Chouinard. Thank you, Mr. President. I'd feel a lot more
    comfortable on top of a mountain than here right now. [Laughter]
        The President. Pretend that's where you are. [Laughter]

    [Mr. Chouinard stated that quality products and quality customer service
    were linked to a quality workplace, quality of life for employees, and
    quality of life on the planet. He described the benefits offered by his
    company and cited its resulting low employee turnover rate of 4.5
    percent.]

        The President. Thank you. Let me ask you, how many employees do you
    have?
        Mr. Chouinard. We have 750 worldwide.
        The President. And that includes the people that actually work in
    all the stores where Patagonia is sold?
        Mr. Chouinard. That's right.
        The President. One of the things that strikes me about--I don't know
    how many of you have ever been in one of their stores, but every time I
    go into one I feel like I'm in an evangelical mission because all the
    young people there--you can't get out of the store; it doesn't matter if
    you don't even buy anything--you get the line, you know, that the
    company is really sort of environmentally responsible and you should be
    too. And they always give you something. Do you do any work on that? I
    mean, do you actually work on getting these kids to learn how to speak
    that way or do they do it just because you set a good example?
    [Laughter]
        Mr. Chouinard. Well, I think this type of thing can't be done from a
    desk somewhere in the part of the company that's called the
    environmental desk. It has to be driven all the way down to every single
    employee. It's part of everybody's job. So they were doing their job.
        The President. Very impressive. Let me also say one other thing
    that--some of you, if you saw the State of the Union Address, you know
    that I mentioned what is now the very famous story of Malden Mills, the
    Massachusetts-based company that had a tragic fire and afterward the
    gentleman who owned the company told the workers he was going to keep
    supporting them until they got up and going again. His name is Aaron
    Feuerstein, and he's here today, too, right out there. Stand up, sir.
        The reason I brought it up now is that Patagonia had a 15-year
    relationship with them, and when he made that announcement, Patagonia
    announced that they would not have any layoffs as a result of the loss
    of the customer and that they would continue to support each other until
    Malden Mills got up and going again. And I think that is also a very
    credible thing.

    [[Page 746]]

        I'd like to ask the Vice President now, before we go on to the next
    topic, to talk about some of the things that are being done in the
    Federal Government to provide our public workers with access to family-
    friendly benefits. I must say that this is an area in which the
    Government has lagged behind at least the most forward-leaning private
    sector companies. And we've tried to do some things in this regard. I'd
    like for the Vice President to talk about it.

    [The Vice President discussed the National Performance Review's emphasis
    on flexible management approaches in the Federal Government and gave
    examples of the impact of family-friendly initiatives both on military
    personnel and public housing residents.]

        The President. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. Let me just
    make one comment here. I'll just invite your best ideas. The military
    now has about--I think about 60 percent of our personnel are married,
    and as we have downsized in the aftermath of the cold war we've had to
    think a lot more about what we need to do to support families. And a lot
    of times, you read something and you think, boy, this sounds great. For
    example, if we reduce the number of planned aircraft carrier battle
    groups--great, no cold war problem, we're going to save a lot of money.
        One bottom-line consequence is that we have to extend the average
    tour of duty of Navy personnel from 6 months to 9 months. That's a 50
    percent increase in the time those Navy people will be away from their
    children, and we have to figure out how to deal with that. The Bosnia
    deployment--the Vice President said it's a year--we try to make sure we
    could get everybody at least one break and sometimes two if they have
    family situations and need it; that's still a long time to be away from
    home. And this is in, you know, a time of peace, when it's hard to
    create this sense of national emergency for your children. They wonder,
    where is Daddy, and in some cases, where is Mom?
        So this is a big challenge for us, and if any of you have any other
    constructive ideas about other things we can do, I'd personally be glad
    to have them because we're always looking for new ways to try to support
    an institution that really tries to live by family values but has been
    strained just by their duty to the rest of us as they exercise it.
        I'd like to move on now to the second topic, which is maintaining a
    safe and healthy workplace, and start with Ralph Larsen, the chairman
    and CEO of Johnson & Johnson, the largest company so far represented
    here. They have something over 28,000 employees, anyway--maybe more,
    including two great plants in my home State. I should say that Johnson &
    Johnson has been repeatedly recognized for its innovative, family-
    friendly practices. But we want to ask today Mr. Larsen to discuss the
    safety program and the efforts that they've promoted in employee
    wellness and what a safe and healthy workplace has done in terms of the
    costs to the company and in terms of the benefits.
        Mr. Larsen.

    [Mr. Larsen described the safety and health program for Johnson &
    Johnson employees which had improved their safety performance by 80
    percent since 1981.]

        The President. Thank you. Now I'd like to introduce Roger Ackerman,
    the chairman and CEO of Corning, and Larry Benkowski, who is the
    president of the American Flint Glass Workers Union, which represents
    the workers at Corning, to talk about their common experience. In
    October of 1995, Corning was awarded the Malcolm Baldrige National
    Quality Award. It's been recognized in many, many other ways. The
    company has, I believe, over 42,000 employees and has a unique
    perspective on safety and health and a very strong partnership with its
    workers. And so I'd like to call on Mr. Ackerman and Mr. Benkowski to
    discuss their experience.

    [Mr. Ackerman described the safety program adopted by Corning which was
    instrumental in decreasing the company's accident rate by 50 percent.
    Mr. Benkowski described the goal-sharing plan and a program to evaluate
    medical facilities used by Corning to prevent safety and health problems
    and to ensure high quality health care for their employees.]

        The President. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Ackerman. You know, I didn't pay him to say any of that, by the
    way. [Laughter]
        The President. You wrote each other's speeches. [Laughter]
        Let me thank you and thank Ralph and Johnson & Johnson for your
    example and your words today. We have given a lot of thought to what we
    might be able to do in a positive way, rather

    [[Page 747]]

    than in a kind of a negative way, through the Occupational Safety and
    Health Administration, to make it possible for there to be more stories
    like the two you just heard.
        And I'd like to ask the Vice President to take just a brief minute
    and explain what we tried to do with our experiment and with OSHA and
    what the results have been.

    [The Vice President stated that companies taking the kind of approach
    described by Mr. Ackerman and Mr. Larson should not be adversely
    affected by the safety and health system designed by the Government for
    companies that were not providing such programs. He then gave an example
    of the new approach that the President asked OSHA to adopt.]

        The President. Thank you very much. I'd like to go on now to the
    final topic of the first panel, and that's health and retirement
    security. And just to note what is obvious, that is, that over the last
    10 years there has been a steady decline in the percentage of people in
    the work force who have been covered with employer-based health
    insurance; that the decline has been most pronounced among employees
    with the lowest levels of education and skills, probably in companies
    with the smallest profit margins; that there has been a similar change
    in retirement, although very often it was a change in the form of
    retirement from defined benefit to defined contribution plans, but there
    have been other changes and also some loss of coverage.
        In 1995, it was the first year in more than a decade that the
    percentage of people in the work force with health insurance tied to the
    job did not decline, and that could be in part a result of the fact that
    the inflation rate in 1995 in health care insurance plans was below the
    general rate of inflation for the first time in a decade.
        But at any rate, this is something that is an issue and a greater
    issue if you believe that people will change jobs more frequently over
    the course of the work life than they have in the past. So I wanted to
    call on, first, Howard Schultz, the chairman and CEO of Starbucks
    Coffee, a remarkable Seattle-based company that, doubtless, many,
    perhaps most of you, have frequented in some city or another in this
    country, and I think they have--they're growing so fast, I don't know
    how many employees they have, but I know they have 9,000, maybe there
    are more. How many do you have now?
        Mr. Schultz. Fifteen thousand.
        The President. Fifteen thousand? This was put together last week.
    They're growing pretty fast. [Laughter] At any rate, Starbucks has been
    recognized for its rather extensive benefit program for the work force,
    including the scope of its health care plan. So I'd like for Mr. Schultz
    to talk about that.

    [Mr. Schultz stated that Starbucks was the first privately owned company
    to provide a comprehensive medical-dental, 401(k), and vision plan to
    all of its employees, including part-time employees, and to offer equity
    to all employees. He attributed the company's low attrition rate to the
    health care plan.]

        The President. I'd like to now call on David Guiliani, who is the
    chairman and CEO of Optiva Corporation, actually a fascinating company
    that was started less than a decade ago with a team of University of
    Washington scientists who developed a new electronic toothbrush that
    uses high frequency vibrations to remove plaque, something I care more
    and more about as I get older. [Laughter]
        Mr. Guiliani.

    [Mr. Guiliani stated that productivity could be gained by choosing,
    motivating, and rewarding the best employees. He described the health
    care, retirement, English language education, and free computer loan
    programs that Optiva provided to its employees.]

        The President. You were pretty modest, but tell us how fast you are
    growing.
        Mr. Guiliani. We have been tripling each year, and we're now the
    number two brand in America in powered brushes, and we're a major
    exporter into Europe and Japan, where our product is marvelously
    popular.
        The President. And how many employees do you have?
        Mr. Guiliani. Three hundred.
        The President. We don't need to discuss this here, but one of the
    things that I would like to know from you--I sent a package of proposed
    pension reforms to Capitol Hill, basically designed to make it easier
    for even smaller companies than yours to access the 401(k) program. If
    you or any of the others out here, particularly from smaller businesses,
    have any suggestions about what else we can do to make this a more

    [[Page 748]]

    user-friendly option for companies, I would very much like to have it,
    because I think it's important. And there are things you can do that we
    have asked for Congress to support, and I believe that it has almost
    unanimous support, it's just a matter of time working it through. And
    one of the top three priorities of the White House Conference on Small
    Business--that will make these things much more user-friendly for self-
    employed people, small businesses, and then also help people when they
    move from business to business to maintain the fund, even if they're
    unemployed for a period of time. So if you or any of the others here
    have any suggestions about what further improvements we can make in
    that, I would certainly like to have it.
        Mr. Guiliani. I'm sure the SBA could do very well with some
    conferences and seminars with small businesses participating, because
    everybody sees the value of starting 401(k)'s early in the worker's life
    as well as the company's life.
        The President. That's the next question I--you answered the next
    question. Do you believe--then I just want to make it explicit--do you
    think that the program is a little more accessible than some people
    know, and that more people would use it if they knew more about it? Do
    you agree with that?
        Participant. Absolutely.
        Participant. We had no particular issues in setting it up quite
    early, I think when we were about 100 people, probably.
        Participant. Most of it is teaching people how to use it,
    understanding it.
        Participant. Yes, it's the education process, I think.
        Participant. Part of it is the name. Anything that has a 401(k)
    sounds like it's bad. [Laughter]
        Participant. It's very bureaucratic.
        The President. I wonder, before we take a brief break--we're going
    to take about a--I'm going to shorten the break, because we started a
    little late--about a 20-minute break. Before we take a break, before we
    start the next panel, I wonder if anyone else in the audience would like
    to make a comment about any of the three topics that were discussed
    here. And if you would, would you please just identify yourself and say
    whatever is on your mind.
        Participant. [Inaudible]
        The President. Let me ask before you sit down, why don't we just--
    we'll take about 10 minutes here. There are at least two other companies
    whose representatives I see out here who have no-layoff policies. If you
    can say in a minute or two, I'd like for anybody who's here who can say
    in a minute or two, if you have a no-layoff policy, how you've been able
    to maintain it, besides making a bunch of money.
        And there is at least another company here that has had wide
    variations in their orders and has come up with some innovations in
    managing that problem to reduce layoffs. If you could just describe in a
    minute or two how you manage this problem, I'd--we'll just start with
    you, sir, and then we'll go with anyone else who wants to talk for a
    minute.
        Participant. [Inaudible]
        The President. Who would like to go next? Yes, sir. Go ahead.
        Participant. [Inaudible]
        The President. So as things go down, they share the work that's
    available with the same number of workers?
        Participant. That's right. And nobody gets laid off. Could I just
    add one thing about 401(k)'s? They're great, but couldn't we raise the
    limit a little bit? People could invest a little more.
        The President. Thank you. You want to raise the limit. That's what
    you said? Okay. I'm told we're going to address some of this in the next
    panel, but I'll call on another person or two and then we'll break.
        Mr. Correnti.
        And answer this question right: You can only talk about--you've got
    to talk about what you do in the down times as well as the up times,
    everybody. It's not fair to only talk about finding more business.
        Go ahead.

    [John Correnti, chief executive officer, Nucor Corp., stated that the
    philosophy of his company in tough financial times was that employees
    and managers would share in the pain of pay cuts or shortened work weeks
    together. He noted that the resulting employee trust and loyalty made
    turnover so minimal that workers practically had to be willed a job in
    one of the plants.]

        The President. I can personally vouch for the truth of that last
    assertion. [Laughter]
        I think what we should do now is take a little break. I think the
    panelists were terrific, and I think that this is a very good panel. I
    can't wait for the next one. So I'm going to start--it's now 1:15 p.m.--
    I'm going to start at

    [[Page 749]]

    1:35 p.m., in 20 minutes. We're adjourned briefly.
        Give them all a hand. [Applause]

    Note: The President spoke at approximately 11:30 a.m. in Gaston Hall at
    Georgetown University. In his remarks, he referred to Rev. Leo J.
    O'Donovan, president, Georgetown University, and Alma Brown, widow of
    former Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown.