NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com
As I mentioned earlier this month, this is the first election we're seeing work/life balance issues addressed in the economic platforms of both major-party presidential candidates.
But do you actually know where Barack Obama and John McCain stand on flexible and family-friendly workplace policies? If the answer is no, not to worry. This recent NPR story, based on an investigation by the Families and Work Institute, breaks it down for you.
For example, the U.S. Family and Medical Leave Act mandates that workers at companies with 50+ employees get 12 weeks of unpaid leave if they're seriously ill, have to care for a seriously ill family member, or just had or adopted a child. According to NPR, here's where the candidates stand on family leave:
"Obama supports broadening the 1993 law's reach and offering paid leave, making it more accessible to low-wage workers. He would extend job-protected leave to businesses with 25 or more employees, including those trying to cope with domestic violence and sexual assault. He would allow parents up to 24 hours of annual leave to participate in their children's academic activities at school. He would establish a $1.5 billion fund to encourage each state to adopt a paid leave system and to offset the cost to employees and employers.
McCain favors legislation such as the Family-Friendly Workplace Act, a House bill introduced this spring, which would give workers the option of banking extra hours in lieu of overtime pay."
And on sick leave, which, according to the Families and Work Institute, is only offered to 24 percent of low-wage workers (including when their kids are sick), the two camps had this to say:
"McCain doesn't support mandated paid time off; he prefers letting the marketplace decide, perhaps by letting workers bank extra hours. His proposed health care plan would address 'underlying problems,' adviser Jay Khosla said, mainly by providing a refundable $5,000 tax credit for each family and $2,500 for individuals to buy health insurance.
Obama would require employers to provide seven paid sick days a year for workers to care for their own or family members' illnesses."
But if you don't want to take NPR's word for it, see the complete transcripts from the Families and Work Institute's interviews with both the McCain and Obama campaigns on each candidate's work/life policies.
Freelance writer Michelle Goodman is the author of "My So-Called Freelance Life" and "The Anti 9-to-5 Guide." E-mail her at ninetothrive@nwjobs.com.
By Joel in Green Lake on November 4, 2008 10:20 AM
I think McCain's thoughts on this are reasonable and balanced. Obama, on the other hand, supports forcing employers to provide increased family leave benefits and I believe does so, as most democrats do - to by extension, buy votes. The other side might argue that McCain is buying 'industry' votes (read that money), but I'm not too sure of that, as in the case of higher taxes, any increased cost of production is almost always passed on to the consumer (me and you). For grins, let's say the cost is not passed on but is absorbed by the employer. This will result in a smaller profit margin and might very well lead to lost jobs. The employer is not going to totally lose profit margin - i.e., break even or worse, lose money. If that happened - guess what? Maybe company goes bankrupt and maybe all the employees are then jobless.
Further, if the employee is in a position that does not offer sufficient benefits for the long term, perhaps the employee should look for opportunities to increase one's ability to a) get a raise b) get promoted c) find another job, perhaps in an elevated position and so on. The employee should have some incentives to improve one's situation and not rely on the govt to 'do it for them'.
That is the beauty of the free-market. Companies are given incentives (some by market, some by govt) to improve their companies (and hopefully maintain employees, increase the employees' benefits, hire more employee's and so forth. This country places no restrictions whatsoever on any employee seeking to better their situation. There are often incentives and opportunities supported and/or provided by employers and/or govt to assist the employee toward improvement.
I could go on and on- Bottom line- McCain's positions support a better economy and more freedom; Obama's do not support a better economy (long term) and tend toward suppression of freedom (company and employee) and promoting both the company's and employee's reliance on the mother's milk of govt. Obama's policies might seem like a God-send, but in reality are shackles in disguise, designed to limit the employee's progression and help ensure future votes for Obama's party.
By the way - I'm just a rank and file, low-level employee at an average local company. But one thing I do understand is basic economics and basic politics.
By Carolyn Wolfe on November 8, 2008 6:31 AM
Obama's ideas and proposals show humane consideration for all employees while McCain once again supports "business as usual". I am so thankful that the majority of Americans saw "business as usual" as just another four years of grief and voted for compassion and positive change.
By Carolyn Wolfe on November 8, 2008 6:37 AM
Obama's progressive ideas and proposals show consideration for the employee while McCain once again supports "business as usual". I am so thankful that America voted for positive change and rejected four more years of grief.