Table of Contents

1. Guiding Principles
2. Questions and Answers Regarding Work and Family Life Authority and Responsibility
3. Alternative Work Schedules (AWS)
4. Leave Options
5. Part-time Employment/Job Sharing
6. Flexiplace
7. Dependent Care
8. Appendix A—Glossary
9. Appendix B—Flexiplace Project
10. Appendix C—Sample Employee/Supervisor Checklist
11. Appendix D—USDA Work and Family Life Report on Focus Group Interviews

Appendix D—USDA Work and Family Life

Report on Focus Group Interviews

Background

On May 25, 1994, Assistant Secretary for Administration Wardell C. Townsend, Jr., spoke at the USDA Video Teleconference on Balancing Work and Family. He stated that the Secretary endorses the Whole Person Concept, one which recognizes the need for a balance between life on and off the job. Mr. Townsend also indicated that he would develop a policy proposal on work and family life for the Secretary.

A Work and Family Life (WFL) Team was formed to review family-friendly practices in the workplace and develop policy recommendations for the USDA. Prior to developing its recommendations, the WFL Team decided to get input from employees by using the focus group methodology.

Thirteen focus groups were held with approximately 110 individuals who represented a diverse cross-section of USDA employees. Nine focus group interviews were conducted September 26-29 in Atlanta, Georgia; Portland, Oregon; and Kansas City, Missouri. Three focus groups were held October 6-12 in Washington, D.C. At each site, three focus groups were conducted: 1) one for supervisors; 2) one for professional/technical (two grade interval) staff; and 3) one for administrative support (one grade interval) staff. In addition, one focus group interview for representatives of the Management Council was held in Washington, D.C., on October 11. A copy of the questions used to guide each focus group interview is attached.

Introduction

The findings of the focus groups are presented followed by a brief discussion. Then, some suggestions are provided for implementing and improving flexible work options in USDA. In general, some regional differences between the groups were observed. Field participants tended to be less knowledgeable about work options than participants located in headquarters. Differences also were observed in the strength of participants' viewpoints. Supervisors/managers tended to be more reserved and thoughtful. Administrative support staff tended to be more open and cynical. Professional/technical staff tended to be more analytical.

General Findings

Participants brought to the discussions their individual attitudes and unique experiences as USDA employees. Although participants expressed strong support for implementing and/or improving flexible work options in USDA, they recognize that not all flexibilities can be applied to every job. Participants agreed broadly on several major issues. They are discussed briefly on the next two pages.

There is a lack of consistency and uniformity among and within USDA agencies in implementing flexible work options. Each agency seems to have its own approach to flextime, credit hours, leave usage, and other options. Several employees complained that only recently were they allowed to use flextime because of the reluctance of some top level managers to join the rest of the USDA. As one employee stated, "If we are Team USDA, we should all enjoy the same benefits and privileges."

There is a need to broaden and expand the definition of family. Many employees discussed caregiving obligations for parents, grandparents, siblings, aunts, and uncles in addition to those for spouse and children. Questions also arose about nontraditional families.

There is a need to allow employees to use flextime. The use of flextime is a useful option for employees who must alter their work schedules to meet personal and family needs. However, some agencies allow employees considerable latitude, while others do not. For example, one agency authorized a 5-4-9 schedule recently but told employees they must take off the second Friday of the pay period. Several employees said they would like to adjust their work days to take off several hours during the middle of the day but are not allowed to do this. Moreover, changes in hours are approved only when the request is made a pay period in advance; this precludes the use of flextime for emergency situations. Some employees are able to earn credit hours, and others are not. Further, some employees indicated that work hours should be expanded beyond the normal time period; they indicated that frequently it was necessary for them to work beyond the normal work hours but such time was donated.

There is a need to change sick leave regulations. Employees overwhelmingly support the use of sick leave to care for family members. Current regulations allow for the use of sick leave only when contagious illnesses are involved.

Employees want the option to work at home. Although this option may not be practical for all jobs, most participants indicated they had some work that easily, and perhaps more efficiently, could be done at home. This was particularly true of those who worked in computer-related jobs.

There is a need for low-cost day care. Numerous comments were made concerning the need for after school care and sick child care. There also was some support for adult care, but the emphasis was on child care.

Participants believe that part-time work can be an effective method of accommodating those with personal needs. However, part-time employment appears to be used minimally. Both managers and employees indicated it was virtually impossible to switch from full-time to part-time and vice versa. Employees were dissuaded from considering part-time work as a viable option.

There is a lack of awareness of the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and a lack of confidence in the program. Some employees were not aware of EAP. Others believe that the limit of three free counseling sessions is inadequate. Many others believe that the services lack confidentiality and indicated they probably would not use them.

Employees believe that managers and supervisors need education and training regarding work options. Many employees feel managers should be better informed about the benefits these options have to the agency. That is, they enhance productivity, are cost-effective in the long run, and contribute to the agency's mission. Instead, many managers feel these options solely benefit employees.

There is a need for more transportation-related options. Public transit subsidies, parking privileges, and ridesharing services are a few of the topics some employees discussed as important in helping them to balance their work and family responsibilities.

Employees want cafeteria-style benefits. Many employees also want the option of covering family members other than spouse and/or children under health plans.

Discussion

Participants were generally happy to be involved in the focus group interviews. Despite the short notice, most employees were cooperative and eager to share their ideas and concerns.

Numerous barriers to implementing and improving flexible work options in USDA were mentioned. They included: funding, equipment, communication, commitment of managers, understanding of managers and co-workers, culture/climate of USDA and its various agencies, accountability of employees--especially managers/supervisors, vested interests in maintaining the status quo, autonomy and isolation of various USDA agencies, myopia and tunnel vision, and unclear definition of family-friendly.

Participants believe that there is life beyond the job and that employees should not feel guilty when they must respond to personal and family needs. They also believe that everyone in the work environment, especially managers and supervisors, could use an "attitude adjustment." Employees feel that managers need to liberalize their thinking, be more open to flexible work options. Apparently, some managers are somewhat intimidating to employees and convey the attitude that flexible work options are available only in dire situations. While these options are accorded to employees as a privilege, not a right, managers should have a more accepting approach in assessing the feasibility of using flexible work options.

Further, participants believe that we have to recognize that both job and family are a part of each of us, and that sometimes these two dimensions will be in conflict. However, they adamantly believe that a family-friendly workplace can reduce the inner turmoil, frustration, and loss in productivity that usually accompanies such conflict. One participant thoughtfully stated, "We need to make every member of the organization a valued member, include them in everything, let them know that it's all right to make mistakes, and help them know how they can be more effective."

Recommendations

Focus group participants provided several recommendations for implementing and improving flexible work options in USDA. They are as follows:

• Agency managers should be instructed to adhere to a family-friendly policy to the maximum extent possible. They should be held accountable for making these options available to their employees.
• The Department should use a broad definition of family when developing policy. (See Note Below)
• The Department should support a change in OPM's regulation regarding the use of sick leave. (See Note Below)
• First line supervisors should be permitted to allow employees to work at home provided adequate guidelines and procedures are followed. Satellite work centers also should be used where feasible.
• The Department should consider developing low-cost day care centers in areas where there are large concentrations of Federal employees. This could be done in cooperation with other Departments.
• The Department should encourage agencies to use the option of part-time employment more often.
• The Department needs to take an indepth look at EAP to determine what can be done to improve its image and use.
• The Department should provide education and training for all employees, but especially managers/supervisors, regarding various workplace options.
• The Department should participate in the public transportation subsidy program.
• The Department should lobby OPM to provide employees with cafeteria style benefits.

NOTE: The Federal Employees Leave Share Act, enacted January 31, 1994, expanded the definition of family. The Federal Employees Family Friendly Act, enacted October 22, 1994, changed the regulations for sick leave usage to include family care and bereavement care purposes.

Focus Group Questions for USDA's Work and Family Life

1. How did you feel when you received an invitation to participate in this focus group?

2. What does family-friendly mean to you?

3. Here is a list of commonly known services and flexible work options:
Dependent care (adult and/or child), Employee assistance, Flexible tours of duty, Flexiplace (work-at-home), Job sharing, Leave policies, Part-time, Satellite work centers/offices. Which of these are available in your agency? Which are appropriate for your type of work?

4. What additional flexible work options would contribute to a family-friendly environment?

5. What barriers exist to implementing or improving flexible work options?

6. How can we overcome these barriers to implementing or improving flexible work options?

7. If you could make one recommendation to the Secretary regarding implementing a family-friendly workplace in USDA, what would it be?