 February/March
2004 Issue Number 56
 Is
a monthly electronic newsletter which links current events and issues
to the daily challenges faced by fire and emergency services managers.
Current topics in the areas of leadership development, workplace diversity,
change management, and conflict resolution will be discussed.
We
hope that you find the information here useful and provocative.
Let us know what you think! If you'd like to subscribe to the newsletter,
please enter your email address in the box below.
enter your email
address
Maryland
Fire Rescue Staff and Command School March 17-24, 2004, Memphis,
TN. Linda Willing will be teaching one segment of this seminar. See
www.mfri.org for
more information.
Leadership
Training Seminar
, March 25-28, 2004, Miami, Florida. Go to www.wfsi.org
for more information.
The
Changing American Family
The
traditional American family has always been portrayed as including
a husband and wife with children living at home, with the husband
as the primary breadwinner. The reality is that this description now
applies to less than 25% of American households today.
More
and more, adults in this country are living what are still considered
as non-traditional lifestyles, yet these so-called alternate living
conditions now include the vast majority of people. Married couples
remain childless by choice, single mothers and fathers raise children
alone, children live with grandparents and other extended family members,
gay and lesbian couples live in committed relationships and raise
children, heterosexual couples cohabitate with no interest in marriage,
people live alone or with friends. This changing picture of American
society has many implications in the workplace.
Workplace
benefits have typically been given assuming that most people match
the traditional image for families. This means that married couples
with children get more benefits; more money applied to health insurance,
more time off to attend to personal matters, more consideration in
work assignments. Although many people philosophically support the
stability that marriage is supposed to provide, doing the same work
and getting less over a career does not often sit well. Gay and lesbian
couples, who usually have no access to the benefits of marriage, pay
more for insurance and other benefits. Single people essentially subsidize
benefits systems that are based on the assumption that all members
could be getting maximum benefits at all times. In some places, these
inequities have led to backlash against traditional benefit systems
and caused significant division within organizations, unions, and
other groups.
The
tax system is also skewed when it comes to families. The much discussed
"marriage tax" which requires married couples to pay more
taxes than both single people would pay separately does not apply
equally across the board. Historically traditional families, with
a primary breadwinner and a dependent spouse actually do better under
current tax law. The people who are hurt most by the marriage tax
are spouses who both work and make essentially the same income. African
American couples are statistically hurt the worst; working couples
from this group with incomes between $30,000 and $120,000 pay a premium
for being married, compared to white couples who jointly make between
$60,000 and $90,000 who are similarly affected. This is due to the
fact that African American couples in these income ranges are much
more likely to have dual incomes of similar levels.
The
changes in family structure in this country are not being reflected
in many of the systems that are supposed to support those families;
taxation, benefits, and recognition in the workplace that families
come in many different forms. Until all types of families can gain
recognition and feel equally valued, there will always be divisions
along these lines.
Source:
The New York Times, January 25, 2004
The EEOC has filed a lawsuit against a cosmetics company over their
English-only workplace policy. The agency contends that the employer,
Sephora, allowed discrimination against Latino workers, and enforced
its English-only policy even during employee breaks. The company denies
the accusations. The EEOC reports an increasing number of complaints
related to English-only policies at work.
Source:
HRNext, November 21, 2003
Your
Day in Court
Many
people believe that if they need to resolve a legal dispute, they
will naturally have access to a jury trial. This is a basic right
in this country, yet one that is exercised far less than in the past.
In fact, although there are five times as many lawsuits filed today
compared to in 1962, only 1.8% of them actually go to trial. In 1962,
11.5% of all civil cases in federal court went to trial.
The raw
number of civil trials has dropped in recent years as well. In 1985,
12,529 cases went to trial. Last year, that number was 4,569. The
number of federal criminal trials has also dropped, from 5,097 in
1962 to 3,574 last year.
In place
of trials, judgements are often being reached through alternate means;
plea bargaining, mediation, arbitration, and other negotiated settlements.
Generally, these alternate dispute resolution systems are significantly
less costly and time consuming than trials. Cost is a motivator for
many plaintiffs to settle out of court; at times, legal fees can negate
any monetary award given by a jury.
In some
cases, those wishing to file a lawsuit have no choice other than using
some type of in-house alternative dispute resolution (ADR) system.
Agencies such as the Social Security Administration and the Securities
and Exchange Commission conduct tribunals that are a required first
stop before a matter can go to court. This requirement by an employer
is controversial and has led to a number of lawsuits, some of which
are still in appeal.
The benefit
of trials is that issues are brought into the open and argued on the
public record, thus paving the way for better, more consistent judgements
later on. This has been particularly true in the area of civil rights
and employment law. In fact, cases involving employment discrimination
and other civil rights now account for a third of all federal civil
trials.
Is the drop in trials a good thing? It depends on the situation, and
what you hope to gain. What is definitely true is that fewer and fewer
people are having their day in court.
Source:
The New York Times, December 14, 2003
|
