(Nadir Company)A memorandum from a corporate vice-president suggests the company should ignore requests from employees for family-flexible work schedules, job sharing, and part-time work. Why, he asks, would the company respond to such requests? These requests, the vice-president argues, are insignificant and will only increase the company’s costs. The vice-president’s argument has several flaws, but the most glaring one is a lack of understanding of the current work environment, especially among younger workers. Accepting the vice-president’s argument would limit the Nadir Company’s ability to recruit and retain the best employees

While the vice-president’s arguments are sound, they are based on outmoded assumptions that have become obsolete. In today’s job market, younger workers, especially those in the technology sector, expect flexibility. Both full-time and part-time employment have become secondary to a more flexible work schedule and, in many cases, the ability to work from home. The Nadir Company’s older employees may expect to retain their traditional 9-to-5 jobs. However, younger workers want more flexibility. They want to be able to balance their work and personal life. They want to avoid the traffic, or they are interested in starting a family. They want to be able to travel to see relatives or to go on extended vacations. There is no reason why the Nadir Company should ignore these requests. If the company’s supervisors and human resource managers choose to offer more flexibility, these younger employees will be attracted to the company. They will also produce higher quality work. When younger workers are not chained to a desk, they can focus on their work. When they are at home, they can be with their families; both will be happier as a result. The vice-president’s arguments that employees will abuse the flexibility and will take extended vacations are also unfounded. All of the employees at the Nadir Company are salaried. They take their vacation days, and the employees in other departments must cover their work while they are gone. The employees are not trying to cheat the company. They are just seeking more balance in their lives. The vice-president believes that the company will lose money by offering more flexibility. However, the extra money the company earns from happier employees will more than offset any losses in productivity

The vice-president makes several questionable assumptions in his arguments. First, he assumes that employees, no matter what they may say, are only interested in money. While this may be true for some younger employees, it is not for all of them. Some employees have families to support and base their employment decision on more than just money. Other employees, especially older ones, are more concerned with security than flexibility; they tend to want more stability and benefits than smaller companies can offer. The vice-president also assumes that the employees will never ask for more than the company has to offer. He also assumes that the employees, no matter how flexible the schedule, will always have to be at work. These assumptions are based on the assumption that all employees have the same needs and wants. Unfortunately, they do not. Some employees want more stability, and some employees do not want the added responsibility of starting a family or caring for elderly family members

Another problem with the vice-president’s reasoning is that he does not cite any empirical evidence to support the claim that only a small percentage of employees participate in family-flexible programs at other companies. In fact, he cites no data at all. The vice-president’s assumption that these programs are insignificant may be based on his experience, but it is unlikely that his company is the only company to offer such programs. The Nadir Company’s competitors, and other companies in the industry, may be offering more flexible work schedules and telecommuting even as they ignore these requests. The Nadir Company may not need to offer family-flexible programs to compete with other companies. The Nadir Company should reconsider its stance on flexible scheduling, especially as it expands its operations

The memorandum from the vice-president to the human resources department does not present the Nadir Company with a valid argument. The Nadir Company should reconsider its stance on flexible scheduling and embrace these requests. It will increase its productivity and be more attractive to the employees.