Sharing the Work

By Rebecca McPheters
Media Industry Newsletter
January 12, 2009

The loss of jobs within the publishing industry has increased at an alarming rate. As revenues have declined publishers have rushed to reduce expenses, even as they begin to pursue business models that are less reliant on advertising revenues. Lay-offs have become an almost knee-jerk reaction to the bad economy and other ills plaguing our industry. But is it the right reaction? And if lay-offs are required is it necessary that they be of the magnitude that we have become accustomed to reading about day after day? It is in the best interest of us all to do whatever we can to minimize or avoid lay-offs. One way to do this is to share the work required among a larger number of people.

The economic and social impact of layoffs is staggering. Those laid off lose their ability to support families, as well as status within their communities and their homes. For most, loss of income results in the near elimination of discretionary spending – and a reduced ability to pay for things that are less discretionary. Homes are lost, families are weakened, debts are not paid, and products are not bought. Without income, many can no longer afford premiums for on-going health care coverage. On the other hand, if hours and salaries are only somewhat reduced, discretionary spending is more likely to occur – albeit at lower levels. More products will be bought and more companies can afford to advertise. Families can tighten their belts, but are less likely to go hungry or lose their homes. The psychic toll is lessened. The cost to society – both monetary and human – is reduced.

In the current environment, spending has been curtailed not only by those who have been laid off, but by a much larger group of those still employed – but who fear the loss of their jobs. A commitment to retain a larger employee base, even at reduced pay, would increase feelings of security among those working, as well as their willingness to spend the money necessary to restore our economy.

Sharing the work would benefit all industries dependent directly or indirectly on consumer spending, because it would increase demand for their products and services. It would benefit employers by reducing or eliminating severance expenses and the cost of training new employees when the economy improves. It would limit the need for government provided social services for which we all pay - provided we are lucky enough to still have enough income to pay taxes.

But exactly how would “sharing the work” work? If a company has targeted a reduction in personnel expenses of 5%, employees would be asked to take a reduction in pay in exchange for working fewer hours – enough to produce the needed savings. Given the costs of benefits, the reduction in hours and pay would be somewhat greater than 5%. Will the best employees leave? Perhaps some will – but many may welcome an opportunity to have an extra day off on a regular basis – or to take a few weeks of unpaid leave. Others will feel increased loyalty and respect for a company that makes the extra effort to keep its employees working and insured during a time when outside opportunities are few for even the best employees.

Sharing the work requires more imagination and leadership than simply reducing staff. But it has the potential to facilitate a faster economic recovery that will benefit us all, allowing more people to maintain their livelihoods, while continuing to buy the products which fuel advertisers’ demand for magazine pages. It is both morally appropriate and economically sound.