Managing employee flexibility for eldercare: comparing corporate policies and legal frameworks

¶ … Opportunity Statement

The major problem that exists in this scenario is a difference of opinion regarding the appropriate level of managerial control over employees' hours and work schedules, with Accord feeling that the need to repeatedly take time off in order to care for one's aging parents needs to be more carefully managed and controlled, while Munger (and others) feel that there should be a great deal of flexibility and employee determination when it comes to these issues. This centra problem has been clouded by accusations of ageism on one hand and a lack of principled work ethic or efficiency on the other, neither of which are elements that can be proven as motives for any of the individuals involved. These problems create a major opportunity for the clarification and codification of policies regarding time taken to care for ageing relatives and general efficiency and scheduling issues.

Task B1: Generic Benchmarking: Topics

Information on a variety of subjects will be necessary in order to determine what an effective solution to the central problem identified above might be. One of the key considerations should be the current legal standing of employees that are required to provide healthcare or support services to their relatives; while it is clear that many in this case feel there is a moral and ethical right for empoyees to engage in such activities as needed, there is not necessarily a legal right to do so. Even if Accord were guilty of the abuses he is being accused of in the most egregious manner, then, he might not have done anything legally wrong and actionable. This would change the tenor and trajectory of the issue.

Task B2: Generic Benchmarking: Companies

Blockbuster (Unsuccessfully)

An example of company that has not encountered this issue very successfully -- truly, an example of a company that has not really tackled anything with a great deal of success lately -- is Blockbuster, the recently bankrupted video rental giant. The company is still in operation, and it does offer certain benefits to some of its employees, but the parental and medical leaves are even more ill-defined than they are at Home Depot and it is not even clear whether these leaves are paid or simple allowances of time off without the threat of termination (Blockbuster 2011). Employees have complained about the lack of flexibility that the company provides in terms of work hours and actually utilizing the leaves that are offered, which leads to doubts regarding the practical applicability of these supposed benefits (Glass Door 2011). Like Home Depot, Blockbuster has no specific policy in regards to caring for ageing relatives, but unlike Home Depot the video rental chain does not appear to fully stand by what allowances and benefits they ostensibly offer (Glass Door 2011).

In addition, most of the benefits that the company offers outside the legally required minimums of compensation and time off required by law are reserved for managerial employees or full-time employees (Blockbuster 2011). This means that the vast majority of those working at Blockbuster couldn't take advantage of the offered benefits even if the company actually allowed for the usage of these benefits to begin with. Clearly, such employee concerns are not a priority for Blockbuster to the degree that they are for Home Depot.