FEDERAL EMPLOYEES FLEXIBLE AND COMPRESSED WORK SCHEDULES ACT OF 1982

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 22
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 3, 2007
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: June 30, 1982
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

,,Approved For Release 2007105/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
:CONORESSIONAIy :RECORD -SENATE June 30, 1982
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am
awaiting the -arrival .-of the distin-
guished minority leader so that-we can
proceed to the consideration of S.
2240. I suggest -the' absence -of a
quorum until he arrives.
The 'PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
all the roll.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President,-I ask
animous consent that the order for
F e quorum call,be,xescinded.
The PRESIDING -OFFICER. With-
t objection,-it is-so ordered.
DERAL EMPLOYEES `FLEXI?BLE
ND COMPRESSED `WORK
CHEDULES ACT OF 1982
Mr. STEVENS. -Mr. President, -I ask
unanimous consent that the Chair lay
before the Senate S. 2240, Calendar
No. 518, the ?flexitime bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER: Is
there objection?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No objec-
tion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
of a collective bargaining agreement be-
tween the agency and -the exclusive.-repre-
sentative. '
"(2) Employees within a unit .represented
by an exclusive representative shall not be
included within any program -under this
subchapter except tothe -extent:expressly
provided under a collective bargaining
agreement between the agency and"the ex-
clusive representative.
"(b) An agency may not!participate in a
flexible or compressed schedule program
under a -collective bargaining agreement
which contains premium pay :provisions
which are inconsistent -with the provisions
-of section 6123 or. 6128 of thisititle, as appli-
cable.".
On--page 14, strike -line 22, -through
and including page -16, line '21, and
insert -the following: -
"(a) Notwithstanding the preceding provi-
sions of this subchapter or any collective
bargaining.agreement and-subject'to subsec-
tion (c) of this. section, if the head of an
agency finds that a particular. flexible or
compressed schedule -under this subchapter
has had or would.have an adverse agency
impact, the agency shall promptly deter-
mine not to-.
"(1) establish such-schedule; or
-"(2) continue such schedule, if the sched-
ule has already been;estalilished.
"(b) For purposes of this section, 'adverse
agency impact' means-
"(1) a reduction of .the-productivity of the
agency;
"(2) a diminished level of services fur-
nished to the public by the agency; or
"(3) an increaseln the cost of agency oper-
ations. -
"(c)(1) This subsection shall apply in the
case of any schedule covering employees in
a unit represented by an exclusive repre-?
sentative.
"(2)(A)'If an agency and an exclusive rep-
resentative 'reach anti impasse in collective
bargaining with respect to an -agency deter-
mination under subsection -(a)(1) not to es-
tablish a flexible or compressed schedule,
the impasse shall;be presented to the Feder-
al Service Impasses Panel (hereinafter in
this section referred to as the 'Panel').
"(B) The.Panel shall promptly consider
-any case. presented-under subparagraph (A),
and shall take final action in favor of the
.agency's determination if the finding on
which it is based is supported by evidence
.that the schedule is,likely to cause an ad-
verse. agency impact.
"(3)(AYIf an agency and.an exclusive rep-
resentative have entered into a collective
A bill (S. 2240) to amend.Title V, United
States Code, to provide permanentauthori-
zation for Federal agencies to use. flexible
and compressed employee work schedules.
Without objection, the Senate pro-
ceeded to consider the bill which had
been reported .from the Committee on
Governmental .Affairs with amend-
ments, as follows:
. On page 4, after.-line.2, insert the fol-
lowing:
"(8) 'collective bargaining', 'collective bar-
gaining agreement', and '.exclusive repre-
sentative' have the same meanings given
such terms-
"(A) by section 7103(a)(12),'(8),_and (16) of
this :title, respectively, In the case of any
unit -covered by chapter :71 of.this title; -and
"(B) in the case of any-other-unit, by the
corresponding provisions applicable under
the personnel.system.covering this unit.".
On page 9, 'strike line 41, through
and including -line 20, and -insert -the
following: - -
"(b) Any -employee who Is -.on a flexible
schedule ~program:under,section 6122?of this
title and who is no longer subject to such a
program shall be paid at -such employee's
then current rate of basic pay for-
"(1) -in the case,of a full-time employee,
not more than. 24 credit hours accumulated
by such employee,-or
"(2) in the case -of,a.;part-time employee,
the number of .credit hours .(not .excess of
one-fourth of the hours in such employee's
biweekly basic work requirement) accumu-
lated by-such employee:". - -
On page 13, strike line - 3, -through
and- including page 14, :line '2, and
insert the following:.
6130. Application of programs in the case
of collective bargaining agreements
"(a)(1) In the case of-employees.in?a unit
represented by an exclusive representative,
any flexible or compressed work schedule,
and the establishment and 'termination of
any such schedule; shall be subject to the
provisions of this subchapter and the terms
-'bargaining agreement providing for use of a
flexible or compressed schedule under this
:subchapter and the head of the agency de-
termines -under subsection (a)(2) to termi-
nate a flexible or compressed. schedule, the
agency may.reopen the agreement to seek
' termination.of the schedule. involved.
"(B) If the -agency and exclusive repre-
sentative reach-an impasse in collective bar-
gaining with respect to terminating such
schedule, the-impasse-shall be'presented to
the Panel. -
"(C) The Panel shall promptly consider
any-case presented under subparagraph (B),
and shall rule ,on such impasse not later
than 60 days after the date the Panel is pre-
sented the impasse. The Panel shall take
final action in-favor of1the-agency's determi-
.nationto':terminate a schedule if the finding
on which the determination is -based is sup-
.ported by -evidence ?. that the -schedule has
caused an adverse agency impact.
"(D). Any such schedule may not be termi-,
-nated until-
",(I) the agreement covering such schedule
is renegotiated or expires or terminates pur-
suant to the terms of that agreement; or .
"(ii) the date of the Panel's final decision,
if an impasse arose in the reopening of the
agreement -under subparagraph (A) of this
paragraph.
"(d) This section shall.not apply with -re-
spect -.to ,flexible schedules that may be es-
tablished without regard to -the authority
-provided under this subchapter.".
So-as to make the bill read:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
American in Congress assembled,' That this
Act may be cited asthe "Federal Employees
Flexible and -Compressed Work Schedules
Act of 1982".
SEC. 2. (a) -Chapter 61 of title 5, United
States Code, is-amended-
(1) by inserting before section 6101 the
following:
"SUBCHAPTERI-GENERAL
PROVISIONS";
and
(2) by adding at the end thereof the fol-
lowing new. subchapter:
"SUBCHAPTER II-FLEXIBLE AND
COMPRESSED WORK SCHEDULES
6120. Purpose
"The Congress finds that the use of flexi-
ble and compressed work schedules-has the
potential to 'improve productivity in the
Federal Government and provide greater
service to the public. -
"16121. Definitions
"For purposes of this subchapter-
"(1) 'agency' means any Executive agency,
any military department, and Library of
Congress;
"(2) 'employee' has the meaning given it
by section 2105 of this title;
"(3) 'basic work requirement' means the
number of hours, -excluding overtime hours,
which an employee is required to work or is
required to account for by leave or other-
wise;
"(4) 'credit hours' means any hours,
within a,flexible schedule established under
section 6122 of this title,.which-are in excess
of an employee's basic work requirement
and which the employee-elects to work so as
to vary the length ?of a workweek or a work-
day;
'(5)'compressed'schedule' means-
"(A) in the,.case of a full-time employee,
an 80-hour biweekly basic work requirement
which is scheduled for less than 10 -work-
,days, and
"(B) in the case of a part-time employee, a"
biweekly basic work -requirement of less
'than 80 hours which is scheduled for less
than 10 workdays;
"(6) 'overtime hours', when used- with re-
spect to =flexible schedule programs under
sections 6122 through 6126 of this title,
means all hours in excess 8 hours in a day
or 40 hours in a week which are officially
ordered in advance, but does not include
.credit hours; and .
"(7-) 'overtime hour', when used with re-
spect to compressed schedule programs
under sections 6127 and 6128 of this title,
means any hours in excess of those specified
hours which constitute -the compressed
schedule.
"(8) 'collective bargaining', 'collective bar
gaining -agreement', and 'exclusive repre
sentative' have the same meanings give
such terms-
this title, respectively, -in the case of an
unit covered-by chapter 71 of this title; an
corresponding provisions applicable unde
the personnel system covering this unit.
Approved For RPIP^sP 2flfl7If1;/f3 ? ('`IA Rnp8ti 00003800 0 300070004 n
o, ~ooooooo~ o~
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
operate at our own peril if we do. not
understand one thing that is happen-
ing. This is another example of the
American people leading their leaders.
The American people understand
better than we understand that there
is a need for a commonsense approach
to dealing with what they understand
may be the thing that can end the ex-
istence of the human race as we know
it today.'
A poll that my colleague (Mr. ROTH)
conducts on a yearly basis recently
was published by my colleague. It
showed, to my amazement-maybe
this is reflecting that I do not know
my State as well as I thought I did.
This poll showed that, out of a regis-
tered number of voters of about
300,000 in the State, 13,000 responded
in writing to my senior colleague.
He asked them "What do you think
the probability of a nuclear war in
your lifetime is? He had four catego-
ries, if my memory serves me. One said
very likely, one said likely, and-it went
on down the line.
The very likely and likely added up
to 54 percent of the people of my
State-54 percent of the people of my
State who answered that poll.
I agree this is not a scientific poll in
the sense that Mr. Caddell or Wirthlin
or-any of them in the polling business
would consider it, but 13,000 people re-
sponded out of a registered total of eli-
gible voters of 300,000 in my State;
13,000 wrote back and more than half
of them said that in their lifetime,
they believe, there will be a nuclear
war.
I think they understand something
pretty clearly: If we keep building
weapons and not agreeing, not talking,
we in fact are likely to have it become
a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Mr. President, I sincerely appreciate
the majority whip's giving me this
time. To conclude, I think the Ameri-
can people -want very badly for us'to
be strong. I think there is a consensus
that we need to build up our military,
particularly conventional, capability. I
think there is an overwhelming con-
sensus that you cannot trust the Rus-
sians, nor should you trust the Rus-
sians. I believe there-is an overwhelm-
ing view that says that there is not a
compatibility : between the Soviet
system and our system. I believe the
vast majority of the American people
rightly perceive the Soviet Union as a
threat. -
Having said all that, it is not the
least bit inconsistent for them also to
say, "But, in our mutual interest, we
should deal with the people we do not
trust, we do not like, we think are bad
for oqr interests when, in fact, we can
do it in a way that is verifiable and in
a way that meets both of our concerns;
that is, the annihilation of humanity."
But we in the Senate, in the 10 years
I have been here, talk about those
things as if they are mutually exclu-
sive. My friends on the left stand up
and say, not only must we have arms
control, but we do not need any. bigger
military. My friends on the right stand
up and say, we need a bigger military
and we need more missiles and we
cannot have any agreement with the
Russians, because no matter how tight
the agreement is, you cannot trust
them anyway.
But the American people have said
where we should be. The American
people say, build up our military, be
credible and tough and strong, second
to no one in the world. But negotiate
on the issue of nuclear weapons.
I make a prediction, Mr. President,
that my colleagues will arrive at that
conclusion very shortly. When I say
shortly, I mean within the year. Be-
cause this is where the American
people are-and the American people
are right.
I end by saying if we trusted the
basic good judgment of the American
people a little bit more, we would all
be a little bit better off. -
Mr. President, I should like to switch
to a second subject, if my colleague
will yield me another 2 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
PROPOSED CUTS IN SOCIAL
SECURITY
Mr. BIDEN. Mr.. President, the
media is full of stories about proposed
cuts and proposals relating to the
social security system. On almost a
weekly basis-I guess I have had 14
thus far this year-on Monday night I
have a town meeting. The most people
that have ever shown up at the-.town
meetings are 600 and.as few as 100,
somewhere on the average of 200. As I
said, I think I have had 14 or 15 since
the middle of January. Social security
is a big issue. We in the Senate spend
many hours debating the issue, and we
are scaring the living devil out of the
American people about the solvency of
the system, what is going to happen to
the system.
While it is proper, Mr. President, for
proposed social security cuts to receive
a great deal of attention and publicity;
I am afraid all that attention has ob-
scured yet another cut which could
have an equally devastating effect on
seniors. I am' referring, Mr. President,
to the Budget Committee's proposal to
slash $23.5 billion from the medicare
program over the next 3 years.. -
Among other changes in law, this
proposed savings would be achieved
through the institution of a 6-percent
copayment in fiscal year 1983, an 8-
percent copayment in fiscal year 1984,
and a 9-percent copayment in fiscal
year 1985. These copayments would be
charged against medicare part A, that
is, the cost of hospitalization. Current-
ly, the patient pays a $256 deductible
against the first day's cost, with medi-
care picking up the tab for days 2 to
60:
If this proposal is enacted into law,
Mr. President, it will mean that a
medicare patient would be forced to
pay $116.34 per week-after the de-
S7637
ductible-for the average hospital
room in Delaware, as opposed to no
fee today. In fiscal year 1984, assum-
ing a 5-percent increase in the cost of
a hospital room, the. charge would be
$165.36/week, again as opposed to no
fee today. In fiscal year -1985, assum-
ing another 5-percent jump in hospital
costs, the additional charge would rise
to $192.15 per week.
To bring this proposal into even
clearer perspective, Mr. President, a
60-day hospital stay for a medicare pa-
tient under current law costs that pa-
tient $256 in out-of-pocket expenses. If.
this proposal is approved, that stay
will cost $1,287.87 in fiscal year 1983,
$1,743.48 in fiscal year 1984 and
$1,972.80 in fiscal year 1985.
When he first heard of the magni-
tude of the proposed medicare cuts,
John Muldoon-who is president of
the Association of Delaware Hospi-
tals-called my office to express his
view that the proposal is "unrealistic."
I go a step beyond that characteriza-
tion; Mr. President. I believe this pro-
posal represents a callous attempt to
cut costs in order to hide the failure of
the administration's economic pro-
gram.
How are we to expect seniors to cope
with this attempt to balance the .
budget on their backs? Let us remem-
ber that, although the CPI actually
went down last month, the health care
portion of the index jumped by 12 per-
cent.
Let us also remember, Mr. President,
that this generation of seniors has
made its sacrifice. They have been
through the Great Depression. They
have been through three and, in some
cases, four wars. They have worked to
bring the country out of numerous re-
cessions.
Yes, they are willing to- do more.
Each senior I speak to expresses his or
her willingness to do their part to help
get America's economy back on track.
But they are not willing to have the
budget balanced on their backs. Mn
President, we must reject the Budget
Committee's medicare cut.
Mr. President, I once again thank
the Senator from Alaska for giving me
this time, and I yield the floor. -
PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR-S.
2240
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that when S. 2240
is being considered by the Senate, Ira
Shapiro, -Marcia McCord, Michael
Forscey, Gerald, Lindrew, and Ed
Jayne be permitted access to the floor
during all proceedings. r
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
CONCLUSION OF MORNING'
BUSINESS
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further morning business? If
not, morning business has concluded.
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
"? Flexible schedules; agencies authorized
to use
"(a) Notwithstanding section 6101 of this
title, each agency may establish, In accord-
ance with this subchapter, programs which
allow the use of flexible schedules which in-
clude-
"(1) designated hours - and days during
which an employee on such a schedule must
be present for work; and
"(2) designated hours during which an em-
ployee on such a schedule may elect the
time of such employee's arrival at and de-
parture from work, solely for such purpose
or, if and to the extent permitted, for the
purpose of accumulating credit hours to
reduce the length of the workweek or an-
other workday.
An election by an employee referred to in
paragraph (2) shall be subject to limitations
generally prescribed to ensure that the
duties and requirements of the employee's
position are fulfilled.
"(b) Notwithstanding any other provision
of this subchapter, but subject to the terms
of any written agreement referred to in sec-
tion 6130(a) of this title, if the head of an
agency determines that any organization
within the agency which is participating in
a program under subsection (a) is being sub-
stantially disrupted in carrying out its func-
tions or, is incurring additional costs because
of such participation, such agency head
may-
"(1) restrict the employees' choice of ar-
rival and departure time,
"(2) restrict the use of credit hours, or
"(3) exclude from such program any em-
ployee or group of employees.
6123. Flexible schedules; computation of
premium pay
"(a) For purposes of determining compen-
sation for overtime hours in the case of an
employee participating in-a program under
section 6122 of this title-
"(1) the head of an agency may, on re-
quest of the employee, grant the employee
compensatory time off in lieu of payment
for such overtime hours, whether or not ir-
regular or occasional in nature and notwith-
standing the, provisions of sections 5542(a),
5543(a)(1), 5544(a), and 5550 of this title,
section 4107(e)(5) of title 38, section 7 of the
Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 207), or
any other provision of law; or
"(2) the employee shall be compensated
for such overtime hours in accordance with
such provisions, as applicable.
"(b) Nothwithstanding the provisions of
law referred to in subsection (a)(1) of this
section, an employee shall not be entitled to
be compensated for credit hours worked
except to the extent authorized under sec-
tion 6126 of this title or to the extent such
employee is allowed to have such hours
taken into account with respect to the em-
ployee's basic work requirement.
"(c)(1) Notwithstanding section 5545(a) of
this title, premium pay for nightwork will
not be paid to an employee otherwise sub-
ject to such section solely' because the em-
ployee elects to work credit hours, or elects
a time of arrival or departure, at a time of
day for which such premium pay is other-
wise authorized, except that-
"(A) if an employee is on a flexible sched-
ule under which-
"(I) the number of hours during which
such employee must be present for work,
plus
"(ii) the number of hours during which
such employee may elect to work credit
hours or elect the time of arrival at and de-
parture from work, -
which occur outside of the nightwork hours
designated in or under such section 5545(a)
total less than 8 hours, such premium pay
shall be paid for those hours which, when
combined with such total, do not exceed 8
hours, and
"(B) if an employee Is on a flexible sched-
ule under which the hours that such em-
ployee must be present for work include any
hours designated in or under such section
5545(a), such premium pay shall be paid for
such hours so designated.
"(2) Notwithstanding section 5343(f) of
this title, and section 4107(e)(2) of title 38,
night differential will not be paid to any
employee otherwise subject to either of
such sections, solely because such employee
elects to work credit hours, or elects a time
of arrival or departure, at a time of day for
which night differential is otherwise au-
thorized, except that such differential shall
be paid to an employee on a flexible sched-
ule under this subchapter-
"(A) in the case of an employee subject to
subsection (f) of such section 5343, for
which all or a majority of the hours of such
schedule for any day fall between the hours
specified in such subsection, or
"(B) in the case of an employee subject to
subsection (e)(2) of such section 4107, for
which 4 hours of such schedule fall between
the hours specified in such subsection.
"? 6124. Flexible schedules; holidays
"Notwithstanding sections 6103 and 6104
of this title, if any employee on a flexible
schedule under section 6122 of this title is
relieved or prevented from working on a day
designated as a holiday by Federal statute
or Executive order, such employee is enti-
tled to pay with respect to that day for 8
hours (or, in the case of a part-time employ-
ee, an appropriate portion of the employee's
biweekly basic work requirement as deter-
mined under regulations prescribed by the
Office of Personnel Management).
6125. Flexible schedules; time-recording
devices
"Notwithstanding section 6106 of' this
title, the Office of Personnel Management
or any agency may use recording clocks as
part of programs under section 6122 of this
title, and the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing may use recording clocks to record
time and attendance of employees of such
Bureau without regard to whether the use
of recording clocks is part of a program
under section 6122 of this title.
6126. Flexible schedules; credit hours; ac-
cumulation and compensation
"(a) Subject to any limitation prescribed
by the Office of Personnel Management or
the agency, a full-time employee on a flexi-
ble schedule can accumulate not more than
24 credit hours, and a part-time employee
can accumulate not more than one-fourth
of the hours in such employee's biweekly
basic work requirement, for carryover from
a biweekly pay period to a succeeding bi-
weekly pay period for credit to the basic
work requirement for such period.
. "(b) Any employee who is on a flexible
schedule program under section 6122 of this
title and who is no longer subject to such a
program shall be paid at such employee's
then current rate of basic pay for-
"(1) in the case of a full-time employee,
not more than 24 credit hours accumulated
by such employee, or
"(2) in the case of a part-time employee,
the number of credit hours (not excess of
one-fourth of the hours in such employee's
biweekly basic work requirement) accumu-
lated by such employee.".
'16127. Compressed schedules; agencies au-
thorized to use
"(a) Notwithstanding section 6101 of this
title, each agency may establish programs
S 7639
which use a 4-day workweek or other com-
pressed schedule..
"(b)(1) An employee in a unit with respect
to which an organization of Government
employees has not been accorded exclusive
recognition shall not be required to partici-
pate in any program under subsection (a)
unless a majority of the employees in such
unit who, but for this paragraph, would be
Included in such program have voted to be
so included.
"(2) Upon written request to any agency
by an employee, the agency, if it determines
that participation in a program under sub-
section (a) would impose a personal hard-
ship on such employee, shall- .
"(A) except such employee from.such pro-
gram; or
"(B) reassign such employee to the first
days after the day on which a written re-
quest for such determination is received by
the agency.
of premium pay
"(a) the provisions of sections 5542(a),
5544(a), and 5550(2) of this title, section
other law, which relate to premium pay for
overtime work, shall not apply to the hours
"(b) In the case of any full-time employee,
hours worked in excess of the compressed
schedule shall be overtime hours and shall
be paid for as provided by the applicable
provisions referred to in subsection (a) of
this section. In the case of any part-time
employee on a compressed schedule, over-
time pay shall begin to be paid after the
schedule who performs work (other than
overtime work) on a tour of duty for any
workday a part of which Is performed on a
Sunday, such employee is entitled to pay for
work performed during the entire tour of
designated by Federal statute or Executive
order 'is entitled to pay at the rate of such
employee's basic pay, plus premium pay at a
plicable, or the provisions of section 7 of the
Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 207)
whichever provisions are more beneficial to
the employee.
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-000038000300070004-0
 S-7640
RCONGRESSfIONAL `'RECOR.D.-3SENATE June-3O, :198.2
,and '8339(m)-of=this title,,in?the-case-of'an
employee who is in any program underthis
'subchapter,'references.to'a -day. ,or--workday
? (or Ito -multiples' or --parts thereof)'contained
in :such 'sections shall be, considered 'to 'be
'references'to 8',hours ~(or to -the respective
inultiples,or.parts`theredf ).
plication-of:programs'in.the'case
"'Q'6130. AP
of'.collective'bargaining agreements
"(9)(1) In case of employees in.a unit.rep-
.resented.by.anexclusive representative, any
flexible the schedule has reduced
eve of services
tivity of the agency or the level of services
workers. With effective management, to the public, or has increased the cost of
this program can continue to benefit the agency operations, and
the taxpayers well. - "(B) termination of the schedule will not
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, _I am result in an increase in the cost of the
most grateful to the Senator from agency operations (other than a reasonable
Missouri for his kind remarks. administrative cost relating to the process
I point out to him that I think' the of terminating a schedule),
work, the dogged persistence on this "the agency shall, notwithstanding any,pro-
issue has been done by Jamie Cowen vision of a negotiated agreement, immedi-
of. my staff, Ed Jayne - of Senator ately terminate such schedule and such ter-
Payoa'S staff, and Ira Shapiro of his mmation shall not be subject to negotiation
or to administrative review (except as the
staff. I think they deserve the credit President may provide) or to judicial review.
he has so generously bestowed on me. "(2) If a schedule established pursuant to
UP AMENDMENT NO. 1047 a negotiated agreement is terminated under
ers and an understanding of manage- Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, as I
ment's concerns could have produced indicated, I send to :the desk two
this result. While the ultimate out- amendments that I have described
come for this legislation -is by no previously, the first to conform thisto'
means assured, without Senator STE- ' the House bill, and the second, a tech-
vEN's extraordinary work, we would nical amendment. I ask unanimous
paragraph, (1). either the agency or the ex-
clusive representative concerned may, by
written notice to the other party within 90
days after the date of such termination, ini-
tiate collective bargaining pertaining to the
establishment of another flexible- or com-
pressed work schedule under subchapter II
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE - a S 7643
of chapter 61 of title 5, United States Code, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I Ask Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, is
which would be effective for the unexpired unanimous consent that I may proceed it the desire of the Senator from
portion of the term of the negotiated agree- for 1 minute without the time being Alaska that I proceed at this time?
merit." charged against anybody. Mr. STEVENS. If the Senator from
At the end of the bill add the following
new.section: The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- Colorado is prepared,` that -would be
SEC. . (a) Section 6106of title 5, United out objection, it is so orderd. our request.
States Code, is amended by striking out the Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I under- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
period and inserting in lieu thereof a comma stand we are prepared to resume con- Senator from Colorado.
and "except that the Bureau of Engraving sideration of the flexitime bill on UP AMENDMENT NO. 1048
and Printing may use such recording which thorn is ? time limitation- i
s
t
".
cor ectr Hours Standards Act and the Walsh-
(b) The amendment made by this section The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Healey Act to permit employees, to whom
shall take effect October 1, 1982. Section 5 Senator from Tennessee is correct. such Acts apply, to work any combination
of this Act shall not apply to the amend-
merit made by this section. Mr. BAKER. Would the Chair of hours in a forty-hour workweek)
On page 8, :beginning ' with the comma on please state the condition of. the time Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
line 18, strike out all through line 22 and agreement? will be delighted to proceed. Before I
insert in lieu thereof a period. - The PRESIDING OFFICER. The do so may I thank the Senator from
The, PRESIDING OFFICER. ? The, agreement under which S. 2240 is Alaska for helping me work out the
question is on agreeing to the amend-, being considered is as follows: Debate time so we could offer this amendment
ment of the Senator from Alaska. on an amendment to be offered by the in a way that permitted me to be pres-
The.amendment (UP No. 1047) was Senator from Colorado (Mr. ARM-
agreed to. - STRONG) relative to the Walsh-Healy tied up in the Committee on Finance
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask Act and -the Contract Work Hours and with some important business, and yet
that the committee amendments, as Safety Standards Act shall be limited I did wish to be- here to present this
amended, be agreed to. to 1 hour, to be equally divided and amendment and to discuss it with my
The committee .amendments, as controlled; debate on a perfecting colleagues, and I -am grateful to the
amended, were agreed to. amendment to be offered by the Sena- Senator from Alaska for his courtesy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- tor from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNE- With that word of explana.tinn . I do
will be considered as original text for snail be limited to 3u minutes to be desk and ask for its immediate consid-
the purpose -of subsequent amend- wally divided and controlled. Is that -
.+i-merit. sufficient for the Senator? There are
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
-
There is one provision in the order ?nn,v,-
continuation of programs conducted that I will discuss with the minority STRONG) proposes an unprinted 'amendment
under Public Law:95-390 its provisions numbered 1048.
do not therefore affect or impair the leader and other Senators, and I may Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
alternative work schedules conducted ask for a.modification at a later point. ask unanimous -cons
t th
t f
th
en
a
ur
er
by the Tennessee Valley Authority in That has to do with the control of reading of the amendment be dis-
w .n _
_
--
- time in onnnsitinn -to the Rannnrio
nce -- .LL._
o
TV
t
f
-
acc
rd
merit amendment is offered. I will- not now =lain
for TVA personnel, as estab- do that
but I will confer with the mi- The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
li
h
d b
h
,
s
e
y t
e TVA Ant ?are notaffect
, ?- nority leader and make sure he has no out objection, it isso ordered.
ed by S. 2240, as I understand it. Fur-
The amendment i
f
ll
s as
o
ows:
objection to it
. they, S. 2240, the Federal Employees I think the intention of the order At the appropriate place in the bill, insert
Compressed Work Schedules Act of ??, 44-
_ _______ _,the following:
if
th
t
of the Federal labor-management rela- offered, the time in opposition would Work Hours~ StandardsW Act Vy(40 VU.S.C
tions law of chapter 71 to cover agen- be 'under -the control of Senator from 328(a)) is amended to read as follows:
ties, like TVA, which are not now cov- Colorado (Mr..ARMSTRONG). The way it "(a) Notwithstanding any other provision
ered. is written at this _ time, it would be of law, the- wages of every laborer and me-
that is a problem - but it- is a matter any contract of the character specified in
RECESS=. IL 1P.'M. which has been brought to my atten- section 103 shall be computed on the basis
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we tine and T will consult n,;tln th
,,;., of a standard workweek of forty hours, and
e
d
one-
matter and we do not wish to disturb one an
I yield the floor. half times the basic rate of pay, for 'all
the meeting of the Committee on Fi- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who hours worked in excess of forty hours in the
nance. yields time? The Senator from Alaska workweek.".
. Therefore, with the understanding Mr: STEVENS. Mr. President, may I edh> Section 102(b) of such Act is amend-
hat it has been approved by the dis- inquire is the Senator from Colorado (1) by striking out "eight hours in any cal-
inguished m nori+ythaeadern I ask prepared to proceed with his amend- endar day or in excess of" in paragraph (1);
tand in recess until 1p m. Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I a. (2) by striking out "eight hours or in
There being no objection, the am prepared. excess ofin paragraph (2).
enate, at 12:05 p.m. recessed until 1 Could I just inquire as to what the Sec. . Subsection (c) of the first section
.in., whereupon the Senate reassem- status. of time is -at the moment_ how of the Act entitled "An Act to provide condi-
iding Officer (Mir. ScmuiTT). The PRESIDING OFFICER. The king of contracts by the United States,
d f
"
or other purposes
(41 U.S.C. 35 (c)),
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who Senator from Alaska has 1.1 minutes, an
commonly known as the Walsh-Healey Act,
ields time? The majority leader is rec- the Senator from Missouri has 7 min- is amended by striking out "eight hours in
gnized. utes. any one day or in excess of".
Aooroved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
S 7644 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE June 30, 1982
Sec. . The amendments made by this Act trend will continue throughout the Denver Regional Council of Govern-
shall not affect collective bargaining agree- 1980's as life styles and family struc- ments in cooperation with the Denver
ments in effect on the date of enactment of tures are changing. Employers who re- . Federal Executive Board, examining
this Act. spond creatively to these new condi- the, travel habits of some 7,000 Federal
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, tions will have the competitive edge. employees on the compressed work
we are proceeding under controlled Unfortunately, the Federal regula- schedule in Denver. To date, this
time, and I yield myself 10 minutes. tions have not kept pace with the study is the only in-depth investiga-
Mr. President, the_proposal to create changing society. Moreover, the un- tion which applies the full travel
a permanent statutory authority for necessary and outdated restriction has impact resulting from an experiment
alternative work schedules for Federal brought extra costs to the Govern- of this size. The study concludes that
employees is now before the Senate ment. In a report to the Congress by the compressed workweek is one of the
for consideration. The Office of Per- the Comptroller General (Contractors most effective transportation manage-
sonnel and Management created and Use of Altered Work Schedules for ment actions that- Denver's Federal
evaluated work schedules that vary Their Employees-How is it Working? agencies can take in addressing the
from the conventional workweek and April 1976), the Department of Labor concern of air pollution and traffic
found them beneficial to agencies, em- cited one instance of an organization congestion. It has been estimated that
ployees, and the public. They conclud- utilizing a 4-day work schedule, that neither providing free transit service
ed that alternative work schedules can negotiated a contract with the Gov- at peak periods for everyone in ; the
improve the productivity of an organi- ernment and included about $240,000 area, nor an extensive and complicated
zation and increase its service to the in overtime and associated costs in the program of carpool - matching would
public without additional costs. contract price because of the overtime even equal the impact on air pollution
I- support this concept and, indeed, I payment required by the Walsh- that resulted from only 7,000 employ-
congratulate the Senator from Alaska Healey Act. The legislation also re- ees on a compressed workweek.
and others who have brought this leg- duces the number of bids on Govern- It is easy to imagine what might
islation to the floor because, in my. ment contracts. The Department of result if all employees of f Federal con-
opinion, there are many instances in Defense and the General Services Ad- tractors 'in the area,- which easily
which this flexitime concept for Fed- ministration, who both do a large -number twice that-of the Federal em-
eral- employees is not only in the best amount of contracting for the Govern- ployees In the study, were allowed the
interests of the' employees but also en- - meat, supported legislative changes in option of shifting to a 4-day work-
hances the productivity of the Gov- the Walsh-Healey Act and Contract week schedule.
ernment itself. Work Hours and Safety Standards Act A change in the Walsh-Healey Act
I -feel we must also, however, offer for this reason. would not-in any way affect.the Fair.
that same kind of option to the Feder- Mr. President, this amendment has Labor Standards Act, which governs
al contractors in the. private sector. one objective and one aim. To allow- all workers and provides that overtime
The concept of increased productivity, Federal contractors the option of al- premiums be paid whenever employees
energy savings, and improved employ- ternative work. schedules. I, stress we work more than 40 hours a week. My
ee morale-through use of a compressed are talking only about an option. This amendment would not impact the col-
workweek is embraced both- in my requires no company and no elnpolyee lective bargaining process, nor would it
amendment to the Walsh-Healey Act- to change their existing work sched- conflict with any of the Federal labor
which governs Federal contractors- ule. It merely says in those instances. laws. Nothing in. this amendment is'to
and in this legislation to reauthorize where employees and their companies be construed to cover employees other
the Government's flexitime program. wish to do so they may adopt: a 10- ' than those- employees specified- in the
With these legislative proposals more hour 4-day workweek or some other Walsh-Healey Act 'and the Contract -
or -less identical in concept, Congress - version of a workweek without incur- Work Hours and -Safety Standards
has a- golden opportunity to update a ring overtime until the total hours Act. Finally, this amendment does not
relic of the past.. worked' within the workweek exceed mandate a compressed workweek, but
The amendment I offer today simply 40 hours. only, restores to American firms and
permits Federal contractors the option This, I stress, is exactly the same their employees serving the Federal
of insitituting flexible work schedules provision that now governs ? every Government a basic option, a basic
without'- facing penalty. The adminis- other private sector firm and employ- freedom of choice.
tration and many. Senators have ex- ee. President, the Government em-
pressed their support for the legisla- The benefits of flexitime, however, Mr.
l
e
Flexible Work Gthe overnment
Employees are eager the
see It is needed primarily to bring go far beyond less Government inter- ployees;
Schedules
the laws governing Federal contrac- ference in the private sector. There Act m
tors into conformity with current over- are, at least for-some companies, dis- Abecome permanent. k Sc We have.,
time provisions and flexibility pro- tinct advantages in choosing to imple- i many of the unions and
testify to that effect. h u workers
vided to private sector employees, and, ment the alternative work schedule. ttethe employees In The the same private true
e
if the legislation before us passes, to. Numerous studies have been conduct-
Federal employees themselves. Specifi- ed on the optional compressed work- tors who are working on Federal con- .
cally, the -proposal amends parts of week, including those done by the tracts. Many private. sector collective
two statutes which regulate pay stand- Comptroller General, the Bureau of bargaining agreements across the
ards for Government contractors: The Labor Statistics, and the National Nation encompass the 4-day, 10-hour
Walsh-Healey Act and the Contract Center for Energy Management and workweek. In my own State of Colora-
Work Hours and Safety Standards Power. do,-many labor contracts include pro-
Act. Those laws presently. mandate Among the conclusions are the fol- visions fora compressed workweek and
that "no persons employed by Federal lowing: That in some cases, at least, are merely awaiting action by Con-
contractors shall be permitted to work greater productivity is realized- gress to update the law in the way
ests
t s
d
h
.
men
ugg
at my amen
in excess of eight hours in any one day higher weekly output, improved use of t
without payment of time and one half plant and equipment and improved In my opinion, it is only fair. for Fed-
for overtime." employee morale; improved working eral contractors to have the same ad-
Since the 1930's, when the Walsh- conditions-reduced employment vantages that private sector and Gov-
'Healey and Contract Work Hours and working costs, increased job satisfac- ernment employees do. If that 'is ever
Safety Standards 'Acts were enacted, tion; and ease of recruitment; and to be accomplished, this is the time to
employer and employee needs and de- energy conservation. do it, because It relates, in concept, so
sires have changed. Today more than - One advantage of particular interest directly to the legislation which is now
one-fifth of the labor force is function- to me deals with the problem of air pending before us. -
ing under flexible, compressed, or vol- pollution. We now have evidence, -as a '_ ' Mr. President, in conclusion, I would
untarily reduced work schedules. This result of a study released by the like to point out that- this amendment
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 or Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
June 90, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
is supported by the administration, by
the National Association of Manufac-
turers, the U.S. Chamber of Com-
merce, the Business Roundtable,
NFIB, and dozens of other associ-
ations and individual companies, a list
of which I ask unanimous consent be
printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the list
was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
ASSOCIATIONS
National Association of Manufacturers.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Business Roundtable.
N.F.I.B.
American Apparel Manufacturing Associ-
ation.
American Horse Council.
American Motorcyclists Association.
American Recreation Coalition.
American` Textile Manufacturers Insti-
tute, Inc.
Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.
Associated General Contractors of Amer-
ica.
Electronic Industries Association.
International Snowmobile Industry Asso-
ciation.
National Meat Association.
National Marine Manufacturing Associ-
ation.
National Motor Sports Committee.
National Spa and Pool Institute.
Printing Industries of America.
Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association.
Recreation Vehicle Industry Association.
United States Ski Association.
OTHERS
A. H. Robins.
ALCOA.
Ball Corporation.
Bristol Myers Corporation.
Burlington Industries.
C. A. Norgren and Company.
Dow Chemical U.S.A.
E. I. duPont de Nemours and Co.
General Telephone and Electronics Co.
JLG Industries.
Mobil Oil Corporation.
Motorola, Inc.
Spring Mills, Inc.
TRW, Incorporated.
Uniroyal, Inc.
United Technologies Corporation.
Upjohn Company.
Xerox Corporation.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
reserve the remainder of my time.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the
amendment of the distinguished Sena-
tor from Colorado is an interesting
amendment and one . that deserves
review by the Senate and by the Con-
gress. But I say to the Senate that it
should not be on this bill.
This is a bill from the Governmental
Affairs Committee. When we go to
conference we will be going to confer-
ence with the Post Office and Civil
Service Committee in the House. Our
old Post Office and Civil Service Com-
mittee was folded into the Govern-
mental Affairs Committee reorganiza-
tions several years ago. Our subcom-
mittee now has the same jurisdiction
as the House full committee.
The Armstrong amendment will
jeopardize the passage of this flexi-
time legislation. The current experl-
mental legislation expires for most
agencies on July 21. The House of
Representatives will not return until
July 12. They will have only a week to
dispose of this legislation. We have re-
ceived assurances that if we amended
the bill in the manner that we have al-
ready amended it, that the House
would attempt to pass our bill without
amendments. This amendment will
mean that it will involve the jurisdic-
tion of two committees in the House
and will undoubtedly see that this bill
would be referred to those two com-
mittees and that would be the end of
flexitime for Federal employees.
In addition to that, let me point out
to the Senate that the Armstrong
amendment does not contain the pro-
tections afforded the Federal employ-
ees to insure that an alternative work
schedule is not imposed upon them.
Our bill, S. 2240, provides full negotia-
tion over the establishment and termi-
nation of flexitime where a union is
involved.
If there is no union, a majority of
the employees in the unit must vote to
agree with an agency decision to estab-
lish a particular schedule. Despite
union representation, or a majority
consent, as the case may, be, an em-
ployee who would experience personal
hardship from the schedule can be
exempted. This employee has recourse
to the Special Counsel of the Merit
System Protection Board if the agency
does not exempt him. Unfortunately,
the Armstrong amendment does not,
and I do not think it could, provide
these kinds of protections because of
the mechanisms that are already in
the Federal law to deal with such ex-
emptions for particular employees.
Now, my plea to the Senate is not to
attach this amendment to this particu-
lar bill. It is within the jurisdiction of
the Labor Committee. I understand
that there is similar legislation in the
Labor Committee. The only result
that can happen is either the House
will strip such an amendment off and
send it back here or the House will be
forced to refer this bill to the two com-
mittees as I indicated.
The Senator is attempting to con-
form the requirements of the Walsh-
Healey Act to the Fair Labor Stand-
ards Act and, as I understand it, he
wants to substitute for the 8-hour
workday restriction the 40-hour work-
week for Federal contractors.
It is, as I indicated, in my opinion a
subject that needs to be pursued. The
Walsh-Healey Act applies only to Fed-
eral contractors. It requires overtime
to be paid for hours in excess of 8
hours a day. That, however, is com-
pletely foreign to the concepts of flexi-
time as they apply to Federal employ-
ees, and the impact of this would be,
as I indicated, in my opinion, to
jeopardize the passage of the flexitime
bill. We will- not have the time to save
'those compressed work schedules that
had _ been instituted during the period
of the experiment. It would require us
to address the matter entirely in a dif-
ferent way. We just cannot handle
this in negotiation with the people
S 7645
that we would be compelled to meet
with if this matter were sent to confer-
ence.
But I state to the Senate that in my
opinion the House would not go to
conference on this bill. There is no
reason for-the House Post Office and
Civil Service Committee to tackle the
problems of the Walsh-Healey Act.
Does the Senator from Missouri desire
to comment?
Mr. EAGLETON. Yes.
Mr. STEVENS. I yield to the Sena-
tor from Missouri such time as he may
wish.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I
join with the distinguished floor man-
ager, Senator STEVENS, in urging that
Senator ARMSTRONG'S amendment to
this bill, which amends the Walsh-
Healey and Contract Work Hours
Standards Acts, be tabled. I do so for
both procedural and substantive rea-
sons.
First, Senator ARMSTRONG'S amend-
ment is not germane to the Federal
flexitime bill. An amendment to the
Walsh-Healey Act has absolutely
nothing to do with extension of Feder-
al flexitime programs. In fact, adop-
tion of the Armstrong amendment will
seriously jeopardize the prospects for
enacting this continuation of the Fed-
eral flexitime program, a topic just
discussed by Senator STEVE NS.
Second, Senator ARMSTRONG Intro-
duced a bill which is virtually identical
to the pending amendment on Febru-
ary 5, 1981; it is still pending before
the full Labor and Human Resources
Committee.
No full committee executive session
has ever been scheduled on this legis-
lation. In seeking to add his amend-
ment to the flexitime bill, Senator
ARMSTRONG is attempting to bypass
full committee consideration by the
committee of jurisdiction.
Finally, Mr. President, I would point
out that while Senator 'ARMSTRONG
likes to suggest that this amendment
is needed "to bring the laws governing
Federal contractors into conformity
with current overtime provisions and
flexibility in work schedules provided
to private sector employees, and ironi-
cally, to Federal employees them-
selves," the amendment differs from
the Federal flexitime bill in a very sig-
nificant way. The Federal flextime bill
contains a number of provisions de-
signed to insure employee free choice
in selecting alternative work schedules
or a compressed work week.
I emphasize the words "employee
free choice."
Senator ARMSTRONG'S' amendment
does not include a comparable protec-
tion for private sector employees. Al-
though his amendment states that it
will not affect collective-bargaining
agreements in effect on the date of en-
actment, it does not provide any mech-
anism for unorganized employees to
have a voice in determining their work
schedules. The unorganized worker
would have no choice but to simply
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-000038000300070004-0
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-000038000300070004-0
S 7646
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --SENATE -June 30, 1982
quit his job if he could -not, for family
reasons, or child care arrangements, or
whatever, adjust to increased hours in
the work day.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who
seeks time?
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
yield to the Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. WALLOP. I thank the Senator
from Colorado.
Mr. President, I rise in support of
his amendment. I would point out to
the distinguished Senator from Alaska
that because the House threatens us
with inability or a lack of desire to act,
there is no reason for us not to do
something which, in our judgment, is
right. I believe that we should do what
our intellect in the Senate tells us we
should do, and that we should not
worry about threats from the House,
whether they will-or will not take up a
certain thing. They have as much re-
sponsibility and accountability to the-
Federal employees who they seek to
respond to as we do.
If they leave us with nothing but
threats, so be it. It would be their
threats and their inability to act, or
their lack of desire to act, or their ob-
stinance -in the face of these threats,
that would be the troublesome factor
to, the Federal employee, not that of
the Senate, if it is, in-fact, the Senate's
ideas.
Mr. President, as I said, I rise in sup-
port of the amendment offered by my
distinguished colleague from Colorado.
The amendment would permit Federal
private contractors to utilize a 4-day,
40-hour workweek. The Walsh-Healey
Act currently limits the ability of pri-
vate industry to employ innovative
work schedules. While the limits of
the act may have been appropriate
back in `the 1930's, there is a need to
modernize this provision to reflect the
changing work force of the 1980's. -
In recent years, a number of compa-
nies have successfully implemented a 4
.day, 40-hour work schedule. The.flexi-
bility it-provides to both employer and
employee is an important incentive for
a more productive workplace. These
experiments have not succeeded in all
cases. Trial and error demonstrate
where such a programis appropriate.
This amendment will greatly expand
the number of firms that can utilize
the 4-day .workweek:
The issue -has been .before the Con-
gress for 10 years. Our former col-
league from Kentucky, Senator
Marlow Cook, was the original propo-
nent of this legislation. I congratulate
my colleague from Colorado for his-ef-
forts in seeking passage of this legisla-
tion.
Our economy is at a crossroads. Last
year, we adopted tax incentives to
reindustrialize privai=e industry. We
need to adopt techniques which will
improve productivity and innovation.
Our economy is faced with an aging
work force. There are. also more
women in the workplace.- Flexibility in
work schedules is necessary as - we
return -to. a full growth economy. The
4-day, 40=hour workweek bill is one
small step. Another improvement is
the compensatory time legislation
which I introduced Parlier this year.
This legislation, S. 2395, would permit
companies to maintain their work
force throughout the year even when
there are peaks and troughs in work
orders. I will not offer my proposal as
an amendment today, but do hope
that we can address the issue in- the
near future. -
For the moment, I would urge my
colleagues to votein favor of the pend-
ing amendment.
Ythank the Senator from Colorado
for yielding.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
am grateful to the Senator from Wyo-
ming for his observations, with which
I fully agree.
Mr. President, I now yield 10 min-
utes to the Senator from Oklahoma. I
would note in doing so, that the Sena-
tor is extraordinarily well Informed on
this issue, having presided at the hear-
ings -held by the Subcommittee on
Labor on this subject.
Mr. NICKLES. I thank the Senator
from Colorado.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that Senator HELMS and I may be
added as cosponsors to the Armstrong
amendment.' .
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I rise
in support of the Armstrong amend-
ment. As the Senator from Colorado
stated, the subcommittee of which I
am chairman, the Subcommittee on
Labor, held extensive hearings on this
matter in March 1981. We have con-
vincing evidence-from a number of sec-
tors-private, public, union, and non-
union-that we -need changes in the
Walsh-Healey Act amendments which
now mandate the payment of overtime
for anything over 8 hours.
In investigating this, we find out
that under the present statutes, all
private employers who are not doing
Government work do not have to pay
overtime until they exceed 40 hours of
work. We find out the Government
employees are allowed to have flexi-
time. But we also find out that those
persons who are doing work for the
Federal Government, Federal contrac-
tors, are obligated under this so-called
mandatory overtime over 8 hours.
What does that mean? I think it is
important for people to realize that
-they have to pay overtime for over 8
hours a day; and you are -doing con-
tract work for the Federal Govern-
ment, if you wanted to work four _10-
hour days. I think that is evident by
the statement of the Senator from
Alaska saying, "Yes, flexitime -works,
it does work," but there are :a lot of
cases where it does work and a lot of
cases where it will not work, where
:employees have opted to do so.
In those cases where the employees
find it is to their economic. advantage,
to their time advantage, to their
family advantage, to work. four 10, or
some other flexible schedule besides
the 5 days, right now they find out if
they are doing Federal . contract work
they cannot do so because their em-
ployer cannot compete.
Why can they not compete? Figure
it up. If you work four 10-hour days
and you are obligated to pay time-and-
a-half over 8, the cost of working 40
hours is not 40 hours but it is 44
hours, . because you pay time-and-a-
half for 2 hours over 8 for 4 days.
It is time-and-a-half for those 8
hours, and that half-time premium is 4
hours. Instead of paying for 40 hours,
you pay for '44 hours. In other words;
it is a. 10-percent premium.
You realize this if you are doing
Federal construction or contract work,
if it is labor intensive. Usually in con-
struction you are looking at two pri-
mary costs, the ' materials; which are
somewhat fixed -for all contractors,
and labor. You find out if you are
doing Federal.contract work you have
a 10-percent premium added on,. man-
dated by the. Federal Government. It
makes-no sense.
Why should a Federal contractor be
under a different law than all other
private contractors? -If they do private
work, they are not mandated by it, but
if they do Federal work they are man-
dated by it. It makes no-sense.
I think Senator STEVENS and the
Senator from Missouri realize the fal-
lacy of this. They may say, "Yes, for
Federal employees, we will allow flexi-
time." I congratulate them -on it. I
think there has been some productiv-
ity increase and morale increase that
have been advantageous. But why are
we going to prohibit that from private
tion to the Armstrong amendment is
based on agruments that just will not
stand up when they are closely exam-
ined. Today, I -would like to discuss-the
. The purpose of the Armstrong
amendment is to alter the Walsh-
Healey Act to permit the employees of
'Federal contractors the same flexitime
-scheduling rights as those enjoyed by
conclusion:
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
S 7647
Walsh-Healey Act and the Contract Work nevertheless important part of the There being no objection, the letter
Hours and Safety Standards Act comparable American economy. was ordered to be printed in the
to that of the Fair Labor Standards Act,
namely to permit work in any combination Opponents of the Armstrong amend- RECORD, as follows:
of hours per day without paying overtime ment have offered many reasons for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
until hours exceed 40 per week. This legisla-. not supporting this measure. Some Washington, D.C., June 16, 1982.
tive language would be consistent with the have charged that collective bargain- Hon. DoN NICKLES,
administration's view that the act should be ing will be undermined. This criticism Chairman, Subcommittee on Labor,
amended to permit labor and management is both unfair and inaccurate. CO11eC- U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in re-
to implement flexible worktime arrange- tive bargaining will not be' affected by sponse to your request for the Administra-
ments that could enhance the quality of the Armstrong amendment. Others tion's views on (a) Senator Armstrong's bill,
worklife, promote energy efficiency, and in-
crease productivity. have charged that the Armstrong S. 398, to amend the Walsh-Healey Act and
h
Flexible work schedules have been
proven to have .several distinct advan-
tages. First, they have resulted in in-
creased productivity. Second, there
have been reductions in absences and
tardiness. 'on the part of workers.
Third, there have been improvements
in employee morale. Fourth, there has
been a better utilization of resources.
Fifth, there has been a reduction in
energy requirements. Finally, employ-
ers and employees have both benefited
in several ways. Employers have been
free to experiment with new time
schedules that allow for both imagina-
tion and innovation. Employees have
been able to arrange their schedules so
that they can have 3-day weekends,
take advantage of educational oppor-
tunities, and spend more time with
their families. To date, flexible work
schedules have provided distinct ad-
vantages to both employers and em-
ployees.
The Armstrong amendment which.
we are considering today would simply
eliminate the 8-hour-per-day restric-
tion of the Walsh-Healey Act that ap-
plies only to the employees of Federal
contractors. It eliminates the restric-
tion but does not compel the adoption
of flexible work schedules. All we are
doing here is providing the employees
of Federal contractors the same oppor-
tunity to have flexible work schedules,
that their counterparts in the Federal
Government and private industry al-
ready possess. Thus, Senator ARM-
STRONG'S amendment merely elimi-
nates a discriminatory situation that
has prevailed in recent years in this
area. Moreover, it frees Federal. con-
tractors to devise ways and' means to
cut costs and increase worker nroduc-
e Contract Work Hours and Safety Stand-
amendment, . by undermining the 8- t
hour day, will lead to an attack on the ards Act to provide federal contractors with
measures that protect workers from Increased flexibility in alternative workweek
being exploited by unscrupulous em- scheduling and (b) a subsequent modifica-
398 a t t which attaching to S S. 2 Son. 2240, the Armstrong flexi-
ployers. This criticism is again both considering of
unfair and inaccurate. This amend- time legislation.
ment is merely a small step to extend As I indicated in my July, 1981 letter to
to the employees of Federal contrac- you on the first question, the Administra-
tors the benefits of flexible work tion supports legislative reform to provide
schedules that their counterparts in federal contractors with increased flexibility
other parts of the work force already in alternative workweek scheduling. With
regard to the
enjoy. This small, but significant, step second question, let me say
that at the Administration would support the
is designed not to undermine the pro- amendment proposed by Senator Armstrong
tections enjoyed by the American to make the language of the Walsh-Healey
worker but rather to remove from Act and the Contract Work Hours and
Federal law a restriction that makes Safety Standards Act comparable to that of
no sense whatsoever. It is time for the Fair Labor Standards Act, namely to
Congress to take a close look at the permit work in any combination of hours
over regulation that has so hampered per day without paying overtime until hours
worked exceed forty per week.
the American economy in recent years. This legislative language would be consist-
The Armstrong amendment will ent with the Administration's view that the
remove one restriction that will en- Act should be amended to permit labor and
courage the innovation and imagina- management to implement flexible work
tion of which Americans are capable time arrangements that could enhance the
once restrictive and senseless regula- quality of worklife, promote energy efficien-
tions are eliminated. cy, and increase prbductivity.
The Office of Management and Budget
A final argument made by oppo- advises that there is no objection to the sub-
nents of the Armstrong amendment is mission of this letter from the standpoint of
that it could result, if adopted, in the the Administration's program.
killing of the Federal flexitime exten- Sincerely,
sion legislation proposal of Senator RAYMOND J. DONOVAN,
STEVENS. I am a cosponsor of- the earli- Secretary of Labor.
er bill sponsored by Senator STEVENS Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President,
and fully support his amendment here will the distinguished Senator from
today. Senator ARMSTRONG has a right Colorado yield to me?
to offer an amendment-an amend- Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
ment which is no more - than a con- shall be pleased to yield to the distin-
forming amendment that will allow all guished Senator from South Carolina,
employees and employers to enjoy the 3 minutes or more , he wishes.
benefits of flexible work scheduling Mr. THURMOND.I thank the Sena-
should they so choose. If the House of tor.
Representatives chooses to defeat this Mr. President, I support the amend-
legislation because the Senate enacts a ment offered by my distinguished, col-
conforming amendment, then the league and good friend from Colorado
tivity. As a result, it represents one House-I repeat, the House-and not
way in which we in this body can seek the Senate has killed this legislation.
to reduce the budget and help restore As 'Senators, we have an obligation
the economy to a sound footing, to legislate in the best interests of all
If Senator ARMSTRONG'S amendment of our constituents.. This was the
is enacted, workers and employers in vision that James Madison had when
several energy intensive industries- he argued for the national interest in
meatpacking, printing, and construc- Federalist Paper No. 51. This is the
tion, for example-all heavily orga- same vision that Senator ARMSTRONG
nized, I might point out-will be -able had when he submitted his amend-
to take advantage of flexitime and ment. I urge my colleagues to accept
compressed work-week scheduling. All the Armstrong amendment. Its bene-
industries and all workers would not fits will be enjoyed by many people as
be inclined to take advantage of a time passes and at this time, it best
Walsh-Healey change. Those most serves the national interest of the
likely to do so can generally be catego- United States. Acts, Federal contractors are subject
rized as small and energy intensive. I ask unanimous consent that a to overtime liability whenever an em-
This was made clear at hearings held letter to me concerning this matter plbyee works in excess of 8 hours ' a
early last year before the Labor Sub- from Secretary of Labor Raymond J. day.
committee. Consequently, this amend- Donovan, be printed at this point in Last year, Senator ARMSTRONG intro-
ment would only affect a small but the RECORD. - duced a bill, S. 398, which would have
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
(Mr. ARMSTRONG). This amendment
would conform the overtime provi-
sions of the Walsh-Healey and Con-
tract Work Hours and Safety Acts to
those of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Mr. President, under the Fair Labor
Standards Act, most employers may
adopt flexible work schedules condu-
cive to their business needs without in-
curring liability for overtime compen-
sation, unless employees are required
to work in excess of 40 hours in a cal-
endar week. Unfortunately, this.is not
the case where Federal contractors are
concerned. Under the Walsh-Healey
and Contract Work Hours and Safety
 S-7648
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-.0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE Juite 30, 1982
-permitted Federal contractors to: -engineering operations, and seven of the 13
adopt a 10-hour, 4-day workweek firms with construction :capability used for
Fi
f th
it
i
b
schedule without incurring overtime
liability. I felt that-was a significant
improvement over the present situa-
tion, and I joined.as a cosponsor.
The amendment Senator ARMSTRONG
offers today is one step better than
.the bill -introduced by him last year. It
would strike all reference to 8-hour
days in the overtime provisions of the
Walsh-Healey . and Contract Work
Hours -and Safety Acts, and provide
that wages for workers on Federal con-
tracts will be computed on the basis of
a standard workweek of 40 hours.
'With this change, only work in excess
of such standard workweek will be
considered as overtime.
Mr. President, not only will this
amendment help to increase worker
productivity and thereby reduce labor
costs on "Federal contracts, it also
should contribute to worker satisfac-
.?tion and. morale by enhancing leisure
time for employees. Accordingly, I
commend this amendment to my col-
leagues as an appropriate adjunct to
the Federal :Employees Flexible and
Compressed Work Schedules Act.
Mr. President, if there is no objec-
tion, I ask that I be added as a cospon-
sor. -
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President,
not -only is there no 'objection to
adding the Senator as a cosponsor;- I
.
e
am delighted -that he -chooses to assn- included practical problems-on jobsites-such
ciate himself with this effort in that as.additional lighting costs, lessened effec-
way. . tiveness during winter months and on job-
I ask unanimous consent that the sites in remote regions where housing is pro-
Senator be added, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection,. it is so ordered.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President,
unless others wish to speak, I have yet
a little -business to complete before. I
yield the floor.
First, I ask for the yeas and nays on
e
es.
ve o
r jo
s
10-hour days on the
six .construction firms on a standard sched-
ule are union companies. The survey was
conducted by T. Michael Goodrich.. vice
president of BE&K, Inc., Birmingham, Ala.
Companies using a compressed work
schedule reported that its advantages far
outweigh disadvantages, and none said that
they intended to abandon the system. It is
the "greatest thing since sliced bread,"
quipped one contractor executive whose
firm uses four-10's on jobsites and "four-
nines and a four" for office workers.
He and others responding to the survey
-noted that worker acceptance of the sched-
ules is almost universal, with- productivity
increasing and absenteeism declining dra-
matically. Workers, they said, "love -it" be-
cause, of the longer-periods of leisure time,
reduced travel expenditures and enhanced
"job satisfaction." It has also become an ef-
fective recruitment-tool,-observed some ex-
ecutives.
Construction firms were especially enthu-
siastic about" the use of four-10s on their
projects, explaining that cost . savings were
achieved-by the elimination of one start=up
and shutdown a week. The firms also
claimed they, could control contruction
schedules more effectively by using Fridays
as a makeup day for -weather delays and
using a second three-day shift for more ex-
tensive delays.
However, there are :some hang-ups in
using compressed workweeks. Problems
mentioned-most frequently in the survey re-
sponses centered on those caused by a firm's
interaction with clients, suppliers and other
Others
a different schedule
divisions - using
vided for workers, and child-care problems
for working parents.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I also ask unani-
mous consent to have printed in the
RECORD -a .letter to me - from the Na-
tional - Federation - of Independent
Businesses, which represents some
:600,000 individuals 'and businesses : in
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there a sufficient -second?-There. is a
sufficient second. -
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr: President, I
have a couple of other matters to take
care of. Then I do want to recognize
the junior -Senator from Oklahoma
again. -
I send to the desk an article from
the 'Engineering News Record about
firms who. favor the compressed work-
week. I ask unanimous consent that
the article "be printed in the RECORD at
this point.
There being no objection,'the article
was ordered to be printed in the-
RECORD, as follows:
(From Engineering News Record, June 24,
1982]
MANY FIRMS.FAVORING COMPRESSED
WORKWEEK
Alternative -work schedules that squeeze
more working hours into fewer days, such as
"four-lo's,"'are becoming increasingly popu-
lar with large design and construction firms,
a new survey reveals.
Of the 18 union and nonunion firms.,ex-
amined, nine worked some form of com-
pressed workweek in their home office and
this amendment; also, , a letter from
the administration in which the ad-
ministration endorses and expresses
its support for the amendment; a reso-
lution signed by some 35 businesses
and associations in-which they endorse
the amendment; a discussion of this
matter in- a -memorandum to Members
of the Senate from the Chamber of
Commerce of the -United States, in
-which they -respectfully urge. Senators
to support the amendment and give
their reasons why; finally; a letter
from the National Association of Man-
ufacturers, in which they endorse the
.amendment and express support for it.
I ask unanimous consent -that all
these items be printed in the RECORD
at this point. - -
There being no objection, the mate-
rial was ordered tobe printed in the
'RECORD, as follows:
-NATIONAL FEDERATION
OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES, .
June 29, 1982.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C
DEAR BILL: I want to express.NFIB's.sup-
port for your proposal to amend the Walsh-
Healy Act. As you know, many small em-
ployers who have agreed with their employ-
ees to institute "flextime" schedules have
been unable to contract with the federal
government because of provisions of the
Walsh-Healy Act. Your proposal will in-
crease opportunities for small business and,
therefore, make a positive contribution to
the economy.
Sincerely,
JAMES D.,"MIKE" MCKEVITT,
Director Federal Legislation.
U.S. DEPARTMENT.OF LABOR,
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Washington, D.C., June 16, 1982.
Hon. DON NICKLES,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Labor, U.S.
Senate, Washington, D.C. -
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in re-
sponse to your. request for the Administra-
tion's views on (a) Senator Armstrong's bill,
S. 398, to amend the Walsh-Healey Act and
the Contract Work Hours and Safety Stand-
ards Act to provide federal contractors with
increased flexibility in alternative workweek
---scheduling and-(b) a subsequent modifica-
tion of S. 398, which Senator Armstrong is
considering attaching to S. 2240, the flexi-
time legislation.
As I indicated in my July,-1981 letter to
you on the first question, the Administra-
tion supports legislative reform to provide
federal contractors with increased flexibility
in alternative workweek scheduling. With
regard 'to the second question, let me say
that 'the Administration would support the
.-amendment proposed by Senator Armstrong
to make the language of the Walsh-Healey
Act and the Contract Work Hours and
-Safety Standards Act comparable to.that of
the Fair Labor Standards Act, namely to
- permit work in any combination of hours
per day without paying overtime until. hours
worked exceed forty per week.
This legislative language would-be consist-
ent with the-Administration?s,.viewthat the
Act should be amended to permit labor and
management-to "implement -flexible work-
time arrangements that could enhance the
quality of worklife, promote energy efficien-
cy, and, increase productivity.
The Office of -Management and Budget
advises that there is no objection-to the sub-
mission of this letter from. the standpoint-of
the Administration's program.
Sincerely,
RAYMOND J. DONOVAN.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF.LABOR,
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Washington, D.C., June 25, 1981.
Hon. DON NICKLES, - - -
Chairman, Subcommittee on Labor, Com-
mittee on-Labor and Human Resources,
U.S.Senate, Washington,.D.C. -
"DEAR CHAIRMAN NICKLES: - This is. 'to rex-
press the views of .the-Department-of Labor
on S. 398, abill "(t)o .amend the Walsh=
Healey and the Contract Work Hours,
Standards Act to permit certain employees
to.work'a ten-hour day in.the case of a four-
day workweek." "
The Department of. Labor -supports suffi-
cient flexibility in the-contract labor stand-
ards. statutes. to permit management and
labor-to implement new worktime.arrange-
mepts that could enhance the quality of
-worklife, promote energy efficiency, and -in-
-crease productivity. "
We understand that -some, workers are in-
terested in new worktime arrangements
which can result in greater time -available
for family and other personal activities. We
also recognize that our Nation's employers
are interseted in worktime arrangements
which can maintain or increase employees'
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE S 7649
job satisfaction while creating energy sav- Xerox Corporation. competitive bids (and thus reduced federal
ings and more, productive -results than con- costs), and (2) increasing competition for
ventional arrangements. A number of our CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE federal contracts (by making wage-hour re-
Nation's employers and their employees UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, quirements consistent across-the-board,
have been trying some of these unconven- Washington, June 29, 1982. eliminating a disincentive to potential bid-
tional work arrangements. At your Subcom- To: Members of the Senate. - . ders.)
mittee on Labor's March hearings, it was From: Hilton Davis, Vice President, Legisla- Elimination of these restrictive Walsh-
noted that contracts providing for a four- tive and Political Affairs. - Healey requirements is particularly a'ppro-
day, 10-hour day workweek have been Subject: Senator Armstrong's Flexitime priat-e and sensitive to our economy's needs
signed with labor organizations in the con- Amendment to S. 2240. at this time of government budget-cutting
struction industry in Alabama, Florida, The Senate will soon consider S. 2240, the and energy conservation.
Kentucky, Louisiana; Ohio, Oklahoma, Federal Employees Flexible and Com- It is also noteworthy that in the private
Texas, and Utah. pressed Work' Schedules Act of 1982, . sector, alternative workweek schedules are
The Federal law's contract overtime pay reauthorizing the 1978 Act which provides gaining popularity with both employers and
requirement for work over eight hours in a the option of flexible work schedules to fed- employees. Furthermore, there is a current
day in effect precludes the use of unconven- eral employees-the. same flexibility that trend toward these provision's in collective
tional worktime arrangements by employers private sector employers and employees are bargaining agreements.
and employees subject to these laws. More. assured' by the Fair Labor Standards Act. Finally, S. 2240 is an appropriate and nec-
over, the existence of this requirement may However, one segment of the American e'ssary vehicle for these much-needed re-
tend to discourage experimentation with workforce is denied the right to opt for al- forms because its subject and provisions are
these arrangements by_ others who are not tern ative workweek -schedules without over- similar. In fact, the Armstrong amendment
currently subject to Federal legal con- time penalties-federal contractors. - serves the exact goals and objectives that S.
straints. - Federal contractors need -that flexibility. 2240 serves.
We support legislative action to remove - Senator Armstrong intends to introduce an I strongly urge you to support Senator
the present disincentives so that Federal amendment to S., 2240 on the Senate floor Armstrong's amendment, to oppose any
contractors, and their -employees, can move to accomplish that end.
forward together, as can other employers The Armstrong amendment would permit effort to weaken or alter it, and to support
innnvat.ive work ceheAnlra without Aaily . S. 2240 as amended.
The Office of Management and Budget
-advises that there is no objection to the sub-
mission of this letter from the standpoint of
the Administration's program. .
Sincerely,
RAYMOND J. DONOVAN.
To meet the needs of today's workforce
and current economic realities, the follow-
ing associations and companies strongly sup- -
The'Walsh-Healey Act singles out federal
port legislative reform of the Walsh Healey contractors to impose a daily overtime pre-
Act and the Contract Work Hours Act to mium for hours worked 'in excess of an
provide flexibility in the day to day. schedul-- eight-hour day. For all other employers, pri-
ing of employees, working on federal con vate and public, overtime is required only
tracts:
for hours worked in excess of a 40-hour
A. H. Robins; workweek. Walsh-Healey prevents federal
ALOCA;
contractors from adopting; for example, a
American Apparel Manufacturing Associ- work schedule of. four ten-hour days or
ation; three thirteen-hour days, instead of the
American Horse Council; more common five eight-hour day workweek
American Motorcyclists Association; schedule. -
American-Recreation Coalition; Numerous studies, including a 1976 Gener-
American Textile Manufacturers Insti al A---ti- nrri- .o,,,,.+
It would benefit employees, employers, and
- the federal government, and would elimi-
nate the wage-hour discrimination against
federal contractors.
On behalf of the Chamber's. more than
250;000 members, I respectfully urge you to
.support the Armstrong amendment - and
eliminate the costly and inequitable daily
overtime requirements which now apply
ica; The Armstrong amendment would not - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Ball Corporation; only rectify the inconsistencies and inequi- SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Bristol Myers Company; ties of the current law; it would encourage Wahington, D.C., June 16, 1982.
Burlington Industries; federal contractors to use compressed work- Hon. DON NICKLES,
Business Roundtable;- weeks. Compressed workweeks: . Chairman, Subcommittee on Labor, U.S.
?" ?`' strated that flexible or alternative work-
Associated Builders and Contractors, -Inc.; week schedules - benefit both management
Associated General Contractors of Amer. and workers -
C.A. Norgren & Company;
Dow Chemical U.S.A.; -
E. I. duPont de Nemours & Company;
Electronic Industries Association;
General Telephone and Electronics Cor-
poration; - -
International Snowmobile Industry Asso-
ciation;
JLG Industries;
Mobil Oil Corporation;
Motorola Inc.;
National Association of Manufacturers;
National Meat Association;
National Marine Manufacturing Associ-
ation;
National Motor Sports Committee;
National Spa and Pool Institute;
Printing Industries of America;
Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association;
Recreation Vehicle Industry Association;
Springs Mills Inc.;'
TRW, Incorporated;
Uniroyal, Inc.;
U.S. Chamber of Commerce;
United States Ski Association;
United Technologies Corporation;
Upjohn Company; .
ployee morale, (2) providing more opportu-
nity for extended leisure time, (3) improving
performance by increasing productivity and
enhancing quality of worklife, (4) decreas-
ing job dissatisfaction, (5) permitting in-
creased employer responsiveness to employ-
ee desires, (6) reducing employee working
costs (such a commuting fares, restaurant
lunches, and child care), and (7) providing
more accessibility to the - workplace for
women with children;
Benefit employers by (1) decreasing over-
time costs, (2) increasing employee produc-
tivity (due largely to reduced start-up and
sumption, (4) permitting more efficient use
of physical resources, (5) enhancing person-
nel and production flexibility, (6) reducing
absenteeism, tardiness, and employee turn-
over, and (7) aiding employee recruitment
(because of the attractiveness of alterna-
tives to the five-day. eight-hour standard);
and
Benefit the federal government by (1) cre-
ating cost savings for federal contractors ?
which would be reflected in lower. and more
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF MANUFACTURERS,
June 17, 1982. -
Hon. WILLIAM L. ARMSTRONG,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR ARMSTRONG: Earlier this
week, the National Association of Manufac-
turers urged you to support an amendment
to be offered by Senator Armstrong during
the Senate's consideration of S. 2240, the
"Federal Employee Flexible and Com-
pressed Work Schedules Act of 1982."
Yesterday, the Administration voiced its
support for Senator Armstrong's amend- _
ment. Enclosed is a copy of the letter to
Senator Nickles from Secretary of Labor
Donovan - expressing the Administration's
position, underscoring the importance it at-
taches to this matter.
The NAM wishes -to reaffirm its strong
support for Senator. Armstrong's efforts. We
ask you to vote in favor of his amendment
and to support S. 2240, as amended.
Sincerely yours,
JERRY J. JASINOWSKL
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This, letter is in re-
sponse to your request for the Administra-
tion's views on (a) Senator Armstrong's bill,
S. 398, to amend the Walsh-Healey Act and
the Contract Work Hours and Safety Stand-
ards Act to provide federal contractors with
increased flexibility in alternative workweek
scheduling and (b) a subsequent modifica-
tion of S. 398, which Senator Armstrong is
considering attaching to S. 2240, the flexi-
time legislation.
As I indicaterd in my July, 1981 letter to
you on the first question, the Administra-
tion supports- legislative reform to provide
in alternative workweek scheduling. With
regard to the second question, let me say
that the Administration would support the
amendment proposed by Senator Armstrong
to make the language of the Walsh-Healey
Act and the Contract Work Hours and
Safety Standards Act comparable to that of
the Fair Labor Standards Act, namely to
permit work in any combination of hours
per day without paying overtime until hours
worked exceed forty per week.
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
S 7650
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE June 30, 1982
This. legislative language would be consist-
ent with the Administration's view that the
Act should be amended to permit labor and
management to implement flexible work-
time arrangements that could enhance the
quality of worklife, promote energy efficien-
cy, and increase productivity.
The Office of Management and Budget
advises that there is no objection to the sub-
mission of this letter from the standpoint of
the Administration's program.
Sincerely,
RAYMOND J. DONOVAN.
Mr.. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
yield to the Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the RECORD a list of some contracts
from many, many States throughout
the country. This list has grown con-
siderably since the time of our hear-
ing. It shows the number of unionized
plants that are now on flexitime. They
have something less than the 5 days. I
think most of these are listed on the
computer as having four 10-hour-day
workweeks. I ask unanimous consent
that this be printed'.
There being no objection, the
was ordered to be printed in
RECORD, as follows:
CONSTRUCTION LABOR RESEARCH
COUNCIL,
list
the
Washington, D.C., June 29, 1982.
Senator DONALD L. NICKLES,
6327 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SMlsxs: The Construction Labor
Research Council has prepared the enclosed
listing from its data files of those collective
bargaining agreements within the construc-
tion industry which permit the option of
utilizing a weekly work schedule of four
days with 10 hours of straight time work
each day.
Data are for the 1,200 contracts in CLRC's
file. They do not include contracts signed in
1982 which include the 4-10's option for the
first time. It is our understanding that a
number of agreements signed this spring
have added this provision.
Please call if we can he of any further as-
sistance.
Sincerely,
ROBERT M. GASPEROW,
Executive Director.
CRAFT CODES-
04.-Asbestos workers
08.-Boilermakers
12-Bricklayers
-
13-Bricklayers-11/11
15.-Carpenters-H/H.
16.-Carpenters
20.-Cement masons
21.-Cement masons-H/H
23.-Crane operators-H/H
24.-Crane operators
26.-Crane operators-utility
28.-Electricians
32.-Elevator constructors
33.-Floor covers
34.-Glaziers
35.-Iron workers-H/H
36-Iron workers-structural
37.-Iron workers-ornamental
38.-Iron workers-reinforcing
39.-Laborers-H/H
40.-Laborers-building
41.-Laborers-tunnel
42.-Laborers-hod carriers
44.-Lathers -
48.-Millwrights
52.-Painters
56.-Plasterers
60.-Pipefitters
64.-Plumbers
65.-Pipefitters-refrigeration
66.-Roofers
68.-Sheet metal workers
72.-Teamsters
74.-Teamsters-H/H
'76.-Tile layers
CONTRACTS WITH 4-10'8, JUNE 29, 1982
City and craft
Birmingham, Ala., 36
Birmingham, Ala., 48
Mobile, Ala., 12
Mobile, Ala., 16
Mobile, Ala., 20
Mobile, Ala., 24
Mobile, Ala., 36
Mobile, Ala., 40
Mobile, Ala., 48
Mobile, Ala., 60
Mobile, Ala., 68
Mobile, Ala., 72
Washington, D.C., 60
Jacksonville, Fla., 60
Miami, Fla., 60.
Pensacola, Fla., 16
Pensacola, Fla., 20
Tampa, Fla., 60
Boise, Idaho, 34
Ft. Wayne, Ind., 52
Louisville, Ky., 08
Alexandria, La., 40
Baton Rouge, La., 40
Baton Rouge, La., 44
Baton Rouge, La., 52
Baton Rouge, La., 60
Baton Rouge, La., 64
Baton Rouge, La., 72
Lake Charles, La., 40
New Orleans, La., 04
New Orleans, La., 24
New Orleans, La., 34
Shreveport, La:, 24 -
Akron, Ohio, 60
Muskogee, Okla., 20
Tulsa, Okla., 20
Abilene, Tex., 12
Galveston, Tex;, 12
Galveston, Tex., 20
Houston, Tex., 04 -
Houston, 'l:'ex., 06
Houston, Tex., 12
Houston, Tex., 16
Houston, Tex., 20
Houston, Tex., 33
Houston, Tex., 60
Houston, Tex., 64
Houston, Tex., 68
San Antonio, Tex.; 60
Wichita Falls, Tex., 36
Salt Lake City, Utah, 15
Salt Lake City, Utah, 21
Salt Lake City, Utah, 23
Salt Lake City, Utah, 34
Salt Lake City, Utah, 39
Salt Lake City, Utah, 40
Salt Lake City, Utah, 74
Newport News, Va., 20
Newport News, Va., 52
Newport News, Va., 56
Newport News,-Va., 60
Norfolk, Va., 04
Norfolk, Va., 12
Norfolk, Va., 16
Norfolk, Va., 40
Norfolk, Va., 52
Norfolk, Va., 60
Richmond, Va., 04
Richmond, Va., 52
Richmond, Va., 56
Richmond, Va., 60
Roanoke, Va., 04
Roanoke, Va., 52
Roanoke, Va., 60
74 records processed.
Mr, NICKLES. Also, I. wish to com-
ment on a telegram, Mr. President. At
the proper time, I shall enter this into
the RECORD. I received this today from
Mr. Kenneth Blaylock, who is national
president of the American Federation
of Government Employees. Most other
Senators, I am sure, received this
today. Mr. Blaylock urges the Senate
to vote against the Armstrong amend-
ment. He says:
Adoption of this amendment would de-
stroy the protection provided for private
sector workers under the Walsh-Healey Act
and also jeopardize passage of this legisla-
tion which continues and expands the au-
thority for the use of alternative work
schedules. Alternative work schedules have
proven-in their limited experimental use
over the past 3 years to be successful in im-
proving agency productivity and Federal
employee morale. It should be continued.
I say to my colleagues, I am some-
what perplexed about this telegram.
The logic used by Mr. Blaylock con-
fuses me. Why should we vote to con-
tinue flexitime for Federal employees
yet at the same time vote to deny even
the possibility of flexitime for the em-
ployees of private Federal contractors?
That makes no sense.
According to Mr. Blaylock, flexitime
is described by him as - a "success" for
Federal employees. However, flexitime
for private employees of Federal con-
tractors would "destroy the protection
provided--for private sector employees
under. the Walsh-Healey Act."
- Mr. Blaylock, I submit, wants to
have two kinds of flexitime, one for'
Federal employees and yet a second
which-he would deny to the employees
of private Federal contractors. -
I submit that this kind of blatant
discrimination is not only unjust but it
is un-American. This, my friends, is
the type of tactic that the opponents
of the Armstrong amendment are
forced to resort to when - the shallow
arguments that support their reason-
ing collapse of their own accord.
I think we have had enough of this -
foolishness, and I hope we vote today
to pass the Armstrong amendment
and restore a little commonsense, a
little equity to persons that are work-
ing for Federal contractors,. as well as
those who work for the Federal Gov-
ernment, as well as those who work
for private employers.
I ask unanimous consent that the
telegram be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the tele-
gram was ordered to be printed in the
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
Washington, D.C., June 29, 1982.
Hon. DON NICKLES, - -
U.S. Senate.
Washington, D.C.
On behalf of the 700,000 Federal workers
who are represented by the American Fed-
eration - of Government Employees (AFL-
CIO), I urge you to vote no on the Arm-
strong amendment to S. 2240, the Flexible
Hours and Compressed Work-Schedules Act
of 1982.
Adoption of this amendment would de-
stroy the protection provided for private
sector workers under the Walsh-Healey Act
and also jeopardize passage of this legisla-
 June 30, 1982
Approved' For Release 20,07/b5/.03: CIA-RDP85-00003R0.00300070004-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
tion which continues and expands -the au-
thority for the use of alternative work
schedules have proven-in their limited ex-
perimental use over the past 3-years-to be
success;ul in improving agency productivity.
and Federal employee morale. It should be
continued.
I urge you, therefore, to support the
motion to table the crippling Armstrong
Walsh-Healey amendment, and to vote
against the Armstrong amendment if the
motion to table fails.
KENNETH T.BLAYLOCK,. _
National President.
Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, one
additional comment.- I have heard
some people say this is antiunion, this
is antiworker. That is far from the
truth of the matter. I am in manufac-
turing. I work with employees who
work on five 8-hour days. I work with
employees who work on four ' 10's. I
work with employees who like to work
four 10's. Many people would rather
have the flexitime, some people would
rather not. A lot. of -employees have
said that they have a great deal of
flexibility to change schedules around
to make them conform to particular
employees' desires, but yet we come in
and tell that, employer "Because you
do work for the Federal Government,
you. cannot do it. You can do it if you
are doing work in the private sector,
you can have some flexibility."
I listed the names of a number of.
unions who have signed on collective
bargaining for flexitime. I think it is
kind of ridiculous to say, "No, we are
going to exclude it. We are going- to
discriminate against you and not allow
you to have- that opportunity."'
A lot of employees, Mr. President,
want to see this Armstrong amend-.
ment passed. It may well be that they
are in construction work and they
have to drive to the construction site.
It may well be that that construction
site is 50 miles away and they do not
want to commute four of- five times;
maybe they can only commute three
or four times, and have the opportuni-
ty to finish their job, come back and
have a 3-day weekend with their
family. Maybe they like to hunt.
Maybe they like to fish. Maybe they,
want to travel. Whatever they want to
do, let us give them that flexibility.
Let us not have a Federal Government
regulation which would prohibit it. Let
us restore a little commonsense. Let us
put Federal empolyees and Federal
contractors under the same - laws and
requirements as all other private em-
ployees and all other governmental
employees.
I urge the adoption of the Arm-
strong amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I yield
1 minute to the Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. I thank .my distin-
guished colleague.
I am most - sympathetic, to the
amendment offered by my - colleague
from Colorado, but I cannot find any-
where the answer to the question:
How can we get it through the House?
Is it not better that at this time we. try
and take the part of it that we. can
achieve, namely, for the Federal Gov-
ernment, and at a later time try to
support the private sector? I am anx-
ious to support your legislation.
Mr. NICKLES. If the Senator will
yield, I would be happy to make a
comment. -
I think the Senate, operating- under
its own guidance and wisdom, really
does not need to'operate under the
wisdom of the leadership of the
House. We have two different bodies.- I
personally did not come to the Senate
to .be governed by the House.
Mr. WARNER. I agree with the Sen-
ator, but as a practical legislative prob-
lem we cannot get it through the
House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 1
minute of the Senator has expired.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, . - I
might say to my good friend from
Colorado and my friend from Oklaho,
ma that I, too, have not really made
up my mind what to do about the
problem of the amendment that they
offer except that I know there is no
question that the House will not agree
to it. They have the committee that
the distinguished Senator from Okla-
homa is the chairman of, the Subcom-
mittee of the Labor Committee that
has jurisdiction' over this. That -com-
mittee can report the Pill out to the
floor and enter a conference with the
Members from the House who deal
with the. Walsh-Healey Act regularly.
Our -committee does not know any-
thing about it. This is- not something
that we ought to be forced to take to
the House in conference or to try to
get the House to adopt. Again I say
that the amendment of 'the Senator
from Colorado does not give. the pri-
vate sector employees the same protec-
tion as this bill gives. Government em-
ployees. It is not possible to.do so be-
cause of the mechanisms that are built
into the Federal Government it terms
of . the ability to get unit votes, the
ability to have an impasse. We have an
impasse panel. It is not proper to state
that this gives the private employees
the same protection as -our bill gives
Government employees because it is
just not possible under existing. law.
Does the Senator wish to make some
further comment? If he does not, I
intend to make a motion to table. One
Senator has an appointment down-
town, and we want to have a long vote.
. Mr. EAGLETON. May I have 30 sec-
onds?
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
have concluded my remarks. I have a
little time remaining which I hope I
can yield to the Senator from Indiana
(Mr. QUAYLE), who I am told is on his-
way to the floor to make a statement
on this matter. I should like to reserve
time for that purpose.
Mr. WARNER. Will the Senator
yield? Does he care to address the
question of how we would get this
through the House? I am sympathetic
with the position of the Senator.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who
yields time?
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
am wondering if the - Senator from
Alaska has time to yield to me for the
purpose of responding to that ques-
tion?
Mr. STEVENS. If the Senator will
limit it to 1 minute, I am happy to do
that. The Senator wants to leave.
-Mr. ARMSTRONG. I should be
happy to limit it to half a minute.
The answer to the question raised by
the.Senator from Virginia is that the
statute books are full of provisions
which at some time or another were
purported to be impassable in. one
House or the other. It is our task to
send to the other body the best legisla-
tion we can, - and then it is up to the
conferees to work it out. As the Sena-
tor knows, that is a usual thing-for
the Senate to say, "No, we will never
agree to that," and for the House to
say, "No, we will never agree to that."
Let us send them a good bill, a bill
that conforms the private sector to
the practice that we are recommend-
ing and work it out in conference. I am
confident we can sell it to them.
Mr. STEVENS. I yield 30 seconds to
the Senator from Missouri.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President,
taking up ' the theme just discussed be-
tween Senators STEVENS and ARM-
STRONG, I think it should be noted that
a subcommittee of the Labor and
Human Resources Committee' report-
ed out the amendment that was in bill
form on July 9, 1981. That is almost a
calendar year ago. That subcommittee
of Labor and Human Resources re-
ported it up to the full committee.
Senator NICKLES is on that committee.
I am on that committee. Senator
HATCH of Utah is the chairman of that
committee. It has been there sound
asleep before the full committee since
July 9, 1981. Not a peep has been
heard about it, not the slightest effort
has been made to move it. Senator
HATCH could convene a committee
markup on the bill at any time he de-
sires, "but it has sat dormant for a cal-
endar year. Now it emerges as this
.amendment. .
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, as
ranking minority member of the Labor
and Human Resources Committee I
want to join.the Senator from Alaska
and the Senator from Missouri in op-
posing the Armstrong amendment.
Those who support the Federal flex-
itime bill, as I do, should understand
that adoption of the Armstrong
amendment will seriously jeopardize
the prospects for enacting the flexi-?
time bill before the current authoriza-
tion expires next month.
The Armstrong amendment is not
germane to the bill before us. If adopt-
ed it will have to be referred to two
House committees and it is extremely
unlikely that House action can- be.
completed before the deadline.
Moreover the chairman. of the House
Post Office and Civil Service Commit-
tee has made it clear that he will not
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
act on a Senate passed bill which in-
cludes a Walsh-Healy amendment.
Beyond that there is absolutely no
excuse for addressing the Walsh-Healy
issue today. The Labor Subcommittee
completed hearings on Walsh-Healy
on March 10, 1981. The bill was re-
ported to the full committee on July 9,
1981. -
It has languished there for 12
months.
The Armstrong amendment is noth-
ing more than an attempt :to disrupt
the orderly procedures of the Senate
by circumventing the committee struc-
ture. There is simply no justification
for proceeding in this manner when no
one on the Labor Committee is pre-
venting consideration of the bill under
normal procedures.
Adoption of the Armstrong amend-
ment will not result in flexitime work
schedules in the private sector because
it will not become law if attached to
this bill. Instead, the likely conse-
quence will be to deny the benefits of
the Federal program to thousands
upon thousands of Federal workers be-
cause no bill will be enacted.
Every Member of this body should
understand that a vote for the Arm-
strong amendment is a vote against
the Federal flexitime bill.
I urge the defeat of the amendment.
? Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I rise in
support of S. 2240, the Federal Em-
ployees' Flexible and Compressed
-Work Schedule Act of 1982. The
author of the legislation, the Senator
from Alaska-(Mr. STEVENS) has consist-
ently demonstrated a profound inter-
est in the needs of Federal employees,
along with the need for a more effi-
cient Federal bureaucracy. I' believe
that this bill is just one more example
of that interest.
The flexitime experiment has been
an asset to worker satisfaction and a
boon to dual career families. Studies
performed by the Office of Personnel
Management indicate that the experi-
ment has enjoyed an impressive 90
percent satisfaction - rating. This cou-
pled with the reports of productivity
improvements outpacing declines by a
3-to-1 margin gives us sufficient reason
to continue the flexitime program.
Management views flexitime very
positively, More than 80 percent of
the supervisors 'involved in the pro-
gram favor continuing the present
schedules. S.,2240 goes beyond the
present program to extend to agency
heads more authority to eliminate in-
efficient schedules. It also established
a standardized procedure for judging
the efficacy of a schedule.
Extension of this program could be
frustrated by 'the' amendment offered
by the Senator from Colorado (Mr.
ARMSTRONG). So, even though this
amendment deserves attention, I do
not believe this is the appropriate time
or place. The Labor and Human Re-
sources Committee is capable of con-
sidering this issue in detail. (As a
result, I support Mr. STEVEN'S motion
to table this amendment and allow the
Federal Government to maintain this
beneficial program.)-
? Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I strong-
ly oppose the Armstrong amendment
allowing management to impose ex-
tended workdays on employees under
Federal- contract.
This amendment would undermine
labor standards earned only after hard
and long struggles and would have a
punitive effect on workers under col-
lective bargaining agreements today.
The Walsh-Healey Public Contracts
Act of 1936 requires that workers
under Federal contract not work more
than 8 hours per day without overtime
pay. Ninety-three percent of workers
under Federal contract today have a
collective bargaining contract requir-
ing payment for time-and-a-half after
8 hours. It would be wrong to punish leg-
islatively freely reached worker-man-
agement agreements on hours. But
that is exactly what we would do by al-
lowing the management of nonunion
employees to, impose longer days on
their workers. We would penalize
unionized companies in the -competi-
tion for Government contracts. .
Under this amendment, longer work-
days could be readily imposed-regard-
less of the risks to worker health and
safety and regardless of the disruption
to home and family. The known po-
tential for such risks and the potential.
for disruption of family life is even
greater now than when Walsh-Healey
was enacted in 1936.
.Now we know that asbestos, petro-
chemicals, and other substances to
which workers are exposed can cause-
severe hazards to worker health. We
know that prolonged exposure to high
levels of noise can cause hearing loss.
We know of the- contribution of fa-
tigue to the probability of cripping ac-
cidents. And now, many of the stand-
ards we have developed to protect
workers from these hazards are based
on 8-hour-not 10-hour-workdays.
Excessive noise is probably the most
frequent worker health hazard. The
standard regulating noise exposure is
based on an "8 hour time-weighted
average." Are we to redo such stand-
ards for a 10 hour or even longer day?
Or are we to guess at whether worker
health is endangered by.regular, pro-
longed exposure at management con-
venience?
And what of the working women
whose family life is structured around
an 8 hour absence? In 1936 when
Walsh-Healey was enacted, we did not
even count the number of the women
in the labor force; 11 years later, at
first count, there -were less than 17
million women workers. In 1979, over
43 million American women worked
outside the home. Over 30 percent of
these women workers have children at
home. More than 5 million children
under age 6 have mothers who work
for a living. Can we seriously argue
that it provides more flexibility to
these women to allow their employers
to impose a longer working day? Is it
June 80, 1982.
readjust their schedules?
Compressed schedules can be con-
ducive to better home and community
life. But that decision should remain
with those who are engaged in the
work and not with those who manage
it. The flexitime program extended in
S. 2240 is a voluntary, worker initiated
program. I applaud the flexitime pro-
gram and I intend to vote in favor of
the Stevens bill.
But the suggestion made with this
amendment is categorically different.
It punishes unionized workers. It -
allows management, to place at risk
the health and safety of workers. It
makes a mockery of standards outside
the purview of the Walsh-Healey Act.
It ignores the needs of those workers
for whom compressed schedules may
cause disruption of family, life. I will-,
vote against this amendment and I
urge my colleagues to do likewise.?
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I join in
strong support of the amendment of-
fered by my distinguished colleague,
Senator ARMSTRONG. He has succinctly
and persuasively made the case for
adoption of his amendment. I would
emphasize only a couple things.
First, the Senate as a body is not
blazing a new trail with this amend-
ment. Just 2 years ago, in the 96th
Congress, this 'body added a similar
amendment to pending legislation that
was in a technical sense not germane
to the Walsh-Healey Act and the Con-
tract Work Hours Standards Act. On
December 9, 1980, Senator BELLMON
added a compressed workweek amend-
ment to the Revenue Sharing bill H.R.
7112. This amendment was adopted by
a record vote, 43 to 38. Unfortunately,
the amendment was. dropped by the
other body.
Second, it should be noted that this
amendment would not in any respect
change the Federal minimum wage
law or the overtime provisions of the
Fair Labor Standards Act. Those stat-
utes remain 'completely intact. Fur-
ther, the Armstong amendment would
not in any way affect the collective
bargaining process, except to make it
possible to bargain over flexible work
schedules such as the 4-day workweek
where such bargaining is not discour-
aged by current law.
Third, while making it financially
feasible to adopt a compressed. work-
week, the amendment in changing the'
Walsh-Healey -Act and the Contract
Work Hours Standards Act does not
mandate-I 'repeat, does not man-
date-the adoption of such A schedule.
Thus, even in the nonunion context,
employees do not have to fear that
this amendment will automatically
result in a different work schedule.
Finally, I think it should be reiterat.
ed how this amendment is designed to
do simple equity. The case has been
persuasively made for giving Federal
employees the opportunity of alterna-
tive work schedules. That is all we are
trying to do for employees of Federal
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 June 30, 1982
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE
S 7653
contractors. Indeed, there is a certain Currently, ENA is on the brink of performed in excess of, 8 hours per
irony in all this. The case for Federal bankruptcy because of the inflexibility day.
employees to enjoy flexible work
schedules was not made just on the ex-
perience under the experimental pro-
graYn which Congress established in
1978. The impetus for the Federal ex-
periment was in part due to the expe-
rience of flexible and compressed work
schedules in the private - sector to
begin with. The committee -reports on
the 1978 legislation expressly alluded
to the positive experience in the pri-
vate sector as grounds-for expanding
its experimental use by Federal em-
ployees. Moreover, the Washington
Post, in commenting recently on the
Federal flexitime legislation, -noted:
"In many private companies, the old 9-
to-5 routine has become outmoded.
One out of the five workers . now
chooses to work either- part time or on
a flexible schedule. Some specialists
predict that half of. the labor force
will be flexing its work time by the
next decade." In short, the practice
and trend which began in the private
sector should be encouraged to grow
there at the same time they'are being
encouraged in the Federal sector.
I urge the adoption of the amend-
ment. -
WALSH-HEALEY MUST BE REFORMED
? Mr. KASTEN. Mr. President, earlier
this year, the owner of a small busi-
ness in McFarland, Wis., came to me
with a problem his firm was having
with the Walsh-Healey Act.
. After reviewing the facts of this case
with the owner, I came away con-
vinced that Walsh-Healey, had to be
reformed and made more flexible for amendment on behalf of all the small
-
Government contractors. - businesses across the country that de-
The company, ENA Business Forms
Inc., is a'24 employee printing compa-
ny that contracts its services with the
Federal Government.
,Several years ago during the energy
crunch, ENA's employees requested
that they be 'permitted to set their
own hours of work rather than work
straight 8-hour days or less.
As Walsh-Healey is currently writ-
ten. Government contractors are re-
-quired to pay overtime for any work
over. 8 hours a day regardless of the
total hours worked per week. This is
the case even if employees request to eliminate inequitable restrictions on
be placed on an alternative work Federal contractors so that they can
schedule and still work a 40-hour have the same rights and flexibility in
week. The effect of Walsh-Healey is workweek scheduling that are present-
that while Federal employees may ly enjoyed by other employers. If we
benefit from. flexitime, 'many private decline to include Federal contractors
sector workers involved with Federal in this measure we are discriminating
contracts are not allowed this option. against a single class of workers and
In ENA's case, employees were paid employers and refusing them the
overtime for work over 40 hours a benefits and flexibility.of alternative
week, but not paid overtime for work workweek scheduling which we reserve
over .8 hours a day. Thus, ENA was out only to those outside the confines of
of compliance with the very provisions government contract work. -
of Walsh-Healey the Senate is at- This amendment is very simple. It
tempting to amend today. simply gives Federal 'contractors the
Subsequently, ENA was audited by same rights already enjoyed by private
the Department of Labor and found to sector contractors. Current law makes
be out of compliance with Walsh- it prohibitively expensive for govern-
Healey. As a result of this audit, ENA, ment contractors to use alternative
the business, owes $27,661.76 to ENA, work schedules because of premium
the workers. - rates which must be paid on any work
as much as 20 percent by converting to
a compressed workweek.) In addition,
there would be a reduced. need for
heating and cooling plants and offices.
I understand that some labor groups
have been concerned that this meas-
ure would affect them unfavorably.
Opponents of the amendment are
saying that it will adversely affect the
minimum wage, that it will alter the
40-hour overtime provisions of the
Fair Labor Standards Act or even that
it will mandate a certain nuniber of
hours in a workday. Let me dispel'
that concern. This measure maintains
the 40-hour workweek. It allows for
flexible scheduling of hours within
that time limit. It makes no change in
minimum wages and it does not man-
date the number of. hours in a work-
day. Any time worked over 40 hours
weekly will still be compensable by
overtime pay.
I would like to make one other point
before I close. Studies of alternative
and compressed workweeks have
shown that experience with the sched-
ule has been an important factor in in=
fluencing attitudes about such sched-
ules. In general, employees have
tended to be very positive about the
schedules, but those who have actual-
ly experienced them were much more
favorable than those who hypoth-
esized the effects.' I feel this is signifi-
' Simcha Ronen, Ph. D., Management Depart.
ment, Graduate School of Business Administration,
New York University, Testimony before the Sub.
committee on Labor on S. 398, p. 4.
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
Approved For Release 2007/05/03 :CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
of Walsh-Healey. The worst possible I know that many Federal employ-
finish to this story would be that ENA ees in Indiana have contacted me
would go bankrupt because of Walsh- asking my help in preserving their
Healey. - flexitime privileges. They support the
But ENA is still fighting for its eco- idea, they have worked under it and
nomic survival. And although w_e in they like it. .
the Senate cannot. alleviate the Now it is time to end disci'imination
burden Walsh-Healey has placed on against those workers and employers
ENA, we can fight too by. amending who have never had the chance to op-
the act to allow Government contrac- erate under a compressed workweek.
tors the same flextime options offered The benefits of working on an alter-
to Government employees. native work schedule are many. In
It appears that at a time when the hearings on this issue before the Sub-
Federal Government is working so committee on Labor, which is chaired
hard to restore vitality to the Ameri- by the distinguished Senator from
can economy, a law which is as coun- Oklahoma, Senator DON NICKLES, we
terproductive as Walsh-Healey must heard many witnesses attest to the ad-
be reformed. _ vantages of the compressed workweek.
Congress must bring the laws gov- Specifically:
erning Federal contractors into con- It increased worker productivity.
formity with the overtime. provisions The result .is a higher r weekly output,
nd
and flexibility use of plant equipment and
y in work schedules pro- improved employee morale as demon-
vided to. the private sector employees, strated through reduced absenteeism,
and ironically, Jo Federal employees tardiness, and turnover.
themselves. It improves working conditions. A
The restrictions of Walsh-Healey necessary side-effect of the change is
were passed by Congress in 1935, reduced working costs associated with
nearly a half century ago. In those 50, reduced commuting time, lunches, and
years, the American work force and child care. Also there is more usable
American lifestyle have changed dra- leisure time for employees and more
matically. Unfortunately, restrictive time'for personal business, medical ap-
laws governing Government contrac- pointments, and rest. y
tors have not kept up with the times. It promotes energy conservation. A
Today the Senate has the opportuni- reduction in fuel costs is associated
ty to reform a law that has outlived its 'with fewer commuting days. (The
usefulness and now- is a burden on Comptroller General reported that
workers and busihesses. I urge my col- employee commuting time and gaso-
leagues to support the Armstrong line consumption could be reduced by
serve the right to establish flextime
schedules without over time penal-
ties.
Mr. QUAYLE. Mr. President; I
would like to speak in support of the
Armstrong amendment to the Federal
-Employees Flexitime Act, and to
,oppose any efforts to weaken that
amendment. I believe we are making a
small but important -improvement in
the flexitime extension by allowing
Federal contractors as well as Federal
employees to participate in this pro-
gram..I believe it is critical that we
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: C'IA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
S 7654 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE June 30, 1982,
cant because I believe many poeple
"hypothesize" the effects of flextime
on. the work of government contrac-
tors. It has been used with great suc-
cess for private sector employees, for
government employees and it has been
shown to increase productivity, I see
no reason why we need to discriminate
against a single group of employees
and employers when we do not place
those restrictions on the private
sector. I support the Armstrong
amendment and I encourage my col-
leagues to support it.
? Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I
support Senator ARMSTRONG'S amend-
ment to remove daily overtime restric-
tions placed on Federal contractors by
the Walsh-Healey and Contract Work
Hours and Safety Standards Act. Cur-
rently, Federal contractors are prohib-
ited from utilizing any form of flexi-
time provisions: that are enjoyed- by
other Federal workers, as well as pri-
vate sector employees. The Walsh-
Healey Act singles out Federal con-
tractors to impose a daily overtime
premium for hours worked in, excess of
an 8-hour day.. For all other employ-
ees; private. and public, overtime is re-
quired only for hours worked in excess
of a 40-hour workweek. I feel that
Senator ARMSTRON!V-s amendment,
which is similar to S. 398 which I have
cosponsored,'would provide an excel-
lent opportunity for restoring uniform
and. equitable. treatment of all employ-
ees, including Government contrac-
tors: This- amendment would bring.
those laws governing Government con-
tractors into conformance with the
Fair Labor Standards Act and main-
tain. the 40-hour workweek overtime
standard:.
The-Bureau of Census has shown re-
cently that in 1980; approximately 12
percent of all. full-time, nonfarm wage
earners were on flexitime or other
schedules- that permit them to vary
the, time- their workdays begin and
end. By- the end of the. decade, it is es-
timated that over one-third -of the
work force, will- be involved in com-
pressed,, flexible, or other alternative
work- schedules. Alternative schedules
.have. been gaining popularity with em-
ployers;. employees, and in recent col-
lective-bargaining., agreements for
many good reasons.,
Such schedules have proven to be
more. responsive to the desires of em-
ployees, provided more leisure time
and. reduced. commuting time and ex-
pense. Equally important are the sub-
stantial "benefits to employers in in-
creased,. productivity, reduced energy
requirements and more. efficient use of
capital equipment. Resulting cost
saving for, Federal contractors would
be reflected in lower and more compet-
itive bids for Federal procurements.
1 am pleased to note the administra-
tion has endorsed this amendment, as
well as. many employer and employee
groups-- across. the Nation. Further-
more, I feel that S. 2240 is an appro-
priate vehicle for Senator Armstrong's
reforms because they serve the exact
goals and objectives of this bill. Feder-
al contractors and their employees
should be permitted latitude in tailor-
ing their work schedules when it is in-
their mutual self-interest. Govern-
ment should not stand in the way of
these changes, but rather promote
worktime arrangement that could en-
hance the quality of worklife, encour-
age energy, efficiency and increase pro-
ductivity. I urge- my colleagues to join
in support of this amendment to allow
Federal contractor's employees to
benefit from innovative work sched-
ules, while maintaining the 40-hour-
workweek overtime standard that pro-
tects all workers.?
? Mrs. HAWKINS. Mr. President, I
support S. 2240, the Federal Employ-
ees Flexible and Compressed. Work
Schedule Act of 1982. I believe that
the 3-year flexitime experiment in-
volving Federal employees - has been
-successful and deserves to be contin-
ued. The experiment in flexible and
compressed workweeks demonstrates
that this intelligent personnel policy
will generate important benefits, in-
cluding higher output, reduced energy
usage, and greater employee satisfac-
tion.
At a time when productivity growth
has been slow, it is noteworthy that.
other observers, have also concluded
that flexitime, programs will lead to
savings and improved morale. For ex-
ample, an_ interim report of the flexi-
time program prepared by the Office
of Personnel Management concluded
that alternative work schedules "can
produce improvements. in productivity,
greater service to the public, and sav-
ings in. cost." The report also noted
that more than 90 percent of employ-
ees and 85 percent of supervisors par-
ticipating in these programs were sat-
isfied with the results and recommend-
ed their continuation.
Another demonstration of the suc-
cess of flexitime is its increased use in
the public and private sector. The
Bureau of Census reports that in 1980,
12 percent of all full nonfarm wage
and' salary workers were on a flexitime
or compressed work schedule.- By 1990,
it is estimated that over 30 percent of
the workforce will be using some type
of flexible. work schedule.
It is easy to see why flexitime im-
proves productivity by improving
morale. Increasingly, single working
fathers and mothers need to arrange
their work schedules to spend more
time with their families. The latest
census reports noted a dramatic rise in
one-parent families in the workforce.
Of the 31.5 million families with chil-
dren under age 18 in the country in
1981, 21 percent, were single-parent
families, up sharply, from 11 percent. in
1970. Clearly, a personnel' policy which
materially helps the head of one out
of - every five working parents will
show up in national. productivity sta-
tistics. Therefore, Federal policy
should. promote the usage of flexitime
in both the public and private sectors.
That is why I support. the continu-
ation of the flexitime program.
While this t' legislation allows the
Federal Government and most private
firms to take advantage of flexible
work schedules, curiously private busi-
nesses doing business with the Federal
Government are prevented from
adopting flexible work schedules or
compressed workweeks for their em-
ployees.. That - is because the Walsh-
Healey Act of 1936 "imposes two sepa-
rate. standards on private businesses,
one for Government contractors and
another for private firms. Senator
ARMSTRONG'S amendment eliminates
the dual standard by making overtime
pay requirements uniform in Govern-
ment and privately contracted work. It
does so by allowing all contractors to
use flexitime if they choose to do so.
Passage of the Armstrong amend-
ment will lead to Federal procurement .
savings. Presently, the requirement
that private businesses contracting
with the Government must pay premi-
um rates for all hours worked in
excess. of 8 hours per day, making it
prohibitively expensive for Govern-
ment contractors to use compressed
workweek schedules. This costs the
Government money because such con-
tractors cannot pass on to the Govern-
ment saving achieved by compressed
workweeks. Furthermore, the Walsh-
Healey Act discourages private sector
users of compressed workweeks from
bidding on Federal, contracts, thus
denying the Federal Government of
the services of some of the more inno-
vative and productive contractors in
'the. labor market.
Mr. President, it is not often that
.the Senate has a chance to raise pro-
ductivity, improve worker morale, and
save the taxpayers money simulta-
neously.. I believe we should take the
opportunity to do so by passing this
important amendment, and S. 2240.9
Mr. NICKLES.. Will the Senator
yield?
Mr. EAGLETON. Yes; I yield.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who.
yields time?
Mr. STEVENS. Just a half a minute.
The Senator has to be downtown in 10
minutes.
Mr.. NICKLES. I will make. a real
quick comment, and that comment. is,
yes, we reported it out of subcommit-
tee. We did- not have. the votes in' the
full committee. But the Senator is also
aware that that- bill has. passed the
Senate 'before.' in the, previous Con-
gress.
Mr. STEVENS. I yield, back the re-
mainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does
the Senator from Colorado yield back
the remainder of his time? .
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I
yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator.
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
Mr. President, I move to table the
amendment, and I ask for the yeas and
nays. -
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion
to table the amendment of the Sena-
tor from. Colorado. On this question
the yeas and the nays have been or-
dered, and the clerk will call the roll;
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the
Senator from Alabama (Mr. DENTON),
the Senator from California (Mr. HA-
YAKAWA), and the Senator -from
Kansas (Mrs. KASSEBAUM) are neces-
sarily absent.
I also announce that the Senator
from'. Georgia (Mr. MATTINGLY) is
absent due to illness. _
I further announce that, if present
and voting, the Senator from Califor-
nia (Mr. HAYAKAWA), and the Senator
from Georgia (Mr. MATTINGLY) would
each vote "nay."
Mr.- CRANSTON. I announce that
the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr.
TsONGAS) is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are
there any other Senators in the Cham-
ber who desire to vote?
The result was announced-yeas 49,
nays 46,_as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 202 Leg.]
YEAS-49
Andrews
Glenn. .
Moynihan
Baucus
Hart
Murkowski
Biden
Heflin
Nunn
Boren
Heinz
Packwood
Bradley
Hollings
Pell
Bumpers ,
Huddleston
Proxmire
Burdick
Inouye
Randolph
Byrd, Robert C.
Jackson
Riegle
Cannon
Johnston
Sarbanes
Chafee
Kennedy
Sasser
Cranston
Leahy
Specter
DeConcini ,
Levin
Stafford
Dixon
Long
Stevens
Dodd
Mathias
Warner
Durenberger
_
Melcher
Weicker'
Eagleton
Metzenbaum
Ford
Mitchell
NAYS-46
Abdnor
Exon
Nickles
Armstrong
Garn
Percy
Baker
Goldwater
Pressler
Bentsen
Gorton
Pryor
Boschwitz
Grassley
Quayle
Brady
Hatch
Roth
Byrd,-
Hatfield
Rudman
Harry F., Jr.
Hawkins
Schmitt
Chiles
Helms
Simpson
Cochran
Humphrey
Stennis
Cohen
Jepsen
Symms
D'Amato
Kasten
Thurmond
Danforth
Laxalt - .
Tower -
Dole . "
Lugar
Wallop,
Domenici
Matsunaga
Zorinsky
East
McClure
NOT VOTING-5
Denton
Kassebaum
Tsongas
Hayakawa
Mattingly
ask unanimous consent that I be re-
corded as having voted "Nay."
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it'is so ordered.
(The foregoing tally has been cor-
rected to reflect the above order.)
Mr. MURKOWSKI assumed the
chair. '
Mr. -STEVENS. Mr. President, I
move to reconsider the vote by. which
the motion was agreed to.
Mr. EAGLETON. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to. -
Mr. STEVENS.' Mr. President, how
much time do we have remaining on
the bill?,
" The PRESIDING OFFICER. A total
of 18 minutes remains on the bill. The
Senator from Alaska controls 11 min-
utes.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we
had time for the Senator from Indi-
ana. The Senator from Virginia wishes
3 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senate will please be in order.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President,' I
might state to the Senate that it is our
intention to have a rollcall vote on the
final passage.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senate will please come to order.
Mr. STEVENS. I yield to the Sena-
tor from Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will
the Senators conversing please excuse
themselves to the cloakroom? The
Senate will come to order.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I yield
to the Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I first
would like to acknowledge the distin-
guished Senator. from Colorado. and
others who were in support of his
amendment.
I should -say that it was practical
politics when we had to vote against
that amendment. Should it appear
again on a proper vehicle, I would pro-
vide my support. I thank those who
-recognize the need for us to get on
with S. 2240, which I consponsor with
the distinguished- Senator from
Alaska, -because it is desperately
needed by those serving in the Federal
Government.
Last March when this legislation was
introduced, it was referred to the Gov-
ernmental Affairs Committee, and we
approved S. 2254 in a temporary 4-
month extension of the existing ex-
perimental program. That extension-
expires July 20.
S. 2240 will continue, the programs
established under Public Law 95-390,
the experimental program for 3 years.
Management of the existing programs
must review them for reduced produc-
tivity, reduced level of public service,
or increased agency costs. If the find-
ings show that. the program is defec-
tive, the agency must terminate the
program immediately. The decision is
not negotiable or reviewable.
During the past 3 years, over 325,000
Federal employees in 1,500 organiza-
So the. motion to table Mr..-ARM-
STRONG'S amendment (UP No. 1048)
was agreed to.
(Later the following occurred:)
Mr. MATSUNAGA: Mr. President,
on rollcall vote No. 202, I am recorded
as having voted "Aye." 1i-intended to
vote "Nay." Inasmuch as the change
.in vote will not change the result, I
S 7655
tions have participated in this pro-
gram. There have been some programs
that have not met the criteria of
better service, increased productivity
and lower cost. These programs will be ,
terminated.
This legislation will provide the op-
portunity for the effective programs
to continue and new programs to start.
This legislation will provide the Feder-
al manager additional tools to provide
better, less costly service. This legisla-
tion will also provide the Federal em-
ployee with optional work schedules
and the chance to increase production.
Flexitime,?or alternative work sched-
ules (AWS), has been used in private
industry for a number of years with
great success. Managers in companies,
such as Metropolitan Life Insurance,
say that flexitime has increased the
productivity of 10,000 employees in
New York City. -
The 3-year experiment has been suc-
cessful. A report by the Office of Per-
sonnel Management indicated that
more than 90 percent of employees
and 85 percent of supervisors partici-
pating in these experiments were satis-
fied with the results and "wished to
continue the program.
This legislation S. 2240, is supported
by OPM, the administration, the em-
ployee groups and the employers
themselves.
Senator STEVENS is to be congratu-
lated for, initiating this worthwhile
legislation, and I am pleased to join
with him. I urge my colleagues to
accept the amendments offered today
by Senator STEVENS and -to enact S.
2240 for the good of the Government,
its employees and the American tax-
payer.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I do
commend the Senator from Colorado
and the Senator from Oklahoma on
the amendment they offered. I, too,
have a deep feeling about that amend-
ment, and Senator BELLMON's amend-
ment when he was here.
I appreciate the support of the
Members of the Senate to clear this
bill to go to the House unencumbered
by that amendment. I do appreciate-
the manner in which the Senator from
Colorado and the Senator from Okla-
homa -handled the presentation of
their points of view.
Mr. President, I do not have any
more requests for time. If there are no
more requests for time, the Senator
from Missouri and I will join in yield-
ing back time on the bill.
Mr: HATCH. Mr. President, I rise in
strong support of S. 2240. I believe
that there is considerable merit in ex-
tending, on a permanent basis, a pro-
gram that has demonstrated its wor-
thiness. It was for this reason that I
introduced in March of this year an
earlier version of the proposal (S.
2156), since then, the interested par-
ties, including the administration, Fed-
eral employee representatives, and
congressional leaders, have closely re-
viewed the proposal and exchanged
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0
S 7656
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE June 30, 1982
recommended changes. The outcome
of this process is the pending bill as re-
ported by my distinguished colleague
from Alaska (Mr. STEVENS).
Mr. President, the Office of Person-
nel Management has found that alter-
native work schedules can produce im-
provements in productivity, greater
service to the public, and added cost
savings. Equally important is the fact
that workers themselves have had a
very positive experience with the con-
cept of flexitime. and of the com-
pressed workweek.. Many people are
coming into the work force, especially'
women with family responsibilities, for
whom flexible schedules are very
beneficial. They are productive people,
yet they are not able to work exactly
the hours that have been regarded as
traditional. Moreover, virtually every
experimental program involving flexi-
ble work schedules has. demonstrated
significant improvements. in the
morale of employees. And there is
greater job satisfaction. As aptly noted
by the Federally Employed Women or-
ganization:
The time-management and psychological
benefits derived from these programs by the
employee are substantial. Alternative work
schedules help people balance their home
and work life responsibilities. They provide
a, sense of freedom and autonomy for the
worker, resulting in increased job satisfac-
tion and higher employee morale.
Flexitime has proven its worth in
the Federal Establishment across the
Nation in 1,500 different agencies, in-
volving 325,000 people. And, the
people of my State of Utah have en-
joyed the success of the program like
those in other States. For instance,
almost 600 of my constituents at
Dugway Proving Grounds personally
contacted me, urging support for the
legislation. They stated: -
We have been on the 4-day workweek. for
the past 18 months and can-assure you that.
it has many advantages over the regular 8-
hour day.
These people are obviously pleased
with the program. And I say that
when Federal employees are happier,
and more productive,, other American
taxpayers are getting their money's
worth as well.
I urge the passage of the legislation.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I
yield back my remaining time.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr President, I yield
back. my time and I ask for' the yeas
and nays on final passage.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second..
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill is open- to further amendment-. If
there be no. further amendment to be
proposed, the question is on the en-
grossment and third reading of the
bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading and was read the
third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill having been read the third time,
the question is, Shall it pass? On this
question the yeas and nays have been
The assistant legislative clerk called
the roll.
Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the
Senator from Alabama (Mr. DENTON),
the Senator from California (Mr.
HAYAKAWA), the Senator from Ver-
mont (Mr. STAFFORD), and the Senator
from Georgia (Mr.. MATTINGLY) are
absent due to illness.
I further announce that, if present
and voting, the Senator from Alabama
(Mr. DENTON), the Senator from Cali=
fornia (Mr. HAYAKAWA), the Senator
from Georgia (Mr. MATTINGLY) would
each vote "yea".
Mr. CRANSTON. I announce that,
the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr.
TSONGAS), is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are
there any other Senators in the Cham-
ber who desire to vote?
The result was announced-yeas 93,
nays 2, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 203 Leg.]
YEAS-93
Abdnor
Exon
Melcher
Andrews
Ford
Metzenbaum
Armstrong
Garn
Mitchell
Baker
Glenn
Moynihan
Baucus - '
Goldwater '
Murkowski
Bentsen
Gorton
Nickles
Biden
Grassley
Nunn
Boren
Hart
Packwood
Boschwitz ,
Hatch
Pell
Bradley
Hatfield
Percy
Brady
Hawkins
Pressler
Bumpers
Heflin
Proxmire
Burdick
Heinz
Pryor
Byrd,
Helms
Quayle
Harry F., Jr.
Hollings
Randolph
Byrd, Robert C.
Huddleston
Riegle
Cannon
Humphrey
Roth
Chafee
Inouye
Sarbanes
Chiles
_
Jackson
Sasser
Cochran
Jepsen
Schmitt
Cohen
Johnston
Simpson
Cranston
Kassebaum
Specter
D'Amato
Kasten
Stennis
Danforth
Kennedy
Stevens
DeConcini
Laxalt
Symms
Dixon
Leahy
Thurmond
Dodd
Levin
Wallop
Dole
Long
Warner
Domenici
Lugar
Weicker
Durenberger
Mathias
Zorinsky
Eagleton
Matsunaga
East
McClure
NAYS-2
Rudman
Tower
NOT VOTING-5
Denton
Mattingly
Tsongas
Hayakawa
Stafford
"SUBCHAPTER II-FLEXIBLE AND
COMPRESSED WORK SCHEDULES
"The Congress- finds that the use of flexi-
ble and compressed work schedules has the
potential to improve productivity in the
.Federal Government and provide greater
service to the public.
"? 6121. Definitions
"For purposes of this subchapter-
"(1) 'agency' means any Executive agency,
any military department, and the Library of
Congress;
"(2) 'employee' has the meaning given it
by section 2105 of this title;
"(3) 'basic work requirement, means the
number of hours, excluding overtime hours,
which an employee is required to work or is
required to account for by leave or other-
wise;
"(4) 'credit hours' means any hours,
within a flexible schedule established under
section 6122 of this title, which are in excess
of an employee's basic work requirement
and which the employee elects to'work sous
to vary the length of a workweek or a work-
day;
"(5) 'compressed schedule' means-
"(A) in the case of a full-time employee,
an 80-hour biweekly basic work requirement
which is scheduled for less than 10 work-
days, and
"(B) in the case of a part-time employee, a
biweekly basic work requirement of less
than 80 hours which is scheduled for less
than 10 workdays;
"(6) 'overtime hours', when used with re-
spect to flexible schedule programs under
sections 6122 through .6126 of this title,
means all hours in excess of 8 hours in a day
or 40 hours in a week which are officially
ordered in advance, but does not include
credit hours; and
"(7) 'overtime hours', when used with re-
spect to compressed schedule programs
under sections 6127 and 6128 of this title,
means any hours in excess of those specified
hours which constitute the compressed
schedule.
"(8) 'collective bargaining', 'collective bar-
gaining agreement', and 'exclusive repre-
sentative' have the same meanings given
such terms-.
"(A) by section 7103(a)(12), (8); and (16) of
this title, respectively, in the case of any
unit covered by chapter 71 of this title; and
"(B) in the case of any other unit, by the
corresponding provisions applicable under
the personnel system covering this unit.".
-
"? 6122. Flexible schedules; agencies author-
ized to use
"(a) Not withstanding section 6101 of this
title, each agency may establish, in accord-
ance with this subchapter, programs which
allow the use of flexible schedules which in-
So the bill (S. 2240), as amended,
was passed, as follows:
S. 2240
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That this
Act may be cited as the' "Federal Employees
Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules
Act of 1982".
SEC. 2. (a) Chapter 61 of title. 5, United
States Code, is amended-
(1) by inserting before section 6101 the
following: -
"SUBCHAPTER I-GENERAL .
PROVISIONS";
and
(2) by adding at the end therof the follow-
ing new subchapter:
clude--
"(1) designated hours and days during
which an employee on such a schedule must
be present for work; and
"(2) designated hours during which an em-
ployee on such a schedule may elect the
time of such employee's arrival at and de-
parture from work, solely for such purpose
or, if and to the extent permitted, for the
purpose of accumulating -credit hours to
reduce the length of the. workweek or an-
other workday.
An election by an employee referred to in
paragraph (2) shall be subject to limitations,
generally prescribed to ensure that the
duties and requirements of the employee's
position are fulfilled.
"(b) Notwithstanding any other provision
of this subchapter, but subject to the terms
of any written agreement referred to in sec-
 Approved For. Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R'000300070004-0_
S 7657
tion 6130(a) of this title, if the head of an which 4 hours of such schedule fall between . "? 6128. Compressed schedules; computation
June 30, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
within the agency which is participating in "? 6124. Flexible schedules; holidays
a program under subsection (a) is being sub- "Notwithstanding sections 6103 and 6104
stantially disrupted in carrying out its func- of this title, if any employee on a flexible
tions or is incurring additional costs because schedule under section 6122 of this title is
of such participation, such agency head relieved or prevented from working on a day
may- "(1) restrict the employees' choice of ar- designated as a holiday by Federal statute
rival and departure time, or Executive order, such employee is enti-
"(2) restrict the use of credit hours, or tied to pay with respect to that day for 8
"(3) exclude from such program any em- -hours (or, in the case of a part-time employ-
ployee or group of employees. ee, an appropriate portion of the employee's
"? 6123. Flexible schedules; computation of _biweekly basic work requirement as deter-
premium pay mined under regulations prescribed by the
? "(a) For purposes of,determining compen- Office of Personnel Management).
sation for overtime hours -in the case of an 6125. Flexible schedules; time-recording
employee participating in a program under devices
section 6122 of this title-
"(1) the head of an agency may, on re-
quest of the employee, grant the employee
compensatory time off in lieu of payment
for such overtime hours, whether or not ir-
regular or occasional in nature and notwith-
standing the provisions of sections 5542(a),
5543(a)(1), 5544(a), and 5550 of this.title,
section 4107(e)(5) of title 38, section 7 of the
Fair Labor Standards Act (29-U.S.C. 207), or
any other provision of law; or -
"(2) the employee shall be compensated
-for such overtime hours in accordance with
such provisions, as applicable. -
"(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of
law referred to in subsection (a)(1) of this
section, an employee shall not be entitled to
be compensated for credit hours worked
except to the extent authorized under sec-
tion 6126 of this title or to the extent such
employee, is allowed to have such hours
taken into account with respect to the em-
ployee's basic work requirement. -
"(c)(1) Notwithstanding section 5545(a) of
not be paid to an employee otherwise sub-
ject to such section. solely because the em-
ployee elects to work credit hours: or elects
a time of arrival or departure, at a time, of
day for which such premium pay is other-
wise authorized, except that-
"(A) if an employee is on a flexible sched-
ule under which-
"(I) the number of hours during which
such employee must be present for work,
plus
"(ii) the number of hours during which
such employee may elect - to work credit
hours or elect the time of arrival at and de-
parture from work,
which occur outside of the nightwork hours
designated In or under such section 5545(a)
total less than 8 hours, such premium pay
shall be paid for those hours which, when
combined with such total, do not exceed 8
hours, and
"(B) if an employee is on a flexible sched-
ule under which the hours that such em-
ployee must be present for work include any
hours designated in or under such section
5545(a), such premium pay shall be paid for
such hours so designated.
"(2) Notwithstanding section 5343(f) of
this title, and'section 4107(e)(2) of title 38,
night differential will not be paid to any
employee otherwise subject to either of
such sections solely because such employee
elects to work credit hours, or elects a time
of arrival or departure, at a time of day for
which night differential is otherwise au-
thorized, except that such differential shall
be paid to an employee on a fl exible sched-
ule under this subchapter- -
"(A) in the case of an employee subject to
subsection (f) of such section 5343, for
which all or a majority of the hours of such
specified in such subsection, or -
"(B) in the case of an employee subject to
subsection -(e)(2) of such section 4107,'for
title, the Office of Personnel Management
or any agency may use recording clocks as
part of programs under section 6122 of this
"?,6126. Flexible schedules; credit hours; ac-
cumulation and compensation
"(a) Subject to any limitation prescribed by
the Office of Personnel Management or the
agency, a full-time employee on a flexible
schedule can accumulate not more than 24
credit hours, and a part-time employee can
accumulate not more than one-fourth of the
hours in such employee's biweekly basic
work requirement, -for carryover from a bi-
weekly pay period to a succeeding biweekly
pay period for credit to the basic work re-
quirement for such period.
"(b) Any employee who is on a flexible
schedule program under section 6122 of this
title and who is no longer subject to such a
program shall be paid at such employee's
then current rate of basic pay for-
"(1) in the case of a full-time employee,
not more than 24 credit hours accumulated
by such employee, or -
"(2) in the case of a part-time employee,
the number of credit hours (not excess of
one-fourth of the hours in such employee's
biweekly basic work requirement) accumu-
lated by such employee.".
"? 6127. Compressed schedules; agencies au-
thorized to use
"(a) Notwithstanding section 6101 of this
title, each agency may establish programs
which use a 4-day workweek or other com-
pressed schedule.
-'Yb)(1) An employee in a unit with respect
to which an organization of Government
employees has not been accorded exclusive
recognition shall not be required to partici-
pate in any program under subsection (a)
unless a majority of the employees in such
unit who, but for this paragraph, would be
included in such program have voted to be
so included.
. "(2) Upon written request to any agency
by an employee, the agency, If it determines
that participation in a program under sub-
section (a) would impose a personal hard-
ship on such employee, shall-
"(A) except such employee from such pro-
gram; or -
''(B) reassign such employee to the first
position within the agency-
"(I) which becomes vacant after such de-
termination, -
"(ii) which is not included within such
program, .
"(iii) for which,such employee is qualified,
and -
"(iv) which is acceptable to the employee.
A determination by an agency under this
paragraph shall be made not late than 10-
days after the day on-which a written re-
quest for such determination is received by
the agency.
5544(a), and 5550(2) of this title, section
4107(e)(5) of title 38, section 7 of the Fair
Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 207), or any
other law, which relate to premium pay for
overtime work, shall not apply to the hours
which constitute a compressed schedule.
"(b) In the case of any full-time employee,
hours worked in excess of the compressed
schedule shall be overtime hours and shall
be paid for as provide by the applicable pro-
visions referred to. in subsection (a) of this
section. In the case of any part-time em-
ployee on a compressed schedule, overtime
pay shall begin to be paid after the same
number of hours of work after which a full-
time employee on a similar schedule would
begin to receive overtime pay.
:"(c) Notwithstanding section 5544(a),
5546(a). or 5550(1) of this title, or any other
applicable provision of law, in the case of
any - full-time employee on a compressed
schedule who performs work (other than
overtime work) on a tour of duty for any
workday a part of which is performed on a
Sunday, such employee is entitled to pay for
work performed during the entire tour of
duty at the rate of such employee's basic '
pay, plus premium pay at a rate equal to 25
percent of such basic pay rate.
"(d) Notwithstanding section 5546(b) of
this title, an employee on a compressed,
schedule who performs work on a holiday
designated by Federal statute or Executive '
order is entitled to pay at the rate of such
employee's basic pay, plus premium pay at a
rate equal to such basic. pay rate, for such
work which in not In excess of the basis
work requirement of such employee for
such day. For hours worked on such a holi-
day in excess of the basic work requirement
for'such day, the employee Is entitled to
premium pay in accordance with the provi-
sions of section 5542(a) or 5544(a) of this
title, as applicable, or the provisions of sec-
tion 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29
U.S.C. 207) whichever provisions are more
beneficialto the employee.
"? 6129. Administration of leave and retire-
ment provisions
"For purposes of administering sections
6303(a), 6304, 6307(a) and (c) 6323, 6326, and
8339(m) of this title, in the ease of an em-
ployee who is In any program under this
subchapter, references to a day' or workday,
(or to multiples or parts thereof) contained
in such sections ;ihall be considered to be
references to 8 hours (or to the respective
multiples or parts thereof).
"? 6130. Application of programs in the case
of collective bargaining agreements
"(a)(1) In the. case of employees in a unit
represented by an exclusive representative,
any flexible or compressed work schedule,
and the establishment and termination of
any such schedule, shall be subject to the
provisions of this subchapter and the terms
of a collective bargaining agreement be-
tween the agency and the exclusive repre-
sentative.
"(2) Employees within a unit represented
by an exclusive representative shall not be
included within any program under this-
subchapter except to the extent expressly
provided under a collective bargaining
agreement between the agency and the ex-
elusive representative.
"(b) An agency may not participate in a
flexible or compressed schedule program
under a collective bargaining agreement
which contains premium pay provisions
which are inconsistent with the provisions
of section 6123 or 6128 of this title, as appli-
cable.".
AnnrnvPrl Fnr RPIPasP 2Cl071(15/03 - (',IA-R.DP85-000038000300070004-0
 Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0'
S7658
"? 6131. Criteria and review
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -'SENATE
"(a) Notwithstanding the preceding provi-
sions of this subchapter or any collective
bargaining agreement and subject to subsec-
tion (c) of this section, if the head of an
agency finds that a particular flexible or
compressed schedule under this subchapter
has had or Would have an adverse agency
impact, the agency shall promptly deter-.
mine not to-
"(1) establish such schedule; or
"(2) continue such schedule, if the sched-
ule has already been established.
"(b) For purposes of this section, 'adverse
agency impact' means-
"(1) a reduction of the productivity of the
agency;
"(2) a diminished level of services fur-
nished to the public by the agency; or
"(3) an increase in the cost of agency oper-
ations (other than a reasonable administra-
tive cost relating to the process of establish-
ing a flexible or compressed schedule).
"(c)(1) This subsection shall apply in the
case of any schedule covering employees in
a unit represented by an exclusive repre-
sentative.
"(2)(A) If an agency and an exclusive rep-
resentative reach an impasse in collective
bargaining with respect to an agency deter-
mination under subsection (a)(1) not to es-
tablish a flexible or compressed schedule,
the impasse shall bp presented to the Feder-
al Service Impasses Panel (hereinafter in
this section referred to as the 'Panel').
"(B) The Panel shall promptly consider
any case presented under subparagraph (A),
and shall take final action in favor of the
agency's determination if the finding on
which. it is based is supported by evidence
that the schedule is likely to cause an ad-
verse agency impact.
"(3)(A) If an agency and an exclusive rep-_
resentative have entered into a collective
bargaining agreement providing for use of a
flexible or compressed schedule under this
subchapter and the head of the agency de-
termines under subsection (aX2) to termi-
nate a flexible or compressed schedule, the
agency may reopen the agreement to seek
termination of the schedule involved.
"(B) If the agency and exclusive repre-
sentative reach an impasse in collective bar-
gaining with respect to terminating such
schedule, the impasse shall be presented to
the Panel.
"(C) The Panel shall promptly consider
any case presented under subparagraph (B),
and shall rule on such impasse not later
than 60 days after the date the Panel is pre-
sented the impasse. The Panel shall take
final action in favor of the agency's determi.
nation to terminate a schedule if the find-
ing on which the determination is based is
supported by evidence that the schedule has
caused an adverse agency.impact.
"(D) Any such schedule may not be termi-
nated until-
"(I) the agreement covering such schedule
is renegotiated or expires or terminates pur-
suant to the terms of that agreement; or
"(ii) the date of the Panel's final decision,
if an impasse arose in the reopening of the
agreement, under subparagraph (A) of this
paragraph.
"(d) This section shall not apply with re-
spect to flexible schedules that may be es-
tablished without regard to the authority
provided under this subchapter.".
"16132. Prohibition of coercion
"(a) An employee may not directly or indi-
rectly intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or at-
tempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any
other employee for the purpose of interfer-
ing with-
"(1) such employee's rights under sections
6122 through 6126 of this title to elect a
June 30, 1982
time of arrival or departure, to work or not to 64 hours during a biweekly pay period in
to work credit hours, or to request or not to the case of a flexible or compressed work
request compensatory time off in lieu of schedule under subchapter II of chapter 61
payment for overtime hours; or of this title)" after "week".
"(2) such employee's right under section SEC. 4. (a) Except as provided in subsec-
6127(b)(1) of this title to vote whether or tion (b), each flexible or compressed work
not to be included within a compressed schedule' established by any agency under
schedule program or such employee's right the Federal Employees Flexible and Com-
to request an agency determination under -presed Work Schedules Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C.
section 6127(b)(2) of this title.
"(b) For the purpose of subsection (a), the
term 'intimidate, threaten, or coerce' in-
cludes, but is not limited to, promising to
confer or conferring any benefit (such as ap-
pointment, promotion, or compensation), or
effecting or threatening to effect any repris-
al (such as deprivation of appointment, pro-
motion, or compensation).
"?6133. Regulations; technical assistance;
program review
"(a) The Office of Personnel Management
shall prescribe regulations necessary for the
administration of the programs established
under this subchapter.
"(b)(1) The Office shall provide educa-
tional material, and technical aids and as-
sistance, for use by an agency in connection
with establishing and maintaining programs
under this subchapter.
"(2) In order to provide the most effective
materials, aids, and assistance under para-
graph (1), the Office shall.conduct periodic
reviews of programs established by. agencies
under this subchapter particularly insofar
as such programs may affect-
"(A)- the efficiency of Government oper-
ations;
"(B) mass transit facilities and traffic;
"(C) levels of energy consumption;
"(D) service to the public;
"(E) increased opportunities for full-time
and part-time employment; and
"(F) employees' job satisfaction and non-
workiife.
"(c) With respect to employees in the Li-
brary of Congress, the authority granted to
the Office- of Personnel Management under
this subchapter shall be exercised by the Li-
brarian of Congress.".
(b) The table of sections at the beginning
of such chapter is amended-
(1) by inserting. before the item relating to
section 6101 the following:
"SUBCHAPTER I-GENERAL PROVISIONS";
and
' (2) by adding at the end thereof the fol-
lowing:
"SUBCHAPTER II-FLEXIBLE AND COMPRESSED
WORK SCHEDULES
6101 note) in existence on the date of enact-
ment of this Act shall be continued by the.
agency concerned.
(b)(1) During the 90-day period after-the
date of the enactment of this Act, any flexi-
ble or compressed work schedule referred to
in subsection (a) may be reviewed by the
agency concerned. If, in reviewing the
schedule, the agency determines in writing
that-
(A) the schedule has reduced the produc-
tivity of the agency. or the level of services
to the.public, or has increased the cost of
the agency operations, and
(B) termination of the schedule will'not
result in an increase in the cost of the
agency operations (other than a reasonable
administrative cost relating to the process
of terminating a schedule),
the agency shall, notwithstanding any pro-
vision of a negotiated agreement, immedi-
ately terminate such schedule and such ter-
mination shall not be subject to negotiation
or to administrative review (except as .the
President may provide) or to judicial review.
(2) If a schedule established pursuant to a
.negotiated agreement is terminated under
paragraph (1), either the agency or the ex-
clusive representative concerned may, by
written notice to the other party within 90
days after the date of such termination, ini-
tiate collective bargaining pertaining to the
establishment of another flexible or com-
pressed work schedule under subchapter II
of chapter 61 of title 5, United States Code,
which would be effective for the unexpired
portion of the term of the negotiated agree-
ment.
SEC. 6. (a) Section 6106 of title 5, United
States Code, is amended by striking out the
period and inserting in lieu thereof a comma
and "except that the Bureau of. Engraving
and Printing may use such recording
clocks.".
(b) The amendment made by this section
shall take effect October 1, 1982. Section 5
of this Act shall not apply to the amend-
ment made by this section.
SEC. 5. The amendments made by this Act
shall not be in effect after three years after
"Sec. the date of the enactment of this Act.
"6120. Purpose. Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider
"6122. Flexible schedules: agencies author-
ized to use.
"6123: Flexible schedules; computation of
premium pay.
"6124. Flexible schedules; holidays.
"6125. Flexible schedules; time-recording de-
vices
Mr. HEINZ. I 'move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to. -
.
"6126. Flexible schedules; credit hours; ac- IRANIAN PERSECUTION OF THE
cumulation and compensation. BAHA'I COMMUNITY
"6127. Compressed schedules; agencies au-
thorized to use.
"6128. Compressed schedules; computation
of premium pay.
"6129. Administration of leave and retire-
ment provisions.
"6130. Application of programs in the case
. of collective bargaining agree-
ments.
"6131. Criteria and review.
"6132. Prohibition of coercion.
"6133. Regulations; technical
program review.".
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of Calen-
dar No. 636, Senate Concurrent Reso-
lution 73.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
concurrent resolution will be stated by
title.
The assistant legislative clerk read
assistance; as follow:
A concurrent resolution (S Con. Res. 73)
SEC. 3. Section 3401(2) of title 5, United to condemn the Iranian persecution of the
States Code, is amended by inserting "(or 32 ? Baha'i community.
Approved For Release 2007/05/03: CIA-RDP85-00003R000300070004-0