At one time the phrase full-time meant that workers received whatever benefits the employing company had to offer. Part-time employees were generally excluded from benefits. Since many companies are scaling back on benefits to full-time employees, the line between part-and full-time is certainly beginning to blur. Since many new youthful workers are not concerned about retirement, they are not overly interested in pension or even health care plans. There is a real danger for the employee that operates with this shortsightedness. Other companies are requiring that newly hired workers remain on the job for a length of time (3-6 months) before benefit packages kick in.
1. How do the changes taking place in the kinds of benefits workers receive affect the employment relationship?
2. What implications do these changes have for employee motivation and involvement in an organization?
3. What lessons should people seeking jobs learn from the experiences of these employees?
How do the changes taking place in the kinds of benefits workers receive affect the employment relationship?
The employer-employee relationship is affected in several ways. Companies on average are scaling back on the benefits packages that are offered, and companies are also scaling back on who they are offered to. In previous times, when economic conditions were at their prime, benefits packages consisted of basic benefits plus employee selections of additional benefits. As times began to change, employers saw that this was no longer possible, as the benefit packages were costing too much for the number of employees that were offered the benefits. This does put a strain on the employer/employee relationship. ...
The solution provides a detailed discussion examining the implications of full-time and part-time relationships, benefits, and lessons.