Seeing the forest…
We had an awkward conversation at the office this morning. One of the most popular discussions happening around almost every one of Uncle Sam’s conference room tables these days is what the forced cuts of the sequester are going to mean for the job and for the individual employees. Since the almost universal answer is no one really knows yet, these conversations usually end in a great gnashing of teeth and another hour gone down the tubes. I’m pretty sure I know what those at echelons higher than reality are thinking though – that if they just plan hard enough, they can still figure out how to cram 40 hours of work into a legislatively-imposed 32 hour workweek.
In trying to account for and occupy every second of those 32 hours, they’re missing the broader point that in addition to the eight hours a week of “lost” time, people are also going to be using their sick and annual leave allotments just as they would under a 40-hour week – except now they’re using it over a shortened week, dramatically compressing the number of days available when leave can be taken. If pushed, I’d make an educated guess that a one-fifth reduction in the work week will actually result in the average office being staffed at somewhere between 50-60 percent on any given day during the furlough period.
If you want a crash course in my logic, here it goes: My personal observation is that on any given work day, about 15% of the total workforce is out of the office on some kind of approved leave. All other factors staying equal, with the sequester furlough (20%) and the use of leave (15%) 35% of the available pool of employees will be unavailable for work. Add in another 5% of the time when immoveable objects like mandatory training take place and you’re into the 40% unavailable range… So while the official talk is about a 20% reduction in work and the activities that will slow down and stop as a result of it, I tend to think someone is being rather optimistic. The real impact is going to be much closer to leaving only 60-65% of time available to actually get the job done.
Compile other intangibles like steadily declining morale, pay that’s likely to be frozen for at least three years, and general worry about being able to meet simple obligation like rent, food, and other expenses, with the direct negative effects of the sequester furlough, and you’ve got a recipe for intensely negative performance across the board. The problem, as far as I can tell, is no one is seeing the second and third order effects of this forest because the trees are so damned close. The media and certain elements on the Hill are fond of pointing out that the sequester hit and nothing happened. Those wheels are in motion and sooner rather than later the real impacts are going to start making themselves felt. That’s when the hard decisions are going to get made about what tasks get done day-to-day and which get tossed over the side for lack of time to do them… and that’s going to be when the real awkward conversations start.
