Which article... ·tells us that the
government will give support to employers, who offer part-time jobs
71. ______
·states that employers can benefit from having two people performing the
same job
72. ______ ·provides means for older people to ease into
retirement
73. ______ ·implies that work-sharing
schemes have so far been unsatisfactory
74. ______ ·shows that the author approves
the Government’s plan
75. ______ ·indicates
that a 63-year-old man might find job-sharing against his interest
76. ______ ·states that job-sharing can offer the chance
of interesting work to people who can only work
part-time
77. ______ ·says that many organizations are doubting the
motives of the govermnent in advocating job-sharing
78. ______ ·implies that increased payment for less
work would destroy the scheme
79.
______ ·states that a rise in output does not reduce
unemployment
80. ______ A The Government is
going to give new "job splitting" grants to employers willing to offer part-time
work to people claiming unemployment benefit. The next scheme,
which took many union leaders and large employers by surprise yesterday night,
will be announced in detail in the autumn. It is intended to cost the taxpayer
nothing because of savings in unemployment benefit. The proposal, unveiled last
night by Mr. Norman Tebbit, Secretary of State for Employment, will be in
addition to the new Community Programme for the long-term unemployed.
Mr. Tebbit said that under the scheme a vacancy could be offered to two
unemployed people, one existing full-time employee or two existing full-time
employees if one of them would otherwise have been made redundant.
The Employment Secretary suggested yesterday that workers reaching
retirement might find the idea of sharing their job attractive, if pensions
could be secured. But he also said that firms might find it attractive to offer
one vacancy to two school leavers. In a sharp reaction to the
Community Programme, Mr. Nicholas Hinton, director of the National Council for
Voluntary Organizations, whose members will be expected to sponsor many of the
new places, said: "The Government is trying to spread too little money too
thinly among too many people and many voluntary organizations arc suspicious of
its motives." B Few people believe that unemployment
in the United Kingdom will fall favorably below the 3.2 million mark, or 13.4
percent of the labour force, during the next few years. The remarkable rise in
productivity over the past year will, if it continues, make it even more
difficult to tackle unemployment. Many firms are confident that they can meet
any increase in demand without hiring extra staff. Remedies more
imaginative and more permanent than those tried so far are needed. The
Government’s job-splitting scheme announced on Tuesday is one example that
should be welcomed. Another good idea is Rank Xerox’s "networking" plan, by
which executives would be able to work part-time from home. The possibilities of
work-sharing need to be more vigorously investigated, on the lines indicated by
a recent OECD study. If the total hours of work required are not going to
increase--with output rising thanks to improved productivity--then let us try to
share those working hours more equitably among the labour force.
Work-sharing helps to produce new jobs by reducing the working hours of
those in existing jobs. The danger with work-sharing is that employees may
expect to be paid more per hour for working shorter hours, and that fixed labour
costs will rise as the numbers on the payroll increase. Many employers therefore
fear that the effect on costs and prices would be inflationary. The Government
is therefore subsidizing employers to participate in its job-splitting
scheme. Most kinds of work-sharing involve marginal cuts of a
few percent in total working hours, and thus only modest increases in the number
of jobs. The biggest difference would be made if a substantial number of
full-time jobs could be turned into part-time jobs. The Government’s role would
be to adapt the tax and social security system to make part-time work more
attractive to employers and employees, notably by ensuring that as many
part-time employees as possible escape both tax and social security
payment. The social effects of work-sharing, are likely to be
beneficial, since it would involve an attempt to match work opportunities to a
wider variety of life styles. The combination of one full-time and one part-time
spouse might become much more universal. C Part-timers
usually earn less per hour than a full-timer, have fewer fringe benefits and
less job security. They have virtually no career prospects. Employers often
think that working part-time means that a person has no ambition and no chance
of promotion. But job-sharing bridges that gap and offers the
chance of interesting work to people who can only work part-time and that does
not mean just married women. As Adrienne Broyle of "New Ways to Work"--formally
the London Job-sharing Project--points out: "There are various reasons why
people want to job-share and so have more spare time." A growing number of men
want to job-share so that they can play an active role in bringing up their
children. It allows people to study at home in their free time, and means that
disabled people or those who otherwise stay at home to look after them, can
work. Job-sharing is also an idem way for people to ease into to
retirement. Many employers are wary of new work schemes, but an
investigation carried out by the EOC shows that they can profit in various ways
from sharing. If one sharer is away sick, at least half the job continues to be
done. Skilled workers who cannot work full-time can bring years of experience to
a job. Half-timers have to work flat out without a tea break.
Another attraction is that two people bring to one job twice as much experience,
sets of ideas and discussion. But there are financial pitfalls
for the job-sharers. If one becomes unemployed, he should be
eligible for Unemployment Benefit. But he has to sign on as being available for
full-time work. Otherwise, he can not claim the benefit.
Pensions are a big block. The EOC paper points out that the local
Government Superannuation Scheme excludes people who work less than 30 hours a
week. For those who are attracted to job-sharing, beware. Most
occupational pension schemes are based either on the average annual earnings
during membership of the scheme or on the employee’s final salary.