vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Air and Radiation
EPA420-S-98-014
July 1998
Office of Mobile Sources
TRAQTechnical Overview
Transportation Air Quality Center
Transportation Control Measures:
Work Schedule Changes
EPA's main strategy for addressing the contributions of motor vehicles
to our air quality problems has been to cut the tailpipe emissions for
every mile a vehicle travels. Air quality can also be improved by
changing the way motor vehicles are used—reducing total vehicle miles
traveled at the critical times and places, and reducing the use of highly
polluting operating modes. These alternative approaches, usually
termed Transportation Control Measures (TCMs), have an important
role as both mandatory and optional elements of state plans for
attaining the air quality goals specified in the Clean Air Act. TCMs
encompass a wide variety of goals and methods, from incentives for
increasing vehicle occupancy to shifts in the timing of commuting trips.
This document is one of a series that provides overviews of individual
TCM types, discussing their advantages, disadvantages, and the issues
involved in their implementation.
> Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Work Schedule Changes
Contents
© How it Works
© Costs and Benefits
© Implementation
© Keys to Success
© Equity Issues
® Recent Examples
© Sources
® On-line Resource
Work schedule changes or variable work hours is one
transportation control measure which may effectively
reduce congestion and improve air quality. Work hour policies
are determined by employers, who are therefore the key entity in
making work schedule changes. Three implementation
options—staggered work hours, flextime, and a compressed
work week—are discussed below.
1. How It Works
Staggered work hours allow employees to begin work in intervals across the
morning. Start times may be 15 minutes apart throughout the morning, and
employees are required to work for eight hours from their start time. The goal of
this transportation strategy is to spread a given amount of traffic over a longer
period of time around peak periods, which reduces concentrations of ozone
precursors.
Flextime arrangements allow employees to select their arrival and departure
times. These have much the same impact as more structured staggered work
hours: reduced peak hour congestion and potentially reduced air pollution. More
flexibility in scheduling may allow some employees to rideshare who would be
unable to otherwise. The fact that fewer people are arriving at the same time may
discourage some ridesharing as well. The first documented flextime program was
established in 1967 in West Germany. Since then, flextime programs have
become prevalent in many organizations around the world.
Compressed work weeks allow employees to work more hours in fewer days
than the usual 8-hour per day schedule. The "4/10" work week is a common
option in which employees work 10 hours per day over four days. Another
common approach is the 9/80 work week which occurs over a 2-week period as
follows: employees work seven 9-hour days in a 2-week period, one 8-hour day
and then receive one "free" day off every other week. Work schedule changes
may improve air quality and reduce congestion. There will be fewer vehicle miles
traveled across the work week and employees will be arriving and departing
during non-peak periods, thus reducing concentrations of ozone precursors.
-------
Work Schedule Changes
Page 2
Because the three measures discussed above are similar in their costs, benefits, and
implementation, they will be broadly considered in this document as one transportation control
measure — work schedule changes.
2. Costs and Benefits
As a result of work schedule changes,
workers may become more productive
and experience improved morale, while
employers may gain from decreased
absenteeism, tardiness, and turnover.
The goal of instituting these measures
is to reduce congestion during peak traveling
times and to improve air quality. Effects on
the latter are difficult to assess, but case
studies indicate that changes in work
schedules can reduce the volume of peak
traffic. In one test in San Francisco in which
6,000 employees from 23 different
companies participated in a flextime program, 60 percent indicated that they experienced "much
less congestion" on their way to work. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
estimated that voluntary alternative work schedule programs would reduce maximum 8-hour
carbon monoxide emissions by as much as 1.9% in the Phoenix metropolitan area, assuming that
20 percent of the regional employees participated. [1]
Implementing work schedule changes may result in benefits to both employees and the
employers whose workers are participating in these changes. Workers may become more
productive and experience improved morale, while employers may gain from decreased
absenteeism, tardiness, and turnover. One company found that flextime increased productivity
by three percent, and the program decreased sick time and personal leave an average of 3.5 days
per year per employee.1 Some companies have found unexpected benefits. For example, a State
official reported that a Connecticut company increased market share of their west coast sales.
Workers who were operating under variable work hours, stayed on the phones later in the
evening and therefore reached more west coast buyers because of the time zone difference.
Employees may also benefit financially
from work schedule changes by saving automobile
operation and maintenance costs. If the work week
is condensed into four days, each employee avoids
the expense of two commute trips. Under flextime
and staggered hours policies, commuting times can
be decreased significantly, which saves money
ordinarily spent on gasoline. Employees appreciate
the opportunity to run personal errands and schedule doctor appointments without having to use
vacation time or sick leave.
A potential cost associated with
work schedule changes may result
if the number of non-work trips
increase significantly as a result of
having a day off.
1 Because of a State law maintaining confidentiality, the name of the company could not be provided.
-------
Work Schedule Changes Page 3
The potential benefits of decreased vehicle miles traveled, improved air quality, and cost
savings may be mitigated to some extent for people working compressed work weeks. If non-
work trips increase significantly as a result of having a day off. It is possible, therefore, that
although employees may benefit from driving on their day off from work, congestion and air
quality may not improve significantly. Another potential cost is a reduction in ridesharing and
transit use because of variable work hours.
However, many trips are likely to be taken during off-peak congestion hours so that the
distribution of ozone precursors is spread out with a net result that ozone formation is reduced.
One case study of a compressed work week policy concluded that total vehicle miles traveled
decreased. In Denver, total vehicle miles traveled for work and non-work trips among
participating employees decreased 15 percent. [2]
Some costs accrue to employers who institute work schedule changes. Time must be
spent planning the program and explaining it to employees. Increased security and utility
expenses also must be considered if the building's operating hours are extended. Additionally,
there are potential costs associated with the disruption of work because some employees are
unavailable.
In sum, work schedule changes may be cost effective if the costs described above do not
outweigh the savings that employers and employees realize. One study showed that a variable
work hour program pays for itself in a little over six years. Specifically, the costs to the employer
to implement the program were matched by employee savings in about six years. [2] This study
did not include benefits derived from decreased pollution.
3. Implementation
These policies may be voluntary, mandatory,
or used by employers to satisfy trip reduction T , ... f , , , .
J ^. ,. , „ Implementation of work schedule
ordinances or air quality regulations. Programs, , , .. , ,
M J ° ° changes is relatively easy because
however, tend to achieve greater success and gain the
there are minimal infrastructure
approval of employees if they are voluntarily adopted , , , ,.
, , . . . . . . costs, and approval from
by employers with employee input. There is , . , . ,
y. , v y, , „ , , , government is not required.
evidence that workers prefer compressed weeks and
flextime to staggered work hours, because staggered
hours may shift some employees into a later arrival
time that puts them in the middle of peak congestion. [3] This may result in employees
experiencing greater travel time compared to their previous schedule.
-------
Work Schedule Changes Page 4
Work schedule changes are relatively easy to establish for several reasons. First, there are
no infrastructure costs or up-front investments of government resources. Second, businesses
may adopt these measures voluntarily and require no approval from government agencies. These
factors allow work schedule changes to be implemented without businesses enduring a lengthy
process of obtaining funds and government approval. These measures are also easily established
because work schedule changes are easily explained and understood by employees.
Although work schedule changes are relatively easy to administer, careful planning and
coordination is needed for the changes to be successful. The costs associated with planning and
implementing the policies (e.g., labor hours used to plan the changes, increased security, and
utility needs) must be compared with the potential savings that employees will gain. It is also
important to consider the effect these policies may have on client relations and other departments
within the businesses or agencies that are accustomed to the "old" work hours. In addition,
businesses must ensure that the policies are consistent with union agreements. Key labor issues
include the definition of overtime in a flexible schedule, and the method of recording hours
worked. Many states have fair labor standards which govern the maximum number of hours
employees may work without compensation for overtime.
Case studies indicate work schedule
changes are most effective where a
large number of employees are
affected and where the associated
traffic is highly concentrated.
4. Keys to Success
In order to increase the likelihood of
success, businesses should coordinate the
schedule changes with transit and ridesharing
services. The schedules for these services may
need to be changed as a response to new
employee arrival and departure times.
Additionally, organizations may want to consider implementing a pilot program for three to six
months before committing to the changed hours so that the policies can be evaluated in terms of
employee morale, productivity, and financial ramifications.
It is important to note that not all variable work hour strategies can be implemented in
every business setting. Information processing companies, for example, may be more able to
rotate worker schedules and permit flextime policies. Organizations which rely heavily on
process manufacturing and need all workers to be present at the same time to produce efficiently,
have less flexibility. For manufacturing plants, a compressed work week policy is a much more
suitable option than a flextime or staggered hours policy.
Another factor which may influence the success of a work schedule change is the
geographic setting of the organization implementing the policy. Case studies indicate variable
work hours are most effective where a large number of employees are affected and where the
associated traffic is highly concentrated. For example, a compressed work week policy
established at a large manufacturing plant may result in significantly reduced traffic during peak
periods in the immediate vicinity of the plant.
-------
Work Schedule Changes
Page 5
5. Equity Issues
There are several equity concerns that need to be addressed when considering the
adoption of a work schedule change policy. Not all companies nor all employees in any one
company may be able to adopt any one of these policies.
6. Summary of Recent Examples
Case studies illustrate that work
schedule changes mitigate congestion and
therefore improve air quality. A staggered
work hour program was initiated in downtown
Honolulu where 11,000 employees (18 percent
of the downtown work force) participated.
Peak period travel time was reduced up to 18
percent, depending on the route commuters
took. The study illustrated, however, that there
are winners and losers under staggered hours:
those leaving early from work saved the most
in travel time, while employees who arrived at
work later than usual actually lost travel time because they moved into the new peak period.
One prominent example of a
successfully instituted compressed
work week took place at a federal
agency in Denver where participants
arrived one hour earlier and departed
one hour later than usual. In addition
to the vehicle miles forgone by not
working the fifth day, congestion was
reduced during the four work days.
One example of a flextime policy took place in San Francisco where at least half of the
participants arrived at work 30 minutes earlier than before the policy was initiated. By traveling
before the main peak period, those traveling by car reduced their commute by nine minutes each
way. Over a week, these employees saved an hour and a half in commute time. In this case
study, over 60 percent of the participants reported having experienced "much less congestion" on
their way to work. In the San Francisco pilot program, 6,000 employees across 23 companies
participated.
One prominent example of a successfully instituted compressed work week took place at
a federal agency in Denver where participants arrived one hour earlier and departed one hour
later than usual. In addition to the vehicle miles forgone by not working the fifth day, congestion
was reduced during the four work days. The maximum percentage of total arrivals in a half hour
period was reduced from 56 to 42 percent, and the maximum half hour percentage of total
departures also was reduced from 47 to 34 percent. In terms of air quality, it was estimated that
average carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions for employees were reduced by 16.4
percent. This carefully controlled experiment involved 9,000 federal employees from 42
agencies. [3]
-------
Work Schedule Changes Page 6
7. Sources
[1] Control Measure Evaluation, Systems Applications International, San Rafael, CA
(September 1990).
[2] Transportation Control Measure Information Documents, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (March 1992).
[3] Report to Congress, Transportation Implications of Telecommuting, U.S. Department of
Transportation (January 1993).
8. An On-line Resource
The Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Mobile Sources has established the
TCM Program Information Directory to provide commuters, the transportation industry, state and
local governments, and the public with information about TCM programs that are now operating
across the country. This document and additional information on other TCMs and TCM
programs implemented nationwide can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/omswww/transp/traqtcms.htm
------- |