AFSCME Voluntary Furlough Survey Report

Kurt Errickson

Field Representative

AFSCME Council 5

One option for addressing the budget challenges facing the University is that of voluntary
furloughs.  While the subjects of mandatory furloughs and pay cuts have been actively pursued by the administration, little serious attention appears to have been dedicated to the possibility of saving revenue through the voluntary unpaid absences from work.

Consequently, the AFSCME leadership at the U decided to research this topic. In response to a data practices request by the Union, the University provided the email addresses of all University staff.

Union staff at Council 5 prepared a short survey regarding the topic of voluntary furloughs
for publication via a web-based service (surveymonkey.com).  The invitation email to the survey, and the survey itself, was kept short in order to avoid prejudicing a response one way or another on the issue, and to minimize disruption of the workplace.

Union staff sent out emails to the entire list of university employees (19,742 emails) on
the evening of Tuesday, April 27. Approximately 5 percent of those emails “bounced back” from bad addresses, resulting in about 18,750 emails delivered.

No controls were set for the survey. It is possible that some respondents completed the survey more than once.  There were reports that workers in some departments, like Boynton Health Service, were unable to open the survey.  Respondents who use email less frequently in the normal course of their duties might have been less likely to respond. 

Despite these limitations, response to the survey clearly indicates a great deal of interest in the topic of voluntary furloughs.

 Within a week of the first emails, more than 4000 employees had responded. Approximately 22 people requested that their names be removed from the list, and there were several dozen additional emails with questions about the sponsorship and intent of the survey.

Attempts were made to honor all requests for removal from the email list, and to respond
to each email.

A revised email invitation with a reminder to complete the survey if respondents had not already done so was sent out to University staff on Monday, May 3.  Thousands more staff responded.  By the time the results were downloaded for analysis in the mid-afternoon on May 5, there were 7000 responses – 37 percent of the University population.

General Data Results

Approximately 37 percent of respondents – 2581 – indicated willingness to participate in a voluntary furlough. Data on wages and the possible duration of the furlough was
provided by 1440 respondents.

            On average, those respondents volunteered for 61.44 hours of voluntary furlough, with a value of $1543.43 a piece.  Hard data for the entire group that provided specific information on wage amounts and the possible duration of a voluntary furlough showed a potential value of $2.2 million for a furlough from this group.

What if the survey respondents who said they would take a voluntary furlough but did not provide
all the information necessary to calculate the value of that furlough took leave at the average rate of $1543.43? The total projected value of a voluntary furlough by survey respondents who said yes to the idea then grows to $4 million.

What if the entire university community participates in a voluntary furlough at the same average rates as survey participants?

            Assuming 19,000
employees, 37 percent is 7030. 
Subtracting the number who have already voted yes (2581) leaves
4449.  Multiplying that number by the
average value of the furlough per volunteer so far ($1543.43) yields a result of
$6.87 million.  That, combined with the $4
million already projected from volunteers, results in a voluntary furlough
value of $10.87 million.

            About twice
as many respondents who reported income earnings indicated an hourly versus
salary wage, although the total value of the reported furloughs between the two
groups was about the same.

            Although we
will continue studying the data to get a better picture of the breakdown by
employee group for interest in voluntary furlough, it appears clear that this
option warrants careful consideration by the University’s top leaders.

Sample Validation

            The
following table illustrates the percentages of various employee groups at the
university, based on information provided to the Union
on April 7, 2010.  Keep in mind that
staffing data provided by the employer to the union is often inaccurate.

            As stated
earlier, this was not a scientifically rigorous survey.  Respondents were free to complete the
questionnaire to whatever degree the chose. 
Some filled out the questionnaire completely.  Others filled in salary data but not job
titles, job titles but not furlough duration, furlough duration but not salary
data.

            Next is a
chart illustrating the breakdown by employee group of those who expressed a
willingness to take voluntary furloughs. 
Of the 2581 respondents who said they would take a voluntary furlough,
1101 clearly identified their job title, enabling the linkage to employee group.

Furlough Respondents by Employee Group

            Although
not all respondents identified their employee group, the largest units here are
clerical, civil service (comprising all of the non-AFSCME hourly employees) and
faculty.

            A smaller
percentage of respondents identified their job title, hourly or weekly wage,
and the possible length of a furlough. 
That information was used to calculate the following table.  Again, because significantly fewer
respondents listed job title, wage and furlough length than did those who listed
just wage and furlough length. 
Consequently, to the total furlough value listed below is smaller than
the $2.2 million figure referenced above.

Furlough Value by Employee Group

            What is
interesting here is that, while faculty comprise only 18 percent of identified
respondents, their group is responsible for 30 percent of the identified
savings.  This indicates a considerable
willingness to sacrifice on behalf of the organization.  While Clerical workers comprise 22 percent of
identified respondents, they are only 12 percent of the total furlough
earnings, perhaps reflecting their relatively low wages compared to the rest of
the organization.

Conclusions

            Survey
responses indicate dramatic interest in voluntary furloughs, as opposed to pay
cuts and mandatory furloughs.  It also
appears as if voluntary furloughs could well reap savings in the same ballpark
as the pay cuts and mandatory furloughs currently being pursued by the
administration.

            One benefit
of voluntary furloughs expressed by many respondents was the ability to control
the timing of the unpaid leave. 
Relatively few respondents wanted to take several continuous days at
once.  Instead, they proposed working the
unpaid leave into their schedules over a longer period of time.  This flexible control of the voluntary
furlough is, perhaps linked to the relatively long duration of furlough time
respondents seem ready to volunteer for – more than 60 hours on average,
compared to the 24 hour period proposed by the administration for mandatory
furloughs.

            These
results indicate the topic of voluntary furloughs clearly warrants immediate
and serious consideration as an option for addressing the university’s budget
problems.  Even if voluntary furloughs do
not reach the financial targets set for mandatory furloughs and pay cuts, the
savings from a voluntary furlough can close the gap, and consequently lesson
the severity of those other, harsher measures.