Bill Overview
Title: Teamwork for Employees and Managers Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes employers and employees to establish voluntary employee involvement organizations to address matters of mutual interest within the workplace (e.g., productivity, compensation, benefits, recruitment, and retention). Employee involvement organizations are not considered labor organizations under federal labor laws, and they do not constitute an unfair labor practice by an employer provided the employees are not already represented by a labor organization.
Sponsors: Rep. Banks, Jim [R-IN-3]
Target Audience
Population: Employees and managers globally
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill primarily targets employees and managers as it deals with employee involvement organizations.
- Virtually all sectors that employ people could be impacted since this law applies broadly to employers and employees.
- This includes industries with high levels of unionization, as it potentially alters the landscape for employee representation.
- Given that it applies to both employees and employers, small and large companies alike would be affected.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects non-unionized employees and managers, which is a significant subset of the U.S. workforce given the low unionization rate.
- The policy has the potential to improve workplace productivity and employee satisfaction by fostering better communication and feedback mechanisms.
- However, the impact might vary depending on the size of the company and its existing work culture.
- Larger companies may have more resources to implement such programs effectively, while small businesses may find the adjustments more challenging.
- The policy does not directly address compensation or benefits, so any improvements in these areas will depend on individual company policies.
Simulated Interviews
Software Developer (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy could improve communication between us and the management, which is often lacking.
- I'm hopeful that these organizations could provide a platform for discussing benefits and other perks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Warehouse Manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy might help improve our team's productivity by getting more input from everyone.
- However, there might be challenges in actually implementing it and getting everyone to participate.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graphic Designer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our company needs better communication channels, so this policy could be beneficial.
- I'm concerned about how much commitment the management will show towards these initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Construction Worker (Dallas, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm skeptical about how effective this will be, as construction work is very hierarchical.
- Still, if it can help bring more safety and workload discussions to the table, it would be welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Marketing Specialist (Boston, MA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Corporate communication is already pretty structured here, so I don't expect huge changes.
- It's nice to have another way to share ideas, but I hope it doesn't add extra meetings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retail Store Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that might improve employee morale and retention is good in my book.
- We have a lot of employee turnover, so anything that might keep people here longer is positive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Factory Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I guess it could help to talk more directly with managers about work conditions.
- As long as it doesn't pile up on our workload, I'm open to trying it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Hospitality Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy means more inclusion in decision-making, that would be great.
- Not sure how much impact it'll really have with how things are run currently.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
IT Consultant (Austin, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this could harmonize many team issues I've seen in companies.
- As a consultant, better internal communication helps my projects run smoothly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Barista (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the time commitment with already busy schedules.
- But, if it helps with discussing our hectic hours, I'd be interested.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Key Considerations
- The voluntary nature of employee involvement organizations limits compulsory compliance costs.
- Potential legal and administrative expenses related to distinguishing these organizations from labor unions could arise.
- The broad scope of potential participants makes exact costs challenging to predict.