The pandemic in 2020 was a challenge for business, management, employees, and customers. It spawned a "new normal" that we came to appreciate was not "a" or "an" anything, but a series or spectrum of "normals." It seems like that event can be referenced in regard to a multitude of changes in the world of work, and workers' compensation is no different. The examples involving virtual work, telemedicine, Zoom mediation, and more are apparent.
As we emerged from the pandemic in June 2020, the OJCC returned to in-person mediation. Telephonic had become the norm in March when the SARS-CoV-2 came to Florida. The reaction to returning to in-person mediation was immediate and negative. Lawyers, you see, did not want to give up the convenience and productivity of virtual/remote mediation. They cited how much more productive they could be attending mediation by telephone. "Productivity" was the rallying cry. You might think they would want to be with their client, and many did have clients come to the attorney's office to Zoom or telephone. But, some do not care to be with their clients. In fact, over the years, I have seen way too many instances in which the lawyer did not even know their client until mediation.
That affinity for the virtual was not just the lawyers. The mediators noted how they were challenged at that time with a veritable blizzard of "requests for telephonic appearance" at mediation. In a very short period, lawyers had fallen in love with remote mediation and had discovered "productivity." When the attempt to return to in-person occurred, the mediator's "productivity" was impaired by the flurry of individual requests. Productivity is one imperative worthy of consideration. We returned to a presumptively telephonic paradigm quickly and remained in it until the spring of 2021.
Productivity is important in the world of legal practice, claims adjusting, and more. The fact is "time is money," according to Benjamin Franklin, The American Instructor (1748). I doubt he was the first to observe that, but he was likely not the first to observe lightning either, and yet he aptly brought perspective to things. Abraham Lincoln is said to have posited "a lawyer's time is his stock in trade." There are many quotes about time, and the fact is that they come down largely to references to productivity.
The new normal following COVID-19 (regardless of when you contend it ended, or if you believe it is ongoing) seemed focused persistently on productivity, efficiency, and capacity. We were all going to use our experience to further leverage technology and be "more." More what is a valid question? With such, we might be more able to spend time in non-work pursuits. Or, we might simply make more money. Either way, that efficiency would bring profit to us individually.
Recently, the Washington Post noted, however, that "U.S. workers have gotten way less productive." (Not sure "way less" is how I would phrase it, but I do not write for the Post). This is based on "worker output," which has fallen recently to levels not seen in America since 1947. In a nutshell, "workers are getting less done." The "first half of 2022" saw a "plunge" in "the measure of how much output in goods and services an employee can produce in an hour."
The folks that monitor such statistics are "perplexed." They cite the impact of SARS-CoV-2, and the productivity growth that initially resulted from the "overnight switch to remote work." The improvement in productivity at the outset of the pandemic demonstrates "levels not seen in decades." That marked economic expansion and growth, and it seems that was hard to maintain. The decline in productivity more recently is seen as part of the current recession. Denier or not, America is in a recession. And, inflation is run amuck in the economy posing a great challenge to working people throughout the country. To combat it, the government poured hundreds of billions of additional funds into the economy in 2022. I'm no economist, but adding fuel to a fire seems an odd method for calming the flames.
The impact of the productivity drop is not seemingly sector- or industry-focused. Though The Post concedes that it is harder to measure productivity in "knowledge workers," the decrease or "drop" is apparent, with "the exception of manufacturing." The U.S. Economy largely shifted away from a manufacturing foundation in the 1970s and 1980s, and therefore the service sector is of more import overall in today's analysis. It is in the knowledge and service sectors that our economy primarily resides.
The argument that "remote" or "hybrid" opportunities are beneficial to both workers and productivity is being questioned now in light of the diminished productivity results. The Post notes that there is ample discussion among business leaders regarding productivity in the non-manufacturing environment and that some in leadership even experience "productivity paranoia." The recent layoffs in the tech sector (knowledge workers) may be significant in consideration of productivity (or paranoia) and the implications for the economy.
How can productivity be maintained? How is management to manage? Elon Musk's solutions included the end of virtual work. The Guardian reported that he said to "return to work or pretend to work somewhere else." We might conclude he is not a fan of telecommuting (sarcasm). However, his absolute stance seemed to soften thereafter when some workers seemed fine with the "leave it" or "highway" options, according to Fortune. In the end, workers are necessary and critical. But, each of us might question if we personally are so critical.
One wonders if the dynamic is actually changing, or whether the tech-industry and "knowledge" workers present certain anomalies. One also wonders if tech employees that work remotely need to be in the U.S.; if workers are to be remote, might they be far less expensively remote in Bangalore, Beijing, Baatan, or beyond? If we can manage a worker remotely in San Jose, why not in San Marino or San Miguel? Be careful what you wish for ("you just might get it all, and then some you don't want"; Daughtry, 2006).
The Post article posits that there are methods for managing remote employees and maintaining productivity. There is discussion of measurement and even software for tracking the team and their contributions. But, there is also a daring quote included. One contributor suggests that the key to productivity is for employees to feel "empowerment, . . . energy and connection for the company’s mission." Productivity, under this view, comes from the perception that employees "are doing meaningful work.” That the work itself might drive each of us is an intriguing construct worthy of consideration.
That made me think about workers' compensation. There is, in reality, very little work that is more meaningful than delivering care and remediation to people suffering from the effects of an injury. That this community is focused on work injury makes the scope narrower, but the implication is the same. Bob Wilson often reminds us that this industry is about rebuilding people's lives, and it is in fact nothing short of that. It is important, meaningful, and critical. That is something we should all remember and imbue as we strive to recruit and retain the next generation for this community.
There is also a return to Henry David Thoreau in the Post story. He long ago posited
"It is not enough to be busy. So are the ants. The question is: What are we busy about?"
A contributor to The Post analysis returns to this and questions whether we should care about "productivity" or about results. The supposition is that only results matter and that this "productivity" analysis misses the boat. Being busy or productive is not the point from that perspective. That, of course, ignores the various corollaries historically drawn between productivity and the broader health of the economy. Just because it has been seen as an important measure for decades, no reason not to question it now. Is it important (still)?
Finally, there is recognition that some degree of this productivity loss is attributable to "quiet quitting" (September 2022). This is allegedly demonstrated by absenteeism, motivation, and even generational distinctions. Millennials and GenZs led the job change tsunami in 2021, according to CNBC. But, Pew supports that more Boomers left the workforce permanently. Thus, a changing workforce makeup may be behind some of the perceptions and conclusions. Some perceive the Boomers as success or intrinsic reward-driven, and the newer generations more idealistic or driven by broader societal-benefit motivations or beliefs. But, painting with a broad brush can produce a deceiving canvas.
The main import of the analyses seems to be change. The U.S. economy is in a state of change. Workers are being motivated by greener grass (pay, virtual, etc.) and are changing jobs. Others are remaining where they are and performing just enough to get by, eschewing the performance and motivation of yesteryear. And, the economy is struggling with the impacts of vast increases in cost associated with legislated wage inflation in what has become a very global economy; one in which cheaper labor seems always just a country away. While shipping costs and supply-chain concerns may impact the distribution of manufacturing jobs, the knowledge jobs seem far easier to offshore.
Is productivity an appropriate measure, or just more ants? Is telecommuting sustainable or just tolerable? If it is sustainable, how long will it remain domestic (or even somewhat so)? Is tomorrow here, or are we merely on a path that could lead there? There are many questions. There are many variables. In the end, I foresee people returning to the collegiality and community of a workspace. There is tangibility there, collectivity, and desirability. While there may be a place for hybrid and its commute, clothing, and chronological savings, the collective of some workspace will remain in some format (and likely strengthen).
In the end, productivity will matter, but the questions of ants may well lead to better analyses of the purpose of our work. Good managers will focus on things like The 5-Monkey Parable (February 2021) and will ask the hard questions about why we do what and as we do. They will adjust how we work, what/when we produce, and they will build efficiencies. This will affect workers' compensation both directly (how we in this community work) and indirectly (how employment works generally, and the risks entailed).
In all, it is an intriguing time to be alive. Of more import, however, it reinforces that the time has come for greater involvement in this community by the next generation. The time is past for plaques and speeches. The time has come for management to become focused and persistent in the recruiting, training, and empowerment of younger managers and leaders. The Time is Now (April 2022). More on that in days to come.
