Working 9 to 5 used to be the way to make a living. Not much longer. High gasoline prices have politicians and businesses desperate for affordable transportation solutions.
Businesses have to make a profit. Any cutbacks they make have bottom-line implications. Bloated governments think they can just squeeze the taxpayer for more money.
Recommended Stories
To cope with high fuel prices, politicians are eyeing alternatives from telecommuting to staggering shifts. One popular choice is the four-day workweek of 10-hour days.
It’s catching on nationwide. State and local governments give employees flexibility some private workers enjoy, but without any obligations to reduce the cost of government long term. Schools in at least 16 states have switched to four-day weeks, and even colleges are joining in. Utah mandated a four-day week for 17,000 workers. Birmingham, Ala., did it for 4,000. Similar ideas are gaining ground in Baltimore City, Baltimore County and Howard County.
Baltimore County Council Chairman Kevin Kamenetz sponsored legislation directing auditors to study an alternative workweek. But Kamenetz is wise to the potential problems. Critics complain that cutting hours also cuts access, and that’s not what the councilman wants. “In my opinion, all government offices need to be open to the public during regular business hours, five days a week,” he told The Examiner.
Kamenetz wants to do more than simply make it easier on employees. He wants to improve service as well. “I envision that opportunities for expanded hours to serve the public could occur. Someone could be at their desk at 7:30 a.m. to answer the phone, or until 6 p.m.”
That’s novel — giving taxpayers more without taxing more. But it’s not how the four-day workweek is being implemented elsewhere. In places like Utah, taxpayers get what amounts to a 20 percent reduction in services — four days of service for the same tax dollars.
Kamenetz’s report is due Sept. 15. “I don’t envision objection because I don’t see reduction in hours, just redistribution of hours, and only on a voluntary basis.”
That’s where his plan falls short. It deals with a specific problem and ignores the big picture — government cost. High fuel prices hurt everyone — from ordinary taxpayers to big business. They all adapt by spending less and cutting corners. Government simply demands more from citizens.
That’s the typical Maryland answer — more taxes. Since 1998, the Maryland budget has grown from just under $16 billion to more than $30 billion. That’s an expense growth rate more than double inflation. Spending at the inflation rate, Maryland would need less than $22 billion of our money.
Such fiscal irresponsibility can’t continue, and local jurisdictions could be key. They should seize high fuel costs as an opportunity not just for a quick budget fix, but for a long-term way to make government more affordable and efficient. The General Assembly might notice. That could convince voters government can work effectively.
