job sharing and 403K

Parent Cafe
1

<p>Forgive me if I do not use all the correct terminology or paint a complete picture in this first post.</p>

<p>For six years I’ve been working part-time at a hospice agency. I began there as an intern and when the internship was over they asked me to stay. My employment status has basically always been PRN (as needed, meaning when the census is up, or another co-worker is on vacation, sick, etc.). Over the years, this has manifest itself in many different ways, from working lots of weekends, to none, to no days for weeks, to 3 days a week. I have been very accommodating with my availability and have almost never turned down the request to work, but have made it pretty much clear that I don’t want full time employment. I don’t mind working a 40-hour week every now and then, but I do not want permanent full time. Every time there has been a full-time position open up, they’ve always come to me first and asked me to take it. And I’ve politely declined and expressed my sincere appreciation for their consideration of me first before posting the listing. I absolutely love the flexibility of the schedule and I get to do what I love to do, but I also have a very healthy work/life balance. Right now we have a 15-year old dog who basically cannot be left alone (nor would I want to) for more than five-six hours max, so it’s just not even an option for me (I don’t want to get into dog walkers, etc. with all her health issues). So the 2 1/2 days I’ve been working for two months now is spread out over five days because I can do my field work, then come home to finish charting. </p>

<p>One of my co-workers works .8 and wants to stay that way; however, the agency is becoming less and less lenient of anything less than 1.0 positions. She lives about 40 miles from me and her territory’s census close to my home has grown and is growing. I know she’s been pressured to go full-time, but she, too, places a high priority on work/life balance. She basically manages the same case level of other workers who work five days a week, although she only works four. She’s a very valuable employee to the agency; however she does need a job because her husband is self-employed and they cannot get health insurance due to some medical issues he has. </p>

<p>Several times she and I have propositioned the agency for the two of us to job share, meaning she’d work .8, and me, .2. I’d still make myself available the other days of the week for PRN. We’ve just continuously hit a brick wall every time we mention it. There are a couple of other instances of workers who job share. This worker and I work very well together, have excellent communication skills and are highly respected by our co-workers and supervisors. But we have not been able to figure out why they won’t take us up on our suggestion to job share. I have never needed benefits and am fine with no paid vacation because I have the flexibility of schedule as a PRN employee. They know I do not need benefits.</p>

<p>Today we found out why the hesitation and I’m wondering if there’s some way around it. Evidently, even if they offer me a .2 position (plus whatever PRN hours I’d continue to work), they have to allow me to enroll in the 403K program if I want to. And they’d have to match my contribution. Honestly, I don’t make enough money compared to H to do this. There is absolutely no need for me to take advantage of this benefit. Heck, on one day a week, I don’t even care about paid vacation time. </p>

<p>But I can understand their hesitation now. I don’t think it would be legal of them to offer me a job with the agreement that I won’t take advantage of the 403K benefit. So my question is, is there a way for me to communicate to them that, if they hire me .2 (so essentially my co-worker and I will cover a 1.0 FTE position and they’ll get off her back) I won’t need the 403K? I guess they’d have to trust me, but how do I present it to them? Perhaps I can’t even say the words, “I don’t need the 403K option or other benefits.” HR, my supervisor, all the necessary people know, I don’t need the benefits. Honestly, the money I make in one year is less than H’s merit increase per year. But I love my job and the only thing that would make it almost perfect would be to job share with this other co-worker (of course, she gets benefits, too) because, like I said, we work very well together. </p>

<p>Any suggestions?? Please let me know if I can clarify any portion of the story.</p>

2

<p>My first thought on reading this (and I may be not understanding properly) is I don’t see why it is such an issue for them. I assume the 403k matching is set at a % of income. Say 6%. </p>

<p>If the total monthly income for a full time job is $1,000 then the max contribution would be $60 and the max they would have to match would be $60. If you work .2 and your coworker works .8 then you would earn $200 with a max contribution of $12 and a max matching of $12. your coworker would earn $800 with a max contribution of $48 and a max matching of $48. </p>

<p>The max company matching would be the same either way $60 or $48+12. So why is it an issue for them?</p>

<p>(I am not familiar with 403Ks but am assuming they work the same as 401Ks - if I am wrong then just ignore the above).</p>

3

<p>swimcatsmom - whenever info comes out of HR about benefits, I just throw them out, as I said, I’ve never needed to use them, so I don’t know what their matching policy is, or the maximum contribution.</p>

4

<p>Terwtt - In order to find out if you can make this dollar neutral to your employer, you will need to look over the benefits info. While I would make the same argument as swimcatsmom that if you are .2 and your coworker is .8, how can they be more than 1.0 (as they would be 1.0 if they hired someone else full time,) but you say .2 plus the prn hours is possible (which sounds like you plus .8 could be over 1.0). You say that right now you are working .5 (2 and 1/2 days), so this plus .8 is more than 1.0 already.</p>

<p>Perhaps you could agree to a .2 fixed position with compensatory time off if you go over .2 to make up for the overage. </p>

<p>I think you mean 403(b) not k - for non profits, govt, schools and the like. This is not as familiar to me as 401k plans and the rules are a bit different as to who may be eligible. I think they may be able to not offer benefits to “on call” type employees as you sound like you are currently, but once the position is a fixed salary, there may be different rules. Isn’t there someone in charge of benefits to talk to? With more facts you might be able to come up with a plan.</p>

5

<p>403 (b) plan, but it is just like a 401K plan for those in certain employment sectors. </p>

<p>The actual dollar amount of the match may not be the problem (after all, if the other person were full time and fully participated in the plan, the company would be out the full amount of the match). </p>

<p>It could be that there is a hefty administrative charge by the Plan administrator for every person enrolled in the plan–the cost could be larged compared to how much they are paying you. Or it could be that the Plan fits under some “small plan exemption” and they are concerned that adding new people might jeopardize their exemption.</p>

<p>Just spinning out some thoughts here, because the stated reason–we’ll have to match your contributions–makes no sense.</p>

6

<p>You’re right, I did mean 403B. </p>

<p>Let me clarify the hours. Right now I am 2.5 days a week because we just hired a new chaplain to replace one who retired in June. He could not start until mid-July so I was given field assignments to cover until he had completed orientation and was up and running on his own. By mid-July, though, our census had sky-rocketed more than they anticipated and, they needed me to stay on even after the new hire began. However, the census went up so quickly that it became apparent that they needed an additional 1.0 position, but in hiring one, it would eliminate the need for me to work 2.5 days a week. So I’ve known for a couple of weeks that, once they hire another 1.0 chaplain, I would be back to strictly PRN, mostly covering for vacations, sick days, etc. and not work the 2.5 days I am working now. I know the numbers and know that they need another 1.0 staff member, not a .5. But they keep pressuring this other co-worker, who is .8 to work 1.0. Until they hire another 1.0 and that person is up and running (which could take upwards of 1+ months), I could do a .2 job share, and work some additional time to help fill in. As it is, the person I’m looking to job share with is going on vacation next week, so I will be working almost full-time (which I can do right now because D2 doesn’t go back to college until the end of the month, so she helps with dog care) next week. </p>

<p>I’m thinking the prospect of something along the lines an administrative charge could be a possibility. There’s something somewhere that they don’t want to commit to anything that might incur extra expenses for the agency. The point I am having a difficult time communicating with them about, is that they needn’t worry because I have no intention of utilizing this benefit. I’d even be willing to sign something, but again, I’m sure that we’d even have this discussion would be illegal. </p>

<p>Hope this clarifies things. We’re talking about an agency that, six months ago, struggled to keep a census in the upper 100s, and now we’re in the upper 200s. That’s a huge increase, but the fruits of some good marketing had eventually paid off.</p>