SHOULD WORKERS GET HAZARD PAY IN A PANDEMIC?

While variable pay generally involves compensating employees according to what they accomplish, employers also can adjust pay to recognize workers for taking on significant challenges. Hazard pay is pay above the agreed-on wage or salary to compensate employees for carrying out hazardous duties or doing work that causes extreme physical comfort and distress that cant be eased with the use of protective devices. During the COVID-19 pandemic, some employees sought and some employers offered hazard pay for working in conditions where employees might have to be exposed to the novel coronavirus. For nurses, paramedics, police officers, grocery clerks, and others, working even while wearing protective equipment could pose a hazard of infection.

Hazard pay is not required by law, but federal government employees are eligible for 25% hazard pay if exposed to virulent biologicals, when protective devices do not completely protect them. Amazon and various supermarket chains announced $2-an-hour temporary pay increases for employees who work with the public. Kroger called the additional pay a Hero Bonus, and Albertsons termed it Appreciation Pay. Other companies, including Walmart, Walgreens, and CVS have paid workers one-time bonuses between $150 and $500. This additional pay added to companies expenses at a time when the economy overall had dramatically slowed, but it did provide an incentive for workers to stay on the job.

Advocates of paying hazard pay during the pandemic noted that many of these jobs already are at the low end of U.S. earnings, and households that depend on wages from a worker who is cleaning hospital rooms, driving a bus, or delivering groceries have little to fall back on if that worker becomes ill. Furthermore, especially in the early months of the pandemic, companies had difficulty obtaining enough personal protective equipment for their workers. From this perspective, it is a matter of basic human rights that people who are risking their health to serve societys needs should be compensated.

A major objection to hazard pay is that employers might use it as a substitute for creating safe working conditions. Another concern is the cost of raising wages, which employees might come to expect will continue at the higher level after the risk subsides. Companies might have to lay off some workers or even go out of business if they cannot earn profits while compensating employees at a higher pay level.

Q1 Considering the list of employee rights in the ethics section of Chapter 1. Which, if any, of those rights would apply to the question of whether to offer hazard pay during a biological, environmental or natural crisis? Explain your answer(s).

Q2 Placing yourself in the role of a HR Manager, what criteria would you recommend to your company on how to determine which jobs may or may not receive hazard pay? (Be sure to take into consideration the employees view of pay equity). Explain and support your answers.

Q3 Now that the Covid pandemic has subsided to very low levels of infection. What are your recommendations for addressing the additional incentive pay received by workers? Should it remain in place or be eliminated? Would you consider offering some alternative? If so, then why? Explain and support your answers.