Worcester Business Journal

wbjournal.com | October 15, 2018 | Worcester Business Journal 21 Businesses should set their own staffing levels Be cautious in assessing changes in median income V I E W P O I N T E D I T O R I A L O n Nov. 6, Massachusetts voters will be tasked with deciding three ballot questions, but the one with the most reverberating impact on the Central Massachusetts economy is – by far – Question 1. If passed, this ballot initiative would mandate healthcare providers meet certain required nurse- to-patient ratios in a complex system based on the situation: an emergency room nurse can only care for one critical patient at a time or five non-critical patients; in maternity, one active labor patients at a time or six postpartum, etc., etc. While voters have heard a lot of comprehensive campaigning from both sides on costs vs. need for patient safety – with plenty of underlying motiva- tions – the winning argument in this debate boils down to one fundamental truth: Businesses should set their own staffing levels. Requiring hospitals and other healthcare pro- viders with minimum nurse staffing ratios is an unfair burden on the healthcare industry and the type of government over-regulation attacking the very foundation of business principles. Police and fire departments don't have required staffing levels, and they aren't even businesses. Hospitals – wheth- er they be for-profit or nonprofit – should not be held to a mandated standard. e success or failure of a business ultimately will come down to how well it is run. A business spreading its workforce too thin will see quality suffer and client satisfaction and retention drop. A business putting too many labor resources toward one effort will never have enough margin to W orcester Business Journal's story on Oct. 1 head- lined "Worcester median income drops nearly 6%," as well as the explanation offered by a local economist relating the drop to a national increase in income inequality is seriously misleading in several respects. First, the U.S. Census Bureau data cited do not take account of possible differences in the rate of immigration to Worcester as compared with other Massachusetts communities. Since a large fraction of immigrants to the city in recent decades has consisted of poorer people seeking to make a better life for themselves in this country, it is inevitable that so long as Worcester experiences a higher rate of immigra- tion than other communities, that fact alone will tend to lower the average household income in any comparison with those communities. (is is not a knock at immigrants, who contribute to our economy in important ways, but sim- ply a statement of fact to be taken into account in interpret- ing the growth or decline of median incomes.) Second, since the census data refer to cash income alone, they do not include possible increases in fringe benefits, notably the rising cost of health care, a substantial portion of which is oen covered by local employers. Such increased benefits are no less a form of income than cash payments. ird, the fact that, as the story reports, the proportion of Worcester households earning more than $75,000 declined considerably over the past year, from 44.8 percent of the population to 27.9 percent, directly contradicts the claim that Worcester is suffering from increased income inequal- ity. Quite the contrary: at substantial decline in the per- centage of upper-income households must have contributed substantially to the overall decline in median household incomes. In other words, Worcester may really be experi- encing an exodus of wealthier people, the cause(s) of which (since they constitute a significant portion of our tax base, homeowners and employers) bear looking into. Fourth, to compare the rise or decline of median house- hold income in Worcester with the situation in the rest of Massachusetts amounts to comparing apples and oranges, since it mixes together all sorts of communities from major cities to oen-wealthy suburbs to rural areas. Indeed, the article's last sentence acknowledges that median house- hold incomes in Springfield and Hartford – two compara- bly-sized Central New England cities – fell by 6.8 percent and 8.9 percent, respectively, last year. In other words, both did significantly worse than Worcester! Much caution needs to be exercised in interpreting fig- ures regarding supposed changes in local income, especially (as Worcester Regional Research Bureau director Tim McGourthy properly points out) given that the reported one-year change is based on a relatively small sample size of respondents as well as a very limited time frame. David Lewis Schaefer is professor of political science at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester. BY DAVID LEWIS SCHAEFER Special to the Worcester Business Journal David Lewis Schaefer The Worcester Business Journal welcomes letters to the editor and commentary submissions. Please send submissions to Brad Kane, editor, at bkane@wbjournal.com. WO R D F R O M T H E W E B sustain itself long term. Staffing levels are a delicate balance of producing a quality product or service at a cost your business can afford to bear. Having mandated levels will throw off that balance, and businesses will suffer. If patient safety had become a realistic concern in Massachusetts, then perhaps some kind of dras- tic action would be necessary. But it's not. In the latest safety ratings by Washington, D.C. nonprofit Leapfrog Group, three Central Massachusetts hospitals scored a "A" rating: Saint Vincent Hospital in Worcester, Heywood Hospital in Gardner and Leonard Morse Hospital in Natick. UMass Memorial Medical Center's Memorial Campus and University Campus in Worcester each received a "B." None of the region's hospitals scored lower than a "C." At a time when healthcare costs are becoming more of a burden for individuals and businesses, now is not the time to saddle the industry with cost- ly regulations. Both sides have their own predictions on the cost of mandated nurse staffing levels – no doubt influenced by their desire to win on Nov. 6 – but the numbers we trust come from the Massa- chusetts Health Policy Commission, the indepen- dent state agency charged with making data-driven decisions on healthcare reform. HPC says Question 1 will cost hospitals and other healthcare facilities $949 million annually. at's far too much. An early October poll from UMass Lowell showed 51 percent of voters opposed Question 1 while 43 percent support it. When standing before your ballot on Nov. 6, you should side with this majority. Doing otherwise would place an undue burden on businesses throughout the commonwealth. Tweets of the week ".@fitchburgart is an underappreciated jewel of a museum in North Central Mass. It's pretty cool that @AISSystems is sponsoring an exhibition there on furniture in contemporary art." - Suzanne Morse (@sznnmorse ), Oct. 2, on a WBJ sto- ry about Leominster-based AIS sponsoring a furniture art exhibit at the Fitchburg Art Museum "We are thrilled to be featured in the @ WBJournal's Book of Lists as one of the Top 5 Ad & Marketing Communications Firms!" - 3 Media Web (@3mediaweb), Oct. 5, on being listed in the WBJ's Book of Lists. Facebook feedback "Kelly Square is your worst nightmare." - Barbara Allen, Oct. 10, on a WBJ story about Worcester and state officials soliciting input on a redesign of Kelley Square "That will be a great fit there." - Jimmy Kalogeropoulos, Oct. 3, on a WBJ story about Mexicali Grill taking over the British Beer Co. location on Shrewsbury Street in Worcester W W

• Cover