Rick Bell – Page 23

February 13, 2020June 29, 2023

The 3rd nominee for the Worst Employer of 2020 is … the Arresting Retaliator

An African-American employee claims he suffered rampant discrimination at the towing company at which he worked, including being called racial slurs.

But that’s not what qualifies A&B Towing for its nomination as the Worst Employer of 2020. It’s what happened to Michael Fesser after he complained to his boss about the discrimination and harassment that is truly eye-opening and offensive. NBC News has the details:

West Linn police began investigating Fesser in February 2017 after Fesser raised concerns to his boss, Eric Benson, owner of A&B Towing, that he was being racially discriminated against at work. …

After he raised his concerns, Benson contacted West Linn Police Chief Terry Timeus, his friend, and persuaded to look into allegations that Fesser had stolen from the company, according to the lawsuit.

The suit said the theft allegations were false and unsubstantiated.

But with the approval of West Linn police Lt. Mike Stradley, Detectives Tony Reeves and Mike Boyd used audio and video equipment to watch Fesser while he was at work, according to the suit. The surveillance was “conducted without a warrant or probable cause” and did not result in any evidence that Fesser was stealing from his employer, the lawsuit stated.

Regardless, West Linn officers, with the help of Portland police officers, arrested Fesser days later based on Reeves’ and Stradley’s “false representations” to Portland police that they had probable cause for an arrest. …

Fesser spent about eight hours at the police station before he was released on his own recognizance. He was later contacted by West Linn police to come to the station to retrieve some of his belongings. While he was there, officers informed Fesser that he had been fired from his job, according to the lawsuit. …

According to the lawsuit, criminal charges in the arrest weren’t filed until after Fesser sued his employer over his termination and for discrimination. The charges were later dismissed.

If you call in a friendly favor to the chief of police to have an employee falsely arrested after that employee complains of workplace discrimination and harassment, you might be the worst employer of 2020.

Previous nominees:

The 1st Nominee for the Worst Employer of 2020 Is … the Repeat, Repeat Offender

The 2nd nominee for Worst Employer of 2020 is … the Uncaring Chief

February 12, 2020June 29, 2023

Even though this employer won its ex-employee’s retaliation lawsuit, don’t do what it did

Family businesses are difficult to manage. They become even more difficult when the owners are spouses, and an employee accuses one of sexual harassment.

For example, consider Allen v. Ambu-Stat.

D’Marius Allen worked as an EMT for Ambu-Stat, owned by husband and wife Santos and Rita Ortiz. During the four months Allen worked for Ambu-Stat, she claimed that Santos subjected her to sporadic instances of verbal sexual harassment. For example, he told her she was “pretty” and “fine as hell.” She also alleged he made three sexually suggestive comments to her.

Three months into Allen’s employment, Rita called her into her office and accused her of discussing her sex life with Santos. Allen demurred that Santos started any sexual conversations between them. Rita ended that meeting by warning Allen that it was inappropriate to discuss her personal life with Santos, as he was her employer. One week later, Rita delivered a disciplinary employee correction form to Allen for having had an “inappropriate conversation” with Santos while on duty. The form stated that “having such conversations while on duty with co-workers (or especially with my husband) is extremely inappropriate and unacceptable.”

Allen responded by explaining to Rita, in writing, that Santos had asked her if her boyfriend was good at oral sex, in response to a lyric in a song on the radio. Allen also wrote that she did want to be “involved in any sexual harassment.” Finding Allen’s explanation to be “outlandish,” “disturbing,” and “full of lies,” Rita terminated her.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Allen’s retaliation claim. The court differentiated between bona fide opposition to unlawful discrimination or harassment (protected), as compared to an attempt to apologize and mend fences (not protected). The court concluded that Allen had engaged in the latter. Case dismissed. Employer wins.

This decision is baffling. Allen was in an extraordinarily difficult situation, harassed by one owner-spouse and having to justify her action to the other owner-spouse. She should not have to use “magic words” to express her discomfort in the situation. (Never mind that she actually did use the magic word “harassment”.)

An employer has the same anti-harassment and anti-retaliation obligations to an employee whether the accused harasser is a line worker or an owner. Take the allegations seriously, investigate, correct and do not retaliate. Ambu-Stat failed on each of these steps and is very lucky to have walked out of this case free and clear.

February 9, 2020June 29, 2023

Sail the C’s to engage a freelance workforce: Caring and communication

Employee engagement can be a big enough challenge on its own, let alone when an organization is trying to increase engagement and retention rates among workers they have never even met in person.

The emergence of the freelance nation challenges organizations to refine their leadership style. Leaders in the workplace must be prepared to collaborate instead of control.

“You don’t really need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to managing your freelance employees,” said Dania Shaheen, vice president of people at Kazoo, a human resources platform.

According to Shaheen, the basic best practices that organizations use with their full-time, in-house employees are fundamentally the same approaches that organizations should take with their freelancers when it comes to increasing engagement.

This includes regular check-ins, meetings and video calls whenever possible to get that important face-to-face time. This gives both the organization and the freelancer an opportunity to share expectations, questions and feedback, and helps to build a stronger relationship.

“As an organization, you have to make sure that employees are engaged and that they feel valued, whether that’s freelancers or remote employees,” Shaheen said.

Contingent workers: Why companies must make them feel valued and engaged

Time and again, communication proves to be the biggest struggle when it comes to employee engagement among remote, global and freelance workforces. Carlos Castelán, managing director of The Navio Group, a business management consulting firm, said that one of the hardest parts of staying motivated as a freelancer is fully grasping how their contributions fit into the overall mission of the company. This obstacle, on top of minimal communication from managers, can result in feelings of isolation.

“In many ways, poor communication signals to someone that they’re not valued enough to be included,” Castelán said in an email statement. “Poor communication can lead to role ambiguity as well as heightened stress or anxiety because of a lack of feedback, which ultimately leads to [a fear of missing out], stress, burnout, talent drain or other symptoms of low employee engagement.”

Jamie Ceglarz, founder and managing director of recruiting firm Guild Talent, stressed the importance of starting with hiring the right people. Addressing their expectations, drive and needs through the onboarding process allows for a great foundation in building that relationship with a freelancer right from the start. Organizations need to ensure that they care about what helps their employees succeed while also being clear and transparent about the company’s expectations and goals.

“With remote employees in particular, it’s important to set people up for success and allow them to work in an environment that best suits them in an effort to get the most out of them,” Ceglarz said in an email statement.

Because freelance workers don’t physically show up to work every day and take part in the team culture within the workplace, it can be easy for some to forget that they even exist. Liz Brown, founder of Sleeping Lucid, an online resource for sleep problem awareness, finds that treating freelancers with respect and genuinely caring about their contributions and well-being within the company is a best practice when it comes to keeping them motivated and maintaining a healthy relationship.

“Businesses should treat freelancers with kindness and not see them as disposable objects that one can simply throw away,” Brown said via email. “Complimenting their achievements and treating them with respect improves their work environment, which in turn keeps them motivated.”

The freelance workforce is not one to neglect. Joe Flanagan, fitness app developer at GetSongbpm, an open source database of beats per minute, said that freelancers provide companies with an array of benefits. Organizations should want them to feel satisfied and engaged to help motivate them to continue producing their best work.

If they are treated as though they are full-time employees, both parties will reap the rewards. In an email statement, Flanagan said, “The benefits of being able to look for someone with the right skill set and who fits work culture on an international level are invaluable.”

February 7, 2020June 29, 2023

From boomers to Gen Z: How to engage a multigenerational workforce

Five generations are now represented in today’s workforce as millennials and Generation Z continue to make their mark.

Millennials will soon be the largest living generation in the U.S. labor force, while the number of people 65 years and older is expected to nearly double. At the same time, digital technologies are changing how these generations collaborate and work together, as well as how organizations engage, manage and retain employees.

Because of this, employee expectations across the board have evolved and no longer does a “one-size-fits-all” approach work when it comes to employee engagement. In fact, failure to meet these expectations can result in decreased productivity and high turnover in an increasingly competitive economy.

In a world of #okboomer memes and “Me Generation” stereotypes, organizations should explore ways to better unify employees and harness the power of a diverse workplace. Here are three ways that HR and communicators can accommodate employees across generations and gain a competitive advantage in the market.

Speak Their Language

First and foremost, HR and communications leaders must identify who their audiences are and what content will resonate the most, as the context and tone of a message can impact how employees receive and choose to engage with it. Even when providing the same information to all generations, communicators should explore ways to share that message to younger versus older employees.

For example, a more detailed email about new company policy might translate better with baby boomers, while it could be ignored by millennials and Gen Z who tend to prefer more informal, casual language. In contrast, a conversational tone may not translate for older demographics who might see it as blurring professional and personal boundaries.

In a multigenerational workplace, HR and communicators should find ways to personalize and distribute content based on employee types and preferences quickly and easily. This plays a major role in making workers feel more valued, drives feelings of inclusion and has a direct impact on productivity and satisfaction.

Once the content is in place, it’s important to consider the distribution strategy and the cadence or frequency in which content is shared. In the past decade alone, the workforce has become infinitely more connected with digital reminders, near-instantaneous updates, collaborative calendars and more. From intranet platforms to multidevice and direct messaging applications, each generation will find different methods better suited for them and employers need to adapt to this digital shift.

As digital natives, millennials and Gen Z are likely more comfortable and familiar with mobile and chat platforms, and may prefer receiving information and updates via mobile app. Conversely, Gen Xers and baby boomers may want to receive information via email or hard copy and hear feedback face-to-face.

Finding a balanced cadence of communications that appeases all employees can be tricky, but is foundational to building and maintaining a unified company culture. In this sense, it’s important to remember that every employee interacts with technology differently. When thinking about how best to disseminate the “nice-to-know” versus the “need-to-know,” evaluate consumption preferences and habits across all employees and tailor communication methods based on this assessment.

Keep Employees Motivated

A third factor to keep in mind when engaging a diverse workforce is that employees want different things from their employers and from their career paths, regardless of demographic. Internal communications directly impact employee motivations and their level of productivity, and leaders will need to invest in ways to empower everyone in their organization.

Research has shown that millennials and Gen Z value work-life balance more so than their older colleagues, and may not want to receive communications from work outside office hours. Gen Xers and boomers also don’t require constant feedback, while younger demographics are motivated by words of encouragement from superiors on a regular basis. Some employees might appreciate reminders to complete surveys or program registrations, while others might find anything more than a weekly reminder overwhelming.

And, while many see technology as a key divider among generations, that’s far from the case. Employee engagement tools and technologies can help managers, supervisors and the C-suite share their mission and messages with all employees in a personalized way. Providing channels to ask questions, share advice or collaborate on work can also energize employees and foster relationships between generations. With the right tools in place, HR and communications teams can measure and analyze the impact of their engagement strategies to adjust over time.

Employees of all ages seek workplace satisfaction and it’s up to HR and business leaders to provide the tools, resources and strategies that empower them to define their own experience. As workforce demographics evolve, organizations must create a space for a variety of work styles to flourish and ultimately position their employees – and the business – for success.

February 7, 2020June 29, 2023

Labor issues when you acquire a company with a union

Spotify recently announced that it is acquiring The Ringer, one of the most prolific and popular podcasting networks.

Spotify also indicated that it intends to hire all of The Ringer’s 90 employees, most of whom work on theringer.com, which covers sports and culture and which Spotify indicates it will keep up and running.

Last summer, 66 of those 90 employees signed union-authorization cards stating their support for the Writers Guild of America East to represent them as their collective bargaining representative. Shortly thereafter, The Ringer management voluntarily recognized the Guild as the union representative for its employees.

What does this mean for Spotify? Is it acquiring a labor union as part of its purchase of The Ringer? Like most legal questions, the answer depends on a number of factors.
The primary question relates to the structure of the deal itself. Is it a stock purchase or an asset purchase?

If it’s a stock purchase — the buyer is acquiring all of the stock of the seller — this issue is much easier to solve. In a stock purchase, the buyer stands in the place of the seller and becomes responsible for all of the seller’s obligations, including its union-related obligations and any existing collective bargaining agreements. In other words, if Spotify purchased all of the stock of The Ringer, then Spotify is almost certainly acquiring its union and related obligations.

The fact that Spotify said that it intends to hire all of The Ringer’s employees, however, makes me think this deal is an asset purchase and not a stock purchase. And in an asset purchase, these issues are much more complex.

In an asset deal, the buyer assumes some, but not necessarily all, of the seller’s union-related obligations, but only if the buyer is a “successor employer.” A buyer is deemed to be a successor employer when it continues the predecessor’s business and hires a majority of its employees from the predecessor’s union employees.

A successor-buyer must recognize and bargain with the union, but it does not necessarily adopt the predecessor’s collective bargaining agreement. Instead, the buyer is usually free to set its own initial terms and conditions of employment before bargaining in good faith to a new collective bargaining agreement (as long as the buyer does not mislead employees into believing they will be re-hired without changes to their terms and conditions of employment, which will lock the buyer into the old agreement).

What I hope you take away from today’s post is the complexity of these issues. If you are involved in the sale or purchase of a business that has unionized employees, you absolutely need to involve labor counsel in the deal so that the parties understand what union-related rights are being bought and sold.

February 6, 2020June 29, 2023

Here’s why fair-chance hiring is a benefit to employees and employers

Many American companies are missing out on employees who have the potential to transform their perspectives and increase their profits. Specifically, they’re overlooking a significant swath of the U.S. population — the 70 million Americans who have a criminal record.

This isn’t to say progress hasn’t been made to re-integrate this group back into the working world. Recently, the Fair Chance Act was signed into law by President Donald Trump as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. The law prohibits the federal government and federal contractors from asking about an applicant’s criminal history prior to the conditional offer stage.

With this recent law, the White House is joining the 35 states and over 150 cities with similar “ban the box” policies. Such “ban the box” policies help remove barriers for people with criminal records during the hiring process by delaying questions about one’s criminal history from the initial part of the hiring process.

This is a part of a larger criminal justice trend taking shape across both the public and private sectors. Many organizations and corporations, including Coca-Cola, American Airlines, Google, Facebook, and others, signed on to the Fair Chance Pledge launched by the Obama Administration.

Slack, in partnership with the Kellogg Foundation and others, launched Next Chapter, a pilot program designed to help formerly incarcerated individuals succeed in tech. Providing these opportunities to qualified candidates adds stability to workers’ lives and, by extension, helps strengthen communities. That’s a message companies want to get behind, and with good reason.

After all, fair chance hiring is built on the premise that everyone, regardless of their background, should be fairly assessed for a role they are qualified for, including those with criminal histories. Candidates that fall into this category are often eager and driven but overlooked for past infractions that may or may not have any connection to the role for which they are applying.

Fair chance hiring lowers recidivism and enables individuals with arrest or conviction records — and their families — to get back on their feet and reintegrated into society. But in my experience, it benefits employers just as much, if not more.

Take my employer, for example. At Checkr, fair chance hiring is deeply embedded into both our culture and our process, which is fulfilling to me on a personal level as a former public service attorney for the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. In terms of hard numbers, about 6 percent of our employees are fair chance, and 72 percent have moved up at Checkr or gone on to new positions elsewhere.

If fair chance hiring is something you’d also like to consider at your organization, here are a few benefits you can expect.

Develop a competitive edge through a broader talent pool. Given how tight today’s job market is — the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the current unemployment rate is hovering around 3.5% — employers can’t afford to turn away qualified applicants. And because one in three American adults has a criminal record, automatically excluding anyone in this category necessarily means that you are missing out on good people. A broader talent pool means better, stronger hires, which in turn gives you a valuable competitive advantage.

Diversify your employee base. In America, the burden of incarceration is borne disproportionately by underrepresented minorities. When companies hire from this talent pool, they’re not just bringing on racial diversity, they’re also opening their doors to people who are likely to have different abilities, education levels and economic statuses. A more diverse team means different perspectives and new ways of looking at challenges, which ultimately lead to creativity, innovation and disruption.

Get a better return on investment. Fair chance hiring practices offer a significant return on investment, both from a performance and retention perspective. In fact, a study of John Hopkins Health Systems & Hospital (which has employed hundreds of people with criminal backgrounds since 2000, making up 5 percent of their workforce) found that, over a four-year period, fair chance employees had a 43 percent higher retention rate than employees without a criminal record.

If you truly incorporate fair chance hiring as part of your corporate mission, the positive effects will astound you. Not only is it the right thing to do, but you will reap rewards far in excess of what you sow through a diversified, loyal, and passionate employee base.

February 5, 2020June 29, 2023

What is the Advancing Support for Working Families Act, and why doesn’t it go far enough?

During last night’s State of the Union Address, President Trump announced his endorsement of the Advancing Support for Working Families Act.

Whether we are Republican, Democrat, or independent, surely we must all agree that every human life is a sacred gift from God. As we support America’s moms and dads, I was recently proud to sign the law providing new parents in the federal workforce paid family leave, serving as a model for the rest of the country.

Now I call on Congress to pass the bipartisan Advancing Support for Working Families Act, extending family leave to mothers and fathers all across our nation.

It’s a bipartisan bill that would provide new parents the ability to borrow against the future tax benefit from their $5,000 federal Child Tax Credit, in the form of a $500 allowance for 10 years.

Also read: FMLA leave: Designate early and often

There is little doubt that the United States needs to do something (anything) to provide new parents with some form of paid family leave. I have serious concerns, however, over a proposal that requires parents to borrow against a future tax credit to take that benefit. I have further concerns over a proposal that does not protect parents who avail themselves of that benefit from retaliation.

It’s good that we are having a national conversation about paid parental and family leave. It will be better when we start talking about proposed laws that will provide real and actual benefits and employment protections to parents.

And it will be best when Congress and the White House get off their collective asses and pass meaningful legislation.

February 5, 2020June 29, 2023

Pay equity doesn’t mean paying the same for everyone

In 2018, 40 states put through legislation on pay equity practices.

There is no shortage of laws that give all people the right to be free from discrimination in compensation, including the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VIl of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and Title I of the ADA Act of 1990.

Pay equity is a critical issue for our time. It’s proven to drive profits for companies that support it. So why is it taking legislation to get companies to move towards a more fair and equitable pay system?

Perhaps it’s the misperception that pay equity means treating everyone the same way. But equal doesn’t mean fair. The goal of pay equity is not to treat everyone the same — it’s actually just the opposite. You can treat people fairly and still treat them differently. Factors such as educational background, tenure, skill, quality of work, etc., are all variables that can, and should, be factored into the mix. But, biases based on personal attributes, such as race, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation and more, are variables that should not affect pay.

Pay equity is equal pay for work of equal value. It is also used to describe pay comparisons where there is no unexplained difference pay, and that is not the result of defensible and legitimate factors. Therefore, pay inequity is any difference in pay that is unexplained, or not the result of defensible and legitimate factors.

According to the World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap Report for 2018, which benchmarks 149 countries on their progress toward gender parity, the US ranked No. 51 in the world. We can do better. By comparison, Iceland, Norway and Sweden occupy the top three spots. And, although many countries have achieved important milestones toward gender parity, much still needs to be done.

Pay equity includes total compensation — including overtime pay, bonuses, stock grants, profit sharing and bonus plans, and yes, life insurance, PTO and holiday pay, travel allowances, reimbursement for travel expenses. However, we need to remember all the processes that result in a worker paycheck, including promotions, performance reviews, merit raises, access to the CEO and representation on the leadership team since they all can impact pay differences over time.

And, while individual organizations have their own formulas for fair and equitable compensation, everyone will benefit by evaluating pay equity in the broader ecosystem. Solving pay equity comes from organizations and their leaders who take ownership of culture, pay programs and total rewards.

The first step is for organizations to be willing to take a look at their own data and processes. And then be willing to acknowledge it if there are issues around pay equity and work to solve for it. Some may desire to make their process and findings public inside their companies, and then share the plan to monitor it regularly to ensure continued pay equity.

Here are three things to get started:

Analyze average pay of people within an organization to find patterns. Start by role-to-role comparisons, then group to group, the protected classes.
Evaluate the hiring processes to ascertain diversity of teams and the ways in which your process results in a wide range of candidates.
Evaluate the processes which reward, promote, and give feedback to your workforce. Are they equitable or did the majority of raises go to one gender, racial, or age group?

To solve for pay equity issues we must look closely at representation. We need more women, people of color, and the LGBTQ community in leadership positions such as on corporate boards. According to Heidrick & Struggles, men hold 93 percent of the CEO positions in U.S. companies. Further research from ISS Analytics found that the percentage of female directors is just 24 percent in the United States.

Total rewards programs include anything that signals to the employee that they are important. The most effective total rewards programs are enacted through the lens of inclusion and take into consideration representation from under represented groups.

It’s also critical to be transparent as to how rewards are given out and how employees can navigate the system. Today, most employees do not have any idea how their pay packages are put together. An organization’s goal is transparency so that people understand how to navigate the culture and achieve their potential at work, which affords them the chance to have a great life.

For example, ACIPCO, an international provider of clean energy technology and services, provides quarterly profit sharing, an on-site health care facility and rewards workers for good tips/suggestions. They also give access to the company plane and yacht when employees need it — and this is not based on hierarchy, everyone gets access. It’s no wonder that they consistently land on Fortune’s 100 Best Companies to Work For and, in an industry where turnover is 80- to 100 percent, they have less than .05 percent a year.

Starbucks offers free Spotify premium and free online classes at Arizona State University and, of course, free coffee. Netflix offers one-year parental leave and Salesforce.com provides commuter benefits, educational reimbursement, refinancing of student debt and 24-hour travel assistance.

Because of the impact on culture, customers, and on the regulatory environment, it’s vitally important that attention to this comes from the C-suite, not just from HR. The critical role for HR is to observe, rebuild systems, make sure the data is accurate and challenge the C-suite and the existing ways of doing things to be the champion of the people experience.

Here are the takeaways:

Don’t shy away from the issue of pay equity. Embrace its importance and build processes around the issue rather than waiting for federal or state laws to dictate what you need to do.
Analyze and understand current plans that are in place. If a woman or minority is disadvantaged from the start of employment, that’s a problem that will grow exponentially.
Consistently look at and monitor the process, review it and test it.
Assess gaps from these measurements and make changes accordingly.
Institute transparency between employees and leadership so that you’re setting the narrative and telling your own story rather than allowing social sharing to drive it and derail it.

In short, paying people fairly is a great idea for many reasons and a great business practice. Don’t be afraid to look at your own pay equity issues. It’s better to be in the know.

The result is a boost in reputation, the ability to recruit the best talent and to provide employees the ability to maximize their contributions to the organization.

February 4, 2020June 29, 2023

Court to decide whether an employer can require direct observation of a workplace urine-sample collection

An employer requires “direct observation” of its employees providing a urine sample pursuant to its reasonable suspicion and random workplace drug-testing policy.

The employer sends an individual of the same sex to accompany the tested employee into a restroom designated for the sample collection to visually observe the employee producing the sample. The employer’s substance abuse policy and the consent and release form provide for the testing, neither discloses or provides for the direct observation of the sample production.

These are the facts of Lunsford v. Sterilite of Ohio, in which the Ohio Supreme Court will decide whether a private-sector, at-will employee who agrees to drug testing as a condition of continued employment has a reasonable expectation of privacy during mandatory drug screening.

The court of appeals determined that the direct observation method of urine-sample collection is an unlawful invasion of the employees’ common law right to privacy. “We find appellants did have a reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to exposure of their genitals.” The issue wasn’t whether the collection itself violated the employees’ privacy. It doesn’t. As the appellate court explained, “[A]n employee consenting to a drug test waives the right to complain that his urine is collected and tested.” However, in this case, the employees “had an expectation of privacy with regard to their bodies and … the compelled exposure of their genitals and compelled urination before a stranger intruded upon that privacy.”

The Ohio Supreme Court, which held oral argument in this case last week, will now decide this fascinating issue.

If you watch the oral argument, you will not witness a whole lot of outrage toward the employer from my state’s notoriously business-friendly Supreme Court. While this case will likely be a win for the employer, it does not mean that your business should across-the-board adopt “direct observation” as the process for your drug testing. To me, it’s a horribly offensive practice that should only be used if necessary, and only after disclosure to, and consent by, the observed employee.

What advice would I provide if a client comes to me and asks about a “direct observation” policy?

I’d ask, “Why?” What are you trying to achieve? Are there less obtrusive means available to prevent employees from cheating a drug test (e.g., searches before they enter the restroom, pat-downs, etc.)? Does it make more sense to limit direct observation to situations in which you have a reasonable suspicion of cheating?
Make sure all employees have notice of the direct observation and when you might use it. Unlike the employer in this case, put it in your drug-testing policy, and have employees sign off on it as an express condition of employment. With notice and consent, they cannot complain about an invasion of privacy, as they’ve voluntarily sacrificed that right.

Just because Ohio’s Supreme Court will likely grant a thumbs-up to Sterilite’s policy in this case, it does not mean that the policy makes for good HR or that it’s one that you should adopt in your workplace. Instead, consider what goals you hope to advance with your drug-testing policy and tailor it accordingly.

February 4, 2020June 29, 2023

The evolving role of a chief people officer

Late last year McDonald’s Corp. Chief People Officer David Fairhurst left the fast-food giant just one day following Chief Executive Officer Steve Easterbrook’s termination after violating company policy by having a consensual relationship with an employee.

The sudden departures caused a major shift in the McDonald’s C-suite, leaving new Chief People Officer Mason Smoot to deal with the fallout. When that kind of responsibility falls to the chief people officer, what should they do?

Eugenie Fanning, vice president of people at commercial real estate company SquareFoot, looks at the chief people officer’s overall role in the workplace before diving into the nitty gritty. According to Fanning, a chief people officer owns the strategy and execution in bringing and retaining top talent to the workplace.

“They must be able to see the business from the perspective of each employee — both new hires and veteran leaders — and to represent all of those views when coaching senior leadership on communication, management and planning,” Fanning said in an email interview. “This all feeds into the maintenance and care of culture, which everyone contributes to in their own way.”

In recent years, there has been some rebranding around human resources, Fanning said. HR is now often labeled as “people” with the emphasis being more focused on employee engagement rather than paperwork and bureaucracy. “CPOs are emerging as stakeholders in the overall long-term success of companies,” Fanning said. “The evolution of this role is a long time coming. While it may crop up more in growing companies looking to standardize processes, it’s a growing trend everywhere.”

While CPOs generally tend to operate behind the scenes, they play an important role in coaching and directing the behavior of those within the organization. If a scandal does occur, the counsel of the CPO decides what should be said and done going forward while also focusing on how well employees will receive the message.

Also read: Tesla’s CHRO pick points to a new era

“With the appointment of a CPO, the organization has brought on someone they believe embodies their culture, vision and values and who can reinforce those values at all times,” Fanning said. “Whatever the message is, it should represent the views of the company and its leadership.”

Fanning also emphasized how vital it is that the chief people officer be secure in their morals and messaging when put in such a situation.

“There is no black and white answer in many situations and never a set process that guarantees to work all the time,” Fanning said. “You need to be able to analyze what’s happening, detect its impact on the company and employees and help manage the best course of action to rectify the situation in a timely manner.”

Fanning suggests three basic best practices for chief people officers to keep in mind if they ever find themselves or the organization in a scandal:

Don’t panic. Employees look to the CPO to know how they should feel and react to the situation and will emulate their behavior.
Understand the repercussions. Look at the situation from all perspectives and make sure to have the vision to see what could happen in the coming weeks.
Earn a seat at the table. Once the company is back on solid footing, the CPO can emerge as a reliable voice of skepticism.

The chief people officer is seen as a partner to everyone in the company. Whether there is a scandal, they are there to help guide internal and external communication and to maintain a support system for all employees.

“The CPO is someone you’d turn to as a key stakeholder to ensure that the messaging communicated matches the company’s values,” Fanning said.