Skip to content

Workforce

Author: Rick Bell

Posted on April 19, 2021

How to identify and handle an employee at risk for workplace violence

termination, covidiot, workplace violence, gun, weapon

It’s been four days since Brandon Hole returned to the Indianapolis FedEx facility at which he previously worked, and killed eight people.

I’ve previously written about how to spot an employee at risk for workplace violence. And while I’m not sure FedEx could have done anything to prevent what happened here, this tragedy nevertheless is a reminder of what employers need to do when they suspect an employee presents a risk of violence.
Here is my post from Feb. 18, 2019, following a workplace shooting in Aurora, Illinois.

Early Friday afternoon, Henry Pratt Co. informed one of its employees, Gary Martin, of his termination. Shortly thereafter, he opened fire with a .40-caliber Smith & Wesson, killing five of his co-workers and wounding five police officers. Martin himself was the sixth casualty, killed in a shootout with police.

After the news of this tragedy broke, reports surfaced of Martin’s history of violence — six prior arrests by the local police department for domestic violence, and a decades-old felony conviction for aggravated assault.

All of which begs the question, should this employer have known that Martin was prone to violence, and if so, should it have taken added measures in connection with his termination.

A criminal history of violent arrests and offenses is not necessarily a predictor of workplace violence. Still, there are certain warning signs for which an employer can look to help determine whether an employee is at risk for potential violence.

According to ESI Group, these warning signs include:

  • A chronic inability to get along with fellow employees
  • Mood swings and anger control issues
  • Expressions of paranoia or persecution. Being a “victim”
  • A history of problems with past jobs and and/or personal relationships
  • An inability to get beyond minor setbacks or disputes at work
  • A fascination with guns, weapons, or violent events
  • A sudden deterioration in work habits or personal grooming
  • Signs of stress, depression, or suicidal ideation
  • A major life problem, such as divorce or legal problems

If one more of these red flags surface, it is recommended that you refer this employee to an employee assistance program, for assessment and treatment.

If you are compelled to fire an employee who you think poses a risk of violence, it is recommended that you take further steps to mitigate against the risk of your termination transforming into a workplace tragedy.

ESI Group recommends the following:

  • Consider a professional threat assessment.
  • Consider using a neutral manager or outside security consultant to carry out the termination.
  • If there is manager or supervisor who has been the object of threats or anger, that person should not be the person to conduct the termination.
  • Have security nearby—not in the same office, but close enough to hear signs of a problem and to act.
  • Do not take a break. There are numerous instances of an employee asking for a bathroom break or time to compose him- or herself, and using the break to retrieve weapons.
  • Wait until the end of the workday to terminate, if possible. This protects the dignity of the fired employee and minimizes the number of employees on hand should a situation escalate.
  • Minimize any reasons why the employee would have to revisit the workplace. Mail a check; have uncollected belongings sent to the person’s home via a delivery service.
  • Allow the person as much dignity as possible, but be brief and to the point. Do not get into a back and forth.
  • Emphasize any severance benefits and outsourcing help that may be available. Some organizations decide they will not contest unemployment or offer the option of resigning.

As with most issues in the workplace, the proverbial ounce of prevention really matters. While there exists no foolproof way to protect your workplace against these kinds of tragedies, a few preventative steps can go a long way to putting you in the best place to deter and respond.

Posted on April 15, 2021

OSHA finally gets real about COVID-19 safety

COVID-19, FMLA, mask, OSHA

Consider the following COVID-19 safety and health violations OSHA recently uncovered at a Massachusetts tax preparation business.

  • Employees and customers were prohibited from wearing face coverings in the workplace despite a statewide mask order that mandated the business to require employees and customers to wear masks.
  • Employees were required to work within 6 feet of each other and of customers for multiple hours while not wearing face coverings.
  • Adequate means of ventilation in the workplace were not provided.
  • Controls such as physical barriers, pre-shift screening of employees, enhanced cleaning, and other methods to reduce the potential for person-to-person transmission of the virus were not implemented.
What did these violations cost this employer in OSHA penalties? $5,000? $10,000? $25,000?
How about $136,532!

According to OSHA Regional Administrator Galen Blanton in Boston, “This employer’s willful refusal to implement basic safeguards places her employees at an increased risk of contracting and spreading the coronavirus. Stopping the spread of this virus requires business’ support in implementing COVID-19 Prevention Programs, and ensuring that staff and customers wear face coverings and maintain physical distance from each other.”

This appears to be the first company cited under OSHA’s recently launched national emphasis program focusing on COVID-19 enforcement efforts. If you’ve waited for the past 13 months without taking COVID safety seriously in your business, you better do so now. OSHA is watching, and based on this one example, violations are going to be quite expensive.

Posted on April 15, 2021June 29, 2023

Wage and hour violations during staff gatherings lead to substantial Labor Department fines

wage and hour law compliance, wages

Employee meetings are typically meant to discuss policies, reinforce training and build organizational transparency.

Two companies discovered the hard way that if not properly monitored, such gatherings can violate wage and hour and overtime laws, leading to the Fair Labor Standards Act violations and steep financial penalties.

Investigations by the Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division determined that Keystone Adolescent Center Inc. owed workers $44,858 in back wages for time spent in meetings, while Maggiano’s Little Italy restaurant in Philadelphia owed 82 employees $116,308 in back wages for minimum wage and overtime violations stemming from pre-shift meetings.

According to investigators, supervisors and behavior specialists gathered every two weeks at Keystone Adolescent Center’s five Greenville, Pennsylvania, facilities where they discussed policy changes, completed required training and reviewed safety procedures to help the at-risk youth they serve.

Also read: Labor Department reopens the floodgate to liquidated damages in wage and hour investigations

Keystone also used the meetings to distribute paychecks, yet failed to pay 80 workers who attended these meetings and required training outside of their regular shifts for the time they spent at them. The investigation determined that — by excluding this work time from employees’ pay — Keystone Adolescent violated the FLSA, leading to the recovery of back wages for the workers.

Wage and hour violations during staff meetings

According to an April 5 Labor Department press statement, investigators found that Keystone paid employees for time spent at staff meetings and required training only if those meetings and training occurred during their scheduled shifts. 

The employer failed to pay workers attending outside of their normal work hours for time they spent in those meetings and required training. Failing to record and pay for this time violated FLSA overtime and recordkeeping requirements, according to the statement.

“Employers must pay employees all the wages they legally earn, which includes paying them for any hours they work outside of their scheduled shifts,” said Wage and Hour Division District Director John DuMont in Pittsburgh.

Complying with federal, state laws

Aimee Delaney, a labor and employment law expert at law firm Hinshaw & Culbertson in Chicago, said that any time an employer requires a non-exempt employee’s attendance at a meeting, training or other mandatory event, the employer needs to realize that this time is considered hours worked and is compensable under state and federal law. This also means that if the time spent at the mandatory meeting puts the employee over 40 hours for the week, the employee is entitled to overtime for any time over 40 hours.

Aimee Delaney, wage and hour violation
Attorney Aimee Delaney, Hinshaw & Culbertson

The employer also needs to understand that state law may require overtime at different thresholds.

“One easy question an employer can ask itself when trying to determine if the time is compensable is whether the meeting or other event was mandatory, as that is usually a sign that the time must be paid,” Delaney said.

Compensation for pre-shift meetings

Oftentimes restaurant managers hold pre-shift meetings to motivate their employees, reinforce training or update the day’s menu. It is time for which employers typically should also be paying their workers, which is the lesson Maggiano’s Little Italy restaurant learned the hard way after a Labor Department investigation.

Investigators found minimum wage and overtime violations of the FLSA. In addition to the $116,308 in back wages, the Wage and Hour Division assessed a civil money penalty of $68,060 as investigators deemed the violations as willful, according to an April 12 Labor Department press statement.

The division determined that by failing to pay workers for time they spent attending pre-shift meetings, the restaurant failed to pay the required federal minimum wage. Maggiano’s Little Italy required dining room servers to attend 15- to 30-minute meetings before the start of their scheduled shifts. When employees worked more than 40 hours in a workweek, this unpaid time triggered overtime violations, according to the Labor Department.

“Restaurant workers are often among the nation’s lowest paid, and most vulnerable, particularly during the coronavirus pandemic,” said Wage and Hour District Director James Cain in Philadelphia. “When employers fail to account for all hours employees work, they deprive workers of their hard-earned wages. Other employers should use the outcome of this investigation as an opportunity to review their own pay practices, and ensure they comply with the law.”

Delaney noted that the Labor Department has a number of resources that explain the law and regulations on this topic specifically and there are specific rules on when activities by a non-exempt employee outside of work hours must be considered hours worked and/or compensable.

She also pointed out that vigorous enforcement of wage and hour and overtime laws is nothing new.

“While there may be a number of areas that employers can expect stricter compliance enforcement on with the new administration, this is a fairly settled area of the law and violations of this nature have been and will continue to be enforced regardless of a change in administration at the top,” she said.

Make wage and hour compliance headaches a thing of the past with Workforce.com’s industry-leading time and attendance software. Book your demo today.

Posted on April 14, 2021

Labor Department reopens the floodgate to liquidated damages in wage and hour investigations

restaurant industry employees, wage and hour compliance for employers

The Department of Labor’s breakup with liquidated damages in wage and hour investigations lasted only four years.

Late last week, the agency announced that it would again seek liquidated damages (an amount equal to the unpaid wages themselves) in investigations, undoing a  policy change made by the Trump administration.

According to the DOL, it will “return to pursuing liquidated damages from employers … in its pre-litigation investigations provided that the Regional Solicitor of Labor or their designee concurs with the liquidated damages request. … Liquidated damages shall not be assessed by WHD where the employer has set forth credible evidence of a good faith defense or the where the RSOL deems the matter inappropriate for litigation.”

What does this mean for your business? You have twice the financial stake in getting your wage and hour house in order as soon as possible.
If the DOL investigates, you should expect to pay double what you would have in the past four years. Your $X in unpaid wages will take $X*2 to settle with the DOL.
If your only defense to these liquidated damages is “credible evidence of good faith,” you better take steps to create that good faith now, such as by having your employment lawyer sign off on how you classify and pay your employees.
Once the DOL comes knocking, it will be too late.
Posted on April 12, 2021May 17, 2022

It’s time to end pandemic PTO hesitancy

leave management, PTO, vacation, PTO

I haven’t taken a proper vacation in 25 months. We were supposed to go to Portugal last March, but then COVID-19 happened. In the 13 months since, there’s been little point in taking off from work for any length of time because I haven’t been able to go anywhere. “I can’t go anywhere, so I might as well work,” has been a popular pandemic refrain (me included).

Americans were bad at vacations before COVID. The pandemic certainly hasn’t helped our PTO hesitancy.

Consider the following from The Atlantic.

Americans are good at lots of different things, but going on vacation is not one of them.… Guess which industrialized country is the only one that doesn’t guarantee time off to its workers? Guess which country left 768 million vacation days on the table in 2018?

The pandemic has not been great for America’s vacation malaise. When there are few new places to go and few new things to do, what’s the point of asking for time off? Yes, many Americans who have made it through without losing their jobs have taken a break to discover nature or their apartment balconies, but largely, we do not seem to be PTO-ing our way through this god-awful year. In February, time-off requests on the HR platform Zenefits were down 26 percent from the year before, a spokesperson told me, in line with what the company has seen since July.

I’m ending my vacation moratorium this summer with a week in a cabin in the Blue Ridge Mountains. I suggest that you strongly encourage your employees to do the same, lest you risk the burnout I warned about last week.

Here are four tips to help push your employees to use their PTO and take a vacation.

1. Teach your employees the benefits of taking a vacation. Make it a part of your wellness education. Communicate the health and wellness benefits of taking a vacation. If employees understand that vacations lead to improvements in performance productivity, they will be more likely to leave work behind for a few days.

2. Take your own time off. If the boss never takes a vacation, employees won’t either. If you want your employees to take time away from work, do so yourself. Leadership and messaging start at the top. If you make vacations a priority, your employees will, too.

3. Ease employee back to work. When asked why they don’t take time off, most employees historically cite the fear of returning to a backlog of work and thousands of emails to which to respond. COVID hasn’t helped, as fewer are away from work. Plan for coverage when employees are out, and provide a day upon their return for them to catch-up, so that they won’t fear the return-to-work ambush or avalanche.

4. Prohibit vacation shaming. No one should be permitted to discourage or tease employees who take a vacation. If you send or permit negative messages about vacations, your employees won’t take them. They will fear letting the team down, or the time-off impacting their employment. This form of bullying cannot and should not be tolerated.
Posted on April 6, 2021

Is work from home not all it’s cracked up to be?

coronavirus, remote work, COVID-19, remote workforce

Three weeks ago I returned to the office. That return matched my start date at Wickens Herzer Panza. I decided that it’d be difficult, if not impossible, to learn a new firm and its systems, and build camaraderie and teamwork with my new co-workers, if I’m working remotely. Thus, I made the decision to break free of my self-imposed COVID-19 cocoon and start working most days in person in the office.

I thought about this decision as I read this article in the Wall Street Journal: After Covid, Should You Keep Working From Home? Here’s How to Decide.

Consider these conflicting stats.

  • 54 percent of employees say that they would want to work remotely if permitted post-COVID-19.
  • Yet, over 60 percent of employees report that remote work has increased their time spent in meetings and their work hours, and nearly 50 percent report that it has decreased their work-life balance.
In other words, employees are in favor of remote work as a concept, but in practice, they may not understand that it is doing more harm than good.
Without a real physical separation between work and nonwork, people won’t ever stop working. They will be on the clock 24/7, ultimately burning themselves out at great cost to themselves and their employers. The most recent episode of Depresh Mode with John Moe expertly addressed this issue.
What does this mean for your remote employees? It means that they are likely working too much, some to the point of burnout. If you value your employees’ mental health and wellbeing, factor it into your decision when and whether to bring your employees back to your physical workplace, at least part time. They might think they want to keep working remotely, but they may not necessarily know what’s best for them.

In the meantime, if your employees are going to continue working remotely, consider these tips to help them maintain the balance they need to avoid overworking and burning out.

1.  Set a schedule for your employees and strongly encourage them to stick to it. Alternatively, make available technology that allows employees to designate when they are available and not available. In either case, it must be clear to managers, supervisors, and coworkers that these boundaries must be respected except in the case of a 911-level emergency.
2. Require that employees take breaks during the workday, including a lunch break.
3. Prioritize days off so that employees can recharge their batteries.
4. Remind employees who might be struggling with their mental health of the services you have available for them, including an EAP and counseling and other mental health services via your health insurance plan.
Posted on April 5, 2021October 1, 2021

Workforce.com appoints Rod Schneider as general manager in the UK

Rod Schneider

The workforce management solutions industry is one that is constantly innovating and evolving, bringing with it both challenges and opportunities. Workforce.com is adding to its experienced, talented leadership team to capitalize on the changing needs of the global market.

The latest addition to Workforce.com’s leadership is actually a company veteran who is leaving Australia behind to take on a new challenge in Europe.

Rod Schneider was recently named general manager of Workforce.com’s office in the United Kingdom. Now based in London, Schneider, who previously was head of partnerships for Workforce.com in Australia, will oversee the company’s operations throughout Europe. With offices in France and Croatia, Schneider said he is looking forward to building relationships across the continent.

“Taking on a whole different market is very, very exciting. Some may think that it’s an odd time to make this move, but if you think about the lockdown nearing an end, it’s really forward looking. Building our external engagement is going to be a big part of what we’re trying to achieve to become more broadly known and have that broader impact here,” Schneider said.

“His success across the board in Australia, aligning with our global mission, means that Rod is fully committed and his passion and talent is just what we need in the UK as companies emerge from the pandemic,” said Tasmin Trezise, president of Workforce.com.

Schneider, who joined Workforce.com in 2016 following a career as a financial adviser, said he is eager to help companies across Europe rebuild their post-pandemic business. He will be meeting with current customers and develop new business as well. “You have good businesses that are looking to bring back their former staff, but in some cases those staff have found other jobs,” he said. “That presents a real challenge to organisations as they rebuild their businesses.”

With a keen focus on customer relationship management and an increasingly broad workforce management product portfolio that continues to expand, Schneider will work closely with the rest of the Workforce.com leadership team to prepare the organisation for the opportunities that lie ahead throughout Europe.

Workforce.com is perfectly positioned to help companies effectively restart their business, he said. “A paper roster is not going to cut it anymore. Workforce will help organisations make sure they are rostering their teams as efficiently as possible,” Schneider said. “It’s exciting to help people get their businesses back up and running.”

 A native of Toowoomba, Australia, Schneider has a master’s degree in business from the University of South Queensland. He currently lives in London with his wife.

Posted on April 5, 2021

Employers, the COVID-19 lawsuits are coming

essential workers; workers' compensation, mask

Thirteen months into the pandemic, the COVID-19-related employment lawsuits are starting to roll into courthouses. Consider the following, all of which made headlines over the past couple of weeks.

A former crew member who worked for Universal TV is suing his former employer claiming discrimination stemming from his termination after his COVID-19 diagnosis.

A COVID-19 long hauler is suing her former employer after she was fired for missing too many days of work while recovering from her illness.

A doctor is suing after he was fired over his vocal opposition to his employer’s COVID-19 response.

And these lawsuits don’t even scratch the surface of employees fired for other COVID-related reasons, such as those fired for refusing the vaccine or complaining on social media about unsafe working conditions.

Employers, you need to understand that if you fire someone related to the pandemic, their first stop likely might be the office of their friendly neighborhood plaintiff attorney. Do yourself a favor a don’t go this alone.

Take the time to vet these terminations pre-termination. The time you spend on the phone with your employment lawyer will be time and money well spent if it helps you not to walk in front of a runaway lawsuit.

Posted on March 31, 2021

COVID-19 vaccination cards will be required to do lots of things — possibly even working

COVID-19, vaccine, flu

According to the Wall Street Journal, COVID-19 vaccination cards are our only proof of vaccination status and will soon be as essential as a drivers’ license or passport. With no national or statewide centralized databases of vaccination records, the piece of paper you receive with your vaccine dose is your only proof of vaccination.

The article suggests that we’ll need this record to do lots of things moving forward, such as travel. What about returning to in-person work? Can employers ask for or require that employees provide proof of vaccination?

According to the EEOC, the answer is yes as to the ask. 

Is asking or requiring an employee to show proof of receipt of a COVID-19 vaccination a disability-related inquiry?

No. There are many reasons that may explain why an employee has not been vaccinated, which may or may not be disability-related. Simply requesting proof of receipt of a COVID-19 vaccination is not likely to elicit information about a disability and, therefore, is not a disability-related inquiry. However, subsequent employer questions, such as asking why an individual did not receive a vaccination, may elicit information about a disability and would be subject to the pertinent ADA standard that they be “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” If an employer requires employees to provide proof that they have received a COVID-19 vaccination from a pharmacy or their own health care provider, the employer may want to warn the employee not to provide any medical information as part of the proof in order to avoid implicating the ADA.

The question then becomes what does an employer do if an employee cannot provide proof of vaccination? If the vaccine is mandatory and a condition of employment, it can deny access to the workplace or even terminate, provided that it is considering exceptions for employees’ disabilities and sincerely held religious beliefs, practices and observances. If the vaccine is not mandatory, why ask for the vaccine record in the first place?

We are entering a very interesting era of privacy, including employee privacy. If you are not mandating the vaccine, while you are within your legal right to ask about vaccination status, why would you? Do you really want to catalogue your employees’ vaccination status and for what purpose?

Posted on March 30, 2021

Let’s meet employees where they are on their pronouns

diversity, gender

In Meriwether v. Hartop, the 6th Circuit recently decided that a state university cannot force a professor to use students’ preferred gender pronouns, and permitted the prof to proceed with his lawsuit challenging the school’s discipline for his misgendering.

The plaintiff, Nicholas Meriwether, a philosophy professor at Shawnee State University and a devout Christian, challenged the school’s decision to discipline him for violating a policy that instructors were to use a student’s preferred pronouns after a student accused him of refusing to properly identify her as a woman or with she/her pronouns. Meriwether claimed the policy violated his First Amendment free-speech and religious freedoms. The 6th Circuit agreed enough to re-institute his claim.

Traditionally, American universities have been beacons of intellectual diversity and academic freedom. They have prided themselves on being forums where controversial ideas are discussed and debated. And they have tried not to stifle debate by picking sides. But Shawnee State chose a different route: It punished a professor for his speech on a hotly contested issue. And it did so despite the constitutional protections afforded by the First Amendment. The district court dismissed the professor’s free-speech and free-exercise claims. We see things differently and reverse.

Unless you are a public employer governed by the Constitution and the First Amendment protections it guarantees, Meriwether has limited applicability to your workplace, your rules and your employees. Moreover, after Bostock v. Clayton County, it’s likely a Title VII violation to intentionally misgender an employee.

Nevertheless, legal or illegal, Meriwether can teach us some important lessons about meeting employees where they are. Here are some things to think about regarding gender, pronouns, and your employees.

1. Educate yourself about the use of pronouns. When I went to school I learned that “he” refers to a singular male, “she” to a singular female,” and “they” to plural wo/men. That is no longer the case. A man can identify as “she” and a female as “he,” and they/them pronouns are used for individuals who identify as non-binary, gender-fluid, or whoever chooses to use them.

2. Do not assume what pronouns your employees use. Just because someone presents a particular way doesn’t mean they their pronouns fit match that presentation.

3. If you’re unsure, ask. Your employees who use alternate pronouns will be more than happy to help you.

4. Avoid gendered language. For example, use “y’all” instead of “you guys” and “everyone” or “people” instead of “ladies and gentlemen” or “men and women.”

More to the point, if you insist that you must refer to someone born with a Y chromosome as “he” and two X chromosomes as “she,” why do you care? If an employee identifies as female (regardless of whether she was born a male), why do you care what pronoun she uses?

This issue is nothing more than a solution in search of a problem. You are doing way more harm to the mental well-being of your employees if you misgender them than you are doing to other employees by having them rethink how they use pronouns.

Any other answer to this issue is bigotry, period. And, in 2021, we should be well beyond bigotry of any kind.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 … Page 95 Next page

 

Webinars

 

White Papers

 

 
  • Topics

    • Benefits
    • Compensation
    • HR Administration
    • Legal
    • Recruitment
    • Staffing Management
    • Training
    • Technology
    • Workplace Culture
  • Resources

    • Subscribe
    • Current Issue
    • Email Sign Up
    • Contribute
    • Research
    • Awards
    • White Papers
  • Events

    • Upcoming Events
    • Webinars
    • Spotlight Webinars
    • Speakers Bureau
    • Custom Events
  • Follow Us

    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • RSS
  • Advertise

    • Editorial Calendar
    • Media Kit
    • Contact a Strategy Consultant
    • Vendor Directory
  • About Us

    • Our Company
    • Our Team
    • Press
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms Of Use
Proudly powered by WordPress