Author: Site Staff

Posted on

How to Keep Creative Types

It’s important to realize that the best creative workers are largely self-motivated—it’s the quality of their work that matters most. Therefore, companies should invest in the kinds of resources necessary for these employees to do their best work.


  • Give creative people tools and resources that allow their work to shine. Whether it’s the latest “toys” in the way of equipment and technology, being able to spend money on a quality photo shoot, or simply sufficient materials and space, creatives derive satisfaction from seeing their work produced in a quality manner.
  • Provide ongoing recognition and appreciation. Although creatives are self-motivated, they still require and respond to external recognition. Ideally, this recognition should come from creative managers who understand the creative process and can appreciate good quality work.
  • Keep in mind, there’s no one-size-fits-all creative. Even creatives that do basically the same thing can demonstrate great variety and skill level.

 


SOURCE: “Strategies for Managing Creative Workers” by Shari Caudron, December 1994. Copyright ACC Communications/ Personnel Journal. All rights reserved.


 


Posted on

When Does Religious Expression Become Religious Harassment

While Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 permits religious expression by employees, supervisors and managers, it prohibits religious harassment. Harassment because of religion may not be as frequent as sexual, racial or ethnic harassment, but it is still unlawful. Although religious harassment can take many forms, two broad categories of religious harassment are (1) coercing employee participation or non-participation in religious activities, and (2) hostile work environment. Below are explanations and examples from the EEOC regarding these two categories of religious harassment.


 


Coercing religious participation or non-participation


A supervisor or manager may not explicitly or implicitly insist that an employee participate in religious activities or hold particular religious views as a condition of continued employment, promotion, preferred job assignments, or any other benefit or privilege of employment. Nor may a supervisor insist that an employee not participate in religious activities outside the workplace or not hold particular religious views. Such conduct would constitute religious harassment in violation of Title VII.


On the other hand, supervisors may engage in religious discourse or expression that cannot reasonably be perceived by employees to be coercive. Even if coercion is not intended, supervisors need to be careful that their statements and actions cannot reasonably be perceived to be coercive.


  • Example: During a conversation about weekend activities, Supervisor Bob tells one of his employees that he very much enjoyed Saturday morning synagogue services, that religion is an important part of his life, and that he is planning to invite the employee to his daughter’s upcoming bat mitzvah. Without more, Bob’s statements could not reasonably be perceived to be coercive and would not violate Title VII.
  • Example: Supervisor Jane, who is a born-again Christian, tells an employee who is not a born-again Christian that she considers the office to be “a place of God,” and that if the employee is unwilling to shape up and “play by God’s rules” the employee will be replaced. These statements are explicitly coercive and would constitute religious harassment, according to the EEOC.
  • Example: Upon her arrival at Creative Corporation, a co-worker tells Sharon that the boss favors employees who belong to his religious sect. Over the next year, Sharon observes that promotions, raises and preferred assignments are given only to employees in the boss’ religious sect. When Sharon is denied a raise, despite her eligibility and excellent performance, she files a charge alleging religious discrimination. On these facts, the EEOC would likely find this course of conduct to be implicitly coercive and thus, in violation of Title VII.

 


Hostile environment harassment


Title VII also protects employees from a religiously hostile work environment, whether created by a supervisor or co-workers. As in cases of sexual or racial harassment, whether a particular employee’s work environment is “hostile” for purposes of religious discrimination depends on the totality of the circumstances. This includes the frequency and severity of the harassing conduct, whether the conduct is physically threatening or humiliating, and whether the conduct unreasonably interferes with the employee’s work performance. The key question is whether, on balance, the harassing conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment, when judged both objectively (using a reasonable person’s standard) and subjectively (from the actual perspective of the affected individual).


Repeated use of religiously derogatory language can constitute hostile environment religious harassment. A single incident, if sufficiently severe, could also constitute harassment. Also relevant to whether there is a hostile environment is whether those who engage in the harassing conduct are co-workers or supervisors, whether the employer knew or should have known of the harassing conduct, and the actions, if any, the employer took to prevent or stop the conduct. An employer that takes prompt and effective action to stop religiously harassing conduct may avoid liability for that conduct.


  • Example: During the course of an argument in the office, one employee makes a derogatory comment about the other’s religion. Subsequently, no more is said. One isolated utterance, generally, will not constitute religious harassment, unless the utterance was so severe as to alter the conditions of the insulted employee’s employment.
  • Example: A group of employees engage in a pattern of verbal attacks on another employee, ridiculing his Shinto religion. The employees openly and repeatedly refer to their co-worker as a “Godless pagan” and “the heathen,” including at staff meetings and in front of their supervisors. After the supervisors fail to stop the attacks, the employee files a charge with the EEOC. This pattern of conduct is sufficiently severe and pervasive to alter the co-worker’s working conditions and constitutes religious harassment, according to the EEOC.

 


SOURCE: “Religious Discrimination; Employment Discrimination Prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended” by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Technical Assistance Program. May 1999. (Revised).


SOURCE: CCH Incorporated is a leading provider of information and software for human resources, legal, accounting, health-care and small-business professionals. CCH offers human resource management, payroll, employment, benefits, and worker-safety products and publications in print, CD, online and via the Internet. For more information and other updates on the latest HR news, check our Web site at http://hr.cch.com.


The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.


Posted on

How Far Must a Relo Be For Employees to Deduct Moving Expenses

Issue: An employee lives approximately 15 miles from his employer’s offices. The employer is moving its offices to a suburban location on the opposite side of the city. How far do the new offices have to be from the employee’s present residence for a move to a new residence to be allowed as a deduction?


Answer: The new offices have to be at least 65 miles from the employee’s present residence in order to qualify for a deduction for moving to a new residence. According to what is commonly called the “50-mile test,” the distance between the employer’s new principal place of work or business and former residence must be 50 miles greater than the distance between the employee’s former primary place of business and former residence. In other words, the commuting distance must have increased by at least 50 miles.


Distances must be computed on the basis of the shortest of the more commonly traveled routes between the two points. If an employee had no former principal place of business, the new place of work or business must be at least 50 miles from the former residence. Following is a list of common relocation expenses and whether or not they qualify for a deduction:


Nondeductible expenses:


  • expenses for meals
  • pre-move house-hunting trips
  • expenses incurred during a stay in temporary quarters for up to 30 days in the general location of the new job
  • the costs of selling an old residence and buying a new residence

Deductible expenses:


  • moving household goods and personal effects from employee’s former residence to new residence
  • storing and insuring household goods and personal effects (this must occur within 30 days after the day the goods are moved from the former residence)
  • travel from the former residence to the new place of residence. A deduction is allowed for one trip only.

Note that for the above expenses to qualify for deduction, they must be reasonable, and the move must bear a reasonable proximity both in time and place to the commencement of work.


SOURCE: CCH Incorporated is a leading provider of information and software for human resources, legal, accounting, health-care and small-business professionals. CCH offers human resource management, payroll, employment, benefits, and worker-safety products and publications in print, CD, online and via the Internet. For more information and other updates on the latest HR news, check our Web site at http://hr.cch.com.


The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.


Posted on

Determining Job Requirements

Determine exactly what the jobrequirements are before looking at any resume—or even placing an ad. It salmost impossible to find qualified candidates if the job requirements areunclear. In addition, think of what the organization needs for excellent jobperformance in two categories: Can-do criteria (tangible functional skills);and will-do criteria (intangible attitudes, attributes and fit).

Reread job descriptions andconsult with others in the company to enhance criteria selection. Brainstormand write down key criteria in order of importance.

For example, the managementinformation systems (MIS) department is looking for a programmer/analyst.

A list of can-do criteria mightinclude:

·Four years data processingexperience, systems design and programming expertise in COBOL and RPG in a DOSenvironment

·Knowledge of online and batchsystems

·Familiarity with DOS, JCL andutilities with VSAM/SAM

·College degree in math orcomputer science

·Knowledge of insurance,financial services, accounting or similar industry.

A list of will-do criteria couldinclude:

·Detail-oriented

·Problem-solving ability

·Ability to work well underpressure

·Liason ability

·Time management skills

·Team player

·Innovative.

With this list in hand, you ll beable to evaluate potential candidates much more effectively.

SOURCE: RecruitmentToday, “The Right Way to Read a Resume, Spring 1990, Vol. 4, No. 2, Reprint#72. Copyright c 1990 by ACC Communications Inc. All rights reserved.

Posted on

Learn Something From Candidates’ Pet Peeves About Web Sites

Tony Lee,Editor-in-Chief and General Manager of Careers.wsj.com, says job-seekers haveseveral “pet peeves” about the corporate Web sites at which they’relooking for jobs.

 

These pet peeves are:

 

1. Having no clue as to whetheranyone actually received their resume, and whether that person is interested;

2. Not being able to find theWeb address to the site, or not being able to find jobs on the site;

3. Jobs with no posting dates;

4. Lack of information abouteach job;

5. Hassles and inconveniencewhen applying;

6. Meaningless job”fairs” (aren’t those companies always hiring?);

7. No place to provide feedbackor ask a question before applying.

 

To avoid such problems, Leerecommends you keep the following in mind when building your “jobs”section:

 

·   Treatall candidates like customers.

·   Makethe job-search process as easy as possible.

·   Keepgraphics simple.

·   Test-driveyour site every few weeks.

·   Rememberthe Golden Rule (pretend you’re looking for a job on the site).

 

SOURCE: Tony Lee, Editor-in-Chief andGeneral Manager of Careers.wsj.com, speaking at an October 28, 1999 seminar onInternet recruiting in Los Angeles.

Posted on

Election Letter Doesn’t Fully Explain Strike Consequences

Issue: At the conclusion of an organizing campaign, a union election was held among employees of a nursing home. Election results established that the employees rejected the union by a margin of 62 to 44. However, five days before the election, the employer had sent to all eligible voters a letter designed to show the negative aspects of having a union. One paragraph of the letter stated “LOST JOBS … [a] union could mean some … employees lose their jobs. When a union went on strike … the nursing home hired new employees, and when the strike ended, many of the union’s supporters had no jobs to which to return.”


In response, the union filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), claiming that this paragraph unlawfully tainted the election by causing the employees to fear they would lose their jobs if they voted for the union. Will the election rejecting union representation be set aside due to this allegedly coercive letter distributed by the employer prior to the election?


Answer: The election results were set aside and a new election ordered by the NLRB. An election will be set aside and a new one directed if the election campaign was accompanied by conduct that the NLRB finds:


  • created an atmosphere of confusion or fear of reprisals, or
  • interfered with the employees’ exercise of their freedom of choice of a bargaining representative as guaranteed by federal law.

In evaluating specific conduct, the NRLB does not attempt to assess its actual effect on the employees, but rather concerns itself with whether it is reasonable to conclude that the conduct tended to prevent the free expression of the employees’ choice.


Here, although the NLRB found that the letter should be considered in the context of other statements made by the employer during the election campaign, it was nonetheless objectionable and warranted a new union election. In particular, the letter failed to adequately explain the consequences of a strike and the rights of strikers. The “lost jobs” paragraph in the letter was improper because it led the employees to believe that they might lose their jobs if they went on strike. In addition, the employer failed to inform the employees that “permanently replaced strikers who make unconditional offers to return to work have the right to full reinstatement when positions become available and to be placed on a preferential hire list if positions are not available.”


The employer relied on two mandatory meetings that it held prior to the distribution of the letter, during which it claimed that it explained to the employees the rights of strikers. Nonetheless, the NLRB found that the language in the letter was objectionable since it “had a reasonable tendency to coerce employees” and interfere with their free choice in the election.


Cite: Mariner Post-Acute Network, Inc., (1999) 329 NLRB No. 14, 1999-00 CCH NLRB 15,265.


Source: CCH Incorporated is a leading provider of information and software for human resources, legal, accounting, health-care and small-business professionals. CCH offers human resource management, payroll, employment, benefits, and worker-safety products and publications in print, CD, online and via the Internet. For more information and other updates on the latest HR news, check our Web site at http://hr.cch.com.


The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.


Posted on

Vision Must Be a Cornerstone of Recruiting

The most powerful weapon in any employer’s recruiting arsenal is “vision.” Successful companies market their vision to improve the odds that they will be the chosen vendor while selling their product. In a similar fashion, you can appeal to the needs of prospective employees with your “sell the product” messages. However, whether or not you emerge as the victorious employer will often reflect how well you have “marketed the vision,” more so than how well you sell your product.


A vision:


  • Can be summarized in one minute (or better, 30 seconds)
  • Must be a story, not some memorized mantra or collection of slogans
  • Showcases differentiation (“What sets us apart from every one of our competitors is …”)
  • Creates excitement.

If you cannot articulate your company’s vision based on these criteria (crisply with compelling differentiation and excitement), then you cannot execute the “market the vision, sell the product” approach. First, fix your vision pitch, and then upgrade your recruiting.


SOURCE: Excerpted from the article “Vision” by Richard Currier, chairman of the Park City Marketing Institute. Richard Currier is known as the “go-to expert” in crafting market leadership messages and product positioning for high-tech companies. While his consulting practice is usually sold out, he does offer a two-day workshop in Mastering Market Leadership. He can be reached at rcurrier@parkcity.net.

Posted on

EEOC’s New Stance Equal Remedies for Undocumented Workers

Once again the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is sending a clear message that workplace discrimination will not be tolerated and that employers who violate civil rights laws must pay the consequences.


In an enforcement guidance issued October 26, 1999, the EEOC modified its position on remedies available to undocumented workers under federal employment discrimination laws. With few restrictions, says the EEOC, unauthorized workers are entitled to the same remedies as any other worker—including back pay and reinstatement.


The EEOC’s new position parallels that of the National Labor Relations Board with respect to discrimination on the basis of union activity. It applies to all of the laws enforced by the EEOC—Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Equal Pay Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.


EEOC’s prior position.
Since 1989, the Commission’s position had been that unauthorized workers were not entitled to reinstatement or to back pay for the period when they did not work because of a discriminatory failure to hire or termination. The EEOC reasoned that compliance with immigration laws forbidding the employment of undocumented workers was a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason to not employ unauthorized workers.


EEOC’s new position.
Workers’ undocumented status is never a justification for discriminatory working conditions or a failure to promote. The EEOC says it will no longer collect or evaluate evidence regarding a worker’s eligibility-to-work status. Rather, unauthorized workers will be presumptively entitled to reinstatement; however, if an employer knows that a worker who was hired after November 6, 1986, is unauthorized, reinstatement can be conditioned on the worker being able to satisfy verification requirements of the immigration laws within a reasonable time. Back pay is available to the extent it does not conflict with the purposes of the immigration laws. The EEOC construes this as limiting back pay relief only where the worker is unavailable for work by virtue of being out of the country.


Why the shift in policy?
A decade’s worth of legal developments is behind the Commission’s decision to change gears. All of these developments focus on deterring discrimination as the central goal and recognize that any failure to penalize employers who discriminate undermines that goal. If employers are not held responsible for discrimination against unauthorized workers, it could create an incentive for unscrupulous employers to engage in unlawful workplace conduct.


What should employers do?


Mixed motive and after-acquired evidence may limit remedies.
A worker’s unauthorized status can be a legitimate reason for a mixed motive or after-acquired evidence defense. Employers who knowingly employ unauthorized workers would not benefit from either of these defenses, however.


A mixed motive defense involves proof that an employer would have taken the same action even if discrimination were absent. In mixed motive cases, employers can be liable for attorney’s fees and injunctive relief but are not liable for reinstatement, back pay, or any damages.


After-acquired evidence refers to evidence acquired after a discriminatory act that would have caused the employer to take the same adverse action. In after-acquired evidence cases, a worker would not typically be entitled to reinstatement, and the period during which back pay accrues would be cut off as of the date that the employer discovered the unauthorized status.


Retaliatory investigation can trigger liability.
Unauthorized workers are particularly vulnerable to threats to report them to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In every case in which the employer asserts that the worker is unauthorized and appears to have acquired that information after the worker complained of discrimination, the EEOC will determine whether the information was acquired through a retaliatory investigation. If the investigation was retaliatory, the employer will be liable for monetary damages without regard to the worker’s actual work status. Appropriate equitable relief is also available.


Cite: Policy Guidance: Remedies Available to Undocumented Workers under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws; October 26, 1999. Appendix B of Section 622, Volume II of the Compliance Manual.


Source: CCH Incorporated is a leading provider of information and software for human resources, legal, accounting, health-care and small-business professionals. CCH offers human resource management, payroll, employment, benefits, and worker-safety products and publications in print, CD, online and via the Internet. For more information and other updates on the latest HR news, check our Web site at http://hr.cch.com.


The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.


Posted on

HR 101 Contingent Staffing

This special monthly section gives you everything you need to know about important HR topics.


This month, learn about contingent staffing Best Practices; Policies; Legal Compliance; Budget Implications, and Technology.

Posted on

How to Choose a Temporary Help Agency

This checklist will help you select an agency that can fill your request for temps with specific skills. It will also help in determining how often you need temporary help, under what conditions, and whether you want to deal with more than one agency or staffing company.


  • What are your most common requirements for temporary workers?


  • Do you want to deal with just one company, or would you like to have two or three to call on?


  • Do you want an agency that specializes in one or two industries (such as home healthcare aides or accountants) or do you want an agency that can provide workers for all departments in your organization?


  • In a multi-specialty agency, are there staff members who specialize in a particular field, such as technical, legal, secretarial or administrative?


  • Is the person who will fill your orders willing to meet with you personally to become better acquainted with your needs?


  • Will the agency representative visit your facility?


  • Can you visit the agency’s offices? Looking around the offices will give you an idea of how professional and well established the agency is.


  • What is the agency’s reputation in the community? Have any complaints been filed with the Better Business Bureau or any state agencies, such as the state department of labor?


  • What are the agency’s rates for your most common requirements? (Markups—the amount the agency charges you above the amount it pays the temporary employee—can range from 25 percent to as high as 100 percent over base wage, depending on employment costs and the availability of skilled workers. A 50 percent markup is average.)


  • Are the rates competitive for this area and for these particular skill requirements? (You could call several companies to determine an average rate for particular skill requirements.)


  • What do they pay the temporary employees who will fill your assignments? (you want to be sure that the temps are being paid well in relation to the amount that you are charged. If they are underpaid, they won’t do the job as well as you expect them to. And while you want to keep costs down, you’d do well to remember the old adage that “you get what you pay for.”)


  • What kind of training does the agency provide?


  • Will the agency provide specialized training to meet your company’s needs? This will depend on the number of temporary workers that you expect to use regularly, how long the assignments will be, and whether you will obtain them from one agency or more than one. It may also depend on whether other companies in the area require employees with the same skills. The temporary agency will expect to recover its costs for training temps to meet your specific needs through long-term or high-volume contracts.


  • What testing process does the agency use?


  • Are employees tested for their proficiency with the most common computer software programs, such as word processing and spreadsheets?


  • Does the agency test for production and manufacturing skills?


  • Does the agency use personality profiles, and are the results available to potential clients?


  • Does the agency do background checks on employees?


  • Are employees tested for basic math and spelling aptitude?


  • Can the agency meet your needs for special, customized testing?


  • Will the agency provide an on-site manager or supervisor? This may depend on how many temporary employees you will need at your workplace and for how long. The agency may be willing to provide an on-site manager at no extra cost if the volume of business it will derive from your company, and the profit to be made, warrant it.


  • What are the restrictions on hiring an employee from the temporary agency for your staff? Most companies require the employer to wait a certain number of weeks. Depending on the availability of workers with the required skill level, this waiting period can be as short as eight weeks or as long as 24.


  • Who pays for any advertising if the agency doesn’t already have an employee on its roster who will fit your needs?


  • How quickly can the agency get a qualified temporary worker to your office?

SOURCE: Excerpted with permission from “Managing a Flexible Workforce,” Copyright 1998 by the Bureau of Business Practice, a division of Aspen Publishers, Inc., Waterford, CT (800/243-0876, ext. 236).