One of the key ingredients of good managers is their ability to maintain consistency in all of their roles and activities. These activities include how you:
SOURCE: Tim Connor, Connor Resource Group, Davidson, NC.
Tips for Starting a New Job
Here are some good “new-job tips” for you or your new employees.
Study the Firm’s Culture
Beginning a new job is not unlike meeting future in-laws — first impressions count. Be attuned to the subtleties of the company’s business environment, including everything from department policies and procedures to how people interact with one another.
Reduce the Learning Curve
Master the position’s responsibilities as quickly as possible by asking questions and seeking out unofficial “mentors” who can show you the ropes. Many firms now have formal mentoring programs for this purpose, but in those companies that don’t, it pays to be resourceful.
Be a Team Player
In your eagerness to hit the ground running, don’t become overly concerned with your specific portion of a given project. Look at the big picture and volunteer for assignments, even if they fall outside your immediate job description. This will allow you to learn about new areas of operations while demonstrating your sense of team play.
Become Indispensable
From the outset, take steps to make yourself an invaluable resource to your new employer by exceeding performance expectations. Arrive early to the office and, whenever necessary, stay as late as it takes to see a project through to completion.
Practice Diplomacy
Tread lightly when offering opinions for improving a particular process or procedure, especially in your first few weeks. While your ideas may be sound, as a new employee you risk alienating veteran workers for whom existing operations are “working just fine, thank you.” Before you recommend a change, take time and talk with your colleagues to understand the reasons behind a specific policy. Only then should you diplomatically suggest enhancements.
Pay Attention to Management Style
Observe how managers throughout the company interact with employees. Is there a hierarchical structure or is the environment informal? Does your supervisor prefer impromptu, one-on-one discussions or scheduled meetings? Adapt your style of communication accordingly.
Follow the Leaders
Study (and emulate) the business and interpersonal styles of those with outstanding track records at the firm. These individuals will likely possess qualities that are highly valued by your new employer.
Chronicle Your Achievements
As you start building a successful work history, document these activities in a separate file. Items to keep include project reports, complimentary notes or memos from supervisors, professional awards and any other evidence of your accomplishments. These materials are useful in preparation for performance and salary reviews, or if you find yourself in the job market again.
SOURCE: ACCOUNTEMPS, Menlo Park, CA, December 11, 1998. The tips are from Max Messmer, chairman of Accountemps and author of Job Hunting For Dummies.
Do you want a good overview of all the tax and wage reporting responsibilities of an employer? Are you a small business or non-profit looking for the taxation-related Web site for your state? Are you a multi-state employer looking for a list of every state’s tax authority?
The Simplified Tax and Wage Reporting System site, or “STAWRS,” has what you need. Find it at: http://www.treas.gov/stawrs (click on “one stop guide”).
Source: Simplified Tax and Wage Reporting System—”STAWRS” (a joint effort between several federal agencies), December 22, 1998.
Recently, someone told me the story of Oliver Wendell Holmes and the train ticket. Holmes was a Supreme Court Justice who was very respected, very intelligent, but a little bit absent-minded.
Apparently, Holmes was on a train one day, when the railroad ticket-checker began walking down the car, checking tickets. As the ticket-checker approached, he watched Holmes search his wallet, unable to find his ticket. Frustrated, Holmes then checked each of his pockets. Still no ticket.
Holmes was more and more agitated with himself as he went through his briefcase, still unable to find his ticket.
The ticket-checker had finally made his way to Holmes’ seat.
“Justice Holmes,” he said, laughing, “I know who you are. Everyone knows who you are. There’s no need to show me your ticket.”
“No, sir, that’s not the problem,” said Justice Holmes. “The problem is that I can’t remember where I’m going.”
When your business is undergoing change, starting a new project, opening a new office, or hiring a new set of employees, keep the Holmes story in mind. It will remind you to always have a feel for the direction you’re going.
SOURCE:Todd Raphael, Workforce Online, February 3, 1999.
Here’s a tip on the best way to set deadlines … don’t!
The most effective deadlines are the ones you don’t set for your staff. Employees usually resent the mandates, and become even more stressed than they already are. The best thing to do is explain the time constraints the organization is operating under, and give your staff responsibility for setting its own deadlines.
People will set deadlines for themselves and be more likely to live up to them.
SOURCE: Positive Leadership, newsletter, February 1999, Ragan Communications, Chicago, IL.
Here are some suggestions for mastering the art of networking.
Two recent cases offer guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In the first, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought suit under the ADA against Chase Manhattan Bank, whose long-term disability plan provided benefits for individuals with physical disabilities until age 65, but only provided benefits for mental disabilities for a maximum of two years.
The U.S. District Court for Southern New York held the policy did not violate the ADA, because “[while] the ADA proscribes discrimination … between the disabled and the non-disabled, it does not mandate equal benefits for different disabilities.” EEOC vs. Chase Manhattan Bank, S.D.N.Y., No. 97 Civ. 6620, 12/8/98.
In the second case, after Leanora Templeton suffered injuries in an automobile accident, she took disability leave from her position with Neodata Services. Before her return, Templeton refused to have her doctor complete a medical form in fear that the company would misuse the information. Neodata claimed the data was needed to determine accommodation for her and to comply with insurance requirements. Templeton was fired, and she sued her employer under the ADA, alleging failure to reasonably accommodate.
Federal district court dismissed Templeton’s claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit agreed, reasoning that Templeton’s failure to engage in an interactive process with her employer to determine a reasonable accommodation precluded a claim for failure to accommodate. Templeton vs. Neodata Services Inc., 10th Cir., No 98-1106, 12/10/98.
Impact:
ADA permits employers to distinguish between disabilities in benefit plans.
Source: D. Diane Hatch, Ph.D., a human resources consultant based in San Francisco, and James E. Hall, an attorney with the law firm of Barlow, Kobata & Denis, with offices in Los Angeles and Chicago.
Finding and keeping key talent is still tough in today’s labor market. That’s why some of the nation’s largest firms have figured out how to link motivational HR programs with resources that help employees. Combined, these resources help employees figure out if a new job in a new location is their best move, and find relocation for the move—meanwhile giving the companies the biggest bang for their buck. Here are three companies’ approaches that have been deemed best practices by Chicago-based consulting firm Arthur Andersen.
Johnson & Johnson
The New Brunswick, New Jersey-based company’s relocation services program is designed to address the major concerns of transferring families, such as obtaining mortgage financing, buying and selling homes, making the moving and transportation arrangements, identifying appropriate schools and helping spouses find new employment. Counseling is also available to help deal with relocation apprehension.
General Electric Co.
GE’s finance organization values diversity of work experience and encourages movement among businesses. Because of the size of the Fairfield, Connecticut-based company’s finance workforce, full-time human resources professionals are available to counsel and coach people about development moves. One effective tool is a career-planning trade-off chart that helps people understand which experiences will develop their abilities and which career moves make sense. Some of the trade-offs include: same business versus new business, field versus corporate and manufacturing versus service. The chart helps individuals see where a move might broaden their experience or where another might not be as advantageous.
Colgate-Palmolive Co.
At New York City-based Colgate, which has operated in 20 countries around the world for more than 50 years, the key development moves are outside the United States, particularly in emerging markets. This is a change from the past, when it was thought that the size of the U.S. market ensured that high-potentials could obtain the necessary experiences without venturing overseas. Despite this new awareness of the global nature of leadership, the company is having difficulty finding high-potentials who are willing to move. To battle this problem, the company is making a strong effort to “raise the profile” of people, accepting development moves in emerging markets in the hopes that their example will inspire other high-potentials to make similar moves. The company also emphasizes that such postings are a prerequisite for major management positions at Colgate.
Source: Global Best Practices, Arthur Andersen, Chicago.
Workforce, March 1999, Vol. 78, No. 3, p. 92.
Send Your Expats Prepared for Success
Long awaited final rules on COBRA continuation coverage have been released by the IRS. The regulations are based primarily on the 1987 proposed regulations addressing COBRA continuation coverage requirements in general, as well as on the 1998 proposed regulations, which covered COBRA compliance issues after the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). The final rules also reflect court decisions and statutory amendments to COBRA since its enactment in 1985.
Clarification is the intent, question and answer the format.
The new final and proposed regulations are intended to clarify many of COBRA’s administrative rules and to enhance reliance on them. It should be noted, however, that while comprehensive, the regulations do not touch upon the COBRA notice requirements. The regulations are presented in the same question-and-answer format of the 1987 proposed regulations, which have been reorganized, renumbered and modified to reflect substantive changes. Key changes and clarifications are highlighted below.
Which plans must comply?
Of particular interest to employers will be the rules, final and proposed, impacting which plans must comply with COBRA. Under 1987 proposed regulations, a group health plan (other than a multiemployer plan) was a small employer plan exempt from COBRA’s requirements if it normally employed fewer than 20 employees on at least 50% of its typical working days during that calendar year. The final regulations substitute the term “working days” with “business days” to allow the employer the option of counting by pay period rather than by every business day.
Also for purposes of qualifying for the small-employer exception, the newly proposed regulations allow employers to count each part-time employee as a fraction of a full-time employee. That fraction is equal to the number of hours that the part-time employee works divided by the number of hours that an employee must work to be considered full-time.
Application to Flexible Spending Arrangements?
The proposed regulations generally limit the application of COBRA to health flexible spending arrangements (FSAs) if the amount that the employer could require to be paid for the COBRA coverage for the plan year would exceed the maximum benefit that the qualified beneficiary could receive under the FSA for that plan year.
Number of plans maintained.
The proposed regulations also would give an employer the option to determine the number of health plans it maintains by either aggregating benefits into a single group plan or disaggregating them into separate group health plans. Plan documents would determine the status of benefits as part of a single or separate plan.
Qualified beneficiaries clarified.
The final regulations adopt the Supreme Court’s decision in Geissal v. Moore Medical Corporation and eliminate the rule in the 1987 proposed regulations that an individual is not a qualified beneficiary if the individual was entitled to Medicare benefits on the date before the qualifying event. The regulations also add a rule that if an individual is wrongfully denied coverage under a group health plan and experiences an event that would otherwise have been a qualifying event, the plan must consider the individual as a qualified beneficiary.
New qualifying events.
Reflecting amendments to COBRA under OBRA 1986, an employer bankruptcy is a COBRA qualifying event under the final regulations. Also, the final regulations clarify that an increase in an employee premium or contribution due to a qualifying event constitutes a “loss of coverage'” that triggers the right to COBRA.
Scope of coverage provided.
The final regulations eliminate the requirement that group health plans offer qualified beneficiaries the option to elect only core health coverage under a plan that otherwise provides both core and non-core coverage. However, the IRS invites comments on its decision to not include such a requirement.
Also, employers must now provide COBRA to qualified beneficiaries who move outside the plan region if the employer would be able to provide coverage to the qualified beneficiary under one of its existing plans. Under the 1987 proposed regulations, an employer maintaining region-specific plans had to offer COBRA to a qualified beneficiary moving outside of the region only if the employer had other employees in the area to which the employee was moving.
Coverage duration clarified.
The final regulations clarify that employers may discontinue COBRA coverage when a qualified beneficiary becomes entitled to either Part A or Part B of Medicare, assuming that the entitlement arises after COBRA was elected. Also, termination of employment following a reduction of hours does not constitute a secondary qualifying event that would expand the maximum coverage period.
Allowable premium increases.
The final regulations revise the 1987 proposed regulations, which did not permit an increase in the applicable premium during the 12-month determination period, by allowing increases in three situations. Thus, a plan is permitted:
Regarding premiums for non-disabled qualified beneficiaries who are entitled to the disability extension, employers may charge 150% of the applicable COBRA premium if the disabled individual is part of the coverage group, but only 102% if non-disabled qualified beneficiaries only are in the coverage group.
Regs effective January 1, 2000.
The final regulations apply with respect to qualifying events occurring in plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2000. For any period before the effective date of the final regulations, the plan and the employer must operate in good faith compliance. Further, proposed regulations issued on June 15, 1987, and January 7, 1998, may be relied upon until the final regulations become effective.
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.
