Skip to content

Workforce

Author: Site Staff

Posted on June 28, 2010August 9, 2018

Dear Workforce What Should We Consider When Launching College Recruiting?

Dear Hungry for Talent:

The truth is, there has never been a better time than now to launch a college recruitment program. The current talent pool is rich with potential, and businesses that have struggled with successfully attracting top graduates in the past have a much better shot at landing exceptional new people. However, it can feel like a daunting task to structure an effective college recruiting program (and hire the right people) with such a competitive talent pool, and less time than ever. Here’s what you need to know about college recruiting in this post-recession era.

Determine a good hire–despite lack of experience
A large percentage of recent college grads simply don’t have the real-world experience most recruiters need to help make their selection decisions, so be prepared to assess college grads differently. Résumé reviews and reference checks are more difficult with limited information to go on, so structured assessments that measure competency potential, critical reasoning and essential knowledge/skills are critical, because they offer objective, job-relevant information to help ensure a more accurate selection.

Don’t fret about perceived hurdles
Although you may think college grads will be deterred by a selective screening process, don’t worry. Even during the “talent war” era, interview dropout rates were reasonable for most employers, ranging from 10 to 18 percent. The risks associated with making a wrong hiring decision are much higher and costlier than the risks associated with possibly turning off candidates from an application process that is considered too structured. The likelihood that you will lose out on top talent is more than offset by the potential gems you may find that could have been missed in a typical interview process.

Get going on social networking
Getting in on the latest activity when it comes to social networking is critical to the success of any college recruiting program. It’s essential to be where the action is for your audience, which means being active on sites like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn—and at on-campus resources such as career service center job boards and alumni networks. Feel as if you can skip this step? It may mean missing out on a major top talent recruitment tool.

Fast communication is critical
Many college graduates have surprisingly high expectations when it comes to feedback and response from potential employers because they’re coming from a highly connected environment—one where they’re used to active online responses from friends, family, peers and professors. They are savvy customers who know the tools and technology that exist for quick interaction via the Web. In stark contrast, they usually aren’t savvy in the recruitment processes companies must follow. The key to hooking this audience is being ready to respond—good or bad—as quickly as possible. Even if you do have a good excuse for your two-week delay in responding to them, grads may have already moved on, so communication is important.

Build your brand
College recruiting can be a valuable tool for building your employer brand, simply because your target audience is more connected and Internet-savvy than most other groups. The more positive the interview process, the greater the chance they’ll spread the good word about your company to their peers, so getting it right is important. Employers that use structured and fair recruiting methods generally are perceived better by college graduates, so keep this in mind as you develop your college recruiting program.

Remember that when hiring, you’re looking for potential as much (or more so) than trained experience. Be ready to have a structured onboarding and training program to get the fastest and best productivity from new college hires. And remember: This group is far more willing to walk away from an employer if they are not engaged, so be ready to manage your new hires more aggressively in the short term to ensure they stay engaged for the long haul.

SOURCE: Nels Wroe, SHL Group, Denver, May 13, 2010

LEARN MORE: Please read how recruiters are using freshly minted college grads to replenish staffs.

Workforce Management Online, June 2010 — Register Now!

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. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Ask a Question
Dear Workforce Newsletter
Posted on June 28, 2010August 9, 2018

Dear Workforce Are First-Time Managers Really Better Off With Training?

Dear Skeptical:

Unfortunately, when it comes to this topic, the adage is true: Where there is smoke, there is fire. … At least a four-alarm fire.

During the past few years, my company has studied the readiness of individual contributors to step into a managerial or supervisory position. A majority of frontline leaders said they had a difficult time making the transition from a nonmanagement role to a first-level manager. Only 57 percent said they possessed the leadership skills needed when they first stepped into a management role. As expected, the most common areas of struggle relate to core managerial competencies: coaching, communication, decision-making and delegation/empowerment.

Most organizations are wise to this issue. According to a 2010 report from Bersin & Associates, “HR leaders rate their first-line managers as their ‘least ready’ workgroup, even less capable than their entry-level employees.”

There are three big reasons this is happening.
• All parties involved need better insight into an individual’s readiness. The individual, his or her manager and the organization have blind spots when it comes to accurately understanding the individual’s strengths and development needs. With hundreds or even thousands of existing and potential frontline leaders, it can be difficult for organizations to get more than a superficial read on an individual’s managerial readiness. Organizations can obtain more information about an individual’s readiness by a variety of methods, including behavioral interviews, 360s and in-depth assessments.

• Knowing someone’s development areas is not enough. According to my company’s research, less than one-third of frontline managers say that they have agreed to a specific, written development plan with their manager. About one-quarter of frontline managers say that they have enough time to devote to their development. Organizations need to put better processes in place to ensure that development planning occurs and that individuals have sufficient time and accountability to complete their development plans.

• They need more support and guidance from their manager. About half of frontline managers say that their managers have the knowledge and tools to support their development. Less than two-thirds say that they get sufficient feedback from their managers. The most discomforting thought is that less than 60 percent believe that their managers are committed to their development. To overcome these beliefs, organizations have to do a better job of providing the frontline manager’s manager with the skills needed to nurture him or her.

There is evidence of new leaders being thrown into the deep end and left to either sink or swim. That’s hardly a “best practice”—especially when there is so much that can be done to prepare leaders to take on such a new job.

SOURCE: Bradford Thomas, Development Dimensions International, Pittsburgh, May 19, 2010

LEARN MORE: Please read tips on how to prepare a new leader to manage a culturally diverse team of employees.

Workforce Management Online, June 2010 — Register Now!

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. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Ask a Question
Dear Workforce Newsletter
Posted on June 28, 2010August 9, 2018

Unions No Chicago-Like Wal-Mart Deal for New York

Wal-Mart has cleared a major hurdle to opening a second Chicago store.


A community and labor coalition dropped its opposition Thursday, June 24, after the Arkansas retail giant reportedly agreed to start workers at a minimum of $8.75 an hour and pay them $9.15 to $9.35 an hour following their first year on the job.


New York labor officials were quick to cast aside any notion that the Chicago agreement meant Wal-Mart was any closer to gaining a foothold in New York City.


“This is New York; this is not Chicago,” said Stuart Appelbaum, president of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union. “They’ve got a long way to go before they would be welcome here.”


The Chicago Federation of Labor announced that a coalition had reached an agreement with the retailer on the wages and had secured a commitment to build the project using union labor, among other measures. The project subsequently cleared a major zoning committee vote in the Chicago City Council.


Wal-Mart would not confirm the pact with labor groups; a spokesman said the retailer had a deal “with the residents of Chicago.” The agreement was only for a store in Chicago’s Pullman neighborhood, though the retailer announced earlier last week plans to build dozens of stores in Chicago in the coming years.


The deal came a day after union leaders and elected officials rallied at New York’s City Hall in opposition to Wal-Mart opening its first store in Gotham. The rally was organized amid reports that the company is eyeing the Gateway II site in Brooklyn.


Appelbaum and United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1500 leaders say they’d be happy to sit down with Wal-Mart officials to discuss their desire to open a store in New York. But it’s clear that in New York, the retailer would have to move beyond what it agreed to in Chicago if it wanted labor’s imprimatur on a project.


Union leaders say they wouldn’t consider negotiating a specific wage amount, but would want any agreement pegged to the prevailing wage for grocery workers in the area. Full-time unionized supermarket workers here start at $12 an hour, plus benefits. And though local unions’ opposition to Wal-Mart has often been framed around issues of low wages, pay rates are not the only obstacle Wal-Mart would have to surmount in talks with worker groups.


“There’s absolutely no question there’d have to be some sense of how they’d deal with unionization,” said Pat Purcell, assistant to the president of Local 1500. “They can pay $10 or $11 an hour, but if they’re going to fire workers like they’ve done in the past when we try to unionize them, that won’t work for us.”


Union leaders worry that if Wal-Mart were to come to New York, its stores would likely eat into the market share of unionized retailers such as Pathmark, Key Food and Duane Reade and put mom-and-pop shops out of business.


At the Wednesday rally, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said that Wal-Mart’s less-than-pristine labor record is also at issue. “We don’t want companies that have led the nation in lawsuits being brought against them by workers,” she said. “We don’t want companies that have the largest class action in history brought against them. We don’t want companies where women are, over and over, paid less than men and not promoted.”


It’s possible that Wal-Mart could bypass the unions and City Council altogether in New York. They’re likely looking for an as-of-right site that wouldn’t require City Council approval, or one that has already gone through the land-use process.


Those sites are a rarity in the city, though Wal-Mart has come close to finding such a location in the past, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said at a Crain’s New York Business forum in October. “It’s not the city’s business to tell companies they can or can’t be here,” the mayor argued, citing the retailer’s efforts to improve its benefits policies and labor practices. “That’s what the marketplace is for.”


As it did in Chicago, Wal-Mart could try to drum up public support for such a move by partnering with religious leaders who are concerned about high unemployment in minority neighborhoods. It’s also likely to follow its Chicago strategy of focusing on poor neighborhoods where there is a pent-up demand for jobs and supermarkets. New York residents already spend $125 million a year at area Wal-Mart stores, according to the company.


The Gateway II site, which is owned by the Related Cos., has already received land-use approval, though a Wal-Mart spokesman continues to insist the company has no projects to announce in the city.  


Filed by Daniel Massey of Crain’s New York Business, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on June 28, 2010August 9, 2018

Obama Signs Pension Funding Relief Bill

President Barack Obama has signed into law pension funding relief legislation.


Obama’s action came Friday, June 25, after the House approved the bill, H.R. 3962, on a 417-1 vote. Only Rep. George Miller, D-California, who chairs the House Education and Labor Committee, voted against the measure. Miller objected to the omission of provisions that would beef up disclosure of 401(k) plan fees.

The measure would give employers temporary alternatives to the basic requirement—embedded in a 2006 law—that requires employers to amortize pension funding shortfalls over seven years.


Under one alternative, employers could amortize funding shortfalls over 15 years for any two plan years from 2008 to 2011.


Under the other option, employers would have to pay interest on a funding shortfall for only the two plan years they choose. After that, the seven-year amortization period would begin. For example, if an employer chose this approach for the 2010 plan year, it would only pay interest—roughly 6 percent based on current rates—on the shortfall in 2010 and 2011, while the shortfall would be amortized over seven years starting in 2012.


Either approach would significantly reduce the cash pension plan contributions employers would have to make compared with current requirements.


“While this bill is not perfect, it is an important step in providing urgent relief to plan sponsors—many of whom continue to be strapped for cash and must choose between funding their plans or delay hiring and capital investments or even further cut back on jobs,” Mark Ugoretz, president of the ERISA Industry Committee in Washington, said in a statement.


Some of the relief provided to employers, though, would be eroded by a provision known as the cash-flow rule. That provision would require employers that use either of the temporary funding schedules to contribute extra cash to their plans to equal “excess” employee compensation or “extraordinary” dividends.


For example, an amount equal to compensation in excess of $1 million paid to any employee would have to be contributed to the plan.


Employers adopting the interest-only funding approach would be bound by the cash-flow rule for three years, while the rule would apply for five years for employers adopting the 15-year amortization schedule. The pension funding relief provisions are part of a broader measure that temporarily reverses a cut in fees the government pays doctors treating patients covered by Medicare.  


Filed by Jerry Geisel of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.


 

Posted on June 23, 2010August 9, 2018

Survey 21 Percent of Job Seekers Dropped After Reference Checks

On average, 21 percent of job seekers are taken out of consideration by managers after a check of professional references, according to a survey released by OfficeTeam, a division of Robert Half International Inc.


The survey also found that 36 percent of managers, when contacting references, are most interested in a description of past job duties and experience of potential employees. An additional 31 percent seek a view into job seekers’ strengths and weaknesses.


OfficeTeam’s survey included telephone interviews with more than 1,000 senior managers at companies with 20 or more employees.  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on June 23, 2010August 9, 2018

Senator Scales Back COBRA Subsidy Extension Plan

Laid-off employees would again be eligible for federal COBRA premium subsidies under a proposal by Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania.


Under the amendment that Casey proposed last week to tax extension legislation, employees laid off from June 1 through November 30 would be eligible for the 65 percent federal premium subsidy for six months.


That is a reduction from the 15-month subsidy extension he proposed earlier.
Senate Democratic leaders have been unable to muster sufficient support to bring the broader bill, H.R. 4213, to a vote by the full Senate. Republicans and some fiscally conservative Democrats oppose the broader bill because it would add to the federal deficit.


However, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Montana, pledged last week to refine the measure to reduce its overall cost and get the 60 votes needed to stop debate and win passage.


It isn’t known how much the latest extension proposal would cost. An earlier proposal to extend the 15-month COBRA subsidy to those laid off through year-end was projected to cost nearly $8 billion, according to congressional budget analysts.


On the Senate floor, Casey said the six-month COBRA subsidy would be fully paid for by a change in the federal earned income tax credit.


While the economy is improving, layoffs are continuing and the extension of the subsidy is needed to ensure that laid-off workers have access to quality health care, Casey said.


The latest COBRA subsidy expired May 31, which means employees involuntarily terminated since June 1 have been ineligible for the subsidy.  


Filed by Jerry Geisel of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on June 21, 2010August 9, 2018

KKR Paying $356 Million for Japanese Staffing Firm

Private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. announced plans to buy the staffing subsidiary of Tokyo-based Usen Corp.


KKR said it will pay 32.5 billion yen ($356 million).


The Usen subsidiary, Intelligence Ltd., provides direct hire, temporary staffing and outsourcing as well as job-search advertising. It operates the Doda brand in Japan. Intelligence has the second-largest market share in direct hire staffing in Japan, according to KKR.


“As one of the few recruitment services firms in Japan providing such a comprehensive offering, [Intelligence] is well positioned to take advantage of an anticipated upturn in economic activity,” said Shusaku Minoda, managing director of KKR and CEO of its Japan operations. “Further growth of the recruitment sector is also expected as a result of the evolving human resource needs of companies, as well as increased mobility of domestic and international labor markets due to growing awareness of career development opportunities.”


The deal is expected to close in July.


Usen ranked No. 41 on Staffing Industry Analysts’ 2009 list of the largest global staffing firms. Usen is a cable broadcaster and media content provider.  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on June 18, 2010August 9, 2018

Revised Tax Bill Does Not Include COBRA Subsidy Extension

A revised tax bill unveiled Wednesday, June 16, by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Montana, does not include an extension of federal COBRA premium subsidies, further decreasing the likelihood that Congress will extend the subsidy.


In March, the Senate approved a tax bill, H.R. 4213, extending the subsidy to employees laid off through year-end. In the absence of congressional action, the 15-month, 65 percent subsidy is not available to employees laid off after May 31.


But the House in May stripped the subsidy and its projected cost of nearly $8 billion from the measure before passing it and sending the bill back to the Senate.


While Senate Democratic leaders had discussed reducing the extension to November 30, a tax bill that Baucus unveiled last week omitted the subsidy, while a subsidy extension also is not in the latest version.


An amendment to the tax bill proposed by Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, would extend the subsidy to employees laid off through November 30. But the Senate has not yet taken up the Casey amendment, which faces an uphill battle to win approval as Senate Democratic leaders look for ways to reduce the cost of the overall bill.


The revamped bill, like the previous version, includes provisions to give employers more time to fund pension obligations, but excludes a provision in the tax bill passed by the House that would beef up disclosure of 401(k) plan fees to participants.  


Filed by Jerry Geisel of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on June 17, 2010August 9, 2018

SHRM Seeks to Put HR Into C-Suite, Policy Conversations

Both ends of the political spectrum will be covered by keynote speakers at the annual conference of the Society for Human Resource Management this month in San Diego.


The party affiliations of Steve Forbes, publisher of Forbes magazine and a former Republican presidential candidate, and former Vice President Al Gore, however, were not as important for SHRM as the trends they represent.


Forbes, who is slated to open the event June 27, will provide insight on the dynamic—and sometimes confusing—media environment. On June 28, Gore will delve into the complexities of environmental stewardship and sustainable business practices.


“HR has to be aware of what the discussions are in the C-suite and among political leaders,” says China Miner Gorman, who recently left SHRM as the organization’s chief global member engagement officer. “We think that Steve Forbes and Al Gore provide a really interesting point/counterpoint to our attendees to jump-start conversations.”


SHRM hopes that the conference also will generate a dialogue about how HR can help companies deal with two of the biggest challenges they face—a recovering but not yet vibrant economy and major policy changes coming out of Washington.


Just as people management was crucial when the economy spiraled in 2008, it is also going to be central to a business environment in which millions of people are put back to work.


Business performance “rests on the ability of the corporation to attract, engage and retain the best talent available—and that’s HR’s job,” Gorman says.


This point will be explored in a featured panel the morning of June 29 that will include HR executives from Google, Northrop Grumman and Deutsche Bank.


Eric Oppenheim, vice president for operations and HR at Republic Foods in Bethesda, Maryland, says that developing a strategic approach to an improving economy will be relevant for most conference participants.


“As soon as the [job] market opens up, people are going to take off because they’ve been suppressed for a couple years,” Oppenheim says. “They’re going to leave just to leave. That’s going to cause a huge strain on HR departments.”


Employment policy changes also are putting stress on companies and giving HR an opportunity to step up—a trend reflected in the SHRM conference program. Gorman says that placeholders were put in the schedule to allow for timely offerings.


“Several of these slots have been filled with legislative sessions, particularly on health care legislation,” Gorman says.


SHRM expects those meetings to be fuller than they were at last year’s annual conference in New Orleans, which attracted about 7,000 participants. The expected attendance in San Diego is more than 9,000.


The exhibit hall also will be more populated in San Diego than in New Orleans. This year’s conference will attract about 650 vendors, compared with last year’s 600.


“The good spots [on the exhibit floor] have been gone for months,” Gorman says.


As usual, attendees will have to keep a tight schedule to take advantage of the show.


“You have to be careful to plan ahead and target your time appropriately because it can be overwhelming,” Oppenheim says.  


Filed by Mark Schoeff Jr. of InvestmentNews, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.


 

Posted on June 16, 2010August 9, 2018

Judge Rules FedEx Drivers Are Not Contractors

A U.S. district judge issued a summary judgment ruling that FedEx Ground and home delivery drivers in Illinois are employees and not independent contractors under the Illinois Wage Act.


The May 28 ruling was the first in the complex FedEx Ground litigation over the classification of drivers as independent contractors, according to law firm Leonard Carder.


“It’s a very important step, but it’s not the end of the road,” said Lynn Rossman Faris, a lead plaintiffs attorney in the case and partner in Leonard Carder.


Other aspects of the Illinois drivers’ case remain for the court to decide. This Illinois case was also not certified as a class action, although that is subject to appeal.


Similar plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment are pending for drivers in 39 other states, and seven other states have laws similar to Illinois’. The FedEx Ground Package System Inc. litigation includes 63 cases.


The judge ruled that the Illinois drivers were employees because “their delivery work was an essential part of FedEx’s business,” according to Leonard Carder.


The court noted that drivers must wear FedEx uniforms and drive trucks with FedEx logos, that FedEx structures drivers’ routes so that the trucks are in use nine to 11 hours a day, that FedEx must approve replacement drivers and that drivers were required to allow FedEx managers to go on customer service rides annually, according to Leonard Carder.  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.


 

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 … Page 416 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