communication – Page 7

June 20, 2019June 29, 2023

How Employers Can Utilize Well-Being in the New Social Contract With Employees

Few people realize that the notion of a workplace social contract came about accidentally nearly 80 years ago as the result of an executive order on wage controls issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Cutting-edge companies at the time then began offering health insurance to employees as a recruitment incentive. And, in the early 1950s, the Internal Revenue Service deemed that insurance and similar benefits wouldn’t be counted as taxable income. Viola! The workplace social contract was born.

Over the last half-century, social contracts between employers and employees have evolved to the point where modern social mores drive a very different conversation today. The old agreement that employees would work for a company in exchange for wages, health insurance and little else sufficed as an agreeable social contract for both parties for decades. Today, however, 56 million millennials and an upcoming 61 million Gen Z workers are reshaping the contract terms.

Also read: The New Employer-Employee Social Contract

And, because younger employees comprise approximately 70 percent of today’s workforce, employers who listen and respond to their demands will be in a better position to compete for and retain top talent than those who ignore their concerns.

One employee benefit that can address these concerns is the often-debated employer-sponsored well-being program.

Many C-suite executives have a hard time seeing a return on investment for their well-being efforts. After all, under terms of social contracts from days gone by, well-being programs were designed to keep employees off the health care merry-go-round, thereby containing the employer’s health care costs. Employees participated in health screenings because employers mandated it, and no one found it to be fun or engaging. What’s more, this approach hasn’t shown improvements in overall employee health.

Today, fortunately, the new social contract between employees and employers presents a tremendous opportunity to leverage well-being as a strategic business tool to not only realize cost containment but to increase productivity and enhance recruitment and retention of top talent.

With these new conditions in mind, employers can utilize well-being benefits as part of a new social contract to address employee demands by doing the following.

Keeping an Integrated Mindset

Well-being initiatives are connected to health insurance and, therefore, overseen by the benefits or human resources department. However, companies won’t get full value of a well-being program if it is viewed solely as a benefit or cost rather than an engagement, culture and productivity driver. Well-being activities should be incorporated more broadly into:

The entire organization by including safety, recruitment, onboarding and training departments.
The entire work day, rather than expecting people to engage on their own time. Incorporate huddle stretches, encourage your supervisors to set an example by walking around to check in with their direct reports, bring in healthy snacks or ditch the junk food vending machine altogether.
Employee-based challenges beyond physical activity. For example, try challenging employees to keep gratitude journals, track their sleep to identify potential sleep issues, even to drink more water. Most employers don’t realize that most of us are dehydrated to some extent and that lack of hydration can play a role in impaired cognitive ability.
A single place where employees can access and interact with all of their benefits. The mind-boggling speed of technology growth in the consumer market mandates that companies evolve just as quickly to provide employees with personalized, consumer-based experiences.

Looking at Your Entire Work Environment

Your employees today expect that every touchpoint of their experience at work be influenced by terms of the new social contract. Are the restrooms well maintained? Do you provide sedentary employees with sit/stand desks and stationary bikes for lunch-hour workouts? Does the cafeteria offer healthy food options?

If you aren’t attending to basics such as these, you’ll send mixed messages around how you’re prioritizing your employees’ health and well-being, which can create confusion and cause employees to question the authenticity of your commitment.

A growing component of the new social contract comes from workers who want to work on their own terms — remotely, from home or while traveling. In fact, a 2019 survey of 1,000 hiring managers revealed that up to 73 percent of all departments expect to have remote workers within the next decade. Smart managers will remember to include these workers in well-being efforts to ensure they’re also happy and productive, even though they might not experience the physical work environment on a regular basis.

Getting Your Leaders Engaged

Employees in the 21^st century expect their bosses to walk their talk. If your company’s executives verbally extol the virtues of the corporate well-being program, then they also need to actively participate if they’re to meet terms under the new social contract. Do they run in the company 5K? Do they avoid eating lunch at their desks, opting instead for the cafeteria or break room? Do they participate in annual biometric screenings? Are they transparent about their own challenges and efforts?

When your C-suite executives and department heads participate, they organically connect with employees on a human level and will contribute immensely to the success of your initiatives.

Contracts, by their very nature, are designed to protect the best interests of both parties. Today’s new social contract between employees and employers is forcing companies to expand their definition of employee benefits, stretch old-school operating procedures to manage talent and look beyond traditional HR channels to deliver a more fulfilling employee experience. Employers who are up to the challenge can expect that their employees will take more responsibility on their side of the contract to participate in activities that lead to long-term well-being habits, resulting in a rested, alert and productive workforce.

June 17, 2019June 29, 2023

How Long of a Leash Must You Give an Employee Before Firing?

When a client calls me to ask for advice about firing an employee, the first question I always ask is, “What does the employee’s file look like?”

I want to know if there exists a documented history of performance issues to justify the termination, and whether said issues are known and understood by the employee.

I ask these questions for two reasons:

1. Can the employer objectively prove the misconduct to a judge or jury? Fact-finders want to see documentation, and if it’s lacking, they are more likely to believe that the misconduct was not bad enough to warrant documentation, or worse, that it did not occur. In either case, a judge or jury reaching this conclusion is bad news for an employer defending the termination in a lawsuit.
2. Surprises cause bad feelings, which lead to lawsuits. If an employee has notice of the reasons causing the discharge, the employee is much less likely to sue. Sandbagged employees become angry ex-employees. You do not want angry ex-employees going to lawyers, especially when you lack the documentation to support the termination.

So what does quality documentation to support a termination look like? Consider Anderson v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (N.D. Ohio May 29, 2019)

Jason Anderson, African-American, claimed that GCRTA discriminated against him because of his race by denying him a promotion, issuing excessive discipline and ultimately terminating him. He lost. Why? Because his employer had a long and documented history of his performance and discipline issues.

On April 17, 2012, Anderson received a coaching for being involved in a preventable motor vehicle accident in an unmarked RTA Transit Police Vehicle.
On March 5, 2013, Anderson received a coaching for making disrespectful and unprofessional comments about a fellow officer over the police radio.
On August 14, 2014, Anderson received a coaching for failing to report to work for an overtime shift that Anderson had volunteered to work.
On January 1, 2015, Anderson received a coaching for neglecting his responsibilities as a first responder after witnessing a motor vehicle accident involving an RTA coach. Anderson continued driving rather than stopping to provide assistance to injured passengers.
On August 5, 2016, Anderson received a coaching for allowing a person to ride without proof of payment purchase or validation of fare and failing to take any enforcement action.
On August 5, 2016, Anderson received a First Written Warning for a disruptive, disrespectful and unprofessional outburst directed at Anderson’s supervising officer during the Republican National Convention. He yelled, among other things, “You disgust me. The very thought of you is disgusting to me and your presence sickens me.”
On January 25, 2017, Anderson received a coaching for failing to address the resistive and disorderly behavior of a fare violater at the Tower City Rapid Station.
On April 12, 2017, Anderson received a coaching for failing to attend to scheduled court appearances.
On May 30, 2017, Anderson received another First Written Reminder for violation of Employee Performance Code for failing to maintain control of a suspect following an investigative detention.
On June 13, 2017, Anderson was charged with multiple misdemeanors following an off-duty incident with his girlfriend during which he allegedly assaulted her while he had his loaded service weapon unsecured in their hotel room.

Based on this history, the court had little difficulty dismissing Anderson’s claims:

Plaintiff was issued three (3) First Written Warnings and (2) two non-disciplinary coachings, each based on a particular circumstance of Plaintiff’s problematic or violative conduct. Plaintiff provides no direct evidence to support a finding that his discipline or termination were made because of his race. Plaintiff also fails to demonstrate how any similarly situated employee received more favorable treatment. The record does however support a finding that GCRTA’s actions against Plaintiff were made for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons following Plaintiff’s unlawful conduct the morning of May 26, 2017 at the Double Tree Hotel.

This employer gave this employee a very long leash before ultimately terminating his employment. Your leash may not, and likely need not, be this long.

However, no matter the length of your leash, you must ensure it’s documented and communicated to the employee each step of the way. Otherwise, you are asking for a lawsuit and issues in said lawsuit post-termination.

June 6, 2019

Relational Intelligence Can Give Companies a Leg Up

There’s a difference between how people behave in their personal life and how they behave professionally. But businesses can learn something from the tactics people use to repair personal relationships, according to therapist and author Esther Perel.

One of the speakers at the Unleash 2019 conference in Las Vegas in May, Perel has extensive experience counseling couples. She consults organizations on conflict resolution as well.

“As couples’ therapists, we have wide familiarity working with polarized systems,” Perel said. “I know [how] to work with relationships where one person doesn’t believe a word the other person is saying. That’s what couples who are arguing do. So we actually have an enormous amount of experience helping companies.”

Her session at Unleash focused on how organizations can use some of the tenets of couples counseling in their workplace when it comes to working on the relationship between the employer and the employee. She also spoke after the session to answer more questions on relationships in the workplace.

Perel prefers the term “relational intelligence” over the oft-used term “emotional intelligence.” That’s because it’s not a self-referential concept, she said. Rather, it’s knowing how to deal with other people and become in tune with the needs of other.

This skill set is especially important after #MeToo, she said. Now, she added, “there’s tremendous anxiety and restlessness in the workplace about how we relate to each other, how we establish boundaries and how we deal with disagreements breaches of trust.”

People carry narratives about relationships that influence their expectations from an interaction and their interpretations of the situation they’re in. Perel calls this their “relationship resume.” People come to work with this past. Were they raised to be trusting or suspicious? Did they grow up in a household where they were taught to ask for help or figure things out on their own? Do they prefer to work collaboratively or alone?

Answers to questions like this help explain what kind of team member a person will be, Perel said. That’s a missing set of questions that employers don’t consider when they hire.

Understanding boundaries is another key relational intelligence skill useful in both personal and professional relationships.

“These days we have narrowed the definition of boundary and we have sexualized it,” Perel said. But really the term “boundary” refers to a much broader scope of situations. Boundaries in sexual situations are just a small piece of it.

In the workplace, boundaries exist in any team. This can show itself in many ways. It’s the difference between an employee who’s involved in everyone’s business and the employee who hardly interacts with any colleagues. It’s the difference between teams that act like a secret society and teams with more “porous” boundaries.

There are several key boundary questions that exist in a team. They include, Who’s involved in this project? Who needs to say what to whom? What needs to be shared, and what can be kept to oneself? How much can you be absent for three days without anyone noticing? What is private versus what is shared? And what are decisions you make alone versus decisions for which you need to ask your manager permission?

When Perel is consulting organizations, she relies on the concept of “polarity management,”“an approach to conflict resolution that’s about identifying and managing unsolvable problems,” to communicate with her client.

The specifics of how to use polarity thinking warrants its own article. Looking at it more broadly, though, Perel explained some of the key tenets behind it. Before you tell someone what they’re doing wrong you tell them what they’re doing right. Also, you acknowledge that you know what losses someone will face by doing something different.

“Before you go directly from here to here and say, ‘This is wrong, you need to do that,’ you first address the loss. Every change comes with loss,” Perel said.

June 5, 2019September 5, 2023

How an Employee-centric HR Communications Strategy Impacts Your Organization

employee communication, hearing, talk, schedules

In today’s digital day and age, designing an HR communications strategy that effectively reaches an increasingly dispersed, distracted workforce is critical to increase employee engagement — and ensure employees are informed and aligned to meet broader business objectives.

Lack of employee engagement remains rampant among organizations, with a whopping 85 percent of employees today not engaged at work. Yet when employees are connected, organizations see an increase in productivity by 20 percent to 25 percent — making internal communications increasingly critical to the business. Those organizations that don’t prioritize their employees and ensure they are well connected will resign themselves to a serious disadvantage.

Also Read: Focus on Employee Work Passion, Not Employee Engagement

Yet, as companies embark on efforts to modernize the employee experience, many HR and communications teams struggle to scale communications in the face of resource and staffing constraints, often with ratios as low as 1 communicator to 20,000 employees. This reality makes it exceedingly challenging to create, deliver and measure content that is relevant and valuable to all different types of employees. HR and communications teams are delivering greater business impact but pulled in more directions than ever, and are in dire need of a scalable, targeted way to carry out their strategies to support broader business initiatives.

With this in mind, here are a few factors to consider as you embark on designing a communications approach that empowers HR, communicators and employees alike — and why it matters to your business goals:

Connected employees directly impact customer satisfaction

Employees’ value extends well beyond what you pay them in salary. Employees need to feel appreciated and recognized, despite what number appears on their paychecks. In fact, 69 percent of workers said they would work harder if they were recognized and appreciated more, and Gartner predicts that by 2020, 70 percent of companies will implement technology for employee recognition and reward.

What’s more, a 5 percent increase in employee engagement can lead to a 3 percent jump in a company’s revenue. Effective communications not only makes employees feel like they matter to their organization, but also emphasizes their role in contributing to a greater goal and broader effort among colleagues — and that directly affects business outcomes.

Despite the clear business benefits of HR communications, most companies still rely on a single channel for communications. Employees have unique preferences for when, how and where they access communications, and HR and internal communications teams need to adopt a multi-channel strategy to reach all employees — regardless of location, job function and the devices they use.

Particularly as many employees today are desk-less, engaging employees wherever they may be is foundational to successfully connecting, informing and building trust with employees. From a company mobile app to digital signage, email, print and more, HR and communications teams must incorporate multiple, targeted channels in their toolkit, with a system to integrate all channels so they aren’t stuck managing multiple platforms.

And not only does the channel matter, but so does the message. What might work on email may not work for mobile or other mediums, and communications should be designed for consumption on each specific channel you plan to use. It is also important to train and encourage team and frontline managers to create their own content that caters to their team members and direct reports — making content more local and relevant not only ensures the right messages get to the right employees, but also alleviates the burden on HR and communications teams in creating all content.

Build Employee Retention With Impactful Communications

As an organization grows, it is important to share engaging and compelling messages to motivate, inform and retain employees. Shockingly, only 10 percent of employees today report knowing what’s going on in their company at any given time — meaning they are not aligned to larger business goals, setting up those initiatives to fail.

Employee retention doesn’t stop with employee orientation. More impactful engagement goes well beyond day one, starting with studying and understanding your employees — who they are, their unique preferences and motivations. Much like a marketer who analyzes the customer journey, building employee personas and mapping out their journey will allow you to deliver more targeted, effective communications personalized to their needs.

Moreover, organizations should look to not only share relevant, customized communications across channels with employees, but also establish a platform where they can quickly search for and find information they need to be informed at all times. An outdated Intranet for sharing employee information simply won’t suffice when employee engagement, productivity and the bottom line are at stake.

Successful HR communication is vital in engaging employees, maintaining a thriving company culture and boosting both individual employees and the organization. By taking a more targeted, customized and multi-channel approach to communications, organizations can elevate HR and communications teams to support broader business outcomes, while reaping the benefits of greater employee engagement, productivity and retention.

May 31, 2019June 29, 2023

Some 2020 Election Views: Jan Berger on Single-Payer Health Care

Not surprisingly the future of the United States heath care system is already a huge topic of debate for next year’s presidential election.

Many of the 2020 Democratic nominees for president are supporting a single-payer or Medicare for All solution.

Since the United States has never had this type of health care, it’s helpful to sort out the myths from the facts, which is exactly what one woman did at an employer-centric health care conference recently.

Jan Berger, president and CEO of international health care consultancy Health Intelligence Partners, gave a presentation on single-payer health care at the Midwest Business Group on Health annual conference in May.

One of the first ideas Berger brought up is key. Every country in the world, including the United States, is having the same health care problems no matter what the financial model is being used, she said. These problems include rising costs and access issues. The only way the U.S. is different, she added, is that we’re the only country that has made health care “political warfare.” Also, in most other countries people don’t go bankrupt or homeless because of health care costs.

Meanwhile, Berger also debunked several myths about other countries’ single-payer systems. One key myth is that “health care is socialized medicine.” While some socialist countries do use a single-payer system, many non-Socialist countries do, too. Pulling the socialist card to dismiss the single-payer discussion is “a bullet people use to not discuss change,” Berger said.

Berger listed other misconceptions about single-payer health care:

Single-payer financial models are all the same. (None are the same.)
“Single-payer” applies to both the finance and delivery of health care. (Only four countries have fully integrated models.)
Single-payer means no cost to the consumer. (This is very rarely true. There are out-of-pocket costs in almost all countries that use single-payer.)
Single-payer means no focus on preventative care. (This is not true, Berger noted, giving the examples of Cuba, Costa Rica, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Australia.)
Single-payer dictates how doctors treat patients. (It doesn’t.)
Single-payer models destroy innovation. (Berger noted many examples of how this is not true. To name a few: The Netherlands, which has one of the most unique memory-care systems in the world; South Africa, with its automated pharmacy teller machine.)

“We don’t have to be somebody else, but we have to learn from somebody else,” Berger said.

One other idea that Berger mentioned was the need to know the definitions of key phrases if you’re going to have a conversation about the different health care proposals. For example, the difference between Medicare and the Medicare For All bills. While Medicare doesn’t cover vision or dental, the predominant Medicare for All Act in Congress covers a broader range of services, she said. While the word “Medicare” is used in this context, by definition Medicare for All does not mean the exact quality and coverage of Medicare expanded to each U.S. citizen.

It’s also necessary to understand the definition of universal health coverage, which the United States does not have even with the Affordable Care Act. The World Health Organization defines universal health coverage as “ensuring that all people have access to needed health services (including prevention, promotion, treatment, rehabilitation and palliation) of sufficient quality to be effective while also ensuring that the use of these services does not expose the user the financial hardship.” It continues, “People need to be protected from being pushed into poverty because of the cost of health care”— a milestone the U.S. has yet to reach.

None of this is to say health care should be one way over another. But if we’re debating on what health care system works best for the country, then relying on facts rather than myths for information is a good start.

It’s possible to admit that the current employer-based health care system is not doing well in certain regards. Almost 24 million Americans enrolled in employer health plans must spend a large share of their income on health care. High-deductible health plans have the power to impact low-wage workers in much more detrimental ways than they impact high-wage workers. Contributing to HSAs like some employers promote just isn’t possible for many low-income employees; in fact, Bruce Sherman, medical director at the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions noted at this same MBGH conference that only 1 percent of low-income employees contribute to HSAs.

Whatever the solution is to problems within employer-sponsored plans currently are, it’s not something that has been solved yet. There are going to be plenty of suggestions from the candidates.

As the 2020 election nears, we’re likely to hear a lot of hyped and a lot of misleading “facts” about certain health system proposals, and I’d encourage you to look at the facts instead of falling too deeply into the “political warfare” of U.S. health care.

May 31, 2019June 3, 2019

Bully or Tough Boss? Here Are Some Guidelines to Define Leadership

The good news: Many companies invest in programs that support employee physical and mental health of their employees. They understand that flourishing human beings generally translate into happier and higher performing employees.

The bad news: Not all bosses have gotten the memo.

It’s bad enough that after having to dodge bullies in school; we still confront them even as adults. Even worse, the bully may be the person who’s supposed to be in charge of your mentorship and growth, yet it seems like they’re more interested in intimidation and threats.

So how do you know when your boss has crossed the line into being a bully, and what do you do when he or she has?

How to Spot a Bully at Work

Having cut my teeth at a Fortune 50 technology company, I’ve heard a lot of debate on whether a boss was tough or simply a bully. It can sometimes be hard to tell if a boss is pushing you to reach your limits or trying to push you off a cliff.

A boss that only wants to be liked and lets his or her team walk all over them is another kind of danger. But being assertive and demanding can go too far. Leadership is tricky; one must be aware of their own personality derailers, understand positive and impactful boundaries, and be able to inspire others to help drive lasting results, without being a bully.

The Workplace Bullying Institute defines bullying as “threats, humiliation, intimidation, work sabotage or verbal abuse.” In its 2017 report, they found that about 1 in 5 workers are bullied at work, and 61 percent of the bullies are bosses.

If you want to know if you’re being bullied, ask yourself how you feel. If you’re being pushed by a tough boss, you should still feel inspired and psychologically safe. If you feel nauseous at the thought of going to work, unable to sleep and stressed to the max, you might be being bullied.

Bullies come in a few varieties, some easier to spot than others.

The easiest one is the loud, abusive boss. They humiliate you in front of others. You’re the butt of their jokes. They curse at you. It feels like the playground and you’re being pushed in the dirt by the big kid.

There is also the boss who is a passive bully. They torment their targets with quiet but piercing techniques such as undermining their employees, dividing their team, gossiping and sometimes even creating lies. This one feels a little more like high school, whispering in the halls.

How to Handle a Bullying Boss

There is not a single or simple answer to how to manage a boss who believes the best way to develop employees is to give them tough love or build thick skin by being abusive, abrasive or explosive.

If you find yourself in this type of environment, let me start by saying it is not OK and it is not your fault. I understand how being in this type of situation can tear you apart emotionally and physically. Breaking you is what the bully wants to do.

The most important thing you must do is take care of yourself. Removing yourself from the situation is always an option.

Some may criticize me for suggesting you leave the bully boss situation, because it may look like you’re letting the bully win. But it is an option you have and sometimes this is the best option for you.

If you choose to take on the situation head on, here’s my advice:

Have a plan. Be thoughtful and deliberate about how you will show up, perform, communicate and get results.

Continue to perform. Bring others along on your journey and deliver results. The bully will have a hard time attacking you if others are involved and part of your work.

Document. Even the little things should go in a log. A bully often makes mistakes that will leave them vulnerable to being reported.

Be careful who you trust. You may find yourself in a situation where you are ganged up on because another person the bully attacks is looking for any break from the bad behavior and they actually side with the bully. It reduces their torment. It sounds crazy, but it happens.

Talk to someone. Many people think this is a sign of weakness but it is not. You might want to talk with someone outside your organization so you know it won’t get back to the bully.

Remember That Bullies Are Ultimately Pathetic

I have come across a few bullies in my career and they were miserable people. They talked about others all the time, bringing everyone around them down.

Their home lives were sad. They were often unhealthy. When they did smile, it was forced. They carried a lot of stress and it showed up in their work, relationships, family and community.

The one thing I remind myself of frequently is that bullies I have come across in my career have to live with themselves every day.

You can escape your bully, but they cannot escape themselves. In time you will rise above the situation and never look back and your bully has the pleasure of living in their hateful and unhealthy life. That is their punishment.

Most bullies lack confidence and feel powerful when others feel powerless. Bullies are often threatened by the person they are bullying. It sounds silly and it is, but it is often true. You must take care of yourself if you find yourself in a situation like this. This will impact how you show up for yourself, your coworkers, your team and, more important, your family and friends.

It’s never OK for someone to bully another person. If the bully is making it sound like it is to get the best results out of a person or toughen them up, feel free to call it out.

There is no place for an abusive boss, including verbal abuse. I believe strongly in accountability and I set a high bar — professionally and personally — for my peers, my team and myself. Please do the same for yourself.

May 30, 2019June 29, 2023

We’re Addicted to … Everything? How to Handle Digital Addictions in the Workplace

As the years go on, so too does the list of things to which people become addicted. Emerging front and center as a relatively new but common modern addiction — to which employers are having difficulty responding — is the concept of a digital addiction.

A digital addiction is more than a mindless but incessant checking of one’s phone, more than browsing Facebook while taking a break from company-focused work. It is a complete disruption to and dysregulation of the daily life of an individual, due to compulsions to engage in the addictive and cyclical behaviors.

Digital Addictions and Treatment

Like other addictions, a digital addiction essentially renders an “addict” unable to perform a major life activity, such as sleeping, eating or working. As with other addictions, a digital addiction often arises out of feelings of discontent, stress, pressure, anxiety, depression or other underlying mental health condition. Although the behaviors themselves (use of electronic devices) may seem more benign than drugs, alcohol or sex, the personal impact is no less severe.

And perhaps even more concerning is the fact that digital addictions can be hard to spot and even harder to stop. We live in a day and age that virtually necessitates constant and unwavering digital and electronic connection. Behaviors that may be dangerous for a minority of the population with a digital addiction are entirely socially acceptable for the majority of individuals, rendering the line between an addiction and a habit blurrier than ever.

As the prevalence and understanding of digital addictions rises, so too does an understanding of the disorder and its treatment. Although this addiction is not yet recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or the DSM-5, treatment programs are seeing the growing need for programs specifically tailored to digital and gaming addictions. Additionally, organizations worldwide have begun conducting investigations and research into the impact of a digital addiction upon both the quality and productivity of life.

What Does This Mean for Employers?

In recent years, employers have come to understand their obligations related to mental health issues and disabilities — employees are to be granted reasonable accommodations for mental health disorders the same as they would be for a physical disorder or illness. This includes, when applicable, leave to attend treatment on an inpatient, partial hospitalization, intensive outpatient or outpatient basis under federal laws like the Family Medical Leave Act or Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as state laws, like the California Family Rights Act and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. What then is an employer’s obligation if an employee exhibits a digital addiction?

It is prudent to accommodate an individual with a digital addiction the same way you would accommodate any other individual: engage in the interactive process and review and discuss any restrictions, limitations or accommodations that may be needed. While there may be concerns regarding an employee’s ability to return to work in the digital age after receiving treatment for a directly related addiction, this concern cannot be used as a basis to engage in an adverse action against an employee.

This remains the case even if the disorder is not officially “diagnosable.” In other words, an employer must take a digital addiction seriously, even if it does not understand the addiction or personally believe the addiction is legitimate.

Where Do We Go From Here?

For now, there are several best practices employers can use concerning digital addictions. An up-to-date compliant handbook with policies addressing leaves and accommodations goes a long way. A handbook creates the foundation for your policies and procedures. If your handbook is wrong, or if you do not have a handbook at all, your internal policies and procedures are much more likely to be problematic and subject to tougher scrutiny.

Your handbook also needs to be acknowledged by your employees. You can use an employee’s acknowledgement to show they were well aware you were more than willing to reasonably accommodate them and welcomed any and all accommodation requests.

Documentation. Document notice of an employee’s alleged disability; meetings and communications discussing the alleged disability; and requested, offered or denied accommodations. Without documentation of this interactive process, it may as well have never happened.

Train your managers and supervisors. They can make or break your defense. They typically receive notice of an alleged disability or requested accommodation first. If they fail to take this seriously and begin the interactive process, your defense can be severely undermined. They need to know what constitutes “notice,” that the company has interactive process obligations and how to handle accommodation requests.

Do not be too quick in denying accommodations. The law requires that you participate in a “good faith” interactive process, which means considering each and every possible reasonable accommodation in “good faith.” Document any legitimate reasons why an accommodation may not be “reasonable,” but understand that not everything is “unreasonable.” While employers do not have to provide accommodations that are unduly burdensome, “undue burden” is an extremely tough standard to meet and is looked at primarily in financial terms by courts.

Finally, stay up-to-date on changes in the law concerning digital addictions. A critical part of avoiding future claims is being aware of your ever-changing legal obligations.

May 29, 2019June 29, 2023

Collaboration Tools Are Great for Communication — Provided They Are Properly Implemented

Organizations around the globe are communicating with employees through digital tools to improve engagement and retention, increase productivity and more.

Connected workforces improve time-to-innovation by 31 percent, according to a McKinsey report. Digitally connected employees are 51 percent more likely to have strong job satisfaction and 43 percent more likely to have a positive view of work-life balance compared to workers who lack these tools, according to a recent study.

A growing number of organizations are adopting collaboration platforms such as Workplace by Facebook, Yammer and Microsoft Teams to break down silos, create a more vibrant culture, and foster a community of real-time teamwork. For instance, Workplace by Facebook provides a user experience similar to the company’s popular social media tools, enabling organizations to engage employees in a variety of ways, from live leadership broadcasts and news updates to polls and sentiment surveys.

Yet many organizations lag behind in implementing these tools. Because of their positive impacts on innovation and connectivity, use of digital collaboration platforms often pop up in pockets of organizations as employees seek more efficient ways to work. This unsanctioned shadow IT often lacks the appropriate governance or compliance mechanisms, carrying with it a myriad of risks, such as insider threats or vulnerable data. The organization must then play catch-up to roll out collaboration in a more controlled way.

Given the impacts on employee engagement, HR leaders often play a major role in the adoption of collaboration tools. But it’s important to look before you leap. Human behavior risk can proliferate without the right controls. The informal communication that speeds innovation can also cross the line into sexual harassment, discrimination and bullying. It’s essential to provide safeguards that ensure employees behave appropriately within these digital platforms to protect the company culture.

Others will share these concerns:

Cybersecurity will need to understand any new types of threats collaboration brings into the technology landscape. While enterprise-grade collaboration platforms are highly secure from outside attacks, it is essential to mitigate potential insider threats. Whether accidental or malicious, the chatty environment of collaboration tools can cause an employee to divulge sensitive or confidential information to the wrong people.
Compliance will have questions regarding data privacy regulations such as HIPAA and the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, which went into effect in 2018. In industries such as healthcare and financial services, it is essential to have a process to enforce data removal and retention policies. Compliance will also want to know what measures will be in place to ensure employees adhere to the organization’s policies and guidelines for appropriate behavior, including in closed or secret groups.
Legal will have be concerned with addressing legal hold situations and efficiently completing eDiscovery processes and internal forensics investigations. Unlike email, collaboration tools offer revision or deletion functionalities on messages and shared content. This can create liability and compliance concerns. As a result, legal may require access to an archive of all public and private content relevant to pending litigation – including revisions and deletions.

To address these stakeholder concerns, organizations need an effective community management strategy when rolling out digital collaboration. This strategy will define what endorsed behavior looks like, along with a response plan for unsanctioned or distracting behavior. It will also detail how the community manager will monitor the digital community and reinforce the desired behaviors.

Community managers should introduce accompanying solutions that satisfy stakeholder needs. This will keep unexpected incidents or requirements from threatening digital workplace rollouts. These include:

A well-configured monitoring tool that scans public and private conversation areas. This solution will automate the day-to-day work of digital community management, providing real-time alerts as issues arise. Real-time surfacing of concerning content—whether an HR violation or a sensitive data share—is critical to reinforcing desired collaboration behaviors.
A searchable archive that serves as a protection against legal action. Introduce a practice of storing authored messages and posts, as well as corresponding context—including revisions and deletions. Legal teams can then efficiently search and extract relevant conversation data for litigation scenarios.
A data management solution that enforces retention policies, satisfies user data removal requests outlined by the GDPR as well as supports the need to manage legal holds. Organizations own the conversation data that is generated by workers. It is critical to have a way to purge, protect and extract as needed.

By staying mindful of stakeholder needs, champions of collaboration will address the risks and requirements that can derail organization’s collaboration rollout. By identifying and addressing these issues before employees start using the platform, community managers can ensure a positive user experience and digital workplace sponsorship across the organization’s leadership.

May 27, 2019June 29, 2023

A History Lesson for #FixItSHRM Followers

Nearly a decade ago a well-intentioned group of HR leaders banded together to dispute several Society for Human Resource Management policies.

Not just some radical fringe group, the SHRM Members for Transparency questioned issues tarnishing the organization’s integrity, from doubling board members’ annual honoraria to allowing reimbursement for business-class travel to wanting more board members who carried HR credentials.

These veteran HR leaders had the pull to garner media attention as well as that of SHRM’s membership. And that caught SHRM’s attention. For a while, anyway.

Fast-forward to 2019 and we find a loose-knit group of today’s HR professionals taking to social media to dispute SHRM’s ties with the Trump administration and relationships with politically conservative companies, most notably the right-leaning Koch Industries. Like the transparency group, these are issues they believe harm SHRM’s reputation and mission. The objectors call themselves #fixitSHRM.

As we approach SHRM 2019 in mid-June in Las Vegas, #fixitSHRM’s protests aren’t aimed so much at internal SHRM policies as the perception of what SHRM represents.

The #fixitSHRM movement traces back to last August when relative unknown HR practitioner Victorio Milian originated the hashtag. Later that fall he fired off a string of tweets explaining the hashtag’s purpose to protest SHRM CEO Johnny C. Taylor Jr. and SHRM leadership embracing the “white supremacist Republican administration.”

Illustrated by a smiling Taylor — now in his second year as SHRM’s CEO — shaking hands with President Trump, Milian’s tweets continued, saying, “@johnnyctaylorjr shaking the current U.S. President’s hand was the spark that lit the #fixitSHRM movement. @SHRM’s ongoing silence to its members who are (rightfully, in my opinion), angry and disappointed about this alliance continues to keep the fire burning. … In my opinion, @SHRM’s alliance does not represent the ethical leadership that #HRpros should be demonstrating.”

Milian’s movement has garnered plenty of online support. Among many others, @k_boulder tweeted in mid-April, “Altered videos to promote racist tropes fanning the flames of hatred, & direction to underlings to break the law, promising no consequences. Ready to renounce this partnership yet, SHRM? #fixitSHRM”.

<blockquote class=”twitter-tweet”><p lang=”en” dir=”ltr”>Altered videos to promote racist tropes fanning the flames of hatred, & direction to underlings to break the law, promising no consequences. Ready to renounce this partnership yet, SHRM? <a href=”https://twitter.com/hashtag/fixitshrm?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>#fixitshrm</a></p>— Kelly (@k_boulder) <a href=”https://twitter.com/k_boulder/status/1117042317653757952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>April 13, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src=”https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js” charset=”utf-8″></script>

It’s also caught SHRM’s attention to the extent where Taylor doubled down on affirming SHRM’s relationship with the Trump administration as well as SHRM’s affiliation with Koch Industries, according to HRDive.

That doesn’t necessarily bode well for #fixitSHRM’s quest. Still, questioning the motives of SHRM’s relationship with those who do not share or represent their values — and in the larger picture the values HR should practice in every workplace — is inherently a good thing.

I get their frustration. The Trump administration has done most everything you don’t want in a company: constant turmoil and turnover among senior leadership, shunning of D&I, and if recent reports are true, attempting to dismantle the Office of Personnel Management, the federal government’s HR department for civilian employees.

And your HR association is complicit with that? I’d be angry, too.

Taylor’s response though makes it clear that sniping through social media won’t change anything, especially with the 800-pound gorilla known as SHRM. They won’t alter relationships because a social media crusade dislikes their ties with the Trump administration and a financial deal with Koch Industries. I’d also wager that a majority of SHRM members either don’t care, are completely oblivious or actually agree with SHRM’s business dealings.

That means #fixitSHRM’s options to modify SHRM’s operations are limited. But history may hold lessons that could offer them hope for change.

The transparency group had the presence and panache to draw SHRM into two meetings. SHRM then abruptly chose to stop meeting. One transparency group member told Workforce at the time, “Their tactic was delay, delay, delay. We realized that they weren’t going to change.” Disappointing, but if #fixitSHRM is serious they can still push for face time. It’s happened before.

If you can’t get SHRM’s attention in the board room, there’s always the ballot box.

“A SHRM member told me, ‘If you want to change the society, the way you should do it is change the board,’ ” said Mike Losey, a former SHRM president and founding member of the transparency group in a 2011 Workforce interview.

Muster a slate of candidates, continue your barrage on social media and get out the vote. It’s a long shot. And FYI, the transparency group’s candidates never achieved its goal.

History offers a sobering realization that it will take more than a social media campaign to create change. Study the past, #fixitSHRM. Blend it with what you know and perhaps you’ll succeed where Members for Transparency couldn’t.