Skip to content

Workforce

Tag: strategy

Posted on December 1, 1999November 14, 2018

Compensation Budget Information

compensation budget, back wages

The amount of money companies spend on employee compensation each year represents a significant portion of operating expenses. Average payroll costs run anywhere from 23% (retail) to 41% (service firms) of the entire operating budget of an organization.

As a result, compensation planning is clearly one of the most important responsibilities of today’s compensation professional. Annual compensation planning involves preparing budgets to address salary increases, salary structure adjustments, promotion increases and variable pay expenditures. Typically, the budget process occurs well in advance of fiscal year end so that cost projections can be included in operating budget forecasts for the coming year.

Compensation professionals can access a multitude of resources to assist them in establishing realistic and competitive projections for the annual compensation planning process. These resources include published surveys from private research companies, surveys from professional affiliations, local area data from city or state entities, national information from government agencies, articles in industry magazines or professional publications. In addition, other methods include networking with other compensation professionals in their market or industry and attending a variety of seminars and presentations focusing on current trends and practices in compensation.

Compensation plans will undoubtedly be developed every year in consideration of the following practice trends:

Salary increases have remained relatively flat over the past two years, hovering at 4.0–4.5%. According to the American Compensation Association’s (ACA) 1999-2000 Total Salary Increase Budget Survey, which combines responses for cost-of-living adjustments, merit increases and equity adjustments, no significant change is projected for 2000:

 

Total Salary Budget Increases—United States

 

Actual
1998

Actual
1999

Projected
2000

Nonexempt Hourly Nonunion

4.1%

4.1%

4.1%

Nonexempt Salaried

4.2%

4.2%

4.2%

Exempt Salaried

4.5%

4.4%

4.4%

Officers/Executives

4.6%

4.5%

4.5%

The same type of budget information is also available from ACA or other resources in various data segments including industry, region, and company size. In a recent survey from PricewaterhouseCoopers, Compensation Planning Survey: 2000, average projected merit increases for FY2000 by industry are as follows:

 

Industry

Executives

Mid Mgmt

Professional

Business Services

4.3%

4.2%

5.0%

Communications & Telecomm

5.0%

5.0%

4.8%

Computer, Electronic Equipment & Related Products

4.9%

4.8%

4.8%

Financial Services

4.1%

4.0%

4.2%

Healthcare

4.2%

3.7%

3.6%

Services—All Other

3.9%

4.1%

4.0%

Utilities

4.0%

3.8%

3.8%

Wholesale/Retail

4.4%

4.3%

4.3%

Companies with particular concerns regarding high tech, or information technology talent will be pleasantly surprised to find merit data readily available. The PWC survey reports planned increases for IT positions with hot skills at 5.6%, down from 1999 increases of 5.9%. Many other publications include comprehensive salary planning data for the information technology market as well.

 

Salary structure adjustments are typically applied in blanket fashion to all existing salary ranges within an organization, i.e., the adjustment amount is added to the minimum, midpoint and maximum of traditional salary ranges, or to the market anchor or broad range of a less traditional salary management structure. Salary structure adjustments have remained fairly steady over the past few years and typically lag merit increase budgets by approximately 1.0—2.0%. FY2000 is no exception as reported by PWC:

2000 Planned Salary Structure Adjustments
Executives

2.9%

Middle Mgmt

2.9%

Professional

2.9%

Only one area is experiencing a significant difference from the norm in salary structure adjustments, of course, information technology. More and more companies are reporting establishing separate salary range programs for IT positions, and adjusting those ranges at a more accelerated pace than the standard ranges. Survey data suggests IT ranges will move as much as 2.0% to 3.0% more than the ranges established for non-IT jobs.

 

Promotion budgets are typically calculated as a percent of base salaries and refer to the amount set aside or specifically budgeted for promotional increases throughout the year. Survey data indicates the following budgets planned for 2000 promotions:

Executives

2.3%

Middle Mgmt

2.2%

Professional

2.2%

 

Variable pay plans are designed to reward employees for achieving specific company and/or individual performance goals. This includes bonus or incentive plans that typically pay out in cash based on achievement of specific annual performance measures (although more frequent payouts may be made depending on business cycle and ability to measure results).

The size and amount of awards in incentive or bonus plans typically varies from period to period based on company and/or individual performance results. Variable or incentive pay plans are becoming a significant element of total compensation packages across all industries. Consequently, companies are reporting an increase in the amount of funds used for these plans.

In the US, 63% of ACA’s survey respondents currently use at least one type of variable pay plan. Variable pay is still most prevalent among management and exempt salaried employees. ACA’s respondents use across their organizations as follows:

  • 74% use variable pay to award performance at management and exempt levels
  • 43% use variable pay to award nonexempt salaried employees’ performance
  • 38% use variable pay to award hourly employees’ performance

According to recent Hewitt Survey Findings: Salary Increases 1999-2000 the average cost of variable pay plans as a % of payroll was reported as:

Actual 1999

Projected 2000

Salaried Exempt

9.3%

9.6%

Salaried Nonexempt

5.5%

5.4%

Nonunion Hourly

5.1%

5.1%

Union

4.7%

4.1%

A recent survey in the November 1999 IOMA’s Pay for Performance Report indicates that variable pay plans are No. 1 on HR/compensation manager’s wish list of items to adopt or expand the use of in their organizations.

Posted on February 18, 1999January 15, 2019

Help Employees ‘Depart With Dignity’ After a Termination

employee communication co-worker

Yvonne Mug, manager of human resources at diagnostic X-ray manufacturer Summit Industries, hasn’t seen a termination suit in 25 years in HR. That’s because she believes in “departure with dignity.” It’s so important to her that if the president of her 100-employee Chicago company didn’t support that, she says, “I’d find another job in a heartbeat.” Here is the termination checklist she developed.

Spell out the reason for the termination.
She hands the employee a paper that reads: ‘resigned’ and ‘dismissed.’ She circles dismissed and writes the reason for the termination.

Encourage employee to talk.
She helps them vent feelings, verbalize the reason for the termination, and take responsibility for it. “I try to imagine the employee’s family is there” and the talk is helping the worker explain what happened to them, so “they can look at the business at hand and move forward.”

Thoroughly review benefits, COBRA, etc.
After getting employee’s signature on paperwork, she gives them copies of everything.

Emphasize the positive.
“I keep the mood comfortable and light,” she says. “I can’t change what happened, [but] I can take as long as it takes to make this person feel OK.”

Answer all questions.
“I try to get rid of some fears, including unexpressed ones like, ‘What will you say in a reference?'”

Write reference letter.
“Everyone has some strengths. Were they extremely punctual? Did they have perfect attendance?” Mug and the employee agree on the letter, so the employee has no future surprises.

Part as friends.
“I don’t expect anyone to be happy, but they can be at peace, with the sense that I respect them. I treat a terminated employee the same way I treat one of my existing employees.” The result? Business as usual—which is invaluable. “Remember, when you let someone go, they have buddies at the company who will be talking and watching your actions. You don’t want the terminated employee to give us a bad rap.”

Source: Yvonne Mug, manager of human resources at diagnostic X-ray manufacturer Summit Industries. Reprinted with permission from Human Resource Management News, 1998. All Rights Reserved. Kennedy Information, LLC/Human Resource Management News.

Posted on June 1, 1996May 4, 2020

Flexible Scheduling Comes Out of Flux

A decade ago, flexible work schedules were about as common as e-mail. In other words, not very. Progressive companies were touted for their broad-minded policies of part-time and flextime work, and some experimented with telecommuting. Driving these management practices was the magnanimous attitude that women with young children needed greater flexibility if they were to stay in the workforce. It was a benevolent philosophy, not necessarily a business-driven one.

How times have changed.

Today with increasing numbers of organizations offering flexible work arrangements of some type, flexibility is as widely anticipated as a computer with a functioning modem and e-mail capabilities. Although most people continue to work in traditional ways during traditional hours, the idea of flexibility is as common as the sound of a dial tone whirring through a computer. The most sweeping change? No longer are flexible hours and a flexible workplace the domain of young mothers. All types of workers want these options. And, a variety of companies are offering them because they make good business sense.

 

Flexibility enhances productivity.
However dramatic the changes may seem when compared with 10 years ago, the changes within the last few years are evolutionary, not revolutionary. More and more companies continue to experiment with different types of options, accommodating a greater variety of employees through these options. More and more are discovering that in specific cases, these arrangements help with productivity, decrease turnover and reduce employee stress. There are several companies who have offered flexible work arrangements for so long they’ve moved the effort from a programmatic solution to a more fundamental endeavor that has affected corporate policy and culture.

To measure and propagate the success of such forward-looking companies, Catalyst—the New York City-based workplace think tank—unveiled its most recent report in February of this year, “Making Work Flexible: Policy to Practice.” The report is based on a study it initiated in the Fall of 1994 in which the group identified 31 corporations and professional firms nationally recognized as having exemplary flexible workplace policies and whose motivation wasn’t altruistic but business-driven. From confidential telephone interviews and several roundtable discussions, the organization developed guidelines to help other companies create and manage flexibility (see “Making Work Flexible: A Summary”). Among these companies are the Bank of Montreal, Price Waterhouse LLP, KPMG Peat Marwick, Deloitte & Touche LLP, NationsBank, Aetna Life & Casualty, Corning, Steelcase Inc. and Pillsbury.

As Marcia Brumit Kropf, vice president of the Research and Advisory Services division for Catalyst points out, until recently, flexibility was viewed as an issue for women phasing back into full-time work after a maternity leave. Now anyone—male or female—may find work needs affected by obligations outside of work: the care of young children, the needs of school-age children, the care of elderly parents, personal development or community work. And American workers of both genders currently face pressure to work long hours and to put in the face time at the office. From the employer’s side, flexibility aids in retaining and recruiting valuable employees. It responds to demographic changes in the workforce, reduces turnover, services people in different time zones, meets cyclical or seasonal business demands, provides continuity on projects and in client service, allows operation of a round-the-clock business, and helps maintain morale and performance after reengineering or downsizing.

“The bottom line is to try to recognize and accommodate the needs of a diverse population,” says Michael V. Littlejohn, managing director at New York City-based Price Waterhouse LLP. “Flexibility now carries with it a much larger connotation than some of the traditional definitions such as flextime or part-time. It’s trying to recognize flexible work arrangements that are more far-reaching.”

As if to underscore Catalyst’s findings, New York City-based Hewitt Associates LLC unveiled a recent report, “Work and Family Benefits Provided by Major U.S. Employers in 1994,” which shows that 66% of the 1,035 organizations surveyed offered flexible scheduling (up 6% from the year before). Of those, 71% offered flextime, 65% offered part-time, 34% offered job sharing, 21% offered compressed work schedules, 14% offered summer hours and 5% provide other options. Flexible arrangements include two types of options: full-time and reduced-time. Full-time options include flextime (workday begins/ends when employee and manager decide), flexible week (fewer but longer days, shorter days in six-day weeks), or flex place (branch offices, telecommuting). Reduced time options include part-time or job sharing.

But creating company policy is one thing; implementing workable practices can be quite another. Consequently, a key component of the Catalyst report is to highlight organizations that put these principles to work.

 

Provide a variety of flex options.
Toronto-based Bank of Montreal brings together Catalyst’s four goals: It builds organizational support for flexibility; it supports managers and users of the practice; it internalizes (or incorporates) the practice, and it sustains the momentum.

The Bank of Montreal has long been a proponent of advancing women throughout its ranks. One example of this is the 1991 Task Force on the Advancement of Women, which was a year-long project sponsored by the bank’s president and chief operating officer, Tony Comper. The task force undertook the largest survey of the bank’s employees ever. Not only did it uncover myths about women and why they weren’t progressing through the organization, but it also provided the basis for developing action plans. The entire flexible work arrangement initiative was an outgrowth of its findings.

“It created an understanding that one of the key things we need to do is to formally support employees—men and women—who are balancing their multiple commitments to work and family, education and community,” says Diane Ashton, vice president of employee programs and the office of work place equality. “The connection to the business case is apparent when we look at demographics and understand our workforce and become concerned we don’t have enough women making their way through to our senior jobs (policy-, program-, and product-development type of jobs). We realized we were neglecting the talents of half the working population.”

As a result, the company developed a policy called Balancing Multiple Commitments that incorporates flexibility in many ways: through flextime, flexible workweek, part-time on a permanent basis, job sharing and flex place. Flex place allows employees to work two or three days a week in another bank branch that’s either closer to home or in a more convenient location. The bank provides this flex space by setting up several workstations at different locations, each with phones, PCs, and other necessities that allow people to work outside of their normal workplace. This also is convenient when someone has appointments with clients that aren’t conveniently located to their usual place of work.

The policies are working. At least, they’re having the desired effect with regard to encouraging women in their upward movement. For example, the number of female executive officers grew significantly: In 1990, the number increased 6%; in 1991, 9%; and in 1995, 19%.

Furthermore, of the 2,125 positions in the Senior Management Group in October 1991, only 13% were women; exactly four years later the figure had risen to 20.4%.

Ashton herself benefited from the policy when she created an arrangement whereby she worked full time but was paid only for 90% of it. It gave her one half-day a week she saved up. “I used that time to be able to spend more time with my children because they get a lot more time off than our standard four weeks of vacation,” she says. “It just enabled me to carry on when there was an emergency. When somebody got chickenpox, I didn’t feel like I had to scramble for arrangements.” This safety valve relieved the burden.

 

Build organizational support.
The bank combines all of the important factors cited in the Catalyst report. One of the most important features of Bank of Montreal’s flexibility approach is that the policy’s spirit is incorporated into the strategic development plan and the business plan. Executive-level managers—and all other managers—create objectives for hiring, promoting and retaining people and decide how flexibility will fit into those target plans. These create a baseline. Performance appraisals also include attention to flexibility, with each manager remaining accountable for meeting individual goals.

In other words, both employees and managers are responsible for translating these work arrangements into viable options. For example, employees initiate a proposal that explains why the flex arrangement would make their lives easier and present it to local management. The onus of responsibility, though, lies with the manager to be flexible and open-minded. As a protection for both of them, they define a trial period after which time, they sit down and evaluate it.

This shared responsibility—and trial period—allows employees to generate extraordinary creativity because they can try out different options. For example, a compressed workweek of three days may sound liberating. The bank’s operating hours allow this type of work option since many of the branches are open six days a week from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., allowing employees the option of a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday shift or a Thursday, Friday, Saturday shift. However, although many employees say they would appreciate it, and believe they’ve discovered the perfect solution, others may find it an exhausting schedule after trying it for a month.

Since the solutions are employee-generated, employees write a letter to their manager and, once approved, they send a copy to the office of Work Place Equality. This not only establishes the Work Place Equality department as a resource center, it also allows the center to track and understand what people are doing. “The spirit of this policy is that it’s employee- initiated,” says Ashton. “They come up with the proposal, and it’s worked out at a local level between the employee and the manager. This has been one of the strengths of the policy.”

 

Support managers and employees.
One way in which the Bank of Montreal propagated its views was through a 100-page book, “Flexing Your Options.” It describes the philosophy, policies and procedures of the bank’s commitment to flexible work, including a detailed checklist for a basic employee-initiated proposal. It also includes items such as commonly asked questions by managers, sample manager replies and phone numbers for obtaining further information.

To set the tone, before introducing the five flexible options (flextime, flexible workweek, permanent part-time, job sharing, flex place), the first paragraph of the document states, “While such arrangements aren’t for everyone, there is compelling evidence that increased self-management translates into increased productivity. The bank is committed to flex arrangements because they make good business sense. The corporate policy, Balancing Multiple Commitments, outlines the direct relationship between helping employees balance their commitments to work, family, education and community, and improved employee morale, increased productivity and superior customer service.”

 

Internalize the practice; sustain the commitment.
The bank also reinforced its philosophy by accepting these flexible arrangements and by assessing employees’ experiences. It believes this practice is important so the arrangements can be tracked for their impact and benefit to the organization. This is one reason the office of Work Place Equality requests a copy of the approved work-arrangement proposal.

Clearly, the bank sustains the commitment by including goals and expectations regarding flexibility in its performance reviews. In fact, employees even rate their managers on this dimension. Each manager’s scores (by his or her subordinates) are averaged, and the employees give their boss feedback about the scores.

This integral respect for the concept of flexibility permeates the organization. Therefore, programs are used by individuals in many different situations. For instance, the original intent was to help women advance by relieving some of the family burden (child care time pressures), but others are using it as well: single fathers, for example, or one man who works 40 hours in four days to enable him to spend one day a week leading Boy Scout activities. And, these kinds of arrangements are being used throughout the organization, not just with junior people. Flexibility is permeating the culture. “I know we have senior managers who are either working on a part-time arrangement, compressed workweek or flex place. These aren’t people who have been sidelined. They’re individuals with important jobs, which is key. We’ve been able to make flexibility part of the culture. It isn’t just seen as something for our most junior people,” says Ashton.

 

Make flexibility a bottom-line issue.
Accounting firm Price Waterhouse LLP (PW) also is lauded in the Catalyst study as a company that integrates flexibility companywide. Indeed, PW is redefining its organization because of an increasingly diverse workforce. Fundamental to that is embracing flexibility. Littlejohn, who heads the Office of Diversity Programs as well as national recruitment, says the effort is twofold: both philosophical and concrete. “The effort recognizes and accommodates the needs of a diverse population (a broader definition than women and minorities, it includes single parents, people who have issues with elder care, child care, and others who want more balance between their personal and work lives).

“Flexibility in the firm goes beyond the concrete part-time and flex-work arrangements. It also involves a philosophical perspective.” According to Littlejohn, “We’re trying to change the mindset of the firm.

“Traditionally, of course, the mindset was that you give 110% to the firm, and if that means a 60- or 70-hour week, so be it. I’ve seen a distinctive shift over the past couple of years, recognizing the fact we can no longer expect that of our people.”

As in the case of the Bank of Montreal, demographics are fueling the changes. “We have to recognize that as the demographics of society change, so do the firms. For us not only to be productive, but also to be competitive, we have to meet head-on the reality that people have different needs.”

Although part-time work options may not seem like such a spectacular innovation at first glance, they’re indeed challenging for intensely client-focused firms for which on-the-spot service and attention are synonymous with revenue. Consequently, for PW to adapt its philosophy toward traditional ways of working, it had to reconsider the entire notion of work styles and how to service customers effectively while being responsive to employees. In fact, there were two forces at play simultaneously. One was the needs of the employees. The other was the changing needs of the clients, who have become quite diverse in their profiles. The firm also believes that its clients want professionals who reflect their population and, thereby, their concerns.

 

Technology can support managers and users.
One of the tools in PW’s network is the company’s sophisticated technological infrastructure that allows partners and associates to establish virtual offices. With Lotus Notes and voicemail, laptop computers become phones, meeting planners and fax machines, allowing employees to support their clients not only in the client’s location, but from anywhere. Technology also has diminished the need for individuals to come into Price Waterhouse offices to transfer information. For example, they previously had to be in the office to have access to files, perform research and provide colleagues with information. No more. Now, most of that can be done remotely via technology.

Given these changes, which facilitate responsiveness to both clients and employees, the company is attempting to extend flexibility in formal and informal ways. PW believes flexible work policies are a powerful tool for attracting and retaining people—a competitive necessity. “Big Six professional services firms face a big challenge because people look at them as a mill—a sweat shop where people work 60- and 80- hour weeks for three or four or five years and we throw them away if we don’t make them a partner,” says Littlejohn. “We had to create the mindset that we’re becoming a kinder place to work; that we’ll try our best to accommodate employees’ needs.”

And, fundamental to that, the firm is changing some of its values and implementing a new career model. Historically, individuals joined the company shortly after college and worked for eight to 10 years. If they made partner, great. If not, they left the company. It was a rigid career path that allowed no leeway for other options. According to Littlejohn, several problems prompted PW to change the situation. Number one, the firm was losing very good people because they hadn’t made partner within the allotted time; number two, employees were saying that partnership wasn’t for everyone and alternatives to the partner track would be valued; and number three, clients were expressing the need to have professional service providers who were not only good consultants but also had a depth of knowledge in their specialty. Consequently, the idea of success broadened to include deep technical specialists as well as individuals who wanted a career on the macro level (wanted partnership). Expected time frames also were changed dramatically. Now, there are several career tracks based on the achievement of milestones rather than on the length of time to complete those milestones. Compensation is based accordingly.

Enter the notion of part-time and flextime arrangements. With these essential changes in the structure of the firm, the flex alternatives become viable. No small thing. This is a fundamental shift in the way Price Waterhouse approaches business and thinks about its employees. It relates to changing the culture of PW.

“Because relationships are such a key in a professional services environment, and our clients are paying us a fee, they have certain expectations,” says Littlejohn. We can’t just say unequivocally we’re going to implement something irrespective of our clients’ wishes. It requires us to not only sell our employees on this, but we also have to sell our clients. We have to sell our clients on the fact it’s good business for them to have someone onsite four days a week versus five days. It’s really in the client’s best interest to work for a balance so our people are happy and they’re happy.”

 

Communication serves managers and employees.
One of the most helpful ways PW communicates its policies is through its newsletters and other organization-wide communication vehicles. It uses these methods to show how flexibility can work and achieve business results as well as satisfy individual needs. Via its communication channels, it relates information such as the fact more than 400 people are working flexibly, including 90 managers and two partners. It also encourages the use of these flexible work possibilities by stating the names of people employees can speak with if they’re interested in discussing flexibility.

Price Waterhouse’s essential commitment to flexibility comes through as a business imperative. Indeed, the firm appointed its first woman to the top management team whose responsibilities include building the organization’s workforce for the next century. Her highly visible task is to develop and evaluate the new career-development paths and service-delivery approaches that will shape PW’s future workplace.

 

Flexible work arrangements are a business imperative.
More and more frequently, as evidenced by Price Waterhouse and the Bank of Montreal, organizations achieve several business advantages when they adopt flex work practices. Paralleling society’s changing demographics and expectations about leading a more balanced life, companies find that allowing employees to direct some of their work—where, when and how they get the job done—not only yields benefits in productivity and retention, but in customer responsiveness as well. By applying technology and many of the changes that already have occurred in the current workplace, they find satisfied, productive, efficient employees translate into revenue.

 

Personnel Journal, June 1996, Vol. 75, No. 6, pp. 34-43.

 

Posted on May 1, 1996March 15, 2019

Why At-will Employment Is Dying

Employers these days can’t terminate an employee without feeling a little nervous—and for good reason. Wrongful termination suits abound. Anymore, we need a stack of documentation and a series of disciplinary actions before we can even consider firing an employee. We need to check and recheck our tracks to ensure everything has been covered. The whole process can take up to a year, forcing us to focus our time and energy on our poor employees instead of our promising ones.

Yet most states have some sort of at-will history, allowing the termination of employees at any time, for any reason. Why then all the fuss over justifying a termination? To be blunt, it’s because at-will employment is on its last leg. Ironically, it’s the very laws designed to give employees an even break that have left employers at a disadvantage. Christopher Bouvier, senior labor counsel for San Francisco-based ABM Industries, details at-will employment’s erosion and offers advice on terminating employees safely.

To start out, can you give a definition of at-will employment?
Employment at will is supposed to mean that either the employer or the employee can terminate the employment relationship at any time, for any reason. That was the traditional American definition.

What’s at-will employment’s history?
The American concept of at-will employment dates back to the mid-19th century, rising primarily out of English common law. In the old days, the view was that an employer had the absolute right to choose its employees. And employer attitudes around the turn of the century were that you can terminate an employee for any reason you want. That was the way it was. It was accepted without question at that time and well into the 20th century. So that’s [the notion] it comes from: The right of capital to discharge labor was absolute.

In the United States, how was it handled—was it covered by legislation?
It depends on the state. California, for instance, has a labor code. It has been codified at least since the 1870s that an employer has the right to terminate an employee at any time, for any reason, and likewise, an employee may leave at any time. Other states have similar statutes. It may not be written in law and not passed by the legislature, but it has been decided by case law—the decisions of the courts have recognized that right. I’d say most states recognize at-will employment.

How did the spirit of at-will employment begin to erode?
In my opinion, the first major assault on employment at will was the development of labor laws in the early 20th century—the 1930s—which culminated in the current National Labor Relations Act. That act was attempting to strike a balance between the rights of labor and capital. One of the things Congress did was to protect an employee’s right to organize or be part of a union. It became unlawful at that point for an employer to terminate an employee because he or she had pro-union sentiments or union support. I believe that’s where you saw the first limitations on an employer’s right to discharge at will.

Did this sentiment snowball?
Federal labor laws basically cultivated labor unionism to an extent and allowed it to grow. Labor unions then were able to negotiate contracts that included protections for the right of discharge too. In other words, employers and unions would negotiate collective-bargaining agreements, and it became fundamental practice over the years that those agreements actually would have a clause in them that prevented discharge without good cause. The opposite of employment at will is no right to discharge unless good cause is proven by the employer. These protections began to appear in collective-bargaining agreements.

And this loss of at will expanded throughout unionized companies?
Yes, it did. Having the strength to bargain with employers, unions were able to negotiate these contractual limitations that said you can’t fire any union member unless you have good cause—and, of course, whether you had good cause would be decided by an arbitrator. This was in the 1940s and 1950s, and at that time it only applied to union employees. There was a 40-year period in which unionized America was winning more and more job protection. The concept of at-will employment was almost completely absent from unionized America by the 1960s. You couldn’t fire a union member unless you could prove that he or she deserved to be fired.

What was happening within the nonunion workforce?
In nonunion America, the concept of at-will employment was going strong. You could be fired at any time for any reason. There was a rather large segment of the workforce that was non-union, and those employees virtually had no protection against discharge. So there was a dichotomy. But with all these lawsuits now, we’re seeing the demise of at-will employment in the nonunion setting. The concept germinated in nonunion America by the fact that [eradicating at-will employment] was not unheard of anymore. It had been present in the labor community for a long time.

So it was simply a case of the non-union workforce following the example set in union America?
Not entirely. I’d say, personally, that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was the beginning of the end for at-will employment in nonunion America—that was in 1964. It didn’t specifically eliminate at-will employment. But what it did was say it’s unlawful for an employer to terminate employees or to affect negatively the terms of employment because of an employee’s race, sex, national origin or religious beliefs. Before Title VII became law, if an employer didn’t like the fact an employee was, for example, Jewish, it could terminate that employee and really not face any problems. Then all of a sudden, you had an entire federal law that made it [illegal] to fire an employee because of one of his or her immutable characteristics, such as skin color or heritage.

This obviously was a much-needed law with excellent intentions—how did it become a stepping stone for the elimination of at-will employment?
Although Title VII said nothing about at-will employment, it suddenly provided a certain level of protection for an entire class of workers. Previously an at-will employee could be fired for any reason or no reason at all. Title VII allowed you to terminate an employee for any reason that wasn’t unlawful. So basically it became wise for employers to start having policies and documenting actions to protect themselves from any claim under Title VII. In 1967, Congress amended it to protect people older than 40: the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). So that was another federal law that was in effect limiting the employer’s right to discharge an employee at will—union or no union. Then in the 1970s, states individually started passing their own fair employment laws that mirrored Title VII. The majority of states now have laws against discrimination in discharge.

Would you say the mindset toward employment was changing during this period?
The long-standing job protections for union employees combined with the protections of Title VII began to impact the thinking of employees, juries and judges. A mindset over time developed that employees couldn’t be fired without a good reason and without a lawful reason. So that’s the statutory erosion. At-will employment has eroded to the point of almost being extinct.

You say statutory erosion—was at-will employment under attack in other areas also?
Starting in the 1960s and 1970s, there were other concepts that came up that further limited an employer’s right to discharge at will. One of the first ones was a public-policy exception to employment at will. That’s where an employer’s right of discharge is limited by concerns of public policy. The classic example: An employee refuses to commit a crime at the employer’s instruction. The employer says, “Oh yeah? Well you’re fired.” That’s a public-policy violation. The courts over time have said you can’t have an employer having the right to fire an employee for reasons like that because it affects public policy.

You’ve mentioned damage awards and juries. Where do they fit in with the erosion of at-will employment?
Many legal theories allow terminated employees to seek a jury trial, and permit recovery of more than lost wages and reinstatement. A plaintiff in an employment case can often recover compensatory damages for his or her emotional harm, punitive damages in outrageous cases, and his or her attorney fees, which often exceed $100,000. After 60 years of increased employment rights, jury members tend to expect that an employee can’t be terminated without good reason, and they’ll award large damages if their sense of fairness is offended. The possibility of jury verdicts with large monetary awards makes employment cases attractive to plaintiff attorneys.

In the 1980s, wasn’t there an explosion in the area of employee contract rights?
The courts acknowledged an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing between employers and labor, which was very popular among all of the states between 1980 and 1988. It said that an employer couldn’t discharge an employee in “bad faith.” In bad faith would mean to terminate the employee for arbitrary or unfair reasons without any real basis in fact or law. Many employees succeeded in obtaining large damage awards, which made these cases very desirable to plaintiffs’ attorneys. This particular claim is less widely used now because several courts eliminated the availability of punitive and compensatory damages.

What other developments were happening during this time period?
Another development that was going along side by side with the good faith and fair dealing covenant was the right of employees to prove the existence of implied contractual terms that limited the right of the employer to discharge at will.

How would they do that?
Let’s say I worked for a company for 20 years and during that time I’d been promoted from a stock boy in the mail room all the way up to the head of a division. I’d been given awards and raises, commendations and promises from my employer about my future with the company. Over time there’s going to be enough evidence accumulated for me to show that even though there’s not anything written down on paper, I have a contract, and they can’t terminate me unless they have good cause for doing so.

That’s another exception to the at-will doctrine?
Yes, it is. They can say that over this period of time, because of all the things that my employer has said to me and because of all the things said about my future, I had a reasonable expectation that I couldn’t be fired without good reason. So even though there are state laws that say you can fire any employee for any reason, employees can overcome that law. You can look anywhere you can possibly think of for statements by the employer: awards, commendations, longevity of employment, raises, verbal promises by your boss, or the most popular—employee handbooks.

Handbooks are a big trouble spot?
They were a fertile area of litigation in the 1980s, and they still are. In implied-contract litigation, the lawyers for the plaintiffs would subpoena employee handbook materials and cull through them to find whatever evidence they could to show an implied contract. At trial, they’d take the first page of the employee handbook where [a firm] talks about how it looks forward to a long, profitable relationship and wishes the employee a future with the company. The lawyers would blow this up 10 times and stick it in front of the jury. All those laws—Title VII, ADEA and other labor laws—have an impact on everyone’s mindset, on the jury as well as the judiciary, who are deciding these appellate cases. At this point they’ve had 40 years with the concept of employment rights, and it’s reasonable to both juries and judges that employees should have some kind of protection and shouldn’t be treated arbitrarily. All of a sudden, a lot more of the legal theories became a lot easier to swallow, when 50 years earlier they were completely foreign concepts.

Where will all this go?
The trend continues. We have the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the continued development of torts in contract claims and the public-policy claim. There’s still a tiny element of at-will employment still alive, but for the most part employers, just to be safe, have been forced to develop policies that are fair and equal and consistently applied; they have to document employees’ histories. From a lawyer’s point of view you still could argue that at-will employment exists under very limited circumstances. But, just to protect themselves, employers are required to be careful in how they treat employees. The result is that it’s really difficult to terminate any employee unless you can show you had a legitimate reason to terminate him or her. I wouldn’t want to declare at-will employment completely dead, but it’s lying on the ground gasping for breath.

Any suggestions for employers?
The safest thing for employers to do is to have uniform employment policies that also are uniformly applied and well publicized to employees. It is extremely important to maintain good documentation about specific treatment of specific employees, so that when the inevitable challenge to your termination decision comes, you’re able to show the employee was treated fairly, that he or she knew about the rules, and that he or she received due process and fair warning about what the consequences would be for failure to follow the rules. You need to show you gave employees a fair opportunity to perform well before you finally terminated them. Documentation has, of course, become critical because otherwise you won’t have anything to show when your judgment is questioned.

Is it getting hard to run a business these days?
Yes, it certainly is. Because of the constant enactment of laws and continual judicial activism, it requires a high level of sophistication for a businessperson just to maintain and manage employment relationships. And without that level of sophistication, you have huge areas of liability that really can hurt a fledgling business. It’s difficult to keep up with all the developments that come around.

Personnel Journal, May 1996, Vol. 75, No. 5, pp. 123-128.

 

Posted on August 1, 1993June 29, 2023

HR Is Solving On-Shift Scheduling Work Problems

shift scheduling for hourly restaurant workers, shift swap

The hospital is quiet in the middle of the night. Its linoleum hallways are hushed and darkened so that the patients can sleep. But in the critical-care unit, fluorescent lights blaze, as registered nurse Jill Coltrain and five other RNs work at a fevered pace. Surrounded by a bank of monitors that guard heartbeats, blood pressure and brain activity, the nurses move through a sea of I.V. poles. One checks the four intravenous tubes dripping fluids into a man recovering from open-heart surgery. Another nurse inspects a woman who’s hooked up to a ventilator. A third RN sponge-bathes her patient and dispenses medication, readying him for sleep.

The nurses have been on duty since 7 p.m. They’ll leave work at 7 a.m. That is, unless something goes wrong. In a critical-care unit, a nurse’s life rarely is predictable. For any of a number of reasons—a patient goes into cardiac arrest, the unit is short-staffed, or there’s a death—Coltrain may not leave work on time. She might not get home and into bed until 10:30 a.m. Frequently, she needs to be back on the job the next evening.

Coltrain has worked nights for 11 years in the intensive-care unit at Bethany Medical Center in Kansas City, Kansas. She works six 12-hour shifts in each two-week period. She’s unaware that she has anything in common with air-traffic controllers, oil-refinery workers, textile manufacturers, truckers and power-plant operators. Like more than 20 million U.S. workers, Coltrain works at night in a society that runs around the clock. Like many of these workers, she has a demanding, high-stress job that requires her to be alert and sharp-witted.

We live in a 24-hour world. Exquisitely designed machines and electronics allow communication, transportation, manufacturing and other services to continue without regard to time. This nonstop universe means that we can increase productivity because manufacturing plants run continuously. We can keep pace in the global marketplace because the time zones no longer restrict commerce and communications. We have all-night restaurants, overnight delivery and supermarkets, television and emergency services available all the time. But it has consequences, as well. People must work evening, night, and—worst of all—rotating shifts. Shift work runs contrary to our natural, circadian rhythm.

Human resources professionals must manage these 20 million night owls, and there’s plenty to manage. On-shift workers suffer from fatigue, health and safety problems. (Between 60% and 80% of night workers have trouble sleeping.) They have family and social difficulties. (Experts estimate their divorce rates to be 20% to 60% higher than day-shift workers.) They present different supervisory and management issues. Surprisingly, HR managers approach these employees as if they had the same work environment as their daytime counterparts, although this clearly isn’t the case.

workforce management, scheduling, time and attendance

Tired workers are less-effective on the job.
Human beings are hard-wired to be awake during the day and to be asleep at night. Our internal clock governs our physical and mental wellbeing. Internal and external cues—light, exercise, food, work schedules and social activity—keep the clock on time. When we force the biological clock to tick at a different pace, without regard to its natural cadence, the human machine malfunctions. Tired people make errors on the job. Fatigue undermines intellectual and emotional functioning. It also causes severe health and family problems.

“As we’ve converted our economy and our business to 24-hour operations, we increasingly have expected people to operate in circumstances for which their bodies weren’t designed,” says Martin Moore-Ede, who’s president of Circadian Technologies in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and author of The Twenty-Four-Hour Society. “By asking people to be equally competent at all hours of the day and night, we’re putting demands on their bodies that are beyond their natural design specs.”

People don’t operate as well at night. After several nights, they can become progressively sleep-deprived. An out-of-sync biological clock, as well as the sleep deprivation, causes problems. What’s frightening is that because of technological advances, when people make mistakes, they can cost businesses large sums of money. For example:

  • The Exxon Valdez oil spill cost $3 billion (plus more than $50 billion in legal claims)
  • The Chernobyl disaster cost more than $300 billion (plus 300 human lives and 1.5 million others contaminated with radiation)
  • Sleepy truck drivers who cause high-way accidents cost approximately $5 billion per year in the U.S.

“The basis of the problem is that you get people raised in a culture in which traditional things get done at a specific time,” says Marty Klein, a psychologist who’s president of SynchroTech, a shift-work consulting firm in Lincoln, Nebraska. “We have traditional cultural mealtimes, bedtimes and family-gathering times,” says Klein. When you change that one factor—make a person work at night or on a rotating schedule—he or she is left without any guide to use to adapt these other areas of life that still are healthy and reasonable. Without guidelines, only a few are successful, according to Klein.

For professionals like Coltrain, whose jobs demand making life-and-death decisions, sloppy mistakes from less-than-peak performance can have devastating results. Coltrain chose her lifestyle. Fortunately, she’s a night person. Wisely, she’s vigilant about scheduling her life so that she gets enough sleep and has time with her family.

Most on-shift workers aren’t so fortunate. According to Klein, most of them never adapt. “Shift workers are in a constant conflict between taking care of their own biological needs and their family and social lives,” he says. “They’re constantly trading sleep for other things.”

Experts can help people optimize their performance during shift work. According to Moore-Ede, management most often simply ignores this information. Human resources managers hire people and tell them to turn up for the midnight shift. Managers don’t help them adjust to their lifestyles, however. Supervisors aren’t attuned specifically to the special needs of shift workers. Often the environment in which these employees work contributes to the problem or even induces sleep.

For example, many high-tech workplaces provide perfect dozing conditions. The room may be darkened so that people can view a computer monitor easily. Workers sit in comfortable chairs, listening to the soft whirring sound of the computers. It’s an insomniac’s dream. It virtually lulls people to sleep.

With on-shift scheduling help, employees can adapt to shift work.
Some businesses are taking note of the research and helping employees adapt to shift work. These firms find that the benefits can be great.

Shelbyville, Indiana-based Libby-Owens-Ford is one such company. A large automotive and architectural glass manufacturer, its plant near Indianapolis opened in May 1990 and changed to continuous operation in April 1991. All shifts were 12 hours long on a rotating schedule. Each person worked 14 shifts a month—two or three days from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., two days off, then two or three days on the night shift from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. People could have every other weekend off. The attraction to employees initially was the short number of hours required per month.

Research has shown that rotating shift schedules are the most difficult. Employees having such work schedules have the highest levels of sleepiness and the worst safety and job performance. On the other hand, the best shift schedules have no shift rotation and provide time off after five days of work. The situation at Libby-Owens-Ford bore this out.

“Businesses don’t always need dramatic restructuring to obtain results with shift workers. Education and awareness can go a long way.”
Steve Bartz,
Schlumberger Well Services

After eight months on the rotating schedule, people were beginning to show signs of weariness. The time off in between the night shift and the day shift wasn’t long enough for the body to recover, according to David Barchick, the company’s manager of human resources. Company surveys identified the work schedule as a consistent problem in other ways as well. “People were tired,” Barchick says. “They weren’t able to be involved in family activities. It was becoming an emotional issue.”

What’s more, according to Barchick, is that the company promotes itself as a wellness facility. The company doesn’t allow smoking, for example. “I always felt that we were promoting wellness, but we were making people work this terrible schedule. It was hard to look people in the eye and justify it,” he says.

The company brought in Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Circadian Technologies Inc. to assess the workplace and schedules, and to teach employees about managing a life of shift work. The company covered such topics as:

  • Sleep schedules and nutrition
  • What to eat before going to bed
  • How to sleep
  • The impact that shift work has on family life.

After the presentation, the organization surveyed employees, asking them to identify the criteria they wanted in their schedules. More than 80% wanted to keep the 12-hour shifts and the time off. What they wanted, however, was a straight day or night shift. They didn’t want a day-and-night rotation.

The company responded by restructuring its scheduling policies. Knowing that some people function better at night than others, it first tried to fill nighttime positions with volunteers. Libby-Owens-Ford also committed to tackling the issue of night work head-on. For example:

  • The organization reorganized its 52 work teams based on skill and shift
  • The benefits coordinator changed her work hours to begin at 6 a.m. so that she would be available for night people
  • HR support and training became available until 11:30 p.m.

“I think it’s the best thing we’ve done in the three years that we’ve been open,” Barchick says. “It’s our biggest change intervention and the biggest success. It really has paid off.”

During the changeover, the facility maintained overall factory productivity. What’s more important is that since the change, turnover has dropped dramatically, from 32% to about 9%. The accidents declined from 10 or 12 serious injuries a month to three or four.

“Employees won’t tell you they love working the night shift, but they will tell you they’re less fatigued,” Barchick says. “There’s more normalcy to their personal lives. They’re finding that they get a little bit more time to recover.”

As an added benefit, Barchick says that the firm already has saved money just from the decreased turnover. The HR staff also finds it easier to get people into continuing-education programs.

Businesses don’t always need dramatic restructuring to obtain results. Education and awareness go a long way. When Houston-based Schlumberger Ltd. was looking at ways to make its work force more productive and service-oriented, it was stumped. “We’re always looking for safe ways to make productivity gains,” says Steve Bartz, director of health, safety and environment, North America, for Schlumberger Well Services. “We do a good job of recruiting highly qualified people and offer a lot of training, but we still had some performance issues. We really didn’t know what was missing.”

Schlumberger Well Services is a worldwide company that provides drilling and interpretation services to the oil and natural-gas industries. It’s a highly complex, exacting job in which conditions are unpredictable. Work schedules in some of the divisions are irregular, and workweeks can range from 60 to 90 hours. It isn’t unusual for people to clock from 24 to 30 hours in one stretch. It’s a five-day-on, two-day-off schedule. In remote locations, it can be a 10-day-on, five-day-off schedule.

The company learned of shift-work technology at a worldwide safety environment conference. It decided to start a pilot project to examine ways to increase productivity at its Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, site, a large district facility. Two consultants studied the employees. They went on jobs for several days and saw how people worked. They looked at hard data: hours of operation, types of service problems, accidents and injuries. They focused on the waking and sleep patterns of several workers, and then administered a survey to the Mt. Pleasant workers and their spouses. After this thorough assessment, the consultants discovered that alertness was a big problem.

To correct the problem, the consultants started by building awareness on the part of workers and their families. First, they educated Schlumberger Well Services people about the limitations of human abilities at night:

  • The high-risk periods
  • Circadian rhythms
  • Sleep cycles
  • The effects of the environment on physiology.

The consultants explained to the employees how to balance their lives so that workers could get enough sleep. They also addressed the disturbing impact of sleep deprivation.

The next question was what to do about it. Most of the workers said they liked the way they worked. They enjoyed the long periods of days off and the irregular lifestyle. The schedule, however, was taking its toll. Like most other shift workers, when Schlumberger Well Services employees had time off, they reverted to a normal (daytime) social and family life. Equally problematic were the days during which they put off going to sleep as soon as they got home so they could be with their spouses or children.

Better lifestyle management was the answer. Schlumberger Well Services included the family in the program to help them understand how the whole system works. The consultants talked about the compromises that were needed to live with a person who does this kind of work. “They explained why the employees came home irritable, and we talked about sleep strategies and lifestyle changes. Our business is a way of life, a culture,” Bartz says.

Bartz says that the consultants also discovered that many employees had bad eating habits, which led to chronic sleep problems and digestive disorders. The five cups of coffee wouldn’t help when the worker went home and tried to sleep. People also ate a lot of high-fat foods. Instead of having a meal with good nutritional value, a lot of employees would stop at a fast-food restaurant as they were driving down the road on the way to a well site.

The education is beginning to pay off. When workers are very busy and working long stretches (12 to 15 days at a time), they don’t have as many service problems or the high accident rate that they had before. “Now employees know they’re likely to be impaired [by the fatigue]. They watch what they eat more carefully, and they take a nap whenever they get a chance.”

Rotating schedules must fit business needs and employees’ needs.
It’s clear that these employees live quite a different existence from day workers. “Employers are realizing more and more that helping shift workers manage their lives can improve the bottom line,” Klein says. “Improving shift-work schedules, and training workers and their families to cope with the lifestyle, reduces absenteeism and can lower turnover dramatically.”

It’s only a matter of time before most businesses consider shift work to be a profitable option. It’s more cost-effective to use equipment around the clock than it is to invest capital in more equipment. The situation creates problems, and it’s up to HR managers to find the solutions.

According to Richard M. Coleman, who’s president of Coleman Consulting Group, a shift-work consulting firm located in Ross, California, and clinical assistant professor at the Sleep Disorders Center at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, if you create a livable schedule, many shift workers actually prefer shift work to day work. The crucial element, though, is developing a schedule that fits business needs and employee needs.

After concerns about pay and benefits (and the additional overtime possibilities that entice shift workers), night employees are most interested in scheduling the best time off possible and having a flexible schedule. For example, Coleman has helped create schedules in which people receive 20 weeks off a year, or regular four-day breaks between work shifts. He contends that it’s the quality of the time off that counts.

“If you’re working nights and weekends—about 50 hours a week—and your schedule changes all the time, your family is going to hate it,” Coleman says. “Trying to be a nice guy and educate the family about sleep patterns and giving them a calendar to organize their lifestyle isn’t really addressing the problem. They may be a little more understanding, but they’re still going to hate it.”

An effective schedule is key. If it’s a decent on-shift schedule that has predictability, flexibility and time off, the family and employee will be more receptive when the trainers hold meetings to explain how to live with these shifts. This increased receptiveness gives the plan a greater chance to succeed.

“If the on-shift schedule fundamentally isn’t working, then that dominates the person’s experience,” Coleman says. “The question is, ‘How well does the schedule fit with the employee’s life and his family’s social life?’ The best you can do is coordinate schedules 75% of the time, but that’s a pretty good fit.”

To accomplish this, human resources managers must be sensitive to the situation. They must be aware of whether the shift schedule is or isn’t working for the employees. If the schedule works, then it makes sense to offer employees and their families what’s available to make life better: tips on child care, on sleeping and on keeping alert. “However, if the schedule is fundamentally broken and employees hate it,” Coleman explains, “no amount of education will fix it. You have to change the schedule.”

There’s only one way to know if the schedule works, and that’s to ask people. There’s only one way for a manager to understand what it’s like to be a shift worker, and that’s to live it—at least for a while. You can’t expect a supervisor who doesn’t have to cope with the whole raft of problems inherent in shift work to manage it well. “The HR manager can talk to all the employees, go on the night shifts, come out on weekends, nights and holidays, and find out what people think,” Coleman says. You also can survey the employees.

That’s what SEH America Inc. did. The Vancouver, Washington-based company manufactures silicon wafers for computers and other electronic devices. In 1986, one division went to a seven-day, 24-hour workweek. However, the schedule was imposed without consulting the workers and without taking into consideration the problems it might create with child care, church attendance and other traditional, weekend family activities.

The experiment initially failed. “Our productivity was lower working seven days a week, 24 hours a day, than it was working five days a week. We were making less product,” says Michael Loggins, the company’s director of human resources and administration.

SEH abandoned the continuous on-shift schedule for that division. However, three years later, when the company faced the same economic situation, the entire company decided to reimplement a 24-hour schedule. To use its machinery more effectively, senior management decided that it must operate the plant around the clock. This time, however, several employees voiced their concerns early in the implementation process. Loggins was able to bring in consultants to survey the workers about their preferences. “We needed to address basic economic issues, which meant that we needed to operate 24 hours a day. However, that left a tremendous amount of latitude to the employees to decide what they wanted,” Loggins says.

Coleman Consulting Group held meetings for six weeks. During these meetings, the company educated the workers, surveyed their needs and met with families. In the end, the consulting firm asked shift workers to look at a lot of different schedules and include their families’ needs in their evaluations. SEH employees opted for two 12-hour (6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.), nonrotating schedules that included long weekends.

HR must address family and lifestyle considerations.
According to Klein, the next step to developing successful shift-work schedules is to offer lifestyle training and support. “The key to successful shift-work training is to train the spouses, not only the employees,” says Klein. Although company trainers aren’t accustomed to training spouses, one of the main reasons that shift workers leave their positions for day jobs is the conflict with family life.

SEH turned its attention to the whole family. After the SEH workers chose their schedules, Coleman began a regular series of meetings. Several of the meetings addressed family concerns. Initially, Coleman held four meetings to talk about lifestyle choices and difficulties. The most important issue raised by workers who had families was child care. They were worried about finding weekend and around-the-clock child care. It was especially difficult for married couples who both worked at the company.

SEH went to work on the problem. The company contacted the Southwest Washington Child Care Consortium, a service that helps locate and arrange child care. From the consortium, Loggins and his staff discovered that there was a child-care center close to the plant. The center was able to extend its hours so that it would be open from 5:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., which would meet the needs of SEH’s day workers.

Eventually, SEH partnered with two other groups and built a child-care center. The center houses 90 children and is able to accommodate dinner and sleeping arrangements (although they haven’t needed to do so, yet). The center also offers weekend care.

SEH isn’t alone. Other businesses also realize that child care can be a major problem for shift workers. St. John’s Hospital in Springfield, Illinois, for instance, offers around-the-clock child care, seven days a week. Step-by-Step Learning Center is located across the street from the hospital. It provides care for children who are from 6 weeks to 12 years old, which allows the health-care staff to be available for emergencies and extended hours.

Although HR managers focus on family and lifestyle considerations, it’s also important to help employees understand that if they’re to stay healthy and productive, they have to adopt new patterns of sleeping, eating, exercising and social interaction.

The on-shift schedule information that’s crucial for HR managers to understand includes:

  • How the employee’s body works
  • What normal sleep patterns are and how to adapt sleep strategies so that em-ployees can live and work around the clock
  • When the common dips in alertness occur
  • What the roles of nutrition, coffee and stimulants are
  • What family and social dilemmas may result, particularly how family communication can break down.

“It’s critically important that managers or supervisors understand the natural patterns of performance and alertness—the times of the night in which it’s most difficult to stay alert on the job,” Moore-Ede says. “They need to make special efforts to design work flow so as to keep people stimulated all the time.” (See “How HR Can Help Employees Stay Alert,”)

Moore-Ede suggests that supervisors should schedule important jobs for the times that are outside the danger-zone hours. For example, it’s common practice in nuclear-power plants to do rod adjustments at night. It’s detailed work that can cause immense problems—even plant shutdowns—if employees push the wrong buttons. It’s also tedious work. The most-effective shift supervisors, according to Moore-Ede, are the individuals who recognize the problem and make a special point to be out on the floor at 3:00 a.m., interacting with people, not retiring to their offices, drawing the blinds and snoozing for a while.

Shift workers can’t be managed as afterthoughts.
In addition, because we live in a daytime culture, companies have to stop treating shift workers as if they’re nighttime afterthoughts. A business may have 15% of its personnel working shifts. Shift employees, however, don’t have access to many of the services that daytime employees have. For example, the personnel office might not open until 9:00 a.m. and the night shift gets off at 7:30 a.m. It closes at 4:30 p.m. and the evening shift comes in at 5:00 p.m. The company cafeteria is open at noon but not at night. The food machine gets filled at 9:00 a.m. and is empty by the time the night shift comes in. The recreation area is open only during the day, and employees can use the gym during their lunch hour—but only if they’re on the day shift.

If you want workers to have healthy lifestyles, the company must reinforce this goal with activities and support. At the very least, management must include these workers actively as part of the labor force. Bring them into company activities.

The Pierre Hotel in New York City is an example of an organization that works to include night-shift workers. The hotel has 24-hour room service, night cleaners, bellmen, elevator operators and front-desk staff members who often take reservations from overseas in the middle of the night. It also has increased security during the night. Altogether, approximately 200 of the 650 employees work evenings and nights, and some of the shifts rotate.

One way that management is sure that the night shift keeps in touch with what’s happening in the hotel, according to Shelley Komitor, director of HR, is by having a buffet breakfast quarterly. The evening and night staffs, night managers and department heads join her and the general manager for an in-depth morning meeting.

It’s an opportunity for the staff to discuss any issues it has with the department heads and the general manager. (This meeting is held in addition to a monthly meeting with the general manager and representatives of each department, day and night shifts.)

Recently, night workers complained that the quality of the food in the cafeteria wasn’t adequate. Employees brought it to the attention of the food-and-beverage director during the breakfast. He sat down with the executive chef and came up with a better menu and food offerings for the employees at night. At the next meeting, the general manager will follow up on this problem to be sure that the employees are satisfied with the solution.

Employee safety is another concern. Like the Pierre Hotel, Bethany Medical Center has increased its security staff because it’s open all night.

“We’re in the inner city,” says Robert Fieger, director of personnel at Bethany Medical Center. “The security department is staffed to be more visible in the evenings and at night.” Guards escort people to and from the parking lots. The hospital stations guards at strategic locations during the prime periods during which staff members report in and check out. They also guard the entrances.

“We need to be sure that we provide reasonable protection for our employees,” Fieger says. “It isn’t impossible to have an incident in the daytime, but it’s more likely to happen—and much more on the minds of our employees—when it’s dark. We have to be concerned about employee safety.”

Furthermore, it’s important to understand the specific training needs of night workers. Do job requirements change? Are workers handling more-difficult customers at night? Are their jobs more challenging than those of day workers?

On-shift workers do their jobs without as much supervision as day workers. Therefore, training is a key issue. They have to have maintenance skills because if something goes wrong on the line, there may not be a maintenance person around during the night. To do their jobs effectively, night workers must be able to look beyond their own tasks. They must think like a plant manager. They tend to be working with expensive technology, or they wouldn’t be working around the clock. Therefore, they have to be trained to maintain the equipment and to recognize problems. They must know enough to understand what they can handle and when to call a manager, or how to know when there’s a danger factor.

“How do you train someone on the night shift?” Coleman asks. “Not very well.” People aren’t as alert. Trainers aren’t as effective at night. He says it’s important to create dedicated training time. “Put employees on the day shift and bring in a trainer,” Coleman says. “Do it at a time when someone else is covering the equipment.”

In the best of all possible worlds, only people who do better on night shifts would work them, but that isn’t likely to happen. So HR professionals must help all employees stay awake at work and satisfied at home. On-shift workers who maintain their health and avoid chronic tiredness, who spend time with family and friends, and who participate in the free-time activities they enjoy, may actually begin to prefer night work.

Coltrain loves it. “I like the hospital at night. You get different crises,” she says, adding that when you have questions at night, there aren’t as many people you can ask. “You have to be more assertive; more willing to take the ball and run with it,” says Coltrain. “I would have a hard time working regular day shifts.”

 

Personnel Journal, August 1993, Vol. 72, No.8, pp. 36-48.

 

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 11 Page 12

 

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