Category: HR Administration

Posted on

The Last Word: Optimas and Its Silver Lining

Think for a minute where you were 25 years ago.

Where did you work? What was your title? Who was your boss? Were you even in the workforce? Considering that the economy was shaking off a decade’s worth of corporate downsizings (“right-sizings” was the annoyingly PC term at the time), interest rates were circling the double-digit range and unemployment hovered between 7 and 10 percent for good portions of the 1980s and into the early ’90s, just having a job was something of an accomplishment. 

While the fits and starts demarcating a quarter-century’s worth of work can seem like an eternity for an organization and especially a person’s career, there are certainly some constants that thread through that lengthy swath of time.

Among them is a business’ need to innovate and evolve. Rather than sit back and try to predict the future, the best companies employ people with the moxie and drive to instinctively seek better ways to improve not only the world around them, but also positively alter their own workplace.

That’s a corporate quality we like to recognize and honor. This year marks the silver anniversary for the annual Workforce Optimas Awards program. Like the evolving world of business, a lot has changed in the quarter century since the Optimas were conceived.

At the time we faxed and phoned clients and sources; updating a doc meant calling the podiatrist about your problems with plantar fasciitis, not adding an entry online.

A quarter-century ago, I was a scrubby new night copy editor on a suburban north San Diego County daily newspaper. The Persian Gulf War had just concluded, and the town I worked in bordering Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton celebrated its returning heroes.

About 60 miles to the north of me, Personnel Journal, a monthly trade magazine directed at the rapidly evolving practice of human resources, was busy hatching the Optimas Awards, a program that was dedicated to similarly recognize and honor the achievements of a job well done.

The debut winner in the General Excellence category of that inaugural Optimas Awards was banking giant First Chicago Corp., which at the time was among the nation’s largest financial institutions.

Well, 25 years later, Personnel Journal has gone through two changes in ownership while the publication’s name switched three times — to Workforce, then Workforce Management and then back to Workforce.

Whither First Chicago Corp.? The bank ultimately merged with NBD Bancorp in 1995, which was then gobbled up by Banc One Corp. in 1998, which later merged with JPMorgan Chase in 2004, which … well, you get the picture.

Like I said, much has changed in the past 25 years.

What hasn’t changed, however, is that determination to innovate and solve the complex challenges of managing a workforce. And for 25 years, the Optimas Awards have celebrated those people management techniques.

Some programs have been groundbreaking. In 1996, the Internet was still new and shiny, and Cisco Systems was awarded an Optimas for “an internal home page that keeps employees informed and cuts paperwork, while an external page boosts recruiting efforts.” An intranet and a branding-centric home page — pedestrian by 2015 standards but edgy stuff two decades ago.

There were practical management techniques taken to another level, like Valero Energy Corp., winners in 2006 for implementing the industry’s first labor supply chain designed to provide “global labor on demand.” Think a sharing economylike labor pool of a decade ago.

Still others have risen from the ashes of need — literally. Malden Mills Industries Inc., which won the Managing Change category in 1999, had lost three of its buildings in a fire. Human resources ultimately created a special center to inform and retrain 1,400 displaced employees, drawing nationwide praise as a role model for employee training and development.

Rereading entries of the past 25 years have been enlightening, engaging and amusing. And 25 years from now some Workforce editor — the future Rick Bell — will look back at five decades of winners.

What will those practices be when Workforce honors its golden anniversary winners? The technology will be dramatically different (remember, the Internet was in its infancy when Workforce — errr, Personnel Journal — launched the Optimas).

And the millennials of today will be the boomers of tomorrow struggling to engage an as-yet-unnamed cohort of employees when the Optimas turns 50.  

Posted on

It’s not Illegal to Give a Negative Job Reference, but …

When you receive a phone call from a company looking for information on a former employee that was a less than stellar employee, or worse, fired, do you …

(a) Ignore it.
(b) Confirm only the fact of prior employment and dates.
(c) Give a truthful, negative reference.

Most employers do either “a” or “b”, while very few opt for “c”. Many employers avoid “c” because they fear liability if the ex-employee loses a job because of a negative reference. Yet, in Ohio and elsewhere, there is nothing illegal about providing truthful, negative information.

Ohio Revised Code 4113.71 creates a privilege for employers to provide information about the job performance of a former employee to a prospective employer of that employee.

An employer who is requested by an employee or a prospective employer of an employee to disclose to a prospective employer of that employee information pertaining to the job performance of that employee for the employer and who discloses the requested information to the prospective employer is not liable in damages in a civil action to that employee, the prospective employer, or any other person for any harm sustained as a proximate result of making the disclosure or of any information disclosed, unless the plaintiff in … establishes … (1) … that the employer disclosed particular information with the knowledge that it was false, with the deliberate intent to mislead the prospective employer or another person, in bad faith, or with malicious purpose; or (2) … that the disclosure of particular information by the employer constitutes an unlawful discriminatory practice….

So, if the practice of providing a truthful, non-malicious, good faith, non-discriminatory negative reference is perfectly legal, why are so many employers wary of doing it? Consider Kienow v. Cincinnati Children’s Hosp. Med. Ctr. (Ohio Ct. App. 10/23/15).

Kienow concerned a former employee of Cincinnati Children’s who failed to get hired by a new employer because of a negative reference she received from her former supervisor. She sued, claiming defamation and tortious interference with her employment. She lost the defamation claim because she brought it too late, but the tortious interference claim survived despite 4113.71.

Cincinnati Children’s maintains that Kienow’s complaint did not plead facts to overcome the statutory privilege. But it is not obvious on the face of the complaint that the privilege applied: there was no allegation that Dayton Children’s “requested” information from Cincinnati Children's or Morris.

In other words, because Kienow argued that her supervisor at Cincinnati Children’s reached out to her prospective employer without first being asked for the reference, 4113.71 might not apply.hat

What does all this mean? It means that even though employers hold a legal privilege to provided a negative reference, the associated transactional costs from potential litigation (no matter how unlikely for an employer to lose) is enough of a deterrent such that negative job references are almost non-existent.

Can you provide a negative references on a marginal ex-employee? Absolutely. Should you? That depends on your tolerance for the potential of litigation, and your belief that people deserve a second chance elsewhere.

Posted on

The Last Word: Cadillac Tax Could Drive Business into a Wall

It’s becoming clear that no matter how good, fair or mediocre an organization’s health care plan may be, employers are beginning to sweat the fact that their employee benefits could be roadkill when the so-called “Cadillac” tax arrives in 2018.
 
Originally touted as an excise tax on “rich” benefit plans — the ones that bear the brunt of health care costs through minimal copays, expansive provider networks and hefty coverage of expensive procedures — the Cadillac tax was touted as a fiscal white knight, helping fund coverage access on the Affordable Care Act’s public exchanges.

The tax was buried somewhere within the 900-plus pages when the ACA became law in 2010 and was largely overlooked — understandably so, considering that pre- and post-passage hysteria surrounded death panels and individual mandates, never mind that 2018 seemed like a lifetime away as our economy was being throttled at the time.

Well, eight years has dwindled to 26 months, and while the Caddy hasn’t pulled into the garage yet, it’s fast approaching. The Cadillac tax is playing a fast and furious game of chicken with the potential to cripple thousands of organizations and the workers who depend on their employers for health care coverage.

Organizations should be deep in the planning stages of how the Cadillac tax will affect them, especially when considering that in a recent Kaiser Family Foundation analysis, 1 in 4 companies could be subject to the tax. But federal agencies constantly rewrite the owner’s manual, releasing mixed messages through its FAQs and formal guidance.

As one speaker at the recent EBN Benefits conference admitted to an audience of several hundred HR and benefits managers, “It’s hard to tell which companies will be subject” to the Cadillac tax. About the deepest insight she could offer was “plan for it, and if it doesn’t happen, be pleasantly surprised.”

Not only is this pending wreck happening in the dark,  no one knows who’s steering and the owner’s manual contradicts itself.

Despite the confusion, the Cadillac tax could be towed to the junkyard before hitting the showroom floor. Despite the president's recent threat to veto any attempt to repeal it, a groundswell of bipartisan support wants the tax overturned and has given rise to the Alliance to Fight the 40, a broad-based coalition of insurers such as Aetna and Cigna, advocacy organizations including the American Benefits Council and WorldatWork and several labor unions.

The coalition pointed out in September just how devastating the Cadillac tax could be to nonprofits and religious organizations, saying it will likely affect a greater share of nonprofit employees than for-profit employees. Citing the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, premiums paid by nonprofit employees average higher than premiums paid by the general working population. Even more ominously, they add that it will tax charitable not-for-profits at the highest for-profit corporate tax rate for offering health care to their employees.

And as automakers and the UAW negotiate a new contract, it appears that the Detroit Three won’t bat an eye to maintain superior coverage for employees. One report noted an agreement would “limit the impact on union members of a threatened excise tax on high-end health care plans as part of the Affordable Care Act, either by amending the benefit plan by mutual agreement or limiting deductibles for those that are hit with the excise tax.”

Sadly, smaller organizations and nonprofits have no such luxury. In the comments section of a story on Workforce.com titled “Coalition Sets Collision Course With Cadillac Tax,” Karen Oakes summarizes what many thousands of employers are coming to grips with: This tax could put them out of business.

“We, as a nonprofit, are going to be hit with a $175,000 ‘fine’ because a majority of our staff opted for Covered CA. As an organization that barely hits revenue over expenses each year, there is no room for this fee. And because we have an aging population of staff and two really bad claims years, our health insurance premiums cost enough to trigger the Cadillac tax when in fact our plan is awful. Our dollars are purchasing a crappy plan and yet we get hit with a Cadillac tax? We are a struggling nonprofit trying to stay afloat in California, where minimum wage is expected to go up to $15 per hour in five years. Unless the ACA exempts nonprofits from the fines and the Cadillac tax, and the government can see it in their hearts to increase our funding, we will likely no longer be in business in 2020.”

You can’t help but feel for Oakes and thousands of managers and small-business owners in her shoes. The ACA is supposed to level the playing field so all Americans have access to health care. But there also needs to be equity for businesses and their employees when it comes to the affordability of health care by the time the Cadillac tax parks itself in January 2018.

Or we can close our eyes and wait for the collision. That is, unless it’s repealed or rewritten. If so, we’ll all be pleasantly surprised.

Rick Bell is Workforce’s managing editor. To comment, email editors@workforce.com.

Posted on

Time and Attendance Orientation Guide

In a growing business, the day will eventually come when managing time and attendance on paper becomes both inefficient and risky, especially when trying to balance things like overtime, paid time off, and myriad regulations. “It usually happens when companies reach 50 employees,” said Jose Gaona, vice president of product strategy for Replicon Inc., a cloud-based time tracking applications provider. “At that point it becomes too complex to do.”

It can also get extremely time-consuming, with human resources staff spending hours each week manually tracking timesheets or punch cards, and transitioning that data over to payroll. Gaona recalls working with a health care facility that processed 10,000 employees’ monthly payroll and had a manual time-keeping system.

“They had 10 people involved with processing time,” he said. Beginning two weeks in advance, the team would sit at a conference table and sort through piles of time cards, and then pass their work to the person next to them to check for accuracy. “And because they had to start two weeks in advance, they had to forecast the last two weeks of every month,” he said. Once they implemented an automated time and attendance system, that process went from two weeks to three days, and from 10 people to two. “It had a huge impact.”

ROADBLOCKS

  • Don’t automate everything. A good time and attendance system will automate tedious tasks, like tracking data and generating reports, but you still need a human touch to do things like accommodate individual schedule goals or to adapt the schedule to accommodate short-term ebbs and flows in workforce planning.
  • A major obstacle in this journey is that time and attendance has four stakeholders — payroll, IT, finance and operations, said Deloitte Consulting’s Lisa Disselkamp. “You need to choose a single owner, or the process will be driven by the individual with the most influence.”

Along with time savings, automated time and attendance systems can also eliminate errors, uncover time theft and, most importantly, help with compliance. “When we talk to companies, the No. 1 issue they are concerned about is compliance,” said Richard Allaway, general manager of ADP small-business services. A recent survey from ADP shows that 35 percent of respondents say they spend more time today on human capital management-related compliance tracking than they did two years ago. And it will only get worse. “The HR landscape has gotten incredibly complex regarding state and federal regulations, and if employers don’t stay in compliance with all of them, they face fines, penalties and even lawsuits,” he said.

According to PricewaterhouseCoopers’ 2015 Global CEO survey, 78 percent of CEOs are concerned with over-regulation and its effect on their ability to achieve their companies’ strategies. This is especially true for small businesses that spend up to 80 percent more per employee on federal regulatory compliance than large companies, according to a U.S. Small Business Administration survey.

An automated time and attendance system that is linked to payroll can reduce the risk of compliance issues because it provides the transparency and data management tools that companies need to track and audit their scheduling and overtime to ensure compliance with the Affordable Care Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, local rules and union contracts.

FAST TRACKS

  • Consider a point system to deal with chronically late employees. Start every employee with five points, and take one away when they are late, then every six months add an additional point to their banks. Establish appropriate disciplinary measures for those who run out of points.
  • ‘Think of time as an asset,’ Replicon Inc.’s Jose Gaona said. You wouldn’t throw away valuable products of resources, so give the same respect for your team’s time.

Value vs. Risk

Though if you want to get the most value from a time and attendance system, you need to think bigger than just compliance, said Lisa Disselkamp, director of HR transformation for Deloitte Consulting. “Time and attendance shouldn’t be treated as a back-office function,” she said. “It should be positioned as a driver of business outcomes.”

If companies want to get the most out of these tools and processes, they should align scheduling and attendance strategies with business goals that have measurable outcomes such as improved productivity, increased employee engagement, better customer satisfaction or reduction of operating costs. “When you focus on what you are trying to accomplish as a business, it reframes the conversation,” she said.

For example, if employee engagement is the goal, you might focus on creating schedules that are more predictable, consistent and adequate so employees can better plan their lives and budgets and reduce use of sick days and shift trading. “It creates shared value for the employees and the employer,” Disselkamp said.

Regardless of your business goals, it’s important to do your due diligence before implementing any time and attendance system. That means making sure you understand your pain points, what you want to accomplish and how you are going to measure the impact of a new system. And recognize that it is going to require a change in the way you operate, Disselkamp said. “It will feel disruptive at first, but in the long term it will add a lot of benefit.”

TIME AND ATTENDANCE CHECKLIST

  • Once you hit 50 employees, it makes sense to transition to an automated time and attendance system.
  • To measure the return on investment of a new system, factor time saved, compliance risk, “time theft,” and unexpected overtime into the equation.
  • Update your scheduling process, and rules around attendance before choosing a tool.
  • Choose a system that can grow with you and adapt to constantly changing regulations.

Plan

Organize the data. Gather all of your historical data on scheduling as well as documentation on attendance rules, payroll guidelines, union agreements and any other documents that influence time and attendance. “If all this data isn’t in place, the transition will be a lot more complicated,” Replicon’s Gaona said.

Review your process. Think about things like how you assign schedules, track time/overtime, and keep track of tardiness and vacation days, then consider whether you want to make improvements, said Joe Wang, chief services officer of ServicePower. “You want processes that clearly define what is expected, and when and where you will make exceptions.” Consider whether you want to update rules around how schedules are assigned, and the way you deal with employees who are chronically late, Wang said.

Look at the regulations. One of the biggest goals for time and attendance programs is to achieve and prove compliance. Before choosing a system, identify the rules you need to comply with, the data you will need to collect, and which systems will need to be integrated to achieve those goals, said Andrew Shopsowitz, manager of product strategy for Ceridian HCM Inc. “If you don’t link time, scheduling, payroll and benefits together, it can be hard to stay in compliance.”

Find the hidden roadblocks. Do an audit of every aspect of your time and attendance process, with a focus on “home grown” solutions that individuals create as workarounds, Disselkamp said. For example, the manager who does all scheduling on paper then enters the data later into the system or allows shift changes without documenting them. “If those hidden systems remain, it will impact your outcomes,” she said.

Set a baseline. Measure the time spent doing time and attendance today, including the costs associated with fixing errors, moving data from one system to another and compliance-related penalties. Use these as benchmarks to prove the effectiveness of the new system.

Set expectations. Figure out how time and attendance aligns with the business strategy, then establish key performance indicators — i.e. improved productivity, reduced turnover, lower operating costs. “When you know the outcome you want to achieve, you can plan back from that,” Disselkamp said.

Do

Assemble a shortlist of vendors. Focus on core functionality, like whether it is cloud-based, has mobile functions, is customizable by users and integrates with your broader HR management system. Then look at usability and performance. “It needs to be user-friendly or you won’t get buy in from managers,” Shopsowitz said.

Involve managers in the review process. If they are the ones who will use the tool, they have to like how it works.

Review reporting tools. The best solutions will give you real-time insight and alerts related to key performance indicators, like increased overtime, or too many hours for part-time workers. “You don’t want to review that data two weeks after it happened,” Shopsowitz said. “You want that feedback in real-time if you are going to avoid compliance issues.”

Make vendors prove themselves. Don’t let the system drive the process, Disselkamp said. “Tell your vendors the outcomes you are looking for, then have them show you the features that will help you achieve those results.”

Think about the future. Choose a vendor and system that can grow with your company and be easily adapted to accommodate new regulations, employees and scheduling strategies. You don’t want to be locked into a system that doesn’t meet your needs in three years.

Make an app for that. Take advantage of mobility features to give managers and employees the freedom to check schedules on the fly. “You want a system that can be used where the work happens,” Disselkamp said.

Train employees to use the system. The only way to get value from a new time and attendance tool is if managers use it effectively. Provide training and support tools in a variety of formats (e.g., live classes, Web-based modules and help desk support) to make sure they have the confidence to embrace the new software.

Communicate. Once you choose a tool and/or a new process, tell your workforce what the changes are, how they will work, and how they will benefit the employee and the organization, Wang said. “If employees understand why you are making a change to your time and attendance program, it will feel less like Big Brother is watching them.”

Review

Measure results against key performance indicators. Six to 12 months after you implement the system, gather data to review impact. Have you cut overtime? Improved engagement? More effectively aligned schedules to the flow of business? Quantifying the effectiveness of the system will help tie HR investments to strategic business outcomes.

Track adoption. Make sure managers and the HR team are using the tool effectively, including data analytics features to support real-time decision-making, and ensure rules and regulations are being met. Consider offering additional training or incentives if adoption is low.

Communicate results across the business. Share impact data with the executive team, managers and front-line workers, and customize your communication to the relevance of your audience, such as financial benefits to your CEO or chief financial officer, or more consistent schedules to employees and managers.

Use the data to build your brand. Reductions in turnover, improved employee satisfaction, and greater predictability in scheduling are all value-driven outcomes that can help you establish the company as an employer of choice.

Do something with the savings. Have a plan for how you will use the time or money saved as a result of the new system, Disselkamp said. Then communicate that plan to the company. “It helps people understand how they are contributing to the business, and that can be very empowering.”

RECAP

PLAN

  • Collect all of your employee and regulatory documentation.
  • Revise any time-and-attendance rules or processes that are creating inefficiencies.
  • Identify current and future regulations that directly affect your business.
  • Look for homegrown processes (i.e., custom spreadsheets used for time tracking) that need to be incorporated into your new system.
  • Define strategic business outcomes (i.e., reduced overtime and improved engagement) and set a baseline to measure results.

DO

  • Assemble a shortlist of vendors that offer the features to meet your needs. Consider including mobile options, real-time reporting, and software-as-a-service on the list.
  • Involve managers in the review process to secure buy-in and prove usability.
  • Look for tools that offer alerts when you fall out of compliance with regulations or internally set rules.
  • Choose a system that can grow with you and adapt to changing regulations.
  • Teach employees to use the tool, and explain your business goals for choosing it.

REVIEW

  • Measure results against key performance indicators, focusing on things like time and money saved, improved retention and greater accountability.
  • Share results with the executive team, managers and front-line workers.
  • Make sure managers are using the tool effectively, and offer training, incentives and deadlines to encourage adoption.
  • Use results to attract new employees and establish yourself as an employer of choice.
  • Reinvest the money and time saved into new initiatives or incentives, and let employees know the role they played in making those programs happen.
Posted on

Extreme Narcissism at Work: A Conversation With Psychologist Joseph Burgo

Dr. Joseph Burgo's latest book, 'The Narcissist You Know,' details eight different kinds of extreme narcissists, some of whom, like the bullying and vindictive narcissists, can make lives miserable for their colleagues. (Photo credit: Burgo photo by Kathy Stanford)

Before reading clinical psychologist Joseph Burgo’s latest book, “The Narcissist You Know,” my vision of an “extreme narcissist” was Vanity Smurf looking lovingly at himself in the mirror. You know, “Oh, Vanity, you’re Smurf-tastic.” That sort of harmless thing.

Was I wrong! Extreme narcissists, which come in many different varieties, Burgo says — from the less worrisome but more annoying know-it-all narcissist to the more concerning and scary bullying and vindictive narcissists — can be very dangerous, especially in the workplace. As Burgo writes, their motives are not always obvious, but when these people come after you, they can be relentless and even turn co-workers against you.

The common theme between all types of extreme narcissists — and Burgo says they could make up as much as 10 percent of the population — is these people experienced something especially traumatic in childhood, such as “a psychotic mother or vindictive parent or gross violence between the parents.” I recently had a chance to talk to Burgo about his book and how HR and employees can deal with these types of personalities in the workplace.

An edited transcript follows.

Whatever Works: Having read your book, I have to say I don’t think FDR had it right when he said, ‘The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.’ I think it should be ‘fear itself and extreme narcissism.’ There are some crazy examples in your book.

Joseph Burgo: It’s a pretty scary phenomenon. It appears in different ways — many different ways people might not be expecting.

WW: Tell me a little about the ‘bullying narcissist.’ You give an example in the book about ‘Marie’ who was bullied by ‘Loraine.’

Burgo: I use the bullying narcissist as my introduction to my subject because it pretty much typifies the way that extreme narcissists work. An extreme narcissist, more than just thinking a little too well of himself or herself, builds himself up at the expense of other people. The example I use in the book is of a woman who was working in a residential facility and became identified as the target of a bullying narcissist mostly because the other person, the bullying narcissist, was jealous of her. She [the bully] mobilized a team of her co-workers to kind of drive this woman out of the job because she didn’t want the competition. Something that bullying narcissists do a lot in the workplace, they will identify someone as their competition, someone they feel threatened by. Sometimes it’s for no reason that the other person can identify. It may just be who they are that’s the problem. They will target them; they will do what they can to sabotage [the other person’s] work product.

WW: There was an interesting example in your book when you talk about the ‘vindictive narcissist.’ You give the example of ‘Tyler’ and ‘Phil.’ What interested me was that ‘Tyler’ actually went to HR to explain that something was going on with ‘Phil,’ but HR pushed back and said, ‘No one else is saying this.’ How can HR handle a situation like this better?

Burgo: It’s a real problem because, as in some other examples I give in the book, narcissists are often very good at disguising their behavior to people who matter. So they hide it from their superiors. They may confine it to just one person. It’s hard to identify. Human resources might not believe it. They might view it … as a personality conflict, something that needs to be worked out between the two people. So they don’t take it seriously. I think that people in human resources aren’t quite onto this type of extreme narcissism yet. They don’t realize what a major problem it is. The other issue is that because narcissists are so ambitious, driven to prove themselves, they’re often very successful employees. You often find them in management. When management is the bully, it’s a problem for the person down below who’s trying to get some redress for the way she is being treated.

WW: You talk in the book about trying to empathize with an extreme narcissist, whether it’s a bully or what have you, but that’s pretty difficult if you have a bully coming at you. How do you handle it?

Burgo: I think feeling empathy in that situation is pretty much a superhuman chore. I think being attacked, when you’re being bullied, it’s hard to feel anything other than anger and resentment and hatred for the way you’re being treated. When I say you need to empathize, it’s just so you understand what the bully is going through and know how to handle them best. If you understand that the bully is dealing on an unconscious level with a sense of shame, then you know that you’ve got to be very careful not to do anything that’s going to stir up shame. You also need to know that they will fight to the death often. They’re relentless competitors. If you go up against them, you want to defend yourself and fight back, you’re going to escalate the battle. You have to understand that about them and know what not to do.

WW: You talk about celebrities who you believe are extreme narcissists in your book, including Donald Trump. Why do you feel that he might fall into this category?

Burgo: With the celebrities I talk about in my book, I never say that I believe they are an extreme narcissist without doing a lot of background research. So I looked into his childhood first of all, and his father was kind of a brutal competitor, brought his kids up to be ‘killers.’ Donald’s older brother Fred really couldn’t handle the pressure and drank himself to death in his 40s. There’s a consistent background here with the people that I talk about. The thing that really strikes me about Trump is that he demonstrates the three qualities I associate with extreme narcissists when they feel that their self-esteem has been challenged. They become indignant first of all. They find a way to turn it around and blame the other person or blame somebody else, and then they will treat the person who is criticizing them with contempt. That pretty much defines Donald Trump’s personality. The great example is the interchange with Megyn Kelly at the first Republican debate.

WW: So it has a lot to do with this ‘loser’ mentality. Many extreme narcissists feel they have to create a loser, is that right?

Burgo: It is, and I think that’s the most useful way for most people to understand extreme narcissism and the way they [extreme narcissists] look at the world. They view the world almost exclusively in terms of ‘winners and losers.’ They build up themselves by turning somebody else into a loser. That was the example with the bully, and you see with Trump. Again, he’s always pronouncing that he’s a winner in one way or another and quite literally calling everybody else losers. If you look at extreme narcissism that way, it’s pretty simple, pretty easy to understand.

Posted on

Mercer Acquires Workforce Metrics Company Comptryx

Mercer went for the metrics with its acquisition of Comptryx.

On Sept. 30, the global consultancy announced it had acquired Comptryx, a workforce metrics company that specializes in the technology sector, for an undisclosed amount.

Comptryx was founded in 2010 by three human resources and compensation consultants: John Cunnell, Joe Duggan and Roger Sturtevant and has headquarters in the United States and United Kingdom. Its software allows companies to benchmark their pay and workforce metrics against competitors with three components: a global salary survey, workforce metrics analysis system and a labor cost modeling tool.

“The technology industry is a growing market for Mercer,” said Ilya Bonic, a Mercer senior partner and president of the consultancy’s talent business, in a news release. “The acquisition of Comptryx strengthens our consulting insights by ensuring the most robust products are utilized to achieve informed, data-driven talent management programs.”

Duggan added in the release: “Our mission is to elevate HR’s role by providing powerful organizational information that executive management needs to run the business. … We believe the experience and resources resulting from the combination of our businesses will be of great value to our clients.”

Posted on

People Moves: October 2015

Nicole Kahny

Airgas Inc. named Nicole Kahny senior vice president of human resources. Kahny joins the company’s management committee and succeeds Pamela Claypool, who was recently named division president of the north division. Kahny previously served as the company’s vice president of talent management.

 

 

Deirdre Evens

Storage and information management company Iron Mountain Inc. named Deirdre Evens as chief people officer. Evens will oversee global human resources, leading operations and strategy to support the company’s growth through recruitment, talent development, and compensation and benefits. Evens comes to Iron Mountain from environmental, energy, and industrial services company Clean Harbors, where she was executive vice president of human resources since 2011.

 

Jamie Ohl

Lincoln Financial Group named Jamie Ohl as president of Retirement Plan Services. Before joining Lincoln, Ohl served as a principal at Edward Jones, responsible for leading the broker-dealer’s strategic direction and product management for its retirement business.

 

 

To be considered for People Moves, email a brief announcement and a high-resolution color photo to editors@workforce.com. Include People Moves in the subject line.

Posted on

When One Act Is Enough for Harassment

To be actionable, the offensiveness of alleged harassment needs to be either pervasive (that is, happening often) or severe (that is, shocking to the system even if observed only once). In Macias v. Southwest Cheese Co. (10th Cir. 8/24/15) [pdf], a federal appellate discussed the difference in the context of a male employee who exposed himself to a female co-worker.

As to the second element concerning the severity or pervasiveness of the conduct, the district court concluded that the …  conduct …  was neither severe nor pervasive enough because it transpired over twenty months … .  His conduct was more than a mere offensive utterance; it was not only physically threatening and humiliating — if true, it was also criminal, see N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-9-14. The environment was objectively hostile, and Ms. Macias subjectively perceived it to be so, fearing that Mr. Stewart might expose himself to her again or assault her in some way.

Thus, suffice it to say that if an employee exposes himself at work, you have a sexual harassment problem on your hands.

The bigger question from this case, however, isn’t whether actionable sexual harassment occurred, but why this employee kept his job after HR learned about the exposure. Employers, here is your take-away from today’s post. When an employee pulls out his little friend at work, do not hesitate to pull the termination trigger (once you investigate and reasonably confirm that that incident happened). I promise you that the risk from that termination will be far less than the risk from one or more of his co-workers suing you for sexual harassment.

Posted on

On Optimas Awards, Deadlines and … SpongeBob SquarePants?

A screen grab from the SpongeBob SquarePants episode "You're Fired." Photo courtesy of Nickelodeon.

Hey. Heyyy. HEYYYYYYY!!!

OK, I’m over it. Tired of it. Sick and tired, in fact. If I get one more call, email, fax, letter, or note via carrier pigeon seeking a deadline extension to enter Workforce’s 25th annual Optimas Awards, I will scream (and you can ask James Tehrani if I do).

Applications for Optimas are due Monday, Aug. 10, at 11:59 p.m. CT. File it or forget it. And believe me, you want to be part of this 25th anniversary class of 2015.

So, you are on deadline, folks — hard and fast deadline, as I like to call it. If you thrive on pressure, just picture me, green visor on my forehead, spectacles barely hanging on the end of my nose, shouting, “Where’s that Optimas entry, consarn it?” And you, sweat beading on your forehead, trickling down your cheek mingling with tears of fear and loathing, pecking away on your keyboard to beat the deadline.  

Like I have written previously, I am all about deadlines. My life professionally as a journalist would bleed ink into my personal life to the point where I raised my kids under the threat of deadlines: “I need that floor mopped by 11 a.m. or I’ll put you on a performance improvement plan so fast your head will spin clean off!” Which of course never worked, because there was always the excuse of, “Just one more episode of ‘SpongeBob,’ Dad. Puhhhleeeeeease?” Well, OK. I mean, it’s “SpongeBob,” not “My Little Pony” after all. What could I do, but sit down and watch it with them?

But not for you. Nope. No deadline extension for you! Nosirree Bob — or … SpongeBob. Hmmmm … SpongeBob. He’s so funny. And maybe there’s time. Maybe we should watch just one more episode from Bikini Bottom. I mean, it’s the one where they try to steal Mr. Krabs’ Krabby Patty recipe, and … oh heck, let’s make it longer. Like two weeks of “SpongeBob SquarePants,” and while we’re at it, let’s extend the Optimas Awards deadline by a couple of weeks, too.

So, don’t email or call or throw rocks through my 12th-story window asking for an extension of the Optimas Awards deadline. You got it!

Your new Optimas Awards deadline is: Monday, Aug. 24 at 11:59 p.m. CT.

And I promise not to scream. Hey, we have a “SpongeBob” marathon to watch.

That Patrick … he’s such a dimwit.

Posted on

ADP’s New Partnership Takes Garnishment Off Clients’ Plates

When processing wage garnishments, ADP wants to cut out the middle man.

On July 7, Automatic Data Processing Inc., the company that handles payroll for about 1 in 6 U.S. workers, announced a new collaboration with Wolters Kluwer’s CT Corp. to help clients expedite wage garnishment orders.

According to a recent study by the ADP Research Institute, roughly 7 percent of employees have their wages garnished. These orders can take up significant resources on the part of the company, as they have to be processed within a legally required timeframe — or else the employer can be held liable, said Amorette Bryant, author of “The Complete Guide to Federal and State Garnishment.”

“Time is very important when it comes to a garnishment because the clock starts ticking when it is served at a CT office,” Bryant said. “Depending on the particular state law that they have to apply, the employer normally would have to get that set up within the same pay period that it is received.  So time is very critical.”

CT Corp., as a registered agent, receives garnishment orders such as child support and tax liens on behalf of companies. Previously, CT Corp. delivered these orders to employers who would be responsible for either processing them internally or outsourcing them to a payroll services provider such as ADP.

With this partnership, rather than going through the employer, CT Corp. will send wage garnishment orders directly to ADP through secure application programming interfaces, which is designed to make the overall process more efficient for all parties.

“Because there wasn’t a relationship between ADP and the registered agent, the registered agent would send those notices to the employer and the employer would have to send them to ADP,” said Julie Farraj, vice president of garnishment services at ADP.

Through this more direct method, Farraj said, employers can reduce the administrative functions and related costs currently tied up in wage garnishments, saving the company time and money.

Although Bryant said the concept isn’t entirely novel — child support, for example, has been handled this way for years ­— she said she believes the partnership will be very effective for ADP’s more than 625,000 clients. In addition to saving time and money, Bryant said that sending garnishment orders directly to a third-party such as ADP will make the overall process more secure and better protect the privacy of the employees whose wages are being garnished.

“I see it as more secure, to the extent that you don’t have other people within the company viewing those documents,” Bryant said.

To further ensure the security and confidentially of these documents, which can often contain personal information about employees, Farraj said ADP and CT Corp. have established a secure channel requiring complete authentication in addition to each partner’s previously existing security protocols.

“This actually increases security because you’re eliminating a step,” Farraj said.

While Bryant recommends that companies outline their expectations for wage garnishments within their contract agreements with ADP, overall she said this sort of collaboration between agents and third-party service providers can only benefit employers.

“Anything that can be done to streamline the process and make sure the documents are going where they need to go in order to be processed within the legally required time that they have to be processed, the better off everyone is,” Bryant said.

 Amy Whyte is a Workforce editorial intern. Comment below or email editors@workforce.com. Follow Workforce on Twitter at @workforcenews.