Skip to content

Workforce

Category: HR Administration

Posted on September 29, 2011August 8, 2018

Meet the 2011 Game Changers

[vc_row][vc_column] Workplace challenges have never been greater than in this era of globalization, economic uncertainty and accelerated technological change. At the same time, nimble workforce management is ever more critical to an organization’s success.

The 15 winners of Workforce Management’s first Game Changers award competition have demonstrated the kinds of skills and achievements that are so necessary in the competitive 21st century workplace.

The winners are all rising stars, 40 years old and younger, who are making their mark in human resources and other areas of workplace management. They come from corporations, startups and not-for-profits, and they are finding innovative ways to create a new generation of leaders, shed light on how companies compensate and treat their employees, bridge global cultural differences in HR management, and use social media to facilitate employee collaboration.

Winners were chosen by Workforce Management’s editorial staff from a pool of approximately 50 nominees. We considered not only professional accomplishments but also community service and other achievements.


Dana Aspillera

Managing director, Charles Schwab & Co., San Francisco

Dana Aspillera, 34, makes sure her team has an active presence in the community for seeking out new talent.

Read more.


Tim Besse

Co-founder and vice president of product and marketing, Glassdoor Inc., Sausalito, California

Tim Besse, 31, was nominated in part because he motivates his staff to think on their feet and to come to meetings with thought-out ideas to help spur progressive conversations.

Read more.


Nicholas Christenson

Manager of talent management, Doosan Infracore Construction Equipment, Seoul, South Korea

Nicholas Christenson, 30, has discovered that uniting the strengths of HR practices for his company in the United States and South Korea has been invigorating.

Read more.


Jennifer Cozier

Director, Automatic Data Processing, Norcross, Georgia

Jennifer Cozier, 38, is interested in the science of people and how to get the best out of a team, which translates into her personal standing as an individual who cares about talent.

Read more.


Sara Sutton Fell

Founder and CEO, FlexJobs

Boulder, Colorado

Sara Sutton Fell, 37, created FlexJobs to streamline the job-hunting process for those looking for something besides full-time work. She has also built a collaborative culture for her 16 employees, many of whom are scattered across the country.

Read more.


Julie Heitzler

Human resources manager

Orlando (Florida) Airport Marriott

Julie Heitzler, 29 is recognized by her peers as a savvy leader and represents a future in which HR leaders are trusted business partners.

Read more.


Kelly Lewis

Founder and managing partner, Bounce Collective, Richmond, Virginia

Kelly Lewis, 39, works with schoolchildren, either in their own leadership learning groups or as part of what she calls “Leaders as Learners,” which brings adult clients into a sixth-grade classroom once a week for six months for a new approach to learning.

Read more.


Lisa Lyssand

Global human resources director, BroadVision Inc., Redwood City, California

Lisa Lyssand, 38, initiated blog posts to spur interest in the use of internal social media and drew up guidelines to help employees stay within the company’s legal, technical and social bounds.

Read more.


D. Zachary Misko

Vice president, Kelly Services’ Outsourcing & Consulting Group

Troy, Michigan

D. Zachary Misko, 39, calls himself a “brand differentiator,” saying it makes sense that an expert in the staffing field would do a better job of spreading the word about his company’s services rather than a marketing manager who may not know as much about the business.

Read more.


Tiffani Murray

Consultant, Atlanta

Tiffani Murray, 34, is taking her technology know-how from the corporate world to help her clients advance their human resources strategies through social media.

Read more.


Ryan O’Leary

Manager, human capital consulting,

PDRI, Arlington, Virginia

Ryan O’Leary, 35, leads a team that is creating the job-discovery portion of a Web portal for what President Barack Obama has called the “9/11 generation” by thinking of new, better and innovative ways to produce better returns for his customers.

Read more.


Laura Picking

Human resources manager, Delta Dental of Kansas, Wichita

Laura Picking, 29, created a job-shadowing program through which employees sign up to follow two jobs for two hours each after employees expressed curiosity about other departments.

Read more.


David Sacks

Founder and CEO,

Yammer, San Francisco

David Sacks, 39, is a CEO who practices what he preaches, saying his goal is to create a corporate culture that is very open and transparent, which helps lead to a happier, more engaged workplace.

Read more.


Benedict ‘Ned’ Salvador

Senior director, Integra Business Processing Solutions Inc., Manila, Philippines

Benedict “Ned” Salvador, 33, makes sure that those around him recognize that the knowledge-process-outsourcing industry provides not only a good career-development path but also careers in which employees’ ability is maximized.

Read more.


Wendy Savlin

Manager, talent development, Sprint Nextel Corp., Overland Park, Kansas

Wendy Savlin, 35, produced a series of short videos that employees could access from the company’s intranet. The videos have helped cut training costs while creating unexpected benefits for the company.

Read more.


Posted on September 28, 2011August 8, 2018

NLRB Issues Employee Notification Rule

UPDATE: According to the National Labor Relations Board, the posting date has been postponed from Nov. 14 to Jan. 31, 2012, in order to allow for enhanced education and outreach to employers, particularly those who operate small and medium sized businesses.

On Nov. 14, the National Labor Relations Board will begin requiring employers to notify their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Both unionized and nonunionized employers must get up to speed on the new posting requirements.

Private-sector employers with workplaces under NLRB jurisdiction (all but the smallest companies) will be required to post the employee rights notice on bulletin boards in the same area that other notices are typically posted. Employers that customarily post employee notices about personnel rules or policies on the Internet, or a company intranet site, will be required to post the board’s notice on those sites as well.

Copies of the notice will be available from the agency’s regional offices. It may also be downloaded from the NLRB’s website (nlrb.gov). The notice states that employees have the right to:

1. Act together to improve wages and working conditions.

2. Form, join and assist a union.

3. Bargain collectively with their employer.

4. Refrain from any of these activities.

It also provides examples of unlawful employer and union conduct and instructs employees on how to contact the NLRB with questions or complaints.

The final rule was modified based on comments received from the public and is less burdensome than the rule that was originally proposed. For instance, the notice is not required to be reproduced in color.

Earlier versions of the rule required that employers also distribute the notice via email, voice mail, text messaging or related electronic communications if they customarily communicate with their employees in that manner. The final rules contain no such requirement, nor are there any recordkeeping provisions.

The new rule treats failure to post the notice as an unfair labor practice. Unfair employer labor practices, however, were created by Congress, not an administrative body. Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA defines an unfair labor practice as conduct “interfering with, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization or for mutual aid or protection.”

So exactly how does not doing something (e.g., failing to post a notice) amount to interference, restraint or coercion? It doesn’t. The NLRB has developed a new subsection of the NLRA without congressional approval, creating a new unfair labor practice. In addition to being labeled as an unfair labor practice, failure to post the notice may toll the six-month statute of limitations.

That means an employer could potentially be held liable for unfair labor practices that occurred a year or more before. Failure to post the notice may also be cited as evidence of anti-union animus in unfair labor practice cases where that is a necessary element of a violation. The new rule has already been challenged in the courts as usurping power by an administrative agency with a political agenda.

Like it or not, the rule is here, meaning human resources leaders need to print out and post the notice by Nov. 14. Doing so may lead to questions from employees, so train supervisors on the meaning of the notice, the company’s position on unionization, the significance of authorization cards and how and when to communicate lawfully about those subjects. Employers should take this opportunity to review labor relations programs and perform a bargaining unit analysis.

Nonunion employers may wish to seek guidance on union avoidance strategies. Some companies may choose to post a side notice letting employees know that they prefer to remain union-free. As always, tread carefully, and seek the advice of an experienced labor attorney if you are uncertain about how to proceed.

Bill Trumpeter and Jay Elliott are members of Miller & Martin’s Labor Relative Practice Group in the firm’s Chattanooga, Tennessee, office. They may be reached at btrumpeter@millermartin.com and jelliott@millermartin.com, respectively.

Posted on September 26, 2011August 8, 2018

Trader Scandal May Hamstring UBS’ Recruiting

Just when it seemed that UBS AG was regaining its feet after the financial crisis, Kweku Adoboli has thrown the Swiss bank back into turmoil.

The $2.3 billion loss the London-based trader allegedly managed to accumulate will make things difficult for the bank’s wealth management business, recruiters said. “They were just getting their sea-legs,” said recruiter Mindy Diamond, president of Diamond Consultants LLC. “They were almost becoming a go-to firm, but not anymore. I can’t imagine an adviser seriously considering making a move to UBS now.”

The embarrassing loss is a major hit to the firm’s reputation, said recruiter Mark Elzweig, president of Mark Elzweig Co.. “The asset management business is about managing risks in volatile markets. People will ask: ‘If they can’t manage their own risks, how can they manage mine?'” he said.

UBS wealth management had been on a roll, Elzweig said. The management team of Robert McCann and Robert Mulholland was highly regarded and the firm reputedly was offering the best recruiting deals in the industry. The adviser ranks, after falling from nearly 8,000 down to almost 6,000 after the financial crisis, have come back up in the last two years. “UBS was definitely on an upswing. They had popular leaders and they were paying a lot,” Elzweig said. “In the short term, it will come to a halt.”

The scandal also may lead at least some advisers to leave the firm, Diamond suggested.

“For advisers that hadn’t left, but were thinking about it, this is an opportunity now for them to say to clients, ‘This is why I need to leave the firm,'” she said.

“Mr. McCann and Mr. Mulholland have acknowledged that this is frustrating for financial advisers, but they are committed to making this the best wealth management business in the United States,” said UBS spokeswoman Karina Byrne.

On Monday, UBS chairman Kaspar Villiger and acting chief executive Sergio Ermotti sent a memo to U.S. employees assuring them once again that the firm is not for sale. This came after the announcement that CEO Oswald Gruebel would resign.

“We want to reassure you that wealth management at UBS has a global footprint and is a core pillar of the firm’s integrated business model. The continued success of our Wealth Management Americas business is essential to maintaining that footprint and helping achieve our strategic vision. Again, this business is not for sale.”

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

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

Posted on September 21, 2011August 8, 2018

UAW-GM Contract to Create or Retain 6,400 Jobs

General Motors Co. has agreed to retain or create 6,400 jobs as part of $2.5 billion in planned product and plant investments under a new labor accord with the UAW.

In a move to encourage GM to add jobs, the union and automaker negotiated new buyout offers of $10,000 to $65,000 to encourage longtime workers to retire and be replaced with lower-paid, entry-level workers.

On Sept. 19, the union released details of the pact covering wages and benefits for 48,000 GM workers, as well as future plant investments.

The investments include two new midsize vehicles to be built at GM’s Spring Hill, Tennessee, assembly plant, which will be reopened.

Additional product plans include a new transmission program at GM’s Warren, Michigan, powertrain plant; a new engine program at a Romulus, Michigan, powertrain plant; a new casting operation at a plant in Saginaw, Michigan; and an additional production shift at GM’s Wentzville, Missouri, assembly plant— where GM is expected to build a new compact pickup for Chevrolet and GMC.

According to the UAW, the investments in Spring Hill, Warren, Romulus and Saginaw originally were slated for GM’s Mexico operations.

GM also plans to assemble a compact vehicle at a yet-to-be determined plant, the union said.

UAW members will vote on the contract between now and Sept. 28 and be eligible for a $5,000 signing bonus upon ratification.

The contract also provides what the union described as “inflation protection lump sum” payments of $1,000 in 2012, 2013 and 2014.

Under an enhanced profit-sharing plan, the union said a minimum payment of $3,500 will be paid in early 2012 based on GM’s 2011 profits through June.

Workers will also be eligible for an annual award up to $250 when quality targets are met.

The union said the lump sum payments, profit-sharing and quality awards will provide eligible employees with at least $12,000 in economic gains during the contract.

UAW leaders said union bargainers decided to go with $1,000 annual inflation-protection payments rather than a restoration of cost-of -living adjustments because workers would likely receive more in lump sums given the low rate of inflation.

“When GM was down, our members sacrificed and saved GM,” UAW president Bob King said in a letter to union members that provides highlights of the pact. “Now that GM is posting strong profits, our members, as a result of this tentative agreement, are going to share in the company’s success.”

King said the GM contract will serve as a general framework and pattern that the union will press Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group to match.

“I’m confident we can put together an agreement with both,” he said.

Negotiations at Ford and Chrysler continue and may take several more days to complete. King indicated the union has not yet decided which company to focus on next. Analysts expect Chrysler to follow GM, and Ford to be completed last

Under the pact, GM will offer a $10,000 bonus for eligible employees who retire over the next two years and a $65,000 bonus for skilled trades workers who retire between Nov. 1 and March 31, 2012.

GM has 12,000 skilled trades workers, of whom 6,000 are retirement eligible, according to the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan. GM has the largest concentration of skilled trades workers: 25 percent. In contrast, the percentage of skilled trade workers at a transplant is about 15 percent, the center reports.

King said there are 14,000 to 17,000 GM hourly workers eligible to retire today.

The union—battered by membership losses at Detroit’s three automakers—hopes GM will have 60,000 UAW members when the contract ends in 2016.

Joe Ashton, head of the union’s bargaining at GM, said jobs were a top priority of the 2011 negotiations. “I think we met that objective,” he said.

While veteran employees will see no wage hike, GM agreed to boost hourly wages for new workers to $15.78, from $14, and to a maximum of about $19.28, up from about $16, in the previous contract. GM has about 2,500 U.S. hourly workers classified as entry-level.

Entry-level workers will also receive improved health insurance and tuition assistance.

The maximum amount of annual profit sharing for a worker is capped at $12,000, according to the deal.

Ashton said the contract calls for 10 percent of employee profit-sharing payouts to be held back and allocated to the UAW’s VEBA to fund future retiree health care needs. The holdback plan is still subject to a legal review to ensure it meets federal guidelines.

GM unloaded most of its annual health care obligations onto the Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association, or VEBA, which pays health care obligations for UAW retirees. It was established in 2007 and took effect last year.

Last year, GM spent $665 million on health care for its 48,000 active UAW workers and their dependents.

A GM spokesperson said Sept. 20 the company would not have additional comments until union members vote on the proposed pact.

On Sept. 16 when the deal was unveiled, Cathy Clegg, head of labor relations for GM, said the agreement “addresses the needs of employees and positions our business for long-term success.

“We worked hard for a contract that recognizes the realities of today’s marketplace, enabling GM to continue to invest in U.S. manufacturing and provide good jobs to thousands of Americans,” she said.

David Phillips and David Barkholz of Automotive News, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, email editors@workforce.com.

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

Posted on September 16, 2011August 8, 2018

Multiple Choice Unrest: HRCI-SHRM Link Leaves Many Stumped

Earning a human resources certification is neither easy nor cheap. Just ask Tracy Smejkal, who has spent hundreds of dollars on study materials and countless hours preparing for the HR Certification Institute exam for senior-level practitioners.

Smejkal, who was laid off in 2009, hopes the credential will give her career paa boost by helping her stand out in a tight job market. But she wonders if it’s worth it. It’s her second try at the rigorous Senior Professional in Human Resources, or SPHR, certification exam, which she plans to take in December.

“Companies say certification is preferred but nobody says it’s required,” says Smejkal, a former HR director for a state charter school. “It’s vague.”

She isn’t the only one questioning the value of HR credentials. The HRCI, the most prominent HR certification organization, has come under increasing criticism over the low pass rate for its SPHR exam and its confusing relationship with the Society for Human Resource Management, or SHRM, professional association.

The institute offers three main credentials—the Professional in Human Resources, or PHR, the SPHR and the Global Professional in Human Resources, or GPHR. Earning certification requires a certain amount of work and educational experience and a passing score on an exam.

Slightly less than half—48 percent—of all SPHR hopefuls pass the test, according to current HRCI figures. Some test takers say the questions are purposely ambiguous; others are uncertain about which study guide will prepare them best for the exam. Many assume that the study kit offered by SHRM is the “official” test preparation method given the affiliation between the two organizations.

SHRM is the world’s largest HR professional organization, with more than 250,000 members worldwide. Although HRCI and SHRM are legally separate organizations with different governing boards, they are closely intertwined. HRCI was created in 1973 by SHRM (then known as the American Society for Personnel Administration) and was originally called the ASPA Accreditation Institute.

However, the HRCI was founded as a separate organization with a different governing body for the purpose of adminstering certification exams, according to Mike Losey, former HRCI board member and past president and CEO of SHRM.

“The founding principle was that HRCI would issue the test and SHRM would handle the test preparation and stay out of the testing processing completely,” he says.

Both organizations share the same Alexandria, Virginia, headquarters, and over the years board members from one group have sat on the board of the other. Currently, SHRM president and CEO Henry Jackson is an HRCI board member; he also has served as the chief financial officer for both organizations, according to the groups’ separate 2009 Internal Revenue Service Form 990 tax filings.

“There is a hugely popular belief that people should use SHRM’s system because they believe that SHRM is the exam, that they write it,” says Karen Mattonen, a San Diego-based recruiter, who had long assumed that HRCI and SHRM were part of the same organization. “That’s why people pay so much money for this material. Even some universities that offer test preparation classes call it the SHRM exam, which it’s not.”

In her opinion, she adds, “SHRM does nothing to clear up this misperception. SHRM’s lack of transparency holds a poor standard for our industry. It should be made clear to people what they’re getting when they pay that much money for a study kit.”

In protest, Mattonen, who is also CEO of Hirecentrix, an online clearinghouse of information for the staffing industry, says she refused to buy the kit or take the exam. Soon after, she also dropped her SHRM membership.

Practitioners seeking certification information on SHRM’s website can register for the exam through a link to HRCI and purchase the SHRM Learning System on the same page. Confusing the two groups might be understandable given their similar brand identity and website design.

The HRCI, however, makes clear on its website that it does not endorse any one program. Mary Power, executive director of the HRCI, said in a written statement that HRCI and SHRM are separate and that SHRM is not involved in any aspect of the test.

“We have strict guidelines so that no mention of test items are shared with any HRCI staff, SHRM staff or SHRM members,” she said. “To ensure total confidentiality, two outside vendors conduct specific item testing and analysis after the subject-matter experts have completed their work.”

SHRM, for its part, stands by its product. “Purchasers of the SHRM Learning System achieve, on average, better examination results than other applicants,” Brian Dickson, SHRM’s head of organizational programs and strategic partnerships, said in a written statement. He didn’t address complaints about the confusing relationship between SHRM and the HRCI, and SHRM officials did not respond to requests for pass rates for people who used the SHRM Learning System.

But with the cost of the SHRM study kit running $815 for nonmembers and $650 for members, preparing for and taking the HRCI exams can easily top $1,000. The SPHR exam alone is $425 for nonmembers and $375 for SHRM members.

Some students also join study groups and take test prep classes offered online and at local universities, which can cost hundreds more. Practitioners must take the exam or complete 60 credit hours of continuing education every three years to stay current. Fees for the recertification exam range between $100 and $150.

SHRM officials did not respond to questions about how much the organization earns from the sale of its study materials.

While there are cheaper alternatives, such as a $345 study kit from Human Resource Certification Preparation, or HRCP, and a $25 study guide from HRCI, many people choose SHRM’s product because they believe it will give them an edge.

Tashana Sims-Hudspeth, HR manager at Pearson Education Inc. in Columbus, Ohio, certainly hoped so. She had tried unsuccessfully to pass twice using other study materials, so she finally bought the pricier SHRM Learning System figuring it was her best chance for success. But she took the test in January 2010 and failed again.

“I had flashcards, I studied at lunch after work, on my breaks,” says Sims-Hudspeth, who also enrolled in an online study course and joined a weekly study group. “I had my 11-year-old son flashing me questions while he watched TV. I drove my family crazy.”

She still is a strong supporter of HR certification and plans to take the test a fourth time next spring. But she feels frustrated by the process. “I only saw a few questions that were remotely similar to the SHRM system,” she says. “I thought, ‘What is this?’ It was nothing like what I had been studying. What’s the purpose of buying the SHRM learning materials if they don’t match up to the test?”

Ray Weinberg, former HRCI president and national exam development director who oversaw the exams between 1987 and 1993, concedes that the certification tests are tough to pass. But he considers that a good thing and feels that criticism of the exams is unfair.

“Pass rates are not a good indicator of how an exam performs,” he says. “If you have a roomful of Albert Einsteins, they will do great, and if you have a room of Ray Weinbergs, probably not. The tests are designed to weed out those who have not mastered the body of knowledge. They are not meant to be easy.”

Despite some test takers’ concerns, officials at the HRCI expect a record number of applicants this fall, even with new, more stringent eligibility requirements for certification.

“There’s a lot of buzz about certification as people are looking for ways to make themselves more competitive,” says Amy Dufrane, the HRCI’s chief operating officer. “We’re definitely seeing an uptick in interest.”

In 2010 there were more than 115,000 HRCI-certified practitioners, according to the organization’s website. The HRCI did not to respond to requests for figures from previous years.

In addition to the HRCI, several other organizations offer HR credentials, including HR.com, a networking site for HR executives; WorldatWork, a not-for-profit that focuses on compensation and benefits; and the Human Capital Institute, which is geared toward talent management professionals. Most offer a one-time certificate upon the completion of a class and an exam, unlike the HRCI, which requires practitioners to recertify every three years.

While other professional associations have links to a credentialing organization, the relationship between SHRM and HRCI seems unusually confusing. And that confusion has been a long-standing problem.

“For the more than 20 years I worked at SHRM, there was confusion about the relationship between HRCI and SHRM,” says Sue Meisinger, who served as SHRM president and CEO for six years until she retired in 2008. “SHRM members often just assumed they were the same organization. It wasn’t uncommon for me to get calls with questions or complaints about HRCI, or where I had to explain that SHRM didn’t have access to the exam questions and didn’t make money on the exam registration fees.”

The distinction seems no clearer today. A quick survey of several HR and academic websites, job postings and discussion forums turns up many erroneous references to “SHRM certification,” giving the impression that SHRM, not the HRCI, issues the credentials.

In one heated thread on a LinkedIn discussion group, for example, many practitioners maintained that the relationship between SHRM and HRCI is apparent, while others expressed confusion, particularly over SHRM’s involvement with the certification process.

“I paid the $1,300 to attend a certification course at a local university, and I found out after the PHR testing that there was no affiliation whatsoever,” one member of the group writes.

“You’re starting to see individuals questioning what SHRM is doing,” says Bob McKenzie, an HR consultant who teaches certification classes at his office in Jacksonville, Florida using the HRCP study materials. “There’s supposed to be a firewall between SHRM and HRCI, but we don’t know if it’s really there because of the high cost of tests and study materials, the low pass rate and the weird questions that are on the test.

“Is this confusion having a negative impact on the organization? Yes. It started as whispers and now it’s getting louder.”

—Workforce Management senior editor Ed Frauenheim contributed to this story.

Posted on September 16, 2011August 8, 2018

Mulally Departing HR Chief Laymon Leaving Ford ‘in Great Shape’

Ford Motor Co. group vice president Joe Laymon has resigned and will be replaced as head of human resources by Felicia Fields, the automaker said Tuesday, March 25.


Laymon, 55, has been with the company since 2000. Laymon was named vice president of human resources and medical services at Chevron Corp., effective immediately.


Marty Mulloy will continue to lead labor relations at Ford, but now will have global responsibilities. He’ll report to manufacturing chief Joe Hinrichs. Fields will report to CEO Alan Mulally.


The move comes one day after Automotive News published a story in which Laymon named six possible successors to Mulally.


Mulally told Automotive News that Laymon notified Ford of his decision to leave Friday, March 21. It was Laymon’s decision to leave, Mulally said.


“He’s leaving us in great shape,” Mulally said.


Mulally said he did not know ahead of time last week that Laymon would discuss Ford’s candidates for CEO. Mulally said he wasn’t bothered by it because “everybody knows the leadership team.” But Mulally said he was a little surprised that Laymon named possible CEO successors.


“I think what he was trying to do was stress the process we use,” Mulally said.


Laymon told Automotive News he had been in discussions with Chevron since late 2007. He said he was not asked to leave Ford, and he noted that offers like the Chevron job don’t come up “overnight.”


He also said he was “at peace and very comfortable” working for Mulally and executive chairman Bill Ford.


“It would have taken another iconic global opportunity” to persuade him to leave Ford, Laymon said. “And I was approached late last year about this opportunity.”


Laymon said his interview last week with Automotive News did not play into his departure.


“I know there’s a lot of controversy about my interview,” he said. “I stand by it.”


Laymon said he rejects the notion that speaking publicly about future CEO candidates will promote infighting and make Mulally a lame duck. An article published on Fortune magazine’s Web site today discussed those possibilities.


Said Laymon: “The suggestion that the public acknowledgment of those candidates would result in back-stabbing, I would venture to say they’d result in just the opposite.”


The elevation of Fields, 42, to head of human resources is part of a succession plan that Laymon created. “She’s a consummate HR professional. She has the respect of the team companywide,” Mulally said.


Filed by Amy Wilson and Richard Truett of Automotive News, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Posted on September 16, 2011August 8, 2018

Worker Fired After Revealing He Previously Had ‘Superbug’

A Florida man who was fired November 2 may be the first American employee to lose his job for having had a drug-resistant bacterial infection that is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people in the U.S. each year.


The events that led to Morris Yomtov’s firing began innocently enough as office banter regarding news reports that the deadly “superbug” methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA, was responsible for nearly 19,000 deaths in 2005, more than double reported by researchers five years earlier. That mortality rate, published in the October 16 Journal of the American Medical Association, surpasses the number of annual deaths attributed to HIV/AIDS or homicide.


Yomtov, a 66-year-old retiree, took a job as an account executive with CPT of South Florida, a small Miami-based IT services company, last summer to help pay his property taxes. He mentioned to co-workers that he had acquired a MRSA infection two years ago while clearing brush left in his yard after Hurricane Wilma.


“So I say, ‘It’s really a nasty thing.’ I say, ‘I came very close to having my hand amputated,’ ” Yomtov says. “An hour later the owner of the company says pack your bags and leave. He says, ‘You couldn’t have had it two years ago because it didn’t exist two years ago.’ ”


MRSA, which is most commonly acquired in hospitals but has also been seen in schoolchildren and athletes, was first discovered in England in 1961.


Yomtov says his boss was concerned that Yomtov could infect co-workers. Later, Yomtov was told he had to produce a written note from his doctor saying he was not infected before he could return to work.


Yomtov’s supervisor at CPT, Barry Hess, did not respond to requests for comment. A secretary at CPT confirmed Yomtov was formerly employed by the company.


Teresa Smith de Cherif, who recently completed her fellowship in infectious diseases at the Veterans Affairs Hospital in Miami, was one of the first physicians to treat Yomtov, who is an Air Force veteran. After several courses of antibiotics, the infection cleared and Yomtov’s swollen left hand returned to normal.


She says she told Yomtov’s boss over the phone and in writing that he was fine and should be able to work. Nonetheless, Yomtov says, on Friday, November 2, a vice president at CPT told him he was fired.

“He just said, ‘Don’t come Monday,’ ” Yomtov says.


Yomtov has filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but Kelly-Ann Cartwright, an attorney specializing in employment law in the Miami office of Holland and Knight, says his case may be limited. Florida is an “at-will” state, meaning employers can fire employees without having to show why.


Other than HIV/AIDS, state law does not provide protection for people fired for having an infectious disease, she says. Yomtov would have to prove he was discriminated against under the Americans With Disabilities Act, which would likely require him to show that his infection was perceived by his employer to be a disability, Cartwright says.


Smith de Cherif says that while the bug is serious, requires treatment and can lead to complications, employers can avoid contagion in the workplace by becoming “advocates for employee wellness” by providing annual flu shots and other vaccines, making it easy for employees to wash hands, and providing time off to those who are sick.


“Sound principles will help prevent infections,” she says.


Yomtov says he was made a pariah, and that the case against his former employer is based on principle.


“I’m a New York boy,” says Yomtov, who is originally from the Bronx. “I was in the military. I’m not going to allow people to talk to me like that.”


To discuss this article, please click here to visit our Community Center forums.


—Jeremy Smerd

Posted on September 7, 2011August 9, 2018

Dear Workforce We Use the SMART Format For Setting Goals. Which Appraisal System Best Suits Us?

Dear Smarter:

The first step in your appraisal system should be to establish goals, and to make them “SMART.” The acronym stands for goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound.

In construction, the organizational structure is typically based upon projects. Therefore, a company’s performance management system usually follows the project framework. Because each project has its own goals—including revenue, budget and timelines—you will likely want to develop goals on a project-by-project basis. It is the job of management to align the overall project goals, the manager goals and the individual goals to bring the project home on time and on budget.

Your company should make the overall project-based goals clearly visible to the members of each project team. Within the project, individuals should then be assigned specific responsibility to do their part to achieve the overall project goals.

Writing SMART goals

One special consideration in a project-based business is that the timing of performance feedback and goal setting typically follows the timeline of the projects. And because a project may wrap up at any time during the year, when people are reassigned from one project to the next, they usually must also update their goals.

Specific goals:

• Are concise.

• State a clearly observable result.

• Identify a specific reference point from which to track progress.

Measurable goals:

• Quantify the expected result (includes number, percentage and frequency).

• Describe the criteria by which the result will be evaluated.

Attainable goals are:

• Challenging, but within reach of the person doing the work.

• Have a realistic time frame.

• Do not present unrealistic barriers to achievement.

Relevant goals are:

• Aligned across the company from individual goals through higher goals and strategies.

• Integrate the company’s values into the objectives.

Time-bound goals:

• Identify the expected deadline for completion.

• Identify the frequency or duration of the project.

SOURCE: Patsy Svare, managing director, Chatfield Group, Glenview, Illinois

LEARN MORE: It can be helpful to remember the role that job analysis can play in defining roles and responsibilities.

Workforce Management Online, March 2011 — Register Now!

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.

Ask a Question

Dear Workforce Newsletter

Posted on September 7, 2011June 29, 2023

DaVita Optimas Award Winner for Competitive Advantage

Dialysis provider DaVita was hurting several years ago because of problems with a key corporate function: recruiting. The Denver-based company’s recruiting department was understaffed, inconsistent and lacking in feedback to recruiters. Nearly 10 percent of budgeted nursing positions were open in 2005, and the time to fill jobs averaged almost 65 days. In early 2006, DaVita managers ranked recruiting as one of the bottom-five departments out of 70 corporate functions.


“Recruiting was labeled as ‘broken,’ ” says Tony Blake, DaVita’s director of recruiting.


What’s more, demands on recruiting jumped when the company effectively doubled in size with the acquisition of Gambro Healthcare in 2005. The 33,600-employee firm now operates more than 1,500 outpatient dialysis facilities and acute units in more than 700 hospitals in 43 states and the District of Columbia.


In response to the hiring challenges, the firm brought in industry veteran Blake in late 2006 and launched an “extreme recruiting makeover.” DaVita implemented new hiring software from Taleo and relaunched its career site. It reorganized the recruiting function with separate teams targeting corporate positions, managers at clinics and clinical staff including nurses. And it began collecting more data on time to hire, cost of hire and quality of hire. It also began force-ranking recruiters. Not everyone fit the new initiative. About 30 percent of the firm’s 50 recruiters have left voluntarily or have been “managed out” in the past few years.


Getting a monthly scorecard with the recruiter rankings was difficult at first, says Sherida Gard, a DaVita clinical recruiter based in Texas. But she eventually came to appreciate the approach and says the firm has managed to increase both individual accountability and a sense of teamwork among recruiters.


DaVita’s reputation faced a challenge last year because of trouble at a company facility in Lufkin, Texas, which experienced an increase in patient deaths. A former employee of the dialysis center has been charged with injecting patients with bleach. The site also shut down for about three months in the wake of a federal probe that found a number of deficiencies.


Negative publicity around the Lufkin center hasn’t damaged DaVita’s recruiting in Texas or nationwide, company spokesman Craig Handzlik says. Indeed, data indicate DaVita’s recruiting function has grown stronger in the past few years. The firm has trimmed its time to fill nursing posts by 26 days, or 41 percent.


Faster hiring allowed DaVita to save $12.1 million in potential overtime and contract nursing costs during the past two years. The registered-nurse vacancy rate fell by nearly 20 percent last year and now stands at about 4 percent. Early this year, DaVita managers ranked recruiting as one of the top 10 corporate departments for the first time.


Dennis Skrajewski, vice president for DaVita’s division serving New Jersey, Delaware and part of Pennsylvania, says recruiting was “very thin” when it came to finding managers in 2006. That has improved over time, he says.


The recruiting staff has played an important role in finding key management talent for his division, Skrajewski says. “They have helped me turn around a division that was struggling 2½ to three years ago,” he says.


For curing an ailing recruiting function and making it a healthy foundation for business success, DaVita earns the 2009 Optimas Award for Competitive Advantage.   


Subscribe Now!

Posted on September 7, 2011June 29, 2023

HCL Optimas Award Winner for Innovation

N oida, India-based HCL Technologies made employee happiness a central strategy three years ago. And that move has helped catapult the company from peripheral player to center stage in the hard-fought, fast-growing information technology services industry.

    The company says a series of reforms dubbed Employee First, including better communication with CEO Vineet Nayar and a pay scheme giving more income security to workers, has curtailed attrition and fueled fast revenue growth. HCL’s revenue jumped 146 percent in the past three years, to $1.9 billion for the year ended in June.

    In fact, customers have been seeking to learn from HCL’s people management philosophy in addition to tapping its IT services, says Shami Khorana, president of HCL America, a unit of the company in Sunnyvale, California. The customer interest has been a pleasant surprise to Khorana, who initially worried about the impact of the initiative.

    “My first thought was, ‘How will the customers react when they hear employee first, customer second?’ ” he says. “In the end, it’s very easy for them to understand and even appreciate.”

    Eugene Kublanov, CEO of outsourcing advisory firm NeoIT, says HCL now routinely is one of the top two or three vendors that make it through NeoIT’s vetting process for clients. Kublanov says that’s an improvement for HCL in just the past few years, adding that HCL’s customer service stands out.

    “When they do win deals, we are definitely seeing a high level of client satisfaction,” he says.

    HCL may be proving the maxim that delighted employees make for happy customers. But this wasn’t always the case. HCL was a late entry in the IT services market, which refers to services such as custom software development and technology consulting. As a result, earlier this decade it struggled to compete for talent with India-based rivals such as Infosys Technologies and Tata Consultancy Services. The company concedes it suffered from above-average attrition of 30 percent in 2004.

    HCL’s leadership also determined that the firm needed to pursue more complex, higher-value contracts, competing against global players such as IBM and Accenture.

    To juice up the firm, HCL in 2005 decided to focus on employees. Goals of the Employee First reforms included creating a unique employee experience, inverting the organizational structure and increasing transparency.

    A signature piece of the overhaul is what the company calls trust pay. In contrast to an industry practice of making 30 percent of engineers’ pay variable, HCL decided to pay higher fixed salaries that included all of what would have been the variable component—essentially trusting that employees would deliver. The policy, put in place for 85 percent of employees, was intended to increase trust and trim the number of decisions HCL had to make about compensation.

    Another initiative encouraged HCL employees to communicate with CEO Nayar. Through an online forum called U&I, he answered 100 questions from workers each week. “I threw open the door and invited criticism,” Nayar says. “We were becoming honest, and that was the sign of a healthy company.”

    Employee First hasn’t just helped goose HCL’s growth, it has also made the firm more of a talent magnet. Attrition dropped below 15 percent for the year ended in June.

    For turning employees into a strategic asset with a novel philosophy and programs, HCL Technologies earns the 2008 Optimas Award for Innovation.
 

Based in Nodia, India, HCL Technologies is a publicly traded firm that employs 49,800 people in 18 countries. Its HCL America unit employs more than 3,000 people in 15 states. For the year ended June 30, HCL reported net income of $280 million on revenue of $1.9 billion.


HCL Technologies sells a variety of information technology services, such as custom software development, application maintenance and technology consulting. HCL is part of the burgeoning Indian outsourcing industry and also offers business process outsourcing in areas including finance and accounting.


Workforce Management, October, 2008, p. 25 —Subscribe Now!

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 … Page 45 Next page

 

Webinars

 

White Papers

 

 
  • Topics

    • Benefits
    • Compensation
    • HR Administration
    • Legal
    • Recruitment
    • Staffing Management
    • Training
    • Technology
    • Workplace Culture
  • Resources

    • Subscribe
    • Current Issue
    • Email Sign Up
    • Contribute
    • Research
    • Awards
    • White Papers
  • Events

    • Upcoming Events
    • Webinars
    • Spotlight Webinars
    • Speakers Bureau
    • Custom Events
  • Follow Us

    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • RSS
  • Advertise

    • Editorial Calendar
    • Media Kit
    • Contact a Strategy Consultant
    • Vendor Directory
  • About Us

    • Our Company
    • Our Team
    • Press
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms Of Use
Proudly powered by WordPress