Benefits – Page 3

September 1, 2020

Vaccines — can an employer require them; should an employer require them?

There are currently more than two dozen COVID-19 vaccines in development worldwide as pharmaceutical companies race to perfect a viable vaccination to halt the ongoing pandemic.

When (and it’s a big when) one or more vaccines becomes available, can an employer require it of their employees as a condition of employment?

When the EEOC initially published its guidelines on pandemic preparedness 11 years ago (in response to the H1N1, aka Swine Flu pandemic) it answered this question with a “yes.”

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the EEOC reissued its guidance.

May an employer covered by the ADA and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 compel all of its employees to take the influenza vaccine regardless of their medical conditions or their religious beliefs during a pandemic?

No. An employee may be entitled to an exemption from a mandatory vaccination requirement based on an ADA disability that prevents him from taking the influenza vaccine. This would be a reasonable accommodation barring undue hardship (significant difficulty or expense). Similarly, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, once an employer receives notice that an employee’s sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance prevents him from taking the influenza vaccine, the employer must provide a reasonable accommodation unless it would pose an undue hardship as defined by Title VII.

ADA-covered employers should consider simply encouraging employees to get the influenza vaccine rather than requiring them to take it.

Here’s the thing. While the EEOC says that employer can’t require “all” of its employee to take a vaccine, an employer actually can require a vaccination subject to reasonable accommodation exceptions for ADA disabilities and sincerely held religious beliefs.

But just because an employer can mandate vaccines for most employees doesn’t necessarily mean that it should. Instead, I fall back to the EEOC’s closing statement about “encouraging employees” to get vaccines.

Mandating what employee does with his or her body feels too invasive and Big-Brothery to me. I’d prefer that employers arm employees with the knowledge they need to make an informed choice about the benefits of inoculations, and then strongly encourage employees to make the scientifically and medically responsible choice.

August 5, 2020June 29, 2023

Who pays for employer mandated COVID-19 tests?

The inevitable has happened. One of your employees has tested positive for COVID-19.

You do what you’re supposed to do. You clean and sanitize your workplace.

You communicate with your other employees to let them know that you’ve had someone test positive. You reinforce all of your coronavirus safety rules, protocols and procedures. And you require the COVID-positive employee to isolate and not return to work per CDC guidelines.

Those guidelines recommend that a positive employee not return to work for either of: 1) being three days fever-free, respiratory symptoms have improved, and it’s been at least 10 days since symptoms first appeared; or 2) the receipt of two negative tests at least 24 hours apart. You opt for the latter, believing that negative tests will provide you and your employees better confidence that COVID-19 will not reenter your workplace when that employee returns.

Who pays for these coronavirus tests?

We have several of federal statutes, old and new, that guide the answer.

As to the cost of the testing itself, we look to the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Both the FFCRA and the CARES Act contain requirements that group and individual health insurance plans cover COVID-19 diagnostic testing without cost-sharing, co-pays, or deductibles. This requirement not only includes the cost of the test itself, but also the cost of any related office, urgent care, emergency room, or telehealth visits.

Second, if for some reason an employee is not covered by applicable health insurance, EEOC guidance strongly suggests that the ADA requires employers to cover the costs of COVID-19 testing. The EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on Disability-Related Inquiries and Medical Examinations of Employees Under the ADA provides that an employer must pay for all medical-exam related costs when an employer requires the examination because the employer reasonably believes the employee poses a “direct threat.” According to the EEOC, “COVID-19 poses a direct threat.” Therefore, the ADA would require an employer to cover the costs of diagnostic testing related to keeping that direct threat out of the workplace.

What about compensation for taking a COVID test? Is the time an employee spends taking a COVID-19 test (including the time spent traveling to and from the testing site) “working time” such that it must be compensated? The answer to this question is likely “yes.” While there is little guidance on this issue, we can look to a 1997 opinion letter by the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division, which states, “[A]ttendance by an employee at a meeting during or outside of working hours for the purpose of submitting to a mandatory drug test imposed by the employer would constitute hours worked for FLSA purposes, as would attendance at a licensing physical examination during or outside of normal working hours.” If time spent submitting to a mandatory drug test or a physical or examination counts as “hours worked” for which an employer must compensate an employee, then it’s safe to assume that a required COVID-19 test falls into the same category.

Simple questions, complex answer. Bottom line, pay for the testing if the employee lacks health insurance to cover it, and pay the employee for the time spent related to the testing. It’s not only the law, but it’s also just the right thing to do.

August 2, 2020August 10, 2020

Passion for getting it right: Spyder Surf’s secret to workforce success

“I fell into the role. I had no idea that I was going to end up in retail for the last 20, almost 30 years now,” said competitive surfer and Spyder Surf managing partner Dickie O’Reilly.

Founded by Dennis Jarvis in 1983, Spyder Surf has been a Los Angeles area mainstay ever since. And it has had no problem keeping up with the trends either, releasing new board models to fit all kinds of needs. O’Reilly has been with the brand from the start, seeing it grow from one small retail space to two Los Angeles locations.

Spyder Surf’s flagship store on Pacific Coast Highway used to be an 850-square-foot space. Today it boasts 7,000-square-feet of signature surfboards, wetsuits and other surfing gear. Likewise, Spyder II in Hermosa Beach has been showcasing their products to millions of surfers since 1997. Maintaining a strong presence in this competitive industry can be quite a challenge. Spyder Surf’s secret? O’Reilly and his team know exactly what they’re doing.

Creating a brand, shaping a culture

Spyder Surf’s story began where all good stories do: the passion for getting it right. Jarvis began competitively surfing in the mid-1970s. As a professional surfer, he quickly learned that his equipment could be better.

Also read: Building a safety policy was vital to Shawmut Design and Construction’s health

He grew up practicing art, so he decided to make the equipment himself. Soon after, he began shaping boards for some of his best contemporaries. “I was shaping boards for competing surfers, and I was surfing against them. We were all friends,” Jarvis said in a 2015 interview.

Jarvis was more than a pioneer though; he was also O’Reilly’s mentor.

“Competing as a surfer myself and dabbling in a little bit of the Pro Junior contests, he was my sponsor and he was making me surfboards. And then you have me working at the store. I worked there through high school,” O’Reilly said. After he graduated from college, an opportunity opened up for him to manage the store. He has been growing the business ever since. “He’s a creative genius and [an] amazing craftsman. A bit of a mentor for me for sure.”

Innovating for Spyder Surf’s workforce

When O’Reilly is not out on the beach, he’s thinking of ways to operate more efficiently. As managing partner, among his duties are monitoring attendance and processing payroll.

But when the administrative work cost too much time and energy, Spyder Surf turned to Workforce.com.

“You know, the fact that you uploaded all of our employee data saved me a ton of time there,” O’Reilly said when asked about his experience. “What was a half a day for me starting out payroll is now an hour at most, and the Workforce.com side of it is about 15 minutes. So that alone frees up my time to do the other stuff that’s more important,” he added.

Workforce.com’s Employee Time Clock App is installed on Spyder Surf’s tablets, which allows them to monitor their stores.

“Love being able to log in from anywhere and see who’s there — exactly when they got there, when they came, when they left, when they took their break or didn’t take their break at the right time. I’ve never seen it before,” he said.

And because it also generates timesheets that can be exported to an existing payroll partner, they are able to pay employees accurately and on time, at a fraction of the effort.

Also read: Payroll challenges eased by software solutions

Riding the waves into bigger things

Spyder Surf is showing no signs of slowing down. The brand continues to evolve, from their product lines to the way they run their stores. O’Reilly looks forward to using more of Workforce.com’s features. “I’m excited about seeing the lifetime salaries and comparing it with our sales,” he said.

Moving forward, O’Reilly’s team is balancing growth with keeping their tight-knit work culture alive.

“We would love to keep growing, but we’ve got a small core group of really good people that have been with us for a long time too. It’s a family,” he said. If their progress so far is anything to go by, Spyder Surf is riding the waves into bigger things.

O’Reilly is keeping a level head, though. “We do it slow and we’re going to continue to do it slow and make sure we do it right.”

June 24, 2020June 29, 2023

Are employees taking paid leave under the FFCRA?

According to a recent poll conducted by the National Partnership for Women & Families, less than one in five employees have either taken or plan to take paid sick or paid family leave under the FFCRA.

Of the 19 percent who has actually taken, or intend to take, paid FFCRA leave:

9 percent say they are using new leave protections for their own illness or isolation.
8 percent say they are using new leave protections due to a family member’s isolation/illness.
7 percent say they are using new leave protections to care for a child due to child care or school closure.
6 percent said they took leave, but not because of the new policy.

Yet, a higher number, more than one in four employees, have no idea that this paid leave even exists or are unsure if they will use it. Of this 28 percent of employees:

17 percent said they were unaware of the new protections.
11 percent are not sure if they will use the new protections.

These numbers seem low to me. So I’ve created my own poll, which you can take below.

I’ll publish the results tomorrow.

June 23, 2020June 29, 2023

Must you accommodate an employee with a high-risk family member?

One of the questions I have received most from clients during this pandemic comes in some variation of the following: “An employee [does not want to come into work/wants to work from home/wants a leave of absence] because s/he lives with someone who is at high risk for coronavirus complications. What do we do?”

In other words, must you accommodate an employee for the employee’s close family member’s disability?

According to the EEOC, the answer is, “No.”

Is an employee entitled to an accommodation under the ADA in order to avoid exposing a family member who is at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19 due to an underlying medical condition?

No. Although the ADA prohibits discrimination based on association with an individual with a disability, that protection is limited to disparate treatment or harassment. The ADA does not require that an employer accommodate an employee without a disability based on the disability-related needs of a family member or other person with whom she is associated.

For example, an employee without a disability is not entitled under the ADA to telework as an accommodation in order to protect a family member with a disability from potential COVID-19 exposure.

According to me, however, the answer is, “It depends” (on how you’ve historically treated similar requests by similarly situated employees).

The ADA not only protects employees with disabilities, but it also protects employees associated with individuals with disabilities. There is, however, one critical difference between these two types of protections. The former imposes on employers an obligation to offer reasonable accommodations, while the latter does not. This difference, however, does not mean that employers in all cases can deny accommodations to employees associated with individuals with disabilities.

If an employer has a history of accommodating employees similarly situated to an employee requesting an accommodation for an employee associated with someone at risk for coronavirus complications, the employer would be open to claim of disparate treatment by denying the employee’s accommodation request. Thus, an employer must scrutinize its decision to deny an accommodation request for an employee’s family member against similar requests by other similarly situated employees to avoid a claim of disparate treatment.

Of course, the ADA is a floor and not a ceiling. An employer is always free to accommodate any employee’s request for any reason. As the EEOC points out, “[A]n employer is free to provide such flexibilities if it chooses to do so.” Further, during the pandemic, the DOL “encourages employers and employees to collaborate to achieve flexibility and meet mutual needs.”

Moreover, there are myriad business reasons why an employer might choose to grant an accommodation in this case.

It’s the ethically or morally correct thing to do.
It will help you to retain a quality employee.
Granting the accommodation will create goodwill, strengthening the employee’s loyalty to your company.
You will avoid the potential for bad press or negative social media if you deny the request, or worse, fire an employee seeking an accommodation under these circumstances.

For these reasons, I generally favor granting the accommodation. Unless there is a legitimate and overriding business reason to deny an accommodation request to an employee who, during the COVID-19 pandemic, seeks remote work or a leave of absence because he or she does not want to endanger a high-risk family member, grant the request. It’s the right thing to do, and, depending on the circumstances, it might also be the legal thing to do.

May 18, 2020June 29, 2023

House proposes significant expansions to paid leave under Families First Coronavirus Response Act

The House of Representatives on May 15 passed the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act, H.R.6800. Among other things, it proposes significant clarifications and expansions to the Emergency Family And Medical Leave and Emergency Paid Sick Leave provisions of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.

What are these proposed changes?

Emergency Family And Medical Leave

Expands emergency FMLA coverage to all employers, not just those with less than 500 employees.
Expands the definition of “parent” to include foster parents, adoptive parents, stepparents, parents-in-law, a parent of a domestic partner, and someone who stood in loco parentis to an employee when the employee was a child.
Provides emergency FMLA to an employee who is —
- self-isolating because of the employee’s own COVID-19 diagnosis;
- obtaining a medical diagnosis or care if the employee is experiencing the symptoms of COVID–19;
- complying with a recommendation or order by a public official with jurisdiction or a health care provider to self-isolate on the basis that the physical presence of the employee on the job would jeopardize the employee’s health, the health of other employees, or the health of an individual in the household of the employee because of the possible exposure of the employee to COVID–19 or because of the exhibiting of symptoms of COVID–19 by the employee;
- caring for or assisting a family member (also defined in the amendments) because the family member is self-isolating because of a COVID–19 diagnosis, because the family member is experiencing symptoms of COVID–19 and needs to obtain medical diagnosis or care, or because a public official or health care provider makes a recommendation or order that the presence of the family member in the community would jeopardize the health of other individuals in the community because of the possible exposure of such family member to COVID–19 or exhibiting of symptoms of COVID–19; and
- caring for a family member who is incapable of self-care because of a mental or physical disability or is a senior citizen, if the place of care for such family member is closed or the direct care provider is unavailable due to COVID–19.
Permits an employee to elect, but an employer cannot require, the substitution of paid time off for emergency FMLA.
Allows employees to take paid sick leave intermittently or on a reduced work schedule without regard to whether the employee and the employer have an agreement with respect to whether such leave may be taken intermittently or on a reduced work schedule.
Prohibits an employer from requiring certification by an employee in support of an emergency FMLA leave to not earlier than five weeks after the date on which the employee takes such leave
Extends the sunset date of emergency FMLA from 12/31/2020 until 12/31/2021.

Emergency Paid Sick Leave

Clarifies that paid sick leave under the FFCRA must be offered in addition to any paid leave offered by an employer, and prohibits an employer from changing its policies to avoid providing any additional paid leave.
Allows employees to take paid sick leave intermittently or on a reduced work schedule without regard to whether the employee and the employer have an agreement with respect to whether such leave may be taken intermittently or on a reduced work schedule.
Prohibits an employer from requiring certification by an employee for the need for paid sick leave for leaves less than three consecutive days of paid sick time, and further prohibits an employer from requiring such certification earlier than seven workdays after an employee returns to work.
Provides for a new allotment of 80 hours of paid sick leave if an employee changes employers.
Requires restoration of an employee to the same or equivalent position at the end of a period of paid sick leave.
Extends the sunset date of paid sick leave from 12/31/2020 until 12/31/2021.

Sen. Mitch McConnell has already said that this bill is DOA in the Senate in its current form but it’s unclear if this statement specifically referenced the FFCRA amendments. Stay tuned to see if any of these proposed amendments gain any traction in the Senate. I’ll keep everyone updated as this bill progresses.

May 4, 2020June 29, 2023

Handling employee mental health issues in a world and workplace changed by coronavirus

employers mental health; Millennials and mental health

May is Mental Health Awareness Month, which is as good a time as any to bring up an issue that has been weighing heavily on my mind — the looming mental health crisis that our employees are facing and will continue to face in a world and workplace changed by coronavirus.

Coronavirus has altered all of our lives, and all employees are dealing with stress, anxiety, and isolation.

Social distance has robbed us of the human contact we need from our family and friends, and work-from-home of the connections with our co-workers.

Some have fallen ill with coronavirus. Most of us know someone who has. And sadly there are those of us who have dealt with the loss, unable to properly grieve because of social distancing rules.

We’ve all missed celebrating milestones such as graduations, birthdays and weddings.

Many of us have dealt with the stress of layoffs, furloughs, lost income or closed businesses, and the stress that flows from figuring out how to pay the bills and feed our families.

Parents are balancing the new job of homeschooling (or at least assistant homeschooling) their kids with the old job of their actual paying job.

We’ve all lived with the everyday stress of just stepping out into the world. The simple task of grocery shopping has transformed into a life-and-death game of six-foot distance, anti-bacterial wipes and face coverings. Even the simplest of daily tasks such as walking the dog has transformed into a game of social distancing chicken — who is going to move off the sidewalk first.

And when society starts to return to some semblance of normal, some of your employees will return to work with mental health issues of varying degrees caused by all of this stress, change and loss. Some will be dealing with the exacerbation of pre-existing mental health issues, and some will have what I am calling coronavirus PTSD.

The easy part is understanding that coronavirus has caused these mental health issues. The harder part is figuring out what we as employers can do and should do to help employees identify and manage these serious issues.

For starters, Ohio has created a free COVID Careline for people to talk to someone about their concerns. It’s available 24/7 at 1-800-720-9616.

Other than letting employees know about this state-provided resource, what else can employers do to help ensure that employees have the support and resources they need now and in the future? I have five suggestions.

1. Check the benefits available to your employees. Do you have an Employee Assistance Plan and are its mental health and counseling services are up to date? Are your health insurance plan’s mental health benefits easy to access and affordable?

2. Revisit paid-time-off policies and consider providing employees the time they need to take care of themselves and their families. And understand that everyone’s situation at home is different. Some only have themselves to worry about, while others have children to tend to during the workday. None of this is ideal, but for some, it’s less ideal than for others, depending on how much non-work responsibilities are on one’s plate.

3. Consider holding town hall or all-employee meetings that focus on mental health awareness. If senior leadership encourages education and communication around mental health issues, your employees will be more likely to access care if and when they need it.

4. Just because many are working remotely does not mean that employees have to be separated. You can use technology to foster togetherness and a sense of community. Virtual get-togethers, mindfulness breaks and online team-building events all help ease the sense of aloneness and isolation that many are feeling.

5. Small gestures of kindness can go a long way. An extra day paid day off, a gift certificate for takeout meals or grocery deliveries, or a surprise delivery of a midday snack can help employees feel appreciated and connected instead of overwhelmed and stressed.

A business is only as strong (or as weak) as its employees. Those that are considerate, flexible and kind will be in the best position to come out of this on the other side with as vibrant a workforce as possible.

April 22, 2020June 29, 2023

I was (mostly) correct on the intersection between employer-provided paid leave and leave under the FFCRA

essential workers; workers' compensation, mask

Last week I took a stab at making sense of the messy and unclear rules surrounding the substitution of employer-provided leave (which, for the sake of simplicity, I’ll refer to as (“PTO”) for paid sick leave (“EPSL”) and expanded Family and Medical Leave (“EFMLA”) under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.

I was (mostly) correct.

Also read: How to calculate PTO versus traditional sick leave and vacation policies

On April 21, the Department of Labor published its 5th set of FAQs discussing the FFCRA. Question 86 squarely addresses and clarifies the intersection between employer-provided paid leave and leave under the FFCRA.

1. An employer may not require that PTO run concurrently with—that is, cover the same hours as—EPSL.
2a. An employer may require that PTO run concurrently with the paid weeks of EFMLA. PTO that runs concurrently with EFMLA will enable the employee to receive 100 percent of his or her daily pay plus the EMFLA benefit (two-thirds of her or her regular rate of pay, capped at $200 per day and $10,000 in total). Note, however, that the FFCRA’s payroll tax credit only reimburses the employer for the paid leave provided under the Act, not for any concurrent PTO applied. Once an employee exhausts all available PTO, EFMLA is continued to be paid out of the statutory two-thirds rate.
2b. Alternatively, an employer and employee may agree to top off the two-thirds EFMLA pay to an amount equal to 100 percent of the employee’s regular pay. Again, the FFCRA’s payroll tax credit only reimburses the employer for the paid leave provided under the Act.
3. An employee may elect—but an employer may not require the employee—to take EPSL or PTO (but not both) during the first two weeks of unpaid EFMLA.

Crystal clear, right?

April 13, 2020June 29, 2023

Making sense of substituting employer-provided leave for EPSL and EFMLA under the FFCRA

employment law, labor law, overtime records

One of the more confounding sets of rules under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act is when employers can require employees to substitute an employer’s own provided leave (which, for the sake of convenience I’ll refer to throughout as “PTO”) for paid leave — the 80 hours of paid sick leave (“EPSL”) or the 12 weeks of expanded family and medical leave (“EFMLA”) — mandated by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.

I am going to make an attempt to explain these rules, but I’ll fully admit that it’s still not 100 percent clear to me. The text of the FFCRA seems to suggest that an employer can never require the substitution of PTO.

Also read: The DOL’s Families First Coronavirus Response Act regulations contain some big changes

The DOL’s proposed regulations, however, muddy the waters, which were muddied even further by an amendment to those proposed regulations published last Friday, which deleted language from the regulations’ explanatory discussion relating to the substitution of PTO for EFMLA.

So let’s try to sort it all out.

1. An employer can never require an employee to substitute PTO for EPSL. The employee can elect that substitution, but it can never be forced by the employer.

2. If an employee is taking leave to care for a son or daughter whose school or place of care is closed, or child care provider is unavailable, due to COVID-19 related reasons, the employee qualifies for both EPSL and EFMLA. It is the employee’s sole choice whether to use EPSL during the initial two unpaid weeks of EFMLA (for which both types of leave will run concurrently), or save the EPSL for later use for another qualifying reason (or, I suppose, tack it on after the expiration of the FMLA leave). An employer cannot force an employee to use EPSL during those initial two unpaid weeks of EFMLA.

3. Here’s where it gets tricky. When can an employer require an employee to use PTO during EFMLA? Section 826.23(c) of the regulations is the key provision.

Section 2612(d)(2)(A) of the FMLA shall be applied, provided however, that the Eligible Employee may elect, and the Employer may require the Eligible Employee, to use only leave that would be available to the Eligible Employee for the purpose set forth in § 826.20(b) under the Employer’s existing policies, such as personal leave or paid time off. Any leave that an Eligible Employee elects to use or that an Employer requires the Eligible Employee to use would run concurrently with Expanded Family and Medical Leave taken under this section.

(Section 2612(d)(2)(A) of the FMLA permits an employer to require the substitution of PTO for FMLA leave.)

Also read: Coronavirus update: The mechanics of the tax credit for paid family and sick leave under FFCRA

What does this all mean? It means that an employer can require an employee to use available PTO during the unpaid portion of an EFMLA school closure of loss-of-child care coronavirus-related leave. If an employer so requires, the PTO runs concurrently with the EFMLA allotment.

4. An employer and employee can agree to “top-off” EPSL or EFMLA (that is, true up the employee’s pay through the substitution of PTO so that the employee earns his or her full pay). But the employer cannot require it.

All clear, correct? Or clear as mud?

Disagree with my interpretation? Drop a comment below and let’s try to figure it out together.

April 9, 2020June 29, 2023

Consumerization of benefits appeals to the on-demand workforce

on-demand workforce, benefits, freelancers, collaboration, communication

There is a growing inequality in today’s labor market that is creating a two-tier workforce between a company’s employees and its contingent workforce when it comes to employee benefits.

Some would add contingent workers are being treated akin to second-class workers without access to benefits in contrast to the extensive, high-quality benefits afforded to full-time employees, although they perform the same tasks, according to John H. Chuang, CEO of Boston-based staffing company Aquent.

“That doesn’t mean an HR director wants to eliminate variable pay or a contingent worker,” he said. “There are obviously jobs where you’re going to hire someone for only a year. It’s OK to have a contractor and an employee work together. A flexible workforce is necessary to help American companies maintain their competitive edge.”

For Chuang’s company, that means offering benefits to contingent workers.

Also read: 5 ways to inspire employee engagement today

It’s part of the changing consumerization of the workforce, which is leading employers to consider transitioning from a one size fits all approach to wages and benefits toward a model that aligns with employees’ diverse needs.

A Shifting Workforce

Driving this change of dynamics in the American workplace is a generational shift, an increasing interest in gig and remote work and new legislation establishing different employee classification metrics.

Consumerization refers to those in the workforce — more than half of whom are now millennials — who seek an employment experience that empowers them to make at least some of their own choices about tasks and goals, thus bringing a customer-like mentality to the workplace.

“They shop around almost like they’re buying a cell phone,” said Cowden Associates President and CEO Elliot Dinkin, whose company provides actuarial, compensation and employee benefits.

“As individuals and consumers, we’re used to setting our own goals and managing our own tasks, rapidly adopting the apps and tools that enable us to achieve what’s important to us, with ease,” said John T. Anderson, CEO of Smartway2, which provides workplace scheduling solutions for enterprises.

“Rather than putting up barriers that hamper autonomy and rapid adoption of new technology, organizations are now firmly focused on offering a seamless, consumerized employee experience so they can reap the benefits of increased productivity, collaboration and innovation.

“The 2020s will be the decade of autonomy at work and the mainstream adoption of tools that enable us to craft our own unique workplace experience,” he said. “These tools will rival consumer applications in ease of use and ability to sculpt human behavior.”

People Are People, Not “Resources”

Joseph Quan, co-founder and CEO of Twine Labs, which helps integrate HR data to deliver analytics and visualizations for CEOs and HR leaders, labeled consumerization as a fancy way of saying that every company will take a much more humanistic approach with every individual it interacts with.

“That applies to customers, partners, investors, candidates, and employees,” Quan said.

Also read: Give your on-demand workforce an arm’s-length embrace

“Forward-thinking companies are shedding the notion that people are just ‘resources’ or ‘capital’ — implicit in the terms HR/human capital — and that attitudinal shift is reflected downstream in the recent mania around candidate experience.”

Companies can position themselves by building a unique brand based on its distinctive cultural values and over-invest in candidate care and experience, said Quan.

“For us, that means sharing an incredible amount of internal data and communications with candidates before they even join the company,” he said.

Rather than imposing innovation from above, studies show employers should use surveys and group discussions to explore employees’ feelings about new technologies and elicit their help and suggestions through managerial collaboration for successful implementation, said Dinkin.

Dinkin, whose own workforce has mostly full-time and some part-time employees ranging in age from 20s to 60s, said each generation has different priorities regarding pay, benefits, time off, retirement, tuition reimbursement and other factors.

As the employee moves through the company, they can migrate to other packages based on their needs, Dinkin said.

Also read: Here are 4 must-know trends in gig hiring

For example, a 24-year-old college graduate may not be thinking about retirement and may prefer to remain on a parent’s health insurance plan until they are 26 years old rather than obtain insurance through work, Dinkin said.

Some employees may want the option to pass on benefits and make as much money as they can, he said. Another employee may prefer more paid time off because they want to attend their child’s school or sports events or must care for an aging parent.

The Value of Benefits for On-demand Workers

In order for employers to set themselves up as employers of choice in a consumerization environment, Dinkin urges employers to be aware of these developments and consider enabling employees to design a package that fits company operations, is cost-effective and offers choices more aligned with individual career goals, life stages and ranking within the company.

Dinkin cites a recent Deloitte study of millennials in which 49 percent said they would leave their current job inside of two years while about 25 percent actually have done so.

“They’re a product of their education where they’re told the best way to get ahead is to change jobs,” said Dinkin. “They lack information as to what are actually their opportunities.”

It’s best to sit down with an employee and show them how their career ladders can intersect with a wage structure and show them the requirements necessary to move from an entry level position into a higher level and what they will make, he said.

Consumerization extends beyond a full-time employee to contingent and gig employees.

In hiring gig workers, an employer may be trying to save payroll taxes and some benefit costs, said Dinkin.

“Why wouldn’t I create benefit plans for those individuals?” he said. “Don’t I want to make them stick to my company?”

For example, they could be offered a health reimbursement account. “Let this class of employees go out and get medical coverage and reimburse them for a certain amount,” said Dinkin.

Aquent is a talent services company providing marketing and creative talent, managed services, extended workforce benefits, project management and professional development. In 1993 Aquent became the first staffing company to offer full comprehensive benefits to its temporary employees.

Its newly launched service, Square Deal, enables companies to offer equal benefits to their contingent workforce efficiently and at scale.

Aquent’s Square Deal offering includes benefits, policies and eligibility designed for variable work: full- and part-time and long- and short-term assignments that are on par with internal employee coverage.

Its benefits package combines health and dental insurance with accident, critical illness and hospital indemnity insurance; a wellness program; 401(k) or Roth IRA plans; flexible spending accounts for health care, dependent care, parking and transit; an identity protection plan; an employee discount program, and career development and online skills training.

The best and most productive talent has many options and seeks a reason to work for a company through consumerization, said Chuang.

Benefits provide that reason, he said.

“If you have a yearlong project where someone leaves at the six-month point, you don’t have time to hire,” he said. “It’s devastating. If there is no commitment to the employee, there’s no commitment for the employee back to the company.

“By giving benefits — especially since it’s so unique and different among contractors — they really value it. We found that offering a strong benefits package typically increases retention by more than 20 percent.”

Nick Patel is founder and CEO of Wellable, which offers customizable wellness solutions enabling employers to run an engagement program through wellness apps and wearable devices that includes gamification, rewards and incentives. Additionally, it provides education and consulting services on how to set up an office environment to promote wellness.

Such programs may be subject to failure, however, if employees are not keen on their employer being closely affiliated with their health, said Patel.

“It’s creating a culture about educating and letting employees know why the company is doing it,” he said.

The primary benefit to the employer in embracing consumerization is that it cuts down on the high cost of turnover with respect to recruiting, hiring and training, said Dinkin.

“If you’re in a client service business, people are leaving your accounts or if you’re an experienced person on an operating line and you’re leaving, it costs the company so much. Some of it can be measured and some of it can’t,” he said.

Another factor in becoming an employer of choice is that it affords a company to be more diligent in the way it supervises, manages and rates employees, said Dinkin.

“All of this attention to training, development, giving people multiple chances, and looking the other way because it’s so hard to find good people … what does that do to my culture? Is that the best way to run my business?

“You’ll just have a bunch of mediocre people slow down your company because the good people leave anyway. They don’t like that culture if they know you’re keeping around somebody who’s mediocre.”

When it comes to how consumerization benefits companies, Patel said that while return on investment was “strictly defined by the fact that if I invest this many dollars to try a wellness program, I should expect first to make dollars in health care savings,” said Patel.

Also read: Why companies should rethink their approach to freelancers

“We see the industry transition to this trend called value on investment, which is what we ascribe to,” he added.

Value on investment can be difficult to measure and will vary with each company, he added.

“It’s taken to other considerations beyond health care expenses,” said Patel. “Employees may be more productive, for example. Studies have identified millennials as buyers of more wellness benefits. It’s bringing those kinds of broader benefits to help their well-being in terms of determining the value on investment.”

That may help attract and retain talent, he said.

The consumer-in-the-workplace mentality can help raise employee engagement and smooth a path to ROI, but is a double-edged sword, said Dinkin.

The same dynamic found in retail — in which the customer experience is important in gaining an advantage and poor customer service leads to people not returning to the store — also is found in the workplace, said Dinkin.

Dinkin said the economic constraints such as a projected 6 percent increase in employer-based health care costs in 2020 makes it difficult for most employers to offer a significantly competitive advantage in terms of salary and benefits.

The differentiating factor is being a valued supplier to consumerized employees, making them feel they have a stake in the company’s success.

That will pay off in loyalty, retention, corporate agility and profit, he said.