Category: Archive

You might expect Yahoo to be suffering from recruiting and retention troubles these days, given all the turmoil at the Internet giant.

Uncertainty about Yahoo’s future rose dramatically this week, amid news of a Yahoo move to test Google’s search-related ad service and reports of possible AOL-Yahoo and Microsoft-News Corp.-Yahoo deals. These headlines followed an ultimatum Saturday, April 5, from Microsoft warning Yahoo to come to terms on a Microsoft acquisition within three weeks or face a possible fight for control of Yahoo’s board of directors.

But attrition has not increased at the Sunnyvale, California-based company since Microsoft’s initial offer in February, Yahoo said in late March. And the number of applicants actually has been growing—a trend that may owe in part to a new severance policy for all full-time employees in the event of an acquisition.

On the other hand, talent management at Yahoo is not exactly business as usual. It takes longer to walk candidates through concerns they have, says Carol Mahoney, Yahoo’s vice president of talent acquisition. Mahoney says it isn’t harder to convince candidates about Yahoo, but “it’s more time-consuming.”

Yahoo, a pioneer on the Internet, has weathered turbulent times over the past year, including the departure of CEO Terry Semel and slumping profits. As part of an effort to refocus the company, Yahoo cut 1,000 jobs this year.

Another major source of upheaval was Microsoft’s unsolicited bid to acquire Yahoo for $44.6 billion in cash and stock. Yahoo rejected the bid as too low, touting plans to make gains in the online ad market and become the “starting point” for the greatest number of consumers. The company has 1,000 job openings as it pursues its new strategy, Mahoney says.

Microsoft turned up the heat Saturday in a letter signed by Steve Ballmer, CEO of the Redmond, Washington-based software titan. “If we have not concluded an agreement within the next three weeks, we will be compelled to take our case directly to your shareholders, including the initiation of a proxy contest to elect an alternative slate of directors for the Yahoo! board,” Ballmer wrote. He also implied that Microsoft would lower its price.

Yahoo’s board on Monday again rejected Microsoft’s offer, but said it was open to a deal with Microsoft under the right conditions.

Then came word of the test with Google, which raises questions about broader collaboration between Yahoo and its Internet rival. Adding to the mix were reports about a possible AOL-Yahoo tie-up and the prospect of a partnership between media giant News Corp. and Microsoft to acquire Yahoo.

It is unclear whether a merger with Microsoft would curb Yahoo’s famed culture of fun—or lead to more layoffs. Yahoo had 14,300 employees at the end of 2007. Microsoft had 78,565 employees as of last June.

The prospect of going to work for “Microhoo” could hurt Yahoo’s recruiting, observers say.

“I hope a merger doesn’t change Yahoo’s corporate culture,” says an MBA student who recently applied for a Yahoo summer internship and asked not to be identified. “Both are good names to have on your résumé, but I would rather work for a company like Yahoo than for Microsoft, because of its culture.”

New severance plans that would be triggered by a change in control at the company help Yahoo’s recruiting, Mahoney says. Benefits under the plans include four to 24 months of severance pay and health coverage. The new policy is “an anxiety reducer” for anyone nervous about joining an acquisition target, Mahoney says.

Many companies have change-in-control agreements for executives. Yahoo’s approach stands out because it covers all full-time employees.

—Gina Ruiz and Ed Frauenheim

MSNBC.com has career goals. The news Web site announced on Thursday, April 10, an agreement with Monster Worldwide Inc. that makes the online job site the exclusive career services provider for MSNBC.com.

Under the agreement, which includes MSNBC.com and Todayshow.com, Monster will be the exclusive provider of career tools and services for MSNBC-affiliated properties. Through a co-branded site, job seekers will be able to access Monster’s search and match capabilities and view job openings nationwide, as well as conduct regional job searches on the site’s local news section. Features include a résumé builder, salary information center and portfolio of job search management tools.

The agreement is a boon for Monster, which will have direct access to MSNBC.com’s 35 million unique visitors.

With an increasing number of companies entering the online job search industry, and chief rival Careerbuilder.com inking a deal with popular social networking site Facebook, Monster is struggling to maintain its dominance in the once-sparse online job services industry.

Rumors of a potential buyout have been circulating since Monster chief executive Sal Iannuzzi joined the company a year ago. Iannuzzi, previously CEO of Symbol Technologies, sold that company to Motorola in September 2006. After bringing Symbol CFO Timothy Yates to Monster in June, rumors grew that Iannuzzi might be preparing Monster for a similar sale.

But Monster has yet to announce any such intentions. In January, the company acquired San Francisco-based Affinity Labs for $61 million, expanding its career guide, search, trade news and social networking offerings. The company also launched its “Your Calling Is Calling” campaign, aimed at marketing Monster as a means of finding a “dream job” and not just a source for job listings.

Shares of Monster fell as much as 2% to $23 and were down 0.7% intraday. Shares have shed 27.5% so far this year.

Filed by Kira Bindrim of Crain’s New York Business, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Concerns about the economy, home values and health costs continue to sap workers’ confidence that they will have enough cash for a comfortable retirement.

The percentage of workers who said they were very confident about having enough money to retire comfortably dropped to 18 percent this year from 27 percent in 2007, according to the 2008 Retirement Confidence Survey.

That represents the largest one-year drop in confidence in the 18-year history of the survey, the study said.

At the same time, the percentage of workers who said they lacked confidence about having enough money for a comfortable retirement jumped to 37 percent this year from 29 percent in 2007.

The survey was conducted by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, a Washington retirement research organization, and Mathew Greenwald & Associates, a Washington public opinion and market research company.

“The good news is that after years of false optimism, at least active workers are beginning to realize that their current level of retirement savings appears to be inadequate for living comfortably throughout their retirement years,” said Jack VanDerhei, one of the study’s co-authors, in an interview. VanDerhei is also an EBRI fellow and professor at Temple University.

The survey also found that the percentage of retirees who were very confident about maintaining enough money for a comfortable retirement plummeted to 29 percent this year from 41 percent in 2007. The percentage of those lacking confidence rose to 34 percent this year from 21 percent last year.

While the survey found that the percentage of workers who say they’ve saved for retirement rose to 72 percent in 2008 from 66 percent the year before, nearly half of those saving for retirement had total savings and investments — minus the value of their primary residences and any defined-benefit plans — of less than $50,000. Seventy-six percent of workers who said they had not saved for retirement reported total assets of less than $10,000.

The survey also said that while 41 percent of workers said they or their spouse had a defined-benefit plan, 59 percent said they expected to receive income from a defined-benefit plan in retirement.

The discrepancy between those numbers suggests that some workers may be under the illusion that they will receive a retirement benefit that they will not actually get, the study said.

The EBRI-Greenwald survey was based on telephone interviews of a random sample of 1,057 workers and 265 retirees in the U.S. age 25 and older.

Filed by Pensions & Investments, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, please e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Please click on image to view PDF graphic.

Adobe Acrobat required

Illustration by Gonzalo Hernandez

The obesity epidemic costs U.S. private employers an estimated $45 billion a year in medical expenditures and worker absenteeism, according to a report released today by the Conference Board.

The report found obesity is associated with a 36 percent increase in health-care spending, more than results from smoking or alcoholism. Since 34 percent of American adults fit the definition of obesity, cutting costs associated with the condition will challenge companies for years to come.

“Employers need to pay attention to their workers’ weights, for the good of the bottom line, as well as the good of the employees and of society,” said Linda Barrington, a labor economist and research director at the Conference Board.

Companies are gearing up to combat obesity.

The report said that more than 40 percent of U.S. companies have obesity reduction or wellness programs, and an additional 24 percent plan to start such programs in 2008. The programs can yield a return on investment from ranging from zero to as much as $5 for each $1 invested.

But throwing money at such programs can also add to employers’ woes.

Companies risk discrimination lawsuits if they are too forceful about encouraging employees to manage their weight, even if it is for the employees’ own good. And not all weight loss and obesity programs get results, which could leave employers stuck with a weighty bill.

The report suggested companies involve their employees in the planning of any health initiatives, before programs are put into place.

Filed by Matthew Scott of Financial Week, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, please e-mail editors@workforce.com.

WellPoint Inc. enrollees’ protected health information and other personal records, including Social Security numbers, may have been exposed via the Internet for an unspecified period of time, WellPoint said Tuesday, April 8.

The membership-based health insurer said two computer servers on which the records were stored were maintained by a third-party vendor and were not properly secured, according to a statement from the Indianapolis-based health insurer. The snafu affected approximately 130,000 customers, according to WellPoint.

WellPoint said that it has notified all possibly affected members and has offered free credit monitoring and customer service support. The insurer said both servers were “not properly secured” in 2007.

WellPoint said both servers are now secured and that it is conducting an internal investigation to find out the cause of the problem.

“We have taken the appropriate steps to secure the data and will continue to work with all vendors to reduce the risk of future incidents,” WellPoint said in a statement. “We are notifying all members who could have been affected by this incident, as well as regulatory officials.”

Filed by Jeff Casale of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Before it became the poster child for the collapsing subprime mortgage market, Bear Stearns was known for its smart, rough-edged, aggressive brokers who rolled up their sleeves each day and made money.

Following the company’s brush with bankruptcy and with a takeover by JPMorgan Chase looming, Bear Stearns’ top talent probably will head for the door.

JPMorgan may be powerless to hold on to them—even with a retention bonus reported to equal 100 percent of annual revenue for brokers making $500,000 or more.

“That’s not going to stop the best from going because competitor firms would certainly be prepared to offer more than one times revenue,” says Jo Bennett, a partner at Battalia Winston, an executive recruiting firm based in New York.

Bennett’s corporate clients are eager to land some of Bear’s several hundred brokers.

“We’re networking like crazy,” she says.

Bear brokers are probably responding.

“These are people with big egos,” says Peter Cappelli, professor of management at the University of Pennsylvania. “They’re used to having lots of options.”

The situation isn’t so bright for the vast majority of Bear’s 14,000 workers, who are likely to be spit out when they’re devoured by the 180,000-employee JPMorgan.

Bear financial advisors are marketable, even in the midst of a downturn for the financial industry, because of their relationships with rich clients.

“There’s a lot of loyalty to the individual broker,” says Barry Miller, manager of alumni career programs and services at Pace University in New York and a career consultant.

That gives Bear brokers freedom to flee JPMorgan. Many have probably suffered devastating financial losses because of the low-ball price JPMorgan offered for Bear stock. About a third of Bear employees own company shares.

JPMorgan proposed $2 per share before raising its price to $10. By contrast, Bear traded at $77 on March 3. It fetched about $160 in early 2007.

Such a precipitous drop takes a psychological toll on Bear employees and adds complexity to the takeover, according to Alan Johnson, managing director of Johnson Associates, a New York compensation consulting firm.

“They’ve just been through a calamity, and a lot of them aren’t going to be able to function for the next six months or a year,” Johnson says. “It’s like a death in the family.”

JPMorgan will bear the brunt of that shock.

“The unique problem for JPMorgan is dealing with the enormous anger and frustration,” Johnson says.

JPMorgan can address the resentment by assuring top Bear performers that they will fit into the new company, according to Barbara Herman, a senior consultant at Diamond Consultants, a Chester, New Jersey, executive search firm.

“They need to demonstrate how they’re going to support a Bear Stearns financial advisor during the transition,” Herman says. “They have to provide meaningful information in a timely way. They have to keep their promises.”

JPMorgan chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon’s plea for other financial companies to stay away from Bear staff “will be honored for now,” Herman says, because of Dimon’s stature. “But it can’t go on indefinitely.”

—Mark Schoeff Jr.

Michigan had the most high-tech job losses of any state in the U.S. in 2006 but remained ranked as the No. 10 cyber state in the nation for total jobs, according to “Cyberstates 2008,” a report released by Washington-based AeA, the largest technology trade association in the country.

It was one of just three states to lose high-tech jobs in the year, the most recent year state-by-state data was available.

Michigan had 176,100 tech jobs, down about 1,500. Colorado lost 900 jobs and Delaware lost 300.

Michigan’s total high-tech payroll of $13.2 billion ranked 13th in the U.S.

The state gained 500 jobs related to computer systems design and 400 related to electronic components, but saw losses in engineering services (1,800), R&D and testing (600) and telecommunications (200).

Nationally, tech jobs increased for the second consecutive year in 2006, adding 139,000 jobs for a total of about 5.8 million.

California added 21,4000 jobs for a total of 940,700, with Texas adding 13,700 jobs, Virginia 9,800, New Jersey 8,500 and New Mexico 6,700.

In Michigan, high-tech firms employed 49 of every 1,000 private-sector workers, and they had average earnings of $75,200, which was 79 percent more than Michigan’s average private-sector wage.

Filed by Tom Henderson of Crain’s Detroit Business, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

WellPoint Inc. is changing its provider reimbursement strategy to withhold payment for certain medical errors.

The reimbursement modifications, which involve preventable adverse events as defined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the National Quality Forum, will be implemented in phases and be modified and expanded. Prior to this announcement, the policy had been implemented on a pilot basis in Virginia.

The Indianapolis-based health insurer will not pay for surgery performed on the wrong body part, for surgery on the wrong patient, or for the wrong surgery being performed on a patient. In addition, WellPoint will not make any additional payments if any of the following occur:

* Object left in the body during surgery.
* Air embolism or blockage.
* Blood incompatibility.
* Catheter-associated urinary tract infection.
* Pressure ulcers.
* Vascular catheter-associated infection.
* Infection inside the chest after coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
* Hospital-acquired injuries such as fractures, dislocations, intracranial injuries, crushing injuries and burns.

“WellPoint firmly believes that putting processes in place that focus on preventing these events can have an immediate impact on health care safety and quality,” Dr. Sam Nussbaum, executive vice president for clinical health policy and WellPoint’s chief medical officer, said in a statement.

“We will continue to work collaboratively with physicians and hospitals to analyze why and how these events occur, and to proactively find ways to improve patient safety and clinical care,” he said.

The new strategy also will save patients and employers money since it does not permit in-network hospitals to bill them for such errors, according to WellPoint.

WellPoint joins a growing list of payers that are no longer reimbursing providers for health care costs stemming from preventable medical errors. Earlier this year, Aetna Inc. said it had begun to include provisions in some provider contracts that they won’t pay for nor allow patients to be billed for care related to the so-called “never events” identified by the National Quality Forum.

Last August, CMS announced it would no longer pay for some hospital mistakes beginning on October 1, 2008. In addition, the Washington-based Leapfrog Group, a consortium of large, national employers focused on patient safety, has announced its support of such payment denials.

In 2002, the National Quality Forum defined 27 events that should never occur within a health care facility.

There are six types of so-called “never events”: surgical errors; product or device events, such as using contaminated drugs; patient protection events, such as discharging an infant to the wrong person; care management events, such as medication errors; environmental events, such as electric shocks or burns; and criminal events, such as the sexual assault of a patient.

Filed by Joanne Wojcik of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.