Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on April 2, 2008June 27, 2018

Republicans Meet Resistance in Sending H-2B Bill to House Floor

Republican lawmakers are trying to jump-start a bill that would raise limits on visas for foreign workers who staff seasonal industries, a move they say would aid faltering businesses in their districts.


Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., R-Louisiana, introduced a measure on Tuesday, April 1, that would send directly to the House floor a bill that would almost double the number of workers who can enter the country on temporary H-2B visas.


Also on Tuesday, foreign nationals who say they have been exploited by employers using H-2B visas held a briefing for congressional staff. They called for a hearing to explore abuses in the system.


Capitol Hill activity has been spurred by complaints from hospitality, seafood processing, landscaping, construction and other industries that say they can’t find enough workers.


The 66,000 limit for H-2B visas was hit in early January. Last year, a total of 120,000 workers entered the country because those returning to their jobs didn’t count against the 66,000 cap. That provision expired this year.


A bill written by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, would restore the returning worker rule. It has 146 bipartisan co-sponsors but has been stalled by tensions surrounding immigration policy.


The Congressional Hispanic Caucus doesn’t want the H-2B bill to move forward alone because it is pursuing comprehensive immigration reform. Last year, a broad immigration bill died in the Senate during a rancorous debate about enforcement and a path toward residency for illegal workers.


Republicans blame Democratic leadership for holding up the H-2B bill. Boustany needs 218 House members to sign a “discharge petition” that would allow the bill to bypass committee action and go straight to the House floor.


Stupak is one name that won’t be appearing on the document. “My discussions with House leadership continue and I remain hopeful that they will lead to the quick action needed for seasonal businesses in northern Michigan and across the country,” Stupak said in a statement.


Rice, sugar, shellfish producers and construction firms are suffering in Louisiana, according to Boustany.


“They can’t find the workforce,” Boustany said at a Capitol Hill press conference. “They depended on H-2B visas over the years to meet these needs. This is good policy that’s being held hostage by politics.”


Some foreign workers who have been brought to the U.S. on H-2B visas, however, contend that the program exploits workers lured here by false promises of good jobs.


In a meeting with about 80 congressional staff, they said that employers can lord over H-2B holders because the visas are for a short duration, only about six to 10 months. During that time, they have no freedom to leave a bad employer, live under constant threat of deportation and lack access to lawyers.


Sabul Vijayan is among 100 Indian guest workers who are suing the Signal International shipyard in Pascagoula, Mississippi, for alleged human trafficking.


Vijayan sold his wife’s jewelry and used money he had been saving for a home in India to pay a recruiter $20,000 to secure a position as a pipe fitter. Once he arrived, he was forced to bunk with 24 workers in one room.


When they complained about living conditions and the poor quality of food, they were subject to verbal abuse. When a few of the workers tried to organize, they were locked in a room for six hours. During the ordeal, Vijayan tried to kill himself and was later fired.


“The H-2B visa as it is structured now is an instrument to create servitude and modern-day slavery,” said Daniel Castellanos, a Peruvian H-2B worker and a leader of the Alliance for Guest Worker Dignity. Castellanos is suing his former employer, the Decatur Hotel in New Orleans.


Castellanos and Vijayan spoke at an event hosted by the House Education and Labor Committee. The chair of the panel, Rep. George Miller, D-California, has introduced a bill that would increase the transparency of H-2B jobs, make employers jointly liable for the actions of recruiters and impose heavy fines for misconduct.


Miller’s H-2B skepticism is another obstacle to raising the program caps. Miller is a close ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California.


—Mark Schoeff Jr.

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

The Baldrige Standard

In its culture reinvention process, Crouse chose to utilize the Baldrige performance-excellence criteria as a framework. Here are its seven key areas of focus, adapted from the Institute of Standards and Technology’s Baldrige National Quality Program Web site
 

1Leadership:How senior executives guide the organization and how the organization addresses its responsibilities to the public and practices good citizenship.
2Strategic planning: How the organization sets strategic directions and how it determines key action plans.
3Customer and market focus:How the organization determines requirements and expectations of customers and markets; builds relationships with customers; and acquires, satisfies and retains customers.
4Measurement, analysis and knowledge management: How the organization manages, analyzes and improves data and information to support key processes and the performance management system.
5Workforce focus: How the organization enables its workforce to develop its full potential and how the workforce is aligned with the organization’s objectives.
6Process management:How key production/delivery and support processes are designed, managed and improved.
7Results: The organization’s performance and improvement in its key business areas: customer satisfaction; financial and marketplace performance; human resources; supplier and partner performance; operational performance; and governance and social responsibility. How the organization performs relative to competitors.


Workforce Management, March 17, 2008, p. 22 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

Use Your Strengths to Strengthen Others

You can’t walk into a conference these days without bumping into a speaker who is trumpeting the value of building on your strengths. It’s easy to understand why this message resonates. From the time we start school, we are evaluated on our weaknesses. Most of us dread this. “Build on your strengths” sounds like one of those alternative schools where people played sports, painted or sang and danced all day instead of memorizing dates in history or taking pre-algebra. Who wouldn’t rather sing and dance or play sports?


    The logic of “build on your strengths” comes from outstanding work by Martin Seligman, who with his colleagues defined and shaped the field of positive psychology. Instead of focusing on what is wrong with individuals, they emphasize what is right. Instead of overcoming depression, they offer clients ways to find authentic happiness. Instead of diagnosing pathologies and overcoming them, they want to identify strengths and build on them. In Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification, a 2004 book written with Christopher Peterson, Seligman and colleagues identified 24 generic strengths that individuals might possess in six domains:


    Wisdom and knowledge: the ability to acquire and use knowledge (creativity, curiosity, love of learning)


    Courage: the ability to accomplish goals in the face of opposition (persistence, vitality, integrity, bravery)


    Humanity: the ability to tend to and befriend others (kindness, social intelligence)


    Justice: the ability to experience a healthy community life (fairness, teamwork, social responsibility)


    Temperance: the ability to protect against excess (forgiveness, humility, self-control)


    Transcendence: the ability to connect to a larger universe and provide meaning (gratitude, hope, playfulness)


    A simple definition of a strength is that it’s something that we find easy, energizing and enjoyable. The authors’ premise is that when you do well in what you identify as a strength and capitalize on it—rather than trying to shore up your weaknesses—you will have more success and more positive experiences. You’ll find happiness. (You can take some of Seligman’s strengths tests here.)


    It is very hard to disagree with this logic. Marcus Buckingham and others have argued that discovering what we do well is a first step to lasting success. Leaders whose strengths are around creativity will be more successful in innovative organizations and work environments, for example.


    But building only on your strengths is not enough if those strengths do not create value for those you lead. In college, I majored in English. I developed a knack for reading novels. I could read two or three novels a week and found this easy, energizing and enjoyable. But what I have since found is that few people care about my strength of reading novels. What they really care about is my ability to analyze a situation in ways that help them reach their goals. Reading and interpreting good writing is a sustainable strength when it informs my ability to diagnose and help others work through their problems.


    According to the recent movie The Bucket List, the Egyptians believed that the gatekeepers of heaven ask new arrivals two questions about their lives on Earth: Did you find joy? Did you bring joy to others? The first question is about building on your strengths to find joy. It is necessary, but not sufficient. It is about the self, not others. The second question shifts the focus of joy to helping others find it. Put in terms of our strengths discussion, this means that we should build on our strengths that strengthen others.



“Building on strengths that in turn strengthen others does not mean pandering. It does not mean you will say and do anything someone wants. it means having a clear sense of self.”

    Leaders may strive to acquire strengths of authenticity, judgment, emotional intelligence, credibility and other noble attributes, but unless and until they apply these strengths in ways that create value for others, they have not been totally successful. Some in the strengths movement have missed the conclusion Seligman reached in his 2004 book, Authentic Happiness: “The meaningful life: using your signature strengths and virtues in the service of something much larger than you are.”


    For leaders, this means that it is not enough to do our work well. We must also use our strengths to deliver value to others. HR professionals who want to build on their strengths in order to strengthen others should consider the following:


    Focus on outcomes, not activities. It is tempting to focus on what HR does without fully considering what HR delivers, but it’s an incomplete goal. The outcomes of an HR activity might include employee morale, but could also be expanded to customers, investors and communities outside the organization. We have asked HR professionals to answer the query “so that …” to turn an activity into an outcome. For example: “We are investing in a performance appraisal (training, 360, communication or other HR process) so that … .” The answer to the “so that” query focuses on an outcome, not an activity. Outcomes are what we should be measuring.


    Help leaders define their results. Many leadership programs are filled with exercises and seminars meant to help leaders learn and grow as individuals. They can identify their strengths and build them. But unless and until those strengths help others, they are incomplete. My colleagues at the RBL Group and I have adapted a fantastic exercise from Marshall Goldsmith. In a workshop, we ask leaders to think about their personal strengths and what they want to improve to be better as leaders and as people. Then, we ask them to stand and talk to five to seven other people who can coach them about using those strengths to strengthen others. Suddenly the focus is not just on what they want to do better, but on how their personal improvements will help others do their own work better. HR professionals who coach leaders about behavioral change can direct those improved behaviors to improved results.


    Build a positive culture from the outside in. Most people acknowledge that companies have a culture, or way of doing things. This culture filters who joins the firm and how people act once they are in the firm. But often this culture is an inside-out view. It is defined as how we do things, our norms, our values, our expectations and our behaviors. By focusing on strengthening others, HR professionals can diagnose a culture against the standard of how it reflects desired outcomes by those outside the organization—customers and investors, for instance. HR professionals can ask leadership teams questions like: “What do we want to be known for by our best customers (or investors)?” By focusing on the strengths that others want to see in us, then translating those expectations into internal leadership and organization actions, we can make a culture an enduring source of value. Strengthening others affects not only the individual but the organization.


    Be a contributor by working with business leaders on their issues. HR competency models that focus exclusively on what the HR professional should know and do are insufficient. The real impact of HR professionalism comes when HR professionals turn their knowledge and skills into productivity for others. HR professionals should know the business so that they help their business leaders achieve financial and customer results. HR professionals should build innovative and integrated HR practices so that strategies turn from aspirations to actions. HR professionals should be credible activists so that they can help those they coach reach the results they desire.


    Develop HR professionals who are curious. In doing HR work, HR professionals should start by identifying their audience and what they want and need. This requires HR professionals who desire to learn first, then act. HR professionals should ask questions about what the business requires, about what leaders are accountable for, about what employees need, and about why customers select one provider over another. By asking these questions, HR professionals spend less time on what they are good at, and more time on what they can do to help others succeed. Curiosity means HR professionals begin their work by learning what others want rather than what they know. Strengthening others means good HR is less about what HR knows and more about how that knowledge affects others.


    Building on strengths that in turn strengthen others does not mean pandering. It does not mean you will say and do anything someone wants. It means having a clear sense of self. It means identifying, developing and investing in personal strengths without arrogance or compromise. But, it also means applying those strengths to the service of others.


    As the strength logic evolves and applies to HR, successful HR professionals might quietly say to themselves, “I am able to help someone accomplish what they need to do.” And that happened because they used their strengths to strengthen others.


Workforce Management, March 17, 2008, p. 28-29 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

Healing from the Inside

It was early 2002, and Syracuse’s Crouse Hospital was still in the excruciating throes of bankruptcy when interim CEO David Speltz and his turnaround senior management team summoned the hospital’s middle management to an off-site retreat.


    The managers at Crouse, whose 566 beds and 2,600 employees make it the largest acute-care institution in the central New York region, undoubtedly were prepared for the worst. Even before Chapter 11, they’d already endured painful layoffs and budget cuts, and struggled to remain focused on their work despite rumors that the once-proud institution, home to one of the nation’s finest neonatal intensive care units, would be broken up or sold outright.


    But what transpired was probably an even bigger shock. Instead of leading the meeting, the turnaround management simply sat around the table like everyone else while a hired consultant ran the show. When it was the top executives’ turn at last to speak, their message was brief and to the point.


    “They told us, ‘At some point in the near future, we’re going to be gone,’ ” recalls Derrick Suehs, who was at the meeting and is now Crouse’s chief quality officer. ” ‘We’ll be turning it over to you, to sink or swim. This is the team right here that’s going to lead the organization forward.’ “


    It was not an admission born of sheer benevolence.



“When [employees] saw that they not only had the ability to make recommendations, but that they
would actually be tracked and put
into practice, it really helped give the culture change credibility.”
—Derrick Suehs, chief quality officer, Crouse Hospital

    “The turnaround guys knew that once the financial bleeding is stopped and the holes are stitched up, you’re still vulnerable,” Suehs says. “You’ve got to sustain life, or the patient’s not going to make it. To get Crouse healthy again, the culture had to change, and they were smart enough to know that wasn’t their area of expertise. So they handed that job off to us. I’m not sure they realized it at the time, but what they had done was very powerful—and empowering.”


    What transpired was a marked contrast to the typical institutional struggle to survive a bankruptcy, in which scorched-earth austerity measures leave the workforce feeling alienated and powerless, and erode the commitment to the organization’s mission that is so essential to high performance and a positive relationship with customers.


    Instead, Crouse used its reorganization and the aftermath not just to regain its financial footing, but also to reinvent its culture. As a result, the hospital has significantly improved the quality of its services and regained its position as a leader in a highly competitive regional market. The key to that success has been bringing together employees from all levels and allowing them free rein to remake the organization, from refocusing the hospital’s mission to reinventing processes from the ground level to improve efficiency.


Loyalty despite crisis
    Crouse’s revival, which earned the hospital the 2006 “Business of the Year” award from the Greater Syracuse Chamber of Commerce and an “Employer of Choice” citation from the central New York chapter of the Society for Human Resource Management, is reflected by a healthier bottom line and improvements in key workforce and performance metrics.


    Crouse posted a profit of $11 million in 2007, compared with a $15 million net loss in 2000. Crouse’s operating margin of 3.5 percent approximates the national average, but is outstanding in New York state, where more than half of hospitals either lose money or achieve a margin of less than 1 percent, according to the Healthcare Association of New York State, an industry group.


    Crouse has regained much of the market share that it lost to other Syracuse-area hospitals during its financial travails; last year, the hospital handled 55,000 emergency room visits and discharged 26,000 patients, both tops in the region.


    “All of the indicators, such as ambulance traffic, are back up,” says Bob Allen, Crouse’s vice president for communications and governmental affairs. “We’re delivering half of all the births in our county, and our neonatal intensive care unit is treating the sickest premature babies from Binghamton in the south all the way to the Canadian border,” a distance of 200 miles.



“Traditionally, people would come to work at Crouse and then stay here
for their entire careers. Despite all
the problems, people still were loyal to the place, and working to keep it going. If they hadn’t, we would have gone down the drain.”
— Bob Allen, vice president for communications and government affairs, Crouse Hospital

    Within the organization, annual workforce turnover has declined from a high of 49 percent in 2001, before the hospital’s culture change, to just 18 percent today. Employees’ belief that they are treated fairly by senior management has risen from below industry-average levels to a high of 74.5 percent, significantly above the industry norm of 67 percent. Overall job satisfaction has climbed to 91.9 percent, slightly above the industry average of 87 percent. After Crouse’s most recent labor negotiations in 2006, a new contract won approval from 97 percent of unionized employees.


    For much of its 120-year history, Crouse Hospital was both a market leader and a venerable community institution in the Syracuse area. But starting in the late 1990s, the institution began to struggle financially and operationally. Crouse stumbled to net losses of more than $6 million in 1999 and $15 million in 2000. By January 2001, the hospital was barely generating enough cash to cover its payroll and other expenses, and Standard & Poor’s slashed Crouse’s bond rating by seven notches to single B-minus, denoting it as one of the financially weakest hospitals in the nation.


    According to news accounts, the hospital’s then-management blamed Crouse’s woes on a variety of problems, from cutbacks in federal Medicare payments to the high cost of delivering services not provided by other local hospitals, to computer-related billing problems. But Allen, who was with Crouse at the time, offers a different explanation.


    Rather than focusing on Crouse’s traditional strengths, he says, the hospital’s executives became preoccupied with building an alliance with another local hospital and creating an integrated system of “cradle to grave” health care services.


    “It was a miserable failure,” he explains. “The cultures of the two institutions and their medical staffs were totally different, and not necessarily respectful of each other. Management got caught up in trying to make it work on a big-picture level, at the expense of the details. In this industry, where quality is absolutely vital, you can’t do that.”


    Budget cutbacks and layoffs at Crouse only served to worsen the downward spiral. In February 2001, Crouse was forced to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Senior management eventually resigned, and at the urging of debt holders, in early 2002 a new team headed by Speltz, a turnaround specialist, took over.


    The turnaround team made some important discoveries. Crouse’s troubled cash flow and aging infrastructure notwithstanding, the hospital had one very solid asset—its wealth of human capital, such as a nursing staff whose members often had 15 to 20 years of experience.


    “Traditionally, people would come to work at Crouse and then stay here for their entire careers,” Allen says. “Despite all the problems, people were still loyal to the place, and working to keep it going. If they hadn’t, we would have gone down the drain.”



“The biggest challenge for us was open and honest communication. … The committee became both a
reliable source of information that helped decrease rumors and a sounding board. Everything said in there stays in the room.”
—Luana Reeves, director of educational services, Crouse Hospital

    That said, the workforce’s relationship with hospital leadership had badly deteriorated because of what Suehs describes as a top-driven, bureaucratic organizational culture, in which managers and line employees had little autonomy and few opportunities to advocate their ideas for solving problems or improving performance. As a result, Crouse’s traditional reputation for high-quality care had suffered.


    “Quality begins with people,” Suehs says. “You can try to manage the technical aspects of work, but if it isn’t aligned with your people strategy, it isn’t going to work very well.”


    The turnaround team, whose expertise was in straightening out financial problems, didn’t have a solution for Crouse’s cultural malaise. So they asked the workforce to find one.


Focusing the mission
    At the first off-site corporate retreat in early 2002, middle and senior management got down to business with what for Crouse was unusual candor. What was working in the organization, and what wasn’t? What operational trouble spots should be priorities for attention and energy? But gradually, the attendees realized that to truly fix all of Crouse’s problems, they needed to shift to the more philosophical level of mission, vision and values.


    “At the time, we had a 53-word mission statement—two paragraphs that nobody could even remember,” Suehs says. “We started working on writing something that had a real meaning. Why do we exist? What are we doing for this community? We had to all be clear on that before we could figure out how to make things better.”


    Eventually, Crouse employees whittled the verbose mission statement down to just 12 words: “To provide the best in patient care and to promote community health.”


    “Notice that we didn’t say, ‘high-quality patient care,’ but ‘the best in patient care,’ ” Suehs says. “That’s significant, because this is an industry where everyone compares themselves to the norm. We wanted to go beyond average, to optimum.”


    Based upon that mission statement, they also developed a list of six core values for the organization, corresponding to the letters in Crouse’s name: community—working together; respect—honor, dignity and trust; open and honest communication; undivided commitment to quality; service to our patients, physicians and ourselves; excellence through innovation and creativity.



“I could see that with the
STB committee, something
radical was happening.”
—Dr. Paul J. Kronenberg, CEO,
Crouse Hospital

    To help transform those abstract concepts into actual change, senior management appointed an 18-member oversight committee consisting of volunteers from middle management and staff. Suehs led the oversight group—which was dubbed the “Simply the Best” committee, or STB for short—in creating a culture reinvention pro­cess that would help achieve the hospital’s mission.


    For structure, Suehs chose the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Baldrige performance-excellence criteria, a self-auditing process that an organization can use to improve overall performance.


    “We needed a model that the management group could buy into relatively easily,” he explains. “It was proven, and it was broad-based, which was important because we needed to change the entire organization, not just a part of it.”


    To that end, the STB committee, which eventually grew to 25 members, would organize another 10 corporate retreats over a five-year period. The committee’s twice-monthly 7:30 a.m. meetings became a forum that facilitated cooperation among the hospital’s various departments, according to director of educational services Luana Reeves.


    “The biggest challenge for us was open and honest communication,” she says. “But in every organization, there are some people that everybody trusts, that if they say something is or isn’t going on, you can bank that it’s for real. So the committee became both a reliable source of information that helped decrease rumors and a sounding board. Everything said in there stays in the room. So if you have somebody that’s not performing, you can talk about it without creating gossip.”


    The reinvention process also spawned scores of smaller group discussion sessions to which employees at every level of the organization were invited to participate. The small groups grappled with how to translate the mission statement and values into specific behaviors that would improve customer service and other aspects of performance. In the first year alone, the small-group process generated more than 900 recommendations.


    In the past, employee ideas at Crouse might have vanished into a bureaucratic shredder. To keep that from happening, Crouse put the ideas into a project management process, and assigned each one to a member of management who would guide it to fruition. At the end of the first full year, Crouse achieved an 85 percent implementation rate.


    “When people saw that they not only had the ability to make recommendations, but that they would actually be tracked and put into practice, it really helped give the culture change credibility,” Suehs says.


Words into action
    In February 2004, six months after Crouse successfully emerged from Chapter 11, Dr. Paul J. Kronenberg, a 20-year practicing physician and former chief of medicine at Crouse, became the CEO. Under the new leader, the pace of cultural reinvention has accelerated.


    “I didn’t know much about hospital administration, but I could see that with the STB committee, something radical was happening,” he recalls. “I had some discussions with them, to the effect of, ‘Why are you guys off on the side? This has to go mainstream.’ ”


    Kronenberg tossed out an existing strategic plan created by his predecessor and embarked upon creating a new blueprint based upon the mission, vision and values that the employees had developed, an effort that is still in progress.


    “Instead of focusing on specific metrics, we’ve decided to make a plan focused on our values.”


    Under Kronenberg, Crouse began to apply its mission, vision and values to the recruiting, hiring and onboarding process. Job applicants now watch an eight-minute video on the hospital Web site that spells out Crouse’s values and includes interviews with employees and a patient about how they are applied. The hospital also has expanded its orientation process to deal more with Crouse’s values, and has added follow-up sessions at the six-month and one-year marks to reinforce the message. Suehs credits those changes with reducing the turnover rate for employees with one year of service by more than half.


    To aid in the cultural transformation, Crouse also developed its own distinctive terminology. Exceeding the basic job requirements has come to be known as “STB Performance.” An example of it is the Crouse security guard who ventured out into the parking lot before a rainstorm to close the windows of an emergency room patient’s car.


    The workforce also learned to apply “The Momma Test” to behavior. “It’s simple,” Suehs says. “If the patient was your momma, how would you want her to be treated? Naturally, you’d want her to have the best. Not the industry average, but the best.”


    The Momma Test spurred Crouse to redesign processes such as the delivery of antibiotics to patients.


    “We were getting the first dose of an antibiotic from the pharmacy to the patient within 3.9 hours of it being prescribed, which is slightly better than the industry norm of four hours,” he says. “But you wouldn’t be satisfied with that if Momma was the patient—you’d want her to have the medicine as quickly as possible. So we went in and simplified the documentation and made technological improvements to enhance our ability to manage medication. In the end, we got it down to 1.9 hours.”


    To reduce emergency room gridlock, Crouse began sending an employee with a wireless notebook computer to register patients while they receive care, instead of making them wait in line to sign in.


    Kronenberg also has put a new cultural emphasis on the welfare of employees as well as patients. “We hired a physician whose job is to focus on employee health,” he says. “We’ve started a lot of wellness activities, and we’re creating a ‘healthy option’ on the cafeteria menu. We may eventually reward people with healthy habits by giving them a reduced cost for health care.”


    Perhaps because employees have been so heavily involved in reshaping Crouse’s culture, the culture change has achieved an unusually high rate of workforce buy-in. According to an internal survey, 86 percent of employees say that they rely upon Crouse values in their decision-making.


    “That’s compared to an industry norm of 45 percent,” Suehs says. “So we must be doing something right.”


Workforce Management, March 17, 2008, p. 1, 18-26 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

Financial Incentives Can Boost Wellness Program Participation

Whether through a discount on premium contributions or cold hard cash, employers increasingly are using financial incentives to encourage employees to adopt healthier lifestyles.

Such incentives are governed by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and other federal and state anti-discrimination laws, which determine how generous offerings may be, among other factors.


Approximately two-thirds of the employers currently offering wellness programs are using financial incentives to encourage participation, according to a recent survey of members of the ERISA Industry Council and the National Association of Manufacturers.


The most common incentive is health insurance premium reductions, which are offered by 40 percent of employers that responded to the survey. Cash or bonuses were a strong second, offered by 29 percent of the companies surveyed.


“We think money is definitely going to encourage better participation,” says Mark Cauthen, benefits manager for the city of Colorado Springs, Colorado. Under the city’s wellness program, dubbed “Reach Your Peak,” participants earn credits for engaging in certain activities, such as health screenings, stopping tobacco use or losing weight. The credits are then redeemed for cash.


“Originally we had quarterly prizes,” such as T-shirts and journals, Cauthen says. “But administratively, it was a nightmare. Now, instead, they get a $250 taxable check.”


Because company officials were disappointed in some of the participation rates, Marysville, Ohio-based Scotts Miracle-Gro Co. decided to get more aggressive with its incentive program.


In 2004, the company offered $120 in cash to employees who completed a health risk appraisal, but there was only a 70 percent participation rate.


The next year, those who didn’t take a health risk appraisal upon enrolling in the health plan were required to pay an additional $40 per month in premium contributions. That change resulted in 90 percent participation.


Then, in 2006, employees identified as moderate- to high-risk in the appraisal were assigned health coaches, and if they didn’t use them, they were required to pay an additional $67 per month the next calendar year. This resulted in 88 percent participation in the first year.


“It’s kind of a tough-love program, but we’ve eliminated all of the barriers and we’ve made upfront investments (in wellness programs), so we don’t want to make it difficult for people to seek care from a financial perspective,” says Pam Kuryla, vice president of global total rewards for Scotts.


While such a punitive approach may seem harsh, it’s legal, according to Alison Earls, CEO of Atlanta-based ACE Ideas. Earls is a benefit consultant and attorney who recently conducted an analysis of federal and state laws affecting health promotion programs for the Washington-based National Business Group on Health.


“Although there’s still lack of clarity about the [Americans With Disabilities Act] and there are some things that the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] has not clarified, I think there’s a lot of good and fair guidance” from the HIPAA nondiscrimination rule, she says.


“You can really design incentives in conjunction with your health plan for healthy behavior and even health improvement, and if you follow the five-part exception to the HIPAA nondiscrimination rule, you can provide incentives for not only education and learning about health, but actually for changing your blood pressure, your weight, your cholesterol, getting certain kinds of treatment,” Earls says.


The lingering uncertainty, though, has caused some employers, such as Indianapolis-based Clarian Health, to back off from imposing more stringent penalties on their employees.


After it received negative publicity and flak from employees, Clarian Health abandoned its plan to fine workers for unhealthy behavior, a company spokesman says.


Clarian Health announced in August that it wasn’t going to charge employees an extra $5 per paycheck fee on employees who did not meet minimum standards for nonuse of tobacco, body mass index, cholesterol, blood glucose and blood pressure.


“Although much of the plan had been presented as final, we have maintained in our communications that the final details of the plan were not fully developed,” the company said in an August 31 statement.


Rather than assessing penalties, “we will now offer employees incentives on their health insurance premiums for meeting parameters for known health risks including smoking, high body mass index, elevated blood pressure, and other factors,” the company statement said.


Pitney Bowes Corp. a few years ago implemented a non-smoking incentive program but later rescinded it, according to Dr. Jack Mahoney, director of strategic health initiatives at the Stamford, Connecticut-based office equipment manufacturer.


“We used to have a nonsmoking discount [on premiums], but it was eliminated after the Department of Labor” ruling, he says.


Under the Department of Labor’s clarification of the nondiscrimination rules under HIPAA, tobacco use is considered a health status rather than a behavior, making any wellness plan incentives or penalties subject to the five-part exception to the rules, Earls says.


Wellness program rules


Here are the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act nondiscrimination rules that govern wellness program incentives:
u The incentive or penalty cannot exceed 20 percent of the cost of employee-only health care coverage.
u The program must give eligible individuals the opportunity to qualify at least once a year.
u There must be a reasonable alternative standard to obtain the reward for any individual for whom it is unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition, or medically inadvisable, to satisfy the standard.
u The plan must disclose program terms and conditions in all printed or online materials.

Although most employers cite “legal compliance” as the reasoning behind their various wellness program incentive or penalty decisions, the real motive is that “employers don’t want to make employees mad,” which could cause their efforts to backfire, according to Marianne Fazen, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth Business Group on Health.


That’s precisely what happened to Scotts when it banned smoking by employees both at work and on their own time as part of the company’s wellness initiatives.


A Scotts employee, Scott Rodrigues, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts in January 2007, claiming that the company’s anti-smoking policy “violates the Employee Retirement Income Security Act because it discriminates against participants in the corporation’s health benefits plans for the purpose of interfering with their receipt of medical benefits.”


Scotts executives declined to comment because the litigation is pending. The company’s lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss on which the court has yet to rule.


However, Howard Weyers, former president of Lansing, Michigan-based Weyco Inc., which was sold to Meritain Health in August, says his former company will continue to enforce its policy banning tobacco use. Weyco in 2005 made tobacco use grounds for termination and instituted mandatory testing.


“I think there should be a consequence. If employees are doing something that has a negative effect on the company and the other employees, the company should do something about it,” he says.


Workforce Management Online, April 2008 — Register Now!  

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

Changehealthcare Could Offer the Change We Need

In 2000, as vice president of HR at a health care management firm, I would stand before our employees and conduct meetings about the company’s health care program.

   Instead of giving the traditional speech about how the national costs of health care are increasing an average of 8 percent per year, I told the group what was happening among co-workers and members covered under our own health care plan.

    I kicked off the enrollment meetings by handing out copies of monthly claims and drug utilization reports. All of the information was presented anonymously. Employees received data from our claims history reports that outlined the company’s claim cost by diagnosis and procedure.


    I shared employees’ prescription drug purchasing and utilization patterns. They saw the total number of heart attacks, catastrophic injuries, costs of ER visits, cost of physician visits and costs of all outpatient procedures. I showed them the percentage of covered employees identified as smokers, overweight and high risk.

    I told them the story of an employee going to the ER for a “hangnail” that cost over $1,000. I provided simple numbers illustrating drug purchasing behavior and the cost impact on our group by having a low generic utilization rate.


    And after the data was presented, I did my best “consumer-driven” health care pitch in an attempt to draw a simplified correlation between access to information and using that information to be better consumers of health care.
Perfect, right? Wrong. I assumed that because there were consumer sites for other large purchases like buying a car or a house, there were similar sites for health care.


    Looking for a new car? On Sites like Vehix.com or Cars.com, you can find expert advice, compare different manufacturers and models, read buying guides and search listings for new and used cars. Buying a new house? Zillow.com, an online real estate service, provides you with a slew of information—all the things you would want to review before signing on the dotted line and buying a house. You can find estimated housing valuations, comparable pricing and neighborhood information.


   But if you need to compare prescription drug costs with local pharmacies, there is little information. Want to compare the cost of an outpatient procedure in two community hospitals? Nothing.


    It never hit me that all of the educating and small group meetings had limited impact because of the scarcity of resources to help employees when they really needed it—usually during a health-related event or episode.


    I preached to employees about data and using information before they made a health care purchase, yet at the time of their prescription purchase, doctor visit or scheduled surgery, the employee had nowhere to compare pricing, physicians or quality of services.


   Enter Change:healthcare. Recently relaunched, the company began by providing a service that lets users enter their medical bills and track actual costs, including out-of-pocket charges, co-pays and deductibles. The new site includes information channels that allow consumers to compare the cost and performance of local and national health care providers, insurers and pharmacies, all with a focused effort to fill the information void for health care consumers.


    Critical to the Change:healthcare database is the aggregation of employer claims data. The company’s strategy is to sell its service to employer groups and collect their claims history to build a national repository of health care purchasing information. It is a bold move. Unlike the public information used to seed sites like Zillow and Vehix, Change:healthcare hopes to partner with employers, access employee claim history, make the data anonymous and integrate it within their database.


   Should covered employees feel open enough to allow a third party access to employee claims data? Will employees be notified of an employer’s partnership with companies such as Change:healthcare? Is employee privacy really being safeguarded? Privacy concerns are important and we should tread lightly when taking individual claims data and extrapolating information for open review. But if a company has guaranteed heightened privacy measures and is committed to ensuring that privacy standards are upheld, I believe it is time we embrace an open platform for general health care purchasing information.


    Internet sites such as DailyStrength and PatientsLikeMe demonstrate that health care information can be shared without compromising a user’s privacy expectations. In fact, these sites show that more people want to share their health care experiences, struggles and wisdom with one another in an open, community environment.


    Daily Strength, for example, is a social network that provides a place for people with a wide variety of medical, psychological and life conditions to discuss their struggles and the treatments. The site has more than 50,000 members and 500 support groups for every health issue and life challenge.


    PatientsLikeMe uses a social networking platform and takes it much further. On the site, patients enter very specific data regarding individual symptoms, treatments and therapies. Patients can then select other patients with a similar diagnosis and compare their treatments and outcomes. The site currently has more than 7,000 patients and continues to develop disease-specific groups.


    It will be interesting to see just how far employers and benefit managers will go in an effort to educate and promote employee knowledge of health care costs. Change:healthcare has begun pilot projects with several employers and expects to continue to build its database with claims data from these covered groups. With guarantees from participating employers and Change:healthcare that the data used will not be exploited and the privacy of consumers will be protected, I champion the effort to bring greater transparency and trustworthy health care information to all of us.

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

Employer Data Quantifies the Value of Wellness Programs

Perhaps the most significant difference between yesterday’s and today’s wellness movement is the science behind it.

Employers who are just now embarking on the wellness path are doing so methodically, collecting data from all relevant sources to better gauge the impact their programs are having, not only on health but also on productivity.


For the past six years or so, we’ve been looking at the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine link to  to see what other employers have been getting in terms of return on investment,” says Patti Clavier, who works in group health and well-being strategy and operations for Santa Clara, California-based Intel Corp.


Dr. Joyce Young, well-being director for IBM Corp., has had several studies on the impact of wellness programs published in that journal, including one on an Internet-based work-site smoking cessation intervention and another on an incentive-based online physical activity intervention on employee health status.


“There is also some good data showing how much more smokers’ health care costs are,” Young says. “We also found that people who were physically active more than twice a week had costs $500 to $600 less than those who were not physically active. You have to do sophisticated analysis to understand all the reasons for that. But the patterns are there.”


A review of 56 published studies of work-site health promotion programs by the Washington-based Partnership for Prevention found they produced an average savings-to-cost ratio of $5.81 to $1. The programs also reduced annual health costs by an average of 26 percent, reduced absenteeism by 27 percent, and reduced workers compensation and disability claim costs by 32 percent.


“What you find is a very comprehensive holistic approach to health and productivity management will usually be cost neutral in year one,” says Shelly Wolff, national leader for health and productivity at Watson Wyatt Worldwide in Stamford, Connecticut. “Year two is when you start seeing return on investment, and by the time you get to three years, things really start kicking in and you really do see ROI,” she says, adding that longer-term studies have found the gains continue for at least seven years.


Many employers also are starting to measure the impact of wellness programs on productivity in addition to health care costs by combining claims data with data on absenteeism, occupational injuries and disability claims, Wolff says.


Pitney Bowes Corp., for example, won the C. Everett Koop National Health Award twice, in 1995 and in 1997, for its work measuring wellness-program ROI, which produced “good hard metrics showing that by investing in health improvement programs you actually saw reductions in absenteeism costs,” says Dr. Jack Mahoney, director of health strategies at the office equipment manufacturer, which is based in Stamford, Connecticut.


The collective impact of ill health on the workplace is what is called the “burden of illness,” says Andrew Webber, president and CEO of the National Business Coalition on Health in Washington. “You put the whole picture together in terms of what the illness burden is costing you,” he says.


“It’s not just health care costs; it’s the time away from work. That’s a big part of where the return comes from,” Wolff says. “If a company is only looking at health care cost trend as their marker of success, they’re missing the other real, important costs that are impacting the health and effectiveness of your employees and the organization.


“We do know that people with health risks, people who are overweight, people who smoke are off work more. That means someone else is doing their job, so you’ve got higher replacement costs, you’ve got overtime, and that has a cascading effect on stress, which is another part of what we saw in our research,” she says. “You kind of get this domino effect.”

Posted on April 1, 2008June 27, 2018

Web-Based Screening May Lead to Bias Suits

Employers’ growing use of social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace to scrutinize job applicants could lead to charges of employment discrimination and litigation, experts warn.


    Observers say that without adequate policies in place, employers may be leaving themselves vulnerable to charges that they are using the data available on the Web sites to cull minorities, homosexuals and other applicants who are members of protected classes.


    With Palo Alto, California-based Facebook alone claiming 66 million active users, more employers are using these popular sites to check out job applicants, observers say.


    A survey of about 350 employers in October 2007 by New York-based Vault.com, a media company focused on careers, found that 44% of employers use social networking sites to examine the profiles of job candidates, and 39% have looked up the profile of a current employee.


    Observers say “failure to hire” lawsuits are far smaller in number than other types of employment litigation, such as those involving termination or charging retaliation, but they do expect litigation to emerge from employers’ growing use of social networking sites. Use of these sites could be used as evidence in litigation, even if it is not necessarily the primary motivation behind a lawsuit, they say.


    Few firms, however, have formal policies on this issue, experts say.


    Looking someone up on a Web site is not illegal because the Internet is public property, says Sue Murphy, manager of the Nashua, New Hampshire-based National Human Resources Association. “But where the liability starts to come into play is when people are making hiring decisions based on that information without coming back and talking to the applicant,” she says. “I think it is going to be tested in the courts.”


    Observers say employers long ago stopped asking job applicants to submit photos with their job applications to avoid being accused of rejecting applicants on the basis of their age, race or other factors. Today, however, it often takes no more than the click of a mouse to locate an image of an applicant.


    If it is found that employers have been looking at the sites, “I have a feeling you’re probably going to see lawsuits, and the burden is going to be back on the employer to show the protected category” did not enter into its “decision to hire or not hire,” says Anthony Zaller, an attorney with Van Vleck Turner & Zaller in Los Angeles.


    Matthew S. Effland, an attorney with Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart in Indianapolis, says he knows of no decision so far “that says using this information is a violation of some employee’s rights, but the law is notoriously slow to catch up to technology,” and “I very much see this becoming an issue in the future.”


    Non-demographic information also can be found on the Web sites. Miriam Wugmeister, an attorney with Morrison & Foerster in New York, says employers should be wary of laws in some states, including New York, that say employers “can’t discriminate against somebody in employment based on activities they engage in, in their private time,” such as smoking.


    Many states’ laws also forbid making job decisions based on applicants’ political activities, Wugmeister says.


    This issue will lead to increased litigation, at least in the short term, “until some parameters are set” as to what is private and public knowledge, she says. “We haven’t yet settled on where the boundary is,” she says. As a result, “we may see legislation even more than litigation” on this issue, she says.


    “We have good-sense policies,” says Tim DeMello, founder and CEO of Boston-based Ziggs Inc., a firm that helps its clients manage their Internet “online brand.”


    DeMello says that as an employer, he occasionally looks at applicants’ social networking sites to get some sense of their character. If you go to Facebook and see someone pictured with swastikas and then do not hire them, “do you call that discrimination?” he asks rhetorically.


    Employers should have a policy in place that “details what the purpose of the Internet search is,” and that specifically spells out that the firm does not base its decision on race, color or national origin, Effland says.


    Jennifer M. Bombard, an attorney with Morgan, Brown & Joy in Boston, says: “Make sure there’s a legitimate business rationale for rejecting applicants and that your hiring decisions are not motivated by information you found on an applicant’s social networking site. Make sure you can point to a legitimate reason for rejecting” the applicant and document and be prepared to justify that decision, she says.


    Neal D. Mollen, an attorney with Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker in Washington, advises employers to avoid looking at the social networking sites altogether. “I think it’s unlikely employers are going to learn a good deal of job-related information from a Facebook page they won’t learn in the context of a well-run interview, so the potential benefit of doing this sort of search is outweighed by the potential risk,” he says.


    Tim Best, president of Arlington, Texas-based PreScreen America Inc., a background investigation agency, says he tells his clients not to use these sites. If the information an employer learns turns out to be false, and the employer relies on that information in making a decision, the company is in danger of being sued, he says. “It’s at best risky doing that,” says Best, who is chairman of the Privacy and Personnel Information Management Council of the Alexandria, Virginia-based ASIS International, a security organization.


    Refraining from checking the Web sites in the prescreening stages protects “the employer from an unfair inference that they relied on demographic data that was not visible on the application,” says Manesh K. Rath, an attorney with Keller & Heckman in Washington.


    But once the candidate has been met, “I think that employers are entitled to consider the whole of an applicant,” says Rath, who is a member of the Alexandria, Virginia-based Society for Human Resource Management’s expertise panel.


    Gerald L. Maatman Jr., an attorney with Seyfarth Shaw in Chicago, says the pros and cons of seeking out this information should be weighed. If there is a subsequent discrimination suit, and an employer honestly acknowledges having looked at a social networking site, “it makes that case more problematic to defend.”

Posted on March 28, 2008August 3, 2023

Feds Take Hard Line on Immigrant Hiring, Visa Shortage for High-Skilled Workers

Just as Capitol Hill is getting back to work after its two-week spring recess, the cap on visas for highly skilled immigrants is likely to be exceeded for the second consecutive year.


Companies that contend they desperately need to hire foreign talent, especially in the technology sector, don’t expect Congress to raise immigration limits.


Applications for H-1B visas are due on April 1 and probably will breach the 65,000 ceiling that day, resulting in a random lottery to determine allocation.


While the struggle at the high end of the immigration spectrum continues, a revived federal regulation may put many low-wage workers at risk.


On March 26, the Department of Homeland Security reissued a rule that would force companies to either resolve within 90 days discrepancies between a worker’s name and Social Security number or fire the employee. It would effectively make so-called “no-match” letters evidence of the illegal hiring.


The action is part of an ongoing federal immigration enforcement crackdown following the collapse of comprehensive immigration reform last year in Congress.


DHS originally announced the regulation in August. A federal judge in San Francisco issued a temporary injunction in October after business, labor and immigration groups filed suit. The plaintiffs argued that that the rule would result in lawful employees being terminated and in discrimination against immigrants.


DHS will gather public comments for the next month on the new regulation, which has only been tweaked from the original. It will then issue a final rule and submit it to U.S. Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco. Breyer will decide whether to lift the injunction. DHS also has appealed Breyer’s order separately.


Opponents of the no-match rule assert that flawed Social Security databases, which show problems with the information for millions of people, will crimp the U.S. hiring system. DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff calls the rule “an important tool” in halting illegal employment.


“We didn’t expect them to issue the exact same rule again,” said Laura Reiff, co-chair of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, a group of business associations. “We’re on pins and needles a little bit about what could happen.”


For companies seeking to hire foreign nationals graduating from U.S. universities, the situation is clearer. There will again be too few H-1B visas to meet demand.


This means that U.S. companies will lose top talent to international competitors, according to business interest groups. They will be forced to relocate operations to countries with more welcoming immigration rules. For instance, Microsoft opened a research facility in Vancouver, British Columba, last summer.


“It’s a national problem that deserves a national response by our national leaders,” said Robert Hoffman, vice president of government and public affairs for Oracle and co-chair of Compete America.


Microsoft chairman Bill Gates made a similar pitch at a March 12 hearing of the House Science and Technology Committee. His appearance catalyzed the introduction of a couple bills to raise the H-1B caps.


But Congress may not act because of the volatile atmosphere surrounding immigration. Last year, a broad Senate bill that would have strengthened border and work-site enforcement while creating a path toward legal residency for undocumented workers died acrimoniously.


Since then, it has been difficult to isolate immigration issues—such as raising visa levels—and move them in separate bills. “The message that’s been given to us is it’s all or nothing,” Hoffman said.


The other problem is that combating illegal immigration has bipartisan political appeal.


“The environment seems to be focused on enforcement and not on competitiveness and getting the workers we need,” said Rebecca Peters, director and legislative affairs counsel for the American Council for International Personnel.


Even if H-1B legislation gets traction, it will have to overcome skeptics of the program who say that it lowers wages in the tech sector and denies jobs to U.S. workers.


Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, have introduced a bill that would require all companies applying for H-1B visas to certify that they have tried to hire U.S. workers first, mandate that employers pay a prevailing wage and prohibit them from outsourcing H-1B employees to other companies.


Another critic, Kim Berry, president of the Programmers Guild, proposed that the H-1B allocations be based not on a lottery but on how much an employer is willing to pay. Those offering the highest salary would secure the foreign talent.


But Victor Johnson, senior advisor for public policy for the Association of International Educators, said that U.S. workers losing jobs to H-1B holders is not a problem.


“It has to be looked at as a competitiveness issue, not a labor issue,” Johnson said. “These are scarce skills.”


—Mark Schoeff Jr.


Posted on March 28, 2008June 27, 2018

Survey Finds CFOs Are Cutting Back, Hunkering Down

CFOs say recession concerns in the U.S. are already tempering their companies’ budgets, spending and hiring, according to the latest survey of CFOs conducted by Financial Executives International and Baruch College’s Zicklin School of Business.


When asked their view of a potential recession in the U.S. in the current year, 41 percent of the CFOs surveyed said they think the U.S. is currently in a recession, while another third think it’s likely to go into a recession in the next six months. Only 18 percent said they did not expect the U.S. to go into a recession in 2008.


Given that pessimistic mood, it’s hardly surprising that 34 percent of the CFOs said they had delayed the implementation of business-related spending during the first quarter of the year.


Last week, for example, General Motors CFO Ray Young indicated the automaker had put some capital projects on hold to help conserve cash.


“What we are hearing from CFOs is, recession or not, they are taking defensive measures to combat the economic slowdown,” said John Elliott, dean of the Zicklin School of Business. “This quarter’s survey revealed that almost half of the CFOs are in agreement with U.S. economists and believe we are currently in a recession.”


Finance chiefs are also looking at other ways to rein in costs. Close to half of the CFOs surveyed identified hiring as an area for cutbacks. Nearly a quarter cited layoffs.


Despite the plans for curbing hiring or laying off workers, average net hiring by the survey group’s employers is set to increase 3 percent this year.


“However, that’s down noticeably from prior quarters and most are delaying previous hiring plans,” Elliott said. “They have a budget in place that was set in November or December, but the world looks different now.”


It sure does. The weakening dollar doesn’t seem to be boosting CFOs’ morale, either. While about a third of the finance chiefs reported that the declining dollar has led to increased international sales, those gains appear to be offset in some cases by rising prices. Over half the respondents said they have seen an increase in the costs of commodities and raw materials. And a third said their quarterly earnings have decreased.


Of note to policymakers: When asked about the economic stimulus bill, only 12 percent of CFOs said they would increase equipment purchases to take advantage of the recently passed stimulus bill, which allows for stepped-up depreciation on equipment purchased and placed into service in 2008.


For more on the survey, click here.


Filed by John Goff (with additional reporting by Frank Byrt) of Financial Week [hotlink this, please], a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 … Page 591 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