Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on August 29, 2007July 10, 2018

Scrutiny Over 401(k) Expenses Heats Up In D.C

A recent legislative proposal that would require 401(k) retirement plans to reveal more information about fees is being described as the beginning of a discussion about the issue. But in Washington, the scrutiny surrounding costs is becoming a low roar.


In addition to the 401(k) fee bill that was introduced in late July by Rep. George Miller, D-California and chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, the Department of Labor is considering new disclosure regulations.


The focus on 401(k) charges comes in the midst of the retirement plans’ enormous popularity. Currently, the plans cover 52 million active workers and contain $3.3 trillion in assets. Fueling that growth is major pension reform passed by Congress last year, which enables companies to automatically enroll employees.


Like businesses, Democratic majorities in Congress are also turning their attention to the plans—but for a different reason.


Miller asserts that opaque fees hurt workers. He cites a recent Government Accountability Office study that shows a 1 percent difference in fees could result in a 20 percent difference in returns.


“Hidden fees are eating into the retirement savings of millions of American workers without them knowing it,” he says.


His bill would require plan administrators to list individually every service fee charged to an account and to clearly identify historical returns and fees assessed on each investment option. It also increases transparency from service providers and calls for 401(k) plans to offer at least one lower-cost, balanced index fund.


Business is wary about the potential costs of Miller’s bill. If disclosure is too onerous, “it will add to the expense of administering the plans, which ultimately gets passed on to participants,” says Bill McClain, a principal at Mercer Human Resource Consulting.


Even before legislation or regulations come to fruition, McClain says companies are trying to lower fees and communicate more clearly about 401(k) plans, which are often used to attract and retain sought-after workers.


He emphasizes that fee disclosure shouldn’t overshadow the effort to get more people to participate and increase their contributions.


“We don’t want to drown out those messages,” he says.


—Mark Schoeff Jr.


Posted on August 28, 2007July 10, 2018

Percentage of Workers Covered by Employer-Supplied Health Insurance Declines

The Census Bureau reported Tuesday, August 28, that the percentage of people covered by employer-based health insurance decreased to 59.7 percent in 2006, from 60.2 percent in 2005, a factor contributing to the rise in the number of uninsured throughout the population.


The percentage and number of uninsured Americans rose in 2006 to 15.8 percent, or 47 million, up from 15.3 percent, or 44.8 million, in 2005.


Similarly, the percentage of children under 18 without health insurance increased to 11.7 percent, from 8.7 percent in 2005.


The percentage of Americans covered by government health insurance programs dropped to 27 percent, from 27.3 in 2005.


The high cost of health insurance has for years been a top concern for American businesses. Hospitals regularly charge employers more for medical services than the rates set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a way to make up for revenue lost by treating people who do not have health insurance.


—Jeremy Smerd

Posted on August 28, 2007July 10, 2018

Cuts at Monster Not Expected to Hamper Service

If things go as planned, industry experts say Monster Worldwide’s sweeping cutbacks, which resulted in a 15 percent reduction of full-time staffers, should not have an adverse effect on the products and services that draw HR professionals to the job board.


“It is unlikely that customers will feel a difference from the reduction in headcount,” says Ashish Thadhani, who tracks Monster as senior VP of research for Gilford Securities in New York.


The restructuring eliminates 800 of the company’s more than 5,500 full-time positions, but most of these are in HR, finance and general administration.


Monster’s transformation into a flatter, more centralized organization should enable workers to respond faster and more efficiently to the needs of customers, says Neal Bruce, vice president of alliances at Monster.


The product development division won’t be cut, and Bruce adds that an expansion of the worldwide sales force is likely as international business has become a key element in Monster’s growth. Some 35 percent of Monster’s revenue is derived from overseas markets.


Monster says the cutbacks will save $150 million to $170 million annually, with $80 million earmarked for new products and services geared toward improving recruiting efforts for HR professionals.


“Reinvesting back into the business is a smart move,” Thadhani says.


Industry experts don’t expect problems with Monster’s core job-postings business in the wake of the restructuring, since the functions are relatively simple and highly automated.


Yet there are concerns for clients who use complex functions like Web site hosting and database integration, which require far more management than job postings, says Ed Newman, founder and CEO of the Newman Group, a talent recruiting consultancy.


“There are certain operations that are very client-intensive because there is always something that needs to be ironed out or upgraded,” Newman says. “This is where Monster needs to be most vigilant against potential defection rates.”


—Gina Ruiz


Posted on August 28, 2007July 10, 2018

Union Urges Auditors to Dig Deeper for Exec Options Excesses

The AFL-CIO wants auditors to step up their reviews of corporate books and records in order to curb illegal stock option backdating.


In letters to the Big Four accounting firms, AFL-CIO treasurer Richard Trumka said independent auditors should dig deeper into corporate disclosures and stock option practices from the past five years—especially during the months surrounding passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which tightened disclosure rules for backdating.


Backdating and spring-loading—in which stock option grants are made before good news or after bad news—occurs mainly because the grants are made between senior management and the board of directors without any counter-party oversight, Trumka wrote.


“We are especially concerned because stock option abuses appear to have been endemic at U.S. corporations,” including Apple and UnitedHealthcare, Trumka wrote. “In order to properly deal with the manipulation of stock option grants, independent auditors need far broader access to senior management and the board of directors than they have typically been granted.”


Calls to the accounting firms—Deloitte & Touche, Ernst & Young, KPMG and PricewaterhouseCoopers—were not returned.


The union, which has met with accounting firms recently over the issue, suggested that auditors go back through old filings to search for illegal backdating, including filings 34 days before and 48 hours after Sarbanes-Oxley was enacted in 2002.


Trumka also suggested that auditors examine equity award plan documents and board minutes, including minutes from a company’s compensation committee meetings. Companies that have granted an “inordinately large” amount of stock options, especially to the CEO or senior executives, should warrant extra attention, he wrote. Companies that granted options during stock “blackout” periods and immediately preceding significant increase in stock price should be vetted heavily, he added.


The letters are a shot across the bow to corporations.


“It’s something [shareholders and union members] have already lost hundreds of millions of dollars on,” said Dan Pedrotty, director of the AFL-CIO office of investment, adding that auditors can face difficulties from stonewalling boards of directors and their law firms. “There are ways [to catch backdating] if auditors are more aggressive.”


More than 200 companies are reportedly being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice for alleged backdating. The stakes for top executives rose significantly this month when former Brocade CEO Gregory Reyes was convicted on 10 counts of fraud related to backdating, record manipulation and conspiracy. Mr. Reyes’ sentencing is scheduled for November.


Some research suggests that roughly 2,000 companies may have engaged in backdating, but have either not reported it or have not been snagged by the federal sweep into backdating and spring-loading.


The Delaware Chancery Court ruled earlier this year that companies could not rely on statutes of limitations to avoid shareholder lawsuits over backdating if the backdating was concealed from shareholders to begin with. Furthermore, the court’s rulings stated that intentional stock option backdating is a violation of a board director’s duty, and that directors are not granted liability immunity in such cases.


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



 

Posted on August 27, 2007July 10, 2018

Hewitt Acquires Middle-Market Health Benefits Administrator

Hewitt Associates has acquired RealLife HR, a Hunt Valley, Maryland-based health and welfare benefits administrator, signaling that the company is in growth mode again.


On Monday, August 27, the Lincolnshire, Illinois-based HR services provider announced the acquisition of RealLife HR, which has 85 employees and services employers with 15,000 or fewer employees.


The acquisition, although small, indicates that the HRO provider is back in the game after a few stumbles, observers say. Hewitt has spent the past several months working to revive its HRO business. In May, the company announced a new head of its HRO business, Jay Rising, to replace Bryan Doyle, who left last year.


“This shows that Hewitt is no longer in triage mode,” says Michel Janssen, managing director at the Hackett Group.


While the acquisition of RealLife is not a big one, it’s a positive sign to the market that Hewitt is being proactive.


“It’s good news that Hewitt is playing a little bit of offense here,” Janssen says. “It’s a step in the right direction.”


While the acquisition of RealLife HR allows Hewitt to offer benefits administration to middle-market clients, the company has no plans to target middle-market clients for HR business process outsourcing deals, Hewitt spokeswoman Maurissa Kanter says.


“Combining with RealLife HR enables us to move aggressively and more quickly pursue the health and welfare outsourcing midmarket,” says Craig Maloney, who was just named Hewitt’s middle-market business leader. Previously he was North American sales manager for benefits outsourcing.


Given the increasing popularity of the midmarket HRO space, analysts say they wouldn’t be surprised if Hewitt eventually expands this offering to target midmarket HR business process outsourcing clients.


“We are looking at it the midmarket space more closely and many of the other service providers are talking about going after the midmarket,” says Stan Lepeak, managing director of research at EquaTerra.


“The 15,000-employee market seems to have stuck in people’s minds,” he says.


—Jessica Marquez

Posted on August 27, 2007July 10, 2018

Silencing the Alarmists

Do we have a looming labor shortage, or not?


    A few weeks ago, I wrote an item for my Business of Management blog  on what I called “The Talent-Shortage Myth.” My premise was this: The gloom-and-doom talk about a huge talent shortage based on the looming retirement of 76 million baby boomers is premature and overstated. I pointed to an AARP survey that found that 69 percent of workers between the ages of 45 and 75 plan to work during their retirement, as well as other anecdotal evidence, to make my case.


    Many executives and HR professionals responded with comments that add some additional insight and perspective to the point I was trying to make. Here are a few of the things they had to say:


    It’s about quality, not quantity. “The issue … is the quality of the workers we have, especially the competitiveness of our leaders,” wrote Marc Effron, vice president of talent management for Avon Products. “It seems that companies in developing countries are much more serious about building great leaders than we are. They are aggressively investing in good, basic leadership development—developmental assignments, projects, self-awareness—and they’re doing this with more commitment and a greater investment of time than many Western companies. So, whether there will be a physical shortage of talent may be a moot point if the talent we will have can’t compete.”


    The public sector is where the problem is. “While I agree that boomers in some areas may keep working as long as their health permits, in others they will not,” says Lisa Rowan, program manager for HR and talent management services at IDC. “Notable among the areas that will be hardest hit is the public sector. With traditional defined-benefit pensions and early-retirement incentives, teachers, for example, are opting out in record numbers. And, it doesn’t end in education, as it carries through the entire government sector as well.”


    Training and technology will be key factors. “Technology waits for no one. Sure, baby boomers may stick around longer, but will they adapt to the skills needed for tomorrow’s skilled workforce?” wrote Steve Bradley, founder and president of SystemLink. “Will companies step up to the challenge of training their workforce for the skills they need? Most companies already do a poor job of this and have not planned for it.”


    Boomers will stay for new opportunities. “As a recruiter, I interview these boomers all day long. Almost all of them are working, but are looking for new opportunities,” says Elizabeth Lyons at Onsite Financial. “The conversation is the same … [boomers) want to feel valued, they want to be heard and feel like at the end of the day, what they did had some point to it. That is the only reason why they are looking at opportunities. Work has long lost its luster for them.”


    These various insights offer different perspectives, but all come at the issue of a looming “talent shortage” from the same place—that it is not necessarily the aging of the workforce that is the issue, but one of many other factors that go hand in hand with it.


    Although I agree with all of the points that these workforce experts are making, it still doesn’t shake me from my original premise: The forecasted labor shortage is at best a demographic ripple, and not the giant tidal wave people claim is out there.


    And here’s one final comment from someone who agrees with me, an HR consultant who signed his note “T.J.” in Lancaster, Pennsylvania: “The stats on savings patterns and the disappearance of the lifetime pension suggest that retirement at 65 is truly an illusion for many of us boomers. We’ll be working later because we won’t have a choice. The workforce will not only benefit from our staying active longer, it will also be bolstered by the incoming 80 million members of the millennial—Gen Y—group that is larger than the boomer generation. Unfortunately, none of this is as headline-grabbing as the doom-and-gloom messages. Keep up the good work of challenging ‘common knowledge.’ ”


Workforce Management, August 20, 2007, p. 58 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on August 24, 2007July 10, 2018

Survey Health Premiums for Union Members Costlier

Health insurance coverage provided to employees represented by labor unions costs more on average than coverage offered to nonunion employees, according to a survey.


The survey, released Wednesday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, found that for single coverage in which employee premium contributions are required, total monthly premiums average $399.96 for union plans, compared with $341.13 for plans covering nonunion employees.


Additionally, premium contributions made by union employees are, on average, much lower compared with those of nonunion employees. Among employers that require employees to pay a portion of the health insurance premium, union-represented employees, on average, pay a monthly premium of $62.45 for single coverage compared with a monthly average of $83.51 for nonunion employees.


In addition, only half of union-represented employees pay a portion of the premium for single coverage, while 81 percent of nonunion employees do so.


The same patterns hold true for family coverage. For example, in plans in which employee premium contributions are required, the total average monthly family premium for union-represented employees is $970.06, while the total premium for nonunion employees averages $953.13.


On average, nonunion employees pay $323.80 a month for family coverage, compared with $211.91 for union-represented employees. Ninety-three percent of nonunion employees pay a portion of the premium for family coverage, compared with 57 percent of union-employees.


The results are based on plan information as of March 2007 and on the responses of 8,256 employers.


Copies of the survey, “National Compensation Survey: Employee Benefits in Private Industry in the United States, March 2007,” are available at www.bls.gov.


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

Posted on August 24, 2007June 29, 2023

Drug Maker’s HR Business Formula

More than a year ago, HR executives at AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals U.S. sat down to discuss what the company could do to get all 12,000 of its employees focused on driving business performance. Penny Stoker, vice president of human resources, met with Workforce Management New York bureau chief Jessica Marquez at the 2007 Conference on People Performance Management to discuss how her HR team is handling the challenges the fast-moving pharmaceutical market presents.

Workforce Management: How do you make sure the team keeps in mind the needs of the business?


Penny Stoker: One of the first things I did when I started three years ago was sit down with my team and ask them, “How many of you have been outside of HR and outside of AstraZeneca within the past 18 months?” And they all had a look on their faces like they had been found out. So I said, “OK, your goal now is to go and understand those parts of the business that you might not understand today. Get involved with those organizations.” HR is useless if it doesn’t have the core understanding of how the business works.


WM: Many consultants say that pharmaceutical companies can no longer predict the talent they will need in 10 years. They say these companies need to create a “just-in-time workforce.” Are you moving in this direction?


Stoker: [It’s] more from the perspective of how we create a workforce that is the right-size core, and then we can increase and decrease as we need it, depending on what’s going on. And it goes across the value chain. So if you look at, for example, development, we have been on-and-off users of clinical research organizations, which outsource researchers. We go up and down with them, depending on what we are working on, and we are looking to do more of that. With sales reps, we have relationships with clinical sales organizations and we use them up and down depending on what our needs are.


WM: Many other pharmaceutical companies are outsourcing their HR processes. Are you looking at this?


Stoker: We outsource when it’s appropriate. We look at it from a couple of different perspectives. First, do we have the processes in place so they can be easily replicated no matter who does it? Then we ask if it is a core process or not. Then we look at whether there are providers that can do this particular service at a level that we think is necessary.


WM: AstraZeneca recently signed a recruitment process outsourcing deal with the RightThing. Was this a hard sell for you?


Stoker: No, it really wasn’t a problem for us. First of all, I haven’t seen many internal recruitment functions that work effectively. That’s always the first thing that people want fixed. The RightThing told us that we would get better-quality candidates, faster, and get them up to speed quicker. We thought we would have a year to get through the cycle and see how it went, but the relationship paid off within the first three months.


WM: Are you considering signing an end-to-end HRO deal?


Stoker: No. I’m not convinced that the value is there yet. I think it’s still an immature market and I have enough issues without being someone else’s guinea pig.

Workforce Management, July 23, 2007, p. 8 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on August 24, 2007June 29, 2023

Recruiters in India Put Out the Call to American Workers

Chennai, India—Sandy Jones left a voice message and a Silicon Valley telephone number for the potential job candidate. Moments later, when a phone rang inside a small office in Chennai, India, Naranjana Iyengar answered it.


“Yes, I did call you regarding a code analyst at Cisco Systems,” says Iyengar, who is “Sandy Jones” when calling the U.S. to fill job openings for American employers. “Would contract positions work for you?”


Iyengar, 24, has used an American name since she started working as a telemarketer at a call center several years ago. Today she works for recruitment process outsourcing company Summit HR Worldwide, earning a commission every time she fills a job for her clients in the United States.


Companies looking for talent, from low-level hourly workers to executives, have long relied on headhunters and staffing companies to meet their staffing needs, usually paying them a fee for every position they fill. Now, like most every other industry, recruiting has found its way offshore. Because filling temporary, hourly jobs is a low-margin business, some recruiters, like Summit HR, have turned to the Indian workforce to increase their profits.


Summit HR, founded in 2000 and based in Los Altos, California, has 200 employees and offices in the Indian cities of Chennai, Bangalore and Pune. It recruits both American and Indian workforces, and its client list features Cisco, Intel, Dell, and AT&T as well as staffing companies that want to take on large accounts but find little business value in recruiting for low-level jobs. Recruiters in its two offices in Chennai, an industrial city on the country’s southeastern coast formerly known as Madras, are focused on recruiting American employees.


According to technology consulting firm Gartner, the estimated market size of the recruitment process outsourcing industry worldwide is expected to total $1.4 billion in 2007 and will to grow to $2 billion by 2010.


But despite the world’s embrace of India as a business process outsourcing hub, recruitment outsourcing has not been adopted by companies with equal enthusiasm, says Robert Brown, vice president for research at Gartner. Employers worry that recruiters will not have the necessary skills to competently identify appropriate candidates, he says.


“There’s a real reluctance to heavily embrace the offshore model as it pertains to HR recruitment,” Brown says.


At least one staffing company, Spherion Corp., experimented with this outsourcing model. Unhappy with the quality of work it outsourced to Indian recruiters, the company decided to bring that function back onshore, says Brown, who was briefed by Spherion executives on the situation. Spherion declined repeated requests for comment for this story.


Summit COO Sarada Srinivas says companies hesitate to offshore recruiting because it’s a difficult skill to master. With fewer processes that can be standardized, recruiters must have sophisticated language and decision-making skills to sift through thousands of résumés, match a candidate to the right job opening, interview potential employees and send the best ones to onshore recruiters, who then conduct face-to-face interviews.


“What’s really hard to do is separate the wheat from the chaff,” Srinivas says of potential candidates. Summit HR executives say their recruiters work at a much higher skill level than most BPOs.


“There’s only so much you can script,” Srinivas says of her recruiters’ calls. “The actual interview requires a bit of judgment and what you call the human touch.”


Inside Summit’s office in Chennai, 12 young workers, most of them women, sit in front of computers at small cubicles supplied with phones and a map of the United States. Most are recruiting for entry-level and middle-management jobs.


Women compose approximately 35 percent of the IT industry’s workforce in India, according to the Indian IT industry group Nasscom. In its 2005 survey of women in the workplace, women said they feel they have achieved parity with men because they have been in the workforce since the BPO industry began. Women, according to the survey, “are intrinsically suited” to work in the industry because they are good communicators. Women said flexible work hours allowed them to “juggle career aspirations and home.”


Recruiters identify themselves by their assumed names, saying they work for a Los Altos, California-based company. Then they leave the company’s Silicon Valley phone number with its 408 area code. Only if people ask do they reveal that the number they’ve dialed connects them to India.


Some recruiters search job boards like Monster. Others sit before Excel spreadsheets plotting their next cold call.


It’s just after midnight in India when Mrudubhashini Chandrashekar, a 24-year-old recruiter, gets Dominique Rodriguez, a construction worker from Redwood City, California, on the line. “Are you looking for any job openings?” Chandrashekar says. “That’s perfect, Dominique. Actually, I got your résumé from Monster and we are tying to fill a position in Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.”


Things seem to be going well. Rodriquez is clearly interested in the construction job at the physics research laboratory at Stanford University. Then Rodriquez’s cell phone signal fades. A bit of a panic sets in.


“Hello? Hello? Yes, Dominique, I’m sorry. The voice was breaking up,” Chandrashekar says. “Hello? I’m sorry Dominique your woice”—and here she fails to pronounce the “v” in “voice” as she had earlier pronounced it in “valley”—”is breaking up. Would you like me to call back again? Do you have my number? OK. I’ll be waiting for your call.”


Correct pronunciation, like an Americanized name, is meant to put the candidate at ease rather than fool them into thinking they’re speaking with an American, recruiters say. Most people are not upset to learn that they’ve received a call from India. Proper accents, though, can establish trust and rapport with candidates, which is what’s needed to keep them on the phone and engaged, recruiters say. Identifying potential hires takes longer than a 60-second call. Perseverance is a quality successful recruiters possess.


“They have to keep it up to see results,” says Ausha Anandakumar, who runs Summit’s training and employee development programs. “At the other BPOs you get results right away. You just have to make 350 calls and you get a pat on the back.”


Most of the recruiters are hired from the BPO industry, Anandakumar says, where they have experience talking to customers on the phone. Before working at Summit, Iyengar made several hundred calls a day as a telemarketer selling Visa cards. Her target audience was people with low incomes and credit scores.


“We had a lot of strategies to sell those credit cards, saying there was no annual fee and all that,” she says.


The job was hard and monotonous, but it exposed Iyengar to the rich vernacular of American profanity.


“They used all the bad words,” she says. “We would just say, ‘Thank you for your time.’ ” Then she would hang up.


Her current job is an improvement. The hours are similar, usually from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. Generally, people are happy to hear from a person with job openings.


The company’s training is broken into three parts. First, Indian recruiters learn how to understand job descriptions, where a job is located and how much it pays. Most of the jobs pay an hourly wage.


“That’s a new concept for us. In India we don’t get paid by the hour—we get paid by the month,” Anandakumar says. Second, recruiters learn how to find candidates. Using key words, they search online communities like LinkedIn, Craigslist, Yahoo and Google groups, and alumni associations.


Once potential candidates are identified, recruiters inspect the authenticity of the résumé they have submitted and whether a person’s credentials make them good enough to call.


The anatomy of the call goes like this:


First, seek permission.


“Dominique? Is it a good time to talk with you about the position? Perfect.” Chandrashekar is back on the phone with her prospective candidate.


Next, interview the candidate. Get them to talk about their experience.


“Can you explain to me a little bit about your position with West Valley Construction?” Chandrashekar asks. “OK. When you said underground construction, what exactly was your position there? What exactly was your role?”


Finally, recruiters must go over the details of the job, its pay rate and whether candidates have any problem with a background check or a drug test. Once a recruiter identifies a potential hire, they give the information to the employer or staffing agency in the U.S., which conducts a face-to-face interview.


But getting to that stage is not easy. Rodriguez turns out to be a good candidate because he’s a construction worker looking for full-time work. One problem quickly arises: Rodriguez’s cell phone signal fades, and with it, the chance—at least for now—to fill a job in California.


“Hello, Dominique? Your voice is breaking up,” Chandrashekar says. This time she nails the sound of the “v.” But to no avail. The line goes dead. Undeterred, she returns to her list of potential candidates and prepares to make another call.

Posted on August 23, 2007July 10, 2018

Review of Retiree Health Care Bias Ruling Denied

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to review a ruling upholding the ability of employers to reduce health benefits to retirees when they become eligible for Medicare, bringing a long-running legal battle near an end.


On an 11-1 vote Tuesday, August 21, the 3rd Circuit denied a request by AARP for the full appeals court to review a unanimous decision by a three-judge 3rd Circuit panel. In that June ruling, the panel said the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has the authority to implement a rule that would exempt from the Age Discrimination in Employment Act health plan changes for retired workers when they become eligible for Medicare.


The rule was proposed by the EEOC in 2003 as a way of counteracting an August 2000 decision—also by the 3rd Circuit, which is based in Philadelphia—that found the plans were subject to the ADEA, potentially exposing employers with mainstream retiree health care plan designs that reduce retiree benefits to big damage awards.


Experts predicted—and the EEOC later agreed in proposing its rule—that the threat of age discrimination charges would have resulted in employers cutting benefits for younger retirees or eliminating retiree health care programs.


The practical effect of the EEOC rule, which never was implemented because of the AARP challenge, would allow employers to continue to provide—without fear of litigation—a two-tier system of retiree health care coverages, with younger retirees receiving richer benefits than Medicare-eligible retirees.


Laura McCann, a senior attorney with AARP in Washington, said the organization is considering whether to seek a Supreme Court review of the panel’s decision.


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

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 … 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