Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on September 2, 2004June 29, 2023

Workforce Management September 2004

When women rise
By Eve Tahmincioglu
Cigna’s $2 million annual commitment to recruiting and developing executive women is based on business strategy, not political correctness. It’s an approach supported by research that says companies with the highest representation of women have better financial performance.

 
Magic for sale
By Douglas P. Shuit
Top management at the Walt Disney Co., may be under intermittent fire, but its people programs steadily drive theme-park success. The company has packaged its workforce-management ideas under the Disney Institute brand and is happily disseminating them to corporations throughout the United States, including Chevron, BMW, PricewaterhouseCoopers and Bank of America.

Pension pain for multinationals
By Patrick J. Kiger
Aggrieved workers are taking to the streets in Toulouse, Milan and Berlin to protest proposed reforms in Europe’s troubled public pension systems. European governments, in turn, are looking to private employers, including U.S.-based multinationals, to assume more responsibility for retirement costs. Consultants warn that the demographic time bomb in Europe may increase labor costs to the point where it could become difficult to do business in some countries at all.

Shopper’s special
By Irwin Speizer
Analysts who study Trader Joe’s, a quirky specialty grocery chain, attribute its success to its ability to make money by saving money. It uses private labels instead of brand names, deals directly with producers to cut out middlemen, rents cheap real estate for its stores and keeps the square footage small. Another secret to Trader Joe’s success is its helpful employees. They know how to move groceries, which boosts store margins.

Between the Lines
A different drug plan
Learning to question that mesmerizing drug-company advertising.
  Reactions From Readers
Letters on opportunities for low-wage workers and success with in-house recruiting.

In This Corner
The gay decade? Not a work
The prospects for a national law extending workplace rights for gays and lesbians are slim. That means employers can expect the divide between various states’ laws to widen.

Legal Briefings
The EEOC withdraws a new rule on retiree health benefits.


Data Bank
As good as it gets

Not quite ready for new world of overtime
Companies are scrambling to comply with complex new overtime rules. Also: Pension funding improves (except at United and US Airways). B-school boot camps get grads ready for the working world. The path is clearer for health savings.
 
 

HR Technology
A few years late, portals gain ground
Web portals stalled in the cooled-down economy, but there’s been a surge in spending lately as human resources leaders see portals as key to managing their workforce. Employees also are driving portal growth. They expect their companies’ sites to be as easy to use as Amazon and Yahoo.
 

Employee Assistance
No longer a private problem
To save lives, stave off lawsuits and maintain productivity, some employers have decided that domestic violence should be a corporate concern. Several have created awareness and education programs for managers and employees.
 

Compensation
Good-by to the golden age of options
Rules from the Financial Accounting Standards Board won’t take effect until 2005 or later. But many companies are already refashioning their incentive plans, curbing the amounts of their option grants, limiting who is eligible, or both.
 

Retirement Benefits
More companies restore 401(k) matches
Some companies are still cutting, but those that feel more certain about their future are putting match money back in play. Fears of competition for employees is also a factor.
 

Recruitment & Staffing
Casting Internet hiring in a new light
Under proposed EEOC rules, companies will have to carefully define and justify their online hiring processes. The proposed changes are akin to those spurred by the ADA.
 

 
July  2004

June  2003

May  2003
If you’re not currently receiving Workforce Management magazine, click here to request a FREE trial issue today!

 


Posted on September 1, 2004July 10, 2018

His Faculty Says Yes, But College President Says No to Partner Benefits

The faculty at Columbia College in Missouri has recommended that employees receive domestic-partner benefits. But the college’s president is essentially vetoing the recommendation, according to the Columbia Daily Tribune.


Columbia President Gerald Brouder says that the proposal might “cause problems” at the college’s 15 military campuses, according to the Tribune. More than half of Columbia’s campuses are on military bases, serving service men and women and their dependents. He also says that offering health and other benefits to domestic partners (which often, though not always, end up being given to people of the same gender) could conflict with Missouri’s constitutional definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman.


In addition, Brouder says, “it’s nearly impossible to distinguish between a genuine same-sex relationship and a couple that might live together simply to acquire benefits.”


Celeste Mazzacono, one of the faculty members that supports offering domestic-partner benefits, says she does so partly for business reasons–it will help recruit faculty members.


For related information, see “Little Impact From Gay Marriage Ruling.”

Posted on August 31, 2004June 29, 2023

The Eddy Awards


Sponsored by Pensions & Investments and Workforce Management


A key to bottom-line success for any organization is its ability to attract and retain high-caliber employees. Offering outstanding benefits is one way to draw and keep great employees, of course. But equally important is helping employees learn to make the most of their benefits–particularly when it comes to defined-contribution plans. So many employees miss opportunities to create a comfortable retirement because they don’t understand how defined-contribution plans work, why they’re important and how they can be used most effectively.


If your organization does an outstanding job educating employees about your defined contribution plan, then the Eddy Awards are for you.


The competition, co-sponsored byWorkforce Management and its sister publication, Pensions & Investments, recognizes corporate, public and union defined contribution plan sponsors for the best and most effective investment education programs in several categories. Nominations are due Oct. 15.


Winners will be announced and will receive their awards at the 14th Annual Defined Contribution/401(k) East Coast Conference this winter.


The 2005 Eddy Awards are just around the corner. Now is the time to gather your materials and begin the submission process.


Click here for the 2005 Eddy Awards Entry Form

Posted on August 26, 2004July 10, 2018

Business Case of Wellness Programs Under Scrutiny

Employers’ efforts to get their employees in shape–under the assumption that such programs will reduce health costs–are all the rage. But according to The Washington Post “the case for employer involvement in health promotion isn’t yet clear-cut, at least as it concerns the bottom line.”

“What’s lacking is clear data that [employer] intervention reduces costs,” says Bill Dietz, director of the Centers for Disease Control’s Division of Nutrition and Physical Activity, which recently launched a $14 million study of workplace wellness programs. And according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, employees aren’t particularly interested in health-promotion programs at work and lose whatever interest they do have quickly.

Ron Z. Goetzel, director of Cornell University’s Institute for Health and Productivity Studies tells the Post that the most financially effective wellness programs are those that target specific diseases such as diabetes as well as such behaviors as smoking, as opposed to fitness-club discounts. Fitness-club perks are often used by people who normally exercise anyway and don’t do much to encourage couch potatoes to improve their health, he says. More information on wellness, disease management, obesity and related topics is available online.

Posted on August 25, 2004July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce Which Is Better Our Own In-House Competency Model or One Based on Best Practices

Dear Grooming:



You’ve identified what matters most to organizations regarding people-related programs: results. A good leadership-development program improves the skills, knowledge and behaviors of leaders so that they achieve the business results expected of them and the organization.

Leadership development is done to:

  • Communicate the key competencies, skills, abilities and behaviors that are expected of leaders in an organization.
  • Assess current skill levels of individual leaders and aggregate skill levels of leader groups.
  • Identify skills gaps, either for individuals or for the entire group.
  • Prepare a development plan and identify the experiences that are needed to help the individual or group close the gap.

You are on target in wondering about the validity of competency models. It’s important to pay attention to the validity of a competency model if it is to be used as the basis for feedback or for making decisions about promotions, career opportunities, succession, etc. (for both legal and effectiveness reasons). In the end, a valid leadership-competency model is, by definition, a current model because it reflects what is expected of leaders now and in the immediate future.

A well-designed and validated leadership-competency model should reflect the competencies that are most strategically significant to your business. These are the key competencies–not an exhaustive list–a leader must demonstrate on the job. Each competency has behaviorally defined levels of performance (e.g., needs improvement, achieves expectations, exceeds expectations) or behaviorally defined levels of growth (e.g., developing, skilled, expert). This defines the behaviors that are realistically expected of high-performers.

For maximum effectiveness, a leadership-competency model should be specific to your organization’s needs and used for a range of decisions, including recruiting and selection, development of individuals, design of leadership course work and assessment tools, and succession planning. Tailor the competency model to support the company’s specific mission, vision, strategy and goals. Be sure to periodically review and update it, especially in light of any major business changes that affect the mission, strategy, etc.

Remember, too, that a “well-researched leadership-competency model” may not target the specific behaviors or skills you need to make smarter organizational decisions on development and promotions. Instead, it’s likely to derive from best practices. GE wouldn’t adopt a leadership-competency model used by Microsoft, and vice versa.

In the end, a validated competency model using best practices always would be better than making a gut decision. Still, it lacks validation inside that particular organization, and therefore is unlikely to provide the strategically sound foundation of a tailored model.

SOURCE: Catherine Mergen, associate principal, Mellon’s Human Resources & Investor Solutions, Chicago, Oct. 25, 2003.

LEARN MORE:How to Capitalize on Competencies.

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

Ask a Question
Dear Workforce Newsletter
Posted on August 25, 2004July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do Banks Manage Employee Performance

Dear Tabs on Tabulators:



An organization’s overall performance-management system begins with the development of organizational strategy. Before any assessment of individual performance is made, make sure the organization’s direction is articulated and communicated. Although looking for bank-related standard performance indicators may be an attractive solution, you’ll achieve better results and have greater buy-in from all stakeholders if key performance indicators are defined on the basis of the bank’s mission, vision and values, combined with the job’s accountabilities, objectives and standards.

Once you have defined the accountabilities, one way to define performance standards is to identify “high-performers” or “stars” within each unit of the bank. This can be segmented into management and non-management. Then, using a standardized set of questions, interview both the star and the star’s manager. Draw out what makes this person a star within the organization. What results are generated by high-performers? Capture direct measures of output. There are only four direct categories of output: quantity, quality, cost and time. Identify the most effective and valid measures for each of these categories.

A performance-appraisal form then can be designed on the basis of traits, talents and results found in high-performers. The design of the form is not as critical as the research that went into it. However, given that the form is a kind of report card for the individual, the better the design, the more effective it will be. BancOne Corp.’s performance factors (from 1996) are listed in Dick Grote’s The Complete Guide to Performance Appraisal. While most of the performance factors are similar to those found across all industries, several are bank-related:

For Management
Business and Operational Management
● Financial planning/forecasting
● Controlling
● Asset quality
● Compliance and internal controls

Quality Process
●
Solicits customer feedback/complaints
● Measures key customer/financial indicators
● Develops and reaches quality plan objectives

Customer Relations (internal/external)
●
Monitors customer/client feedback
● Develops new/improved customer relations

Grote states: “It is unnecessary to determine in advance the level of performance that will earn a rating at each position on your scale (highest to lowest). Only the core requirements for fully satisfactory performance need be identified.”

You also could design a special form for measuring traits considered critical or most important for a given job. You would indicate the level of importance of a specific trait to a job (high, medium or low).

Then you’d use a numerical scale of 1 through 5 to indicate the level of performance observed or documented for the employee. For example: 1 = clearly below acceptable levels; 2 = needs immediate improvement; 3 = meets high standards; 4 = consistently exceeds high standards; and 5 = always exceeds high standards and consistently works effectively beyond the scope of the job. Include a comment box to support your rating with objective results using quantities, qualities, costs and time.

SOURCE: Carl Nielson, principal, The Nielson Group, Dallas, Oct. 25, 2003.

LEARN MORE: About 67 other items on performance appraisals, including sample appraisals.

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

Ask a Question
Dear Workforce Newsletter
Posted on August 24, 2004July 10, 2018

Seattle Medical Centers Become Latest Battleground over Health Benefits

Faced with a strike by nurses and other employees, the Group Health Cooperative in Washington state will make do with $40-an-hour temporary nurses this week, according to the Seattle Times.

The 5-day strike, like many recent labor disputes around America, involves the shifting of health-care costs to employees. Union members at Group Health currently “pay no monthly health premiums and receive 100 percent insurance coverage after paying $5 co-pays for doctor visits and prescription drugs,” according to the Times.

Management would like to increase co-pays to $15 and start charging employees a percentage of their pay for coverage. According to the New York Times, the employees–who are members of the Service Employees International Union–are willing to pay more, just not as much as management is requesting.

A similar dispute is taking place at Caterpillar.

Posted on August 20, 2004July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do I Convince a Manager to Drop Her Dictatorial Style

A Dear No Autocrats Allowed:



Aren’t the results enough proof that her managerial approach is out of style, not to mention ineffective? If turnover is high under her command, she ought to be wondering why, and examining ways to correct the problem. If not, then she’s probably too close to the situation to realize that it is her managerial style that’s at fault (rather than the young front-liners she’s probably blaming). Advise her to step out of the frame and take a look at the big picture.

Show her statistics on your high turnover and low morale. Show her the value of retaining people. If she still doesn’t get it, take a bolder step.Survey your employees and ask for candid, albeit anonymous, responses to a series of questions about the job and the company management.

Use sample questions like:

  • Would you recommend this job to a friend?
  • Do you work hard and do your best even when no supervisor is watching you?
  • Do you feel valued and appreciated by management?

Surely these andother questions will be the wake-up call she needs to totally revamp her managerial style–or find another career.

SOURCE: Eric Chester,Generation Why, Lakewood, Colorado, September 2003.

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

Ask a Question
Dear Workforce Newsletter
Posted on August 20, 2004July 10, 2018

Court Says Just Sending Employees an E-Mail Doesn’t Qualify as Communication

A recent federal court case in Boston suggests that merely distributing a policy change by e-mail does not relieve a company of its responsibility to ensure that employees are notified of the policy. E-mail is an effective and efficient way to quickly communicate with large numbers of employees. But the court’s message is that human resources professionals and managers must demonstrate more than just that the e-mail was sent, that it arrived, and that it was opened.



The burden is on you
    In Campbell v. General Dynamics Government Systems Corp., a federal court in Boston found that the company could not simply rely on an e-mail notification to show that its employees received and understood a change in company policy. Instead, the court held that it is the company’s burden, even with electronic distribution, to ensure that its workplace policies have been received and reviewed by its employees.


    The facts of the Campbell case demonstrate the importance of ensuring that electronic communications are properly distributed and monitored for their receipt. In 2001, General Dynamics distributed an e-mail containing the company’s new dispute-resolution policy to all of its employees. This was an important policy change, stating that employees would be required to agree to arbitrate any claims they might have against the company. The e-mail indicated that it was sent from “Broadcaster NDHM.” The subject line of the e-mail was “G. DeMuro-New Dispute Resolution Policy.” Gerald DeMuro was the president of General Dynamics.


    The text of the message was in the form of a letter, addressed “Dear Fellow Employees.” The first two paragraphs made no mention of the new dispute-resolution policy. Although the letter vaguely described the policy in the third paragraph, it was not until the fifth paragraph that it indicated that the new dispute-resolution policy was an essential element of the employment relationship. The e-mail letter did not mention that the company expected its employees to be bound by the policy. Significantly, the letter didnot include the dispute-resolution policy, but contained hyperlinks to the policy and to the company’s handbook, which were posted on its internal Web site.


    The company had a record to show that Campbell, the employee in question, opened the e-mail two minutes after it was sent to all employees. There was no evidence, however, that Campbell read the e-mail or that he viewed either hyperlink.


    Subsequently, Campbell sued the company for handicap discrimination in court, and the company sought to have the case dismissed because, under the dispute-resolution policy, any claim of handicap discrimination would be taken to an arbitrator, not to a court. Campbell responded by claiming that he had no knowledge of the company’s dispute-resolution policy, and therefore he was not bound to it.


    The court concluded that the e-mail distribution of the policy was not sufficient to prove that Campbell had “notice” of the policy; therefore, he could not be bound to the policy. Exhibiting a realistic understanding of what employees do with e-mails received at work, the federal court stated:


E-mail is certainly an inexpensive and convenient means of notification. But those same blessings bring with them drawbacks. Whether it is used for work or for personal reasons, most users of e-mail inevitably receive incredible volumes of messages. It is often hard to distinguish the important from the frivolous. It is not surprising that Campbell reported that he received between 10 and 100 daily, many of which were “mass e-mails relating to company functions, birthdays and anniversary announcements, and other trivial matters.” The practice of reflexively opening (so as to remove the unread tag) and deleting a mass e-mail without reading it, or even being aware of it, is not uncommon. Under those circumstances, to presume that Campbell read the text of the e-mail, clicked on its links, and read the linked documents, and use that as the basis for depriving him of rights guaranteed to him by federal law, would be to show an intolerably low level of respect for those rights.


    The court also pointed out what the company failed to do. The company did not require the employee to indicate by return e-mail that he had read the e-mail, that he had read the attachments and that he understood the implications. The company did not require the employee to reply by stating, “I accept.” The company did not configure its computer system to log when and if employees clicked on the internal hyperlinks. The only evidence was that Campbell opened the e-mail. The court held, however, that it “will not assume that Campbell was aware of the e-mail’s contents simply because he clicked to open it.”


Understanding the message
    The Campbell case raises an important issue and teaches an important lesson for human resources professionals and other individuals responsible for disseminating workplace policies. It is not enough to simply distribute a policy electronically without applying further safeguards to ensure that employees actually receive, read and understand the message.


    When distributing workplace policies electronically, companies can do a number of things to ensure receipt. A company should require employees to confirm via e-mail that they have read the policy. It should also configure its computer system to monitor access to internal Web sites and to track employee access. Failure to take these steps could mean that a company cannot hold employees to workplace policies because it is unable to demonstrate that the employee received and read the information.


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

Workforce Management
Online, August 2004 — Register Now!

Posted on August 19, 2004July 10, 2018

Labor Department “Wait and See” Approach on Overtime is Unacceptable

Some employers are taking their time in figuring out how to comply with the U.S. Department of Labor’s new overtime regulations. Howard Radzely, the Labor Department’s head of litigation, tells The News & Observer, which covers the Raleigh, North Carolina area, “That might not be a wise decision.”


“We will begin enforcing these new rules starting Monday,” Radzely says. “Those who take a wait-and-see approach will likely be visited by a compliance officer if we get a complaint.”


In Raleigh, 60 employees at WakeMed, a hospital, will now get overtime, including some who work in the hospital’s recreational facility, according to Jeanene Martin, WakeMed’s senior vice president of human resources.


The News & Observer reports that at the cardiology practice of Capital Heart Associates, some employees may lose overtime protection. At Rex Healthcare, a couple of employees in the IT department will also lose their non-exempt status.


Many employers apparently haven’t performed the self-audits that these Raleigh companies have. The Post and Courier, a Charleston, South Carolina, newspaper, surveyed employees last week and found that “most had no clue the new overtime regulations are coming.” And a spokesman for 200,000-employee Verizon tells the Boston Herald that “This is such a complex issue we are still studying it.”


The new overtime rules, simplifying exempt-or-not-exempt decisions, go into effect on Monday, August 23. Jeff Joerres, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Manpower, tells the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the new rules are simpler than the current regulations. “It’s a good thing overall,” he says. “It makes the law much clearer and simpler. From that perspective, it will make life a little easier for us.”

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 294 Page 295 Page 296 … 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