Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on May 4, 2009June 27, 2018

DOL Opinion on Pay for Study Time

On January 15, the U.S. Department of Labor issued an opinion letter addressing whether time spent outside normal working hours by city employees studying for city-required training programs, seminars and classes is compensable time under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The FLSA requires an employer to compensate an employee for all hours worked.


The city that sought the opinion letter requires certain of its employees to attend and pass various training programs intended to help the employees become more proficient at their jobs. The employees attend the training during working hours and the instructor informs the employees that they must read or study selected material for the next day.


When determining the compensability of training time applicable to all FLSA-covered employees, the DOL’s regulations provide that certain training activities need not be treated as hours worked if the following four criteria are met: (a) attendance is outside the employee’s regular working hours; (b) attendance is in fact voluntary; (c) the course, lecture or meeting is not directly related to the employee’s job; and (d) the employee does not perform any productive work during such attendance.


When completion of homework is a requirement of a compensable training class, time spent completing assignments for such training is compensable. The Labor Department previously found that time spent reading or studying at home would not be compensable if time is allotted during working hours but employees voluntarily chose to do their own or extra work at home, or if the excess studying was not required by the employer.


Although the Labor Department found that all time spent studying outside of work for these training courses was compensable, it also found that the city may limit the time the employees spend studying. FLSA2009-15 (1/15/09).


Impact: When homework—including reading and preparing for classes, programs or seminars—is required, time spent by an employee completing assignments is compensable.

Workforce Management, April 6, 2009, p. 10 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on May 1, 2009August 3, 2023

Chrysler Bankruptcy Could Lower Pension Benefits

The Chrysler bankruptcy filing Thursday, April 30, could result in lower federally guaranteed pension benefits for Chrysler employees and retirees if the financially troubled automaker later jettisons its massively underfunded plans.


In a new question-and-answer guide about Chrysler’s pension plans, the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. notes that a bankruptcy filing can result in a reduction of benefits if plans are later taken over by the PBGC.


For example, under law, the PBGC does not guarantee benefits earned after a bankruptcy filing. The PBGC provides in its guide an example of a company that filed for bankruptcy on July 1, 2009.


Two years later, the PBGC took over the company’s pension plans. In that example, the PBGC would not guarantee benefits earned after July 1, 2009.


In addition, in such a situation, the maximum benefit the PBGC would guarantee to a plan participant would be linked to the amount set for 2009, not the maximum limit that would apply for plans terminating in 2011.


Auburn Hills, Michigan-based Chrysler sponsors 10 pension plans that are covered by the PBGC insurance program. Chrysler’s pension plans, as of November 30, 2008, had about $9.3 billion in unfunded benefits, according to the PBGC, of which about $2 billion would be guaranteed by the PBGC if the plans are terminated.


The carmaker’s plans have about 255,000 participants.


If the plans are terminated, it would be the PBGC’s fourth- or fifth-biggest loss, depending on the current value of the plans’ assets and liabilities, and the largest termination in terms of the number of plan participants affected.


The PBGC’s biggest plan takeover, in terms of loss to the agency’s insurance program and number of participants in the plans, was the 2005 termination of United Airlines’ four pension plans. The plans had about 122,000 participants and $7.5 billion in unfunded PBGC guaranteed benefits.


Chrysler has not filed a notice with the PBGC that it intends to terminate the plans.



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


Workforce Management’s online news feed is now available via Twitter


Posted on May 1, 2009June 27, 2018

Recession Will Cause More Health Cost Shifting

The recession likely will boost group health care costs higher than employers anticipated, leading more organizations to shift more costs to employees and adopt lower-cost consumer-driven health plans, according to a survey released Thursday, April 30.


Employers surveyed by benefit consultant Mercer of New York now expect health care costs to rise by an average of 7.4 percent this year. That compares with a 6 percent average increase employers predicted in a 2008 Mercer survey.


One possible reason for the higher-than-expected increase is increased utilization of health care services, according to the survey. In fact, 15 percent of the 428 responding employers said medical plan utilization has been higher than expected.


Mercer consultants said it isn’t surprising that employees and their dependents would step up their use of health care services during a recession.


More employees, fearful of being laid off, want to get medical tests and have health care services completed while they still have employer-based coverage, said Beth Umland, Mercer’s director of research for health and benefits in New York.


With costs going up at a time when many employers can least afford it, many intend to shift more costs to employees next year.


For example, 47 percent of respondents said they are likely to increase the percentage of premium employees pay in 2010.


In addition, 22 percent of employers say they are likely to add consumer-driven health care plans—either a CDHP linked to a health savings account or a health reimbursement arrangement—in 2010.


“This will be a boon to CDHPs,” said Linda Havlin, Mercer’s global leader for research and knowledge management in Chicago.


Increased employer interest in CDHPs during a recession is not surprising, given that this type of plan costs much less than other health care plans, according to Mercer.


In 2008, Mercer found that HSA-based CDHPs cost an average of $6,027 per employee, compared with an average of $7,815 per employee for more traditional preferred provider organization plans.


The survey also found that more employers were in favor of broad health care reform legislation that would require employers to offer a health care plan or pay a fee to help fund coverage for the uninsured, and a requirement that all individuals be covered in a health care plan.



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


Workforce Management’s online news feed is now available via Twitter


Posted on May 1, 2009June 27, 2018

U.S. Agencies Seek Input on Mental Parity Law

The Labor Department is asking for public comments as it and two other federal agencies prepare to develop rules for a law that requires employers to offer the same level of insurance coverage for mental health disorders as they do for other medical conditions.

The 2008 mental health care parity law takes effect next year.


Information sought by the agencies—the Labor Department, Treasury Department and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services—includes: the financial impact of upgrading health care plans to comply with the mandate; which provisions in the law require clarification from regulators; how out-of-network coverage for mental disorders differs from out-of-network coverage for other medical conditions; and whether any special consideration should be given to small employers.

The request for comments was published in the April 28 edition of the Federal Register.


Comments are due by May 28 and can be sent via e-mail to the Labor Department at E-OHPSCA.EBSA@dolgov.




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


Workforce Management’s online news feed is now available via Twitter


Posted on May 1, 2009June 27, 2018

Wall Street Refugees Seek Work

Lots of people cope with tough times by quaffing a cold beer or two. Drew Weinstein hopes folks will soon reach for one of his.


Weinstein, who last October lost his job as a research analyst at investment bank Cowen & Co., has said goodbye to Wall Street to take a shot at starting Magellanic Brewery. His plan is to hire other breweries to make his beer, a light lager he describes as “a better Budweiser.”


But what Weinstein may have in vision, he lacks in money and experience.


He needs to raise $2 million to get his new venture hopping so it can compete with the nation’s 1,600 other small breweries. Beer is a tough business, the 35-year-old father of two acknowledges, but he figures it’s worth a try—after all, the banking world in which he worked for nearly 10 years is gone for good. “At my age,” he says, “you don’t get many more chances to swing for the fences.”


More than 20,000 securities industry workers in New York have lost their jobs in this recession. And the Wall Street outflow threatens to turn into an exodus over the next two years: The Independent Budget Office forecasts another 30,000 job losses in the securities industry, or 25 percent of the city’s best-paid workers. By 2011, total financial job losses could surpass 77,000, when layoffs at insurers and other institutions are included.


Fearing a devastating brain drain of smart, ambitious people who no longer can afford to stay in New York, the city plans to spend $45 million to turn former Wall Street bankers into entrepreneurs by offering them training, office space and even funding for their startups.


Those who don’t yearn to become entrepreneurs are being encouraged to find work with the federal government, which has embarked on a radical overhaul of finance regulation and will need to fill the ranks of its expanding workforces in New York for everything from the Federal Reserve to the Securities and Exchange Commission.


It’s a painful adjustment for most. Jobs with startups or federal agencies pay a fraction of what the Masters of the Universe used to get, and the long slog of entrepreneurism or the slow drip of government bureaucracy can vex and even infuriate those accustomed to moving quickly. But there’s little alternative, considering how many banks and brokerage houses have collapsed or been acquired, or rely on federal assistance.


‘Profound, lasting change’
“What’s happening is much more than a cyclical downturn,” says veteran Wall Street recruiter Richard Lipstein. “This is a profound, lasting change in the landscape, and everyone will have to learn to cope.”


Andrew Friedman is trying as best he can. The 48-year-old former Bear Stearns executive was laid off twice last year, first after Bear was acquired by JPMorgan Chase, and then a few months later when his next firm, Broadpoint Securities, acquired a rival.


After 10 years of supervising research analysts, Friedman wants to become a banking regulator. He insists he’s ready to accept much less than he ever got paid on Wall Street—a useful outlook, since pay for bank examiners at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. tops out at $123,000.


“At this point, pay is not the only consideration,” Friedman says, citing “job stability, a nice pension and good benefits.”


To help unemployed bankers, the New York Society of Security Analysts, a professional group of 11,000, recently arranged a job fair featuring officials from the FDIC, the FBI and other agencies. The event is expected to draw as many as 400 people, quadruple the typical number, and NYSSA officials say they’ve seen a spike in membership so that people can attend the members-only event.


“Two years ago, everyone would have laughed at this,” acknowledges William Drawbridge, NYSSA’s director of membership, marketing and development.


Ex-bankers readily acknowledge the transition to government work can be frustrating. Spencer Cutter, 40, a former Lehman Brothers executive, is getting anxious because he hasn’t heard back from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York after interviews he thought were successful.


“I cannot get the HR person to return a phone call,” he says. “I know I can do something for them, and I know they need people, but for some reason there’s a disconnect.”


Little wonder that former bankers want to try to start their own businesses instead. They will become masters of different universes, but they will have a chance to be their own masters nonetheless.


At an entrepreneur “boot camp” sponsored by the New York City Department of Small Business Services last week, about a dozen casualties of the Wall Street collapse boldly laid out their business plans. The outsized assumptions that inflated the banking bubble can be hard to completely shake.


‘We are not daunted’
Weinstein, for instance, projects that his startup brewery could generate $50 million in revenue by 2013. “The risks are daunting,” he says, “but we are not daunted.”


Wall Street refugees may find that their experience is of little use in a startup.


Investing in long-term goals or sharing knowledge with inexperienced employees is anathema for many star traders or stock pickers, says Ari Kiev, a psychologist who specializes in counseling Wall Streeters. “Their confidence, naivete or arrogance leads them to think that developing a business is easier than it actually is.”


If nothing else, Wall Street vets are often experts in exuding the optimism needed to sell a new venture. Such was the case when boot-camp participant Anita Wong, who spent 13 years at Merrill Lynch & Co., pitched an idea for a stress-relief program called Melt With Anita. The program involves squeezing stress balls and using a foam roller on the hands, neck or feet.


“One hour of Melt With Anita, and you’ll feel better,” Wong says, adding that people still employed could follow the program at work. “It’d be great to do while on conference calls.”

Posted on May 1, 2009June 27, 2018

Unhealthy Employees Cut Productivity, Study Finds

Poor health among U.S. workers costs employers much more in reduced productivity than many realize, according to a multi-year study of 10 employers and more than 150,000 workers.

The study, published this month in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, found that presenteeism—when employees are present at their jobs but unable to perform at full capacity—creates a greater drain on company productivity than employee absence, a finding that may come as a surprise to many employers, researchers say.

For every dollar spent on medical costs and pharmaceuticals, there is $2.30 of health-related productivity losses due to absenteeism and presenteeism, according to the study. For certain conditions, such as anxiety, employers lose as much as $20 in productivity for every dollar they spend on medical care and pharmaceuticals.

The study, which researchers say is one of the largest to date on the subject, found that when medical and prescription drug costs are considered alone, the top five conditions driving employer health care costs are cancer, back/neck pain, coronary heart disease, chronic pain and high cholesterol.

However, when medical and drug costs and productivity losses are factored into the equation, the five costliest conditions for employers are depression, obesity, arthritis, back/neck pain and anxiety, researchers say.

“The key thing is that, so often, employers have been focused on medical and pharmacy claims costs, but that really is not the full impact of poor health on the workplace,” says Dr. Pamela A. Hymel, senior director of integrated health and corporate medical director at San Jose, California-based Cisco Systems, one of the companies that participated in the study.

“I hope that employers really seize the moment” and use this study to address health-related productivity costs beyond medical and pharmacy costs, she says.

The study would be particularly useful in today’s economy, says Mary Tavarozzi, principal and national practice leader, absence and disability management consulting, at Towers Perrin. The research may help those managers seeking commitments from upper management to implement or maintain health management programs that address employee productivity, she says.

“In these very lean times, where organizations have cut staff, can we afford not to look at the impact on productivity,” Tavarozzi says. “Everybody who’s still working has to be as close to 100 percent productive as possible.”

Moreover, the size of the population that was studied should give the findings more credibility, says Shelly Wolff, national practice leader of health and productivity at Watson Wyatt Worldwide.

The study, “Health and Productivity as a Business Strategy: A Multiemployer Study,” combined medical and pharmacy claims data with self-reported health-related employee absenteeism and presenteeism data culled from the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire, a tool developed by Harvard University researcher Ronald Kessler and the World Health Organization.

The study was conducted in two phases: The first phase used data collected in 2005 and 2006 from four employers with 57,000 employees. In the second phase, from 2007 to 2008, researchers increased the number of employers to 10 and employees to 150,000 and investigated more subtle aspects of the relationship between the 25 targeted health problems and productivity.

More than 1.1 million paid medical and pharmacy claims were included in the combined analysis.

Dr. Ronald Loeppke, a principal author of the study, says another interesting finding was that health-related productivity losses are as pervasive among executives and managers as they are among rank-and-file workers.

“They had a lot of presenteeism impact. They were getting burned out, so the quality of their work suffers,” says Loeppke, who is executive vice president of health and productivity for Brentwood, Tennessee-based Alere, which conducted the research with funding provided by the National Pharmaceutical Council. Alere’s Center for Health Intelligence, the San Francisco-based Integrated Benefits Institute and the Elk Grove Village, Illinois-based American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine coordinated the study.

Dr. Loeppke says the study also found that the more conditions an employee has, the greater the effect on his or her work-related productivity.

“Employees that have multiple health conditions have much greater days of productivity loss per year,” he says. The majority of workers that were studied—representing a cross section of the general population—suffered from more than one health condition, he pointed out.

To address the effect of multiple health conditions on worker productivity, Tom Parry, president of the Integrated Benefits Institute, suggests disease management and health promotion programs be more holistic and focus on the person as a whole, rather than on individual medical conditions.

Workforce Management Online, May 2009 — Register Now!

Posted on May 1, 2009June 27, 2018

Green Benefits Prove Helpful in a Down Economy

The Greening of HR Survey,” a January 2009 study conducted by New York-based Buck Consultants, shows that many employers are going green.


More than half of surveyed organizations incorporate environmental management into business operations and have a formal green program in place. Nearly 80 percent use webconferencing or teleconferencing to reduce travel expenses, 57 percent offer telework options, and 52 percent offer rideshare programs for employees.


Employers are becoming cautious in this economy about extras they might have considered benefits, but there are a number of eco-friendly benefits that can contribute to a company’s bottom line, says Jennifer Woofter, a consultant at Silver Springs, Maryland-based Strategic Sustainability Consultants.


For example, Calvert, a Baltimore, Maryland-based investment management firm, buys walking shoes for employees who walk to work.


“It’s not a significant cost, but it motivates employees to take the extra step in being environmentally friendly,” Woofter says.


Many employers believe there is a business case behind offering green programs. According to “The Greening of HR Survey,” 47 percent of executives believe these programs help with attracting and retaining top talent, while 30 percent say that such programs drive profitability.


Similarly, in the Society for Human Resource Management’s 2009 study “Green Initiatives: What Has Changed in One Year,” 12 percent of HR managers surveyed say that green programs increase workforce productivity, up from 6 percent who said the same thing in 2008.


In 2005, Meradia Group, a West Chester, Pennsylvania-based management consulting firm with 17 employees, started a $5,000 incentive for employees who purchased or leased a hybrid vehicle. One employee has taken advantage of the offer, and another employee plans to purchase a hybrid this summer.


CEO Scott Wybranski developed this eco-friendly benefit along with an incentive that encourages employees to take mass transit to client offices. Roughly 75 percent of Wybranski’s consultants work off-site at client locations, so he pays 120 percent reimbursement when employees choose mass transit over cars. All of the company’s consultants are now using mass transportation, such as the train from Philadelphia to New York.


“I’m trying to create sensitivity and awareness among employees,” Wybranski says.


But because of the economy, Wybranski—whose firm largely services the investment community—had to temporarily suspend these benefits in early 2009. He will review the decision quarterly and hopes to implement the benefits again soon.


Paybacks
Woofter says smart companies will focus first on green benefits that make financial sense, such as telecommuting and alternate work schedules. She emphasizes that studies show teleworkers are 15 to 45 percent more productive and have lower rates of absenteeism. “It’s a perk for employees with real bottom-line benefits for the employer,” she says.


The Brick Cos., an Edgewater, Maryland-based real estate owner and developer with 160 to 300 employees (based on the seasonal nature of its golf courses and marinas), recently awarded an Energy Star appliance to its “Environmental Steward of the Year” for efforts to reduce impact on the environment at work and home. Employees nominate co-workers for their environmental success, and the winner is inducted into the company’s Hall of Fame.


Shelly Ford, head people person at the Brick Cos., says the program has generated excitement among employees since the first winner was honored at a staff meeting in early 2009. Winner Brad Vaccarella, customer service associate at the company’s Potomac Ridge Golf Course, detailed 27 ways he helped the environment at home, such as installing rain barrels to collect water for landscaping, reducing his energy consumption 17 percent and adding clear plastic over windows to reduce drafts.


Brick employees are committed to helping the organization in its 12×12 Program (reduce energy usage 12 percent by 2012), Ford says. The organization has achieved a 9 percent reduction in energy usage across all of its facilities in just seven months, which averages to more than $45,000 in savings through January 2009.


Ford says the Brick Cos. won’t cut its eco-friendly benefits because they are important to the organization.


“The payback comes in employee engagement, their commitment to our 12×12 pledge, and the resulting energy cost savings it brings to our company,” Ford says.


David Evans and Associates (DEA), an architectural/engineering firm based in Portland, Oregon, with 886 employees across seven states, works to reduce its carbon footprint by 10 percent at each location. Green strategies vary from office to office. In the Portland headquarters, for example, employees get free transit passes as well as an additional $3 to $6 a day for using alternative transportation such as carpooling, walking, biking or mass transit for their daily commute. Because of the recession, however, DEA has suspended its commuter cash incentives, but it still provides free transit passes. About 50 percent of its Denver employees use alternative transportation at least three days a week, and 34 percent of its Portland employees do the same.


“Our programs not only give people more flexibility, but they also reduce our carbon footprint, and that’s just good business,” says Paul Horton, director of sustainability at DEA. “When employees feel good about what they are doing, they feel better about working where they are working.”

Posted on May 1, 2009June 27, 2018

Caution Urged as Workers and Management Look to Buy Failing Firms

Workers and supervisors thinking about buying out their companies shouldn’t let emotions overrule good sense in today’s tough economy.


Employee and management buyouts of struggling firms rarely succeed, said Bernard Jacques, a labor and employment attorney at law firm Pepe & Hazard.


“In a distressed situation, it’s usually just a last gasp before it goes under,” said Jacques, whose firm has offices in Connecticut and Massachusetts.


It’s difficult to get a precise figure on the number of employee and management-owned businesses in the United States. The National Center for Employee Ownership research group estimates that there are some 11,400 companies that have employee stock ownership plans, stock bonus plans or profit-sharing plans primarily invested in employer stock. That number is up from just 1,600 in 1975, according to the Oakland, California-based center.


Companies that share ownership broadly with employees are less likely to go out of business, said Corey Rosen, executive director of the center. Such firms also generate more jobs and create on average three times more retirement benefits than nonemployee ownership companies, he said.


“But the success these companies have is not simply a matter of sharing stock,” Rosen said. “To work, employee ownership companies have to set up a culture of high employee engagement in decisions affecting their work.”


Rosen said most employee buyouts of companies occur when a stable firm is sold by private owners to the employees, who borrow money against their stock ownership plan. Of the thousands of companies with significant employee ownership, 100 or fewer are the result of workers buying a troubled firm, he estimates.


“It’s not the way it’s typically done,” he said.


In March, a management buyout resulted in a new firm called Global Steering Systems. Managers from a unit of manufacturer DriveSol Worldwide teamed up with outside investors to buy DriveSol’s global steering division, headquartered in Watertown, Connecticut. The operation was slated to shut down and eliminate about 240 jobs, according to the Connecticut Development Authority, a quasi-public agency that loaned the new firm $2 million.


The unit was hit hard by the auto industry crisis last year, said Joseph Harpie, chief lending officer of the agency.


But Global Steering Systems’ management had a good business plan, which included funding from sources including a Chinese company, says Marie O’Brien, president of the Connecticut Development Authority. The agency, whose funds were slated for additional machinery and the purchase of intellectual property, expects 135 jobs to be saved.


O’Brien’s agency aims to spur the state’s employment and intellectual capital through favorable loan terms.


Connecticut officials are open to helping with other employee or management buyouts. But long-term viability is key.


“It has to make good business sense,” O’Brien said.


—Ed Frauenheim


Workforce Management’s online news feed is now available via Twitter.


 

Posted on April 30, 2009June 27, 2018

Hourly Employees Spared Painful Benefits Cuts in Chrysler Bankruptcy

Chrysler hourly employees will receive unemployment benefits as well as supplemental pay that will amount to most of their base wages until the company emerges from the bankruptcy protection it filed Thursday, April 30, the company said.


Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli made the announcement in a memo sent to employees shortly after the company filed for bankruptcy protection Thursday. The company assured workers that the structured, U.S. Treasury directed, bankruptcy is anticipated to last 30 to 60 days. The bankruptcy will produce a new company that will be part of Italian automaker Fiat, which agreed to a strategic alliance Thursday, April 30.


During that time, most manufacturing will be idled effective Monday, May 4. Union employees will still receive company-sponsored health care. Nardelli said “all qualified employee” pension and 401(k) funds would be protected from Chrysler’s creditors.


Based on agreements ratified before the bankruptcy filing, the United Auto Workers agreed to labor concessions in return for giving the union’s retiree health care trust a 55 percent equity stake in the newly formed automaker. The UAW represents about 26,800 Chrysler workers in the United States.


Fiat will own 20 percent and the U.S. and Canadian governments will own 10 percent, according to a company press release.


The bankruptcy will do little for the company’s network of 3,200 dealerships, many of which are likely to close as a result of the bankruptcy.


Nardelli also told employees that he would step down as chief executive after the company emerged from bankruptcy to become an advisor to Cerberus Capital Management, the private equity firm that bought a controlling stake in the car maker in 2007 and later relinquished ownership as part of the government’s bailout.


“With the U.S. government approval of our viability plan and the completion of an agreement in principle for the alliance, this is an appropriate time to let others take the lead in transformation of Chrysler with Fiat,” Nardelli said.


Chrysler has shed almost 40 percent of its workforce over the past two years, to 54,000 workers as of January 1 from nearly 87,000. The company expects to trim 3,000 more workers by the end of the year, a spokesman said.


—Jeremy Smerd


Workforce Management’s online news feed is now available via Twitter


Posted on April 30, 2009June 27, 2018

Nardelli to Leave Chrysler Once Bankruptcy Is Completed

Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli says he will step aside after the company emerges from Chapter 11 bankruptcy.


“Now is an appropriate time to let others take the lead in the transformation of Chrysler with Fiat,” Nardelli said in a statement. “I will work closely with all of our stakeholders to see that this new company swiftly emerges with a successful closing of the alliance.”


The White House expects the bankruptcy case to take 30 to 60 days.


Nardelli came to Chrysler in August 2007 after Cerberus Capital Management took an 80.1 percent stake in the automaker. He has guided the company through negotiations with the United Auto Workers and the Department of Treasury auto task force. Chrysler has been surviving on a $4 billion Treasury loan.


Nardelli, who turns 61 on May 17, represented the company in congressional hearings late last year. He plans to return to Cerberus as an adviser. Before heading Chrysler, Nardelli spent six controversial years as CEO of Home Depot, finally receiving a $210 million severance package when he left the retail giant in January 2007.


David Kelleher, a Philadelphia Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep dealer, praised Nardelli and Chrysler’s management team.


“If people on top of the board hadn’t done the job they did in the last six months, we wouldn’t have a company,” Kelleher said.


A senior administration official praised “the incredible role of Chrysler management and CEO Bob Nardelli. He led the team to this place and really deserves recognition for what he did.”


Filed by Bradford Wernle of Automotive News, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Workforce Management’s online news feed is now available via Twitter.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 … 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