Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on November 18, 2001July 10, 2018

GE Brings Skills to Life

Today, there’s no shortage of ideas about how HR can better manage workers. But amid the hubbub, one thing stands out: organizations that develop an inventory of skills and competencies and manage them effectively usually enjoy a distinct advantage.


At General Electric, which has approximately 313,000 employees worldwide, competency management has become a powerful tool for identifying labor and training needs. In 1995, it created a Six Sigma program (an approach that focuses on specific quality-control criteria) in order to improve performance across the company. “The goal was to create linkage between the business, the customer, and employees,” says Russell Baird, leader for quality training and corporate leadership development. GE uses 360-degree assessments and a database to maintain employee profiles.


The company has developed a formal competency-analysis program based on 45 different behaviors deemed essential to the organization’s success, including clear business thinking, the ability to manage change, and good interpersonal relationships. It then offers curriculum and training based on the needs of both employees and the company. At that point, hiring managers and trainers focus on the specific behaviors required for a particular competency model.


Ultimately, the program helps the company use resources more effectively and gain a competitive edge in the marketplace. “From a trainer’s perspective, the data is invaluable. It’s possible to structure and present material for specific needs of employees,” Baird says. “Developing leaders doesn’t just happen. It’s something a company has to focus on.”


Workforce, November 2001, p. 44 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on November 16, 2001May 20, 2024

About This HRMS Request for Information…

A request for information (RFI) is, in theory, an easy thing to create. You ask software vendors questions about their systems. The tricky part is knowing which questions to ask and how to ask them, so that you get the answers you need. The trickier part is getting used to the idea that the stupid questions, the really detail-oriented questions on simple processing, should be part of an RFI as well. And the trickiest part is to get the vendors to respond with good answers, which is why many vendors are now using RFP Software powered by AI to automate their responses. 

Here is a tailored RFI that I used with my current employer. It’s based on an RFI that I designed for another employer (which I created using all sorts of different sources), and it focuses on the main categories an HRIS/HRMS should address in its application. We grouped the questions under the categories we were most interested in, and tailored those questions to meet our specific needs.

For example, our benefits plan is relatively simple, so our benefits questions are routine. The original template RFI had two pages of benefit questions, because that employer had a massive cafeteria plan, tuition reimbursement and remission, five different retirement plans, in-house COBRA, and retiree benefits. You should be able to use a template RFI like this one, and group the questions under the categories that are most important to you.

You’ll note that most of the entries under the categories start with “describe your….” That’s intentional. I learned the hard way that if I asked, “Do you do tip crediting?” a number of vendors would answer, “Yes.” What I really wanted to ask was how they handled tip crediting — but I left the door open for them to describe in as much or as little detail as they liked how they handled it. You’ll find that the way your vendors answer the questions is a good indicator of how they will handle your account.

But first you have to pick the right vendors. An RFI isn’t a tool that you send out to every HRIS/HRMS vendor you can find. You should determine those you want to focus on, no more than 8 to 10 vendors. For help in choosing which vendors to research to determine RFI eligibility, I’d suggest contacting IHRIM (International Association for Human Resource Information Management) or your local IHRIM chapter. IHRIM publishes a list of software vendors that can help you jump-start your search.

Once you have gathered a list of 30 or so vendors that sound interesting, start researching them on the Web. Many have white papers, which give an overview of their products, their technical requirements, and their intended audiences, that will answer some of your questions before you contact them.

After you have narrowed down the list to 8 or 10 possibilities, out goes your RFI! Include a letter of introduction that tells the vendor who you are, what your company does, some history about the company, the future goals for the company, the time frame of the project, and who the competing vendors are. Each vendor gets a clear vision of your company and your time frames, and can also tailor its RFI to address specific issues it sees for your industry. It also can compare itself to the competitors. Give them a reasonable time to respond-but no more than 60 days.

When the responses come in, take a minute to look at each one before diving in and reading it. Did they respond in a professional manner? (One nationally known company responded to my “describe your …” with yes-and-no answers, singly spaced, on a piece of paper that didn’t even carry the company logo. The envelope gave them away. Another responded that they “wouldn’t waste their time” answering my RFI. Two never responded at all.) While reading, keep asking yourself if they’re answering your questions, or spending a lot of time “selling” you on their company. Are their responses what you would expect from someone with whom you want to partner?

Once you have identified the top two or three contenders, it’s time to move to the request for proposal. By this point, thanks to your RFI, you know — in theory — that these companies are a good match. The next step is for both sides to prove which is the best match.

Posted on November 9, 2001July 10, 2018

Save Money Manage Health Benefits Online

Most benefits administrators spend at least half their time trying to crawl out from under mountains of paperwork. These HR professionals should be focusing on strategic planning, but are instead trapped by unpaid claims, inaccurate invoices, and illegible enrollment forms. Dealing with paperwork consumes as much as 80 percent of most HR departments’ time, reports Forrester Research, a technology research firm located in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Paper-based processes are inefficient and error-ridden, and add considerably to the already high price of health care. Administration costs consume more than 20 cents of every dollar spent on health care (a higher percent than in any other industry,) according to Forrester’s August 2000 report “Health Claims’ New Intermediaries.” Claims processing is considered the primary culprit.


Benefits administrators have had enough. They are clamoring for a paperless way to manage their health-care plans, and providers are reluctantly complying by moving at least some of their processes online.


“Bringing claims-related transactions online is a priority for insurers,” says Douglas Johnston, author of the Forrester report. His research shows that 60 percent of insurers are using the Web for some claims-related transactions, while 90 percent say processing is a very or extremely important element of their e-commerce strategy. Increased operational efficiency and cost savings — not customer service — were cited as the most important reasons for the move.


The early benefits processes to hit the Web are administrative tasks, such as managing open enrollment, finding a provider, and checking the status of a claim. Some larger providers, including Aetna U.S. Healthcare and Humana, are also adding interactive member tools that let customers review plan descriptions, get contact information, use health-risk-assessment tools, and comparison shop.


For HR professionals, reductions in cycle time, paperwork, and errors are the most attractive aspect of Web-based benefits tools. It allows them to shift their focus to strategic planning and other HR tasks more critical to business goals, says Mindy Kairey, e-business leader of the health-care management practice for Hewitt Associates LLC, an HR consulting firm in Lincolnshire, Illinois. The integration and availability of data is what appeals to employees, who are eager to take a more active role in choosing and overseeing their health-plan options. “The Web puts benefits information right in the hands of the people who need it,” Kairey says. Employees want to track their claims, review their current coverage levels, and compare their options. “They want to take responsibility for their health plans.”


Fortune 1000 companies are the first to benefit from these Web-based options. They spend the most money and have the greatest amount of paperwork, so it’s crucial that they find ways to streamline health-care administration, she says. Some companies are building custom tools in-house; others are using their influence with providers to demand changes in their services.


Smaller companies will have to wait a few years for these options, because they have so little clout with providers, she adds. “It’s not as feasible for smaller companies to ask their providers to put their plans online, and they can’t afford to build their own tools in-house.”


Regardless of a company’s size, however, the true impact of the Web on health care is still several years away, says Bradford Holmes, a Forrester Research analyst. Today only 36 percent of insurers give members the ability to check claim status and look up providers online, even though these are the most highly sought-after benefits-administration tools. “It will be three to five years before these services are common,” Holmes says. “And 10 years before the doctors, providers, employers, and employees are all linked into a single streamlined system for health-care management.”


But it will happen eventually, Kairey says. It’s not a fad. “It’s the way it will be.”

Posted on November 9, 2001July 10, 2018

Web-Based Tool Built In-House

Open enrollment for 2001 presented enormous challenges for Prudential Insurance.Because the company sold its group health insurance business, all of its 37,000employees had to re-enroll with one of the 150 new providers — or their insurancewould be canceled. To ease the chaos and improve data quality, the company builta $500,000 Web-based enrollment application to replace the paper-based forms andreduce use of the interactive voice response system.

LargeCompany
Name: PrudentialInsurance Company of America
Location: Newark,New Jersey
Business: Lifeinsurance and financial services company
Employees: 37,000

    Every employee had an average of 15 plans that required some action, or thesystem would default to “no coverage,” says Gerard Bu, vice presidentof corporate center operations and systems/tech services. To make sure thatdidn’t happen, Bu and his team built a navigation wizard on top of the applicationto guide users through the site.


    The first time employees logged on, the wizard popped up and walked them throughenrollment, says John Heutz, director of information systems at corporate centersystems/technology services. It verified that they had completed all the mandatoryfields, then automatically directed them to the next necessary step. After theirinitial enrollment was complete, employees could take control of the site andgo anywhere to make changes or re-evaluate their choices. “The wizard makessure nothing gets overlooked,” Heutz says.


    Prudential’s health-care providers worked closely with the IT team to createthe site, supplying online directories of their plans and links to their ownsites for more information. Bu’s team also made sure the site’s framework andtools coupled closely with the company’s PeopleSoft HRMS so that all the datawould move smoothly within the system.


    Once the tool was complete, the HR department sent mass e-mailings and memosreminding people to re-enroll or lose coverage. Then everyone sat back and waited.”We weren’t sure how it would hold up,” Heutz says, “especiallyunder peak usage.”


    The site was built to handle 1,000 users at once. Then, just to be safe, Bu’steam added two identical sites at separate locations in New Jersey and New Yorkin case a server went down or traffic exceeded 1,000 simultaneous users.


    It went live at 8 a.m. on October 23, 2000, for the 2001 enrollment. Peoplestarted using it right away. It held up without a glitch, even under the heaviesttraffic — at 3 p.m. on the last day of enrollment, when nearly 1,000 usersenrolled simultaneously.


    “Reaction was better than we expected,” Heutz says. He had predicted70 percent usage, but 85 percent of employees enrolled online. The other 15percent used the interactive voice response system because they said it wasfast and easy to use.


    Compared to the old system, the data collected during the massive re-enrollmentwas “very clean and accurate,” Bu says. “With paper enrollment,there were always problems. Forms got lost, and there were a lot of appealsfrom employees whose enrollment got screwed up.” This year there were veryfew appeals, he says. And because every use of the online enrollment tool isrecorded, when there were appeals, they were easily reconciled.


    Prudential has no plans to add claims management to the site just yet, butBu and his team are working on additional enrollment tools and adding an extensivehealth plan comparison guide. “Soon new hires will be able to enroll onlinethe day they arrive, and existing employees will be able to make coverage changesanytime during the year.”


Workforce, November 2001, pp. 66-68 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on November 7, 2001July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Can I Get Employees To Work A Full Eight-Hour Day

Q

Dear Workforce:


I manage a small raingear business and have trouble getting employees show upand work a full eight hours. Since we’re a small company, when someone is outour production suffers. Any suggestions?


— Stressed out GM, manufacturing, Attleboro, Massachusetts.


A Dear Stressed Out:


Whenever you deal with employees not performing the basic duties of the job,you might want to consider the following:

Do you have a current policy about attendance and tardiness? Is itwritten?
Writing the policy is very important to avoid potential misinterpretationsand to ensure that all employees receive the same information.
Are all employees aware of the policy and the consequences for violatingit?
Make sure all your employees receive a copy of the written policy. You maywant to require a signed acknowledgement form as well. Some attendance policiesinclude specific consequences for non-compliance but that may be too cumbersomefor your small company. At the very least, be sure your policy includessomething about “failure to follow this policy may result in disciplinaryaction up to and including termination.” This will put the teeth in yourpolicy that allow you to enforce it.
Are your current managers pushovers for the crew? Do they let things slideor are they able to enforce the policy as it comes up?
This, of course, is an internal training issue. If your supervisors aren’tconsistently and fairly enforcing the policy you’ve written, they may needcoaching on performance management or documentation practices.

However, if your problem is widespread and many of your employees are beinglax about their schedule, you’ll want to take some additional steps:

  1. Develop your infrastructure as above, but also hold a meeting with youremployees.

  2. Clarify your scheduling expectations and explain to them howtardiness affects their co-workers and production.

  3. As much as possible, involveyour employees in coming up with solutions. They may surprise you with some verycreative solutions. You may also find out information that will help youunderstand any underlying reasons for this uncommitted attitude toward doingtheir jobs.

Make sure to follow through with the solutions and with any consequences.This should be a great start. Good luck.


SOURCE: Cheryl Lawler, HumanResources Manager, and Robin Bruins, Senior Human Resources Manager, Personnel Management Systems,Inc., Kirkland,Washington, June 19, 2001.


LEARN MORE: See a “Sample Attendance Policy” for language to usewhen crafting a policy.


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

Ask a Question

Dear Workforce Newsletter

Posted on November 4, 2001July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce Should We Rehire A Worker Fired For Bringing Marijuana Brownies To Work

Q

Dear Workforce:


Our president wants to re-hire a former employee who was fired for bakingmarijuana into brownies and serving them at a function attended by companyemployees. Company practice has been to not rehire employees terminated forcause, but the boss says the employee has learned his lesson. How do I convincethe boss this is a bad idea?


— Holding out on hashish, AssistantHuman Resources Manager, manufacturing,Auburn Hills, Michigan.


A Dear Holding Out:


I can empathize with your dilemma. The employee’s behavior showed a prettyoutrageous lack of judgment, not to mention put the company in potential legaljeopardy. If the boss is not willing to consider your viewpoint, you mightsuggest he speak to other company presidents for a second opinion.


Still, if your boss is determined to be forgiving, then your best bet is toconvince the boss of the necessity for a three-way rehiring interview with theemployee. Let the boss play good cop while you play bad cop. Raise all yourarguments that run counter to employment, yet be reluctantly willing to give theemployee a second and last chance. While willing to forgive, the boss mustemphasize that he’s not totally willing to forget. And the boss must alsoacknowledge in front of the employee the validity of your serious concerns.


If the decision is to rehire, then I would have a meeting with thisemployee’s supervisor also, again letting him or her know the trial nature ofthis process and that initially there will be close supervision, as if theindividual is a new employee. (A definite probationary period will be ineffect). If all parties can agree with this plan then I believe the employeewill, over time, either prove his professional reliability, or his liabilitywill quickly be exposed.


SOURCE: Mark Gorkin, LICSW, “The Stress Doc” and American Online’s”Online Psychohumorist,” Washington, D.C., May 31, 2001.


LEARN MORE: See “Starting a Drug-TestingProgram“


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

Ask a Question

Dear Workforce Newsletter

Posted on November 2, 2001June 29, 2023

Holiday Gift Guide

This holiday season, show your appreciation with a gift from these premiere recognition and rewards companies. Click on the links below for Special offers to help you give employees, clients, contractors, vendors, and other associates the recognition they deserve.

Gift certificate awards by Hallmark


This year, give employees the gift of choice with more than 400 gift certificate options. Enter here!

With the Dave & Buster’s Gift Card, you give employees an experience they’ll remember. And they’ll remember you for it. Click here!


The Perfect Gift for Your Team!



Gift Giving Made Easy!


Say Thank You or Job Well Done With Delicious Gourmet Gifts From Omaha Steaks. Click here!

Motivation has never been this fun! The Toys”R”Us Gift Card is the perfect choice!
1-800-887-Toys – Click here!





From BURGER KING®… A great-tasting way to reward your recipients. Order Today! 1-800-535-3412

Like Cash Only Faster! Online ordering for both corporate and consumer purchasing.
1-800-348-4805 – Click here!




Motivate with Music….Music Awards


FREE CD offer! Call toll free 877-BMG-SP44 for info on our Music Awards gift certificate program and get a Free CD (while supplies last).

For a full range of incentive reward cards and Gift Cheques, call 1-888-453-0150 or visit www.aeis.com.


American Express Incentive Services


Posted on November 2, 2001July 10, 2018

A How To for Online-Benefits Management

Savvy companies are increasingly conducting their benefits enrollment electronically. By one estimate, 80% of organizations with over 1,000 employees will have some form of online enrollment by 2003. In preparing your organization for online enrollment, you will need to evaluate various Web options and then take the steps needed to achieve an efficient, effective enrollment process. This is true whether you are just adopting Web enrollment or upgrading a system that is currently in place.


A critical starting point for your evaluation is often overlooked — “know thyself.” Mapping out in writing the answers to some basic questions about your organization and about the goals of the change will help assure that no important information is left out of the decision-making process. Although that may take a little extra time up front, it usually pays big dividends later.


When you examine the issues involved in the online enrollment decision, it may be helpful to think of yourself as kind of a detective systematically answering the questions “who, what, why, where, when, and how.” Some considerations might include:


Why online enrollment?
Why are you considering moving to online enrollment or modifying an online enrollment program already in use? Is the effort part of an overall human resources information technology strategy to increase employee self service, or is it a stand-alone project? Who are the sponsors for the project within the organization, and who will “own” the application once it is completed (IT, HR, Communications, etc.)? Specific goals may include:

  • Reducing costs via:

    • Elimination or reduction of paper enrollment materials (enrollment forms, benefit handbooks, provider directories, and so on) and of postage.

    • Reducing the need to hire staff to conduct open enrollment sessions.

    • Reducing the need for customer service representatives.

  • Increasing employee satisfaction by providing:

    • More timely and frequently updated information (e.g., online provider directories, countdown to annual enrollment close date, etc.).

    • Access to more and richer information than can be included in enrollment packets or through interactive voice response prompts. Examples include Web-site help text, Web pages providing up-to-date customized summaries of employee benefit data, FAQs on common benefits questions, access to complete information regarding less-common benefits, and interactive decision-support tools around plan or provider selection.

    • More choices for enrollment (Web, voice response, paper).

    • Reducing the need for new hires to visit a central HR location — which is especially useful for geographically dispersed organizations.

What do you need the system to do?

  • What types of online enrollment system are to be investigated, and what are the technical and functional specifications?

  • Does the application only need to collect data, or should it be able to integrate employee communications and decision support tools?

  • Does the system stand alone, or does it need to be integrated or interfaced with your HRMS, intranet, ERP, or other system?

  • Does the company need voice response (IVR/VRS) and paper enrollment options handled concurrently? What about call center functionality?

Where will this system be?

  • Where will the application be hosted and where will it be delivered?

  • Can your IT function support this application on internal servers, or will IT’s needs be better met by having the application accessed through the Web in an ASP (application service provider) model?

  • Will a solution delivered only within the company environment suffice, or is home access to allow family member participation a requirement?

When will this be done?

  • When does the solution need to be in place? Implementing online benefits enrollment is typically complex and time-consuming; in other words, rapidly implementing a solution for the upcoming benefits year can be a risky proposition.

  • Will you be satisfied with a system just for annual enrollment, or does the value proposition require the solution to be in place for new hires and for status changes year-round?

Who’ll do it?

  • Who is going to build/maintain the system and who/what else is affected by the project? This is the classic “build vs. buy” decision. Do you have the technical resources and capabilities to build a system in-house? Is this the best use of company resources and is it something your organization will be committed to on an ongoing basis (maintaining and upgrading)? Or do you want to purchase either an off-the-shelf system or have one built to specifications?

  • How does the proposed online enrollment capability relate to your existing vendors, systems, and processes (i.e., will it supplement or replace an existing flexible-benefits administration vendor or paper-based-enrollment services vendor)?

How much money?

  • How much capital is allocated for achieving the company’s objectives? This should include not only the cost of the solution, but also any implementation, systems integration, and consulting fees, as well as training and promotional communications.

  • How strong a business case do you need to build for senior management in order to ensure that the project moves forward?

The lay of the land
Navigating through the maze of options involved in pre-qualifying, selecting, or validating an online enrollment vendor can quickly move beyond the scope of a single application. Often, this is an ideal time to revisit the company’s entire digital HR strategy.


Listing existing applications, their status in their expected life cycle, and when new applications are slated to be investigated are simple yet valuable first steps to take in determining how to facilitate integration with your new Web enrollment functionality. Top-level categories could include HRMS/ERP solutions (Human Resources Information System/Enterprise Resource Planning software), HR intranet, HR portal, employee self-service functionality, and internal HR application functions (compensation, performance management, recruiting, training, etc.).


The next step is to evaluate your options in the online-enrollment arena. Regardless of the status of other HR systems, your new online enrollment functionality will most likely fall into one or more of the following five categories: Employer Built, Custom Built, HRMS/ERP Integrated Module, Stand-Alone ASP Solution, and Integrated ASP Solution.


The Online Benefits Enrollment Spectrum

Employer-Built
HR function works with IT department to create online enrollment application
Typically housed on company servers

Custom-Built
HR function hires external help to develop and possibly manage application
Typically housed on company servers

HRIS/ERP Integrated Module
Upgrade current or buy new HRIS/ERP system that integrates online enrollment functionality
Typically housed on company servers, but can be ASP

Stand-Alone ASP
Hire vendor to deliver online enrollment solution over Web, and interface with existing systems and processes
Housed on vendor servers and delivered over the Web

Integrated ASP
Hire vendor to deliver broad online HR solution that includes online enrollment as one of many components
Housed on vendor servers and delivered over the Web

The employer-built option
Also called “home grown,” this choice requires your IT staff to program the necessary interfaces, data collection, validation, and other systems needed to accommodate online enrollment. If HR can work in harmony with the IT department, this may be the most cost-effective way to start online benefits enrollment because the need for a large capital outlay is reduced.


Employer-built systems range widely in their functionality, effectiveness, and usability. A talented IT staff with extensive experience building sophisticated Web-based applications can generally do a passable job of creating a stand-alone enrollment application. However, one should beware of software developers who lack experience in building complex, data-driven Web applications.


Even experienced IT staff can stumble when graded on integration with other HR applications, usability, maintainability, and the ability to add more robust functionality (decision support, life event changes, etc.).

Reality Check
Organizations usually underestimate the investment and resources necessary to build a credible enrollment system. For example, a high-tech firm with 5,000 employees spent $250,000 creating a system for the 1/1/2001 enrollment, only to move to outsourced enrollment and benefits administration the following year. The in-house online enrollment system could not yet handle ongoing life event changes or new hires, although the company was planning to build that functionality in the future.

The custom-built option
This involves an application built by a third party that is customized to address particular needs of your company. The big management-consulting firms, as well as many Web-consulting companies, do this sort of thing.


These firms may maintain and upgrade your application, or they may turn over the finished product to your IT staff. Typically, custom building is a costly option, somewhat akin to having a car built from scratch rather than driving one off the lot. Back in the days when there were only a few firms offering enrollment solutions, this option was more prevalent.


Now, fewer companies have the unique requirements that would drive them to look to this option as a solution. Still, the value-added framework surrounding an online enrollment solution such as rich interfaces, branded tools, and meaningful communications may require some customization of solutions.


HRMS/ERP Integrated Module
Many HRMS and ERP systems are selling add-on online enrollment functionality for their products. These solutions are typically priced separately from the other core software functionality, and often online enrollment is bundled with other Web self-service capabilities, such as address changes. PeopleSoft, for example, is adding online enrollment through an eBenefits module that can be used with version 8.0 of their core software.


Another popular vendor is also offering a separate employee self-service module, but one large communications company (14,000 employees) decided in early 2001 not to implement this solution because of a high per employee per year recurring cost. Also, many of these solutions are moving towards providing a fully Web-based version and/or have ASP hosting services for their software.


Companies sometimes feel so tied to their installed vendor that looking beyond its capabilities and promises for the best solution can seem daunting. In many cases, using the current vendors’ pre-integrated components in conjunction with a system that already houses company data may not actually be a bad choice. However, this route may also lead to a system with much more limited usability and functionality. Online benefits enrollment is often just a sideline, at best, for HRMS and ERP vendors, and they typically will not have invested the time or effort required to build out an easy-to-use application.


In other words, the application could be functional, but generic. To more fully leverage the enrollment application, organizations often have to add communications and other integrated functionality.


Stand-alone ASP solution
The enrollment area with the most activity, and perhaps the most difficult to work with, is the stand-alone application service provider solution space. The defining aspect of these solutions is that they center around providing Web-centric online enrollment/benefits administration capabilities, rather than a broader set of HR services through installed software. The marketplace is bundling together more and more services and functionality, making it hard to find a solution that just offers online benefits enrollment services alone.


AtWork, for example, has a standard rate for its suite of services at $4 to $6 per employee per month for a 1,000-employee company. In general, smaller employers pay between $1 and $9 per employee per month for online enrollment solutions. These are often bundled with several other benefit administration-related services.


Larger employers have more flexibility to buy unbundled services and can sometimes pay less than $0.50/employee/month for basic services. This is a rapidly maturing market — many of these firms are trying to recoup substantial system development costs. Over time, competition may drive these fees down, so you should compare fees carefully.


Selecting a vendor can be a daunting task, with the range of services and capabilities varying widely.


A quick phone survey of five major ASP benefits enrollment providers in March 2001 found that the cost of a two-year contract for 20,000 employees ranged from $150,000 per year to $300,000 per year, with one outlier at $750,000. A 1,000-employee organization, depending on the quality and complexity of the solution, could put a system in place for anywhere from $20,000 to $100,000 plus.


Integrated ASP solution
Broader Web solutions that encompass more of the HR spectrum, but also include online enrollment, can be designated as integrated solutions. These products may have much of the functionality of an HRMS or ERP system, or they might provide other integrated point solutions such as work-life benefits, performance management, salary administration/modeling, or training and development applications.


Without a clear sense of the scope of services to be provided, pricing these solutions tends to be more difficult. Often, services can’t be unbundled, even for large companies, and there can be serious data issues that must be taken into account when installing applications that span many HR activities.


Putting it all together
The solution categories, vendors, and capabilities laid out above are fluid. Business models, products, and, pricing all can change overnight — not to mention the actual existence of some vendors.


Coordination and integration with existing enrollment capabilities is another key to success, but it can greatly increase the complexity of the project. Some areas for consideration include:

  • Integration with existing vendors, systems, and processes: Your company may have existing vendors and/or systems that work well, but are not Web-based. Should you completely replace all existing capabilities, attempt to directly extend those capabilities into the e-commerce environment, or create or hire new capabilities to mesh with the old capabilities?


    Recall that the existing vendors and/or systems may be sending eligibility, premium, and other related data to a variety of other organizations (e.g., health insurance carriers and other non-health carriers), so total replacement implies replacing all of those data links, as well. In the end, this decision may depend on how well the existing capabilities work. In other words, “know thyself.”

  • Data management: A strategy for synchronizing existing databases with the new Web-based system often must be created. If a system is being totally replaced, then a strategy for converting data from the incumbent systems must be created.

  • Education and outreach: Providing a Web-based enrollment capability does not guarantee that employees will either use it or use it properly. Employees need to be told about the site’s existence, and educated about using it. Also, since paper-based enrollment frequently cannot be totally eliminated, realizing savings from paper reductions may require a concerted communications strategy to promote the use of on-line enrollment and to achieve employee buy-in to reduce paper-based communications.


    You may have concerns about the acceptance of a new online-enrollment application, especially if a segment of your workforce doesn’t have Web access at work or is not technology savvy. However, many organizations have found ways to reduce or eliminate this perceived obstacle. One 5,000-employee company rolled out online enrollment for the first time on 1/1/2001, and it was able to garner virtually complete Web use through careful investments and communication. In this case, there were a number of manufacturing facilities where employees had no Web access on-site, and at these locations Web kiosks were installed.


    Another major tactic involved not providing voice response enrollment, forcing employees to choose between the Web and making a specific request for paper enrollment material by mail. The initiative was supplemented by aggressive communications directing employees to alternate avenues for accessing the Web (kiosks, home computers, managers, libraries, etc.).

These issues can be pursued in the context of an HR/IT strategy and/or as part of your system selection process. Whatever online enrollment solution you decided is right for your organization, be certain you create or have the vendor provide an implementation and ongoing project task list. The task list should clearly indicate responsibilities, timing, and allocated resources for each part of the project.


Finally, while being mindful of your timetable, try to expand the scope of thought from a single application or functionality to a broader benefits and human resources technology strategy. This will help position you to move forward quickly when the next opportunity arises to improve HR operations through technology.

Posted on November 2, 2001July 10, 2018

Fair and Legal Background Checking

Background screening must be conducted in accordance with both the applicable Federal and State laws.


On the Federal level, this is primarily the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Some states have their own FCRA requirements and privacy laws as well.


Generally speaking, background screening must be conducted on the same basis for all applicants seeking a particular position or type of position. In other words, all applicants for a particular position must be subject to the same screening.


Limits on screening
Background checks can legally be conducted only for permitted purposes only, not simply because someone wants to gather information on another person. Background screening as part of pre-employment evaluation is one of the most common purposes recognized by law.


In addition, screening must be done with the knowledge and written consent of the applicant, as required by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). In fact, the FCRA requirements pertain about 80 percent to investigative reports and only about 20 percent to credit reporting. Employers must follow those procedures to the letter, or they can be subject to invasion of privacy suits.


In most states, an employer is also prohibited from seeking from any source whatsoever a record of arrest that did not lead to conviction.


Finally, as a limitation on background screening, it should be remembered that merely finding derogatory information about an applicant is not necessarily sufficient to disqualify that person from employment. The deficiencies found must be shown to be “job-related,” according to the EEOC.


Source: InfoLink Screening Services


The information contained here is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.

Posted on November 2, 2001July 10, 2018

Safe Hiring Audit

The follow is a review of your hiring and policies.

I. Preliminary Steps — Training Policy and Procedures


  1. Organizational responsibility for safe hiring


    1. Is there a position in the organization specifically responsible for safe-hiring practices?


    2. Is that position centralized in HR or Security, or decentralized in hiring departments?


    3. If decentralized, are there policies and procedures in place for uniform procedures across the organization, review and audit of performance, and training?


    4. Is the responsibility for safe hiring part of a periodic review?


  2. Policies and procedures in place


    1. Is there a company policy on safe hiring?
    2. Does the employee manual address safe hiring issues?
  3. Training


    1. Is there training for hiring managers, HR, etc.?


    2. How is the training conducted?


    3. Frequency of training?


    4. How is training success monitored and measured?


    5. Who analyzes, implements, and evaluates the training program?


  4. Auditing of safe-hiring practices


    1. Is there an audit procedure to ensure safe-hiring practices are followed?


    2. Where is the completed audit information maintained?


    3. How frequently does auditing occur?


    4. Who conducts the audit process?


  5. Procedure to ensure hiring mangers follow plan for each hire (See attached checklist)


  6. Communication of policies and procedures


    1. How is the company’s policy communicated to the workforce and managers?


    2. How frequently is the information communicated?


II. Placing Applicants on Notice before Hiring Process Starts


  1. Procedure to Place Applicants on Notice (Goal–to get maximum advantage from safe hiring by discouraging applicants with something to hide from applying in the first place).


    1. Is there notice in the job announcement, bulletin, classified advertisement, Internet site, etc.?


    2. Is there a notice on the application form that a prospective candidate receives?


III. Application Stage


  1. Does the firm use an application form?
    (Note: Use of an employment application form is considered a best practice. Resumes are not always complete or clear. Applications ensure both uniformity and that all needed information is obtained, prevents employers from having impermissible information, and provides employers with a place for applicants to sign certain necessary statements.)


  2. Does the application form have all necessary language?


    1. Broadest possible language for felony and misdemeanor convictions and pending cases. (This helps discourage applicants with something to hide and to encourage truthful applications. One of the biggest mistakes employers make is to only ask about felonies on an application form. Employers may inquire about misdemeanors to the extent allowed in their state.).


    2. Statement that criminal records do not automatically disqualify.


    3. Statements that lack of truthfulness or material omissions are grounds to terminate the hiring process or employment no matter when they are discovered. (This is particularly important if a criminal record is found. Under current law, a criminal record may not be used automatically to disqualify an applicant unless there is a sound business reason. However, if an applicant has lied about a criminal matter, the falsehood can be the basis for an adverse decision.)


    4. Statement that employment is at will.


    5. Release for references and other background materials


    6. Other standard statements (e. g. no discrimination, mandatory arbitration, etc).


  3. If the firm does not have a formal application process, is there a supplemental form that contains the language in section nine above?


  4. Does firm require a release for a background check in the application process?


    (Note: Have each job applicant sign a consent form for a background check, including a check for criminal records, past employment and education. Announcing that your firm checks backgrounds may discourage applicants with something to hide, and encourage applicants to be truthful and honest about mistakes they have made in the past.)


  5. If using an outside background screening service, does the firm have a separate form as required under the FCRA?


  6. Does application or form provided by a screening service request listing of all past addresses for seven to ten years? This is also needed for a criminal search.
    (Note: Include future screenings in the consent language. This becomes important if a future investigation is required for some form of workplace misconduct.)


IV. Application Review Stage


  1. In reviewing the application, does firm look for the following seven (10) critical factors?


    • Applicant does not sign application.


    • Applicant does not sign consent or background screening.


    • Applicant leaves criminal questions blank (the honest criminal syndrome).


    • Applicant self-reports a criminal violation.


    • Applicant fails to explain why he or she left past jobs,


    • Applicant fails to explain gaps in employment history.


    • Applicant gives an explanation for an employment gap or the reason leaving previous job that does not make sense.


    • Excessive cross-outs and changes.


    • Applicant fails to give complete information (i.e. insufficient information to identify a past employer, leaves out salary, etc).


    • Applicant failed to indicate or cannot recall the name of a former supervisor.


  2. In reviewing applications or resumes, does firm look for employment gaps?
    (Note: It is critical to verify past employment to determine where a person has been for the last 5-10 years, even if you only get dates and job titles. Look for unexplained gaps in employment. Generally, if you can verify that a person was gainfully employed for the last five to ten years, it is less likely the person spent time in custody for a serious offense, although this does not eliminate the possibility of lesser offenses.


  3. In reviewing applications, does firm examine reasons for leaving each job?


V. Interview Stage


  1. Are interviewers trained in legal compliance:


    1. Treating all applicants in a similar fashion


    2. Questions that may not legally be asked (i.e. questions that are discriminatory or prohibited by law)


    3. How to respond when an applicant volunteers information that an employer may not ask about or possess


    4. Statements that an interviewer should not make to an applicant, such as promises about the job


    5. Uniform note taking and record keeping procedures (e.g. do not make notation on resume)


  2. In interviews, are certain key questions asked that are designed to ensure honesty and integrity?
    (Note: Towards the end of an interview, advise applicants that the firm will perform a criminal background and reference check as a standard business practice, and ask whether the applicant has any concerns to share. Good applicants will shrug off the question, while applicants with a problem may either reveal something or withdraw. Applicants should also be asked during an interview what they think a former employer will say about them. For example, “If we were to contact past employers, how would they describe your job performance?” Since applicants have signed releases and have been told such checks may occur, they may be motivated to reveal information about past jobs.)


VI. Background Investigation Stage


  1. Does firm check references?
    (Note: Verifying past employment is one of the single most important tools for an employer. Past job performance can be an important predictor of future success. Some employers make a costly mistake by not checking past employment because they believe past employers may not give detailed information. However, even verification of dates of employment and job titles are critical because an employer must be concerned about unexplained gaps in the employment history.


    In addition, documenting the fact that an effort was made will demonstrate due diligence. Although there can be many reasons for a gap in employment, if an applicant cannot account for the past seven to ten years, that can be a red flag.


    It is also important to know where a person has been because of the way criminal records are maintained in the United States. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a national criminal database available to most employers. Searches must be conducted at each relevant courthouse, and there are over 10,000 courthouses in America. However, if an employer knows where an applicant has been, it increases the accuracy of a criminal search, and decreases the possibility that an applicant has served time for a serious offense. Finally, documenting an attempt to obtain references can demonstrate due diligence.)


  2. Does firm take any other steps, such as checking court records, or outsourcing to a background firm?
    (Note: If outsourced, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) applies. If background screening is done in-house, the investigation falls under rules governing privacy rights of employees.


  3. Before outsourcing to a third party service provider, has firm taken the following into account:


    1. Expertise/knowledge of the service provider.


    2. Legal compliance–There are numerous issues surrounding legal compliance. A screening service must understand the laws surrounding pre-employment screening and hiring, and make a commitment to provide an organization only with information an organization may legally possess. An outside firm should also be able to provide FCRA compliance.


    3. Personal service and consulting–It is critical to keep in mind that pre-employment screening is much more than just providing raw data. A screening company should be able to assist the human resources department in the same manner as any other consultant.


    4. Training/consulting services available.


    5. Pricing.


    6. Turnaround time.


    7. Internet order/reporting options.


  4. Mechanics of the screening process


    1. Is there a specific person in change of mechanics of the screening process?


    2. Process to send requests to screening company and to track progress.


    3. Determination at what stage in hiring process is screening is conducted (not all applicants are screened–typically only the finalists are subject to screening).


    4. Determination of the degree of screening for types for position (not every position needs to be screened at the same level).


    5. Uniform screening procedures (are similarly situated applicants treated the same i.e. no discriminatory practices).


    6. Privacy protected in the manner reports are transmitted to employer.


    7. Policy that only persons in organization with proper authority will review the report.


    8. Policy concerning storage of background reports (should be stored separately from personal files).


VII. Analysis of information stage


  1. If negative information is located, is there a policy or procedure to follow?


    1. Policies — are there written guidelines to follow?


    2. Documentation — are all procedures and decisions documented to file?


    3. Review — is there a review process, with a particular person in the organization in charge of the process?


    4. Uniformity — are similarly situated applicants treated the same?


    5. Privacy — is there a mechanism to ensure that information remains private and secured, and only appropriate decision makers view the information (i.e., reports with negative information are not sent through office mail to a hiring manager’s desk)?


    6. Legal compliance — If a third party obtains information under the FCRA, is there a procedure to ensure pre-adverse action and post-adverse letters are handled as required by law?


  2. If the negative information is a criminal record:


    1. The firm understands and follows the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission rules concerning the use of Criminal records. Under EEOC rules, an employer may not deny employment to an ex-offender unless it is a business necessity, determined by reviewing the following three (3) factors:


      1. the nature and gravity of the offense;


      2. the amount of time that has passed since the conviction or completion of sentence.


      3. the nature of the job being held or sought.


    2. Be aware if your jurisdiction has a prohibition on considering arrests not resulting in convictions. (If your jurisdiction allows consideration of arrests, then an employer must independently verify the underlying behavior and may not use an arrest all by itself as an indication of lack of fitness. The critical inquiry is the behavior, not the police action.)


    3. That the firm has independently verified the nature of the offense and has not merely taken the word of the applicant at face value or relied upon the information in court records solely.


      (A Court record all by itself may be insufficient to determine the true nature and of the offense, since the final outcome could have been influence by a plea bargain or some other resolution not reflecting the true behavior. A firm should attempt to verify the true nature of offense by contacting or at least attempting to contact a person in authority, such as parole/probation officer, police officer, and prosecuting attorney).


    4. The firm has conducted additional due diligence to discover if there are other offenses in addition to any that are self-reported. (Just because an applicant self-reported an offense does not eliminate the possibility of other offences the applicant did not report).


    5. Did the applicant lie in the application and fail to disclose a criminal record in response to a direct question. (Note: this is the reason why it is important for an application to ask the broadest possible permissible question about a criminal record, and to advise applicants that any dishonesty is grounds to terminate the hiring process or employment. If an applicant lies about a criminal record, then the reason to deny employment can be on the basis of a false application.)


  3. If a firm makes a decision to hire someone with a criminal record or some other negative finding:


    1. The firm has examined the type of support, supervision and or structure that may be needed for the individual to improve the chances of success with the organization (i.e. that the firm is proactive in taking steps to reduce any potential difficulties)


    2. The firm has considered the nature of the job and the circumstances of the past offense, in order to take appropriate measures to protect the firm, co-workers and the public from harm. This involves a determination of whether the particular job is a good fit for the ex-offender in view of the nature of the job and the nature of the offense. (For example, a person with a history of theft, may not be a reasonable fit for a position that involves access to cash, assets, or confidential information. However, that person may be well suited to a number of other jobs within an organization.)


  4. If firm begins employment before the background check, is there a conditional offer to the applicant?


    (Note: If employment begins before a background check is completed, state in writing that employment is conditioned upon receiving a report that is satisfactory to the employer.)


VIII. Post-Hire stage


  1. Have documented policies and procedures that recognize a firm has a legal obligation to continue due diligence even after a person is hired. A firm can be liable for negligent retention, negligent supervision, and negligent promotion.


  2. Have policies and procedures to govern post-hire workplace situations (Timely and attentive management of potential problem situations along with appropriate follow-through and documentation are the keys to avoiding legal claims of negligent hiring/supervisor)


    1. Does employer have policies and procedures concerning workplace misconduct?


    2. Does the firm conduct periodic performance reviews of workers that include issues related to workplace conduct?


    3. Are supervisors trained to recognize, report and deal appropriately with workplace misconduct?


    4. Are supervisors periodically trained and educated regarding the employer’s liability for negligent retention, supervision or promotion?


    5. Is there a procedure to investigate workplace misconduct?


    6. Is there a mechanism for workers or managers to report and record workplace misconduct?


    7. Is it part of written job descriptions for supervisors to record, report and address workplace misconduct?


    8. Is compliance with the duty to record, report and address workplace misconduct part of the periodic performance appraisal of supervisors, so that they understand that they are evaluated in part upon monitoring workplace misconduct?


    9. Is there periodic training on workplace violence, so that supervisors are aware of the importance of prevention and signals to watch for?


©Lester S. Rosen, Employment Screening Resources, 2001. Version 1.7.


The information contained here is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 378 Page 379 Page 380 … 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