Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on January 22, 2009June 27, 2018

Study More People Struggle With Prescription Costs

Nearly 14 percent of nonelderly Americans went without a prescription drug in 2007 because of cost concerns, up from 10.3 percent in 2003, according to a national study released by the Center for Studying Health System Change.


The study, “More Nonelderly Americans Face Problems Affording Prescription Drugs,” pointed to rising prescription drug costs and less-generous drug coverage as the main reasons that children and working-age Americans are going without a prescribed medication. The center is a nonpartisan health policy research organization.


“The number of Americans who cannot afford prescription medications is likely to grow as the economy continues to decline and the ranks of the uninsured grow,” said Laurie Felland, a senior health researcher at the center and study co-author.


Uninsured, working-age Americans experienced the biggest jump in unmet prescription drug needs between 2003 and 2007, with the proportion rising from 26 percent to almost 35 percent. In addition, a growing proportion of working-age Americans with employer-sponsored insurance are going without prescription medications, the study found.


The study was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Findings were drawn from the Center for Studying Health System Change’s 2007 Health Tracking Household Survey, a nationally representative survey containing information on 10,400 working-age adults and 2,600 children. The survey had a 43 percent response rate.


(For more, read “Report: Health Care Spending Growth Rate Slowed in 2007” and “Paying for a Doctor’s Visit in the Age of Medical Consumerism.”)


Filed by Rebecca Vesely of Modern Healthcare, 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 January 22, 2009June 27, 2018

Publisher Freezes 401(k) Match

Newspaper publisher and broadcast operator Media General Inc. will freeze 401(k) plan matching contributions starting April 1, with the freeze continuing through at least December 31, the company announced this week.


The Richmond, Virginia-based company, which publishes 24 daily newspapers and owns and operates 19 network-affiliated television stations, had been matching 100 percent of employees’ salary deferrals, up to the first 5 percent of pay.


The freeze comes as revenue and profit have slid. For the nine-month period ending September 30, revenue declined to $593 million, down from $663.8 million during the comparable period a year earlier, while it reported a net loss, excluding certain one-time events, of $3.5 million, compared with net income of $1.1 million the prior year.


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 January 22, 2009June 27, 2018

SPECIAL REPORT Downturn May Limit Lump-Sum Pension Payments

The ongoing chaos in the financial markets has created a new set of issues for HR executives at companies with defined-benefit plans. Many employers are discovering that they may be restricted in their ability to provide lump-sum payments to retiring employees.


    Defined-benefit plans have been pummeled by the markets in the past few months. In October and November, the defined-benefit plans of the S&P 1,500 companies saw their funded status shrink by $240 billion, according to Mercer.


    As a result, many employers may find that their plans are below the 80 percent funded status required to be able to pay retiring employees full lump-sum payments. Under current regulations, companies with defined-benefit plans that are below 80 percent funded can pay only half of the lump sum owed to retirees. HR executives need to be in close contact with their company’s actuaries to determine whether this is going to be an issue at their firms, experts say.



“I think we will see a significant minority of firms that fall below the 80 percent funded status [required for full retiree lump-sum payments].”
—Alan Glickstein,
Watson Wyatt Worldwide

    Companies that don’t certify their funded status by April 1 will be assumed to be 10 basis points below their 2007 levels. That means any company that was 90 percent funded or less last year could have issues, experts say. Congress did give defined-benefit plan sponsors some relief late last year by passing legislation that will allow companies that are less than 60 percent funded to use their January 1, 2008, funding levels for the year. Under the Pension Protection Act, companies with plans that are less than 60 percent funded have to freeze their plans, and thus cannot dispense lump-sum payments, so the last-minute legislation was a relief to many employers, experts say.


    Still, there will be issues. “I think we will see a significant minority of firms that fall below the 80 percent funded status,” says Alan Glickstein, a senior consultant at Watson Wyatt Worldwide.


    Companies with plans that are below 80 percent funded will have to decide in the next few months whether they will contribute more to their plans to increase the funded status, and HR executives need to be part of those discussions, says Brad Klinck, senior vice president in Aon Consulting’s retirement practice.


    “Some are going to have to choose between making contributions to their plans or keeping people employed,” he says.



“Some [companies] are going to have to choose between making contributions to their plans or keeping people employed.”
—Brad Klinck, senior vice president, Aon Consulting’s retirement practice

    HR also has to decide how to communicate this to employees. “It’s a very difficult question to answer,” says Eric Keener, a principal and senior consultant in the retirement practice at Hewitt Associates. From a fiduciary point of view, the HR executive has to decide whether it’s better to allow retiring employees to take lump-sum payments before the restrictions take effect or whether that’s a bad idea because it will result in less money in the plan, he says.


    This could become a real issue for companies in which there are unions, he says. “I think if a union is going into collective bargaining in the future, you will see them want to include some language around these issues,” Keener says.


    HR executives at companies with benefits restrictions also have to make sure that they communicate to all employees about the changes, not just the ones who are retiring soon, Glickstein says.


    In some cases, employers may even find themselves as defendants in lawsuits brought by employees affected by the restrictions, experts say.


    “People are going to be wondering, ‘Does this mean my company is in trouble?’ ” Glickstein says. “It could affect productivity and morale.”


Workforce Management, January 19, 2008, p. 35 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on January 21, 2009June 27, 2018

Dear Workforce What Could We Do to Avoid Cuts to Our Training Programs?

Dear Anxious:

Is your training designed and delivered by in-house staff, or is it outsourced? This will make a difference in how you interpret my answer.

1. Cut costs by providing more self-help workbooks and on-the-job aids.

2. Enlist local experts or coaches to take the place of some training sessions.

3. Cut non-value-add training sessions—those that don’t really advance real organizational objectives.

4. Review your list of training suppliers for more economical alternatives.

5. Rationalize your list of training suppliers to obtain volume discounts.

6. Save on material costs by printing on both sides of paper when producing learning materials or sending out soft-copy versions of learning guides.

7. Demonstrate the achievement of organizational objectives—how learning produces real benefits to your organization—and the return on investment of your training programs.

Finally, these suggestions go along with the idea that companies need to tighten their belts in tough times, and the training function is not sacrosanct. Your training function will be more respected if you can replace a “Yes, but …” response with one that says, “Yes, and this is what we are doing about it.”

The final suggestion uses a different approach. It is based on the belief that if you cut training programs, the organization actually will lose money. The two approaches, of course, are not mutually exclusive.

SOURCE: Les Allan, Business Performance Pty Ltd., Melbourne, Australia, January 16, 2009

LEARN MORE: Please see “Workforce Training in the Budget Cross Hairs.“

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 January 21, 2009June 27, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do We Decide Whether to Use Job Descriptions Versus Role Profiles?

Dear Madness but No Method:

There are several situations in which a company needs clear, accurate and business-focused information about employees’ roles. This information is necessary when:

  1. Managers hire new people.
  2. HR benchmarks salaries against those at similar companies.
  3. A supervisor and employee discuss performance goals and expectations.

The information needed for each of these tasks is different and changes over time. That means someone has to figure out how to collect the needed data, ensure that it is used to the best advantage, and keep it up to date. Job descriptions and role profiles are just two of the templates companies may use for these purposes.

Basically, job descriptions are high-level overviews of basic skills a person needs to perform the role’s functions. The document typically lists various tasks to be done and the prior experience that the company believes is necessary for successful execution. It also includes information such as the title and reporting structure.

Job descriptions are most commonly used for hiring and salary benchmarking. The tasks and experience data outlined in a job description are comprehensive enough to give a candidate an idea about whether they are qualified. It also usually contains enough information for the compensation specialist trying to benchmark salaries to determine if a job is equivalent to one in another company that may have a different title.

Most job descriptions do not have enough detailed information to help a hiring team outline the specific role a new hire will fill. Nor can a manager use it to underscore the company strategy or the expectations they have of the incumbent.

The role profile, which is a more comprehensive instrument, provides some information not found in a basic job description. A role profile often contains an explanation of the company or group strategy. It also details the critical skills, accomplishments and competencies expected of a successful employee.

Crafting role-profile documents is a lot of work. So before investing the time, determine how they will be used in your organization and whether they will be valued. For instance, many companies use individual development plans or personal goal-setting documents to set employee expectations. In that case, a role profile document might be redundant.

Some companies require the hiring team to meet prior to interviews for any job. The hiring team documents tasks, skills and behaviors needed in the successful candidate. They also determine which interview questions each will ask and agree on a time to vet the candidates. In companies with such robust hiring reviews, a role profile would be unnecessary.

Finally, in many smaller companies, jobs are quite flexible. Roles may change often as the company evolves. Here, role profiles would need repeated rewrites or they would become outdated.

Both job descriptions and role profiles are valuable when used in the right way. To determine which tool to use, first understand the needs that you are trying to fill and which competing or overlapping processes are in place already.

SOURCE: Ellen Raim, Cascade Microtech Inc., Beaverton, Oregon

LEARN MORE: Please read the value that job descriptions can play in recruiting talented people.

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 January 21, 2009June 27, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do We Select a Training Team

Dear At a Loss:

Training can be the bridge to world-class business results, especially during recession. Your training team needs a clear “line of sight” between training goals and business goals. Other considerations:

Be inclusive
A training program typically focuses on a variety of skills in technical areas, leadership development, sales enhancement and/or management. Some training programs have multiple tracks, while others focus on a single track, such as improving the performance of salespeople. If this is the case, the training team must have sales leaders who have “been there, done that” to guide development of courses and programs. It is equally important to include human resources professionals, especially those familiar with training disciplines.

In addition, having a senior executive on the training team demonstrates its importance and value. Finally, don’t forget to include any external partners that might be appropriate.

If the training program has multiple tracks beyond sales, it is essential to include additional experts. This could include people in marketing, information technology, finance, purchasing, and other groups.

Have a training game plan
It should include at least the following elements: mission, goals, alignment with business enterprise and culture, core competency assessment, internal versus external courses, blended learning, stretch assignments, principles for adult learning, individual versus group development plans, and face-to-face versus online courses. It typically takes six months to a year to get a quality training program up and running.

Set things in motion
As you begin putting the pieces in place, your training team will operate largely as an advisory body to human resources, especially in technical and subject-specific areas. In the beginning, your team should meet at least once a month, moving to a quarterly basis as the program develops. Make certain the team zeroes in on the competencies that your company deems pivotal to achieving its goals.

Monitor your progress
Don’t forget to have the training team closely examine the results. If training is for salespeople, this means examining participants’ course evaluations and their actual performance in the field. That will give you an idea of how people feel about the course topic, instructors, and other important areas. It also provides insight on ways you can improve things.

Don’t let up
The Japanese have a word for continuous improvement: kaizen. Again, this ties into the concept of consistently examining the outcome of your training efforts. Remember, a training program is only as good as the ability of your training team to provide leadership and guidance. That means the team must be nimble enough to make adjustments when needed.

An engaged and motivated training team isn’t easy to create, but the results are worth it. Bringing together committed individuals from various employee groups should help individuals grow professionally, helping to move your organization from being “just OK” to being great.

SOURCE: Dana E. Jarvis is an adjunct professor of business ethics and management at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh.

LEARN MORE: On a related note, planning a curriculum to help people develop professionally also might be a consideration.

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 January 21, 2009June 27, 2018

New Laws Apply to Employer Health Care Plans

Employer-sponsored health care plans are subject to new requirements created by a number of federal laws enacted in 2008, including the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, and “Michelle’s Law.”

    The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (H.R. 493, P.L. 110-233) prohibits employers and group health plans from discriminating on the basis of genetic information and limits the collection of information by employers and group health plans. The law prohibits enrollment restrictions and premium adjustment on the basis of genetic information or services and bars employers from requesting or requiring that an individual take a genetic test. Employers and group health plans can be held liable for the unlawful collection of genetic information. The law takes effect in November 2009 (18 months after enactment on May 21, 2008).


    The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (H.R. 1424, 110 P.L. 343) requires employers with 50 or more employees that provide mental health and substance abuse benefits to extend benefits on the same level as they provide for traditional medical and hospital benefits. It does not require employers to provide benefits for mental health and substance abuse services. This law applies to plan years beginning on and after October 3, 2009, and beginning January 1, 2010, for calendar-year plans. For collective-bargaining-agreement plans, the law applies to plan years beginning after January 1, 2009, or the date on which the last collective bargaining agreement terminates.


    “Michelle’s Law” (H.R. 2851) ensures that dependent college students who take a medically necessary leave of absence for up to one year do not lose health insurance coverage.


    Impact: Plan sponsors should review their plans to ensure that appropriate mental health and substance abuse benefits are available and that limitations imposed on mental health, substance abuse, medical and hospital benefits are the same.


Workforce Management, January 19, 2008, p. 8 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on January 20, 2009June 27, 2018

Eaton Lays Off More Than 5,000 Employees Worldwide

Cleveland-based manufacturer Eaton Corp. said it’s laying off more than 5,000 people, or about 6 percent of its workforce, as a result of the global economic slowdown.


“We are reducing our global staffing level by about 5,200,” said Eaton spokeswoman Kelly Jasko. “This is a global impact, and the reason for it is to further align our cost structures with the weakening markets that we compete in.”


The layoffs will include about 60 employees at Eaton’s five locations in and around Cleveland, where the company employs about 800 people, Jasko said. Employees will be told in the next few weeks whether their jobs are being cut. Those affected will receive severance pay, the opportunity to continue their benefits and outplacement services, Jasko said.


Eaton makes hydraulic and other power management equipment and systems for a variety of markets, ranging from automotive to aerospace, all of which have been hit to varying degrees by the economic downturn. In all, Eaton employs about 80,000 people around the world. The company has 225 manufacturing facilities worldwide and sells products in more than 150 countries.


The recent cuts come on top of 3,400 layoffs Eaton announced in December, which also were spread around its operations worldwide. The announcement Tuesday comes less than a week before Eaton is set to release its quarterly and full-year financial results on January 26.


On December 16, Eaton announced it was lowering its guidance for fourth-quarter earnings. It told investors to expect earnings of between 90 cents and $1 per share, rather than the $1.70 to $1.80 per share that had been forecast previously by analysts.


Filed by Dan Shingler of Crain’s Cleveland Business, 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 January 20, 2009June 27, 2018

Obama Asks Workers and Businesses to Serve and Sacrifice

Invoking work and entrepreneurship as symbols of the country’s strength, President Barack Obama in his inaugural address appealed to American employers and employees to nurture a willingness to compromise during this time of economic crisis.
 
Obama praised the private sector but also leveled criticism: Too often organizations act only within the confines of their narrow interests. His appeal for conciliation will likely be tested by employers bracing for pro-union legislation and health care reform.


As an example of sacrifice, Obama mentioned employees, such as those in local governments and at certain newspapers, who have accepted pay cuts and unpaid mandatory vacation time as a way to forestall the layoffs of others.


Obama said it is “the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours.”


In his 21-minute address, Obama lauded the country’s entrepreneurial spirit. He said America’s greatness came from the willingness of individuals and businesses to reward achievement gained through effort, ingenuity and risk.


“Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less,” Obama said. “It has not been the path for the faint-hearted—for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things—some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor—who have carried us up the long, rugged path toward prosperity and freedom.”


Obama said the economic challenges facing our country come in large part from “our collective failure to make hard choices.” It is a failure, Obama said, that has led to lost jobs, bankrupt businesses and costly health care.


Later, he repeated his campaign promise to end partisanship and appealed to citizens and businesses to lead the charge.


“Our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions—that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and begin again the work of remaking America.”


Toward that goal, the Obama transition team last week unveiled a new Web site, usaservice.org, to make it easier for people and organizations to volunteer.


—Jeremy Smerd


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


 

Posted on January 20, 2009June 27, 2018

Millions on Washington Mall Represent Thousands of Days Off

American workers juggled schedules and cashed in sick days and paid leave as they sought to be among the millions who descended upon the National Mall in Washington to witness the historic inauguration of the country’s first African-American president.


Coming to Washington is a short trip for John Paul Held, who lives in Odenton, Maryland. But getting out of work required its own journey.


Held was one of 20 workers at a Whole Foods Market in Annapolis, Maryland, who asked for a free day to attend the inauguration. With so much demand, Held had to make up time—doing inventory—to have his January 20 free.


“I ended up working Monday at 4 a.m. so I could be here today,” he said. “I had to do some schedule-flipping and begging.”


He was the seventh or eighth person asking for time off at his store. Christina Held, also of Odenton, was quicker on the draw. She is a waitress at the Iron Bridge Wine Co. in Columbia, Maryland.


“As soon as Obama got elected, I sent an e-mail to my boss to request the day off,” Christina Held said. She got her wish.


Her colleagues rue the fact that they tarried and are working today. “They’re jealous,” she said.


It wasn’t necessarily first-come, first-served at the Morrow County Board for the Mentally Retarded and Developmentally Disabled in Mount Gilead, Ohio, where Lorrie Williams serves as an administrator.


She had to stretch her workdays last month to create free time in January. “I worked extra hours before Christmas,” Williams said.


Williams was one of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people who came to Washington as chaperones for groups of junior high and high school students. Kids made up a large share of those attending the inauguration, hitting the capital as if every school system in the nation took spring break at the same time.


Even among the youth cohort, however, there were work worries. Tabitha Lassen, a junior at Tri-Valley High School in Dresden, Ohio, came to Washington to participate in inaugural activities hosted by Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington.


But first, she had to get time off work. It was a bit of a challenge.


Only four months ago, she found a job at a Dresden pizza parlor that offered a “perfect” location and a work schedule that accommodated her extracurricular activities, including marching band.


When she got the chance to come to Washington for the inauguration, she couldn’t turn it down. At first, however, her boss said she failed to give him enough notice.


“I apologized and told him I couldn’t give him more notice,” Lassen said.


If she had blocked out her schedule and then the Washington trip fell through, she would have lost workdays and pay.


“If I told him before I could go, then those hours would have been wasted,” she said.


For workers in the District of Columbia, the path to the inauguration was easier. Many companies in town gave their workforce the day off. Security restrictions made a typical business day impossible.


Brennan Snow is a product specialist at B-Line Medical, a software company in Washington. The firm gave its employees a floating holiday that they could use for either Martin Luther King Jr. Day or for the inauguration. Alternatively, they could exercise a work-at-home day.


“Our company was kind of cool about it,” Snow said. “They didn’t ride our butts about making it into the office.”


The largest employer in Washington—the federal government—gave everyone the day off. That meant it was no problem for Sharmane Watson, a secretary at the Patent and Trademark Office, to join her family for the inauguration.


Her husband, Moses Watson, is employed in a part of government that was especially busy on January 20—the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. He works on computer systems inside squad cars.


“I’m not essential personnel, so I took off,” he said.


Sharmane Watson summed up why they—and most everyone else—left work behind on inauguration day.


“I’m just here to be part of history,” she said.


—Mark Schoeff Jr. 


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


 

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 … 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