Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Workplace Culture

Posted on December 12, 2011July 24, 2024

Democracy at Work: 5 Questions With Traci Fenton, Founder and CEO of WorldBlu

Many people like to keep politics out of the workplace. But to Traci Fenton, what workplaces badly need is the infusion of a political idea: democracy. Fenton is founder and CEO of WorldBlu, a 14-year-old organization devoted to making companies more participatory. Allowing workers a stronger voice on the job is not only a lofty ideal, she argues, but also a recipe for revved-up employees and better business results. The proof, she says, can be found at firms on WorldBlu’s annual list of the Most Democratic Workplaces. Fenton spoke recently with Workforce Management senior editor Ed Frauenheim.

Workforce Management: Why did you start WorldBlu?

Traci Fenton: Because of a series of life-changing events. My senior year in college, I was director of a student-run public affairs conference. My peers wanted to do the conference on democracy. I said, ‘That’s the worst idea I’ve ever heard. Democracy means government and politics and I’m not interested in either!’ But I started to research the concept. I realized democracy creates an environment that unlocks our full potential. … It really spoke to my heart. Then I spent time in Indonesia, when the dictator Suharto was being overthrown. I saw what it was like to not live in a free and democratic environment. When I returned to the United States, I took a job at a Fortune 500 firm. I came home from my first day of work demoralized. I realized I was not going to have a voice there. So I left. And I started WorldBlu.

WM: Isn’t workplace democracy a recipe for sluggish decision-making?

Fenton: Decentralized decision-making can take more time on the front end as you gather more input from employees. But organizational democracy doesn’t mean you have to vote on everything. And even if decisions require more time, you make up that time in the execution. People who have had a say in a decision are more willing to follow through on it.

WM: Is organizational democracy good for everyone?

Fenton: It’s not right for all employees. Not everyone has a strong sense of their own self-worth. This may sound hippy-dippy, but it’s a requirement for effective participation in a democratic organization.

WM: You say organizational democracy is inevitable. Why?

Fenton: We don’t live in the Industrial Age anymore; we live in the ‘Democratic Age.’ And the command and control system that worked before simply doesn’t work in this new age.

WM: Is organizational democracy good for all businesses?

Fenton: Yes. Organizational democracy is good for all companies, but what matters is the timing as to when it is introduced. The mindset of the CEO and top leaders must be prepared for it first before a democratic framework and leadership style can be introduced.

Workforce Management, December 2011, p. 13

Posted on December 1, 2011August 8, 2018

Background-Check Tool Keeps Tabs on Sex Harassment Cases

Asher Adelman’s boss would regularly explode into profanity-laced tirades, occasionally punctuating them by hurling objects. Staffers dreaded his next outburst, but none felt empowered to act on how the CEO had locked his subordinates in a hostile workplace with his abusive behavior.

The executive created an atmosphere that was so toxic that Adelman quit. Then Adelman acted out against bad bosses everywhere in 2007 by creating a website—ebosswatch.com—committed to identifying those who make their workplaces emotional torture chambers.

For a fee, job candidates can even use the website to run background checks that include criminal history reports on prospective supervisors. But since mid-2010, the site’s latest tool has been nearly as popular among human resources and hiring managers as it has been with job seekers.

The free tool is a national sexual harassment registry that allows visitors to check whether an individual has been accused of making unwanted advances to a subordinate or co-worker in recent years. About 1,000 employers consult the registry monthly—40 percent of the registry’s users, Adelman says.

Ebosswatch.com is part of a broader trend of technology tools that allow employers to gain deeper insight about a candidate or help employees assess places where they want to work. Some think such transparency technologies as ebosswatch.com and Glassdoor.com are beneficial to both employers and employees. But not everyone agrees.

A number of critics warn that ebosswatch.com can create legal and practical complications for employers.

“I don’t think it has any value” as a screening device, says employer lawyer Robin Shea, a partner at Constangy Brooks & Smith in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. She says that many accusers either drop or lose their cases.

During the past decade the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reports it dropped roughly 70 percent of the more than 140,000 harassment claims it handled. In a large majority of those cases, the EEOC found that the plaintiff had no reasonable cause to file a complaint. The remaining cases were closed because of administrative reasons, such as the agency could not locate the plaintiff, the plaintiff withdrew the charges or related litigation took precedent over the EEOC’s case. About 27 percent of the cases resulted in favorable outcomes for accusers.

“The bigger risk” is a rejected applicant alleging that an employer’s reliance on the registry is a ruse to discriminate against protected classes, Shea says.

A formal policy against hiring anyone who ever faced a sexual harassment charge could backfire, says Zev Eigen, an assistant law professor at Northwestern University School of Law in Chicago.

Under a Civil Rights Act of 1991 provision based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1971 ruling in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., a hiring policy that inadvertently hurts a protected class violates that group’s civil rights, Eigen says.

Labor Finders International Inc. does not consult the sexual harassment registry, says Wayne Salen, director of risk management for the Palm Beach Gardens, Florida-based industrial labor staffing company.

Still, the registry might be a helpful tool, and using it might not result in treating any group in an impermissible disparate manner, Salen says. Employers “have to be careful” about inadvertently harming protected groups, he says.

Rejecting a job candidate solely because they have a criminal background violates that individual’s rights, except for certain jobs, Salen says.

Eigen says the best way to limit liability for a rogue employee is to follow the Supreme Court’s directions for implementing and enforcing a strong anti-harassment policy.

And when using an online source, employers also have to determine whether they trust the registry’s credibility, he says.

Adelman says ebosswatch.com only repackages publicly available information. He primarily uses Google Alerts to aggregate data from various online sources, particularly news media and court websites. A proprietary database and software program his company developed then populates the registry.

Adelman also maintains that his registry has helped employers based on the number of accused harassers who have asked him to remove their names. He says he never will, because employers should know whether job candidates ever faced harassment charges.

Independent employment lawer Donna Ballman in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, likes the registry concept because she has so many male and female clients “who are victims of sexual harassment.”

She suggests improvements, however, including a more complete list of accused harassers. “If you see a name over and over again, it tells you something: Someone needs to do something about this person.”

David Ratner, a lawyer who represents an Illinois woman who was awarded $39.8 million in her sexual harassment case, doesn’t like the registry.

“I think harassers should lose their jobs and be punished,” says Ratner, managing partner of Morelli Ratner of New York. “But there’s a right way and a wrong way to go about it.”

Adelman says the registry should be used with other evaluation tools and that employers should allow accused harassers to explain their cases. But that suggestion is disingenuous, Ratner says. He doubts whether employers with multiple job candidates would consider one listed in the registry.

As a result, employers could reject talented job candidates who either were wrongly accused or made one mistake and learned from it, critics say.

Dave Lenckus is a freelance writer based in Tucson, Arizona. To comment, email editors@workforce.com.

Posted on November 27, 2011August 8, 2018

Employers Adding Value to Good Employee Health

In 2006 Lafarge North America, a global supplier of construction materials with 12,000 employees in the United States and Canada (70,000 worldwide), took a close look at the data related to its health care program. The goal was to find ways to save money by restructuring medical plans without putting an undue burden on employees.

“One of the interesting pieces of information we found was that employees with certain chronic diseases, such as diabetes, hypertension and asthma, were not being compliant with their health care,” says Philia Swan, director of health, benefits and employee insurance for Reston, Virginia-based Lafarge. “To encourage better self care, we lowered copays for those medications and went from a 35 percent compliance rate to 80 percent today.”

Additionally, Lafarge’s medical plans pay 100 percent for preventive care in-network, such as mammograms and prostate screenings, and even pay employees $75 for taking the tests.

“We send out postcards on an employee’s birthday to remind them that it’s time for their annual check-up or screening,” Swan says, noting that compliance reached 95 percent in 2011.

Lafarge is among a growing number of employers taking what is known as value-based health insurance—an employee-centered approach that often begins with reducing or even waiving copays for preventive and maintenance medications. According to researchers at the University of Michigan’s Center for Value-Based Insurance Design, “the basic premise of value-based insurance design is to remove barriers to essential, high-value health services.”

Center co-director and professor Dr. A. Mark Fendrick, says the failure of patients to take needed medications costs about $100 billion a year in the U.S., partly as a result of hospitalizations that could have been avoided.

“With a comprehensive value-based approach, employers are basically saying there are certain things you, as an employee need to do, and you can benefit financially by doing them, but if you are not willing to take a role in improving your health, our plan will be more expensive and perhaps a bit unattractive,” says Jim Winkler, large employer segment leader in the health & benefits practice with consultant Aon Hewitt in Norwalk, Connecticut.

According to Winkler, there are three phases to a value-based approach, and most early adaptors are in the first phase, which involves reducing or eliminating costs around specific medical conditions that have, or may in the future have, a negative effect on an employer’s health insurance costs. According to Aon Hewitt’s 2011 Health Care Survey, about 23 percent of employers use a value-based approach for their prescription drug plans and another 55 percent plan to adopt the approach within three to five years.

Winkler notes that in the second phase, low cost or free medications come with strings attached: the employee needs to take part in a disease management program. Aon Hewitt’s survey reports that about nine percent of employers using the value-based approach are at phase two, “but I think we’ll see more of this moving forward,” Winkler says.

Phase three adds a level of complexity to the plan, because surgery that might be covered at 80 percent after the deductible has been met may not be covered at all if the employee hasn’t taken steps to prevent it. For example, an employee with a back injury may need to take part in weight loss coaching and physical therapy prior to being approved for surgery as a last resort. Winkler acknowledges this phase is administratively complex, adds a new layer of information to already challenging employee communications and may be unpopular, at least initially.

“Employees with chronic diseases that fall under the value-based approach appreciate phase one, because it costs them less money, however, healthier employees may be less than thrilled because they are not receiving any monetary benefits,” Winkler notes. “That’s why moving to a broader approach where disease management is required is the next step, and a logical one, for employers to take.”

A survey released by the non-profit International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans in November shows that 37 percent of multi-employer and public employer plans use a value-based health insurance strategy: 15 percent have just begun, and 23 percent have various components of a value-based initiative. Just three percent believe they have achieved a culture of health by taking a value-based approach.

The survey reports that diabetes and heart disease are the conditions having the most impact on productivity and health care costs. Obesity is another top concern that employers plan to address.

“Ideally, the real emphasis of value-based health care is not on cost containment, but on a holistic system of keeping healthy people healthy,” says Sally Natchek, senior research director at the Brookfield, Wisconsin-based foundation, which provides education and information on employee benefits, compensation and financial literacy education.

“You provide incentives to change employee behaviors—use urgent care instead of the emergency room or take your annual cancer screening,” Natchek says. “But you also have healthy food choices in the employee cafeteria, you communicate more with employees so they understand the costs of prescription drugs and the options they have, or how to be better consumers of health care.”

Natchek emphasizes that the goal is not to reduce plan costs initially, but to prevent high future costs. And she believes a value-based approach provides a competitive advantage for companies. “If you can work for someone who provides your cholesterol medication for free, that builds loyalty,” she says.

Says Lafarge’s Swan: “We’ve invested more than $7 million in incentives, communication programs, and a disease management project with The Cleveland Clinic, and in return we’ve seen a reduction in health care costs, increased productivity, and an upward trend in retention.”

SeeChange Health Insurance Co., based in San Francisco, is the first commercial payor to focus exclusively on offering value-based benefit plans to the health care market. SeeChange Health selected HealthEdge’s HealthRules product suite for its ability to design, implement and update a variety of benefit plans. For information on HealthRules, go to:

http://www.healthedge.com/pages/news_events/press_releases/100816-HE-SeeChange.htm

Posted on November 16, 2011August 8, 2018

How Do We Overcome the Perception of Favoritism?

Dear Oops:

As you’ve shown by writing to Dear Workforce, this is an important problem: Your integrity is being questioned. While you may not have favored your friend, appearances are important. People can make decisions based only on what they see. That’s one reason why, in general, it’s good to tell people your rationale when making unpopular decisions: They may not be aware of all the information or issues.

If you have set up systems through which you can benchmark performance or outcomes so that you can objectify rather than personalize performance, it would help. As you suggest, there are likely to be more issues down the road, especially when the time comes for performance evaluations or disciplinary actions. You may need to excuse yourself from supervision in some cases.

In fairness to you, managers are often seen as being friendlier with some employees than others—every person finds it easier to be close to some people than others. That’s one reason that open and equal access is important. The perception may exist that you are not being fully open to others’ suggestions. Regardless of whether that perception is based on reality, you need to address it directly.

Once you have made clear your rationale, the next step is to actively solicit (and act on) ideas from other employees. We’re not talking about things like “Should we get a new water cooler?” but rather on work-process and similar changes.

We recommend doing this informally by talking with all employees and asking for their input, on the spot or whenever they’re ready. A formal program may seem as if you’re not taking it seriously, versus this one-on-one conversation. Any time you ask for ideas or suggestions, however, you must make sure of a few things:

• You should be biased toward action—if the idea is seen as being neutral or “only a little costly,” it should be adopted. This encourages people to bring forth more ideas, (often “neutral” ideas) do save money or raise quality.

• Before rejecting an idea, make sure you fully understand its costs and benefits. This may require additional conversation. Likewise, when rejecting an idea, give strong reasons why and seriously consider counterarguments.

• The person who proposed an idea can be empowered and made responsible for its implementation—as long as he or she has reasonable support.

• You must be willing to put a reasonable amount of time and effort into soliciting, considering and enacting ideas.

In the future, carefully consider whether your other reports have similar encouragement to give input (and are seen as having similar opportunities and encouragement) and whether those with the same job role really do have the same access to you as your friend does.

SOURCE: Katherine Zatz and David Zatz, Toolpack Consulting, Teaneck, New Jersey

LEARN MORE: On the flip side of favoritism are morale-damaging employee cliques.

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.

Posted on October 24, 2011August 8, 2018

Caterpillar Sees Climb in Flex, Full-Time Workers

Caterpillar Inc., the Peoria, Illinois-based heavy equipment maker, reported its flexible workforce had risen 35.1 percent at the end of the third quarter.

The company’s flexible workforce totaled 27,385 at the end of the quarter, up 7,117 employees from 20,268 at the end of the same period in the previous year.

Full-time, traditional employment at Caterpillar rose 18.7 percent to 121,513 workers at the end of the third quarter.

Caterpillar reported that it added 5,591 jobs in the U.S., 9,463 jobs outside the country and 11,240 jobs were added through acquisitions such as its purchase of equipment-maker Bucyrus.

The company reported its third-quarter revenue rose 41 percent to $15.72 billion.

Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, email editors@workforce.com.

Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on October 7, 2011August 8, 2018

Mercer CEO Resigns to Head Retirement Policy Center

Mercer chairman and CEO M. Michele Burns is resigning to become executive director of a retirement policy center that parent company Marsh & McLennan Cos. is forming.

The purpose of the center, Marsh & McLennan announced Oct. 4, “will be to become a catalyst for new ideas and perspectives on retirement and to educate the public and key constituents on retirement public policy issues.”

Burns, 53, joined Marsh & McLennan in March 2006 as executive vice president and chief financial officer after holding several positions with Mirant Corp., an Atlanta-based power company. She also was CFO of Delta Air Lines Inc.

Marsh & McLennan named her chairman and CEO of Mercer in September 2006.

In a written statement, Marsh & McLennan said it has begun a search for a new Mercer CEO. Until a successor is named, Marsh & McLennan group president and chief operating officer Dan Glaser will oversee Mercer’s executive committee.

Jerry Geisel writes for Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, email editors@workforce.com.

Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on October 4, 2011August 8, 2018

What Impact Does Unscheduled Absence Exert on Our Productivity?

Dear Not Fond of Absence:

You are wise to examine the impact this kind of absence has on productivity and identify — and then eradicate — its cause.

First, check local, state and federal laws where the employee and the work site are located. You’ll also need to check precedents for your state supreme court, federal circuit courts for your area and the U.S. Supreme Court. It is beyond the scope of this response to outline the laws and court precedents that may apply, but you need to be aware they may all impact what you ultimately choose to do.

Other considerations to make before choosing how to handle this situation include:

• Is the employee subject to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act? Most employees who are not managers are. That means they are eligible for overtime. Through the FLSA, the federal government established standards that determine an employee’s eligibility for overtime. These are not subject to change by the employer.

• Is software you use compatible with how you want to address the situation? For instance, some software does not credit employees with accrued sick or vacation leave.

• Does your company allow for leave? Does your company have an employee manual that commits it to specific treatment of the employee that may conflict with your chosen resolution?

Unscheduled absences could be a red flag. They can result from an injury or illness that will not go away. This could involve issues with workers’ compensation, the Americans with Disabilities Act or the Family and Medical Leave Act that have not been properly dealt with by the employee or by the employer.

Investigate the reasons behind the repeated unscheduled absence. Ask the employee to explain why he or she is unable to get to work as scheduled. Explain the effect this has on co-workers, and how the absences may reflect poorly on the employee. If the employee has a justifiable reason for being absent—for instance, staying home with a sick child— try to work together to resolve the situation. You might check to see if this falls under FMLA (or comparable state law).

If circumstances recently changed in the employee’s life, a different daily start time might help alleviate the absence issues. Perhaps the person no longer is able to perform the job duties, if he or she was recently injured on or off the job; employees may not want to tell the employer this out of fearing of being let go. In summary, your employee may have a situation going on that he or she does not know how to deal with.

There is a lot of employee uncertainty now because of the economy. Many employees may be toughing it out, waiting for the situation that causes their absence to improve. Be proactive by offering assistance to your employees. They may realize that by your doing this, their employer has employees’ best interests at heart. They may be much more willing at this point to talk to you about engagement issues that may be causing employees to give less than their best effort. This can also be one of the best things an employer can do to retain employees and build engagement.

SOURCE: Joe Gross, HR & Policy Solutions, Olympia, Washington

LEARN MORE: On a related matter, please read how to help managers can combat chronic employee lateness.

Workforce Management Online, October 2011 — Register Now!

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 October 4, 2011August 8, 2018

Data Bank Focus: Time Management

The American Time Use Survey shows a number of disparities between how women and men with children and full-time jobs spend their time on an average day. Women devote a combined three hours and 18 minutes to household activities and care for others; men spend an hour less, at 2 hours and 18 minutes. On the other hand, men work 48 minutes a day longer than women—but also enjoy an extra 48 minutes spent in leisure and sports activities. While people work more hours on weekdays, the average person puts in 5.6 hours a day on weekends and holidays, too.

Posted on September 16, 2011August 8, 2018

Productivity Doesn’t Stop at the U.S.-Canada Border

Canada’s economy isn’t as powerful as its southern neighbor’s, but it’s not because the Great White North’s workforce is less productive, according to a new study by Statistics Canada, the country’s central statistics agency.


The study examined why the GDP per capita in Canada is less than it is in the United States. Between 1994 and 2002, it was only 83 percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. Statistics Canada found that Canada’s workforce is actually 94 percent as productive as the American workforce–not such a big difference. Instead, the main reason for the GDP gap is that Canadians are less likely to work at all, and when they do, they work fewer hours.


The January 2005 issue of the Canadian Economic Observer analyzes the findings. According to the Observer: “The progress that has been made since the mid-1990s in closing the Canada/U.S. gap came not from improvements in productivity, but from improvements in the hours worked per capita in Canada relative to the United States.”


This is the first time the Canadian government has compared productivity levels in Canada to the United States. Past studies have only examined productivity growth rates.

Posted on September 12, 2011August 8, 2018

Best Practices for Diversity Training

Here are five of the best practices based on research and companies’ experiences.

• Communicate an individual business case. During the past decade, developing a business case for diversity has become a standard practice within companies. However, organizations also should communicate what Villanova University management professor Quinetta Roberson calls an individual business case. “People want to know, ‘What’s in it for me?’ ” says Roberson, who studies strategic diversity management. “Is this going to increase my skill set where I’m more likely to be identified as a high-potential or future leader? They need to be given some kind of motivation to learn.” That way, they’re more engaged when they attend training.

• Use experiential training focused on behaviors. “Generic and theoretical learning doesn’t have the same stickiness as experiential learning,” says Michael Hyter, president of diversity consultant Global Novations. Leading-edge practices incorporate experiential learning that develops skills rather than simulates discrimination. “We don’t teach people how to manage black people,” Hyter says. “We teach people how to teach people who are different than them.”

• Adopt clear metrics. Determine the goals of diversity training and evaluate its effectiveness, says Shilpa Pherwani, a managing partner with diversity consultant Ibis Consulting Group. Pherwani‘s firm tracks effectiveness by creating action plans for participants, tying the actions to organizational competencies. Steps may include setting specific recruiting and hiring goals for people of color and providing equitable opportunities to members of underrepresented groups.

• Encourage employees to practice what they learned. Managers need to provide opportunities for subordinates to apply their diversity training, Roberson says. “We saw examples where employees would go back to their job excited about what they learned, but their managers would say, ‘I don’t care about all that diversity stuff. You’ve been gone for a day or two. I need you to do X, Y and Z.’ ” But when managers share the newly trained subordinate’s enthusiasm, they’re reinforcing the message that the company values diversity and inclusion programs.

• Don’t expect training to be a panacea. “Diversity training just in and of itself doesn’t change the culture,” Pherwani says. It should be part of a comprehensive strategy that includes recruitment, mentoring and talent management. The diversity training helps explain the business rationale and provide skills to engage in difficult diversity conversations. Combining that training with a systemic approach provides a road map to organizations that want to build an inclusive culture, she says.

Workforce Management, August 2011, p. 14 — Subscribe Now!

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 … Page 53 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