Posted on Wed, Sep 08, 2010 @ 07:15 AM
In the spirit of keeping our readers out of trouble (a common theme of our business), we'd like to talk a bit about policy development. One of the biggest things that gets employers in trouble from an employee relations standpoint is poor use (or no use) of formal internal policies. Many companies don't even have an employee handbook, which obviously completely negates any sort of "that's our policy" defense in case of legal issues.
The development of an effective leave of absence policy in a small employer company requires many considerations. Here are the five key components of an effective leave of absence policy:
- Legal Compliance
- Organizational Culture
- Cost
- Administrative Burden
- Workforce Demographics
Legal Compliance
Ensuring the company is in legal compliance is the highest priority for any employer. Some leaves are legally required, depending on the size of the organization. For instance, the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) is primarily concerned with companies of 50 or more employees.
The HR professional needs a thorough understanding of required state and federal leaves before developing a leave of absence policy. Consideration should also be given to the future. For example, a company with 45 employees with solid growth may want to go ahead and implement an FMLA policy.
Organizational Culture
The desired culture of the organization is also an important piece for the HR professional to understand. This involves understanding the company’s strategic and philosophical tendencies. The company should consider how it wants to be viewed internally and externally. A proper leave of absence policy may help a company that is concerned with attraction and retention issues.
Cost
With any organization, large or small, cost is going to be a crucial consideration. A leave of absence policy can have direct and indirect costs to a company. A direct cost would be the actual cost of having an employee gone (vacation pay, for instance). An indirect cost may be the morale cost of those still at work.
Administrative Burden
Don't forget about those who are left to keep track of everything. The administrative burden of this policy needs to be considered, as this can have a significant impact on smaller companies' administrative staffs who are probably already stretched paper thin. Complex leave policies require more administrative work to keep records accurate and policies current.
Workforce Demographics
Finally, an HR professional must understand the demographics of the workforce. This allows a better understanding of what types of leaves will have the most impact.
Resources in this Post:
--
Help Integrity HR Spread the Word!
Use our blog as a resource - http://integrityhr.com/blog
Stay on top of of your organization by subscribing to our blog via email or RSS to the left. If you would like to Contact Us about any of the concepts in the above blog posting please call 502.753.0970.
Before You Go, Leave Your Feedback and Comments Below!
Posted on Thu, Aug 26, 2010 @ 07:08 AM
Are You Losing the Unemployment Claims Battle?
It’s probably comes as no surprise that unemployment claims have risen substantially in the past eighteen months, and while hiring rates seem to be increasing gradually, there’s not yet an end in sight as benefits continue to be extended.
Understandably, the number of companies disputing claims are also increasing, as is the number of employers who take the step to appeal and overturn a unemployment benefits award.
However, judging by the relatively low number of claims and appeals being won by the employers, not many are doing a very good job of fighting unemployment claims. Here’s why, and here's how your company can do a better job.
1.) Poor or No Documentation
Many employers fail to realize that the documentation they provide regarding an employee’s work history and termination will be translated as evidence by the unemployment office. Simply put - No documentation = No evidence.
The burden of proof that the employee was fired for cause is on the employer entirely, and they must prove the termination was cause to deny benefits. While it is legal in most states to terminate an employee at will, many employers do not know that termination under at will does not deny an employee their unemployment benefits.
Included in this documentation of employment and termination needs to be verification that the employee was aware of company policies, such as signature of receipt for the employee handbook and other types of internal company training.
Additionally, if an employee is terminated for a violation not outlined in the employee handbook (give that link a look if you're not sure if all of your "policies" are documented), employers are going to have a tough time proving that a violation even took place, especially if the employee was never warned of their behavior.
Around here we like to call these expensive little mishaps "unwritten policies." Here are two extremely helpful blog posts discussing these all too common omissions and why you should avoid them.
If you need help with your employee handbook, drop us a line immediately. This is one of the most important pieces of a properly functioning small business.
2.) The Wrong Representative
Who usually handles the appeals hearings in your company? Hopefully Human Resources or an HR representative is speaking on behalf of the employer during the hearings, as it should be.
These hearings are defined by protocol and it’s important that the employer side be led by a highly experienced professional, such as the Certified HR Professionals at Integrity HR (yes, we provide this service to our clients). However, that usually is not enough.
Unless the representative witnessed first-hand the behavior that led to termination, it can be perceived as hearsay. Sure, it’s professional hearsay if HR is speaking regarding what the supervisor told them or even documented, but the hearing officer will need to hear it straight from the supervisor’s mouth for it to hold much weight.
The same is true for anyone who witnessed the behavior that led to termination – or who can attest to the employer’s consistent application of the policy in question. Having these witnesses available to provide personal testimony is key and employers must often determine if they want to invest the time to pull them away from their duties in order to participate, or if they want to risk the validity of their appeal.
If a witness absolutely cannot be present, a signed and sworn statement from the witness may be substituted (considering, of course, it is provided to the hearing officer and the claimant as required in advance of the hearing)
3.) Inaccurate Reason for Termination
This all comes down to why the employee was terminated. If the employee is terminated for attendance, this is what they are told, and this is what is provided in the unemployment fact finding interview, then that is what will be considered. Employers cannot be at the appeals stage and then add that performance was an issue, or attitude, or productivity, or anything else that was never before mentioned.
If these reasons apply, they need to be valid reasons from the beginning. No matter how many written warnings an employee may have for attendance, if they are terminated for poor work quality, proof of the poor work quality is going to be what’s required.
Remember, having a lawful reason to terminate an employee does not necessarily mean that that employee will be denied unemployment benefits. While terminating an employee lawfully should be what is of utmost concern, employers who wish to fight and deny unemployment claims must also be able to validate their reasons, and provide evidence to support them.
The Bottom Line:
The cold fact of the matter is that in this current economy with unemployment rates being what they are, odds simply are not in favor of the employer. If employers wish to fight unemployment claims now and moving forward it is up to them to raise those odds with the proper documentation, communication, and representation outlined above.
Resources From This Article:
(image provided by freedigitalphotos.net)
--
Help Integrity HR Spread the Word!
Use our blog as a resource - http://integrityhr.com/blog
Stay on top of of your organization by subscribing to our blog via email or RSS to the left. If you would like to Contact Us about any of the concepts in the above blog posting please call 502.753.0970.
Before You Go, Leave Your Feedback and Comments Below!
Posted on Tue, Aug 03, 2010 @ 07:09 AM
Job Titles Can Effect Productivity
A couple of weeks ago, we blogged about the psychological value of job titles with respect to the importance of establishing proper supervisory roles in the chain of command. There is some good info in there. If you missed it make sure to take a look with the link above.
Today we take a look at the effect that job titles have on human behavior and just how that might (and most likely does) affect the performance of your employees.
Many people hold a large amount of intrinsic value with their job title, which means there is a large likelihood that the name of one's job title and what that title means to them can develop into a self-fulfilling prophecy. This follows another one of Cialdini's Principles of Persuasion called "Consistency." (You’ll note we referenced Authority in the previous job title post).
For example, if you give a person a title like "Assistant" they are very likely to behave in accordance with that title. Now you might say, well if they are an assistant then they should behave like an assistant. True, but what if they're not an assistant at all? What if the job paradigm your company lives by doesn't fit the position anymore? What if this person or position has evolved to the point where they have been given many new responsibilities?
The label assistant no longer fits, and that's a big deal to a lot of people. You see people often identify themselves by their job titles. If they're stuck with a title that denotes something less than they are (or potentially could be), this could be a huge drain on their productivity.
In the above case this person will be more likely to behave like an assistant, and thus holding them back from their potential, until a change is made.
The reverse is also true. Those who are assigned titles like "Manager" "Manager of" "Supervisor" or other titles that denote success and power in their eyes, will feel inherently tied to those roles, will identify with them, and are more likely to behave consistently with them.
Job Titles Must Align With Your Company Culture
Of course there is an issue of title consistency across the organization. You want to be sure that your titles are consistent with the culture of your business as well as your employee handbook policies.
Of course you can't give everyone titles like manager and supervisor. The value of your titles would be deflated in no time. But perhaps you can get creative.
For example Microsoft gives its product demonstrators and promoters the title of "Evangelist." A business contact of mine calls his staff "Support Superstars." Apple calls its staff at its retail locations "Geniuses." You know what I think when I hear those titles? I think to myself, "that must be a cool company culture. Odds are your employees will think the same thing.
Just be careful not to get too creative. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar after all, right Sigmund? An important point to keep in mind is that your titles must align with your company culture, your chain of command, and your company policies - otherwise they lose their value entirely (don't get stuck in an old paradigm if your policies are out of date).
The point is to think about how your employees might feel about their job titles. Might people in your organization feel better about coming into work every day if they had titles that they were comfortable with, titles that made them feel like they were going somewhere, titles that allow them to feel great about handing over their business card to potential customers?
Don’t get me wrong here. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with traditional job titles, as long as those job titles are used properly. I'm just saying, like Zappos, don't be afraid to get your employees’ input about their job titles at their performance reviews.
What's in a Job Title Takeaways:
Simply this. Recognize the effect that job titles have on your staff. You may have potential rising stars at your company who are stuck with a job title that is de-motivating to them. Maybe they don’t even know it themselves. But think about it. Who might those people be? Get their input.
Job titles have a larger effect on people than you might think.
Resources in this post:
--
Help Integrity HR Spread the Word!
Use our blog as a resource - http://integrityhr.com/blog
Stay on top of of your organization by subscribing to our blog via email or RSS to the left. If you would like to Contact Us about any of the concepts in the above blog posting please call 502.753.0970.
Before You Go, Leave Your Feedback and Comments Below!
Posted on Wed, Jul 21, 2010 @ 03:16 PM
The Importance of Job Titles:
- "What was your last position called?"
- "Was that an appropriate title?”
These questions are among the many that the hiring managers at Zappos.com, a wildly successful online shoe company, ask of their job candidates. Why in the world do they ask such things? Because they know job titles have a lot larger effect on people than simply determining what pay grade they should be at within the company. There are deep psychological effects that are often difficult to recognize.
Zappos understands that if there is a disconnect between the duties of the person and the job title, that often times a person will not be able to adequately do their job because they are not viewed by others within the company to have the authority to do so.
For example, I can recall an experience when a friend of mine was expected to take on a management role at the same level in the chain of command of those workers who were being overseen, i.e. this person was operating in a management role without being given a management title. What happened was that as hard as this person tried they could not get these employees that had been told to listen... to listen. In this situation there was a disconnect between this person's title, and their responsibilities.
This wasn't an issue lack of management skills. In fact this person was highly successful manager at a previous job. This was an issue of another kind of a authority, the credibility difference that naturally exists between having titles like "Manager" or "Supervisor" and titles like "Coordinator", "Assistant", "Specialist" or whatever the case may be. "Authority" is one of the Six Psychological Principles of Persuasion that Robert Cialdini, a famous Behavioral Psychologist lists in his classic book "Influence." It has large implications in business.
Cialdini recognized that by nature, humans have a higher regard for the direction and input of authority figures (those with the innate credibility of managers, supervisors, bosses, etc.) in the workplace. Humans are literally psychologically programmed to listen to authority. If we do not feel that someone is credible, we are far less likely to listen.
So What's the Lesson?
Be consistent with your job titles. If someone needs to be in a position of authority it is not enough to simply tell his or her future subordinate(s) to listen without issuing a title change. Psychologically this person is still viewed as an equal unless a formal change is made.
That's just the first part of the argument though. There is another very deeply rooted psychological effect that job titles have on people. We'll discuss that in the next post.
Until then, think about those individuals that you could not do without who you trust to maintain order and productivity within your organization. Have they been given the proper authority and tools to do so?
Have you ever encountered a situation like this? Feel free to share your comments.
Resources in this Post:
--
Help Integrity HR Spread the Word!
Use our blog as a resource - http://integrityhr.com/blog
Stay on top of of your organization by subscribing to our blog via email or RSS to the left. If you would like to Contact Us about any of the concepts in the above blog posting please call 502.753.0970.
Before You Go, Leave Your Feedback and Comments Below!
Posted on Thu, Jul 08, 2010 @ 11:54 AM
Our last blog posting dealt with the Top 5 Salary Employment Law Myths and gave a bit of insight about each. While some of you probably know that these myths are, in fact, just myths, even an occasional seasoned business professional is guilty of believing a few of these, whether he or she will admit it or not.
If you didn't get a chance to read that, it's a goodie. Check that one out before you read this follow-up post. It might be a good idea to review it anyway.
Know Your Rights as an Employer
Please know that the idea behind these employer’s arguments is not to abuse employees or make them work unreasonable hours. However, they are defenses against employees who believe that because they are “salary” they can come and go as they please without answering to a defined schedule, or who believe that they deserve equal time off for any time they work over 40 hours.
In a reasonable workplace that follows salary employment law, everyone works what is required to get the job done, and those who are required to put in extra time are rewarded (hopefully) for a job well done. Most employers do not want to resort to forcing employees to use PTO (paid time off) – they hope that their employees will recognize when PTO is required and will request it to cover their time.
Keep Proper Policies and Enforce Them
Most employers certainly do not want to resort to docking anyone’s salary for absences – however, the abuse of time off by some salaried exempt employees is forcing their hand. Make sure you've got the proper policies in your employee handbook in place to enforce this if / when it happens (think: is your employee handbook up to date?).
What’s the most simple resolution to this problem? Discipline. It's a word most don't like to use, but discipline is important. Managers need to discipline the abusers so that they are not forced to implement policies that will reduce flexibility for everyone else who puts in their time to get the job done. Not only discipline, but consistent discipline. If you take action against one person, make sure that action is consistent across the organization in order to avoid favoritism.
Properly Classify Employees and Train Managers to Know the Difference
Management also needs to be certain every employee is properly classified as exempt or non-exempt. There are very specific requirements for a position to be exempt from overtime. Putting someone on salary is neither a “perk” nor a way to get out paying overtime. Failure to properly classify employees can lead to major headaches, major fines, and major backpay settlements. Drop us a comment if you'd like more info on this point.
Lastly, managers can only implement a solid program for addressing the time of salaried exempt personnel once they understand what is and is not allowed under FLSA -- so be careful who you listen to, there are a lot of myths flying around out there. Make sure your department managers are trained to know the differences between salary and non-salary. This can end up costing your company quite a bit of money otherwise.
Resources in this Post:
Psst.. Check out our new Facebook group "like" application to the left of this article. If you like what you see in our blog, give us a "like" on Facebook by clicking the button inside the box.
--
Help Integrity HR Spread the Word!
Use our blog as a resource - http://integrityhr.com/blog
Stay on top of of your organization by subscribing to our blog via email or RSS to the left. If you would like to Contact Us about any of the concepts in the above blog posting please call 502.753.0970.
Before You Go, Leave Your Feedback and Comments Below!