Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Concerted Activity

When you think of the term "concerted activity" there is often an automatic assumption that a union, or union activity, is involved.  But that's not always the case.  Section 7 of the NLRA states "Employees shall have the right to self-organize, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities. . . " 
 
Protected concerted activity sometimes has nothing to do with unions at all.   Employees who get together and complain to management about their pay or benefits is engaged in concerted activity.   Concerted activity can include internal complaints of discrimination, discriminatory harassment complaints, etc., all of which is protected by Section 7 of the NLRA.  

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Gun Control?

This morning I began working on a blog addressing gun control in the workplace.  Little would I know that later today, at 1:30PM, a handful of people would be shot at the Lone Star College here in Houston.    I wasn't aware of the situation immediately, being holed up in my office behind a computer screen at the time.   The situation was brought to my attention by a fellow employee whose girlfriend was on campus that day.  Her safety became our immediate concern.  (I'm glad to say she is fine, having been in the Student Services office at the time.)

For employers:
In September 1, 2011, SB321 went into effect restricting public and private employers from prohibiting employees who are concealed handgun license holders, or otherwise lawfully possessing firearms or ammunition, from transporting or storing firearms or ammunition in the employee's privately-owned, locked car on the employer's premises. (This bill does not apply to an employer owned or leased car; most school districts, chemical manufacturers and oil/gas refineries.)

With employers focusing more and more on the safety of employees, some employers feel that SB321 is an infringement on their property rights. Further, that allowing employees to be in possession of firearms on company property endangers all employees by allowing easy access to weapons by any potentially violent or disgruntled worker.

The gun control debate continues to be waged furiously between those who want tougher gun control laws and those who support the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.   Adding fuel to the fire are employers and employees squaring off on the subject and the potential threat to safety in the workplace. 

The blog on gun control will have to wait until another day.  The subject hit a bit too close to home today.

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Marijuana Legalization and Texas Employers

With both Colorado and Washington passing state laws allowing for the legalization of recreational Marijuana use, Texas employers question the impact to their drug testing and substance abuse policies.   Without going into multiple scenarios or explanations, let's go with a short answer.  These laws have little, if any, effect on your policies/programs
 
Remember:
  1. Marijuana possession is still unlawful under Texas and federal law. 
  2. Texas has no law prohibiting employers from taking adverse action against employees engaged in lawful off-duty conduct.  As such, a Texas employer can take disciplinary action against an employee testing positive for Marijuana usage. 
  3. Federal law still criminalizes the possession of Marijuana even in states that have legalized it.

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Outside The Interview Process

We're all pretty much aware of what we can, and can't, ask during an interview process.  I mean, not everything is fair game.  Depending on the type of interview style or format in use, most employers have a standard list of questions that they use.    But even with the best interview processes we face flawed human judgement.

I don't quite remember where I ran across this, but below is an interesting list of candidate traits to keep an eye on during the interview process. 
  • Arrive late for interviews or who get lost (not prepared)
  • Bellyache about their current job (negative/disloyal)
  • Describe every accomplishment as a personal feat (loner/non-team player)
  • Speak before processing a question and its implications (careless thinker)
  • Disregard/poke fun at your administrative staff (not a strong team player/disrespectful)
  • Use diminutives to address junior staff/women professionals/their seniors (poor manager of diverse staff)
  • Use the passive voice extensively in conversation (not willing to take charge)
  • Cut others off before they have finished a thought (impatient)
As a closing recommendation, take the time to discuss the candidate with the receptionist.   How did the candidate interact with the receptionist?   What was his/her behavior like?  Pay close attention to the initial impression - whether yours or someone elses.   It may provide you with valuable insight!

Happy recruiting!


Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Is Gender Bias Alive And Well?

Gender Bias n. unequal treatment in employment opportunity (such as promotion, pay, benefits and privileges), and the expectations due to attitudes based on the sex of an employee or group of employees.  Gender bias can be a legitimate basis for a lawsuit under anti-discrimination statutes.
 
Gender bias begins at an early age.  From the pink or blue outfits children receive at infancy, the influence of toy selections, to how teachers respond to a child in school, or the books we read them at bedtime. (An April, 2011 study of gender bias in literature examined nearly 6,000 children's books published from 1900 to 2000.  Of those, 57% had a central male character compared with only 31% female protagonists.  Presumably animals of an indeterminate gender led the rest.)  So how do we respond to gender bias in the workplace?
 
First let's understand that gender bias is more subtle than sex discrimination.    Bias occurs because of personal values, perceptions and outdated, traditional views about men and women.  We may encounter gender bias in many forms and degrees.   For example, both men and women tend to view women who express anger more negatively than they view men who express anger.  Even when the members of both sexes use the same words and body language to express that anger.  Gender bias exists where men or women are evaluated or perceived differently depending on whether their actions violate expectations of how they should act or expectations of what behaviors are required for a role they have assumed.  Whether the subject of bias is male or female, the effects of gender bias can be devastating.
 
Beginning in as early as 1982,  state judiciaries began to address gender bias by creating a variety of research committees and task forces.  Since that time, attention around gender bias in the workplace has continued to grow in every industry.
 
Then:
"Gender bias exists in many forms throughout the Massachusetts court system.  Sexist language and behavior are still common, despite an increased understanding that these practices are wrong."  New England Law Review.  Volume 24, Spring 1990.

"The New Mexico Supreme Court is greatly concerned over manifestations of gender bias in the court environment within the State of New Mexico."  "In 1987, the State Bar of New Mexico established The Task Force on Women and the Legal Profession and requested that the Task Force examine the needs of women lawyers, their acceptance by the Bench and Bar in general. . . . . The Final Report, issued November 2, 1990, documented gender bias not only directed toward women lawyers, but affecting female litigants, witnesses, and court employees."

The State of Florida, Gender Bias Study Commission:  Executive Summary, found that "during it's two years of hearing and study, that gender bias -- discrimination based solely on one's sex -- is a reality for far too many people involved in the legal system.  (1990)

In 2011, a team at Yale University asked 127 professors at six U.S. research universities to judge the merits of college graduates.  The graduates were applying for a position as a lab manager before heading to graduate school.  While using identical resumes, of which half were obviously female applicants, the participates were significantly more likely to hire the man, and at a higher salary.  Interestingly enough, the bias was equally strong among both the female and male scientists and did not vary by age, race or discipline. (www.sciencemag.com)
 
Now:
"The Supreme Court's decision on the Walmart case - in which five justices, all male, sided with the company in denying 1.5 million female employees the right to pursue a class-action sex-discrimination lawsuit - showed a truly stunning obliviousness to the way gender bias actually plays out in the workplace."  The Daily Beast.  "The Supreme Court's Cluelessness on Gender Bias."  June 22, 2012.
 
MSLGroup currently has a class action lawsuit pending alleging gender pay discrimination.  The $100 million class action lawsuit was filed in February 2011 and represents women who worked at the agency from 2008 until the date of judgement.  Of the 33 total plaintiffs, two are current MSL employees.  One, Sheila McLean, is currently a SVP and a 12-year veteran of the firm.  The lawsuit alleges that MSL paid female professionals less; did not promote women at the same rate as male counterparts; and conducted discriminatory demotions, terminations and reassignments for female staffers during the agency's 2009 reorganization.
 
After all the steps we have taken, all the studies, polls, research papers, etc., gender bias is still alive and well in the workplace.  As an employer, you need to be aware if gender bias exists in your workforce.  Train your employees to identify it, and to acknowledge it.  Secondly, call attention to the bias.  Make a commitment to eliminating it in your workforce.
 
 Title VII prohibits discrimination "because of" an employee's sex. As an employer we may not take adverse action against an employee because of their sex. Sex can not play a role in any aspect of their employment including hiring, transfers, promotions, pay, disciplinary action, suspensions, and discharges. It's also important to understand that while Title VII was originally understood to apply only to women, that is no longer the case. It also prohibits discrimination against men. For example, when a male employee is denied a promotion in favor of a female employee, and the male can prove that the reason was "because of his sex," there may be claim for sex discrimination.

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Effective Job Advertisements: A Bit Of Humor

For a job advertisement to be effective it needs to provide information that captures the interest of the best candidates.  And yet, it must avoid any discriminatory language that might violate federal or state laws.  The advertisement should provide enough information about the job, including the education, experience and skills that will allow the candidate to decide whether or not s/he is a fit.  For just a moment I want to poke fun at a few current job advertisements I ran across.

For the first advertisement, let's roll on over to Craigslist/Houston and look at the advertisement for a "National Director of Human Resources."  We all know that there are guidelines for employers to use during the selection process. These guidelines ensure that the information requested is of business necessity only and is job-related.  This organization wants a complete profile including a picture and a short video of the candidate.  Really?  Requesting that an applicant submit a photograph, mandatory or optionally, at any time before hiring is an unfair pre-employment inquiry.  Can you read potentially discriminatory?  Employer please take note, it is totally acceptable to request a photograph after hiring and if for identification purposes.

Example number 2 can be found on CareerBuilder.com.  A real estate organization in San Antonio is seeking an HR Department Manager.  The posting reads, "Human Resource experience is not required."  Okay, not a problem - if there was an educational requirement in lieu of experience!  This organization is requesting that the individual create policies and procedures and be responsible for employment law.  There is a long laundry list of responsibilities for the position. As a potential employer, you should ponder some of the basic requirements of the position.  Take the time to properly identify and develop a description of the required behaviors, abilities, skills, and knowledge of the position.  My 17 year old could apply for the position and, theoretically, couldn't be disqualified from the application process.  He does have the reliable transportation, a valid driver's license and vehicle insurance that is requested in the posting.  With a base pay of $45 - 90K, I'm sure he'd just love it. 
 
The last posting, back at Craiglist/Houston, advertises a "2-day HR Gig."  The potential employer is requesting a "very experienced HR professional (2-5 years)" to work with them on a two day engagement.  The job?  Represent the employer on a two day "introduction presentation/session" with a client.  The individual is coached and prepped on the company, then on day two, the individual presents the information to the client.  The compensation for this jewel of a job "will be interesting" according to the advertisement.  I'd run from this one.  But, if any brave soul accepts this position, I'd be morbidly interested in the details!  I think there's smoke and mirrors involved here.
 
Happy recruiting!


Thursday, January 3, 2013

2013 Top EEOC Enforcement Topics

2013 is here and so are new challenges for employers!  Via HR Alert, below is a list of the top 5 EEOC enforcement topics for 2013. 
 
  1. Strict leave policies and ADA.  To avoid EEOC attention, ensure that you are providing proper reasonable accommodations to disabled individuals.  Also under the EEOC microscope will be leave policies like no-fault attendance, fixed-leave and 100% healed (policies requiring an employee to be fully healthy before returning to work.)
  2. LGBT Issues:  EEOC will be looking for signs of discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals.  In April 2012 the EEOC issued a precedent-setting case, Macy v. Holder, that interpreted existing laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex to also prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sex stereotyping (believing a man must be masculine and a woman feminine, for example).   EEOC determined that transgender employees are covered under Title VII.
  3. Leave Policies for Pregnant Workers.   Review your leave policies to ensure they don't open the door to discrimination against pregnant workers.
  4. Litigation of national and regional class-action cases.  Employers can expect to see a continued emphasis on company wide investigations. 
  5. Use of background checks in hiring process.  In April the EEOC released its guidance on the use of arrest and conviction records in employment decisions.  If you need a refresher, refer back to my June 6, 2012 blog for the enforcement guidelines.   As an employer you need to ensure you understand the differences between arrest and conviction records and how, in some instances, the use of an individuals criminal history in making an employment decision may violate the prohibition against employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
Happy Thursday everyone!

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

Fiscal Cliff: Payroll Department Take Note!

With Congress averting the plunge off the fiscal cliff, here's a couple of items for payroll professionals to take note of.

H.R. 8, The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, made permanent Bush-era tax rates for all but the highest earners.  This means no tax increase in income tax rates for employees taxed at the 10%, 15%, 25%, 28% and 33% rates.  It is anticipated that President Obama will sign the bill this week.  H.R. 8 also includes a few other payroll provisions including; the employer wage credit for employees who are on military leave is extended retroactive to January 1, 2012 and will expire on December 31, 2013; and, employer-provided educational assistance under tax code Section 127 is permanently extended.

Effective January 1, employers must resume withholding at the 6.2% Social Security payroll tax.  Congress declined to extend the payroll tax economic stimulus that took place in 2011 and 2012 in which the employee's share of payroll tax was lowered to 4.2%.  Underwithholding should be corrected as soon as possible, but not later than March 31, 2013.  Consider notifying employees this week of changes that will impact their take-home pay! The increase to 6.2% for employees means that an employee with an income of $50,000 to $75,000 will pay an average of $985 more in taxes. 

On January 1 the IRS released the 2013 Percentage Method Tables indicating that employers should implement the 2013 tables ASAP, but not later than February 15th.  Unfortunately these tables do not reflect the H.R. 8's tax brackets.  Keep an eye out for updated tables.  In addition to reissuing the 2013 withholding tables, we're waiting on the release of the 2013 Form W-4.

Happy New Year!