Workplace Trends for 2015 #2

Trend #2 as reported in Forbes:

2.  More millennials are taking leadership roles.  "A few years ago, PayScale.com and my company found that nearly 13% of all millennials in America were managers already.  That number is expected to grow in 2015 as millennials become the largest workforce for the very first time."

HRi:  In late November the US Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted that millennials will make up approximately 75% of the workforce by 2030.  Now, in 2015, millennials account for the highest percentage of workers compared to Gen X and Boomers.   Adding to the equation, millennials are the most educated generation in history as well as ambitious and eager for career advancement!

DOMA Decision

Lower courts have begun to issue rulings based on the Supreme Court's June 26, 2013, Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) decision, with two district courts recently extending the ruling's application.  In addition, the Department of Labor revised a fact sheet on qualifying reasons for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), in response to the Supreme Court's historic decision this summer striking down Section 3 of DOMA.

Employee Accountability

I ran across a definition for accountability that I feel truly identifies its precise meaning; ". . . the responsibility of the employee to accomplish with integrity the defined and assigned tasks required by his/her job within a reasonable time in order to assist the organization to fulfill its goals." 

Is employee accountability important?  Yes!  Employee accountability is important to a business's success as a whole.  It is the cornerstone of business success.  A Gallup poll estimates that the lost productivity that stems from disengaged and unaccountable employees costs American businesses between $287 and $370 billion annually.  This is through customer loss due to poor service, high employee turnover and quality control issues, just to name a few impacted areas.

How can you engender a culture of accountability in your workplace?  Through the effective communication of goals, expectations, success and failures.   These are the fundamental tenants of accountability. 

Establish the beliefs and values required for accountability in your organization.  Behavior will follow belief.

• Communicate accountability
• Coach accountability
• Practice accountability

DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act)

First the history lesson.  The Defense of Marriage Act was enacted September 21, 1996, allowing states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages granted under the laws of other states. 

Section 3 of the Act was ruled unconstitutional in June, 2013 thereby allowing same-sex married couples to be recognized as "spouses" for purposes of federal laws, and allowing them to receive federal protections such as Social Security, health insurance and retirement savings.  Essentially, same-sex couples who are legally married deserve equal rights to the benefits under Federal law that go to all other married couples. 

If you have followed the DOMA case, you know by now that the ruling will have far-reaching implications.  The recent ruling which mandates that all officially recognized marriages be treated equally under the law, has immediate legal ramifications for the 12 states that already allow same-sex marriages.  Opponents of same-sex marriage are bracing themselves for a wave of legal challenges in the states that do not recognize marriages of gay and lesbian couples. 

What does all of this mean for Human Resources and Texas employers?  Well, here in Texas marriage is defined as the "relationship between a man and a woman."   While the Supreme Court removed the federal definition of marriage, it left it to the states to decide whether to honor other states' laws on the matter.  This does not mean that Texas is required to legalize same-sex marriage.  Texas Family Code 6.204 states same-sex marriages performed in other states are void in Texas.  For Texas, there isn't a huge impact immediately.  However, employers should revisit the definition of "spouse" in their benefit plans to ensure that the definition is consistent with the employer's intent, in light of the Windsor decision.  With regard to qualified pensions, plan language and procedures will need to be considered because same-sex spouses have additional rights to federally protected benefits. 

Terminating With Dignity

One of the less enjoyable aspects of my job is having to terminate an employee.  While the decision to terminate may be the best step for the organization, one of HRs goals should be to maintain the employee's dignity throughout the process.  When it is necessary to terminate an employee, here are a few guidelines that I recommend:

1. Consider the timing.  NEVER terminate on a Friday.
2. Always plan out the termination.  Who is terminating the employee and what should be said. 
3. During the termination process, provide the employee with positive feedback about some aspect of their work performance.  They need the kind words!  "Even in the termination based on performance, prompted by the fact that acquired skills were not adequate for a particular situation, the person's assets and liabilities can still be acknowledged," wrote Richard Bayer in Business Horizons.
4. Have an information package available for the employee.  It should contain items such as a termination letter outlining the reasons for the termination (remember to stick to the facts).  Discuss severance, compensation for unused vacation, unemployment compensation, benefits, any type of outplacement assistance, etc.
5. Don't allow yourself to be caught up in the emotions of the termination process.
6. Allow the individual to vent if necessary. After they have vented, allow them a decompression period.  They need to have some control over their departure!
7. Always, always, handle with compassion.

Please remember that each termination decision that is made carries a profound impact on at least one human being's life.  Handle with care.

Happy Birthday to the Equal Pay Act

50 years ago today the Equal Pay Act was signed by President John F. Kennedy.  While equal pay is the law, the nation still faces gender wage disparities.  In 2012, women generally earned 77 percent of men's wages.  For African-American and Latina women, the number is even lower.    We have made progress, but it's not enough.

The Equal Pay Act requires that men and women in the same workplace be given equal pay for equal work.  The jobs need not be identical, but they must be substantially equal.  Remember that job descriptions and titles are irrelevant. 

On the front line of this battle is the EEOC who has made enforcing equal pay laws one of its six priorities as outlined in the Strategic Enforcement Plan.

Mother-Friendly Employers

While driving home I heard a radio commercial advertising Mother-Friendly Employers here in Texas.  We've come a long way.  Who would have thought that companies would advertise their support of breastfeeding in the workplace?  Or that a work-site might obtain "Mother-Friendly" designation?

The Texas House of Representatives passed HB 741 in early May.  HB 741 requires public employers, school districts, cities, counties and state agencies, to accommodate employees who need to express breast milk at the work place.  Under current law, working mothers who are hourly employees have federal protections in place for when they need to express milk in the workplace.  (The Federal Health Care Reform Bill, signed in March 2010, contained an amendment to the FLSA requiring employers to give breaks for nursing.)  However, salaried employees have no protections in state or federal law.  House Bill 741 seeks to close this loophole.

Territorial Behavior in Employees

When we were children we were taught to share our toys.  Through sharing we learned patience (waiting our turn), problem solving (who gets to play with what) and social skills (discussing and reaching solutions). 

Now, let's fast-forward a few years into the work environment where one of the most important assets any organization has is the combined knowledge and expertise of its employees.  "Combined knowledge" would infer that information is shared in the workplace.  Where information is not shared, information silos develop having a profound effect on your ability to develop a cooperative work environment.

So, why do some employees guard information so carefully?    On a very basic level, its job security.    If knowledge is power, sharing knowledge is a loss of power.  Company information is seen as intellectual property for the individual. Territorial employees control the flow of information in an effort to make themselves irreplaceable.    If the employee feels threatened, he/she may become territorial and retain information or information is meted out in meager portions.  Be observant.  Territorial behavior isn't restricted to only employees.  It can be observed between managers and even departments. 

End your turf wars.   Work with your employees to foster an environment of sharing. 

Managing with Questions

How do you show your employees that their opinions matter?  Ask questions.  It's as simple as that.  Questions such as:

• What made you mad today?
• What took too long?
• What caused complaints today?
• What was misunderstood today?
• What cost too much?
• What was wasted?
  What was too complicated?
• What was just plain silly?
• What job involved too many people?
• What job involved too many actions?

Communicating with your employees will improve organization communication.  I know that you're tired of me saying that any organizations greatest resource is its people.  But there, I said it again!  Remember, employees feel appreciated and valued when they are listened to!

Policies: Do the Employees Get It?

Earlier today I had a long-tenured employee ask “What are the procedures for documenting sick leave?”  “ .. . . I realize it is documented someplace but I’m not sure where and I thought you would know it off “the top of your head” saving me the trouble of finding it.”    I smiled.  This document in question is located in both the employee handbook as well as a standalone policy on the HR portal.

Companies devote substantial time and resources in developing policies.  Once policies are developed we roll them out in meetings, post them, put them on the company intranet, distribute them via email, and/or hard copy distribution.   We obtain the signed acknowledgement as proof that the employee received and is aware of the policy - thereby negating any future claims from the employee that s/he "didn't know."   But no matter how or how often policies are communicated, sometimes it seems the company falls short in the communication of the policy.  Are the policies then wasted?  No, but perhaps we need to better understand our audience.  How are our employees receiving the information we are communicating?  Words must always be carefully chosen; nuances must be considered. 

My recommendation, schedule assessments of your company policies at regular intervals. This will allow you to assess the employee understanding of the policies and to obtain feedback.

Yes, you will still have the rare employee who finds it easier to ask HR than look something up.  But, after all, that's why we're here!

Workplace Violence

"Workplace violence is now recognized as a specific category of violent crime. . . "  FBI, Workplace Violence, Issues in Response.

 

It is believed that 2 million American workers are victims of workplace violence each year.  2012 statistics reflect that nearly 1 out of 5 occupational fatalities is attributed to workplace violence.  In 2011, 780 fatalities (attributed to violence) occured with men making up the majority of fatal workplace injuries.   Media coverage has a tendancy to create an impression that workplace violence is more widespread than it is.  While incidents of workplace violence are serious, the rates of workplace violence have dropped sharply since the mid-90s.

 

Whether harassment or intimidation, the threat of physical violence or other threatening behavior, the prevention of workplace violence is a major concern for employers and employees.  Employers should train managers and supervisors to recognize the warning signs of potential workplace violence. 

 

Here's a couple of basic steps you can take:

1. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate.  Ensure that the employee has an outlet for frustration.  Allow the employee to vent.  If your organization offers an Employee Assistance Program, ensure employees are aware of it and can use it as needed.
2. Assess your business climate.  Be aware of what's going on in your workplace. Pay attention to unusual changes in employee behavior. Has there been any recent events which could increase the sensitivity of an employee?   (Devil's Advocate here.  A couple of questions.  Do you know the spouse's names of your employees?  How many children they have, their names?  Are they going through a divorce or other life trauma?  If you can't answer these questions, you don't know your employees.  If you don't know your employees, how can you tell if there is something wrong?)
3. Prevention.  Employees spend the majority of their lives in the workplace.  Disagreements are always going to happen, how you handle those disagreements is key.  Potential aggressors can be identified - just look for the warning signs. Warning signs can include strange behavior such as the employee becoming reclusive, erratic behavior, deteriorating appearance.  Other observable warning signs can be emotional problems and/or performance problems.

The 2012 documentary, Murder by Proxy: How America Went Postal, is framed around the USPS shootings that took place in the 80s and 90s. I found the documentary interesting as a provided the perspective of a postal carrier who survived a shooting in 1991 (Royal Oak, Michigan) and his ongoing efforts to urge lawmakers to pass legislation designed to curb workplace employee "abuse."  Not just a film about mass murders, the documentary addresses some of the underlying issues within the workforce that drove individuals to begin killing at random.   

 

In the closing minutes of the documentary, possibilities other than mass workplace shootings are considered.   James Alan Fox, Ph.D., Lipman Professor of Criminal Justice at Northeastern University, states; "Sabotage could be even more deadly and a greater risk to safety than bringing a gun to work." "It could be poisoning products, creating environmental contaminants. . . "  (September 1982 seven people in the Chicago area were killed by Tylenol capsules laced with potassium cyanide.  I don't believe this case was ever solved, so I can proffer the scenario that this could have been the work of a disgruntled employee. )

 

The bottom line? Workplace violence needs to be proactively dealt with.   We can't completely eliminate it, but we can mitigate risk for violence by educating and training our managers, supervisors and employees.

Employee Turnover

Granted, it's early in December and maybe a bit early to begin calculating my 2012 turnover rate.  I'm concerned that the organization is developing a revolving door when it comes to the employees.   After calculating I find my turnover is at 20.48%.    Should I panic? 

  

Turnover can be a result of many factors and oftentimes it isn't about the money. It's about the environment. The employee can be unhappy, feel under appreciated. They may experience supervisor conflict, or the supervisor may have poor leadership skills.  Employee pay may be unequal or substandard.   If their skills are in demand, they may be lured away by other employers.  Perhaps the employee feels that he/she has no future in the organization.

 

When an organization must replace an employee, the organization will incur direct and indirect expenses.  Expenses such as recruiting, new hire training, loss of productivity, etc.  To replace even an entry level employee can cost up to 25% of his/her salary.  And then there are other hidden costs of high turnover.   Surviving employees have to absorb the work of the departing employees,  may experience increased stress levels, feel demoralized and ultimately move on as well. 

Take a look at your turnover.  Is it beneficial or harmful?  What steps can you take to halt and/or reduce employee turnover?

 

 

We'll Miss The Twinkies

Talks between Hostess management and the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Union failed on November 20th.  If a favorable agreement had been reached, over 18,000 jobs would have been saved.  It is unfortunate, but Hostess brand began terminating most of its 18,000 employees last week.  This action came after Hostess won court approval to shut down and start selling assets.

CEO Gregory Rayburn said 15,000 workers would be fired as soon as possible so that they could begin receiving unemployment benefits.  The Court ordered the Company to implement a non-executive employee retention plan to ensure the Company has the necessary personnel to implement the wind down.  Approximately 3,200 employees will stay on temporarily to clean plants and begin to wind down operations.  Employee headcount is expected to decrease by 95% within the first 16 weeks.  The closure of 33 bakeries, 565 distribution centers, approximately 5,500 delivery routes, and 570 bakery outlet stores could take up to three months. 

WARN Act
In May, Hostess Brands Inc. mailed out WARN Act notices to its employees.  The WARN Act requires companies to give workers sixty (60) days notice before closing a facility or performing a mass layoff.  Spokeswoman Anita-Marie Laurie stated Hostess wanted to notify employees that a "sale or wind down of the company is possible in the future." 

On November 21st a former employee, Mark Popovich, filed for damages on behalf of himself and all employees laid off by Hostess.  "We believe Hostess violated the federal WARN Act as well as state laws.  These employees deserved better," said Charles A. Ercole, who filed the Complaint for Mr. Popovich.   Failure to give sixty (60) days advance notice violates the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act. 

Hostess has a different viewpoint believing that the multiple notices issued throughout 2012 and the court declaration to layoff workers are sufficient to excuse it from WARN Act liability.

There are a lot of different versions as to who is to blame for the failure of Hostess and the loss of so many jobs.  Whether mismanagement or a union failing to make concessions, there are now 18,000 people facing unemployment.  The largest number of employees impacted are based in Irving, Texas.  I'm sad to say I haven't been able to find any information relating to job fairs for the Irving employees.    Texas, let's get moving on that shall we?  The Utah Department of Workforce Services and Ogden/Weber Technology College is hosting a job fair this Thursday for former Hostess employees. 

Hostess, previously with annual sales of about $2.5 billion, had been making 500 million Twinkies annually prior to the shutdown.  We'll miss the Twinkies. . . .

Management and Mr. Likert

Do you ever have to go through your old emails in search of some missing piece of information?  It's akin to a trip down memory lane.  You never know what you will stumble across or where you will end up.    During a recent journey,  I rediscovered this one small email and felt it worthy of discussion.   Yes, the email is cryptic.  But the message screamed volumes to me.

Him:  Are you familiar with Likert’s management theories? 

Me:  Are we speaking of exploitative authority?

Him:  We are.  Like verbatim.

Me.  Yes sir.  (End of conversation)

There are a lot of different definitions of the word “management,” but for the sake of this blog, I’m going with a very fundamental definition. Getting things done through and with people.  

Rensis Likert, an American educator and organizational psychologist, is best known for his research on management styles.  (And let’s not forget The Likert Scale.)   Likert identified a four-fold model of management styles,  each style revolving around decision-making and the degree to which people are involved in the decision making process:

1. Exploitative Authoritative;
2. Benevolent Authoritative;
3. Consultative; and,
4. Participative.    

With that email in mind, let's explore the Exploitative Authoritative management style.  For the EA, responsibility lies in the hands of the people at the upper echelons of the hierarchy.  The supervisor has no trust or confidence in subordinates and motivation is based on threats.  Decisions are imposed on sub-ordinates and teamwork/communication is extremely limited.  Essentially the communication style is almost entirely downwards and the psychologically distant concerns of the employees are ignored. With a style of “do what I tell you,” the overall impact to an organization is extremely negative.

In short, the leader imposes decisions on subordinates and uses fear to achieve employee motivation. 

“E-A leaders are highly production-oriented, display no confidence in their subordinates, provide them no influence in decision making, seldom seek or use subordinates’ ideas, use fear, a threat, punishment and occasional rewards to enforce compliance, and engage mainly in downward communication.”  Organization & Management by R.D. Agarwal.

Let's compare the EA management style against the characteristics of an effective work group.  In an effective work group there is a high degree of confidence and trust in each other.  The values and goals of the group all link in harmony with each other and there is strong motivation by each member to communicate fully and frankly.  An important factor is that employees feel secure in making decisions.  That is 100% at odds with the EA management style.

The “difference between a leader and a manager is that a manager pushes while a leader pulls.  By this, we mean that a manager uses its authoritative powers to push people to reach the set targets and pressurize them to achieve the firm’s goal.  He orders actually.  While a leader pulls, that is, it motivates people and develops zeal in them towards achieving a goal. . . “    The Role and Effectiveness of Leadership in Team-Working: Abstract.

In closing, I ask the following question:  If your employees had the chance, would they "vote" you out of your position?

Creating a Feedback Culture

Feedback is a communication process between two individuals. It emphasizes the flow of dialog and creates clarity and understanding. For an organization to grow and it's employees to learn, employees must have feedback. Without it, they don't know how they are performing, what's working and what's not, and where changes need to be made. 

"Creating a culture where employees share productive feedback can become an integral part of a growing organization's development strategy towards strategic goals." Creating a Feedback Culture. Research Report. February 2008)

 

To determine if you have a Feedback Culture, ask yourself the following:

1. Is your communication minimal?
2. Is it primarily top-down?
3. Or is it open, honest, two-way communication?

A feedback culture is one in which individuals continuously receive, solicit and use formal and informal feedback to improve their job performance.  Take a moment to read the bullets below and carefully consider your answers.

• If I asked you if I could criticize you, what would your response be?
• If I asked if I could provide you with constructive feedback, what would your response be?

Feedback must come from a place of support, not a place of critique.  To be effective it must provide specific context (behaviors), not generalizations.   It's constructive, usable and based on the impact of the subjects actions rather than generalized opinions about that person. 

 

Supportive Feedback will have three specific components.  The feedback components are designed for one person only and are tailored to that specific person's behavior.  Components are NOT interchangeable from Employee A to Employee B. 

Supportive Feedback:

1. When did the behavior occur?
2. What was observed?
3. Why does it matter? 

For Constructive Feedback, there is a fourth component, the Request.  The Request will identify what needs to change. 

 

In closing, a prerequisite for a feedback culture is a respectful stance towards each and every employee, manager, and executive.  "A corporate culture is incredibly strongly linked to a leader's personality," says Peter Bregman, a corporate culture consultant and author of Point B:  A Short Guide to Leading A Big Change.   To create a feedback culture, you must start at the top and walk the talk!

Generation Gaps: How We (Mis)Communicate

The Baby Boomer generation is starting to exit the workforce, leaving the reins of leadership to the GenXers.  Through this transition organizations are struggling to balance the work styles and communication preferences of 3  - 4 different generations.   Baby Boomer or member of Generation X, through formal writing or an IM, we all need to communicate with each other.   This is where our real generation gap exists.

In my blog entry, Rudeness at Work, stats reflected that younger employees, by an increase of 28% over older workers, contributed to incivility in the workplace.  Question:  Does this present a framework for identifying age-related differences in work attitudes and behaviors?   Answer:  Yes.  In September of this year CareerBuilder surveyed 3,892 U.S. workers and 2,298 U.S. hiring managers ages 18 and over. The results of this survey, Generational Differences in Work Styles, Communication and Changing Jobs, highlighted the contrasts of the generational trends on how each generation approaches work.  It appears as though this isn’t intentional incivility, it's the result of the generation you grew up in and the differences in generational communication styles.   

CareerBuilder Survey Question:  How Do You Like To Communicate at Work?
 

Face to Face

• 60% (Ages 55+) 
• 55% (Ages 25 - 34)

Email/Text

• 28% (Ages 55+)
• 35% (Ages 25-34)

Phone

• 12% (Ages 55+)
• 10% (Ages 25 - 34)

Baby Boomers, born between 1946 and 1964, are the largest generation born in America to date. The offspring of the Silent Generation, the Boomers experienced* the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights Movement, and the assassinations.   The "We Generation" who were defined by the Cold War and the Space Race. The Boomers recognize the value of relationship building, preferring personal, face to face communication over communicating through technology. Technology is a means of communication, not an exclusive tool to communicate.   Here's where the generation gap comes into play.  The GenX and GenY prefer to use digital communication almost exclusively.

GenXers, born between 1965 and 1980, are defined by Watergate, an era of political corruption, economic inflation, single-parent homes, MTV, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the Challenger tragedy.  GenXers often prefer direct and straightforward communication.  And as a result, they may appear abrupt.    While the gap between Gen X and Gen Y is much larger due to the rate of technology growth, GenXers are highly techno-literate and don't worry about being outpaced by younger colleagues.   

GenY, born between 1980 - 1999, are "The Millennials,"  the generation of Facebook and MySpace.  Labeled as digital natives, the high-tech environment has shaped their values.  They are defined by computers, TV talk shows and the Oklahoma City bombing.   (The Department of Labor statistics estimate that GenY will compromise more than 40% of the workforce by 2020. Their sheer numbers will transform every life stage entered.)  GenY is extremely comfortable in a wired world.

GenZ, born after 2000, is the Digital Generation.  They are plugged in to the Internet by handheld devices, remaining connected every moment of their lives.  With so much of the GenZ life centered around the digital domain, a significant percentage prefers socializing online than in real life.  Through IM, text or Mobile phones, their digital connection to the world is essential.  They have access to the World Wide Web 24/7 and information and knowledge at their fingertips.    With a vague memory of such a key event, they are the generation of 9/11 and homeland security.

As technology evolves, so do our communication options and preferences.  Communicating faster, each generation will have vast differences in their communication methods and preferences.  These preferences may create a dividing line between one generation to the next.  Every organization will need to have increased awareness of the potential miscommunication due to generational differences. It will be critical to know the generation and to connect with their preferred style.

*Generations . . .  are deeply influenced and bound together by events of their formative years.  . . . the events that occur at various critical points in the group's lifetime .. . define their core values."

Generation "dates" are approximate and vary by demographer. 

Cronyism or Extreme Social Connections?

Normally the hiring process is a relatively random process based on the selection of applicants.  And in the recruiting process, referral hiring is a common practice.   But there are times when the selection process is not so random or neutral.   What happens when the hiring manager is not totally indifferent to members of the candidate pool and the referral value of a candidate increases based on their social connection with the hiring manager?   Is this where an organization, or manager, potentially crosses the line into favoritism? 

 

In my last blog (Nepotism - It's All Relative) I discussed nepotism and the challenges it may bring to an office environment.  Skipping down that little favoritism trail,  hand in hand with nepotism, is cronyism.   Cronyism is a specific form of favoritism referring to partiality towards friends and associates.   

 

Have you ever worked in an environment where there's a bunch of "good ole boys?"   A group of individuals that are given an undue advantage but who don't necessarily merit this treatment?   Individuals that may be in positions where they are not even qualified to do their job?  In an environment where it's not WHAT you know but WHO you know, you are experiencing cronyism.  That favoritism can be exhibited in compensation, discipline, or even positions.  

 

Does cronyism undermine business effectiveness?  Unfortunately cronyism can create an air of entitlement for those employees who were hired based on their social connection.  They may feel as though company rules do not apply to them.  Additional negative consequences are that sometimes these individuals are under-qualified to perform their jobs (potentially promoted to a level of incompetence) and even pay scales may become distorted.

 

Referencing my earlier question regarding the practice of nepotism and whether or not it's ethical, here's something for consideration:

• One of the most basic themes in ethics is fairness. Logically, cronyism (or nepotism) interferes with fairness through the undue advantage of one person who may not merit such treatment.

Both can greatly undermine the effectiveness of an organization.  So, draw your own conclusion.

 

Always keep an eye on your hiring practices.   We all know that businesses are often thick with social connections.  But don't allow your organization to become too relationship-driven that you unknowingly violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discounting highly qualified applicants.

Employee Actions Off The Clock

In case you missed it, Joseph Andolino, a senior vice president of Halliburton's tax department was arrested in a Harris County prostitution sting along with six other men (reported in the Houston Business Journal).  While there are no reports that he committed the crime on the job, several questions relating to his on-going employment with Halliburton come up.   

 

While I don't think that employers want to overly intrude into the private lives of employees, as an employer do you  have a policy or an employment contract that says an employee may be terminated if s/he engages in criminal conduct?  Do any of your company policies address employees conviction of a crime that indicates unfitness for the job or raises a threat to the safety or well being of fellow employees? 

Texas is an at-will state.  That allows Texas employers a lot of latitude in the hiring and firing decisions.  Essentially an employer can terminate an employee for any reason that is not specifically prohibited by law.  However, state legislation, employment contracts, union contracts or your internal policies may dictate your decision.   An employment clause may provide you with an avenue for dismissal.  But does it mandate the dismissal?

• Do you have to prove that the conduct has a direct impact on the job? 
• Does it compromise the employee's ability to do the job? 
• It is an embarrassment to the organization? 

We all agree that an employer shouldn't keep an employee whose after-work activities affect their job performance.  The general rule is the more off-duty behavior negatively affects the work environment, the more termination and/or discipline becomes a legal and valid option.  But, is failure to take remedial action regarding the off-duty conduct inferring that similar actions are condoned on the job?

 

Companies may face difficulty when dealing with terminating employees for off-duty conduct. Potential results when employee's are fired for off-duty behavior can be negative publicity, low morale and related turnover.   You must consider the nature of the crime and how it affects the workplace.  What effect, if any, does the behavior have to the workplace or the company's image?   Does the behavior justify adverse employment action?

 

If you are considering regulating the off-duty conduct of your employees, there are some things to be considered:

• Is the conduct legal or illegal?
• Is there an applicable law that protects the off-duty conduct of the employee?
• Am I willing to apply this policy consistently?

Jason Bosch, None Of Your Business (Interest):  The Argument for Protecting All Employee Behavior With NO Business Impact: " . . . employees should not have to relinquish autonomy over very aspect of their lives just to get or keep a job.   Employers have a vested interest in controlling those aspects of employee's lives that reasonably affect the employees' performance on the job, but that does not justify giving employers carte blanche to control every aspect of their employees' lives."

Employee Satisfaction Surveys

In 2004 Congress mandated that all federal agencies conduct surveys of their employees.  The purpose was to assess the employees perceptions about their work environment and work experiences.  The results of these surveys are used to measure employee satisfaction in areas such as benefits, training, leadership, diversity, recruiting and the work environment. 

Employee viewpoint surveys are extremely important as they provide an overview of how well the organization is doing.  Where properly conducted, the survey can identify an organizations strengths and areas of improvement. The survey is a tool for opening a dialog among the employees and the results can act as a tool for driving positive change. 

Remember, a survey doesn't end once the results are received.  If the survey is not responded to, employees are less likely to participate in future surveys.  The employees expect that management will use the information to make improvements to the organization.  These surveys create expectations.  Conversations around survey results can potentially lead to increased engagement, productivity and profits while reducing turnover and costs. 

Once you have the survey results you should act quickly.    Create a team to review the results.  Select the key items to address and develop a corporate action plan to resolve them over the next 6 - 12 months.  Re-evaluate and adjust your action plan as necessary.  A recommendation is to select three areas to focus your efforts on.  This will allow you to concentrate your efforts and make substantial progress.

• In what areas is positive change most important to your organization?
• In what areas is the positive change most needed?
• What areas are the top priorities?

Follow up regularly on the plan and the progress toward meeting the goals.  Communicate across the organization OFTEN and make the improvements visible.  Employees expect that their concerns are addressed and resolution to occur. 

When You Lose A Good Employee

I lost a good employee today.  And while I understand the reasons behind her resignation and departure, it doesn't make the loss any less significant.  After months of looking for the right employee, reviewing hundreds of resumes, phone screens, and face:face interviews, we found the right employee for the position.  Someone that had the level of skills and abilities to take the position and re-define it - -  to grow it.   

 

As an organization we failed.  While we identified where processes could be improved, workloads leveled, bottlenecks eliminated, and savings experienced, we lacked the ability to implement the very changes that would allow us to be successful.    We were unable to engage the employee in this new role because of our inability to let go of an existing process.

 

(We were able to identify a new start. We were able to provide the vision of what it would be like when the change took place. But we were not able to overcome the resistence by the existing employees that would experience this change and the sense of loss the new process would bring. Employees need to understand how the organization will benefit from changing. They need to understand how the change will benefit them individually, as well as the consequences for them if there is no change.) 

 

My advice to every employer out there - to retain employees, the employer must deliver on the expectations set up during the recruitment process. Put forth every effort to keep your employees engaged.