Hiking the ‘Living Wage’ in NYC

According to the New York Times, Mayor Bill de Blasio plans to sign an executive order today designed to “significantly expand” New York City’s living wage law, covering thousands of previously exempt workers and raising the hourly wage itself, to $13.13 from $11.90, for workers who do not receive benefits.

The executive order will immediately cover employees of commercial tenants on projects that receive more than $1 million in city subsidies going forward. Workers who receive benefits such as health insurance will earn $11.50 an hour, compared with $10.30 before, the paper notes.

And the current living wage law, passed in 2012, has applied to about 1,200 jobs, officials say, excusing many retailers and companies that lease space as part of city-subsidized projects, the paper reports.

The paper says the living-wage change is also intended to frame a looming debate in Albany, where Mr. de Blasio hopes to win the authority to set the citywide minimum wage at the same amount. If Mr. de Blasio succeeds in matching the minimum wage to the living wage, all hourly workers in the city would earn more than $15 by 2019, according to the city’s projections.

New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who in February said that allowing local governments to set their own minimum wages would yield “a chaotic situation,” seemed to have reversed himself months later. He said he would support a plan, advocated by the Working Families Party, that allowed municipalities with higher costs of living to set their own minimum wages.

As a result, the governor has endorsed an increase to $10.10 in the statewide minimum wage, with a provision allowing New York City and other areas to raise their minimums as much as 30 percent higher, to $13.13.

It will be interesting to see how — and if — New York City’s example is adopted elsewhere when it comes to setting a higher bar for a living wage for workers.

Regardless, HR leaders should keep an eye on this development to ensure they won’t be caught off guard when a living-wage boost may be introduced in their municipality or state.

Twitter It!

Yes, a ‘Cantankerous Jerk’ Can Be Fired

177030950 -- angry bossCan a person be lawfully terminated just for being a hard-core grump? Yes, says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Matthew Weaving v. City of Hillsboro.

Weaving, an officer with the Hillsboro (Ore.) Police Department, was cited several times over a period of years for conflicts with fellow employees. A formal report — issued after a departmental investigation of an officer’s grievance about him — concluded he was “tyrannical, unapproachable, belittling, demeaning, threatening, intimidating, arrogant and vindictive.” (That’s quite a list.)

Based on the investigation, which also found Weaving had created a hostile work environment and did not possess the emotional intelligence to work in a team environment, he was fired Dec. 11, 2009, after three years with the force.

He sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act, claiming he had been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and this condition caused his work conflicts and limited his ability to work or interact with others (a requirement of his job).

He contended his ADHD was a disability, which a district court upheld, but the appeals court reversed. (For everything you ever wanted to know about Weaving’s contention and how both courts viewed the ADHD/ADA issue, see both links above.)

Considering Weaving’s argument that ADHD falls under the ADA, I thought I’d share several earlier blog posts from some of us at HRE that delve into other expansions of, or attempts to expand, the definition of disability under the law.

This one, by David Shadovitz, delves into an appeals court ruling establishing that temporary impairments are now allowed under the law so long as they’re severe enough.

This post, by Mark McGraw, also gets into the temporary-condition allowance, in a different lawsuit, and mentions the American Medical Association’s new definition of obesity as a disease, adding exponentially to the ranks of the disabled.

And this from me a few years back highlights an informal letter issued by the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission warning that requiring a high-school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act because the requirement could effectively screen out anyone unable to graduate because of a learning disability.

Meanwhile, in this latest case, employers have good reason to breathe a sigh of relief, says Myra Creighton, a partner with Atlanta-based Fisher & Phillips. The case, she told me, “upholds the principle that employers can enforce their employee-conduct standards governing personal interaction without worrying that the employee will blame his or her bad behavior on his or her disability.”

The ruling doesn’t, however, rule out ADHD as a disability if the plaintiff can prove the condition limits his or her ability to work.

As the Practical Law piece in the first link above puts it, the Ninth Circuit majority held “that the employee’s condition … did not rise to the level of disability [and argued] that a different holding … would open employers to potential liability each time they take an adverse-employment action concerning a hostile employee.”

The dissenting minority, however, it says, notes that “employers are [still] left in the complicated position of having to determine whether an individual, who has been properly diagnosed with ADHD, should be deemed disabled or just a jerk.”

 

 

Twitter It!

Getting Out the Vote

Business groups are looking to make a difference in November’s midterm elections.

As a recent piece on the The Hill website reports, “Heavyweight groups such as the National Retail Federation, the National Federation of Independent Business, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Associated General Contractors of America and BIPAC are among those seeking to increase engagement in the political process this year.”

According to The Hill, more than 90 companies and industry groups are taking part in the Employee Voter Registration Week (which ends today), including the American Forest & Paper Association, Anadarko Petroleum, Caterpillar, eBay and a slew of state-level organizations.  Their hope is to break the gridlock and get employees registered and involved.

About 54 percent of American voters went to the polls two years ago, compared to around 38 percent in the 2010 midterms.

David French, the senior vice president of government relations at the National Retail Federation who discussed the initiative at a press conference the other day (see video), notes that …

“Any of these races could be decided by a few hundred votes, so a strong turnout from the business community could make the difference between a candidate who understands our concerns and a candidate who’s tuned to other voters’ interests.”

As The Hill piece explains, “trade groups and corporations will not be instructing their members and employees how to vote or who to vote for … but will be providing information about deadlines, how to register and where to vote.”

I asked Littler Shareholder Michael Lotito (who is based in San Francisco, but always keeps a watchful eye on what policymakers are up to in Washington) to share his thoughts on the significance of this effort.

Lotito sees it as a counter weight to what the American Federation of Labor does in getting out the vote through registration drives and email solicitations.

“Businesses have been largely quiet in this regard,” he says. “But often, the employees would benefit from hearing from their employer as to how the positions of candidates and state and local propositions may impact the company and, either directly or indirectly, the employees who depend on the company.  Many companies are not engaged in this process, not even encouraging their people to register and vote, let alone modify work schedules on election day to make sure people can vote.”

Lotito also suggests that HR might want to be more than just a bystander in this regard. “Let HR be the leader for the identification of issues, how those items will impact the company, which candidates (regardless of party) advances those interests, and then advising how a person can register to vote, obtain absentee ballots and go to the polls on election day.”

At the end of the day, it’s probably going to be tough to know how much of an impact any of this will have, but with voter turnout for the midterms being as pitiful as it is, it would seem to me that any effort to get citizens more engaged (if I can borrow a word from the HR lexicon) in our electoral system should be viewed as a good thing.

In case you’re wondering, the midterms are November 4—so, if you haven’t yet, mark it down.

Twitter It!

A Hospital Employee’s Offensive Tweets

We’ve written before about the “bring your own device to work” trend, commonly referred to as BYOD. Experts have cautioned about the potential risks employers face when allowing employees to bring devices that can be easily used to share and disseminate potentially confidential information. Now comes news of a Philadelphia-area hospital employee whose Twitter postings will no doubt cause more sleepless nights for medical-center HR and legal staffers.

Kathryn Knott, an emergency room technician at Lansdale Hospital in Lansdale, Pa., apparently liked to write about the patients and their medical conditions she encountered — and her personal opinion of their conditions — during the course of her work. Her Twitter posts include these gems (as reported by the Philadelphia Daily News):

“Babysitting a 36 yo 30pillxanax overdose and holding the urinal for him is definitely what I wanted to do today #winninglikeVegas.”
Knott’s June 10, 2013, photo of an X-ray of a busted pelvis is captioned, “why would you clean your gutters in the rain? #ouch.”
Another, on Feb. 20, 2013, shows a clear bag containing something lumpish. Its caption reads, “A patient gave me a bag of ice with his two fingers in it!” Yet another, posted on New Year’s Day 2013, shows a small spring – X-rayed in what appears to be an abdomen – captioned, “Kid had way too much fun at lacosta last night. Swallowed a pen spring. #rage.”
Knott’s Twitter postings came to light during the course of a police investigation of a brutal event involving her and a large group of friends, who were captured on video allegedly beating and verbally abusing a gay male couple in downtown Philadelphia recently. Knott, whose Twitter posts also included ones denigrating homosexuals, has been suspended from her job by Abington Health, which owns Lansdale Hospital:

 We can confirm that Kathryn Knott has been employed at Lansdale Hospital since May 2011. Because of the nature of the charges against her, she has been suspended from her job as an Emergency Room tech.”

Abington Health is also investigating her Twitter account.The tweets could violate the hospital’s patient-privacy and social-media policies, according to the statement from Abington Health

Daily News columnist Ronnie Polaneczky interviewed a nurse who’s also a lawyer, who told her that while Knott’s tweets may be deeply unprofessional, they don’t appear to violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act because “patients’ names and other identifiable was not shared.” However, medical ethicist Art Caplan told Polaneczky that he disagrees. If there’s information in the tweets for others to deduce who’s being discussed, he said, then it’s a clear HIPAA violation and a legal liability.
Now is probably a good time for HR leaders in the healthcare industry to review their BYOD and social-media policies, and perhaps schedule some refresher training.
Twitter It!

Learning the Language

EnglishEmployers with hopes of maintaining a skilled U.S. workforce in the future would be wise to initiate English-education programs in the present, according to a just-released report from the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program.

The study, which the Washington, D.C.-based think tank describes as “the first-ever metro-level analysis of limited English-proficient workers in U.S. metropolitan areas,” finds almost one in 10 adults of working age in the United States—19.2 million people between the ages of 16 and 64—lacks full proficiency in English.

Based on U.S. Census Bureau data culled from a 2012 survey, Brookings’ Investing in English Skills: The Limited English Proficient Workforce in U.S. Metropolitan Areas identified 89 of the most populous U.S. metro areas and ranked them for size and share of their population that is limited English-proficient (LEP) as well as for growth or decline in limited English-proficient population since 2000. The report also provides detailed characteristics of metro areas’ LEP workforce, including the languages they speak, the occupations and industries in which they work, employment rates, median income and educational attainment.

According to the study, metro areas with a high concentration of immigrants, especially metro areas in California and Texas, “dominate the list of metros with the highest share of their working-age populations that is LEP,” according to a Brookings statement. Among the top 10 metro areas studied, Miami is the only one not located in either California or Texas.

In addition to recommending increased funding from the Workforce Investing Act; targeted outreach and instructional innovation enabling LEP adults to access instruction at the worksite, online and by mobile device; the report urges employers to invest in English-education programs, particularly companies operating in industries with the highest numbers of LEP workers, such as manufacturing, food services, construction and the retail trade.

“English proficiency is the most essential means of opening doors to economic opportunity for immigrant workers in the United States,” says Jill H. Wilson, senior research analyst and associate fellow at the Brookings Institution, and author of the report, in a statement. “Yet access to acquiring these skills is persistently limited by a lack of resources and attention.”

In the same statement, Wilson theorizes that the price for failing to provide these workers with more opportunities to improve their English-speaking skills will only get steeper with time.

“Given the large number of LEP workers in the United States, and the fact that virtually all of the growth in the U.S. labor force over the next four decades is projected to come from immigrants and their children, it is in our collective interest to tackle this challenge head on.”

Twitter It!

Google’s CHRO on Resume Mistakes

Laszlo Bock, the senior vice president of people operations at Google — and HRE’s 2010 HR Executive of the Year — recently weighed in on LinkedIn on the five biggest mistakes he sees on resumes and how to correct them.

When you helm HR at one of the most-admired, most-envied tech companies in the world — one that can reportedly receive more than 50,000 resumes in a single week — it should surprise no one that Bock says he personally has seen more than 20,000 resumes himself.

 “I have seen A LOT of resumes,” he says.

While the five mistakes Bock shares are not exactly earth-shattering — typos, length, formatting, sharing confidential information and lying — his insight adds a certain gravitas to the conversation, especially on the topic of confidentiality and who you can trust to keep your company’s secrets once you let them in the door:

I once received a resume from an applicant working at a top-three consulting firm. This firm had a strict confidentiality policy: client names were never to be shared. On the resume, the candidate wrote: “Consulted to a major software company in Redmond, Washington.” Rejected! There’s an inherent conflict between your employer’s needs (keep business secrets confidential) and your needs (show how awesome I am so I can get a better job). So candidates often find ways to honor the letter of their confidentiality agreements but not the spirit. It’s a mistake. While this candidate didn’t mention Microsoft specifically, any reviewer knew that’s what he meant. In a very rough audit, we found that at least 5-10% of resumes reveal confidential information. Which tells me, as an employer, that I should never hire those candidates … unless I want my own trade secrets emailed to my competitors.

While Bock’s post is of course more intended for the job seeker than the hiring manager, it is nonetheless heartening to see such advice earnestly dispensed by the top HR person at one of the hardest places on the entire planet to get hired.

Twitter It!

Bullying Touches All Races and Roles

467291571 -- bullying2A fairly comprehensive — and concerning — report on bullying was released by CareerBuilder on Thursday, showing office bullying knows no partiality when it comes to who the victims are.

The survey of 3,372 U.S. full-time, private-sector employees, conducted by Harris Poll on behalf of Chicago-based CareerBuilder, shows 28 percent of respondents have felt bullied at work and 19 percent of them left their jobs because of it.

More importantly, while the prevalence of bullying is higher among certain minorities and workers with lower incomes, the study finds workers in management roles, those with post-secondary education and other workforce segments are not immune.

“One of the most surprising takeaways from the study was that bullying impacts workers of all backgrounds regardless of race, education, income and level of authority within an organization,” says Rosemary Haefner, vice president of human resources at CareerBuilder.

“Many of the workers who have experienced this don’t confront the bully or elect not to report the incidents,” she says, “which can prolong a negative work experience that leads some to leave their jobs.”

Here’s how the percentages of respondents who say they are currently being bullied break down in the study:

Job Level

  • Management (manager, director, team leader, vice president and above) – 27 percent
  • Professional and technical – 21 percent
  • Entry-level/administrative and clerical– 26 percent

Highest Level of Education Attained

  • High-school graduate – 28 percent
  • Associate’s degree – 21 percent
  • Bachelor’s degree or higher – 23 percent

Compensation Level

  • Earning less than $50,000 – 28 percent
  • Earning $50,000 or more – 19 percent

And here’s what I found to be a pretty interesting breakdown as well, the varying ways bullying victims felt bullied on the job:

  • Falsely accused of mistakes he/she didn’t make – 43 percent,
  • Comments were ignored, dismissed or not acknowledged – 41 percent,
  • A different set of standards or policies was used for the worker – 37 percent,
  • Gossip was spread about the worker – 34 percent,
  • Constantly criticized by the boss or co-workers – 32 percent,
  • Belittling comments were made about the person’s work during meetings – 29 percent,
  • Yelled at by the boss in front of co-workers – 27 percent,
  • Purposely excluded from projects or meetings – 20 percent,
  • Credit for his/her work was stolen – 20 percent, and
  • Picked on for personal attributes (race, gender, appearance, etc.) – 20 percent.

And you might find this surprising. I did. Comparing the public and private sectors, workers in government were nearly twice as likely to report being bullied (47 percent) than those in the corporate world (28 percent).

Meanwhile, as David Shadovitz reported back in July, the nation’s road to anti-bullying legislation at the state level — starting with Tennessee — appears to be a slow one, despite the fact that 28 states have introduced such legislation this year.

In fact, as Mark McGraw posted on this blog a little later that month, one of those states — New Hampshire — went in the opposite direction, when its governor — Maggie Hassan — vetoed the bill pending there because its definition of abusive conduct was too broad.

The silver lining there, McGraw says, is that both the governor and the bill’s sponsor acknowledge workplace bullying is a problem that needs to be dealt with.

My guess is the people in that camp far outweigh those questioning the problem’s seriousness. CareerBuilder’s certainly in the former. So what’s it gonna take to get more laws on the books?

 

Twitter It!

Taking Talent Acquisition Up a Notch

If you’re looking for additional proof that talent-acquisition capability matters, check out the latest research coming from the Bersin by Deloitte unit of Deloitte Consulting LLP.

452269237According to Bersin by Deloitte’s study of 300 U.S. organizations, titled High-Impact Talent Acquisition: Key Findings and Maturity Model,  employers with mature talent-acquisition strategies perform, on average, 30 percent better than their peers as far as business outcomes are concerned, including the ability to meet or exceed customer expectations, create new products and services faster than competitors, and meet or exceed financial targets.

So what are the key drivers of talent-acquisition performance?

The Bersin by Deloitte research puts developing strong relationships between recruiters and hiring managers at the top of the list. At organizations with lower levels of maturity, the study found, recruiters are basically order takers for hiring managers. But for those organizations with higher levels of maturity, the relationships between recruiters and hiring managers typically were strong and, in turn, the performance outcomes greater.

Other influential talent-acquisition drivers, according to the research, include developing candidate pools, giving employers the ability to find “just-in-time” candidates; and leveraging social media both as a recruiting vehicle and as a way to promote the employer brand.

On this latter front, some mature organizations have gone so far as to hire dedicated strategists whose purpose is to “curate” social-media content.

When I asked Robin Erickson, vice president of talent-acquisition research at Bersin by Deloitte, what surprised her most in the findings, she pointed to the significant role building strong relationships plays as a driver of talent-acquisition performance. “We didn’t expect the relationship with hiring managers to be four times more influential than everything else—more influential than social media and more influential than employment branding,” she told me.

To be sure, there are no shortage of vendors out there working hard at developing tools aimed at helping employers get their hands around the three major drivers cited in this research. If you’re planning to attend next month’s HR Tech Conference in Las Vegas and walk the floor of the expo, I’m sure you’ll come across lots. But whether you’ll be there or not (and I certainly hope you will), I’ll be sure to keep my eyes open and let you know what I find.

Twitter It!

New ADP Index to Focus on ‘Vitality’

ADPPayroll-services provider ADP, which currently puts out a monthly employment report based on its massive trove of payroll data, announced today that it plans to start providing a quarterly workforce index that will offer “deep insights into U.S. workforce dynamics. The first index will be released next month, says ADP. Data from the new index will form the basis of a high-level panel discussion at the HR Tech Conference on October 9 in Las Vegas. David Gergen, senior political analyst for CNN, will chair a panel entitled “Workforce 2020: How Data and Analytics Will Shape the Workplace” that will discuss the implications of data analysis and the workforce from an economic, academic and talent management perspective.

“The U.S. labor market is as dynamic and complex as it has ever been, and this new index will help uncover key factors driving workforce trends,” said ADP president and CEO Carlos Rodriguez in a statement. “The index will provide a clearer picture of the vitality of today’s workforce.”

The new index is intended to answer “critical questions” about the state of the U.S. workforce, according to ADP, such as: How is the workforce thriving as a whole? How do major regions and large states compare? Which industries are doing well? What are the wage trends? What roles do age and gender play?

The index will measure quarterly changes in metrics such as employment growth, wage growth, job turnover and hours worked, says ADP. The index will be compiled by the company’s ADP Research Institute, which also puts out the monthly employment report, and will be derived from its warehouse of 24 million aggregated payroll data sets from companies of all sizes. ADP will collaborate with Moody’s Analytics Inc. on the quarterly report.

 

Twitter It!

Men, Women, Competition and Cooperation

Common stereotypes may tell us that men are more competitive and women are more cooperative, but researchers at Aalto University in Finland recently studied the physiological responses to both competitive and cooperative play in order to investigate respondents’ emotions to see how males and females are motivated to behave in these situations.

So, what did the researchers find?

While males did enjoy competition more than cooperation, females enjoyed both competition and cooperation equally.

(The results of the research were published in an article in the international science journal PLOS ONE.)

“Although there is a lot of research on gender differences, nobody has studied the emotions – the physiological mechanism that steers our behavior – of competitive and cooperative activities in males and females before. This gives a better insight into why people behave the way they do. You may unconsciously give false information about your motivations, but your body doesn’t lie,” said researcher Matias Kivikangas.

Kivikangas also said the results suggest that parts of the common stereotypes are untrue, at least in that women are not enjoying cooperation any more than competition.

And, he added, “it seems that the fact that men do enjoy competition more than cooperation might actually be a consequence from gender expectations rather than innate differences.”

According to the press release announcing the findings, the two studies employed cooperative and competitive digital games to test the responses. While this makes the responses more natural than a contrived experimental procedure, the intrinsically motivated nature of the activity limits the generalizability of the results.

‘Neither males or females experienced notable differences in negative emotions, indicating that only positive emotions are relevant in motivating competitive behavior. However, separate studies with other activities should be carried out as well, because I’d suspect that competition that the individual has not chosen themselves might elicit different emotional reactions’, Kivikangas added.

The implications of this study could indeed have some far-reaching  consequences in the workplace, especially in terms of how work groups are organized (i.e. competition-based vs. collaboration-based).

But for this admittedly male writer, the findings only confirm what I already learned from my childhood experiences playing (and losing) board games with my mom and sister: Women can be just as competitive — if not moreseo than — men.

Twitter It!