Remember my short and abrupt memo from a few weeks ago? It is still on my mind. No personal use of company email. Period. I sound like a Nazi English teacher.
I wanted to leave no room for misunderstanding, but in doing so I took the humanity out of it. It is not just about clarity and well-defined rules: it sounds terrible. It reads like a rule for a 3 year old. End of discussion.
I guess what it comes down to is whether I trust the staff to use their own good judgment about what is appropriate use of company email. Some personal use is to be expected, I guess, but I still don’t think it belongs in the company server. And the memo was in response to a department head who said her staff needed to be reminded about personal use and language. Maybe I should have sent the memo just to her staff. And I could have addressed the specifics that prompted her to call me. Oh, sure, now I think of it!
But back to the black & white rule vs. the “use your good judgment” rule. Employers have learned that for most employees, treating them with some leeway for decision making and creativity results in more engaged, productive, and happy employees. All good. It takes hiring the right ones in the first place, but we’ve discussed all that. Setting hard & fast rules squelches creativity and imitative: so if you need neither, I guess it is OK. But don’t your employees feel like they’re being treated like children? “Don’t cross the street” is a no room for argument rule designed to keep your child safe. Other than safety regs, is there really a business equivalent?
Ignoring the grey areas ignores the humanity involved. Latitude is often a good thing when dealing with employees. Except when it is favoritism or discrimination and you get sued. You see the problem?
Welcome to the wonderful world of human resources.
So here goes:
MEMO REGARDING USE OF COMPANY EMAIL
As you all know, the email system is company property and, as such, must be used for company business and in line with the company’s values, especially “Respect for all.”
Some recent emails have contained unprofessional and disrespectful language, and that is absolutely not OK. If you have a problem with a coworker please bring it to my attention so that it can be addressed responsibly.
Other recent emails have been jokes that are not appropriate for the workplace, and those have to stop, too. No one will think you are a social outcast if you delete a joke email. In fact, if you receive something of that nature from a friend, get them to change your email address on their list to your home address.
Final point: email contents are discoverable for lawsuits and therefore the company needs to have access to them at all times. You should have no expectation of privacy when using the company email system.
Any questions? See me.
Yeah, that’s better.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Friday, December 18, 2009
TO MEMO OR NOT TO MEMO
I wrote a memo to our staff last week, and I am wondering if it was too abrupt. It concerned emails. One of the department managers contacted me that her staff needed reminding about appropriate use of company email, and I knew of another inappropriate email that had come through from another employee, so I jumped right on it.
I usually write a short memo, and this was no exception. I did, however, add another section of explanation for those who like their memos longer and more detailed. But I thought the message was clear cut, and sometimes when you try to explain something simple you just end up making it more complicated.
Here it is: Do not use company email for anything that is not the business of the company. Period. And word every email with respect. No name-calling. Ever. Or company secrets.
What do you think? Too black & white? That’s what I am afraid of. I send emails all day long that only tangentially concern United Staffing: to the Chamber, to HRACC or Rotary members. Turning in my Tolosa columns. So did I just write myself a memo telling me I can’t do that anymore?
Why did I go so inflexible when I know better? I know that employee handbook policies should be written as guidelines to follow, but never so detailed as to leave no room for on-the-spot management decision making. Even a “zero tolerance” policy against harassment shouldn’t mean that every offense will be met with immediate termination. Only that every offense will be met with appropriate discipline that may include termination. The point in zero tolerance is that nobody gets a mulligan when it comes to harassment. HR has never been a rigid arena, so what was I thinking?
By the way, I have had no second thoughts about the second part of my memo: that dealt with respectful language. Email is forever and can come back to punish you for thoughtless (or worse) language. I have been told by more than one attorney that the delete button is a ruse, designed to provide a false sense of security in the user. Besides, if you are enforcing respectful language and treatment in the workplace, it should include emails, too.
Our company policies are clear on the subject of emails and doing personal business while at work, so my memo was meant as a reminder, and I attached a copy of both policies (again, for those who like to see the source and read the fine print.) Is it a zero tolerance policy about personal use of email, though? Or is a “reasonable” amount OK? Courts, you know, have the reasonable person criteria for evaluating an issue: what would a reasonable person feel about it? Know any who sit on juries? But I digress.
In my attempt to be clear I feel I have been unreasonable. Certainly unrealistic. And an unrealistic policy is usually not enforceable. Great: I have accomplished the exact opposite of my intention and have to write another memo explaining what I meant in the first place. But maybe I’ll have someone else draft it.
I usually write a short memo, and this was no exception. I did, however, add another section of explanation for those who like their memos longer and more detailed. But I thought the message was clear cut, and sometimes when you try to explain something simple you just end up making it more complicated.
Here it is: Do not use company email for anything that is not the business of the company. Period. And word every email with respect. No name-calling. Ever. Or company secrets.
What do you think? Too black & white? That’s what I am afraid of. I send emails all day long that only tangentially concern United Staffing: to the Chamber, to HRACC or Rotary members. Turning in my Tolosa columns. So did I just write myself a memo telling me I can’t do that anymore?
Why did I go so inflexible when I know better? I know that employee handbook policies should be written as guidelines to follow, but never so detailed as to leave no room for on-the-spot management decision making. Even a “zero tolerance” policy against harassment shouldn’t mean that every offense will be met with immediate termination. Only that every offense will be met with appropriate discipline that may include termination. The point in zero tolerance is that nobody gets a mulligan when it comes to harassment. HR has never been a rigid arena, so what was I thinking?
By the way, I have had no second thoughts about the second part of my memo: that dealt with respectful language. Email is forever and can come back to punish you for thoughtless (or worse) language. I have been told by more than one attorney that the delete button is a ruse, designed to provide a false sense of security in the user. Besides, if you are enforcing respectful language and treatment in the workplace, it should include emails, too.
Our company policies are clear on the subject of emails and doing personal business while at work, so my memo was meant as a reminder, and I attached a copy of both policies (again, for those who like to see the source and read the fine print.) Is it a zero tolerance policy about personal use of email, though? Or is a “reasonable” amount OK? Courts, you know, have the reasonable person criteria for evaluating an issue: what would a reasonable person feel about it? Know any who sit on juries? But I digress.
In my attempt to be clear I feel I have been unreasonable. Certainly unrealistic. And an unrealistic policy is usually not enforceable. Great: I have accomplished the exact opposite of my intention and have to write another memo explaining what I meant in the first place. But maybe I’ll have someone else draft it.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Bereavement Leave is a Benefit
The question of bereavement leave has come up lately as I have lost both my parents in the last 3 months: both after several days in the hospital. So many people know what that experience is like: watching your loved one become less of who you know them to be. And as you sit there and try to balance your grief with your celebration of who they have been in your life, as you second guess the doctors and the decisions you’ve made, as your relationship with your remaining family members becomes more precious, even as you get annoyed with each other, the last thing you want to be worried about is your job.
Bereavement leave is an optional benefit employers can offer their employees. It can range in number of days and who the employee is grieving. The leave may be paid time off or unpaid time when the grieving employee is relieved of the guilt and possible discipline of being away from work. Some employers allow their grieving employees to take vacation or sick time, as well.
The things I like about bereavement leave include the warm & fuzzy effect on employees seeing this clear statement of support in the Employee Handbook amongst the rules about absences, unacceptable conduct, disciplinary procedures and the like. The psychological impact of such an assurance can be huge.
Things to consider before you add this benefit to your menu of employee support: how many days can you afford to be without the employee? 3 days is common, yet I know now what I had guessed before August: 3 days is not nearly enough to handle the myriad decisions demanded of you. Much less the emotions. What I have done in the past is word the policy in such a way as to acknowledge that the 3 days will not meet all their needs, but we want to relieve them of the stress of work concerns [during that critical first 3 days]. And the granting of more time can be considered.
With the growing number of blended families that has resulted in more parents and siblings, and the inclusion of same-sex couples in the definition of the word “spouse” in California, the number of possible family members included in “immediate” has expanded. Whose death triggers an authorized use of bereavement leave should be clearly delineated in the policy, and some flexibility should be reserved for management to decide on the spot to expand the list. If any of my nieces or nephews were to pass I would have to take time off – period. Paid, unpaid, bereavement leave, vacation, whatever. Job be damned? Probably – but what a horrible decision to have to make. My best friend? My partner’s children? Yikes.
One thing made clear to me in these sad months is that there are many, many people who have already had this devastating experience. Some of their employers have been more understanding than others and I can’t help but wonder how that impacted their healing.
Bereavement leave is an optional benefit employers can offer their employees. It can range in number of days and who the employee is grieving. The leave may be paid time off or unpaid time when the grieving employee is relieved of the guilt and possible discipline of being away from work. Some employers allow their grieving employees to take vacation or sick time, as well.
The things I like about bereavement leave include the warm & fuzzy effect on employees seeing this clear statement of support in the Employee Handbook amongst the rules about absences, unacceptable conduct, disciplinary procedures and the like. The psychological impact of such an assurance can be huge.
Things to consider before you add this benefit to your menu of employee support: how many days can you afford to be without the employee? 3 days is common, yet I know now what I had guessed before August: 3 days is not nearly enough to handle the myriad decisions demanded of you. Much less the emotions. What I have done in the past is word the policy in such a way as to acknowledge that the 3 days will not meet all their needs, but we want to relieve them of the stress of work concerns [during that critical first 3 days]. And the granting of more time can be considered.
With the growing number of blended families that has resulted in more parents and siblings, and the inclusion of same-sex couples in the definition of the word “spouse” in California, the number of possible family members included in “immediate” has expanded. Whose death triggers an authorized use of bereavement leave should be clearly delineated in the policy, and some flexibility should be reserved for management to decide on the spot to expand the list. If any of my nieces or nephews were to pass I would have to take time off – period. Paid, unpaid, bereavement leave, vacation, whatever. Job be damned? Probably – but what a horrible decision to have to make. My best friend? My partner’s children? Yikes.
One thing made clear to me in these sad months is that there are many, many people who have already had this devastating experience. Some of their employers have been more understanding than others and I can’t help but wonder how that impacted their healing.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Dylan Redux
A client called the other day to remark that she continues to be surprised at how applicants for jobs dress for their interview. A candidate for retail store manager showed up in an un-ironed shirt that was not tucked in. Quick: can you guess the approximate age of the owner and candidate? Yep, the owner is a Boomer (45 – 63) and the job applicant was a Gen Y guy. (27 or less).
That episode reminded me to ask our recruiters if they counsel applicants on how to dress for a job interview. Yes, they assured me, “but some people just don’t get it”. Another example of differing points of reference: maybe the guy felt he was dressed professionally because he wasn’t wearing jeans.
So my suggestion to business owners who are or will be hiring soon: when you respond to an applicant’s resume and would like to interview them, send them a copy of your dress code. Eliminate this issue before it becomes a barrier to your perception and judgment during the interview. And, Boomers, I know you think any candidate worth their salt will know – or research on the internet – about your company’s style, and come dressed appropriately. But, as a Boomer icon sang to our parents decades ago: the times they are a’changing.
That episode reminded me to ask our recruiters if they counsel applicants on how to dress for a job interview. Yes, they assured me, “but some people just don’t get it”. Another example of differing points of reference: maybe the guy felt he was dressed professionally because he wasn’t wearing jeans.
So my suggestion to business owners who are or will be hiring soon: when you respond to an applicant’s resume and would like to interview them, send them a copy of your dress code. Eliminate this issue before it becomes a barrier to your perception and judgment during the interview. And, Boomers, I know you think any candidate worth their salt will know – or research on the internet – about your company’s style, and come dressed appropriately. But, as a Boomer icon sang to our parents decades ago: the times they are a’changing.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Who Would You Lunch With?
While Human Resources Manager at a Home Depot store in Thousand Oaks in the decade of the 90’s I would conduct mass orientations: we would hire people by the bushel-full and they would spend their first day filling out forms and learning the values and policies of the rapidly growing organization. There was also the opportunity to bond with your other newbies, and I always enjoyed this more creative part of the day.
My favorite question for new employees is one that was asked of President Obama last month – much to my surprise. I knew I hadn’t been the first or only person to think of the question as an effective way to get insight about a person, but I was still surprised to hear it, these 15 years later. I once asked it of renaissance man Steve Allen while interviewing him on my radio show, thinking he would probably pull the most amazing answer from his incredibly fertile mind. Nope, he replied: “I hate questions like that”. I think I had to go to commercial to recover from the embarrassment.
“If you could have lunch with anyone, living or dead, who would it be?” And I usually added: “and what would you talk about?” I added this last part after an employee years before had answered: “Adolf Hitler”. Stunned – and re-thinking my hiring criteria – I stuttered “why?” Calmly she replied, ”So I could ask him ‘What the #!^@ were you thinking?’”
Anyway, it is a great question for getting to know people. And over the years as I asked it of 100’s of new employees, I came up with many different people myself. Mary Martin (the original Maria von Trapp in Sound of Music and Nellie Forbush in South Pacific, and Peter Pan), because I had wanted to grow up to be her. Vincent Van Gogh, because his letters to his brother Theo were as colorful as his paintings and I wanted to hear him talk. John F. Kennedy, a childhood icon struck down when I was in 8th grade science class. (One new employee answered Lee Harvey Oswald to this question and I thought that was brilliant: “Did you act alone?”). Hands down, the best answer I ever heard came from my brother, Phil, who immediately responded “Pete and Kobe Bryant”. Tears rolled as I imagined my developmentally delayed nephew -- who dresses in a Lakers uniform before watching every game on TV -- and his basketball hero happily chatting away.
I was pleased to hear that the President chose to lunch with Mahatma Gandhi. Not pleased that he made the same lame joke I did about his lunch date not eating much, but pleased with the choice. I would ask Gandhi things like “how do you keep from getting discouraged?” and I wondered if the President would ask him that, too.
What has this all got to do with employment? Well, I was just thinking about the importance of having a connection with your employees and co-workers that goes beyond the daily grind. And then I remembered my favorite question. Today, I think I’ll lunch with my grandmother. That has always been the #1 answer.
My favorite question for new employees is one that was asked of President Obama last month – much to my surprise. I knew I hadn’t been the first or only person to think of the question as an effective way to get insight about a person, but I was still surprised to hear it, these 15 years later. I once asked it of renaissance man Steve Allen while interviewing him on my radio show, thinking he would probably pull the most amazing answer from his incredibly fertile mind. Nope, he replied: “I hate questions like that”. I think I had to go to commercial to recover from the embarrassment.
“If you could have lunch with anyone, living or dead, who would it be?” And I usually added: “and what would you talk about?” I added this last part after an employee years before had answered: “Adolf Hitler”. Stunned – and re-thinking my hiring criteria – I stuttered “why?” Calmly she replied, ”So I could ask him ‘What the #!^@ were you thinking?’”
Anyway, it is a great question for getting to know people. And over the years as I asked it of 100’s of new employees, I came up with many different people myself. Mary Martin (the original Maria von Trapp in Sound of Music and Nellie Forbush in South Pacific, and Peter Pan), because I had wanted to grow up to be her. Vincent Van Gogh, because his letters to his brother Theo were as colorful as his paintings and I wanted to hear him talk. John F. Kennedy, a childhood icon struck down when I was in 8th grade science class. (One new employee answered Lee Harvey Oswald to this question and I thought that was brilliant: “Did you act alone?”). Hands down, the best answer I ever heard came from my brother, Phil, who immediately responded “Pete and Kobe Bryant”. Tears rolled as I imagined my developmentally delayed nephew -- who dresses in a Lakers uniform before watching every game on TV -- and his basketball hero happily chatting away.
I was pleased to hear that the President chose to lunch with Mahatma Gandhi. Not pleased that he made the same lame joke I did about his lunch date not eating much, but pleased with the choice. I would ask Gandhi things like “how do you keep from getting discouraged?” and I wondered if the President would ask him that, too.
What has this all got to do with employment? Well, I was just thinking about the importance of having a connection with your employees and co-workers that goes beyond the daily grind. And then I remembered my favorite question. Today, I think I’ll lunch with my grandmother. That has always been the #1 answer.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Sexual Harssment and more
While we still harass each other sexually at work, it seems we are perfecting other ways to discriminate, as well. Racial and disability discrimination are up in the last 12 months. And claims of ageism were up during all the layoffs.
The law mandates that employers keep their workplaces safe (all those OSHA regs) and free from discrimination (sexual harassment is a form of discrimination -- based on sex), but aren't these common-sense issues? Of course you want your emplyees to be safe. But the devil is in the details, and we seem to need to have someone to sue (blame) if something goes wrong. The same thing goes with sexual harassment: we all know it is on our best interest to demand respect in the workplace, but we don't all define harassment the same way.
I say keep it simple: rather than bother trying to define illegal harassment, just enforce the respect rule. This would mean that anything that falls short of respectful behavior is not OK; will be addressed,and must be corrected. Set the bar low enough that behavior is not likely to get as high as the legal definitions. That would take care of all the kinds of discrimination. And save a lot of pages in the Employee Handbook. And change the world.
The law mandates that employers keep their workplaces safe (all those OSHA regs) and free from discrimination (sexual harassment is a form of discrimination -- based on sex), but aren't these common-sense issues? Of course you want your emplyees to be safe. But the devil is in the details, and we seem to need to have someone to sue (blame) if something goes wrong. The same thing goes with sexual harassment: we all know it is on our best interest to demand respect in the workplace, but we don't all define harassment the same way.
I say keep it simple: rather than bother trying to define illegal harassment, just enforce the respect rule. This would mean that anything that falls short of respectful behavior is not OK; will be addressed,and must be corrected. Set the bar low enough that behavior is not likely to get as high as the legal definitions. That would take care of all the kinds of discrimination. And save a lot of pages in the Employee Handbook. And change the world.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Twittering Policy May Be A Good Idea
As long ago as early 2009, SHRM (Society for HR Managers) was recomending that businesses consider adding a Twitter policy to their Employee Handbooks. Apparently, it isn't about the hours of lost productivity (its isn't??), but about the content of the tweets. We went through the same problem when blogs became popular.Here are some examaples:
The NBA slapped Mavericks owner Mark Cuban with a $25,000 fine for publicly criticizing the officials after Denver's 103-101 win over Dallas.
A building materials company and its owner have appealed a $12.6 million verdict against them, alleging that a juror posted messages on Twitter.com during the trial that show he's biased against them.
Suggestions for policy include reminding employees to tweet on their own time, to make it clear they are not speaking an behalf of the company, and don't disclose any confidential company information.
This strategy won't keep employees from tweeting, but it will give a company some leverage if they are caught hurting the company as a result.
And we'd all better get a handle on technology in the workplace soon -- the young employees coming into the workplace are used to jumping from one thing to another -- are we gojng to be able to supervise that?
The NBA slapped Mavericks owner Mark Cuban with a $25,000 fine for publicly criticizing the officials after Denver's 103-101 win over Dallas.
A building materials company and its owner have appealed a $12.6 million verdict against them, alleging that a juror posted messages on Twitter.com during the trial that show he's biased against them.
Suggestions for policy include reminding employees to tweet on their own time, to make it clear they are not speaking an behalf of the company, and don't disclose any confidential company information.
This strategy won't keep employees from tweeting, but it will give a company some leverage if they are caught hurting the company as a result.
And we'd all better get a handle on technology in the workplace soon -- the young employees coming into the workplace are used to jumping from one thing to another -- are we gojng to be able to supervise that?
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Paid to Do Nothing
An alarming new study has indicated that employers are virtually paying people to do nothing! Sorry to say, but this ain’t exactly news.
There are many reasons given but I have not yet heard a valid justification for not basing an employee’s pay on performance. Productivity. Deliverables. Pay based on longevity is a thing of the past. Except in government work – and we all know what they say about government workers.
If your employee isn't delivering how can you afford to keep him or her on the payroll? Or aren't you paying attention?
There are many reasons given but I have not yet heard a valid justification for not basing an employee’s pay on performance. Productivity. Deliverables. Pay based on longevity is a thing of the past. Except in government work – and we all know what they say about government workers.
If your employee isn't delivering how can you afford to keep him or her on the payroll? Or aren't you paying attention?
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
SWINE FLU - Its Here
Way back in April, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) placed a special link on swine flu that references its “Guidance on Preparing Workplaces for an Influenza Pandemic”. OSHA lists measures to protect employees & recommends employers develop pandemic flu plans tailored to the needs of their worksites. More information & resources can be found in United Staffing Associates NEWS YOU CAN USE archives, at http://www.unitedwestaff.com/hr_resources.html#flu
By now you are no doubt familiar with the steps recommended by the CDC that individuals can take to stay healthy:
•
Cover your nose & mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it.
•
Wash your hands often with soap & water, especially after you cough or sneeze. Alcohol‐based hands cleaners are also effective.
•
Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth. Germs spread that way.
•
Try to avoid close contact with sick people.
•
If you get sick, CDC recommends that you stay home from work or school & limit contact with others to keep from infecting them.
In addition, our Human Resources Consulting Division has these suggestions for preparing your staff:
1) The most important issue to address is your expectations about what your employees should do if they are sick. Make it clear to them that you expect them to stay home if they have the slightest flu‐like symptoms. Reassure them that they will not be disciplined for erring on the side of caution. (You can choose to require a medical certificate for return to work or not).
2) Is it clear who your employees call if they cannot come in, & by what time? Is it 2 hours prior to shift or the night before, or 30 minutes following the start of their shift? Do they know that it’s not OK to text their absence to you unless you have that form of communication already in place? Do they know they cannot leave a message on the office voice mail? It isn’t important what you set up, as long as you set up something & communicate it to your staff.
3) We can supply you with telecommute guidelines, too, but your first priority really should be about the employee getting diagnosed. That means relieve them of their duties until they can find out. Also, remember that you can compromise your sick‐time policy if you allow your employees to work while they are out sick.
4) You also need to set up a contingency plan for the possibility that several employees may be out at once. Is now the time for that cross‐training you always planned to do? Split shifts so that fewer employees interact with each other? Call your local USA or other staffing office to discuss getting temporary workers you can call in an emergency? Clorox makes a handy disposable cloth for wiping down phones, copiers, etc.
I will continue to provide you with helpful information that we come across.
Way back in April, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) placed a special link on swine flu that references its “Guidance on Preparing Workplaces for an Influenza Pandemic”. OSHA lists measures to protect employees & recommends employers develop pandemic flu plans tailored to the needs of their worksites. More information & resources can be found in United Staffing Associates NEWS YOU CAN USE archives, at http://www.unitedwestaff.com/hr_resources.html#flu
By now you are no doubt familiar with the steps recommended by the CDC that individuals can take to stay healthy:
•
Cover your nose & mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it.
•
Wash your hands often with soap & water, especially after you cough or sneeze. Alcohol‐based hands cleaners are also effective.
•
Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth. Germs spread that way.
•
Try to avoid close contact with sick people.
•
If you get sick, CDC recommends that you stay home from work or school & limit contact with others to keep from infecting them.
In addition, our Human Resources Consulting Division has these suggestions for preparing your staff:
1) The most important issue to address is your expectations about what your employees should do if they are sick. Make it clear to them that you expect them to stay home if they have the slightest flu‐like symptoms. Reassure them that they will not be disciplined for erring on the side of caution. (You can choose to require a medical certificate for return to work or not).
2) Is it clear who your employees call if they cannot come in, & by what time? Is it 2 hours prior to shift or the night before, or 30 minutes following the start of their shift? Do they know that it’s not OK to text their absence to you unless you have that form of communication already in place? Do they know they cannot leave a message on the office voice mail? It isn’t important what you set up, as long as you set up something & communicate it to your staff.
3) We can supply you with telecommute guidelines, too, but your first priority really should be about the employee getting diagnosed. That means relieve them of their duties until they can find out. Also, remember that you can compromise your sick‐time policy if you allow your employees to work while they are out sick.
4) You also need to set up a contingency plan for the possibility that several employees may be out at once. Is now the time for that cross‐training you always planned to do? Split shifts so that fewer employees interact with each other? Call your local USA or other staffing office to discuss getting temporary workers you can call in an emergency? Clorox makes a handy disposable cloth for wiping down phones, copiers, etc.
I will continue to provide you with helpful information that we come across.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
When I worked as the Human Resources Manager for a Home Depot store in southern California in the 90’s, “Our employees are the secret to our success” was one of our mottos. And it was true: teh thought was that anyone can build a warehouse and pass along the cost savings to the cutomer, but that a rich human element had better be there if you wanted to be successful.The fun, service-based culture envisioned by the founders was alive and well for employees and customers alike.
Then the company founders retired, were replaced by Bob Nardelli, and that motto (the philosophy, the salaries, the respect, the dedication, and the customer service) quickly faded away. I kept reassuring the worried loyal employees that Bernie & Arthur's Home Depot was still here; that the only change was in the measurement of all that great service and good will we engendered. I truly meant it. So when it became obvious that the heart was gone I, too, felt thrown under the bus. Of course Nardelli has left the Home Depot and now runs Chrysler.
Then the company founders retired, were replaced by Bob Nardelli, and that motto (the philosophy, the salaries, the respect, the dedication, and the customer service) quickly faded away. I kept reassuring the worried loyal employees that Bernie & Arthur's Home Depot was still here; that the only change was in the measurement of all that great service and good will we engendered. I truly meant it. So when it became obvious that the heart was gone I, too, felt thrown under the bus. Of course Nardelli has left the Home Depot and now runs Chrysler.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Want a Job in SLO Government?
Are you following the saga of the stupid in SLO county government? Is it making you crazy and are you reordering your anti-depressant meds like I . . . I mean, like others I know? Have you wondered how you could get a job paying $200k where you could have an affair that destroys confidentiality and creates a huge conflict of interest and where you could also send very personal and explicit emails back and forth with your boss? Geez, when most of us steal our employer’s time we’re just shopping online.
Maybe we should start a pool? How many times am I going to say: “Oh my God – what were they thinking??” before this – pun alert – affair is over? I counted 14,382 such outbursts during the Bush Administration.
And I sure wish I was still broadcasting my radio show, “The Wonderful World of Work”. There is certainly enough material here for a dozen “Stupid Employee Tricks” and “Bad Boss of the Month” segments.
Maybe we should start a pool? How many times am I going to say: “Oh my God – what were they thinking??” before this – pun alert – affair is over? I counted 14,382 such outbursts during the Bush Administration.
And I sure wish I was still broadcasting my radio show, “The Wonderful World of Work”. There is certainly enough material here for a dozen “Stupid Employee Tricks” and “Bad Boss of the Month” segments.
Monday, August 3, 2009
How Do you Cheat in an Interview?
If you are unemployed and need to brush up on your interview skills, there are zillions of resources on the web, at the SLO Women’s Business Center at Mission Community Services, and from the EDD. There is also a pretty cool book entitled: Surviving a Layoff, by Harry Dahlstrom that can be helpful. A local company provided copies of this book to each of the employees they had to lay off earlier this year.
I think that was a great move: one that may not have been appreciated at the time the pink slip arrived, but can be very useful once the shock wears off. It has chapters on how to tell your family you’ve been laid off, which bills you can set aside when money is tight, and the usual resume template and “how to win that interview” advice. I love the names used on the resume templates: Bea Hopeful and Will M. Press. Subliminal positive messages, I guess.
Another chapter includes fifty questions to expect during a job interview . . . and tips for answers. The EDD offers a similar sheet of questions; turn it over for suggested answers. Is this cheating or valid research for the task ahead? As an HR professional, I think of it as a warning to anyone conducting an interview: don’t expect creative answers to these questions, folks. Better try some others.
The book suggests you be prepared to answer: “How long do you plan to work here”? And they suggest this answer: “A long time. This is the job I’ve been hoping for”. Point #1: Any applicant worth hiring has already determined if the employer is looking for a summer employee or a long-timer. So this point is moot. Point #2: What else would you say to that question? “As long as you’ll have me”. “Until my parole officer retires”. Point #3: Does the interviewer think this is the only position you’ve applied for? I’m guessing you gave that same answer to the guy you interviewed with yesterday.
Another question you could anticipate in an interview: “How did you feel about being laid off”? My answer: “Lousy; like I was kicked in the stomach.” Suggested response: Don’t bad-mouth your old employers. Admit that you miss the job and the people. Say that you are grateful for the opportunities and the skills you learned there. My response to that response: “Are you a pod left behind by a body-snatcher?”
In order to avoid this whole dance, I have developed a series of interview questions over the last 30 years. Some are designed to stump the applicant, others to challenge him or her, some to reveal past performance, and still others to move them from “interview” mode into “interesting conversation”. Not that I would ever publish my list and desired responses. . . . well, maybe. Check in here again in a few weeks.
Betsey Nash, SPHR, has interviewed hundreds of applicants for jobs ranging from lot attendant to CEO. She is the current President of the Human Resources Association of the Central Coast and can be reached at betsey.nash@unitedwestaff.com.
I think that was a great move: one that may not have been appreciated at the time the pink slip arrived, but can be very useful once the shock wears off. It has chapters on how to tell your family you’ve been laid off, which bills you can set aside when money is tight, and the usual resume template and “how to win that interview” advice. I love the names used on the resume templates: Bea Hopeful and Will M. Press. Subliminal positive messages, I guess.
Another chapter includes fifty questions to expect during a job interview . . . and tips for answers. The EDD offers a similar sheet of questions; turn it over for suggested answers. Is this cheating or valid research for the task ahead? As an HR professional, I think of it as a warning to anyone conducting an interview: don’t expect creative answers to these questions, folks. Better try some others.
The book suggests you be prepared to answer: “How long do you plan to work here”? And they suggest this answer: “A long time. This is the job I’ve been hoping for”. Point #1: Any applicant worth hiring has already determined if the employer is looking for a summer employee or a long-timer. So this point is moot. Point #2: What else would you say to that question? “As long as you’ll have me”. “Until my parole officer retires”. Point #3: Does the interviewer think this is the only position you’ve applied for? I’m guessing you gave that same answer to the guy you interviewed with yesterday.
Another question you could anticipate in an interview: “How did you feel about being laid off”? My answer: “Lousy; like I was kicked in the stomach.” Suggested response: Don’t bad-mouth your old employers. Admit that you miss the job and the people. Say that you are grateful for the opportunities and the skills you learned there. My response to that response: “Are you a pod left behind by a body-snatcher?”
In order to avoid this whole dance, I have developed a series of interview questions over the last 30 years. Some are designed to stump the applicant, others to challenge him or her, some to reveal past performance, and still others to move them from “interview” mode into “interesting conversation”. Not that I would ever publish my list and desired responses. . . . well, maybe. Check in here again in a few weeks.
Betsey Nash, SPHR, has interviewed hundreds of applicants for jobs ranging from lot attendant to CEO. She is the current President of the Human Resources Association of the Central Coast and can be reached at betsey.nash@unitedwestaff.com.
Monday, July 20, 2009
WHAT’S YOUR COLOR?
Home Depot, 1997 -- It took me awhile but I finally figured out that when the store manager called me into her office, it wasn’t to give me direction: it was to allow her to think out loud, to process. I can’t tell you how many times I tried to add to the “conversation” only to realize she was in her own zone. I would rise from my chair every few minutes, thinking she had settled on a goal or strategy, only to find that she was still processing, and quietly sit back down. The first 10 pages of my notes could be tossed in the trash, but those last 2 were essential.
That was the manager of the Simi Valley store. The Thousand Oaks store manager was just the opposite: by the time he conversed with the management team he had decided on the direction, strategy, and every detail of whatever project was next. Meetings with him were short. Very few notes.
Since Hippocrates first placed us into personality type quadrants in 450 BC, society has been talking about communication. Sales people speak and process information differently than bookkeepers and engineers, right? A supervisor should communicate in such a way that their employee can “hear” or “get” what they are saying. Or at least warn them about their style. It took me awhile to get up to speed on Simi and T.O.: a hint would have helped. Or a class in Hippocrates.
This goes for employees, too. You want to be “heard”; whether to impress your boss or to beg for a day off. So, are you “speaking his or her language?” If they are a detail person, don’t waste time drawing the “big picture”.
Are they fast-paced and quick-thinking, focusing on results? Then present your idea or concern without a lot of detail, focusing on the bottom line. Be brief and be gone. And you will be heard.
Supervisors: are you asking a relationship-driven employee -- the one who plans the pot lucks and takes 10 minutes to get to their desk in the morning because they have to greet and chat with everyone first -- to complete a project on their own? No collaboration? No way.
If I want my employees to do what I ask…..if I want my boss to understand my concerns…. It behooves me to first understand their style.
In the parlance of my favorite personality style analysis, Real COLORS ®,,the pot luck planner is a Blue – relationship driven, sensitive, collaborative. The best person to place on a project is a Green – process, research, answers questions with questions. For details and organization, pick a Gold. Their sock drawer is organized and they love to make lists. And if you are looking for a creative, “outside the box” type – get an Orange.
Most of our entrepreneurs are Orange. And so is our prison population. (I’ll pause here while you make a joke about all the entrepreneurs in prison.)
We’ll talk more about communication in another column, but you can start thinking about your style (and your boss’s) in the meantime.
Betsey Nash, SPHR, is a consultant in Human Resources with United Staffing Associates and a certified trainer in Real COLORS ®. She can be reached at betsey.nash@unitedwestaff.com
That was the manager of the Simi Valley store. The Thousand Oaks store manager was just the opposite: by the time he conversed with the management team he had decided on the direction, strategy, and every detail of whatever project was next. Meetings with him were short. Very few notes.
Since Hippocrates first placed us into personality type quadrants in 450 BC, society has been talking about communication. Sales people speak and process information differently than bookkeepers and engineers, right? A supervisor should communicate in such a way that their employee can “hear” or “get” what they are saying. Or at least warn them about their style. It took me awhile to get up to speed on Simi and T.O.: a hint would have helped. Or a class in Hippocrates.
This goes for employees, too. You want to be “heard”; whether to impress your boss or to beg for a day off. So, are you “speaking his or her language?” If they are a detail person, don’t waste time drawing the “big picture”.
Are they fast-paced and quick-thinking, focusing on results? Then present your idea or concern without a lot of detail, focusing on the bottom line. Be brief and be gone. And you will be heard.
Supervisors: are you asking a relationship-driven employee -- the one who plans the pot lucks and takes 10 minutes to get to their desk in the morning because they have to greet and chat with everyone first -- to complete a project on their own? No collaboration? No way.
If I want my employees to do what I ask…..if I want my boss to understand my concerns…. It behooves me to first understand their style.
In the parlance of my favorite personality style analysis, Real COLORS ®,,the pot luck planner is a Blue – relationship driven, sensitive, collaborative. The best person to place on a project is a Green – process, research, answers questions with questions. For details and organization, pick a Gold. Their sock drawer is organized and they love to make lists. And if you are looking for a creative, “outside the box” type – get an Orange.
Most of our entrepreneurs are Orange. And so is our prison population. (I’ll pause here while you make a joke about all the entrepreneurs in prison.)
We’ll talk more about communication in another column, but you can start thinking about your style (and your boss’s) in the meantime.
Betsey Nash, SPHR, is a consultant in Human Resources with United Staffing Associates and a certified trainer in Real COLORS ®. She can be reached at betsey.nash@unitedwestaff.com
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Hiring Again?
It is time to start preparing to hire, as the economy shows signs of life. I have several favorite interview questions, all based on 2 theories:
past behavior is an indicator of future behavior, and
past success is an indicator of what you like to do.
Got any interview questions -- asked or asked of -- that you think are especially good? I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
past behavior is an indicator of future behavior, and
past success is an indicator of what you like to do.
Got any interview questions -- asked or asked of -- that you think are especially good? I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Discrimination Ruling in Supreme Court
The Supreme Court ruled Monday in favor of the white fire fighters who claimed their New Haven, Conn. Fire Department discriminated against them while trying to avoid a possible lawsuit from African-Americans.
When the promotion exams were given and the results tabulated, it was determined by the Department that the test resulted in a “disparate impact”, and should be tossed out. Disparate impact is the term for (often inadvertent) unfair results of some action: for instance if a business is laying off all their highest paid employees, that action may have a disparate impact on older workers.
Since so few people of color passed the test, it was felt that the test was somehow discriminatory, and left the Department vulnerable to a discrimination claim.
Low & behold, by tossing out the results, the Department set itself up for a claim, but filed by the white Firefighters who had passed the test. I can hear the department scream: “Damned if we do, damned if we don’t!”
In a 5-4 decision, the Justices decided that "Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions."
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Ginsburg said the court should have assessed "the starkly disparate results" of the exams against the backdrop of historical and ongoing inequality in the New Haven fire department. As of 2003, she said, only one of the city's 21 fire captains was African-American.
Until this decision, Ginsburg said, the civil rights law's prohibitions on intentional discrimination and disparate impact were complementary, both aimed at ending workplace discrimination.
"Today's decision sets these paired directives at odds," she said.
In a year when we expect to see legislation that looks out for the underdog and places workers rights ahead of those of the employer, it seems we can expect some interesting judicial decisions, too.
When the promotion exams were given and the results tabulated, it was determined by the Department that the test resulted in a “disparate impact”, and should be tossed out. Disparate impact is the term for (often inadvertent) unfair results of some action: for instance if a business is laying off all their highest paid employees, that action may have a disparate impact on older workers.
Since so few people of color passed the test, it was felt that the test was somehow discriminatory, and left the Department vulnerable to a discrimination claim.
Low & behold, by tossing out the results, the Department set itself up for a claim, but filed by the white Firefighters who had passed the test. I can hear the department scream: “Damned if we do, damned if we don’t!”
In a 5-4 decision, the Justices decided that "Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions."
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Ginsburg said the court should have assessed "the starkly disparate results" of the exams against the backdrop of historical and ongoing inequality in the New Haven fire department. As of 2003, she said, only one of the city's 21 fire captains was African-American.
Until this decision, Ginsburg said, the civil rights law's prohibitions on intentional discrimination and disparate impact were complementary, both aimed at ending workplace discrimination.
"Today's decision sets these paired directives at odds," she said.
In a year when we expect to see legislation that looks out for the underdog and places workers rights ahead of those of the employer, it seems we can expect some interesting judicial decisions, too.
Monday, June 22, 2009
How to Fire Someone
There are many laws that govern acceptable reasons to fire an employee: even in California, where "at-will" employment means you don't need a cause. Laws aside, there is one rule you should live by when contemplating the termination of an employee. Ask yourself: WILL THEY BE SURPRISED?
My first one was -- and all I could think was "shame on me". I hadn't done my job. She really was honestly surprised. (Many will react as if they are. But they know.)
That's it: just make sure they are not surprised. They know what is expected; they said they could do it; they aren't doing it; they have all the tools they need to do it; they have been trained and warned of the consequences.
Surprise – I am doing what I said I would do if you didn’t meet the standards!
My first one was -- and all I could think was "shame on me". I hadn't done my job. She really was honestly surprised. (Many will react as if they are. But they know.)
That's it: just make sure they are not surprised. They know what is expected; they said they could do it; they aren't doing it; they have all the tools they need to do it; they have been trained and warned of the consequences.
Surprise – I am doing what I said I would do if you didn’t meet the standards!
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Interviewed in this month's HR Magazine (published by SHRM, the national HR organization), GE's former CEO Jack Welch has praised human resources professionals. OK, so he knew his audience. He said we HR pros should be ashamed (my word) if we don't have a seat at the table, as a true partner in the strategic planning and execution of the business. Natually, I agree. And it is exepcially important right now, for two main reasons: employee hiring and separations.
How is your business handling lay-offs? Please tell me it is not about seniority. It should be all about productivity, what tasks you can merge into another position, and whatever needs to happen to keep the business alive. Using seniority as a criteria can get you into trouble because you may inadvertently terminate only employee over age 40 -- ageism. Charges to the EEOC of ageism are rapidly rising this year.
Productivity is a valid criteria for sure. But did the employee you can live without get a good performance evaluation in the last year? Here is a serious pitfall. Does the employee have proof you think they are a valuable employee or is there documentation about the employee's need to improve?
Right now isd the time to be planning for the economy's upswing and how/who you will be hiring. How many will you need, what will be the indicator, and in which departments? How long will it take you to find them. Just as a baseball team always has a bench, you should always have some resumes of promising candidates on hand.
So, HR professionals: grab a place at the table and let everyone know you are looking out for the best interests of the business by putting effective processes in place at both ends of the employment life-cycle.
How is your business handling lay-offs? Please tell me it is not about seniority. It should be all about productivity, what tasks you can merge into another position, and whatever needs to happen to keep the business alive. Using seniority as a criteria can get you into trouble because you may inadvertently terminate only employee over age 40 -- ageism. Charges to the EEOC of ageism are rapidly rising this year.
Productivity is a valid criteria for sure. But did the employee you can live without get a good performance evaluation in the last year? Here is a serious pitfall. Does the employee have proof you think they are a valuable employee or is there documentation about the employee's need to improve?
Right now isd the time to be planning for the economy's upswing and how/who you will be hiring. How many will you need, what will be the indicator, and in which departments? How long will it take you to find them. Just as a baseball team always has a bench, you should always have some resumes of promising candidates on hand.
So, HR professionals: grab a place at the table and let everyone know you are looking out for the best interests of the business by putting effective processes in place at both ends of the employment life-cycle.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Communication is Key
One of our culture’s most popular clichés is “timing is everything”. Just ask a realtor as they wait in the unemployment line. Well, we business and HR professionals tend to believe that timing is very important – but COMMUNICATION IS EVERYTHING.
Employees spend over 75% of their time in an interpersonal situation: with clients, customers, co-workers, the boss, the public; verbally, written, email -- it is all about the communication. And speaking of email, does the irony strike anyone else that all this blogging, “twittering,” and “linking” is called social networking? The new definition of social apparently does not include personal interaction. At least not face-to-face. By now, your employees may be spending 80% of that interpersonal 75%, networking socially.
If, as studies show, employees don’t quit the company they work for so much as they “quit” their immediate supervisor, then every supervisor had better be an expert communicator.
Why is this an issue now that an employer can have his or her pick from a multitude of eager applicants? Because you still want the best people you can find. Once you get them in the door you had better communicate well or they’ll keep looking.
If an employee is not doing what’s expected of him or her, it is likely for one or more of the following reasons. Notice how many are communication-based:
• They don’t know why they should do it
• They don’t know how to do it
• They don’t know what they are supposed to do
• They think your way will not work
• They think their way is better
• They think something else is more important
• They think they are doing it
• They are punished for doing it
• They are rewarded for not doing it.
• It is beyond their personal limits
• No one could do it
So it is clear that a good supervisor communicates expectations and rationale and is consistent when working with their employees. It involves a lot more than being good at giving orders, however. Eisenhower once defined “leadership” as (I paraphrase) the ability to get others to do what you want because they want to. He was good at giving orders, but it took something more to make him a good leader.
We all know how important listening is. It is probably the most important – and hardest part – of communicating. You can take classes in “Active Listening” but what I am talking about goes beyond merely understanding the message – it is understanding the messenger. Is your manager a detail person or do they leave the details to you and provide you with the broad picture? Is your employee the kind that likes a lot of direction or very little? These different types of personalities, thinkers and producers, are all communicating that information to you, and they hear better when you match their style.
Feedback is also huge. One of a manager’s most important skills is to give specific, individualized feedback to their employees. But listen to these 2 different approaches and tell me which is the more effective:
“Well, congratulations! You’re on time for a change!” Or
“Thanks for making it in on time today. I knew you could do it.”
Sounds obvious, but the first one is used all too often. Not sure if any personality style would respond to that back-handed complement, either.
In order to attract and retain the best employees businesses must hire supervisors who can set expectations, listen, coach, and communicate them to each “style” of employee. You don’t want your employees quitting because your supervisors don’t understand that communication is everything.
Employees spend over 75% of their time in an interpersonal situation: with clients, customers, co-workers, the boss, the public; verbally, written, email -- it is all about the communication. And speaking of email, does the irony strike anyone else that all this blogging, “twittering,” and “linking” is called social networking? The new definition of social apparently does not include personal interaction. At least not face-to-face. By now, your employees may be spending 80% of that interpersonal 75%, networking socially.
If, as studies show, employees don’t quit the company they work for so much as they “quit” their immediate supervisor, then every supervisor had better be an expert communicator.
Why is this an issue now that an employer can have his or her pick from a multitude of eager applicants? Because you still want the best people you can find. Once you get them in the door you had better communicate well or they’ll keep looking.
If an employee is not doing what’s expected of him or her, it is likely for one or more of the following reasons. Notice how many are communication-based:
• They don’t know why they should do it
• They don’t know how to do it
• They don’t know what they are supposed to do
• They think your way will not work
• They think their way is better
• They think something else is more important
• They think they are doing it
• They are punished for doing it
• They are rewarded for not doing it.
• It is beyond their personal limits
• No one could do it
So it is clear that a good supervisor communicates expectations and rationale and is consistent when working with their employees. It involves a lot more than being good at giving orders, however. Eisenhower once defined “leadership” as (I paraphrase) the ability to get others to do what you want because they want to. He was good at giving orders, but it took something more to make him a good leader.
We all know how important listening is. It is probably the most important – and hardest part – of communicating. You can take classes in “Active Listening” but what I am talking about goes beyond merely understanding the message – it is understanding the messenger. Is your manager a detail person or do they leave the details to you and provide you with the broad picture? Is your employee the kind that likes a lot of direction or very little? These different types of personalities, thinkers and producers, are all communicating that information to you, and they hear better when you match their style.
Feedback is also huge. One of a manager’s most important skills is to give specific, individualized feedback to their employees. But listen to these 2 different approaches and tell me which is the more effective:
“Well, congratulations! You’re on time for a change!” Or
“Thanks for making it in on time today. I knew you could do it.”
Sounds obvious, but the first one is used all too often. Not sure if any personality style would respond to that back-handed complement, either.
In order to attract and retain the best employees businesses must hire supervisors who can set expectations, listen, coach, and communicate them to each “style” of employee. You don’t want your employees quitting because your supervisors don’t understand that communication is everything.
Friday, May 29, 2009
My Company's Values
I have a framed drawing of Gandhi in my office, with his quote: "Each of us must be the change we wish to see in the world." It serves to remind me that business owners (and others in management) and employees can create a mutually-rewarding experience and that it is my job to assist them in doing exactly that.
So this is a quick reminder to let your business' values lead your decision-making in all things. And be sure they are posted in your breakroom so that the employees know they are their guidelines, as well.
We HR types stress the importance of using the Employee Handbook as our guide for decision-making, and that is very true. But don't forget the value of your values, too.
Your thoughts are welcome.
So this is a quick reminder to let your business' values lead your decision-making in all things. And be sure they are posted in your breakroom so that the employees know they are their guidelines, as well.
We HR types stress the importance of using the Employee Handbook as our guide for decision-making, and that is very true. But don't forget the value of your values, too.
Your thoughts are welcome.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Cut My Pay? No Way. Yes, Way.
A general manager called me the other day to ask if the owner of his company could just walk up and tell him his pay was cut. No discussion, no warning, just boom! In my proudest HR style I replied: "It depends."
Short answer: Yes. It can be a unilateral decision. They made you an offer that you accepted when you were hired, and they are actually making you a new offer now. You can choose it or not. Not probably means you are no longer employed, but you might be able to negotiate. If you think the owner can't live without you, take a deep breath and think again, and then get your ducks in a row before you try to convince him. And remember, as nice as he has been to you for the last 5 years, he really doesn't care about your mortgage and kid's tuition as much as he cares about saving his business. How can you help him do that?
Longer answer: Maybe. (Isn't HR a great field?) If you are an exempt employee, that is, not subject to the wage and hour laws like breaks and overtime- and as a general manager I would fully expect that you are-check to be sure your new salary doesn't drop you below twice the minimum wage. If your salary goes below $35,360 per year, then you are probably losing your exemption. That means you may be an hourly employee, no longer paid by performance but by the hour. Now you have to take rest breaks and a meal break and clock in and clock out, and you get paid overtime if it should ever happen that you work more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week.
Still part of longer answer: And check to see if your hours are being reduced. As if you would want to be paid less for working just as hard. Is the owner now coming in to cover some shifts? Even without the salary threshold being crossed, changing your hours may change your classification as well. Are you dropping below the full time threshold and so, no longer qualify for benefits? You'd better find out all of these details before you make a decision whether to stay or go. And if you discuss this with the owner, he may decide he can't afford to make the changes after all. Especially if you start getting paid overtime.
If the owner tries to lower your pay retroactively: "Hi Joe, we've just finished our taxes and realize we need to cut back, so effective the start of the last pay period we are reducing your salary by 20 percent," when you pick yourself up off the floor tell him "No way!" No fair.
By the way, that general manager who called me the other day decided to turn down the salary reduction and move on: shocking his boss, to say the least. He'll be staying on as a consultant until either his replacement is hired and trained or business picks up again. That felt like a win-win to me. But it all depends.
Short answer: Yes. It can be a unilateral decision. They made you an offer that you accepted when you were hired, and they are actually making you a new offer now. You can choose it or not. Not probably means you are no longer employed, but you might be able to negotiate. If you think the owner can't live without you, take a deep breath and think again, and then get your ducks in a row before you try to convince him. And remember, as nice as he has been to you for the last 5 years, he really doesn't care about your mortgage and kid's tuition as much as he cares about saving his business. How can you help him do that?
Longer answer: Maybe. (Isn't HR a great field?) If you are an exempt employee, that is, not subject to the wage and hour laws like breaks and overtime- and as a general manager I would fully expect that you are-check to be sure your new salary doesn't drop you below twice the minimum wage. If your salary goes below $35,360 per year, then you are probably losing your exemption. That means you may be an hourly employee, no longer paid by performance but by the hour. Now you have to take rest breaks and a meal break and clock in and clock out, and you get paid overtime if it should ever happen that you work more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week.
Still part of longer answer: And check to see if your hours are being reduced. As if you would want to be paid less for working just as hard. Is the owner now coming in to cover some shifts? Even without the salary threshold being crossed, changing your hours may change your classification as well. Are you dropping below the full time threshold and so, no longer qualify for benefits? You'd better find out all of these details before you make a decision whether to stay or go. And if you discuss this with the owner, he may decide he can't afford to make the changes after all. Especially if you start getting paid overtime.
If the owner tries to lower your pay retroactively: "Hi Joe, we've just finished our taxes and realize we need to cut back, so effective the start of the last pay period we are reducing your salary by 20 percent," when you pick yourself up off the floor tell him "No way!" No fair.
By the way, that general manager who called me the other day decided to turn down the salary reduction and move on: shocking his boss, to say the least. He'll be staying on as a consultant until either his replacement is hired and trained or business picks up again. That felt like a win-win to me. But it all depends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)