Lindsey Lohan and homelessness

OMG!! Did you hear that Lindsey Lohan is suing E-Trade for mocking her in one of their clever baby e-trader commercials? You know the commercial – a girl baby asks the boy baby e-trader if “that milkaholic, Lindsey” spent the night with him. Be honest – did that make you think of Lindsey Lohan? Drinking milk? Onterested in the stock market? Really?

Of course, it may be that Lindsey (the older one, not the milkaholic) and her dad are following that old rule that any publicity is good publicity. But, really: even publicity that makes you looks like an idiot? And now I will think of her every time I see that commercial, which really makes me mad. That was one of very few commercials I didn't speed past with my TIVO.

So I contrast this “news item” with another I came across on the same day: the 2009 San Luis Obispo, CA, County Homeless Enumeration Report. Now here is some information worth our attention.

What does this report have to do with employee-employer relations? Almost 20% of the county’s homeless have jobs. I don’t know if they are part-time or full-time or what, but 9% of respondents said they live in San Luis Obispo county because they have a job. Not because of the great homeless services, not because of the weather, but because they have a job. So, stereotypes be damned.

Some local employers have workers with no place to go at night, and the impact this one fact has on productivity, absenteeism, and morale can be significant.
Almost half of the homeless respondents with jobs work in construction: that can’t feel very secure about now. A third work in retail: not the best pay around, even though the great majority of our homeless have at least a high school diploma and a third have attended college.

I guess I would know if one of my employees did not have a home to go to. Wouldn’t I? What would be the signs? Dress and grooming? Sure, if they are one of the 46% who sleep in a vehicle or outside at night. Lack of engagement? Easy to believe they would have things other than work on their minds, especially if they are part of the 29% who are responsible for one or more children. (Of the 1372 children and teens counted on this January day in 2009, 384 were not in school.)

What are their special needs? I can’t expect them to advance any business expenses and wait for reimbursement, so does that limit which position they can fill? If you don’t have an address can you get a driver’s license? They can’t drive for me if they can’t afford insurance. That means they can’t run company errands: another limitation to their employment? What about a phone?

And what are my obligations as an employer if I do know that an employee is homeless? Nothing legal as far as I know. That milkaholic Lindsey certainly has a sense of entitlement, but homelessness is not a “protected class”. That’s for sure.

Texting: The Key to Controlling the Latest Distraction

Necessity may be the mother of invention, but sneakiness is the father. Just ask any employer who is trying to curb the use of iPhones and Blackberries in the workplace. Some employees are so good at texting that they can do it without looking. Secret Texting could be the next Olympic sport: “Look at that! A 360 behind the back twist while checking movie times in his sweatshirt pocket! That should rate at least a 56.7, Bob”.

Employers have to decide if they want to keep employees from checking in with their BFF while they should be helping customers. Diligent, consistent enforcement is going to be key. Some outlaw cell phones altogether. Not allowed in the building. If you can’t live without your phone, you should get a job at the phone company. The thinking here: if it ain’t within reach it can’t be used. Other employers have decided to allow their employees to text while on breaks: they figure if they offer a time for their use, the employee will wait until then. Hmmm.

Lawsuits are appearing in this arena: blogging nasty things about your boss, hackers in your social media site, freedom of speech, and privacy issues are all in play. If an employee texts f-worded threats to his supervisor for changing his schedule is that free speech? If an employee is fired for no-call, no-show, but says she texted her boss that she was sick, is that sufficient notice? Should she be reinstated? If the employee agrees to pay for text characters over a certain limit on the company’s phone, can the company limit what is said or is this a privacy issue?

I tell my clients that this is just the latest distraction at work. Be consistent or you can’t expect compliance. Do you allow personal phone calls? Are friends allowed to come visit your employees while they are on the clock? Do you care if your employees come in a few minutes late or are you a stickler for being on time? Do you have filters on the computers so that your staff cannot access porn sites and Facebook? How much control do you want over the myriad distractions in the workday? When you know the answer to this question, then you will know the policy you need to put into place.

Here are two abbreviated samples:
1). Engaging in social networking and texting during your day can negatively impact your productivity and work performance. Therefore it is your responsibility to regulate your social networking and texting so that it does not impact your productivity or cause you performance issues.

2). Employee’s own electronic media is not to be used during work hours on the work premises under any circumstances. Texting and the use of Internet based programs such as Facebook, [etc.] is a violation of Company policy and use of these programs either on Company owned property or on your personal property during work hours on the work premises can result in discipline up to and including termination.

In either case, consistent enforcement – as always – is key.Let me know what you think.