OCCABA News

Starbucks offers $1,200 bonuses to baristas with top customer service ratings

Bill Brewer — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 23:34:46 GMT

Aimee Picchi

April 2, 2026 / 10:40 AM EDT / CBS News

Starbucks is offering its baristas up to $1,200 in annual bonuses and shifting to weekly pay as the coffee chain pushes to boost sales and improve customer service.

The company said Thursday that the bonuses are tied to whether individual Starbucks outlets meet customer service and sales goals. Moving to weekly pay should also give workers more financial flexibility, it added.

Under CEO Brian Niccol, Starbucks has sought to energize growth and boost profits after several consecutive quarters of flat or declining sales. The most recent quarter showed improvement, with same-store sales rising 4%. Analysts attribute those results to Niccol's "Back to Starbucks" turnaround plan, which includes adding new menu items and a barista dress code aimed at improving the company's image.

"As the company's Back to Starbucks transformation continues to deliver results and an improved customer experience in Starbucks coffeehouses, the new incentive rewards program recognizes partners for the progress they make possible," the company said in a statement.

Baristas can earn $300 per quarter, or $1,200 a year, in bonuses if their locations meet or exceed performance goals, which the company didn't specify. The bonus program will begin in July.

Starbucks said it is also changing its tipping program in the chain's mobile app, as well as when customers pay by scanning the app at the register, a move the company said will make it easier for customers to add a gratuity. The company estimates baristas' tips could increase by 5% to 8% because of the change.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CBS News

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starbucks-barista-bonus-1200-customer-service/

Stability Over Salary: 67% of New Graduates Would Take Lower Pay for Security

Bill Brewer — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 23:31:22 GMT

News provided by

Monster | Mar 30, 2026, 08:00 ET

Economic uncertainty and rising AI concerns are reshaping priorities, pushing graduates toward security-first career decisions.

GUAYNABO, Puerto Rico, March 30, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- As the Class of 2026 prepares to enter the workforce, new survey data from Monster® shows graduates adopting a pragmatic approach to their careers, prioritizing stability over status in an uncertain job market.

According to Monster's 2026 State of the Graduate Report, two-thirds of graduates (67%) say they would accept a lower-paying job if it offered greater long-term career security. While salary remains a top consideration when evaluating job offers (68%), job security (52%) now ranks above career growth opportunities (49%) among graduates' top priorities.

That shift reflects a broader adjustment in expectations. Nearly seven in 10 graduates (69%) say they are more willing to compromise on their ideal role than they were a year ago.

"Today's graduates are entering the workforce with ambition, but also realism," said Monster career expert Vicki Salemi. "Pay matters, but stability is increasingly shaping early career decisions. Many are weighing long-term security more heavily than rapid advancement."

Confidence in landing a job remains relatively high, but not universal. While 79% say they are confident they will receive a job offer within three months of graduation (down from 83% in 2025), more than 1 in 5 (22%) are not confident they'll secure an offer in that timeframe. Expectations around job search timelines also reflect caution: 35% anticipate their search will take four months or longer.

At the same time, concern about structural factors shaping the workforce is rising. Nearly nine in 10 graduates (89%) worry AI could replace entry-level roles, up from 64% last year. Concern about the broader economy remains steady, with 76% saying they are worried about its impact on job prospects.

Key Findings

Stability matters: 67% would accept lower pay for long-term career security.
Pay leads, but stability outranks growth: Salary is a top consideration (68%), and job security (52%) ranks above career growth opportunities (49%).
Expectations are shifting: 69% are more willing to compromise on their ideal role than they were a year ago.
Short-term tradeoffs are on the table: 75% say they would accept a job they expect to leave within a year if it provided immediate income.
Job searches may take longer: 35% expect their job search to take four months or longer (20% expect 4–6 months; 15% expect more than six months)
AI concern is rising: 89% worry AI could replace entry-level roles, up from 64% in 2025.
Economic anxiety remains steady: 76% are concerned the economy will affect their job prospects.

Financial and Career Priorities
Economic uncertainty continues to shape graduate decision-making.

While salary remains a key factor, stability is clearly influencing choices. Two-thirds (67%) say they would accept a lower-paying role if it offered greater long-term security.

At the same time, many are prioritizing immediate financial footing. Three in four graduates (75%) say they would accept a job they expected to leave within a year if it provided income.

The most important considerations when evaluating a job offer include:

Salary — 68%
Job security — 52%
Work-life balance — 52%
Career growth opportunities — 49%
Benefits (health insurance, PTO, etc.) — 48%
Remote or flexible work options — 32%
Company values — 17%

A More Pragmatic Outlook
Graduates are also demonstrating increased flexibility in how they approach early career decisions. Nearly seven in 10 (69%) say they are more willing to compromise on their ideal role than they were a year ago. Additionally, three in four (75%) say they would accept a job they expected to leave within a year if it provided immediate income.

Together, these responses point to a generation balancing ambition with practicality as they navigate a changing workforce landscape.

The Bottom Line
Compared to last year, graduates remain optimistic about their prospects but are adjusting expectations in response to economic and technological realities. Stability is becoming a defining priority. Many are willing to trade pay or ideal-fit roles for long-term security, even as concerns about AI's impact on entry-level opportunities continue to grow. These signals suggest a workforce entering the market focused not just on getting hired, but on building sustainable careers.

Methodology
This survey was conducted by Pollfish on February 17, 2026 among more than 1,000 U.S.-based recent and impending college graduates. Respondents answered a series of multiple-choice questions exploring job market outlook, job search expectations, AI readiness and concerns, and early-career priorities. The sample included graduates and students spanning the Classes of 2023 through 2027.

For more information, please view the full report at https://www.monster.com/career-advice/research/2026-state-of-the-graduate-report

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: PR Newswire

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/stability-over-salary-67-of-new-graduates-would-take-lower-pay-for-security-302727489.html

Equity isn’t just for executives: Report urges HR to think beyond base pay

Bill Brewer — Wed, 05 Nov 2025 18:45:21 GMT

Published Oct. 23, 2025 | Kate Tornone

While the compensation option may be well associated with executives and tech startups, it’s increasingly being offered elsewhere, such as to Walmart store managers.

Equity grants — a compensation option that gives employees company stock — are increasing in popularity around the globe, according to a report published last week.

That means HR professionals should think beyond pay and design compensation strategies that integrate short-term cash rewards with long-term equity incentives, according to Deel and Carta research.

“Positioning equity as a central component — not a supplementary perk — can help attract top talent, align employee interests with company growth, and improve retention without overextending fixed payroll costs,” according to the firms.

Such efforts are particularly important for employers aiming to be competitive in certain industries or in a global market, they said.

For example, equity is increasingly valued as part of total compensation in emerging markets like Brazil and India, according to the report. There’s also a shift toward equity-heavy compensation for technical talent, it showed — something that could be relevant for employers seeking specialized AI talent.

While the compensation option may be well associated with executives and tech startups, it’s increasingly being offered elsewhere — like to Walmart store managers, for example. The employer last year announced plans to add $20,000 in stock grants to the annual compensation packages of Supercenter store managers in the U.S. The company said managers of other types of Walmart stores would be eligible for $10,000 and $15,000 stock grants.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/equity-isnt-just-for-executives-stock-grants-employees/803637/

Why employees don’t negotiate compensation, according to researchers

Bill Brewer — Wed, 05 Nov 2025 18:42:47 GMT

Published Oct. 24, 2025 | Emilie Shumway

While experts predicted job seekers would be more influenced by the offer of negotiation coaching, a simple message that employers expect negotiation nudged more job seekers to try it, results showed.

Workers avoid negotiating compensation more because they believe employers are not open to it than because they don’t think they have the proper skills, according to researchers from Harvard, Brown and University of California Los Angeles.

The researchers conducted an experiment involving more than 3,100 job seekers in the U.S. tech sector, according to a white paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. The job seekers were 31 years old on average, had seven years of work experience and made annual compensation between $217,000 and $221,000. Many worked for top tech companies like Google, Apple and Meta.

Workers were surveyed on past experience and beliefs about salary negotiations and then targeted with two different approaches. One received an “encouragement” treatment, which involved receiving a simple message like “companies expect you to negotiate” and “don’t feel guilty for negotiating.” The other approach offered workers a coaching option with a discount of more than 80% to help them improve their salary negotiation skills.

Among the first group who had received job offers within a period of several months, 61% countered their initial offer, compared to a control group of 54%. They received on average an increase in compensation of 12.45%, or equivalent to $27,000 annually.

In comparison, among the group who received the discounted coaching option, few took up the offer (only 3%, compared to 1% who received no discount). And even among those who received the coaching, it had “no meaningful effect on negotiation attempts,” the researchers said.

The results are surprising even among experts, the researchers found. They asked 117 academics to predict what would happen with their experiments, and “most predicted that the coaching treatment would be more effective than the encouragement treatment in increasing negotiation rates and compensation — whereas we find the opposite.”

More than half of workers don’t negotiate their salary, various studies have found. While the NBER white paper suggests they are leaving money on the table, a recent weakening of the economy — especially the tech sector — may be influencing job seekers’ habits.

More recent coverage of the study by UCLA Anderson Review noted that the job market has fallen in strength since the experiment was conducted (May 2023 through February 2025), and Ricardo Perez-Truglia, the participating UCLA researcher, said the “benefits (and risks) of negotiating compensation may rise or fall.”

According to data released by ZipRecruiter in April, fewer workers negotiated their offers or received signing bonuses in early 2025, and new hires were less likely to increase their pay or receive a counter-offer from their former employer.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source; HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/why-employees-dont-negotiate-compensation/803596/

Analysis on Financial Wellness Mindset Among U.S. Workers and Employers

Bill Brewer — Mon, 08 Sep 2025 17:15:26 GMT

PNC Bank Survey Offers Insights, Analysis on Financial Wellness Mindset Among U.S. Workers and Employers

PITTSBURGH, Aug. 27, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- PNC Bank today released findings from its third annual Financial Wellness in the Workplace Report entitled, "What today's workers value most, across generations," which summarizes survey data and in-depth interviews from more than 1,000 U.S. workers and more than 500 U.S. employers to better understand the financial health and wellness of today's workforce.

Overall, the survey revealed broad consistent trends when compared with previous years' results, though the percentage of workers who reported being stressed about their finances ticked down slightly. The survey findings show that 68% of workers report being "somewhat" or "very" stressed about their financial situation — down slightly from 70% in 2024 and 71% in 2023. Notably, in 2025, 69% of employers surveyed believed their workers to be facing financial stress, which was down significantly from the 78% reported in 2024 and slightly from the 71% reported in 2023.

Other notable findings include:

Boomers are feeling better year-over-year. Among those surveyed, 48% of Baby Boomers said they were better off financially this year compared to last year. Across other generations, 38% of Gen X survey participants, 31% of Millennial participants and 18% of Gen Z participants reported feeling better about their financial situation in 2025 compared to 2024.
Most U.S. workers are comfortable managing debt. Of those surveyed, 72% of workers said they are at least "somewhat" confident in managing debt. Significantly, Gen Z and Gen X reported being less concerned about student loans compared to last year, and Boomers were less concerned about auto and finance loans in 2025 compared to 2024. Millennials' debt concerns are about the same as last year across all types of loans.
Confidence level for meeting retirement goals varies across generations. Gen Z is the most confident, with 56% reporting they are "somewhat" or "very confident" they will meet their retirement goals. Millennials (50%) and Boomers (50%) were equally confident, while Gen X (43%) were the least confident in their ability to meet retirement goals.
Employers generally think their workers are prepared for retirement. A majority (78%) of U.S. employers believe their workers are prepared for retirement. Conversely, only 45% of workers believe they are prepared for retirement.
U.S. workers are more likely to stay with an employer that offers more financial wellness benefits. A significant majority (81%) of U.S. workers surveyed said they are more likely to stay with an employer that offers financial wellness benefits, which is up from 78% in 2024. Additionally, 96% of U.S. employers believe they have at least some responsibility to offer financial wellness benefits, up from 94% last year.

"Today's workforce spans multiple generations, each with its own set of financial goals," said Kaley Keeley Buchanan, senior vice president and head of PNC Organizational Financial Wellness. "To attract and retain top talent, employers must offer individualized benefits to employees that resonate across age groups and life stages. The PNC Organizational Financial Wellness team has unique understanding and insights to help businesses deliver targeted, high-impact benefits that help support employee well-being, boost performance and foster long-term loyalty."

Additional notable findings include:

Among workers surveyed, 67% reported living paycheck to paycheck. That's up from 63% from last year.
However, workers generally reported being in more control of their finances in 2025 (62%) compared to 2024 (56%).
A financial planning benefit was available to 30% of workers surveyed in 2025, compared with 28% in 2024.

With today's workforce indicating they are more likely to stay with an employer that offers financial wellness benefits, businesses must adapt their approach to stay competitive and retain top talent. PNC Organizational Financial Wellness partners with companies to design and deliver innovative, customized benefits that support both business goals and the evolving needs of the people they aim to hire and keep. More findings, including the complete report and related information are available at pnc.com/WorkplaceReport.

PNC Bank, National Association, is a member of The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (NYSE: PNC). PNC is one of the largest diversified financial services institutions in the United States, organized around its customers and communities for strong relationships and local delivery of retail and business banking including a full range of lending products; specialized services for corporations and government entities, including corporate banking, real estate finance and asset-based lending; wealth management and asset management. For information about PNC, visit http://www.pnc.com.

Methodology
The 2025 Financial Wellness in the Workplace Study1,2 was conducted in early 2025 and surveyed two different populations: U.S. employers and U.S. workers. The research was conducted in two phases: PHASE 1: QUALITATIVE In-depth interviews, separately, with employers and workers in January 2025. PHASE 2: QUANTITATIVE Separate online surveys with employers and workers in March 2025. The Employer Survey was conducted online with a national sample of 500 U.S. employers with 100+ workers and annual revenues of $5 million or more. The sampling error is +/- 4.4% at the 95% confidence level. The Workers Survey was conducted online with a national sample of 1,000 U.S. workers ages 21–69 who work full time at companies with 100+ workers. The sampling error is +/- 3.0% at the 95% confidence level. The study was conducted by Willow Research, a custom market research firm and certified woman-owned business. Gen Z 1997-2012, Millennial 1981-1996, Gen X 1965-1980, Boomer 1946-1964.

DISCLAIMER: This report was prepared for general information purposes only and is not intended as specific advice or recommendations. Any reliance upon this information is solely and exclusively at your own risk. NOTE: The sum of percentages may not add to the total due to rounding.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source PR Newswire

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/pnc-bank-survey-offers-insights-analysis-on-financial-wellness-mindset-among-us-workers-and-employers-302540111.html

Employers let workers trade in PTO for cash, student loan payments

Bill Brewer — Fri, 15 Aug 2025 19:20:01 GMT

Employers have a “balancing act” of providing flexibility but also making sure employees are actually taking time off, an expert at Goldman Sachs Ayco told HR Dive.

Published Aug. 14, 2025 ... by Ginger Christ

By letting workers convert unused PTO into cash, student loans or 401(k) contributions, more employers are giving workers choice. Goldman Sachs Ayco’s 2025 Benefits and Compensation Trends report, published earlier this year, showed some employers even permit workers to convert their time into health savings account contributions; into charitable giving, including donating time off to co-workers; and into 529 plan, or qualified tuition, programs.

“This really kind of fits in with the overall trend we’ve seen the last few years about large employers specifically really trying to provide as much flexibility in their PTO programs as possible,” said Kris Battistoni, vice president, compensation and benefits solutions at Goldman Sachs Ayco.

Jonathan Barber, vice president and head of compensation and benefits solutions at Goldman Sachs Ayco, called the benefits situation a “perfect storm.” Workers, often in hybrid and remote roles, are taking less PTO and want flexibility, and companies are willing to offer flexibility using dollars they’ve already set aside, Barber said.

“We’re seeing that across the board with employee benefits,” Barber said.

However, it’s not a free-for-all, they warned. The benefits and compensation trends report shows that most companies limit how many hours can be converted annually; the limit typically is 40 hours per year.

Employers have a “balancing act,” Battistoni said, of providing flexibility but also making sure employees are actually taking time off.

There are some things employers need to keep in mind when implementing a conversion program, Barber warned. Employee paid leave laws vary by state and even sometimes by municipality, so they need to ensure workers still get the legally required amount of vacation and sick time, he said.

While the PTO conversion trend is emerging, the number of companies offering such options is still in the single digits percentage-wise, said Battistoni, who called PTO “the next frontier” for flexibility in benefits.

“The purchase programs are probably more popular than the conversion programs at this point,” Battistoni said. “I think we’ll see an increase in both.”

The company’s trends report shows that about 25% of its corporate partners offer PTO purchase programs, which allow workers to buy and sell vacation days, typically up to five days.

“We might be in the single digits now, but that’s certainly not going to be the case, probably two, three, four years down the road,” Battistoni said of PTO conversion programs.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/employers-let-workers-trade-in-pto-for-cash-student-loan-payments/757643/

The Hartford’s New Study Finds Continued Financial Stress Among U.S. Workers Amid Economic Uncertainty

Bill Brewer — Fri, 15 Aug 2025 19:16:08 GMT

August 05, 2025

Employers and U.S. workers express differing views about artificial intelligence (AI), job satisfaction, benefits offerings and more

HARTFORD, Conn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Financial stress remains high among U.S. workers, according to the latest research from The Hartford, a leading provider of employee benefits and workers’ compensation. The sixth annual Future of Benefits Study, released today, presents perspectives of U.S. workers and employers regarding personal finances, AI and technology trends, workplace benefits, and other factors influencing today’s fast-changing business landscape.

“As financial concerns continue to weigh on U.S. workers, it’s clear that workplace benefits are more than just a perk – they’re a meaningful source of financial support and well-being,” said Mike Fish, head of Employee Benefits at The Hartford. “Employers can help the workforce navigate through uncertainty by ensuring they have access to benefits and the education needed to fully understand and utilize them. Employers and insurers have an opportunity to help their workers take control of their financial future with confidence.”

The study, which polled U.S. workers and HR professionals (employers), finds that most U.S. workers (72%) are at least somewhat stressed about their household finances, with one-third (33%) reporting they are very/extremely stressed. This is consistent with last year’s findings, which found 72% were at least somewhat stressed about their household finances, with 34% reporting they were very/extremely stressed. Other key findings include:

Half of U.S. workers (51%) report they are living paycheck to paycheck;
53% of U.S. workers say their savings have decreased in the past 12 months; and
More than half of U.S. workers (56%) report financial health is negatively impacting their workplace productivity.

Value of Employee Benefits

Amidst a backdrop of economic uncertainty, U.S workers are turning to their employers for support. The study reveals workplace benefits play a critical role in helping U.S. workers protect their finances, with most employers (80%) and workers (62%) recognizing the essential role benefits have in making them feel more financially secure. At the same time, a significant majority of employers (75%) say the benefits they offer are underutilized, creating an opportunity to educate employees about how employee benefits can provide additional financial security. Employers are adding to the benefits they offer to support their workers – 34% added benefits in 2025 and 53% plan to add benefits in 2026. While employer-provided benefits are key to improving financial well-being and overall job satisfaction, confusion remains a barrier.

“To bridge this gap, employers have an opportunity to be proactive in educating and engaging their employees to ensure they have access to the necessary resources and feel confident using them,” Fish said. “This requires a strategic shift – moving beyond enrollment periods and adopting a year-round approach to communication, personalized guidance, and digital tools that enhance accessibility.”

Benefits are also an important factor for job seekers. According to the study, 82% of U.S. workers say benefits are a key consideration when searching for a new job, and 58% would consider switching jobs for a more comprehensive benefits package.

Digital Split Around AI And HR Technology

Technology and AI-driven solutions have emerged as potential game-changers, providing personalized benefit recommendations and streamlined decision-making. However, there is a gap between employer and U.S. workers’ feelings about AI in the workplace – 72% of employers feel more optimistic this year than they did in 2024 about the use of AI in the workplace, and only 29% of employees say they are more optimistic. Addressing this disparity will require employers to be transparent and ensure that digital enhancements feel intuitive, reliable, and truly beneficial to employees.

Although technology continues to enhance the overall benefits experience, when it comes to completing certain benefits-related tasks, U.S. workers continue to prefer working with a person. U.S. workers prefer to interact with a person when:

Requesting a leave of absence: 58%, an increase from 53% in 2024;
Learning about benefits during open enrollment: 48%, an increase from 43% in 2024; and
Selecting benefits during open enrollment: 47%, an increase from 42% in 2024.

The Hartford is a leading provider of employee benefits products and services, including leave management, group life and disability insurance, as well as other voluntary products. For more information, visit www.thehartford.com/employee-benefits.

Study Methodology

The Hartford’s 2025 Future of Benefits Study was fielded March 4-28, 2025, and included 701 employers and 1,000 U.S. workers. The employers surveyed were HR professionals who manage/decide employee benefits, and U.S. workers surveyed were actively employed. The margin of error for employer responses is +/- 3% and for U.S. workers is +/-3% at a 95% confidence level. Download the full Future of Benefits Study at www.thehartford.com/futureofbenefits.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Hartford

https://newsroom.thehartford.com/newsroom-home/news-releases/news-release-details/2025/The-Hartfords-New-Study-Finds-Continued-Financial-Stress-Among-U-S--Workers-Amid-Economic-Uncertainty/default.aspx

Offering student loan payment assistance a ‘no brainer,’ benefits manager says

Bill Brewer — Wed, 09 Jul 2025 15:44:11 GMT

Employers have several options at their disposal, even if only for the 1% to 2% of workers who are most in need, a SHRM 2025 panel moderator told attendees.

*****

Published July 2, 2025 by Ginger Christ, Editor

SAN DIEGO — Applied Materials’ student loan repayment program for employees reaped such rewards that the company more than doubled its annual contribution after the first year, Tes Fernandez, director of U.S. benefits for the company said Monday during a panel discussion at SHRM 2025.

In year one, the manufacturing company contributed $2,000 per employee in direct repayment of workers’ student loans. In the years that have followed, Applied Materials now pays out $4,800 per employee and uses the benefit as both a way to support generally newer hires, recent graduates and some underrepresented groups and as a recruiting tool.

“They had to go up to the CFO and ask for extra millions of dollars to add this benefit. A year later, they more than doubled the benefit amount, not because the CFO got generous, but because they were seeing the results of the benefits,” Chris Rinko, VP and student debt and health and wellness benefits administration account executive at Fidelity Investments, said during the panel, which he moderated.

When it comes to student loan debt assistance, employers have two choices, Rinko explained. They can either provide a direct payment to student loan servicers to help pay down employees’ loans, or they can elect to offer matching contributions in the 401(k) plans of workers who demonstrate they are making student loan payments.

The direct payment method can be targeted to only apply to certain groups — those who earn less or those in a specific job, for example — and can have a set end date, Rinko said, while matching contributions are tied to a company’s overall 401(k) plan offering and can’t exclude any workers.

Tracey Gannon, a senior benefits manager at eBay, said it was “kind of a no-brainer” for the e-commerce company to offer matching funds after the passage of the SECURE 2.0 Act. The law gave employers the ability to match employee contributions to certain student loan payments.

“We felt that this was just such an easy first step,” Gannon said.

The company already budgets for all employees to get the full matching contribution in their retirement plans and has a 96% participation rate, Gannon said. That meant the new offering wasn’t a big budget item for the company but could provide support to some employees in need.

Similarly, offering a matching contribution seemed like “an easy win” for The Walt Disney Co. and its workers, said Marianne Lynch, a senior manager of executive benefits and hypercare for the company.

“It’s a huge, huge benefit to reduce that burden” of student loan debt, Lynch said. At Disney, 97% of employees already receive the full 401(k) match, but for those who don’t, it’s a way not to miss out on the matching funds to which they’re already entitled, she added.

“The only change here is you’re giving them another way to earn that match by paying their student debt,” Rinko said.

At companies where most employees already receive the full matching contribution, some leaders may ask, “Why bother?” with a student loan repayment match, Rinko said.

“The reason is, if it’s just 1% or 2%, if you can find a path for that small number, for those people who are usually in the greatest need to earn the match, why not?” Rinko said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/student-loan-payment-assistance-no-brainer-shrm-2025/752224/

Citi offers hybrid employees 2 weeks of remote work in August

Bill Brewer — Thu, 12 Jun 2025 17:40:37 GMT

Dan Ennis

Tue, June 10, 2025 at 3:55 AM PDT

Citi is allowing its hybrid employees to work remotely for two weeks of their choice in August, according to a memo seen Monday by Banking Dive.

“We've selected August because it is traditionally a quieter time for some of our businesses and clients, when many are already out of the office due to vacations,” Sara Wechter, the bank’s chief human resources officer, wrote in the memo, first reported by Business Insider.

Citi was an early COVID-era pioneer in its devotion to hybrid scheduling – a commitment the bank reaffirmed Monday, calling it an effective tool to attract and retain talent.

While Citi has offered a similar two-week remote period to hybrid employees every December, it hasn’t given a blanket out-of-office green light in August since 2022.

Citi’s lean into remote work runs counter to a prevailing industry trend that has seen JPMorgan Chase, BNY and Royal Bank of Canada, so far this year, increase the number of days employees are required to work from the office.

JPMorgan in January told employees companywide to return to the office five days a week starting in March.

“We know that some of you prefer a hybrid schedule and respectfully understand that not everyone will agree with this decision,” JPMorgan’s operating committee wrote at the time in a memo. “We think it is the best way to run the company.”

BNY called its employees back to the office four days a week starting in September – but with a caveat that the bank did not intend to push the mandate further.

“We have no plans to return to 5 days in office unless circumstances were to demand otherwise,” BNY said in its April memo.

RBC, meanwhile, said last month that it wants its employees – at least those not already in the office full time or remote full time – to work from the office four days a week starting in September.

That marks only a slight change, though, from the stance the Toronto-based lender took in March 2023, when it gave its hybrid workers the option to work from the office three or four days a week.

RBC is not the only Canadian lender to tighten its reins on in-office work. Scotiabank last week said it would require teams that work in locations with “real estate capacity” to begin coming into the office “4+ days per week” in September, according to an internal memo to Toronto area employees.

“We know having our teams working together in-person has many benefits – greater collaboration, higher engagement, more career development opportunities, and a stronger culture and sense of belonging – and we are already seeing the positive impact this is having across the bank as we focus on executing on our strategy,” Scotiabank spokesperson Clancy Zeifman said in an emailed statement seen by The Globe and Mail.

For teams with more limited real estate, the in-office requirement will increase as space becomes available, the bank said.

“We will continue to build on this impact as we bring our teams on-site more often, with the goal of reaching four days onsite across the bank over time,” Zeifman said.

The memo wasn’t sent to branch workers, who are already working on-site full time.

Likewise, Citi’s August remote-weeks offer does not apply to branch workers, employees in non-hybrid roles or jobs that require staff to be on-site for regulatory reasons.

The bank also specified that employees must work from a location where they have the legal right to do so.

Citi chose a common time frame for its August offer because “having a designated remote work period provides consistency across teams globally to meet our deliverables and client obligations.”

“Whether working in the office or remotely, it is essential that we remain as productive as ever, stay connected, collaborate effectively and deliver on our commitments,” Wechter said in the Citi memo.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Yahoo Finance

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/citi-offers-hybrid-employees-2-105508738.html

53% of benefit managers know their wellness programs are failing employees

Bill Brewer — Thu, 12 Jun 2025 17:29:08 GMT

By Alyssa PlaceJune 10, 2025, 12:00 p.m. EDT

Despite a near-universal rollout of wellness initiatives across organizations, the stark reality is that most well-being programs aren't meeting employees' needs.

New findings from Insurope's annual Global Employee Benefits and Multinational Pooling Market Report reveal that while 84% of HR leaders believe wellness solutions have a positive impact on retention, absenteeism and employee satisfaction, many programs are falling short. Poor alignment with company culture, lack of personalization and low engagement were some of the top reasons for the disconnect.

More than half of benefit managers surveyed acknowledged this disconnect in the wellness benefits their companies offer with how leadership treats employee well-being on a daily basis. This lack of authenticity sends a conflicting message to employees, diminishing trust and decreasing participation in wellness offerings.

When wellness is treated as a check-the-box initiative instead of being integrated into the organizational culture, employees are less likely to engage — regardless of the program's quality or scope.

"Today's workforce is highly attuned to whether employers care about their well-being," Fallon Carpenter, head of people and culture at Sentinel, previously shared with EBN. "By offering resources that support whole-person health, companies can enhance their cultural appeal and strengthen their talent retention strategies."

Low employee engagement remains a top concern for benefit leaders, according to the report, cited as one of the most common challenges with current benefit offerings. Additionally, 27% reported receiving negative feedback on wellness initiatives, while 22% admitted that their benefits simply don't support all employees.

These findings point to a fundamental issue: Many wellness programs aren't inclusive or flexible enough to serve a globally and generationally diverse workforce. Without customization or offerings that account for different life stages, health needs and work environments, uptake and effectiveness will continue to lag.

Finding workable solutions to employee well-being

Yet employers don't have to search for complex solutions to these issues; simply listening to employee feedback is a good first step. Employees are increasingly vocal about the benefits that would most improve their well-being: According to the Insurope survey, the most requested benefits include health and medical insurance (61%), pension and retirement plans (49%), wellness and mental health services (45%), childcare and maternity benefits (39%), education assistance and career development (40%), and flexible working hours or remote options.

But wellness programs alone aren't enough — employees want comprehensive, holistic support that spans their physical, financial and emotional well-being. Offering flexible working arrangements and financial wellness programs, for example, also have a significant impact on stress reduction and overall satisfaction in the workplace.

"This isn't just an individual challenge — it's a collective one, impacting team morale, productivity and job satisfaction," said Peter Dunn, CEO of Your Money Line. "This strain isn't just a personal issue; it's a workplace challenge that demands attention."

Leadership must also model and support well-being from the top down, aligning business practices, communication and managerial behavior with company wellness goals. It's clear that employees don't want one-size-fits-all programs — benefit managers should offer benefit plans that allow individuals to select the services that best match their needs, whether that's telehealth, therapy, fitness, or financial coaching.

Ultimately, well-being initiatives will only have an impact when they are employee-centered, culturally supported and strategically integrated into the broader benefits ecosystem. As companies grapple with rising healthcare costs and evolving employee expectations, it's no longer enough to offer wellness as an add-on. It must be a pillar of the employee experience.

By reevaluating priorities and listening closely to employee feedback, benefit managers can transform underperforming wellness initiatives into powerful tools for engagement, retention, and productivity — turning good intentions into real-world impact.

"Gathering insights without acting upon them is pointless, and can even prove damaging as employees will feel that they are not listened to and that their views have no value," Ian Barrow, senior employee experience consultant at WorkBuzz, previously shared with EBN. "With valuable new information on hand, the organization can put together action plans, creating a thriving organizational culture that employees want to be a part of."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Employee Benefit News (EBN)

https://www.benefitnews.com/news/wellness-benefits-are-not-improving-employee-health

Delayed pay rises fuels employee turnover, disengagement – report

Bill Brewer — Thu, 12 Jun 2025 17:23:22 GMT

Employers under pressure to raise pay despite budget constraints

BY Dexter Tilo ||| 10 Jun 2025

Organisations delaying pay rises are reporting higher turnover and disengagement in their workforce, according to new research.

The latest findings from Robert Walters revealed the consequences of pushing back salary hikes for professionals and white-collar workers, even if it stems from difficult financial positions.

It found that 49% of organisations that delayed pay hikes reported an increase in employee turnover. Another 36% said delaying pay rises led to disengagement within their teams.

"Our research shows that these decisions, while understandable, are not without consequence," said Sean Puddle, Managing Director at Robert Walters North America, in a statement. "Whether it's higher turnover or a gradual drop in motivation, companies are starting to feel the effects."

The report further found that 57% of employees who didn't receive a pay rise this year are now actively looking for a new job. This is also the case for 65% of employees who received a lower-than-expected pay hike.

"There's a clear message here: even if employees understand the business pressures, unmet expectations are still pushing them to reconsider their options. And with AI tools streamlining the job application process, employees have more opportunities than ever to explore new roles," Puddle said.

Difficult financial positions

The pressure to meet employees' salary demands comes in the wake of financial challenges facing organisations.

"Businesses are under immense pressure to keep costs down, and for many, salary increases just haven't been feasible this year," Puddle said.

According to the report, 53% of business leaders said budget constraints and business performance were the reasons why they delayed or reduced employees' pay rises.

Puddle said they are also seeing more employers who are asking how to retain their best people when pay increases aren't on the table.

Robert Walters' advice: think creatively, such as by offering meaningful career development, flexible work arrangements, as well as internal mobility pathways.

"When salaries are constrained, culture and communication matter more than ever. The organisations that succeed will be those that balance cost control with a thoughtful, market-informed approach to employee engagement," Puddle said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HRD

https://www.hcamag.com/us/news/general/delayed-pay-rises-fuels-employee-turnover-disengagement-report/538636

Pay transparency may come with unintended consequences, study says

Bill Brewer — Thu, 17 Apr 2025 16:27:51 GMT

Sharing employee pay can unexpectedly influence workplace dynamics and feelings of entitlement among co-workers, according to a study published April 3 in the Journal of Business Ethics.

When workers learn where their pay ranks against their peers, their feelings of entitlement can rise or fall based on whether they’re near the top of performance ranking lists, the researchers found.

“Organizations should carefully consider the type of information shared with employees, as the appropriateness of this information may depend on the employees’ relative performance,” lead author Boris Maciejovsky, associate professor of management at the University of California at Riverside, said in a statement.

Across four experiments, employees with top performance rankings tended to feel entitled to significantly higher compensation than those ranked below them, even when comparing themselves to peers with similar rankings. They were also more likely to demand significant raises.

On the other hand, employees with low-level performance rankings felt demoralized and were less likely to ask for a raise. Some workers felt they didn’t deserve a raise at all, and because of that, had less incentive to improve their work or collaborate with others.

The study findings may hold important implications as companies, cities and states adopt transparency policies, Maciejovsky said. Although transparency aims to promote fairness and reduce inequities, it can also reinforce status differences between high and low performers, he added.

Maciejovsky and colleagues emphasized that pay transparency still has value, as it can uncover unfair disparities and reduce systemic biases. To combat the unintended consequences, though, employers should invest in a supportive workplace culture that “values growth and contribution across all levels — not just those near the top,” they said.

Only 19% of U.S. companies have a pay transparency strategy in place, according to a Mercer survey. However, 63% of companies said they planned to share pay information internally and externally, and 56% said employees should have access to compensation data.

In general, 3 in 4 employers aren’t prepared for pay transparency laws to take place in 2025 and 2026, according to a survey by Aon plc. Companies that comply with new regulations “sooner rather than later” will be better able to tackle pay disparities, encourage fairness and help workers make informed career choices, an Aon executive said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source; Yahoo Finance

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/pay-transparency-may-come-unintended-111300219.html

Abernathy Daley 401k Consultants Study Finds 84% of Corporate Retirement Plans in United States Have at Least One Regulatory or Fiduciary “Red Flag” Violation

Bill Brewer — Thu, 17 Apr 2025 16:22:54 GMT

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Abernathy Daley 401k Consultants (“Abernathy-Daley”), a consultancy in 401(k) plan administration and employee education, has found that nearly 84% of United States-based retirement plans have at least one likely Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) red flag from a regulatory and/or fiduciary violation. These findings indicate that over 600,000 American companies could be at potential risk of fines, legal penalties, and fiduciary failure.

Abernathy-Daley analyzed the latest Form 5500 filings for 764,729 plans, identifying and tagging each plan with any red flags from their most recent filing. Abernathy-Daley defines red flag violations as either “infractions, fineable offenses, fiduciary failure, or plan malpractice” and are separated into two main categories: Regulatory Infraction Red Flags (RIRF) and Egregious Plan Mismanagement Red Flags (EPMRF).

Key Research Findings:

43% of companies across the United States have at least one of four major red flag violations in their retirement plan that can lead to governance and compliance-related issues, which may result in violations, lawsuits, and/or fines (RIRFs).
76% of American-based companies have at least one of four major red flag violations that represent a fiduciary failure from either the plan administrator or plan sponsor (EPMRFs).
In total, approximately 84% of plans have at least one red flag violation that puts them at regulatory risk or indicates their failure as a fiduciary.

“Plan sponsors and employees are not only overpaying for their retirement plans on a widespread scale; they are also being underserved and exposed to unplanned and potentially damaging legal, compliance, and financial risks,” said Steven Abernathy, CEO of Abernathy. “CFOs, HR leaders, and other key executives must work to ensure the design and administration of their plans align with legal and fiduciary requirements.”

Monetary Penalties from Retirement Plan Mismanagement

In 2024, the Employee Benefits Security Administration’s (EBSA) legal proceedings restored nearly $1.4 billion to employee benefit plans, participants, and beneficiaries. EBSA’s ensuing criminal investigations resulted in 68 indictments and 161 convictions or guilty pleas, including from plan officials and corporate officers. On January 21, 2025, Vanguard agreed to pay more than $100 million in fines to the Security Exchange Commission for misleading investors regarding their Target Date Funds, along with $40 million in fines to 401(k) plan participants.

Abernathy-Daley Research Methodology

RIRFs are defined by Abernathy-Daley as “the most severe violations, which represent issues within the retirement plan that can result in civil legal penalties, discovery leading to trial, or both.” The selected RIRF infraction categories were: 1.) Loss from fraud or dishonesty; 2.) Not offering qualified default investment alternatives (QDIA); 3.) an insufficient fidelity bond; and 4.) Not 404(c) compliant. Abernathy-Daley found at least 328,833 retirement plans had at least one RIRF, representing approximately 43% of the total plans.

Egregious Plan Mismanagement Red Flags (EPMRFs) are defined as “red flags that may not necessarily result in a fine, but represent failure of:

The plan administrator in their fiduciary duty to the plan sponsors, and
The plan sponsors in their fiduciary duty to their employees.

The selected EPMRF infraction categories were: 1.) Not including automatic enrollment; 2.) No corrective distribution of excessive contributions; 3.) No 404(c) with participant-directed accounts; and 4.) Failure to transmit payments on time. Abernathy-Daley found at least 584,113 retirement plans had at least one EPMRF, representing approximately 76% of the total plans.

“Retirement plans represent a fiduciary duty toward employees and provide an essential competitive advantage for talent acquisition and retention. Yet, these alarming findings clearly show that administrators are not keeping plan sponsors out of harm’s way and plan sponsors are not offering their employees a bulletproof retirement plan,” said Matthew Daley, president of Abernathy-Daley.

Daley continued, “As a result, hundreds of thousands of unknowing American businesses could conceivably face considerable regulatory and fiduciary penalties. We recommend implementing benchmarking audits to ensure corporate leaders remain in compliance and deliver the optimal solutions and choices to their employees.”

Contact Abernathy Daley 401k Consultants to schedule a cost-free benchmarking audit and ensure retirement plans meet all regulatory and fiduciary standards at https://www.abernathydaley401k.com/

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Wire

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250128762249/en/Abernathy-Daley-401k-Consultants-Study-Finds-84-of-Corporate-Retirement-Plans-in-United-States-Have-at-Least-One-Regulatory-or-Fiduciary-Red-Flag-Violation

PTO reduces job hopping regardless of employee satisfaction, study finds

Bill Brewer — Thu, 17 Apr 2025 15:51:22 GMT

Paid time off can be a low-cost and popular benefit, but whether workers feel comfortable using it is another story.

Published April 3, 2025 by Ryan Golden

Paid time off policies reduce turnover for all workers, regardless of how satisfied workers are with their jobs or whether they have access to flexible schedules, according to a joint Florida Atlantic University and Cleveland State University study published in the International Journal of Manpower last month.

Researchers found that voluntary turnover dropped by 35% among employees who were offered PTO. However, PTO did not affect workers’ job satisfaction — though job satisfaction did independently reduce turnover by about 30% to 40%, the universities said in a press release.

“While workers may feel satisfied with their job, the absence of adequate resources like PTO can still drive them to quit,” said LeaAnne DeRigne, professor at FAU’s Phyllis and Harvey Sandler School of Social Work, in the release. “Even when employees are content in their roles, the lack of sufficient time away from work can lead to burnout, stress or a sense of being undervalued, ultimately prompting them to leave.”

Similarly, access to flexible schedules also reduced voluntary turnover, but did so independently of PTO availability, per the study results. Researchers compared the value of flexible scheduling to that of retirement plans in terms of their role in turnover reduction.

Increasingly in-demand

The study results reflect what may be obvious to HR observers: employees tend to seek positions with PTO availability. Unlimited PTO is increasingly in demand; about 1 in 5 workers surveyed last year by financial services firm Empower said they would turn down jobs that did not come attached with an unlimited PTO benefit, and 26% said they would even take a job that paid less if it came with unlimited PTO.

Employers, particularly those in talent-hungry industries, largely have responded to the trend. Data from Indeed showed that mentions of PTO in job postings on the site more than doubled between January 2020 and May 2024, with in-person work jobs being especially likely to offer PTO.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/paid-time-off-reduces-job-hopping-regardless-of-employee-satisfaction/744342/

National Report Reveals the Health and Productivity Impact of Chronic Conditions on U.S. Employers and Workers

Bill Brewer — Fri, 21 Mar 2025 16:45:17 GMT

WellTheory’s First-of-Its-Kind ‘Autoimmune Disease Impact’ Report Identifies Most Effective Strategies for Reducing Employers’ Healthcare and Disability Costs

ATHERTON, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--WellTheory, a first-of-its-kind virtual solution for the 50 million Americans suffering with autoimmune disease, today released a groundbreaking Autoimmune Disease Impact Report in partnership with the Integrated Benefits Institute (IBI), a national nonprofit organization that provides impartial research, data analytics, and practical tools aimed at improving the quality and effectiveness of employee health and productivity programs.

The report, which examines the health and productivity impacts of five of the most prevalent and costly autoimmune conditions: rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel diseases, psoriasis, and thyroid autoimmune disorders, includes data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s (AHRQ’s) Medical, Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), IBI’s Health and Productivity Benchmarking System, and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) program and National Compensation Survey.

Autoimmune diseases now affect roughly 50 million Americans, yet most benefits strategies fail to address their true impact on healthcare costs, absenteeism, and workforce productivity. With rising prevalence and skyrocketing treatment costs, these conditions are quietly becoming one of the most expensive and overlooked challenges for employers. For every 1,000 U.S. employees, the five autoimmune conditions examined in this report drive roughly $580,000 in excess and potentially avoidable healthcare costs and lost work time from sickness and disability. This does not include the value of lost productivity due to early exits from the labor force, excess turnover costs, and presenteeism and is comparable in magnitude to that of other chronic conditions, such as diabetes, which typically receive more attention from employers.

“Living with an autoimmune disease makes everyday feel unpredictable,” said Ellen Rudolph, CEO and Co-Founder of WellTheory. “I know from firsthand experience that these conditions don't always show visible symptoms, making them particularly challenging to recognize and understand in a workplace setting. With this data, we’re giving employers an opportunity to more accurately identify the underlying prevalence and impact of these conditions, to then be able to provide essential support to their employees.”

Key findings from WellTheory’s report include:

Prevalence of Autoimmune Conditions: 7.2 percent of surveyed employed adults received treatment for one of five researched autoimmune conditions. This figure underrepresents the true prevalence of these conditions in society, as there are an estimated 100+ autoimmune conditions and they are significantly underdiagnosed and untreated.

Disparities in Incidence and Outcomes: The incidence of autoimmune conditions among women is twice that of men overall.

Excess Medical and Pharmacy Costs: Autoimmune patients with conditions like multiple sclerosis can cost employers up to 6X more in medical and prescription medication costs, and up to 16x more for prescription medications alone, compared to employees without autoimmune conditions

Short-Term Disability Claims: The average lost work days due to short-term disability for patients with certain autoimmune diseases represent approximately 73 calendar days per year, costing employers as much as $27,000 per patient in economic value

Long-Term Disability Claims: The average lost work days due to long-term disability for patients with certain autoimmune conditions represent approximately 287 calendar days per year, costing employers $82,000 per claimant

“Autoimmune diseases are one of the most overlooked drivers of employer healthcare and disability costs,” said Jim Huffman, President of IBI. “Despite affecting millions of employees, benefits programs often fail to address their true financial and productivity impact. Forward-thinking employers have an opportunity to intervene earlier, improve employee well-being, and reduce long-term costs.”

The findings of this report identify crucial trends and actionable insights for organizations looking to improve their employee health offerings. The analysis in this report also provides scalable cost benchmarks to assess potential savings from reducing the prevalence of symptoms, treatment costs, and illness-related absences and disability leaves. The full report is available for download here.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Wire

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250320854330/en/National-Report-Reveals-the-Health-and-Productivity-Impact-of-Chronic-Conditions-on-U.S.-Employers-and-Workers

Poll: Most U.S. workers with chronic conditions manage them at work, haven’t told employer

Bill Brewer — Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:11:08 GMT

By Maya Brownstein

February 11, 2025

Paid leave, flexible schedules, and adequate breaks may help those with difficulty managing their conditions

For immediate release: February 11, 2025

Boston, MA—Chronic health conditions are taking a major, hidden toll on the U.S. workforce’s lives and productivity, according to a new national poll by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the de Beaumont Foundation. The poll, conducted among a national sample of U.S. employees, found that three-fourths (76%) of those with chronic conditions—such as hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, and asthma—need to manage their conditions during work hours. Yet a majority (60%) have not formally disclosed their conditions to their employer.

The poll, U.S. Employee Perspectives on Managing Chronic Conditions in the Workplace, was conducted October 2–16, 2024, among a probability-based, nationally representative sample of the U.S. workforce, composed of 1,010 part-time and full-time working adults ages 18+ who are not self-employed and work at organizations with 50 or more employees.

The poll found that more than half of employees in the U.S. (58%) report having physical chronic health conditions, with many structuring their health care to account for their jobs or going without. Notably, more than one-third of employees with chronic conditions (36%) say they have skipped medical appointments or delayed getting care to avoid interfering with work in the past year. And about half of those with chronic conditions say, in the past year, they felt they could not take time off work (49%) or take a break while at work (49%), even though they needed to because of their conditions.

Missed opportunities and stigma

In addition, one-third of employees with chronic health conditions (33%) say in the past year they have missed out on opportunities for more hours or projects because of their conditions, while 25% report missing out on opportunities for promotion and 21% report receiving bad reviews or negative feedback as a result of their chronic health conditions.

“Though employers may think they know their employees’ needs, poll results suggest there are widespread and frequently hidden challenges facing workers with chronic conditions,” said survey lead Gillian SteelFisher, director of the Harvard Opinion Research Program and principal research scientist at Harvard Chan School. “Workers commonly feel stigmatized by their conditions, and this can have a profound effect on both their work and their health. To help retain employees in a tight job market, employers may want to have more conversations with employees about ways that they can make work ‘work’ for everyone.”

Challenges managing family members’ conditions

The poll also found that a significant share of the U.S. workforce faces additional challenges caring for family members with chronic conditions. One-third of all employees (33%) say they have helped family members with their chronic conditions in the past year, and nearly half of those helping family members (45%) frequently needed to do so during working hours. More than a third of those helping family members (37%) say it has been difficult to take time off work, and among those helping family members or managing chronic conditions themselves, a quarter (25%) have needed to reduce work hours to manage this.

Concerningly, one in four employees who have chronic conditions themselves or help family members with theirs say they don’t have any paid leave (12%) or have run out of paid leave in the past year (14%) because they were trying to take care of their or their family’s chronic conditions.

“There is a major opportunity for employers to play a greater role in supporting employees who are managing their own or their family’s chronic conditions,” said Brian Castrucci, president and CEO of the de Beaumont Foundation. “Not only will this improve the health of employees and their families, but it will also provide employers a way to distinguish themselves, as well as improve retention and reduce absenteeism.”

Less than half of all U.S. workers say their current employer is very supportive of key measures that allow employees to manage their conditions, including allowing employees to take breaks when they feel they need it (44%) or take paid leave (44%). Fewer than four in ten say their employer is very supportive of flexible schedules or working remotely more often if the work can be done offsite (37% and 27%, respectively).

Methodology

Results are based on survey research conducted by the Harvard Opinion Research Program (HORP) based at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, in partnership with the de Beaumont Foundation. Representatives from each organization worked closely to develop the survey questionnaire, while analyses were conducted by researchers from Harvard Chan School and the fielding team at SSRS of Glen Mills, Pennsylvania.

The HORP project team included Gillian SteelFisher, director of HORP and principal research scientist at Harvard Chan School; Mary Gorski Findling, managing director; and Hannah Caporello, senior research projects manager.

The de Beaumont Foundation project team included Brian Castrucci, president and CEO of the de Beaumont Foundation; Katy Evans, senior program officer; Emma Dewhurst, program and research associate; Mark Miller, vice president of communications; and Nalini Padmanabhan, communications director.

Interviews were conducted with a representative sample of 1,010 part-time and full-time working adults ages 18 and older, who work at organizations with 50 or more employees. Self-employed individuals were excluded. The sample included a subset of 594 adults with physical chronic health conditions. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish online and by telephone. Respondents were reached online and by phone through the SSRS Opinion Panel, a nationally representative, probability-based panel. Panelists were randomly recruited via an Address Based Sampling (ABS) frame and from random-digit dial (RDD) samples on SSRS surveys. Most panelists completed the survey online, with a small subset who do not access the internet completing by phone. The interview period was October 2–16, 2024.

When interpreting findings, one should recognize that all surveys are subject to sampling error. Results may differ from what would be obtained if the whole U.S. adult population had been interviewed. The margin of error for the full sample is ±3.8 percentage points.

Possible sources of non-sampling error include non-response bias, as well as question wording and ordering effects. Non-response in web and telephone surveys produces some known biases in survey-derived estimates because participation tends to vary for different subgroups of the population. To compensate for these known biases and for variations in the probability of selection within and across households, sample data are weighted in a multi-step process by probability of selection and recruitment, response rates by survey type, and demographic variables (gender, age, education, race/ethnicity, region, the frequency of internet use, civic engagement, population density, registered voter, party ID, religious affiliation, number of adults in household, and home tenure) to reflect the true population of employed adults in the U.S. working at organizations with 50 or more employees. Other techniques, including random sampling, multiple contact attempts, replicate subsamples, and systematic respondent selection within households, are used to ensure that the sample is representative.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/poll-most-u-s-workers-with-chronic-conditions-manage-them-at-work-havent-told-employer/

Remote work is the new company car as businesses offer perk to lure, retain top talent

Bill Brewer — Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:03:23 GMT

February 5, 2025 by John Mullinix

Latest jobs data from Ladders shows highest paying jobs gained most remote work opportunities

Highlights from Ladders Q4 2024 $250,000 jobs report

Jobs that pay $250,000 are more likely to have remote work opportunities than jobs below 250K+
Remote and hybrid opportunities for the highest paying roles increased throughout the year
Medical and tech professionals are most likely to earn high paying remote jobs

New York, New York (February 5, 2024) – In the past, a company car was the ultimate status symbol for high earners. Now, skipping the commute all together is the coveted perk. New data from Ladders, the career site for jobs that pay $100,000 or more, revealed employees who earn $250,000 or more are the most likely to find remote work opportunities. “You could say remote work is the new company car. Employees don’t want to drive to work in a fancy car, they don’t want to drive to work at all,” said John Mullinix, Director of Growth Marketing at Ladders.

Work Environment	Salary Range	Q3 Share of jobs	Q4 Share of jobs
Hybrid	250K+	2.93%	3.29%
In-person	250K+	86.61%	84.61%
Remote	250K+	10.44%	12.10%

The Q4 2024 $250K+ Jobs Report from Ladders revealed continuous growth in remote and hybrid opportunities for the highest paying jobs. Tech and medical roles dominated the trend. Mullinix explained, “This trend is largely driven by technological advancements, particularly in telehealth, which has enabled healthcare organizations to scale remote service offerings like never before. Mental health, primary care, and even some nurse practitioner roles have seen significant remote expansion, making high-paying medical jobs more accessible outside traditional clinical settings.

While telehealth is a significant factor, the increase in remote work is also influenced by non-clinical roles within the healthcare industry. Positions such as IT support, and administrative functions have transitioned to remote settings, also contributing to the overall growth of remote work in healthcare. However the majority of the remote work is telehealth related.”

Top 15 jobs that pay $250,000 or more

Physician
Medical Director
Psychiatrist
Dentist
Market Manager
Principal Software Engineer
Solar Sales Representative
Dermatologist
Chief Financial Officer (CFO)
Gastroenterologist
Urologist
Anesthesiologist
Neurologist
Hospitalist
Neonatologist

Ladders High Paying Jobs Competition Index reveals job titles with the most applicant competition

Job seekers will face the least competition for high paying remote jobs in healthcare, science, and engineering roles. Those in business development, sales and marketing will have a more difficult time securing a high paying remote role. To determine the type of job openings with the most competition, Ladders divided the number of high paying jobs in a particular field by the number of applications submitted within that field.
alt="article-content-image" />

Years of experience requested for 250K+ Jobs

Mullinix noted, “Unsurprisingly, most professionals will have to work their way up to a sought-after six-figure remote job.” Ladders found most job postings offering $250,000 or more require eight to ten years of experience. A significant number required five to seven years of experience.
alt="article-content-image" />

Research Methodology
Data scientists analyzed over a million job postings each quarter from January through December of 2024 to compile the Q4 2024 Ladders Quarterly $250,000+ Jobs Report. In addition to the remote work data, they also studied high paying job titles, career fields, and the companies with the most high paying jobs available.

Quarter-over-Quarter (QoQ) percentage change measures how shares of specific forms of work availability increased or decreased from one quarter to the next.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Ladders

https://www.theladders.com/career-advice/remote-work-is-the-new-company-car-as-businesses-offer-perk-to-lure-retain-top-talent#:~:text=Now,%20skipping%20the%20commute%20all,is%20the%20new%20company%20car.

The Cigna Group Launches Actions To Drive Positive Change for Customers and Patients

Bill Brewer — Tue, 18 Feb 2025 18:59:20 GMT

BLOOMFIELD, Conn., Feb. 3, 2025 – Global health company The Cigna Group (NYSE:CI) today announced a new multi-year effort aimed at meaningfully transforming the experiences of the millions of people it serves.

“The health care system in America needs to be better, and we have challenged ourselves to help lead and drive systemic change,” said David M. Cordani, chairman and CEO of The Cigna Group. “We do a lot of good for many people, but we need to do better for everyone. We are committed to implementing tangible actions across our company to help drive better health outcomes and health care experiences. Today’s announcement marks the initial steps in our multi-year journey toward building a better and more sustainable model in health care.”

The Cigna Group has established five key areas of focus, and several initial specific actions, to improve the health of its customers and the value it provides:

Easier access to care: The company will address the challenges customers face by making its processes simpler, easier and faster.
Better support: The company will provide customers with more support and resources to navigate the health care system.
Better value: The company will drive better value for its customers.
Accountability: The company will implement governance processes at the highest levels to successfully ensure positive changes.
Transparency: The company will openly share how it is continuously improving.

Initial Actions To Drive The Cigna Group’s Commitments

The Cigna Group: To ensure alignment in priorities and greater accountability, The Cigna Group will tie its leaders’ compensation to improving the satisfaction of its customers.

Additionally, starting in early 2026, The Cigna Group will publish an annual Customer Transparency Report to make its progress toward its commitments clear. The report will include important information relating to how the company facilitates customer care, including details about its services and resolution statistics.

Cigna Healthcare: As announced separately today Cigna Healthcare is taking the following actions:

Expanding its team of Cigna Healthcare advocates who support customers and patients with the most challenging or complex conditions, such as cancer; these highly trained advocates will help more patients navigate every stage of their care and treatment journey
Investing resources to help more customers and patients quickly resolve administrative needs with prior authorization and post-care claims
Introducing an enhanced digital status tracker that patients can use for prior authorization updates
Encouraging physicians to communicate electronically about prior authorizations and claims through Cigna Healthcare’s digital provider portal to expedite approvals and reduce error

Evernorth Health Services: Evernorth recently announcedThis link will open in a new tab. actions to address Express Scripts’ patient access and affordability and improve transparency.

Going forward, Evernorth’s standard offerings will protect patients from paying the high list price of their medications, ensuring they benefit from the lower price negotiated by Express Scripts. Additionally, patients in employer-sponsored plans will have improved financial predictability, receiving the benefit of savings negotiated by Express Scripts if they don’t already.

As part of this broader effort, the company also committed to providing an annual personalized summary to customers about how they benefit directly from the discounted prices Express Scripts negotiates and providing an annual standardized report to plan sponsors disclosing costs and pharmacy claim-level reporting.

Executive Changes To Ensure Accountability

The Cigna Group’s work to drive significant improvements for all its customers will be governed by its new Office of Excellence and Transformation. This office will partner across the organization to shape the company’s response to improve the health of the millions of customers it serves and to ensure accountability.

The office will have oversight by Dr. David Brailer, the company’s executive vice president and chief health officer and a highly experienced physician. Additionally, Chris DeRosa will assume a newly created role leading the office, reporting to Dr. Brailer. DeRosa, a longtime Cigna Healthcare leader with a deep understanding of the needs of customers and health plan sponsors, currently serves as president, U.S. Government, Cigna Healthcare. DeRosa will continue to oversee the company’s Medicare businesses through the transaction with HCSC, which we expect will close in the first quarter.

“I am inspired to work alongside our 70,000 colleagues and the Office of Excellence and Transformation to realize our commitments to better care and clinical excellence,” Dr. Brailer said. “We will lead the health care industry in how we serve our patients and customers and support the clinicians who care for them.”

More information about The Cigna Group’s commitments is available hereThis link will open in a new tab..

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Cigna

https://newsroom.thecignagroup.com/the-cigna-group-launches-actions-to-drive-positive-change-for-customers-and-patients

Public Company Director Pay Grows Amid Rising Expectations and Responsibilities for Corporate Boards

Bill Brewer — Tue, 18 Feb 2025 18:55:59 GMT

News provided by: National Association of Corporate Directors

Feb 03, 2025, 09:00 ET

NACD today published its annual Director Compensation Report, the industry standard for public company board pay practices, structures and trends.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 3, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- The National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD), the authority on boardroom practices representing 24,000 board members, has reported that public company director compensation levels continue to grow modestly. NACD's 26th annual Director Compensation Report, produced in collaboration with leading compensation and leadership consultancy Pearl Meyer, shows that as boards' responsibilities and expectations continue to expand, median director pay for 2024 slightly increased by 3 percent, and overall compensation practices continued to align with governance standards and shareholder expectations.

Figure 5 - Median Total Direct Compensation by Company Size

The report presents key findings based on Pearl Meyer's research of director compensation trends and practices from 1,400 public companies across 24 industries. In addition to providing robust data, NACD's report also affirms the leading principles and best practices that all companies should consider when setting director compensation.

Key Findings from the report:

Total Direct Compensation (TDC) for directors has slightly increased by 3 percent over the prior year for all publicly traded firms. Micro companies (defined as having between $50 million and $500 million in revenue) had the largest annual increase at 10 percent TDC and experienced the greatest increase over the past several years.
The equity portion of TDC has steadily increased as the median director's pay mix is approaching a 60 percent equity and 40 percent cash split, with equity awards full-value shares and, less commonly, stock options) being the largest component of director compensation across public firms.
Audit, compensation and nominating/governance committee prevalence numbers remain consistent, and risk committees are on the rise. From 2014 to 2024, the prevalence of risk committees increased by 8 percent, while the number of other standing committees have evolved their agendas to meet the changing needs of companies. The percentage of companies delivering retainers to their audit, compensation, and nominating/governance committees also increased steadily, ranging from 76 to 88 percent in 2014, and from 87 to 91 percent today.
Providing compensation for committee chairs remains a frequent practice. As the roles and responsibilities of boards and their primary committees have broadened, the need for additional, specialized committees has diminished, as oversight and governance functions have become streamlined under a more cohesive structure. This simplification and streamlining was similar for director compensation programs overall.

Read the full report for additional insights into the most recent trends in director compensation at www.nacdonline.org.

"Directors today operate in a complex and fast-paced environment that requires agility and adaptability. The commitment needed for board membership has increased significantly due to oversight of emerging risks related to economic uncertainty, along with oversight in areas of human capital, technology and cybersecurity," said Peter Gleason, NACD president and CEO.

"While year-over-year changes in board pay have been modest, the scrutiny boards face continues to increase," said Ryan Hourihan, managing director at Pearl Meyer and lead author of the report. "It's important for boards to understand how they compare to market practice to ensure their programs are competitive and capable of attracting the caliber of director expected by shareholders."

About the Pearl Meyer/NACD 2024–2025 Director Compensation Report:

Data presented in the 2024-2025 Director Compensation Report was collected through a study with Main Data Group of 1,400 companies across 24 industries that had filed a proxy statement or any other SEC filing containing director compensation information for the fiscal year ending between Feb. 1, 2023, and Jan. 31, 2024. The report assigns companies to one of five size categories based on revenue: micro ($50 to $500 million in revenue), small ($500 million to $1 billion in revenue), medium ($1-$2.5 billion in revenue), large ($2.5-$10 billion in revenue), and top 200 (200 largest companies in the S&P 500 based on revenue).

About NACD

The National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) is the leading member organization for corporate directors who want to expand their knowledge, grow their network and maximize their potential. For more than 47 years, NACD has helped boards and the business community elevate their performance and create long-term value. Our leadership continues to raise standards of excellence and advance board effectiveness at thousands of member companies.

NACD's valued insights, professional development events and resources, such as the NACD Directors SummitTM and the NACD Directorship Certification® program, support boards in navigating complex challenges. With a growing network of more than 24,000 members across over 20 Chapters, boards are better equipped to make well-informed decisions on the critical, strategic issues facing their businesses today. Learn more at www.nacdonline.org.

About Pearl Meyer
Pearl Meyer is the leading advisor to boards and senior management helping organizations build, develop and reward great leadership teams that drive long-term success. Our strategy-driven compensation and leadership consulting services act as powerful catalysts for value creation and competitive advantage by addressing the critical links between people and outcomes. Our clients stand at the forefront of their industries and range from emerging high-growth, not-for-profit and private companies to the Fortune 500.

Media Contacts:
Shannon Bernauer
sbernauer@nacdonline.org
571-367-3688

Teresa Osborne
teresa.osborne@pearlmeyer.com
508-244-0821

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

SOURCE National Association of Corporate Directors

Fewer than 1 in 5 US companies have a pay transparency strategy

Bill Brewer — Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:21:50 GMT

The data highlights a disconnect between the importance employers say they place on advancing these strategies, and how much progress has been made,” Mercer’s global rewards solution leader said.

Published Jan. 14, 2025 / Ginger Christ

Dive Brief:

Only 19% of U.S. companies have a pay transparency strategy in place, according to the results of Mercer’s 2024 Global Pay Transparency Survey Report, which were released Jan. 10.
Despite that, 63% of U.S. organizations said they planned to share pay information internally and externally in a standardized way, and 56% said employees should have the same access to compensation data, regardless of where they work in the world, Mercer found.
Of the more than 1,000 companies surveyed, over 300 of which are in the U.S., 77% identified compliance as a key driver for their strategy, and more than 50% cited improving employee satisfaction and aligning with company values as drivers of their policy.

Dive Insight:

Pay transparency is becoming increasingly important in the U.S., as more states, including New York, California and Colorado, pass legislation requiring employers to disclose pay or pay ranges.

Beyond that, 75% of U.S. employers said they think candidates expect pay transparency, and 54% believe current employees expect it, Mercer found.

“The data highlights a disconnect between the importance employers say they place on advancing these strategies, and how much progress has been made,” Gordon Frost, Mercer’s global rewards solution leader, said in a news release. “With fair pay the second-most important reason employees choose to stay with an organization, don’t wait to prioritize these efforts — because there is still a lot of work to be done.”

To address this, 65% of U.S. organizations plan to conduct pay equity studies, and 59% are adjusting their employee compensation models to align with external market rates, the report found.

But organizations also reported that the biggest hurdle for them is manager inability to explain compensation programs to workers; 37% of U.S. companies identified this as their biggest challenge, Mercer said.

“With manager enablement one of the biggest challenges our clients face in 2025, these employees will be critical to your pay transparency strategy’s success. Ensuring managers are equipped to deliver these messages to your workforce should be a key component of that rollout,” Tauseef Rahman, a partner in Mercer’s career practice, said in a statement.

Three in 4 companies said they aren’t ready for pay transparency laws, according to the results of a survey by Aon plc, a global professional services firm, released in December.

While the incoming Trump administration will likely try to weaken government agencies promoting pro-worker initiatives like pay transparency, state efforts will still have movement, Lulu Seikaly, senior employment counsel for Payscale, said regarding 2025 compensation trends.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/1-in-5-us-companies-have-a-pay-transparency-strategy/737114/

How retirement savings will change in 2025

Bill Brewer — Tue, 07 Jan 2025 16:59:38 GMT

Higher contribution limits to 401(k) and IRA accounts, plus other twists are ahead for savers and retirees.

Kerry Hannon · Senior Columnist

Updated Sat, January 4, 2025 at 5:08 AM PST 7 min read

Saving for retirement will get a modest boost in 2025 thanks to higher contribution limits and the phase-in of provisions stemming from the Secure 2.0 Act, which became law at the end of 2023.

For retirees, there are also changes for Social Security and Medicare worth noting.

Here’s a roundup of some of the key retirement-related changes to watch for in the new year.

Higher saver contribution limits

Employer-sponsored retirement plans come with sizable contribution limits — not that everyone can spare to set aside that much — and they’re increasing slightly. For 2025, you’ll be able to increase your annual contribution to your 401(k), 403(b), governmental 457 plans, and the federal government's Thrift Savings Plan to $23,500, up from $23,000.

The catch-up contribution limit, for those 50 or older, is holding steady at $7,500. There’s an extra layer of icing for workers aged 60 to 63, thanks to the Secure 2.0 law — a higher catch-up contribution limit of $11,250.

“People at this life stage often have college funding in the rearview mirror, so if they're in the position to turbocharge their retirement plan contributions in advance of retirement, they should take advantage of it,” Christine Benz, director of personal finance and retirement planning for Morningstar, told Yahoo Finance.

The contribution limit on individual retirement accounts (IRAs) will stick at $7,000, and the catch‑up contribution limit for individuals 50 and over stays at $1,000 for 2025.

IRA deductions for singles covered by a retirement plan at work phases out for modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) between $79,000 and $89,000, up from $77,000 to $87,000. The deduction gradually disappears for married couples filing jointly between $126,000 and $146,000, up from $123,000 to $143,000.

Some good news for Roth IRA fans: The income limit range for contributing will increase to between $150,000 and $165,000 for singles and heads of household, up from $146,000 to $161,000. For married couples filing jointly, the range increases to between $236,000 and $246,000, up from $230,000 to $240,000.

Finally, the income limit for the Saver’s Credit, a nonrefundable tax credit worth up to $1,000 ($2,000 if married filing jointly) for taxpayers who contribute to a retirement account is $79,000 for married couples, up from $76,500; $59,250 for heads of household, up from $57,375; and $39,500 for singles and married individuals filing separately, up from $38,250.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Yahoo Finance

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/what-do-people-regret-the-most-when-they-retire-143035482.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAsT9E0zmDdAYJ7_Hfs_RCv9bLsFTXJEfcrowXg3ZR--HuJzyLmqXFQfKY5NJRl57vFzYixNpPmoDZw9o4sw9jGpIrkceCEkwsFmnfaDdA3IR_7TP0faU9d2aBpE3lmfmdqGwSHnszcK3PqVqScYa2LPyYGWheuIuoLmI1OmxV9h

Despite economic uncertainty, US employers maintain elevated compensation budgets for 2025

Bill Brewer — Tue, 07 Jan 2025 16:51:50 GMT

Employers also plan to promote 9.3% of employees in 2025, up from 8% in 2024

December 10, 2024

Today, Mercer, a business of Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC) and a global leader in helping clients realize their investment objectives, shape the future of work and enhance health and retirement outcomes for their people, released the results of the November 2024 Mercer QuickPulseTM US Compensation Planning Survey.

According to the survey of more than 850 US organizations, employers are planning to raise their compensation budgets by 3.3% for merit increases and 3.7% for total salary increases for non-unionized employees in 2025. Sixty-nine percent of surveyed employers expressed confidence in their compensation budget projections. These figures remain consistent with the actual merit and total salary increases delivered in 2024, which were 3.3% and 3.6%1, respectively.

While these planned increases are similar to last year, they remain above historical trends, confirming that employers are prioritizing talent investment even in the face of economic uncertainty.

“Amid a persistently tight labor market and low unemployment, employers are recognizing the need to invest in their workforce to drive retention,” said Lauren Mason, Mercer’s US Workforce Solutions Leader. “To remain competitive in this environment, employers will need to look beyond compensation and transform work itself to improve the employee experience and unlock greater productivity.”

The majority of employers (80%) indicated that they have not finalized their compensation budgets. Among those with approved compensation budgets (20%), their 2025 budget projections were consistent with the projections made in August for all surveyed employers, which were 3.3% for merit increases and 3.6% for total salary increases.

The survey also revealed industry variations. The technology sector reported above-average compensation budgets, with increases of 3.5% for merit and 3.8% for total compensation, while the healthcare services industry reported below-average increases for merit and total compensation of 3.0% and 3.5%, respectively.

Employers are planning to promote 9.3% of employees in 2025, up from 8% in 2024. Many employers reported a flexible approach to promotions, conducting them as needed or via two or more cycles per year. This emphasis on career and compensation progression demonstrates a commitment to retaining essential talent and skills while fostering employee engagement and loyalty.

Reflecting the move towards greater pay transparency, 18% of companies said they are sharing pay ranges with all employees and candidates, while another 27% are considering this action. The August 2024 Compensation Planning Survey revealed that 52% of employers plan to conduct pay equity studies to meet rising transparency demands, underscoring a strong focus on fair pay practices.

“When employers aren’t clear about pay, employees create their own narratives—and those stories can be more negative than the reality,” said Ms. Mason. “Despite significant investment in pay in recent years, employee satisfaction with fair pay is still on the decline.”

“Companies should continue to redesign and communicate how pay decisions are made, ensuring every dollar invested closes critical gaps and contributes to a more transparent, fair and rewarding experience,” Ms. Mason added.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Mercer

https://www.mercer.com/en-us/about/newsroom/us-employers-maintain-elevated-compensation-budgets-for-2025/

3 in 4 employers aren’t prepared for pay transparency laws

Bill Brewer — Tue, 07 Jan 2025 16:48:39 GMT

By the end of 2026, at least 14 U.S. states, four Canadian provinces and all European Union countries will have pay transparency laws in place.

Published Dec. 17, 2024 by Ginger Christ

Dive Brief:

Seventy-five percent of companies aren’t ready for pay transparency laws, according to the results of a survey by Aon plc, a global professional services firm, released Dec. 5. Yet, 14 U.S. states and four Canadian provinces will have laws in place by the end of 2025 and all European Union countries will by the end of 2026.
Of the 626 global U.S. employers surveyed, those in retail and e-commerce (33%), financial institutions (21%), manufacturing (20%) and professional and business services (20%) reported feeling the most prepared.
While 81% of employers surveyed said they include salary ranges on job listings, 63% said they don’t share salary ranges with current employees. Of the 37% who do share salary ranges with existing workers, 61% said they only disclose that information where they are required to do so by law.

Dive Insight:

In addition to states, some U.S. cities have passed their own laws requiring employers to disclose pay or salary ranges, including New York City and Cincinnati.

“The rise of pay transparency and pay equity initiatives reflects a broader cultural shift, particularly among younger employees,” Brooke Green, head of talent solutions for North America at Aon, said in a statement. While it was once considered “impolite to publish salary information,” Green said, not doing so may reinforce and exacerbate pay gaps.

Green said companies that comply with new regulations “sooner rather than later” will be better able to tackle pay disparities, encourage fairness and help workers make informed career choices.

Forty-seven percent of companies with significant operations in Europe said they were concerned about the upcoming EU Pay Transparency Directive, according to an October report by software company Syndio. And one expert said the directive will “upend” how companies manage and explain pay.

The laws are effective in making companies share pay information, according to an October story from Indeed’s Hiring Lab. The three states and localities that showed the largest growth in salary transparency over the past year — Hawaii, Washington, D.C., and New York — had pay transparency laws that went into effect around the last year.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/employers-arent-prepared-for-pay-transparency-laws/735789/

Interim IRS Guidance Published on Student Loan Matching Payments

Bill Brewer — Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:40:19 GMT

The program, created in SECURE 2.0, addresses student loans, which are considered a significant impediment to retirement savings.

Reported by Amy Resnick

The Internal Revenue Service published guidance Monday to assist plan sponsors providing or planning to provide matching contributions based on employees’ qualified student loan payments.

The IRS published Notice 2024-63, which uses a question and answer format, to illustrate the rules for employers with 401(k), 403(b) and governmental 457(b) plans to provide matching contributions based on qualified student loan payments, abbreviated as QSLP, rather than based only on elective contributions to retirement plans. Student loan defined contribution plan matching was permitted under the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022.

Student loan repayment is frequently identified as one of the largest causes of financial stress and impediments to retirement savings among U.S. workers.

The notice also separately outlines QSLP rules for SIMPLE IRA plans.

The IRS is taking public comments on the notice, which applies to plan years beginning after Dec. 31, 2024. The comment period runs for 60 days after the notice is published in the Federal Register.

The ERISA Industry Committee, representing large employers in their capacity as benefit plan sponsors, supported the IRS’ action.

“ERIC’s member companies are committed to the financial wellbeing of their employees, including those with outstanding student loans,” said Andy Banducci, ERIC’s senior vice president for retirement and compensation policy, in a statement. “That is why we lobbied Congress to enact a tax law change allowing employers to make retirement plan matching contributions on account of workers’ qualified student loan payments. We applaud the IRS for issuing interim guidance implementing this change and look forward to providing technical comments to IRS in the coming weeks.”

The regulator also announced plans to issue proposed regulations providing further guidance on the QSLP benefit, stating that plan sponsors may rely on the notice until the proposed regulations are issued.

The guidance makes clear that plans cannot include provisions limiting QSLP matching to certain qualified education loans and that “all employees … eligible to receive matching contributions on account of elective deferrals must be eligible to receive matching contributions on account of ‘qualified student loan payments.’”

It also states that plans have to offer uniform treatment of elective deferral matches and QSLP matches.

“A plan with a QSLP match feature may not include provisions that exclude employees from receiving QSLP matches if those employees are eligible to receive elective deferral matches, and a plan with a QSLP match feature may not include provisions that exclude employees from receiving elective deferral matches if those employees are eligible to receive QSLP matches,” the IRS wrote.

Overall, the notice addresses plan administration issues raised by Section 110 of SECURE 2.0, including:

Only an employee’s qualified education loan payments that were made during a plan year are eligible to be counted for purposes of the employee’s QSLP match for that plan year;
A qualified education loan payment is a QSLP only if the certification requirement is satisfied with respect to that payment. A plan may require a separate certification for each qualified education loan payment intended to qualify as a QSLP or permit an annual certification that applies for all qualified education loan payments intended to qualify as QSLPs for a year; and
To certify a QSLP, the plan or its third-party service provider much receive the amount of the loan payment made, the date of the loan payment, that the payment was made by the employee, that the loan being repaid is a qualified education loan and was used to pay for qualified higher education expenses of the employee, the employee’s spouse or the employee’s dependent, and that the employee incurred the loan.

The notice also offers examples of administrative procedures and optional Actual Deferral Percentage testing.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: PLANADVISER

https://www.planadviser.com/interim-irs-guidance-published-student-loan-matching-payments/

U.S. Employers Forecast 3.5% Pay Increases in 2025

Bill Brewer — Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:36:13 GMT

15th August 2024

Payscale Inc., a leading provider of compensation data, software, and services, has released the results of its ninth annual Salary Budget Survey, a key resource for HR and compensation professionals determining pay increase strategies for the upcoming year. The survey results reveal that U.S. employers are budgeting for 3.5% pay raises in 2025.

“Given the stabilization of inflation and the easing of labor market conditions, we’re seeing a slight reduction in planned salary increases for 2025, though figures are still above the 3% pre-pandemic baseline that employees have come to expect,” says Ruth Thomas, chief of research and insights at Payscale. “When we zoom in on different industries and sectors, we observe that raises can vary by up to 1.4%, indicating that labor is in higher demand for some organizations.”

Pay raise growth is on the decline—but slightly more people are set to receive one, the survey finds. Going into 2025, organizations are anticipating pay increases of 3.5% in the U.S. and 3.3% in Canada, a slight drop from 2024. So far, actual pay increases in the U.S. have averaged 3.6%, down from the 4% pay raises observed in 2023. Although rates are declining, 85% of employees will receive a base pay bump this year, compared to 83% last year.

Employees in certain industries will experience rates exceeding 4%, while those in other lines fo work will barely surpass 3%. Government workers and those in the engineering and science fields can expect to see higher-than-average salary increases, averaging 4.5% and 4.2%, respectively. Conversely, retail and customer service employees and those that work in education—including teachers—will see raises of just 3.1%.

While most salary increase budgets remain unchanged, organizations with higher and lower budgets both point to the economy as a main reason for the shift. Just two in 10 organizations anticipate a compensation budget that’s higher than last year’s, and even fewer are expecting a lower budget allocation. Most organizations (66%) expect budgets to stay the same. For those with higher budgets, increased competition for labor was the primary reason, followed by economic performance. For those with reduced salary budgets, outsized increases in years prior and concern about the economy were cited.

“Although perceptions of the current economy are mixed, organizations in a growth phase and those facing headwinds are competing for the same talent,” says Lexi Clarke, chief people officer at Payscale. “Employers must have a compensation strategy built on data to guide their salary increase budgets, or they risk losing top talent this budgeting cycle.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HRO Today

https://www.hrotoday.com/news/ticker/u-s-employers-forecast-3-5-pay-increases-in-2025/

Job seekers increasingly want ‘core hours’ with time flexibility, survey says

Bill Brewer — Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:32:21 GMT

From the employer side, the number of jobs offering “a little flexibility” more than tripled between June 2024 and the same time last year, Flexa’s data showed.

Published Aug. 12, 2024

By Laurel KalserContributor

Dive Brief:

Employers may have found a compromise for staff resisting return-to-office mandates: Offering them a little flexibility over when they have to be at work, according to an analysis released Aug. 4 by U.K.-based Flexa, a global job platform focusing on flexible workplaces.
The analysis found that in June, 14% of job seekers, up from 11% in April, expressed a preference for roles offering “core hours” — where employees are required to work during certain hours, such as 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., but may complete their work in their own time.
From the employer side, the number of jobs offering “a little flexibility” more than tripled between June 2024 and the same time last year, Flexa’s data showed. “A little flexibility” means employers can start or finish their work a little early or a little late, but otherwise work regular hours, according to the platform. In June, nearly 8 in 10 job postings mentioned the benefit, a steep increase from 50% two months earlier, Flexa found.

Dive Insight:

Workers’ post-pandemic preference for job flexibility isn’t limited to where they work, according to Flexa data from more than 4,000 job posts and preferences expressed by 9,473 job seekers in the U.S. and Europe between April and June 2024.

Employees are also looking for flexibility over when they work, the data showed. “Demand for core hours is not a million miles away from current levels of supply, but is increasing by contrast,” Flexa said.

In June, 39% of workers said they didn’t mind whether they had flexible hours or not (as opposed to it being something they sought specifically). But that’s a rapid downturn from April, when 49% said they didn’t mind, and it’s the lowest amount since December 2021, the platform pointed out, meaning employees increasingly seek it out.

Fortunately, “flexible working hours are something that far more employers agree with them on, thanks to the trend towards asynchronous work and output-led management,” Flexa CEO and co-founder Molly Johnson-Jones stated in the report.

For now, employers seem reluctant to offer anything more than “a little flexibility,” according to the data. In June, the number of job vacancies that offered core hours plummeted to 8%, down from 15% in April.

According to a 2022 survey from digital payroll solutions firm Deluxe, some employees may even prefer flexible working hours to the flexibility of working from home. One in five employees at small-to-mid-size businesses said the No. 1 action their employer should take to improve their working environment is to offer flexible scheduling that lets them adjust their work hours.

Notably, if employer support for flexible scheduling lags behind employee demand, employer support for hybrid working arrangements remains strong. Nearly two-thirds of employers who responded to the Society for Human Resource Management’s 2024 annual benefits survey, released in June, offer a hybrid work model.

Even so, most employers have yet to adapt their practices to support the shift to hybrid arrangements, a March report by TechSmith Corp., Global Workplace Analytics and Carytid Workplace Consultancy pointed out.

Leaders and managers need hybrid-related skills, such as establishing team or meeting norms, the report explained, but 3 out of 4 workers said they haven’t received training on these skills.

Employees’ current focus is on flexible working hours, Flexa indicated. “Not since the pandemic have workers cared as much [about this],” Johnson-Jones said. That could be for several reasons, such as staff wanting a better work-life balance or seeking a flexible schedule to balance out having less influence over their working location, she explained.

“Ultimately, flexible working hours meet many different needs for many different workers. And having even just ‘a little flexibility’ around work start and finish times can make a big difference,” Johnson-Jones added.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/job-seekers-increasingly-want-core-hours-flexibility/723571/

US employers more conservative with salary budgets as employee base stabilizes

Bill Brewer — Thu, 18 Jul 2024 20:42:35 GMT

July 15, 2024

Almost half (47%) of U.S. organizations report their salary budgets for the 2024 cycle are lower than the previous year, as the overall median pay raise for 2024 fell to 4.1%, according to WTW.

ARLINGTON, VA, July 15, 2024 — Almost half (47%) of U.S. organizations report that their salary budgets for the 2024 cycle are lower than the previous year, as the overall median pay raise for 2024 fell to 4.1%, compared with 4.5% in 2023. That’s according to the latest Salary Budget Planning Report by WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company.

The report found employers are being more conservative with their salary budgets as they anticipate lower demand resulting in longer-term stability in their employee base following a period of high resignation and turnover. While around two-fifths of employers (38%) report having trouble attracting and retaining talent in 2024, this figure has dropped almost 20 percentage points from two years ago (57%).

“
As the workplace stabilizes and employers look more toward the future, companies are reviewing and updating their compensation philosophies to ensure they align with business strategy,”

Lesli Jennings | North America leader, Work, Rewards and Careers, WTW

Overall salary budget increases are expected to rise by 3.9% in 2025, which, despite declining since 2023, remain fairly high.

In addition, total annual payroll expenses (which include salaries, bonuses, variable pay and benefit costs) continue to rise substantially in the U.S., as a majority (73%) of companies report that their total payroll expense was higher than last year.

Inflation can impact salary budgets in both directions. Those organizations that lowered salary budgets cited concerns related to cost management, weaker financial results and inflationary pressures as the leading causes, whereas those that raised salary budgets this year cited inflationary pressures and a tight labor market.

In light of these issues, companies are looking to make longer-term changes to their compensation programs. Over half (51%) of companies that have made changes to compensation programs or workplace flexibility have undertaken a compensation review for specific groups; almost half (49%) are hiring people at higher salaries, and 45% have undertaken a full compensation review of all employees.

Additionally, organizations are taking actions to address current market conditions and employee needs, particularly providing more workplace flexibility (52%) and improving the employee experience (52%).

“As the workplace stabilizes and employers look more toward the future, companies are reviewing and updating their compensation philosophies to ensure they align with business strategy,” said Lesli Jennings, North America leader, Work, Rewards and Careers, WTW.

“In light of cost management concerns, employers are taking more of a holistic approach to their reward programs, factoring in bonuses, long-term incentives, and health and wellness benefits; however, a more targeted review of specific employee groups could allow for greater support for those with in-demand skills or those in lower salary ranges. Pay equity is top of mind for employers, and giving a big-picture view of what employees are offered ensures the salary increase process is clear and emphasizes the connection to business performance,” added Jennings.

About the survey

The Salary Budget Planning Report is compiled by WTW’s Rewards Data Intelligence practice. The survey was conducted from April to June of 2024. Approximately 32,000 responses were received from companies across 168 countries worldwide. In the U.S., 1,888 organizations responded.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW

https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2024/07/employers-more-conservative-with-salary-budgets-as-employee-base-stabilizes

The majority of US employers plan to maintain their current benefits in 2025, despite rising healthcare costs, says Mercer

Bill Brewer — Thu, 18 Jul 2024 20:37:40 GMT

NEW YORK, June 27, 2024 – Mercer, a business of Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC) and a global leader in redefining the world of work, reshaping retirement and investment outcomes and unlocking real health and well-being, today released the results of its Survey on Health and Benefit Strategies for 2025. The survey reveals that despite higher healthcare cost trends, the majority of employers will not cut health benefits, and many will make enhancements to their programs, although they may be doing so more selectively than in past years.

“Employers are juggling faster cost growth with the need to offer attractive benefits and keep healthcare affordable for all employees,” said Ed Lehman, Mercer’s US Health and Benefits Leader. “That’s why it’s important they assess their investments in employee health more carefully than ever to create real, long-term value for employees.”

“To strike a balance between cost containment and ensuring access to high-quality care for their employees, employers are leveraging strategies like high-performance networks and enhanced clinical case management,” said Mr. Lehman. According to the survey, in 2025, more than a third of large employers (36% of those with 500 or more employees) will offer a high-performance, narrow network or other alternative medical plan designed to steer employees to quality, cost-efficient care.

Focus on inclusive reproductive benefits

The survey highlights the continued growth in benefits and resources to support women’s reproductive health needs, from pre-conception planning, which will be offered by 35% of large employers in 2025, to benefits designed to help women returning to work after becoming a parent (31%).

There has been significant growth in fertility treatment coverage in the past few years. As Mercer previously reported, the prevalence of coverage for in vitro fertilization (IVF) doubled between 2019 and 2023, when it reached 45% among large employers. The majority of employers providing fertility benefits say they are designed to be inclusive (61%), extending coverage beyond women who meet the clinical definition of infertility.

Ensuring access to specialized care during menopause is a new but fast-growing benefit. Next year, 18% of employers plan to offer specific resources for women going through menopause, up from just 4% in 2023.

This year, the survey explored coverage for men’s reproductive health for the first time and found that over a third of employers (35%) now offer coverage for men’s fertility testing and 20% cover sperm freezing, similar to the percentage that cover egg freezing (19%).

Coverage for weight-loss medication likely to expand

The surge in utilization of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) drugs for diabetes and obesity treatment had a notable impact on benefit budgets last year.

Currently, only about half of the large employers surveyed (52%) cover weight-loss medications. But as more GLP-1 drugs are approved to treat obesity, employers are facing growing pressure to cover them. Plans may experience substantial net new costs given that the drugs cost about $1,000 per month per patient (not counting manufacturers’ rebates, which vary) and a large number of patients may benefit from them.

The survey asked employers about their plans concerning coverage for weight-loss medications. Despite the cost, very few large employers have either dropped coverage or plan to drop it (3%), and only 10% say they are considering it. On the other hand, 27% of employers are considering adding coverage.

Moving up the benefits agenda: climate-related health impacts

Nearly two-thirds of large employer respondents said their workers have been affected by some type of climate event or natural disaster in the past two years — with over a third stating their business operations have been affected. While events like floods and wildfires have an obvious impact on employee health and safety, climate-related conditions such as extreme heat and poor air quality can lead to heat stress, heat stroke, chronic disease complications and mental health issues.

The good news is that around half of respondents (53%) have at least some policies or programs in place in preparation for climate events or have plans to implement them in 2025. These include policies and resources to help employees in the aftermath of a disaster and guidelines to ensure worker safety and health during extreme weather conditions.

“Employers are starting to think about the impact climate events can have on their people and their businesses,” said Tracy Watts, Mercer’s National Leader for US Health Policy. “Employers could do more to plan for climate events and safeguard employee health. Conducting a vulnerability assessment to understand which employees are most at risk is a good place to start.”

Click here to learn more and download the report.

About Health & Benefit Strategies for 2025

This study includes 697 organizations (537 organizations with 500 or more employees and 160 organizations with fewer than 500 employees). The study was fielded between March 21 and April 12, 2024.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Mercer

https://www.mercer.com/en-us/about/newsroom/the-majority-of-us-employers-plan-to-maintain-their-current-benefits-in-2025/

1 IN 3 EMPLOYERS DON’T HAVE A PAY EQUITY STRATEGY

Bill Brewer — Thu, 18 Jul 2024 20:34:26 GMT

July 12, 2024 | Kathryn Mayer

In light of heightened employee expectations and new laws requiring salary disclosures, calls for pay equity have never been louder. A new report indicates that while a majority of employers are working toward pay equity, there is still work to be done.

Nearly three-quarters of employers (70%) said they have analyzed their compensation strategies and shared existing gender pay gap statistics with employees and/or external stakeholders, according to new data from compensation firm beqom.

That has led to a number of problems being uncovered, according to beqom’s survey of 875 salary and compensation decision-makers in the U.S. and the U.K., including wage discrimination (cited by 64% of respondents), promotion disparities (57%), below-market salary ranges (54%), pay compression (53%), and gender pay gaps (48%).

In response to some of the pay problems they’ve uncovered, most companies have reported taking steps to close existing wage gaps and foster transparency, the beqom report found.

Those strategies include listing salary ranges within new job descriptions (81%), increasing salaries due to inflation and economic standard-of-living costs (68%), implementing a process for continuous feedback (67%), increasing pay to correct existing pay gaps and salary inconsistencies (65%), providing clear structure for bonuses and performance review processes (65%), and increasing salaries based on performance (65%).

The report finds that “employers are making meaningful progress and taking action,” said Tanya Jansen, co-founder and chief marketing officer of beqom, but it also uncovers a big gap: About 1 in 3 employers (34%) still don’t have a pay equity strategy in place.

Some Employers Struggling with Developing Strategy

Perhaps even more surprising, more than half of the compensation decision-makers surveyed by beqom said they doubt their company complies with global standards, and 45% said their approach to pay equity is hurting their ability to attract talent.

Compliance complexities are another matter. Just 2 in 5 employers (41%) said they are aware of global pay equity standards.

The data is evidence that employers are grappling with addressing wage discrepancies and promoting fair compensation, even when they know they should be doing more, Jansen said. “They understand the urgency in confronting wage gaps but find themselves navigating a complex web of regulatory requirements and stakeholder demands,” she said.

Numerous states now have laws requiring some kind of pay transparency, such as including pay ranges in job postings.

Part of the reason why some employers don’t have a pay equity strategy is because of those complexities and variations in standards. Meanwhile, smaller firms specifically may face difficulties because they often lack the necessary resources and expertise to address the topic, said Jeremy Feinstein, managing director at Empsight, a New York City-based human resource consulting firm specializing in compensation.

Jesse Meschuk, a Los Angeles-based human capital advisor and HR expert specializing in compensation, said figuring out a pay equity strategy can be “tricky.”

“What to disclose, how to get managers and employees ready—these are all actions that take careful planning and communication,” he said.

But not having a strategy in place proves to be problematic, experts said.

“Companies without a pay equity strategy are exposed to significant risks, including legal repercussions, challenges in attracting and retaining talent, and a weakened employer value proposition,” Feinstein said.

“The one-third who don’t have a strategy in place need to do so, and do so soon,” Meschuk said. “Regulations are increasing across the U.S.”

Wage Discrimination, Gender Pay Gap

The findings from beqom follow a report from Payscale earlier this year, which found that the U.S. gender pay gap for 2024 remains the same as last year, with women earning just 83 cents for every dollar earned by men. The gap is even worse for women who work remotely (79 cents) compared to women who work in person (89 cents). It’s also worse for working mothers, with the report finding that working mothers make 75 cents for every dollar a working father earns, while women and men without children have a pay gap of 88 cents.

Since 2019, the uncontrolled gender pay gap has narrowed by 5 cents for Black women and Native American and Alaska Native women, as well as by 4 cents for Hispanic women and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander women, Payscale found.

While that movement is helpful, it’s not especially encouraging overall, said Ruth Thomas, pay equity strategist at Payscale, earlier this year.

“The only small sign of progress is pay gaps for women of color are closing more rapidly than pay gaps overall, but this is partially because these pay gaps are wider to begin with,” she said. The data implies the need for “legislators and employers to take action to break this cycle of stalled pay gaps and speed up the historically slow progress toward gender equality.”

Getting a Pay Equity Strategy in Place

To establish a robust pay equity strategy, Feinstein recommended that employers first examine their job architecture framework. This involves ensuring that employees are correctly classified within the organization through clearly defined job families, sub-families, and individual roles within them, combined with a comprehensive grading/leveling strategy, he said.

Meschuk said organizations should “gather all the relevant information you will need— job levels, salary ranges, individual employee profiles/experience, performance evaluation histories, promotion data, and actual compensation information.

“If some of this does not yet exist, it may make sense to do some initial work to best position yourself for a robust analysis—put in place a rudimentary job leveling/evaluation system so you can compare like jobs across departments and ensure you have a sufficient number of data points.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/mena/topics-tools/news/benefits-compensation/1-in-3-employers-don-t-have-a-pay-equity-strategy-

How Amazon’s employee financial wellness program is making a difference

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:25:18 GMT

ByDawn Kawamoto

May 20, 2024

Nearly 72% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, with less than $2,000 in savings. And Amazon employees are among them.

About five years ago, Amazon started surveying workers about their financial health and the benefits they would find most useful—which painted a picture of financial stress among employees, says Justin Roberts, senior manager of financial benefits at Amazon.

To address this, Amazon created a global financial health team in 2022, says Roberts, who recently spoke on a panel, The Role of Financial Care for Employee Health, Wellbeing and a Thriving Workforce, at the Elevate Change, Ignite People (EPIC) conference in Las Vegas.

The financial health team is comprised of 12 full-time employees and contractors, as well as dozens of specialists on partner teams who work on various aspects of Amazon’s financial health benefits, from payroll to technology. This team is part of Amazon’s global financial and wellbeing benefits organization, which is part of the HR department.

Amazon’s HR leaders are not alone in wanting to help employees address their financial woes, which can lead to stress-induced health problems and deteriorated mental health, and, for employers, a loss in productivity and increased attrition. It’s a focus being accelerated by ongoing economic uncertainty. For the first time, last year, employers ranked the high cost of living as a top financial wellness concern over retirement preparedness, according to an Employee Benefit Research Institute report.

How Amazon created its financial health program

Prior to the start of the pandemic, Amazon began talking to employees and conducting employee surveys regarding their financial wellness concerns. Roberts said understanding such needs is key to any successful financial wellness strategy.

“It all starts with talking to your employee base and asking them what they want. What do they need from a financial perspective?” Roberts said. “A lot of times, they don’t know what they want until they are provided with some options. Once they see the options, they know clearly what they want to extract from them.”

After gathering data for more than a year, Amazon “saw the financial stress metrics that we have are fairly high,” Roberts said, which prompted the company to create a financial health team in 2022.

The team realized it needed to first sharply focus on helping employees manage short-term financial wellness, like financial emergencies—more so than prepare for long-term financial goals like retirement planning, Roberts said.

“Whenever somebody is hurt on the battlefield, the first step is to stop the bleeding,” says Roberts, a former Marine. “So, whenever we started to look for financial wellness solutions for our frontline employees, it was to stop the bleeding. What can we do for them in cases of emergencies? What do we need to do to take care of that first? Then we can later build on that.”

When Amazon’s financial health team learns of a U.S. employee facing a financial emergency, it directs that employee to its financial care solutions partner Brightside. That partner works with employees to find emergency housing, arranges food and grocery delivery, and connects them to appropriate community and government support services.

After tackling these immediate needs, Brightside and Amazon’s financial health team seek to build a strong financial foundation by working with affected employees to create a savings plan, rebuild their credit rating and eventually tack on retirement savings, Roberts said.

Roberts offered several tips for selecting a financial wellness partner. Seek a partner that receives all of its funding from its clients rather than a combination of clients and vendors whose products may be used in providing service to the organization.

“You don’t want a vendor to get paid more to pitch an annuity versus a different savings vehicle. You could then find there’s a propensity to select a resource that may not be in the best interest of employees,” Roberts said.

Amazon also wanted a partner that would not limit the amount of time employees could spend with a financial wellness representative. Brightside was also asked to ensure employees meet with the same financial representative whenever they need help to build on their existing relationship.

Amazon’s financial wellness ROI

Amazon measures its financial wellness return on investment through two lenses—impact on its employees and its business.

Since launching its financial health team and partnership with Brightside, Amazon has seen improvements in its employees’ savings rates, the number of dollars going back to employees—as they budget better and even set aside money for retirement funds—and the value they receive from the program.

“We’re looking at a 3x value,” Roberts said. “For every dollar we put into the program, the employee gets about $3 worth of value.”

Roberts said employees also rate Amazon’s financial wellness program with a 90 NPS score, adding, “It’s insanely high.”

Although Amazon’s overall employee base rates its financial wellness program high, financial woes persist among the online retailing giant’s warehouse workers, highlighting the scope of the challenge.

For example, 53% of 1,484 Amazon warehouse workers across the U.S. say they have experienced one or more forms of food insecurity in the past three months, and 48% of these workers face housing insecurity, according to a report released Wednesday by the Center for Urban Economic Development at the University of Illinois Chicago.

Additionally, 56% of warehouse workers are not able to pay all their bills, and 33% use one or more publicly funded assistance programs.

As Amazon seeks to improve further the lives of its employees, including its warehouse workers, the company is leaning into the benefits its financial health program is yielding. Roberts said the company believes it’s seeing greater productivity from workers, less attrition and safer workplaces—since workers are less distracted by financial problems. The program has been so successful that Amazon is expanding its geographic footprint for the program from one region in the U.S. to nationwide.

Common mistakes to avoid when creating a financial wellness program

Despite the potential of a financial health program, there are some common mistakes HR can make in crafting such an initiative, Roberts said.

Moving mountains quickly

“The biggest mistake is trying to do too much, too fast,” Roberts says. However, he noted that most decisions regarding financial health programs are two-way doors, where HR leaders need to be able to pivot and change plans.

Failing to know your employee base

HR leaders can fall into a herd mentality that can hurt their financial wellness program, Roberts observed.

“I often see some of my peers out there who will see what someone else is doing and say, ‘That’s great. I want to do that.’ They may start an emergency savings account program without understanding what their employees need. If it’s a hospital, maybe your nurses need student loan benefits before getting an emergency savings account,” he said.

Missing the mark on what to measure for program success

HR needs to know exactly what its financial wellness program is built to do and the desired outcomes and metrics to hit. Without measurable goals, merely having employees engaged in the financial wellness program does not equate to success, Roberts says.

“We know we want to provide X number of value per family and we hold ourselves accountable to that,” Roberts said. “If you have a performance-driven leader, you’ll get to the place you want to go.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/how-amazons-employee-financial-wellness-program-is-making-a-difference/

Citi boosts US parental leave to compete with Wall Street rivals

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:01:04 GMT

Bank increases paid leave to up to 24 weeks for birth parents

Published Wed, Jun 5, 2024 · 12:12 AM

CITIGROUP is increasing the time-off allowance for new parents in the US and introducing leave for staff to care for ailing family members, bringing it more in line with Wall Street rivals as they fight to attract and retain talent.

Under the expanded policy, all new parents in the US and Puerto Rico will receive 16 weeks of paid leave, including those who adopted or had children through surrogacy, according to an internal memo seen by Bloomberg News. Birth parents will receive an additional paid recovery time of as much as eight weeks, reaching a potential total of 24 weeks.

In addition, Citigroup will now allow colleagues two weeks of paid leave annually to care for an immediate family member who’s seriously ill and incapable of self-care. Previously, it offered only unpaid leave. Some rivals already offer as much as four weeks of paid leave for that purpose.

While the new family-leave allowances help make the firm even more competitive with US peers, they’re less than policies in other parts of the world, bolstered by stronger cultural demands for parental leave as well as statutory mandates. In the UK, Citigroup employees are entitled to 26 weeks’ leave at base pay and more time at a lower-paid or unpaid status.

In India, where women comprise less than a quarter of the work force, banks have expanded their policies for female employees in a race to hire more. HSBC Holdings pays for bankers’ nannies in the country, while Citigroup allows new mothers to work from home for a year after their maternity leave ends.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Business Times

https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/banking-finance/citi-boosts-us-parental-leave-compete-wall-street-rivals

Worker Expectations Clash with Economic Realities, Payscale’s 2024 Compensation Best Practices Report Reveals

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:57:32 GMT

March 20, 2024 09:00 ET | Source: Payscale

Pay transparency is officially a best practice as the majority of organizations (60%) now publish salary ranges in job ads, up 15% over last year.
More organizations are ditching degree requirements and embracing skills-based hiring strategies.
Compensation is considered the biggest challenge facing organizations in 2024, ahead of recruiting, retention, and engagement.

SEATTLE, March 20, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Today, Payscale Inc., the leading provider of compensation data, software and services, released its flagship report, the 2024 Compensation Best Practices Report (CBPR). Now in its 15th year, data and insights from the company’s annual survey of compensation professionals and HR leaders are distilled into the largest report of its kind, revealing the latest workplace and compensation trends in the wake of high inflation, pay transparency legislation, and slowed economic growth.

“This year’s report tells us that while the economy may be in flux, employee expectations have not swayed. Transparent pay practices and meaningful raises are now table stakes to attract and retain top talent, but many organizations are falling behind as legislation is only accelerating,” said Payscale’s Chief People Officer Lexi Clarke. “Half of employers don’t yet have a compensation strategy or pay communications in place, but employee engagement hinges on workers understanding the ‘what’ and ‘why’ behind their pay.”

Key takeaways from CBPR include:

Pay Increases and the Job Market: Competitive raises that exceed inflation are a priority, even in a sluggish economy — but fewer organizations are planning to hand them out.

Organizations predict an average base pay increase of 4.5% in 2024, compared to the average of 4.8% actually given last year. This increases to as high as 6% for some industries.
This year, only 79% of organizations plan to give pay increases, which is a drop from 86% in 2023, and the lowest it has been in years. However, 14% are unsure, which means this could end up looking similar to last year.
Reported voluntary turnover is 21% in 2023, down 4% from 2022 (25%) and much lower than 2021 (36%) — evidence that it’s an employer’s market, at least temporarily.

Pay Transparency and Fair Pay: Posting pay ranges in job ads is now the norm, prompting underpaid employees to resign — yet some employers are still gambling with unaddressed pay inequities.

The majority of organizations (60%) are publishing pay ranges in job postings in 2024, compared to 45% in 2023. However, there has also been a slight uptick in organizations resisting pay transparency (from 11% to 13%).
In response to pay transparency, 27% of organizations say employees are asking more questions about their pay, 14% have had employees quit because they saw job ads with higher pay elsewhere, and 11% have had employees see an internal job posting for a similar role and realize they were being paid less. More encouragingly, 14% say that employees have expressed appreciation for transparent pay practices.
Pay equity analysis is a planned or current initiative for 62% of organizations — but over a quarter (27%) admit they do not address severely underpaid employees unless the employee or their manager asks.

Compensation Strategy and Pay Communications: While progress has been made, almost half of organizations need to get serious about strategic compensation management.

HR leaders rank compensation as their biggest challenge this year (50%), over recruiting (44%), retention (42%), and engagement (37%).
While only 53% of organizations have a formal compensation strategy in place, 21% are planning to build a compensation strategy for the first time in 2024.
Only half of organizations (51%) train managers on how to have pay conversations with employees, which is still a first-time majority in 2024.

AI Adoption: Although forms of artificial intelligence (AI) have been used reliably for years in compensation, organizations are approaching the technology with caution.

Almost half of HR leaders and compensation professionals (49%) are optimistic about AI; most (63%) believe that AI will reduce unfulfilling work. Meanwhile, 17% are pessimistic; their top concern (56%) is that AI will extend bias rather than mitigate it.
The practical application of using AI for compensation decisions is viewed more cautiously by organizations, with only 7% of respondents being totally on board and 50% undecided.
Currently, 21% of organizations are using or developing AI for managing or generating job descriptions, 18% to parse resumes and identify candidates, and 17% to create or support learning and development or standard HR documents.

Remote Work and Skills-based Pay: Modern approaches to work, like valuing skills over degrees or productivity over office mandates, are paying off for forward-thinking companies.

One in three organizations (34%) have removed degree requirements for salaried positions. Overall, only a minority (22%) still require a college degree for all salaried positions in 2024.
The majority of organizations (58%) compensate for competitive skills.
While only 11% of employers offer a fully remote work environment (unchanged from last year), the voluntary turnover rate for remote companies is 13%, compared to 30% for traditional in-person work, 23% for work environments split by job type, and 16% for hybrid.

Labor Unions and the Minimum Wage: Worker rights will continue to be a major focus in 2024, as employees continue to organize and pay floors increase in almost half of states.

HR leaders view unions significantly more positively (62%) compared to executives (38%).
Almost a quarter (22%) of employers bargain with a union, with 18% having done so for many years and 4% just in the last few years. While not a large number, the 4% includes organizations of all sizes and industries.
Minimum wage increases will impact compensation strategy for 27% of organizations.
Almost three-quarters (73%) of employers are in favor of raising the federal minimum wage.

“Fair pay is the bedrock of compensation strategy, yet alarmingly, more than a quarter of employers are not proactive about correcting pay disparities,” said Ruth Thomas, pay equity strategist at Payscale. “We’re seeing forward-thinking companies, on the other hand, make adjustments for external and internal pay equity, pay compression, and competitive skills — while diversifying their workforce by removing barriers to entry like degree requirements.”

Payscale’s 2024 Compensation Best Practices Report analyzes survey data from 5,735 respondents gathered between October 2023 and December 2023. Nearly 100 pages long, the report includes cuts of the data across organization size, performance, industry, and location. The full report and its methodology can be accessed in its entirety at Payscale.com/research-and-insights/CBPR.

About Payscale
As the industry leader in compensation management, Payscale is on a mission to help job seekers, employees, and businesses get pay right and to make sustainable fair pay a reality. Empowering more than 50% of the Fortune 500 in 198 countries, Payscale provides a combination of diverse and dynamic data sources, experienced compensation services, and scalable software to enable organizations such as Angel City Football Club, Target, Gainsight, and eBay to make fair and appropriate pay decisions.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: GlobeNewswire

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2024/03/20/2849394/0/en/Worker-Expectations-Clash-with-Economic-Realities-Payscale-s-2024-Compensation-Best-Practices-Report-Reveals.html

Survey: Pay structures are changing to suit equity, transparency needs

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:53:54 GMT

Survey: Pay structures are changing to suit equity, transparency needs

Organizations have become more transparent about pay, according to Payscale, but generally only disclose data to individual employees and only when required to do so.

Published June 6, 2024

Traditional pay grades remained the most common form of pay structure for organizations entering 2024, but many were considering market-based pay ranges — segmented either by individual jobs or by groups of comparable jobs — to meet equity and transparency goals, according to a recent Payscale report.

The vendor’s late 2023 survey of more than 5,700 compensation professionals, most of them from the U.S. and Canada, found that more than half said their organizations targeted pay ranges either presently or in the future. Another pay structure model, the step structure, was cited by 31% of respondents as a future target for their organizations and by 22% as both a current and future target.

Most employers’ pay strategies target middle of market or are job-specific

“Which of the following best describes your organization’s market strategy?”

A plurality of respondents said their organizations priced pay by targeting the middle of the market, but Payscale said it found that top-performing organizations were more likely than their lower-performing counterparts to pay above-market. Paying above-market rates was also more common among smaller organizations with fewer than 100 employees.

Employers are making those changes against a backdrop of shifting compliance demands. Jurisdictions in at least 13 U.S. states and Washington, D.C., now have laws requiring some form of pay transparency, such as the inclusion of pay ranges in job postings. Minnesota is the most recent state to join that list with a law set to take effect in 2025.

The trend toward disclosure has been observed even where such laws are not in place, a recently published National Women’s Law Center analysis of Glassdoor data between 2022 and 2023 found.

Generally, most respondents to Payscale’s survey said they were posting pay ranges either to comply with applicable laws or had done so regardless of legal requirements. In 2023, only 15% said they were not posting or advertising jobs in locations that mandated pay transparency, and 11% said they had refrained from doing so while they worked on their pay practices. Both percentages declined when respondents were asked about their 2024 plans.

While transparency has grown thanks in part to legislation, the manner in which organizations approached the subject varied, Payscale found. For example, nearly 70% of organizations said that they shared individual pay with employees only, and only when required to do so. Only 6% said individual pay was shared within departments, and even fewer shared this information organization-wide or publicly.

“While the prevalent method centers on sharing pay ranges only with affected employees, as pay transparency becomes more ubiquitous, it is important to think about the impact publishing ranges can have on employee retention — both positive and negative,” Payscale said. “Even more critical is the importance of empowering managers to have proactive conversations with employees about pay and the organization’s approach to it through pay communications.”

Sometimes the newfound availability of pay information can increase employee conversations about the subject — leading to sometimes awkward interactions between co-workers or between managers and their reports. But over time, familiarity with pay conversations will help normalize the topic and support discussions about pay and career progression, Payscale said.

When setting pay, 63% of respondents to Payscale said they use between two to four sources, with over one-third of organizations with more than 5,000 employees stating they used more than five sources.

Salary survey data from traditional publishers, HR-reported aggregate market data in compensation software and closed-network HR-reported data ranked highest on the list of data sources that respondents trusted most when setting pay policies. “Free or open online data” and salary data from job board postings were among the least trusted sources, according to Payscale, although they remain commonly used.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/pay-structures-change-to-suit-equity-transparency-needs/718228/

1 in 10 Managers “Sick Shame” Unwell Workers They Forced To Come into the Office

Bill Brewer — Fri, 19 Jan 2024 19:12:29 GMT

January 17, 2024

It’s been reported that ‘sick shaming,’ or the practice of pressuring workers to work while sick but then ridiculing them for appearing under the weather, is leading to increased sales of cold medication and even causing individuals to overmedicate.

In January, ResumeBuilder.com surveyed 1,000 managers to find out their thoughts on workers taking sick time off and if they are engaging in sick shaming.

Key findings:

24% of managers think workers who take sick days often lie or exaggerate their illness
One-third of managers often ask for medical documentation as proof of illness
20% encourage workers who are feeling ill to still come into the office
11% admit to sick shaming workers
27% of managers believe a culture that encourages sick employees to work is good for productivity

1 in 4 Managers Think Workers Often Abuse Sick Days

On average, 35% of managers say their direct reports ask for sick time off very often (10%) or often (25%), while 44% say occasionally, 21% say rarely, and less than 1% say never.

One in four managers often suspect that their reports are lying or exaggerating their condition, while 34% often ask for medical documentation as proof of illness for workers who request a sick day.

11% of Managers Admit to Sick Shaming

Our survey found that 20% of managers encourage workers to come into the office even when they are sick. Surprisingly, 45% of these managers (or 11% of the total sample) admit to then often shaming visibly sick workers who choose to come into the office.

Additionally, 27% of managers overall believe a culture that encourages sick employees to work is good for productivity.

“Having a culture where workers are asked to work or just expected to work when sick is bad for companies because it enforces the view that companies only see you as a number versus a human being,” says Resume Builder’s Resume and Career Strategist Julia Toothacre.

“It creates a culture that lacks empathy and ultimately doesn’t care for its employees’ health, well-being, or productivity. People who are sick are more likely to make mistakes and can be slower to comprehend. It doesn’t make sense to encourage sick people to work when they aren’t 100% ready to work.”

3 in 10 Managers Think Workers With Severe Colds Shouldn’t Take the Day Off

Only 20% of managers think workers should take a day off for a mild cold, while 38% say the employee should work from home, 20% say they should still go into the office, and 22% say they should take the day partially off but still answer emails or attend meetings.

For a severe cold, 70% of managers think workers should take the time off, 14% believe the employee should work from home, 5% think workers should still come into the office, and 11% think workers should take the day partially off.

“COVID-19 changed a lot about how we work and specifically how we work when we are sick,” says Toothacre.

“This survey shocked me because of what we went through with COVID. Why are we promoting having people in the office who can spread any kind of illness around? As a result of working from home, there is now an option for many people to take work home when they aren’t feeling well, but that doesn’t mean it should be recommended. Giving employees the option without any pressure would be the best course of action.”

65% Say More Clear Sick Policies Are Needed in the Workplace

Overall, 65% of managers say more clear sick leave policies are definitely (32%) or probably (33%) needed in their workplace.

We asked managers when they think it’s reasonable for workers to take sick days off, and many do not believe it’s always reasonable to take a day off for personal health, mental health, or family emergencies.

Stringent or unofficial sick policies will create an unsupportive environment for employees ultimately resulting in organizations losing talent,” says Toothacre. “Employees are people, and they want to be seen as such. They get sick, they have hard days, their family members get sick, and life happens. The average employee won’t take advantage of the system if they are in a supportive and flexible culture.”

Methodology

This survey was commissioned by ResumeBuilder.com and conducted online by the survey platform Pollfish. It was launched on Jan. 10, 2024, and 1,000 respondents completed the full survey.

To qualify for the survey, all participants had to work at a company with at least 11 employees and have an executive, director, and manager-level title. Respondents also had to have a household income of at least $50,00 and be at least 25 years old. Finally, respondents were screened out if they answered that they do not manage one or more direct reports.

To avoid bias, Pollfish employs Random Device Engagement (RDE) to ensure both random and organic surveying. Contact pr@resumebuilder.com for more information.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: ResumeBuilder.com

https://www.resumebuilder.com/1-in-10-managers-sick-shame-unwell-workers-they-forced-to-come-into-the-office/

Rising health insurance premiums linked to wage stagnation, study finds

Bill Brewer — Fri, 19 Jan 2024 19:09:40 GMT

Wed, January 17, 2024 by Emily Olsen

Dive Brief:

Families with employer-sponsored health insurance lost out on an average of more than $125,000 in earnings over the past 30 years as growing premiums cut into their wages, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open.
Premiums as a percentage of compensation were significantly higher for Hispanic and Black families over the more than 30-year study period compared with White families. Lower-income people were also more burdened by increasing health insurance costs.
Rising premiums are likely linked to lower earnings, increased income inequality and wage stagnation, researchers said.

Dive Insight:

Health insurance offered through employers represents the single largest source of coverage in the U.S.

But premiums often rise faster than inflation and wage growth, frustrating employers who are on the hook for a large portion of climbing costs and putting increased financial pressure on families.

Yet access to health coverage doesn’t negate affordability challenges either. Forty-three percent of people covered under employer-sponsored plans reported it was difficult to afford healthcare, according to a recent survey by the Commonwealth Fund.

Increasing premiums may also be restricting wage growth, especially for racial minorities and families who already earn less, according to the latest JAMA study, which analyzed compensation and employer-sponsored premium data from 1988 to 2019.

Though a similar number of people were enrolled in employer plans, premiums represented an average of 7.9% of compensation in 1988, compared with 17.7% in 2019.

If costs had stayed the same, the median family with employer coverage would have earned $8,774 more in annual wages in 2019.

That decrease in wages has “real consequences for US families,” as many struggle to afford unexpected expenses or have already racked up medical debt, researchers said.

But the financial burden from growing premiums doesn’t impact families equally. In 2019, premiums as a percentage of compensation at the 95th percentile of earnings was 3.9%, compared with 28.5% for families in the 20th percentile of earnings.

For White families, premiums represented 13.8% of compensation in 2019, compared with 19.2% among Black families and 19.8% for Hispanic families with employer-sponsored coverage.

“By receiving lower earnings historically, Black and Hispanic households shoulder a greater proportion of the increase in health care premiums as a percentage of their compensation, a trend that persisted throughout all 3 decades of our analysis,” researchers wrote.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Yahoo Finance

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rising-health-insurance-premiums-linked-110014364.html

Workers are (a little) more satisfied with compensation

Bill Brewer — Fri, 19 Jan 2024 19:04:52 GMT

Published Jan. 11, 2024 by Caroline Colvin

While Eagle Hill expects retention to decline in the first half of 2024, compensation continues to be a positive factor.

Workers are more likely to leave their jobs within the next six months, Eagle Hill Consulting researchers warned employers in a recent analysis of factors that play into retention. “Employers can expect increasing attrition” through mid-2024, they projected.

In their analysis, researchers factored in worker opinions on their level of compensation, their job market prospects, their current workplace culture and overall confidence in their organization. Throughout the past year, the firm’s retention index dropped between Q1 and Q4.

----- -----

BY THE NUMBERS: HOW PAY FACTORS INTO RETENTION

49% - The rate of workers who said they feel confident in their company’s future
50% - The rate of workers who said they feel connected to their organization’s culture
40% - The approximate rate of workers who feel they have better opportunities outside of their current company
37% - The rate of workers who believe they have a path to increase their compensation at their organization.

----- -----

While the results of this Eagle Hill Consulting report may not inspire confidence, one finding may provide hope: The rate of satisfaction with compensation was the only factor in the index that saw an increase.

Researchers suggested that “looming economic uncertainty” throughout 2023 may have “reframed” workers’ perceptions of their pay, resulting in more positive sentiments about their compensation.

The situational reframe is notable because raises have generally tapered off since first talks of an economic downturn in 2022. Recently, data suggested that almost half (40%) of workers had not seen an increase in compensation in the 12 months preceding. In that same BambooHR report, almost 75% of workers said they would leave their role for a higher salary.

Another study pointed to wage growth slowing, per employer reports. Bill Reilly, managing director of Pearl Meyer advising firm, characterized the worker compensation landscape as “certainly cooling off, consistent with declining overall inflation levels,” but “not gloomy.”

Financial well-being remains a focus for workers going into the new year — it’s one of the main projected 2024 workplace trends, along with debates over RTO, artificial intelligence and how best to address worker mental health.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/workers-are-a-little-more-satisfied-with-compensation/704103/

Job ads with wide pay ranges can deter applicants

Bill Brewer — Fri, 19 Jan 2024 18:59:34 GMT

January 3, 2024 by Sara Zaske, WSU News & Media Relations

PULLMAN, Wash. – As more states require employers to list compensation on job ads, a trending strategy to use very wide pay ranges could potentially harm recruitment, according to a Washington State University study.

The study, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, found that participants in three different experiments were more likely to respond negatively to job ads with very wide pay ranges, viewing those employers as less trustworthy. Prior surveys have found that most people report they would trust organizations that include pay ranges in their postings more than those that do not, but as this study indicates, the way potential pay is presented also matters.

“It’s not just a choice between including a pay range or not – how compensation information is communicated matters, and at least in this study, having a very wide range might send a negative signal to potential applicants,” said study author Kristine Kuhn, a WSU Carson College of Business researcher.

How the ad explained the wide pay range also had an effect. In one of the experiments, participants were even less attracted to the organization if a very wide pay range included a statement that the offer amount would depend on the candidate’s qualifications. On the other hand, a more seemingly objective explanation that the offer would depend on the candidate’s geographic location tended to improve impressions of the employer.

Historically, most job postings in the U.S. did not include numerical pay information, but in recent years several states, including Washington, California, Colorado and New York, have enacted transparency legislation requiring many recruiters to list pay ranges – in part because there is evidence it increases equity.

Seeing an emerging trend in job postings with large pay ranges, Kuhn set up three experiments with different groups of participants to test the effect of this practice. In each experiment, some participants saw ads with wide salary ranges, such as a gap of $50,000 or more between the low and high point, while others saw ads with a narrower gap of around $10,000. The candidates then responded to questions about their perceptions of the organization posting the ad.

Participants in the initial experiment were college students; the second experiment surveyed 350 college graduates using an online panel, and the third experiment involved 245 participants with recent job search experience. Across all three experiments, on average ads with larger pay ranges evoked less favorable impressions of the employers than the narrower ranges.

In the last experiment which had an ad with a very large pay range of $58,100-$152,500, the participants provided written answers about how they viewed the employer. This revealed a high level of cynicism among some who called the wide pay range “dishonest,” “disingenuous” and “ludicrous.”

As one participant put it: “The large range implies that they tend to devalue their employees. I doubt they would actually offer anyone applying for this position a salary at the top range, regardless of credentials.”

There were some outliers, however, who viewed the large range as a positive, seeing the high top number as showing possible “room for growth without needing a promotion to another job.”

Ideally, advertising a pay range should streamline the recruiting process, Kuhn said, so the recruiter and applicant on are on the same page. However, some organizations, especially smaller ones, may not have well-defined job structures, so the large pay ranges in job ads may indicate they want to tailor the position to the candidates who respond.

“There probably is a goldilocks area of a just right pay range where it gives the employer some flexibility without sending negative signals to prospective applicants,” said Kuhn. “Also, while from a legal standpoint they may be required to advertise an expected pay range, employers and job candidates can still negotiate.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Washington State University

https://news.wsu.edu/press-release/2024/01/03/job-ads-with-wide-pay-ranges-can-deter-applicants/

CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATE FOR 2024

Bill Brewer — Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:00:18 GMT

Date: 6 November 2023

US Labor, Employment, and Workplace Safety Alert

By: Saman Rejali, Gabriel M. Huey, Alison Hamer, Carter L. Norfleet, Neil A. Eddington, Lauren E. Elvick, Sabrina Fani

In the November edition of The Essentials, we outline key provisions of many of the new employment laws that will take effect in 2024.

GENERALLY APPLICABLE NEW LAWS

AB 1076 and SB 699: Sweeping Prohibition Against Employment-Related Noncompete Agreements

The California legislature continues to expand its prohibition against noncompete agreements through California Assembly Bill (AB) 1076 and California Senate Bill (SB) 699, which broaden California’s already significant restrictions on noncompete agreements or clauses.

AB 1076

Business and Professions Code Section 16600 voids noncompete agreements in California except in cases where narrow exceptions apply. AB 1076 amends Section 16600 to codify Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal. 4th 937 (2008), providing that the statutory provision is to be broadly construed to “void the application of any noncompete agreement in an employment context, or any noncompete clause in an employment contract, no matter how narrowly tailored, that does not satisfy an exception in this chapter.”

AB 1076 additionally creates Section 16600.1, making it unlawful to include a noncompete that does not satisfy an exception in an employment contract. This section also requires employers to notify current employees and former employees who were employed after 1 January 2022 and who entered into noncompete agreements that fail to satisfy an exception under the section that the clauses are void. The notice must be in writing and delivered by 14 February 2024 to the employee’s last known physical and email addresses. Employers who are required to and fail to provide such notice commit a violation of the Unfair Competition Law under section 17200.

SB 699

SB 699 creates a new section of the Business and Professions Code, 16600.5, which goes into effect on 1 January 2024 and substantially expands on Section 16600’s noncompete restriction in five key ways:

Noncompete agreements are unenforceable regardless of where they were signed or entered into, even if the prior employment occurred in another state and the contract was entered into outside of California.
Current or former employers are prohibited from attempting to enforce a noncompete agreement that is void under Section 16600, even where the agreement was signed and the employment took place outside of California.
Employers are prohibited from entering into a contract with a noncompete provision that does not satisfy an exception.
Any employer who enters into or attempts to enforce a void noncompete agreement in California commits a civil violation.
Current, former, and prospective employees can bring a private action seeking injunctive relief or actual damages for violations of Section 16600.5 and are entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs if they prevail.

The impact of SB 699 is extensive. The law purports to apply extraterritorially to hold unenforceable in California noncompete agreements that were validly entered into in other states. Under SB 699, if an employee and employer validly enter into a noncompete agreement in another state and the employee later obtains work in California in violation of that agreement, the employer cannot enforce the agreement. SB 699 is likely to face many challenges to its enforceability and its attempt to circumvent otherwise valid choice-of-law provisions. The statute, in its expansive scope, may also be inconsistent with the dormant commerce clause.

While the scope and enforceability of SB 699 will be litigated in the months and years to come, California employers should ensure compliance by carefully reviewing and updating employment agreements to remove noncompete clauses that may subject them to liability under the new laws. Employers outside of California should be mindful of these new laws before attempting to enforce noncompete agreements in California, even against employees whose previous work was in another state. Finally, employers should ensure that they comply with AB 1076 notice requirements by the 14 February 2024 date.

AB 636: Wage Theft Notice Amendments

California’s Wage Theft Prevention Act, Labor Code Section 2810.5, requires employers to provide new hires a notice containing information regarding their employment, wages, and sick leave.

AB 636 expands the notice requirement to include information regarding any federal or state emergency or disaster declarations that may affect employees’ health and safety. In addition, the notice for employees admitted pursuant to the federal H-2A agricultural visa must include detailed information regarding their rights and protections under California law. Certain exceptions apply.

The California Labor Commissioner will create a new notice template by 1 March 2024. Employers should work with their counsel to ensure their notices are legally compliant. Failure to provide legally compliant notices carries risk of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) penalties.

SB 616: Expanded Paid Sick Leave Law

California’s Healthy Workplace, Healthy Families Act of 2014 established statewide requirements relating to paid sick days and paid sick leave. Since that time, several cities have enacted their own local ordinances to provide employees with more than the state-mandated sick leave. Beginning 1 January 2024, SB 616 will expand California’s existing paid sick leave law in several ways, and will preempt local ordinances in certain respects, bringing more uniformity to the administration of sick leave in the state. Subject to limited exclusions:

Frontload Amount Increase

Employees are now entitled to five days or 40 hours of paid sick leave per year, up from three days or 24 hours, under the frontload method, and up to 10 days or 80 hours, up from six days or 48 hours, under the accrual method.

Accrual Availability Increase

Employers who use the accrual method must make three days or 24 hours of sick leave available to the employee by the 120th day of employment, and an additional two days or 16 hours available by the 200th calendar day of employment, for a total of five days or 40 hours.

Accrual Method Carry Over Increase

Employees under the accrual method may now carry over 10 days or 80 hours of accrued paid sick leave each year, rather than six days or 48 hours.

Use Cap Increase

Employees’ use of accrued paid sick leave may now be capped at 40 hours or five days’ paid sick leave, up from 24 hours or three days.

The new law preempts local ordinances with respect to paying out unused paid sick days upon termination (not required under SB 616), lending employees sick days in advance of accrual, written notice of the amount of paid sick leave available, the rate of pay for sick days, notice of the need for sick leave, and the timing of pay for sick leave taken.

California employers should take steps to ensure compliance by 1 January 2024 by determining whether the new law preempts any local paid sick leave provisions, reviewing their current paid sick leave policies and employee handbooks, and revising any necessary accrual processes.

SB 700: Prohibition Against Inquiring About Prior Marijuana Use

During the 2022 legislative session, the governor approved AB 2188, which prohibits most employers from discriminating or retaliating against applicants and employees for off-the-job cannabis use. SB 700 expands on AB 2188 by prohibiting employers from requesting information from an applicant about the applicant’s prior cannabis use or using related information obtained through a background check unless otherwise permitted by federal or state law.

AB 2188 and SB 700 both go into effect on 1 January 2024. California employers affected by AB 2188 and SB 700 should take steps to ensure compliance by (1) updating policies relating to drug testing, drug use, and background checks, (2) providing guidance to HR and recruiting, and (3) confirming with drug-testing vendors that they are using a test that can differentiate between THC, which indicates active impairment, and nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolite.

SB 497: 90-Day Rebuttable Presumption of Retaliation

SB 497 establishes a rebuttable presumption of retaliation if an employer takes an adverse action against an employee within 90 days of the employee engaging in certain protected activities, such as complaining about an equal pay violation or an employment practice that the employee reasonably believes is unlawful. Under California’s burden-shifting framework for retaliation claims, an employee bears the initial burden of establishing a prima-facie case of retaliation, which includes (1) engaging in a protected activity, (2) suffering from an adverse employment action, and (3) establishing a causal nexus between the protected activity and adverse employment action. Courts already consider the timing of the employer’s adverse action for purposes of evaluating whether the employee has established a causal nexus. The rebuttable presumption, however, makes it easier for employees to satisfy their initial burden when the adverse action occurs within 90 days of specified protected activities. Employers, however, can still defend against retaliation claims by articulating a legitimate, nonretaliatory reason for the employment action.

As part of their risk-mitigation strategy, employers should ensure their approach to performance management includes sufficient consideration of the timing of the proposed employment action and the employee’s protected activity, and should train managers accordingly.

SB 497 also allows employees who suffer from retaliation in violation of Labor Code Section 1102.5 to recover the $10,000 civil penalty directly.

SB 848 – Reproductive Loss Leave

Effective 1 January 2024, SB 848 creates a new type of protected leave for California employees who have experienced a reproductive loss event. While existing California law provides for bereavement leave for the death of a family member, it does not address reproductive loss. A reproductive loss event is broadly defined as a miscarriage, stillbirth, failed adoption, failed surrogacy, or an unsuccessful assisted reproduction technology procedure. If a covered employee would have become a parent of a child born absent the reproductive loss event, the employee may take leave under this law.

Up to five days of reproductive loss leave may be taken following a reproductive loss event. If an employee experiences more than one reproductive loss event within 12 months, the employee may take up to 20 days’ reproductive loss leave within the 12-month period. Leave must be taken within three months of the loss or other leave the employee takes immediately following the loss, and it need not be taken in consecutive days.

If the employer does not have an existing leave policy that applies, reproductive loss leave may be unpaid, except the employee may use vacation, personal leave, sick leave, or compensatory time off otherwise available.

Unlike when taking bereavement leave, employees do not need to provide documentation to support the need for reproductive loss leave. Employers are required to maintain confidentiality relating to any requests for reproductive loss leave.

Retaliation for requesting or taking reproductive loss leave is prohibited.

The law applies to private employers with five or more employees and public employers of any size; employees must have been employed for at least 30 days to be protected.

California employers should review their existing employee handbook and policies, determine whether reproductive loss pay will be paid pursuant to any existing leave policies, and train human resources and management on how to handle this new leave law.

California and Illinois are the first two states to grant reproductive loss leave for private employees, while several cities, including Boston, Pittsburgh, and Portland, have done the same for government employees. Other states will likely follow their example with similar legislation.

SB 553: Mandatory Workplace Violence-Prevention Programs

SB 553, which amends Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, aims to ensure workplace safety by imposing specific obligations on employers to implement a workplace violence-prevention plan. This legislation applies to all employers in the State of California, regardless of size or industry. Beginning on 1 July 2024, SB 553 requires employers to take specific measures to prevent and address incidents of workplace violence, including:

Mandatory Workplace Violence-Prevention Plan

Employers are now required to establish, implement, and maintain a workplace violence-prevention plan that assesses and mitigates the risk of violence at the workplace. This plan should be tailored to the specific circumstances of the employer’s operations and should identify the individuals responsible for implementing and maintaining the plan.

Employee Training

Employers must provide workplace violence-prevention training to all employees. This training should cover potential risks, de-escalation techniques, reporting, and emergency response procedures, among other required topics.

Incident Reporting and Response

The bill requires employers to establish procedures for employees to report incidents or threats of violence and prohibits retaliation against employees for making such reports. Employers are obligated to respond to workplace violence concerns in a timely manner.

Support for Victims

The legislation encourages employers to offer support to employees who have experienced workplace violence, which may include providing access to counseling or resources.

Recordkeeping

Employers must maintain records related to workplace violence incidents, prevention plans, and training programs to ensure compliance with the bill’s requirements.

Employers who fail to comply with SB 553 can be subject to a citations and civil penalties by the Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Employers should ensure that their workplace violence-prevention plan is up to date, regularly reviewed, and effectively communicated to all employees. It is essential to monitor the implementation of these new obligations and provide the necessary resources to support a safe and violence-free work environment. California employers are encouraged to seek legal counsel and workplace safety experts to assist in the development and implementation of their workplace violence-prevention plans to ensure compliance with SB 553.

SB 428: Harassment Restraining Orders

An employer’s ability to seek a restraining order on behalf of employees (including independent contractors and volunteers at the employer’s worksite) is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 527.8. Existing law authorizes employers to seek a restraining order under limited circumstances: if there is a credible threat of violence against an employee or the employee has already suffered from a violent act.

Effective 1 January 2025, SB 428 amends Code of Civil Procedure section 527.8 by authorizing employers to seek a restraining order on behalf of an employee suffering from “harassment,” which is defined as “a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose.” The conduct must have subjectively and objectively caused the employee to suffer from substantial emotional distress but need not constitute violence or a credible threat of violence.

Additionally, the standard differs from that under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), California’s primary employment-related antidiscrimination, harassment, and retaliation statute. Employers can seek a restraining order even if the harassment is not tied to a category protected by the FEHA (e.g., sex, race, age, etc.) and does not meet the “severe or pervasive” standard. SB 428 also protects the identity of affected employee(s) by requiring employers to provide them with an opportunity to decline to be named in the petition for restraining order before filing it on their behalf.

AB 594: State Prosecution for Labor Code Violations

AB 594 empowers city, district, and county attorneys to prosecute civil and criminal violations of the California Labor Code through 1 January 2029. The bill also provides that any individual agreement requiring a worker to arbitrate disputes with their employer, or that otherwise restricts representative actions, shall have no effect on the prosecutor’s authority to enforce the Labor Code. Money recovered in such actions will be distributed first to workers who are due payment, and any civil penalties would be paid to the state’s general fund.

The practical effect of this law is uncertain. California employers can already be held criminally liable for Labor Code violations, but criminal prosecutions against employers are rare. Moreover, it remains to be seen, given the myriad ways in which employers may already be prosecuted for unlawful wage-and-hour conduct (i.e., civil litigation, Labor & Workforce Development Agency investigations, Department of Labor prosecutions, PAGA lawsuits, etc.) how much time and resources public lawyers can and will divert from the prosecution of the criminal matters they already oversee. The arbitration provision in AB 594 will also likely be challenged on Federal Arbitration Act preemption grounds.

SB 365: Revocation of Automatic Stay Pending Appeal of Order Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration

SB 365 provides that, notwithstanding the general rule to stay proceedings pending an appeal, trial court proceedings will not be automatically stayed pending the appeal of an order dismissing or denying a motion to compel arbitration.

SB 365 arrives at a peculiar time, given that the United States Supreme Court recently issued a contradictory ruling in Coinbase v. Bielski. There, the United States Supreme Court held that appeals under Section 16 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) appealing an order denying arbitration automatically stay district court proceedings. SB 365 will likely be challenged as preempted by the FAA. While the FAA does not prohibit states from creating rules governing the procedure of arbitration in their state, SB 365 could still be viewed as having a chilling effect on arbitration. Until there is further clarity on the validity of SB 365, employers should review their arbitration agreements for language expressly invoking the FAA’s procedural rules, as arbitration agreements that are governed by the California Arbitration Act will be subject to SB 365.

INDUSTRY-SPECIFIC NEW LAWS

AB 1228: Fast Food Act Update

In 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 257 into law. AB 257 created a Fast Food Council within the Department of Industrial Relations. The council was provided with broad authority to impose sector-wide minimum standards on wages, working hours, and other work-related conditions concerning health, safety, and the overall welfare of fast food workers. Different industry groups in California opposed AB 257 and qualified to have AB 257 included in the 2024 ballot via referendum, which halted the enactment of AB 257.

Fast forward a year: California and industry groups were able to come to an alternative agreement regarding regulation in the fast food industry. AB 1228 was devised after a series of industry group meetings facilitated by Governor Newsom and goes into effect starting in 2024. The key provisions of AB 1228:

Establish a minimum wage of $20 per hour for most fast food employees effective 1 April 2024;
Authorize the Fast Food Council to establish annual increases to the minimum wage for fast food employees through the end of 2029;
Prohibit fast food restaurants from discriminating or retaliating against employees who participate in a proceeding before the Fast Food Council; and
Place limitations on the Fast Food Council’s broad authority by precluding it from creating new paid time off benefits and regulations regarding predictable scheduling, and by requiring standards, results, and regulations developed by the Fast Food Council to go through the rulemaking process set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act.

AB 1228 will have far-reaching implications for California’s fast food industry employers. The statewide minimum wage is set to increase to $16, which is $4 less than the $20 fast food minimum wage. Employers outside of the fast food industry may find it difficult to retain minimum-wage workers who will earn 25% more if they work for a fast food employer. Employers looking to compete for and retain minimum-wage employees by raising their hourly pay above the statewide minimum wage will face increased operational costs.

SB 525: US$25 per Hour Minimum Wage for Covered Health Care Workers

SB 525 establishes a statewide US$25 minimum wage for covered health care employees, including physicians, nurses, and even some janitors and laundry workers. The health care worker minimum wage will replace the current state minimum wage of US$15.50 per hour. The pay increase to US$25 per hour is incremental and depends on the nature of the employer. For example, the minimum wage will increase to US$25 per hour in 2026 for larger health facilities, whereas it will increase to US$25 per hour in 2028 for licensed skilled nursing facilities. SB 525 also mandates that exempt, salaried employees must be paid no less than 150% of the health care worker minimum wage. The bill does not affect health care employees who are outside salespersons. Notably, SB 525 prohibits any ordinance, regulation, or administrative action related to wages or compensation for covered health care employees. Employers in the health care sector, such as hospitals, clinics, and urgent care centers, should consult counsel to determine when, and at what rate, the minimum wage increases for its covered employees.

SB 723: COVID-19 Right of Recall Extended for Covered Hospitality and Business Services Employees

California Labor Code Section 2810.8 requires covered employers in the hospitality and business services industry (including, but not limited to, hotels, event centers, and employers that provide maintenance services) to make written job offers for positions that become available to qualified employees who (1) worked for the employer for six months or more in the 12 months preceding 1 January 2020 and (2) were laid off “due to a reason related to the COVID-19 pandemic.” Such employers are also prohibited from retaliating or taking adverse action against a laid-off employee for seeking to enforce their rights under these provisions. Section 2810.8 was originally set to expire on 31 December 2024.

SB 723 broadens the pool of covered employees to whom employers must offer recall rights. Covered employees are redefined as (1) any employee who was employed by the employer for six months or more, (2) whose most recent separation from active employment by the employer occurred on or after 4 March 2020, and (3) whose separation was due to a reason related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

SB 723 creates a presumption that a separation due to a lack of business, reduction in force, or other economic, nondisciplinary reason is related to the COVID-19 pandemic unless the employer establishes otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence. Additionally, SB 723 extends the 31 December 2024 repeal date to 31 December 2025.

Covered hospitality and business services employers should keep careful records of any laid-off employees to ensure that they are able to properly identify any employees entitled to recall as they open new positions.

AB 647: Expanded Protections for Grocery Workers

Under existing law, an incumbent grocery employer that transfers a qualifying large retail store to another grocery employer is required to provide the successor with a preferential hiring list of eligible workers within 15 days after the change in control document (e.g., purchase agreement) is executed, and the successor is required to hire from that list for up to 90 days after the store opens and retain them for at least 90 days unless the successor has cause to discharge the worker. Grocery employers are not required to comply for transfers of retail stores that have ceased operations for at least six months.

AB 647 amends existing Labor Code sections and adds new ones that expand protections afforded to grocery workers in eight key ways:

Requiring grocery employers to comply with preferential hiring rules when transferring qualifying distribution centers;
Narrowing the exclusion to retail stores that have ceased operations for at least 12 months;
Expanding the required information in the preferential hiring list to include known cellphone and email addresses for each eligible worker;
Requiring incumbent grocery employers to provide the preferential hiring list to collective bargaining representatives, if any, and authorizing the successor to obtain the information from the collective bargaining representative;
Prohibiting employers from retaliating against an employee for attempting to enforce these rights or opposing prohibited practices;
Requiring any collective bargaining agreement superseding these requirements to clearly and unambiguously state that these protections are superseded by the collective bargaining agreement;
Providing employees with a private right of action to enforce these rights and permitting prevailing employees to obtain injunctive relief (hiring or reinstatement) and recover civil penalties, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs; and
Authorizing the labor commissioner to issue citations and recover on behalf of employees.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: K&L Gates

https://www.klgates.com/The-EssentialsCalifornia-Employment-Law-Update-For-2024-11-6-2023

California Establishes New Leave for Reproductive Loss

Bill Brewer — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:59:24 GMT

By Rick Reyes, Joy C. Rosenquist, and Adam Fiss © Littler

October 13, 2023

On Oct. 11, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law allowing for up to five days of time off work for reproductive-related losses.

Senate Bill 848 makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to refuse to grant an eligible employee's request to take up to five days of unpaid leave following a reproductive loss event.

Previously, California law required employers to provide bereavement leave upon the death of an employee's family member. Reproductive-related losses, however, largely remained unaddressed. Such losses are a common occurrence with more than 1 in 4 pregnancies resulting in miscarriage, and they may result in post-traumatic stress disorder (with almost 1 in 3 women developing pos-traumatic stress disorder after a miscarriage).

What Does this New Leave Require?

SB 848 acts as a subset of California's bereavement leave law and increases an employee's leave entitlements for a reproductive loss event, which is defined as "the day or, for a multiple-day event, the final day of a failed adoption, failed surrogacy, miscarriage, stillbirth, or an unsuccessful assisted reproduction." Covered employers must provide up to five days of leave for reproductive loss events.

The law limits the amount of reproductive loss leave to a maximum of 20 days within a 12-month period. Thus, although an employee may be subject to multiple reproductive loss events in a 12-month period, an employer is not required to provide more than 20 days of reproductive loss leave.

Like many other California leave laws, SB 848 prohibits employers from retaliating against any employee for requesting or taking leave for a reproductive loss.

California employers with five or more employees are covered under the law. Only employees who have worked for the employer for at least 30 days are eligible for reproductive loss leave.

Subject to narrow exceptions when an employee takes applicable leave under state or federal law, eligible employees must take the leave within three months of the event triggering the leave (i.e., reproductive loss events), but need not be taken on consecutive days.

Leave under the statute is unpaid, unless the employer has an existing policy requiring paid leave. Eligible employees may choose to use any accrued and available paid sick leave or other paid time off for reproductive loss leave.

SB 848 does not contain any provision permitting employers to request any documentation in connection with reproductive loss leave.

In light of this new leave entitlement, steps that a California employer may wish to take include:

Updating their employee handbooks and/or leave policies to incorporate this new leave entitlement.
Training management, supervisors, and HR on this new leave law.
Determining whether reproductive loss leave will be paid pursuant to any existing employer-provided leaves or policies.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: SHRM

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/california-reproductive-loss-leave.aspx

GE to pay $61M to settle 401(k) fund mismanagement allegations

Bill Brewer — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:52:19 GMT

The payout represents the “largest ever in an ERISA case alleging a retirement plan improperly offered proprietary funds,” according to the plaintiffs.

Published Oct. 13, 2023 by Ryan Golden

Dive Brief:

General Electric will pay $61 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by participants and beneficiaries of its 401(k) retirement plan, according to court documents filed Oct. 6.
The settlement concludes nearly six years of litigation stemming from a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in 2017. The plaintiffs alleged GE breached its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by limiting actively managed funds available to participants to a group of five funds that were managed by a wholly owned subsidiary of GE.
The funds at the center of the suit also “substantially underperformed” other comparable investment options, and GE refused to consider replacing the funds or their managers, the plaintiffs alleged. Per the settlement terms, GE denied all claims and allegations of wrongdoing.

Dive Insight:

In their motion for approval of the settlement, the plaintiffs claimed that the $61 million payout represents the “largest ever in an ERISA case alleging a retirement plan improperly offered proprietary funds.” Additionally, a plaintiffs’ damages expert calculated the reasonable recoverable damages in the range of $283 million, the plaintiffs said.

The settlement total nonetheless represents approximately 21.5% of the figure cited by the plaintiffs, “which is at the higher end of settlement recoveries approved in other ERISA class action settlements,” according to the motion.

ERISA requires persons or entities who exercise discretionary control or authority over retirement plan management or assets to uphold fiduciary responsibilities. Such responsibilities include running the plan solely in the interest of participants and fiduciaries and diversifying plan investments in order minimize risk, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

Recent years have seen retirement plan litigation settled for similarly high dollar amounts. In July, DOL announced that one investment management firm would pay upwards of $124 million to settle allegations that it mismanaged an employer’s 401(k) plan through a “self-proclaimed strategy of non-diversification,” resulting in losses for more than 9,000 participants.

In 2022, the agency settled with Wells Fargo, which agreed to pay $145 million over claims the bank overpaid for preferred stock. That same year, DOL sued the owner of a New Jersey-based design firm for allegedly using plan assets to invest in a bank owned by the owner’s spouse. The defendants in that case entered a consent order with DOL in which they agreed to pay more than $1.8 million to plan participants.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/general-electric-401k-settlement-fiduciary-class-action/696607/

Premiums rose 7% for employer-sponsored health coverage in 2023

Bill Brewer — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:38:50 GMT

The average premium was nearly $8,500 for single coverage and nearly $24,000 for family coverage this year, according to the study published in Health Affairs.

Published Oct. 18, 2023 by Emily Olsen

Dive Brief:

The average annual premium for both employer-sponsored single and family health insurance coverage rose 7% in 2023, faster than last year but consistent with inflation and wage growth, according to a survey conducted by KFF and published in Health Affairs.
The average premium was $8,435 for single coverage and $23,968 for family coverage this year. On average, workers contributed 17% of the premium for single coverage and 29% of the premium for family coverage.
Many employers surveyed raised concerns about their workers’ views of health plan performance. Fifty-eight percent said their employees had a high or moderate level of concern about the affordability of cost sharing. About half said their workers had a high or moderate level of concern about their ability to schedule timely appointments or the complexity of prior authorization requirements.

Dive Insight:

Employer-sponsored insurance is the largest source of health coverage in the country, covering almost 153 million nonelderly people this year, according to the survey.

Providing insurance is also increasingly pricey for employers, and many are disappointed with their plans when assessing their ability to provide high-quality care, according to a report from the Leapfrog Group published earlier this year.

The KFF survey on employer health benefits, which is conducted annually, noted that premiums have historically risen faster than inflation and wages, with the average family premium growing 47% over the past decade while inflation grew 30% and wages grew 42%.

However, during the past five years, these metrics have seen similar cumulative increases.

“This is in part due to the decline in use of health services during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the end of a prolonged period of very low inflation,” the study’s authors wrote. “There is no way to know whether this is a transient trend or a new pattern in the costs of care.”

People with employer-sponsored coverage generally have to pay for some portion of their care out of pocket. Ninety percent of workers were enrolled in a plan with a general annual deductible for single coverage this year, according to the survey. Nearly two-thirds of them had a deductible of $1,000 or more, while 31% were enrolled in a plan with a deductible of $2,000 or more.

Eighty-three percent of employees faced some type of cost sharing for inpatient hospital services, while 68% had a copayment and 19% had a coinsurance payment when visiting a primary care doctor this year.

Despite the increased premiums, employers report some challenges with their provider networks.

Though most said their largest plan had enough primary care providers to offer timely access to care for their workers, firms weren’t as satisfied with access to mental healthcare or substance use services. Only 68% of small companies, with three to 199 workers, and 59% of large firms, with 200 or more employees, felt there was a sufficient number of mental healthcare providers.

Coverage for abortion care, facing upheaval in the wake of the Dobbs decision, is still up in the air for many firms. Among large employers, 32% said legally provided abortions are covered in most or all circumstances, 18% said they’re covered only under limited circumstances and 40% responded “don’t know.”

“The fairly large share of respondents (40 percent) who answered ‘don’t know’ to the abortion coverage question may reflect the complexity and fluidity of the issue as states continue to consider and pass abortion legislation and state courts continue to consider legal challenges seeking to block these abortion restrictions,” the study’s authors wrote.

Some companies have added travel benefits for workers who can’t access abortion services where they live. Seven percent of large companies either provided or planned to provide financial assistance for abortion travel expenses, while 19% of firms with 5,000 or more workers reported these benefits.

Telehealth care, which experienced its own disruption as utilization increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, still remains a part of employer-sponsored coverage. Nearly all employers offered health benefits that covered services provided via telehealth in their largest health plan this year.

Forty-one percent of firms with 50 or more workers said they believed telemedicine would have a “very important” role when it came to delivering behavioral healthcare going forward, compared with 27% for primary care and 16% for specialty care.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/premiums-rise-7-percent-employer-sponsored-health-insurance-kff-health-affairs/697057/

US companies to increase levels of pay communication

Bill Brewer — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:36:16 GMT

October 12, 2023

Still, many struggle to educate their managers and employees effectively on pay and pay equity

ARLINGTON, VA, October 12, 2023 – A majority of U.S. organizations are communicating pay information to their employees, according to a new survey by leading global advisory, broking and solutions company WTW (NASDAQ: WTW). The 2023 Pay Transparency Survey found that increasing regulatory requirements are encouraging organizations to communicate their organization’s broader pay policy. However, barriers to pay transparency remain as employers fear increasing questions and are concerned about their effectiveness in educating their workforce on this complex topic.

“
Many U.S. organizations are providing more visibility into their pay programs and practices.”

Mariann Madden | North America Fair Pay co-lead, WTW

The survey found most U.S. organizations are communicating different components of their pay program information to employees. Six in 10 are disclosing job levels to their employees, and almost half (48%) are communicating how individual base pay is determined and progresses. Over one-third of companies (36%) are disclosing individual pay ranges to employees, but an even larger number (46%) are planning or considering doing so in the future.

Regulatory requirements are the most commonly cited (81%) factor for encouraging greater levels of pay program communication. Other commonly cited factors include company values and culture (55%) and employee expectations (54%), followed closely by an environmental, social and governance and diversity, equity and inclusion agenda (53%).

“Many U.S. organizations are providing more visibility into their pay programs and practices,” said Mariann Madden, North America Fair Pay co-lead, WTW. “Boards of directors are taking ownership for pay equity and pay transparency and are looking for organizations to define, monitor and report on their commitments and priorities. Pay equity and transparency are closely linked. It will be very difficult to have confidence in one without the other in place.”

WTW’s survey found 38% of U.S. employers are communicating or planning to communicate publicly a pay equity commitment. A smaller number have communicated their pay transparency commitment; however, 44% of companies are planning or considering what they will share.

While these mandates are still only enacted in less than 10 states, regulatory requirements are driving more employers to communicate pay information. For prospective employees, nearly two in five respondents are communicating or planning to communicate pay rate or pay range information regardless of requirements. Of the 91% of companies communicating or planning to communicate pay ranges, 65% are disclosing a hiring rate/range for the job. A majority of organizations are using a consistent approach to what is shared and what pay range/rate is disclosed.

Half (50%) of employers believe communicating pay rates or ranges will increase questions from current employees. Manager effectiveness concerns are also top of mind for employers (47%). Indeed, although managers are the most common channel for communicating pay program information (84%), only 38% of organizations report being effective at educating managers about this complex topic.

“We are at a tipping point with pay transparency,” said Lindsay Wiggins, North America Fair Pay co-lead, WTW. “Organizations need to get their house in order by developing and actively managing foundational job architecture and leveling frameworks and conducting equal pay, pay gap and pay driver analyses to uncover and address areas of risk. Understanding their current state will support businesses in their efforts toward addressing the various legislative requirements but also in providing greater transparency into their talent and rewards programs and practices.”

About the survey

WTW’s 2023 Pay Transparency Survey was conducted in July 2023. In the U.S., a total of 448 respondents completed the survey. Globally, a total of 1,313 respondents completed the survey.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW

https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/10/us-companies-to-increase-levels-of-pay-communication

U.S. court upholds Nasdaq board diversity rule

Bill Brewer — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:07:54 GMT

October 18, 2023 — 03:08 pm EDT

Written by Jody Godoy for Reuters ->

By Jody Godoy

Oct 18 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court upheld Nasdaq's board diversity rule on Wednesday, requiring companies listed on the exchange to have women and minority directors on their boards or explain why they do not.

National Center for Public Policy Research and the Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment, a group formed by conservative legal activist Edward Blum, had asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to block the rule.

The groups sued the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which approved the rule in August 2021.

The rule requires companies to have one director who identifies as female, a member of an underrepresented racial or ethnic minority, or LGBTQ+ by the end of this year or explain why they do not. Companies would generally need two diverse directors to satisfy the rule by 2026.

Companies also have to disclose annually how board members identify in those categories, although the individuals can decline to answer.

The groups said the rule violates the U.S. Constitution's prohibition of discriminatory laws and restraints on free speech. They argued that those restrictions on government extend to Nasdaq because the SEC could penalize the exchange if it does not enforce the rule.

The SEC and Nasdaq argued that the exchange is a private entity not bound by restrictions on government. They said the rule is not a quota but a disclosure requirement that provides standardized information on board diversity.

Several Republican state attorneys general had weighed in against the rule, while institutional investors and a coalition of Nasdaq-listed companies, among others, filed briefs in support.

The case is Alliance For Fair Board Recruitment v. SEC, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 21-60626.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Nasdaq.com

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/u.s.-court-upholds-nasdaq-board-diversity-rule

More Than Half of Professionals Did NOT Negotiate Salary for Most Recent Job

Bill Brewer — Tue, 03 Oct 2023 16:35:14 GMT

Salary negotiation is one of the most common topics professionals seek content on, but it’s still hard to get a macro understanding of who’s negotiating and who isn’t. Professionals in the Glassdoor community are weighing in on if they negotiated their salary for their most recent job and the data may surprise you. More than 6,500 professionals weighed in and more than half of them (54%) did not negotiate their most recent salary.

How does that break down by industry? Salary negotiation is most common among advertising, marketing, and tech professionals—with 67%, 62%, and 56% of them negotiating their most recent salary, respectively. Which industries had the least negotiation? Just 22% of graduate students and 37% of accounting and law professionals negotiated their most recent salary.

What about age? 56% of professionals between the ages of 36-40 negotiated their most recent salary, while 55% of those aged 41-44 and 50% of those aged between 30-35 did the same. Younger professionals are less likely to negotiate pay, with just 27% of those aged 21-25 and 44% of those between 26-29 negotiating their most recent salary.

And gender? Men and women are equally as likely to negotiate, with 46% of men and women having negotiated their most recent salary.

Methodology: This poll ran from August 9, 2023 through August 14, 2023 and was answered by 6,673 professionals on Fishbowl by Glassdoor. Respondents could answer with either “Yes” or “No” to the question, “For your most recent job, did you negotiate your salary?”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Glassdoor

https://www.glassdoor.com/research/conversation-starter-more-than-half-of-professionals-did-not-negotiate-salary-for-most-recent-job

US employers plan more modest compensation increases in 2024

Bill Brewer — Tue, 03 Oct 2023 16:31:27 GMT

September 25, 2023 09:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Today, Mercer, a global leader in redefining the world of work, reshaping retirement and investment outcomes, and unlocking real health and well-being, and a business of Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC), released the results of its August 2023 Mercer QuickPulse™ US Compensation Planning Survey. According to the survey, employers in the US plan to raise their compensation budgets by 3.5% for merit increases for 2024 and 3.9% for their total salary increase budgets for non-unionized employees. This compares to actual merit increases of 3.8% and 4.1% for total salary increase budgets for non-unionized employees in 2023.i

“While preliminary compensation budgets for 2024 are showing a slight decline, they remain well above pre-pandemic levels, reflecting the ongoing tightness of the labor market and low levels of unemployment. However, if the labor market continues to stabilize and inflation cools further as we move towards the end of the year, compensation pressures are likely to continue to decline. This could prompt further reductions in 2024 compensation increase budgets, as employers adjust their strategies to reflect the changing economic landscape,” said Lauren Mason, Senior Principal, Career, Mercer.

Across industries, Healthcare Services are projecting 2024 budgets that lag other industries, with merit budgets of 3.1% and total increase budgets of 3.4%, as the industry continues to recover from the financial impact of the pandemic. Recent layoffs and financial strain on the high-tech industry also appear to be impacting merit budgets, with projected increases of 3.3%, a reversal of historical trends where high-tech typically led increases across industries. Several industries, including Energy and Consumer Goods, are planning merit budgets above the national average, projecting an increase of 3.7%.

The survey also found that employers are planning to promote less (8.7% of the employee population) and therefore will allocate less of their budget (1.1%) to promotional increases in 2024. In 2023, employers reported that they promoted 10.3% of their population, allocating 1.2% of their salary budget to do so.

Looking back at actual compensation increases over the last year, employer base salary levels increased 5.6%ii on average, despite 2023 merit increase budgets of 3.8%. This is a result of off-cycle pay increases which 59% of employers reported providing in 2023. The top reasons cited for off-cycle increases were to address retention concerns, counteroffers, market adjustments, and internal equity.

Ms. Mason continued, “As employers plan for 2024, it is crucial that they move away from the reactive approach of the past few years and adopt a more strategic approach. This will enable employers to focus their compensation investments on the most critical attraction and retention segments of their workforce, while also ensuring that pay increases are distributed fairly and equitably.”

Note to editors:

Total increase budgets include other base pay increases such as promotional pay increases and cost of living adjustments, in addition to merit increases.

About Mercer’s US Compensation Planning Survey

The August 2023 Mercer QuickPulse™ US Compensation Planning Survey includes data from more than 900 organizations in the US, from small employee bases (less than 500 employees) to very large employee bases (over 20,000 employees) across 15 industries. This study was fielded between July 31st - August 11th. You can review more of the survey findings here.

About Mercer

Mercer believes in building brighter futures by redefining the world of work, reshaping retirement and investment outcomes, and unlocking real health and well-being. Mercer’s approximately 25,000 employees are based in 43 countries and the firm operates in 130 countries. Mercer is a business of Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC), the world’s leading professional services firm in the areas of risk, strategy and people, with more than 85,000 colleagues and annual revenue of over $20 billion. Through its market-leading businesses including Marsh, Guy Carpenter and Oliver Wyman, Marsh McLennan helps clients navigate an increasingly dynamic and complex environment. For more information, visit mercer.com. Follow Mercer on LinkedIn and Twitter.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Mercer

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230925303517/en/US-employers-plan-more-modest-compensation-increases-in-2024

U.S. salary increase budgets hit 20-year high

Bill Brewer — Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:16:22 GMT

By Dawn Kawamoto - September 7, 2023

U.S. employers made bold moves this year on compensation, pushing salary increase budgets to a 20-year high, despite fears of resurgent inflation and recession, according to a WorldatWork survey released this week. But the momentum is expected to slow by next year.

Increases to salary budgets rose to 4.4% on average this year, slightly higher than earlier projections of 4.1%, and also marking the highest level since the 2001 peak of 4.5%, according to the survey of more than 2,000 U.S. employers. Last year, salary increase budgets stood at 4.1%.

A tight labor market and cautious economic optimism contributed to the increase, Liz Supinski, director of research and insights at WorldatWork, tells HRE.

“While there are still many concerns about recession, there is significant speculation among economists that we might achieve a soft landing,” Supinski says. “A number of economists are now speculating that we might see a novel kind of recession that is not accompanied by the large-scale job loss that we’ve seen in past recessions.”

But despite higher-than-expected salary increase budgets this year and more optimistic outlooks on the economy, budgets are expected to slightly drop next year, to 4.1%, according to the survey.

Supinski characterizes the shift as a migration back to what was seen as “normal”: 3%-3.5% salary increases that largely prevailed for most of the last 20 years, until 2022.

The forecasted 2024 decline, she adds, may also be the result of an easing of the intensity of the labor market pressures as the impact of economic policy decisions filters out.

This year, salary hikes were more impacted by labor market pressures than recessionary fears, though the increases were still moderate, she notes.

HR can address those labor market pressures by looking beyond base salaries.

“Variable pay continues to play an important role in compensation and allows organizations greater flexibility in responding to business and economic conditions than do base salary increases,” Supinski says. “So, [this] will continue to be a focus for many employers.”

Notable salary increase budgets around the world

WorldatWork’s report found higher-than-anticipated salary boosts around the world this year. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the average salary increase rose 4.5% compared with a projected 3.9%, according to the survey.

One country posting consistent growth in salary increase budgets was Mexico. In 2021, the average rose to 4.7%, then 5.7% the following year and last year jumped to 6.3%.

India, meanwhile, garnered the largest increase of the 18 countries where employers were surveyed. The average salary increase in India was a hefty 9.8% this year, bringing it closer to the pre-pandemic level of 9.9%. Last year, however, employers there doled out salary increases that averaged 10.1%.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., all states are expected to experience a decline in 2024, which is anticipated to range from a 0.1% drop in salary increase budgets in Arizona and California to a 0.4% fall in Alaska and North Dakota.

Layoffs may be even lower in 2024

In addition to salaries rising across the globe this year, employers are scaling back on layoffs, according to the WorldatWork survey.

This year, 70% of employers worldwide reported no layoffs and a whopping 91% expect the same for 2024, states WorldatWork in its report.

And in the U.S., 61% of employers report no layoffs this year and 87% have similar expectations for next year.

Despite that, Supinski cautions HR not to read too much into the numbers.

“It was a broad, exploratory question, intended mostly as a screener to identify what portion of organizations were repurposing savings from layoffs for salary budget increases,” she notes.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/u-s-salary-increase-budgets-hit-20-year-high/?oly_enc_id=1127F6638590B7V

BofA Report Finds Average 401(k) Balances Up Nearly 10% in 2023; More Participants Taking Hardship Withdrawals

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Aug 2023 16:06:34 GMT

Newly Expanded Participant Pulse Report Also Finds Health Savings Account Balances Up Nearly 12% This Year

August 8, 2023 at 8:00 AM Eastern

CHARLOTTE, NC – Today, Bank of America released its Q2 2023 Participant Pulse (PDF)(MAP5773977), which found average 401(k) balances increased by $7,250 (9.6%) since the end of 2022.1 The report also found that a growing number of 401(k) participants are initiating withdrawals from their plans. The number of participants taking hardship distributions increased 36% year-over-year,1 following increases in Q12 this year. In addition, the percent of participants borrowing from their workplace plan in Q2 also increased (2.5%, up from 1.9% in Q1).1

The Pulse monitors plan participants’ behavior in Bank of America recordkeeping clients’ employee benefits programs, which is comprised of more than 4 million participants as of June 30, 2023.

“The data from our report tells two stories – one of balance growth, optimism from younger employees and maintaining contributions, contrasted with a trend of increased plan withdrawals,” said Lorna Sabbia, Head of Retirement and Personal Wealth Solutions at Bank of America. “This year, more employees are understandably prioritizing short-term expenses over long-term saving. However, it’s critical that employees continue to invest in life’s biggest expense – retirement.”

Amid rising 401(k) plan withdrawals, employee contributions remained steady, with the average rate remaining at 6.5% throughout the first half of 2023.1 Meanwhile, more participants increased their rate than decreased their rate (10.2% vs. 2.2%) in Q2,1 which was led by Gen Z3 and Millennial3 employees (19.3% vs. 2.6% and 11% vs. 2.6%, respectively).

Health Saving Account and Financial Wellness Trends

To provide a more holistic look at confidence around financial preparedness, Bank of America has expanded the quarterly Participant Pulse report series to examine engagement across Health Saving Accounts (HSA)4 and overall feelings of financial wellness, in addition to 401(k) trends. Key HSA and financial wellness findings include:

HSA account balances increased by 11.9% over year-end 2022. Average HSA account balances increased from $3,931 to $4,397 in the first six months of 2023.4
Many HSA account holders continue to save their contributions for future expenses. Nearly 4 in 10 account holders contributed more than they withdrew in Q2, consistent with year-end 2022.4
Baby Boomers invested their HSAs at higher rates than other generations. On average, only 12% of account holders invested their HSAs for future growth in Q2, with Baby Boomers3 leading at 15%. In addition, more men invested than women (18% vs. 11%).4
Feelings of financial wellness declined slightly. Out of a possible 100 points, the average financial wellness score for employees was 56, down one point from 57 at year-end, with women trailing men (52 vs. 59).1

Read the full report and methodology (PDF) to learn more.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Bank of America

https://newsroom.bankofamerica.com/content/newsroom/press-releases/2023/08/bofa-report-finds-average-401-k--balances-up-nearly-10--in-2023-.html

CEOs plan to raise wages at least 3%, Conference Board says

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Aug 2023 16:00:52 GMT

U.S. companies across a range of industries seek to gain an edge in an unusually tight labor market by increasing pay.

Published Aug. 15, 2023 by Jim Tyson, Senior Reporter

Dive Brief:

Roughly three out of every four CEOs (74%) plan to boost wages by at least 3% during the next year, with most top executives identifying wage growth as the sharpest spur to inflation during the coming 18 months, according to a quarterly survey by the Conference Board and Business Council.
“Attracting qualified workers remained difficult for the majority of companies,” Conference Board Chief Economist Dana Peterson said in a statement.
“The competition for talent is fierce,” she said, noting that two out of five CEOs “are maintaining the size of their workforce — a sign of labor hoarding in an extremely tight labor market.” The two-week survey of 127 CEOs concluded July 24.

Dive Insight:

U.S. companies for months have faced challenges hiring and retaining workers, with unemployment falling last month to 3.5% from 3.6% in June and available jobs far exceeding the number of workers seeking employment, according to the Labor Department.

Aiming to attract and retain workers, companies increased hourly wages after inflation by 0.3% last month in the fifth consecutive month of pay hikes. Yet demands for higher pay persist — inflation-adjusted hourly earnings have risen only 1.1% during the past 12 months amid the worst inflation in 40 years.

“There’s still a lot of pressure upwards” on wages, HireQuest CEO Richard Hermanns said during a second quarter earnings call on Thursday, noting “a constant shortage” of workers.

“I was flying through Minneapolis the other day, and you’ve got a restaurant in the middle of the airport closed until two o’clock because they didn’t have enough people,” Hermanns said. HireQuest provides temporary staff services.

CEOs at a broad range of industries — from financial institutions, to cinemas, to transportation firms — are using layoffs, technology and other streamlining to cope with rising labor costs, several top executives said during recent Q2 earnings calls.

UPS reduced compensation and benefits by $205 million during the second quarter by trimming management staff by 2,500 year-over-year, CFO Brian Newman said in an earnings call on Tuesday. The cuts helped blunt a 6.5% increase in average union wage rates during recent labor negotiations, he said.

“One thing that was very important for Teamsters leadership was to front-load some of the wage inflation,” UPS CEO Carol Tomé said. “We agreed to do that, so that does put a little pressure on the margin.”

“We’ll have a bit of pressure for the next year — June to August of next year — but then inflation is very manageable,” Tomé said.

TFI International, a transportation company, recently agreed to a 3% average annual salary increase for five years after cutting its year-over-year shipping costs by 15% compared with last year, CEO Alain Bédard said during a quarterly earnings call on Aug. 1.

ARKO, a convenience store operator, faced a 6.5% rise in personnel costs during Q2 compared with the same period last year, CFO Donald Bassell said during an earnings call on Tuesday.

“We, like others in the industry, have faced wage inflation,” Bassell said. “Our overtime has decreased a tremendous amount and that goes towards, I think, quality of life that we’re getting with people and also getting temp services.”

Still, “the biggest unknown is going to be labor,” he said.

Cinemark Holdings, an operator of cinemas, faced a 12% surge in global salaries and wages during the quarter, on a year-over-year basis, CFO Melissa Hayes Thomas said during an Aug. 4 earnings call. Yet such costs fell 1.6% as a proportion of revenues thanks to higher attendance and streamlining.

“We are still seeing some wage rate pressure,” she said, pointing to higher minimum wage requirements in some states rather than a “labor market dynamic.”

The increase in pay and retirement savings at many companies has buoyed performance at Principal Financial Group, a provider of insurance and manager of retirement assets.

“We are uniquely positioned, that when inflation plays through, especially when it plays through on salary levels, we do get benefits,” Principal CFO Deanna Strable said during a July 28 earnings call. “That plays through from a revenue perspective.”

Yet Principal is also buffeted by labor market headwinds. “We have had to increase salaries because of that inflationary pressure and war for talent,” Strable said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/ceos-plan-raise-wages-3-percent-conference-board-inflation-labor-pay/690889/

Google to pay $8.4 million in overtime settlement

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Aug 2023 15:57:04 GMT

The employer allegedly calculated the rate of overtime pay incorrectly for nonexempt workers, thereby shorting staff of wages, per court documents.

Published Aug. 10, 2023 by Caroline Colvin, Reporter

A federal judge on Tuesday signed off on a $8,369,000 settlement agreement between Google LLC and 6,517 workers, resolving an overtime compensation lawsuit.

The class action suit, originally filed in 2021, concerned violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, along with California state law. The two groups in the suit are the California class and the FLSA collective, including workers in and out of the state.

The California class includes all non-exempt Google employees who worked in the state from December 22, 2017, through June 5, 2022, and were awarded restricted stock units and/or received a sign-on bonus at that time. The FLSA collective includes Google employees who worked at the tech company from December 22, 2018, through June 5, 2022, and were also awarded restricted stock units and/or received a sign-on bonus.

Workers alleged that the company incorrectly calculated the regular rate of pay by excluding commission and stock unit payments, which led to an incorrect calculation of the overtime pay rate.

Attorneys at Nichols Kaster, one of two firms representing plaintiffs in the cases, said this miscalculation “gave Google the benefit” of paying hourly employees at lower rates than required.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s decision comes after a March 2023 preliminary approval for the nearly $8.4 million settlement.

This isn’t the first overtime class action brought against Google in recent memory. In 2018, the tech company and a staffing agency agreed to shell out about $5.5 million to settle claims it failed to properly pay recruiters and sourcing professionals. At the time, Michael Palmer, a partner at the law firm representing the Google recruiter who filed the 2016 case, said Google restricted the hours recruiters could report, “knowing that they must work overtime to meet performance goals.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/google-overtime-class-action-8-million/690565/

Estate planning benefits remain mysterious for most workers

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Aug 2023 15:53:38 GMT

“It’s never too early or too late to bridge the gap,” an attorney said regarding the report.

Published Aug. 8, 2023 by Caroline Colvin

Dive Brief:

Not only do the majority of Americans not have a will, but most people would be more willing to create one if their employer aided the process, LegalShield’s Aug. 8 report on estate planning revealed.
A medical diagnosis or health concern would prompt about half of Americans to make a will; 42% would make a will if they reached an increase in wealth. Retirement or “age milestones,” marriage, death of a loved one, a house purchase and the birth of a child were the next motivators, more than employer-offered benefits.
Still, nearly 60% said that if their employer offered legal services to help them create a will, they would.

Dive Insight:

The report also revealed that a gap in understanding exists among workers regarding what benefits packages entail. While 42% said their company doesn’t provide estate planning benefits and 8% said it does, the rest of U.S. workers surveyed could not confirm whether their employer offered voluntary estate planning benefits.

Since the pandemic, conversations about benefits have expanded. Conversations about mental health and wellbeing have come to the fore, along with long COVID considerations and benefits as both attraction and retention strategy.

While events such as illness diagnoses or life transitions were cited as the catalyst for creating a will, as Ashley Higginbotham, attorney with Deming, Parker, Hoffman, Campbell & Daly LLC said in the report’s announcement: “It’s never too early or too late to bridge the gap.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/worker-estate-planning-benefits/690300/

California Minimum Wage Soars to $16 per hour in 2024

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Aug 2023 15:49:30 GMT

By Anthony Zaller on August 10, 2023

POSTED IN WAGE & HOUR LAW

California’s Department of Finance provided a letter to Governor Newsom as required under Labor Code section 1182.12 to reflect the adjustment in the state minimum wage each year. The Department announced that California’s minimum wage will increase by 3.5% to $16.00 per hour for all employers as of January 1, 2024. This Friday’s five reviews how the increase impacts California’s employers:

1. White Collar Exemptions – Salary Requirement Tied to State Minimum Wage

California’s employment laws classify employees into two main categories: exempt employees and nonexempt employees. Federal and state laws exempt certain employees from wage and hour requirements. An exempt employee is an individual who is exempt from any overtime pay or minimum wage requirements. The “white collar” exemptions are: Professional, Executive and Administrative. To qualify as an exempt employee, the employer bears the burden to meet the requirements of a two-part test the employees must meet to be exempt: (1) the salary basis test and (2) the duties test. The salary basis test requires that the employee must be paid a salary that is at least two times the state minimum wage, which will increase as California’s minimum wage increases.

With the increase to the California minimum wage on January 1, 2024, the minimum annual salary to meet the white-collar exemption increases to $66,560 per year, and $5,546.67 per month (increasing from $64,480 per year in 2023). For more information on exempt employee classifications, see our prior article here.

2. Computer Professional Exemption Salary Requirement Increases in 2024

Labor Code section 515.5 sets forth that certain computer software employees are exempt from overtime requirements under the Labor Code. One aspect to meet this exemption is a minimum salary. For 2023, California’s Department of Industrial Relations adjusted the computer software employee’s minimum hourly rate of pay exemption from $50.00 to $53.80, the minimum monthly salary exemption from $8,679.16 to $9,338.78, and the minimum annual salary exemption from $104,149.81 to $112,065.20 effective January 1, 2023. The DIR will be announcing the increase for computer professionals in October 2023.

3. Local Minimum Wage Ordinances

There are over 35 local minimum wage ordinances throughout California. Employers are required to comply with the higher of the state or local minimum wage that applies to them. Many of the local minimum wage rates increase on July 1 of each year, but there still are some that have a January 1 increase date. Employers must carefully review all applicable local minimum wage (and paid sick leave) requirements.

4. Industry Specific Minimum Wages

Hotel Workers:

In addition to state and local minimum wage rate, some localities also have industry specific rates. The employers should always check their local ordinances that might apply to their workforce/industry. There are some cities that apply specific rates for hotel workers. For example, the City of Long Beach and the City of West Hollywood have adopted ordinances requiring a higher minimum wage for these workers.

FAST Act – Fast Food Workers:

As we have written about on this blog, on September 5, 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law AB 257, termed the Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act or FAST Recovery Act. The law proposes to establish a Fast Food Sector Council to regulate California’s fast food restaurants and set the minimum wage rate, among other workplace regulations, for the fast food industry. However, the law has been challenged and a coalition, the Save Local Restaurants Coalition, submitted over one million signatures on December 5, 2022, in opposition to the FAST Act and now the bill will be on the November 2024 ballot as a referendum for California voters to decide the fate of the law.

5. Planning For Minimum Wage Increases

As employers start to prepare for 2024, some best practices for ensuring compliance with all minimum wage requirements include:

Review all exempt employee classifications and specifically list which exemption they qualify for and ensure they are paid the statutorily required salary.
Develop a chart listing all nonexempt employees by location and ensure compliance with the location where the employee is working.
Audit your payroll processing company to ensure they are updating the minimum wage and salary payments to employees. Do not rely on your payroll company to know or understand the minimum wage requirements here in California.

Finally, there is an initiative that qualified for the November 2024 ballot that would increase California’s minimum wage to $18 per hour and then increase each year based on the cost of living. Employers will need to continue to monitor this initiative in 2024.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Zaller Law Group, PC

https://www.californiaemploymentlawreport.com/2023/08/california-minimum-wage-soars-to-16-per-hour-in-2024/

Childcare benefits popular with Gen Z talent

Bill Brewer — Tue, 15 Aug 2023 17:11:47 GMT

Survey finds they're the important factor for retention – ahead of health coverage

by Dexter Tilo - 11 Aug 2023

As maturing Gen Z employees begin to set their sights on raising their own families, a new report has found that childcare could be key to retaining this generation at work.

A survey revealed that 30% of employees people born in the late 1990s and early 2000s consider childcare benefits as the most important factor in considering whether to stay in their current role, just behind health insurance (29%).

Nearly half (43%) of Gen Z parents said they would switch jobs for financial assistance to cover childcare costs, while more than half (52%) would do so for on-site childcare, found the survey of over 2,000 parents from KinderCare Learning Company.

Another 36% of parents said they have accepted a job that pays less but has more flexibility, while 29% admitted to moving to a new location to find childcare, according to the report.

Disconnect: Childcare benefits offered by employers

Education funding (65%)

Pre-tax benefits (61%)

Subsidized childcare (60%)

On-demand childcare (59%)

Emergency/back up childcare provided by employer (56%)

Mixed childcare offerings (55%)

"Off hours" where parents are unplugged (54%)

On-site childcare (54%)

Co-working spaces that double as daycares (50%)

Concerning future for Gen Zs
Most Read
'We have no turnover in our office – and just a little in our stores'
Non-profit sues Kellog's, Target for race-based discrimination
First U.S. AI hiring discrimination lawsuit settled by EEOC

The findings come as 61% of the survey's overall respondents believe that there is disconnect between employers and childcare support, with 67% saying employers should offset the cost of childcare for their staff.

According to the survey, over half of the respondents would stay in their current roles for the following childcare benefits:

Gen Z employees have been growing more concerned about the surging costs of living over the past year, according to a Deloitte survey. It found that 51% are already living pay check to pay check, with 46% taking on a side job to remain afloat.

Due to the current economic uncertainty, many of them believe that it would be more difficult to seek a raise or promotion, get a new job, or request for greater work flexibility.

"Their economic concerns are also impacting their ability to plan for their future on a more personal level, with many saying it will become harder or impossible to buy a home or start a family," Deloitte said in a media release.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HRD America

https://www.hcamag.com/us/specialization/benefits/childcare-benefits-popular-with-gen-z-talent/456040

1 in 5 Companies Plan to Lower Salary Increase Budgets Next Year

Bill Brewer — Wed, 02 Aug 2023 16:42:34 GMT

Employers still budgeting fairly large pay raises for 2024

By Kathryn Mayer - August 1, 2023

More data is coming out to paint a picture of anticipated pay increases in 2024.

New research from Seattle-based compensation software firm Payscale finds that U.S. employers are budgeting for 3.8 percent pay increases next year—down slightly from this year's average 4 percent bump.

While more than three-fourths of U.S. companies plan to increase salaries in 2024 at the same level or higher than this year, according to the company's Salary Budget Survey, the percentage of organizations expecting to lower their salary increase budgets in 2024 has risen to 22 percent from 9 percent last year—a significant jump that may indicate employers are less concerned about attraction and retention than they have been in the past couple of years.

Payscale's survey comes on the heels of a report by WTW, released in late June, which predicted that employers are budgeting an average increase of 4 percent in 2024.

WTW's Salary Budget Planning Survey, which polled more than 2,000 U.S. organizations, found that number is down from the actual increase of 4.4 percent in 2023 and the 4.2 percent increase in 2022, but the projected 2024 figures remain higher than the 3.1 percent salary increase budget in 2021 as well as other increases in pre-pandemic years.

The two recent salary reports indicate that employers are remaining fairly aggressive both due to the continued tight labor market and to higher employee expectations around salaries—Payscale in its report says that workers may continue to expect higher pay increases to regain some of the lost value eaten up by high inflation last year—but that aggressiveness appears to be slowing.

With inflation decreasing from its red-hot pace—last summer it hit a 40-year high of 9.1 percent, but has eased to 3 percent in the Consumer Price Index's latest reading—and the labor market loosening, employers want to bring pay increases down to more conservative levels in 2024, said Ruth Thomas, pay equity strategist at Payscale.

However, she warned employers won't want to dip too much as "it is still very much an employees' labor market with skills shortages persisting in some sectors."

Employee expectations have increased around pay due to both inflation and the tight labor market. A massive employee survey of more than 32,000 workers this spring from the ADP Research Institute, for instance, found that the overwhelming majority of workers expect a bigger payday from their employers, and they may be ready to walk if they don't get it. Companies including Chobani, the Home Depot, Walmart and Delta have recently announced pay bumps for employees.

Although the surveys around pay predictions for 2024 are important gauges for HR leaders planning compensation strategies, analysts say the forecasts are just that—a forecast.

"This is a bit like looking into a crystal ball, as it is only July and we are talking about budgets for 2024," said Lesli Jennings, North America leader of work, rewards and careers at WTW.

The salary predictions usually change slightly in reality: For instance, Payscale last year found that employers projected a 3.8 percent pay hike on average, but the actual increase has been at 4 percent this year.

The wild card for 2024 salary predictions is a potential recession, which some analysts have warned about for months.

"When it comes to pay increases, the last few years have indicated that the new normal may be in the 3.5 percent to 4 percent range, but that could change if we go into a recession," Thomas said.

In addition to salary budget reports, Thomas noted, "organizations will need to keep an eye on wage growth trends and continue to invest in up-to-date market data to remain competitive and ensure that pay is fair."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/compensation/pages/payscale-2024-salary-pay-budget-employer-forecast.aspx

The US Department of Labor (DOL) yesterday submitted a draft overtime rule to the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a final review

Bill Brewer — Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:23:20 GMT

DOL Overtime Rule Coming Soon (No, Really This Time!)

Author: Michael Cardman, XpertHR Senior Legal Editor

July 13, 2023

The US Department of Labor (DOL) yesterday submitted a draft overtime rule to the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a final review.

This means that the overtime rule is now at Step 4 of the 9-step federal regulatory process - and that the DOL is likely to issue a proposed rule within the next 100 days.

Under Executive Order 12866, the OMB is required to perform a cost-benefit-cost analysis for any new regulation that is economically significant (a criterion the overtime rule is almost certain to meet).

The OMB has 10 days to make a preliminary determination of whether or not the overtime rule is economically significant. After that, the OMB will have another 90 days to review the rule.

However, this 90-day period may be extended indefinitely by the DOL or for as many as 30 days by the OMB.

Already having delayed the overtime rule several times before, it's possible the DOL could delay it again. That seems unlikely, as each delay will make it more difficult for the Biden administration to defend the rule from an expected legal challenge.

The DOL confirmed to XpertHR it had sent a proposed rule to OMB but did not respond to a request for comment about the timeline.

HR professionals are eagerly awaiting the release of the proposed rule, as it will give them a strong indication of what they can expect to see in the eventual final rule.

First and foremost, the DOL will likely propose raising the minimum salary for most employees exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) from its current level of $35,568 per year. Some experts anticipate the new minimum salary will be somewhere in the range of $46,800 to $52,000 per year.

The DOL also may propose annual inflation adjustments and/or make changes to the overtime exemptions' duties tests.

After a new overtime rule is proposed, the public will have at least 30 days to comment on it before the DOL can issue a final rule. Then the final rule would take effect no sooner than 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register, assuming it is classified as a major rule.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: XpertHR

https://www.xperthr.com/news/dol-overtime-rule-coming-soon-no-really-this-time-/52506/

U.S. employers anticipate 2024 pay raises to remain high as labor market challenges remain, WTW survey finds

Bill Brewer — Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:17:20 GMT

ARLINGTON, VA, June 29, 2023 — Salary budgets for U.S. employees are expected to remain high in 2024 as employers become accustomed to ongoing labor market challenges. According to the latest Salary Budget Planning Survey by WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company, organizations are budgeting an average increase of 4.0% in 2024. Though down from the actual increase of 4.4% in 2023, the numbers remain higher than the 3.1% salary increase budget in 2021 and years prior.

The survey found that more than two-thirds (70%) of U.S. employers budgeted for pay raises to be either the same or higher in 2023 than 2022. Less than one-quarter (14%) of companies have budgeted for pay raises to be lower than last year.

“While we are seeing lower salary increases forecasted for next year, they’re still well above the ones we’ve seen for the past 10 years.”
Hatti Johansson | Research director, Reward Data Intelligence, WTW

Concerns over a tighter labor market impacted by worker shortages is the most commonly cited driver influencing changes in 2023, cited by nearly two-thirds (61%) of respondents expecting changes in their salary budgets, followed closely by inflationary pressures (60%). Other factors prompting changes to salary budgets include concerns regarding employee expectations (24%), anticipated recession or weaker financial results (23%) and cost management (20%).

“While we are seeing lower salary increases forecasted for next year, they’re still well above the ones we’ve seen for the past 10 years. This shows that companies are striving to stay competitive in an everchanging work climate,” said Hatti Johansson, research director, Reward Data Intelligence, WTW. “Those companies that have a clear compensation strategy as well as a pulse on the factors affecting it will be more successful attracting and retaining employees while keeping pace with an evolving environment in which yesterday’s certainties no longer apply.”

According to the survey, more than half (51%) of organizations this year reported having difficulty with attraction or retention, compared with 57% last year. Respondents are expecting labor market pressures to ease, with only 35% expecting difficulties in 2024.

In response to these ongoing pressures, organizations are taking action to attract and retain talent. Half (50%) of respondents have reviewed compensation of specific employee groups, and 28% are planning or considering doing so. Additionally, 44% are hiring people higher in relevant salary ranges, raising starting salary ranges (43%), reviewing compensation of all employees (42%) and enhancing use of retention bonuses or spot awards (40%).

Non-monetary actions to attract and retain talent are in motion as well. More than half (59%) of respondents have broadened their emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion, and 25% are planning or considering doing so. Nearly as many (58%) have increased workplace flexibility. While 46% of respondents have taken action to improve their employees’ experience, 41% are planning or considering doing so. Other measures taken include changing health and wellness benefits (36%), modifying reward elements of compensation programs (33%) and increasing training opportunities (26%). Almost half (43%) reported funding the increase in total compensation spend through total rewards optimization (up from 21% in 2022).

“It takes more than compensation to attract and keep great talent, and the past few years have pressed companies to be more resourceful,” said Lesli Jennings, North America leader, Work, Rewards & Careers, WTW. “As workforces become more diverse, demanding and dynamic, the key is understanding their specific needs and preferences while providing the desired employee experience and career opportunities within the company.”

About the survey

The Salary Budget Planning Report is compiled by WTW’s Reward Data Intelligence practice. The survey was conducted in April to June 2023. Approximately 33,000 sets of responses were received from companies across 150 countries worldwide. In the U.S., 2,090 organizations responded.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW

https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/06/us-employers-anticipate-2024-pay-raises-to-remain-high-as-labor-market-challenges-remain-wtw-survey

Too many US adults are skipping wellness appointments that can help save their lives

Bill Brewer — Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:10:04 GMT

Too many US adults are skipping wellness appointments that can help save their lives

1 in 2 American adults admit to avoiding important health screenings

COLUMBUS, Ga., June 28, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- Americans don't seem to be on a path to living healthier, longer lives, according to a study released by Aflac Incorporated, a leading provider of supplemental health insurance in the U.S.¹ The Wellness Matters survey, conducted among 2,001 employed adults in the U.S., examines attitudes, habits and opinions about health and preventive care.

51% of respondents who have had cancer said their diagnosis came as a result of a routine checkup or screening.

The nationally representative survey finds that many — 1 in 4 — simply skip regular checkups because they are feeling healthy. Other reasons cited include conflicts with work hours (23%); not thinking about it (22%); dislike of going to the doctor (21%); insurance issues (21%); fear of hearing bad health news (18%); and time commitment to go to the doctor (16%).²

According to the survey, about half of adults have avoided at least one common health screening, including tests for certain diseases and other exams. At the same time, 51% of respondents who have had cancer said their diagnosis came as a result of a routine checkup or screening.²

Men and women do not see eye to eye on their current and future health.
Survey findings show the majority of men have a positive outlook regarding all aspects of their current health, including their ability to control it in the future: weight/BMI (56% men, 38% women); financial health (53% men, 40% women); mental health (66% men, 56% women); and physical health (69% men, 54% women). Hispanic men and women also have differing outlooks: weight/BMI (64% men, 45% women); financial health (57% men, 44% women); mental health (71% men, 62% women); and physical health (77% men, 63% women).²

Generational points of view show wide gap in control over health.
According to the survey, Gen Z [ages 18-24] feels the least control over their mental and physical health, yet they are the most likely to skip annual wellness visits that could empower them to feel more in control. Baby boomers [ages 57-65] (64%) and Gen X [ages 41-56] (55%) think preventive care is very important to their overall health and well-being, versus millennials [ages 25-40] (49%) and Gen Z (40%).²

Managing health and wellness does not come easy for U.S. Hispanic population.
Among Hispanic survey respondents, 31% indicate language is a barrier to accessing preventive care resources. As a result, 72% have avoided a wellness screening, compared to 46% who do not feel it is a barrier. Many Hispanic respondents also agree (61%) that health care providers and organizations need to better engage and educate the Latino community about the benefits of being proactive with their health and wellness.²

Screenings work and lead to better outcomes.
A significant number (72%) of Hispanic survey respondents diagnosed with cancer found out at a routine medical exam or regularly scheduled annual screening, compared to 46% of the general population.²

An analysis of Aflac internal data reveals its cancer wellness benefit claims dropped in 2022 compared to 2019 — notably among younger generations. For every 1,000 Aflac policyholders, cancer policy wellness claims dropped 11% for those in their 20s and 9% for those in their 30s.³

"The results of the Wellness Matters survey put a spotlight on the need for individuals to have a more proactive approach to their health care," said Tom Morey, chief actuary, Aflac U.S. "That is why Aflac is encouraging policyholders and others to take control of their health by building good health habits early, asking health and insurance providers questions, and prioritizing routine wellness checkups."

Take wellness matters into your own hands — sooner rather than later.
According to the survey, individuals are more likely to schedule checkups and prioritize wellness screenings as adults if their parents or caregivers demonstrated good habits, such as scheduling childhood wellness appointments, early in life. Most individuals are self-motivated to go to the doctor, most notably Baby boomers (64%), followed by Gen X (45%), millennials (35%), and Gen Z (29%). Additionally, encouragement from loved ones and financial incentives can help motivate individuals to seek preventive care. Many (64%) say they benefit from friends and family who encourage them to go to the doctor for routine visits. Most (85%) are more likely to go to a routine checkup appointment if a cash incentive was offered to help with the cost.²

Learn more at Aflac.com/WellnessMatters.

ABOUT THE STUDY
The 2023 Wellness Matters Survey was conducted among a nationally representative sample of 2,001 employed U.S. adults ages 18-65 in June 2023 by Kantar Profiles on behalf of Aflac. As part of the Hispanic population report, 200 Spanish-speaking respondents were added for a total of 580 respondents to ensure a robust understanding of this population. The additional 200 are not included in the general population report in order to maintain the nationally representative sample.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Aflac

https://newsroom.aflac.com/2023-06-28-Too-many-US-adults-are-skipping-wellness-appointments-that-can-help-save-their-lives

Gen Z saving for retirement sooner than earlier generations

Bill Brewer — Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:04:56 GMT

A survey from the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies determined that 66% of Generation Z, those born between 1997 and 2012, are growing their retirement savings. That's a smaller percentage than previous generations, but members of Gen Z are saving sooner than those older than them. Kyla Scanlon, founder of the financial education company Bread, joined CBS News to talk about the findings.

JUL 14, 2023

Watch the 3 min 40 sec video reports here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/gen-z-saving-for-retirement-sooner-than-earlier-generations/

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CBS News

Over half of future retirees plan to continue working amid savings insecurities

Bill Brewer — Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:01:55 GMT

Rachelle Akuffo

Thu, July 13, 2023 at 9:31 AM PDT

According to a study by the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies, at least 55 percent of potential retirees plan to delay retirement and continue working. Yahoo Finance Columnist Kerry Hannon details the savings insecurities older U.S. workers are experiencing.

Video Transcript

RACHELLE AKUFFO: All right, well, a relaxing retirement may be a pipe dream for some with a new survey from Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies showing that 55% of people plan to continue working after they retire. Yahoo Finance's Kerry Hannon is here with the details. That's unfortunate. That's sad. I mean, is this a must?

KERRY HANNON: Well, I'll tell you, I personally don't think work is a bad thing. There's a lot of good reasons to keep working in retirement. But this is noteworthy, because it's-- across generations, people are saying, hey, we simply aren't able to save enough for retirement right now. We don't have enough income.

There's sort of this pervasive pessimism out there about outliving their savings. And so it appears to me to be a bit of a default reaction saying, well, you know what? I'm just going to keep working in retirement. Maybe not pedal to the metal, but there will be part-time work. And some are saying full-time. But shockingly, 15% did say they expected work to be their primary source of income in retirement which really surprised me.

But here's the thing, it's the first time people are actually thinking about work and starting to put it in their head that you're not going to just have a cold stop at 65 or whatever year you may be bounced out of the workplace which does happen earlier if you get a layoff and hard to get back in.

So, you know, but the number one reason people say that they plan to work in retirement, in some fashion, is because they're concerned about Social Security not being enough. The second reason is because they're worried they're not going to have enough income, enough savings in order to support their lifestyle in a comfortable way. And the third reason is to pay for health expenses, which you and I know is going to be a huge ticket item as people grow older. So those are the reasons we're seeing people thinking about it.

The problem here why we say pipe dream, why you said that, is that employers aren't quite getting that yet. They aren't set up for these phased retirements, flexible work, letting their staff kind of shift into less stressful work and, you know, adjustable hours.

They're not quite there yet. They're starting to understand that they need to offer this to retain employees, because of what? Rachelle, this is huge. The demographic shift is noteworthy. And there has been a steep drop in fertility rates. And so this, they're starting to feel the fact of a tight labor market.

And in fact, they actually need some of these older workers to continue to work because I think what we're seeing-- this transformative thing in the workplace-- is by 2030, they're going to be more people over 65 in the United States than under the age of 18. This has huge implications in the workplace. So I think employers are going to start to get this.

RACHELLE AKUFFO: I mean, I get that. My dad retired and came back to work. He loves what he does, and he's 80. And he's like, yeah, no, I'm good. I'm just going to keep working. So then for people who are thinking, you know, how do I prepare for longer working lives, what should they know?

KERRY HANNON: Right. So it's not all doom and gloom. I mean, it's really important that if you are earning some income even if you saved appropriately, I mean, it keeps you from having to dip into your retirement accounts. You can push back your Social Security benefit to age 70.

But what you need to do if you want to keep working in retirement, by all means, you've got to be prepared. You need to keep your skills up to date, you need to add certificates, and maybe even a degree if you need to. You have to be sharp. You have to be lean and mean and ready to take on work. No one's going to-- its you're not a charity case, so you have to perform. You have to stay healthy.

One of the main reasons people step out of the workplace is for health reasons. Pay attention to exercise and eating with an eye to nutrition. And do some scoping around. Start early five years before you might retire. What would you like to do?

You know, do some volunteering, some moonlighting. Try a few things out. What might be work that you can go to? So let's look at as you're not retiring from something, you're retiring to something, a new form of work that actually can be great for you financially as well as psychologically. So I hate to be such a Suzy Upsider here, but I do see the upside in it.

RACHELLE AKUFFO: No, I like that. Retiring to something. It puts a different spin on it versus, you know, it's end of an era versus actually have something to look forward to and some shifts that I can enjoy. Great stuff as always. Our very own Kerry Hannon. Thank you so much.

KERRY HANNON: Great.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Yahoo Finance

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/over-half-future-retirees-plan-163120682.html

Parental, Family Leave Programs See Boost in 2023 SHRM Employee Benefits Survey

Bill Brewer — Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:47:34 GMT

By Kathryn Mayer ||| June 12, 2023

Significant strides have been made in parental leave and family leave benefits programs over the past year, signaling that employers are getting serious about supporting employees in their home lives as well as their work lives, according to the 2023 SHRM Employee Benefits Survey.

Paid maternity and paternity leave each saw 5-percentage-point jumps from last year and are now offered by 40 percent and 32 percent of employers, respectively, the new report finds. SHRM Research's survey of 4,217 HR professionals at organizations across all sizes, industries and sectors was conducted from Jan. 17 to March 8, 2023. The findings were released June 12 at the SHRM Annual Conference & Expo 2023 in Las Vegas.

[For detailed charts filterable by industry, organization size and location, SHRM members can view the full 2023 Employee Benefits survey results interactive online tool: shrm.org/benefits]

Simultaneously, paid parental leave is now offered by roughly 4 in 10 employers (39 percent), a 6-point jump from last year, according to this year's survey. Paid adoption leave also jumped by 6 percentage points, with about a third of employers (34 percent) now offering it, and paid foster child leave is now offered by 25 percent of employers, representing a 3-percentage-point increase.

"Paid leave for new parents increased across the board," said Daniel Stunes, manager of research operations with SHRM Research.

That's likely because benefits are "all about family this year," added SHRM researcher Cal Engstrom. "Prior to the pandemic, a lot of benefits had been about focusing on individuals. But when COVID-19 hit, a lot of employers started to think about benefits that help not just their employees, but their loved ones as well."

SHRM's survey results come as several organizations have recently enhanced parental leave benefits. In April, media company Thomson Reuters, a global firm with 26,000 employees, announced a 16-week paid parental leave program. The global benefit grants eligible employees who are welcoming a new child into their family through birth or adoption at least 16 weeks of paid time off, regardless of the employee's gender, sexual orientation or marital status. In addition, consumer health care company Haleon in January implemented a 26-week paid parental leave policy for all employees, while last month, global law firm Clyde & Co. rolled out a new parental leave policy, offering employees who have been with the firm for one year 26 weeks of paid leave to bond with a new child.

There are likely several reasons behind the uptick, including rising employee expectations and calls for family leave and flexible time as a result of the pandemic.

In fact, a survey released by insurance provider Unum in December found that paid family leave was among the top three noninsurance benefits U.S. workers most want. Another survey released by online insurance broker Breeze in November found that workers would rather their employer offer paid parental leave than an array of other benefits, including employer-paid fitness or mental health benefits, vision insurance, or student loan repayment assistance.

Paid parental leave is "one of the benefits that, when you need it, it's really, really valuable," Stunes said. "And for employers, it's not super-expensive to the organization, and it's not like everyone's having a baby at the same time. While it can sometimes be difficult for teams to cover someone who goes out on parental leave, it's a one-off thing, and it's so beneficial to the parents."

It's also possible that SHRM's 2022 survey results about parental leave—which found that leave for new parents was closer to pre-pandemic levels after all types of parental leave reached a pinnacle in 2020—made some HR and benefits leaders do some soul-searching and decide to step up their efforts, Stunes said. Last year's survey found that the number of organizations offering paid maternity leave was 35 percent in 2022, down from 53 percent in 2020. The number offering paid paternity leave was 27 percent, down from 44 percent.

Outside of parental benefits, other types of family benefits are growing as well. Paid family leave so employees can care for an immediate family member became slightly more common, with one-third of employers (33 percent) now offering it. Meanwhile, nearly 2 in 10 employers (18 percent) provide paid leave to care for extended family.

Similarly, pet insurance is a growing employee benefit, SHRM's benefits survey found. Nearly 1 in 5 employers (19 percent) now offer it, up from 14 percent in 2022.

"People are considering pet health insurance to be very important," Stunes said, noting that the pandemic spurred a rise in pet adoption, which likely inspired employers to add the benefit. "It is about family—and pets are family. People are recognizing that more and more."

Most Important Benefits

While family and parental leave benefits are becoming more prevalent, employers continue to view health care as the most vital benefit offering, according to this year's survey. Eighty-nine percent of HR leaders said it was "very important" or "extremely important," with virtually all employers (98 percent) offering health coverage to their employees.

What kind of health care coverage are employers offering? Preferred provider organization (PPO) plans remain the most common type offered (by 82 percent of employers), but high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) linked to a health savings account (HSA), health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) or flexible spending account (FSA) continue to gain popularity: 64 percent of employers offer such a plan, up from 61 percent in 2022. Meanwhile, of the 60 percent of employers that offer an HSA as part of their HDHP, 63 percent contribute to their employees' accounts.

Group HRAs are trending downward, from 20 percent in 2019 to 15 percent in 2023, as are medical FSAs, which declined slightly for the second year in a row, to 62 percent.

Tied for the second-most important benefit were leave and retirement savings and planning—81 percent of HR leaders said those benefits were "very important" or "extremely important." In general, the retirement landscape has changed little since 2022, the survey found, with the vast majority of organizations (94 percent) continuing to offer a traditional pretax defined contribution plan, such as a 401(k), 403(b) or 457(b). Of these employers, 84 percent provide a matching contribution, with an average maximum percentage salary match of 7.02 percent.

Post-tax Roth retirement options continue to grow in popularity, jumping 3 percentage points to 71 percent this year. Of the employers that offer Roth plans, about 3 in 4 (74 percent) also provide employer matching, with an average maximum percentage salary match of 6.69 percent.

Flexible work arrangements are also one of the top benefits offered by employers, the survey found—and for good reason. The pandemic spurred widespread adoption of flexible and remote work options, and it seems the majority of employers aren't turning back. Seventy percent of employers said flexible work is very or extremely important—the same percentage as in 2022. Although that's lower than in the thick of the pandemic—83 percent of employers said it was very or extremely important in 2020/2021—it's a significant increase from before the pandemic, when just 49 percent of employers cited the benefit's importance.

Other Benefits Changes

Also new this year? Perhaps in response to the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade last year, 11 percent of employers said they are reimbursing employees for domestic travel expenses related to seeking medical care, and 6 percent are doing so for international travel, according to the survey.

Coverage for weight loss surgery increased by 3 percentage points and is now offered by 28 percent of employers. Meanwhile, coverage for weight loss programs was up only slightly, at 20 percent, down from a five-year peak of 29 percent in 2019.

Financial benefits, awards and bonuses are also in demand this year—likely a result of the financial stress employees are experiencing due to sky-high inflation, coupled with employers making moves to woo and keep workers in an employee-driven job market.

Nearly a quarter of employers (23 percent) said they offer retention bonuses—up from 15 percent in 2019, the last time this benefit appeared on the SHRM survey. And nearly 6 in 10 employers (59 percent) currently offer referral bonuses, up from 53 percent in 2019.

Though still not at pre-pandemic levels, the prevalence of nonretirement financial advice benefits rebounded notably this year. Nearly one in three employers (31 percent) currently offer online or in-person services—an increase of 10 percentage points from 2022.

As the job market continues to be employee-driven, Stunes says employers are realizing that innovative and generous benefits are a good way to attract and retain talent.

"I think companies are really looking for those benefits that are above and beyond," he said. "You expect health care, you expect some kind of leave, but then you see other benefits—maybe pet health insurance, maybe bonuses—and that is what is setting employers apart."

*****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/benefits/pages/shrm-2023-employee-benefits-survey-paid-parental-family-leave.aspx

CEO pay increased 2.7% in 2022, WTW proxy analysis finds

Bill Brewer — Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:43:09 GMT

May 24, 2023

Weaker annual and long-term incentive awards contributed to sharp slowdown in total compensation increase.

RLINGTON, VA, May 24, 2023 — Chief executive officers (CEOs) at the largest U.S. corporations saw their increase in total compensation slow dramatically in 2022, driven largely by a decrease in annual bonuses and slower growth in long-term incentives, according to a new analysis of proxy disclosures by WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company.

The WTW analysis found total pay for CEOs increased 2.7% in 2022, sharply lower than the 18.3% median increase in 2021. Additionally, the percentage of CEOs who received a reduction in total pay doubled from 21% in 2021 to 42% in 2022. Total pay, as reported in the Summary Compensation Table (SCT) in company proxy statements, includes base salary, actual annual and long-term cash bonuses, the grant-date value of long-term incentives (such as stock options, restricted stock and long-term performance shares), the value of perquisites, earnings from deferred compensation and the change in value of executive pensions.

The analysis, based on 450 S&P 1500 companies that filed proxies disclosing 2022 pay by the end of April, found annual bonuses, which soared by 36.8% in 2021, declined 2.5% last year. While annual bonuses were lower, payouts remained above target (123% of target) in 2022, but this was well below 2021 when payouts were 148% of target. The value of earned long-term incentives rose 10% in 2022 – less than the 44% increase in 2021 but still building on 2021’s significant growth rate. Salaries for CEO increased 3.1% in 2022, following a year in which the average CEO salary remained unchanged.

“CEO pay stabilized last year and is returning to levels typically seen before the pandemic,” said Don Delves, North America leader, Executive Compensation, WTW. “Given the stock market performance and lingering economic uncertainties, the fact that annual and long-term incentives weakened last year demonstrates the pay-for-performance model is working at most companies.”

More companies adding ESG metrics to incentive plans

The analysis also revealed over half of the S&P 1500 companies (56%) reported using an ESG performance measure in their annual incentive plan in 2022, up from 49% in 2021. The use of ESG performance measures in long-term incentive plans, however, remains relatively low – 8% in 2022 compared with 7% in 2021. A subset of 227 S&P 500 companies from the analysis also revealed growing interest in linking executive incentive awards to ESG measures. Twenty-one companies added an ESG measure to their annual incentive plans, while 47 companies expanded their use of ESG metrics. Additionally, 9 companies added an ESG metric to their long-term incentive plans while two companies expanded the use of ESG metrics in their long-term incentive plans.

“We are seeing continued interest by boards in linking executive pay to ESG priorities, particularly those priorities they feel they may be linked to sustainable value creation,” said Kenneth Kuk, senior director, Work & Rewards, WTW. “Many boards of directors see executive incentives as an effective way to hold CEOs and other corporate leaders accountable to meeting ESG goals they believe are most critical to business strategy, such as carbon emission reduction and diverse representation for management and the workforce.”

About WTW

At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW

https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/05/ceo-pay-increased-2-point-7-percent-in-2022-wtw-proxy-analysis-finds

Wage growth slowing sharply in US, Indeed says

Bill Brewer — Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:39:00 GMT

Wage growth slated to return to pre-pandemic levels by 2024

By Megan Henney

U.S. wage growth has slowed sharply over the past year and is on pace to return to pre-pandemic levels by early 2024, according to new data from career site Indeed.

The wage tracker – based on salaries for job advertisements listed on Indeed – showed that salaries were up 5.3% in May compared with the same time one year ago. That is a marked drop from January 2022, when wages were up about 9.3%, suggesting that employers are facing less competition for new hires.

Based on the current trajectory, wage growth will likely return to its pre-pandemic range of about 3% to 4% late this year or early in 2024.

While the deceleration is broad-based, it is most pronounced in low-wage sectors. Posted pay for that group tumbled to 5.6% in May from 12.5% at the start of 2022.

"Broadly speaking, it is clear that the largest slowdowns in wage growth are happening in typically lower-paying sectors," wrote Indeed labor economist Nick Bunker, "After growing much more quickly than wages in other segments over the past several years, wage growth for low-wage and middle-wage sectors was identical in May."

Among the industries that are seeing a rapid decline in wages is the software industry, which has been at the forefront of high-profile layoffs and hiring freezes. Job postings in that sector have plummeted by nearly 60% over the past year, and posted wage growth is currently less than half of what it was in November.

Other sectors proved more resilient. Wage growth among construction jobs remains almost a percentage point above its 2019 average – a "notable" spike given the rapid rise in mortgage rates over the past year, which has led to less residential and commercial development.

The Indeed gauge underscores a separate report from the Labor Department released last week, which showed that average hourly earnings – a key measure of inflation – rose 0.3% in May, in line with analyst expectations. Wages are up 4.3% on an annual basis, the report showed.

The Federal Reserve is closely watching wage growth as it fights stubbornly high inflation with the most aggressive rate-hike campaign since the 1980s.

Policymakers approved a 10th straight rate increase in May, lifting the federal funds rate to a range of 5% to 5.25%, the highest since 2007.

Although the consumer price index has cooled from a peak of 9.1% in June 2022, it remains about three times higher than the pre-pandemic average despite the rapid increase in rates.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source; Fox Business

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/wage-growth-is-slowing-rapidly-us-indeed-says

EEOC: SALARY DISPARITIES RANGING FROM $3K TO $17K SHOWED GENDER BIAS

Bill Brewer — Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:32:44 GMT

A Wisconsin school district has agreed to pay $450,000 and raise employee salaries to settle the commission’s claims.

Published June 20, 2023 by Kate Tornone

A Wisconsin school district has agreed to pay $450,000 to settle claims it paid female employees less than their male counterparts, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced Friday.

Verona Area School District paid nine female special education teachers and one female school psychologist less than more recently hired male employees for the same work, EEOC said. Each had comparable or greater experience than a male colleague but was paid $3,000 to $17,000 less.

Additionally, while the female employees’ repeated requests for raises were denied, the district repeatedly negotiated and agreed to salary increases sought by male teachers, EEOC said.

The commission sued, alleging the district had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. To settle the lawsuit, the district agreed to the monetary relief and agreed to raise the salaries of the women involved. It also will review its pay policy, conduct anti-discrimination training and post a notice about the lawsuit, according to the EEOC’s announcement.

“More than 60 years after the Equal Pay Act, it is not only illegal but unacceptable to treat men and women differently when negotiating and setting pay,” said Diane Smason, EEOC’s acting district director in Chicago, in a statement. “The EEOC will continue to vigorously investigate and enforce the law to make sure employees do not face such discrimination.”

The school district’s board of education president, Meredith Stier Christensen, told HR Dive in a statement that the parties worked together to resolve the dispute without going to trial. Additionally, the board in 2021 adopted a new governance model that included the creation of clear, formalized systems to ensure that lawful and equitable hiring and compensation practices are in place, Stier Christensen continued. “As a result of our robust oversight practices, the Board has full confidence that our administration’s proactive steps to achieve this critical outcome have been successful.”

Vice President Jennifer Murphy concurred: “We now have systems in place to effectively eliminate the type of concern raised in the EEOC complaint now and in the future.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/eeoc-salary-disparities-ranging-from-3k-to-17k-showed-gender-bias/653414/

IRS boosts HSA contribution limits for 2024

Bill Brewer — Fri, 19 May 2023 17:16:42 GMT

You Can Put a Lot More Money Into Your HSA Next Year

By: Pete Grieve | Editor: Julia Glum | Published: May 17, 2023

The contribution limit for health savings accounts (abbreviated HSAs) will get a large increase in 2024 to adjust for inflation, allowing Americans to save more money for medical expenses.

HSAs are a type of account you can open if you have a health insurance deductible above a certain threshold — $1,600 for individuals in 2024 — and want to grow a cushion for medical expenses.

HSA owners benefit from what's called a triple tax advantage. They can make tax-deductible contributions, therefore reducing their taxable income, and withdraw the funds for eligible expenses tax-free. The earnings also grow tax-free.

HSA contribution limits for 2024

The maximum amount of money you can put in an HSA in 2024 will be $4,150 for individuals and $8,300 for families. (People 55 and older can stash away an extra $1,000.)

The contribution limit is adjusted by the IRS every year, but the 2024 increase is bigger than normal due to inflation. In 2024, the limit will be $300 higher than this year’s limit of $3,850 for individuals and $550 higher than the 2023 limit for families of $7,750.

Maxing out a HSA isn’t feasible or recommended for everyone, but some Americans use them for retirement savings.

Money you put in an account can be invested, which can make HSAs a helpful tool to prepare for medical costs you're likely to incur when you’re older. Qualified expenses include deductibles, copayments and other medical charges; HSAs can also be used to pay for prescriptions, over-the-counter medications, hearing aids and menstrual products. Funds can be used to pay for some Medicare expenses like Part B deductibles.

The limit increase will allow people who are contributing to the max to put even more money into their HSAs next year.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Money

https://money.com/hsa-contribution-limit-2024/

Pearl Meyer Survey Shows Significant Change In Job Title Practices Pre- And Post-Pandemic

Bill Brewer — Wed, 17 May 2023 15:40:23 GMT

By HRTech Specialist Last updated Apr 28, 2023

Pearl Meyer has published a new survey that points to a material change in US companies’ use of job titles. The 2023 Pearl Meyer Job Titling Practices Survey includes information for more than 400 public, private, and not-for-profit organizations and shows a substantial shift in the data from the prior edition, published in 2018.

“We have all heard and experienced so much turmoil in the job market over the last few years and much of the emphasis has been on a combination of compensation and flexibility in this war for talent,” said Rebecca Toman, vice president of the survey business unit at Pearl Meyer. “However, our data indicate that companies are also increasingly reliant on job titles as an important component of their strategy.”

More than half of the companies surveyed (54%) are leveraging job titles to attract prospective employees, a 35% increase from 2018. There has also been an increase from 30% to 38% in the use of a job title to determine eligibility for some compensation programs.

“Where we see the most eye-popping numbers is in the significant effort to reward and retain employees through the use of titles,” said Toman. “Thirty-seven percent of respondents are actively applying titles as a way to retain key employees, which is up from 27% in 2018. Further, a third of those surveyed use titles to reward current employees and this is a 74% increase from pre-pandemic levels.”

Signaling a need to retain and reward the existing workforce in the face of a potential economic slowdown, the survey shows a growing number of companies (13%) are explicitly deploying job titles “when funds are limited.”

“Job titles can be practical tools for employers and compensation professionals, but in general, I would not rely on them as a strong retention option unless they are backed up by a pay increase,” said Susan Sandlund, managing director and leadership practice lead at Pearl Meyer. “This data may indicate some employers are recognizing that in the absence of large compensation increases, they need to offer something to key employees. I see this as a somewhat positive development in terms of recognizing there are rewards beyond pay that have meaning to individuals. However, I would counsel organizations to likewise focus on career development opportunities and keep a close eye on maintaining a positive corporate culture. These elements are proven retention tools.”

Key Findings: Changing Uses or Drivers of Job Titles Between 2018 and 2023

Recognize and/or reward employees when funds are limited: from 8% to 13%, a 62.5% increase
Reward current employees: 19% to 33%, a 74% increase
Retain current employees: 27% to 37%, a 37% increase
Attract prospective employees: 40% to 54%, a 35% increase
Determine eligibility for certain compensation programs: 30% to 38%, a 27% increase

Methodology and Availability

Pearl Meyer’s Job Titling survey is conducted periodically; the last survey was published in 2018. More than 400 respondents from public, private, not-for-profit/government chartered organizations contributed data to the 2023 survey. Respondents’ annual revenue, assets, or operating budget ranged from under $100 million to over $30 billion. Results are offered according to revenue and broad industry groupings (industrials/materials; consumer discretionary/staples/services; healthcare; financials; information technology/telecom services; and energy/utilities). Complete survey results include a full list of participating organizations and are available for purchase.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Technology News

https://techrseries.com/executive-leadership/pearl-meyer-survey-shows-significant-change-in-job-title-practices-pre-and-post-pandemic/

Worker, retiree confidence in retirement savings sees largest drop since Great Recession

Bill Brewer — Wed, 17 May 2023 15:36:07 GMT

The effects of COVID-19 and economic concerns are causing some workers to delay retirement and some retirees to head back into the workforce.

Published May 4, 2023 | By: Ginger Christ

Dive Brief:

The confidence workers and retirees have that they’ll have enough money for retirement fell starkly in 2023 — a level of decline not seen since 2008 during the Great Recession, according to the 33rd annual Retirement Confidence Survey released April 27 by the not-for-profit Employee Benefit Research Institute and research firm Greenwald Research.
Of the 2,537 surveyed in early 2023, 64% of workers believed they would be able to live comfortably in retirement, down from 73% in 2022, and 73% of retirees shared that confidence, a drop from 77% last year. Workers and retirees attribute their concern to having little or no savings, inflation and debt, the survey found.
“The confidence both workers and retirees have in their ability to finance their retirements dropped significantly in 2023. … This shows that the current economic climate, in particular inflation, is eroding the confidence that Americans had in their retirement preparations going into the pandemic,” Craig Copeland, director of wealth benefits research at EBRI, said in a news release.

Dive Insight:

The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and economic concerns are causing some workers to delay retirement and some retirees to head back into the workforce.

Seventy-one percent of the 2,002 respondents in a survey commissioned by 401(k) plan provider Human Interest said the pandemic changed their target retirement age. Among those who had a “very difficult time” during the pandemic, 71% said they plan to delay retirement.

“With the pandemic’s after-effects and ongoing inflation, people have had a revelation about retirement,” Eric Phillips, senior director of partnerships and strategic insights at Human Interest, said when the results were released in November. “In the past three years, 42% of employees with a retirement benefit at work say they saw their employer contribution get cut.”

Some workers are turning to pre-retirement, a transition period between full-time work and retirement, the survey found.

On the other side, some retirees are rejoining the workforce. Twenty percent of respondents to a Resume Builder poll last year said they planned to return to work that year. Sixty-nine percent attributed that decision to rising costs.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/worker-confidence-in-retirement-drops/649199/

Q1 2023 Job Seeker Relocation Falls to Lowest on Record as Remote & Hybrid Work Persists

Bill Brewer — Wed, 17 May 2023 15:29:57 GMT

PUBLISHED MAY 16, 2023

Job seekers’ relocating for new jobs fell to the lowest level on record in the first quarter of 2023, as employers continue to offer remote and hybrid positions and job seekers become unwilling to move for work. Meanwhile, rising interest rates mean buying homes becomes a less attractive option as well, according to data released Monday by global outplacement and business and executive coaching firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc.

The data comes from a survey of over 3,000 job seekers across the country the firm conducts quarterly.

Relocation For New Jobs Grinds to a Halt

In the first quarter, 1.6% of job seekers relocated for new positions, according to the survey, down from 3.7% in the final quarter of 2022 and 4.6% in the same quarter last year. It is much lower than the 7.5% of job seekers who moved for positions in the second quarter of 2020, the highest since Q4 2018, when 7.7% of job seekers relocated.

Source: Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. ©

“In the 1980’s and 90’s, nearly a third of job seekers would move for new positions. That has fallen steadily since, as housing costs have risen and companies have moved to where talent pools are located. Now, remote and hybrid positions are keeping workers at home,” said Andrew Challenger, Senior Vice President of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc.

Source: Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. ©

The reluctance to move is possibly the result of job seeker demand for remote work options, though companies appear to be offering them less often. According to a new Challenger survey conducted online in April and May among 170 companies nationwide, 39% of companies are offering fully remote work options, down from 44% of companies who offered them last fall, and 61% who offered them Spring 2022. Fully remote work offerings peaked in Fall 2022, when 73% of companies offered them to their workers and hires, according to Challenger.

“Many employers are recalling workers to the office, at least for part of the time. Hybrid work is becoming much more common, and job seekers who are holding out for fully remote may have to concede some time to the office,” said Andrew Challenger, Senior Vice President of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc.

In fact, 32% of companies report most of their workers are in the office, though they’re allowing remote work on a case-by-case basis. That is up from 13% who reported this last fall. Of those companies with hybrid options, most workers are in the office two days a week with 29%, while 26% are in 3 days a week. Another 13% are in the office 4 days a week.

“Another reason job seekers have refused to move for work is the cost. With interest rates continuing to rise, mortgage rate increases and persistent inflation, the cost of selling a house and finding other housing may not be worth it to job seekers,” said Challenger.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Challenger, Gray & Christmas

https://www.challengergray.com/blog/q1-2023-job-seeker-relocation-falls-to-lowest-on-record-as-remote-hybrid-work-persists/

Global employers look to creative ‘cross border’ pensions to help expats and local workers in unstable countries

Bill Brewer — Thu, 09 Mar 2023 19:56:20 GMT

ARLINGTON, VA, March 6, 2023 — Demand for international pensions and savings vehicles is continuing to grow as employers try to optimize their benefits packages for different groups within their global workforce, research by WTW showed today.

WTW (NASDAQ:WTW), a leading global advisory, broking, and solutions company, launched its latest International Pension Plan Survey, which covered 1023 International Pension and Savings Plans (IPPs and ISPs). A quarter (23%) of these were set up in the last five years, reflecting the growth in demand. Assets under management of the surveyed IPPs and ISPs reached US$19.3bn, up 5% from the previous year.

Around half (51%) of the IPPs and ISPs were set up for expatriate workers unable to stay in their ‘home’ country plans, while at the same time either locked out of their ‘host’ country arrangements or likely not entitled to a benefit from any potential ‘host’ plan.

But IPPs and ISPs can also solve savings problems for various other employee groups. One in eight (13%) plans were established to include and serve local employees, often in countries at risk of economic or political instability.

“
Companies are facing skills shortages in many hotspots across the world and are redefining their employee experience and total benefits offer to stay competitive.”

Tony Broomhead | managing director, Integrated and Global Solutions, WTW

Tony Broomhead, managing director, Integrated and Global Solutions, WTW, said: “Companies are facing skills shortages in many hotspots across the world and are redefining their employee experience and total benefits offer to stay competitive. Many multinationals, charities, and international governmental organisations are looking for ways to offer minimum yet sufficient levels of pensions and savings to their global staff.

“Expats are often excluded from joining local ‘host’ pension schemes, or it may be inadvisable for them to do so. And local staff in many countries may also have limited options, or any savings may face the risk of economic instability or local sovereign debt default. International plans are a flexible way for employers to offer these vital benefits in a secure and efficient way.

“Companies are looking at setting up IPP or ISP solutions that can meet and fix multiple pensions challenges within the business. These plans can serve various expat groups, such as foreign staff excluded from local plans like the Central Provident Fund in Singapore, or to reward executives subject to capped ‘home’ country benefits. In the Middle East and GCC these international plans can be used to fund mandatory gratuities.

“More recently these plans can help meet DEI objectives whereby plan sponsors are keen to be able to report that by including an IPP they are now able to offer access to a pension plan to all their global staff.”

The WTW IPP Survey 2023 also found that:

Of the 1 in 8 plans oﬀered to local employees in countries facing more challenging political and economic circumstances, Egypt was the most popular location for such IPPs/ISPs. 32 plans included Egypt-based savers. Argentina-based employees were in 31 plans, Lebanon 28, Sri Lanka 16, and Ecuador 15.
ESG considerations are an emerging focus for IPPs and ISPs, with 163 plans indicating that they reviewed the fund range in the past 12 months for ESG considerations, which includes Diversity, Equity and Inclusion audits.
71% of plans were established with a 'retirement objective' (IPPs), and 29% have a shorter-term 'savings objective' (ISPs).
Almost all (94%) IPPs are defined contribution, with employer contribution rates typically ranging from 10% to 14%.
IPPs/ISPs are offered by companies in all business sectors, but particularly in banking and finance, which accounted for 26% of plan sponsors, followed by oil and gas (9%), and consumer goods and retail (7%).

About the Survey

The WTW International Pension Plan Survey 2023 was conducted in Q4 2022 and covers 1023 IPPs and ISPs sponsored by 955 companies. It is the 15th edition of the survey. Download a free copy here.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW

https://www.wtwco.com/en-US/news/2023/03/global-employers-look-to-creative-cross-border-pensions-to-help-expats-and-local-workers-in-unstable

Overtime Pay Due Despite Six-Figure Income, Supreme Court Rules

Bill Brewer — Thu, 09 Mar 2023 19:52:17 GMT

Feb. 22, 2023, 7:19 AM

Khorri Atkinson - Senior Labor & Employment Reporter

Chris Marr - Staff Correspondent

A former offshore oil rig worker earning more than $200,000 a year is eligible for overtime pay under federal law, the US Supreme Court ruled.

The high court’s Wednesday ruling upheld a US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit September 2021 decision that former Helix Energy Solutions Group Inc. worker Michael Hewitt wasn’t exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s overtime requirement because the company paid him a day rate and not a guaranteed weekly salary.

The day-rate basis on which Hewitt was paid, “so that he receives a certain amount if he works one day in a week, twice as much for two days, three times as much for three, and so on” doesn’t count as a salary basis to exempt him from the FLSA’s overtime protections, Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the 6-3 majority.

The case has significant implications for the energy industry because of its use of day rates instead of salary rates to compensate workers, including highly paid employees on oil-field or offshore jobs.

The heart of the case comes down to the relationship between the FLSA’s implementing regulations governing overtime pay exemptions for highly compensated executives, administrative, and professional employees.

To be exempt, executives must be paid on a salary basis, meaning their predetermined pay must be “calculated on a weekly, or less frequent basis” and not tied to the hours worked per week. They also must have a minimum pay threshold of $684 per week.

The regulations also say workers paid on an hourly, daily, or shift basis can be classified as salaried, and thus overtime exempt, as long as their employer guarantees “at least the minimum weekly-required amount” despite the number of hours, days, or shifts worked.

Helix argued that, because Hewitt was an executive who received more than the minimum weekly pay and whose compensation never changed, the case should end there.

But Hewitt said Helix never offered him a minimum weekly guaranteed pay, so his day rate earnings can’t be classified as a salary.

Clement & Murphy PLLC represents Helix. Boies Schiller Flexner LLP represents Hewitt.

The case is Helix Energy Sols. Grp., Inc. v. Hewitt, U.S., No. 21-984, 2/22/23.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Bloomberg Law

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/supreme-court-holds-six-figure-worker-entitled-to-overtime-pay

NLRB Rules that Employers May Not Offer Severance Agreements Requiring Employees to Broadly Waive Labor Law Rights

Bill Brewer — Thu, 23 Feb 2023 17:26:05 GMT

Board Rules that Employers May Not Offer Severance Agreements Requiring Employees to Broadly Waive Labor Law Rights

Office of Public Affairs
202-273-1991
publicinfo@nlrb.gov
www.nlrb.gov

February 21, 2023

Today, the Board issued a decision in McLaren Macomb, returning to longstanding precedent holding that employers may not offer employees severance agreements that require employees to broadly waive their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The decision involved severance agreements offered to furloughed employees that prohibited them from making statements that could disparage the employer and from disclosing the terms of the agreement itself.

The decision reverses the previous Board’s decisions in Baylor University Medical Center and IGT d/b/a International Game Technology, issued in 2020, which abandoned prior precedent in finding that offering similar severance agreements to employees was not unlawful, by itself.

Today’s decision, in contrast, explains that simply offering employees a severance agreement that requires them to broadly give up their rights under Section 7 of the Act violates Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. The Board observed that the employer’s offer is itself an attempt to deter employees from exercising their statutory rights, at a time when employees may feel they must give up their rights in order to get the benefits provided in the agreement.

“It’s long been understood by the Board and the courts that employers cannot ask individual employees to choose between receiving benefits and exercising their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Today’s decision upholds this important principle and restores longstanding precedent,” said Chairman Lauren McFerran.

Members Wilcox and Prouty joined Chairman McFerran in issuing the decision. Member Kaplan dissented.

Established in 1935, the National Labor Relations Board is an independent federal agency that protects employees from unfair labor practices and protects the right of private sector employees to join together, with or without a union, to improve wages, benefits and working conditions. The NLRB conducts hundreds of workplace elections and investigates thousands of unfair labor practice charges each year.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)

https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/board-rules-that-employers-may-not-offer-severance-agreements-requiring?utm_campaign=hrb&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=morning_brew

Home Depot says it will spend $1 billion to give hourly workers a raise

Bill Brewer — Wed, 22 Feb 2023 01:48:52 GMT

PUBLISHED TUE, FEB 21 20236:00 AM ESTUPDATED TUE, FEB 21 20236:59 AM EST

KEY POINTS

Home Depot said it will spend an additional $1 billion to raise hourly employees’ wages.
The home improvement retailer is the latest to signal that the labor market is still tight.
Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, recently announced it would raise its minimum wage to $14 an hour for store employees.

Home Depot on Tuesday said it will spend an additional $1 billion to give its hourly employees a raise, as retailers and restaurants compete for workers.

The home improvement retailer announced the wage investment as it reported fourth-quarter earnings. It did not disclose the new average wage for employees, but said every market’s starting wage is at least $15 an hour.

Hourly workers will see the increase, which went into effect on Feb. 6, this month in their paychecks. The increase will boost pay for all hourly workers in the U.S. and Canada.

With the move, Home Depot becomes the latest major retailer to signal that the labor market is still tight — especially when it comes to lower-wage hourly workers. Across the jobs market, the data is still strong: The unemployment rate fell to 3.5% in and nonfarm payroll growth was better than expected in December, the most recently available data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Several big-name tech companies and banks, including Google, Amazon and Goldman Sachs, have laid off thousands of employees. So far, however, retailers, restaurants and the hospitality industry has largely bucked the trend — and even announced plans to hire or boost pay.

Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, recently announced it would raise its minimum wage to $14 an hour for store employees and have an an average U.S. hourly wage of more than $17.50, as of early March. Chipotle Mexican Grill said it wants to hire 15,000 restaurant workers ahead of its busy spring season.

The companies have made those plans, despite industry-watchers’ expectations for slower sales growth in the year ahead. Companies have cited labor costs among the things driving up their budgets. But they also feel pressure to increase pay as prices rise for groceries, rent and other essentials.

Home Depot is one of the country’s largest private employers with about 475,000 workers. The vast majority of its employees are hourly workers at its approximately 2,300 stores in the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Its frontline employees, who will receive the wage increases, also work in supply chain, customer care and merchandising roles.

In an email to employees that was shared with CNBC, Home Depot CEO Ted Decker said the investment “positions us more favorably in every market where we operate.” He said higher wages will improve the customer experience as the company attracts more high-quality workers and keep experienced staff.

“This investment will help us attract and retain the best talent into our pipeline,” he said.

Home Depot has added more training opportunities, too, he said, including the promotion of more than 65,000 employees in 2022 alone.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/home-depot-hourly-workers-raise.html

Today’s Employees Expect Retirement Plan Benefit in ‘New Savings Paradigm’

Bill Brewer — Thu, 02 Feb 2023 16:58:38 GMT

A new Vestwell research report details emerging retirement trends for employers and workers.

Reported by NOAH ZUSS

Employers failing to offer workers a retirement benefit have dismissed a basic feature demanded by employees, Vestwell research finds.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, workers’ expectations for their workplace benefits are higher and dissatisfaction has contributed to the post-pandemic Great Resignation and a historically low U.S. unemployment rate of 3.5% in December. Many expect employers to offer a retirement plan benefit, according to the Vestwell 2023 Retirement Trends Report.

“Regulatory tailwinds and advanced technologies have enabled a monumental shift in the industry, expanding retirement access to small businesses and savers that are historically difficult to reach,” Aaron Schumm, founder and CEO of Vestwell, said in a press release.

The research found 73% of employees said they agreed or strongly agreed that they expect employers to offer a 401(k) or 403(b) retirement plan because of the tight labor market and 98% of respondents said they think it’s important for their employer to offer a retirement benefit for employees at the workplace.

Voya Financial Research shows a retirement plan is as important for employee retention as a competitive salary and work arrangement, according to November data 2022, that finds 60% of workers are more likely to stay with their current employer if they offer an employer-sponsored retirement plan.

Among registered voters 25 and older, 96% said that having a workplace retirement savings plan is important to helping them save for retirement, and 92% supported establishing a program to help workers save for retirement if their employer does not currently provide a retirement plan at work, according to American Association of Retired persons 2021 data, presented in a blog post.

The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, a package of legislative retirement reforms passed by Congress in December 2022, included provisions to expand retirement plan benefit coverage. The legislation “significantly sweetens the deal for small businesses” interested in offering a retirement plan for the first time, according to the report.

The favorability for employer-sponsored retirement plans at work was shown by workers’ reported saving preference, ranked as follows:

401(k) (57%)
cash balance plan (23%)
individual retirement account (11%)
emergency savings account first (4%)
health savings accounts at the top (3%)
529 college savings plans (2%).

“A super-majority of [the] responding population indicated that they see retirement benefits as an expectation, rather than an exceptional perk,” the report found. “Employers seeking to differentiate their benefits package may consider offering additional savings benefits beyond just a retirement plan.”

Vestwell found 89.6% of employees expect companies that offer a retirement plan to also be involved in retirement education. To meet this demand, employers want to work with retirement plan advisers: 30% of plan sponsor respondents placed employee education as the top preferred service among expanded services for employers.

The “survey [data] shows an opportunity for small businesses, technology providers, and advisers to come together and embrace the new savings paradigm of 2023: where retirement plans are an expectation, employers are expanding their benefits, and employees have confidence in their position in the market,” the report concluded.

Data for the Vestwell report was gathered in a series of surveys, conducted in 2022, that included more than 1,300 employees, 500 advisers and 250 small business owners.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: PLANSPONSOR

https://www.plansponsor.com/plans-use-digital-nudges-to-move-plan-participants-toward-retirement-goals/

More states roll out pay transparency laws

Bill Brewer — Thu, 02 Feb 2023 16:55:37 GMT

California and Washington have both enacted pay transparency laws this year

BY ERIN BENDIG | PUBLISHED 30 JANUARY 2023

Earlier this month, pay transparency laws went into effect in Washington and California, requiring employers to list pay ranges on job listings. Later this year, New York state will also follow suit. These laws, already in place in Colorado, are one way that states are combatting wage gaps —including racial and gender pay gaps. In fact, the gender pay gap was cut by 45% in organizations that disclosed pay compared to those that didn’t. As more states, including South Carolina and Massachusetts, begin developing pay transparency laws, this could soon become the new norm.

Here’s what you need to know about the new pay transparency laws effective this year.

California: At the beginning of this year, California’s labor code(opens in new tab) began requiring employers with more than 15 employees to list salary ranges on job postings, even for postings on third-party websites.

Employers are also required to share pay ranges for an employee's current position, upon request — which is likely to put the cat among the pigeons... Home to many powerful companies — like Apple and Wells Fargo — and to millions of employees, California's pay transparency laws could soon become the new normal across states.

Washington: Similar to California, Washington now requires employers with more than 15 workers to share salary information on job postings — both internally and on third-party sites like Glassdoor and LinkedIn — thanks to the Equal Pay and Opportunities Act(opens in new tab). Furthermore, company benefits, like health care, retirement benefits and sick leave, are also required on job listings. These requirements are effective whether the applicant will fill a position in person or remotely.

Rhode Island: Rhode Island has also required further pay transparency from employers. According to Rhode Island’s Pay Equity Act(opens in new tab), if requested, employers are required to provide pay ranges for job listings if "inquired about". However, they don't have to list these ranges outright on job listings. Employers will also be required to disclose salary ranges before an employee is hired or before they change positions.

New York State: New York state’s transparency laws will go into effect in September of this year. Starting in September, New York employers are required to share pay ranges for job listings. This applies to employers with four or more workers. Pay transparency laws have been in effect in New York City since November 1, 2022, which made it the largest municipality in the U.S. to codify pay transparency.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Kiplinger

https://www.kiplinger.com/personal-finance/more-states-roll-out-pay-transparency-laws

SEC Adopts New Executive Compensation Clawback Rules for Public Companies

Bill Brewer — Sat, 28 Jan 2023 14:39:42 GMT

January 27, 2023

On November 28, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) published final clawback rules (the Final Rules) in response to the long-standing requirement under Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to increase transparency and disclosure in financial reporting; the Final Rules were adopted by the SEC on October 26, 2022, and become effective 60 days following publication, i.e., January 27, 2023.

Ultimately, the Final Rules will require companies that are listed on the NYSE or NASDAQ to establish, comply with, and disclose a written policy that provides for the recovery, or clawback, by the company of any incentive-based executive compensation that is received by current and former executive officers during the three-year period preceding any requirement to prepare an accounting restatement based on a misstated financial performance measure. Smaller reporting companies, emerging growth companies, foreign private issuers, and controlled companies will not be exempt from compliance with the Final Rules.

In the near term, new Rule 10D-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), instructs the NYSE and NASDAQ to revise their listing standards to require listed public companies to establish, adopt, and abide by a written clawback policy mandating the recovery of any excess incentive-based compensation (i.e., compensation that is based upon attaining a specific financial reporting measure) that is received by current or former executive officers in the event that the company needs to prepare an accounting restatement due to material noncompliance with a financial reporting requirement under applicable securities law. Affected companies will be required to file their clawback policies with, and provide certain disclosures in, their annual reports and certain other public filings.

The Final Rules require each exchange to file its proposed revised listing standards within 90 days of the publication date of the rules, i.e., February 26, 2023, and the proposed revised listing standards must be effective by the first anniversary of the publication date, i.e., November 28, 2023. This means that, on the date that the listing standards become effective (which may be before November 28, 2023), all incentive-based compensation received by executive officers on or after such date must be subject to a compliant clawback policy, and all disclosures required by the Final Rules must be included in all applicable SEC filings required on or after that date. The latest date for companies to adopt a compliant clawback policy is 60 days after the revised listing standards become effective, which, at the latest, could be January 27, 2024, assuming that the applicable exchange’s revised listing standards do not have an earlier effective date. Companies should monitor developments regarding the revision of existing listing standards, as the dates noted are the latest possible dates.

The Final Rules are significantly more expansive than the prior rules adopted under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which require the recoupment of erroneously paid compensation to the CEO and CFO for material restatements resulting from misconduct. Under the Final Rules, clawbacks will be required for more types of restatements, including restatements that are not material (what the SEC calls “little r” restatements), in addition to those restatements that correct errors that are material to previously issued financial statements, i.e., “big R” restatements. Little r restatements correct errors that are not material to previously issued financial statements but would result in a material misstatement if (i) the errors were left uncorrected in the current report or (ii) the error correction was recognized in the current period. A finding of fault will not be necessary in order to trigger the obligation to recover compensation, and companies will be prohibited from indemnifying affected executive officers against the loss of erroneously awarded compensation. Further, the new rules will apply to more executives, i.e., all Section 16 officers, than are covered under most existing policies.

For purposes of the Final Rules, the definition of “executive officer” is the same as that found in Rule 16a-1(f) of the Exchange Act and includes a company’s president; principal financial officer; principal accounting officer (or, if none, the controller); any vice president of the company in charge of a principal business unit, division or function; and any officer who performs a policy-making function.

The company’s recovery shall be limited to any excess amount “received” during the three completed fiscal years prior to the date when the company became required to prepare the accounting restatement. Under the Final Rules, the term “received” is intended to mean that the applicable financial reporting measure connected to the incentive compensation has been satisfied and the incentive compensation has been earned, even if not yet paid, such that a bonus award would be deemed received in the fiscal year it was earned on the achievement of the performance measure, even if it was not actually paid until the following year. The clawback amount (on a pre-tax basis) is the difference between the incentive-based compensation received by the executives and the amount that would have been received based on the required restatement.

There are limited exceptions to the recovery requirement due to impracticability where the company has already made a reasonable attempt to recover the excess compensation and (i) direct third-party expenses incurred to assist in enforcing the policy would exceed the amount to be recovered, (ii) the company receives an opinion of home country counsel advising that the recovery would violate home country laws that predated the new rule, or (iii) the recovery would likely cause a tax-qualified retirement plan to fail to meet IRS requirements.

New disclosure requirements related to the Final Rules were also adopted in amendments to Item 601(b), Item 402, and Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K as well as to the cover pages of Forms 10-K, 40-F, 20-F, and, for listed funds, Form N-CSR, which require reporting the adoption and compliance with the clawback policy in annual reports, proxy statements, and information statements. These disclosures will need to be tagged using Inline XBRL. Under new Item 601(b)(97) of Regulation S-K, affected companies will need to file a copy of their clawback policy as an exhibit to their Annual Report on Form 10-K. Under new Item 402(w) of Regulation S-K, to the extent that an accounting restatement becomes necessary, a company will need to disclose the date when it became required to issue an accounting restatement, the amount of excess compensation that was awarded, an explanation of how the excess amount was calculated, how much of the excess amount had not been recovered as of the end of the last completed fiscal year, and an explanation as to any impracticality that precludes its recovery.

A company will be subject to delisting if it does not establish and comply with a clawback policy that meets the requirements of its exchange’s listing standards. As such, companies listed on the NYSE or the NASDAQ are strongly encouraged to begin the process of preparing and implementing a clawback policy for incentive-based executive compensation, determine whether they need to amend any of their current policies in order to comply with the Final Rule’s requirements, confirm which executive officers will be subject to the policy (including both current and former officers), and consider how the Final Rules may affect their existing compensation plans or accounting practices and what measures could reasonably be taken to recover any such compensation. While companies will not be required to adopt a clawback policy, or amend an existing one, to comply with the new rules until after the exchanges publish final revised listing standards implementing Rule 10D-1 and such standards become effective, companies can and should begin the process of evaluating their current circumstances and planning accordingly.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: JD Supra

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/sec-adopts-new-executive-compensation-5450402/

WorldatWork Survey Finds 70% of Organizations are Taking Action on Pay Equity

Bill Brewer — Mon, 23 Jan 2023 19:12:04 GMT

January 17, 2023 — Scottsdale, Arizona— WorldatWork’s Pay Equity Study finds an increase in organizations acting on pay equity.

The survey revealed 70% of organizations are taking action on pay equity in 2022, a 10% increase since 2019 and a 4% increase over 2021. Only 2% of organizations reported not having pay equity on their radar. Three-quarters of organizations reported that they have been doing pay equity analysis for three years or more compared to two-thirds in 2021.

Organizations taking action on pay equity cite “it’s the right thing to do, to build/maintain a culture of trust and to remove bias against protected classes” as the main reason for doing so. The potential cost to fix pay inequities is cited as one of the largest barriers for companies that have pay equity on their radar and have not yet acted.

“Increasingly employees want more transparency on how they are being paid and why,” said Sue Holloway, CCP, CECP, compensation content director at WorldatWork. “With more pay transparency legislation being implemented, pay equity has garnered more attention from organizations.”

Organizations are increasingly concerned about the legal risk of pay inequity; since 2020 the proportion citing “mitigating legal risk” as very or extremely influential to their organization’s choice to pursue pay equity has increased by 20% to 71%.

While organizations have begun to include more types of compensation in their pay equity analyses, most organizations could improve their pay equity analysis by being more inclusive of all types of pay.

Among organizations that have a pay equity process in place:

Nearly all include base pay in their analysis or are thinking of including it in 2023.
More than half include or hope to soon include short-term incentive plan payments (e.g., annual bonuses, profit sharing), and sales commissions/incentive payment.
Nearly half include or anticipate including long-term incentive plan equity/stock-based grants.
Even the least-frequently included types of compensation, such as special one-time equity/stock-based grants are (or likely will soon be) included in pay equity analysis by more than a quarter of respondents.

“If companies conduct an analysis only on base pay, they could be leaving out important elements of total compensation. Including bonus payouts, equity grants, and other kinds of compensation results in a more holistic analysis.” – Emily Cervino, Head of Fidelity Stock Plan Services Industry Relationships and Thought Leadership

When it comes to communicating about pay equity:

Just over one in ten share the high-level results of pay equity analysis publicly.
Only a quarter share the high-level results with their employees.
And only a third even share the fact that they are doing a pay equity analysis with their employees.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HRO Today

https://www.hrotoday.com/ticker/worldatwork-survey-finds-70-of-organizations-are-taking-action-on-pay-equity/

EY survey: Payroll errors average $291 each, impacting the economy

Bill Brewer — Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:04:47 GMT

Payroll errors can cost businesses up to $705 per error

OKLAHOMA CITY--(BUSINESS WIRE)--One in five payrolls in the United States contains errors, each costing an average of $291, according to a new Ernst & Young survey. The study also shows the negative impact of traditional payroll methods where perfect payrolls often do not occur.

The average organization makes 15 corrections per payroll period, according to EY. The effects are costly: lost revenue, hours correcting errors, and potential lawsuits and fines.

“Payroll errors have consequences for employees, businesses and the broader economy,” said Chad Richison, founder, chairman and CEO of Paycom. “Organizations need to ensure their payrolls are 100% accurate and not hindering their businesses or people. With Beti, Paycom’s self-service payroll solution, employees are empowered to identify and correct errors ahead of time so everybody wins. Beti is the future of payroll.”

More than 40% of surveyed organizations facing litigation as a result of payroll errors resort to cutting jobs. More than half of those facing regulatory and compliance issues as a result of payroll errors also resort to cutting jobs. Others facing regulatory and compliance issues reported declines in employee morale (41%), fines (15%) and reputational decline (36%).

EY targeted companies with 250 to 10,000 employees and collected responses from 508 individuals who work at companies headquartered in the U.S. and work with payroll.

Survey results indicate an average 1,000-employee organization spends an aggregate of 29 workweeks fixing the most common payroll errors.

Time/attendance and expense errors were the most common payroll errors, occurring on average more than once per employee per year. Those errors cost about $250,000 per 1,000 employees, according to EY. Errors recorded include:

Payroll error category	Errors per 1,000 employees, per year	Cost per 1,000 employees, per year
Time/attendance and expense	1,139	$250,000
Vacation/PTO/sick time requests	721	$220,000
Benefits	503	$140,000
Schedule earnings and deductions	410	$135,000
W4 and tax allocation changes	229	$135,000
Direct deposit	159	$45,000

The top five most time-consuming errors to fix — time punches, expenses, uniforms charge errors, sick time not being entered and errors setting up health savings plans — take nearly 29 40-hour weeks to fix per 1,000 employees. That’s more than half a work year spent on manual processes instead of strategy to advance a business. Fixing missing and incorrect time punches was the most time consuming; companies spent 26 minutes per employee fixing these errors in the last fiscal year.

The EY report comes on the heels of a Morning Consult survey commissioned by Paycom showing payroll errors cause nearly 1 in 5 American adults to take drastic actions and nearly 60% would have difficulty paying bills and making purchases if just $100 were missing from their check. The good news: Outdated payroll and related problems are easily fixable. For example, Paycom’s Beti guides employees to find and fix payroll errors before submission.

More information on the EY report can be found here.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Wire

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20221222005093/en/EY-survey-Payroll-errors-average-291-each-impacting-the-economy

New website aggregates tech salary ranges in California and New York City

Bill Brewer — Wed, 11 Jan 2023 18:20:55 GMT

Published Jan. 10, 2023 | Lindsey Wilkinson

Dive Brief:

Roger Lee and Teddy Sherrill have launched a new website, Comprehensive.io, that tracks and publishes tech salary ranges daily to advance pay transparency and eliminate pay inequity. Lee will serve as CEO and Sherrill as CTO.
“For companies: you can look up the salary ranges that similar companies are posting for similar roles,” a Friday LinkedIn post from Comprehensive.io said. “If you’re not complying with the pay transparency law yet, we hope this data can help you figure out what salary range to use.”
In order to provide accurate information to users, Comprehensive.io aggregates job posts from over 700 tech companies, totaling more than 53,000 job postings, and extracts the salary ranges daily, according to the website.

Dive Insight:

Starting Jan. 1, California required employers to include salary ranges on job postings. A similar law went into effect in New York City last year. As transparency laws become more common, business leaders and employees alike can use the increased visibility to their advantage.

In addition to tracking salary ranges, Comprehensive.io provides users with pay transparency compliance rates for California and New York City.

Compliance rates are calculated by dividing the number of companies that include salary ranges in job posts by the total number of companies required to be compliant per relevant location, according to Comprehensive.io.

The California compliance rate sits below half at nearly 42%, while New York City’s is nearly two-thirds, according to Comprehensive.io.

A company is considered compliant if the majority of jobs posted on its career page in the relevant location contain a salary range.

The website also highlights how employers seem to test the limits of the transparency laws’ “in good faith” requirement.

Tesla sits atop the list of companies with the highest salary range for senior software engineers, with a salary range of $83,000 to $418,000, according to the website. Snowflake is second with a salary range of $214,000 to $328,000 for senior software engineers, according to Comprehensive.io.

Before working on Comprehensive.io, Sherrill was CTO at Restaurant Brands International, where he created a TypeScript codebase for restaurant apps including Burger King, Popeyes and Tim Hortons, according to his LinkedIn. Co-founder Roger Lee created Layoffs.fyi during COVID-19 to track tech layoffs and co-founded Human Interest, a digital 401(k) provider for businesses, in 2015, according to his LinkedIn.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/pay-transparency-tracker-California-NYC/640103/

The FTC wants to ban companies from telling their employees they can't work for competitors — and says it'll help workers make $300 billion more a year

Bill Brewer — Fri, 06 Jan 2023 17:42:30 GMT

Juliana Kaplan | Jan 5, 2023, 7:00 AM

The Federal Trade Commission wants to make sure your boss can't force you to sign away your rights to work at a similar company — or even start your own business.

Under a new proposed rule, the FTC would ban employers from saddling workers with noncompete agreements that prohibit them from working at competitors, or starting similar businesses. The Commission argues that noncompetes are an unfair method of competition, violating the Federal Trade Commission Act — and their ban would broaden opportunities for American workers, putting almost $300 billion more in their pockets annually.

"Why are we doing this? Basically, in short, there's a whole raft of economic evidence that now documents the ways in which these noncompete clauses undermine competition and competitive conditions," FTC chair Lina Khan said.

Theoretically, noncompetes are meant to stop primarily high-level employees from jumping ship to other companies, bringing proprietary information and other knowledge with them.

But, in practice, noncompetes are more sweeping. Over 30 million workers are made to sign noncompetes, according to the National Employment Law Project, and over a third of those workers are asked to sign the agreements after they've already accepted a job. In some cases, workers can't start their own businesses similar to the ones they're working in.

"If you're a phlebotomist or a journalist and you think that you can't practice your trade in the area in which you work for a long period of time, that's still significantly chilling. It could still mean that you don't match with the optimal job that you want," Elizabeth Wilkins, director of the office of policy planning at the FTC, said. "You can't get a raise, and you can't ask for the kinds of things that you might be able to ask for if you could get a better job."

Agreements are sometimes foisted upon low-wage workers, preventing them from jumping ship to a different restaurant or retail store offering higher pay. Among workplaces paying an average of less than $13 an hour, 29% have noncompetes for all workers, according to a report from the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute.

One famous example of noncompetes: Stopping sandwich sales. In Illinois, sandwich chain Jimmy John's settled a lawsuit from the state's attorney general in 2016, and said it would not enforce noncompetes on its workers. Workers had been banned from working at any business within two or three miles of a Jimmy John's that made over 10% of its revenue from selling "submarine, hero-type, deli-style, pita, and/or wrapped or rolled sandwiches" for two years.

The White House has already taken aim at noncompetes as a barrier to competition. President Joe Biden signed an executive order last summer encouraging the FTC to ban or limit the agreements. Now, the FTC is doing just that, with its proposed rule outlawing employers from entering into, maintaining, or making it seem as though a worker is subject to a noncompete. Independent contractors and unpaid workers would be subject to the rule. Under it, employers would have to rescind current noncompetes and let workers know they're doing so.

The public will have 60 days to submit comments on the proposed rule, which the FTC will then review and potentially incorporate into a final rule.

Anecdotally, some businesses have recently been more dogged in enforcing noncompetes amidst labor shortages in attempt to keep workers. The rule is likely to attract ire from businesses which deploy noncompetes.

Crucially, noncompetes are one mechanism for maintaining what's called monopsony power — which means that, due to a lack of competition, employers have more power over the labor market, and the ability to do things like set wages at lower levels than a more competitive market would create.

The Treasury Department previously found that wages are 15% to 20% lower currently than they would be in a perfectly competitive labor market, showcasing the monopsony power employers still hold. One reason for those suppressed wages, according to Treasury: Noncompetes.

"If this rule were to be finalized and go into effect, workers that are currently stuck in place, effectively, would now be able to freely move to another job," Khan said, adding: "I would think that would basically force employers to compete more vigorously over workers in ways that should lead to higher wages. That should lead to improved working conditions."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Insider

https://www.businessinsider.com/ftc-wants-ban-noncompete-agreements-workers-make-300-billion-more-2023-1

2022 director compensation trends at S&P 500 companies

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:37:40 GMT

By Rebecca (Becky) Burton and Peter Kim | December 1, 2022

Equity-focused increases drive overall non-employee director compensation growth

Companies remain vigilant in their pursuit of balanced yet attractive pay programs amid a turbulent global economy. WTW’s Global Executive Compensation Analysis Team (GECAT) has completed its annual S&P 500 year-over-year director pay program analysis comparing results between 2022 and 2021 proxy data. Total pay for non-employee directors continues to grow at a modest but fixed rate led by a particular focus on equity.

More than half of companies (55%) disclosed pay program changes in 2022, compared with 39% of companies reporting changes in the prior year, reflecting a return to pre-pandemic prevalence. Approximately one-third of companies (34%) increased the value of their annual equity grant, while just under one-fourth (23%) of companies increased their annual cash retainer. Only 16% of companies adjusted their non-core pay elements.

The combination of cash and equity changes has pushed pay levels to a new milestone in the history of GECAT’s annual study, and median total direct compensation (TDC) now rests at $300,000 (a rise from $290,035). Additionally, in what appears to be an acknowledgement of increased public interest in diversity and representation, the gender landscape has shifted from 76% male/24% female in 2018 to 70% male/30% female in 2022.

The median annual cash retainer remained steady at $100,000.

68% of companies deliver all or a portion of annual equity value through restricted stock or restricted stock units, up from 67%

55% of companies made changes to their pay programs

58% of S&P 500 companies separate the roles of COB and chief executive officer (CEO)

Specific key findings include:

Similar to the prior year, the median value of most individual cash components remained the same. Meanwhile annual stock compensation and TDC median values each increased 3%. Consequently, the pay mix for non-employee board members shifted to 61% in equity and 39% in cash (previously 60% in equity and 40% in cash).
Shifts in cash compensation include the prevalence of board meeting fees declining by two percentage points to 4% and the prevalence of committee per-meeting fees declining by three percentage points to 5%. The median value of board meeting fees remained at $2,000, while committee per-meeting fees decreased from $2,000 to $1,500 (–25%). In contrast, additional committee chair retainer median values rose 17% (from $15,000 to $17,500).
Median annual equity values continued upward across all vehicles, pushing overall pay mix more in favor of equity compensation. The median value increased 12% for stock options (from $89,167 to $99,955), 3% for deferred and phantom stock (from $165,047 to $170,000), 3% for restricted stock (from $170,043 to $175,055), and 4% for common stock (from $160,018 to $166,258). The number of companies granting deferred/phantom stock decreased one percentage point (to 17%), while the number of companies granting restricted stock increased one percentage point (to 68%). One-time initial stock grant prevalence remained at 9%, while the value at the median increased 18% from $170,000 to $200,000.
Pay for board leadership roles outpaced TDC increases during the past fiscal year. Additional non-executive chair of the board (COB) pay rose 6% at the median (from $155,000 to $165,000), while additional lead independent director pay leapt 14% at the median (from $35,000 to $40,000). When compared with 2019, these values reflect an overall median increase of just 3% (from $159,959 to $165,000) for COBs and 33% (from $30,000 to $40,000) for lead directors.
Will the utilization of equity continue be favored in lieu of cash, or will companies return their attention to include cash going forward?

Download the report

Title	File Type	File Size
S&P 500 director pay trends - Dec 2022 (EPM 1 Dec 2022)	PDF	.8 MB

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW

https://www.wtwco.com/en-US/Insights/2022/12/2022-director-compensation-trends-at-S-P-500-companies

Employers’ unused PTO problem may be getting even worse

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:30:39 GMT

Workers left an estimated 28% of PTO unused in 2019, according to Sorbet. This year, that share jumped to 55%.

Published Dec. 22, 2022 Ryan Golden

The pandemic disrupted employers’ paid time off policies, but two years later, a recently published study shows the problem may have only grown worse.

Results from a July survey of U.S. adults by PTO solutions provider Sorbet found that 55% of PTO went unused by employees, compared to 28% in 2019. In all, the company said 57% of workers left PTO on the table this year, compared to 37% in 2019.

That unused PTO translated into a real monetary cost for workers, too. Sorbet estimated that the average employee held $3,000 in unused accrued PTO.

“We tend to think of PTO in terms of time, [but] people often don’t realize is that there’s a dollar and cents implication in your compensation when you accrue PTO,” Veetahl Eilat-Raichel, Sorbet’s CEO, said in an interview. “And when you don’t take it, you essentially end up with a hard-earned portion of your compensation locked up and unavailable to you.”

The vendor’s findings seem to mesh with those of other organizations. In August, Eagle Hill Consulting announced survey results that showed 42% of U.S. workers had not taken a vacation in the past year, though not all workers in the cohort reported having access to PTO.

The impact of flexible work

More than two years after COVID-19 created shutdowns and wreaked havoc on employers’ accrual systems, Eilat-Raichel said employers still have difficult questions to consider with respect to how their organizations handle time off, such as whether to adopt policies that group all PTO into one bucket and allow workers agency to choose how to use their time, or create separate buckets.

But as far as employees’ lack of willingness to take time off, the pandemic may have only highlighted a pre-existing problem. “Partially, this trend of not taking time off is deeply rooted in culture,” Eilat-Raichel said. “It has to do with the fear of the optics of it [and] being seen as unprofessional or less committed.”

Employees felt even less legitimacy to take time off with the advent of remote work, she added, because of the ways in which life activities and events bled into the work day.

Few trends are perhaps as reflective of this sentiment as the “workcation,” described in a March BBC article as a trend in which employees who are able to work from anywhere combine elements of a vacation with a workday in an exotic locale.

As excited as employees may be at the thought of cliff diving in between days spent working on a laptop, a recent Visier survey found that employees who worked while on vacation were more likely to quit their jobs than those who disconnected. The firm also found in a separate 2021 survey that one-third of employees felt pressured to check in with their jobs during vacation — while many respondents described vacation as a mere temporary relief from burnout.

What can HR do?

HR cannot solve the unused PTO problem by itself, Eilat-Raichel said. Instead, departments will need to work with leadership and management to address the cultural component involved. That could start with a baseline of ensuring employees have the time they need to take care of themselves, and then ensuring that leaders model the behavior they want to see from workers.

“If the general sentiment is that you need to always be on in order to perform, that’s not going to work,” Eilat-Raichel said.

Having access to the right data also may help. Eilat-Raichel said she is seeing employers track PTO use and include it as part of employees’ performance reviews so that managers can follow up on the subject.

Employers also may need to be aware of the inequities inherent in PTO availability and use. Sorbet, for instance, found that male employees received 10% more PTO days on average than women, and that men took 33% more days off than women.

Since the start of the pandemic, employers have experimented with enhanced PTO policies on a small scale. Google announced in February that it would implement a minimum of 20 vacation days for employees alongside expanded caregiving leaves. Others, like Hootsuite, have taken companywide weeks off with the aim of addressing burnout and mental health issues.

PTO can be an expensive and difficult benefit to administer, but the fact that workers let their time off go underutilized and unused “almost does the exact opposite of what PTO was originally intended to do,” Eilat-Raichal said. “There’s so much to be unlocked by this incredible benefit that you already have.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/employers-unused-pto-problem-may-be-getting-even-worse/639436/

More companies are trying out 4-day workweeks — and not turning back

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:27:10 GMT

One advocate says reduced-hour weeks could become the norm in the next decade.

Published Dec. 21, 2022 By Ginger Christ

It’s often said that one of the silver linings of the COVID-19 pandemic is the reshuffling of priorities. As people reflect on what matters most, they’ve put more value on a work-life balance and on personal time to spend with loved ones or on hobbies.

“There is more to life than just slogging for hours and hours on end. I think the 21st century, the ‘quiet quitting,’ the Great Resignation, they represent that the working class, the workers, have decided they want to have quality, meaningful work they value, but they also have things they want to do outside of work,” said 4 Day Week Global Managing Director and Co-founder Charlotte Lockhart.

Lockhart’s not-for-profit launched in 2019 after news spread about a successful trial the previous year at New-Zealand-based estate planning company Perpetual Guardian, a company co-founded by Lockhart’s 4 Day Week Global colleague Andrew Barnes.

Since then, 4 Day Week Global has led more than 250 companies through pilot programs on shortened weeks. The latest cohort of companies included 33 businesses, most of which were in the U.S. or Ireland or were fully remote. Of those, none said they planned to return to a five-day week after the six-month pilot ended, a report released Nov. 30 found. Companies reported average revenue gains of 38% compared to the previous year and rated productivity at a 7.7 out of 10 during the trial.

On the employee side, about 97% said they wanted to continue with shortened weeks, and 70% said they would need to receive 10% to 50% more pay to work at a job with a five-day workweek, the report found.

“The four-day week has been transformative for our business and our people. Staff are more focused, more engaged and more dedicated, helping us hit our goals better than before. Greater employee retention and faster hiring has been surprisingly powerful in driving improved business outcomes, too,” Jon Leland, chief strategy officer at Kickstarter, said in a news release about the pilot program. “We’re achieving more as an organization, while giving people time to start new creative projects, rest and be with their families. It’s a true win-win.”

Lockhart said there’s been a “real shift since the pandemic” on companies’ interest in shortening the workweek.

“Prior to the pandemic, we really did have to explain to people all of the benefits that are there. Now, it’s about the how. We shifted from why to how,” Lockhart told HR Dive.

Software company Buffer did two different consecutive trials on four-day workweeks starting in May 2020 as a way to give employees more flexibility. The company’s former Director of People Nicole Miller said, “The four-day workweek resulted in sustained productivity levels and a better sense of work-life balance.”

Buffer has Fridays as the default day off, which employees may use as overflow days when needed to catch up on work. Employees still get paid the same as when they were working five days per week.

Umber Bhatti, a content strategist at Buffer, said the schedule change initially took some adjustment.

“It was strange when Thursday rolled around, and people would say ‘have a great weekend’ in Slack. I kept forgetting that meetings couldn’t be scheduled on Fridays and end-of-week deadlines needed to be met by Thursday. There was even a bit of anxiety on my part as I wondered if the work was really doable in just four days,” Bhatti said. “But gradually, I became confident that this schedule was actually realistic.”

As more companies normalize reducing the time on the clock, Lockhart sees the four-day workweek movement making big strides in the coming years.

“There are some real conversations being had not just by companies but also by governments in some shape or form, whether they be national or local. I think we’ve got to the point now where some form of reduced-hours working will be the norm in the next decade,” Lockhart told HR Dive.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/companies-clocking-in-on-four-day-workweeks/639364/

Employers are reshaping performance management and pay programs

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:23:52 GMT

ARLINGTON, VA, December 13, 2022 — Employers in North America need to reshape their performance management efforts and pay-for-performance programs to give them a much-needed boost, according to a survey of over 800 global organizations by WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company. The survey revealed similar conclusions worldwide.

The survey found just one in four North America employers (26%) reported being effective at both managing and paying for performance. Additionally, the gap between the priorities for performance management and delivering on those objectives is wide. For example, more than nine in 10 North America respondents (93%) cited driving organization performance as a key objective for performance management, yet less than half (44%) said their performance management program is meeting that objective. Similarly, nearly three in four (72%) said supporting the career development of their employees is a primary objective, but only 31% said their performance management program was meeting that objective.

North America respondents also had mixed views on the effectiveness of managers in evaluating performance and differentiating pay. Less than half (49%) agree that managers at their organizations are effective at assessing the performance of their direct reports. A similar number — 46% — consider their managers effective at differentiating their direct reports’ performance. Further, only one in three organizations indicates its employees feel their performance is evaluated fairly. Interestingly, despite the rapid increase in remote and hybrid working models, only one in six employers (16%) reports having altered its performance management approach to align with such models.

“Employers have their work cut out to raise the bar on their performance management programs. Many recognize that their programs have not kept up with the changes due to the pandemic and tight labor market, yet they have not taken action. Ideally, employers will reshape their programs to correspond with new work styles and employee career aspirations and provide a better employee experience,” said Amy Sung, Work & Rewards global growth leader, WTW.

While most employers recognize their programs are falling short of expectations, the survey found that North America employers already have several initiatives in place or are planning or considering enhancing their performance management and pay-for-performance programs:

Three in 10 respondents (34%) have strengthened the link between performance management and career development; another 60% are planning or considering doing so.
Over half of employers (54%) currently ensure ongoing and meaningful performance dialogue between managers and employees in a remote/hybrid working environment; another 39% are planning or considering taking actions to ensure meaningful dialogue.
Only 17% of employers have improved employees’ understanding of how their performance is evaluated, but 70% are planning to improve employee understanding.
Nearly one in four respondents (23%) has improved the employee and manager experience, but 64% are planning or considering ways to improve the experience.

Employers that make the effort to improve their programs are likely to reap financial benefits. The study found that companies using performance management programs effectively are one and a half times as likely to report financially outperforming their industry peers and one and a quarter times as likely to report having higher employee productivity than their peers. Companies that are effectively using pay programs to drive individual and team performance are also more likely to outperform their peers (1.2 times) and report higher employee productivity (1.4 times) than their peers.

“Our results show that performance management can be a key competitive differentiator as can pay-for-performance programs. While most organizations are currently planning for larger increases in 2023, the need to demonstrate to employees how their pay is tied to performance has never been greater,” said Alex Weisgerber, senior director, Work & Rewards, WTW.

About the survey

A total of 837 organizations worldwide, including 150 North America employers, participated in the 2022 Performance Reset Survey. The survey was conducted during September and October 2022. North America respondents employ more than 2.7 million workers.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW (NASDAQ: WTW)

https://www.wtwco.com/en-US/News/2022/12/employers-are-reshaping-performance-management-and-pay-programs

What to know about salary trends in 2023

Bill Brewer — Wed, 21 Dec 2022 17:02:08 GMT

By Kathryn Mayer on December 5, 2022

Compensation is always an important part of the employer arsenal, but in 2023, that might be more true than ever. Fueled by a confluence of factors—rising inflation and changing employee expectations among them—HR leaders are planning to turn to larger-than-usual salary increases in 2023, data indicates.

But reevaluating employee salaries isn’t the only thing HR and other company leaders need to think about in the coming year. Here is what to know about salary strategies as 2023 approaches.

Next year looks to be a “banner year” for salary increases. A report from Salary.com, which surveyed 1,000 HR professionals, finds that nearly half of U.S. employers plan higher year-over-year budget increases next year compared to 2022. The long-predominant 3% raise, which started its decline last year, has been replaced by a median raise of 4% across all employee categories, the survey finds. And a quarter of employers plan to give increases in the range of 5%–7% in 2023.

“2023 promises to be another banner year for employees seeking salary increases,” says Chris Fusco, senior vice president of compensation at Salary.com. That’s a far cry from just a couple of years ago. When the pandemic began in 2020, Fusco adds, just under 10% of employers planned a higher salary budget increase than in the prior year.

Other reports are finding similar results: New Willis Towers Watson data finds that salary boosts are forecast to be 4.6% in 2023, up from a mid-year estimate of 4.1%. And compensation consultancy Pearl Meyer data finds that 40% of business and HR leaders expect to provide higher salary increases next year than in 2022.

Rising inflation—and talent wars—are driving the trend of higher salaries. Not one but two factors are helping to fuel higher salaries in 2023. Inflation has soared over the past year, causing employees to shell out more for their groceries, gas, housing, medical costs and more. Although inflation has fallen a bit in the last month from 40-year-highs (inflation jumped 7.7% in October versus a year ago, according to the latest cost-of-living index), costs are still hitting workers hard and resulting in a dive in their financial confidence. With employees struggling, many employers are responding. Gartner, for instance, found that 63% of executives plan to make compensation adjustments in response to high inflation.

Plus, a competitive job market is making it all the more imperative for employers to rethink salaries, as well as benefits, to not only entice workers to join their ranks, but sway them to stay, experts say. A survey from human resources consulting firm Mercer finds that more than two-thirds of U.S. employers say they are looking to enhance their health and benefits offerings next year in order to attract and retain talent. Better healthcare access, more affordable medical care and increased family-friendly benefits are all on tap, Mercer found.

Salary transparency laws are here. Pay transparency laws are taking effect throughout the country—from New York City to Colorado and, starting Jan. 1, California. It’s a big shift that has big implications for employers in those areas—and elsewhere.

One thing HR leaders should keep in mind about the new rules? Posting broad salary ranges in response to the law rather than good faith estimates—say, a salary range that is $75,000-$250,000—is likely going to hurt employers by not only opening an employer up to city or state penalties, but also by deterring potential candidates. “This is forcing organizations to put out one of the things that really builds trust, and that’s transparency around pay,” says Tony Guadagni, senior principal in the Gartner HR practice. “If done right, it could be a really positive thing, a boon for organizations.”

Bonuses may be an even bigger part of the equation. What’s a hot job market without salary increases, benefits enhancements and bonuses? More employers say they’re offering, or considering offering, bonuses to employees to both reward workers and help them with rising expenses. According to Pearl Meyer, 5% to 20% have increased or plan to increase competitive positioning for one or more pay components, like base salary, cash bonuses or equity-based incentives.

Compensation attention should be focused on both new hires and current employees. Many employers are upping the ante for potential hires, offering large paydays. A survey of more than 635 workers and 650 hiring managers by software firm Capterra, for example, finds that companies are increasing pay for new hires: 65% of hiring managers say starting salaries and wages at their organization are higher than usual right now due to inflation and talent shortages. On average, new hire pay is 9% higher than usual. But, some analysts warn, efforts to woo candidates could be to the chagrin of current employees, many of whom are suffering from financial stress as they reel from the soaring cost-of-living and seek help from employers in the form of compensation increases.

Though a focus on competitive pay for new hires “solves one problem—filling important job openings,” says Brian Westfall, principal HR analyst with Capterra, it’s also creating pay discrepancies with tenured employees.

“That’s causing tension. Inflation has already left workers feeling slighted about the reduced purchasing power of their paychecks,” he says. “The fact that new hires are getting higher wages and salaries right now feels like adding insult to injury.”

Westfall recommends that HR leaders audit compensation frequently to identify glaring discrepancies between new and existing employees. “You may not be able to increase salaries and fix every discrepancy you find, but hopefully you can close the gap in the worst cases,” he says.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/what-to-know-about-salary-trends-in-2023/

How one beverage distributor tackled chronic employee illness

Bill Brewer — Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:55:12 GMT

By Phil Albinus on December 16, 2022

Today’s healthcare system is failing blue-collar workers who deal with chronic diseases, creating unnecessary “barriers” that are worsening employee health.

So says George Brown, director of Retro Health, the onsite clinics created by beverage distributor L&F Distributors, which provides medical testing and consultation to L&F’s 1,200 employees and their dependents in Texas and New Mexico.

L&F employees, many of whom drive delivery trucks or move cases of beer in a warehouse, told their supervisors and HR leaders that time and money prevent them from accessing care to control issues like weight, diabetes, high cholesterol, hypertension and more.

They typically say “I’ve got to clock out, drive across town and see a doctor. I’m going to sit there for a couple of hours in the waiting room and then see the doctor for maybe 10 minutes or probably less,” explains Brown.

L&F executives took a two-pronged approach to provide more attentive medical care to their employees while reducing their visits to emergency departments. In 2017, the employer built nine onsite medical offices inside their distribution centers and a year later it provided employees with health solution provider b.well Connected Health’s platform, a suite of mobile tools through which employees can store medical records, co-pay and insurance information, and receive healthcare advice.

With this one-two approach, the beverage distributor saw ED visits slashed by 69%, overall per-member, per-month health costs reduced by 22%, and utilization of the onsite clinics increased by 57% in one year. (A recent UnitedHealth Group study found that an ED visit costs around $2,200 on average, and about two-thirds of the nation’s roughly 27 million annual ED visits are avoidable.)

For Brown, a major driver of the success comes down to the employee adoption rate of the b.well solution. So far, 90% of employees have registered for the tool, and more than 60% have used it on a regular basis since its introduction in 2018. And during the early days of COVID, the b.well app was HR’s primary form of communication for employees to learn about prevention information and pandemic updates.

b.well describes its platform as a digital health management tool that combines employees’ medical history gathered from their physicians and caregivers to share this information with the employees’ current and future medical professionals for a holistic view of their health. The solution also gives employers data analysis of the workforce to provide a “snapshot” of employee health and wellness without violating the end users’ HIPAA rights, says Heather Crosby, director of clinical programs for b.well.

In addition to improving employee health, the app and the rollout of onsite clinics have also helped with the beverage distributor’s employee engagement. Brown says that beverage distributors typically experience a high worker turnover rate but resignations have lessened since it implemented the b.well app and services from the onsite clinics, suggesting that the focus on health is impacting more than just employees’ physical wellbeing. [Employee engagement will be a key topic at the 2023 HR Tech Virtual Conference from Feb. 28 to March 2.]

“They’re living healthier lives. We’re saving money, we’re able to share those cost savings back with the employees by keeping their premiums and their deductibles low,” says Brown. “It just becomes this flywheel where everybody wins.”

At first, some L&F managers and executives doubted that its workers would download and use a health app on their mobile devices. “We were told when we started this that these are blue-collar guys and they don’t like technology,” says Brown. “That’s complete B.S. because if it’s done really well and it’s useful and helpful, they’ll use it.”

“They won’t use bad technology,” he adds. “They’ll use really good and helpful technology.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/how-one-beverage-distributor-tackled-chronic-employee-illness/?oly_enc_id=1127F6638590B7V

U.S. Surgeon General Releases New Framework for Mental Health & Well-Being in the Workplace

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 Oct 2022 02:04:33 GMT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 20, 2022

Reports of “Quiet Quitting” and the Great Resignation Highlight How the COVID-19 Pandemic Shifted the Way Americans Live and Work

Framework Highlights Five Essentials for Workers in Organizations, and Businesses of Every Size to Help Leaders Develop Policies and Practices that Support the Mental Health and Well-Being of Workers

(Washington, DC) -- Today, United States Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy released a new Surgeon General’s Framework for Mental Health & Well-Being in the Workplace outlining the foundational role that workplaces should play in promoting the health and well-being of workers and our communities. As reports of “quiet quitting” and the Great Resignation have shown, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the nature of work for many and the relationship that some workers have with their jobs.

With more than 160 million people participating in the United States workforce and with the average full-time worker in the United States spending about half of their waking life at work, workplaces play a significant role in shaping our mental and physical well-being. Employers have a unique opportunity not only to invest in the mental health and well-being of their workforce, but also to strengthen their organizations’ success by doing so.

“A healthy workforce is the foundation for thriving organizations and healthier communities,” said Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy. “As we recover from the worst of the pandemic, we have an opportunity and the power to make workplaces engines for mental health and well-being, and this Surgeon General’s Framework shows us how we can start. It will require organizations to rethink how they protect workers from harm, foster a sense of connection among workers, show workers that they matter, make space for their lives outside work, and support their growth. It will be worth it, because the benefits will accrue for workers and organizations alike.”

The COVID-19 pandemic brought the relationship between work and well-being into clearer focus for many U.S. workers. According to recent surveys:

76% of U.S. workers in a 2021 survey reported at least one symptom of a mental health condition (anxiety, depression), an increase of 17 percentage points in just two years.
81% of workers reported that they will be looking for workplaces that support mental health in the future.
84% of respondents reported at least one workplace factor that had a negative impact on their mental health .

In the Surgeon General’s Framework for Mental Health and Well-Being in the Workplace, Dr. Murthy outlines Five Essentials for Workplace Mental Health and Well-Being to help organizations develop, institutionalize, and update policies, processes, and practices that best support the mental health and well-being of all workers.

Protection from Harm: Creating the conditions for physical and psychological safety is a critical foundation for ensuring mental health and well-being in the workplace. In order to promote practices that better assure protection from harm, workplaces can:
1. Prioritize workplace physical and psychological safety
2. Enable adequate rest
3. Normalize and support focusing on mental health
4. Operationalize Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) norms, policies, and programs
Connection and Community: Fostering positive social interaction and relationships in the workplace supports worker well-being. In order to promote practices that better assure connection and community, workplaces can:
1. Create cultures of inclusion and belonging
2. Cultivate trusted relationships
3. Foster collaboration and teamwork
Work-Life Harmony: Professional and personal roles can create work and non-work conflicts. In order to promote practices that better assure work-life harmony, workplaces can:
1. Provide more autonomy over how work is done
2. Make schedules as flexible and predictable as possible
3. Increase access to paid leave
4. Respect boundaries between work and non-work time
Mattering at Work: People want to know that they matter to those around them and that their work matters. Knowing you matter has been shown to lower stress, while feeling like you do not can increase the risk for depression. In order to better assure a culture of mattering at work, workplaces can:
1. Provide a living wage
2. Engage workers in workplace decisions
3. Build a culture of gratitude and recognition
4. Connect individual work with organizational mission
Opportunities for Growth: When organizations create more opportunities for workers to accomplish goals based on their skills and growth, workers become more optimistic about their abilities and more enthusiastic about contributing to the organization. In order to promote practices that better assure opportunities for growth, workplaces can:
1. Offer quality training, education, and mentoring
2. Foster clear, equitable pathways for career advancement
3. Ensure relevant, reciprocal feedback

A Surgeon General’s Framework is a guide to call attention to a public health issue, developed to help the American public better understand and address factors that affect health. This particular Framework provides Essentials, a foundation of key components, for workplace leaders to engage all workers and equitably support their mental health and well-being. It includes evidence-informed practices that leadership across workplaces of varied sizes and industries can apply to reimagine and reinvigorate their organizations.

As the Nation’s Doctor – the 21st Surgeon General of the United States – Dr. Murthy has focused much of his work, research, and public platform on how the nation can recover from the pandemic stronger than before, including his recently-issued Surgeon General’s Advisories on Youth Mental Health and Health Worker Well-Being. The Surgeon General’s Framework for Mental Health and Well-Being in the Workplace is part of the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) ongoing efforts to support President Joe Biden’s whole-of-government strategy to transform mental health services for all Americans—a key part of the President’s Unity Agenda that is reflected in the President’s Fiscal Year 2023 budget. Following the President’s State of the Union in March, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra kicked off the HHS National Tour to Strengthen Mental Health to address the mental health challenges that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, including substance use, youth mental health, and suicide.

You can read the full Framework here.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2022/10/20/us-surgeon-general-releases-new-framework-mental-health-well-being-workplace.html

401(k) And IRA Contribution Limits Will Jump In 2023, IRS Says

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 Oct 2022 01:57:42 GMT

Janet Novack, Forbes Staff

The Internal Revenue Service announced today that young workers will be allowed to contribute up to $22,500 pretax to a 401(k) or similar retirement savings plan in 2023, a $2,000 jump from the current $20,500 limit. Those 50 or older will be permitted to sock away up to $30,000, a $3,000 boost, which includes a $7,500 “catch-up” contribution, up from a $6,500 catch-up in 2022. That means employees who are already contributing the maximum and are able to save more will in effect be able to give themselves a tax cut.

At the same time, the IRS said, the limit for contributions to a pre-tax or Roth IRA will rise next year to $6,500, up from the $6,000 level where it has been stalled for four years. Those 50 and older can make an additional $1,000 catch-up contribution to an IRA—a number that is not subject to inflation adjustments.

Meanwhile, the maximum contribution an employee can make to a Simple IRA Plan—a retirement plan designed for small businesses—will rise to $15,500 in 2023, up from $14,000.

The contribution limit increases were widely anticipated since they are based on the inflation rate—now running at a 40-year high. According to benefits consultant Mercer, the limit increases are all the largest ever. (The last time inflation was this high, automatic adjustments weren’t a part of the tax code.)

Last week, the IRS released a slew of other inflation adjustments, including higher standard deductions and tax brackets and increases in the amount of wealth that can be transferred free of gift or estate tax. The Social Security Administration also announced an 8.7% cost of living adjustment for 2023—an automatic benefits boost increase for 70 million Americans.

The full set of IRS adjustments to retirement plans are available here, in Notice 2022-55.

Here’s more of what you need to know about the retirement adjustments for 2023.

401(k) Plans

The new $22,500 and $30,000 limits apply to employee contributions that are made either pre-tax or to a Roth account in a 401(k) plan, or to similar plans maintained by non-profit and government employers—403(b) plans, most 457 plans and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan for workers.

There’s also an overall limit (including employer contributions) on how much can go into any employee’s 401(k) each year. That will be jumping from $61,000 to $66,000 for younger workers and from $67,500 to $73,500 for those 50 plus, who get that catch-up boost. The highest paid employees may find that number relevant, since some plans permit workers to top up their own contributions to reach the limit. Top-up contributions must be made with after tax dollars and don’t go into a Roth.

It works like this: Pre-tax contributions reduce your current tax bill and grow tax deferred, but all your withdrawals in retirement are taxable (with certain exceptions for money transferred directly to charity). Roth contributions are made after tax and all earnings on them (as well as the original contributions) are tax free when taken out in retirement. Earnings on after-tax contributions are merely tax deferred and only the original contributions come out tax free.

IRA Contributions And Income Limits

While the amount you can contribute to an IRA is rising from $6,000 to $6,500, that’s not the only number that has been adjusted for inflation. You can’t make a tax deductible contribution to an IRA unless you either have no workplace retirement plan or your income is below certain limits. For 2023, the deduction will phase out for single taxpayers earning between $73,000 and $83,000 (up from $68,000 to $78,000) and for married couples filing jointly earning $116,000 to $136,000 (up from between $109,000 and $129,000). If your spouse is covered by a workplace plan and you’re not, your deduction for an IRA phases out between $218,000 and $228,000 in 2023, up from $204,000 to $214,000 in 2022.

At the same time, the income limits to make a contribution to a Roth IRA, which are higher than those for the pre-tax IRA, are also rising sharply. (Important note: the pre-tax and Roth IRA are both subject to the same $6,500/$7,500 contribution limit. Roth IRAs are generally considered a desirable account to fund because they are so flexible—you can always take out your original contributions to a Roth IRA without facing the sort of tax penalties that can hit pre-retirement withdrawals from other accounts. In fact, Roth IRAs can even function as an emergency account for young savers.)

The income phase-out for contributions to a Roth IRA for singles and heads of household will be $138,000 to $153,000 in 2023 (up from $129,000 to $144,000). For married couples filing jointly, the phase-out range will be $218,000 to $228,000, up from $204,000 to $214,000 this year.

SEP IRAs and Solo 401(k)s

These are plans designed for the self-employed and small business owners. The maximum that can be saved in a SEP IRA will go to $66,000, up from $61,000 in 2022. That’s considered an employer contribution and is based on total earnings. A self-employed person can effectively contribute up to 20% of earnings of up to $330,000, up from $305,000 in 2022.

The limit for total contributions to a Solo 401(k)—a 401(k) for self-employed folks—is rising from $61,000 to $66,000 for younger folks and from $67,500 to $73,500 for those 50 and older. That’s the same as the overall limit for regular 401(k)s. One part is the employee contribution, which has the same contribution limits as any other 401(k)—$22,500 in 2023 for younger workers and $30,000 for those 50 or older. The other part is the employer contribution and is based on earnings. One advantage of a Solo 401(k) is that the employee contribution part allows the self-employed to save large amounts at lower earnings levels than with a SEP IRA. Another advantage is that those 50 and older can make an additional catch-up contribution to a Solo 401(k), but not to a SEP IRA.

Saver’s Credit

This is a tax credit designed to encourage low and moderate income workers to save for retirement by matching (at a rate of 10% to 50%) some of what they contribute to an IRA or workplace plan. The credit phases down and out as a taxpayer’s income rises. In 2023, the credit will phase out at $73,000 for married couples filing joint tax returns (up from $68,000); $36,500 for singles and couples filing separately (up from $34,000); and $54,750 for heads of household (up from $51,000).

Defined Benefit Plans

The amount that can be put into a plan for any one worker is affected by a Congressionally set (and inflation adjusted) limit to how much of that worker’s salary can be considered for calculating his future benefit. That maximum salary in 2023 will be $265,000, up from $245,000. The use of defined benefit plans has declined at big companies, but older small business owners have increasingly been using custom designed defined benefit plans to sock away huge amounts on a pre-tax basis.

QLACs

The dollar limit on the amount of your IRA or 401(k) you can invest in a qualified longevity annuity contract will rise in 2023 to $155,000 from $145,000. A QLAC pays you money some time in the future and is considered a way to avoid outliving your money or to provide for long term care expenses late in life. The $155,000 is a lifetime limit, not an annual limit.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2022/10/21/for-2023-401k-savings-limits-will-jump-by-record-amount/?sh=75aba6e636b3

2023 FSA limits increase in response to rising inflation

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 Oct 2022 01:52:20 GMT

By Kathryn Mayer | October 21, 2022

Spurred by soaring inflation, which has been on an upward trajectory over the last year, the Internal Revenue Service pushed the cap for flexible spending accounts next year above $3,000 in one of the larger increases in recent years.

Employees will be able to contribute $3,050 to FSAs—made pretax through salary reductions—in 2023, the agency said this week. That’s up $200 from this year’s $2,850 limit. FSA limits generally increase by about $100 each year.

For cafeteria plans that permit the carryover of unused amounts, the maximum carryover amount is $610—an increase of $40, the IRS said.

Shobin Uralil, co-founder and COO of health savings account provider Lively, says the increase in FSA contribution limits is “a step in the right direction” but isn’t enough to address financial concerns from employees. “Americans are seriously struggling due to high inflation rates, and the reality is that they will need more ways to save and invest their dollars to protect their retirement,” he says.

Indeed, the 7% increase for FSA limits is still lower than the current inflation rate, which is 8.2%, according to the latest consumer price index. Inflation has taken its toll on nearly all aspects of employees’ finances, from monthly expenses to emergency savings and retirement savings, information that is spurring many employers to make changes in the form of salary adjustments, bonuses or enhanced financial wellness benefits.

Still, a bigger increase in FSA limits—as well as health savings accounts—can be helpful for workers. The IRS back in May announced its 2023 annual HSA limits, which also increased more significantly in response to inflation. Health savings account contribution limits for an individual with self-only coverage will jump to $3,850—a significant $200 increase from $3,650 for this year. Last year, the amount climbed just $50 from $3,600 for 2021. For family coverage, the HSA contribution limit jumps to $7,750 next year from $7,300 in 2022.

Experts say employers would be wise to promote HSAs and FSAs and encourage workers to increase their contributions as a helpful way to assist with medical costs.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Human Resources Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/2023-fsa-limits-increase-in-response-to-rising-inflation/

California law forces most companies to provide salary info in job ads

Bill Brewer — Tue, 04 Oct 2022 18:26:06 GMT

Pay transparency is having a moment. Here’s what you should know.

by Taylor Telford on October 3, 2022

California companies with more than 15 employees will be required to list salary ranges for jobs and make that information available to existing employees thanks to a new law signed last week by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D).

The law represents a major win in the growing push for pay transparency, which experts say is a critical lever for countering the wage gap. In California, women lose $87 billion to the pay gap each year, according to Newsom’s office.

Here’s what you need to know.

• What does the law do?

• Which other states have adopted pay transparency measures?

• Why does it matter?

• How should employers respond?

• How should employees make use of this information?

What does the law do?

Companies in California were already required to provide pay scale information for job candidates upon request, but after the new law takes effect on Jan. 1, 2023, companies with 15 or more employees will have to do so for all postings, both internal and external.

The law applies to roughly 200,000 companies, which employ about 19 million workers, the vast majority of California’s labor force.

Companies with 100 or more employees will also be required to report detailed pay information to California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing annually. Updated pay data reports will be due starting May 10, 2023. Companies could face fines of $100 per employee for failing to comply.

California is home to scores of corporate giants, including Google, Meta, Oracle, Apple, Uber and Lyft.

Peter Bamberger, scholar with the Academy of Management and a professor in the Coller School of Management at Tel Aviv University, said that the law represents “the strongest legislative effort for pay transparency in the U.S. to date.”

“For employees, this legislation takes a good part of the guessing game out of pay negotiations and levels the playing field in such negotiations,” Bamberger said, noting that it is similar to the type of pay transparency regulations seen in much of the European Union.

Which other states have adopted pay transparency measures?

Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Nevada, Rhode Island and Washington have enacted some form of pay transparency laws. New York City has a law taking effect Nov. 1, while New York state’s law is awaiting the governor’s signature.

But while other state measures tend to require posting salary ranges in ads, only California’s law gives existing employees the ability to access the same information, according to Greg Selker, managing director at Stanton Chase, a global executive search firm.

Companies could face a cost — in the form of public image and talent retention — for failing to address pay inequality in their ranks, Selker said.

Why does it matter?

Pay transparency is seen as critical to reducing gender and racial pay gaps. Women in the United States earned 17 percent less than men in 2021, according to the most recent available data from the organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

For women of color, the gap is often greater: Black women earned roughly 88 percent of the median wages of White women in the second quarter of 2022, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while median earnings of Hispanic women were about 79 percent of White women.

Black men earn 82 percent of the median earnings of White men in the second quarter of 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while the median earnings for Hispanic men were 75.5 percent of the median for White men. Earnings of Asian men and women were higher than their White counterparts.

How should employers respond?

Employers should view this as “an opportunity to identify and correct potential disparities that they had not previously focused on,” according to Jennifer Cormier, a partner at Ropes & Gray, a firm with expertise in employment law.

The new law may create challenges for companies that have not been actively considering pay equity issues, so employers should work with legal counsel to ensure that they are complying, Cormier said. Employers can also conduct their own pay equity audits with an outside consultant.

Companies could also benefit from understanding their rivals’ compensation packages for similar positions if they want to be competitive in the labor market.

“Ultimately, employers who embrace pay transparency could also potentially better attract top talent and increase employee morale,” Cormier said.

How should employees make use of this information?

Employees should study the pay ranges that are made public and use that information in bargaining. In coming years, employees should request a copy of the annual pay equity reports from their employer to make sure they are being compensated fairly, Bamberger said.

Armed with the new pay information, employees can also meet with compensation and HR professionals to learn how to best advocate for themselves, said Emily Dickens, chief of staff at the Society for Human Resource Management.

“It’s going to require more than just recognizing that there are systemic gaps that do adversely impact one group over another,” Dickens said. “You can have all the laws on the books, but it’s going to take effort on both parts.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/03/faq-california-pay-transparency-law/

Fortune: Say goodbye to the standard 3% raise—one-quarter of employers plan to give increases of 5-7% next year

Bill Brewer — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 18:22:54 GMT

BYSHERYL ESTRADA

September 8, 2022 at 3:24 AM PDT

Annual pay raise budgets in the U.S. are getting a bump in 2023 from the longtime status quo.

“The increases have gone up from what had been 3% for many years,” David Turetsky, VP of consulting at Salary.com, told me. “It’s now budgeted for 4% and potentially higher for next year.”

New data released by Salary.com, a software company that provides compensation data and analytics, found that the median pay increase of 4% is continuing an upward trend that began in 2022.

For salary budget planning, the factors usually considered in raises include a general increase (which considers inflation), equity/market adjustment, and merit increases, according to the data.

Unemployment is low right now, Turetsky says. “There are skilled and unskilled roles that are going unfilled,” he says. “And that’s putting a lot of pressure on the starting rates for those jobs.”

He continues, “We usually see job switchers get large pay increases when they go to other places. Now we’re seeing people who are what we call ‘stayers,’ people who stay in roles, are saying, ‘Well, what about me?’ And so these 4% increases are for the job-stayers.”

For the past 10 years, since recovery from the financial crisis of 2008, the average wage increase percentage has been about 3%, Lori Wisper, a managing director at the advisory firm Willis Towers Watson, recently told me. Coming up with a salary budget “is not arbitrary for most companies, especially big companies, where even a 10th of a percent represents millions, maybe even hundreds of millions of dollars in payroll,” Wisper said.

Salary.com’s survey of more than 1,000 companies in a range of industries conducted in June found that the median 4% increase planned for 2023 is across all employee categories—executives, managers, and exempt and nonexempt employees. However, that data showed that the actual median increase in 2022 for executives was 3.5% compared to 4% for all other categories.

“I think it’s saying that executives basically said, ‘Look, we’re going to take a little bit less so we can give the other groups more,’” Turetsky says. “Actually, executive salary isn’t typically the highest driver of pay. Usually incentives or stock or something else is a larger component of pay.” Stock and stock-option awards certainly boosted executive compensation in 2021. For example, the median pay packet for leaders of S&P 500 companies rose roughly 12% to $14.7 million that year.

Salary.com also found that when it comes to salary percentage increases, the health care industry was an outlier. Health care median total increases in 2022 were just in the 3% range. Salary increases in the health care industry are impacted by reimbursement limits imposed by private and federal health insurers, according to the report.

Although there’s historic inflation this year, smaller organizations (under 500 full-time employees) were more likely to provide cost of living increases than larger organizations, according to the report. Average cost of living increases for smaller organizations were in the range of 2.5–2.7% higher than the typical 2% provided by larger organizations.

When it comes to overall salary percentage increases, “a lot of companies are planning to do more next year,” Turetsky says. A quarter of employers surveyed plan to give increases in the range of 5–7%. And 48% said they planned on salary budget increases that are higher or significantly higher than in 2022.

“Salary budgeting time [for next year] is actually right now,” he says. “HR is working with their CFO partners to basically say, ‘How much can we afford to pay?'”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Fortune

https://fortune.com/2022/09/08/goodbye-standard-3-percent-raise-employers-increase-next-year/

More North American organizations plan to disclose pay information, survey finds

Bill Brewer — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 18:18:03 GMT

ARLINGTON, VA, September 14, 2022 — In light of the increased legislation on pay transparency, the number of North American organizations that disclose pay rate and range information to prospective employees is expected to surge across the U.S., even in places without requirements. This, according to a new pulse survey by leading global advisory, broking and solutions company WTW (NASDAQ: WTW).

“We expect the recent wave of pay transparency legislation to continue.”
Mariann Madden | North America Fair Pay co-lead, WTW

The 2022 Pay Clarity Survey found that 17% of companies are already disclosing pay range information in U.S. locations where not required by state or local laws. In addition, 62% of organizations are planning or considering disclosing pay rate information in the future, even where there are not local mandates requiring them to do so. This will include information such as hiring range and full salary range, with 58% of companies planning on doing the former and 48% the latter. The survey found that 71% of companies plan to use a consistent approach in determining which pay rate and range information will be disclosed across all jobs. Over half of organizations (57%) are applying a geographic pay policy to determine the pay rates or ranges, and they will differ based on location of the job.

Interestingly, some organizations that currently disclose pay rates are seeing more questions from current (38%) and prospective (27%) employees. Nearly one in six companies (16%) are also seeing an increased number of candidate applications.

“We expect the recent wave of pay transparency legislation to continue,” said Mariann Madden, North America Fair Pay co-lead, WTW. “Regulatory requirements are only one factor in the expected increase in disclosures and communication about pay. Job seekers and current employees want to know and understand that they are treated fairly and are provided with equal opportunities to thrive and grow within the organization.”

Still, some companies are holding back on communicating pay information. About three in 10 (31%) organizations say their pay programs are not ready for this kind of transparency. Almost 30% cite administrative complexity and 25% cite lack of clear job architecture as reasons to hold back. In part due to these underlying considerations, almost half of all organizations (46%) cite possible employee reactions as a reason for holding back on communicating about pay.

The survey also found that most organizations plan to provide a narrative on their approach to managing pay equity. One-third of North American organizations (33%) are already disclosing information on their approach to managing pay equity, and 53% expect to do so in the future and on a global level.

“We’re seeing a clear trend among employers around the globe publicly committing to fair pay. In North America, companies are beginning to disclose their adjusted pay gaps, while in Europe more organizations are sharing their fair pay ambitions as well as their plans to monitor, track and communicate progress toward their commitments. We expect that level of transparency will likely become the norm as external stakeholders demand more clarity and visibility into companies’ pay management practices,” concluded Lindsay Wiggins, North America Fair Pay co-lead, WTW.

About the survey

WTW’s 2022 Pay Clarity Survey, North America was conducted between June 27 and July 8, 2022. In North America, a total of 388 respondents completed the survey.

About WTW

Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WTW (Willis Towers Watson)

https://www.wtwco.com/en-US/News/2022/09/more-north-american-organizations-plan-to-disclose-pay-information-survey-finds

Study: Employers miss the mark on pay equity

Bill Brewer — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 18:14:10 GMT

Many equal-pay-for-equal-work initiatives focus on women, but it’s so much more complex than that, the research notes.

Published Sept. 22, 2022 by Caroline Colvin

Three out of four executives said they consider pay equity to be a “moderate” or “high” strategic priority; 7 in 10 workers said they feel that compensation is also an “important” priority for their organizations, a UKG report published Sept. 19 suggested.

But within that same pool of 453 corporate executives and 3,005 employees of all ranks, half of employers and 38% of employees admitted that their company did not have a pay equity program.

In comparison, about a quarter of employers and a quarter of employees could point to “a well-established program” in place. The remaining respondents said they had just started a program or that it was “ineffective,” and 24% of employees told UKG that they didn’t know either way.

This study, done in partnership with the Harvard Business Review Analytic Services, takes the temperature of prevailing approaches to equity strategy. It also emphasizes the importance of intersectionality.

Many equal-pay-for-equal-work initiatives have been tailored to women — something UKG reconfirms in its study — but the phenomenon of pay disparities is much more complex than gender discrimination. It’s “an intersectional issue that cuts across race, color, and sexual orientation,” the report said.

UKG surveyed employers generally and, specifically, employers of efficient, well-established equity programs (called “leaders” by UKG) regarding which social groups were the focus of their pay initiatives. Both groups were aligned on tackling the gender pay gap and racial inequities in compensation. Employers — as opposed to those deemed leaders— lagged behind in creating pay programs that included the LGBTQ community, workers with disabilities, people over 50 years old and religious minorities.

In the report, Brian K. Reaves, UKG’s executive vice president and chief belonging, diversity and equity officer, pointed out that gender-based pay discrimination has been illegal for decades. Still, the pay gap “widens even further when you look at intersectionality such as Black, transgender, and immigrant women.”

A factor that is often glossed over was the culture of silence around salary and compensation. Overall, 34% of workers surveyed told UKG that silence is a “major obstacle” to implementing equal pay. Black, Hispanic and Latinx were twice as likely as White workers to remain silent, researchers observed. Asian-American employees were also more likely than White workers to remain silent.

In turn, workers of colors feel like they are most in need of help: 35% of Black employees, 26% of Asian Americans, and 20% of Hispanic and Latinx workers told UKG that racial discrimination factored in whether they had opportunities for advancement. This rings true even at the baseline, where 32% of Black and 25% of Asian, Hispanic, and Latinx employees said that racial discrimination factored into their salaries or hourly rates. Salary negotiation abilities were also a pain point, causing workers of color more distress than their White peers.

Researchers said the task of attaining equity “requires a deeper examination of varying perspectives and a more granular look at pay data.” While no one-size-fits-all equity fix exists, UKG’s solution recommends doubling down on collecting demographic data on compensation. Specifically, researchers suggested employee pulse surveys — “an opportunity to collect ongoing, anonymous feedback to help organizations know how their people feel” — as an option.

“Business intelligence and analytics tools that rely on data also allow organizations to see where inequities exist, so they can ensure fairness throughout the employee lifecycle,” researchers said in the press release.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/study-employers-miss-the-mark-on-pay-equity/632450/

Biden Cancels Up To $10k In Student Debt for Many Borrowers, Extends Payment Pause

Bill Brewer — Wed, 24 Aug 2022 18:56:04 GMT

BY ALEX GANGITANO - 08/24/22 11:35 AM ET

President Biden officially announced on Wednesday that his administration is forgiving up to $10,000 in federal student loan debt for borrowers making less than $125,000 annually and $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients, marking the largest forgiveness of the loans per individual to date.

Biden also again extended a payment freeze on federal student loans and interest accrual, butting right up against an Aug. 31 deadline that would have kicked bills back into effect just before November’s midterm elections.

The payment pause is now in effect until Dec. 31 and the White House said the pause is extended “one final time,” indicating that January will mark the end of the years-long student loan payment freeze.

The White House also said that if borrowers have undergraduate loans, they can cap repayment at 5 percent of their monthly income. Current students with loans are also eligible for this debt relief, and dependent students will be eligible for relief based on their parents’ income.

Biden shared the announcement on Twitter and plans to deliver remarks at 2:15 p.m. on Wednesday.

“In keeping with my campaign promise, my Administration is announcing a plan to give working and middle class families breathing room as they prepare to resume federal student loan payments in January 2023,” Biden tweeted.

Pell Grant borrowers also have to make less than $125,000 annually, or $250,000 annually if they are part of a household, to qualify.

Senior administration officials said the plan announced on Wednesday will benefit tens of millions of middle-class Americans. Officials said that if everyone who is eligible claims the relief, 43 million federal student loan borrowers will benefit, and 20 million borrowers will have their debt completely canceled.

“This announcement will help people who by and large came from working families and our working class now,” one official said.

“By targeting relief to borrowers with the highest economic need, this plan helps narrow the racial wealth gap,” the official added.

The Hill had reported on Tuesday that the White House would announce a plan to cancel a chunk of student loan debt and an extension of the existing pause, citing multiple sources. The announcement comes within the smallest window of time borrowers have had to determine when their payments would resume, which has aggravated advocates due to it leaving borrowers in limbo.

Loan payments were first put on hold in March 2020 under former President Trump, and the freeze has since been extended six times. Trump’s order froze the accrual of interest on federal student loans, effectively putting on hold $1.6 trillion in debt owed by more than 40 million Americans.

Officials addressed criticism that student loan forgiveness will have a negative impact on inflation, arguing that these steps largely offset and “it could well be neutral or deflationary.” Republicans have strongly come out against proposals for student debt relief and denounced them as unfair and inflationary.

“The combination of restarting those loan payments and providing targeted debt relief, per the president’s plan, at roughly the same time, will largely offset each other. That’s our view,” an official said.

The Department of Education said in a statement that it will be announcing further details on how borrowers can claim relief in the weeks ahead. Officials said some borrowers will have to submit “a simple application that goes to their income.”

The department also announced it is making changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which allows borrowers working in public service to gain progress towards their loans, by allowing more payments to qualify for the program and allowing various deferments and forbearances, such as for those in the Peace Corps.

Additionally, the department will propose a rule to hold career programs accountable through measures such as publishing an annual “watch list” for those with the worst debt levels.

While the cancellation will be celebrated as the most far-reaching move to help student loan borrowers, activists and some Democrats will also likely call for more in student loan forgiveness, like forgiving up to $50,000 per borrower, or overhauling federal loan programs.

The White House has faced fierce pushback at the idea of means-testing to decide which borrowers are granted student loan forgiveness after reports had surfaced that it would limit relief to people earning below $125,000.

Biden had kept his next move on student loans payments, including whether to forgive any amount of debt, largely under wraps, though he told reporters last month that “the end of August” was his timeline for making a decision.

Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said on Sunday that a decision on the matter would come within the week.

The Education Department had said that borrowers will be communicated to “directly” about the end of the freeze, following reporting last month that student loan servicing contractors have been told to not send upcoming billing statements.

Biden has been under pressure from Democrats and advocates to extend the freeze, as well as act on student loan forgiveness.

Last month, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) led a letter signed by over 100 Democrats in Congress calling for Biden to extend the pause, citing the economic hardship some have faced due to the coronavirus pandemic, as well as the squeeze rising inflation has put on consumers nationwide.

In May, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) met with Biden to push for loan forgiveness. Advocates and other Democrats, including Schumer, have pressed for forgiveness of $50,000 per borrower or to cancel debt entirely.

Biden announced in June that he would cancel billions in student debt for former Corinthian College students, which raised pressure on the White House to offer more extensive relief.

During the 2020 campaign, Biden supported forgiving at least $10,000 in federal student loans per person. Over a year ago, he requested a memo from the Department of Education to determine his authority to forgive student debt through executive action. Since then, the administration has not publicly announced if the memo is complete.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Hill

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/3611977-biden-cancels-some-student-loan-debt-extends-pandemic-payment-pause/

Health Benefit Cost Growth Will Accelerate to 5.6% in 2023, Mercer Survey Finds

Bill Brewer — Tue, 23 Aug 2022 15:54:40 GMT

Employers avoid benefit cuts despite new cost pressures

August 11, 2022 09:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--US employers expect health benefit cost per employee to rise 5.6% on average in 2023, according to early results from Mercer’s National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans 2022, which launched June 22 this year and remains open.

“They must manage rising health care costs while making smart decisions about how to attract and retain the workers they need. For now, we are seeing the majority of employers prioritizing attractive benefits.”

While significantly higher than the increase of 4.4% projected for 2022, the 2023 increase lags overall inflation, which is currently running at about 9%. According to Sunit Patel, Mercer’s Chief Actuary for Health and Benefits, “Because health plans typically have multi-year contracts with health care providers, we haven’t felt the full effect of price inflation in health plan cost increases yet. Rather it will be phased in over the next few years as contracts come up for renewal and providers negotiate higher reimbursement levels. Employers have a small window to get out in front of sharper increases coming in 2024 from the cumulative effect of current inflationary pressures.”

Patel also cautions that while most large, self-insured employers have a good sense of their 2023 costs at this time, many smaller, fully insured employers have not yet received renewal rates from their health plans. “Those may well come in higher as insurance carriers hedge their bets in today’s volatile health care market,” he added.

The projected increase of 5.6% reflects changes that employers plan to make to hold down cost. If they made no changes, respondents indicated that the cost for their largest medical plan would rise by an average of 7.0%.

Employers are prioritizing benefit enhancements for 2023

The survey asked employers to rate nine benefit strategies in terms of their importance over the next 3-5 years. “Enhancing benefits to improve attraction and retention” came out on top, with 84% of large employers (those with 500 or more employees) rating it important or very important. It’s an even higher priority than “monitoring and managing high-cost claimants,” which was second this year but historically tops the list.

“In today’s environment of record-breaking inflation and widespread labor shortages, employers face a really tough balancing act,” says Tracy Watts, Mercer’s National Leader of US Health Policy. “They must manage rising health care costs while making smart decisions about how to attract and retain the workers they need. For now, we are seeing the majority of employers prioritizing attractive benefits.”

Behavioral health is one benefit area where many employers are looking to expand. Nearly three fourths of large respondents (74%) say that improving access to behavioral health care will be a priority over the next few years. Examples of benefit enhancements include expanding EAP services and adding virtual behavioral health care options.

Focus on health care affordability

Another area of concern is health care affordability. Despite rising costs, the majority of employers will not take cost-saving measures that shift healthcare expense to employees, such as raising deductibles or copays. Only 36% of survey respondents are making cost-cutting changes in 2023, down from 40% in 2022 and 47% in 2021.

Further, overall, employers will not increase employees’ share of the cost of coverage in 2023. Among large employers responding to the survey, employees will be required to pick up 22% of total health plan premium costs, on average, in 2023 through paycheck deductions, unchanged from 2022 and 2021. In a survey conducted earlier this year, Mercer found that 11% of large employers will offer employees free coverage in at least one medical plan in 2023, and another 11% are still considering it.

“Healthcare affordability is a real issue for many employees, especially with inflation stressing household budgets,” said Watts. “Employers want to do what they can to keep more money in employees’ paychecks and remove cost barriers when care is needed.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Wire

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220811005163/en/Health-Benefit-Cost-Growth-Will-Accelerate-to-5.6-in-2023-Mercer-Survey-Finds

New Research from PandoLogic Finds Pay Scale Transparency and Remote Work Options Lower Cost of Hiring by as Much as 5X

Bill Brewer — Tue, 23 Aug 2022 15:51:41 GMT

Quarterly Voice of the Candidate Study Explores Recruiting Experience from the Job Seeker’s Point of View in Q1 2022

August 16, 2022 07:00 ET | Source: PandoLogic

DENVER and NEW YORK, Aug. 16, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- PandoLogic, a wholly owned subsidiary of Veritone, Inc. (NASDAQ: VERI) and leading provider of artificial intelligence (AI) hiring solutions, today shared the findings of its latest Voice of the Candidate (VOC) Study. With the publication, PandoLogic revisits data from previously available VOC research and reveals the new conversations that emerged in Q1 2022.

Given the rapidly changing state of the job market over the last year, the Q1 2022 results are telling. As the Great Resignation persists even in the face of a possible economic recession, the VOC noted a rise in candidate passion and intensity, with candidates seeing themselves as empowered. Three of the five major trends captured in the VOC directly relate to how employers position openings to job seekers.

First, pay remains a significant driver and jobs with pay information in the title performed much better than those without. In addition, jobs without pay information cost 1.6 times as much per application as those with pay information. Likewise, the remote work conversation continues to increase. Similar to pay, jobs that include remote in the title convert 57 percent better, with a cost per application that is on average 5.5 times lower than those without remote listed. Finally, benefits have become increasingly important, specifically healthcare and health insurance, giving employers the opportunity to increase focus on information in job descriptions and advertising materials.

Taking a unique approach to this subject matter, PandoLogic creates the quarterly VOC in partnership with Parsons Strategic Consulting to obtain a deeper understanding of the candidate experience from the job seeker’s perspective. Using social listening technology, the VOC examines millions of public conversations about the recruiting process and then analyzes the top-mentioned emotions and sentiments.

Terry Baker, president and CEO of PandoLogic, shared, “Since we first launched the Voice of the Candidate research in 2021, PandoLogic has analyzed what candidates think about the recruiting process. The latest insights are especially telling as we’re in one of the most dynamic job markets in recent history. What employers don’t know about candidate expectations may be hurting their hiring outcomes. An effective way to improve recruiting results is to tune in to what the candidates are saying, and PandoLogic is in the unique position to provide this type of insight, given its technology and business model. It is also one reason PandoLogic has successfully driven optimized job advertising results for our clients.”

Download the Voice of the Candidate Study Q1 2022 here.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: GlobalNewswire

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/08/16/2498898/0/en/New-Research-from-PandoLogic-Finds-Pay-Scale-Transparency-and-Remote-Work-Options-Lower-Cost-of-Hiring-by-as-Much-as-5X.html

California’s Fast Food Bill Could Link Chains To Wage Theft And Other Workplace Violations

Bill Brewer — Tue, 23 Aug 2022 15:47:26 GMT

Published On August 22, 2022 - 10:47 AM
Written By Jeanne Kuang

California lawmakers this month are considering a fast food bill that would significantly shift the relationship between restaurant workers and the corporate chains whose products they sell.

If Assembly Bill 257 passes, California would be the first state to assign labor liability to fast food corporations and not just their individual franchise owners.

The bill’s provisions would let workers and the state name fast food chains as a responsible party when workers claim minimum wage violations or unpaid overtime at a franchise location.

The bill’s language also would allow a franchisee to sue a restaurant chain if their franchise contracts contain strict terms that leave them no choice but to violate labor law.

It’s part of a larger bill pushed by unions to more strictly regulate fast food businesses. AB 257 also includes a measure to create a state-run, fast food sector council to set wage and labor standards across the industry.

Last week the bill survived the “suspense file” process, where controversial bills often are quietly killed. After clearing the Senate Appropriations Committee, the bill awaits a vote on the floor.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has not stated a position on the bill, but his Department of Finance opposes it, saying it would create “ongoing costs” and worsen delays in the state’s labor enforcement system.

If it becomes law, proponents said it could deter wage theft and other abuses in the low-wage industry.

“How you hold the companies at the top of the food chain, who are really setting the terms and conditions of employment, responsible for the lower levels — California has been way ahead on that,” said Janice Fine, professor of labor studies and employment relations at Rutgers University. “What’s happened in California is a real effort to try to figure out the fissured economy.”

California fast food bill

The fast food bill is one of the most contentious measures the Legislature is considering during its final weeks in session.

The California Chamber of Commerce and the state restaurant association have lobbied hard against it, arguing the bill would upend the franchise business model and ultimately raise costs for franchise owners and consumers. On Wednesday, a group of franchisees flooded the Capitol to oppose the bill.

The Service Employees International Union and its Fight for $15 campaign led a series of strikes this summer to rally for the bill’s passage, including an overnight rally at the Capitol this week.

Currently most workers who allege wage theft, say, at a McDonald’s, Burger King, or a Jack in the Box can only name the owner of their specific franchise location as responsible for paying them back — even as they work under the banner of a multibillion-dollar fast food corporation.

In other industries, California already has done some of what AB 257 proposes to do for fast food. In some cases, the state has expanded responsibility for employment conditions beyond the subcontractor or supplier level to the larger companies they do business with, even though they don’t directly employ the workers.

For instance, in 2014 the Legislature made businesses that use contract workers liable for wage theft committed by those workers’ agencies. Lawmakers later did the same for contractors in the janitorial, gardening, construction and nursing home industries.

Last year the Legislature passed a measure putting major fashion brands on the hook for wage theft by garment manufacturers in their supply chains.

Wage theft in fast food

Fast food is the latest industry attracting this type of regulation, and it is one of the largest and most visible.

Restaurants such as fast-food joints, take-out businesses and cafes employed more than 700,000 workers across the state, according to June federal data. Proponents of the bill estimate 80% of the workers are Black, Latino or Asian and two-thirds are women.

SEIU and Fight for $15 say the industry is rife with labor violations. The union released a survey of 400 workers this year in which 85% said they were victims of wage theft.

Business groups said the bill targets fast food unnecessarily. The Employment Policies Institute, a national think tank with restaurant ties, published a report this month showing the percentage of wage claims filed against this segment of business is lower than its share of the California workforce.

If approved, the proposed legislation could mark a turning point in American labor law.

Typically under the franchise model, fast food corporations strike agreements with franchisees that dictate a variety of standards for selling food under their brand — but leave wages, hours and labor conditions up to the franchisee.

The model has provided inroads to business ownership for many minority entrepreneurs, supporters point out.

But critics say companies like McDonald’s and Domino’s have been allowed to profit while distancing themselves from any responsibility for how restaurant employees are treated.

Joint employers?

The question of franchisors’ relationship to workers remains unsettled at the federal level. Across three presidential administrations the National Labor Relations Board has gone back and forth on whether to automatically consider franchisors and franchisees “joint employers.” The courts, including the California Supreme Court, have generally rejected that idea under current laws.

“These franchise models have been an avenue and way for companies to avoid responsibility for being employers,” said Emily Andrews, director of education, labor and worker justice at the Center for Law and Social Policy, a national, left-leaning anti-poverty organization.

Studies have found franchisors can exert a significant amount of pressure and control over franchise business owners.

In a paper published last year, law professors at the University of Miami and Cornell University examined 44 franchise contracts from 2016 and found that more than three-quarters gave the chain exclusive power to terminate contracts, putting a franchisee “in a position of economic dependence.”

“Franchisees can respond to intensive franchisor monitoring and tight profit margins by unlawfully chiseling wages as the only cost variable that the franchisor does not directly monitor,” the law professors wrote.

The International Franchise Association disagrees, arguing the business model is defined by franchise owners’ independence in labor decisions. The fast food bill, they said, would reduce those owners to middle managers, and larger companies would pull back opportunities in California if they’re required to monitor labor law compliance.

“You’d be holding an entity responsible or assigning liability for things they don’t have control over,” said Jeff Hanscom, spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based association which includes franchisors and franchisees. “You’re taking a franchise and turning it into the corporate entity.”

The Cheesecake Factory case

That argument holds some sway with lawmakers in the state Senate.

During a June hearing for the fast food bill before the Senate Judiciary Committee, some Democratic lawmakers questioned if an automatic expansion of liability is necessary. Sen. Bob Wieckowski, a Fremont Democrat, pointed out that under current law a judge can already find a franchisor liable for a labor violation if it’s proven on a case-by-case basis.

Representatives for some franchisors, including McDonald’s, Jack in the Box and Burger King, did not respond to requests for comment on California’s fast food bill.

To worker advocates, extending liability is key to enforcing wage and labor laws.

Yardenna Aaron is executive director of the Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund, a janitorial worker center that pushed for joint liability in that industry in 2015.

Prior to that law’s passage, Aaron said, contractors often closed up shop or declared bankruptcy when faced with allegations of wage theft, only to reopen under another name or business entity later.

The new law has enabled the state’s labor commissioner to issue citations against larger and more prominent companies in cases of alleged wage theft.

In a highly publicized 2018 case, the California Labor Commissioner named the Cheesecake Factory jointly responsible with a janitorial services firm, saying they owed nearly $4 million to 559 janitorial workers who cleaned eight of the chain’s Southern California restaurants. It was one of the state’s largest cases of wage theft.

The state has brought similar cases against electric car manufacturer Tesla for its contractors allegedly underpaying janitors at its San Jose factories, and e-commerce giant Amazon for a contractor allegedly failing to pay overtime to its delivery drivers.

The power of the purse

Labor experts said it’s too soon to tell if joint liability has made it easier for the state to recover unpaid wages. State investigations of wage theft take months. And when the state cites employers, seeking unpaid wages and penalties, employers usually appeal, setting off administrative hearing processes that can take years.

The Cheesecake Factory case is still awaiting a hearing, four years later. Advocates expect a resolution this year, Aaron said. The Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund represented the workers interviewed in that case; its director at the time, Lilia Garcia-Brower, is now the California State Labor Commissioner.

Officials in the labor commissioner’s office in 2020 pointed to the growing complexity of liability laws for the long delays in processing the tens of thousands of individual wage claims workers file each year.

Still, legislative staffers predicted joint liability would “almost certainly” improve labor compliance in fast food by forcing the larger businesses to monitor the behavior of franchisees.

Aaron said that has been evident in the janitorial industry since the 2015 law change. The worker center meets with client companies that hire janitorial contractors to educate them about labor laws.

“We find, generally, clients want to avoid the liability that contractors would bring in terms of wage theft cases,” Aaron said. “The power of the purse is real.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Business Journal (TBJ)

https://thebusinessjournal.com/californias-fast-food-bill-could-link-chains-to-wage-theft-and-other-workplace-violations/

U.S. Employers Boost Pay Budgets Despite Recession Concerns

Bill Brewer — Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:23:42 GMT

By Stephen Miller, CEBS | August 1, 2022

Slower growth, lingering inflation and still-tight labor markets are factors to weigh

Salary budgets for U.S. employees are projected to increase in 2023, mainly influenced by a labor market with more open jobs than people to fill them and inflation's impact on employees' pay expectations, despite signs that the economy is slowing.

The survey was conducted in April and May 2022. In the U.S., 1,430 organizations responded.

According to the report:

Nearly 2 in 3 U.S. employers (64 percent) have budgeted for higher employee pay raises last year, while two-fifths (41 percent) have increased their budgets since original projections were made earlier this year.

Less than half of companies (45 percent) are sticking with the pay budgets they set at the start of the year. Some companies are also making more-frequent salary increase adjustments. More than one-third (36 percent) have already increased or plan to increase how often they raise salaries. Among those respondents, the vast majority (92 percent) have or will adjust salaries twice per year.

Demand for Labor Still High, for Now

U.S. gross domestic product contracted by 1.6 percent in the first quarter of 2022 and by 0.9 percent in the second quarter, as the U.S. Federal Reserve raised interest rates to fight inflation. Two consecutive quarters of slower economic activity is the technical definition of a recession.

Although some economic sectors, such as technology, have seen lower labor demand and even workforce reductions this year, as of mid-2022 the U.S. labor market overall remained tight for many employers and concern about hiring and retaining talent is a key driver of higher pay budgets, cited by 73 percent of respondents as their top factor in the WTW survey.

While attraction and retention challenges continue to plague organizations, fewer respondents expect those difficulties to be at the same level next year: 94 percent of respondents are experiencing difficulties attracting talent this year, but only 40 percent expect difficulty in 2023.

Similarly, 89 percent of companies reported difficulty keeping workers this year, but 60 percent expect those pressures to be lower next year.

Despite concerns of an economic slowdown, however, 46 percent of respondents cited employee expectations for higher increases driven by inflation as pushing pay budgets higher for 2023.

"Compounding economic conditions and new ways of working are leading organizations to continually reassess their salary budgets to remain competitive," said Hatti Johansson, research director for Rewards Data Intelligence at WTW, referring to both inflation and the rise in remote work and hybrid work arrangements.

In addition to raising pay, many companies are taking nonmonetary actions to attract talent. For example, 69 percent of respondents have increased workplace flexibility and 19 percent are planning to do so or considering doing so in the next couple of years.

In light of both a potentially slower economy and continued high inflation and talent supply challenges, "organizations need to get more creative to address attraction and retention challenges," said Catherine Hartmann, WTW's global practice leader for work, rewards and careers.

Another View of 2023 Salary Budgets

According to pay data and software firm PayScale's 2022–2023 Salary Budget Survey, U.S. respondents report, on average, a planned base salary increase of 3.8 percent in 2023. Among some industries, however, base salary increases reported by respondents may surpass 4.5 or even 5 percent for their employees.

These 2023 projections follow similar increase trends from 2022, where the average overall increase came in at 3.6 percent and surpassed 5 percent in some segments.

The survey was conducted May-June of 2022 with responses from 2,021 employers. The data "shows a clear response to the labor market conditions of the last year," according to PayScale's analysts. "The top reason given for higher budget increases in 2023, by 85 percent of respondents, is competition for labor."

Have Pay Pressures Peaked?

New data suggests that wage growth has remained strong through the first half of 2022. On July 29, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that wages and salaries for private-sector workers rose 5.7 percent for the 12-month period ending in June, up from a 3.5 percent increase a year earlier. At the end of the first quarter, the annual increase had been 5 percent.

For full-time hourly employees, the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta tracked 5.4 percent hourly wage growth for the 12 months through June.

Relief on rising labor costs may be in sight, however, according to Joseph Briggs, an economist at investment bank Goldman Sachs. He wrote in a July 28 brief that "we expect wage growth to slow going forward," while remaining higher than in recent years.

The firm forecasts that wage growth will slow to 4.5 percent year over year by the end of 2022 and to under 4 percent by end of 2023.

"The firmness in wage growth in 2021 and early 2022 likely partially reflected one-off factors related to the pandemic that are no longer relevant," Briggs noted. Also, the breadth of wage increases has fallen in recent months, and forward-looking wage growth expectations have started to moderate.

Struggling to Make Ends Meet

Other survey data shows that nearly 6 in 10 U.S. workers are concerned their paycheck is not enough to support themselves or their families as employees look to keep up with the rise of inflation.

In an American Staffing Association (ASA) Workplace Monitor survey, conducted June 2-6 among a total of 2,027 U.S. adults age 18 and older, 58 percent of employed U.S. adults said their paycheck was no longer enough to support themselves or their families. The number was higher for Hispanic workers (69 percent) and for parents with children under 18 (66 percent).

As the cost of living increases, workers are looking to change their circumstances. Twenty-eight percent of employed U.S. adults plan to search for a new job in the next six months, while 27 percent plan to start a second job to supplement their income and 20 percent plan to ask for a raise from their current employer.

"Workers are concerned about the effects of inflation, and they're planning on taking action," said Richard Wahlquist, ASA president and chief executive officer. "Employers need to provide competitive compensation and work flexibility, and invest in employees' professional development, if they want to keep and recruit quality talent in this labor market."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: SHRM - Society for Human Resource Management

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/compensation/pages/employers-boost-pay-budgets-despite-recession-concerns.aspx

Employees Weigh In On What’s Important to Them and Why They Stay At Their Companies

Bill Brewer — Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:14:57 GMT

The Great Resignation may be waning as our survey found nearly half of workers are planning to stay at their companies in the next 12 months, though younger workers may still need to be convinced of the benefits of staying.

Paychex, in partnership with Executive Networks, conducted a 10-minute online survey with 604 full-time and part-time employees who were all living in the U.S., working at small to mid-sized businesses (20-500 employees), and aged between 18-75 years old. The research sample included 65% active workers and 35% sedentary workers. Active workers work on the front line of their business, while sedentary workers work at a desk for a majority of their workday. The survey also segmented by employees who work fully remote (19%), fully on-site (63%), and hybrid (18%).

Overall, job stability and performing meaningful work were cited as the two most important reasons employees continue to stay at their companies.

However, there were variations depending on working arrangements (remote/hybrid/on-site and active/sedentary), industry sector, and generation.

Here were some of the top findings:

More Baby Boomers (46%) reported that flexibility in work hours or schedule would make them stay long-term at their organization than Gen X (38%), Millennials (31%), and Gen Z (24%).
Sedentary workers (20%) were more likely to say flexibility in work environment would make them more likely to stay at their company long-term than active workers (11%).
Active workers (66%) were less likely to feel valued for the work they do than sedentary workers (75%)

Key Findings: What’s Important to Workers and What Makes Them Stay with a Company

#1 Almost half of employees surveyed plan to stay with their current companies

The data could lead us to believe that workers are starting to see the value of staying with their current employer. Most agreed that they currently perform reasonable amounts of work (71%), are provided the tools they need to be successful (71%), and that they feel valued for the work they do (69%). Additionally, 48% of employees said they do not plan to change companies within the next 12 months.

Out of those who reported they would like to change companies in the next 12 months, Millennials (34%) and Gen Z (30%) were significantly more likely to say they would want to switch employers than Baby Boomers (15%) and Gen X (22%) .

Employers may already recognize this, as Gen Z (49%) and Millennials (36%) are more likely to report having a "stay interview" at their company compared to Gen X (21%) and Baby Boomers (12%). For the purposes of this study, a stay interview was defined as when an employer meets with an employee to gather information about what the employee values about their job and to discover what the employee believes can be improved.

When it comes to leaving their current company, those in professional and business services (41%); retail, trade, transportation, and utilities (35%); and construction (36%) were the most likely to say they’re interested in leaving in the next 12 months. Those in education and health services (16%), as well as those in financial services (18%) were the least likely to report wanting to change companies.

#2 Employees value companies that align with their personal interests and values

When asked to consider factors outside of compensation and benefits, the top-ranked reasons employees work at their companies were:

Job stability
Meaningful work
Passion for their field of work or industry
A strong support system
Company growth
Opportunities for one’s personal career growth

The lowest-ranked reasons that employees choose to stay with their company include: company culture and values, company brand and reputation, and company products/services. From this we could infer that employees are making career decisions based on their own goals and values and not those of their employer.

When asked about what perks would make employees more likely to stay long-term with their employer, respondents were most likely to rank flexibility in hours/schedules (35%), opportunities for skills development, career advancement and internal job mobility (15%) as their top picks.

However, there were some key differences when we examined these factors based on generation, industry, and working arrangements.

#3 While Baby Boomers, Gen X, and Millennials value job stability and financial wellness most when it comes to staying with their organizations, Gen Z places value on mental health benefits

Baby Boomers (32%), Gen X (35%), and Millennials (31%) were significantly more likely to say that job stability is the most important reason they work at their company than Gen Z (14%).

When asked to rank benefits (aside from higher pay), more Gen Z (23%) participants cited mental health benefits as the top benefit that would make them stay at a company long-term compared to Millennials (14%), Gen X (5%), and Baby Boomers (3%).

Baby Boomers (14%), Gen X (16%), and Millennials (14%), were also more likely to rank financial wellness benefits as their top reason for staying at a company compared to Gen Z (7%).

When asked to rank perks (aside from higher pay), more Baby Boomers (46%) reported that flexibility in work hours and scheduling would make them more likely to stay long-term at their organization than Gen X (38%), Millennials (31%), and Gen Z (24%).

#4 Failing to Consider Industry Preferences When Evaluating Employee Values May Lead to Poor Retention

Aside from job stability, employees in leisure/hospitality (20%) and education/health services (16%) were most likely to say that passion for their field and industry is the most important reason they work at their company. They were also the two industries most likely to site meaningful work as their number one reason they work at their company (20% and 25% respectively). Manufacturing (6%); retail, trade, transportation, and utilities (5%); and other services (4%) were least likely to rank passion for their field and industry as number one.

Those in financial services (29%) were most likely to cite greater company commitment to work/life balance as their top reason to stay at an organization, followed by flexible work schedules (20%), while more opportunities for skills development, career advancement, and internal job mobility came in last for this group (3%).

And, those who work in leisure/hospitality (27%), construction (24%), and professional/business services (20%) were significantly more likely to cite financial wellness benefits as the top way to encourage them stay at their employer long-term. Those who work in manufacturing (9%); education/health services (6%); and retail, trade, transportation and utilities (13%) were least likely to rank financial wellness benefits at the top.

What Employers Can Do to Retain Employees

Look for ways to build flexibility into work schedules. Our research shows workers highly value flexibility in when they work (working hours) rather than just where they work (remote/hybrid/on-site). Employers could start by taking regular polls to uncover employee suggestions for building schedule flexibility into all types of roles, as “flexibility” can mean different things to those in different industries. However, they should first consider what the business can accommodate and tailor the questions to what is feasible before asking an open-ended question in case you do not have the ability to meet most requests. What flexibility looks like for a healthcare worker, for example, may be different from that of an office worker. Employers can also explore a range of technology solutions which allow workers to easily indicate their scheduling preferences, see upcoming shifts and initiate shift swaps (if applicable), or request time off.
Survey employees to understand what benefits are of value to various segments of workers. As we saw in our research results, different generations place higher value on different benefits, so employers need to take an employee-centric approach to total rewards and benefits. And, if you have a mix of employees on-site, hybrid, or fully remote, it may be worth segmenting your survey results based on location so that you can offer a benefits package that addresses the needs across your workforce. Fully remote workers, for example, might prefer monthly remote work stipends to help them pay for home internet bills, while fully on-site workers might prefer access to financial wellness classes offered in person at the worksite.
Invest in a range of opportunities for skill development and provide greater access to mentoring and coaching opportunities. Workers are looking to their employer for opportunities to broaden their skills and grow their careers. Employers could start by questioning how they are approaching their investment in training and development: what is their total investment in training and development? How are they delivering this to employees? Is it aligned to their current and future strategic business priorities? Is it easily accessible and relevant?
Have regular check-ins or stay interviews with employees. Stay interviews are an opportunity to learn how to better engage your employees so they want to stay with your company. Rather than just interviewing employees on their way out in an exit interview, more employers need to have stay conversations with employees to receive their feedback on the workplace and what would motivate them to stay. This is especially important for younger workers who, as our research shows, are more likely than older workers to have had a stay interview, yet still want to switch companies. Employers can build regular check-ins as part of the company culture and train managers to have these on a regular basis with their teams. Stay interviews help employers learn about an employee’s career aspirations, receive feedback on what makes them want to stay with the company, and understand exactly what support and resources they need to succeed in their job.

“The future of work is creating a personalized, human experience at work. Employers should embark on active listening and conduct employee sentiment surveys, so they understand what makes an employee want to stay with their company and what changes they need to implement to increase employee retention.”

-Jeanne Meister, Executive Vice President, Executive Networks

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Paychex, Inc.

https://www.paychex.com/articles/human-resources/employee-retention-what-makes-employees-stay-leave

Working on Vacation Makes Employees More Likely to Quit: New Survey

Bill Brewer — Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:13:03 GMT

Does going on a vacation leave you feeling refreshed and ready to return to work, or does time off make you more likely to quit your job? Does working on vacation really make people want to quit more than those who don’t? We wanted to find out if there was any truth to the rumor that people are more likely to quit their job after vacation. We surveyed 1,000 full-time employees to get the scoop on post-vacation resignations.

How many people quit after coming back from paid time off?

Turns out there’s some truth to the rumor: Yikes. From our survey, 20% of respondents admitted they’d quit after returning from vacation, and nearly half (44%) have thought about it. Some respondents (12%) even used their vacation to look for another job.

While most people (89%) feel refreshed after taking paid time off (PTO), not everyone is ready to get back to work. In fact, 43% of respondents say they dread returning to work after time off. And a few people (11%) said they felt drained after their vacation.

How refreshed do employees feel returning to work after a vacation?

How soon do people quit after vacation?

How did you spend your summer vacation? Going on a trip, visiting friends and family, relaxing at home, or looking for a new job? While a significant number of employees think about quitting while on vacation, the majority don’t start job-seeking activities until after their time off.

Thoughts of quitting don’t usually prompt impulsive decisions—most employees that do quit after a vacation take as long as three months (62%) to do so. Only 19% of respondents quit within a month of their vacation time. The takeaway is that while people do have time to think on vacation—thoughts which may include quitting—these don’t usually result in immediate action, meaning employers may have a chance to fix the situation before employees walk out the door.

Most people who quit after vacation will do so within 1-3 months.

Working on vacation makes people more likely to quit

When it comes to retention, PTO policy or duration of time off matters less than whether employees work on vacation. More than half of employees (56%) stayed connected to work while on vacation. This could mean anything from checking the occasional email to joining meetings or working on tasks.

Younger generations are the least likely to totally disconnect from work, and the most likely to stay very connected to work. And this isn’t because their employer requires them to; they may just feel like they have something to prove as a more junior-level employee.

Which of the following best describes your relationship with work when you take paid time off?

	I totally disconnect from work — I don’t even think about work at all.	I somewhat disconnect from work — I may check my email once or twice or think about work-related problems, but I don’t take action on any work activities.	I stay somewhat connected to work — I check my email regularly but answer important messages only/limit my work activities.	I stay very connected to work — I work actively while I’m on vacation (e.g., taking meetings, creating deliverables)
Gen Z	33%	33%	22%	11%
Millennials	42%	31%	19%	7%
Gen X	49%	28%	17%	6%
Baby boomers	50%	32%	16%	2%

Working on vacation is more common for younger respondents.

Almost all of these employees (95%) did so by choice, either because they were worried about the catch up work waiting for them when they got back, or for peace of mind so they knew they weren’t missing anything important.

However, not being able to mentally disconnect from work comes at a cost. Employees who work while they’re on vacation experience increased thoughts of quitting and rates of departure than those who totally disconnect. This is especially true of those who were required to work while on PTO.

Of those who thought about quitting after a vacation, those who stayed very connected to work while on vacation were 36% likely to actually quit, and those required to work while on vacation were 34% likely to quit. A significant portion (72%) of those who were required to work while on PTO thought about quitting while they were on vacation.

	Percentage of all respondents who thought about while quitting on vacation.	Quit rate for respondents who thought about quitting while on vacation.	Quit rate for all respondents.
Totally disconnect from work	43%	37%	26%
Somewhat disconnect from work	43%	44%	19%
Somewhat stay connected to work	45%	51%	23%
Very connected to work	52%	71%	36%

Working on vacation makes people more likely to quit after vacation.

Three demographic differences affecting likeliness to quit after vacation

While the average rate of people quitting after vacation averaged 20%, a few factors made this more or less likely, such as gender. While women and men think about quitting while on vacation at the same rates, men were more likely (+5%) to follow through and women were less likely (-4%) to quit after vacation. This makes sense when combined with the results indicating that men were already more interested in switching positions.

1. Gender

Which of the following best describes you?

	I’m actively looking for a new job.	I’m open to a new job, but not actively looking	I’m not looking to switch
Male	25%	54%	22%
Female	19%	49%	32%

Male respondents were more likely to be looking for a new job than women.

2. Age

Age also played a factor. While millennials and Gen Z were 2-5% more likely to quit after a vacation, Gen X and boomers were 9% less likely to. Older respondents were less likely to quit overall. This could be because boomers are closer to retirement. It could also be that older respondents feel greater stigma against job hopping, or that they’re more likely to be settled into careers they’re happy with rather than younger employees who are still trying to build career capital and experience.

Younger generations were more likely to be looking for or open to new jobs.

3. Caregiving responsibilities

Surprisingly, having dependents made respondents more likely to quit. Those with dependents were more likely to both think about and follow through with quitting. This may indicate that reasons for quitting have more to do with flexibility or compensation than personal reasons, such as conflicts at work.

How caregiving responsibilities affect the likelihood of quitting.

Caregivers are more likely to follow through on plans of quitting.

How employers can support employees at risk of quitting post-vacation

Employers trying to limit the likelihood of a post-vacation quit should pay close attention to demographics more at risk, such as millennials and those with dependents. Tactics such as stay interviews or even just having managers check in after a return from vacation could limit the likelihood of these groups leaving their jobs in the following months.

Since working while on vacation seems to be a critical factor in quit rates, those who want to support boosting retention may want to create policies that prevent employees from working while on vacation.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Visier

https://www.visier.com/blog/quit-after-vacation/

High-deductible plans increased out-of-pocket spend, EBRI finds

Bill Brewer — Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:09:09 GMT

By Ryan Golden

Dive Brief:

The share of out-of-pocket healthcare costs paid by employees within employer-sponsored health plans increased from 17.4% in 2013 to 19% in 2019, and the rise of high-deductible health plans appears to be driving the trend, researchers at the Employee Benefits Research Institute said in a statement Monday.
Researchers found that plan design played a role in whether costs increased. Those in non-high-deductible plans, such as preferred provider organizations and health maintenance organizations, saw decreased or stable costs during the same time frame. While most enrollees did not see out-of-pocket spending rise significantly, those who were high users of care and those with certain medical conditions did, EBRI said.
Out-of-pocket spending for outpatient services grew faster than for inpatient services, while expenditures for prescription drugs declined. EBRI utilized data from the IBM Marketscan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database, encompassing more than 45 million patients.

Dive Insight:

As with many goods and services, healthcare has not been immune to inflationary pressures. U.S. health systems faced a combination of rising supply and labor expenses in recent months, according to Healthcare Dive, even as patient volumes have increased. As a result, providers are likely to pass on increased costs to commercial insurers during upcoming contract negotiations, Fierce Healthcare reported last week.

But from the employer perspective, employee benefits programs — including health benefits — remain a key component of talent management in a difficult hiring market, according to a McKinsey & Co. report from May. The consultancy also found that many employers have turned to HDHPs, among other strategies, as a way to address rising costs.

Yet increasing employee deductibles creates a “fundamental tension” between employers’ dual goals of securing workers’ well-being and controlling costs, according to EBRI.

“On the one hand, employers are more frequently implementing financial wellness programs as a means to improve their employees’ financial wellbeing,” Jake Spiegel, research associate at EBRI, said in the statement. “On the other hand, in an effort to wrangle health care cost increases, employers often turn to raising their health plan’s deductible, potentially offsetting the positive impact of any financial wellness initiatives.”

In their report, EBRI’s researchers also noted the role that health savings accounts, which may be offered in conjunction with a HDHP, may play in balancing increased out-of-pocket costs. Those enrolled in an HSA-eligible HDHP may be able to cover those costs using HSA contributions made by themselves and their employers. A previous EBRI report highlighted the role that pre-deductible coverage of chronic condition medications may play in HSA-eligible plans.

Aside from increasing patient deductibles, there are a variety of other cost-saving healthcare measures employers may seek. An executive for insurer NFP previously told HR Dive that these options can include care navigation services, virtual care options and value-based care arrangements, among others.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/high-deductible-plans-drive-increased-employee-out-of-pocket-spend-ebri-study/628935/

Tight labor market drives U.S. employers to boost 2023 pay raises

Bill Brewer — Wed, 20 Jul 2022 17:23:22 GMT

WTW survey reveals fewer employers expect broad attraction and retention challenges next year; will continue to focus on pay and employee experience

July 14, 2022

ARLINGTON, Va., July 14, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Salary budgets for U.S. employees are projected to increase in 2023, mainly influenced by a labor market with more open jobs than people to fill them. Leading global advisory, broking and solutions company WTW’s (NASDAQ: WTW) Salary Budget Planning Report found that companies are budgeting an overall average increase of 4.1% for 2023, compared with the average actual 4.0% increase in 2022. These are the largest increases since 2008.

According to the report, nearly two in three (64%) U.S. employers have budgeted for higher employee pay raises than last year, while two-fifths (41%) have increased their budgets since original projections were made earlier this year. Less than half of companies (45%) are sticking with the pay budgets they set at the start of the year. Some companies are also making more frequent salary increase adjustments. More than one-third (36%) have already increased or plan to increase how often they raise salaries. Among those respondents, the vast majority (92%) have or will adjust salaries twice per year.

Concerns over a tighter labor market seem to be the main driver for the higher budgets, with nearly three in four respondents (73%) citing this as their top factor. Additionally, 46% of respondents cited employee expectations for higher increases that are driven by inflation, and 28% adjusted their budgets in anticipation of stronger financial results.

“Compounding economic conditions and new ways of working are leading organizations to continually reassess their salary budgets to remain competitive,” said Hatti Johansson, research director, Rewards Data Intelligence, WTW. “With such a dynamic environment, it’s imperative for organizations not only to have a clear compensation strategy but also a keen understanding and appreciation of the factors that influence compensation growth. And, if an organization is planning to increase budgets, it’s best to be prepared as to how to award and communicate pay changes as quickly and effectively as possible.”

According to the survey, attraction and retention challenges continue to plague organizations, although fewer respondents expect those difficulties to be at the same level next year. Over nine in 10 respondents (94%) are experiencing difficulties attracting talent this year, but only 40% expect difficulty in 2023. Similarly, 89% of companies reported difficulty retaining workers this year, but that number is expected to drop to just under 60% next year.

In fact, many companies have taken or plan to take non-monetary actions to attract talent. For example, 69% of respondents have increased workplace flexibility, and 19% are planning or considering doing so in the next couple of years. Six in 10 respondents (59%) have placed a broader emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), and 24% are planning or considering doing so in the next few years. Additionally, 49% of companies continue to enhance recruitment offers with sign-on bonuses and equity/long-term incentive awards, while over 21% are planning or considering doing so in the next few years.

Efforts to retain talent are also under way. Almost three-fifths (58%) of companies have broadened their emphasis on DEI to retain more talent, and over 26% are planning or considering doing so. In addition, half (50%) have increased the flexibility for remote work, and 25% are planning or considering doing so in the future. Almost 40% have changed their compensation programs (e.g., base salary and short- and long-term incentive plans), and another 35% are planning or considering. Over 36% have made changes to improve their employees’ experience, and 45% are planning or considering doing so.

“With a possible recession looming, continued high inflation and employers grappling with talent supply challenges, organizations need to get more creative to address attraction and retention challenges,” said Catherine Hartmann, global practice leader, Work, Rewards & Careers, WTW. “The workforce is composed of a diverse employee population, each with their own unique dynamics. Employers are challenged to meet their preferences and needs while delivering on a superior employee experience for all.”

About the survey

The Salary Budget Planning Report is compiled by WTW’s Reward Data Intelligence practice. The survey was conducted in April and May 2022. Approximately 22,570 sets of responses were received from companies across 168 countries worldwide. In the U.S., 1,430 organizations responded.

About WTW
At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at wtwco.com.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company (WTW)

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/07/14/2479938/0/en/Tight-labor-market-drives-U-S-employers-to-boost-2023-pay-raises.html

Shifting Priorities: Rethinking Employee Benefits

Bill Brewer — Wed, 06 Jul 2022 15:55:07 GMT

July 1, 2022 by Debby Routt, Forbes Councils Member, Forbes Human Resources Council

Since the pandemic started, HR professionals have had to juggle retaining their current employees while also attracting new talent. Employees have more options than ever when it comes to job choice. They’ve come to expect benefits like comprehensive healthcare plans, creative time off options and development opportunities that include job shadowing. But, while important, benefits are just one of many reasons a candidate chooses you over another company or why an employee stays at your company.

Now is the time for HR leaders to get creative and look for areas where they can make adjustments to their employee benefits. Here are some ways to help you stand out.

Behavioral health services have taken center stage recently as more employers are offering counseling as part of their employee assistance programs (EAPs). HR professionals need to start looking at the quality of these services at a much deeper level. Historically, EAPs provided high-level counseling with a predetermined number of visits per year and were bundled together with other benefits like short-term disability for a reduced price. But now, more EAPs are providing comprehensive mental health services for employees.

The adage “you get what you pay for” is true when it comes to EAPs. Organizations must ask the right questions when evaluating a potential partner. For example, ask how many certified specialists they employ and if they have a waitlist. Ask about the average wait time to get an appointment with a counselor since some counselors have long waitlists due to high demand. Check to see if they have specialists who are certified to work with your employees’ children as the pandemic has impacted our younger populations in profound ways. HR leaders should also talk with other companies that use the EAP services they are evaluating or ask for references.

It's also crucial to take the time to find a partner that really understands your organization and your employee population, instead of taking a cookie-cutter approach. You should choose an EAP that can provide you with reporting to identify the challenges your employee population is currently facing. If you have several employees who are reaching out for help with anxiety, childcare needs or financial hardships, use the data as you evaluate benefit plans to make more informed decisions about what to offer.

An EAP isn’t valuable if your employees don’t take advantage of it. All too often, HR leaders get an EAP and have extremely low utilization rates. Your EAP shouldn't be a “get it and forget it” benefit. You must put a plan in place to promote the offerings throughout the year. Find ways to make the services more attractive to your employees. If it’s not front and center, you’re wasting money.

Flexibility Is A Must For Work-Life Balance

Letting employees have time off has always been important to prevent burnout, but it's even more so now since they are juggling the challenges brought on by the pandemic. Even with increased flexibility provided by remote and hybrid work schedules, employees are finding it difficult to step away from their work even when they have days off.

Traditional PTO plans may no longer be the answer. When making changes to PTO benefits, employers need to consider their employees’ needs to help them disconnect. Sometimes it might be stepping away for a few hours to attend a PTA meeting or to attend a wellness class. Many employees have come to expect the ability to move away from the standard 9-to-5 work schedule and are wanting more flexible hours.

Work-life balance is crucial right now. If an employee doesn’t have any meetings scheduled in the afternoon and wants to join their kids on the playground for recess, they should feel empowered to do so if their job allows them to. This will help balance the times when they need to put in additional hours during evenings or weekends.

For employees to feel comfortable taking time out for themselves or their families when needed, organizations need to make sure they’re creating a culture that supports this type of flexibility. They should also try to honor their employees' PTO by minimizing incidents when they need to contact them during vacation time.

Professional Development Should Be A Two-Way Conversation

Investing in your employees has always been incredibly important to ensure they have a robust career development plan. But the Great Resignation has caused more employees to start looking for professional development opportunities as they are able to compete in more job markets due to the flexibility of remote work. If employers don't provide these opportunities, expect employees to find a company that will.

It's important that managers have a conversation with their employees to help them identify beneficial development opportunities and how they will help to support them in their career paths. Goal setting is an effective way to kick off this conversation by identifying how an employee wants to grow in their career. Managers can provide guidance on options such as on-the-job training, classes, webinars, podcasts, job shadowing and books that could be beneficial. If they know they will need to complete their professional development outside of work hours, they should have clear expectations so they can plan for the additional time commitment.

Finally, organizations should invest in good management training. Employees historically don't leave companies, but instead, leave bad managers. Now is one of the most important times to make sure that managers are really in sync with their employees so they’re able to effectively lead and manage their team. Leading in a hybrid work environment is much different than anything many managers have faced before. Make sure you are working with your leaders on how to manage in a hybrid environment. While some employees are natural people leaders, others need guidance so they can effectively deal with things like personnel issues, development plans and difficult conversations.

As employee priorities continue to shift, it's vital that companies keep pace and rethink their benefits.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2022/07/01/shifting-priorities-rethinking-employee-benefits/?sh=bb85380222ab

Voluntary Employee Departures Spike 41 Percent Among U.S. Businesses, Aon Reports

Bill Brewer — Wed, 06 Jul 2022 15:46:21 GMT

Firm quantifies the "Great Resignation" and the challenges employers face attracting and retaining top talent
Average budgeted employee salary increases reach 5.2 percent, up from 4.5 percent last year

CHICAGO, June 2, 2022 /PRNewswire Opens in a new tab/ -- Aon plc Opens in a new tab (NYSE: AON) reported a 41 percent spike in voluntary employee departures last year amid the "Great Resignation" in the United States, according to data from the firm's Salary Increase and Turnover Study. Aon, a leading global professional services firm, reported 21.8 percent of U.S. employees left their jobs in 2021, of which 17.2 percent departed voluntarily. In 2020, 19.7 percent left employers, of which 11.9 percent departed voluntarily.

"The spike we've seen in voluntary departures quantifies the challenges employers face during this period we call the 'Great Resignation,'" said Michael Burke, CEO for Human Capital Solutions at Aon. "Employers must look to the underlying root cause and not merely treat the symptoms. They will need to review total rewards strategies and look at resilience, agility, wellbeing and purpose in order to retain and attract top talent in their respective industries. A tight labor market will continue to challenge employers in the near term."

Figures come from Aon's Human Capital Solutions bi-annual Salary Increase and Turnover Study, which is a global survey of nearly 2,000 employers. The report provides insights on salary increases and employee retention powered by industry-leading data and analytics that reflects how broader economic circumstances impact the talent landscape.

The study also shows:

Average budgeted salary increases in 2022 reached 5.2 percent, up from 4.5 percent last year in the U.S. This includes merit raises and promotions.
Forty percent of U.S. employers say they will hire aggressively in 2022, while 46 percent plan to hire at a normal pace, 13 percent will be very selective and 1 percent will freeze hiring.
Energy (10.6 percent), construction (15 percent) and financial services (15.6 percent) had the lowest voluntary departure rates among industries measured.

The report includes measurable data samples from 10 industries, which include business consulting, construction/real estate, energy, entertainment, financial services, life sciences, manufacturing, retail/hospitality, technology and transportation.

"We use these data insights to provide advice and solutions that give employers from an array of industries the clarity and confidence needed to make better decisions to protect and grow their business," said Michael Deeks, global head of the data business for Human Capital Solutions at Aon. "It's a hot job market out there and as a result, we are seeing turnover grow and many companies allocate more money in their salary budgets."

To learn more about the report, click here Opens in a new tab.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Aon

https://aon.mediaroom.com/2022-06-02-Voluntary-Employee-Departures-Spike-41-Percent-Among-U-S-Businesses,-Aon-Reports

‘You have to be cautious’: 3 fast FMLA compliance tips

Bill Brewer — Wed, 06 Jul 2022 15:35:38 GMT

Employers can reduce compliance risk by conducting annual audits and giving employees time to file certifications, WorkForce Software’s Paul Kramer said.

Published July 5, 2022 by Ryan Golden

Employers likely need few reminders about the importance of Family and Medical Leave Act compliance, though that has not stopped federal regulators from telegraphing their enforcement plans in recent months.

As with other areas of compliance, employers continue to face litigation around the FMLA, often incurring costly settlements and associated legal fees.

Last week, a live web Q&A session presented by the Disability Management Employer Coalition covered areas including FMLA audits, concurrent leaves and delayed worker certifications. Paul Kramer, head of compliance at vendor WorkForce Software, walked employers through a set of considerations for FMLA compliance.

#1: Be proactive about DOL audits — and do your own

FMLA audits can translate into a lengthy process, but things tend to move quickly once the U.S. Department of Labor notifies an employer that an audit will take place, Kramer said. Among other items, the agency may seek to examine company and employee records; interview management and employees; and conduct on-site visits and inspections.

Attorneys who previously spoke to HR Dive said employers should prepare by gathering necessary materials, composing a position statement and designating a point of contact for the audit. Kramer similarly advised employers to:

Review their FMLA correspondence and policies.
Ensure leaves have been properly tracked and calculated.
Analyze their FMLA certifications and practices for fairness and consistency.
Review any steps taken to curb leave abuse.
Ensure employees have been given proper notice of their leave rights.
Check that company records are complete and accurate.

Kramer also recommended that employers perform their own audits annually. He noted that FMLA records must be maintained for at least three years.

#2: Be aware of when leaves may run concurrently

Employers may have situations in which FMLA leave runs concurrently with other leave. Kramer said determining whether an employee qualifies for different leave can be a key challenge.

“I think a big problem with leaves that run concurrently is that you have to make sure the employee actually qualifies for each concurrently run leave,” Kramer said. “Different leave laws have different qualification requirements employees must meet to be eligible for the leave and you must make sure the employee meets them before approving the leave.”

Asked by an audience member who worked for a public-sector organization about tracking family and medical leave that may interact with workers’ compensation cases, Kramer said that an employee’s workers’ compensation absence due to an on-the-job injury also may qualify as a serious health condition for FMLA purposes. “If it does, the workers’ compensation absence and FMLA leave may run concurrently,” he added.

#3: Be careful when denying leave over delayed certifications

Under certain circumstances, the FMLA permits employers to require that eligible employees submit a certification from a healthcare provider to support the employee’s need for FMLA leave.

Generally, an employee must provide the certification within 15 calendar days of the employer’s request, but Kramer said he would advise employers to grant “a little extra time” to employees if needed. By doing so, the employer may be able to use the granting of extra time as evidence that it did not retaliate against the employee in the event the employer is sued.

“You have to be cautious about denying FMLA leave because a certification is a little late,” Kramer said. “When an employee makes diligent good faith efforts to provide the certification timely but is unable to meet the 15-day calendar deadline, the employee is entitled to additional time to return the requested certification. Do you want to risk the DOL or a court concluding that the employee made diligent good faith efforts to provide the certification timely and that you wrongly denied the leave?”

Kramer also said employers may want to require employees to put leave requests in writing; “There is evidence to suggest that when you require leave requests in writing it reduces dishonest behavior. Think about it. If someone asks you to put something in writing, aren’t you always more careful to be accurate?”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/you-have-to-be-cautious-3-fast-fmla-compliance-tips/626564/

California Bill Would Require Pay Range in Job Ads

Bill Brewer — Thu, 23 Jun 2022 00:01:49 GMT

By Leah Shepherd, June 15, 2022

A proposed bill in California would make pay more transparent. Under the bill, employers with 15 or more employees would have to include pay range in all of their job postings and publicly report how much certain groups of employees are paid.

"I give the bill a moderate chance of passing," said Anthony Zaller, an attorney with Zaller Law Group, based in El Segundo, Calif. "If passed, it would be one of the strongest pay transparency laws in the country. Not only does the bill require employers to report wages for employees across race, gender and position in the company, it also proposes to publish each employer's information on the Internet."

"It seems to be moving through the Senate quite quickly, but it does have quite far to go before the governor signs it," said Laura Reathaford, an attorney with the law firm Lathrop GPM, based in Los Angeles.

If it passes, HR professionals would need to implement a consistent protocol to ensure that job ads reflect accurate pay scales. "It will be important for HR professionals to have a compliance system in place to review and approve all job ads to ensure they are legally compliant," Zaller said. "It will also be important to have records of the ads placed and retain these records for the time period required by the bill."

That means HR professionals should document pay history for each employee for the duration of their employment plus three years after the employment ends.

This effort toward pay transparency is meant to help employers to detect and avoid discriminatory pay patterns.

It's still unclear whether the proposed law in California would impact salary negotiations with job applicants.

"While it sets a range for the negotiations and gives employees an idea of what the position pays, the ranges could be large, and many employers are currently posting wage expectations to attract qualified employees," Zaller said. "Moreover, California law already prohibits employers from asking employees about prior salary history."

"Job applicants do not apply for jobs simply because the salary range has been disclosed. They apply for jobs where the salary and wages are competitive," Reathaford said. "Therefore, I think one effect this law will have is that employers may be pressured to offer higher wages because the salaries and wages of their competitors will be more robust and accessible."

Similar Bill in New York

The New York State Legislature recently passed a similar bill that would require employers with four or more employees to include salary ranges in their job ads. Gov. Kathleen Hochul has not signed it yet.

New York City has a similar pay transparency law that will take effect on Nov. 1. The New York City Commission on Human Rights recently released guidance to clarify that the law applies to both internal and external job postings. Bonuses, stock, benefits, overtime pay and commissions are not included as salary.

Although employers in New York City won't be fined if they correct a first violation within 30 days, they may have to pay civil penalties of up to $250,000 for any subsequent violations.

Pay Data Reporting

California's proposed bill would require private employers with 100 or more workers to submit a pay data report to the state's Department of Fair Employment and Housing. The report must include the number of employees by race, ethnicity and sex in these job categories:

Executive- or senior-level officials and managers.
First- or mid-level officials and managers.
Professionals.
Technicians.
Sales workers.
Administrative support workers.
Craft workers.
Operatives.
Laborers and helpers.
Service workers.

The pay data report also must include the number of employees by race, ethnicity and sex whose annual earnings fall within each of the pay bands used by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in the Occupational Employment Statistics survey.

Employers with multiple establishments would have to submit a report for each establishment. Failure to provide a report each year could result in a fine of $100 per employee.

The state will publish these annual pay reports on a website that the general public can view.

Ultimately, preventing discrimination is the purpose of this record-keeping.

"The underlying goal is to have employers evaluate any pay disparities within their organization, specifically along racial or gender lines. The law is meant to encourage compliance with equal pay and anti-discrimination laws. If companies and HR professionals keep this goal in mind, the reporting obligation should be less of a concern," Reathaford said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/california-pay-transparency.aspx

Consultant says shifting market is pushing pay, cultural transparency

Bill Brewer — Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:50:18 GMT

HR Dive spoke with Salary.com’s David Turetsky, who encouraged employers to speak openly with workers amid economic frustrations.

Published June 14, 2022 by Katie Clarey

The pandemic may have spurred last year’s record-high quit rates, but job seekers weren’t necessarily all motivated by health and safety concerns. Many left because of low pay.

A Pew Research Center study released in March found that 63% of those who left a job said low pay numbered among the reasons why they quit, alongside a lack of advancement opportunities (63%) and feeling disrespected at work (57%). Thirty-seven percent of respondents said low pay was a major reason why they left their jobs.

David Turetsky, VP of consulting at Salary.com, saw Pew’s findings play out in real time. “We came out of a pandemic where everyone was worried for their health. That’s part of why the Great Resignation happened,” he said. “Workers decided ‘I’m not getting paid enough to kill myself at work.’”

It appears many workers received the compensation boost they wanted by switching jobs. According to Pew, more than half of those who switched jobs said they earned more money in their new gig. A February Conference Board survey produced similar findings, revealing that a third of employees who made pandemic-era job switches made over 30% more in their new positions. A fifth landed increases of 10% to 20%.

Workers who jumped ship weren’t the only ones to benefit from a teeming job market. At the beginning of the year, ADP Research Institute analyzed the wages of 18 million workers during the last three months of 2021. It found wage growth among existing job holders hit 5.9% in December from a year earlier — the biggest increase the firm had seen since 2014, it said. Wage gains for existing employees averaged 5.7% in the last quarter of 2021, representing an all-time high for that timeframe.

Salary.com captured organizations’ preparations for the widespread uptick in pay in a fall 2021 poll. The research revealed 52% of organizations planned to boost funding for merit increases, a large jump from the 19% of respondents that reported such plans in 2020. Organizations also communicated plans for increased bonus spending.

Meanwhile, 40% of respondents said they were incorporating premiums into base salaries, and 33% said they were providing hiring bonuses. Nearly two-thirds of those polled said they were using referral bonuses and hiring bonuses, up 24% since 2020.

Since employers reported their plans for higher salaries and alluring bonuses, however, the broader economic situation has tightened, with inflation soaring, expenses rising and preparations beginning for a potential recession. A more recent Salary.com survey revealed 98% of employers are somewhat or very concerned that rising inflation rates will erode employee compensation.

Stormy economic conditions led Turetsky back to the lesson he believes employers should learn from the latter half of 2021 and its high quit rates: “Compensation should not be the reason why people leave,” he said. The Great Resignation motivated companies to review their pay practices and policies and ensure they’re competitive and transparent.

He referenced the recent headlines heralding Microsoft’s decision to nearly double its budget for employee salary increases in an effort to retain staff. “That’s Microsoft. They can do that,” Turetsky said. “There are a lot of other organizations that can’t. They’d love to, but they can’t.” Instead, smaller organizations have to make hard decisions about how to dispense the funding they have to help employees deal with the economic conditions at hand.

Many companies are turning to compensation tools that don’t compound, Turetsky said. Instead of heightening base salary, organizations use tools like stay bonuses and lump-sum payments.

Employers need to think beyond more granular pay tactics to quell quit rates during hard economic times, especially when pay may be affected, Turetsky said. ”I’m always on the side of being more open. The more you try and hold back from employees, the more they don’t understand when you make strange policy decisions. You have to tell people why you’re doing the things you do so it makes sense to them, so they believe in your mission and so they’ll stay.”

When companies don’t communicate openly with employees, they send the message that workers aren’t mature enough to be in the know on business decisions. Turetsky noted that this frustration fuels labor organization — an effort that’s fundamentally rooted in taking power from opaque management.

“It all comes back down to how you treat employees,” Turetsky said. “And it starts from the hire: how you hire them, how you pay them, paying them fairly.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/consultant-says-shifting-market-is-pushing-pay-cultural-transparency/625395/

SHRM: Mental health, telehealth benefits are post-pandemic priorities

Bill Brewer — Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:47:28 GMT

Published June 22, 2022 By Laurel Kalser

Dive Brief:

Mental health coverage and telemedicine or telehealth services are among the most important benefits employers feel they can offer employees in 2022, according to the Society for Human Resource Management’s annual benefits survey released June 12. The survey was conducted in January and February and sent to U.S.-based SHRM members representing a variety of industries and sectors that range in size from two to more than 25,000 employees.
Of the survey’s 3,129 responses, 93% said they offered telemedicine or telehealth, a 20% jump from 2019, when the category was last recorded. Similarly, respondents offering mental health coverage hit a new high of 91%, up from prior to the pandemic. “The strong prevalence of these benefits, even after businesses have returned to more normal conditions following the COVID-19 vaccine rollout,” indicates they’re likely to become “permanent fixtures,” the executive summary noted.
Retirement savings and planning benefits were next, with 82% of employers saying they were important to offer, up from 55% in 2020/21. Most employers offered some type of retirement plan; 94% offered a traditional 401(k), 68% offered a Roth 401(k). Many employers also provided some type of employer match. Just over half (51%) said they automatically enroll new or existing employees in their company’s retirement plan, a figure that’s held steady since the pandemic’s onset.

Dive Insight:

As reflected in the survey, employer priorities continue to adapt to evolving post-pandemic needs. For example, while nearly all of employers currently offer paid vacation (99%) or sick (96%) leave, the prevalence of leave for new parents, beyond what’s required by law, returned to pre-pandemic levels. In particular, the number of organizations offering paid maternity leave dropped to 35% in 2022, down from 53% in 2020; paid paternity leave dropped to 27% in 2022, down from 44% in 2020.

The decline could be attributed to direct parental leave needs early in the pandemic, the executive summary explained. “Now that many businesses have returned to a more typical way of operating, employers seem to be dialing back on expanded parental leave opportunities,” the summary said.

Consistent with the priorities employers now place on mental health coverage, the survey revealed emerging support for mental health leave: 1 in 5 employers said they offered paid mental health days separate from regular sick leave. That’s in line with what one employment law attorney urged HR professionals June 13 at SHRM’s annual conference.

With the stresses brought on by the pandemic, an employer should ensure that employees know it appreciates what’s going on in the world and supports their mental health, the attorney said. Employers can show support by training managers on how to respond to leave requests as well as emphasizing the importance of using inclusive language.

The survey also reflects the pandemic-triggered shifting between in-person and remote work. Hybrid work opportunities continue to be well-represented among benefit offerings, the survey found. About 2/3 of employments (63%) said they offer most of their workers the opportunity to adopt some combination of remote and in-person work. Across all organizations, 62% said they reimburse or offer a subsidy to employees for at-home office work or equipment. On average, thees employers provided about $891 to employees to cover the costs of working at home.

In developing a hybrid work model, employers need to be intentional and build trust, a global diversity, equity and inclusion strategist said during her June 13 presentation at SHRM’s annual conference. While company leaders look for models to adopt, they should keep in mind that no one size fits all, the strategist said. She outlined five questions employers should ask to structure their model, including who gets to choose in-person versus remote work and when, and how and for whom they will use management tactics like surveillance.

The possibility of remote work gives organizations access to wider talent pools, the survey’s executive summary noted. Because workers also have more options for where and when they will work, employers face a challenging talent landscape. But benefits can be instrumental in how this plays out, the summary concluded.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/shrm-mental-health-telehealth-benefits-are-post-pandemic-priorities/625754/

Here are 4 ways to retain your best employees

Bill Brewer — Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:38:38 GMT

June 21, 2022 by Denise Leaser

In 2021, more than 47 million people quit their jobs, and 2022 isn’t looking much better: More than 4.5 million workers quit in March alone, a record high. As organizations seek to understand why, they are brainstorming ideas to keep employees happy. Perks like bean bag chairs and foosball tables are being replaced by high-end offerings like spa weekends, star chefs, yoga and fly-fishing trips.

But it won’t work. That’s because most employers fail to understand the root of the problem: The Great Resignation did not appear out of nowhere, and it did not start with the COVID-19 pandemic, even though it exacerbated the problem. Resignations now mirror the pre-pandemic trend that started in 2009, and American employers are going to have to retool to this new reality.

According to Harvard Business Review, the problem is the mindset of the labor market and the aging population in America. Workers are retiring in greater numbers and reconsidering their work/life balance and care roles. They are making localized switches among industries, or reshuffling, rather than exiting the labor market entirely. And, since the pandemic, they’re demonstrating a reluctance to return to in-person jobs, either from fear or the taste of flexibility they have experienced by working from home.

So, how can you know what elements of your corporate culture matter to employees—and what can you do to get it right? Using Glassdoor data, MIT Sloan/CultureX performed multi-year research project to identify the problem. The used artificial intelligence, specifically natural language understanding, to analyze the language workers used to describe their employers. Sentiment analytics revealed how positively (or negatively) employees felt about various topics regarding the corporate culture. Then, to identify which factors were most important in predicting a company’s overall culture score, they calculated each topic’s SHAP (Shapley additive explanations) value to understand the impact each feature has on a company’s overall culture rating.

The MIT Sloan/CultureX team identified 10 elements of culture that matter most to employees, but I’ve collapsed them into four areas that will be easy for any organization to understand: Meaning, Mobility, Managers and Money.

1. Meaning. Employees expect to be treated with respect and appreciation. They want to know that their work makes a difference to people and that it enriches their lives. They also want to work in a role that matches their values and builds their skills. Problem is, many employees are not in roles that match their skills or their values. Compounding that, employers are using a “warm body” approach to hire, not considering the personality traits, motivations or skills of candidates. In fact, only 16% of new hires possess the needed skills for both their current role and the future, according to Gartner.

Action: Organizations need to perform a full audit of their employees, take inventory of skills and understand, deeply, the desires and motivations of their workforce. Tools like MyInnerGenius create an unbiased profile of an employee and can suggest better roles in the organization and skills paths to accel in future roles.

2. Mobility. Employees now expect mobility and flexibility to move into different roles and to shape their workdays. But many employers do not create personalized progression plans for their employees and, as the pandemic becomes normalized, some employers are forcing employees to return to the office. Among Americans with jobs that can be done remotely, 60% say they want to work from home all or most of the time when the pandemic is over if given the choice, according to new Pew Research.

Action: Survey employees to find out if they prefer to work from home, then establish accommodations for top performers, including modifying the way work gets done or promoting employees to new roles that do not require in-office work.

3. Managers. According to the MIT Sloan/CultureX research, employees assign more credit or blame to the C-suite than to their direct boss. Nonetheless, employees expect managers to be supportive of their work and their need for purpose. They expect managers to be responsive and go to bat for them and offer encouragement. Being supportive is perhaps the most important trait to increasing engagement and retention.

Action: Managers should be assessed to determine their leadership capabilities, including their ethics and their ability to empathize. Managers should also be assessed for communication skills, engagement, coaching ability, leadership, collaborative mindset, purpose, direction and adaptability. Managers with deficits should be provided with personalized performance plans and training or reassigned to roles that do not require people management.

4. Money. Benefits are more important than salaries to most employees. Health insurance, health benefits, retirement benefits and pensions rise as top motivators for retention. And wages are important, especially in an inflationary economy. A Brookings study found that 44% of U.S. families did not earn enough to cover their living expenses.

Action: Many employees will simply quit or begin job searches before they ask for a salary increase. Don’t wait for an employee to ask for a raise; ask the employee first. Managers should proactively ask employees if they believe their compensation is commensurate with their work.

Companies that focus on these cultural priorities and treat their employees like customers and establish personalized development plans can dramatically reduce the impact of the inevitable shifts in the labor market.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/here-are-4-ways-to-retain-your-best-employees/

The Deloitte Global 2022 Gen Z and Millennial Survey

Bill Brewer — Thu, 02 Jun 2022 16:29:57 GMT

Top concerns among Gen Zs and millennials

This year’s survey finds Gen Zs and millennials deeply concerned about the state of the world, and actively trying to balance the challenges of their everyday lives with their desire to drive societal change. They are struggling with financial concerns, while trying to invest in environmentally sustainable choices. They feel burned out, but many are taking on second jobs, while pushing for more purposeful—and more flexible—work. They press their employers to tackle climate change, particularly when it comes to efforts they can get directly involved in, but businesses may still be missing opportunities to drive deeper and broader climate action. And they have inspired organizations to take action to address workplace mental health challenges, but many don’t feel this is resulting in any tangible change for employees.

Please continue reading this article on the Deloitte web site at: https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/genzmillennialsurvey.html

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Deloitte

The pandemic increased employee stress about retirement, study says

Bill Brewer — Thu, 02 Jun 2022 16:27:08 GMT

Published May 27, 2022 by Emilie Shumway

Dive Brief:

While saving for retirement is the top financial goal for employees, 51% of workers said the pandemic somewhat or significantly increased their stress about being able to afford to retire when they wanted, according to a survey from TIAA.
Overall, employees said they were satisfied with their company’s retirement offerings, but they showed increased interest (54% versus 51% in 2020) in guaranteed lifetime income annuities, which only one-third of responding employers said they offered. Employers seemed to register the deficit, too; 43% of those not currently offering GLI annuities said they were extremely or very interested in them, and 38% said access to GLI annuities was the feature most lacking from their retirement plans.
Among both workers and employers not interested in GLI annuity plans, cost was the primary reason, followed by the complicated nature of the plans.

Dive Insight:

The pandemic increased stress generally, and it appears stress related to retirement plans was no exception.

While the TIAA study did not investigate causes, circumstances that emerged relative to the pandemic (and other global events) may be a factor. High inflation and a struggling stock market have frightened those on the verge of retirement. A recent Pew Research survey found that 70% of Americans viewed inflation as a “very big problem” for the country, making it the top issue. It was followed by another economic concern: healthcare affordability. And of course, given the nature of the condition, anxiety caused by the pandemic may have caused more generalized anxiety.

Guaranteed lifetime income annuities can address retirement anxiety by providing more security than other types of plans, as GLI plans can be invulnerable to inflation, market swings and other unexpected financial events. Through such plans, employees provide an initial, upfront investment and then receive set monthly payouts for life, even if they outlive the value of their investment or the economy is upended.

However, buying into an annuity can come with a hefty price tag — often $100,000 or more for the initial investment, along with a slew of fees. Given workers’ financial demands related to everything from housing to child care to healthcare, it can be a significant task to set aside hundreds of thousands to invest in an annuity fund, even over many years.

Still, the TIAA survey shows workers who are familiar with it are interested in the GLI concept. The number of workers interested in in-plan GLI annuities if the cost were lowered jumped from 54% to 73%, the survey showed.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/pandemic-increased-employee-stress-about-retirement/624454/

Lowe's Launches Debt-Free Education Program for More Than 300,000 Associates

Bill Brewer — Thu, 02 Jun 2022 16:14:36 GMT

Comprehensive program provides associates access to free tuition to build careers in technology, supply chain, data analytics and more

MOORESVILLE, N.C., April 13, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Lowe's today announced a new education program to make it easier for associates to grow their careers. The new benefit gives full-time and part-time associates access to 100 percent debt-free programs, unlocking opportunities for over 300,000 eligible associates to pursue their educational and career aspirations.

In partnership with Guild, Lowe's is offering over 50 academic programs across 23 universities and learning providers in Guild's Learning Marketplace, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). The free programs are designed to help associates excel in their jobs today and build toward the careers of tomorrow within Lowe's, including pathways into supply chain, logistics, data analytics, cybersecurity, technology and more.

Research conducted by Guild found that its students enrolled through employer programs similar to Lowe's are twice as likely as the average employee to receive a promotion or new role.

"At Lowe's, we believe greater access to education leads to more opportunities, and our success is intertwined with our associates' success and their ability to continuously learn," said Janice Dupré, Lowe's executive vice president of human resources. "We actively listen to our associates to identify how we can help them in the many facets of their lives. This debt-free education offering is one of the many ways we're working to help our associates reach their career potential while knocking down traditional barriers that often make it difficult for them to obtain a degree."

Lowe's new education program offers debt-free tuition assistance to associates seeking to earn undergraduate certificates or degrees, or enroll in English language learning, high school completion or college prep programs. The education benefit is designed for busy working adults. Programs include flexible classes that fit different schedules, fully covered textbooks and course fees, and one-on-one support from Guild coaches. Lowe's will continue to provide direct payments of up to $2,500 annually in tuition assistance for more than 165 additional academic programs serving associates to reduce the burden of up-front, costly tuition payments.

Lowe's is committed to creating pathways for more people to access higher education while strengthening its pipeline of associates from all backgrounds and experiences. Academic partners in the Guild program include the University of Arizona – a Hispanic-Serving Institution – and HBCUs such as Morehouse College, North Carolina A&T State University and Paul Quinn College.

For 20 years, Lowe's has partnered with top scholarship organizations to contribute to student success. Recently, Lowe's announced a $9 million investment in select schools and scholarship programs to provide traditionally underserved students with greater access to higher education and pathways to future Lowe's employment.

"With the persistent war for talent, it's more critical than ever to invest in employees," said Rachel Carlson, Guild's CEO and co-founder. "By offering debt-free education and upskilling, Lowe's is expanding their long-term strategic commitment to providing career pathways, skills and support that every worker needs to open doors to their dreams."

Additionally, Lowe's offers a long-standing tuition reimbursement program, which reimburses associates up to $2,500 annually in education expenses. Lowe's also continues to offer Track to the Trades, a company-funded pre-apprentice certificate program to help up to 4,000 part-time and full-time associates pursue careers in the skilled trades each year. Lowe's covers 100 percent of tuition for Track to the Trade diplomas in HVAC, solar, commercial HVAC, appliance repair, multi-family facilities management, electrical and plumbing. This program supports Lowe's commitment to building a future generation of skilled trades professionals through the Generation T movement.

Kelly Pennington, a scheduling and staffing administrator at Lowe's store in Madison, Tennessee, is pursuing a bachelor's degree in behavioral science through online courses with Wilmington University. Her learning experience has inspired her to encourage others to enroll in Lowe's education programs.

"When I hit my 20 years with Lowe's, I thought, 'I think it's time to venture and go another direction.' But as I'm continuing to learn through the schooling, I could actually take this and apply it more with Lowe's," Pennington said. "Being involved in the position that I'm in now, I actually get to promote the schooling to other associates. A lot of times when I mention I'm going back to school and Lowe's pays for it, they're like, 'Really?' You kind of see them light up."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Lowes

https://corporate.lowes.com/newsroom/press-releases/lowes-launches-debt-free-education-program-more-300000-associates-04-13-22

Study Shows Employers Expanding Benefits

Bill Brewer — Tue, 26 Apr 2022 23:27:55 GMT

BY WORLDATWORK STAFF | APRIL 27, 2021

Employers are diversifying their benefit offerings in 2021 with enrollment in high-deductible health plans (HDHPS) and voluntary benefits such as income product plans increasing, according to a study from benefits technology platform.

Benefitfocus Inc.’s “State of Employee Benefits 2021” report, based on 3.5 million benefit enrollments, found that:

Employers are expanding benefit packages to address the diverse needs of a multi-generational workforce. Nearly three quarters of large employer groups offered a mix of traditional health plans (PPOs) and high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) for 2021, moving away from single health plan strategies. Voluntary benefit offerings continued to expand to supplement core coverage and provide greater flexibility and choice.
Employee health plan premiums saw moderate growth as employers took on more of the cost burden in 2021. While employee health plan premiums saw only a slight increase from 2020 to 2021, employers are paying more as a percentage of the total premium in 2021.
HDHPs are catching up to traditional PPOs in popularity among employees. PPOs are still the health plan of choice among employees, but HDHPs have grown in popularity across the board, with participation up 30% since 2018.
Consumer-directed health care accounts appeal to younger employees. Since 2018, the percentage of Generation Z with a health savings account (HSA) has more than doubled. Gen Zers, Millennials and Gen Xers are upping HSA contributions by 10% or more in 2021.
Supplemental benefits gained significant traction among employees. Over the past four years, employee participation in hospital indemnity plans has more than doubled and increased by 13% in 2021 alone. Participation in both critical illness and accident plans has grown by 65% or more since 2018 as well.

“The State of Employee Benefits provides a clear picture of how employers maintained their strategic focus on employee engagement and controlling health care costs,” said John Thomas, chief data officer for Benefitfocus, in a press release. “It also highlights, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, how employers are approaching benefit plan design, offering more consistency in workforce benefits planning and better addressing employees' total well-being.”

Marta Turba, WorldatWork’s vice president of content management, encourages employers to consider broadening their benefits offerings to help employees address COVID-exascerbated problems. That would include expanding health coverage for medical recovery from the pandemic, such as catch-up for routine services missed during the pandemic, and addressing such pandemic-related problems as obesity, depression, stress and complications because of delayed care. Also consider expanding family-related benefits, such as child and elder care-related assistance and relationship counseling.

For the report, Charleston, S.C.-based Benefitfocus aggregated, anonymized and analyzed 3.5 million actual enrollment records from nearly 350 large employer customers (1,000-plus employees).

Based on its analysis of the compiled data, the Benefitfocus report concluded: "There was a clear trend upward for expanding benefit offerings as a way to differentiate in a competitive job market leading up to 2020. If anything, employers took a more paternalistic approach in 2021, continuing to offer more benefits and absorbing health plan cost increases to keep things consistent for employees. At the same time, employees took more advantage of savings opportunities and income protection."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WoldatWork

https://worldatwork.org/workspan/articles/study-shows-employers-expanding-benefits

4 key trends for hybrid work in 2022 and beyond

Bill Brewer — Mon, 25 Apr 2022 23:19:01 GMT

by Renee Cocchi, April 18, 2022

We aren’t the same workforce we were a few years ago. Our eyes have been opened to the world of remote/hybrid work. And one thing is certain, there’s no going back. Employees have tasted the freedom and enjoy making themselves a priority. Now, employers are challenged with meeting and trying to exceed employees’ desires, to come out on top in the battle for talent.

One way to do this is by keeping up with what employees accept from you.

In its second annual study (Great expectations: A road map for making hybrid work work), Microsoft surveyed 31,000 people in 31 countries, along with an analysis of a trillion of productivity signals in Microsoft 365 and labor trends on LinkedIn.

As employers move forward in this new hybrid world, they can use these four key trends Microsoft uncovered to help steer their ships.

New priorities for employees

Employees have new priorities, and they aren’t willing to make the sacrifices they did in the past. The survey found that over half (53%) of the people are more likely to put their health and well-being ahead of their work. And if employers aren’t prioritizing their employees’ health and well-being, it’s likely their employees will fly the coup. Eighteen percent of respondents quit their job last year and 52% of Gen Z and millennials said they’ll likely get a new job next year.

But seeking new, more flexible jobs isn’t just being done by people in non-management positions. Leaders want that flexibility, too. Forty-seven percent said they’re likely to apply for a new job that’s not near their home in the next year.

Managers feel stuck in the middle

While leaders are steering the ship, it’s the managers who get to hear it from both sides. They hear from the leaders what they’re willing to give, and then they hear it from their employees what they want and expect. They’re the go between. It’s not an easy thing to deal with day in and day out. So, to keep your managers happy and keep their employees happy, managers need the power to act. If their hands are tied, frustration will set in. And most employers can’t afford to lose good managers. But it may happen because 54% said they feel leadership is out of touch with employee expectations. Another 74% said they feel they have no power or resources to make the changes needed to keep their teams happy.

Make commuting worth their while

Help employees feel connected and engaged. When employers do that, employees are more innovative and productive. Employees must know when and why they need to come into the office. If it’s just to sit there and stare at a wall, the employee feels manhandled and not valued. Bring them in for important meetings or collaboration on projects. If you make it clear, employees won’t feel so confused. The study found 38% of hybrid employees said knowing when and why they need to be in the office is their biggest challenge. And only 28% of leaders noted they created new team agreements for hybrid work. Other things the study uncovered: 43% of remote workers don’t feel included in meetings and only 27% of leaders said their company developed hybrid meeting etiquette so employees feel engaged and included.

Flexible work doesn’t mean 24/7

Microsoft reported that the average time spent in meetings for Teams users went up 252% since March 2020, and meetings spill over what’s considered the normal business hours. This includes weekends, too. Flexibility is great and allows employees to be more present in their lives outside of work. But there must be boundaries to protect employees from burnout.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Morning

https://www.hrmorning.com/news/hybrid-work-trends/

For some employers, pay equity is nonnegotiable — literally

Bill Brewer — Mon, 25 Apr 2022 23:14:28 GMT

When a candidate proposed a lower-than-average salary, one employer was transparent that the role paid more. “The person was very surprised.”

Published April 19, 2022 by Katie Clarey

At Magoosh, making candidates a good offer is nonnegotiable. Literally. The company doesn’t allow job seekers to negotiate their salaries or benefits.

Magoosh, which provides standardized test prep, has had its no-negotiation policy in place since its founding in 2009. The practice is still standard, the company confirmed to HR Dive. Instituting the policy was a scary decision for Magoosh CEO Bhavin Parikh, he said in a 2015 blog post. But he said he believed his company would benefit from it.

Parikh argued that the practice would eliminate friction between employees in similar roles whose earnings diverged because of negotiation. And it would reinforce the idea that compensation is merit-based, not subjective.

Parikh pointed to a third reason for nixing negotiation: It would help shrink pay inequities.

Since Magoosh’s founding, attention toward pay gaps has grown significantly. Many companies have aired intentions to fix pay gaps and to achieve pay equity. Advocates for pay equity have pushed employers to pursue measures such as disregarding salary history and expectations, publishing salary ranges, and conducting pay audits.

Foregoing salary negotiation is a less common practice, to be sure. Only a few other companies — Reddit, for example — have publicly committed to the practice. But sources told HR Dive it can be a significant step toward equitable pay.

Magoosh: A case study in no negotiations

Behind Magoosh’s commitment to making candidates one nonnegotiable offer of employment is a compensation ecosystem it says is designed to compute fair pay for every candidate who comes on board.

The company started by creating salary tracks for each of its departments or functions, Parikh wrote in another blog post in 2019. Each gets two tracks: One for individual contributors and another for managers. Each track contains levels that correspond to responsibility, scope and title. Increments between those levels serve as stepping stones to reward smaller advancements. The tracks ensure all workers doing the same job get the same pay, Parikh wrote.

The company uses third-party data to determine market compensation for each level within a job function. It refreshes the numbers every year in the third quarter, and if the market rates increase for companies similar to Magoosh, it provides salary boosts to its employees.

When Magoosh sets out to make a new hire, it publishes the salary range for the open role alongside the job description. It shares its no-negotiation policy early in the process, as well.

“We realize that a no-negotiation policy can turn some folks away, especially if they erroneously believe we won’t pay a fair wage as a result. We also know that some companies use no-negotiation policies to purposefully lowball candidates,” Parikh wrote.

The company first instituted the policy as a way to show it wouldn’t compete on salary — it was small and couldn’t afford to pay more, so it wanted candidates to choose Magoosh for its mission. But after years of growth, Parikh saw the policy differently. “I’ve realized pay and passion need not be mutually exclusive. We still use our no-negotiation policy as a way to maintain pay equity and support our Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion goals,” he wrote. “But we also want to pay competitively and want employees to feel good about their compensation.”

Negotiation and pay gaps

So how can negotiation — or the lack thereof — affect pay equity?

Recent research has highlighted disproportionate outcomes of salary negotiation in terms of gender. A study released October 2021 by researchers at the University of Southern California found that women negotiating for salary against virtual humans fared no better than men in the experiment. Forty-three percent of participants did not negotiate at all, and job seekers left 20% of value on the table.

While the study found no significant differences in the negotiating behaviors of men and women, it found that women “were willing to settle for less if they thought the environment is hostile to a woman.” “This expectation didn’t impact their final outcome when the interviewer ignored their gender, as our AI was programmed to do,” Jonathan Gratch, one of the study leaders, said in a press release. “This is consistent with the story that the problem is with the men that are interviewing the women, not the women themselves.”

Other research examined the gender-associated effects of pay negotiation for incumbent employees, as opposed to candidates. A 2021 report from LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Co. revealed similar findings, which were based on data from more than 130 companies and 34,000 men and women. The report revealed, for instance, that women negotiated for promotions and raises as often as men but faced more pushback. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, found that, among 2,000 graduates of an elite U.S. business school, more women than men asked for raises and promotions, but they were turned down twice as often.

Salary negotiation has been an important issue in equal pay litigation for several years, according to Matthew Gagnon, partner at Seyfarth Shaw.

If an employee sues an employer under the Equal Pay Act or another anti-discrimination law, the worker must identify another employee who was paid more for doing equal work. Then the burden shifts to the employer.

The employer must then justify why the pay disparity exists. The most commonly used defense is the “factor other than sex” defense, Gagnon said in an email to HR Dive. “As the name implies, an employer just needs to show that the disparity exists due to some factor other than sex,” he said. “Negotiation is sometimes one of those factors that an employer will rely on: the pay disparity exists because one employee negotiated for a higher salary than another employee.”

Companies are still trying to get bargains and it’s unfortunate. Bargains are bad in the world of HR today. They cause problems. And they’re morally wrong.

David Turetsky

VP of consulting at Salary.com

Some equal pay plaintiffs have begun to challenge this defense, Gagnon said. They argue that the negotiation process itself involves gender bias.

“Plaintiffs argue that there is a disparity in how employers treat employees during the negotiation process, often arguing that a man ended up with a higher salary because they were perceived to be a ‘better’ or ‘harder’ negotiator than a woman, solely due to gender stereotypes,” Gagnon said.

This argument has had mixed success, Gagnon noted. But most of the time, it has not been successful.

Pay equity, negotiations or no negotiations

Salary negotiation can take place without discrimination, but only if the employer has a strong policy and good tools, according to David Turetsky, VP of consulting at Salary.com.

Turetsky’s No. 1 rule of salary negotiation for employers is to avoid bargains — snagging talent for a lower price than they’re worth. “Companies are still trying to get bargains and it’s unfortunate,” Turetsky told HR Dive in an interview. “Bargains are bad in the world of HR today. They cause problems. And they’re morally wrong. It takes training. It takes leadership. And it has to come from the top. This is not an HR problem — this is a business problem.”

Companies can still negotiate if they equip candidates with information, Turetsky said. Individuals need to know the company’s salary ranges, what the job pays, and what their benefits and career path would look like.

From there, the employer can disclose the starting rate in an offer, maybe $90,000 with an upcoming bonus and benefits. The employee can ask to start at $100,000 instead, and the employer will explain how that changes the extra, based on the total budget.

“That conversation can happen,” Turetsky said. “The employer needs to have the policy and the tools for the hiring manager and the recruiter to do the right thing, so there’s no bargain, but there’s a good starting place for that person to be on.”

Compensation conversations marked by openness and honesty may surprise candidates. When Turetsky was hiring for his consultant group, he identified a wage he planned to pay all consultants. When someone came in and requested a figure that was 25% less than his selected amount, Turetsky said he wouldn’t do that, he’d pay more. “The person was very surprised.”

Even though he said he believes negotiations are still possible with good compensation architecture, Turetsky said he approves of a no-negotiation policy if it’s in the name of pay equity. In fact, he encourages more organizations to pursue pay equity policies on the whole.

“I hope it doesn’t take regulation to make this happen. I hope organizations and their leadership are providing the guidance that we as organizations need to do the right thing for employees and potential employees,” he said. “We need to think pay equity, act pay equity. We need to treat everyone the same. Put blinders on.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/for-some-employers-pay-equity-is-nonnegotiable-literally/622168/

Young women are out-earning young men in several U.S. cities

Bill Brewer — Mon, 25 Apr 2022 23:11:28 GMT

MARCH 28, 2022 by RICHARD FRY

Women in the United States continue to earn less than men, on average. Among full-time, year-round workers in 2019, women’s median annual earnings were 82% those of men.

The gender wage gap is narrower among younger workers nationally, and the gap varies across geographical areas. In fact, in 22 of 250 U.S. metropolitan areas, women under the age of 30 earn the same amount as or more than their male counterparts, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data.

How we did this

Men in the United States have long earned more than women, on average, but this gender wage gap has slowly narrowed over time. The gap tends to be smaller among younger workers. This analysis examines the extent to which the gender wage gap among young workers also varies across metro areas.

The analysis is based on the American Community Survey (ACS), the largest household survey in the U.S., with a sample of more than 3 million addresses. It covers the topics previously covered in the long form of the decennial census. The ACS is designed to provide estimates of the size and characteristics of the nation’s resident population, which includes persons living in households and group quarters.

The specific 2015-2019 five-year ACS microdata sample used here was provided by the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) from the University of Minnesota. IPUMS assigns uniform codes, to the extent possible, to data collected in the ACS.

The 2019 ACS data is the most recent available. The collection of the 2020 data was severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Based on the 2010 census, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget delineated 384 metropolitan statistical areas. The IPUMS ACS provides information on 260 metros. As explained in the documentation for MET2013, there is an imprecise correspondence between the metro boundaries in the ACS data and the official metro area boundaries. This analysis uses information for only 250 metros because 10 metros had an insufficient number of young full-time, year-round working women living in them to provide accurate estimates.

A “full-time, year-round worker” worked at least 50 weeks in the year prior to the interview date and usually worked at least 35 hours per week. Among women workers under 30, 43% work full time, year-round.

Recent Pew Research Center analyses of the gender pay gap examine the median hourly wage of both full- and part-time workers using the Current Population Survey (CPS). The CPS does not provide information on individual metropolitan areas. The CPS and ACS provide similar estimates of the gender pay gap for the U.S. Using the CPS, the Census Bureau estimates that the gender earnings gap for full-time, year-round workers ages 15 and older was 82% for 2019, matching that derived from the ACS.

The New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles metropolitan areas are among the cities where young women are earning the most relative to young men. In both the New York and Washington metro areas, young women earn 102% of what young men earn when examining median annual earnings among full-time, year-round workers. In the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim metro area, the median earnings for women and men in this age group were identical in 2019. (For data on earnings and the gender gap for 250 U.S. metropolitan areas, read this Google sheet.)

Overall, about 16% of all young women who are working full time, year-round live in the 22 metros where women are at or above wage parity with men.

There are 107 metros where young women earn between 90% and 99% of what young men earn. Nearly half (47%) of young women working full time, year-round lived in these areas in 2019.

In another 103 metros, young women earn between 80% and 89% of what men earn. These areas were home to 17% of young women who were employed full time, year-round in 2019.

And in 14 metros, young women’s earnings were between 70% and 79% those of men in 2019. About 1% of the young women’s workforce lived in these metros.

In four metro areas – Mansfield, Ohio; Odessa, Texas; Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas; and Elkhart-Goshen, Indiana – women younger than 30 earn between 67% and 69% of what their male counterparts make. These metros account for 0.3% of the young women’s workforce. (Some 19% of young women in the workforce are employed in metros where earnings data is not available or are in nonmetropolitan areas.)

From a regional perspective, metropolitan areas in the Midwest tend to have wider gender wage gaps among young workers. Young women working full time, year-round in Midwestern metros earn about 90% of their male counterparts. In other regions, by comparison, young women earn 94% or more of what young men earn.

Nationally, women under 30 who work full time, year-round earn about 93 cents on the dollar compared with men in the same age range, measured at the median. As these women age, history suggests that they may not maintain this level of parity with their male counterparts. For example, in 2000, the typical woman age 16 to 29 working full time, year-round earned 88% of a similar young man. By 2019, when people in this group were between the ages of 35 and 48, women were earning only 80% of their male peers, on average. Earnings parity tends to be greatest in the first years after entering the labor market.

Labor economists examine earnings disparities among full-time, year-round workers in order to control for differences in part-time employment between men and women as well as attachment to the labor market. However, even among full-time, year-round workers, men and women devote different amounts of time to work. Men under 30 usually work 44 hours per week, on average, compared with 42 hours among young women.

Note: For data on earnings and the gender gap for 250 U.S. metropolitan areas, read this Google sheet.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Pew Research Center

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/03/28/young-women-are-out-earning-young-men-in-several-u-s-cities/

Pay, health benefits beat flexible work in winning new hires

Bill Brewer — Mon, 25 Apr 2022 23:08:57 GMT

Published April 18, 2022 by Maura Webber Sadovi

Dive Brief:

More than half (56%) of workers surveyed cited pay and bonus as among the top factors that would be most important to them when considering whether to jump to a new employer, followed by health benefits (39%), job security (33%), flexible work arrangements (31%) and retirement benefits (29%), according to a report from global advisory firm Willis Towers Watson (WTW). Pay and bonus was also the top factor cited by workers as among the most important reasons to stay with their current employer, followed by job security, health benefits, flexible work arrangements and work that provides a “sense of purpose.”
A rising percentage — nearly half — of employees surveyed said their company’s retirement (47%) and healthcare plans (48%) were an important reason they decided to work for their current employers, compared with less than a third (29%) that cited the plans in 2015, according to the report.
Well over half of the employees (60%) cited their employers’ retirement and healthcare benefits as an important reason for sticking with their current company, up from 48% who cited retirement in 2019 and just 54% who cited healthcare, in both cases marking a more than decade high in the benefits’ role in retaining workers. ore

Dive Insight:

Attracting and retaining employees are key issues for many CFOs who are facing the tightest labor market in decades while also fighting rising costs on other fronts as inflation has soared to a four-decade high. Many finance chiefs are aiming to hold on to employees this year by giving them raises above 3% but that may not be enough as inflation outpaces pay gains, experts say.

While employees still see pay as the most “compelling reason to stay or leave a company, health and retirement benefits have become a much more significant factor in their decision-making process,” Monica Martin, senior director, retirement, at WTW, said in a statement. “In this tight labor market, organizations that understand the importance that employees place on these core benefits and that provide highly valued benefit programs can differentiate themselves in their effort to become an employer of choice.”

Some of the top retirement options cited by respondents as offerings that would be most helpful to employees included: a guaranteed retirement benefit (cited by 62%), more generous retirement benefits generally (58%), retiree medical benefits (53%) and flexibility to use retirement monies for short-term needs (37%).

Of the top options that would most improve flexible work arrangements respondents cited more generous paid time off and sick leave (50%), the option to work from home/anywhere (47%), the option to select when work occurs (45%) and policies that respect personal time outside of work (35%).

Respondents asked which health-related benefits would most help them cited a generally more generous healthcare plan (46%), health screenings and risk assessments (42%) and a more generous dental plan (37%). And nearly half of employees (46%) said they would give up higher pay for a more generous healthcare plan versus 36% in 2020.

The 2022 Global Benefits Attitudes Survey queried 9,600 U.S. employees from large and midsize private companies across a range of industries from December through January.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CFO Dive

https://www.cfodive.com/news/workers-cite-retirement-healthcare-key-retention-embargoedhold-f/622236/

March 2022 US Labor Market Update: Wage Growth Remains Strong

Bill Brewer — Thu, 31 Mar 2022 20:57:07 GMT

March 23, 2022 by Nick Bunker and AnnElizabeth Konkel

Wages have picked up in higher-wage industries, but have cooled slightly in lower-wage industries.

Key takeaways:

Spotlight: Wage growth remains strong, but the origins of those gains are shifting. Wages have cooled slightly in lower-wage industries while picking up in higher-wage industries.
The US labor market remains hot as demand for workers has outstripped the willingness of many workers to take those jobs.
This imbalance is the root cause of the current strong wage growth, albeit gains that have been diluted by high levels of inflation.
Employment levels are recovering in response to elevated levels of employer demand, but have not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels.

Spotlight: A Rotation in Wage Growth

Wage growth remains strong, but the source of those strong gains have changed. Since the summer, wage growth has slowed for workers in lower-wage industries while it has increased for workers employed in higher-wage industries. Wage growth in industries such as department stores, food services and drinking places, and child daycare services has tempered, while gains for workers in industries including hospitals and legal services have increased.

The slowdown for lower-wage industries implies that some of the factors giving workers extraordinary leverage last summer have faded. The largest gulfs between demand and supply in these lower-wage, in-person industries seem to have shrunk. The result is slower wage growth, but a pace of gains that is still elevated.

At the same time, the broadening of wage growth is an important trend in itself. The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s Wage Growth Tracker shows raises are becoming more common among workers. More workers seeing wage gains mean that wages and total incomes could continue to grow briskly even if gains slow among lower-income workers.

Bar graph titled “The ‘tilt’ of wage growth is changing” with a vertical axis ranging from 0% to 14%, The graph shows the 3-month annualize growth rate of average hourly earnings for workers in low-wage, middle-wage, and higher-wage industries in August 2021 and January 2022. Wage growth for workers in lower-wage industries has slowed from 11.4% in August 2021 to 7.6% in January 2022. At the same time, wage growth for workers in higher-wage industries has grown from 2.6% in August to 5% in January.

Labor Market Overview

The US labor market remains hot. Demand for labor has grown much more quickly than supply as the US economy has quickly recovered from the initial COVID-19 shock. The result has been quickly rebounding employment, fast wage growth and joblessness approaching but not yet at pre-pandemic levels. This forward momentum faces potential speed bumps and roadblocks in the form of quickly tightening monetary policy, geopolitical instability, and new variants of COVID-19.

Line graph titled “Job postings on Indeed, United States.” With a vertical axis ranging from -25% to 50%, Indeed tracked with two lines, the percent change in seasonally adjusted job postings and non-seasonally adjusted job postings between February 1, 2020 and March 18, 2022. On March 18, 2022, seasonally adjusted job postings were 58.6% above February 1, 2020, the pre-pandemic baseline while non-seasonally adjusted job postings were up 65.9%.

Employer demand for workers remains strong. Indeed job postings are 58.6% above their pre-pandemic baseline, but overall growth in labor demand has slowed in recent months. However this decline has been driven by our adjustment for seasonal fluctuations as non-adjusted postings are above their 2021 year-end level. Occupational sector variation is plentiful, HR job postings are 128% above pre-pandemic baseline but growth in low advertised wage occupations has declined.

Strong wage growth, but inflation eating away gains

This strong demand for workers, with acute hiring difficulties across different sectors, has driven wage growth higher than at any point in over 20 years, with wages growing at almost 6% on a year-over-year basis. While nominal wage gains may be strong, high levels of inflation are eating away gains for many employees. One of the biggest questions for the US economy is what will happen to the pace of nominal wage growth. The rate at which employers are bidding up wages might temper, but inflation would have to drop even more in order for inflation-adjusted raises to become more common.

Line graph titled “Wage growth remains elevated” with a vertical axis ranging from 1 % to 6% and a horizontal axis that covers January 2007 to February 2022. The data graphed are the year-over-year change in the Employment Cost Index wage measure for private sector workers excluding those in incentive-paid occupations and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s Wage Growth Tracker. Both series show strong rises in 2021 with the Wage Growth Tracker metric showing even stronger growth so far in 2022.

Prime-age workers are returning to work

Labor supply has not grown as swiftly as demand, but people are returning to work. Measures such as the labor force participation rate and the employment-to-population ratio have been sluggish, but a solid rebound has been masked by the aging of the population. Looking at these statistics for people in their prime working years shows much stronger growth in employment and labor force participation.

Line graph titled “Employment recoveries have differed among age groups” with a vertical axis ranging from 0 % to -35% and a horizontal axis that covers Feb 2020 to February 2022. The data graphed are the percent change in the employment-to-population ratios for different age groups. The graph shows a very steep decline for workers ages 16-24 in spring 2020 compared to workers ages 25 to 54 and those 55 years and older. However, the recovery has been much stronger for young workers and those 25 to 54. The employment-to-population ratio is most depressed for older workers.

Muted rise in urgent job search

While many people are taking new jobs, the rise in urgency among job seekers has been relatively muted, according to our most recent Indeed Job Search survey data. While more workers are reporting they are searching urgently, the increase is far slower than the rebound in jobs. The pickup in employment is being driven by workers who are being enticed by employers, rather than feeling a need to urgently find new work.

Line graph titled “Urgent job search among the jobless has risen since the summer” with a vertical axis ranging from 0 % to 25% and a horizontal axis that covers June 2021 to March 2022. The data graphed are the share of the employed and jobless who are actively and urgently looking for work and those who are actively but not urgently looking for work. The shares of both jobless and employed people actively and urgently looking for work have moved up in recent months, but the upward trend is more enduring among jobless people.

Elevated quits rate

Employed workers are also finding new work. The quits rate is at levels not seen in the 21st century with 3.2% of private sector workers voluntarily leaving their jobs in January 2022. This high volume of quitting has been driven by the strong demand for workers and is concentrated in industry sectors such as manufacturing, leisure and hospitality, and retail trade.

Line graph titled “The quits rate is well above pre-pandemic levels” with a vertical axis ranging from 1.5 % to 3.5% and a horizontal axis that covers January 2019 to January 2022. The data graphed are the share of the employed workers who voluntarily left their job during the month with a line for all workers and a line for private sector workers. Both lines show elevated quits rates with the all workers series at 2.8% and the private sector at 3.2% in January 2022.

The recent US labor market has offered a variety of opportunities for workers while presenting some challenges to employers. However, the present situation can and will change. We will continue to monitor the above trends and track others as the labor market evolves.

Methodology

Data on seasonally-adjusted Indeed job postings in this blog post are the percentage change in seasonally-adjusted job postings since February 1, 2020, using a seven-day trailing average. February 1, 2020, is our pre-pandemic baseline. We seasonally adjust each series based on historical patterns in 2017, 2018, and 2019. We adopted this methodology in January 2021. Data for June 24-30, 2021, November 1, 2021, January 1, 2022, January 27, 2022 and January 28, 2022 are missing and were interpolated. Non-seasonally adjusted data are calculated in a similar manner except that the data are not adjusted to historical patterns.

The data on job postings are based on publicly available information on the Indeed US website and any other countries if named in the post. Unless specified otherwise, it is limited to the United States, is not a projection of future events, and includes both paid and unpaid job solicitations. US Armed Forces job postings are excluded.

The data from the Job Search Survey is based on ten online surveys of 5,000 US adults ages 18-64, starting in late May 2021 and through March 2022. The first survey was conducted May 26-June 3, the second July 12-20, and the third August 10-18, the fourth from September 13 – 29 and fifth from October 11-20 and the sixth from November 8 – 18 the seventh from December 6 – 22 , the eight from January 10 – 24, the ninth from February 7 – 21, and the most recent from March 7 – 21. Weights were applied to each survey to match respondent distributions across age, educational attainment, race/ethnicity, and sex with the 2020 Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and Economic Supplement.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Indeed Hiring Lab

https://www.hiringlab.org/2022/03/23/march-2022-us-labor-market-update/

Great Resignation: 80% of Tech Employees Considering Another Job

Bill Brewer — Thu, 31 Mar 2022 20:54:01 GMT

BY RICK CHEN | POSTED ONMARCH 10, 2022

As many as four out of five professionals are considering looking for another job in the next three months, according to a survey from the professional social network Blind. The data may indicate the “Great Resignation” is likely to continue, especially for in-demand tech workers.

But there may be more bad news for some executives looking to keep talent at their company.

The number of professionals who said they had considered looking for another job in the next three months is as high as 95% of survey respondents at Better and PayPal. Indeed, employees at financial services companies, including American Express, Capital One, Deloitte, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, were among the most likely to say they wanted out from their current role.

Large technology companies are not immune from the phenomenon. More than four out of five verified professionals at Amazon, Dell, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle and Salesforce polled by Blind might have one foot out the door.

Professionals taking “concrete steps”

While it may be expected that people on a professional social network would be more open to new career opportunities than others, Blind found many workers had taken concrete steps already and as recently as the last month.

Nearly three out of five professionals (57%) said they had applied for a job in the past month.

“It’s not a ‘Great Resignation,’” said a verified Salesforce professional on Blind. “This is a shift of control to the workers. People are getting better jobs.”

The cloud-computing company professional continued: “It’s more aptly named ‘The Great Career Upgrade.’ People are leaving s—ty jobs for better ones.”

About three out of four workers (74%) answered “yes” when asked by Blind if they had communicated with a recruiter in the last month. Headhunters seemed to have the most success with their job pitches at Amazon, Cisco, Expedia, SAP, VMware and Wayfair—companies whose employees had a higher-than-average response rate than others in Blind’s analysis.

Perhaps more startlingly, nearly half of all professionals (49%) in Blind’s survey said they had interviewed with another company in the last month. Even employees at the juggernauts and popular workplaces Apple, Bloomberg, Google, Facebook-owner Meta, Twitter and Uber have recently sought greener pastures.

What is a better job?

While the American workforce is diverse, their idea of what makes a better job is almost anything but.

Compensation was the No. 1 answer by an overwhelming majority of professionals. When asked by Blind what was one thing their current company could do to keep them, thousands of professionals responded with everything from stock-based compensation to desires of pay raises. The most common asks were “25%,” “30%,” and even some cheeky respondents who sought a doubling of their salary.

Alternatively, companies looking for an easy way to prevent employee attrition might consider the continued opportunity to work from home or an indefinite delay to return-to-office plans. The demand for “full” or “100%” remote work remains top-of-mind for many workers, even after two years of the public health orders that sent people home and left many workplaces empty.

Other recurring replies to Blind’s survey included the hope for “better benefits,” promotions and other opportunities for professional growth, and work-life balance.

While recently popular, a four-day workweek or company-enforced and paid “recharge” breaks came up rarely.

The bottom line

A majority of workers may be in the job market, especially in the red-hot technology industry. According to a recent survey by Blind, 80% of professionals said they are considering looking for another job in the next three months. Additionally, one half or more have applied for a job, communicated with a recruiter or interviewed with another company in the last month.

Methodology

Blind conducted an online survey of 6,802 verified professionals in the U.S. on its platform from March 2 to 8, 2022, to understand whether employees intend to quit for another job amid the “Great Resignation.”

Survey respondents answered “yes” or “no” to the following questions:

Are you considering looking for another job in the next three months?
In the last month, have you applied for a job?
In the last month, have you communicated with a recruiter?
In the last month, have you interviewed with another company?

The survey also asked: “If you are considering another job, what is one thing your company could do to keep you?” Blind anonymized and aggregated the responses to the open-ended question in its analysis.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Blind Blog – Workplace Insights

https://www.teamblind.com/blog/index.php/2022/03/10/great-resignation-tech-jobs-hiring/

DOL Warns 401(k) Plans Against Allowing Crypto Investments

Bill Brewer — Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:34:48 GMT

Guidance stops short of a blanket cryptocurrency prohibition

By Percy LeeMarch 22, 2022

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) is warning 401(k) plan fiduciaries to "exercise extreme care" before considering whether to include a cryptocurrency option in a plan investment menu.

The sternly worded guidance, in Compliance Assistance Release No. 2022-01, published March 10, reveals heightened skepticism of 401(k) cryptocurrency investments and predicts new DOL enforcement activity for fiduciaries who permit 401(k) participants to invest in cryptocurrencies.

Crypto's Lukewarm Reception by Retirement Plans

Cryptocurrencies are digital currency created and exchanged over a decentralized computer network. Although Bitcoin is the first and best-known cryptocurrency, thousands of cryptocurrencies now exist.

Created to facilitate transactions free from governmental and third-party interference, cryptocurrencies have gained notoriety as volatile investments. Large institutional investors have been circumspect in investing in cryptocurrency, with defined benefit pension plans showing greater reticence than university endowments and family offices.

Investment in crypto assets by defined contribution plans remains uncommon, and most leading 401(k) record keepers do not permit cryptocurrencies to be traded directly on their platforms. Recently, however, several companies have begun to market services that would allow 401(k) plan participants to invest in cryptocurrency using specialized cryptocurrency exchanges.

Simmering DOL Wariness

The guidance follows President Biden's March 9 executive order directing federal agencies, including the DOL, to coordinate in developing a national policy that promotes the "responsible development and use of digital assets." However, Ali Khawar, acting head of the DOL Employee Benefits Security Administration, indicated as early as summer 2021 that the agency found 401(k) plan investment in cryptocurrency "very troubling" because of the volatility and lack of transparency of crypto investments.

In a March 10 blog post accompanying the new guidance, Khawar repeated the DOL's concerns about exposing plan participants to direct investments in cryptocurrencies and related products, such as non-fungible tokens, coins and crypto assets.

A Warning to Fiduciaries: Five Concerns

Plan fiduciaries must follow duties of prudence and loyalty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which courts have described as the "highest known to the law." Citing the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hughes v. Northwestern University, the guidance reminds fiduciaries that they must select and monitor each investment option made available to plan participants to ensure its appropriateness. The guidance identifies five areas of concern facing 401(k) plan investment in cryptocurrency:

Volatility and speculative nature of crypto investments.
The guidance attributes the extreme price volatility of cryptocurrency investments to uncertainties in valuation, speculative conduct, fictitious trading, theft/fraud and other factors.

Difficulty of enabling informed decisions.
Cryptocurrency investments have dominated headlines for large gains and losses. The guidance states that this exposure can make it challenging even for experts to separate the facts from the hype and can attract participants who expect high returns without appreciating the risks. The difficulty is exacerbated if participants construe the availability of such investments in a plan investment menu as fiduciaries' endorsement of them.

Custodial and record-keeping concerns.
The guidance notes that unlike traditional plan assets that are held in trust or custodial accounts, readily available to pay benefits and plan expenses, cryptocurrencies generally exist as lines of computer code in a digital wallet and are susceptible to loss and theft.

Valuation concerns.
The guidance describes concerns about the reliability and accuracy of cryptocurrency valuations, noting expert disagreements on valuation models and the lack of consistent accounting treatment and reporting, as well as data integrity requirements, among cryptocurrency market intermediaries.

Unstable regulatory environment.
The guidance states that the rapidly evolving regulatory landscape for cryptocurrency markets poses considerable risks of noncompliance with respect to issuance, investments, trading and other activities. The DOL further cites cautions by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) that cryptocurrencies have been used in illegal activities. Consumers who invest in cryptocurrency could be affected if law enforcement agencies shut down or restrict the use of platforms and exchanges.

Based on these concerns, the guidance issues a direct warning to 401(k) plan fiduciaries who allow participants to invest in cryptocurrencies and related products, concluding that the DOL expects to conduct an investigative program aimed at protecting participants and beneficiaries of plans that offer such investments.

Fiduciaries of such plans should expect to respond to questions about their compliance with ERISA duties of prudence and loyalty.

Departures from Previous DOL Guidance

The DOL has taken an aggressive position. First, the guidance takes the unusual step of singling out a specific asset class for additional enforcement scrutiny, even if it falls short of imposing a blanket prohibition on offering crypto assets to 401(k) participants. Fiduciaries may note that the DOL's position is more stringent than the ones expressed in the June 2020 information letter and December 2021 supplement statement regarding private equity investments in 401(k) funds, which are permissible as part of a diversified fund that is properly vetted and contains features designed to alleviate the liquidity and valuation concerns of private equity investments.

In contrast, the guidance on cryptocurrencies leaves little room for doubt that the DOL discourages crypto investments in 401(k) plans. It offers no concession for diversified investments similar to those described in the June 2020 information letter.

Brokerage Windows

The guidance on cryptocurrencies also appears to extend its warning not only to plans that offer crypto through the plan's menu of designated investment funds, but also to plans that let participants invest in stocks, bonds and other securities through an open platform referred to as a brokerage window. This suggests, contrary to prevailing guidance, that the DOL may expect plan fiduciaries not only to prudently select a brokerage window provider, but also to monitor the underlying investments made available through a brokerage window.

Conclusion

As cryptocurrency investments grow in popularity and mainstream consciousness, fiduciaries of 401(k) and similar plans may face questions from participants about the availability of cryptocurrency investments. The latest DOL guidance makes clear that an abundance of caution is warranted.

Fiduciaries who are considering adding cryptocurrency investments to 401(k) plans should reconsider their decision in light of this guidance and proceed only after weighing the risks of DOL investigation and fiduciary litigation and documenting the decision-making process.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/benefits/pages/dol-warns-401k-plans-against-allowing-crypto-investments.aspx

Google employees increasingly dissatisfied with pay, return-to-office plans

Bill Brewer — Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:27:44 GMT

By: Colin Lodewick | March 15, 2022

The results of Google’s famous annual survey are out, and it seems that employees aren’t as happy about their compensation as they used to be.

The “Googlegeist” measures employee satisfaction with regards to things like leadership, compensation, diversity, and company values. The company conducted its 2022 survey in January, and the results were obtained by CNBC.

Around 53% of Google employees said their pay is competitive — a drop of 5 points from last year, while 56% said their pay is “fair and equitable” — down 8 points, according to the survey. In the company’s cloud division, the number of participants who described the promotional process as fair declined 2 points, to 54%.

Competitive pay has become a major issue for companies big and small across all industries, as they fight to attract and retain their workers.

More workers are quitting jobs than ever before, in a movement that has been dubbed “The Great Resignation.” At least 4 million workers have left their jobs every month since July 2021, peaking in November with the highest number of quits ever recorded by the Bureau of Labor Statistics since it started keeping track in 2000.

Tech companies—a traditionally hot sector—are scrambling to keep up. In February, Amazon announced that it was doubling its maximum base salary to $350,000 in the face of a competitive labor market.

Alphabet CEO Sundhar Pichai told employees in an email announcing the results that the survey is “one of the most important ways” the company gauges workplace satisfaction, CNBC reported.

"We know that our employees have many choices about where they work, so we work to ensure that they are very well compensated," said a Google spokesperson in a statement shared with Fortune. "That's why we've always provided top of market compensation across salary, equity, leave, and a suite of benefits. Getting employee feedback is important and we'll continue to ensure we pay competitively everywhere our employees work and help them grow their careers at Google.”

Leadership and Google’s overall mission received relatively high scores; Pichai received a favorability rating of 86%, while the company’s mission to “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful” was rated at 90%. Employees gave the company’s values an 85% favorability rating.

The Googlegeist survey also comes at a time when more companies, including tech giants, are navigating return-to-office plans. Google plans to bring its workforce back April 4, while Meta is slated to return March 28—both companies are offering their workforce hybrid schedules.

But not all the tech giants are requiring a return to the office. Twitter, LinkedIn and Salesforce are all offering employees the opportunity to work from home indefinitely.This year’s survey is not the only sign of employee dissatisfaction at Google. In January of last year, a coalition of Google employees announced the formation of the Alphabet Workers Union to advocate for workplace equity and the ideal of tech being used only for good.

Source: Fortune

https://fortune.com/2022/03/15/google-googlegeist-survey-employees-unhappy-with-pay/

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Google employees say its return-to-office plan is unfair

Googlers said the company enforces remote work policies for some, but not others.

By: Lizzy Lawrence | March 16, 2022

Some Google employees are calling out the company for unevenly applying its remote work policies, Business Insider reported Tuesday. Google is bringing Bay Area employees back to the office at least three days per week starting April 4. But while some team members are spared from in-person work policies, others are no longer allowed to work remotely, employees say.

Employees raised their complaints at a company all-hands last Thursday, submitting questions through a system called Dory. Two popular questions involved remote work, according to Insider.

"Google made record profits through the pandemic (and WFH), traffic has already increased (at least in Bay Area) with gas prices at record high, and people have different preferences for WFH vs work from office," one question said. "Why is the RTO policy not 'Work from office when you want or when it makes sense to?'" Another submitter said some teams "blanket ban" remote work, with Google rejecting applications "even if managers are supportive."

Workers told Insider that Google's remote work policies felt arbitrary. One employee said a colleague was barred from remote work even though their manager was allowed to work from home. Bay Area employees who wish to work remotely from other states might face pay cuts: Google will lower pay if employees relocate to cities like Durham, North Carolina, and Houston, Texas.

This isn't the first time Google's remote work plans have upset its employees. In July, CNET reported that employees were angered by "hypocritical" remote work policies, allowing senior executive Urs Hölzle to work indefinitely from New Zealand while lower-level employees had to go through an application process.

Other big tech companies are also opening their offices for corporate employees in the coming weeks. But not everyone's requiring in-person work. Twitter will let employees work from home forever, if they want. The pandemic has made workers accustomed to a flexible work environment, and many find required, in-person work unappealing.

Source: Protocol

https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/google-employees-upset-remote-work

Companies with overpaid CEOs underperform, shareholder advocacy group says

Bill Brewer — Fri, 25 Mar 2022 21:21:27 GMT

By: Ryan Golden | Published March 23, 2022

Dive Brief:

2021 marked a large increase in CEO pay package rejections by shareholders, according to a report by As You Sow, a shareholder advocacy nonprofit. Last year, 16 companies saw their CEO pay packages rejected by more than half of shareholders, up from 10 in 2020 and seven in 2019.
The organization found that CEO compensation does not typically correlate with past stock return performance and that, instead, companies with the 100 most overpaid CEOs underperformed the equal-weighted average S&P 500 company for each of As You Sow's annual reports going back to 2015.
The report ranked those 100 CEOs using a formula based on indicators including pay compared to organizational performance, CEO to worker pay ratio and the percentage of institutional shareholders who voted against a pay package. CEOs from Paycom, Norwegian Cruise Line, General Electric, T-Mobile and Nike held the top five spots on As You Sow's list.

Dive Insight:

Executive compensation has become a contentious topic among members of the public, in part due to the wide gaps between CEOs and the average worker at a given company.

Last year, a study by job search website Lensa revealed a 2,202% wage difference between the average CEO of a large U.S. company and the average worker at such a company. In dollars, that equated to more than $1.2 million annually. Other entities, including the Economic Policy Institute, have found that this gap widened since the 1970s.

Organizations instituted pay increases on a broad scale in late 2021 and early 2022, including for workers below the executive and managerial levels. But recent fears regarding inflation have caused financial departments to pump the brakes on future increases.

More recent increases in executive compensation also may be reflective of a candidate-friendly hiring market that favors leadership candidates. In January, data analytics and consulting firm GlobalData said it found a 35% increase in the number of job listings for roles such as CEO, CHRO and CFO in 2021 compared to 2020.

That shareholders are increasingly rejecting pay package proposals may be reflective of frustration with how executives are compensated relative to company performance, particularly during the pandemic, according to the As You Sow report.

"Some boards acted as if pay for performance didn't matter when COVID-19 was involved, and shareholders angrily rejected those packages," Rosanna Landis Weaver, executive compensation program manager at As You Sow, said. "But it is time for more shareholders to vote against the quantum of pay, not just particular bad practices. The growth in CEO pay is unjustified and not in the best interests of shareholders."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/companies-with-overpaid-ceos-underperform-shareholder-advocacy-group-says/620928/

US soccer's $24M gender pay gap settlement may help HR 'elevate' pay equity

Bill Brewer — Thu, 03 Mar 2022 20:02:23 GMT

Published March 2, 2022 | Ryan Golden

In the past, fear of potential reputational or liability risks may have thwarted efforts to address pay equity internally. But that calculus has changed in recent years.

In July 2019, the U.S. women's national soccer team successfully defended its 2015 FIFA World Cup championship title. By all accounts, the athletes' victory cemented their status as top performers in their chosen field.

Months earlier, however, members of the team argued in court that their pay did not reflect that status.

A March 2019 collective and class action brought by players on the women's national team, also known as the USWNT, alleged that the U.S. Soccer Federation, the nation's governing body for the sport, failed to promote gender equality by paying USWNT players less than it paid members of the U.S. men's national team. white paper

"The USSF admits to such purposeful gender discrimination even during times when the WNT earned more profit, played more games, won more games, earned more championships, and/or garnered higher television audiences," per the filing.

The case made waves before, during and after the team's 2019 championship run, making its way up to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit after a California district court ruled in favor of the federation. Last year, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the athletes.

Nearly three years later, the end of the legal saga may be in sight. USWNT players reached a $24 million settlement agreement with their employer in February, according to Mayer Brown, a law firm representing members of the team. In a joint statement, U.S. Soccer and USWNT said the settlement was contingent upon the negotiation of a new collective bargaining agreement.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/us-soccers-24m-gender-pay-gap-settlement-may-help-hr-elevate-pay-equity/619691/

Target boosts its starting pay for some jobs to $24 an hour, part of $300M investment in workforce

Bill Brewer — Thu, 03 Mar 2022 19:58:50 GMT

By Parija Kavilanz, CNN Business | Tuesday, March 1, 2022 6:11AM

Target announced Monday that it is raising its starting wage for workers in some positions to up to $24.

The Minneapolis-based retailer said the increase will apply to hourly workers at its discount stores, supply chain facilities and headquarters.

Target in 2020 set its minimum wage at $15. That will remain in place, but Target said some workers will qualify for higher starting pay based on the nature of their job and the prevailing competitive wages in their local market.

Target, which employs more than 350,000 workers and has over 1,900 US stores, said the hike in some starting wages is part of its plan to spend an additional $300 million on its workforce. That investment also includes expanding access to healthcare benefits for hourly workers, beginning in April.

Under the plan, Target's hourly employees who work a minimum average of 25 hours a week will be eligible to enroll in a company medical plan. That's down from the previous requirement of 30 hours per week.

The retailer is also shortening the waiting period for eligible hourly team members to enroll in a Target medical plan. Depending on their position, employees will be able to get comprehensive health care benefits three to nine months sooner. Employees will also get faster access to 401(k) plans.

The changes come as more retailers and restaurant chains have moved to a $15 an hour minimum rate.

Amazon raised its starting wage to $15 in 2018, while Best Buy bumped up its minimum to $15 in 2020. Walmart, the largest US retailer, said in September that its workers who handle the front end of the store, food and general merchandise units will get at least a dollar an hour increase to $12. The pay raise would cover 565,000 Walmart workers.

Target's move comes amid an ongoing worker shortage in the retail industry, partly triggered by the pandemic, as companies across the board struggle to retain and hire more workers.

"Alongside the health risks, uncertainty and stress of working during a pandemic, many service-sector workers continue to contend with chronically unpredictable and unstable work schedules," according to a recent report from the Shift Project, a joint venture by Harvard University and the University of California, San Francisco.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNNWire

https://abc13.com/target-store-raising-starting-wages-employees-workforce-investment/11609156/

Chipotle will link executive compensation to environmental and diversity goals

Bill Brewer — Thu, 03 Mar 2022 19:55:20 GMT

UPDATED THU, MAR 4 20219:25 AM EST | Amelia Lucas

KEY POINTS

Chipotle is tying executive compensation to annual targets aimed at improving the company’s internal diversity and sustainability.
Investors have been pushing publicly traded companies to make more commitments to improve their environmental, social and corporate governance.
Chipotle plans to publish its carbon emissions footprint by the end of the year

Chipotle Mexican Grill said Thursday that executive compensation will now be linked to hitting targets tied to the company’s environmental and diversity goals.

The burrito chain is following in the footsteps of Starbucks and McDonald’s, both of which recently announced that performance for racial and gender diversity goals will impact executive compensation plans. Individual investors and large asset managers like BlackRock are increasingly picking stocks with strong environmental, social and corporate governance in mind, pushing companies to make changes to become a more attractive investment.

“I think the increased focus on performance around ESG and investor feedback was definitely behind our decision to go public with this,” said Laurie Schalow, who oversees sustainability and ESG reporting for Chipotle in her role as corporate affairs chief and food safety officer.

Starting this year, 10% of Chipotle executives’ annual incentives will be tied to their progress toward achieving company goals.

“It’s very important for us to be transparent and to be held accountable. We can say a lot of words, but we want to make sure that we have the actions to back it up,” Schalow said.

Those targets include increasing the pounds of organic, local or regeneratively grown or raised food from the previous year. Last year, Chipotle hit 31 million pounds of local produce under this umbrella, and it has set a goal of 37 million pounds by the end of 2021.

The company plans to publish its carbon footprint, including all indirect emissions along its value chain, by the end of the year, faster than its prior expected publication date of 2025. Schalow said the company will announce new sustainability goals stemming from those learnings when the report is released.

Chipotle is also seeking to maintain racial and gender pay equity and promote more women and people of color above the restaurant level. It has created a training academy with online courses that teach a wide range of skills, from conflict resolution to setting goals, with the aim of helping employees of all backgrounds climb the corporate ladder. The company employed nearly 88,000 people, as of Dec. 31.

Shares of Chipotle have risen 91% in the last 12 months, giving it a market value of $39.6 billion.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/04/chipotle-will-link-executive-compensation-to-environmental-and-diversity-goals.html

Salaries in Job Ads

Bill Brewer — Thu, 03 Mar 2022 19:52:38 GMT

Being at the forefront of Meeting room hire means that we meet real people from real businesses all the time. And we know when trying to find a new job, one of the biggest frustrations is job adverts missing one of the most important pieces of information: how much you'll get paid. According to some surveys, nearly 7 in every 10 job seekers consider the salary the most important factor when choosing a new job, and it's been found that job ads without a salary get clicked up to 35% less. And yet you still won't always be able to find it when looking at job adverts.

In fact, when Meetingo analyzed US jobs being advertised on job site Indeed.com, less than 3 out of every 10 jobs (29% of jobs advertised in US cities) were advertised with a salary. Of the cities we looked at, adverts were the least transparent in New York, where only 12% of job listings had a salary. Los Angeles (15%) and Boston (17%) didn't fare much better.

At the other end of the scale, the most salary transparent cities were Denver and Colorado Springs, where 68% and 72% of jobs respectively had a completed salary field. This is unsurprising, as both are in the state of Colorado, which has recently passed laws to make the inclusion of salary in job adverts mandatory.

The type of job you're looking for has a big impact on whether a salary will be advertised - the majority of ads in sectors like Personal Service (76%), Transport (67%) and Travel, Attractions & Events (61%) make it clear what you're likely to be paid. At the other end of the scale, less than a fifth of jobs in Technology (16%), Architecture & Engineering (18%), and Healthcare (20%) listed a salary. Only just behind were Marketing, Advertising & PR jobs (23%) and Science & Research jobs (26%).

Of the salaries that were listed, by far the highest were found in tech, where jobs were advertised as paying over $39,000 on average, followed by Architecture and Engineering ($84,111). The lowest-paid sector was Cleaning & Ground Maintenance followed by Food & Beverage (both paying approximately $32,000 on average)

Comparing the average salary and transparency rates showed that lower-paid sectors were more likely to list a salary than higher-paid sectors, though it's hard to say for sure that this is truly the case reality as many job ads in some sectors failed to include salary information.

Looking at average salary by city, San Francisco and New York came top (unsurprisingly given the number of tech firms in each) with an average salary listing of over $67,000, followed by Los Angeles ($56,000) and Seattle ($55,000)

The cities with the lowest salaries in their job adverts were El Paso, Texas ($34,000 - about $13,000 less than the US average), then Louisville, Kentucky ($38,000) and Virginia Beach, Virginia ($39,000).

These results show that the US has some way to go in the area of salary transparency - similar research we conducted in the UK found that 71% of jobs ads - more than double the number in the US - featured a salary. But this isn't true across the country, as we can see from the example set by Colorado setting it into law that ads have to include details of pay (one of the few such laws in the world - a similar mandate came into effect in the country of Latvia in 2019). Though the value of salary disclosure is still the subject of much debate for employers, for would-be employees the making pay transparency more common than it currently is in the US could only be a good thing.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Meetingo

https://www.meetingo.com/en-us/salaries-in-job-ads

DOL Issues Guidance on Compensability of Time Spent Undergoing COVID-19 Health Screenings, Testing, and Vaccinations

Bill Brewer — Mon, 31 Jan 2022 23:59:44 GMT

Note: On January 24, 2022, the DOL removed Fact Sheet #84 from its website. For more information please see our follow-up Alert.

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has issued Fact Sheet #84 (available here) addressing the compensability of time spent undergoing COVID-19 health screenings, testing, and vaccinations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Fact Sheet addresses how the OSHA Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) factors into the DOL’s analysis of whether such time is compensable under the FLSA. The U.S. Supreme Court has stayed the ETS from going into effect, determining that OSHA likely lacked the authority to impose the ETS.

The DOL stated that employees must be paid for time spent going to, waiting for, and receiving medical attention required by an employer or on the employer’s premises during normal working hours. Specifically, if an employer requires an employee to get a COVID-19 vaccine dose, undergo a COVID-19 test, or engage in a COVID-19 related health screening or temperature check during the employee’s normal working hours, the time the employee spends doing so is compensable. This is the case regardless of where the activity occurs.

The DOL also addressed activities that occur outside of normal working hours. The DOL stated that employers are required to pay employees for time outside of normal working hours if the task employees are required to perform is necessary for the work they are paid to do. Time spent engaged in employer-required activities that are necessary for employees to safely and effectively perform their jobs is “integral and indispensable” to their work and therefore must be paid. As an example, if an employer has implemented a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and requires employees to receive COVID-19 vaccinations after their shifts or on weekends, then the employer must pay employees for the time spent doing so because the vaccine is necessary for them to safely and effectively perform their jobs.

Where an employer has a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, but an employee is unable to receive a vaccination (e.g., due to a disability or sincerely held religious belief) and is required instead to undergo testing, any time spent outside of normal working hours undergoing regular employer-required COVID-19 testing is “integral and indispensable” to the employee’s work and therefore compensable. The employee must be paid for the time spent going to, waiting for, and undergoing the testing.

Where an employee is able to receive the COVID-19 vaccine as an alternative to regular COVID-19 testing but has voluntarily declined to be vaccinated, the employer is not required to pay the employee for time spent undergoing regular COVID-19 testing. Since the employee chose not to get vaccinated, the time spent undergoing testing outside of normal working hours is not “integral and indispensable” to the employee’s job.

Where neither vaccination nor testing is required by an employer, an employee’s choice to engage in such activity outside of normal working hours is generally not compensable.

This Fact Sheet is the most recent guidance by the DOL regarding the compensability of time spent undergoing COVID-19 health screenings, testing, and vaccinations under the FLSA. It should not be considered in the same light as official statements of position contained in regulations. Employers should consult with legal counsel to ensure their COVID-19 related policies and practices comply with the FLSA’s requirements.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: JD Supra

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/dol-issues-guidance-on-compensability-5545479/

Planned 2022 salary increases not enough to retain talent, comp pros say

Bill Brewer — Thu, 27 Jan 2022 19:35:14 GMT

Published Jan. 19, 2022 | by: Ryan Golden

Dive Brief:

Amid ongoing churn in the U.S. labor market as well as inflation in the broader economy, employers continue to build salary increases into their compensation budgets, according to a recent poll of compensation professionals by WorldatWork.
The HR management association's more than 200 respondents reported an average salary budget increase of 4% at their organizations, or a median 5%, in 2021. These figures sit below the 5% average, or 6% median, increase that respondents said they would need to retain and attract talent, WorldatWork said. But they exceed the average of 3.3% and median of 3% planned budget increases for 2022 that the organization recorded in a separate survey of CEOs, CFOs and HR professionals.
Despite more than half of respondents to the compensation professional poll stating that they had increased their organizations' salary budgets in the past six months, 71% said attracting and retaining talent was "somewhat difficult" and 23% said it was "very difficult."

Dive Insight:

All signs point to higher compensation budgets in 2022 for the vast majority of employers. XpertHR's November survey of employers bore similar results to WorldatWork's research; the company found employers planned salary budget increases of 3% this year, with retention, recruitment and economic factors commonly cited to explain the trend.

Earlier 2021 research by advisory firm Willis Towers Watson revealed employers particularly had sought pay increases for those at the executive level, with comparatively smaller increases for management, professional employees and support staff. Across sectors Willis Towers Watson found employees in technology and pharmaceuticals were in line for the largest 2022 pay increases, while those in oil and gas or leisure and hospitality were set for the lowest increases.

Overall, the news may in part represent the reversal of currents impacting U.S. workplaces during the first year of the pandemic, when 45% of employers in a November 2020 Gallagher survey reported that COVID-19 had disrupted their salary increase plans. However — as WorldatWork's researchers noted — 2022's planned increases might not keep pace with inflation, according to a report published in December by HR consulting firm Mercer.

Then there is the worker sentiment piece of the puzzle. Even at the height of the Great Resignation last autumn, nearly half of U.S. workers surveyed by Robert Half between March and April of 2021 said they believed they were earning less than they deserved. Though younger workers and women were the respondent demographics most likely to say they felt underpaid, according to Robert Half, 31% of all respondents said they would consider quitting their jobs by the end of 2021 if they did not receive a raise.

While pay increases land at the top of employee asks in some research, HR teams may need to take a broader perspective at the benefits space in order to gain an advantage in attracting talent. Sources recently told HR Dive about the importance of focusing on topics such as flexibility, caregiver support and mental health throughout 2022.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/planned-2022-salary-increases-not-enough-to-retain-talent-comp-pros-say/617345/

Study: Top priorities for 2022 benefits plans

Bill Brewer — Wed, 29 Dec 2021 22:45:30 GMT

by Renee Cocchi | December 7, 2021

Want to know what your peers’ top priorities are when it comes to their benefits plans for 2022?

Cost management, new services and offerings, and employee engagement.

Cost management is a top priority because 94% of respondents to a Maestro Health survey believe costs will continue their upward trend as high as 20% more.

Switching providers

OK, so maybe that’s not a huge surprise. But what’s surprising is that 71% of the respondents said they’re contemplating switching health plans or administrators in 2022.

Reason: They’re unhappy with their current plan’s flexibility and customer service. And with costs rising, Benefits pros are looking for ways they can counteract it. Switching to an administrator that is more in tune with their wants and needs is one way to do that.

The report surveyed 600 U.S. HR professionals who manage their company’s health insurance benefits. It revealed Benefits pros are wanting to take back control of their plans.

“It’s not surprising that a majority of HR professionals are looking to change insurers or plan administrators in the new year,” said Brandon Wood, CEO of Maestro Health, a tech-enabled third-party health and benefits administrator. “The demand for flexibility has significantly increased and with companies’ priorities shifting in 2022 as a result of the pandemic, HR-decision makers will be focusing on new cost-saving tactics that provide the best quality of care for their employees.”

Cost savings

Other cost-saving strategies on the table for 2022 are:

penalties for people who “do not receive proactive COVID-19 care” (52%)
alternative reimbursement strategies (52%)
pharmacy benefit management for specialty, mail and retail pharmacies (51%), and
care access solutions (45%).

The report pointed out that out-of-network repricing management, provider network partnerships, and quality and cost transparency tools are often overlooked when it comes to cost management strategies. But not only do they provide a lot of savings, they also end up expanding and personalizing health services for employees. And since they’re often found in self-funded or level-funded plans we’ll probably see a growth in them in 2022.

As for what services and offerings they’ll be expanding, 59% said telehealth services, 56% said mental health services and 53% said health plan member enrollment.

Unused services

Another cost saving strategy is not paying for services employees aren’t using.

While 94% of the respondents feel they communicate “often enough” with employees about their health benefits, 78% say 11% to 20% of the services they pay for go unused. And 14% said that number is closer to 31% or higher when it comes to unused services.

Reasons for this:

employees don’t actually need those services
they might not know about them or understand them, and/or
Benefits may not have the proper support or tools effectively engage members.

So if you’re administrator isn’t providing the proper tools and support, maybe it is time to switch.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Morning

https://www.hrmorning.com/news/benefits-plans-2022/

As employers scramble to keep talent, cash bonuses reign

Bill Brewer — Thu, 23 Dec 2021 17:21:38 GMT

Published Dec. 21, 2021 | Kathryn Moody

Dive Brief:

More employees may receive a cash bonus this year as employers scramble to keep talent on board, a Dec. 9 report from Grant Thornton revealed. Sixty-eight percent of HR leaders surveyed said they increased the number of employees eligible to get a cash bonus.
More than half of those surveyed said they expected to grant average merit increases of more than 5%. However, a separate Grant Thornton report that surveyed employees noted that more than half of respondents would give up a 10-20% salary increase for better flexibility regarding where and when they work.
"It's clear that employees value the flexibility they have had since the start of the pandemic," said Tim Glowa, principal at Grant Thornton. "However, not all companies will want or be able to offer 100% flexibility. If flexibility is not an option, it is critical to differentiate your value proposition in a meaningful way."

Dive Insight:

In an attempt to fill jobs, more employers have been turning to bonuses and increased wages to attract talent.

Some of those bonuses come in the form of sign-on and referral bonuses, a November WorldatWork survey noted. The sign-on bonus was the most common form used in recruiting, cited by 79% of those surveyed; only 7% said they used no forms of bonus in recruiting.

Others are offering retention bonuses as a form of appreciation for employees' work during the pandemic. Target, for example, paid its hourly workers $500 in January — the third round of such bonuses the company offered since the start of the pandemic.

But more broadly, signing bonuses may be replaced by higher base salaries, according to a Salary.com survey published in August. While half of employers in that survey said they were offering signing bonuses in 2021, only 20% said they would be doing so by the end of the year.

The bigger question at hand for employers may be the future of flexibility at work, as implied by the Grant Thornton survey. Employers and employees may still be at odds; 76% of employees surveyed by Future Forum said they did not want to return to the office full time, while 68% of executive respondents said they wanted to work in the office all or most of the time.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source : HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/as-employers-scramble-to-keep-talent-cash-bonuses-reign/616420/

ACA FILING TAKEAWAYS FOR THE NEW YEAR

Bill Brewer — Thu, 23 Dec 2021 17:17:17 GMT

DECEMBER 2, 2021 JOANNA KIM-BRUNETTI

The end of the year is officially here and with it, a whirlwind of ACA responsibilities to tend to for the upcoming filing season.

To assist you with your ACA responsibilities, we’ve curated a list of the most common ACA filing questions and answers. We hope you find these to be helpful as you head into the 2021 tax season and prepare your ACA filings with the IRS and state governments.

What type of organization must comply with the ACA’s Employer Mandate?

Under the ACA’s Employer Mandate, employers with 50 or more full-time employees and full-time equivalent employees are Applicable Large Employers (ALEs) and must:

Offer Minimum Essential Coverage (MEC) to at least 95% of their full-time employees (and their dependents) whereby such coverage meets Minimum Value (MV); and
Ensure that the coverage for the full-time employee is affordable based on one of the IRS-approved methods for calculating affordability.

Do only ACA full-time employees require a 1095-C?

Yes. ALEs are required to furnish to their ACA full-time employees a 1095-C Form. The same goes for filing to the IRS and most state governments. Oftentimes, employers over-report their ACA information and include employees that didn’t need a 1095-C form. The challenge with overreporting is that it can subject your business to greater ACA penalty risk from the agency.

If an employer offers a self-insured health plan, the ALE must also report on all individuals who enrolled in the self-insured health plan, including non-full time employees and non-employee individuals, such as spouses and dependents.

Need assistance with ACA filing and furnishing? Contact us to learn about our suite of ACA solutions.

What is the TIN Error Reconciliation Process?

The Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) error reconciliation process is a system that addresses TIN errors. For example, if the IRS Affordable Care Act Information Returns (AIRS) system indicates that an employer’s filing is “accepted with errors,” a list is provided containing all of the employees with respect to whom a TIN error was noted. This typically occurs due to mismatches in the legal names and social security numbers (i.e., TIN) of those employees. This list should be cross-referenced with the employer’s HR/payroll records, which may be out of date.

Employers should be engaging in the TIN solicitation process to ensure names or social security numbers (SSNs) are up to date. Employers filing 1095-C forms that contain incorrect TINs will not be subject to penalties if they comply with the TIN solicitation requirements. The IRS is currently issuing late filing penalties to employers via Letter 972CG and Letter 5005-A to employees that fail to file altogether.

Once you correct the employee names and SSNs, be sure to use the corrected information for future 1095-C filings. Failing to do so could create future ACA filing issues. Please note that the IRS does not require the filing of corrections to SSN or name errors alone without any corrections to the amounts identified in the 1095-C).

What kind of documentation is necessary for substantiating ACA reporting?

Supporting documentation includes items such as offers of coverage, and important plan information which can be found in Summaries of Benefits of Coverage and Enrollment Guides, Employee Handbook, Summary Plan Documents, Employee Premium Rate Sheets and/or Acknowledgement of Offer of Coverage.

If the question is specifically focused on payroll, supporting documentation could be a spreadsheet on which relevant payroll data was downloaded for use in determining full-time employee status.

When in doubt, hang onto any physical or digital information that communicates health plan information and employee offers of coverage. The IRS is ramping up ACA enforcement efforts and employers should retain all relevant documentation in the event of an inquiry. Trusaic will handle the documentation retention process for you, as well as prepare a defense of any IRS inquiry with its ACA Complete solution.

We hope that the information above proves helpful as you prepare for 2021 ACA filings. If you’re unsure of your current ACA compliance status, we invite you to get your ACA Vitals. This free tool will identify any potential penalty risk areas so that you can proceed accordingly.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The ACA Times

https://acatimes.com/aca-filing-takeaways-for-the-holiday-season/?utm_campaign=IW&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_M9sF63NGV1jTXi1yWyvMHtTB4uQiNRXbC-As6EMvjIm8Y1OS373u2v0LVtmFxPzJAUMX7pwrPsZI4epUocJC5u9YkFrIpqZjQRuzteEcY5ThQ5Nw&_hsmi=197980998&utm_content=197980998&utm_source=hs_email&hsCtaTracking=48b563e7-1666-40be-94ee-fef24095d55a%7C8317b0c0-267f-4d6f-a1d8-bcfb9af20924

Tyson Foods to Give Frontline, Hourly Team Members Approximately $50 Million in Year-End Bonuses

Bill Brewer — Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:23:59 GMT

Company also invested $500+ million in wage increases, thank you bonuses over past year

Springdale, Ark. – December 6, 2021 – Tyson Foods (NYSE: TSN) is saying thank you once again to its frontline and hourly team members by giving them approximately $50 million in year-end bonuses for their efforts over the past year. For team members in the U.S., these one-time bonuses will be based on tenure, range from $300 to $700, and be distributed starting this month.

“This is yet another way for us to say thank you and show how grateful we are for our frontline teams’ efforts to keep each other safe, our company strong and our world fed over the past year,” said Donnie King, president and chief executive officer of Tyson Foods. “While 2021 presented many challenges, our entire Tyson team continued to meet them, head on.”

Tyson Foods has also invested more than $500 million in wage increases and thank you bonuses for frontline workers over the past year. With average hourly pay of more than $18, plus the value of medical, dental and vision insurance, vacation and other benefits, the average total compensation for hourly team members has increased to more than $24 an hour, or an annual value of more than $50,000. This does not include overtime, an option many team members choose, or other incentives. For example, as part of the company’s efforts to protect its U.S. workforce against COVID-19, the company paid $200 to frontline team members who were fully vaccinated.

Tyson is looking at other ways to better support its frontline workforce. In addition to pay increases and signing bonuses, it is offering more flexible work schedules at some facilities and, starting January 1, 2022, paid sick leave. The company has opened seven health centers to give frontline team members and their families easier access to high-quality healthcare at, in most cases, no cost. Tyson is also addressing childcare needs. For example, the company recently launched a pilot to offer access to high-quality childcare for late-shift workers at its Amarillo, Texas, beef production complex.

“Tyson wants to be the most sought-after place to work, period,” said King. “Our frontline team members tell us higher pay is important, but that’s only a part of the story—they also want more flexibility and more say over their time. In rural parts of the country, they don’t want to have to drive miles to see the doctor. Everything we’re doing is because our team members are the heart of our business and its future success.”

Tyson also provides training and development opportunities so frontline team members can further their career and personal goals. The company’s Upward Academy program, which marked its fifth anniversary in 2021, helps team members develop life skills, offering free and accessible classes in English as a Second Language (ESL), High School Equivalency (HSE), U.S. citizenship, financial literacy and digital literacy. Earlier this year, the company launched Upward Pathways, an in-plant career development program that provides frontline team members with free job skills training and workforce certifications. A third program, 1+2 Maintenance Training, is an “earn while you learn” education and career opportunity for team members interested in highly skilled, high-paying maintenance jobs. Tyson offers the program in collaboration with local community colleges in many locations, and also pays two-thirds of the tuition.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Tyson

https://www.tysonfoods.com/news/news-releases/2021/12/tyson-foods-give-frontline-hourly-team-members-approximately-50-million

Compensation is going up. But, is it enough?

Bill Brewer — Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:57:47 GMT

Heading into the holiday seasons means one thing for compensation professionals — gearing up for the 2022 compensation cycles. And, a big part of that is establishing the budget for annual pay increases.

Over the last several years, this has been largely a “rinse and repeat” process for compensation teams as budgets have remained steady at 2.5% to 3% — and early indicators based on the August Pulse of the market indicate that is likely to be the case again. But pressures have continued to mount over the past several months with both inflation and quit rates being at 20-year highs. This has resulted in many employers taking a harder look at compensation plans for 2022.

So, are compensation budgets trending up?

Based on insights from more than 950 employers, compensation budgets are going up, but only slightly. Merit increase budgets are tracking at 3.2%*, while total increase budgets, which also include other types of budgeted base pay increases, such as promotion awards, are tracking at 3.5%. This is up just slightly from 2022 projections of 3% and 3.3%*, respectively, from our August Pulse — and an increase over 2021 actual increases of 2.8% merit and 3%* total increase budgets. While still representing a minority of employers, the percentage of employers providing increases of 3.5% or more doubled between the August and November pulses – from 13% to 27%.

It’s worth noting that incentive payouts are looking to be strong relative to last year, as 1 in 4 employers say they will have an overall bonus pool more than 10% higher than last year. Nearly half of employers say the bonus pool will be comparable to that of last year (within ± 10%), while only 7% say it will be more than 10% less than last year, 19% say they aren’t sure, and 1% say they will not pay bonuses.

Source: 2021 Compensation Planning Pulse Survey

So, back to 3% and we’re all set, right?

The reality is that budgets are not yet baked. The majority of employers do not provide increases until March or April, and as we saw during earlier stages of the pandemic, employers are going to defer decisions until the latest point possible. Of more than 950 respondents, nearly half of employers said their budgets are still preliminary, a third of employers have proposed their budget to leadership and only 20% say they have been approved by leadership. So the reality is that these numbers may still change, particularly with the economic uncertainty surrounding Omicron.

While this data is useful to understand the expected broad market movement, compensation budgets should be handled the same as any other multi-year strategic investment — and require a deeper examination of the organization’s circumstances.

Most organizations are struggling to attract and retain the talent they need. With extensive media coverage about the labor market and inflation, employee expectations are still running high. And, with 10.4 million open jobs, the tough reality is, at the moment, most employees would likely have no trouble finding a new role – and likely command a premium for job switching.

So what can you do?

1. Prioritize your hourly workforce

Our research has shown that this is the segment of the workforce driving the continued attrition in the workforce — and wages are moving fast. Keep in mind that annual merit budgets do not take into consideration other types of increases. Of employers reporting, 37% have increased their internal minimum wage since March 1 for at least some positions and another 5% are considering doing so before the end of 2021. BLS data shows year-over-year average hourly earnings have increased by 4.9% — so if you haven’t already addressed your starting wages for your hourly workforce, now is the time.

2. Seal the cracks

Merit budgets have a tendency to be spread like peanut butter. This often means that gaps in pay competitiveness are not addressed and there are pockets within the organization at the employee, job, or function level where pay is falling short.

Below-market compensation presents a talent-retention risk in a hot job market. It also means that organizations may be more likely to resort to off-cycle increases outside of the merit process — for which 3 out of 4 organizations do not budget. Failure to proactively address these gaps in competitiveness can lead to increased turnover, higher spending, and potential pay equity concerns when increases are distributed outside the process (and generally to those who make the most noise).

Organizations should ensure that their merit budgets are sufficient enough to close gaps in competitiveness — and also ensure that the budget is distributed where it’s most needed. That may mean a segmented approach that considers critical business segments, high performers, and/or those below market.

3. Don’t forget the broader employee experience

While pay matters, a lot, in many cases it’s when the broader employee experience falls short that employees will start to shop their options. Employees are feeling exhausted and burnt out from the pandemic, and that is leading to a great reckoning about work. While pay is important, don’t lose sight of the bigger picture. Examine ways you can support your workforce with their unmet needs, deliver higher quality jobs, and create more supportive flexible environments.

As we continue to navigate this unprecedented labor market, the pressure will be on for compensation departments. Now is the time to double-down on your strategy and target your investments where they will deliver the most value to your business.

* All data reported represent averages and include zeros (i.e., companies that did not provide merit, or are not planning to provide merit, are included in the totals).

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Mercer

https://www.mercer.us/our-thinking/career/compensation-is-going-up-but-is-it-enough.html

Employers' health insurance costs surge in 2021 as elective procedures resume-survey

Bill Brewer — Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:37:09 GMT

Dec 13 (Reuters) - Health insurance costs for employers rose the most in over a decade this year as Americans resumed non-urgent procedures delayed earlier due to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a survey published on Monday.

The survey by benefits company Mercer of firms that employ about 118 million people showed the average cost of employer-sponsored health insurance per employee jumped 6.3% this year to $14,542 - the largest rise since 2010.

The increase was just 3.4% in 2020 when the pandemic had strained hospital capacity and forced people to put off elective procedures.

"I think that's (catch-up care) certainly part of the cost driver," Kate Brown, Mercer's Center for Health Innovation Leader, told Reuters.

Brown said several other factors, including claims related to the treatment of long-term effects of COVID-19 and specialty drug pricing, could also be driving the cost rise and may continue into 2022.

The survey, which included 1,745 public and private employers, showed firms expect a "fairly typical" cost increase of 4.4% next year.

But most of them were unwilling to try to reduce the cost increase as they double down on making physical and mental healthcare more affordable for employees dealing with the stress of the nearly two-year-long pandemic.

Tracy Watts, national leader for U.S. health policy at Mercer, said generous health benefits could help companies in attracting and retaining staff in the tight labor market.

Adding or expanding programs to increase access to behavioral healthcare was among the top three priorities for all large employers, the survey showed.

"It's clearly become very salient throughout the pandemic that mental health is a critical need for all people and it's become really more top of mind for most employers over the last two years," Brown said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Reuters

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/employers-health-insurance-costs-surge-2021-elective-procedures-resume-survey-2021-12-13/

Hybrid Tanked Work-Life Balance. Here’s How Microsoft Is Trying to Fix It (Harvard Business Review article)

Bill Brewer — Thu, 09 Dec 2021 16:40:40 GMT

Hybrid Tanked Work-Life Balance. Here’s How Microsoft Is Trying to Fix It.

by Dawn Klinghoffer | December 08, 2021

If there was a word that has defined the year 2021, it would be “overwhelmed.” After a year and a half into the pandemic, with overflowing inboxes and back-to-back meetings, people are tired. People are also searching for an answer to this digital exhaustion — including me. As the head of Microsoft’s people analytics function, I spend a lot of time exploring this problem by looking at the data.

When my colleagues studied the anonymous productivity trends of millions of Microsoft customers around the world, they saw that one year into the pandemic, weekly time spent in Teams meetings more than doubled and the average person sent 42% more chats after hours. While initially this seemed like the best way for teams to stay connected, we’ve since realized that these non-stop video calls, emails, and chats have turned into digital overload, and we see the well-being impacts in our Microsoft employee surveys. Between April and November 2020, employees’ satisfaction with work-life balance dropped by 13 percentage points.

So, my team and I set out to uncover the reasons behind the drop and identify data-based actions managers and employees could take to turn the numbers around in this hybrid work environment.

We asked ourselves, what can we learn from our employees’ activity patterns, vacation time taken, and surveys? And what can managers do to create a culture where work-life balance exists and employees thrive? One where finishing your to-do list or avoiding after hours work doesn’t require superhuman effort and unrealistic self-discipline?

The Virtual Work Practices that Affect Employee Well-Being

To answer these questions, we studied the aggregate and de-identified collaboration activity and survey data of thousands of Microsoft employees over the course of many months — the majority of whom were working from home due to the pandemic. Overall, we discovered that over-collaborating, lack of uninterrupted focus, and skipping time off were major drivers of the decreased work-life balance we were investigating.

As collaboration time increased, well-being decreased.

The first bit of our analysis, based on April 2020 work activity and sentiment data, confirmed what we thought to be true: Employees who spend the most time collaborating — attending meetings, writing emails, and sending chats — rate lower satisfaction with work-life balance than colleagues with fewer hours of collaboration time.

Employees satisfied with their work-life balance attend 25% fewer meetings and spend on average 6 fewer hours per week collaborating compared to those employees with neutral or unfavorable work-life balance sentiment. In addition, those employees satisfied with their work-life balance tend to send 29% fewer emails in general and 36% fewer emails after working hours.

As people set aside more focused time, well-being improved.

On the flip side, we saw that employees satisfied with their work-life balance had 1.3 times the number of focus hours and 1.3 times the number of two-hour focus blocks compared to employees less satisfied with their work-life balance.

As vacation time increased, so did well-being.

Next, we looked at patterns in vacation time taken. We found that early in the pandemic, many Microsoft employees stopped taking their vacations altogether as they sheltered in place, avoided travel, and stayed home. In fact, we saw that the average amount of vacation time recorded by Microsoft’s U.S. employees dropped by up to 83%.

That drop caused a ripple effect, and we could see in the numbers that taking vacation — or not — has a real impact on employees’ perception of work-life balance. Based on our research, we saw that employees in the U.S. who were able to take time off to recharge during March or April 2020 had, on average, an 8 percentage point-higher perception of work-life balance in the month of May than those employees who did not take time off during those months.

So, if part of the secret to well-being lies in fewer meetings, more focus time, and taking time off to recharge, how do we do that exactly? Here are four strategies different teams at Microsoft have started rolling out.

Prioritize

Our data shows that one of the most important things a manager can do to improve work-life balance is to help their team prioritize. In particular, employees who do not receive prioritization support from their managers are much less satisfied with their work-life balance. In fact, data collected between Oct and Nov of 2020 shows that 81% of them are dissatisfied, and 42% are not feeling as productive as they were prior to the pandemic.

As a manager myself, I know we will never get it all done. So, I’ve had to have tough conversations with partners and other teams, to say “Okay, we can do this…but it means we might not be able to do these other three things. What’s most important here?” To truly combat this overload and keep workloads sustainable, we can’t always say “and” — it comes down to “either/or.”

My team still jokes that prioritization might as well be called “getting in touch with your inner Klinghoffer” since I’ve said it so much. But it’s become my mantra for a reason.

Prioritization is how we create stability even in the face of chaos. It is the fundamental platform of work-life balance because it empowers your team to take control, to speak up, to say “no” to things that aren’t mission critical — which in the end means fewer meetings, more focus time, and most importantly, the freedom to take time off.

Reevaluate Meetings

Once the work is properly prioritized, the next step is reevaluating team meetings. Here are some strategies that have worked for us.

Build in breaks.

A small breather between collaboration sessions is a chance for employees to grab a glass of water, get ready for their next call, or mentally transition to a new topic. When we shift our focus from maximizing meeting time to maximizing meeting effectiveness, Microsoft’s brain research shows that meetings with just a five- to 10-minute buffer between them not only reduce stress levels for your employees but also enable better focus and engagement. In Outlook or other email platform, organizations can set a company-wide default for these breaks, or individual employees and teams can change their own settings.

Avoid bookending the week.

Like breaks between meetings, time at the beginning and end of each week helps employees transition. For example, Monday morning meetings can pressure employees to prep over the weekend, contributing to even greater feelings of being overwhelmed. Instead, designate Monday mornings for focus and preparation to set the team up to successfully collaborate throughout the week. We’ve also seen many teams at Microsoft embrace no-meeting Fridays as dedicated time to wrap up key work and fully unplug before the weekend.

Press pause.

A recent study out of Microsoft Research shows that multi-tasking in meetings increases significantly in longer and larger meetings. In the study, people also frequently mentioned that they multitask during meetings they find irrelevant or have lack of interest or engagement in.

So, take the time to step back and reevaluate the effectiveness of meetings for your team by asking for your team members’ perspectives. Also ask yourself, do you own meetings with low engagement and lots of multi-tasking? Could some meetings be shorter? Less frequent? Who truly needs to be there? Should they be recurring or only scheduled as needed? Do they need to be meetings at all?

Protect Time to Focus and Set Boundaries

With work prioritized and meetings narrowed, encourage your team to prioritize the time they spend on focused work and to set boundaries to protect it.

Encourage focus time.

Suggest that your team proactively set aside blocks of time for focused work each week to tackle key priorities. Carving out this time allows employees to engage in deep work and dive into projects without distractions or interruptions. More focus time means more progress, which means less overwhelm. It also means less work spilling into after hours.

Use tech to respect quiet hours.

Hybrid work goes beyond the “where” we work — it’s also about the “when.” For example, balancing my job with my personal schedule sometimes means that going through my inbox in the evening when I can truly focus is the best way for me to get work done. On the other hand, our research shows that one after-hours email from a manager can have a ripple effect of after-hours work for the team.

Technology can help your team empower everyone to work in the way that’s best for them while still avoiding that “always on” mentality. When I’m working in the evening — which is how I work best as an individual — I take advantage of “delay send” features to make sure my flexible working hours don’t become someone else’s late-night stressor.

I’ve also encouraged my team to mute notifications in order to remove the pressure to check emails and chats when it’s time for them to step away from work. We’ve also established team norms about when responses are expected, so no one feels like they’re constantly on call.

Encourage Time Away

Finally, actively discuss ways to make it easier for employees to take their well-earned vacation time.

Time away might not look like it used to.

The ability to unplug is key to work-life balance. Whether it’s vacation, staycation, mental health days, sick days, or observing religious holidays, resting and recharging can mean different things to different people. In late 2019, we redefined sick leave at Microsoft to include mental health days; little did we realize how important that would become a few months later when the pandemic hit. We also offered five well-being days globally in addition to their regularly allotted vacation to encourage employees to take more time off.

Broadly, help your team understand that there are many reasons to take time away that don’t hinge on travel or trips and that their well-being is a priority is worth taking time for.

Make it easier to take vacation time.

Employees will find it tough to step away if they don’t feel like they have the coverage or support. As their manager, proactively offer to help cover when they are gone. You can also create a buddy system that gives each employee someone to oversee their work while away. You might even facilitate consensus days when members of your team agree to take time away collectively to minimize the email and other accumulated work they’ll come back to.

. . .

Times of major transition and change are an opportunity to step back and rethink. As the world changes, the way we work can too. The most powerful thing I’ve learned from our study of work-life balance is that we as managers have an opportunity to challenge the status quo and say, “this can be better.”

By focusing on the tactics above, managers can create a world where responsibility for work-life balance doesn’t rest solely on an individual’s shoulders. It’s about establishing team norms and an environment that empowers everyone to focus on impact, not activity. By creating clarity and identifying the important, managers enable their employees to do their best work and thrive in a hybrid environment.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Harvard Business Review

https://hbr.org/2021/12/hybrid-tanked-work-life-balance-heres-how-microsoft-is-trying-to-fix-it

Most big employers say they are requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for workers

Bill Brewer — Thu, 02 Dec 2021 19:44:57 GMT

BY AIMEE PICCHI

NOVEMBER 30, 2021

Most large U.S. employers say they now require, or plan to mandate, that their workers get vaccinated against COVID-19, according to a new survey of more than 500 companies by corporate advisory firm Willis Towers Watson.

The survey comes as the Biden administration's new rule about workplace vaccinations remains in limbo. Under the regulation, companies with 100 or more employees must require workers to get vaccinated or undergo weekly testing for the disease.

Implementation of the emergency standard is currently on hold after a federal appeals court earlier this month reaffirmed an earlier temporary halt on the vaccine rule and ordered the Labor Department's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to stop enforcing or implementing the regulation.

The Willis Towers Watson survey sheds light on how large companies are approaching COVID-19 vaccinations amid challenges to the Biden rule, which has been the target of lawsuits from at least 11 states over its constitutionality. Nearly 6 in 10 companies indicated that they either already require COVID-19 shots for employees or plan to implement such a requirement, according to the firm's findings. Yet roughly a third of respondents said they will move forward with a vaccine mandate only if an Ohio district court upholds the OHSA rule.

Biden vaccine rule faces stiff legal challenge, experts say

Only about 7% of businesses said they plan to require vaccines regardless of what happens with the OSHA rule, while another 18% currently require the shot, the survey found. More than 8 in 10 businesses said they plan to offer regular COVID-19 testing to employees. About 3 in 10 businesses said they don't plan to require vaccinations, while 1 in 10 are undecided, the survey found.

Despite the uncertainty around the OSHA vaccine rule, legal experts have urged companies to move forward with meeting its requirements. That's partly because businesses may face costly fines if the 490-page regulation goes into effect and they are caught unprepared. Willis Towers Watson said it is also recommending that companies plan on implementing the vaccine rule.

"Despite the current holding pattern pending the court rulings, we advise employers to proceed with plans to implement the mandate as well as other efforts to protect their workers," said Dr. Jeff Levin-Scherz, population health leader at Willis Towers Watson, in a statement.

The study, which was conducted from November 12 - 18, polled 543 U.S. employers with a combined 5.2 million workers. Each of the employers that participated in the study had more than 100 workers — the group that will be required to adhere to the OSHA rule if it moves forward.

Some employers have expressed concern that workers who are opposed to the vaccinations may quit if the OHSA rule is enforced. New Hampshire manufacturing owner Kathy Garfield, expressed concern that some vaccine-wary workers may depart for smaller businesses that aren't subject to the same regulation. Garfied called the OSHA rule a "crushing blow to employers."

But few employers with vaccine mandates — only 3% — said they had seen a spike in resignations, according to the Willis Watson Towers survey. Even so, one-third of businesses planning mandates told Willis Watson Towers they were worried about the possibility that some employees could leave.

About 5% of unvaccinated workers said in a recent survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation that they would quit their job due to a COVID-19 shot requirement by their employer. That group represents just 1% of all U.S. adults, the Kaiser survey noted.

Some employers say they see an upside to a vaccination requirement. Almost half of employers surveyed said they believe it could help recruit and retain workers.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CBS News

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-mandate-big-employers-update/

Survey Shows Salary Budgets Will Increase 3.0% in 2022

Bill Brewer — Wed, 01 Dec 2021 17:28:15 GMT

New report reveals recruitment and retention as the top upward pressure on 2022 wages

NEW YORK, Nov. 12, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- The median projected percentage change for total salary budgets from 2021 to 2022 is an increase of 3.0%, according to XpertHR's 2022 Salary Budget Survey of 429 U.S. employers. This is also the median increase projected for the salary budgets for all three employee groups covered by this survey: exempt, nonexempt, and officers/executives.

According to Andrew Hellwege, Surveys Editor, XpertHR, the projected median 3.0% increase in total salary budgets is notable, given a national labor shortage exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The median projected percentage change for total salary budgets from 2021 to 2022 is an increase of 3.0%, according to XpertHR's 2022 Salary Budget Survey.

"This median projected increase is on par with the actual median increase from 2020 to 2021, indicating that while the nature of work has shifted dramatically in the last two years, planned salary budget increases remain unchanged," he explained. "Forward-looking companies that are eager to overcome the labor shortage may want to consider increasing their projected salary budgets by more than 3.0%, or potentially examine how benefits beyond compensation can contribute to a positive employee experience."

Additionally, the survey reveals the large role recruitment and retention is playing in employers' plans for next year's wages. When asked if a dozen various factors would exert upward, downward, or no pressure at all on their organization's 2022 total salary budget, nearly eight in 10 (79%) organizations cited recruitment/retention as an upward pressure.

"Nearly four in five employers noted recruitment and retention as a positive influence on their 2022 total salary budget, which appears to be a clear indication that the labor shortage is top of mind with employers as they plan for next year's wages," says Hellwege.

Meanwhile, salaries in the industry (73%), inflation/cost of living (69%), the economy (59%), and salaries within the organization (53%) round out the top five upward pressures on 2022 wages.

XpertHR's Salary Budget Survey 2022 was conducted from Sept. 7 to Oct. 1, 2021. The survey included responses from 429 U.S. employers of various industries and workforce sizes, representing just over 2 million workers. The survey report explores several aspects of the salary budget planning process, including pressures on salary budgets, percentage change of salary budgets from 2021 to 2022, and in what month next year's salary budgets will come into effect. Additionally, this report covers performance metrics for annual salary adjustments, plans for bonuses in 2022, and more.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: XpertHR

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/survey-shows-salary-budgets-will-increase-3-0-in-2022--301423125.html

42% of Employees Say their Employer Is Not Dedicated to Closing Pay Gaps in New Pay Equity Research by Salary.com and the HR Research Institute

Bill Brewer — Wed, 01 Dec 2021 17:24:52 GMT

Just half of employees believe they are paid equitably

WALTHAM, Mass., Nov. 2, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Forty-two percent of employees do not think their employer is dedicated to closing pay gaps, according to the 2021 Viewpoint: Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, a new survey by Salary.com and the HR.com Research Institute. The research provides insights on views of HR executives vs. those of employees to help understand the state of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace.

The report also found HR pros and employees are not on the same page when it comes to pay equity: only half of surveyed employees (53%) say they are paid equitably or believe their peers are, while a larger proportion of HR professionals (66%) believe their peers are paid equitably. HR professionals and employees are more aligned when it comes to how leadership prioritizes equitable pay: only 17% and 18%, respectively, say it is a top priority among the executives in their organization.

"Pay equity is a fundamental element of the employer-employee relationship, yet 42% of employees surveyed say their employer is not dedicated to closing pay gaps," said Lenna Turner, Director of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and a Compensation Consultant at Salary.com. "At Salary.com, we define pay equity as internally equitable, externally competitive, and transparently communicated. While employers are making progress, a lack of transparent communication could be leading to this employee skepticism when it comes to pay equity."

Addressing Pay Equity
HR respondents (57%) suggest they are more likely to report pay equity issues, which is far more than employees (37%). This may be because HR has more access to the training and the workforce data necessary to uncover discrepancies in pay. Further, while HR professionals report pay equity issues more often, employees are more likely to suffer consequences when reporting these issues (44% vs. 17%)

Budget Breakdown
Fewer than one-quarter of HR professionals say their organization has a formal budget allocated to closing pay gaps. This lack of budget could be the reason why just 33% of HR professionals agree or strongly agree that their organization has the proper tools to detect internal pay gaps.

HR professionals who say their organization's pay equity tools successfully detect internal pay gaps and inequity are more likely to:

say they themselves and their peers are paid equitably
have pay equity among different ethnicities/races
make equitable pay a top priority among executives
have a formal budget allocated to closing pay gaps
have employees speak up if they witness or experience workplace discrimination
have DE&I initiatives that are adequately staffed, funded and measured
say their organization celebrates diversity

"In the wake of the pandemic, it's even more critical that management and their employees see eye to eye when it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Employees value these issues immensely but are not seeing their companies do enough work in this area," stated Debbie McGrath, Chief Instigator and CEO of HR.com. "Employers have to understand that equity is critical for business growth!"

Download the full report which includes details on ten key takeaways to help HR departments gain insights into how to improve diversity and inclusion initiatives to ensure equity in all areas of their workforce management and optimal engagement, productivity, retention, and business results.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Salary.com

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/42-of-employees-say-their-employer-is-not-dedicated-to-closing-pay-gaps-in-new-pay-equity-research-by-salarycom-and-the-hr-research-institute-301413596.html

Souped-up 401(k) leads KPMG's efforts to hire and keep workers

Bill Brewer — Mon, 15 Nov 2021 19:38:40 GMT

KPMG replaces 401(k) match with a single, automatic firm-funded contribution

By Suzanne O'Halloran

Accounting giant KPMG is aiming to stay one step ahead of the drum-tight job market by rewarding current employees and hopefully luring new ones with enhanced benefits including a modern-day 401(k) plan.

In what is believed to be the first, the firm will replace the traditional match with an automatic funded contribution that is equal to as much as 8% of an employee’s salary.

"You used to have to put a matching contribution into your own 401(k), and you can still contribute to your own 401(k) as you are permitted by law, but you no longer have to put a matching contribution. Instead we’re going to make an automatic contribution on your behalf that you will be able to enjoy in the future," KPMG CEO Paul Knopp told FOX Business. "We’re giving our employees more flexibility, more security for their financial future and a lot more ability to spend time with their families" for key life events.

Other benefits recently upgraded include cutting employee health care premiums by 10% in 2022, while keeping benefits the same, and three weeks of additional paid caregiver leave, separate from paid time off, to name a few.

KPMG, like many other companies, is finding it challenging to hire workers with job openings at near-record levels.

On Friday, the U.S. economy reported it added 531,000 workers last month, up from 194,000 in September. While hiring is improving, there are still a near-record 10.4 million job openings.

"We are really trying to hire right now. We are hiring in record numbers" Knopp added, citing digital businesses, including cyber, audit and tax.

The firm, which has 35,000 U.S. employees, is aiming to hire 2,500 experienced professionals, 1,300 full-time campus hires and 1,200 interns domestically.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: FOXBusiness

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/401k-match-kpmg-taxes-benefits-jobs-hire-workers

2022 IRA and 401(k) Contribution Limits Are Set (There's Both Good and Bad News)

Bill Brewer — Mon, 15 Nov 2021 19:33:17 GMT

Workers will be happy to know that they can contribute more to their 401(k) accounts next year, but IRA owners may be a little disappointed.

by: Rocky Mengle | November 4, 2021

There's good news and bad news from the IRS for Americans saving for retirement with IRAs, 401(k)s, and other retirement accounts in 2022.

Let's start with the bad news: IRA Contribution limits won't go up next year. For anyone saving for retirement with a traditional or Roth IRA, the 2022 limit on annual contributions to their account remains unchanged at $6,000. It's been stuck at this same amount since 2019. The additional IRA "catch-up" contribution for people 50 and over is not subject to an annual cost-of-living adjustment and stays at $1,000, too.

And now the good news: Workers who are saving for retirement with 401(k), 403(b), most 457 plans, and the federal government's Thrift Savings Plan can contribute up to $20,500 to those plans in 2022. That's a $1,000 increase over the contribution limits in place for 2020 and 2021. The "catch-up" contribution limit for employees age 50 or older who participate in these plans holds steady in 2022 at $6,500, though.

The contribution limit for a SIMPLE IRA, which is a retirement plan designed for small businesses with 100 or fewer employees, is also increased for 2022. It jumps from $13,500 to $14,000 next year. But, as with 401(k) plans, the catch-up contribution limit for workers at least 50 years old who participate in a SIMPLE plan stays put at $3,000.

Income Ranges for 2022

There's more good news! Increased income ranges for the traditional IRA deduction, Roth IRA contributions, and the Saver's Credit means more Americans will qualify for these tax breaks.

If you're contributing to a traditional IRA, the deduction allowed for your contribution is gradually phased-out if your income is above a certain amount. For 2022, the phase-out ranges are:

$68,000 to $78,000 for a single person covered by a workplace retirement plan (up from $66,000 to $76,000 in 2021);
$109,000 to $129,000 for a married couple filing jointly if the spouse making the IRA contribution is covered by a workplace retirement plan (up from $105,000 to $125,000 in 2021);
$204,000 and $214,000 for a married couple if the spouse contributing to an IRA is not covered by a workplace retirement plan and the other spouse is covered (up from $198,000 and $208,000 in 2021); and
$0 to $10,000 for a married person filing a separate return who is covered by a workplace retirement plan (the same as 2021 because this range is not subject to an annual cost-of-living adjustment).

For people saving for retirement with a Roth IRA, the actual amount that you can contribute to the account is based on your income. To be eligible to contribute the maximum for 2022, your modified adjusted gross income must be less than $129,000 if single or $204,000 if married and filing jointly (up from $125,000 and $198,000, respectively, for 2021). Contributions begin to be phased out above those amounts, and you won't be able to put any money into a Roth IRA in 2022 once your income reaches $144,000 if single or $214,000 if married and filing jointly ($140,000 and $208,000 for 2021). The phase-out range for a married person filing a separate return who contributes to a Roth IRA is not adjusted annual for inflation and remains $0 to $10,000 for 2022.

Finally, the 2022 income limit for the Saver's Credit for low- and middle-income workers is $68,000 for joint filers ($66,000 in 2021), $51,000 for head-of-household filers ($49,500 in 2021), and $34,000 for singles filers and married people filing a separate tax return ($33,000 in 2021).

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Kiplinger

https://www.kiplinger.com/retirement/retirement-plans/603711/2022-ira-and-401k-contribution-limits

Hawbaker faces second lawsuit for employee wage theft case

Bill Brewer — Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:21:02 GMT

Published Oct. 19, 2021 | Zachary Phillips

Workers brought a class action suit against one of Pennsylvania's largest road builders after the contractor pleaded no contest to charges from the state attorney general.

The legal battles continue for Glenn O. Hawbaker.

For the second time in six months, the Pennsylvania road builder faces litigation, this time in a class action lawsuit.

In addition, the state DOT is pushing for Hawbaker to be suspended from public work for three years, the AP reported. The case has been delayed after a court ruled to give Hawbaker more time to build a legal response, reported WJAC 6, a local NBC affiliate. Hawbaker received estimated payments worth $1.7 billion from the state as of 2021, making it one of the largest public works contractors in Pennsylvania.

In a lawsuit filed last week, three employees of the contractor accused Hawbaker of violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Instead of placing the prevailing wage workers' retirement funds into the 401(k) account of those who earned it, Hawbaker used the funds to pay for all employee, executive and owner retirement savings, attorney Mike Donavan wrote in the lawsuit, according to the Centre Daily Times.

This resulted in prevailing wage workers being short-changed in their profit-sharing and retirement saving accounts.

The lawsuit follows on the heels of allegations made in April by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who charged Hawbaker with stealing $20 million from employees in the largest wage theft case on record.

After a three-year investigation, Hawbaker was charged with four counts of theft relating to violations of the Pennsylvania Prevailing Wage Act and the federal Davis-Bacon Act. Investigators reviewed Hawbaker's accounting records and found that, between 2015 and 2018, the contractor stole nearly $20.7 million of prevailing wage workers' fringe benefit money.

As a contractor receiving large amounts of funding from the state and federal governments, Hawbaker must pay wage rates determined by government agencies — though a portion of those wages can be provided via fringe benefits.

Same issue, new case

Hawbaker stole wages, according to investigators, by using money marked for just prevailing wage workers' retirement funds and health and welfare benefits to contribute to all workers retirement funds — including owners and executives — and subsidize the cost of a self-funded health insurance plan to cover all employees.

In August, Hawbaker pleaded no contest — meaning the defendant does not plead guilty, but accepts conviction or sentencing as though it did — and agreed to pay more than $20 million to nearly 1,300 workers in restitution. Additionally, the company faces five years of probation, and must have a corporate monitor of their practices.

While the attorney general's investigation determined that the contractor's scheme had lasted decades, it could only be charged for the last five years due to the statute of limitations.

With this more recent case by previous employees, Hawbaker could be liable for practices as far back as September 2012. As with the no contest plea, Hawbaker has denied wrongdoing, claiming that state and federal regulators had reviewed its practices for years.

"Throughout this process, Hawbaker has fully cooperated because we always believed we were following all laws," Hawbaker said in a statement shared with Construction Dive. "We will vigorously defend any of these allegations."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/glenn-hawbaker-faces-lawsuit-employee-wage-violations-theft-Pennsylvania/608825/

Amazon will let managers decide how often employees come into the office

Bill Brewer — Fri, 22 Oct 2021 19:02:08 GMT

PUBLISHED MON, OCT 11 2021 .... Annie Palmer

Amazon is giving its employees more flexibility to work from home even after its offices begin to reopen next year.

In a memo to employees Monday, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said the company will leave it up to individual team directors to decide how often their employees work in the office.

“We expect that there will be teams that continue working mostly remotely, others that will work some combination of remotely and in the office, and still others that will decide customers are best served having the team work mostly in the office,” Jassy wrote. “We’re intentionally not prescribing how many days or which days — this is for Directors to determine with their senior leaders and teams.”

Amazon declined to say how many people it employs at the director level.

The move marks a shift from Amazon’s earlier return-to-work plans, which said it expected most corporate employees to return to the office beginning Jan. 3, 2022. Amazon had set a baseline of three days a week in the office, leaving employees the option to work remotely up to two days a week.

Jassy said Amazon found it couldn’t prescribe a “one-size-fits-all approach” to work at the company’s scale. Amazon now has 1.3 million employees worldwide, with hundreds of thousands of those in corporate roles.

As part of the policy change, Amazon will also give corporate employees the option to work up to four weeks per year fully remotely from any location within the country they’re employed.

While Amazon is giving employees greater leeway on reporting to the office, Jassy said most employees will be expected to remain close enough to their team “that they can easily travel to the office for a meeting within a day’s notice.”

Other tech giants have also embraced remote work. Microsoft in September indefinitely postponed its return to the office, while Facebook and Google expect a portion of their employees to continue to work from home if their jobs can be done remotely.

Twitter even told its employees last year they can work from home “forever” if they choose to.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/11/amazon-to-let-managers-decide-how-often-employees-come-into-the-office.html

McDonald’s achieves equal pay for women and other underrepresented groups at corporate restaurants

Bill Brewer — Fri, 22 Oct 2021 18:54:29 GMT

Adjustments in 2022 will result in comparable pay among all company employees

Bret Thorn | Oct 19, 2021

McDonald’s has essentially achieved equal pay for women and other historically underrepresented groups across company-owned restaurant and corporate employees in the United States, the company announced Tuesday.

Chicago-based McDonald’s said it employs more than 180,000 people, that employees of all genders now receive equal pay for comparable work at all company-owned restaurants, and that women are paid 99.16% of men for comparable work among corporate staff in the United States. Globally that figure is 99.85%.

A McDonald’s representative said the U.S. figure would reach 100% once adjustments are made during next year’s “compensation cycle.”

That announcement came after working with pay analysis expert Mercer to conduct a study of corporate staff and company-owned restaurants globally.

Around 7% of McDonald’s approximately 39,000 locations worldwide are company-owned, the representative said.

The announcement was made in a letter to the global McDonald’s system from global chief people officer Heidi Capozzi.

“Making McDonald’s an inclusive brand is a core value because it isn’t just the responsibility of one person or one team. It depends on all of us,” Capozzi said. “Over the past 18 months, we’ve worked together to create a future where equality, fairness and opportunity aren’t just goals, but the lived experience of every single person in our communities.”

Earlier this year, McDonald’s said it was tying senior leader compensation in part to goals it set for developing a more diverse leadership team. Those goals include having 35% of positions of senior director and above filled by people of underrepresented groups, such as women and people of color, by 2025. It set a goal of having at least 45% of those roles filled by women by 2025 and 50% by 2030.

McDonald’s said it would continue to conduct a global pay analysis annually.

“We recognize that to realize our aspiration [of equal pay] we must also keep actively attacking the systemic biases that negatively impact women and people with other marginalized identities,” Capozzi said in the letter. “We’ll do this by continuing to hire, promote, and retain diverse, world-class talent; by offering the most competitive learning and development programming among our peers; and by creating formal mentoring and sponsorship programs to accelerate success in our workforce. McDonald’s has also joined the Catalyst Gender and Diversity KPI Alliance, a group of DEI advocates, corporations, academics, and trade organizations that support the adoption and use of a set of key performance indicators to measure gender and diversity in their organizations.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Nation's Restaurant News

https://www.nrn.com/quick-service/mcdonald-s-achieves-equal-pay-women-and-other-underrepresented-groups-corporate

OFCCP Reverses Course, Will Use EEO-1 Pay Data for Investigation, Enforcement

Bill Brewer — Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:23:06 GMT

On September 1, 2021, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), the Department of Labor sub-agency charged with enforcing affirmative action and non-discrimination requirements imposed on federal contractors by way of Executive Order 11246, announced that it was reversing its prior position regarding the use of EEO-1 compensation data collected by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for calendar years 2018 and 2019 (the so-called “Component 2”).1

Specifically, OFCCP announced that effective immediately, it is rescinding its prior policy under which the agency would not “request, accept, or use EEO-1 Component 2 data.” The prior policy was based on OFCCP’s belief that it would not find significant utility in the data, “given limited resources and [the data’s] aggregated nature.”

Reversing course, OFCCP now indicates that it has determined that the prior non-use policy was “premature and counter to the agency’s interests in ensuring pay equity.” The agency claims that its prior decision to not use Component 2 data was premature because, at that time, OFCCP had little information about the response rate of the collection, how the data was submitted and assembled, or the completeness of the data. Nor did the agency have the opportunity to review and analyze the data.

OFCCP’s announcement states that it will use information gathered in the prior Component 2 data collection to assess its utility for providing insight into pay disparities across industries and occupations, with the stated purpose of “strengthening Federal efforts to combat pay discrimination.” Specifically, the agency indicates that it will evaluate the data’s utility, “because the joint collection and analysis of compensation data could improve OFCCP’s ability to efficiently and effectively investigate potential pay discrimination.” OFCCP’s position is that compensation data, in conjunction with other available information, such as labor market survey data, could help OFCCP identify neutral criteria to select contractors for compliance evaluations.

Given the aggregated nature of the data, it is likely to be of limited use in proving pay discrimination, which usually involves a very close examination of the work and compensation of a specific individual vis-à-vis others. That said, OFCCP’s 180-degree turn provides yet another example of the aggressive stance the Biden administration has taken (and is expected to continue to take) with respect to issues of pay equity, and its willingness to use the carrot of federal contracting to regulate private-sector employers that do business with the federal government.

Possibly the most significant consequence of this decision is that it may have the potential to expose contractor pay data to public disclosure through FOIA requests. While an individual employer’s Component 2 data that has been provided to the EEOC is clearly protected from further disclosure by the EEOC, the FOIA protections that apply to EEO-1 data that is in OFCCP’s possession has been a subject of prior litigation.

Littler’s WPI will apprise of relevant developments as they occur.

Footnotes

1 By way of background, in 2016 the EEOC published a final rule requiring employers to report certain compensation data of their workforce sorted by race, sex, ethnicity, salary range, and job category. In 2017, the agency announced that it was suspending this effort and would not move forward with this collection. Ultimately, a federal district court ruled that the agency’s suspension of the collection was unlawful, and required the EEOC to collect pay data for calendar years 2018 and 2019. That collection was completed in early 2020.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: JD Supra

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/ofccp-reverses-course-will-use-eeo-1-8971089/

OFCCP reopens door to request employers' reported pay data

Bill Brewer — Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:06:06 GMT

Published Sept. 14, 2021 by Ryan Golden

Dive Brief:

The U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs rescinded Sept. 2 a Trump administration notice that it did not intend to request, accept or utilize pay data collected under Component 2 of EEO-1 forms.
In November 2019, OFCCP announced that it would not request, accept or use Component 2 data collected as part of EEO-1 forms for the 2017 and 2018 calendar years. In its Sept. 2 update, however, OFCCP did note that it had "previously expressed interest" in collecting summary compensation data ultimately by collaborating with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as part of the EEO-1 filing process.
"Upon further consideration, OFCCP believes the position taken by the agency in the November 2019 notice was premature and counter to the agency's interests in ensuring pay equity," the agency said. OFCCP added it plans to examine Component 2 data because analyzing that data, in conjunction with other inputs, "could help OFCCP identify neutral criteria to select contractors for compliance evaluations."

Dive Insight:

The change is, in part, a reflection of the differing views of the OFCCP under the Trump and Biden administrations, respectively. In 2019, the agency disputed whether pay data collected via Component 2 would be useful; it said the data was collected in a "highly aggregated format" that "is not collected at a level of detail that would enable OFCCP to make comparisons among similarly situated employees as required by the Title VII standards that OFCCP applies in administering and enforcing Executive Order 11246."

OFCCP's reversal also has to be understood within the context of EEO-1 Component 2, an initiative that has experienced its own share of see-saw activity during the past four years. After a lengthy series of court battles required EEOC to institute pay data collection for 2017 and 2018, the agency ultimately declined to renew Component 2 for future years.

Under recently appointed Chair Charlotte Burrows, however, EEOC has indicated it will continue to pursue methods for examining pay equity in U.S companies. The agency last year announced it was considering a rulemaking to include a new pay data reporting requirement to be published by October 2021. Per its filing with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, that effort is still in the prerule stage.

Both Burrows and the Biden administration at large have said they aim to address pay equity in the future. In 2019, while a commissioner at EEOC, Burrows told an audience during a conference session that she felt EEO-1 Component 2 was "very useful" to EEOC. But the Commission's majority-Republican composition may oppose efforts to reinstate the requirement. Former chair and current commissioner Janet Dhillon, a Trump administration appointee, previously expressed concerns about Component 2.

EEOC's first pay data report, based on 2017 and 2018 Component 2 data, is scheduled to be published on Dec. 31, 2021, according to an agency announcement in July 2020.

Meanwhile, employers also may need to pay attention to state and local developments on pay data collection. California instituted a pay data reporting requirement for all employers in the state that are required to file EEO-1 reports. California employers were required to report pay data to the state's Department of Fair Employment and Housing by March 31.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/ofccp-reopens-door-to-request-employers-reported-pay-data/606556/

2021 Employee Caregiving Survey: The Case for Supporting Employee Eldercare Caregivers

Bill Brewer — Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:02:31 GMT

If not now when? The pressures on today’s workforce have never been greater. Healthcare, finances, work, children, aging loved ones; it is all a balancing act. If just one piece of that intricate puzzle falls out of place, things can go poorly.

We've seen this; we know this. We hear about it on the news. We hear our friends and colleagues tell stories. We see women, and men, leave the workforce much earlier than expected because the precarious juggling act is too much.

What kind of impact does caring for an aging loved one have on working adults? Are employers supportive? Do employees get the help they need? We asked these questions in the Homethrive 2021 Employee Caregiving Survey to find the answers.

Survey at a Glance

The Homethrive 2021 Employee Caregiving Survey was conducted via a third-party survey provider from June 28 - July 21, 2021. Two hundred adults in the U.S., who work outside the home while also providing support for an aging loved one, were surveyed about how those caregiving responsibilities impact their employment. Respondents were from a variety of companies and industries, make at least $50,000 per year, and currently support at least one aging loved one. The survey pool was 64% female and 36% male.

43% of respondents are distracted, worried, or focused on caregiving — and not their jobs — 5 or more hours per week, while 20% are distracted at work more than 9 hours per week
More than half of respondents indicated their supervisors were not as supportive as they needed them to be about their outside-of-work caregiving responsibilities
One third of respondents said that because of their caregiving responsibilities outside of work, their supervisor had noticed a change in their work habits either because it was impacting their job performance or because they were noticeably under stress
Despite the growing need for employee benefits that support caregivers, 79% of employers are not yet offering them or are not communicating about such benefits
The vast majority (84%) of respondents were receptive to the idea of their employer offering a benefit that provided them with resources, guidance, or support for caregiving

To continue reading, please go to:

https://info.homethrive.com/2021employeecaregivingsurveyreport

Canada Pay Equity Act Takes Effect Today

Bill Brewer — Tue, 31 Aug 2021 15:20:31 GMT

By Joanna Kim-Brunetti | August 31, 2021

The Canada Pay Equity Act goes into effect today, August 31, 2021, marking the official commencement of a major international move to advance workplace equality.

The Act has been highly anticipated since its original passage in 2018. Now that the law is in full force, affected employers must develop and implement pay equity plans that address systemic gender-based discrimination in their workplaces.

We’ve previously taken a deeper dive into examining the Act and its requirements. Below we’ve outlined a recap on the law and how it may signal potential legislative changes in the U.S..

The Canada Pay Equity Act in a nutshell

The Canada Pay Equity Act applies to federally regulated employers in public and private sectors with 10 or more employees.

An integral piece of the Act requires that employers draft and post pay equity plans for the purpose of identifying and resolving gender wage gaps. The plans must follow a strict set of criteria, which obliges organizations to: identify job classes; determine if gender predominance exists in those job classes; evaluate work; calculate compensation; and compare compensation.

Upon completion of the above tasks, employers must increase compensation for the predominantly female job classes that are comparatively underpaid within three to five years of the law’s effective date.

As further means of accountability, employers must also provide employees an opportunity to comment on draft plans and take that feedback into consideration. They have three years to implement their plans.

Employers with 100 or more employees (and employers with 10 to 99 employees if some or all employees are unionized) must also establish a representative pay equity committee. The committee is responsible for developing the pay equity plan, as well as reviewing and updating it every five years.

Employers that do not comply with the Act are subject to penalties. Violations could cost an organization between $30,000 to $50,000, as imposed by the Canada Pay Equity Commissioner.

Pay equity trend picks up speed, at home and abroad

Canada’s pay equity law may be a breakthrough in today’s world, but such legislation is shaping up to be standard in the world of tomorrow. As other recent efforts in the U.S. and abroad show, the workplace equality trend isn’t going away any time soon – in fact, it’s picking up speed. Rhode Island and Colorado are among the wave of states working to close the gender and racial pay gap. The issue has even made its way to Congress, which contemplated the idea of passing federal pay equity legislation last spring.

The Canada Pay Equity Act’s continuous improvement model and a societal shift toward progress are examples that performative measures won’t be enough for organizations when it comes to confronting systemic discrimination. Change must be authentic and forward moving. Ongoing accountability and maintenance are critical factors in advancing effective diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) goals.

Employers can get ahead of the curve by implementing a pay equity program within their organizations and conducting a pay equity audit. Ongoing pay equity analytics and DEI monitoring are key features of our PayParity solution, which provides DEI consulting services and pay equity software employers need to be proactive. PayParity addresses pay disparities at the intersection of race and gender, allowing employers to narrow in on the root-causes for perpetuating wage discrimination.

To learn more about how to meet your organization’s DEI goals, download our white paper Designing a Successful Pay Equity for Your Organization.

Organizations looking to disclose pay equity, diversity, and inclusion data information should do so within an ESG reporting framework. Download our white paper, DEI in ESG Reporting to learn about the different standards you can leverage for sharing your progress.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Trusaic

https://trusaic.com/blog/canada-pay-equity-act-takes-effect-today/?utm_campaign=IW&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-87wm5S4p4aZXYAXbbivrf9-KzYE6k7D8b6CxmPLaHl8ryoHHCare3qKX2LsH4LlzWSX4LPA9w9f18Wpv_gnKrWpNGZRJYGrauHAwcsjioARnYDIig&_hsmi=154271496&utm_content=154271496&utm_source=hs_email&hsCtaTracking=9156a467-9829-4e4e-915c-e959096ba2d7%7C99b23ad3-f39c-42f4-8d15-d0b69eebfd08

Delta Air Lines to Impose Monthly Surcharge on Unvaccinated Employees

Bill Brewer — Thu, 26 Aug 2021 19:16:27 GMT

By Mary Schlangenstein | August 25, 2021

Delta Air Lines Inc. will impose a $200 monthly surcharge on employees who aren’t vaccinated against Covid-19, becoming the first major U.S. company to levy a penalty to encourage workers to get protected.

The new policy was outlined in a memo from Chief Executive Officer Ed Bastian, who said 75% of the carrier’s workers already are vaccinated. Increasing cases of coronavirus linked to a “very aggressive” variant are driving the push for all employees to get the shots, he said in the note to employees Wednesday.

The fee applies to employees in the airline’s health-care plan who haven’t received shots by Nov. 1. The company also will require weekly testing for employees who aren’t vaccinated by mid-September.

Delta stopped short of a mandatory vaccine requirement like the one imposed earlier this month by United Airlines Holdings Inc. and other companies. Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Facebook Inc. also have announced vaccine requirements.

Delta is confident that its approach will succeed in moving its worker vaccination rate beyond 75%, a spokesman said when asked why the company didn’t impose a mandate. The potential penalty is “well within” legal parameters, he said.

While vaccine requirements have increased since Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE’s vaccine received full Food and Drug Administration approval on Monday, employers are treading carefully for fear they’ll hurt morale and spur defections in a tight labor market. Some consultants doubt that surcharges will be as persuasive as demanding inoculation, though the size of Delta’s surcharge could change that calculus.

“Vaccine hesitant employees are likely to see this as a mandate or a punitive measure, as it creates an additional annual cost of $2,400 for that employee,” said Brian Kropp, chief of human-resources research for the Gartner consulting firm.

The fee for unvaccinated employees is “to address the financial risk” from their decision, Bastian said. The average hospital stay for Covid-19 patients has cost Delta $50,000 each, he said.

“With this week’s announcement that the FDA has granted full approval for the Pfizer vaccine, the time for you to get vaccinated is now,” Bastian said.

American Airlines Group Inc. and Southwest Airlines Co. continue to encourage employees to be vaccinated but haven’t imposed mandates.

Delta was the best performer on the S&P 500 Airlines Index, rising 1.9% to $41.30 at 2:09 p.m. in New York.

In May, Delta became the first major U.S. airline to require coronavirus shots for new employees. The airline had agreed not to mandate vaccinations for its pilots, the only major work group represented by a union, until at least Nov. 21. The pact also provided incentives for pilots to be vaccinated.

Delta would have to negotiate a new agreement “over any employer-mandated vaccination for pilots,” the Air Line Pilots Association said in a statement. Union leadership “has consistently advocated to maintain the right of each individual pilot to consult with his or her medical provider regarding Covid-19 vaccinations or booster doses.”

Under the policy announced Wednesday, any worker not fully vaccinated by Sept. 12 will be required to take a weekly coronavirus test “while community case rates are high,” Bastian’s memo said.

Employees who aren’t vaccinated must wear masks in all indoor settings, effective immediately. Delta also said that starting Sept. 30, the airline would preserve full pay for workers who have received both shots but who still get sick and may end up on short-term disability.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-25/delta-air-lines-to-impose-surcharge-on-unvaccinated-employees

PwC US Pulse Survey: Next in work

Bill Brewer — Wed, 25 Aug 2021 15:25:54 GMT

PwC US Pulse Survey: Next in work

At a pivotal moment for the future of work, companies can help their businesses and employees thrive

Employees have had more than a year to reflect on their needs and aspirations, and many want a new model of work. Our latest US Pulse Survey found that 65% of employees are looking for a new job. We also talked to executives, 88% of whom told us they are seeing higher turnover than normal.

For the most part, executives have a good grasp on why their employees are looking elsewhere. But when it comes to offering incentives that employees want most, they’re falling short in two key areas: benefits and comp. This employer-employee tension compounds the challenge facing companies eager to redesign work. Rising inflation, the surging delta variant and tension over vaccines, masks and shifting return-to-work plans are creating extra uncertainty.

How can executives balance their strategic and operational goals with shifting employee expectations? Companies have a tremendous opportunity to transform work. By redesigning work, you can help drive growth, better anticipate uncertainty and create a workplace that top talent is eager to join. To successfully execute your plans, you’ll need to figure out your hybrid work model, make changes to processes and operating models, revamp strategic planning and, most importantly, attract and retain top talent.

Our survey offers insights into the changes executives are making as they redesign work and how they are centering many of those decisions around people.

To continue reading, please go to:

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/library/pulse-survey/future-of-work.html

*****

Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)

How the pandemic forced one manufacturer back to benefits basics

Bill Brewer — Wed, 25 Aug 2021 15:23:46 GMT

New York-based Moog went into "survival mode," said Kristine Karnath, so the 70-year-old firm sought to plug up gaps in its support system for workers.

Published Aug. 19, 2021 by Ryan Golden

When a global crisis strikes, even the most firmly rooted organizations may need to pause and re-evaluate.

New York-based aerospace and industrial manufacturer Moog recently celebrated its 70th year in business. Since its founding, the company has sought to sustain a culture in which employees can easily collaborate, be creative and have autonomy without the pressures of bureaucracy or hierarchy, according to Kristine Karnath, Moog's U.S. director of benefits. That culture, she added, influences how Moog makes benefits decisions.

But COVID-19 put the company into "survival mode," Karnath said during an Aug. 11 presentation as part of the Disability Management Employer Coalition's 2021 virtual annual conference. When its clients in the commercial airline industry suffered financial losses, Moog's leaders knew it had to adjust.

"The last thing we wanted to do was have a layoff or a furlough," Karnath said. "We were able to maintain everything that we had pre-pandemic and continue that moving forward, but we started to look at what do we need to change."

Moog realized it was entering a new world, and it sought a benefits strategy that could adapt to the changes brought on by the pandemic, Karnath said. One example was a telemedicine platform that Moog worked to ensure was "completely accessible" to employees; it also added behavioral health support to the platform after seeing utilization spike.

Prior to the pandemic, the company also had offered on-site medical centers and fitness classes, and it transitioned those services to a virtual format. It added mental health and physical wellness holidays to its schedule after realizing it had gaps in its holiday schedule and observing that, despite having an unlimited vacation policy, staff were not taking days off.

"We wanted specifically to have it be holidays where the entire business was shut down so that people didn't feel the pressure to work," Karnath said. "We wanted those days where we kind of forced people to take that time off and to recoup a bit."

Moog also realized it lacked benefits to support caregivers as employees began taking care of children at home during the work day. It added a program to address that need, Karnath said.

Remote work creates two groups of employees

Few Moog employees were remote prior to the pandemic, Karnath said. But with the need to send some to work from home came the division of its U.S. employees essentially into two groups. That proved a challenge, in part, because the company traditionally maintained a similar benefits package across the board for all employees, she explained.

"Our on-site employees looked at our employees at home and thought, ‘well they're on permanent vacation, they're not working, they're watching TV,'" Karnath said. "We also knew that our employees at home were dealing with different situations … they were a parent, a teacher, a caregiver; they had multiple roles they were now playing and trying to balance all of that."

Some on-site employees wanted hazard pay, but Moog pushed back. "We didn't feel that it was appropriate to pay those employees hazard pay because we were doing everything we possibly could to keep those employees safe," Karnath said. "If we paid hazard pay, we felt that that was saying, ‘you are in a hazardous situation, we're not doing everything we can, so we're going to pay you additional.'"

Similarly, Moog did not want to recognize one group of employees without recognizing the other, Karnath said. Ultimately, it decided to focus on the particular issues both groups faced. It offered short-term disability coverage to those with medical conditions that put them at risk of contracting COVID-19. It offered paid leave to employees with immunocompromised persons at home and continued to offer unpaid leave with full benefits and the promise of returning to their job after the end of the period of paid leave.

For virtual workers, Moog asked managers to shorten meetings times from 60-minute windows to 50-minute windows to give employees the ability to take care of tasks outside of work. "There's nothing magical about that last 10 minutes," Karnath said. "We knew that people at home needed time. You can't tell your kids to wait eight hours so that you can help them."

Toeing the line on communications

Keeping an apolitical, fact-based approach is important when relaying information about COVID-19 safety to employees, Karnath said. Moog put forth branded messaging to employees about the virus, vaccines, policies and other topics such as staying active during quarantine. At times, that messaging would occur three to four times per week.

"When we communicated information, we knew we needed to keep the politics out of it as well," Karnath said. "Any area we thought employees might be questioning, nervous about or anxious about, we wanted to make sure that we were addressing that."

In 2019, Moog decided it would focus on mental health and well-being throughout 2020. It kept this plan moving into the pandemic, Karnath said, tailoring specific mental health topics to particular months. February saw a focus on building relationships, while August dealt with community service and November with financial wellness.

"We wanted people to see that mental well-being wasn't just about depression, anxiety or a diagnosable condition," Karnath said, "we wanted them to see it was about everyday life."

However, the company realized it needed to build on those efforts even further, she added. "We were being bombarded with so much information, so many emotions, that there were a lot of people who didn't even recognize that they were feeling anxious, they were depressed," Karnath said. In addition to the use of telehealth benefits and employee assistance programs, Moog trained managers to recognize mental health issues in their reports and point them toward available resources.

Along those same lines, Moog encouraged managers to be vulnerable and open up to their teams about their struggles. Within her own team, Karnath talked about times when she had trouble focusing on work. "Our conversations really changed once I started sharing that," she said. "There was this feeling that I don't need to be that A-plus employee. I can admit that I'm having a hard time here, and that's okay. And they also knew that it was a safe place to do that."

Going forward, Karnath said Moog needs to continue to adapt to employees' needs as expectations around work change. She added that the organization's focus on transparency and trust has helped manage its culture during a turbulent time.

"We have some managers who think when this is all over we're just going to go back to 2019 and everything is just going to go back to the way that it was," Karnath said. "We know as an organization that's not true. The world has changed."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/how-the-pandemic-forced-one-manufacturer-back-to-benefits-basics/605260/

How Employee Benefits May Change in a Hybrid Workplace

Bill Brewer — Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:55:22 GMT

Among other things, more flex time, work-from-anywhere periods, and continuing stipends for home offices

By Suman Bhattacharyya

Aug. 14, 2021

With the coming of the hybrid workplace, employee benefits are being put under the microscope. And many companies are realizing that the current crop of benefits may not make as much sense as they used to.

“A lot of employers are re-evaluating their benefits propositions,‘’ says Lauren Mason, a principal at Mercer, a management-consulting firm. “Employee values have shifted quite significantly because of the stressors of the pandemic and around child care and other concerns, as well as just re-evaluating life circumstances.”

For many companies, this means expanding some benefits while making others less of a priority. In a Care.com survey of 500 human-resource executives in the U.S. conducted in December 2020 and January 2021, 66% said they plan to offer more flexibility, with 63% planning to increase child-care benefits and 41% planning to expand senior-care offerings. At the same time, some benefits that were important pre-Covid, including commuter benefits, on-site meals and on-site child care, are becoming less important, the survey found.

Here’s a closer look at how companies and HR experts expect benefits to change in a world transformed by the pandemic:

Flexible time off that employees can take when they need.

One lesson companies learned from the pandemic is that people often work best when they feel they have more control over their hours, tailored to their specific life needs at the moment. It’s best to focus on output, many HR executives say, rather than time spent working.

One result is that the notion of flexible time off where there are no formal limits, and employees simply take time off when they feel they need it—is one policy that experts say has become more popular, and will become even more so in the years ahead. According to Mercer surveys, the percentage of employers offering such “unlimited paid time off” to at least some employees rose to 20% this year from 14% in 2015.

Fair Isaac Corp. FICO -0.48% , a data-analytics software firm, rolled out a nonaccrual-based vacation policy this year for most of its U.S. employees. “Traditional vacation policies assume that you earn it and then you use it on sort of a 9-to-5, Monday-through-Friday kind of basis. It was just an outdated concept,” says Rich Deal, executive vice president and chief human-resources officer at Fair Isaac. He says the company started a “much more fluid policy that’s trust-based. It doesn’t put accrual limits and usage limits around it, and that acknowledges that work can happen at any time of the day.”

Under flexible vacation policies, managers still have to approve time-off requests, and employees will still be held accountable for poor performance due to extended leave periods. “If you take so much time off that you don’t perform, that’s a performance issue and you can lose your job,” says Iain Urquhart, senior vice president of Americas at Barco, BAR 0.20% a Belgium-based visualization-technology company that moved to a flexible vacation policy in July.

Fewer sick days but more ‘home leave’ days.

The Covid pandemic highlighted the importance of working around schedules and needs, including circumstances when an employee may be feeling slightly ill but can still contribute a portion of their workload. Nicholas Bloom, an economics professor at Stanford University who studies remote work, calls this “home leave.”

Dr. Bloom says a company might give workers 10 extra days of home leave a year, beyond the work-from-home days allowed. In return, he says, the employee might take, perhaps, two fewer of their allotted sick days.

“Sick leave is when you really don’t work, but with home leave, for all intents and purposes, you’re working,” he says. “It’s far less costly. If you think of sick leave, you may get zero output, but with home leave, you may get 80%.”

Work-from-anywhere periods.

If the pandemic taught companies anything, it was that employees relish the opportunity to work for extended periods outside the office.

Revolut, a London-based financial-technology company, this year increased allocated work-from-abroad time for its employees to a maximum of 60 days from 29 days, in response to employee surveys.

“Creating this policy was clearly motivated by last year’s experience, and it represents what we felt could be beneficial and appreciated by a young, global workforce like ours,” says Jim MacDougall, the company’s vice president of people. Mr. MacDougall says the company will monitor employee feedback, and then decide whether to make it a continuing benefit.

Alphabet Inc.’s GOOG +0.49% Google also has expanded its work-from-anywhere allocations for employees, from two weeks to four weeks. And business-information services company Thomson Reuters TRI -1.42% says it’s set to unveil a new leave approach in the coming months that will incorporate work-from-anywhere benefits.

“The pandemic has accelerated people’s focus on how they want to live their lives and how work can fit into their ideal life, and work from anywhere—flexible work, primarily—gives them more opportunity to do that,” says Mary Alice Vuicic, the company’s chief people officer.

Continuing stipends for home offices.

According to a survey of more than 3,600 world-wide employees carried out by Gartner Inc. within the past year, 71% said they feel their employer should help cover home-office expenses while they are asked to work remotely, though only 44% of employees reported that their organizations covered home-office expenses for some or all employees.

Bluecore, a New York marketing-technology company, says it’s going to continue offering its employees a $200 monthly stipend, with wide latitude on how it is spent. “It could be for health and well-being, like the Calm app, or workout equipment, or if you need more office type of stuff, you can use it relative to however it makes you productive,” says Michelle McComb, chief financial officer at Bluecore.

Expanded discounted services for employees.

Experts expect companies to offer employees more deals based on discounted rates companies negotiate with third-party vendors. Mercer’s surveys found that almost a quarter of all employers with 500 or more employees say they will add or expand such voluntary benefit offerings in 2021.

Two areas that were of particular importance to employees during the pandemic: pet insurance (for all those dogs and cats adopted during lockdown) and identity-theft protection (as a result of employees using their work computers for personal activities while working from home).

A recent study from Willis Towers Watson, a consulting firm, found that 47% of employers surveyed offered pet insurance, with 69% saying they would offer it by 2022 or beyond. The study found that 53% of employers currently offer identity-theft protection, with 78% planning to offer it by 2022 or later.

Benefits that will aim to translate in-office perks for hybrid work environments.

Before the pandemic, many offices offered in-office catering, on-site gyms and other perks to attract employees. In a hybrid context, companies are exploring how to offer similar benefits for employees who are working remotely, in part through delivery and subscription and digital services.

A survey by Willis Towers Watson found that 80% of employers were planning to increase perks this year. It further found that most employers suspended on-site perks, such as food, gyms, fitness classes and social events, and instead offered virtual perks, such as access to health and wellness apps and telehealth.

Infragistics, a user-experience technology company based in Cranbury, N.J., offered on-site cooked meals to its employees before the pandemic. The company, which plans to reopen its Cranbury office this fall, will have a hybrid workforce. So while it’s planning to bring the chefs back to the office, it also is trying to figure out how to offer some of the food benefits to employees working at home.

“It probably wouldn’t be meals, but fruits and stuff like that, but we don’t have anything official yet,” says Dean Guida, the company’s CEO.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Wall Street Journal

https://www.wsj.com/articles/employee-benefits-hybrid-workplace-11628796247

U.S. employers planning larger pay raises for 2022, Willis Towers Watson survey finds

Bill Brewer — Wed, 11 Aug 2021 14:44:13 GMT

Only 3% of employers freezing salaries

ARLINGTON, VA, July 20, 2021 — Pay raises are making a comeback. U.S. companies plan to give employees larger raises next year as they recover from the economic fallout from the pandemic and face mounting challenges attracting and retaining employees, according to a new survey by Willis Towers Watson (NASDAQ: WLTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company. The survey also found employers are continuing to recognize their high performers with significantly larger raises.

The 2021 General Industry Salary Budget Survey found only 3% of companies are not planning to boost salaries next year, a drop from 8% that didn’t give raises this year. Notably, raises are returning to pre-pandemic levels. According to the survey, companies project average salary increases of 3.0% for executives, management and professional employees, and support staff in 2022. This is up from the average 2.7% increases companies granted this year. Production and manual labor employees are in line to receive average increases of 2.8% next year, higher than the average 2.5% increases this year. Salary increases hovered around 3.0% for the past decade until the pandemic forced companies to trim budgets. The larger raises coincide with a surge in demand for labor and a shortage of supply of hourly workers and specific professional roles with premium skills.

Among the major industry groups, high-tech and pharmaceutical companies project the largest increases (3.1%) followed by health care, media and financial services companies (3.0%). Oil and gas industry companies, as well as leisure and hospitality industry companies, are budgeting significantly lower salary increases for employees (2.4%). Retail industry companies are projecting average raises of 2.9% next year.

“Companies are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to compensation planning,” said Catherine Hartmann, North America Rewards practice leader at Willis Towers Watson. “On the one hand, employers need to continue effectively managing fixed costs as they rebound from the pandemic. On the other hand, companies recognize they need to boost compensation with sign-on, referral and retention bonuses; skill premiums; midyear adjustments; or pay raises. Or they can utilize all of these options, especially with millions of Americans quitting their jobs, changing careers or postponing looking for employment.”

Top performers continue to receive larger raises

The survey found companies continue to reward top performers with significantly larger pay raises than average-performing employees. Management and professional employees receiving the highest possible performance rating were granted an average increase of 4.5% this year, 73% higher than the 2.6% increases granted to those receiving average ratings. This trend continued for support staff and hourly workers who received the highest ratings.

The survey also revealed over nine in 10 companies (91%) awarded annual performance bonuses this year based on 2020 performance, significantly higher than 76% of companies that awarded them last year. Bonuses, which are generally tied to company and employee performance goals, averaged 16.0% of salary for management and professional employees. Bonuses for support staff and production and manual labor employees averaged 8.0% and 5.5%, respectively.

“Attracting and retaining employees remains a major challenge for employers. In fact, the current environment makes these challenges even more difficult. Employers need to deliver a sound employee value proposition supported by comprehensive Total Rewards programs. Beyond competitive salaries, which are table stakes at the moment, companies also need to focus their spend on a diverse set of health, wealth and career programs to drive employee engagement,” said Hartmann.

About the survey

The 2021 General Industry Salary Budget Survey was conducted by Willis Towers Watson Data Services between April and June 2021. A total of 1,220 companies representing a cross section of industries participated. The report provides data on actual salary budget increase percentages for the past and current years, along with projected increases for next year.

About Willis Towers Watson

Willis Towers Watson (NASDAQ: WLTW) is a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company that helps clients around the world turn risk into a path for growth. With roots dating to 1828, Willis Towers Watson has 45,000 employees serving more than 140 countries and markets. We design and deliver solutions that manage risk, optimize benefits, cultivate talent, and expand the power of capital to protect and strengthen institutions and individuals. Our unique perspective allows us to see the critical intersections between talent, assets and ideas — the dynamic formula that drives business performance. Together, we unlock potential.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Willis Towers Watson plc.

https://www.willistowerswatson.com/en-US/News/2021/07/us-employers-planning-larger-pay-raises-for-2022-willis-towers-watson-survey-finds

Canada Pay Equity Act Tackles Gender Wage Gap

Bill Brewer — Tue, 03 Aug 2021 19:05:37 GMT

By Robert Sheen | July 29, 2021

Canada is making strides to close the gender wage gap with the adoption of its historic Pay Equity Act. Originally passed in December 2018, the Act goes into full effect August 31, 2021.

The Canada Pay Equity Act aims to address systemic gender-based discrimination, foster equal compensation for work of equal value, and proactively maintain pay equity going forward. To achieve these goals, the Act requires federal employers to establish a pay equity plan through a rigorous process, then create a pay equity committee to develop, execute, and maintain said plan.

Below we’ve outlined what employers need to know about designing a pay equity plan, how to create a pay equity committee, who the Act applies to and why organizations in the U.S. should start preparing now.

Impacted organizations

The Canada Pay Equity Act applies to federally regulated organizations in public and private sectors. Certain distinctions apply to organizations based on the total number of employees in their workforce and whether they are unionized:

Employers with 10 or more employees must establish a pay equity plan
Employers with 100 or more employees must additionally establish a pay equity committee
Employers with 10-99 employees must establish a pay equity committee if any of the employees are unionized
Employers with 10-99 non-unionized employees may voluntarily establish a pay equity committee, but are not required to do so

Establish a pay equity plan

Pay equity plans are intended to identify and remedy pay disparities based on gender. The Act requires employers pay equity plans to include the following:

Identification of job classes
Determination of predominantly female and predominantly male job classes
Determination of value of work
Calculation of compensation
Comparison of compensation

Notably, the Act broadly defines “compensation” to include salaries, commissions, bonuses, and paid time off; in-kind payments; employer contributions to retirement, long-term disability, and health insurance plans; and any other “advantage” received directly or indirectly from the employer.

Create a pay equity committee

The Canada Pay Equity Act requires employers to form representative pay equity committees that will develop, execute, and maintain the pay equity plans. Specifically, “At least two-thirds of the members must represent the employees to whom the pay equity plan relates.” There are other stipulations for establishing membership – for example, women should compose at least 50% of the pay equity committee.

Pay equity committees will be responsible for reviewing and updating pay equity plans at least once every five years.

Built-in accountability

The work doesn’t end with establishing pay equity plans and committees. The Act includes measures for accountability and maintenance to allow for continuous improvement. These measures require employers to:

Post a draft pay equity plan, with an opportunity for employees to comment (Employee feedback must be taken into consideration.)
Implement the pay equity plan within three years
Increase compensation for the predominantly female job classes that are comparatively underpaid
Maintain pay equity and review the pay equity plan at least once every five years
Provide certain information/notices to their pay equity committee, employees, and the Pay Equity Commissioner

Pay Equity Act non-compliance

The Act penalizes employers that fail to comply. Specifically, Canada’s Pay Equity Commissioner is responsible for enforcing the Act and may impose penalties between $30,000 to $50,000 for violations.

International efforts foreshadow changes to U.S. legislation

Canada’s recent action to confront systemic gender-based discrimination may herald change in the U.S. and other countries throughout the world.

Equal pay is already rising as a top concern in both American legislative board rooms and employee break rooms alike. Last spring, Congress reviewed policies aimed at resolving pay disparities for protected classes. The heads of U.S. labor and employment organizations, including the chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the director of the Office of Federal Contractors Compliance Programs (OFCCP), are also making pay equity a focus.

A diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) lens is integral to building a good workplace culture and a reputation as a forward-thinking employer. Simply put, organizations that demonstrate a commitment to DEI aren’t only doing the right thing – they’re also bolstering recruitment efforts and attracting investors.

One of the Canada Pay Equity Act’s most prominent focuses is to close the gender wage. Through proactive pay equity measures, U.S. employers too can close the gap and promote workplace equality. With new federal regulations on the horizon, U.S. organizations that approach the social good on their own are setting themselves up for greater success. Best practices include undergoing a comprehensive pay equity audit now. To get started, download our white paper Designing a Successful Pay Equity Program.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Trusaic

https://trusaic.com/blog/canada-pay-equity-act-tackles-gender-wage-gap/

Ireland Gender Pay Gap Information Act 2021 Signed into Law (see What does this mean for U.S. employers?)

Bill Brewer — Tue, 03 Aug 2021 19:02:07 GMT

By Robert Sheen | August 3, 2021

In an effort to address the pay disparity between men and women, the President of Ireland signed the Gender Pay Gap Information Act 2021 into law on Jul. 13, 2021.

The Gender Pay Gap Information Bill amends the Employment Equality Act 1998 and requires gender pay gap reporting from certain Irish employers. The Act’s goal is to promote pay transparency by requiring certain Irish employers to report and publish information about gender pay gaps within their organizations. It also holds employers accountable by requiring them to explain gaps and what action they’re taking to eliminate or reduce identified wage gaps.

Below we have outlined this latest international effort to advance pay transparency and what it could mean for the future of the U.S.

What are the reporting requirements?

The Act provides that the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration, and Youth establish regulations as soon as “reasonably practicable” mandating employers to publish a variety of information about the compensation of their employees, including:

Mean and median hourly compensation for full-time and part-time male and female employees
Mean and median bonus compensation of male and female employees
Percentage of all employees who have received a bonus or benefits

Employers will also be required to explain why gender pay gaps exist and the actions they’re taking to rectify them.

It’s important to note the Act draws a distinction between the “gender pay gap” and “equal pay for equal work.” While equal pay for equal work has long been codified into Irish law, the new regulations are specific to gender pay gaps, which are defined as the difference in the average hourly wage of men and women across a workforce. Gender pay gaps don’t necessarily mean discrimination is present – but the new reporting system will illuminate where discrimination does exist and require employers to take action to resolve it.

In addition to reporting requirements, the regulations may determine:

The class of employer, employee, and pay to which the regulations apply
How the number of employees and pay is to be calculated
The form and manner in which information is to be published, along with the frequency of publication (which will not be required more than once per year)

Which organizations are impacted?

Private and public sector employers will be affected with the following requirements:

Initially, the legislation will only apply to companies with 250+ employees
Two years after the start of the Act, the act will expand to include organizations with 150+ employees
Three years after the start of the Act, organizations with 50+ employees will need to comply
At this time, organizations with less than 50 employees are exempt from the Act’s reporting and disclosure requirements

When does the law take effect?

While the law is expected to be fully enacted at the end of this year, the reporting process is expected to begin in 2022.

How will the law be enforced?

The Workplace Relations Commission will investigate complaints and follow up with employers accordingly to enforce pay equity in Ireland. Additionally, if “reasonable grounds” are present, the Irish Human Rights And Equality Commission may file an order with the Circuit Court or High Court that would require an employer in question to comply.

What does this mean for U.S. employers?

Ireland’s action to amend pay equity legislation is reflective of movements gaining traction around the globe. Canada’s recent passage of its Pay Equity Act is yet another effort aimed at confronting systemic gender-based discrimination. Local efforts to close the gap are also cropping up across the U.S., and federal legislation seems imminent. Already, states like California, Illinois, Rhode Island, and Oregon have passed legislation requiring employers to achieve pay equity through similar transparency efforts. Congress is also actively working to pass legislation to bolster the federal Equal Pay Act.

U.S. employers should get ahead of the curve by implementing a pay equity policy now. A focus on pay equity isn’t the ethos of the future – it’s already here. To get started, download our white paper Designing a Successful Pay Equity Policy for Your Organization.

We’re here to help employers take a proactive approach to achieve pay equity in their organizations. Our PayParity Solution provides auditing and ongoing monitoring to help your organization get ahead and minimize risk.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Trusaic

https://trusaic.com/blog/canada-pay-equity-act-tackles-gender-wage-gap/

Revisiting Business Strategy and Compensation Alignment in Light of COVID-19

Bill Brewer — Fri, 30 Jul 2021 16:20:08 GMT

ADVISOR BLOG

AS PUBLISHED IN WORKSPAN WEEKLY

JULY 2021

COVID-19 and the ensuing pandemic produced the largest global economic shock and business transformation period of our lifetimes. And while there were some companies that benefitted from the situation, for many others, the virus painfully exposed material weaknesses in their business.

We’ve experienced wholesale changes in how work gets done. For workers who could, there was a pivot to working from home. (In fact, a recent survey found that the work from home model may become more permanent for many companies. Respondents indicated they expect a third of their total US-based workforces will continue to work remotely.) An interesting lesson here is just how quickly—and seamlessly for many—this pivot was executed; it happened in a fraction of the time most of us would have thought possible.

As we optimistically put the pandemic in our rearview mirror, company management and their boards continue to meet more frequently than ever to discuss and formulate near-term and long-range business plans. However, with all that we’ve learned over the past year-plus about agility and flexibility, we can’t lose sight of some of the fundamental principles that help businesses achieve ongoing performance. More than ever it is incumbent on compensation committees, leadership teams, and HR professionals to ensure that the links between business strategy, talent management, and compensation strategy and design are meaningful.

The forced re-evaluation of both vulnerabilities and new opportunities may have been overdue for some companies and an unexpected benefit for others. But in light of those changes, it’s important to take the next step and examine some core compensation questions.

Do we have the right executive compensation metrics to drive current, newly evolved business goals and priorities?
Are the right leaders in place to support our changing business model or strategies?
Given our changing business, how do we create line of sight for all employees?
What have we learned from the pandemic about what our employees value?
Has the virtual workforce opened up new opportunities for talent acquisition?

Just as business as usual was not acceptable in 2020, compensation as usual should not be acceptable going forward. Customer needs have changed, workforce needs have changed, and people and compensation must be realigned to match those new preferences.

Many companies have re-evaluated the metrics in their incentive programs to ensure alignment with new business goals and strategies. There have been changes to the long-term incentive mix to not only mute the lingering effect of COVID-19, but to also highlight shifting attitudes about the primary objectives and attributes of long-term incentives. And these shifting attitudes aren’t confined to the executive ranks. With growing concern about the availability and needs of the broader talent pool, some high-profile companies have made public announcements regarding permanent work from home models and associated HR and compensation policy changes.

Bottom line: if your business strategy has changed or is evolving, so should your pay program. Reevaluate your compensation design to ensure it reflects the changes to your business model and business strategies. Every company is inherently different, and compensation and people strategies should reflect that. View these ongoing discussions and deliberations between the board and management through a lens that makes clear the right differences in your pay programs, relative to your competitors, can create a tremendous competitive advantage.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Pearl Meyer

https://www.pearlmeyer.com/blog/revisiting-business-strategy-and-compensation-alignment-in-light-of-covid-19

Wages are rising, but inflation may have given workers a 2% pay cut

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Jul 2021 15:15:26 GMT

by Greg Iacurci | PUBLISHED TUE, JUL 27 20211:30 PM EDT, UPDATED TUE, JUL 27 20216:37 PM EDT

Workers saw their hourly pay in June jump at the fastest clip in more than a decade. Yet some of them saw those gains erased by high levels of inflation.

“Real wages” — a measure of income after accounting for the cost of goods and services people buy — fell by almost 2%, on average, last month compared with 2020. Senate Republicans said Wednesday that Americans were getting a pay cut as a result.

“The staples of American life are increasing exponentially,” according to Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., who cited examples like higher prices for gas, laundry, airfare, moving costs, hotels, bacon and TVs.

The thrust of the argument — that inflation eats into rising wages — is true, according to economists. Still, there are many nuances, they said.

For one, whether a consumer got a pay cut or not depends on their individual earnings and the things they buy.

“If prices are growing faster than wages, then people are getting inflation-adjusted pay cuts,” according to Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank. “Ultimately, this varies dramatically for every individual.”

Plus, inflation has been volatile and may prove temporary — meaning a reduction in buying power could be short-lived, economists said.

Inflation and wage growth

Average hourly earnings rose 3.6%, to $30.40, in June compared with the same month in 2020. That’s the biggest spike since January 2009, according to data compiled by the Economic Policy Institute.

Meanwhile, the consumer price index, a measure of inflation, jumped 5.4% over the same period — the most since August 2008.

Together, this amounts to a 1.7% loss in buying power, on average, when factoring in seasonal adjustments, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“Inflation is a tax,” said William Foster, a vice president at Moody’s Investors Service. “That’s the best way to think about it.”

Inflation most impacts lower earners, who spend more of their average dollar on gas, food and other items that may be rising in price, Foster said. Wealthier individuals, who tend to hold more financial assets like stocks or homes, may be better able to offset the impact of inflation, he added.

But not everyone necessarily got a pay cut as a result. The 5.4% jump in annual inflation is an average of many items — and households aren’t necessarily buying the ones that are getting much costlier.

For example, the metric includes prices for used cars and trucks, which are up about 45% from June 2020 — their largest change on record. That price shock wouldn’t hit someone’s wallet unless they bought a used car.

Similarly, gasoline prices are up 45%. That extra cost would be borne by drivers, though perhaps not city residents who ride public transit.

By comparison, food prices are up just 2.4% over the same time, lower than the broader inflation measure.

Consumer behavior

The consumer price index also doesn’t account for shifts in the behavior of consumers, who may change what they buy to avoid these higher costs.

For example, one might switch to chicken from beef to save money, or delay buying a car until prices fall.

“People respond to price changes by shifting their consumption,” according to Noah Williams, an economics professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

The personal consumption expenditures price index, another measure of inflation, accounts for these shifts. The Bureau of Economic Analysis hasn’t yet issued the figure for June. But in May, the PCE index was 1.1 percentage points lower than the consumer price index annual reading (3.9% versus 5%) — which indicates consumers bought lower-cost goods.

However, these shifts still impose a cost on consumers, if not an explicit one, according to Casey Mulligan, an economics professor at the University of Chicago.

“They’re trying to minimize the evils, but they’re both evils,” said Mulligan, who served as chief economist of the White House Council of Economic Advisers during the Trump administration.

Distortions

There’s also reason to be wary of overinterpreting inflation and wage figures as the U.S. economy rebounds from the Covid-19 pandemic, according to economists.

That’s due to economic distortions caused by the virus. For example, consumer prices fell early in the pandemic. Comparing prices today to lower prices a year ago will naturally cause inflation readings to seem high.

Similarly, wage data may be skewed by a disproportionate number of layoffs among low-wage workers during the pandemic. In April 2020, for example, average hourly earnings jumped 8% (the highest on record) even amid mass layoffs, since more high earners remained in the workforce.

The same may be happening now, but in reverse. As the economy rebounds and lower-wage workers are rehired, average earnings may appear suppressed.

“It could be a little misleading” to suggest workers are getting a pay cut, according to Susan Houseman, research director at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

″[The composition of the workforce] is especially changing during downturns and recoveries, so one has to be careful about interpreting these data,” she said.

Temporary or not?

It’s unclear whether higher consumer prices and wages are temporary or longer-lasting, according to economists.

However, at least some of the inflation can be explained by likely short-term dynamics, like supply constraints and a surge in demand as consumers emerge from a pandemic-induced hibernation, they said.

For example, high recent gas prices were caused partly because major oil-producing nations couldn’t reach agreement to raise oil supply in early July, according to AAA. And a shortage of microchips has led to a spike in car prices.

Some expect inflation to persist, though.

“Inflation is not going to be transitory,” Mohammed El-Erian, the chief economic adviser at Allianz SE, told Bloomberg TV on Friday. “I have a whole list of companies that have announced price increases, that have told us they expect further price increases, and that they expect them to stick,” he added.

Wages seem to have increased in recent months amid rising demand for workers, according to the Labor Department. Increased pay may be longer-lasting than high inflation, since businesses often don’t cut pay after raising it, Houseman said.

“We typically don’t give people wage cuts,” she said. “Employers typically don’t do that.

“So in that sense, they’re stickier.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: MSNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/27/wages-are-rising-but-has-inflation-given-workers-a-2percent-pay-cut.html

Chipotle, Chobani, Verizon Among Companies Committing to Financial Health of US Workforce

Bill Brewer — Tue, 27 Jul 2021 15:40:55 GMT

PUBLISHED July 2021

Member companies will assess the financial security and health of their employees as part of a new effort to address the economic hardships of workers.

Chipotle, Chobani, Even, Prudential Financial, Verizon and other leading companies have joined PayPal and JUST Capital in the Worker Financial Wellness Initiative — a coalition aimed at making workers’ financial security and health a C-suite and investor priority. The initiative elevates worker financial wellbeing to a top priority as business leaders consider solutions to shape a sustainable and inclusive recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and take action for racial equity.

Research shows that improving workers’ financial wellness benefits not only workers themselves, but also business outcomes including productivity, innovation, customer satisfaction, and employee turnover and engagement. The Worker Financial Wellness Initiative joins those from a growing number of corporate heavyweights (including Apple, Starbucks, EVERFI, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Mastercard and Visa, to name a few) that have turned their attention to improving worker inclusivity and wellbeing — particularly for minorities and women, who have been disproportionately impacted during the pandemic.

PayPal and JUST Capital launched the Worker Financial Wellness Initiative in October 2020, in collaboration with Financial Health Network and Good Jobs Institute. Companies joining the initiative commit to conducting a financial wellness assessment of their workforce to understand their financial vulnerability and identify opportunities to improve their resilience over the long term. Specifically, these companies will complete at least one assessment within a 12-month period, such as an employer-provided benefits assessment, an employee survey, or a living wage assessment.

“If we are going to deliver on the promise of stakeholder capitalism, we need to help more corporate leaders and investors understand that employees are a company’s most valuable asset, and that investing in their well-being will drive long-term financial success,” said JUST Capital CEO Martin Whittaker. “Through the Worker Financial Wellness Initiative, we’ll continue to build the growing body of evidence demonstrating the connection between the financial security of a company’s workforce and their overall business performance, and refute the anachronistic Wall Street narrative that raising wages destroys value.”

PayPal conducted an assessment on the financial wellness of its hourly and entry-level workforce in 2018 and found that many employees were struggling to pay their bills each month despite market pay alignment. The findings propelled the company to institute several changes to improve its employees’ financial well-being, including lowering the cost of healthcare benefits, making every employee a stockholder, raising wages where appropriate, and offering new financial coaching programs. Since implementing these changes, the company has helped raise the minimum PayPal-defined estimated net disposable income for hourly and entry-level workers in the U.S. to at least 18 percent, making significant progress to reaching its target of 20 percent for all employees globally.

“At Chipotle, we believe in investing in the overall wellness of our employees by offering robust benefits that address physical, mental and financial health,” said chairman and CEO Brian Niccol. “Being a founding company in the Worker Financial Wellness Initiative demonstrates our commitment to being an industry leader and ensuring that we’re truly assessing the comprehensive needs of our workforce. Joining forces with other leading organizations and using our collective voices will shed greater visibility on this important matter — impacting not only our individual companies, but potentially the economy as a whole.”

Participants in the initiative will have access to a wealth of resources — including quarterly webinars highlighting company best practices, and guidance on developing and deploying financial wellness assessments. Companies interested in more specialized tools and resources can receive tailored recommendations from initiative partners based on their assessment results, as well as enhanced peer learning workshops for HR teams. The partner organizations will also continue to share case studies, business case analysis and best-practice insights to help educate, inform and catalyze the wider business community.

With the first cohort representing approximately 260,000 US workers across a range of industries, the program presents a unique opportunity to demonstrate what companies can accomplish when they come together with a shared goal of improving the financial health and resilience of workers across the nation.

"It's no secret that it is getting harder to recruit and retain talent at all levels, especially with hourly employees," said Jon Schlossberg, co-founder and executive chairman with on-demand pay platform Even — which PayPal recently enlisted to help it improve the financial health of its own workforce. “During a time where keeping a productive and loyal workforce is crucial, Even provides employees with the tools they need to improve their financial health; and in return employers are rewarded with a more productive, engaged and loyal workforce. We're proud to be part of this initiative and look forward to partnering with this coalition to raise the importance for all employers to play an active role in the financial health of their workforce."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Sustainable Brands

https://sustainablebrands.com/read/finance-investment/chipotle-chobani-verizon-among-companies-committing-to-financial-health-of-us-workforce

Chipotle CFO: Higher wages preventing staff shortages

Bill Brewer — Tue, 27 Jul 2021 15:36:50 GMT

The move has paid off in staffing retention that's "as good or better" than it was before the pandemic.

Published July 26, 2021 | Jane Thier

Commodity shortages and price increases will mostly cancel out a 3.5% to 4% menu price hike Chipotle Mexican Grill announced in May to pay for higher employee wages, the company's CFO, Jack Hartung, told analysts this week.

Even with the price of ingredients rising, the company stands by its decision to raise the average wage to $15 by June, which Hartung called "a very bold move" that has paid off in staffing retention that's "as good or better" than it was before the pandemic.

Chipotle reported $188 million in quarterly net income, compared with $8.2 million the same quarter last year, and a 24.5% operating margin, a twofold year-over-year jump, and its highest quarterly gain since 2015.

"There is so much going on right now with inflation, and the question about whether inflation is transitory or permanent," Hartung said. "And now [with] the Delta variant, there's a lot of unknowns, so we don’t want to declare, with certainty, what we’ll do between now and the end of the year."

Consumers have been "really, really good" with the elevated menu prices, Hartung said. "We’re really seeing no resistance whatsoever." As for pricing decisions going forward, "let's see what happens to inflation and the economy over the next several months, and we'll make the appropriate decisions at the appropriate time."

The brand maintains pricing power and significant upward mobility on its margins, Hartung added. "Now, it's just a matter of how and when we decide to use that pricing power to either protect margins or to invest in our people, like we just did with the wages."

Digital sales, which account for nearly 50% of Chipotle’s business, grew 10.5% even as dining rooms reopened, and it opened 56 new restaurants, 45 of which include a Chipotlane drive-thru. Locations with Chipotlanes have 20% higher sales than those without, Hartung said.

"What we had hoped would happen is happening—we’re holding onto these digital transactions while people’s previous habits are returning when they feel comfortable going out and about," he said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/chipotle-cfo-higher-wages-preventing-staff-shortages/603892/

Remote Work Is the New Signing Bonus

Bill Brewer — Fri, 09 Jul 2021 21:47:35 GMT

Workers are trading jobs, enticed by the guarantee of flexible schedules and continued work from home

By Chip Cutter and Kathryn Dill | Updated June 26, 2021 12:01 am ET

After almost a year and a half of working from home, many white-collar employees say they are not willing to return to corporate offices full-time. Even whispers of returning have been enough to send some professionals searching for an exit—and plenty of bosses are welcoming them to new jobs with the promise they can work remotely, at least most of the time.

The push for flexibility is adding to the wave of resignations rippling through the U.S., recruiters say, and motivating many employers to re-evaluate their work-from-home policies. Canadian video-software firm Vidyard says it has seen a steep increase in job applications in recent months after emphasizing that roles can be performed mostly at home. And at Allstate Corp. , conversations about every new position now begin with the question: “Why can’t this be done remotely?” says Carrie Blair, the insurance giant’s chief human-resources officer. “It’s a big workforce shift for us.”

Hardly anyone will return to Allstate’s offices full time, Ms. Blair says, after employees expressed in surveys that they didn’t want to and the company found most functions don’t require an office setting. Allstate recently decided 75% of roles can be performed remotely, and another 24% can be done on a hybrid basis, with workers splitting time between home and the office. The 1% who will go back to a pre-Covid-style office setting include some top executives and certain people in field offices with customer-facing roles.

“Remote is going to be the new signing bonus,” he says. “Instead of dangling, ‘We’ll give you $10,000 if you sign for this job,’ it’ll be: ‘Instead of having to commute 35 minutes every day, go to work, and get in your car and drive 35 minutes home, you can work from your home office all the time.’ ”

Matt Croak, a 27-year-old software engineer in New York City, wasn’t actively looking for a new job earlier this year, but believed his consulting-firm employer could begin reopening its offices this summer in a hybrid capacity. So, when a recruiter reached out in April about an engineering role at an e-commerce company that would allow him to continue working fully from home, he pursued it. The job comes with higher pay and the chance to learn new skills, but it will also allow him to spend mornings reading in his living room in Brooklyn, instead of hunched over a subway seat while commuting 45 minutes into Manhattan. Mr. Croak says that, over the past 16 months, he has had more personal time for meditation and other self care—activities he wasn’t ready to give up in order to rush back and forth to and from an office again.

“I do really want to work from home permanently,” he says.

Minaya, a 26-year-old tech-company employee, calls remote work ‘the arrangement that I want to keep.’PHOTO: JOVELLE TAMAYO FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Marc Cenedella, founder and chief executive of Ladders, a job-search site for roles that pay north of $100,000 a year, says greater flexibility is shaping up as a perk that companies can wield to poach talented people.

“I do really want to work from home permanently,” he says.

More American workers are quitting their jobs than at any time in at least 20 years, according to the Labor Department. One factor behind the trend, executives say, is that more employers are outlining their return-to-office plans in detail, giving employees a clearer sense of what to expect next. Apple Inc. recently said it wants most office workers to show up Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays, with the option to work remotely on Wednesdays and Fridays. Other companies, such as Pontiac, Mich.-based United Wholesale Mortgage, are recalling thousands of employees to a corporate campus in the coming weeks, with a goal of getting close to 100% of workers back and resuming a traditional five-day workweek, according to the company’s chief executive, Mat Ishbia.

“You see tons of bold statements. Companies saying, ‘No remote work.’ Some companies are saying, ‘We’re getting rid of all of our offices,’ ” says Bret Taylor, president and chief operating officer of Salesforce.com Inc. In many cases, it is the employees who are primarily calling the shots. “There’s like a free market of the future of work and employees are choosing which path that they want to go on.”

In a recent survey of 2,000 workers commissioned by Prudential Financial Inc., a quarter of respondents said they planned to look for a new job post-pandemic, with many of those planning to leave citing work-life balance issues as among their top concerns. Half of respondents reported feeling that the pandemic had given them more control in deciding the direction of their careers.

Jeff Simonds, a 38-year-old who lives in Burlington, Vt., began a new remote job this past week as a search-engine optimization manager at Updater Inc., a New York-based tech company that makes software designed to help with logistical challenges when people relocate. Before the pandemic, Mr. Simonds worked in an office and says he never would have considered doing otherwise.

Over the past year, he says he appreciated being able to throw in a load of laundry during the workday, or to begin his day from home earlier so that he could squeeze in a round of golf in the late afternoon, with his work completed. The new role came with a raise, and he says he considers the ability to work remotely as a kind of bonus. “It’s the freedom to kind of define my own workday,” he says.

His prior company, which provides marketing services and tools for auto dealers, had tentatively discussed returning to the office in September, Mr. Simonds says.

“Knowing that there was somewhat of a looming deadline of life back in the office” helped to inform the career move, Mr. Simonds says, adding that he was primarily drawn to his new employer’s growth prospects and the chance to help shape a new team. “I didn’t hate the office life, but I’m very accustomed to this now.”

Though a number of companies are still calling workers back to offices, some bosses realize policies must shift to remain competitive. At First Advantage Corp. , an Atlanta technology company that employs more than 3,500 people and had its initial public offering this week, CEO Scott Staples says the company plans to reopen its offices in phases over the coming months. Some employees, particularly those in technology roles, will likely be able to spend more time working remotely.

“I think CEOs of the future just have to have a lot more flexibility on policies and procedures. It’s the only way you’re going to grow and survive,” Mr. Staples says. “There are certain roles where if a person doesn’t want to come back in for a variety of reasons, we can accommodate that, and I think that will make us an attractive employer.”

Technology giant Adobe Inc. said this week that its roughly 23,000 employees could spend 50% of their time at home once U.S. offices begin reopening in July, but also said that remote-work arrangements would expand for those who desire them.

“Our default work arrangement going forward for employees is to be flexible,” says Gloria Chen, the company’s head of human resources. Adobe won’t mandate which days employees go into offices or track how much time they spend in them. “Flexibility means flexibility,” she says.

Last fall, as Amy Culver’s employer began discussing plans to eventually return to the office, she found herself filled with dread. Without her typical 40-to-60-minute commute, Ms. Culver, a marketing copywriter, had more time to spend with her daughters, 11 and 16. She was able to continue horseback riding, her postwork outlet, even as the winter sun set earlier. Previously, she and her husband, who works irregular hours, might go several days each week without seeing each other. Working from home outside Richmond, Va., eliminated that issue, she says, and made it easier to spend time together as a family.

“I felt like I had a handle on everything for the first time in a long time,” says Ms. Culver, who is 43.

Though her manager told her she could continue to work from home even after the office in Richmond reopened, Ms. Culver worried about scrutiny and whether she’d be treated as a second-class citizen in the company, losing out on opportunities if she stayed in her basement workspace while co-workers returned. She began applying for jobs at companies that allow most employees to work remotely, and quickly had an offer that appealed to her. In November she started at When I Work, an employee-scheduling software company.

Today Ms. Culver typically works from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., but says she has the autonomy to take her daughter to driver’s ed class in the middle of the day or return to a project later in the evening when she feels creative.

“Now that I work for a remote-first company, we’re all in the same boat. I’m not concerned that’s going to hold me back at all,” she said. “I’m on a team, but I still get to work from home, and I feel like that’s the best of both worlds.”

Other employees have chosen companies with defined remote-work cultures. Pallavi Daliparthi, a 36-year-old who lives outside Austin, Texas, took a job in May with GitLab Inc., a fully remote company that sells tools for software developers. Ms. Daliparthi, now a senior manager on GitLab’s sales team, had previously worked remotely at a large enterprise-technology company, and knew that in a hybrid environment, decisions could be made over coffee in the office that she may have missed while at home. “Whereas here, everybody really is remote,” Ms. Daliparthi says. “You know there’s nothing happening in the background, in-person somewhere.”

A lot of people say they hope to stay remote for years to come. Brandon Minaya, a 26-year-old tech-company employee, moved to a neighborhood in Seattle late last year that has few links to public transportation, anticipating that he would no longer be commuting to an office in future roles. In March, he took a fully remote client-facing position with Intellum, an Atlanta-based company that makes education software.

Instead of taking an hourlong bus ride each way to a WeWork location, as he did in a previous role, Mr. Minaya says he often starts his mornings walking to a nearby beach, where he looks for seals and birds. Most mornings, he takes the time to brew himself a pour-over coffee, something he once reserved for weekends.

While searching for a new job, he prized companies that seemed committed to remote work. “I wanted to find somewhere where this isn’t something that’s going to be pulled back in six months,” he says. “Like: ‘Just kidding!’ ”

He has the flexibility to meet with colleagues in person, or to travel to the company’s Atlanta headquarters, he says. But “the fact that it’s not expected of me is kind of the arrangement that I want to keep.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Wall Street Journal

https://www.wsj.com/articles/remote-work-is-the-new-signing-bonus-11624680029

401(k) investors may be using a robo-advisor — and not even know it

Bill Brewer — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 22:51:34 GMT

PUBLISHED FRI, JUN 25 20218:30 AM EDT by Greg Iacurci

KEY POINTS

Workers are increasingly getting enrolled into their company 401(k) plans automatically, often into target-date funds that shift the stock-bond mix over time.
About 60% of 401(k) plans used auto-enrollment in 2019, up from 42% a decade earlier, according to the Plan Sponsor Council of America.

Americans saving in a 401(k) plan may have money stashed in a robo-advisor — and they might not even know it.

Robo-advice is basically professional money management guided by an algorithm (a robot, so to speak), largely allowing investors to be hands-off.

Companies offering a retirement benefit are increasingly enrolling employees into 401(k) plans automatically. Most are diverted to some type of robo-advisor.

About 60% of 401(k) plans used auto-enrollment in 2019, up from 42% a decade earlier, according to the Plan Sponsor Council of America. Doing so helps overcome inertia that may prevent a person from saving.

“You get the momentum going,” Keith Gredys, chairman and CEO of The Kidder Company in Clive, Iowa, who works with 401(k) plans and investors, said of automatic enrollment. ”[Employees] go in and tend not to come out.”

TDFs and managed accounts

About 66% of 401(k) plans guide those automatic savings into target-date funds, according to the Council, a trade group representing businesses that offer retirement plans.

TDFs are perhaps the simplest version of a robo-advisor — they automatically toggle savings from aggressive (lots of stocks) to conservative (lots of cash and bonds) according to an investor’s planned age of retirement.

About 5% of 401(k) plans default funds into a “managed account.” In such accounts, algorithms choose one’s asset allocation based on factors beyond just age, such as income, savings rate, employer contributions and amount of non-401(k) savings.

Employers must notify workers that they are being automatically enrolled in a 401(k). But those who don’t pay close attention may not know part of their paycheck is getting invested a robo-advisor.

Robo-advisors have come into vogue over the past 15 years or so, leveraging investor demand for ease and lower-cost investing.

About 80% of 401(k) plans offer target-date funds, for example, up from 64% a decade ago, according to the Plan Sponsor Council of America.

“Most people are terrible investors,” said Philip Chao, a certified financial planner and chief investment officer at Experiential Wealth, based in Cabin John, Maryland.

“They’re diversified [and] professionally managed,” Chao said of target-date funds and managed accounts. “So you don’t have to go find an advisor; it’s done for you.

“And they’re easy to understand, so they become very popular.”

There’s also a legal rationale for employers to automatically guide funds into such investments — the Pension Protection Act of 2006 offered additional protections to do so.

However, Chao doesn’t consider target-date funds to technically be advisors since they only tailor asset allocation (the mix of stocks and bonds) based on the year in which someone plans to retire.

Managed accounts, on the other hand, are more tailored to the specific individual since their asset allocations are based on other data points.

But managed accounts are also typically more expensive — and that may pose a problem for investors who are automatically enrolled, according to Chao.

Managed accounts often rely on investors to input specific data points (like amount of non-401[k] savings) to guide their investment mix. But those inputs are unlikely to occur without investor engagement, as is more apt to occur after automatic enrollment — potentially negating the additional cost.

“You shouldn’t blindly let your money get defaulted,” Chao said. “You should know the cost.

“And you should make sure employer has done their job to controlling expenses.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/401k-investors-may-be-using-a-robo-advisor-and-not-even-know-it.html

Confronting Vaccine Misinformation in the Workplace

Bill Brewer — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 16:04:34 GMT

By Kelly Anderson, June 23, 2021

Misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines has proliferated across the Internet in recent months, with false rumors about dangerous side effects, surveillance and other conspiracies.

The rise in false information about vaccines has had a marked impact on vaccination rates, with 1 in 4 Americans saying they are not planning to get vaccinated.

Vaccine conspiracies can cause disturbances in the workplace, especially if employees are sharing misinformation or condemning employees who have chosen to get vaccinated.

"It's distracting to others, and it has a real impact to some on their actions around the vaccines," said Elisabeth Joyce, vice president of advisory in the HR practice of Gartner, a research firm based in Stamford, Conn., that provides human resource consulting.

Joyce said disputes over vaccines or company policies requiring employees to get vaccinated should be handled like other workplace disagreements, rather than treating them as a health or safety issue.

"I would be treating it as a manager like I would treat any other kind of disruption in the workplace in terms of having a conversation around what is appropriate or is not appropriate," Joyce said.

Below, experts give tips on how to handle these conversations, as well as a script to use with vaccine-hesitant workers.

Handling Vocal Vaccine Objections

If an employee is claiming that vaccines contain microchips or cause cancer, or is spreading other false information at work, the best recourse for a manager is often the least confrontational one.

Joyce said managers should avoid discussing their own beliefs about vaccines and instead should emphasize that sharing spurious claims with co-workers is disruptive to the professional environment. "This is not work-related, and it's causing people to lose focus on their work," she said. "That's not a way that we want to be engaging in the workplace, regardless of topic."

Robert Neiman, a lawyer who specializes in employment litigation at Much Shelist P.C. in Chicago, suggests that managers approach misinformation-spreading employees with patience and respect, rather than condescension.

"It's an issue of persuasion rather than changing their mind," Neiman said, "because chances are, you're not going to change someone's mind on things like that."

Legal Ramifications

False speech is not protected in private workplaces, which means employees who share misleading information about vaccines cannot argue that their claims are protected under the First Amendment, according to Neiman.

"Like all employer-employee relations issues, the key is to treat all of your employees the same way," Neiman said. Lawmakers in several states have proposed legislation that would make vaccination status a protected class under anti-discrimination laws, but those efforts have mostly failed.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued guidance that allows employers to mandate vaccinations. Employees who have valid medical or religious objections, however, must be exempted from vaccine requirements due to statutes in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Lawsuits against workplace vaccine requirements have been filed in several states. A detention center officer in New Mexico sued his employer over its vaccine mandate, which he says made co-workers hostile toward unvaccinated employees and led to his being demoted unfairly. Similar lawsuits have been filed by public employees in North Carolina and California, and the cases will be the first to test the legality of vaccine mandates.

The lawsuits use the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) decision to grant emergency use authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines as the basis of their legal claims.

FDA policy states that any person may refuse to take medical products approved under an EUA, and that they are entitled to know the consequences of refusal.

The EUA lawsuits are unlikely to form the basis of credible complaints against employers that mandate vaccines, said Neiman, who noted that EEOC guidance supersedes other regulatory agencies in the workplace.

Tips for Managers

Establishing trust and providing credible sources of information may help stop the spread of vaccine misinformation. Experts suggest that managers use the following tips when talking with employees who have bought into vaccine misinformation:

Ask the employee if she's willing to talk to other employees of the same rank or seniority who have been vaccinated, rather than speaking one-on-one with a manager. Vaccinated employees can share their experiences of receiving the vaccine and how vaccinations have benefited their own lives. While dispelling conspiracy theories can be difficult, hearing about vaccinations from a trusted, respected peer can help the employee become more open-minded about the COVID-19 vaccine.
Create video interviews of vaccinated employees of varying seniority and positions to distribute to unvaccinated employees. In the interviews, ask employees about their motivations behind receiving the vaccine and how it has affected their lives. Neiman suggests e-mailing these videos to unvaccinated employees on a regular basis so they have the opportunity to hear testimonials at their convenience without forcing confrontation.
Ask if the employee would like to speak with a licensed medical professional to learn more about the vaccine.
Avoid using a rude or condescending tone, which could alienate a vaccine-skeptical employee who is wary of taking advice or considering different viewpoints.

Jaime Klein, CEO of New York City-based HR consultancy Inspire Human Resources, said offering accommodations for vaccine appointments can also help sway hesitant employees. Klein suggests giving paid time off for employees to receive the vaccine during work hours, as well as giving paid sick days to those who experience vaccine side effects.

"It's crucial to lead in a human-centric way and to validate the opinions and feelings both of team members who received the vaccine and of those who do not want to receive a vaccine," Klein said.

Sample Script

An employee named Sarah has come to her manager, Kim, with a YouTube video that shows someone who claims to be a doctor discouraging people from receiving vaccines. The "doctor" makes several false claims, arguing that the vaccines alter the DNA of recipients, making them more likely to become infected by the virus. Sarah has e-mailed the same video to several co-workers and was overheard telling employees not to attend their vaccine appointments. Here's a sample template Kim could use to respond to Sarah's concerns:

"I understand you're concerned about the COVID-19 vaccine. We respect your opinion and will respect your decision about getting vaccinated regardless of which option you choose. We expect that you will also afford the same respect to your co-workers who may make different decisions. Fomenting fear among your peers is unhelpful to creating a productive work environment and can make it harder for others to make informed decisions about the vaccines.

"Whether or not you get vaccinated is your choice, but we want to make sure you and all of our other employees have the resources to make the best-informed decision. Our company website includes links to information from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and state and local guidance on the vaccines and the coronavirus. The consensus of scientific research is that vaccines are completely safe and overwhelmingly effective at stopping infection and the worst effects of contracting COVID-19.

"More than half of the adults in the U.S. and millions of people across the world have received the vaccines. If you'd like, we can set up a time for you to meet one-on-one with another employee who has been vaccinated to hear about their experience. Your peers who are vaccinated are enjoying the vaccine's benefits: They can now gather indoors with large groups of people, travel with greater ease, and no longer have to wear masks outside and in many indoor spaces. You'll also have much more flexibility at work because you won't have to be tested regularly to work from the office, may not have to quarantine if a member of your household tests positive, and can more freely access common spaces like the lunchroom and conference room.

"If you'd like to hear a medical opinion, we can help set up a time for you to speak with a health care provider or another licensed medical professional. There is rampant disinformation on the Internet from people who often lack qualifications, but speaking with a reputable doctor can ensure you have the most scientifically accurate information about vaccines.

"If you're concerned about the logistics of receiving the vaccine, our workplace has ample accommodations to give you flexibility.

"I understand your worries about the vaccines, and I'm here to enable you to make the best decision for your health. I am happy to have more conversations about vaccines in the future if it would be helpful, but going forward we will not tolerate employees who spread lies about medical issues."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/people-managers/Pages/COVID-vaccine-misinformation-.aspx?_ga=2.36007136.1398801990.1624464229-752200093.1615220521

Paid leave policies are changing, Mercer survey says

Bill Brewer — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 16:01:31 GMT

Published June 23, 2021 by Emilie Shumway

Dive Brief:

Employers have instituted more flexible and frequent leave allowances in response to the pandemic, according to Mercer’s Survey on Absence and Disability Management. Among the notable trends, 1 in 10 survey respondents now include Juneteenth as a paid company holiday; 61% of respondents offer paid parental leave for birth parents, up from 40% in 2018, while 60% offered paid leave to non-birth parents, up from 41% in 2018. Twenty-percent of respondents offer unlimited paid time off to at least some employees — mainly exempt workers — compared to 14% in 2018.
Respondents also reported that compliance with state and local leave requirements has gotten more challenging during the pandemic; 46% said they hired a third party to monitor and help comply with those rules and 23% established a leave policy expected to exceed state and local laws to reduce the administrative burden. More than half of respondents supported the concept of a voluntary federal minimum standard for paid leave.
Mercer engaged more than 400 employers for its survey. It will release the complete results in July.

Dive Insight:

The pandemic has caused a rapid evolution in many workplace policies, from remote and hybrid work to mental health assistance to free training and education benefits. Paid leave is no exception, the Mercer survey results show. Employers have seen that companies can continue to function well — even thrive — when employees have wide latitude to balance their personal lives and better manage their health and wellness.

More employers offering paid time off for Juneteenth and for parental care (including adoption leave) also demonstrates employers' increased interest in creating an inclusive workplace. Many companies were ahead of the federal government in making Juneteenth a paid day off, noting the importance of the day to their Black employees and generally as a time of reflection and solidarity for their entire employee base. The past year has also brought attention to workers' struggles with child care, with women bearing the brunt of the burden.

It's likely employers' growing embrace of policies like unlimited paid leave is further prompted by a need to attract and retain talent in a worker's market. Close to 1 in 3 employees who responded to a recent survey by Robert Half said they had experienced a "shift in perspective due to the pandemic," and employees have repeatedly asserted their preference for continued hybrid or remote work in surveys over the past year. Unlimited paid time off is one more policy employers can use to show workers they provide a flexible and competitive work environment.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/paid-leave-policies-are-changing-mercer-survey-says/602235/

Employers Revisit Time-Off Benefits (Mercer survey)

Bill Brewer — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 15:57:21 GMT

In the wake of the pandemic and the social justice movement, some employers are changing time-off policies – such as providing more leave for new parents, more flexible time-off, and recognizing Juneteenth as a company holiday. Here are a few highlights from Mercer’s 2021 Absence and Disability Management Survey.

For survey highlights, click here.

DOL proposal would resurrect 80/20 rule for tipped workers who perform untipped work

Bill Brewer — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 15:54:52 GMT

Published June 21, 2021 by Ryan Golden

Dive Brief:

The U.S. Department of Labor announced Monday a rule withdrawing and re-proposing a portion of a Trump administration 2020 final rule regarding tip pool regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The proposal aims to address situations in which an employee performs both tipped and untipped work, also known as a "dual job." Under the proposed rule, employers would only be able to take a tip credit if their tipped employees performed work that is part of the employees' tipped occupation.
Such work would include work that produces tips as well as work that "directly supports" tip-producing work, DOL said, provided the supporting work is not performed for a "substantial amount of time." Work that supports tip-producing work is performed for a substantial amount of time if it either exceeds, in the aggregate, 20% of the employee's hours during the workweek, or is performed for a continuous period of time exceeding 30 minutes.

Dive Insight:

Tip regulations have proven to be one of the most active areas for regulatory activity at the federal level, and DOL's announcement this week is the latest in a series of changes and delays.

When the Trump administration DOL proposed last year an update to the agency's interpretation of the FLSA's tip regs, it addressed the "dual job" issue by stating that employers could take a tip credit for the time a tipped employee spent performing related, non-tipped duties, as long as those duties were performed contemporaneously with, or for a reasonable time immediately before or after, tipped duties.

The 2020 final rule also implemented guidance from a 2018 opinion letter, in which DOL stated that employers could take a tip credit for an employee's work if the employee's tasks were on the O*NET task list for that tipped job. The O*NET list could be used "as a source of guidance for determining when a tipped employee's non-tipped duties are related to his or her tipped occupation," DOL said in the 2020 rule.

While the Biden administration subsequently allowed certain components of the 2020 final rule to take effect April 30, it delayed other parts — including the "dual job" component — from taking effect until Dec. 31.

In order to address the "dual job" issue, DOL's latest proposal marks something of a return to the so-called "80/20" guidance that characterized the agency's approach to tip credits from the late 1980s until 2009, when the administration of former President George W. Bush issued an opinion letter rescinding the 80/20 approach. The Obama administration withdrew the letter and revised the then-existing 80/20 guidance, but the Trump administration re-issued the letter in 2018, effectively withdrawing the 80/20 approach.

As DOL noted in the proposal to be published June 23, employers and their representatives have criticized the 80/20 guidance for being challenging to administer. For example, the agency cited a comment on a 2019 proposed rulemaking by law firm Littler Mendelson stating that the 80/20 approach "did not include a 'comprehensive list of related duties or even a way to determine which duties were related,'" among other issues.

Citing district court rulings, however, DOL said it "believes that 20 percent of an employee's workweek is an appropriate tolerance for non-tipped work that is part of the tipped employee's occupation. The Department seeks comments, however, on whether a different portion of the employee's workweek would be appropriate or if another metric would be more appropriate."

DOL's proposal also defines "substantial amount of time" as "any continuous period of time that exceeds 30 minutes," which is meant to address concerns that the 80/20 guidance did not adequately address scenarios in which employees perform non-tipped, directly supporting work for extended periods of time.

"Particularly because the proposed guidance provides examples illustrating the type of work that is part of the tipped occupation, including work that is tip-producing and work that directly supports the tip-producing work, employers should be able to proactively identify work that counts toward the tolerance and assign work to tipped employees accordingly, to avoid going over this tolerance," DOL said. "Similarly, a continuous, uninterrupted block of 30 minutes or more is a significant amount of time, and does not require the minute-by-minute micromanaging with which the 2020 Tip final rule expressed concern."

Stakeholders will have the opportunity to submit public comments on or before 60 days after the proposal is published in the Federal Register.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/dol-proposal-would-resurrect-8020-rule-for-tipped-workers-who-perform-unti/602184/

Biden signs bill making Juneteenth a national holiday

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:54:38 GMT

By Tyler Olson , Morgan Phillips | June 17, 2021

President Biden on Thursday signed the bill making Juneteenth, a day celebrating the freeing of Black slaves after the Civil War, into a national holiday.

Biden said the day would now be a "day in which we remember the moral stain and terrible toll slavery took on the country," as he signed the bill surrounded by members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Vice President Harris.

He again turned back to new voting reforms put in place by GOP-led states, saying the promise of equality would not be fulfilled "so long as the sacred right to vote remains under attack." The room erupted in applause.

"We see this assault from restrictive laws, threats of intimidation, voter purges and more."

"The promise of equality will not be fulfilled until it becomes real in our schools, on our streets and in our neighborhoods, in the water that comes out of our faucets, the air that we breathe in our communities and in our justice system," the president continued.

Biden said the nation would continue to work to root out hate, which he said "never ends" but "only hides."

"In short, this day doesn't just celebrate the past, it calls for action today," Biden said.

The Juneteenth bill passed the Senate unanimously and saw opposition from 14 House Republican lawmakers when it came for a vote Wednesday evening.

"There's nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. And it seems to me that this is the most propitious time for us to recognize our history and to learn from it," Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said before the House vote Wednesday. Juneteenth is already a state-designated holiday in Texas.

"Slavery was a blemish upon our country from its earliest days, and it is a part of our nation’s history that must not be ignored or swept under the rug," House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said in a statement after the House quickly passed the Senate's bill. "Juneteenth is an opportunity to remember with solemnity all those who endured enslavement and the trauma still felt by their families and communities to this day, as well as an opportunity to pay tribute to all brave individuals who worked for abolition and emancipation."

Juneteenth is the anniversary of when Union Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger, two years after the Emancipation Proclamation, arrived in Galveston, Texas, to declare that the Civil War was over and that slaves must be freed. Slavery ended in other southern states before that but because of how far Texas was from the Union's power center around Washington, D.C., and the Northeast, there were not enough Union soldiers to enforce Lincoln's order.

Texas first made Juneteenth an official holiday in 1980, and most states eventually followed with at least some form of Juneteenth observance.

The House members who voted against the bill are Reps. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.; Mo Brooks, R-Ala.; Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., Scott DesJarlais, R-Tenn.; Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.; Ronny Jackson, R-Texas; Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif.; Thomas Massie, R-Ky.; Tom McClintock, R-Calif.; Ralph Norman, R-S.C.; Mike Rogers, R-Ala.; Matt Rosendale, R-Mont.; Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Thomas Tiffany, R-Wis.

Roy, who recently ran for House Republican Conference chair, said his problem with the bill was related to semantics.

"Juneteenth should be commemorated as the expression of the realization of the end of slavery in the United States - and I commend those who worked for its passage," Roy said. "I could not vote for this bill, however, because the holiday should not be called 'Juneteenth National Independence Day' but rather, ‘Juneteenth National Emancipation [or Freedom or otherwise] Day.’"

He continued: "This name needlessly divides our nation on a matter that should instead bring us together by creating a separate Independence Day based on the color of one’s skin."

Brooks, meanwhile, said that the end of slavery "ought to be celebrated as much as the 4th of July," according to AL.com. But he said the date should be the anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation or perhaps the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which officially banned slavery, rather than June 19 because of its roots specifically in Texas.

Gosar, meanwhile, decried Juneteenth as an effort "to divide this country."

"Juneteenth is more debunked Critical Race Theory in action. I reject racism. I reject the racial division people are promoting. I voted no because this proposed holiday does not bring us together, it tears us apart," he added. "I cannot support efforts that furthers racial divisions in this country. We have one Independence Day, and it applies equally to all people of all races."

Rosendale alleged that the bill "is an effort by the Left to create a day out of whole cloth to celebrate identity politics as part of its larger efforts to make Critical Race Theory the reigning ideology of our country."

"Since I believe in treating everyone equally, regardless of race, and that we should be focused on what unites us rather than our differences, I will vote no," Rosendale added.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-juneteenth-national-holiday-bill-signing

‘Obamacare’ survives: Supreme Court dismisses big challenge

Bill Brewer — Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:48:56 GMT

By MARK SHERMAN | June 17,2021

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court, though increasingly conservative in makeup, rejected the latest major Republican-led effort to kill the national health care law known as “Obamacare” on Thursday, preserving insurance coverage for millions of Americans.

The justices, by a 7-2 vote, left the entire Affordable Care Act intact in ruling that Texas, other GOP-led states and two individuals had no right to bring their lawsuit in federal court. The Biden administration says 31 million people have health insurance because of the law, which also survived two earlier challenges in the Supreme Court.

The law’s major provisions include protections for people with existing health conditions, a range of no-cost preventive services, expansion of the Medicaid program that insures lower-income people and access to health insurance markets offering subsidized plans.

“The Affordable Care Act remains the law of the land,” President Joe Biden, said, celebrating the ruling. He called for building further on the law that was enacted in 2010 when he was vice president.

Also left in place is the law’s now-toothless requirement that people have health insurance or pay a penalty. Congress rendered that provision irrelevant in 2017 when it reduced the penalty to zero.

The elimination of the penalty had become the hook that Texas and other GOP-led states, as well as the Trump administration, used to attack the entire law. They argued that without the mandate, a pillar of the law when it was passed, the rest of the law should fall, too.

And with a Supreme Court that includes three appointees of former President Donald Trump, opponents of “Obamacare” hoped a majority of the justices would finally kill the law they have been fighting for more than a decade.

But the third major attack on the law at the Supreme Court ended the way the first two did, with a majority of the court rebuffing efforts to gut the law or get rid of it altogether.

Trump’s appointees — Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — split their votes. Kavanaugh and Barrett joined the majority. Gorsuch was in dissent, signing on to an opinion from Justice Samuel Alito.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the court that the states and people who filed a federal lawsuit “have failed to show that they have standing to attack as unconstitutional the Act’s minimum essential coverage provision.”

In dissent, Alito wrote, “Today’s decision is the third installment in our epic Affordable Care Act trilogy, and it follows the same pattern as installments one and two. In all three episodes, with the Affordable Care Act facing a serious threat, the Court has pulled off an improbable rescue.” Alito was a dissenter in the two earlier cases in 2012 and 2015, as well.

Like Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas was in dissent in the two earlier cases, but he joined Thursday’s majority, writing, “Although this Court has erred twice before in cases involving the Affordable Care Act, it does not err today.”

Because it dismissed the case for the plaintiff’s lack of legal standing — the ability to sue — the court didn’t actually rule on whether the individual mandate is unconstitutional now that there is no penalty for forgoing insurance. Lower courts had struck down the mandate, in rulings that were wiped away by the Supreme Court decision.

With the latest ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that “the Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” former President Barack Obama said, adding his support to Biden’s call to expand the law.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton pledged to continue the fight against “Obamacare,” which he called a “massive government takeover of health care.”

But it’s not clear what Republicans can do, said Larry Levitt, an executive vice president for the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, which studies health care.

“Democrats are in charge and they have made reinvigorating and building on the ACA a key priority,” Levitt said. “Republicans don’t seem to have much enthusiasm for continuing to try to overturn the law.”

Republicans have pressed their argument to invalidate the whole law even though congressional efforts to rip out the entire law “root and branch,” in Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell’s words, have failed. The closest they came was in July 2017 when Arizona Sen. John McCain, who died the following year, delivered a dramatic thumbs-down vote to a repeal effort by fellow Republicans.

Chief Justice John Roberts said during arguments in November that it seemed the law’s foes were asking the court to do work best left to the political branches of government.

The court’s decision preserves benefits that have become part of the fabric of the nation’s health care system.

Polls show that the law has grown in popularity as it has endured the heaviest assault. In December 2016, just before Obama left office and Trump swept in calling the ACA a “disaster,” 46% of Americans had an unfavorable view of the law, while 43% approved, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll. Those ratings flipped, and by February of this year 54% had a favorable view, while disapproval had fallen to 39% in the same ongoing poll.

The health law is now undergoing an expansion under Biden, who sees it as the foundation for moving the U.S. to coverage for all. His giant COVID-19 relief bill significantly increased subsidies for private health plans offered through the ACA’s insurance markets, while also dangling higher federal payments before the dozen states that have declined the law’s Medicaid expansion. About 1.2 million people have signed up with HealthCare.gov since Biden reopened enrollment amid high levels of COVID cases earlier this year.

Most of the people with insurance because of the law have it through Medicaid expansion or the health insurance markets that offer subsidized private plans. But its most popular benefit is protection for people with preexisting medical conditions. They cannot be turned down for coverage on account of health problems, or charged a higher premium. While those covered under employer plans already had such protections, “Obamacare” guaranteed them for people buying individual policies.

Another hugely popular benefit allows young adults to remain on their parents’ health insurance until they turn 26. Before the law, going without medical coverage was akin to a rite of passage for people in their 20s getting a start in the world.

Because of the ACA, most privately insured women receive birth control free of charge. It’s considered a preventive benefit covered at no additional cost to the patient. So are routine screenings for cancer and other conditions.

For Medicare recipients, “Obamacare” also improved preventive care, and more importantly, closed a prescription drug coverage gap of several thousand dollars that was known as the “doughnut hole.”

___

Associated Press writer Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed to this report.

The Great Resignation of 2021: Are 30% of workers really going to quit?

Bill Brewer — Thu, 27 May 2021 14:59:29 GMT

by Veronica Combs in Digital | Transformation on May 25, 2021

There is a pent-up demand for change among workers and managers need to spell out flexible work options ASAP, experts say.

Masks and life via Zoom are not the only things people are leaving behind now that headlines about vaccination rates are replacing COVID-19 case numbers. People are ready to leave both pandemic restrictions and their current jobs behind in 2021, according to several surveys.

The numbers range from 26% to 40%. The Microsoft Work Trend Index found that 40% of people want to change jobs this year. A survey of workers in the U.K. and Ireland put the number at 38% and a similar U.S. survey found 26% of workers are planning to leave their current job over the next few months.

It's easier, of course, to want a new job than to actually go out and get one. J.P. Gownder, a vice president and principal analyst at Forrester, said managers should be careful when interpreting survey data on intentions, particularly for large decisions like leaving a job.

"Leaving a job often requires some combination of finding a new job and overcoming the inertia of staying with the old one," he said. "But I think we are at an inflection point at which many people are reconsidering the particulars of their lives and of work-life balance."

As more offices plan the great reopening, there is still a lot of uncertainty about what the work week will look like. Brian Kropp, chief of research in the Gartner HR practice, said that companies should expect a bumpy launch and months of experimenting.

"The re-entry into the new hybrid will be messy and uneven and filled with problems," he said.

Kropp sees two ways for company leaders to respond to the uncomfortable early days of the hybrid approach:

We know this approach is right so let's learn from this and get better.
This is too hard and we're going back to what we're familiar with.

The risk is that executives will decide that defining the hybrid workplace is too difficult and revert back to old habits. Kropp said that all of the data shows that employees are higher performing and more productive in hybrid work settings.

"The mindset of some folks is that it's impossible to collaborate unless you're in the same room with people," he said. "If that's what you think, then you have to believe that zero collaboration has occurred over the last 14 months and that's obviously not true."

Are more people really quitting now?

The short answer is that it's too soon to tell, but the number of people quitting in the information sector was up in March. The overall quit rate is back to what it was before the pandemic. The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes the Jobs Opening and Labor Turnover report monthly which details openings, hires and separations. The total separation rate includes quits, layoffs, discharges and other departures.

The most recent report for March 2021 shows job openings were up while the other two metrics were unchanged. The quits rate was similar to the February number at 2.4%. The number of people quitting their jobs voluntarily went up in two sectors— accommodation and food services (+63,000) and information (+16,000).

The quits rate is the number of quits during the entire month as a percent of total employment. The overall number has not changed dramatically over the last five years. The rate was 1.5% in March 2020, 2.3% in 2019 and 2018 and 2.1% in 2017.

Overall, the seasonally adjusted separation rate for nonfarm jobs has been between 4% and 3.5% for the last 15 years while the quit rate has been at about 2% over the same time period, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. However, the percentage of quits to total separations went up every year from 2010 to 2017, according to the Bureau of Labor.

LinkedIn found that the IT industry has one of the highest turnover rates among all industries, sharing the top of the list with retail at 13% turnover in 2017.

In its 2019 Retention Report: Trends, Reasons and A Call to Action, the Work Institute found that the top three reasons for leaving a job were career development, work-life balance and manager behavior. The report also found that voluntary turnover was up 7.6% over 2017 and that preventable reasons for leaving were also trending up.

What's causing this desire for a new job?

Gownder sees several forces behind this predicted wave of resignation. First, Forrester's data shows that 53% of employees want to keep working from home. Although Forrester research suggests that 70% of companies will adopt a hybrid work schedule, not every organization will do so and not every job will qualify.

"So a number of people are rethinking office life altogether," Gownder said.

Second, Gownder noted that the pandemic has created two distinct financial realities for workers, with some people unemployed or behind on rent payments, but other people having increased their savings. People can use this financial cushion to make a career or location change.

"People with means are able to rethink their entire work/life paradigm," he said. "Some will even want to work in so-called Zoom towns, fully remote in a more rural area, permanently."

Lindsay Lagreid, senior adviser for the Limeade Institute, said that people have had a lot of time over the last year to think about what role they want work to play in their lives.

"People have been thinking about who built this system of work and why it works for some but not all people," she said. "People are thinking about sacrifices they had made previously, and hearing, 'We want to go back,' but thinking about how 'back' didn't work well for me."

Lagreid sees this critical thinking about work as part of the conversations about social justice over the last year that questioned many of society's established systems.

"This has been a deeply reflective experience and it is striking this very moral nerve with people," she said. "A dismissive and top-down approach is not going to work anymore."

She sees this transition period as a chance to make work more humane, compassionate and caring.

"The research does not support the 'OK, on June 14 everyone is back in the office' approach that we've been seeing so much of," she said.

Lagreid said that she sees a lot of oversimplifying in the hybrid office discussion.

"The way I hear it is 'Back five days a week 9 to 5,' or 'I will never see you again until the end of time,'" she said. "The reality is that for each employee, it will change every day."

Lagreid said that all the research she has seen shows that productivity for the vast majority of workers has stayed the same or gone up over the last year of remote work.

Kropp sees pent-up demand for changing jobs after months of uncertainty due to the pandemic combined with the hiring that's going to occur as the economy grows. He expects turnover rates to go up but not at a dramatic rate.

"There's a risk of significant turnover if we do nothing but there's a lot that we can do," he said.

What managers can do to keep more employees from leaving

Kropp said that the first thing employers should do is to eliminate as much uncertainty as possible about the rules for flexible work hours.

"One thing you can do right now to minimize the risk of turnover is to be very clear about flexibility," he said. "And if you're not offering flexibility, you'll have a turnover problem."

Gownder suggests holding listening tours, focus groups and town halls to understand the drivers of retention and churn and the high points and the pain points of the employee experience.

Before doing any listening tours or surveying employees about what they want, senior leaders have to be frank about what the options really are for the company's hybrid work options, Lagreid said.

"Let's not give people a blank canvas and then tell them they only get three colors to color with," she said.

She said that trusting employees and providing flexibility and autonomy in setting work hours are the best tactics for retaining employees.

"Let employees choose where they can best do their work and be intentional about how you're going to use time together," she said. "If your work is collaborative, bring everyone in on Thursday, order lunch, and then do brainstorming."

Gownder also recommends adopting an "office + anywhere" hybrid work policy with employees in the office one to three days per week.

"Give employees a reason to come to the office, not just mandate it," he said.

Kropp said companies should be ready to experiment over the next 12 to 18 months to find the hybrid design that works best for their companies. He recommends a set of philosophies as opposed to rigid policies.

"If you create a set of philosophies and principles, then employees know the rules and can adjust," he said.

He recommends creating a framework for employees to let them know about what sort of work they need to be in the office to complete.

"You don't want to surprise employees with 'Oh, I'm supposed to be in the office for that,'" he said.

Finally, managers should think about what makes for a great employee experience because that is a driver of retention.

"Making sure people have autonomy to do their jobs, are given the tools to do so effectively, and understand their purpose in the grand scheme always help retain top talent," Gownder said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: TechRepublic

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-great-resignation-of-2021-are-30-of-workers-really-going-to-quit/

The workforce of the future

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 May 2021 17:33:46 GMT

By Sean Brown, Susan Lund, and Sven Smit | May 24, 2021

Accelerating trends in remote work, e-commerce, and automation mean that more people will need to change jobs and learn new skills. Are leaders ready to guide the shift?

A new report from the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) indicates that up to 25 percent more workers than previously estimated may need to switch occupations. This episode of the Inside the Strategy Room podcast looks at how the COVID-19 crisis has permanently changed workplace conditions and skill-set needs and how corporate leaders can prepare for this future. Susan Lund, an MGI leader and expert in global labor markets, is joined by her report coauthor Sven Smit, cochair of MGI, who helps leading companies develop strategies for growth. An edited transcript of the discussion follows. You can listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Google Podcasts.

Sean Brown: Susan, you have led MGI’s work on the pandemic’s impact on the global economy. How does this research fit into that broader effort?

Susan Lund: We have been studying the long-term impact of COVID-19 after economies reopen, and that includes the jobs, skills, and workforce transitions that will be required. We looked at eight countries that represent different levels of income and economic development to get a global perspective. The first thing we found is that physical proximity matters. We measured proximity metrics for 800 different occupations, from how close interactions with people are to the frequency of those interactions to whether the work is indoors or outdoors. We found that the disruptions will be highest in four arenas: on-site customer interaction, such as in retail; work in leisure and travel, including restaurants and hotels; indoor production and warehousing, which includes factories; and computer-based office work.

Notice that these categories cover a lot of low-wage, hourly, frontline service jobs. This will be a very different dynamic than what we saw in the past with technology and automation, where service jobs were largely not affected and, in fact, people who were displaced from offices or manufacturing sites could find work in that sector.

Sean Brown: Are there other trends beyond the impact of the pandemic affecting the future of work?

Susan Lund: The disruptions are coming from three broad sets of trends. First, COVID-19 accelerated a shift to remote work and virtual meetings. Even after the pandemic, most companies are planning to continue some form of work from home. Additionally, McKinsey’s Travel, Logistics & Infrastructure Practice estimates that 20 percent of business travel may be permanently replaced by virtual meetings, although the same will not be true for leisure travel and tourism. The second big group of trends relates to e-commerce and other digital transactions, from restaurant delivery to telemedicine. All these activities surged in 2020, and many new users have found electronic channels both convenient and efficient and plan to continue using them. Third, there is automation and AI, with companies using technology to adapt to the new realities and planning to implement more technologies in the future.

Sean Brown: On the point about remote work, what kinds of jobs will continue to be done remotely, and which do you expect to return to work sites?

Susan Lund: Any activities done on a computer by yourself can be performed just as effectively at home as in an office. However, activities such as negotiations, onboarding new people, brainstorming, and coaching benefit from in-person interaction. When we added it all up, we found that 20 to 25 percent of the workers in advanced economies could work from home three to five days a week [exhibit]. It is still a minority, but that is four to five times as many people as worked from home before the pandemic, so this would have profound implications for what the office will look like. It will be a space used much more for collaboration.

Exhibit

Another trend in the United States and Europe, which we are not sure will continue after the pandemic, is people moving out of high-cost city centers to suburbs and smaller towns. You see it both in office-vacancy rates and residential rents. That would reverse a decade-long trend in the opposite direction. Some companies, although a distinct minority, are talking about a work-from-anywhere model in which employees could live wherever they choose. Others are considering more distributed footprints, with smaller offices and satellite locations closer to where people live to reduce commute times.

Sean Brown: How will the large-scale embrace of digitization during this crisis affect the workplace in the future?

Susan Lund: When we surveyed 800 business executives around the world last summer, two-thirds said they plan to use more automation and AI as they reimagine the next normal. That includes digitization of employee interactions, including remote work, but also a big uptick in the digitization of consumer channels and supply chains. COVID-19 was a massive disruption to supply chains, and it showed that supply-chain management was shockingly analog, which leads to problems such as executives not being able to tell when shocks are coming.

Sean Brown: With all these shifts, do you anticipate major employment growth in some occupations and big drops in others?

Susan Lund: We see big growth in healthcare jobs, and that is due not only to COVID-19 but aging populations and higher consumer incomes in countries such as India. STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics] professionals is another growth category, especially for people who design and maintain technology. Creative and transportation jobs will also grow. Transportation was projected to be flat or decline slightly over the next decade with the introduction of autonomous vehicles, but delivery and e-commerce trends are now generating pretty strong growth.

As for declines, the biggest categories in terms of the sheer number of jobs are customer service and sales. We see continuing automation in factories and warehouses eliminating jobs. Food service is another area of decline. We have not seen much automation there, but the pandemic has had a number of knock-on effects, such as people not going to the office and out for lunch and not traveling for business. And lot of food-service demand is generated by travel and being away from home.

People in those declining occupational categories—it’s more than 100 million in the eight countries we studied—will need to be retrained into some of the growing occupations. The challenge is not only the large numbers but the jumps they will need to make are much higher than in the past. Traditionally in Europe and in the US, people would go from, say, a food-service job to a hotel job and then maybe to a retail job. That would now mean moving from one declining occupation to another. We will need to figure out how to help them transition to different career pathways. This will disproportionately affect women—four times as many as men—and people without college degrees, as well as young people and ethnic minorities.

Sean Brown: Where do you expect the resources for this needed retraining to come from so people can move into higher-wage and higher-security jobs?

Susan Lund: Many large employers are creating those upward career paths—for example, taking the best low-wage employees and putting them through management or digital training. But some companies and sectors will simply see lower head counts, and that is where educational institutions and governments need to step in. One thing we learned over the past five years is that short-term training programs can teach individuals the minimum skills needed to get a job, such as to the lowest level in nursing, in a matter of weeks. To move up to registered-nurse status takes more education, but at least somebody can start on that upward career path.

Sean Brown: Sven, what are the implications of all these findings for companies trying to reimagine their workforces in the postpandemic era?

Sven Smit: The most important new factor since COVID-19 is proximity. It is now a consideration in where we work, how we work, what skills we need, and what organizational culture we need. Culture may be the factor people are most concerned about. Can you maintain a corporate culture when people work remotely? More than 70 percent of executives tell us they expect to continue some form of hybrid remote work, where you allow full-time or part-time work from home for selected staff. Some companies are migrating training or related events to online models, reducing the time staff will be expected to travel, and subsidizing the cost of setting up robust work-from-home arrangements.

[Proximity] is now a consideration in where we work, how we work, what skills we need, and what organizational culture we need.
Sven Smit

Companies first need to assess the potential for remote work. Anything that has to do with processing information, performing administrative duties, updating knowledge and learning, or routine communication with clients could shift to remote models. COVID-19 has taught us that some things we thought were best done in person we now find can be done remotely. For example, there is a lithography machine for which service people require ten years of training. When the pandemic hit, these people could not travel, and the work had to be done remotely. People without the skills of these professionals could be successfully guided through virtual reality and remote tools. As a result, the availability of the machines went up.

Sean Brown: What work practices in particular do you think businesses should try to hang on to?

Sven Smit: If there is one thing I will remember from COVID-19, it is how fast we moved. We went to remote learning in five or ten days. In telemedicine, we went from 10 percent to 80 percent for first-line contact in five days. We moved at an incredible pace because the crisis forced rapid decision making in flatter, faster organizations in small agile teams, with very dynamic talent reallocation. It saw five years’ worth of innovation in five weeks, and that could continue if we keep those practices. If we held on to even half of them, how much faster would we move into the future? That might be one of our greatest opportunities.

Sean Brown: How has technology helped business leaders gain this agility and speed in decisions?

Sven Smit: Machine learning and AI have enabled more virtual assistance and remote operations management than we have ever seen, and they work. Here is an example: sites need to be inspected by auditors with functional expertise and that involved travel for in-person visits as well as managers’ time on the site. It turns out that if you digitize all the site data so it can be inspected by the auditors virtually, the visit need not happen, since the purpose of the visit was to get the data.

Sean Brown: All this new technology requires new skills, but those skills may not just be technological but social and cognitive. How should business leaders assess the skills that their workforces will need?

Sven Smit: Companies need to do the homework of classifying the tasks all their employees perform so they understand how much their workforce will change. That is not day-to-day or annual workforce planning; it is a strategic workforce assessment at a fundamental level of each task that can be automated and when. We will have to do that work the same way we did to adapt to lean manufacturing and centralization of global business services.

Sean Brown: What kinds of skills or tasks do you see particularly rising in importance?

Sven Smit: The key is a lifelong learning aspiration and a growth mindset, as well as comfort with change, which is not natural for most people. Others are creativity, critical thinking, social intelligence, and then skills in software design and big data analytics. There is a mismatch now of skills and needs that will require significant retraining efforts, as Susan mentioned, and companies cannot rely on the market or the education system to solve it.

Sean Brown: How trainable are those social and creative skills? Can you teach people to have emotional intelligence?

Sven Smit: You can do some of this training by leveraging AI and simulating conditions that give people exposure to situations they otherwise would not have. Most people intrinsically have creativity, social intelligence, and communication capabilities—their jobs may simply not tap into them.

Sean Brown: You mentioned the shift to faster decision making. Has that need for speed reduced collaboration and consensus building in organizations?

Sven Smit: I don’t think consensus or participation need to go down when you move fast. However, you have to set a deadline for decisions. The important things are transparency and that you have heard everybody. I don’t think engagement went down during this crisis; it probably went up.

Susan Lund: Many companies have found that operating via videoconference has actually fostered consensus because you see colleagues at home. A dog barks, or a child walks in, and people have gotten to know each other in more personal settings. It’s also less hierarchical. On videoconference, the CEO may be in the bottom left of the screen rather than sitting at the head of the table in a conference room. These shifts have enabled many companies to build closer, stronger-knit executive-leadership teams. The challenge is retaining that. If we move to partial remote-work situations where some people are in the room and others are not, how do we make sure that does not create a two-tier culture?

If we move to partial remote-work situations where some people are in the room and others are not, how do we make sure that does not create a two-tier culture?
Susan Lund

Sean Brown: What kind of hurdles do companies need to overcome to make their workforces more agile?

Sven Smit: One is the adaptability to what has been an avalanche of change. For example, the army decouples planning teams from execution teams, and that accelerates adaptability. You also have to make the challenge clear to employees. Some companies have literally said, “In three years, we need to reach this destination. Ninety percent of you will have different jobs, and the other 10 percent probably will not be working here. But the 90 percent of you can acquire those new skills, and here is your training program.” I believe people are more adaptable if they know where things are heading, so you need to be intentional and transparent about the journey and give people the tools and time to adapt.

Sean Brown: It sounds like corporate leaders have hard work ahead to figure out what workforce transitions they will need. How should they get started?

Sven Smit: You need to work on two fronts. There is a technical aspect where you literally take your current workforce and your expected future workforce and go skill by skill to understand the capabilities you will need in various areas. Then there is the design of the journey, the training investments and managing the change.

Susan Lund: There are technology tools to help you assess your starting point. What skills does your current workforce have? What are their tasks and roles? Individuals then have to refine that and say, “I’m good at econometrics but I’m not good at basket weaving.” That is then married to your vision of how technology will transform your company and which business units will be the future growth drivers.

Sean Brown: As executives plan the future of their workforce, what are the main questions they should ask themselves and their teams?

Sven Smit: There are six questions that can help executives go through the challenge structurally. How can you reconfigure the workforce and the workplace to increase agility, raise productivity, and empower workers while maintaining the culture? Are you positioned to leverage technologies and take advantage of the long-term trends accelerated by them? What are we doing to close the skill gaps? Are you clearly and transparently communicating your plans and supporting workers in making transitions? Are you supporting their lifelong learning? And finally, are you leveraging ecosystem partners to increase the effectiveness of those efforts?

On the last point, don’t only look at your own company but at other companies in the region that could be part of the solution. I have seen some great examples of collaboration between regional or national governments and multiple companies to take a statewide or countrywide view of the future of work and try to clear some of the skills mismatches between companies.

Sean Brown: What about this new future of work is each of you most excited about?

Sven Smit: We are in this “and” world. For example, we are having quick meetings through technology and we can make in-person meetings much better. In that, we are learning something from the crisis.

Susan Lund: The silver lining is that companies have refocused on their employees’ experience, and I think that will continue. That bodes well for a more enjoyable future workplace for everyone.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

Susan Lund is a partner in McKinsey’s Washington, DC, office, and Sven Smit is a senior partner in the Amsterdam office. Sean Brown, global director of communications for the Strategy and Corporate Finance Practice, is based in the Boston office.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: McKinsey & Company

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/the-workforce-of-the-future?cid=podcast-eml-alt-mip-mck&hdpid=9cca004b-e59b-405b-8e78-d4c7b8545872&hctky=12644087&hlkid=f231114b0145466aa7143882e585eaff

1 in 6 U.S. Workers Stay in Unwanted Job for Health Benefits

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 May 2021 15:43:43 GMT

BY DAN WITTERS | May 6, 2021

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Black workers are more likely to stay in unwanted job for benefits
Half concerned that the rising cost of care will outpace ability to pay
Most Americans support government role in some cost-containment measures

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- One out of every six adult workers whose primary health insurance comes from an employer are staying in jobs they might otherwise leave out of fear of losing their health benefits. The fear is even more pronounced among Black workers and those making less than $48,000 a year. These results are based on a new study conducted by West Health and Gallup.

Staying in Unwanted Job for Health Insurance Benefits, by Race/Ethnicity and Annual Household Income

Are you currently in a job that you want to leave but don't because you are afraid of losing your health insurance benefits? (% Yes)

	Yes
	%
All U.S. workers	16
RACE/ETHNICITY:
Black workers	21
Hispanic workers	16
White workers	14
ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME:
<$48,000	28
$48,000-<$90,000	19
$90,000-<$120,000	12
$120,000-<$180,000	10
$180,000+	10
West Health-Gallup Healthcare Survey, March 15-21, 2021 (n=3,870)
GALLUP PANEL

Overall, Black workers (21%) are more likely to say they would stay in an unwanted job for purposes of keeping their health benefits than White workers (14%), a statistically significant difference. As such, Black workers are an estimated 50% more likely to be staying in their current job for this reason than are their White counterparts. Hispanic workers (16%) are not statistically different from either of the two groups. And workers in households earning under $48,000 per year are nearly three times more likely to stay in an unwanted job for the health benefits than are workers living in households earning at least $120,000 per year (28% to 10%, respectively).

This survey was conducted by web from Mar. 15-21, 2021, with 3,870 adults, ages 18+, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia via the Gallup Panel, a probability-based, non-opt-in panel of about 120,000 adults nationwide.

Concerns Run High That Rising Cost of Care Will Outpace Ability to Pay

With millions of workers staying in unwanted jobs for the health benefits, concerns run high among all adults that the rising cost of care will persist to the point of being unaffordable. Recent research showed that 18% of U.S. adults -- an estimated 46 million persons -- could not afford quality healthcare if they needed it today. New results estimate that around 135 million adults are worried that they will eventually reach this point -- if they haven't already.

Over half of survey respondents are either "concerned" or "very concerned" that the cost of healthcare services (53%) and the cost of prescription drugs (52%) will continue to rise in the future to the point that they will no longer be able to afford them. Black and Hispanic adults have modestly elevated concerns about the rising costs of healthcare compared with White adults. Forty-two percent of respondents, in turn, report concern that they would not be able to pay for a major health event, including 49% of Hispanic adults and 47% of Black adults.

In comparison, 25% are concerned about losing their home, and 29% of workers are worried about losing their jobs.

Concerns Over Potential Life-Changing Events, by Race and Ethnicity

How concerned are you with each of the following? Very concerned, concerned, not very concerned, or not at all concerned? (% Very concerned/Concerned)

	U.S. total	White adults	Black adults	Hispanic adults
	%	%	%	%
The cost of healthcare rising until you can no longer afford it	53	50	59	59
The cost of prescription drugs rising until you can no longer afford them	52	51	59	53
Not being able to pay for a major health event	42	40	47	49
Losing your job (workers only)	29	26	40	37
Losing your home due to your inability to pay for it	25	20	37	32
West Health-Gallup Healthcare Survey, March 15-21, 2021 (n=3,870)
GALLUP PANEL

Majorities Support Government-Led Cost Control Measures

The survey found substantial support for the federal government to play a bigger role in reducing the financial burden of healthcare on individuals and families via selected approaches. Such support is nearly indistinguishable among those with government-run or private insurance plans or those with no insurance.

About three-quarters favor setting limits on prescription drug price increases (77%), capping hospital prices in areas with few or no other hospitals from which to choose (76%) and negotiating lower prices for some high-cost drugs without lower-priced alternatives (74%). Another 65% support placing government limits on prices charged by out-of-network care. Those with private insurance were just as likely as those on public health plans (including Medicare and Medicaid) to favor government intervention.

Public Support for Proposed Government Cost Control Measures in Healthcare, by Insurance Status

To what extent do you agree or disagree that a stronger role for government is needed to contain costs in the following situations? (% Strongly agree/Somewhat agree)

	U.S. total	Insured by private plan	Insured by government-run plan	All insured	Uninsured
	%	%	%	%	%
Allowing the federal government to set limits on drug price increases	77	77	77	77	72
Capping prices for hospitals in certain markets with limited or no competition	76	76	75	76	71
Allowing the government to negotiate prices for certain high cost drugs that have no competitors	74	73	76	76	71
Establishing limits on prices charged by out-of-network care	65	66	63	65	60
West Health-Gallup Healthcare Study, March 15-21, 2021 (n=3,870)
GALLUP PANEL

The proposals generally have bipartisan support, even though Republicans are less likely than Democrats and independents to support a stronger government role. This includes majority support among Republicans for all proposals except for establishing limits on prices charged by out-of-network care, for which 81% of Democrats, 64% of Independents and 43% of Republicans strongly or somewhat agree with government action.

Agreement levels for the remaining proposals are:

Allowing the federal government to set limits on drug price increases:

Democrats: 91%
Independents: 74%
Republicans: 63%

Capping prices for hospitals in certain markets with limited or no competition:

Democrats: 89%
Independents: 76%
Republicans: 59%

Allowing the federal government to negotiate prices for certain high-cost drugs that have no competitors:

Democrats: 88%
Independents: 73%
Republicans: 58%

Overall disagreement with the proposals is comparatively low, ranging from 11% who report that they strongly or somewhat disagree with capping prices for hospitals to 15% for establishing limits on out-of-network care.

Implications

Approximately 158 million people, or more than half of the U.S. adult population, receive health insurance via their own employer or the employer of a household member. As such, the 16% of workers who are remaining in their jobs for the sake of their benefits will frequently extend to other individuals other than themselves, bolstering their reluctance to seek out other work. The higher levels of these sentiments among Black workers and those in lower-income households underscores the disproportionate role that employment plays in needed health coverage for some Americans.

High healthcare prices are likely fueling the problem. In the past five years, the average insurance premium for a family of four has increased 22%, and in 2020, premiums increased more than wages. The generally high agreement with several proposals for government action designed to contain the cost of various forms of care is understandable, particularly so as those with insurance are voicing support at levels that match those without it. Such sentiment could bolster the Biden Administration politically as it prepares to release a number of health policies intended to strengthen the Affordable Care Act, expand Medicaid, and allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Gallup, Inc.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/349094/workers-stay-unwanted-job-health-benefits.aspx

Waste Management offering no-cost college program for employees

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 May 2021 15:39:58 GMT

Program also includes short-form technology and business certificate programs, high school completion

By Daniella Genovese | May 13, 2021

Waste Management Inc. is eliminating the burden of college expenses for its employees and their families.

The company's Your Tomorrow program, in collaboration with Guild Education, offers employees and their "eligible dependents" the ability to chose "from a full range of education options, including earning a college degree" at no cost to them.

Nearly 36,000 full-time employees nationwide will have access to more than 170 fully funded programs, the company announced Thursday.

This includes undergraduate and graduate degrees and will also cover the cost of short-form technology and business certificate programs as well as high school completion.

The education and training programs focus primarily on business, technology, science and mathematics, which directly ties into the needs of the business, according to Waste Management.

An employee walks toward a garbage collection truck in San Leandro, Calif., on Feb. 12, 2018. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Competency in these areas will be "critical to the future of WM’s business" where employees are asked to operate "technology-enabled fleet and equipment and enhance the customer experience."

The program "supports the reskilling and retention of existing talent, while also helping to attract new talent to equip the business with a skilled workforce for the future," according to Waste Management Chief People Officer Tamla Oates-Forney.

However, employees won't be the only ones benefitting from the education and upskilling benefit program.

"[The program] will soon help our team members eliminate the financial burden of providing for their dependent’s education as well," Oates-Forney said.

Later this year, benefits-eligible dependents, which include nearly 34,000 children and spouses, will be allowed to enroll in educational programs for the following year.

Waste Management said this is the first time a company has extended education opportunities "at this scale."

In doing so, Guild Education CEO Rachel Carlson said Waste Management is "setting the standard for how organizations can creatively invest not only in their employees, but also those employees’ children and families, in a way that ties to their company strategy."

The program is one of a handful of incentives the company announced as part of its hiring push to fill essential frontline driver and technician positions across North America.

The company will be holding "career day" events on May 21-22 in an effort to fill the positions. To persuade job seekers, the company said the positions will come with a range of new employee benefits aside from the Your Tomorrow program, including flexible work schedules and sign-on bonuses.

"Through our Career Day events, we hope to attract new team members that want to evolve their career and will take advantage of this new benefit program," Oates-Forney said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/us/waste-management-college-bills-employees

Health plan saw over 2,000% increase in virtual mental health visits during pandemic

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 May 2021 15:37:35 GMT

Mental Health Telehealth Visits Rapidly Increase During the Pandemic

Well before the pandemic, provider payments have been paid at the same reimbursement rate as in-person visits since 2013.

May 10, 2021

MINNETONKA, Minn. — Medica members accessing mental health care through telehealth technology has increased by 2,515 percent since the pandemic began in March 2020. Meanwhile, Medica's network of providers offering mental health care via telehealth has increased more than sixfold in the same period.

"For six years, Medica has understood the value of telehealth services for providing mental health care and has been paying providers for these visits at the same rate as in-person visits," said John R. Mach, M.D., Medica's chief medical officer. "When it became clear to us early in the pandemic that telehealth care was particularly well-suited for taking care of our members' mental health needs, we worked quickly with our provider partners to build a more robust network to support our members."

In the first quarter of 2020, early in the pandemic, Medica processed approximately 650 telehealth claims for mental health. During a similar time stretch spanning late 2020 to early 2021, Medica had processed 17,000 claims.

An analysis of mental health telehealth claims provide some insight to the effect of the pandemic. The top three conditions treated by telehealth were anxiety, depression and trauma (which includes diagnoses for post-traumatic stress disorder, acute stress disorder, adjustment disorder and reactive attachment). For those conditions, approximately 70 percent of claims were telehealth visits.

A breakdown of mental health telehealth claims for all conditions shows that people ages 35 to 49 used this service the most when seeking mental health care, followed by those ages 27 to 34. For those claims, women outnumbered men by a 3:2 ratio.

In the first few months of the pandemic, the number of Medica's in-network providers offering mental health services through telehealth increased from 5,500 to 39,800 nationally. In Minnesota, the number increased from 3,841 to 7,130.

A key factor in the network expansion was that Medica, with its behavioral health vendor, fast-tracked the onboarding process for providers who wanted to offer telehealth visits. Medica also worked with providers to quickly move visits to a virtual setting to minimize care interruptions as patients were more hesitant to have face to face appointments during the pandemic.

"At a time when people's mental health was drastically impacted by the pandemic, we were pleased that Medica stepped up to ensure continued — and enhanced — access to mental health treatment through telehealth," said Sue Abderholden, executive director of National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Minnesota. "On behalf of NAMI Minnesota, we appreciate Medica's commitment to payment parity because whether it's in person or through telehealth or even telephonic, mental health professionals deserve fair reimbursement for the important care they provide."

Paying Telehealth Visits at the Same Rate

Medica has reimbursed mental health visits via telehealth at the same rate as in-person visits since 2013.

Medica Mental Health Pandemic Experience

"Payment reimbursement at the same rate regardless of delivery mode is one of the reasons Medica was able to respond so quickly to our members' needs for mental health services through telehealth," Mach said. "Providers who were perhaps on the cusp of providing the service already had an incentive in place and they quickly saw the value it would bring to their patients."

The future of mental health by telehealth

Medica has placed a priority on ensuring its members have access to mental health care in the setting that is most comfortable for them. To ensure they have access to the highest quality providers, Medica will continue to reimburse these visits — office and telehealth — at the same rates.

About Medica

Medica is a non-profit health plan headquartered in Minnesota. The company serves communities in the heart of America by providing health care coverage and related services in the employer, individual, Medicaid and Medicare markets. It operates in Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

Medica's vision is to be trusted in the community for our unwavering commitment to high quality, affordable health care. Medica's annual report, which includes the organization's community involvement activities, is available online.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Medica

https://www.medica.com/newsroom/press-releases/2021/05102021-mental-health-telehealth-visits-rapidly-increase-during-the-pandemic

Amazon to hike wages for over 500,000 workers

Bill Brewer — Tue, 04 May 2021 22:53:00 GMT

PUBLISHED WED, APR 28 20214:59 PM | EDTUPDATED WED, APR 28 20216:48 PM EDT

Annie Palmer

Amazon announced Wednesday it will give more than 500,000 workers a raise.

Amazon will hike pay by between 50 cents and $3 an hour for over half a million of its U.S. operations employees, Darcie Henry, vice president of global human resources for Amazon, said in a blog post on the company’s website. Amazon will spend more than $1 billion on incremental pay for these workers, Henry said.

The pay raises will start to take effect in mid-May through early June of this year, Henry said. Amazon said it moved up annual pay review for positions across its customer fulfillment, delivery, package sorting and specialty fulfillment teams from fall to this spring.

The raises are meant to help incentivize hiring for tens of thousands of operations jobs across the U.S., Henry said. The jobs will add to the hundreds of thousands of workers Amazon brought on in 2020, as the coronavirus pandemic pushed the company to go on a hiring spree to keep up with a spike in online orders.

As the economy has started to reopen, some businesses say they’ve struggled to find workers and are pointing to expanded jobless benefits as a possible reason for the staffing shortage. Critics have argued that employers should consider raising wages to attract workers.

Amazon in 2018 raised its minimum wage to $15 an hour for all U.S. employees, following pressure from politicians and worker advocacy groups. The company has thrown its weight behind the Raise the Wage Act, a bill backed by President Joe Biden and top Democrats that would increase the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour from $7.25 an hour by 2025. Amazon also touted its starting pay of $15 an hour as part of its argument against unionization amid a high-stakes election at one of its warehouses in Alabama earlier this month.

The e-commerce giant is the second-largest private employer in the U.S., behind retail rival Walmart, with more than 800,000 employees nationwide.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/28/amazon-to-hike-wages-for-over-500000-workers-to-up-to-3-an-hour.html

Ginger Brings On-Demand Mental Healthcare to 14 Million Cigna Behavioral Health Customers Nationwide

Bill Brewer — Tue, 04 May 2021 22:50:49 GMT

April 28, 2021 08:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time

SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Ginger, the leader in on-demand mental healthcare, today announced it is joining the Cigna network of providers to bring Ginger’s full suite of virtual mental health services to 14 million Cigna behavioral health customers nationwide. Now, Cigna customers with employer-sponsored or individual and family (IFP) insurance plans can access Ginger’s behavioral health coaching, therapy, and psychiatry services as an in-network benefit.

Cigna customers can get started with Ginger by downloading the Ginger app (available via the iOS App Store and Google Play) and providing their insurance benefit information, which Ginger will verify in real-time. Eligible customers will have the option to begin texting with a Ginger behavioral health coach within 60 seconds, in addition to accessing Ginger’s robust library of self-guided content and skill-building activities. For individuals who need higher levels of care, a therapist or psychiatrist can be added to their care team for video-based sessions.

With this new addition to its network, Cigna is the first national health plan to offer Ginger’s behavioral health coaching as an in-network benefit. Behavioral health coaching takes an active, goal oriented approach to address a wide array of sub-acute mental health challenges, ranging from sleep issues to relationship struggles. Available 24/7, Ginger’s behavioral health coaching offering is:

Prevention-focused: Behavioral health coaching is designed to prevent the onset of more serious mental health conditions before they start.
Collaborative: Coaches are trained to identify the need for higher-level care, and can help to escalate customers into therapy or psychiatry services when needed. Coaches support individuals through their entire care journey with Ginger.
Evidence-based: Ginger’s team-based approach is proven to decrease symptoms of anxiety and depression, as published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research. Ginger’s providers are supported by artificial intelligence technology, which helps to surface care insights, support collaboration, and improve quality assurance.
Cost-effective: Ginger’s behavioral health coaching services support the needs of 80% of the population. One month of care costs less than a single traditional therapy visit.

“Cigna's mission is to improve the health, well-being and peace of mind of those we serve by making healthcare simple, affordable and predictable,” said Cigna’s Dr. Doug Nemecek, chief medical officer for behavioral health. “Right now, more than ever, individuals are seeking out mental health support, and our relationship with Ginger creates more access to that care, when and where customers need it.”

"We're facing a nationwide supply-demand crisis in mental healthcare, with demand reaching unprecedented levels, and fewer providers entering the industry than ever before," said Russell Glass, CEO of Ginger. "We're proud to partner with leading organizations like Cigna that recognize not only the scope of the nation's mental health crisis, but the importance of taking a preventative approach to this challenge. Together, we are opening up access to incredible mental healthcare for millions, at a fraction of the cost of traditional care."

Ginger and Cigna have had a longstanding relationship, including an investment by Cigna Ventures in early 2020.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Wire

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210428005278/en/Ginger-Brings-On-Demand-Mental-Healthcare-to-14-Million-Cigna-Behavioral-Health-Customers-Nationwide

Remote Workers Expect Pay to Reflect Their Locations

Bill Brewer — Mon, 26 Apr 2021 15:16:50 GMT

By Stephen Miller, CEBS | April 21, 2021

More employers are adopting 'geographic pay' policies

Geographic pay policies that set and adjust pay for far-flung workers based on local compensation factors, such as cost of labor and cost of living rates, are becoming more common among employers, new research shows.

With 67 percent of employees expecting their compensation to reflect their location, geographic pay has become a pressing issue for employers, according to WorldatWork's Geographic Pay Policies Study, based on a February survey with responses from 1,063 organizations and 503 employees.

"Work is no longer a place," said Scott Cawood, CEO of WorldatWork, an association of total rewards professionals. "With remote working requests continuing to emerge and surprise leaders, companies are re-evaluating how to create cohesive, consistent and fair geographic pay policies."

Of the 62 percent of organizations with existing geographic pay policies, 44 percent are considering modifying or have recently modified their policies due to the increase of full-time remote work, the survey found. Among other results:

The top two considerations for organizations addressing localized compensation are expanding (38 percent) or consolidating (20 percent) pay differentials by geographic area.

The more locations an organization has, the more likely it is to consider creating a U.S. geographic pay policy, especially as full-time remote work rises.

41 percent of organizations apply pay differentials as a premium/discount to either a jobs-based pay structure or to individual pay, and 33 percent create separate base pay structures for each different geographic location where employees are working.

Localized Pay Factors

Over half (55 percent) of organizations use city/metro areas for setting geographical pay differences. Cost of labor is overwhelmingly a greater influence than cost of living for determining the pay policy approach, employers said.

Almost all organizations are somewhat or moderately flexible regarding voluntary relocations for full-time remote workers. As for their employees, 50 percent say that a pay adjustment—either higher or lower—would be very or extremely influential in their decision to voluntarily relocate.

A determining factor for many employers will be if pay localization policies affect retention. Remote work, which "used to only be an occasional issue is now a frequent request, and savvy employers will need to respond with fair, transparent and attractive geographic pay policies for distributed workforces if they wish to remain competitive," Cawood said.

Limits on Adjustments

While more companies are adopting geographical pay policies, the extent to which pay rates will vary by location is unclear.

Silicon Valley tech firms that adjust pay for those who moved out of the San Francisco Bay Area, for instance, make smaller downward adjustments than might be expected, Tauseef Rahman, a partner at HR consultancy Mercer in San Francisco, observed last year.

"National data would suggest that a job paid $100,000 in San Francisco would be paid about 13 percent less in Puget Sound" in Washington state, he noted. "However, our research indicates that the current pay differential is smaller—closer to 6 percent less. So instead of expecting a $13,000 pay cut, the hypothetical reduction would be closer to $6,000."

Rahman concluded, "The tech job market will soon be national, and 'local market rates' will be replaced by some variant of 'Silicon Valley tech rates less 10 percent.' " In the end, "candidate pools and pay will be less about city address and more about availability and capability."

Much less certain, however, is whether the trend among big tech companies toward a national labor market, give or take 10 percent of pay, will be repeated by industries where competition for talent is less severe.

The desire to keep pay policies simple could be a factor here. "Multinational companies are already well-versed in the practice of differential pay policies at a global scale," wrote Brett Christie, managing editor of WorldatWork's Workspan Daily. However, for companies with offices exclusively in the U.S., "the prospect of overhauling pay structures to account for geographic differences might seem daunting."

Employees Don't Want a Pay Cut When Relocating
(with an Exception)

Craftjet, a company that connects local home service professionals with homeowners, recently asked if employers should adjust salaries down—making a locality adjustment—when an employee moves from a more expensive area to a less expensive one.

The answer from workers was a resounding no—87 percent believe they should be paid the same amount they're currently being paid, no matter where they move.

However, when people were asked what pay cut they would take to relocate to their ideal spot, most Americans (83 percent) would take a 10 to 20 percent pay cut to make that move, with 60 percent saying 10 percent would be the maximum they would tolerate.

The survey was conducted March 29 to April 9, with 2,888 respondents, including 50 to 150 residents in each of 24 major American cities. Respondents' average age was 38 years old.

Among other survey responses:

When asked if they would move if given the opportunity to work permanently remote, most Americans living in cities (61 percent) said yes. Many of the most expensive and densely populated cities contained the highest percentages of people looking for a change.

Of those who would leave their current city, when asked what reasons would most compel a move, desire for a bigger, better home and lower cost of living were the top reasons cited, followed by desire for more access to nature and being closer to family and friends.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/compensation/pages/remote-workers-expect-pay-to-reflect-their-locations.aspx

Employer Actions & Employee Perceptions: Gauging the COVID-19 Workplace Experience

Bill Brewer — Mon, 26 Apr 2021 15:12:33 GMT

NEWS PROVIDED BY: WorldatWork | Apr 20, 2021, 08:53 ET

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., April 20, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Sixty percent of employees are currently working remotely, and 76% indicate they would like to continue in that capacity after the pandemic. However, employers anticipate that 34% of employees will continue working remotely after the pandemic setting up possible future tension between organizations and their workforces. Also, thirty-two percent of employees state they would not return to work and look for a new job if they cannot work remotely. These findings are in the "WorldatWork COVID-19 Employer Plans and Employee Perceptions" survey, conducted in partnership with SalesGlobe. The comprehensive survey, a follow-up to April 2020's "COVID-19 Employer Response Survey" covers vaccine policies/incentives, hazard pay, financial impact/forecasting, business travel, remote work, investment in software solutions, work-from-home expense reimbursements, worker protections, employee recruitment, PTO policies, and vacation stances, among other topics. (Journalists: contact kstrauss@worldatwork.org for survey reports.)

Sample Findings:

60% of organizations report they will not require employees to receive a COVID-19 vaccine prior to returning to work, an indication that organizations are opting to maintain a personal vs. professional line by not, as of now, requiring the vaccine. And most employees are choosing to obtain the vaccine; 72% of employees have received a vaccine or plan to get one when it becomes available to them.
Organizations and HR professionals successfully adjusted their business and people operations in 2020 to help sustain financial viability. Only a handful of organizations (9%) report their financial performance has decreased by 30% or more under plan over the past 12 months. Among those that have experienced financial losses, 66% believe their organization will be able to recover in two years or less.
31% percent of organizations are providing hazard pay for essential workers who are required to be on-site during the pandemic and organizations that are providing hazard pay have increased by eight percentage points since last year's survey. This positive trend shows that employers recognize the importance of providing fair compensation to essential workers for the additional risk they incur.
38% of organizations reimburse expenses related to working from home, a 13 percentage-point increase from June 2020's "WorldatWork Back to Work Playbook," and 92% of employees feel their organization provide sufficient reimbursement for work from home expenses.
Organizations are still managing travel expenses conservatively and adjusting the way they do business to incorporate less travel, with 68% of organizations expecting the same level of business travel or less in 2021, as compared to 2020.

Methodology
WorldatWork invited its member and customer base to participate in a survey on employer plans regarding COVID-19. A total of 380 responses were received. In addition, 1,418 full-time business professionals in the U.S. responded to employee view questions via MarketCube, an online panel, and via SalesGlobe. Data was collected in February 2021 over a three-week period.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WorldatWork

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/employer-actions--employee-perceptions-gauging-the-covid-19-workplace-experience-301272485.html

Salary.com Launches Pay Equity Reporting Toolkit

Bill Brewer — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:38:14 GMT

Expanded pay equity capability helps companies assess where and why gaps exist

By: PRNewswire | March 25, 2021

Salary.com, the compensation management solution providing more of the trusted data and intuitive software organizations need to get pay right, today announced the launch of the CompAnalyst Pay Equity Reporting Toolkit. As companies prioritize identifying potential pay disparities within their organizations, the timely launch of this Toolkit allows for a deeper dive into identifying differences in pay based on gender, race, age, or any basis of comparison that a company finds important. As part of CompAnalyst®’s Reporting and Analytics Module, the Pay Equity Reporting Toolkit provides the tools needed to assess where pay discrepancies exist, giving companies valuable insights into why such gaps exist, and the corrective actions they can take.

The standard reports in the new Pay Equity Reporting Toolkit are analyzed by job, family, level or grade across gender, ethnicity or age, all of which can be customized. Among the types of reports offered are:

Pay Equity at My Company
Pay Equity by Ethnicity, Gender or Age
Equal Pay for Equal Work
Individual Employee by Job
Average Pay Spread by Gender

The Pay Equity Reporting Toolkit is best leveraged in tandem with Salary.com’s other tools as part of a workforce planning suite, including:

JobArchitect™, which streamlines job description management by offering guidelines for jobs with similar duties, responsibilities, and leveling based on matching, which is critical when looking for pay disparities.
CompAnalyst Market Data, an HR-reported compensation database that ensures that once the content of jobs is defined, HR can understand any pay differences that might exist compared to the market.

“Given that today is Equal Pay Day, it’s particularly meaningful to the Salary.com team to launch this expanded pay equity capability,” said David Cross, senior compensation consultant at Salary.com. “Pay equity legislation and DE&I initiatives have led employers to review their compensation practices on a recurring basis. This renewed focus is proving beneficial to both employers and employees, as paying equitably helps companies acquire and retain the best talent, build employee engagement, increase innovation, and improve business performance. By using our Pay Equity Reporting Toolkit alongside JobArchitect and CompAnalyst Survey Data, organizations have a solid foundation on which they can build a sound workforce plan and get pay right.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HrTech Cube

https://hrtechcube.com/salary-com-launches-pay-equity-reporting-toolkit/

Taco Bell expands PTO benefits for managers, eyes filling 5K positions

Bill Brewer — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:34:23 GMT

Author: Julie Littman | Published: April 12, 2021

Dive Brief:

Taco Bell has expanded benefits for general managers at company-owned restaurants, offering four weeks of accrued vacation annually, four weeks of paid time off for "baby bonding" for new parents and guardians and eight weeks of paid short-term disability following the birth of a child, according to a press release.
The fast food chain is also hosting its fourth annual hiring parties event on April 21, with plans to hire at least 5,000 team members across nearly 2,000 locations. While open positions will vary, job roles will range from cashier to general manager. Restaurants are also hiring more "bellhops," who use tablets to service drive-thru orders.
The expansion of general manager benefits comes just over a year after Taco Bell tested $100,000 annual salaries for restaurant managers at company-owned locations. The company also expanded its sick leave last year at Taco Bell-owned locations, offering at least 24 hours of paid sick leave for all levels of employees.

Dive Insight:

Taco Bell aims to reach 10,000 locations globally by the end of the decade, and adding 5,000 additional employees will help it reach its goal. Last summer, the chain made a goal to hire at least 30,000 team members. This year, the company is eyeing more reopenings, remodels and new builds, according to the release. Taco Bell collaborated with Diversified Restaurant Group, for example, to open its first drive-thru Cantina in Danville, California, last month. The chain is also opening a kiosk-focused location in Manhattan this year and will roll out more Go Mobile concept stores, which it tested in 2020.

Retaining general managers will be critical to Taco Bell's growth. Chains, in general, were working to improve retention of these employees even before the pandemic, especially since the longer the tenure, the higher the potential sales of the location, CNBC reports. Then the coronavirus hit and shortly after the crisis began, Taco Bell provided a $1,000 one-time bonus to its restaurant general managers at its 1,200 company-owned stores and committed to paying their second quarter bonuses even if restaurant sales performance wouldn't allow them to normally qualify, Yum Brands CEO David Gibbs said during the company's Q1 2020 earnings call.

Taco Bell's hiring parties will include on-the-spot interviews that will take place in patio areas, with some candidates able to participate in drive-up interviews. All participants and interview locations will be at least six feet apart and masks are mandatory.

Even with all these safety measures in place, Taco Bell could struggle to meet its employment needs. Including its franchisees, the company has over 34,000 open positions listed on its website. With dining rooms reopening, chains and local restaurants are increasingly pressed to fill positions to meet growing consumer demand as they feel more comfortable returning to restaurants. Many hospitality workers who lost their jobs early in the pandemic turned toward other industries, such as construction and real estate, Reuters reports.

During Q1 2021, the restaurant industry added 442,000 jobs according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data, with the bulk of its gains occurring in February with the addition of 286,000 jobs. However, these gains are a drop in the bucket, with employment in foodservices and drinking places short 1.7 million jobs compared to January 2020, according to the BLS data.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/taco-bell-expands-pto-benefits-for-managers-eyes-filling-5k-positions/598212/

Newsom signs off on two weeks paid COVID-19 leave for most Californians

Bill Brewer — Fri, 26 Mar 2021 00:48:10 GMT

The COVID-19 supplemental paid sick leave law will include retroactive payments through January 1st.

Author: Lena Howland (ABC10)

Published: 7:31 PM PDT March 22, 2021

Updated: 6:21 AM PDT March 24, 2021

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Millions of Californians are breathing a sigh of relief after Governor Newsom signed off on the supplemental paid sick leave bill last Friday. The bill is expected to impact 10.4 million workers across the state, for every company with 25 or more employees.

It's been nearly three months since the Families First Response Act lapsed and families had no supplemental paid sick leave for coronavirus-related reasons.

"I was seriously concerned about my well being and being able to pay for the bills coming up without pay," said a temp worker for Sacramento County, who didn't want to be identified over fear of retaliation.

She said after she called out for a day earlier this month for medical reasons, her managers told her she needed to self-quarantine at home for 10 days because her symptoms sounded COVID-related. However, as a temp worker, she only gets three sick days, the rest would be unpaid.

"I'm already pretty much paycheck to paycheck, like I don't have room, I'm not blessed with my financial situation, I have student loans to pay, I have apartment rent that just keeps getting higher to pay," she said.

Now that Governor Newsom has signed off on the new supplemental paid sick leave bill, it's people like her that will likely be paid retroactively, upon request, according to employment attorney Jennifer Shaw.

"If you gave someone time off after January 1 for a COVID reason or reason that is covered by the sick leave, at their request you have to go pay them for that time," Shaw said.

Last year's supplemental sick leave was for employers with 500 or more employees. This one includes all companies with 25 or more employees.

The Center for Workers Rights says because of Prop 22, this does not include ride share drivers, it also means businesses with 25 or fewer employees won't be covered.

"That's a large portion of California's workers and in particularly our service workers, you know small restaurants, most of those places of employment are 25 or fewer," Daniela Urban, the Executive Director for the Center for Workers Rights said.

This bill sets aside 80 hours or two weeks of pay for anyone showing symptoms, has to self-quarantine or is diagnosed with coronavirus.

It also sets aside time to go get your vaccine and it includes time for parents helping their kids with distance learning.

"It's nice that the legislature recognized workers who did sacrifice those weeks of pay in order to do what's right and quarantine or take the time off after a positive diagnosis and allows them to recover the money that they lost as a result," Urban said.

The latest federal relief bill includes tax credits for businesses that pay for COVID sick leave, so that should help businesses owner worried about the cost.

The new law will last through the end of September.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: ABC10

https://www.abc10.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/newsom-two-weeks-paid-covid-19-leave-californians/103-1cd39ba8-f8bc-4a57-9c28-0f5299554984

Tax-advantaged benefits: What's working, what's not?

Bill Brewer — Thu, 25 Mar 2021 20:52:18 GMT

One subset of employee benefits that doesn’t always get the spotlight are tax-advantaged benefits.

By Christa Day | March 25, 2021 at 10:32 AM

In a year filled with uncertainty, one thing became quite certain in 2020. Employee benefits are an essential part of the American workforce. Just how essential?

Quite essential, it turns out. According to a recent Prudential report, a majority of workers believe COVID-19 has made benefits much more important. In the survey, 77% of employees said benefits programs were a large part of their compensation with 73% saying benefits are a large reason why they would stay at their company or organization. Because of the pandemic, three-quarters of workers said having benefits through their employer are “now more important than ever before.”

Like the ability to work remotely, which once was considered a nice option but not a necessity, workplace benefits are clearly viewed as essential by employees. And we’re not just talking health care, which is obviously at the top of the list. One subset of employee benefits that doesn’t always get the spotlight are tax-advantaged benefits.

What are tax-advantaged benefits?

Yay for HSAs: Health savings accounts (HSAs) are accounts designed to help employees with high-deductible health plans save for medical expenses. How do we know? A whopping 28.3 million Americans had an HSA last year, a number that has steadily grown over the past decade. Ninety-five percent of employers are now providing account-based plans with HSAs. HSAs are attractive because they allow an employee to set aside pre-tax dollars to get a better handle on unexpected health care costs.

FSA – can we say, flexible? 32 million Americans have a flexible spending account, or FSA. Similar to an HSA, an FSA allows users to set aside pre-tax dollars. With an FSA, you have access to the entire amount you want to set aside on day 1 of the plan year.

Enter the HRA: Health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs), which are self-insured arrangements that are established and completely funded by employers, help reduce insurance premiums, provide employees with greater control over their health care expenses and reimbursements to employees are not taxable. Approximately 14 million people have an HRA.

What did we learn about these flexible benefits in 2020? Let’s take a deeper dive into these tax-advantaged benefits and see what’s working and what’s not.

What’s working with tax-advantaged benefits

HSAs stay even if job lost: HSAs are definitely helping working Americans as we move through the pandemic. In a year where many people lost their jobs, they did not lose their HSAs, allowing them to continue to spend existing funds on qualified expenses.

Female products get eligible: In a move that many consider a bit late (but better than never), the CARES Act made feminine care products HSA and FSA eligible for the first time. That means people can spend their tax-free dollars on tampons, pads, liners, and cups. We’ll take it as a win.

FSAs changing with the times: With 2020 being a year of unprecedented changes, FSAs have been trying to go with the flow. First, employers last year could choose to allow employees with FSAs to change their contribution amount or even open or close an account without having a life-changing personal event. Second, furloughed employees could still be considering full-time employees for purposes of maintaining an FSA, depending on your employer.

No prescription paperwork for OTC meds: The CARES Act ushered in another win for HSA and FSA eligible expenses with over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. Individuals no longer need to obtain prescriptions for OTC medicine in order to use their FSA or HSA dollars to buy them. This paperwork prescription requirement was keeping a lot of people from saving money using tax-free dollars on OTC medicines, and now we’re all free to do so (permanently) without the paperwork trail.

Yay to new HRA type: In the midst of COVID-19, HRAs have proved resilient and flexible, helping employers maintain benefits. At the start of 2020, HRAs changed considerably with the government allowing employers to provide a new type of HRA called individual coverage HRAs, better known as ICHRAs.

What’s not working with tax-advantaged benefits

Let’s ensure PPE/sanitizers are considered qualified medical expenses: Section 213(d) of the Internal Revenue Code defines what expenses are considered “qualified medical expenses” for purpose of the deduction for medical expenses on an individual’s tax return and as a tax-free payment or reimbursement from an employer-provided health plan or HSA. Medical professionals have recommended the use of face masks, hand sanitizers and disinfectants as a means of preventing the spread of COVID-19. Under the current provisions of the tax law, it is unclear whether such items are considered to be qualified medical expenses in all cases.

Representing over 33 million employees through our member companies, my organization ECFC has asked the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service to provide guidance that would state that face masks and hand sanitizers and disinfectants are qualified medical expenses under Code section 213(d).

The “care” in “dependent care” needs work: Dependent care FSAs, which lets individuals set aside pre-tax dollars to offset work-related dependent care costs such as preschool, summer day camps and before and after school programs, have traditionally been an effective and simple way to save money while taking care of your loved ones so you can continue to work.

Unfortunately, the effectiveness of dependent care FSAs has been lessened by the fact that statutory $5,000 limited was set more than 20 years ago and has never been adjusted for inflation. The amount falls far below dependent care costs in most parts of the country.

With the dependent care FSA limits remaining the same and little flexibility built in for COVIDS-19 factors, childcare became a big problem for parents and families. Many parents had to quit their jobs or reduce their working hours because of a lack of childcare. Essential workers did not have that option. They were often left scrambling for childcare. Congress needs to act to make sure dependent care FSAs have a higher limit and more flexibility for funds to help cover skyrocketing prices for childcare. Dependent care FSAs do work but not as effectively while stuck in their current limit.

COBRA not cutting it: With unemployment still high and COVID-19 not showing signs of abating, many Americans are concerned that they will not be able to play for all their health care needs this year. Many of those who were furloughed or lost their jobs last year ended up in COBRA, which stands for the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. It is a law that mandates that an employer offer prolonged health coverage if an employee is laid off or quits. COBRA falls into the not working category because it is very expensive as well as confusing for many employees and employers alike.

COBRA speaks to the larger issue of expanding the portability of health insurance and how it can be used to meet the needs of an ever-changing and transient workforce, particular during this pandemic. COBRA is not cutting it for many Americans. This one requires a more thoughtful and thorough overhaul and is high on the list of overall health care concerns in our COVID-19 economy.

What’s next?

The good news is COVID-19 has made benefit offerings a focal point to help workers navigate health care, mental health and family challenges. In 2020, employers had to get creative, stay flexible and apply stop-gap measures. Some of these measures worked, other did not. As this pandemic made frighteningly clear, employee benefits are essential. What’s next? Let’s hope we can improve what’s not working, and close more employee benefit gaps for Americans.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Benefits Pro

https://www.benefitspro.com/2021/03/25/tax-advantaged-benefits-whats-working-whats-not/?slreturn=20210225165131

DOL will allow Trump-era tip pool expansion, withdraw other proposals

Bill Brewer — Thu, 25 Mar 2021 18:52:41 GMT

AUTHOR: Kate Tornone | PUBLISHED: March 25, 2021

Dive Brief:

Trump-era regulations prohibiting managers from keeping tips and allowing employers to include non-tipped workers in certain tip pools will take effect April 30 as scheduled, the U.S. Department of Labor announced Tuesday.
The agency also proposed, however, to delay other portions of that rulemaking a second time, to Dec. 31. Specifically, DOL said it wants to revisit provisions affecting civil money penalties and the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act's tip credit to tipped employees who perform both tipped and non-tipped duties.
"The proposals we announced today ensure that we consider all of the circumstances in today's rapidly changing workplace," said Wage and Hour Division Deputy Administrator Jessica Looman in a statement. "These essential workers deserve our careful and thoughtful consideration as we craft and implement rules that affect their well-being."

Dive Insight:

Tip rules have been in flux in recent years. Generally, the FLSA requires that employers permit workers to retain gratuities, but allows for some tip pooling.

In 2011, former President Barack Obama's DOL issued rules prohibiting tip pools that included non-tipped employees, even if employers also paid all workers involved minimum wage. (Employers with tipped employees can take a "tip credit," applying some gratuities toward minimum wage obligations.) Federal circuit courts split on that specific issue, with one declaring the regs invalid.

Despite the Biden administration's pro-worker stance, the agency said it will allow the Trump-era plan to reverse that rule to take effect in just a few weeks. Employers will soon be cleared to operate tip pools that include both tipped and non-tipped employees as long as all involved are paid minimum wage. In other words, employers may not take a tip credit based on those gratuities.

It hopes to delay and revisit, however, the Trump administration's attempt to change limits on when employers can take a tip credit for an employee who performs both tipped and untipped work, known as the "dual job" or "80/20" rule.

Stakeholders may submit comments on both actions.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/dol-will-allow-trump-era-tip-pool-expansion-withdraw-other-proposals/597330/

DOL official: Employers paid 'close to $4M' for FFCRA violations

Bill Brewer — Thu, 11 Mar 2021 17:25:59 GMT

AUTHOR: Ryan Golden | PUBLISHED: March 10, 2021

Dive Brief:

Employers paid "close to $4 million" to more than 3,500 employees last year to resolve Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) violations alleged by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Helen Applewhaite, director of DOL's Division of FMLA and Other Acts, said during the 2021 DMEC Virtual Compliance Conference March 3.
In total, Applewhaite said the agency conducted more than 4,200 FFCRA investigations and continues to enforce the law's emergency paid leave requirements for the effective period, which ended Dec. 31, 2020. She added that DOL continues to do virtual presentations on COVID-19 and its impacts on the workforce and will do so "for whatever period of time in order to reach the people we need to reach."
Applewhaite said that other department initiatives have continued, including DOL's Request for Information on paid leave programs and the Family Medical and Leave Act. The agency received "about 100" comments from stakeholders on the RFI and "is still looking at those," Applewhaite said.

Dive Insight:

Much of Applewhaite's presentation discussed the wide-ranging, sometimes overnight changes DOL made during the initial months of the pandemic. She noted that the agency's website, which typically received 500,000 visitors per week prior to the pandemic, saw more than 6 million visitors in a single week last year.

She described the process of implementing FFCRA regulations as "intense" and "unprecedented." Staff performed online presentations and outreach, with investigators answering "hundreds of thousands" of phone calls and providing technical assistance. DOL published regs implementing the FFCRA without the opportunity to gather public comments and feedback.

"To say that we published regulations in two weeks — it still kind of chills me every time I say that," Applewhaite said. "It's just not done."

During the temporary non-enforcement period instituted following the FFCRA's enactment, DOL took a compliance assistance approach, Applewhaite said; "If we had a complaint, we would contact the employer, provide information needed for compliance, and if we gained agreement to comply and the issues were remedied immediately we didn't pursue further." But DOL did take a more "vigorous" approach "if we didn't find a willing employer," she noted.

As a result of legislation passed in December 2020, employers were not required to provide paid leave via the FFCRA beyond the end of the year, but they may continue to do so on a voluntary basis in exchange for a tax credit through March 31, 2021. In his American Rescue Plan document, President Joe Biden called on Congress to strengthen and extend the FFCRA's mandatory paid leave provisions through Sept. 30, 2021.

However, that provision does not appear in the version of H.R. 1319 — also known as the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 — the Senate passed March 6. The bill would instead establish a tax credit for employers that voluntarily provide paid leave between April 1, 2021 and Sept. 30, 2021. In addition to the qualifying reasons for taking such leave described in the FFCRA, the tax credit would also apply to leave taken to receive a COVID-19 vaccination or to recover from any injury, disability, illness or condition related to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.

DOL continues to publish FAQ-based guidance on its website as well as field assistance bulletins that allow employers to see how DOL will approach enforcement, Applewhaite said, adding that last year's experience showed how the agency can adapt to the needs of the U.S. workforce; "We can be far more flexible than we ever thought possible."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/dol-official-employers-paid-close-to-4m-for-ffcra-violations/596484/

Most Employers Open to Negotiating Salary, Not Benefits

Bill Brewer — Tue, 09 Mar 2021 20:00:39 GMT

By Roy Maurer | February 24, 2021

HR is still working toward equity in compensation, total rewards

The majority of employers are open to negotiating salary for some or all positions once a job offer has been made, but that openness does not extend to bonuses and benefits, according to a new survey.

Nearly 90 percent of the 324 organizations that responded to XpertHR's Recruiting and Hiring Survey 2021 said they are flexible about negotiating salary with job candidates—at least for certain positions—but only 42 percent are open to negotiating bonuses, and just 32 percent are willing to negotiate benefits.

"The survey results show that employers are much more likely to negotiate pay with a prospective hire than benefits, something job seekers may want to keep top of mind when presented with a fresh offer of employment," said Andrew Hellwege, XpertHR surveys editor.

Total rewards experts agreed that the survey results reflect consistent practices that have been in place for years, especially at midsize and large organizations.

"Salary has traditionally been viewed as more flexible because it is commonly accepted that pay is influenced by a variety of factors, including the organization's compensation philosophy, as well as a candidate's experience level and expectations," said Marta Turba, an expert on total rewards strategy and vice president of content at WorldatWork, the association for total rewards professionals.

Tom McMullen, a senior client partner in the Chicago office of Korn Ferry and a leader in the firm's North America total rewards expertise group, agreed that "base salary is typically where the negotiation happens. There may be more flexibility in creating a tailored, custom reward package around the specific requests of an employee in a smaller organization, where there may not be as much structure and consistency in the base pay, incentive and benefits programs.

"In medium to large organizations, typically benefits are not as open to negotiation because the intent of the benefits package is that it applies to all employees in an employee group within an organization. It is a consistent part of the rewards package that all employees receive by virtue of being a member of the organization."

WorldatWork's Turba added that traditional benefits programs like health care and retirement are highly regulated and based on universal, nondiscriminatory standards that would prevent flexibility in negotiation. "By contrast, ancillary programs like hiring bonuses, flex schedules, paid/unpaid time off and educational assistance are more likely to be negotiated," she said.

Employers are less likely to negotiate structured short-term incentive plans such as bonuses because they are an integral part of the total cash compensation package, and most employers have a standardized plan design, Turba said. "Targets are set at a rate that appropriately incentivizes performance and connection to business results in a specific role, and deviation from the set plan may create inappropriate incentives, pay inequities, market competitive challenges and administrative burden."

McMullen added that incentive programs often consist of enterprise or team performance instead of or in addition to individual performance. "However, it can be a reasonably prevalent practice in some organizations to offer either a guaranteed incentive or bonus for the first year of tenure in a new organization as a bargaining chip. Sometimes a signing bonus will serve in this capacity to offset some of the risk in the candidate joining a new organization."

Addressing Pay Inequity

A contentious issue generated by the practice of salary negotiation is the high risk of creating or perpetuating pay inequity within an organization, Turba said. She outlined a few common scenarios that often drive pay equity concerns:

When the salary offer is extended without a deep understanding of qualifications.
When the salary offer is made in consideration of the work group but not the organization.
When a higher offer is made to overcome a real or perceived labor market shortage.
When the offer is based on pay in a prior position.

Proponents of the recently reintroduced Paycheck Fairness Act contend that more transparency from employers during salary negotiations would help close the gender wage gap. The bill would ban employers from asking applicants about salary history and prohibit retaliation against workers who discuss wages. The proposal has unanimous support among Democrats in Congress and the support of President Joe Biden.

Salary-history bans have been enacted for all employers in 19 states and territories, and newly introduced state bills would require employers to provide compensation ranges for open positions.

Turba recommended ways employers can do their part to address pay inequity:

Establish strong foundational structures, such as consistent job-evaluation processes, salary structures and pay determination guidelines. 
Establish firm pay rates and ranges to provide more transparency.
Cultivate strong interview techniques that get at the value of knowledge, skills, abilities and past accomplishments.
Document negotiations during the offer process. "This data is invaluable later when your organization conducts pay equity analyses to validate that pay outcomes are in line with intentions," she said.

Negotiating Benefits

Turba explained that U.S. regulations ensure consistency and nondiscrimination in benefits offerings, but there is no guarantee that consistent offerings translate to equal value in the workforce. "It is likely this perceived disparity in value that's sparking the interest or need to negotiate benefits," she said.

"We are seeing that employers are actively working to address this by infusing more personalization and flexibility in benefit offerings, knowing that their offerings must work to attract and retain workforce segments with very different needs and expectations. Social determinants of health are not uniform for all employees in an organization, and it is unrealistic to expect a one-size-fits-all benefits package to be effective."

Flexibility in benefits is the critical element to achieve fairness, she said. "This flexibility is much more likely to surface in areas related to work exchange, flexible working hours, location, extra vacation time and child care needs versus traditional areas of regulated benefits, like health or retirement planning. We've seen an acceleration of this in the past year with COVID-19."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/most-employers-open-to-negotiating-salary-not-benefits.aspx

Costco to increase its minimum wage to $16 per hour, but CEO says the average pay for hourly workers is $24

Bill Brewer — Tue, 09 Mar 2021 19:54:10 GMT

Kelly Tyco | Published 1:47 p.m. ET Feb. 25, 2021 Updated 10:56 a.m. ET Mar. 1, 2021

Costco is raising its minimum wage to $16 an hour, leapfrogging competitors including Target, Best Buy and Amazon.

Costco CEO Craig Jelinek announced the increase Thursday at a U.S. Senate Budget Committee hearing on worker wages at large companies. Democrat lawmakers and President Joe Biden are pushing to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 from $7.25.

"Since Costco's inception, the company has been committed to paying the employees very competitive retail wages and providing them broad and affordable health care benefits," Jelinek said. "Two years ago, we moved our starting hourly wage to $15 everywhere in the U.S. Effective next week, the starting wage will go to $16."

But the membership-based wholesale chain already is paying many of its 180,000 U.S. workers a much higher rate. Jelinek said the average wage for hourly workers is around $24 per hour.

Costco has 558 clubs in 45 states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico.

"We try to take care of our employees because they play such a significant role in our success," Jelinek said, who noted the longevity of employees and that Costco pays regular bonuses and offers vacation time.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., convened Thursday's hearing titled "Should Taxpayers Subsidize Poverty Wages at Large Profitable Corporations?" to discuss proposals to change the minimum wage.

The Vermont independent railed against corporations like Walmart and McDonald's, saying hundreds of thousands of workers were being left behind.

Target raised the minimum wage for all of its U.S. hourly employees to $15 an hour in July 2020 and Best Buy raised its minimum to $15 in August. Amazon also increased the starting wage in 2018 to $15.

"While Costco, Amazon, Target, Best Buy, and other large corporations have all raised their minimum wage in recent years to at least $15 an hour, the minimum wage at Walmart has remained stuck at $11 an hour for three years," he said. "The result: 760,000 workers at Walmart, about half of their U.S. workforce, are paid less than $15 an hour."

Walmart announced last week it was raising pay for 425,000 employees starting March 13. The nation’s largest employer said the raise for store workers in its digital and stocking workgroups and would bring their average pay above $15 an hour. Starting pay rates for these employees move from $13 to $19 per hour based on the store location and market, Walmart said.

Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said the company has increased starting wages by more than 50% since 2015 and that the average wage in the U.S. will be at least $15.25 per hour. The retailer has about 1.5 million employees in the U.S. at more than 5,000 stores and Sam's Club locations.

Hobby Lobby's rate is even higher than Costco's at $17 an hour, an increase that went into effect in October. In 2014, the chain raised its full-time minimum wage to $15 and says that was "well before it became fashionable with other retailers."

A recent report released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said boosting the minimum wage to $15 per hour would raise income for millions of Americans and lift 900,000 people out of poverty.

But by 2025, when the hourly rate would hit $15 under a proposal before Congress, some 1.4 million fewer Americans would be working, the report concluded. That is because higher wages would increase the cost of producing goods and services and, in response, many employers would reduce their workforce or hire fewer employees, the report said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: USA Today

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/shopping/2021/02/25/costco-minimum-wage-hourly-pay-increase-2021/6816327002/

Employers Begin to See Long-Term Value of Stock Options

Bill Brewer — Wed, 17 Feb 2021 17:37:45 GMT

Reported by LEE BARNEY | February 17, 2021

Equity compensation has not traditionally been used for retirement savings, but there are ways to incorporate it into employees’ long-term financial plans.

WHILE EMPLOYER STOCK OPTIONS, stock purchase plans and equity compensation have not traditionally been thought of as retirement savings tools, benefits executives and attorneys say companies can help their workers think of these options for long-term goals, including retirement.

“I don’t know of many employees, or employers, who view those vehicles as necessarily meant for retirement savings, because they are generally tied to a set vesting period—unless it is a publicly traded company,” says David Joffe, chairman of the employee benefits and executive compensation practice group at Bradley. “There are usually limits to how long an employee can hold those types of stock options, and it may not be possible for them to own it through the time when they retire. They may leave the company or face an event that causes them to sell the stock.”

However, Joffe notes that employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) are used to save for retirement and are becoming more and more popular, particularly if the company wants to help its employees have greater retirement savings. “A lot of the companies I work with not only have a 401(k) but profit sharing and ESOPs, which provide substantial additional retirement savings,” he says.

Sheila Frierson, president, plan managers, North America, at global employee share plan provider Computershare, agrees that “historically, equity has never really been looked at from a retirement-related perspective. However, as more plan sponsors become more concerned about the financial health and well-being of their employees, they might begin to view how such a compensation plan could be used for their employees’ future goals. For now, however, a survey we did jointly with WorldatWork found that only 34% of companies said they might make their restricted stock program retirement related.”

Jon Barber, vice president of compensation and policy research at Ayco, says his company makes sure advisers discuss stock options with clients when it’s applicable to their personal retirement savings strategy.

Barber says the firm seeks to help executives understand that value “comes down to goal setting.”

“We can help participants do cash flow analysis on when the best time is to exercise their stock,” he says. “When it comes to retirement, it might be wise to reign the executive in and help them see the wisdom of not holding the stock up until their retirement.”

Barber says it is important for benefits firms and advisers to communicate the terms of their stock options to executives, especially when it comes to termination events, which might accelerate the vesting of those holdings.

Barber says companies that want to help their employees view their stock options through the prism of retirement can do so by equipping them with tools that can perform retirement cash flow and risk analyses and aggregate all their stock holdings so they can see when the various units are vested and when they can exercise them. “That will enable them to inventory what they have and fully understand when they can monetize those units for their retirement,” he says.

Barber also says companies are giving stock options and restricted stock units to more of their employees these days, not just highly paid executives.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: PLANSPONSOR

https://www.plansponsor.com/in-depth/employers-begin-see-long-term-value-stock-options/

Workers skipped preventative healthcare in 2020. How should employers respond?

Bill Brewer — Wed, 17 Feb 2021 17:34:07 GMT

AUTHOR - Ryan Golden | PUBLISHED - Feb. 11, 2021

Organizations have the opportunity to re-examine several aspects of their plans and educate employees about their health, sources told HR Dive.

Employers have long sought programs and practices that can help workers be proactive in managing their health. But a pandemic disrupted that work in many ways.

COVID-19's spread — a health risk by itself — coincided with a decline in healthcare participation. In one study conducted by healthcare navigation company Castlight Health, researchers found "dramatic reductions" in the use of healthcare during the first two months of the pandemic. Musculoskeletal surgery, for example, declined about 47% compared to the same time frame in 2019, while MRIs declined 45%.

Some of the biggest plummets came at the expense of preventative care, a broad category that can include check-ups, immunizations, screenings and other procedures undertaken for disease prevention purposes. According to data from the nonprofit Health Care Cost Institute (HCCI), submitted health claims for mammograms and pap smears were down nearly 80% in April 2020 year-over-year, and those for colonoscopies were down "almost 90%" in mid-April 2020 year-over-year.

Percentage change of selected preventative care procedures during COVID-19 pandemic

Preventative care type	YOY trend (as of April 14, 2020)	YOY trend (as of Oct 1. 2020)
Colonoscopies	-88%	-13%
Childhood vaccinations (aggregate)	-57%	-8%
Mammograms	-76%	-11%
Pap Smears	-77%	+19%

SOURCE: Health Care Cost Institute

Those declines reversed by fall, HCCI data show, but preventative care procedures generally have not returned to pre-pandemic levels, said Daniel Kurowski, senior researcher at HCCI. While Kurowski noted that there are limitations to the type of claim-based analysis used by HCCI in its study, he confirmed that the organization's data suggest the U.S. healthcare system has not made up for the loss of services that occurred since the pandemic's onset.

What can employers derive from these findings? Healthcare industry sources who spoke to HR Dive expressed some concern that deferred care could have an impact on disease prevention down the line, but the complete picture is far from clear. What's more, the scramble to respond to such challenges could yield some positive lessons.

'Everything stopped'

Dr. Mark Cunningham-Hill remembers the initial months of the pandemic well. As the medical director for the Northeast Business Group on Health, a regional coalition of employers and healthcare stakeholders, Cunningham-Hill observed closures on a wide scale. "Everything stopped for a month or two," he told HR Dive, "and gradually, telemedicine started coming online."

An executive at insurer Aetna shared a similar view. "We have seen declines in every aspect of care within our populations, specifically within preventative services," said Julie Bietsch, the company's senior vice president, clinical operations. But by August, Aetna began to see preventative care utilization trends rebound to the point that, by October 2020, those trends were close to 2019 levels, Bietsch noted.

Virtual care has helped to fill in some of the gaps caused by COVID-19 and may even have helped to offset some declines in care utilization, said Magda Rusinowski, vice president of Business Group on Health. While such care was initially delivered via providers that specifically focus on virtual care, the format "has emerged as a way to see your brick-and-mortar provider" as well, Rusinowski said.

Cunningham-Hill said telehealth and similar technologies can allow care providers to review patients' health and direct them to book appointments for in-person procedures, such as a mammogram, when available. For other specialties, such as mental healthcare, telehealth "possibly works better" than it did even before the pandemic, he added.

Even for procedures such as colonoscopies that typically require an in-person visit, alternatives are available. The pandemic has caused providers and other members of the healthcare system to "think outside the box" when it comes to preventative care, Bietsch said. Examples include HbA1c test kits that can evaluate blood glucose levels and Cologuard, a Food and Drug Administration-approved, at-home testing kit that helps screen for colon cancer.

'A matter of enormous concern'

Still, the impact of deferred care may be a puzzling development for employers, one with potentially devastating consequences for some patients.

Early detection of serious conditions is a primary concern. In a June 2020 article published in Science Magazine, Norman E. Sharpless, director of the U.S. National Cancer Institute, described a statistical model for excess deaths from colorectal and breast cancers between 2020 to 2030. Due to delayed diagnosis and care issues caused by COVID-19, Sharpless said the model suggests almost 10,000 excess deaths from both types of cancer over the next decade, or about a 1% increase.

"This analysis is conservative," Sharpless wrote, "as it does not consider other cancer types, it does not account for the additional nonlethal morbidity from upstaging, and it assumes a moderate disruption in care that completely resolves after 6 months. It also does not account for regional variations in the response to the pandemic, and these effects may be less severe in parts of the country with shorter or less severe lockdowns."

And while declines for procedures such as colonoscopies and mammograms pose a challenge for health plans, another item — childhood vaccinations — can be just as worrisome, multiple sources told HR Dive. HCCI found that childhood immunization rates varied by type. Meningococcal and HPV vaccines saw year-over-year declines of 75% in mid-April 2020, while those for Rotavirus saw a 33% decline.

This area is "a matter of enormous concern" for employers, said Jeff Levin-Scherz, national co-leader of Willis Towers Watson's health management practice, because vaccinations save lives and prevent families from incurring substantial medical costs.

Childhood vaccinations have not only been impacted by closure of care centers, in which such vaccines are often given, but also by the closure of school systems, which often provide reminders to families about receiving vaccines, Bietsch said. Lack of access in certain geographic areas can also play a role in vaccine disparities, she added.

There also are concerns about the management of chronic conditions such as diabetes and asthma. Bietsch said Aetna has messaged plan members after, for example, a trend of diabetic patients who would receive a lab test but not a foot or eye exam.

What employers can do

Providing coverage is the most important thing employers can do to encourage employees to use preventative care, Levin-Scherz said; "No one should miss preventative care because they didn't think it was covered." Employers have several opportunities to improve their healthcare offerings as a result of the pandemic, including the chance to work closely with health plans that are proactive about reminding employees about the importance of such care, he added.

COVID-19 also may prompt healthcare providers, payers and even employers to re-examine what constitutes high-value or low-value care, Cunningham-Hill said. He referred specifically to procedures such as colonoscopies that are performed on patients over the age of 75, as well as false positives that lead to lengthy investigations that do not turn up problems. But there are also items proven to be valuable, such as asthma medications and diabetes management tools. "How do we come out of this doing more of the high-value stuff?," Cunningham-Hill said.

That points to another actionable item for employers: access. It is one thing to provide coverage for a given form of preventative care, but associated copays may discourage workers from actually taking part in that care. Even if the plan provides 80% coverage for a procedure with a $25 copay for the worker, "that copay is a fortune for someone earning $25,000 a year," Cunningham-Hill said. Such examples point to the need for greater healthcare equity, he added.

Employees may have alternatives when it comes to things like ensuring their children have access to important vaccinations. "It doesn't have to be a physician's office," Bietsch said, adding that pharmacies and other qualified health centers can provide such vaccines.

Communication also emerged as a common theme in conversations with sources. Kurowski said his takeaway for employers is to encourage employees to take control of their health and remind them of the access that employers provide to chronic care management, preventative care and even fringe wellness programs, like fitness benefits.

This can be particularly important for workers with chronic conditions. "You can't tell people enough about looking at their diabetes in different ways," Bietsch said. Plans and employers might decide to mix up communications around preventative health by sharing stories about how a plan member managed their diabetes successfully, she noted. Rusinowski said organizational leaders, especially those whom employees trust, can also play a part in communications strategy.

Healthcare industry observers have noted for months that COVID-19 spurred the growth of the virtual healthcare space, but that growth also could yield positive results for preventative care. Telehealth can allow care providers to monitor patient health, recommend follow-ups and help patients manage their chronic conditions. "Many of the telemedicine companies have been doing substantially more primary care," Levin-Scherz said. "As they do that, they become educated on preventative care and they become advocates of preventative care."

There are still hurdles to the adoption of telehealth and similar services and, importantly, not all visits can be replaced by virtual care. But Rusinowski sees the space "not as a replacement, but as a way to enhance" care specialties and improve the overall patient experience.

As employers seek to communicate to employees the importance of continuing their care routines and seeking preventative care, businesses should not focus solely on costs. "I just want to make sure that when we talk about it, we emphasize the well-being component and the desire to create an environment where employees can have the best health outcomes possible," Rusinowski said. "The pandemic has shown us more than anything else that you can't have a productive workforce where health is an issue, but this is not anything new for [employers]."

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled Rusinowski's name. HR Dive regrets the error.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/workers-skipped-preventative-healthcare-in-2020-how-should-employers-respo/594908/

Thinking Through COVID Vaccine Incentives

Bill Brewer — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:36:04 GMT

*****

BY MARK MCGRAW, WORLDATWORK | FEBRUARY 9, 2021

There’s a segment of the population that doesn’t believe in the medical advantages of vaccinations.

A 2019 Gallup survey, for instance, found that 11% of 1,025 American adults actually consider vaccines to be more dangerous than the diseases they’re intended to prevent.

Given the distaste that some have for vaccines in general, it stands to reason that a fair number of individuals have no intention of receiving one of the vaccines now available to help fend off COVID-19. One recent poll sees more than a quarter of U.S. respondents saying they definitely or probably won’t get vaccinated against the coronavirus.

Many of the American employees who do receive COVID vaccinations will do so via their employer-sponsored insurance plans. And, while companies can — with some exceptions — require employees to receive a coronavirus vaccination, most won’t.

That’s according to an ongoing Mercer survey, which finds 78% of more than 350 employers saying their organization has no plans to mandate the vaccine for employees. (Just 13% said their company is considering mandatory vaccinations at this point.)

Still, employee skepticism toward the coronavirus vaccine creates a challenge for employers with designs on providing vaccines for their workforce. The Mercer poll also looks at the likelihood of companies creating rewards to encourage COVID vaccine uptake among employees who are hesitant about being vaccinated.

Many companies remain unsure as to whether they will provide incentives in hopes of motivating this group of workers to get the vaccine, according to Mercer’s data. Roughly 44% of respondents have already decided against it, but a nearly identical number (46%) said their organization is still thinking and talking it through.

Most of these discussions center around the possibility of offering incentives like cash, gift cards and/or paid time off, Mercer finds, with the still-open survey finding nearly half of employers (47%) indicating they will provide employees with additional paid time off to go get the vaccine.

Companies that do opt to proceed with such vaccination incentives will have a host of factors to weigh, said Wade Symons, leader of Mercer’s regulatory resource group.

“There are different considerations, depending on whether the employer will be involved in the vaccine administration or simply encouraging employees to seek vaccinations in their communities,” said Symons.

Symons points out that the EEOC’s updated guidance clarifies that the administration of a vaccine alone does not constitute a medical examination, but the questions an employee must answer before receiving the vaccine “will almost certainly qualify as a disability-related inquiry under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).”

As such, ADA restrictions would apply, even if the employer has contracted with a third party to deliver the vaccine.

“In connection with an incentive program, that means the incentive likely must be limited in order for it to be considered a ‘voluntary’ program.”

That said, simply encouraging employees to get vaccinated through, say, a pharmacy chain or county health department would not carry ADA implications, said Symons.

“Limits should not apply, since the pre-vaccination medical questions do not tie back to the employer. And, per the EEOC, requiring proof of vaccination is not a medical inquiry under the ADA. Thus, the employer would be free to ask for such proof in order to provide the applicable incentive.”

Companies providing vaccination incentives should also be careful to provide accommodations due to disability or religious objections, he added.

“The obligation to accommodate would only be implicated in situations where an employee is unable to get the vaccine due to a disability or an objection based on a sincere religious belief, and then, only absent undue hardship to the employer.”

When an accommodation is required, the employer would need to consider alternatives to getting the vaccine, such as periodic COVID testing or remote work options, so the employee with the religious- or disability-related objection can still earn the incentive, said Symons.

“As far as ADA limitations on vaccines, we don’t currently have guidance as to what amount of incentive would exceed the threshold to make vaccination ‘involuntary’ for those employers involved with vaccine administration,” he continued.

“Rules which permitted incentives of up to 30% of the employee-only medical plan premium amount were struck down by the courts several years ago and regulations to replace them have yet to be formally proposed.”

For employees without strong feelings one way or the other, incentives might ultimately be “the nudge they need to make the effort to get vaccinated,” said David Zieg, MD, clinical services leader at Mercer.

On the other hand, such rewards could lead some workers to feel the organization is “coercing them into accepting the vaccine, especially if they are experiencing financial challenges and view the money being offered as substantial,” he added.

“The good news is that the majority of the population is willing to get vaccinated, which means that incentives are not targeted to these people and will not change their behavior.”

Then there are employees for whom no amount of encouragement, financial or otherwise, will likely make much difference, said Zeig.

“Widespread disinformation about COVID-19 vaccines has fostered confusion and distrust. It seems unlikely that incentives will affect the behavior of people who are strongly opposed to taking the vaccine.

That said, it remains unclear whether incentives “will meaningfully improve uptake among those who are hesitant rather than opposed,” said Zeig. “Many will wait to be vaccinated until they feel comfortable, which will take time and experience, not money.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source; WorldatWork

https://www.worldatwork.org/workspan/articles/thinking-through-covid-vaccine-incentives

Some Participants Reducing 401(k) Deferrals to Contribute to HSAs

Bill Brewer — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 22:59:24 GMT

Industry sources have recommended that participants adopt a savings hierarchy for retirement plan and health savings account contributions.

Reported by REBECCA MOORE

More than half (56%) of 401(k) participants reduced their retirement plan contributions in the first year that they made health savings account (HSA) contributions, according to a study conducted by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI).

In general, as income increases, the percentage of participants reducing their deferrals to their 401(k) increases in the first year that they made HSA contributions. There was also a spike among low-income workers in the percentage making a reduction.

EBRI found that the “crowding out” of HSA savings on retirement savings was modest at the median: The median dollar reduction in participant 401(k) contributions in the first year of HSA contributions was $34. However, deferral rates decreased by $5,127 at the 10th percentile.

Higher HSA contributions were associated with lower 401(k) contributions. While at the median, 401(k) contributions fell $315 among HSA participants allocating more than $4,350, among HSA participants committing $1,000 or less, median 401(k) contributions fell only $8.

“Not only does the amount of 401(k) contributions decrease as HSA contribution levels increase, the higher the 401(k) contribution, the greater the reduction in 401(k) contribution among those who contributed to their HSA for the first time,” says Paul Fronstin, director of the health research and education program at EBRI and coauthor of the report.

Specifically, 401(k) contributions fell $482 in the year following initial HSA deferrals among those allocating more than 10% of their income in the year prior to the HSA contribution. They fell $49 among those contributing 6% to 10% of their income. At the median, 401(k) deferrals were essentially unaffected among participants contributing 6% or less of their income.

The results of the EBRI survey highlight the need for retirement plan participants to establish a savings hierarchy. During the 2018 PLANSPONSOR HSA Conference, Jack Towarnicky, executive director of the Plan Sponsor Council of America (PSCA), advocated for saving enough to get the employer match in both the retirement plan and the HSA, if the HSA offers an employer match and if the participant can afford it. Otherwise, Towarnicky said the common-sense approach is to contribute an initial amount to fund the HSA and contribute up to the full match in the 401(k). Participants can then alternate contributions between the two vehicles.

More recently, Brian Hanna, a partner and executive vice president at Everhart Advisors, told PLANSPONSOR, “What’s becoming more accepted as a best practice is that you should save into your qualified employer plan up to the match level first. Then you should save into your HSA up to the maximum annual contribution—and not spend your HSA on an annualized basis but use it as a retirement savings vehicle. Then, if you have any money available for savings, you can go back to the 401(k) and make a higher contribution.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: PLANSPONSOR

https://www.plansponsor.com/participants-reducing-401k-contributions-contribute-hsas/

Google to pay $3.8 million over alleged discrimination against women, Asians

Bill Brewer — Tue, 09 Feb 2021 19:53:48 GMT

ByCatherine Thorbecke | February 2, 2021

Google to pay $3.8 million over alleged discrimination against women, Asians

As part of the resolution, the tech giant denies wrongdoing.

Google has agreed to pay more than $3.8 million, including nearly $2.6 million in back pay, to settle allegations of "systemic" pay and hiring discrimination that disadvantaged women and Asian workers.

The payments will go to more than 5,500 current employees and job applicants from the company's California and Washington state offices, the Department of Labor announced in a statement Monday evening.

As part of the resolution, Google denies any violations or noncompliance with any laws or regulations.

Of that sum, more than $1.3 million will go toward back pay, with interest, to 2,565 female employees in engineering positions who were allegedly subjected to pay discrimination, while over $1.2 million will be set aside for 1,757 women and 1,219 Asian applicants for software engineering positions who weren't hired.

The Department of Labor said its Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs identified pay disparities affecting female employees in software engineering positions at Google offices in Mountain View, California, as well as in Seattle and Kirkland, Washington, during a routine compliance evaluation.

"Pay discrimination remains a systemic problem," Jenny Yang, programs director at the OFCCP, said in a statement. "Employers must conduct regular pay equity audits to ensure that their compensation systems promote equal opportunity."

The agency said it also found hiring rate differences that disadvantaged women and Asian applicants for software engineering positions at Google outposts in San Francisco and Sunnyvale, California, as well as in Kirkland.

In addition to the back pay, the tech company will also allocate a reserve of $1.25 million for pay-equity adjustments over the next five years for employees in engineering positions in Mountain View, Kirkland and New York City -- where approximately 50% of Google's engineers work.

A Google spokesperson told ABC News in a statement the company is pleased to have resolved the matter and that the company has conducted an internal analysis of pay equity for the last eight years.

"We believe everyone should be paid based upon the work they do, not who they are, and invest heavily to make our hiring and compensation processes fair and unbiased," the spokesperson said. "We're pleased to have resolved this matter related to allegations from the 2014-2017 audits and remain committed to diversity and equity and to supporting our people in a way that allows them to do their best work."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: ABC News

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/google-pay-38-million-alleged-discrimination-women-asians/story?id=75633080

DOL Ends Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) Program for Employers

Bill Brewer — Wed, 03 Feb 2021 17:22:57 GMT

February 2, 2021

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has announced the immediate termination of its Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program. The PAID program began in March 2018 as a pilot program to allow employers an alternative method to rectify overtime and minimum wage violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) without the worry of an extended statute of limitations, penalties, and threat of private litigation or attorneys’ fees. The Wage Hour Division has repeatedly touted the program’s success. Although after a successful trial period the program was extended indefinitely in October 2018, the DOL abruptly ended the self-reporting program on January 29, 2021.

In its press release announcing the end of the program, the DOL indicated that the resources and outreach provided by the Wage and Hour Division to employers are sufficient to help employers comply with the FLSA “without relieving them of their legal obligations.”

Under the PAID program, employers were able to self-report a wage violation, submit a calculation of back wages to the DOL, and enter into an agreement to pay 100% of back wages owed over a two-year period. In turn, the DOL would supervise and approve the settlement permitting employees to issue a valid release of the claim, limited to the reported issue. The DOL agreed not to seek a third year of back wages, liquidated damages, or civil money penalties, and kept the identity of reporting employers confidential, subject to FOIA requests. As an additional incentive for employers to participate in the PAID program, the DOL agreed not to investigate the underlying merits of the issue that the employer self-reported; instead, its review was limited to the back wage calculations prepared by the employer for accuracy.

Without the self-reporting PAID program, the only two options available to release FLSA claims are through a court-approved settlement or as a result of a DOL-initiated investigation. While the PAID program did not release any state law claims, it allowed for significant relief for employers to correct issues without the threat of additional litigation or negative publicity. It is not clear whether employers currently working with the DOL through the PAID program will be allowed the benefits of the program.

Even without the added benefits of the PAID program, employers should continue to be proactive to audit pay records and correct potential wage issues if identified.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: JD Supra

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/dol-ends-payroll-audit-independent-8523810/

Target To Give $500 Bonuses To Frontline Team Members

Bill Brewer — Wed, 03 Feb 2021 17:20:27 GMT

By WCCO-TVJanuary 25, 2021 at 11:48 am

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) — Target announced Monday that it’s giving $500 bonuses to more than 375,000 of its frontline team members working at stores across the country, including seasonal workers.

The Minneapolis-based retailer said the bonuses are the company’s fifth round of recognition for team members amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The company says the bonuses should be paid out by early next month.

Included in this round of bonuses are store directors, executive team leaders and salaried distribution center leaders, who will receive $1,000 to $2,000 bonuses.

In total, these bonuses will amount to a $200 million investment in workers, the company says.

Additionally, Target says that it’s extending COVID-19 benefits into 2021, such as paid leave for team members who test positive for the virus.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CBS Minnesota

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/01/25/target-to-give-500-bonuses-to-frontline-team-members/

Seyfarth: FLSA class actions will likely 'explode' in 2021

Bill Brewer — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:50:39 GMT

AUTHOR Katie Clarey | PUBLISHED: Jan. 21, 2021

Dive Brief:

Federal courts saw fewer Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) filings for the fifth year in a row in 2020, according to Seyfarth Shaw LLP's Jan. 5 Workplace Class Action Litigation Report. Wage and hour litigation saw more class and collective actions certified than any other area of workplace law, however, with the rate of certification success increasing.
This trend is likely to "explode" in 2021 with the arrival of a more worker-friendly U.S. Department of Labor that is "apt to make supposed wage theft its enforcement priority and to shift its regulatory focus toward a plaintiff-friendly agenda."
Work from home arrangements drove litigation in 2020 and will continue to do so in 2021, Seyfarth said. Specifically, claims will relate to subjects germane to telework, such as expense reimbursement and off-the-clock work.

Dive Insight:

Workplace class action lawsuits are the most common type of class actions, according to the results of the 2019 Carlton Fields Class Action Survey. The report, which gathered responses from general counsel or senior legal officers at 395 large companies, revealed that organizations spent a collective $2.46 billion in 2018 defending class actions. Labor and employment cases accounted for 26.1% of spending, Carlton Fields found, and companies reported that wage and hour matters were "their top concern in this category." In 2020, organizations shelled out nearly $295 million to settle wage and hour class action claims, according to Seyfarth.

Employers likely rejoiced when, in 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that employers could require workers to arbitrate disputes individually, waiving their right to class or collective actions. Attorneys urged caution, however, and recommended employers refrain from widespread arbitration mandates, as arbitration can be expensive and create backlash, especially if claims contain allegations of sexual misconduct.

There has been some movement to hedge the freedom the decision granted employers. Lawmakers introduced the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act (FAIR Act) in 2019, calling forced arbitration "unfair, unjust and un-American." The bill would allow employees and consumers to choose arbitration at will. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill in September 2019, but the U.S. Senate has yet to vote on the legislation.

Even without the FAIR Act, employers will likely see more wage and hour collective actions in 2021, due to the incoming, employee-friendly administration, Seyfarth predicted. The Biden administration may focus on raising the federal minimum wage, one attorney previously told HR Dive.

Management-side attorneys identified another factor in wage and hour claims that Seyfarth called out as well: telework. The pandemic has forced many hourly workers to work from home — a rare occurrence in pre-pandemic times, Venable Partner Nicholas Reiter said. Such workers generally have fixed schedules that easily facilitate overtime pay; with many working from home, employees may not have the infrastructure to track hours worked as diligently as previously. "That could be a real risk," Reiter said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/seyfarth-flsa-class-actions-will-likely-explode-in-2021/593754/

Western Digital settles gender bias class action for $7.75m

Bill Brewer — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:42:05 GMT

By Chris Mellor | January 7, 2021

Final approval has been granted to a Western Digital settlement of a class action lawsuit, which accused the company of underpaying female staff and discriminating against them in pay, promotions, and placement.

Western Digital will pay $7.75m – $5m to 1863 female employees, and most of the rest to their law firm. In addition, the company will undertake “sweeping programmatic measures to help eliminate gender disparities and foster equal employment opportunity going forward”.

The lawsuit was bought by Yunghui Chen, who joined WD’s Audit Department in 2005 and resigned in September 2016, having been promoted to Internal Audit Manager in 2008.

She alleged that Western Digital “paid her $30,000 less than her male counterparts performing equal and substantially similar work and refused to promote her to Senior Manager, despite promoting similarly situated, less-qualified men.”

Her class action lawsuit, filed in May 2019, stated: “Men dominate Defendants’ leadership and management. Upon information and belief, the overrepresentation of men in Defendants’ leadership is both the source and product of continuing systemic discrimination against female employees.”

Also, Western Digital’s “compensation, promotions, and placement policies and practices have resulted in and perpetuated longstanding, company-wide gender discrimination and sex-based disparities with respect to pay, promotions, and job placement.”

The company relies “on a tap-on-the shoulder promotion process that disparately impacts women and encourages the predominantly male management to engage in a pattern of disparate treatment. Rather than posting open positions, managers evaluate which, if any, of their reporting employees should be placed into them.”

Where the money goes

The $7.75m settlement will be disbursed to several groups of people;

$4,811,667 goes to California-based female employees of WD and related companies at or below the senior management level after November 1, 2012, and also to female employees of WD elsewhere in the USA with similar posts since November 1, 2013,
$2,583,333 at a maximum goes to class counsel in attorneys fees,
$97,324 goes to them for for litigation costs,
$180,000 at maximum to Chen for her litigation costs,
$18,000 service award to Chen,
$50,000 for Class Administrator’s fees and costs,
$75,000 for PAGA costs.

Any remaining money goes to a couple of legal aid charities.

The 1,863 individual class action members (plaintiffs) and they will get $3,615 each on average. The precise amount will depend upon their employment duration and pay rate.

Interested parties with Pacer access can read the final settlement document or by looking up Chen v. Western Digital Corp., C.D. Cal., No. 8:19-cv-00909, final approval of class settlement 1/5/21.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Blocks & Files

https://blocksandfiles.com/2021/01/07/western-digital-settles-sex-discrimination-class-action/

The Pandemic Alters Pay

Bill Brewer — Wed, 13 Jan 2021 17:59:37 GMT

In 2021, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pay will vary by industry and region—and even by job within companies.

By Tamara Lytle | January 9, 2021

The coronavirus pandemic took employee compensation on a roller coaster ride in 2020. The year began with a tight labor market and rising wages followed suddenly by stay-at-home orders and massive job losses that upended the labor market. Companies had to adjust on the fly. Today, business leaders struggle to set 2021 pay levels absent certainty about when the economy will recover and how soon a vaccine for COVID-19 might become widely available. They are also considering the role of compensation in retaining top performers, who are more valuable than ever in this unstable environment.

Last spring, one-fourth of companies reduced pay (most of them temporarily) when the novel coronavirus shut down large swaths of the economy, according to research by Mercer. During those early months of 2020, as the pandemic was just beginning to be felt in the U.S. but not yet understood, companies weighed whether to stick with their compensation plans. Sixty-eight percent of them went ahead with merit pay increases and 79 percent paid out bonuses as planned, according to Mercer. Overall, the consultancy says, compensation rose about 3 percent in 2020—roughly the same as the increases seen in each of the past seven or eight years.

A survey report from Gallagher, however, found a lower average pay increase of 2.5 percent in 2020. And the benefits brokerage and advisory company projects a 2.1 percent increase for fiscal 2021.

But behind the averages, specific impacts varied.

Mixed Effects

In 2021, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pay will continue to vary by industry and region—and even by job within companies.

Company leaders expect to increase compensation in 2021 by between 2.6 percent and 3 percent, according to Mercer’s research. But industries will be affected unevenly, just as they were in 2020. Online retailers enjoyed record sales as homebound consumers avoided stores and opted for delivery, for example, while other sectors were seriously hurt by the economic downturn. Between September 2019 and September 2020, the U.S. economy lost a net of 9.6 million jobs (not including agricultural jobs). A disproportionate 8.6 million of those were service jobs, with 3.6 million in leisure and hospitality, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Some workers in hard-hit businesses realized less growth in their hourly wages than national averages, according to the BLS’s Current Employment Statistics. Between September 2019 and September 2020, average hourly wages in the leisure and hospitality industry rose just 15 cents to $14.78. By contrast, average hourly earnings for nonfarm workers in production and nonsupervisory roles rose from $23.70 to $24.79.

Going forward, the effects of the pandemic are impacting decisions about overall compensation strategies. Incentive plans at some companies that have benefited from the unusual circumstances of 2020 paid out above target levels despite the battered overall economy, says Gregg Passin, senior partner, Executive Solutions, at Mercer. Other companies will take years to recover and must decide whether to change incentive plan awards downward to reflect the new economic reality.

Companies everywhere are weighing the uncertainties of the economy against the need to keep pay levels up to retain top performers. There’s no right answer for all companies regarding pay, according to Mary Ann Sardone, partner, U.S. Talent Solutions leader, at Mercer. “Our advice is you have to look at your situation,” she says.

Tom Gimbel, CEO of LaSalle Network, a national staffing and recruiting firm based in Chicago, recommends ranking employees on ability and future potential. He maintains that the top quarter need to get increases in base pay or variable compensation so that they don’t get snapped up by competitors.

“If you want to retain your best people, you have to do it with your top quartile,” Gimbel says.

Contributing Factors

Despite high rates of unemployment brought on by the pandemic, some companies with front-line workers raised hourly rates to attract new hires. Target increased its minimum wage to $15 an hour in July and gave front-line workers a $200 bonus. Walmart bumped up pay for 165,000 workers.

As the virus raged and killed hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S., many industries realized how critical their hourly workforces were for keeping the business—and the country’s economy—going.

While higher minimum wages and hazard pay were the answer for many companies, businesses in the health care industry were a notable exception, Sardone says. Leaders in that sector resisted hazard pay because nurses, doctors and other workers routinely faced job-related health threats before the pandemic.

“It’s a bit of a slippery slope when you add hazard pay to an already hazardous job,” Sardone notes.

The impact on compensation is not as widespread as in past recessions.

But while the coronavirus is still a risk for the 50 million front-line essential workers in the U.S., most companies dropped hazard pay by early summer as a new normal took hold, according to the Brookings Institution.

At the same time, some lower-level workers have seen their wages stagnate because massive layoffs have resulted in a larger supply of labor, Gimbel says.

He doesn’t expect pay to collapse for managers and executives, though, as happened during the 2001 and 2009 economic downturns. That’s because the impact on compensation is not as widespread as in past recessions. Many job seekers are willing to hold out for more money instead of taking a reduction in pay because they believe that the economy will return to normal after a COVID-19 vaccine becomes widely available. “The accountant isn’t competing against the barista who got laid off,” Gimbel says.

And, unlike in previous downturns, the federal government in 2020 decided to temporarily expand unemployment benefits and protect against evictions and home foreclosures. “You don’t see people willing to take jobs below their skills and pay grade,” Gimbel says.

Regional differences have also impacted compensation decisions. Dan Ryan, CEO of executive search firm Ryan Partners in Nashville, Tenn., has seen virtually no downward pressure on salaries in the Southeast, where his clients include architectural, engineering and construction firms.

“Depending on geography, in parts of the country where development is still on track, the pace of construction and design is still very busy,” Ryan says. “From a supply and demand standpoint, there is still inadequate supply [of labor].” When stay-at-home orders were imposed in the spring, many construction companies cut pay by 10 percent to 15 percent, Ryan says, but most have since restored rates to pre-pandemic levels.

'Companies may take a much more surgical approach this year to distributing salary increases.'

Mary Ann Sardone

Leaders at some companies are trying to determine what areas of the business need beefing up and what type of talent they need. With the economic upheaval leaving less money to go around for salary increases, companies must choose wisely where to dole out increases. The move to remote work, for instance, put a spotlight on the importance of IT workers who can enhance a company’s digital infrastructure. And marketing talent is valuable as companies adapt to new digital platforms.

“What COVID has shown is the need for digital transformation of … business and what parts of the business will enable that,” Sardone says. “Companies may take a much more surgical approach this year to distributing salary increases.”

Flexible Work Arrangements

Flexible work was a top priority for many employees prior to the pandemic. Then the public health crisis gave businesses a sudden chance to experiment with flexible work on a large scale when they were forced to send their employees home to work remotely. Even when it’s safe for everyone to be back in the office together, flexible work options and hours will become common. Before the pandemic, just 1 in 30 companies planned to let half or more of their employees work remotely, according to Mercer. Now, one-third of companies plan to allow that.

As employees shifted to remote work, some companies provided compensation for home office furniture or equipment. Google and Twitter, for instance, kicked in $1,000 stipends for remote employees.

Not all jobs can be done remotely. But it’s important to note that working in sweatpants from a home office isn’t the only type of flexible work arrangement available. Some jobs can provide flexible hours or allow split shifts or job sharing.

Gimbel sees a coming rift between blue-collar and white-collar workers if only the latter get flexibility. Workers who aren’t allowed to take advantage of flexible work arrangements are going to want more compensation to make up for it. Their message, Gimbel says, will be “Pay us more … or have everyone get their butts into the office. [If] I’m in Chicago in the cold and the marketing person is in Naples, Florida, is that fair?”

Location Matters

As companies realize that remote work can work, some are rethinking how they recruit and compensate people. If a job can be done outside the office, should it be benchmarked to the local talent market? Should it be pegged to the regional or national market? Why pay a Silicon Valley salary to an employee sitting in his home office in Montana?

When you say you don’t care where your workers work, it calls into question how you set pay, Sardone says.

Some companies are cutting the salaries of workers who switch to remote work permanently if they move to a lower-cost area.

In fact, the move to remote work could save companies money if they reclassify employees based on their remote status, Ryan says. He has already seen workers use the flexibility of remote work to move from high-tax states like Illinois and California to suburban and rural areas where they have more space, such as Texas and Florida. The ability to work remotely is high on many candidates’ priority lists when weighing jobs, even if it means less pay, because they can live in a lower-cost area. “It’s a trade-off people are willing to make,” Ryan says.

But companies may be better off reducing pay for future hires who live in less expensive areas instead of ruffling the feathers of current staff who work remotely, Sardone warns.

Businesses also need to be careful about how they handle executive compensation, especially if rank-and-file workers have taken a hit on pay. “Making executives whole or close to whole is a difficult story to tell” if other workers are suffering financially, Passin says.

Leaders need to think about how employees, regulators and customers will view cushy executive incentive payouts in the middle of hardship, Passin says. He is seeing a range of strategies among his clients. Some companies planned to limit executive incentive payouts at the end of 2020. But with the uncertain economy, executives could have a tough time meeting target goals in 2021, leaving them without incentives two years in a row.

That’s not what you want to tell an executive who you’re keen to retain, Passin says.

There’s no right or wrong answer on executive compensation, Gimbel says. He took no salary from February through September 2020 so he could pay his employees. And he understands that it’s important to workers to be able to choose where they perform their jobs.

“I’m seeing companies say more than before, ‘What is our culture? What do our employees mean to us?’ ”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/all-things-work/Pages/the-pandemic-alters-pay.aspx

Temporary FFCRA Leave Requirements End in 2020 but Tax Credit Extended Through March 2021

Bill Brewer — Fri, 08 Jan 2021 16:57:56 GMT

WRITTEN BY: Davis Wright Tremaine LLP [co-author: Crystal Miller-O'Brien] | January 4, 2021

The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), passed on March 18, 2020, temporarily mandated paid sick time and paid family leave for COVID-19-related issues, including for school and place of care closures, for certain employees and employers through December 31, 2020.

On December 21, 2020, Congress decided not to extend FFCRA paid time off obligations beyond 2020, and the latest COVID-19 stimulus bill (Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021) became effective on December 27, 2020. Even though FFCRA paid leave benefits are no longer mandatory, employers can voluntarily continue providing paid leave benefits with the option of claiming the payroll tax credit, which has been extended through March 31, 2021. (See our prior advisories on U.S. Department of Labor guidance on the FFCRA here.)

Updates to the FFCRA

Paid Sick Time: While employers are no longer required to provide FFCRA paid sick time to employees after December 31, 2020, employers who choose to provide FFCRA paid sick time benefits to employees continue to be eligible for a tax credit for the paid sick time through March 31, 2021. Employees who have exhausted available FFCRA paid sick time entitlements will not be entitled to additional paid sick time.

However, if employers opt to continue to provide FFCRA paid sick time, employees can use available sick time. Employers will not receive tax credits for benefits provided in excess of statutory limits.

Paid Family Leave: While employers are no longer required to provide FFCRA paid family leave to employees after December 31, 2020, employers who choose to provide the FFCRA paid family leave benefits to employees continue to be eligible for a tax credit for the paid sick time through March 31, 2021. Employees who have exhausted available FFCRA paid family leave entitlements will not be entitled to additional paid family leave.

However, if employers opt to continue to provide FFCRA paid family leave time, employees can use available family leave. Employers will not receive tax credits for benefits provided in excess of statutory limits.

No Retaliation: In order to remain eligible for the tax credit for providing employees with FFCRA paid sick time and family leave, employers also must not discharge, discipline, or in any way discriminate against an employee who seeks to take leave as provided for in the FFCRA. In addition, even if employers choose not extend the FFCRA benefits, retaliation against employees who used FFCRA benefit remains prohibited.

Employer Considerations

Employers should consider whether to extend FFCRA paid sick time and family leave benefits to employees through March 31, 2021.
Employers should also keep in mind there may be other state and local laws that provide similar benefits to employees and that some of these laws may also be changing.
If employers continue to provide FFCRA benefits to employees, employers should obtain the requisite documentation for the FFCRA benefits to receive the tax credit. Please see our prior blog post here on FFCRA documentation.
If employers are providing extended FFCRA benefits, they should continue to document leave use. Employers will not receive tax credits for benefits provided in excess of statutory limits.
Employers should be mindful that the anti-retaliation provisions of the FFCRA are still applicable to past use of FFCRA benefits even if employers do not extend benefits until March 31, 2021. This means that employers cannot discharge, discipline or in any way discriminate against an employee who seeks to take leave or took leave as provided for in the FFCRA.
Employers may also want to review their COVID-19 benefits and policies to ensure they are up to date.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: JD Supra, LLC

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/temporary-ffcra-leave-requirements-end-9761496/

4 major California employment law changes for 2021

Bill Brewer — Mon, 04 Jan 2021 18:40:03 GMT

AUTHOR: Aman Kidwai | PUBLISHED: Jan. 4, 2021

In addition to the constantly changing guidance around the COVID-19 pandemic, California has adopted new leave and pay reporting mandates.

California governor Gavin Newsom signed a number of bills into law that are set to take effect in the new year. These mandates represent vast change amid disruption brought on by the pandemic and continuing into the start of the year.

Compliance will require extra attention from employers and their HR teams, according to attorneys who spoke with HR Dive. Those involved should lean on the support and resources provided by the state as much as they can, Julie Hall, counsel at Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP, advised.

"California does a really good job with this," she said. "The agencies that enforce these laws can have very helpful links and sites on their web pages to help employers comply."

Coronavirus precautions

With respect to the ongoing pandemic,updates to COVID-19 precautions are changing on a regular basis in the state, nearly daily, sources said. They recommended employers task an individual with regularly checking the state's Department of Industrial Relations site for any updates.

"Cal-OSHA recommends having a coordinator that is dealing with these issues at the company," Walter Stella, member at Cozen O'Connor, told HR Dive. "Those companies that are in a mostly remote if not exclusively remote situation, it doesn't get any easier. But for those employers who have employees coming into the physical space [...] most clients I know typically have at least one, if not more, and maybe even the department HR, that's really focused on dealing with COVID-19."

SB-1383 - CFRA leave expansion

A leave law, SB 1383, is the most significant new law that is not directly related to COVID-19, attorneys told HR Dive.

The bill expanded the California Family Rights Act to include employers with at least five employees and also expanded the list of reasons for taking family or medical leave. Employees can now take leave to care for siblings, grandparents and grandchildren.

There are some gray areas that may need to be settled, either by an update from the DIR or by a court. "One of the questions that comes up, and we still don't have notice definitively, is if the five employees have to all be California-based. And the answer is we aren't sure at this point," Hall said.

It's also unclear whether employees that use CFRA are also eligible for time off under the federal Family Medical and Leave Act, Hall and Stella pointed out. "It's possible that you may have employees out for weeks under CFRA," Stella said, "and then for a different reason that triggers FMLA would have another 12 weeks off for FMLA."

Hall also said pregnant employees will likely have the ability to use this leave on top of the pregnancy leave afforded to them in California. "CFRA doesn't cover pregnancy disability leave so I theoretically could take my four months of pregnancy disability leave, whether it's intermittent or continuous [...] then I get my 12 weeks to bond with my baby."

SB-973 - Pay data reporting

Separate legislation, SB 973, will require employers with 100 or more employees to submit a pay data report by March 31, 2021, and annually thereafter. The report must include the number of employees by race, ethnicity and gender and their job categories as well as pay band data.

"It's a pay equity enforcement mechanism for the state of California," Hall said. "So it's important for that reason because if the employer does have pay equity issues, based on gender or race, they should know that before they file."

Hall recommended employers get to work on this report and identify any problem areas before the March 31 deadline so they can attempt to address them. "My recommendation is [...] to have some sort of compensation analysis done [...] Because if there are problems, you want to try to fix them before you have to file your report," she said. "So there's not a lot of time and those employers should already have kind of done that" because the data reported aligns closely with the EEO-1 report required by the EEOC.

"Employers might want to approach this by pre-identifying any problems because it's going to be public information in due time," Stella added.

AB-979 - Board diversity requirements

Finally, AB-979 mandates that boards have at least one nonwhite board member by the end of 2021. By the end of 2022, boards with five through eight members will be required to have two from underrepresented groups; a corporation with 9 or more directors must have at least 3 directors from underrepresented communities. This builds on earlier legislation which required similar measures for female representation in 2019 and 2021.

"There are a number of legal challenges [to the gender representation law], so we'll see where that goes," Stella said. "It is difficult to argue against the policy behind it. We're just not seeing the diversity on boards that reflect the general population or workforce. That said, it will be interesting to see how the legal challenges play out. Because it means a strict quota system and it is requiring decision making based on protected classes."

Employers have until the end of this year and 2022 to make these changes, but for many companies, changes at the board level and the search for a replacement can take time to unfold. "For the most part I see it as a corporate governance issue, because it's all about the bylaws," Stella said. "The bylaws that control how board members are removed or replaced, and so you're going through that process."

If complying with AB-979 requires the removal of board members, Stella suggested employers exercise caution. "I'm always worried about adverse actions. Because at the end of the day, it's adverse actions that create risk for companies," Stella said, noting the potential for a wrongful termination allegation from a board member, who will have contractual protections even if not an employee.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Dive: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/4-major-california-employment-law-changes-for-2021/592772/

DOL clarifies pay rate calculations for piece-rate workers

Bill Brewer — Wed, 09 Dec 2020 16:22:29 GMT

Ryan Golden | PUBLISHED Dec. 7, 2020

Dive Brief:

Employers may calculate the regular rate of pay for employees paid on a piece-rate basis — i.e., those paid per unit of production rather than a period of time — by dividing the employees' earnings by the number of hours worked in a workweek, including both productive and nonproductive hours, the U.S. Department Labor's (DOL) Wage and Hour Division said in a Nov. 30 opinion letter.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) stipulates that the regular rate for an employee paid on a piece-rate basis is calculated by totaling workweek earnings "from all sources," including production bonuses and waiting time, DOL said.
Employers may use this calculation even if they do not have a written agreement with piece-rate employees to do so, DOL said. Such an understanding or agreement "'need not be in writing, but rather, may be inferred from the parties' conduct.'" Still, the agency noted that courts "have not always been consistent regarding the content or scope" of the FLSA's mutual understanding requirement.

Dive Insight:

DOL's letter may aid in overtime calculations for piece-rate workers under the FLSA. Per agency guidance, employees paid on a piece-rate basis are generally entitled to an additional one-half times their regular rate of pay for each hour over 40 in a given workweek, plus their full piecework earnings.

The department has issued a number of opinion letters in the past year addressing what may be included in an employee's regular rate of pay for FLSA overtime calculation purposes. In March, for example, DOL said that a longevity bonus must be included in the regular rate, as must certain installments of a referral bonus.

DOL also finalized in December 2019 a rule updating the FLSA's regular rate of pay requirements. The rule clarified that bona fide meal periods, reimbursements, certain benefit plan contributions, state and local scheduling law payments and other benefits may be excluded from the regular rate when calculating overtime pay for a non-exempt employee.

As with previous wage and hour opinion letters, DOL's interpretation may not apply to every situation, experts previously noted.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/dol-clarifies-pay-rate-calculations-for-piece-rate-workers/591674/

Danone extends 18 weeks of parental leave to manufacturing employees

Bill Brewer — Wed, 09 Dec 2020 16:06:52 GMT

By Jim Cornall | 03-Dec-2020 - Last updated on 03-Dec-2020 at 09:40 GMT

Danone North America, the world’s largest Certified B Corp, has announced it is expanding its gender-neutral Parental Bonding Leave policy to its manufacturing employees, enabling them to take up to 18 weeks’ paid time off after the birth or adoption of their child.

The benefit is now available to all the company’s 5,700 US employees, whether they work in an office or in one of Danone’s 14 manufacturing facilities across the country.

The policy – effective company-wide immediately – is an evolution of the company’s previous practice of providing its frontline manufacturing employees up to two weeks of paid leave in addition to allowing the use of paid time off or vacation for such absences. The policy, which can be taken anytime within the first year of a child’s birth or adoption date, is applicable to either parent, which the company said recognizes parenting can be a shared responsibility between caregivers.

“At Danone, family is important to us. We understand how special – and also how challenging – welcoming a new child into the world can be. That’s why we are proud to support all our Danone parents, of all genders, in our factories and our offices, as they bond with their newest family member,” said Shane Grant, CEO at Danone North America.

“Our hope is that we will inspire others and help advance parental leave equity outside our walls, as well.”

Across the US, Danone North America partners with the International Union of Food (IUF), the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers' International Union (BCTGM) and the Teamsters.

“Danone’s family-first approach to supporting its teams sets it apart from so many of its peers in the industry. We believe an offering like this provides a huge value not only to its employees but has equally significant impacts for families and the communities where Danone operates,” said Mark Lauritsen, international vice president at UFCW.

According to the National Partnership for Women and Families, only 9% of US companies offer paid paternity leave to male employees. And, while many manufacturing companies have begun to expand their paid parental leave in recent years, policies continue to differentiate between primary and secondary caregivers, which Danone said reinforces traditional family roles even while American family dynamics and needs evolve.

Recent research from the Council on Contemporary Families also shows an 11% rise in equal responsibilities shared between mothers and fathers since the onset of the covid-19 pandemic, indicating a larger social change that Danone intends to support. In fact, encouraging gender-neutral policy that helps dads engage more and earlier in their children’s lives has broader and longer-term benefits, too; just one of which is that it impacts women’s income and consequently, their families’ financial security. Research from Sweden shows each additional month of parental leave taken by a father increases the mother’s wages by nearly 7%.

Danone’s new policy is in line with the global commitment the company made in 2017 as part of the UN Women’s HeForShe initiative to become one of the leading parent-friendly companies in the world, through the implementation of a global gender-neutral paid parental leave policy.

In addition, the company said its commitment to inclusive diversity includes creating an environment in which all employees feel a sense of belonging and support. Ensuring its manufacturing teams can care for their families while also maintaining employment security is a critical part of this commitment. For employees expanding their families through adoption, the company provides adoption assistance up to $6,000 and it further supports a more inclusive economy by providing a living wage to all its colleagues.

Within its communities, Danone has long partnered with the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Program through product donations and policy improvements to allow for more families to access the program.

Recently, the company also signed the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, to provide accommodations for pregnant women to minimize risk to their pregnancies at work.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Dairy Reporter

https://www.dairyreporter.com/Article/2020/12/03/Danone-expands-parental-leave-in-US

Flexible Work and Rewards Survey: 2021 Design and Budget Priorities

Bill Brewer — Thu, 03 Dec 2020 01:25:11 GMT

Highlights of key findings, North America

November 19, 2020

Supporting flexible work in a pandemic-altered workplace is key to delivering impactful Total Rewards and capturing business value.

About the survey respondents

Research findings are based on responses from 344 organizations in North America employing 4.83 million employees. The survey fielded between October 6 and 21, 2020.

Respondents by industry

Respondent profile:

52% domestic
17% international
32% global

Overview

Employers pivot to flexible work arrangements and rethink approaches to Total Rewards

In the face of the uncertainties wrought by the pandemic, employers responded by embracing workplace flexibility and prioritizing organizational resilience and agility. Our Flexible Work and Rewards Survey: 2021 Design and Budget Priorities, which fielded between October 6 and 21, 2020, takes a close-up look at the current and expected future state of flexible work arrangements as well as the implications for rewards and benefit programs.

Respondents to the survey indicate about six in 10 workers (59%) are currently telecommuting/working from home, and they expect over half of their workers (52%) to be doing so through the first quarter of 2021. Yet despite this significant pivot to flexible work arrangements, over one-third (37%) of organizations do not have a formal policy to manage these arrangements, and a quarter (25%) have just put such a policy in place this year.

While safety concerns will remain the primary reason for offering alternative work arrangements into the first quarter of 2021, an increasing number of employers also expect to enhance employee retention, engagement and productivity through these arrangements.

Additionally, alternative work arrangements are prompting employers to rethink their approach to Total Rewards. Roughly half of employers (49%) indicate that the new work requirements necessitate a hybrid reward model, which for some organizations may include paying employees based on where they are located geographically.

Most organizations do not expect flexible work policies to substantially affect pay and benefit budgets over the next three years; however, over half of employers (57%) expect reductions in real estate expenses, and over a third (36%) anticipate a decrease in commuting expenses during this period. While some of these savings will be offset by increases in subsidies around items such as computer equipment and wireless devices, organizations have an opportunity to reinvest these savings in reward and benefit programs to help meet employees where they are.

The ability to shape a flexible workplace that meets the needs of their employees will help organizations persevere and prosper in an evolving, pandemic-altered world of work.

“As companies continue to evaluate the cost benefits of alternative work arrangements, many indicate that the workplace changes as a result of the pandemic are here to stay. Employers that are able to create and manage a flexible workplace through automation and adaptable policies while reinforcing an enhanced employee experience will not only meet the needs of their employees but be better positioned to compete in the new world of work,” said Catherine Hartmann, North America Rewards practice leader, Willis Towers Watson.

“
Employers that create a flexible workplace with automation, adaptable policies and an enhanced employee experience will be better positioned to compete in the new world of work.”
Catherine Hartmann | North America Rewards practice leader, Willis Towers Watson

Highlights and trends

Alternative work arrangements

Prevalence

Employers say that over half (59%) of their workers are currently telecommuting/working from home; they expect this number to remain high, at around 52% through first quarter of 2021.

Article

Getting flexible work right

DOL Priorities Will Change Under Biden Administration

Bill Brewer — Tue, 01 Dec 2020 17:48:30 GMT

By Allen Smith, J.D. | November 30, 2020

Employers are preparing for changes the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) may make under President-elect Joe Biden's administration. From joint-employer issues to Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) action, the DOL is likely to shift direction on many fronts.

Michael Lotito, an attorney with Littler in San Francisco and co-chair of Littler's Workplace Policy Institute, discussed likely changes at the department with SHRM Online. Lotito has testified before the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, as well as the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. He also co-founded the Emma Coalition, a project named in honor of his granddaughter and dedicated to preparing American businesses for displacement of employees that the rapid rise in automation and artificial intelligence is expected to bring.

SHRM Online: Might the Biden DOL reissue joint-employer guidance and, if so, how might this be significant from a practical standpoint?

Lotito: The DOL joint-employer rule under President Donald Trump's administration was challenged by 18 state attorneys general in a federal court in New York. The district judge held the rule to be invalid. The case is on appeal. Littler has intervened on behalf of the International Franchise Association and other associations to protect the rule. The new administration might attempt to have the Department of Justice, which is litigating the case for the DOL, change its position as to whether the rule should be upheld. The case may likely go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the meantime, the DOL may attempt to pause any effectiveness of the rule while it considers its options. Doing so will risk litigation against DOL, as Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements will become operative. The fight then to confirm the rule will play out in court and often over complex administrative law questions.

However, the field personnel of DOL may well take a much more aggressive enforcement posture against companies in applying the rule to a set of facts. This, too, will invite even more litigation.

SHRM Online: How might a Biden DOL advance unions' interests, such as if large infrastructure projects move forward?

Lotito: Biden proudly says he is a union man and wants to be a union president. One way of demonstrating sincerity in that regard will be through federal contractors who will bid on infrastructure projects. He is likely, through executive orders, to impose requirements on contractors similar to the previously issued and nullified "blacklisting rules." Neutrality, card check, no record of unfair labor practices, strict adherence to Davis-Bacon Act rules and more will possibly impose on contractors a huge price to pay for the privilege of working for the government.

SHRM Online: Do you expect any significant changes at the Wage and Hour Division, and, if so, what might those be?

Lotito: I expect the Wage and Hour Division will stop issuing opinion letters, which have been helpful to many in the regulated community during the Trump administration. A potential review of the joint-employer and upcoming independent-contractor rule will be high up on the division's agenda. Perhaps the division will revisit overtime standards and issue rules dealing with pay entitlement for off-the-clock work, like checking e-mail from home. Enforcement will be aggressive, especially against certain industries like fast food, janitorial, construction and other targets. The department will also coordinate with state DOLs to cooperate with one another as investigations progress.

SHRM Online: What shifts in priorities will the OFCCP likely make under the Biden administration?

Lotito: The OFCCP will have to deal with the executive order from President Trump concerning diversity training guidelines. I suspect President-elect Biden will nullify it. In any event, diversity and inclusion are enormously important issues for everyone and particularly government contractors. More rigorous enforcement efforts, including in-depth audits, will once again become the norm. Controversy over pay disparity issues will intensify.

SHRM Online: What steps might OSHA take in the Biden administration?

Lotito: First, the new president will move quickly to appoint and have confirmed an undersecretary of OSHA, a position that has been vacant over the past four years. That person will move swiftly to promulgate an emergency temporary standard applicable to the pandemic for all impacted stakeholders. Regular new standards will evolve as the pandemic continues and ultimately subsides. Strict enforcement will be the rule of the day. OSHA will be one of the busiest government agencies so long as the pandemic persists.

SHRM Online: What legislative changes might a Biden DOL seek to lead?

Lotito: Legislative changes will depend largely on the results of the Georgia Senate contests. But even if the Senate is 50/50 with Vice President-elect Kamala Harris breaking all ties in likely favor of progressives, legislative initiative may be minimal. A 50/50 Senate will not eliminate the filibuster as Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., has said recently he is not in favor of the filibuster's removal. As long as one needs 60 votes to approve legislation in the Senate, controversial matters on labor and employment like the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, paid sick leave, a new minimum wage and the like may not be front and center as Biden deals with COVID-19, taxes and infrastructure.

SHRM Online: How should employers prepare to respond to these possible changes?

Lotito: First and foremost, be comfortable with uncertainty. Increase compliance focus. Stay engaged and informed. Elections have consequences. How this plays out will depend on many factors. But if the Biden Administration really wants to be remembered for workplace initiatives, it should embrace a new GI bill for upskilling the workforce of the 21st century. We are in the midst of the most transformative workplace disruption in history given the pandemic, robotics and artificial intelligence.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/dol-priorities-will-change.aspx

Employers' Interest in Individual Coverage HRAs Is Rising

Bill Brewer — Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:24:56 GMT

By Stephen Miller, CEBS | November 24, 2020

As ICHRAs approach their first birthday, vendors see continuing growth

Individual coverage health reimbursement arrangements (ICHRAs) became available as a new employee benefit in January 2020 under IRS regulations issued by the Trump administration in June 2019. As ICHRAs approach the end of their initial year, consultants and firms that administer the accounts weighed in on the benefit's future.

With ICHRAs, pronounced "IK'-rahs," employers subject to Affordable Care Act (ACA) coverage requirements could opt to pay for employees to purchase their own health insurance coverage on the ACA marketplace or through an insurance broker, rather than providing an employer-sponsored group health plan. Among a few ICHRA facts to keep in mind:

As with other health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs), employees don't pay taxes on health care spending reimbursed through an employer-funded ICHRA.

An ICHRA, like most other HRAs, is not portable when employment ends, although businesses subject to COBRA requirements must give eligible employees a chance to elect COBRA coverage.

When employers with 50 or more full-time or equivalent employees provide coverage through an ICHRA rather than a traditional group health plan, employer funding must be sufficient for employees to purchase a plan that meets the ACA's coverage and affordability requirements. For instance, in 2021, an employer's ICHRA allowance must be high enough that employees can buy the lowest-cost silver plan on an ACA marketplace exchange by combining their ICHRA funds with no more than 9.83 percent of their adjusted gross income.

Employers Take Notice

There is a growing interest in ICHRAs as a way for employers to keep their health care spending at a fixed dollar amount. This is according to 397 large U.S. employers that participated in HR consultancy Willis Towers Watson's 2020 Health Care Delivery Survey, conducted in August and September. The survey revealed these statistics:

About 15 percent of employers polled were planning to offer or were considering offering ICHRAs to at least some of their employees in 2022 or later.

Almost a quarter (22 percent) of wholesale and retail employers were planning to offer or were considering offering ICHRAs in 2022 or later.

In a further sign of support for ICHRAs, one-third of chief financial officers (CFOs) are considering ICHRAs for some of their active employees, according to 54 CFOs who participated in the Willis Towers Watson 2020 Health Care CFO Survey, conducted in September and October.

"Not surprisingly, relatively few employers adopted ICHRAs this year, as the pandemic diverted much of their attention to other critical benefit matters," said John Barkett, senior director of policy affairs, benefits delivery and administration at Willis Towers Watson. "However, we expect to see interest grow as companies learn more about ICHRAs and the market for individual health plans continues to grow more robust each year."

As more employers adopt ICHRAs to fund health care, he added, "employees could find relief from the burden of having to change plans whenever they change jobs."

ICHRAs, QSEHRAs and Group Plans

Dallas-based HRA administrator Take Command Health recently posted its first ICHRA annual report. "Many business owners and brokers are evaluating their options for group benefits, searching for flexible and budget-friendly options," said Jack Hooper, the firm's CEO.

Among the firm's clients, ranging in size from one to 151 eligible employees, 46 existing clients that previously offered a qualified small-employer HRA (QSEHRA) switched to an ICHRA to offer more generous benefits to their employees.

QSEHRAs—pronounced "kyoo-SEHR'-ahs"—allow employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees to use pretax dollars to reimburse employees who buy nongroup health coverage. The rules for ICHRAs and QSEHRAS differ. For instance, QSEHRAs have a reimbursement cap while ICHRAs do not. QSEHRAs first became available in 2017.

Take Command Health's client data showed increasing interest in ICHRAs:

California, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania and New York lead the country in ICHRA sign-ups, thanks to their strong individual markets.

Professional services, nonprofits, tech companies, and health care providers and services lead in sign-ups.

The average reimbursement rates for 2020 ICHRAs were $749.93 for singles, $847.20 for couples and $931.95 for families.

Survey respondents rated budget control and flexibility at the top of their list of ICHRA benefits.

"Despite the uncertainty that we've all faced these past few months, we've seen sign-ups for individual coverage HRAs climb steadily and double since January," Hooper said. "Carriers are returning to the individual market, and individual premium prices are stabilizing—critical factors in the success of this new HRA."

Differences by Industry

Marek Ciolko, CEO of Gravie, a Minneapolis-based health insurance brokerage, currently has 52 ICHRA clients, some of whom dropped group health coverage and adopted ICHRAs.

"With the unsustainable increases in many current group plans, an ICHRA is a good option," Ciolko said. "Many want to get out of the business of administering health benefits and also prefer the simplicity and predictability of defined contributions enabled by ICHRA."

Specifically, he noted, the firm has seen an increase in interest from companies in the home health care, restaurant, and manufacturing and delivery sectors. "Another area where we have seen interest in ICHRAs is midsized companies that find it challenging to locate or maintain health coverage at reasonable rates due to employee health status," he said.

Reimbursements Differ

Salt Lake City-based PeopleKeep, which provides consumer-directed health accounts, recently posted its own "first nine months" report on ICHRAs.

"There is a vast difference in the allowance amounts offered by employers who allow reimbursement [through ICHRAs] of both insurance premiums and out-of-pocket expenses compared to those who only reimburse employees for premiums," wrote Nick Green, product marketing manager at PeopleKeep.

Among the ICHRAs PeopleKeep administers, 37 percent were limited by employers to reimbursing plan premiums, while 63 percent could be used to reimburse both premiums and out-of-pocket costs.

Employers' Average Annual ICHRA Funding Amounts

	Reimburse Plan Premiums Only	Reimburse Premiums and Out-of-Pocket Costs
Employee-only coverage	$538	$1,017
Employee plus spouse coverage	$640	$1,233
Employee, spouse and dependents coverage	$723	$1,324

Source: PeopleKeep.

"It stands to reason that employers who are able and interested in broadening the type of expenses they reimburse would also want to make more money available to their employees for those expenses," Green wrote. "What was unexpected was the degree to which that is true."

A Bipartisan Solution?

ICHRAs have "proven to be a great fit for employers who want more control over their health benefits costs than a group health insurance plan can provide but want to offer more in allowances than the QSEHRA will allow," Green stated.

Ciolko noted, "Employers don't have to worry about selecting plan options that will work for all of their employees, but rather can empower their employees to choose a plan and carrier that meets their needs."

According to Hooper, "We think the ICHRA model could be the key to bipartisan success. It delivers more lives to the individual market, which is important to Democrats, while providing consumer choice and flexibility that Republicans insist on."

He added, "We believe it could be one of hopefully a few bridges that help to fix the health care system from both sides."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/benefits/pages/employers-interest-in-individual-coverage-hras-is-rising.aspx

Fewer Workers Will Get Pay Raises in 2021; Bonuses Gain Ground

Bill Brewer — Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:22:58 GMT

By Stephen Miller, CEBS | November 17, 2020

More organizations shift from across-the-board increases to variable pay models

The economic effects of COVID-19 have forced nearly half of organizations (45 percent) to re-evaluate salary increase plans for 2021, new survey findings show.

Researchers collected data from 1,283 U.S. organizations during July and August for benefits advisory and brokerage firm Gallagher's 2020/2021 Salary Planning Survey report.

At the start of 2020, two-thirds (66 percent) of surveyed employers had awarded pay raises, as organizations felt primed for growth with a robust economy and record-high employment. By the end of the first quarter, however, the reality of COVID-19 had set in, forcing many employers to put the brakes on wage hikes.

This trend will continue into 2021, according to surveyed employers.

Among the segment of employers that indicated COVID-19 has forced them to re-evaluate 2021 salary increase plans, half (51 percent) expect to reduce salary increases, and 45 percent plan to suspend salary increases altogether.

According to the report:

For 2020, salary increase budgets will end up rising 2.5 percent, down from earlier projections of a 2.8 percent average increase.

For 2021, Gallagher projects average salary budget increases of 2.1 percent, with variations by employee group (see chart below) as well as by location and industry.

Average Fiscal Year Salary Increase Budgets by Employee Group

	2020	2021
Executives	2.3%	2.0%
Managers	2.6%	2.1%
Other exempt workers	2.6%	2.1%
Nonexempt workers	2.6%	2.2%

Source: Gallagher's 2020/2021 Salary Planning Survey report.

Shift Toward Variable Pay

As an alternative to salary increases, variable pay, such as annual bonuses, "can save money and serve as an investment in future success," according to Gallagher's report.

"Revenue streams and budgets will be unpredictable in 2021, and for these reasons, many employers are pausing across-the-board salary increases," said William F. Ziebell, CEO of Gallagher's benefits and HR consulting division. "However, the data shows more employers are leaning into variable pay models because this allows them to provide employees with a pay increase based on performance."

The researchers found that 40 percent of respondents use variable pay for at least one employee group. In addition:

57 percent don't anticipate changing their variable pay budgets for 2020 despite the pandemic.

73 percent don't anticipate changing their variable pay budgets for 2021.

The benefits of variable pay, according to the report, include increasing employee productivity by linking compensation to organizational success while avoiding long-term costs by not adjusting base-pay levels upward.

Incentive Pay Pointers

"Organizations can be prudent in protecting themselves from overpaying under an incentive plan during challenging economic times," said Bob Lindeman and Linda VanDeventer, managing director and co-founder and director of compensation consulting, respectively, of The Overture Group, a boutique executive compensation and search firm that specializes in privately held, small-market organizations.

Lindeman and VanDeventer advise organizations to take the following steps:

Review who is participating in the plan.
Reducing plan participants is a simple way to reduce potential cost, they noted. "Most legal plan documents and employee communications state—and if not, should state—that management reviews and selects the participants in the plan annually. Stating this fact tempers the expectations of employees, albeit it is a drastic change to implement," they noted.

Examine the plan's threshold, target and maximum payouts.
Reducing a payout maximum as a percent of salary, such as from 250 percent to 150 percent, can curb excessive payouts. "Participants will likely notice such a change, but if communicated effectively, plan participants should respect that an organization does not have a bottomless checkbook, especially in the era of COVID," Lindeman and VanDeventer said.

Similarly, raising the payout threshold percentage, for example from meeting 60 percent of a targeted goal to 80 percent, "is another effective method to modify the plan while still keeping it motivational," they suggested. Increasing the target performance required for a payout in the financial formulas can ensure "the organization will have enough profit dollars to afford the payout."

Financial Sector Rewards

In at least one area of the U.S. economy, the financial sector, employees may find both salary increases and annual bonuses under pressure.

Year-end incentive payments in the U.S. financial sector are expected to be lower compared with last year, according to an analysis by Johnson Associates, a compensation consulting firm. "The pandemic is wreaking havoc on many parts of the U.S. economy this year, and the financial services industry is no exception," said Alan Johnson, managing director of the firm.

"Unfortunately, as we look to 2021, even with an optimistic vaccine path, the pandemic will continue to negatively influence businesses, but perhaps to a lesser degree than in 2020," Johnson said. "Headcount reductions will continue in the first half as companies transform and adapt. For 2021, we expect some stabilization with early projections for modest salary increases and flat to slightly increased incentives."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/compensation/pages/fewer-workers-will-get-pay-raises-in-2021-as-bonuses-gain-ground.aspx

Companies offer creative solutions to worker burnout during the pandemic

Bill Brewer — Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:10:02 GMT

By Chip Cutter

Companies are adapting policies and rushing to roll out benefits to head off a surge of employee distress

A few months into the pandemic, Nick Popoff let his guard down in an all-hands video call and said aloud what many had been experiencing: He felt burned out.

Some weeks, the engineering director at ticketing company Eventbrite Inc. didn't leave his house for days, he said. Slack notifications buzzed constantly. He missed seeing friends and colleagues in person. Even a hike with his wife through northern California's redwoods, didn't leave him sufficiently recharged.

"Work burnout is insidious. It's not just like a red light that comes on, " Mr. Popoff says. "It's something that very slowly starts to happen, and that's how it can catch people by surprise."

After Mr. Popoff shared his experience in the meeting, colleagues came forward, saying that they, too, felt exhausted by work, and life, in a pandemic. Mr. Popoff began leading "recognizing burnout" sessions for other employees, giving staffers a forum to voice their feelings, and to hear advice from mental health professionals about how to cope.

The effort is one of many experiments afoot in corporate America as bosses stare at a sea of faces on Zoom and worry. With no end to the pandemic in sight, managers say many remote employees report feeling depressed, fed up and wary of what's next. Companies are adapting policies and rushing to roll out benefits to head off a surge of employee distress.

"There's this second wave upon us, where people are feeling super-anxious that this is the new normal, and how much longer can we sustain this?" says Matthew Schuyler, chief administrative officer at Hilton hotels. "I don't think we've yet come to grips with the mental impact this is having on all of us."

In addition to expanding access to counseling and mental health services, many employers are trying other approaches, such as insisting employees disconnect or offering more training for managers. In recent months, Antonio Neri, chief executive of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co., has been encouraging bosses at the technology company to call employees to check in on their well-being. "You've got to make the effort," he says. "Don't assume email is enough, because email is not personable."

Jimmy Etheredge, CEO of North America at consulting firm Accenture PLC, recently asked his 27 direct reports to attend 2 1/2 hours of virtual training on how to better support colleagues facing mental-health issues. All participated. Mr. Etheredge says he regularly receives emails from employees, explaining their pandemic-related challenges. But consultants have a tendency to jump into a situation and become problem-solvers, an "occupational hazard," Mr. Etheredge says. The training stressed that, in conversations with employees, sometimes attentive listening without judgment can be most helpful.

"Just validate that the person is being heard," Mr. Etheredge says, while directing them to additional resources, if needed.

Solutions needn't be complicated or costly, executives say. Eventbrite recently changed leadership training during the pandemic to focus on how supervisors can manage with empathy while people are working remotely. Now, bosses are taught to begin one-on-one sessions with employees with a simple phrase meant to elicit genuine emotions, says David Hanrahan, the company's chief human resources officer. Instead of a stock "How are you?" before quickly moving on to business, managers might ask, "How are you really, really doing?" After Mr. Hanrahan poses the question, he is silent, even if the pause feels uncomfortable. With some prodding, employees may then open up about their true feelings regarding work or personal challenges. "It's a simple tactic any manager can employ," he says. "But it's about true empathy and true care."

Other companies have taken steps to bolster morale in the Covid era. Seattle construction and engineering company McKinstry Co. LLC began issuing companywide "good news Friday" memos, pointing out, "Hey, here's eight things that happened this week that are pretty good," says Dean Allen, the company's CEO. That could be feedback from a happy customer or details about new business the company landed. Hilton's Mr. Schuyler encourages managers and teams to allow Zoom calls from parks or other outdoor venues.

Fidelity Investments recently began a pilot program for a small portion of its workforce in which employees can opt to work 30 hours a week, with a small pay cut, while retaining their full benefits. Fidelity plans to hire more staff to pick up the work so that other colleagues aren't overwhelmed, says Bill Ackerman, head of human resources at the financial-services firm.

As the pandemic drags, employers need to adjust their approach, Mr. Ackerman says. Benefits that may have been appreciated early on -- such as matching gifts to charities and stipends for home offices -- have shifted this fall to include access to child-care coordinators and subsidies, as parents grapple with schooling issues.

Many bosses say even finding ways to get employees to step away from their laptops takes more thought now. Geben Communication, a public relations firm in Columbus, Ohio, began offering employees bonus "self-care days" off in recent months, to encourage them to disconnect, says Heather Whaling, the company's president. In Austin, Texas, Ryan Wuerch, chief executive of Dosh, an app that gives consumers cash back when they shop, takes another approach: impromptu three-day weekends. On some Thursdays, during all-staff meetings, Mr. Wuerch now surprises the company with the news that the following day is a "Dosh Day," when no work is allowed.

Extra vigilance is key, managers say. To head off burnout, Eventbrite's Mr. Popoff watches for employees who seem to be plugging away after hours and follows up with them the next day, saying that such work is unnecessary.

Some workers have adopted cues to signal they need help. At Dell Technologies Inc., Jennifer "JJ" Davis, senior vice president of corporate affairs at the technology company, says during the pandemic her team has developed a way to alert colleagues when they are "above the line" -- feeling OK, and able to lend a hand -- or "below the line" and needing assistance. The phrases allow people to convey their state of mind without necessarily divulging personal details. "Nobody asks questions. They just say: 'OK, what can I do?' " Ms. Davis says.

Pandemic-specific peer groups also are effective. More than 1,500 Dell employees joined colleagues in virtual support groups focused on child care or pandemic isolation, for staffers living alone. "It gives you a safe place to let your guard down," Ms. Davis says.

Ms. Davis says she helps her colleagues cope by being honest about her own challenges, such as deciding whether her three teenage sons should attend classes in-person or virtually. Sometimes, when meetings run long, Ms. Davis begins preparing dinner -- and tells her team she's multitasking. "I'm like, 'Hey guys, great meeting, I just finished a batch of brownies,' " Ms. Davis says. "If I don't tell my staff and lead by example that I'm cooking brownies while doing a meeting at the same time, then they don't know that they have permission to do the same thing."

Taking Action

What companies can do to curb staff burnout:

Encourage employees to take time off. Some companies offer bonus "self care" days or end work a few hours early.

Expand access to counseling and mental-health services. Employers have rolled out digital counseling apps or brought on coordinators to help employees access care.

Ask managers to check in on individuals' well-being. Even simple gestures, like a phone call instead of an email, can go a long way.

Offer training for managers on supervising with empathy. Overseeing employees in a pandemic is a new skill, so guidance on supporting colleagues' mental well-being can help.

Foster dialogues where workers share genuine emotions. Asking "How are you?" isn't enough; probe to get a sense for people's real situation.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Fox Business

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/companies-offer-creative-solutions-to-worker-burnout-during-the-pandemic

DOL’s new 401(k) rule: Firms must give workers ‘lifetime income’ estimates

Bill Brewer — Mon, 09 Nov 2020 23:31:31 GMT

by Lynn Cavanaugh | November 2, 2020

Employers have a year to implement a new 401(k) rule, but it’ll take some preparation. The Department of Labor (DOL) is requiring firms to provide employees with lifetime income estimates to help them determine their retirement readiness.

The DOL’s Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) has announced this interim final rule. It’s meant to help workers realize how their current retirement plan might translate into lifetime monthly payments, in a similar fashion to what the Social Security Administration provides employees.

This rule was set in motion by the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement (SECURE) Act, passed in 2019. This Act amended the pension benefit statement requirements to show participants equivalents of their retirement savings as monthly income.

“Our goal is to help workers and retirees understand how savings translate to retirement income,” says EBSA’s acting assistant secretary Jeanne Klinefelter Wilson.

To help ease administrative burdens on employers, the new rule includes 11 brief model language inserts that may be used in an employer’s own plan disclosure. Firms can access the new rule online, since it’s now published in the Federal Register.

Calculating estimates

The DOL’s fact sheet includes an example of a plan disclosure for a 40-year-old employee, using a 10-year constant maturity Treasury rate to calculate the monthly payments. Here is the information that must be provided:

• current account balance: $125,000
• single life annuity: $645 per month for life, and
• qualified joint and 100% annuity: $533 per month for an employee’s life and $533 for the life of a spouse following participant’s death.

The DOL is allowing a 60-day comment period, giving employers until Nov. 17, 2020 to submit or mail comments (tinyurl.com/DOL614) on this new rule.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Morning

https://www.hrmorning.com/articles/dols-new-401k-rule-firms-must-give-workers-lifetime-income-estimates/

Why diversity and inclusion initiatives need financial wellness

Bill Brewer — Tue, 03 Nov 2020 15:09:37 GMT

By Marthin De Beer | October 30, 2020

From a pandemic and the move to remote work, to natural disasters and social justice protests, 2020 has been a rollercoaster. These events are having a meaningful impact on companies as employees look to their employers for support. Many organizations have stepped up their efforts to address some of these big challenges our society is facing today, while simultaneously investing in the future of every employee — and the company as a whole.

In the current market environment as HR and benefits leaders look ahead and plan for 2021, Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) initiatives have taken on increased importance. D&I initiatives are no longer nice-to-have, but rather vital for organizations to thrive as employees increasingly demand them. Monster.com found that 62% of job candidates would turn down a job if they didn’t feel the company valued workplace diversity. This is a notable change from recent years and a step in the right direction to address some of society’s biggest challenges where we spend the bulk of our waking life: the workplace.

Although there are a lot of important threads to the D&I conversation, there's one element that often gets left out: financial wellness. That’s a critical oversight given the wealth gap in this country. The Federal Reserve reports that on average white families have accrued eight times the wealth of Black families and five times the wealth of Hispanic families. This is a systemic issue and provides an opportunity for companies to play their part in solving this problem by enabling people of color to increase their wealth.

Growing up in apartheid South Africa, I saw firsthand how the depth of systemic racism permeated society. It became clear that lack of access to economic opportunity — and education to get there — was holding back generations. When I moved to the U.S. and founded BrightPlan, I made a commitment to advancing financial wellness to fuel equality. Employers have an opportunity to lead this transformation by ensuring financial wellness programs are an integral part of their D&I initiatives.

Financial wellness is core to D&I

Employers are working hard to expand their D&I initiatives. LinkedIn data shows there has been a 71% increase in worldwide D&I roles in the past five years. Most D&I efforts focus on representation and removing workplace bias — which is important, but not sufficient to solve the larger issue of financial inequality. Creating lasting wealth for underrepresented communities, however, can lead to change by fueling generational advances.

That’s where financial wellness can be very valuable. Even something as simple as education can be a powerful step forward. Financial education and literacy in the U.S. is extremely low, in general, but even more so in underrepresented communities. For example, a study from Next Gen Personal Finance found that only 3.9% of students from low-income schools were required to take a personal finance class, compared to nearly 17% nationwide. Employers can help close this financial literacy gap by offering wellness benefits that provide comprehensive financial education to employees.

But education alone isn’t enough. A successful financial wellness program should make it easy for employees to take action across their entire financial life. That means providing a complete view of all their personal finances in context of life goals, delivering clear recommendations and making it easy to monitor progress.

Employees expect their employers to provide essential benefits like health care and 401(k)s. It’s now time to add financial wellness to that list, with companies going beyond retirement plans to offer complete financial wellness benefits. By helping underrepresented communities achieve financial wellness, employers can play an active role in bridging the wealth gap.

Gaining a competitive advantage

Including financial wellness as part of employer provided benefits and D&I initiatives doesn’t just benefit employees and society as a whole. It’s also good for business. We’ve seen compelling data from enterprises revealing that financial wellness as part of a broader well-being strategy, improves employee engagement and workplace happiness, while increasing retention and strengthening recruitment efforts. Moreover, data shows that diverse companies perform better financially too.

Data from PwC shows finances are by far the top source of stress for employees. By offering financial wellness benefits, employers can help alleviate anxiety so employees can be more productive and engaged at work.

I’ve seen firsthand that demand for financial wellness solutions is soaring as COVID-19 and D&I conversations have motivated employers to seek innovative solutions. With D&I set to be a priority for employers headed into 2021, financial wellness will be even more valuable as an actionable program that directly addresses root causes, empowering companies and employees to enact lasting change.

Diversity pays off in many ways, and we're just starting to scratch the surface of how financial wellness can support more equitable organizations. By adding financial wellness as a key component to D&I initiatives, employers can take a leadership role in advancing equality and creating generational wealth for all employees while gaining a competitive advantage.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Employee Benefit News (EBN)

https://www.benefitnews.com/opinion/why-diversity-and-inclusion-initiatives-need-financial-wellness

Paid time off to vote is common this year — but many workers don’t know it

Bill Brewer — Mon, 02 Nov 2020 16:06:59 GMT

Published: Nov. 1, 2020 at 3:51 a.m. ET | By: Andrew Keshner

‘It’s not unusual for people not to be aware of the specifics they are being afforded by their employers, sadly.’

A record number of Americans have voted early in the race between President Donald Trump and Democratic challenger Joe Biden, and many will still head to the polls on Election Day. Some companies want to make sure they have plenty of time to do so.

Major companies including Walmart WMT, +1.04% and Twitter TWTR, -3.32% are trying to make it easier for workers to cast their vote on or before Nov. 3’s Election Day, often by providing paid time off.

But many workers don’t know about the accommodations, a new survey suggests.

While 52% of companies are offering paid time off to vote according to their human resource staffers, only 23% of workers are aware of the benefit, a survey from the Society for Human Resource Management found.

Almost one-third (30%) of human resource officials say their companies are providing time off with no pay, and 16% of workers said they knew about such a benefit.

“It’s not unusual for people not to be aware of the specifics they are being afforded by their employers, sadly,” said Johnny Taylor, president and CEO of the Society for Human Resource Management, a professional association.

The survey comes during a hard-fought presidential election — and the coronavirus pandemic that’s up-ended work routines and added another layer of complexity to the voting process.

More than 22 million people had already cast their vote as of earlier this month, according to the Associated Press. That’s 16% of all votes in the 2016 presidential election.

The wait for early in-person voting has sometimes stretched on for an hour or more, according to media reports. A delay like that can take a real chunk out of a person’s work day.

The findings come from two surveys, one of almost 500 human resource workers who are members of the Society for Human Resource Management. The other survey polled approximately 1,000 people. ***NORC at the University of Chicago performed the worker survey on SHRM’s behalf. ****

Workers in one survey may not necessarily be working at the same companies as the human resource officials. Still, said Taylor, the lack of awareness might hold true even if the workers and HR poll participants worked in the same place.

Employees are often unaware that they’re entitled to all sorts of perks, he said. “Some of it is employees during the orientation process are just overwhelmed with data,” and more focused on key questions like pay.

Between 42% and 44% of surveyed companies offered paid time off to vote between 2017 to 2019, according to previous benefit surveys from the organization that used larger sample sizes.

Taylor was expecting even more companies to offer time off for voting this election season. But when he asked around, some colleagues told him they weren’t doing it because the opportunity to vote has been stretched out over so many days, and workers already had flexibility in how they used their time off.

Around 25% of companies told Mercer, the human resources consulting firm, they were changing their internal policies this year to provide more voting time. The most-cited tweak was increasing paid time off (10.5%), according to the survey released Thursday.

As of late August, more than 700 companies had joined Time To Vote, a non-partisan coalition of businesses pledging to facilitate their staff’s ability to vote. (That’s anything between a paid day off, lighter schedules or assistance with mail-in ballots.)

Over 200 companies joined the coalition over the summer, including Nike NKE, +2.25%, Dell Technologies DELL, 1.50% , Visa V, +2.54% and Bank of America BAC, +1.24%. Nike said its accommodations may include paid time off on Election Day, no meetings that day or offering resources for mail-in ballots and early voting.

Dell already offers paid time off to vote, a spokeswoman noted. But she added that the company joined the coalition “to further amplify this message amongst team members and reinforce our commitment to civic engagement.”

Visa expanded its paid time off policy from two to four hours and offered other resources on voting, including a virtual event with voting experts, a spokesman said. “Taken together, we hope these actions lead to an increase in employee voter participation in our country’s elections this year,” he said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: MarketWatch

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/many-workers-have-no-idea-their-employers-are-offering-this-democracy-boosting-perk-survey-suggests-2020-10-23

Gartner Top 3 Priorities for HR Leaders in 2021

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Oct 2020 15:14:21 GMT

October 23, 2020 | Contributor: Jackie Wiles

Building critical skills and competencies continues to top the list of priorities for HR leaders in 2021. Also on the radar — organizational (re)design and change, and leadership.

A recent survey of more than 800 HR leaders shows that although many expect their organizations to focus on growth in 2021, cost optimization features more widely than it did previously — and improving operational excellence remains paramount. To support these and other business priorities, 68% of HR leaders say they will be building critical skills and competencies, an objective that has topped the priorities of HR leaders for three consecutive years.

Organizational design and change management also feature among the key objectives for HR leaders, as does building a bench of current and future leaders. None of these goals is new to HR leaders, but all have been made more urgent by the effects of COVID-19.

“As organizations move from their initial pandemic response to more sustainable operations, they’re trying to build resilience into everything, from strategy to work design, so as to enable the organization, its leadership and employees to sense and respond to change, repeatedly,” says Mark Whittle, VP, Advisory, Gartner.

Top priority No. 1: Building critical skills and competencies

HR leaders see building critical skills as vital to driving many of their organization’s priorities — from growing the business and executing business transformation to improving operational excellence.

One-third or more of HR leaders agree the major challenges include their lack of visibility and understanding of current skill gaps and being unable to integrate learning effectively into employee workflows.

Use a dynamic approach for future-forward skills development

Traditional ways of predicting needs and upskilling the workforce aren’t working in today’s highly changeable conditions, where employees need more skills for every job and many of those skills are new. Gartner TalentNeuron™ data shows that the total number of skills required for a single job is increasing by 10% year over year, and one-third of the skills present in an average 2017 job posting won’t be needed by 2021.

Furthermore, many employees aren’t learning the right new skills — for their personal development or the benefit of the organization.

Gartner research shows that HR leaders need to adopt a dynamic approach to reskilling and redeploying talent, one in which all impacted stakeholders work together to sense shifting skill needs and find ways to develop skills as those new needs arise. Currently, only 21% of HR leaders say peers share accountability or partner with HR to determine future skill needs.

Gartner research shows that when using this type of dynamic approach to reskilling, employees apply 75% of the new skills they learn — far more than with other approaches — and learning begins sooner, as needs are identified faster.

Adopt new recruiting tactics

HR leaders also need a more modern and out-of-the-box approach to recruiting. Traditionally, organizations sought to replace roles and individuals in the workforce by seeking a similar set of candidate profiles — from known talent pool sources and from those attracted to the existing employee value proposition (EVP).

Instead, to ensure quality hires:

Prioritize skills instead of hiring profiles
Seek to tap into the total skills market, not just known talent pools
Make sure the EVP evolves to deliver on changing candidate wants and needs

Gartner research finds that 65% of candidates have cut short the hiring process because they found certain aspects of the job (e.g., work-life balance, development opportunities, company culture) unattractive.

Top priority No. 2: Organizational design and change management

This objective is a top priority for 46% of HR leaders. And it’s key to driving many enterprise business goals, including cost optimization (which aligns costs and resources to business priorities).

Many organizations have experienced, in trying to respond at speed to the effects of the pandemic, that their years-long focus on efficiency has actually left them with rigid structures, workflows, role design and networks that don’t meet today’s needs or flex with fast-changing conditions.

Work friction weighs down employees

Gartner research shows that only 19% of HR leaders report that their workforce can effectively change direction based on changing needs or priorities. Less than 40% believe employees can effectively detect when they are working on the right things for customers.

What is keeping employees from adapting to change? Research shows outdated work design is the cause of numerous forms of work friction. Future-forward work design is what’s needed to ensure employees can be responsive — that is, in sync with customer needs, in a position to anticipate changes in those needs, and with the ability to adapt their approach and activities accordingly.

This work friction adds to the burden of incessant everyday change that is driving widespread change fatigue. That fatigue means employees are unable to process change at a time when organizations most need them to be responsive and adaptable.

Unlock employee responsiveness

HR leaders can help prevent change fatigue, and address the specific factors that contribute to work friction. Rethinking work design strategies can help to unlock responsiveness at scale across the workforce and build organizational resilience.

Tactics include realigning work design to the way work really happens and resetting rigid permissions and signoff processes and hurdles so they don’t unnecessarily impede innovation and action.

This type of shift from designing for efficiency to designing for flexibility is expected, according to 52% of HR leaders, to have a significant impact on their organizations into 2021. Only 8% said they expected no impact from this evolution.

Top priority No. 3: Current and future leadership

Strong leadership is especially important during times of great change. Gartner research recently showed that only 44% of employees say they trust their organization’s leaders and managers to navigate a crisis well.

Lack of diversity tops the leadership concerns of HR leaders. This contributes to the lack of confidence and trust in leadership in a year when demands for equity and inclusion have, in general, become more visible and ardent from both employees and the public.

Gartner TalentNeuron data illustrates the lack of diversity among the leadership of U.S. companies. It shows that only 10% of senior-level corporate positions are held by a woman from a racial or ethnic minority and only 18% by a man from a minority segment.

The barriers that impede advancement among underrepresented talent equally apply to the leadership pipeline. Potential leaders from diverse groups often face unclear career paths and steps to advancement, get too little exposure to senior leaders, and lack mentors or career support.

Go beyond mentoring to nurture diverse leadership talent

HR leaders know it takes more than intent to fix bias. A Gartner survey of HR leaders in early 2020 found that 88% felt their organization had not been effective at increasing diverse representation. The imperative for diversity, equity and inclusion leaders now is to assess all the systems and processes that systematically deter equal opportunity, as well as take proactive measures to build diversity on the leadership bench.

One approach is to manufacture more intentional networking opportunities that expose high-potential diverse talent to a network of connections that are diverse in role, skills, level and experience — and directly expose that talent to senior leaders who can support their growth and advancement.

Organizations that use diversity networking programs are 3.4 times more likely to report they are effective at increasing opportunities for talent mobility.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Gartner

https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/gartner-top-3-priorities-for-hr-leaders-in-2021/

IRS Announces 2021 Retirement Plan Contribution Limits For 401(k)s And More

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Oct 2020 13:15:58 GMT

by: Ashlea Ebeling | Oct 26, 2020,04:59pm EDT

How much can you save for retirement in 2021 in tax-advantaged accounts? How does $58,000 sound? The Treasury Department has announced inflation-adjusted figures for retirement account savings for 2021.

The basic salary deferral amount for 401(k) and similar workplace plans remains flat at $19,500; the $6,500 catch-up amount if you’re 50 or older also remains the same; but the overall limit for these plans goes up from $57,000 to $58,000 in 2021. That helps workers whose employers allow special after-tax salary deferrals, and self-employed folks who can save to the limit in solo or individual 401(k)s or SEP retirement plans.

For the rest of us, IRA contribution limits are flat. The amount you can contribute to an Individual Retirement Account stays the same for 2021: $6,000, with a $1,000 catch-up limit if you’re 50 or older.

There’s a little good news for IRA savers. You can earn a little more and get to deduct your IRA contributions. Plus, the phase-out income limits for contributing to a Roth IRA are bumped up.

And the income limits to claim the saver’s credit, an extra incentive to start and keep saving, has gone up.

We outline the numbers below; see IRS Notice 2020-79 for technical guidance. For more on 2021 tax numbers: Forbes contributor Kelly Phillips Erb has all the details on 2021 tax brackets, standard deduction amounts and more. We have all the details on the new higher 2021 estate and gift tax limits too.

401(k)s. The annual contribution limit for employees who participate in 401(k), 403(b), most 457 plans and the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan is $19,500 for 2021—for the second year in a row. Note, you can make changes to your 401(k) election at any time during the year, not just during open enrollment season when most employers send you a reminder to update your elections for the next plan year.

The 401(k) Catch-Up. The catch-up contribution limit for employees age 50 or older in these plans also remains steady: it’s $6,500 for 2021. Even if you don’t turn 50 until December 31, 2021, you can make the additional $6,500 catch-up contribution for the year.

SEP IRAs and Solo 401(k)s. For the self-employed and small business owners, the amount they can save in a SEP IRA or a solo 401(k) goes up from $57,000 in 2020 to $58,000 in 2021. That’s based on the amount they can contribute as an employer, as a percentage of their salary; the compensation limit used in the savings calculation also goes up from $285,000 in 2020 to $290,000 in 2021.

Aftertax 401(k) contributions. If your employer allows aftertax contributions to your 401(k), you also get the advantage of the new $58,000 limit for 2021. It’s an overall cap, including your $19,500 (pretax or Roth in any combination) salary deferrals plus any employer contributions (but not catch-up contributions).

The SIMPLE. The contribution limit for SIMPLE retirement accounts is unchanged at $13,500 for 2021. The SIMPLE catch-up limit is still $3,000.

Defined Benefit Plans. The limitation on the annual benefit of a defined benefit plan is unchanged at $230,000 for 2021. These are powerful pension plans (an individual version of the kind that used to be more common in the corporate world before 401(k)s took over) for high-earning self-employed folks.

Individual Retirement Accounts. The limit on annual contributions to an Individual Retirement Account (pretax or Roth or a combination) remains at $6,000 for 2021. The catch-up contribution limit, which is not subject to inflation adjustments, remains at $1,000. (Remember that 2021 IRA contributions can be made until April 15, 2022.)

Deductible IRA Phase-Outs. You can earn a little more in 2021 and get to deduct your contributions to a traditional pretax IRA. Note: Even if you earn too much to get a deduction for contributing to an IRA, you can still contribute—it’s just nondeductible.

In 2021, the deduction for taxpayers making contributions to a traditional IRA is phased out for singles and heads of household who are covered by a workplace retirement plan and have modified adjusted gross incomes (AGI) between $66,000 and $76,000, up from $65,000 and $75,000 in 2020. For married couples filing jointly, in which the spouse who makes the IRA contribution is covered by a workplace retirement plan, the income phase-out range is $105,000 to $125,000 for 2021, up from $104,000 to $124,000.

For an IRA contributor who is not covered by a workplace retirement plan and is married to someone who is covered, the deduction is phased out if the couple’s income is between $198,000 and $208,000 in 2021, up from $196,000 and $206,000 in 2020.

Roth IRA Phase-Outs. The inflation adjustment helps Roth IRA savers too. In 2021, the AGI phase-out range for taxpayers making contributions to a Roth IRA is $198,000 to $208,000 for married couples filing jointly, up from $196,000 to $206,000 in 2020. For singles and heads of household, the income phase-out range is $125,000 to $140,000, up from $124,000 to $139,000 in 2020.

If you earn too much to open a Roth IRA, you can open a nondeductible IRA and convert it to a Roth IRA as Congress lifted any income restrictions for Roth IRA conversions. To learn more about the backdoor Roth, see Congress Blesses Roth IRAs For Everyone, Even The Well-Paid.

Saver’s Credit. The income limit for the saver’s credit for low- and moderate-income workers is $66,000 for married couples filing jointly for 2021, up from $65,000; $49,500 for heads of household, up from $48,750; and $33,000 for singles and married filing separately, up from $32,500.

QLACs. The dollar limit on the amount of your IRA or 401(k) you can invest in a qualified longevity annuity contract is still $135,000 for 2021.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2020/10/26/irs-announces-2021-retirement-plan-contribution-limits-for-401ks-and-more/#22efe7b0215f

Starbucks to link executive compensation to DEI goals

Bill Brewer — Thu, 29 Oct 2020 13:12:19 GMT

AUTHOR: Sheryl Estrada | PUBLISHED: Oct. 16, 2020

Dive Brief:

In efforts to advance racial and social equity, Starbucks will link executive compensation to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) goals beginning in the 2021 fiscal year (FY21), the company said Oct. 14. The Seattle-based company will also launch an Inclusion and Diversity Executive Council in the first quarter of FY21. Starbucks said it's sharing workforce diversity data "in more detail than we have previously shared," as well as making its filings with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission public. Other initiatives announced include a partnership with employee resource groups and the launch of a leadership mentoring program.
Starbucks has set a goal of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) representation of "at least 30% at all corporate levels and at least 40% at all retail and manufacturing roles by 2025," according to the DEI report. In corporate level positions, White individuals represent 65.2% of employees; Asian 19.2%; Hispanic or Latinx 7.4%; Black 3.7%; and employees who identify as multiracial 2.6%. Women represent 69.2% of Starbucks employees in the U.S., overall; and there are roughly 47% BIPOC employees. Starbucks has reached 100% pay equity, according to the report.
A mentoring program will begin in FY21 with a group of executives in senior vice president roles or higher paired with BIPOC directors in corporate and retail roles, the company said. It plans to increase talent development opportunities for BIPOC employees as well as partner with professional organizations that specialize in facilitating development. Anti-bias content will be included in hiring, development and performance assessment toolkits, according to Starbucks. The company will also invest in recognition and development programs for its employee resource groups — Black Partner Network, Hora Del Café, India Partner Network, Indigenous Partner Network and Pan-Asian Partner Network. An Inclusion and Diversity Virtual Leadership Summit scheduled for the second quarter of FY21 will be part of the initiative.

Dive Insight:

Starbucks has the responsibility to lead by example and will implement transparency and accountability to meet its commitment, CEO Kevin Johnson said in a letter accompanying the announcement.

Executive compensation at Starbucks will now be linked to DEI goals, which is a form of accountability that supports long-term changes, according to Mercer. Starbucks will also focus on racially and ethnically diverse representation on corporate boards of directors by joining the Board Diversity Action Alliance, Johnson said. Starbucks' new initiatives are built on the guidance offered in a prior Civil Rights Assessment conducted by Covington & Burling, according to the company. One of the recommendations was to hire a global chief inclusion and diversity officer. Nzinga "Zing" Shaw was hired for the role beginning at Starbucks in December 2019 "to help establish a strategic vision for the path ahead," the company said.

Starbucks also said all leaders in vice president roles or higher will be required to complete a two-hour anti-bias training and "the foundational and racial bias courses from the To Be Welcoming Curriculum," according to the company. This isn't Starbucks' first time partaking in diversity training. The company closed more than 8,000 U.S. stores and its corporate office for several hours in 2018 for racial bias training following an incident in Philadelphia when a store manager racially profiled two Black customers.

Starbucks' push toward recognizing and developing employee-led networks is to better understand and support the experiences of BIPOC employees, the company said. The networks could also help Starbucks understand the viewpoints of its diverse customers who advocate for employees. In June, amid national protests calling for racial justice, Starbucks received backlash for banning employees from wearing Black Lives Matter T-shirts and accessories. After a #BoycottStarbucks hashtag went viral, the company designed its own Black Lives Matter T-shirt.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/starbucks-to-link-executive-compensation-to-dei-goals/587158/

Money or Life? WorldatWork Survey of 5400 Workers Choose Life

Bill Brewer — Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:06:30 GMT

A survey of over 5,400 workers reveals how COVID-19 and the current political environment have contributed to dramatic shifts in what workers value and expect from their organizations.

SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. (PRWEB) OCTOBER 13, 2020

Money or Life? New WorldatWork Survey Shows Dramatic Shift in What Employees Expect from Their Bosses in Exchange for Their Time and Energy

Worker Value Survey of 5,400 Finds That Safety Replaces Money as the New Currency

Almost half would take a lower title and a 30% pay cut to work from home -
More than half prefer their organizations take a stand on social issues -

Employees are putting their safety, security, and personal values over money and titles according to the results of the Worker Value Survey, one of the largest of its kind, conducted by WorldatWork, the Total Rewards Association for HR professionals. The study of more than 5,400 working professionals uncovered significant workplace shifts and reflects the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns and social justice protests. (Journalists contact judy@companyb-ny.com for a copy of the results.)

The survey found that employees value safety more than money and want to align with leaders who take a clear stance on issues in which they believe. The survey also dug into what benefits are most important.

“There has been a reckoning. The American Dream — bigger title, more pay — has been pushed aside and replaced with, ‘I want what I do to have meaning; to have a job that makes an impact; and a safe environment that values me as a whole person,” says Scott Cawood, CEO, WorldatWork.

The survey provides insights into how COVID-19 and the current political environment have pushed core values and current issues to the forefront of the employer/employee conversation. Findings can help business leaders design and deliver Total Rewards programs that give workers a sense of purpose and meaning in their lives.

According to the survey, employees say:

● They are seeking greater work/life balance, even if it means less money and a lower title. 42% of respondents would take 30% less pay and a lower title to work from home and have a more balanced work schedule. Over one-third (33%) of men and almost half (47%) of women say they’d make this trade.

● They strongly prefer that organizations take a public stance on social issues. More than half (54%) of respondents want companies to publicly voice opinions, one-third (33%) say they strongly prefer their employers speak out. Younger generations are the drivers for this. Standing for something is more important to Gen Z and Millennials (64%) than to their Boomer (38%) counterparts.

● They want their companies to ensure their safety … or they won’t go to work. 50% say they will NOT work for companies if they don’t feel safe. Another 28% say that if they don’t feel safe they are unlikely to work for that company.

● They want leaders whose values align with theirs. The majority (60%) state that working for a leader who shares similar social beliefs is very or extremely important. Almost a third (29%) viewed this as somewhat important and only 12% said it was not at all important. Almost two-thirds of Millennial and Gen X respondents want to work with someone who thinks like they do.

“This attitudinal shift -- across all generations - has implications well beyond the short-term accommodations that companies are making because of the pandemic. Companies must pay attention or risk losing talent to others who are putting employees first,” says Cawood.

Benefits that matter most now
The survey also looked at what benefits matter most to today’s professionals. While employees would like to engineer perfect work and life balances, when asked to rank benefits in order of importance, health insurance outranked lifestyle perks such as paid time off, flexible work schedules, and the ability to work remotely. Scoring 21 points higher than any other benefit, 45% of respondents said health insurance was the most/second most important benefit their company could offer.

Offering a retirement or 401K plan came in second, with 25% of respondents choosing it as their first or second most important benefit. Flexible work schedules and the ability to work from home came in fourth and fifth, respectively.

Methodology
The WorldatWork Work Value survey, conducted online, captured responses from 5,417 working professionals, collected between 8/14/2020 – 8/31/2020. 46% of respondents identified as male, 54% identified as female. Respondents were screened to only include those that are full-time employed in the US.

About WorldatWork®
WorldatWork is the leading nonprofit professional association in compensation and Total Rewards. We serve those who design and deliver total rewards programs to cultivate engaged, effective workforces that power thriving organizations. We accomplish this through education and certification; idea exchange; knowledge creation; information sharing; research; advocacy; and affiliation and networking. Founded in the United States in 1955, today WorldatWork serves Total Rewards professionals throughout the world working in organizations of all sizes and structures.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Cision

https://www.prweb.com/releases/money_or_life_worldatwork_survey_of_5400_workers_choose_life/prweb17464884.htm

Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums rose 4 percent in past year: analysis

Bill Brewer — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 16:06:49 GMT

BY JESSIE HELLMANN | 10/08/20

Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums rose 4 percent over the past year, outpacing the increase in workers’ wages and the rate of inflation, according to an analysis released Thursday by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Average annual premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance are now $7,470 for a single plan and $21,342 for a family plan, up 4 percent from the previous year. Those dollar amounts include both worker and employer contributions.

Meanwhile, wages increased by 3.4 percent alongside 2.1 percent inflation.

About 157 million people get their insurance through work, and the costs have steadily risen over the years.

The average premium for family coverage, including the employer contribution, has increased 22 percent over the last five years and 55 percent over the last decade.

In 2020, on average, workers contributed 17 percent of the premium for single coverage — about $1,243 — and 27 percent for family coverage, or about $5,588.

Rising health care costs have been one of the reasons behind stagnant wages.

Eighty-three percent of covered workers had an annual deductible for single coverage that must be met because most services are paid for by the plan, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation analysis.

The average deductible for single coverage was $1,644 in 2020, similar to the average deductible last year.

Sixty-five percent of covered workers have coinsurance that requires they pay for a percentage of their care of meeting their deductible.

The analysis concluded that health care costs were stable in 2020, with premium increases modest and consistent with recent years. However, as the analysis was conducted in the early days of the pandemic, it doesn’t address how employers responded to it.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Hill

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/520193-employer-sponsored-health-insurance-premiums-rose-4-percent-in-past-year

Exercising The Right To Time Off To Vote (Forbes)

Bill Brewer — Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:03:21 GMT

Aaron Colby | Oct 10, 2020

Many food and hospitality businesses are incentivizing workers to vote. But, how does the law protect workers who are forced to choose between working and voting?

Encouraging Civic Engagement

Hospitality organizations of all sizes are encouraging employees to get out and vote. Examples include paid time off to vote, employee and customer voter registration initiatives, closing operations on Election Day, and free meals to poll workers. The encouragement is consistent across non-restaurant employers too. And, it has shown to make a difference.

Schedule Conflicts Suppressing The Vote

A Pew Research Center survey from the last national election shows several reasons Americans decided to not vote:

“While a dislike of the candidates or issues was the most frequently cited reason for not voting, other top reasons included a lack of interest or a feeling that their vote wouldn’t make a difference (15%), being too busy or having a conflicting schedule (14%), having an illness or disability (12%) and being out of town or away from home (8%)....”

Even so, a recent survey of HR professionals reveals that still less than half of businesses offer workers any time off to vote:

Paid Time To Vote. 45% of large organizations (500+ employees) said they are offering paid time off for voting, compared to 43% of medium organizations (100-499 employees), and 55% of small organizations (1-99 employees).
Unpaid Time To Vote. 33% of large organizations said they are offering unpaid time off for voting, compared to 30% of medium organizations, and 23% of small organizations.

Like most Americans, many hospitality workers are scheduled to work when polls are open. But, what’s different is that most hospitality jobs are non-exempt (hourly) and either customer-facing or essential to daily operations, making efficient scheduling and attendance vital to success. There is an increased importance on “showing up to work on time” because absences may lead to lost revenue. The unintended impact can be a partial, albeit real, barrier to participating in the elective process.

The Right To Time Off To Vote

Having the right to vote is one thing; having the ability to exercise the right is another.

Election Day is not (yet) a national holiday, and voters often face long lines at the polls.

No federal law mandates that businesses give employees time off to vote. The right to time off to vote comes from state law.

Only 30 states have laws that require time off work to vote. Common nuances between state laws guaranteeing workers time off to vote include:

Which workers must get time off to vote? Smaller businesses, newer employees, and independent contractors (like gig workers) may not be covered.
When workers may take time off to vote? Some laws provide time off “while polls are open” on Election days, whereas other laws do not specify. This issue may play out in the courts given the higher voting by mail and ballot box during the pandemic.
What amount of time off do workers get to vote? State laws differ, ranging from two hours, three hours, a “reasonable time,” “the morning of Election Day,” to depending on whether the worker can get to the polls when not working.
Whether workers must be paid for the time off to vote? 23 of the 30 state laws mandate the time off to vote also have some element of pay for the time (the other seven state laws require at least unpaid time off).
Whether workers must provide proof of voting? Most state laws do not require workers to present proof of voting, but at least seven do in certain circumstances (such as for documentation to be paid for the time).
Whether workers must give advanced notice for time off to vote? Most state laws do not require notice, however, some do require “reasonable” notice or notice a day or two before the election.

Bottom line: whether it is because you have the time, your company gives you the time, or you carve out the time, exercise your right to vote.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/aaroncolby/2020/10/10/exercising-the-right-to-time-off-to-vote/#337a3eb668a4

Fitness benefits moved online during COVID-19 — but will they stay there?

Bill Brewer — Wed, 07 Oct 2020 16:06:35 GMT

AUTHOR: Ryan Golden | PUBLISHED: Oct. 1, 2020

Companies largely haven't cut back on fitness classes, citing cultural and employee-health concerns as cause for continued investment, sources told HR Dive.

During the U.S. public-health response to COVID-19, many employees witnessed the closure of their physical workplaces and other community fixtures, including gyms, yoga studios, spas and similar facilities.

The latter group of closures affected employee engagement and retention efforts among employers that offer benefits programs centered around physical fitness and personal wellness. According to the Society for Human Resource Management's 2019 Employee Benefits survey, nearly one-third of U.S. employers offered fitness center memberships or subsidies or reimbursements for fitness classes. Such arrangements were more common than on-site fitness centers or classes, offered by 29% of employers as of last year.

Prior to the pandemic, physical fitness benefits formed "a major component" of wellness strategy, according to the SHRM survey. But providers that facilitate these benefits told HR Dive that COVID-19 necessitated a massive shift.

Providers follow the remote trend

Since March, a number of employers have closed physical worksites and asked employees to work from home. Per a July survey by Gartner, more than 80% of company leaders planned to permit some form of remote work after the pandemic.

The move to online work was accompanied by a movement to online delivery of certain employee benefits, including many healthcare services. A shutdown of in-person care led to increased use of telehealth services, and experts in the space suggested telehealth can continue to be an important part of the benefits ecosystem moving forward.

A similar development may be emerging with respect to fitness benefits. ClassPass, a fitness class booking platform with a business-to-business product, pivoted "very quickly" to virtual offerings as certain markets entered lockdown, said Nicole Wolfe, the company's head of corporate programs.

Ryan Golden/HR Dive, data from the Society for Human Resource Management's 2019 Employee Benefits survey

Employees using ClassPass can access online video sessions either by signing up for them in advance or by accessing pre-recorded content on demand. Since the move to virtual delivery, users are trying new types of programs in different markets, Wolfe said. Those based in New York, for example, might take yoga sessions delivered by studios in London. Fitness centers have also helped the company navigate certain public-health closures. When officials in San Francisco prohibited indoor workouts, some providers held outdoor events like bootcamps instead.

One-on-one fitness sessions have increased in popularity since the pandemic began, perhaps due to the fact that group classes are no longer available in many markets, but employers are also using ClassPass benefits as a way to team build, Wolfe said.

Other vendors made a similar transition. Peerfit, which offers an employee-benefit platform for scheduling personalized fitness activities, launched a digital product that made use of existing digital classes and other activities already on its provider network. It also allowed employers to purchase this digital product without the company's traditional brick-and-mortar offering, said Emma Maurer, vice president of enterprise health at Peerfit.

Before the pandemic, Peerfit also emphasized the ability of its platform to bring employees together via shared fitness experiences. That's continued during the pandemic, Maurer said. Streamed classes allow employees to invite their co-workers to join virtually.

"We are seeing our users starting to go back to in-person classes," Maurer said, adding that the number of subscriptions and views of digital content on Peerfit is also down from April. Providers within the company's network are beginning to reopen, albeit with additional health and safety precautions. "Gyms are taking this health crisis seriously and there are additional precautions that our members need to know about," she said.

COVID-19 hasn't led to significant cuts

Digital offerings might make sense in the current environment as some research suggests a potentially negative outlook for brick-and-mortar fitness centers. For example, a TD Ameritrade survey of U.S. adults published in May found 61% planned to exercise at home instead of paying for the gym. Across the country, reopening gyms and similar locations have struggled to comply with public regulations and mitigate the risks of exercising indoors during a pandemic, NPR reported in September.

Yet these observations haven't necessarily caused employers to drop fitness benefits. Most large-employer members of the Business Group on Health, roughly 80%, "have no plans to open on-site fitness centers anytime soon," said LuAnn Heinen, vice president of BGH and leader of its Well-being and Workforce Strategy Institute. "Clearly that only reflects the impact of COVID and not the import and the value of fitness programs that employers know employees need and value," she added.

Other Business Group members are either continuing with plans to open such centers in the future or have existing centers open in select locations, Heinen said, and vendors that offer access to digital fitness classes have become popular. "Companies that didn't already have those kinds of options are certainly looking into them," she explained.

Moreover, pushback on virtual fitness classes has been minimal, Heinen said. On a recent benchmarking call of BGH members, one HR representative said they had received some internal pushback on virtual-class usage. For the most part, however, Heinen said she hasn't heard talk of any cuts to fitness benefits from members. "Things may be a little bit on pause and getting recalibrated, but we haven't heard about cuts — I haven't."

This tracks with findings about employers' larger well-being investment during the pandemic. A survey conducted earlier this year by Willis Towers Watson found the vast majority of employers would not be changing their wellness benefit budgets, said Regina Ihrke, North America well-being leader at the firm.

The two vendors who spoke to HR Dive noted that they were both flexible with their payment options as the pandemic set in. Wolfe said that ClassPass has traditionally moved away from a per-employee-per-month payment model so that employers are paying for workers who actually use the program. "When the pandemic hit, we actually froze all our memberships," Wolfe said. "Now it's really kind of on them to determine when they want to come back on."

"Things may be a little bit on pause and getting recalibrated, but we haven't heard about cuts — I haven't."

LuAnn Heinen

Vice President, Leader of Well-being and Workforce Strategy Institute, Business Group on Health

"I think everyone was worried," Maurer said, noting that Peerfit's many public-sector clients faced falling revenues and had difficulty maintaining existing benefits without making adjustments, as did others. The company offered clients the opportunity to freeze their contracts for up to 60 days, keeping the benefit an option for employees if they wanted to buy fitness experiences for themselves. "It was more from a position of compassion [to freeze the contracts] than really anything else."

Peerfit is now seeing interest from clients in ramping up their fitness benefits, Maurer said, adding that employers may be concerned about COVID-19 causing workers to feel isolated. "I think employers are looking for a way to build back their culture, to create a sense of connectivity and togetherness again."

What wellness may look like post-pandemic

Employers who spoke to HR Dive mainly confirmed the importance of wellness benefits moving forward. Ultimate Kronos Group, the company recently formed from the April merger of Kronos and Ultimate Software, set up virtual fitness classes for employees and their children over the past few months, and the company plans to hold a competitive company-wide step challenge in October as employees work remote, said Chief People Officer Dave Almeda.

Tess Hamberg, a wellness consultant employed by Aetna who works with engineering consulting firm WSP, said that WSP shifted its wellness strategy to focus on supporting employees during the transition to working from home. WSP had already brought on ClassPass before the pandemic, and the ability to offer virtual access to classes was a component of a broader strategy to better match benefits strategy to the virtual environment.

Those virtual offerings are likely to be a permanent feature of WSP's benefits package moving forward, Hamberg said; "It’s like the cat's out of the bag at this point because we realize that it's an option that's now available to us. COVID really pushed a lot of people to realize we can do all these offerings that we didn't think of before or just never utilized."

Worries about employees' mental health are also likely to continue, Ihrke said, but employers who've spoken to Willis Towers Watson noticed increased engagement on digital communications regarding mental health, even as use of employee assistance programs decreased at some firms.

Those concerns can be addressed by digital offerings, though sources still perceive deficiencies in mental healthcare in the U.S. "COVID, like so many other things, exposed the cracks, the weakness and the needs that we haven't met in our healthcare system," Heinen said. "If [companies] didn't have a full suite of virtual benefits, they certainly have it now."

But wellness isn't one-dimensional. "There is this 'watch out' phase that's now starting to get heightened in not ignoring the physical well-being aspects," Ihrke noted, due to worries that employees are getting less activity and making less healthy decisions. "I think there is concern that, if we ignore that piece too long and just focus [on] mental health, we are going to face more significant issues long-term."

In the meantime, gyms, studios and other businesses are moving to accommodate the virtual trend long-term. "I think it's here to stay," Maurer said. "[Providers] have kind of learned that they needed another way to stay alive … if folks were still fearful of going back to gyms then they would need to offer virtual content."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/fitness-benefits-moved-online-during-covid-19-but-will-they-stay-there/586229/

Companies to Shrink Offices as Remote Work Becomes ‘New Normal’

Bill Brewer — Wed, 07 Oct 2020 15:29:25 GMT

Ian King | Tue, October 6, 2020, 3:03 PM PDT

More than half of companies plan to shrink their offices as working from home becomes a regular fixture after the Covid-19 pandemic ends, according to a survey by Cisco Systems Inc.

Some 53% of larger organizations plan to reduce the size of their office space and more than three quarters will increase work flexibility. Almost all of the respondents were uncomfortable returning to work because they fear contracting the virus, the poll found.

Cisco, the largest maker of networking equipment, recently surveyed 1,569 executives, knowledge workers and others who are responsible for employee environments in the post-Covid era. The findings suggest many of this year’s radical changes to work life will remain long after the pandemic subsides.

The poll, conducted for Cisco by Dimensional Research, concluded that working from home is the “new normal.” More than 90% of respondents said they won’t return to the office full time. 12% plan to work from home all the time, 24% will work remotely more than 15 days of each month, while 22% will do that eight to 15 days every month.

Working From Home Trend to Continue After Covid

A quarter of those surveyed say they'll be WFH half the time

Source: Cisco Survey

Cisco’s Webex video conferencing service has benefited from lockdowns that have kept millions of people working and studying from home. It’s also faces rising competition from Zoom Video Communications Inc.

For employees who do return to the office, Webex is adding environmental sensors that plug into its current video-conferencing gear. That will help companies identify over-used and under-utilized spaces, while complying with room capacity limits.

Underscoring the importance of conferencing software, according to the survey, 98% of all meetings post Covid will include a remote attendee. That doesn’t mean users are happy with their current experience. Some 98% shared frustrations with video conferences.

Top Ten Gripes About Conference Calls

Cisco survey reveals unhappiness with meeting technology

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-06/companies-to-shrink-offices-as-work-stays-remote-after-pandemic

New California Law Significantly Expands Employee Entitlement to Family and Medical Leave

Bill Brewer — Thu, 01 Oct 2020 13:56:48 GMT

Friday, September 18, 2020

California employers with as few as five employees must provide family and medical leave rights to their employees under a new law signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 17, 2020. The new law significantly expands the state’s existing family and medical leave entitlements and goes into effect on January 1, 2021.

Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) also expands the covered reasons for protected leave and the family members whom employees may take leave to care for under the law.

Expanded Eligibility to Small Employers

Under pre-existing law, employers were not required to provide family care and medical leave under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) (Cal. Gov. Code section 12945.2), if the employee seeking leave worked at a worksite with fewer than 50 employees within a 75-mile radius. Similarly, employers were not required to provide “baby bonding” leave under the New Parent Leave Act (NPLA) (Cal. Gov. Code section 12945.6), if the employee seeking leave worked at a worksite with fewer than 20 employees within a 75-mile radius.

SB 1383 repeals CFRA and NPLA and expands the obligation to provide leave to small employers not covered before. The new law requires employers with at least five employees to provide an otherwise eligible employee with up to 12 workweeks of unpaid job-protected leave during any 12-month period for certain covered reasons. The employer must maintain and pay for the employee’s coverage under a group health plan for the duration of the leave at the level and under the conditions coverage would have been provided if the employee had continued in employment continuously for the duration of the leave.

Additional Covered Family Members and Expanded Reasons for Leave

SB 1383 also expands the covered family members and potential reasons for which an eligible employee may take leave. Under SB 1383, eligible employees may take leave to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves or a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner.

Under the prior CFRA statute, leave for purposes of caring for a family member was available only if the family member was the employee’s child, a parent, spouse, or domestic partner.

With the enactment of SB 1383, all eligible employees will be able to care for grandparents, grandchildren, and siblings, unlike under the prior CFRA statute.

SB 1383 contains other significant changes. It requires an employer that employs both parents of a child to grant up to 12 weeks of leave to each employee. Under pre-existing law, the employer only had to grant both employees a combined total of 12 weeks of leave.

The new law also requires employers to provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid job-protected leave during any 12-month period due to a qualifying exigency related to the covered active duty or call to covered active duty of an employee’s spouse, domestic partner, child, or parent in the Armed Forces of the United States. Lastly, SB 1383 does not permit an employer to refuse reinstatement of “key employees” as was previously allowed by the CFRA under qualifying circumstances.

Under SB 1383, employees will still need to meet eligibility requirements, including 12 months of service and 1,250 hours worked for the employer in the previous 12-month period, to qualify for family and medical leave.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The National Law Review

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/new-california-law-significantly-expands-employee-entitlement-to-family-and-medical

How top US companies like Bank of America and Salesforce are preventing parents from exiting the workforce by providing thousands of dollars in childcare benefits

Bill Brewer — Thu, 24 Sep 2020 15:02:41 GMT

Marguerite Ward

Sep 14, 2020, 10:11 AM

One out of every five businesses have had employees quit or reduce their hours due to childcare needs during the pandemic, per a recent survey of about 235 employers by HR nonprofit WorldatWork.
To prevent more employees, mainly women, exiting the workforce, more companies are stepping up and expanding childcare benefits.
Bank of America's global HR lead Sheri Bronstein said providing childcare benefits is crucial to not only the company's success, but maintaining a healthy economy.
In addition, KPMG, PwC, and other top companies have expanded or added new childcare benefits recently.

A childcare crisis in the US has already begun.

Some 21% of companies have seen employees quit their jobs to help their child learn from home during the pandemic, according to an August survey of about 235 employers by HR nonprofit WorldatWork. Data from childcare provider Bright Horizons found that 13% of working parents have quit or reduced their hours in the last few months because of childcare conflicts, Human Resource Executive reported.

If that data is indicative of the larger US population, that's hundreds of thousands of Americans, mainly women, exiting the workforce right now or scaling back their careers, as economists predicted. This is because, while some other highly industrialized countries offer national, affordable childcare, the US does not.

Right now, the Republican-controlled Senate is sitting on two bills, the Child Care is Essential Act and the Child Care for Economic Recovery Act. They would provide a combined $100 billion in direct childcare funding over the next five years, including $50 billion in immediate pandemic relief.

But it's unclear if the legislation will be passed.

In the absence of a public program or bailout thus far, more companies are taking it upon themselves to keep their workers, well, working.

Take Bank of America for example, the company recently announced that eligible employees can get unlimited reimbursements of $75 or $100 per day, depending on their compensation, to pay for childcare arrangements. The policy, among others, goes through the end of the year.

Bank of America's Sheri Bronstein, the company's chief human resources officer, spoke with Business Insider about the decision.

"We don't want to have a childcare crisis, in the macro sense, because if we do, we're not going to be able to have productive employees and teammates who can do their jobs. It's just one of the most important things," she said.

Providing childcare benefits isn't just good for business (and workers) in the short-term. Employees will remember how their companies treated them during this time, too, down the line.

"There will come a time when the employment market is better and this is the time to really create that bond, that loyalty and continue to drive culture," she said.

Here's what employers are doing to support working parents.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Business Insider

https://www.businessinsider.com/discount-daycare-childcare-employee-benefits-kpmg-citibank-dell-2020-9#palo-alto-networks-has-extended-work-from-home-availability-through-july-2021-and-gave-each-employee-1000-per-year-to-spend-on-a-number-of-flexible-benefits-like-tutoring-for-children-6

Walmart increasing pay for approximately 165,000 hourly workers across U.S. stores, introducing new roles

Bill Brewer — Tue, 22 Sep 2020 14:56:12 GMT

Kelly Tyko | September 17, 2020

Walmart is giving approximately 165,000 hourly workers a raise by introducing new leadership roles and "cross-training opportunities."

The retail giant announced it was introducing a "team-based operating model" in Supercenters, similar to one that has been successful at Sam’s Club over the past year and in Neighborhood Market stores this year.

"We’re investing in new roles and skills training to give us the flexibility to serve customers anytime and anywhere," Dacona Smith, Walmart U.S. chief operating officer, said in a blog post Thursday. "In turn, associates will have more room for career and pay growth."

Smith said the pay increases will start in October and take the place of the annual increase employees typically have to wait until February or April to receive.

Smith said the new structure "is built around higher-skilled jobs of the future, and the compensation for those roles reflects that."

The new salaried and hourly roles come with higher pay and Walmart will also raise pay for some current salaried employees including digital, asset protection and auto care center assistant managers.

"The new wage ranges for the hourly team lead roles start at between $18 and $21 an hour and can go up to $30 an hour in Supercenters," Smith said. "Through this new, tiered structure for team leads, we’re creating room for pay and career growth while investing in areas like pickup and delivery as customers increasingly turn to those options."

Smith said Walmart also is investing in some hourly positions including the deli and bakery where minimums are "increasing from $11 an hour to $15 or higher.

"We are re-investing in several ways to provide associates with higher and more consistent base pay," Smith said. "Likewise, for these select hourly roles, this increase will also take the place of the regular quarterly bonus and become part of their base pay going forward, offering more predictability and more pay in their hourly wages."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: USA TODAY

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/09/17/walmart-wage-increase-165000-employees-new-leadership-roles/3480101001/

DOL Revises FFCRA Regulations to Clarify Paid Leave Rules

Bill Brewer — Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:40:10 GMT

By Jeff Nowak on September 14, 2020

On September 11, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued revised regulations under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) following a federal court’s decision that invalidated a handful of regulatory provisions interpreting the FFCRA. Although the DOL was widely expected to address the court decision through revised regulations and/or court action, these new regulations throw additional curveballs for employers already struggling to comply with extensive COVID-19-related legislation.

Over the weekend, five Littler colleagues and I (including Bill Allen, Alexis Knapp, Lauren Marcus, Emilie Hammerstein, Mike Lotito) discussed, debated, even delighted in these new regulations. [No, we didn’t delight. The DOL dropped these new regs at 6:15pm ET Friday night. Yeah, I might love the FMLA, but not on a Friday night at 6:15pm. No thank you, DOL.]

Yesterday, we published a comprehensive alert for employers on these DOL’s new regulations. If clicking through is too much work, here are the details of our post below.

Decision Invalidating Parts of Rule and DOL’s Response

As background, on August 3, 2020, a federal court in New York struck down four parts of the FFCRA’s final rule: (1) the requirement that leave under the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA) and the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (EFMLEA) are available only if an employer has work available for the employee from which leave can be taken (“the work availability requirement”); (2) the requirement that an employee must have employer consent to take FFCRA leave intermittently; (3) the definition of an employee who is a “health care provider,” who an employer may exclude from use of FFCRA leave; and (4) the requirement that employees must provide their employers with certain notice and documentation before taking FFCRA leave (rather than after the leave begins).

In response, the DOL has issued revised regulations in which it clarified and doubled down on some of its original positions, while making some regulatory changes in line with the court’s ruling. Dare I say, the DOL even got a little saucy with the New York court at times in defending its positions on various rules. [Love that spunk, DOL!]

In its revised regulations, set to be published and take effect on September 16, 2020, the DOL:

Reaffirms that EPSLA and EFMLEA leave may be taken only if the employer has work available from which an employee can take leave, and provides its reasoning why this precondition is critical;

Confirms that intermittent leave under FFCRA can only be taken with employer approval;

Provides an amended definition of “health care provider” that is narrower than its original regulations to cover employees who are health care providers under the classic Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) definition, as well as other employees who are employed to provide diagnostic, preventive, or treatment services, or other services that are integrated with and necessary to the provision of patient care; and

Clarifies the timeline for when an employee must provide notice of the need for leave and supporting documentation.

The DOL Stands Firm on the Work Availability Requirement

Under the DOL’s original rule, one of the requirements for taking FFCRA leave (under both the EPSLA and EFMLEA) is that the employer must actually have work available for the employee to perform when the need for FFCRA leave occurs. If the employee is not scheduled to work—whether due to a furlough, business closure or otherwise—there is no work from which to take leave.

In vacating this rule, the court found that the DOL’s “barebones explanation” for the work availability requirement was deficient in that it did not provide sufficient analysis as to the reason why work must be available for leave to be available. The court’s decision to strike down the work availability requirement stood in contrast to long-standing FMLA regulations, which make clear that periods of time when an employee would not otherwise be expected to work do not count against an employee’s FMLA leave entitlement.

In its new final rule, the DOL held firm that an employer must have work available for an employee in order for the employee to be eligible for FFCRA leave. In other words, the employee’s FFCRA reason for leave must be the sole (“but-for”) reason they are not working. In doing so, the DOL made clear:

. . . if there is no work for an individual to perform due to circumstances other than a qualifying reason for leave—perhaps the employer closed the worksite (temporarily or permanently)—that qualifying reason could not be a but-for cause of the employee’s inability to work. Instead, the individual would have no work from which to take leave. The Department thus reaffirms that an employee may take paid sick leave or expanded family and medical leave only to the extent that any qualifying reason is a but-for cause of his or her inability to work.

In its analysis, the DOL observed, “leave is most simply and clearly understood as an authorized absence from work; if an employee is not expected or required to work, he or she is not taking leave.” The DOL also revisited one of the FFCRA’s core purposes of discouraging employees who might be likely to spread the virus from reporting to work, and pointed out that work must be available for that purpose to be effectuated.

Notably, the Agency cautioned that removing the work availability requirement would lead to “perverse” results. Take, for instance, an employer that closes its doors or limits business hours and furloughs employees, none of whom would receive pay for being off work. Under the court’s reading, a furloughed employee with a qualifying reason for FFCRA leave could take EPSLA or EFMLEA leave, even when the business is otherwise closed or lacks available work. As the DOL noted, this employee would be paid during this period of leave, while their co-workers who do not have a qualifying reason for FFCRA leave would not be paid. As such, the DOL stood firm in its position on the work availability requirement, and reinforced that employees on furlough or temporary layoff status are more appropriately directed to contact their unemployment agency, rather than seek paid leave from their employer.

The DOL underscored, however, that employers may not arbitrarily withhold work in order to thwart an employee’s ability to take leave and emphasized that the unavailability of work must be due to legitimate, nondiscriminatory, non-retaliatory business reasons.

Definition of “Health Care Provider”

The FFCRA permits employers to exclude “health care providers” from some or all forms of EPSLA or EFMLEA leave. In its original rule, the DOL provided an expansive definition of “health care provider” for FFCRA purposes that focused on the types of employers that could exercise the exemption. In striking down the DOL’s broad, original definition, the court noted that any definition of “health care provider” must require “at least a minimally role-specific determination” of who is capable of providing healthcare services, depending upon the “skills, roles, duties, or capabilities” of the employees, and may not “hinge[] entirely on the identity of the employer.” In other words, the court held that a health care employer would need to undertake a position-specific analysis of whether someone met the definition of health care provider before deciding whether leave was permitted, and that the definition of “health care provider” should also be much narrower (which would, in theory, permit more employees to take FFCRA). When it invalidated the DOL’s original definition, the court referred only to the very narrow definition of “health care provider” under classic FMLA, leaving a regulatory gap for the DOL to again try to fill.

In response, the DOL crafted a definition that focuses on employees whose duties or capabilities are directly related to the provision of health care services or are so integrated to provision of such services so as to adversely impact patient care if not provided. Accordingly, the new regulations remain far broader in scope than the classic FMLA definition of health care provider, while eliminating those employees whose services are not related or integral to provision of health care services.

More specifically, for purposes of that exemption, the DOL revised the regulatory definition of “health care provider” to include only employees who: (1) meet the definition of that term under the existing FMLA regulations; or (2) are “employed to provide diagnostic services, preventive services, treatment services or other services that are integrated with and necessary to the provision of patient care and, if not provided, would adversely impact patient care.”

Existing FMLA Regulations

The existing FMLA regulations define “health care provider” to include doctors of medicine and osteopathy and “others capable of providing health care services.” The definition also includes podiatrists, dentists, clinical psychologists, optometrists, chiropractors, nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, clinical social workers, physician assistants, and certain Christian Science practitioners. Somewhat circularly, the existing FMLA regulations also recognize health care providers from whom an employer or employer’s group health plan’s benefits manager will accept certification of a serious health condition for purposes of substantiating a claim for benefits.

Newly Revised FFCRA Regulations

To fill the gap left by the court, the DOL asserts that the scope of health care services for purposes of the FFCRA must take into account the context of a pandemic and encompass a broader range of services than in the limited, classic FMLA context of diagnosing serious health conditions and filling out medical certifications. The DOL underscored that a broader definition of “health care provider” for purposes of the exemption is justified because “those employees’ services are important to combating the COVID-19 public health emergency and are essential to the continuity of operations of our health care system in general” and thus, their absences from work would be “particularly disruptive.” Consequently, the DOL drew upon the definition of “health care service” in the Pandemic Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019 to identify relevant health care services. The revised FFCRA regulations clarify the various types of services that constitute health care services as follows:

Diagnostic: Includes taking or processing samples, performing or assisting in the performance of x-rays or other diagnostic tests or procedures, and interpreting test or procedure results.

Preventive: Includes screenings, check-ups, and counseling to prevent illnesses, disease, or other health problems.

Treatment: Includes performing surgery or other invasive or physical interventions, prescribing medication, providing or administering prescribed medication, physical therapy, and providing or assisting in breathing treatments.

Integrated: Those services that are “integrated with and necessary to diagnostic, preventive, or treatment services and, if not provided, would adversely impact patient care, including bathing, dressing, hand feeding, taking vital signs, setting up medical equipment for procedures, and transporting patients and samples.”

Consistent with the focus on employees rather than employers, the revised FFCRA regulations specifically identify the following types of employees who may continue to be excluded from taking FFCRA paid leave:

nurses, nurse assistants, medical technicians and others directly providing diagnostic, preventive, treatment or other integrated services;

employees providing such services “under the supervision, order, or direction of, or providing direct assistance to” a health care provider; and

employees who are “otherwise integrated into and necessary to the provision of health care services,” such as laboratory technicians who process test results necessary to diagnoses and treatment.

The revised regulations then specifically exclude those who do not actually provide such health care services, even if their services could affect the provision of health care services, “such as IT professionals, building maintenance staff, human resources personnel, cooks, food services works, records managers, consultants, and billers.”

The DOL provided an “illustrative list” of “typical work locations” where employees providing health care services may work, including the following: “a doctor’s office, hospital, health care center, clinic, medical school, local health department or agency, nursing facility, retirement facility, nursing home, home health care provider, any facility that performs laboratory or medical testing, pharmacy, or any similar permanent or temporary institution, facility, location, or site where medical services are provided.” The specifically identified locations match the list in the original FFCRA regulations, while the “catch-all” is similar to the original regulations but eliminates “similar institution, Employer, or entity” as a modifier to the locations. Of course, an employee need not work at one of these enumerated facilities to be a health care provider for FFCRA purposes, and working at one of these facilities does not necessarily mean an employee is a health care provider.

Intermittent Leave Still Requires Employer Consent—But “Intermittent” May be Defined Differently than Employers Previously Thought

In striking down the DOL’s rule on intermittent FFCRA leave, the court questioned the DOL’s blanket requirement that an employee have employer consent to take intermittent FFCRA leave, finding that the DOL had not explained its rationale for such consent. Sticking to its original position, the DOL stood firm in these new regulations on its position that intermittent FFCRA leave is available only when the employer consents, but offered an extensive rationale for its position.

In contrast to the FMLA, the FFCRA itself does not address intermittent leave, giving the DOL broad regulatory authority to fill this statutory gap. In revisiting its original regulations, the DOL noted that the classic FMLA regulations generally provide for intermittent leave only for certain qualifying reasons (e.g., where intermittent leave is medically necessary), or where the employee and employer agree to an intermittent leave arrangement (such as for bonding leave following the birth or placement of a child). The DOL further harkened back to the classic FMLA regulations, which require that, when the need for leave is foreseeable, it must be scheduled in a way that is minimally disruptive to business operations—leading the DOL to reinforce the requirement of employer consent for FFCRA leave.

In the case of leave to care for a child whose school or place of care is closed, medical necessity is not an applicable framework. Thus, the DOL noted that FFCRA leave obligations should “balance the employee’s need for leave with the employer’s interest in avoiding disruptions by requiring agreement by the employer for the employee to take intermittent leave.” Leave in this instance, according to the DOL, is akin to an employee taking intermittent leave to bond with a child after childbirth or placement into adoption or foster care. Consequently, intermittent FFCRA leave can only be taken with the consent of the employer.

Notably, however, the DOL’s use of the term “intermittent” seems to have taken on some new substance. More specifically, the preamble to the DOL’s new regulations address administration of FFCRA leave when an employee’s child participates in hybrid learning in which schools operate on adjusted or alternating schedules. Here, each day of school closure “constitutes a separate reason for FFCRA leave that ends when the school opens the next day.” As a result, intermittent leave is not necessary on these occasions because the “school literally closes . . . and opens repeatedly.”

Easing Documentation and Notice Requirements in Certain Instances

In its decision, the NY court invalidated the final rule to the extent it required the employee to provide documentation prior to taking FFCRA leave, as it rendered some of the statutory provisions unworkable.

Taking note of the court’s admonition, the DOL tweaked the existing regulations to clarify that any documentation required under Section 826.100 need not be provided before leave begins, but rather may be given “as soon as practicable, which in most cases will be when the employee provides notice” of the need for FFCRA leave.

Further, in situations where an employee seeks EFMLEA leave to care for a child whose school or place of care is closed, the DOL confirmed that the employee must provide the employer with notice of leave as soon as practicable under the circumstances. If EFMLEA leave is foreseeable, such as in instances where the employee learns in advance that school will be closed, the DOL anticipates that the employee generally will provide notice before taking leave.

New FAQs

In conjunction with issuing revised regulations, the DOL updated and added to its FAQs to reflect the new guidance in the following ways (as of the publication of this article):

The updated FAQs note an employee must provide their employer with the required documentation and information “as soon as practicable.”

The FAQs regarding intermittent leave under both EPSLA and EFMLEA are updated to provide that an employee whose child’s school or place of care is closed, may still only take leave under the FFCRA intermittently if the employee and the employer agree. The example given is that if you have another family member watch your child on Tuesday and Thursday, but cannot work on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, you would need employer approval to use the leave intermittently. However, in line with the amendment discussed above, the FAQ notes that if an employee’s child’s school or place of care is closed on alternating days, leave may be used intermittently even without employer permission, because it is really being used in single, full-day increments and is not, in fact, “intermittent.”

The DOL also amended the FAQ providing “who is a ‘health care provider’” to track the updated definition.

The DOL added FAQs # 101-103 specifically addressing the effect of the NY court decision and the new regulations.

Insights for Employers

There certainly is some good news for employers here, as the DOL provides a common-sense application of the work availability rule that enjoys a much stronger chance of surviving legal challenge in the future. The new rule also carefully balances an employer’s operational needs when an employee requests intermittent leave. Employers also should be mindful of the DOL’s changes on the timing of notice of the need for FFCRA leave and the timing of documentation requirements.

In the meantime, the DOL’s regulatory changes have immediate impact on health care employers, particularly those that have exempted some or all of their employees from FFCRA leave as a result of the DOL’s initial sweeping rule regarding health care providers. We encourage these employers to seek counsel on the scope of employees now exempt from FFCRA leave. In addition, to the extent employers have questions about whether they should take any actions to mitigate risk from having followed the prior regulations on any of these issues, they should also consult with their favorite employment counsel to discuss strategy and approach.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: FMLA Insights - Guidance & Solutions for Employers

https://www.fmlainsights.com/dol-revises-ffcra-regulations-to-clarify-paid-leave-rules-in-wake-of-new-york-federal-courts-decision/

Salary Increase Budgets Fall for First Time in 12 Years

Bill Brewer — Mon, 14 Sep 2020 20:16:31 GMT

BY JIM FICKESS, WORLDATWORK | AUGUST 11, 2020

Total United States salary budget increases fell for the first time in a dozen years, according to WorldatWork’s “2020-21 Salary Budget Survey.”

Respondents, who took the survey during the COVID-19 economic fallout, said the average salary budget hike will be 2.9%, a pronounced departure from the projected increase of 3.3%.

Contributing to the decline in average salary increase budgets is the significant increase in the percentage of organizations indicating a 0% salary budget increase for 2020 – nearly 10 times higher than 2019. Meanwhile, respondents typically budgeting in the 3% to 4% mean range declined by 7 to 10 percentage points, depending on industry sector.

Yet, 84% of organizations expect to pay some form of salary increases in 2020.

The last time the survey saw a decline in salary budget increases was during the Great Recession of 2008-09. An updated survey will be fielded in October to offer further insights into salary budget strategies during the pandemic.

“As the economy recovered following the financial collapse in 2008, we first saw a gradual rise in salary increase budgets, then a leveling off. But over the past two years with low unemployment rates and increased competition for talent, we saw a bigger jump in salary increase budgets,” said Sue Holloway, Director, WorldatWork. “Now, the sudden jolt of the pandemic has driven a higher percentage of organizations indicating a zero salary increase budget for 2020. More than 70% of companies are still giving increases in the 3% to 4% range.”

The 47th annual survey, the longest running of its kind, provides CEOs, Chief Financial Officers and HR professionals with comprehensive, year-over-year data to design competitive compensation plans and total rewards strategies that attract and retain high-performing employees. The data covers nearly 14 million employees from 19 countries.

A total of 4,754 organizations responded to the survey while addressing unprecedented business challenges, down less than 10% from 2019.

Among the highlights of the survey:

Industry: While most industry shifts in salary increase budgets are downward, public administration and accommodation and food services were least affected this year, showing no change from 2019. Although stable this year, public administration is projected to have one of the largest falls in 2021. At 1.5%, educational services saw the lowest salary increase budgets.
Merit pay: Average merit increase budgets for 2020 were reported at 2.6%, a 0.3% drop from 2019.
Performance-based pay: Even though the size of all salary increase budgets, including merit budgets, declined in 2020, organizations continue to differentiate base pay-related awards. Average performance-based pay increases for 2020 are expected to fall to 2.5% for middle performers and 3.6% for high performers.
Pay-equity adjustments: 65% of responding organizations expect to make pay adjustments in 2020 to remediate pay equity issues, and about the same number are anticipating pay equity adjustments in 2021.
Metro areas: Denver and Seattle saw the largest average salary increase budgets in 2020.
Around the globe: India saw the largest swing in salary increase budgets, dropping from 9.9% in 2019 to 8.4% in 2020. However, India’s 8.4% reflects the largest salary increase budget in the world.

2021 salary budget increases will likely mirror 2020, respondents predicted. But those projections could change with the October updated survey,

“We recognize the impact of the pandemic will lag,” Holloway said. “The October results of the updated survey will give a better indication of the future state of salary budgets.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: WorldatWork

https://worldatwork.org/workspan/articles/salary-increase-budgets-fall-for-first-time-in-12-years

A quarter of adults in employer plans are underinsured, Commonwealth Fund says

Bill Brewer — Fri, 11 Sep 2020 15:12:42 GMT

AUTHOR Samantha Liss | PUBLISHED Sept. 11, 2020

Dive Brief:

A fourth of adults with employer-sponsored plans are underinsured, according to Commonwealth Fund's latest biennial report assessing the health insurance landscape. Underinsurance is a potential signal that some adults may be unable to pay their medical bills, posing possible problems for providers and hospitals who prize patients with commercial coverage.
Nearly half (43.4%) of working-age adults in the U.S. were inadequately insured in the first half of 2020, on par with figures from Commonwealth's previous report from 2018. Those adults were either uninsured for a period of time during the past year, experienced a coverage gap or had high out-of-pocket costs or deductibles relative to their income.
The share of privately insured adults with deductibles over $1,000 has more than doubled since 2010 and has outpaced income, putting a strain on workers, Commonwealth found.

Dive Insight:

The current public health crisis only threatens to exacerbate the growth in un- and underinsurance, as the economy is burdened by the novel coronavirus and its effects.

"Coverage insecurity will leave people with mounting medical debt, as well as significant financial barriers to getting the health care they need to survive the pandemic and lead healthy and productive lives," according to the report, which is based on a survey of more than 4,000 adults between the ages of 19 and 64.

People without adequate coverage often delay care and filling medications, according to the study. That poses additional problems for the healthcare system as delayed care can lead to deteriorating (and likely more expensive) health conditions.

Initially, it was feared that as millions of Americans lost their jobs they too would lose their connection to employer-sponsored coverage. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimated in May that as many as 27 million Americans lost coverage as a result of job losses that were spurred by the pandemic. However, an August Urban Institute report found coverage losses may not have been as drastic as initially feared, despite the record number of lost jobs.

Yet even with coverage, affordability remains a key problem.

The Commonwealth report found one-third of adults reported having a cost-related problem in getting needed healthcare. Unsurprisingly, the highest rates were among those who spent some time uninsured in the past year. But perhaps most concerning was cost-related problems among those with adequate insurance and without any interruptions in coverage throughout the year — most among those with employer plans.

Another pressing issue is the level of high uninsurance among people of color, young adults, workers at small businesses and people with low-incomes.

The authors outline several policies that could help consumers gain comprehensive coverage, including expanding Medicaid in the 12 states that have yet to open the program up to working adults without children and with incomes within 138% of the federal poverty level. Other policies options include enhanced subsidies for marketplace coverage and banning plans not compliant with the Affordable Care Act, plans the Trump administration has expanded under the president's term.

Researchers warned consumers are likely to face dire consequences without some policy action, noting "ongoing policy inaction on insurance coverage combined with the raging pandemic is certain to tip the nation's health care affordability problems into crisis for U.S. households."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/a-quarter-of-adults-in-employer-plans-are-underinsured-commonwealth-fund-s/584940/

Open Enrollment 2021 Blueprint

Bill Brewer — Wed, 09 Sep 2020 18:28:09 GMT

by Tim McElgunn | September 8, 2020

As 2021 open enrollment approaches amid the continuing pandemic, employers are striving to find a difficult balance.

How can you provide the benefits and advice employees deserve and also achieve the needed return on benefits investments?

And its a critical challenge. In multiple surveys, over half of employees say health coverage is the greatest factor in job satisfaction.

And more than three-quarters say the quality and affordability of benefits options influence their engagement and productivity at work.

The COVID-19 crisis is magnifying those challenges and changing what benefits employees need at an incredible speed. A recent research study highlights those pressures:

This is the background as we enter the final months of 2020 and benefits teams continue adjusting plans for a very uncertain 2021.

Here’s a framework you can use to help optimize open enrollment this year.

Building the open enrollment blueprint one question at a time

The issues you’ll face during this year’s open enrollment are going to test your skills and creativity. And one of them is getting leadership to think carefully about those challenges and the choices your organization faces.

They’ll need you to be the calm center of their daily storm of challenges and rely on your expert advice to build the best possible mix of benefits options.

They hope you have all the answers but they absolutely need you to help find the RIGHT questions to ask.

Part of your job is to keep pulling them back to data-driven decision-making.

Here are some questions that you’ll want to drill down on.

What are critical requirements versus nice to have?
- From the employer perspective? From the employee perspective?
If some attractive options are simply unaffordable in the current business climate, are there less expensive, albeit more limited, alternatives available?
Should you implement auto-enrollment to ensure a minimum level of participation before the deadline?
What processes are automated now?
- What MUST be automated immediately to compensate for the pandemic’s impact on in-person interactions?
- Can non-critical processes be automated cost-effectively?
Where does the voluntary benefits discussion fit in the enrollment process?
- Is your EAP prepared for an increase in emotional and behavioral health demands?
- Are there third party apps or other services, such as financial management, that can be included at little or no upfront cost?
Are you prepared to launch and manage a comprehensive digital communication campaign?
- What needs to be different this year? Cadence? Frequency, reminders?
Will any/all of these changes be permanent?

As you ask these questions, challenge any easy answers and get leadership and your team to dig a little deeper.

And hold back some of your advice until you are satisfied leadership really knows what they want to prioritize.

As 2021 open enrollment approaches, how can employers provide the benefits and advice employees deserve and also achieve needed benefits ROI?

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HRMorning

https://www.hrmorning.com/articles/open-enrollment-2021/

How to help employees get more out of benefits enrollment

Bill Brewer — Fri, 04 Sep 2020 15:15:28 GMT

AUTHOR: Kyle Addy | PUBLISHED: Sept. 3, 2020

Even in a virtual environment, employers can still deliver comprehensive communication about benefits and personalized enrollment support, writes Kyle Addy of Colonial Life.

Is it the chicken or the egg?

Employees who admit they don't understand their workplace benefits "at all" plan to spend the least time learning about them before their enrollment, according to a recent Colonial Life survey of 1,200 U.S. adults.

Or maybe because these employees will spend less than an hour on their benefits enrollment this year, they're poorly educated on the important and valuable options available to them at the workplace.

Either way, the survey findings should be cause for concern for human resources professionals charged with implementing an effective benefits enrollment. And the research shows the problem is widespread: Nearly 3 in 4 employees rush through their annual enrollments each year, with 41% spending less than 30 minutes considering their workplace benefits. An additional 32% spend just 30 to 60 minutes learning about their benefits choices. That means the majority of employees spend an hour or less on decisions that can have a significant financial impact on them and their families for a year or longer.Read Now

This dynamic also can have a negative impact on your business, because employees who don't understand their benefits participate at lower levels, engage less strongly with the company, and don't value the considerable investment you're making in the benefits package.

As fall benefits enrollment season approaches, it's critical to map out a strategy to effectively communicate with employees and help them select and enroll in the benefits they need. This vital task will be more challenging than ever this year, thanks to the pandemic and the resulting employee stress, distraction and geographic isolation.

Drive engagement with communication and personal support

Despite the daily reminders of the importance of protecting our physical, emotional and financial health, many workers seem unwilling to set aside the time to understand their needs and options.

The good news is you can help employees become more engaged in their benefits program by providing both comprehensive communication about benefits options before the enrollment and opportunities for employees to get personalized support during enrollment — even in a virtual environment.

More good news: Delivering effective benefits education and enrollment virtually should be easier this year, since we've all learned to accomplish more things remotely, from staff meetings to doctor visits. In fact, another recent survey shows many employers are taking those lessons and applying them to this year's benefits enrollment. The number of employers who plan to offer employees the opportunity to enroll via videoconferencing or cobrowsing with a benefits counselor nearly doubled, from 23% in 2019 to 42% this year. In addition, 22% will offer individualized, real-time support through telephone enrollments.

Those virtual "high touch" enrollment methods will replace in-person meetings for many employers: Only about a third will enroll in person this year, compared to nearly half a year ago. The number of employers planning to use online self-service enrollment increased a bit from 47% to 54%.

These trends are likely to continue long term, as more benefits providers and enrollment companies develop technology solutions to deliver a personalized experience for employees in multiple locations and situations. The ideal solution in today's environment may be using a package of high-tech solutions that still provide high (virtual) touch capabilities to create a more cohesive, personalized enrollment strategy for your employees.

Some of the solutions to consider include:

Virtual meeting technology — Web-based meeting tools offer the opportunity for employees to meet with a benefits counselor to better understand their needs, gaps in coverage and the benefits options available to meet those needs, and complete their enrollment.
Cobrowsing capabilities — This technology allows an employee and a benefits counselor to review information together, then for the benefits rep to hand over control to the employee to create a secure login and sign insurance applications.
Call center resources — This is a convenient option for employees without good internet access or who prefer a phone call to an onscreen experience.
Online scheduling — These tools allow employees to schedule a virtual or telephonic one-to-one meeting for the day and time most convenient for them.
Digital communications — Your employees have unique needs and preferences, so it's important to use a variety of benefits communication methods to reach them when, where and how they like. These can include emails, digital postcards, custom websites and mobile apps, and digital benefits booklets.

You play an important role in ensuring employees have the support and resources they need to educate themselves about their benefits, so they can protect themselves and their families from whatever the future brings. With the right combination of communication and enrollment strategies and tools, you can create a more successful enrollment this fall.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/how-to-help-employees-get-more-out-of-benefits-enrollment/584669/

DOL clarifies FLSA pay requirements for remote employees

Bill Brewer — Fri, 04 Sep 2020 15:06:05 GMT

DOL Reminds Employers of an Old Obligation with Modern twists: Tracking hours worked

Tuesday, September 1, 2020

An employer’s obligation to track compensable hours of its employees and compensate employees accordingly is not a new concept. Most employers know of that obligation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Yet, tracking hours of remote workers has always been a challenge. Recognizing this issue and the need to address modern day technology at this time of increased remote work, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued a field assistance bulletin explaining employers’ obligations for tracking compensable hours worked by non-exempt remote employees. This is the first update to remote worker guidance provided by the DOL since 1961.

What We Need to Know

The DOL explains what time is compensable and breaks the standard into two scenarios: when an employer has actual knowledge of the work performed and when the employer has constructive knowledge. The constructive knowledge guidance incorporates remote employee challenges.

Actual Knowledge of Work Performed

Under the FLSA, an employer must pay for all time that an employee is “suffered or permitted to work.” This means that an employer must pay an employee for all hours the employee is scheduled and/or directed to work, but it also means that an employer must pay for time that an employee is permitted to perform unscheduled work. If an employee performs work outside of the employee’s scheduled hours, the employee still must be compensated for that work, although an employer can discipline an employee for performing work outside of scheduled working hours and prohibit such work going forward. Simply put, if the employer knows that work is being performed, the time must be compensated.

In a remote work scenario, it is more challenging for employers to know when work is or is not being performed by remote employees. Actual knowledge may be derived from employees reporting that they worked extra hours, or it may be obtained through other means, such as a supervisor directing or receiving work outside of an employee’s scheduled work hours. If the employer has actual knowledge that work is being performed, it must have the employee report/record the hours worked and compensate the employee for the time, including any applicable overtime compensation.

Constructive Knowledge of Work Performed

Under the FLSA, employers must also pay for all time they should know is being worked. This should know standard is very important for employers to understand. The DOL guidance explains that this means that employers must use reasonable diligence to determine all hours being worked by their employees. For example, an employer may provide non-exempt employees with a form explaining that no work is to be performed off-the-clock and that if they perform any work outside of their scheduled working hours like responding to emails, texts or phone calls, they must report it using that form. If the employee fails to report the time worked, the employer generally does not have an obligation to investigate further to determine whether any work is being performed off-the-clock.

The DOL explains that the reasonable diligence standard is based on what an employer should know, not on what an employer could know. Acknowledging the difficulty in defining what this means today, given the advances in technology and substantial increase in remote workers, the DOL guidance provides helpful parameters:

“Though an employer may have access to non-payroll records of employees’ activities, such as records showing employees accessing their work-issued electronic devices outside of reported hours, reasonable diligence generally does not require the employer to undertake impractical efforts such as sorting through this information to determine whether its employees worked hours beyond what they reported.”

Applying this Guidance to your Business

The DOL’s guidance, while specific to the FLSA, applies equally under Wisconsin wage and hour law. It is also important to note that, while the DOL’s guidance is favorable to employers, courts may interpret the laws differently. The bottom line is that employers must implement and communicate reasonable procedures for reporting ALL hours worked by remote employees to reduce the risk of wage claims. This also means that employers should not discourage accurate and complete reporting of work hours or tell employees that work performed outside of scheduled working hours will not be compensated.

Employers should examine current remote worker arrangements and ensure robust record keeping systems, communication plans, and clear remote policies and practices that define work expectations are in place. For example, remote worker policies should make clear that employees are obligated to accurately record all time and employers should enforce the requirement.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: National Law Review

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/three-minute-update-dol-reminds-employers-old-obligation-modern-twists-tracking

Shake Shack to offer year-end bonuses to employees

Bill Brewer — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 20:17:33 GMT

The fast-casual burger chain will grant payments ranging from $250 to $400

By Thomas Barrabi | Published August 21, 2020

Shake Shack will offer year-end bonuses to its employees as it continues to recover from the coronavirus pandemic, according to multiple reports this week.

The fast-casual burger chain will grant payments ranging from $250 to $400, Nation’s Restaurant News reported. The employee’s position will determine the size of the payment.

"Taking care of our teams has always been a core tenet of Shake Shack - we couldn’t do this without them,” the company said in a statement to the publication.

The year-end bonuses were announced days after Shake Shack ended a 10 percent hazard pay bonus that employees received during the pandemic. Employees were eligible for the premium pay from the end of April until Aug. 19.

Shake Shack said the increased pay program helped to maintain staffing at the height of the pandemic. Aside from the year-end bonuses for all employees, the company said it will be “guaranteeing bonus payments to all managers” in the third and fourth quarter.

Like many restaurant chains, Shake Shack has struggled to generate revenue during the coronavirus pandemic. The company’s same-store sales plunged 49% in the second quarter. Overall revenue plunged nearly 40% to $91.8 million.

The company has stepped up efforts to alter its business in the current climate, announcing plans to open its first-ever drive-thru location in 2021.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Fox Business

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/shake-shack-year-end-bonuses-coronavirus

Salary increases set for workers in 2021 compensation plans, survey finds

Bill Brewer — Tue, 25 Aug 2020 15:23:10 GMT

AUTHOR: Sheryl Estrada | PUBLISHED: Aug. 25, 2020

Dive Brief:

Salary increases for employees at many companies in the U.S. are on the horizon for 2021, according to the 2020 General Industry Salary Budget Survey conducted by Willis Towers Watson Data Services released Aug. 17. Amid compensation planning, most employers surveyed are expecting "a turn toward normalcy in 2021," the global advisory, broking and solutions company found.
About 7% of companies are not planning pay increases in 2021, "down significantly from 14% this year," according to Willis Towers Watson's survey of 1,010 companies conducted mid-May through late-July. Companies surveyed projected the average salary increase next year will be 2.8% for non management, management and exempt employees. However, hourly and nonexempt salaried employees and executives are expected to receive a 2.7% increase. Performance continues to play a major role in salary increases. "Stars" or employees receiving the highest possible rating were granted an average increase of 4.7%, compared to an average of a 2.8% increase for employees who received an average rating. Across all groups, performance/bonus short-term incentive awards are expected to remain steady in 2021, the firm said.
Industries impacted during the pandemic such as health care and retail, "are projecting a slight bump but still fall shy of pre-pandemic levels with salary increases projected to average 2.6% and 2.8%, respectively," according to Willis Towers Watson. Meanwhile, above-average increases are projected in the insurance industry (2.9%) and nondurable goods industry (3%). Before the pandemic hit, companies budgeted, on average, 3% increases in salary, but have granted employees increases between 2.5% and 2.7% this year, according to the firm.

Dive Insight:

During the pandemic, many companies have implemented pay cuts; however, most are determined to pivot back to salary increases, according to Catherine Hartmann, North America Rewards practice leader at Willis Towers Watson.

"This has been the most challenging compensation planning year for many companies since the Great Recession," Hartmann said in a statement. "However, unlike then, companies have been hit differently depending on their industry, the nature of how work gets done and the type of talent they need." For example, research has shown that sales compensation plans have been adjusted in terms of final compensation. Most companies have reduced the size of 2020 salary budgets and "are holding the line on increases for next year," Hartmann said.

Managing the short-term effects of financial downturn amid the COVID-19 pandemic effectively can give organizations greater options when it comes to controlling long-term outcomes, Mercer, a human resources consulting firm, told HR Dive in April. Conserving cash and delaying increases and grants this year preserves flexibility, according to Mercer. But at the same time, companies should consider evaluating potential compensation and benefit actions to take later to improve cash flow. If employers achieve a balance between economics and empathy during the pandemic, they will be rewarded with loyalty from workers, candidates and customers, the firm said.

"Most companies will continue to be in a cash preservation and cost optimization mode regarding their budgets, Hartmann said. "And although many companies are looking toward stabilizing their business next year, the full extent of the economic impact of the pandemic is yet to play out. Companies will remain cautious and continue to adopt strategies that attempt to balance employee engagement with protecting their core business."

But amid the financial crisis caused by the pandemic, fewer workers are expecting a pay increase, according to an Aug. 4 Randstad US survey. About 62% of the 1,200 employees surveyed said they expect a pay raise every year to remain at their current company, which is down from 82% in 2018. More than half (58%) of the respondents said they would prefer to negotiate for a better benefits package than a higher salary.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/salary-increases-set-for-workers-in-2021-compensation-plans-survey-finds/584086/

Big firms offer stressed parents new perks such as subsidized tutoring

Bill Brewer — Fri, 21 Aug 2020 19:36:16 GMT

Aimed at stressed out parents, the offerings try to make up for widespread school closures

By Jena McGregor | August 20, 2020

Tech firms and other major corporations that have long offered family-friendly perks for their employees’ youngest children are adding new educational benefits to help with school-aged kids as working parents again face a school year juggling work and virtual learning.

A program initiated by discussions between Accenture and Bright Horizons, the child care center operator, and being adopted by Microsoft, Bank of America and Accenture, will offer employees of these corporate giants access to small-group, part-time, “school-day supervision” at a heavily subsidized cost.

The program, which will operate through a network of centers that includes Mathnasium, Sylvan Learning and Code Ninjas, will be available to other employer clients of Bright Horizons as capacity allows.

It is one of a fast-growing range of benefits some employers are starting to offer working parents struggling with the crushing stress and financial burden of work and virtual school.

Bank of America and Accenture are continuing their expanded backup child-care benefits and the bank said it would be offering “virtual field trips” and educational webinars for parents. The dairy co-op Tillamook has started offering employees a block of 10 hours of online tutoring per child from an online platform called Varsity Tutors.

“Employees had been through two and a half months of Zoom classrooms, and it was a nightmare, even for the most tech-savvy parents,” said Ellyn Shook, who leads human resources at Accenture. “Parents said they needed educational support, not just babysitting.”

From tutoring discounts to funding searches for virtual school facilitators to help with forming learning pods or micro-schools, the new benefits will be helpful for many exasperated working parents — if yet another way the pandemic is exposing deep inequities between America’s workers.

According to the Society for Human Resource Management, 4 percent of the member companies it surveys in an annual snapshot of employee benefits offered subsidized child-care centers or programs, and about 40 percent did not even offer a dependent-care flexible spending account, a pretax benefit used to pay for child care.

Megan Neumann, a consultant at Mercer who focuses on employer health and benefits issues, said she’s getting at least four times as many inquiries from clients about child care and educational help as she was in March. “Employers really haven’t ever been focused on [the needs of school-age kids]," she said. “People have depended on the school year to provide for watching children and fostering a learning environment.”

Meanwhile, employers are having to consider the safety risks of on-site options while navigating the tricky communication to employees that the new benefits may be only temporary. “They’re re-shifting priorities to have funds available, but for [many employers] this is not a long-term strategy,” Neumann said. “Nobody likes things being taken away.”

Providers of online tutoring platforms such as TutorMe and Varsity Tutors said interest from corporate clients has grown rapidly after being nearly nonexistent before the pandemic. Brian Galvin, chief academic officer of Varsity Tutors, said his company has created a division to focus on employer clients. “It’s a pretty recent phenomenon, even really after July 4,” Galvin said.

Mercer’s Neumann said there has been an “explosion of innovation” from other providers. Wellthy, which helps employers connect workers with assistance for chronically ill family members, added a service to help employees find qualified nannies or virtual schooling facilitators. Chris Bennett, CEO of Wonderschool, a network of in-home preschools and “micro-schools," said he’s getting inquiries from businesses about matching up employees with teachers starting learning pods or other programs in their homes.

Bright Horizons has also received many inquiries about options for older children. In cases where state licensing already allows, Bright Horizons CEO Stephen Kramer said, some of its centers are able to add school-age children to existing operations. In early August, it acquired Sittercity, an online platform for finding nannies or sitters, which recently added the ability to search for learning pods. Employers are also buying subscriptions for their employees to have access to Sittercity.

But some employers were hearing from workers who wanted more educational help. Shook began talking about possible alternatives with Kramer, knowing it had been operating some of its child-care facilities continuously for essential workers since the pandemic started and appreciating the safety measures they were enforcing. That, she said, gave her “confidence that the partners they’re working with are going to follow strict protocols.”

The program, which at launch will include 1,800 Mathnasium, Sylvan Learning and Code Ninja locations, will be offered at three-, four- and seven-hour-per-day increments, depending on provider. It will cost employees $5 an hour, with employers picking up the majority of the cost. Facilitators will help students work through their virtual curriculums, adding activities like extra math or coding during down times.

With safety precautions such as mandatory masks, temperature scans and 10 to 12 kids per location — as well as keeping the same cohort of kids together each day — Shook hopes parents will feel comfortable with the program. If not, Accenture is also offering expanded backup child care and discounts on tutoring.

Keli Kemp, the co-founder of Atlanta-based transportation consulting firm Modern Mobility Partners, said she wasn’t sure she would feel comfortable sending her children to a tutoring center with kids she doesn’t necessarily know. But her small, 15-person firm is offering a “learning pod" for employees with young kids at their unused office space, paying a “learning assistant” to oversee the virtual schooling of one of her children and those of two colleagues, all of whom have been strictly social distancing for months.

The arrangement allows Kemp and her two colleagues to meet in-person two days a week while the learning assistant oversees the kids’ schooling on the other side of the office; the other days, they rotate having her come to their homes. The pod includes a kindergarten girl, a sixth-grade boy, and each of the women has a third-grade son. The boys "knew each other, but during covid they started doing Zoom calls while we would be on Zoom calls,” Kemp said, and all became friends.

The first day of school, Aug. 17, Kemp said she was able to work productively on email and bills, as well as meet with her colleagues face-to-face. “The kids were so quiet this morning — I thought, ‘oh my gosh, this is amazing,’ " she said. "Lunch started getting a little rowdy, but now they’re being quiet.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/20/accenture-employer-benefits-school-children-tutoring/

Salary budget increases fell on average from 2019 to 2020, survey finds

Bill Brewer — Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:30:12 GMT

By Maddy Simpson | August 13, 2020

As the coronavirus recession continues to impact organizations nationwide, many firms have had to lay off or furlough employees. But now, as the country begins to open up, employers must make decisions about their remaining employees. One big decision: 2020 salary increases.

Since 2009, average salary increases have risen each year since their all time low in 2008 due to the Great Recession.

“As the economy recovered following the financial collapse in 2008, we first saw a gradual rise in salary increase budgets, then a leveling off,” said Sue Holloway, director at WorldatWork. “Over the past two years with low unemployment rates and increased competition for talent, we saw a bigger jump in salary increase budgets.”

WorldatWork’s 2020 Salary Budget Survey surveyed about 5,000 employers to understand what firms were doing with salary budgets in this volatile market.

In 2019, WorldatWork reported an average salary increase across all industries of 3.2%. This year, the average increase dropped to 2.9%. Though 70% of firms still plan to increase salaries between 3% and 4%, many employers are opting to forgo increases altogether due to the pandemic.

The survey reports that all industries surveyed have median salary increases at 3%, with the exception of the educational services industry, which had a median salary increase of 1%. On the flip side, the industries that showed no change from 2019 were the public administration industry and the accommodation and food services industry.

“There's unevenness [in the impact of the coronavirus],” says Catherine Hartmann, rewards practice leader for North America at Willis Towers Watson. “Certain industries have been hit and particularly challenged like healthcare and retail.” Hartmann notes that, in its uneven impact, this recession is different from the Great Recession, so firms have to respond differently than they may have then.

Holloway warns that the pandemic’s effect on salary budget data may not yet be fully realized. Because of this, WorldatWork plans to update the survey in October to see the continual impact of the recession.

As the impact of the pandemic continues to be realized, Hartmann urges firms to remain cautious while still taking steps to recruit and retain employees.

“Caution is wise, but [employers] also have to manage that there still is a war for talent, for particular skills and knowledge areas,” Hartmann says. “So while [employers] should remain justifiably cautious, they might want to adopt strategies that balance employee engagement with protecting their core business and financials.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Employee Benefit News (EBN)

https://www.benefitnews.com/news/salary-budget-increases-fell-on-average-from-2019-to-2020-survey-finds

Large U.S. Employers Accelerating Adoption of Virtual Care, Mental Health Services for 2021, Business Group on Health Survey Finds

Bill Brewer — Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:26:29 GMT

August 18, 2020 10:00 ET

Employers project health benefit costs will climb more than 5% but impact of pandemic adds uncertainty

WASHINGTON, Aug. 18, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Large employers plan to expand virtual care offered to employees next year as well as double down on mental health and emotional well-being as they continue to address the COVID-19 pandemic, according to an annual survey by Business Group on Health. Employers project health benefits costs will rise by more than 5% in 2021 although the pandemic’s impact is fueling uncertainty about overall costs.

According to the 2021 Large Employers' Health Care Strategy and Plan Design Survey, the total cost of health benefits is expected to rise 5.3% in 2021, taking cost management initiatives into account. The increase is slightly higher than the 5% increases employers projected in each of the last five years. Including premiums and out-of-pocket costs for employees and dependents, the total cost of health care is estimated to be $14,769 per employee this year, an increase of $197 from last year. The total cost is projected to rise to an average of just over $15,500 in 2021. In line with recent years, employers will cover nearly 70% of costs while employees will bear about 30%, or nearly $4,500.

“Health care costs are a moving target and one that employers continue to keep a close eye on,” said Ellen Kelsay, President and Chief Executive Officer of Business Group on Health. “The pandemic has triggered delays in both preventive and elective care, which could mean the projected trend for this year may turn out to be too high. If care returns to normal levels in 2021, the projected trend for next year may prove to be too low. It’s difficult to know where cost increases will land.”

The exponential growth in virtual care is one of the major trends identified in the survey, some of which is being fueled by the pandemic. Eight in ten respondents (80%) believe virtual health will play a significant role in how care is delivered in the future, a sharp increase from 64% last year and 52% in 2018. Additionally, over half (52%) will offer more virtual care options next year.

Nearly all employers will offer telehealth services for minor, acute services while 91% will offer telemental health, and that could grow to 96% by 2023. Virtual care for musculoskeletal management shows the greatest potential for growth. While 29% will offer musculoskeletal management virtually next year, another 39% are considering adding it by 2023. Employers are also expanding other virtual services including the delivery of health coaching and emotional well-being support. These offerings are expected to increase in the next few years.

“Virtual care is here to stay. While employers have been implementing more virtual solutions in recent years, the pandemic caused the pace to accelerate at an astronomical rate. And virtual care is now garnering growing interest and receptivity from both employees and providers who increasingly see its benefit,” said Kelsay.

Another key trend for employer plans in 2021 is the expansion of access to virtual mental health and emotional well-being services to address provider shortages, minimize wait times and reduce the stigma associated with seeking care. More than two-thirds of respondents (69%) provide access to online mental health support resources such as apps, videos, and articles, and that number will jump to 88% in 2021. Employers are also taking other steps to bolster mental health services besides expanding virtual options. Roughly half (47%) provide manager training to help recognize mental and behavioral health issues and direct employees to services. Another 18% plan to do so in 2021. Half of respondents (50%) will conduct anti-stigma campaigns in 2021.

Employers are also helping to address cost barriers by reducing out-of-pocket costs for mental health services. More than half (54%) are lowering or waiving costs for virtual mental health services in 2021. More than a quarter (27%) will reduce the cost of counseling services at the worksite, bolstering the trend to bring services directly to employees.

“Employers were already prioritizing mental health and emotional well-being before the pandemic hit. Now it’s a significant crisis. In addition to those individuals with pre-existing mental health needs, many more employees and family members are now dealing with anxiety, stress or loneliness. We expect employers will boost their investment in programs that support employees’ mental health and emotional well-being,” said Kelsay.

Among other survey findings:

More employers are linking health care with workforce strategy: The number of employers who view their health care strategy as an integral part of their workforce strategy increased from 36% in 2019 to 45% this year.
On-site clinics continue to grow: Nearly three in four respondents (72%) either have a clinic in place or will by 2023. Some employers are expanding services – 34% offer primary care services at the worksite, and an additional 26% plan to have this service available by 2023.
Growing interest in advanced primary care strategies: Over half of respondents (51%) will have at least one advanced primary care strategy next year up from 46% in 2020. These primary care arrangements, which move toward patient-centered population health management emphasizing prevention, chronic disease management, mental health and whole person care are key focus areas for employers.
Employers remain concerned about high-cost drug therapies. Two-thirds of respondents (67%) cited the impact of new million-dollar treatments as their top pharmacy benefits management concern.

About the Survey
The 2021 Large Employers' Health Care Strategy and Plan Design Survey was conducted between May and June 2020. A total of 122 large employers participated. Collectively, respondents represent a wide range of industry sectors and offer coverage to more than 9.2 million employees and their dependents.

About Business Group on Health
Business Group on Health is the only non-profit organization devoted exclusively to representing large employers' perspective on health policy issues and optimizing workforce strategy through innovative health, benefits and well-being solutions. Business Group keeps its membership on the leading edge of innovation, thinking and action to address health care cost and the delivery, financing, affordability and experience with the health care system. Business Group members, many of whom have operations globally, include 74 Fortune 100 companies, and provide health coverage for more than 60 million workers, retirees and their families in over 200 countries. For more information, visit www.businessgrouphealth.org.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: National Business Group on Health

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/08/18/2080056/0/en/Large-U-S-Employers-Accelerating-Adoption-of-Virtual-Care-Mental-Health-Services-for-2021-Business-Group-on-Health-Survey-Finds.html

the randstad COVID-19 2020 U.S. compensation insights survey

Bill Brewer — Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:19:16 GMT

a look at a global pandemic’s impact on the world of work

Despite COVID-19 being at the forefront of the global conversation and the resulting economic uncertainties, job seekers are displaying signs of confidence — including negotiating salaries, backing out of job opportunities and even ghosting or ignoring calls from potential employers. The Randstad COVID-19 2020 U.S. Compensation Insights survey explores the sentiments of 1,200 American workers on today’s salary negotiation practices, honing in on generational and gender differences.

Here’s what we learned:

Although younger workers are more likely to get cold feet or “ghost” prospective job offers, these generations are doing less of it — and the number of traditionalists (65+) is on the rise.

I've gotten "cold feet" with a job opportunity in the past, accepting a job offer, only to change my mind and back out at the last minute.

54% of gen z
60% of millennials
50% of gen x
35% of boomers
28% of traditionalists

I've “ghosted” (accepted a job offer only to disappear entirely without informing the employer ahead of the start date) an employer for a higher paying job opportunity elsewhere.

48% of gen z
52% of millennials
41% of gen x
21% of boomers
16% of traditionalists

Despite the pandemic, not much has changed in other respects. Our survey reveals a continued disconnect between employer wants and employee needs regarding pay transparency.

	2019*	2020
I prefer to keep my salary or pay private and not discuss it with others.	76%	78%
My company does not publish salary or pay information for each role.	55%	54%
I wish my employer would publish salary or pay ranges of what each role earns across the company.	60%	58%
My company publishes salary or pay information for each role.	45%	46%

Women and men have different salary negotiation tactics. Women can be better self-advocates, but the trend of women being less likely to engage in any sort of negotiating or discussions or pushing for higher salary continues.

	all	women	men
I have asked my colleagues about their salary before entering salary negotiations.	41% agree	36%	47%
I would rather negotiate for a higher amount and settle for a number in the middle than ask for nothing.	78% agree	75%	81%
I've never negotiated my pay.	54% agree	57%	51%
As a negotiation tactic, I've told a prospective employer I had another job offer — when I really didn't.	39% agree	35%	44%
I prefer giving a specific number rather than a range when negotiating for a higher amount.	65% agree	61%	70%
I would leave my role to find an equivalent position at a different company just to make a salary jump that I won't receive if I stay at my current company.	63% agree	60%	66%

Generationally, older workers are more likely to ask up front for the salary they want, whereas younger workers are more indirect with negotiations.

I would rather negotiate for a higher amount and settle for a number in the middle than ask for nothing.

71% of gen z
78% of millennials
82% of gen x
79% of boomers
82% of traditionalists

I've never negotiated my pay.

61% of gen z
61% of millennials
52% of gen x
45% of boomers
52% of traditionalists

As a negotiation tactic, I've told a prospective employer I had another job offer when I really didn't.

52% of gen z
62% of millennials
50% of gen x
34% of boomers
22% of traditionalists

Compensation remains a key factor in employee retention, but employees appear to be less confident that they will receive ongoing pay increases in the wake of the global pandemic.

My compensation is sufficient to make me stay in my current role for the next 12 months.

I expect a pay raise every year in order for me to stay at my current company.

	2018**	2019*	2020
all employees	82%	66%	62%
gen z	82%	73%	65%
millennials	91%	74%	78%
gen x	80%	71%	72%
boomers	76%	62%	57%
traditionalists	63%	43%	40%

Additionally, while salary remains important, there are other ways to effectively attract and retain workers.

I would rather take a position with growth potential than a position that pays more but does not challenge me.

I would rather negotiate for a stronger benefits package than a higher salary.

Lastly, job satisfaction remains positive as employers respond to COVID-19.

I am satisfied at how my employer's response to COVID-19 met my personal needs.

I am satisfied at how my employer's response to COVID-19 met my professional needs.

Their compensation has not been negatively impacted by COVID-19.

I have a positive outlook on my employment options over the next six months and 12 months.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Randstad

https://rlc.randstadusa.com/for-business/learning-center/future-workplace-trends/randstad-2020-compensation-insights?utm_campaign=rusa_workforce%2Bmanagement_client_rus_all&utm_medium=press&utm_source=prnewswire

Rethinking employee wellness perks in the age of the coronavirus

Bill Brewer — Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:16:18 GMT

AUTHOR: Pamela DeLoatch | PUBLISHED: Aug. 20, 2020

With many working from home, traditional benefits must change to meet the new needs of workers, sources say.

In years or even months past, companies offered employees wellness perks such as midday in-office yoga classes, discounted gym memberships and free healthy snacks in the break room. With many employees now working from home, many of the those traditional healthy lifestyle perks are no longer an option. And yet, now may be the time employees need wellness benefits the most.

Supporting the well-being of remote employees is not as simple as adjusting in-person offerings to an online setting. Instead, it may mean re-engineering the concept of work, sources say.

The stressed remote employee

Between the pandemic, job insecurity, juggling of family responsibilities and the loss of social connections, people working at home are stressed. Career platform Monster found in a July survey that 69% of remote employees have burnout symptoms, CNBC reported. What's more, that feeling of burnout is growing. The study showed burnout is up almost 20% from similar survey results obtained in May.

A lengthening work day doesn't help matters. The average workday for those working at home in the U.S. increased three hours since mid-March, according to findings from NordVPN, CNBC said.

Numerous studies evidence the positive connection between employee wellness and productivity, retention and engagement. Employers tend to recognize this, with many offering various wellness benefits.

But widespread remote work will likely continue for some time, and employers are adjusting perks to support employees' current needs.

Translating wellness perks to the remote environment

Ensuring employees balance work to avoid burnout can be difficult, said Steve Beauchamp, CEO of Paylocity, an HR and payroll services provider. Unlike many companies that had to pivot suddenly to working from home, half of Paylocity employees already worked remotely.

"The biggest challenge is making sure people are taking time off," he said. Because of limitations in travel and other activities due to the pandemic, employees are less likely to take vacation days, so companies have to proactively remind employees, he said. As companies offer more flexibility, Beauchamp noted it could be difficult to track employees' work hours. That makes it hard to know when an employee is working too much.

Beauchamp said Paylocity had to rethink how wellness perks translate in a virtual environment. The company moved in-person yoga classes online and added virtual groups so employees could connect. It unveiled a free mental health mobile app as social justice conversations heated up and coronavirus transmission rates spiked. Teams have after-work happy hours via Zoom and host game nights for the social aspect, he said.

Instead of considering a perk as a one-size-fits-all option, employers should ask employees what they need, Beauchamp said. With one-third of the Paylocity's workforce having children 12 and under, the company looked at how different scheduling, such as a split schedules, could help parents manage school activities, he said.

Tailoring wellness options

The pandemic highlighted several aspects of employee wellness, said Erika Zauner, founder and CEO of HealthKick, a platform that gives employees personalized access to well-being brands. Making healthy living accessible and supporting employees' mental and emotional well-being are key. "We need to invest in helping people make healthy choices before they get sick," she said, adding that many who were affected by the coronavirus had underlying health conditions.

As companies make decisions about the rest of the year, the question becomes, "how do we sustain and adapt to the reality of today?" she said. Allowing employees to tailor wellness perks to their specific needs is one way to do that. "Providing maximum flexibility for people is truly servicing their well-being needs because every person has different preferences and different gaps they're looking to round out," Zauner said.

Creating a new concept of wellness

When Visier, a people analytics company, shut down its office and sent employees home to work, the company had to rethink wellness quickly, Visier Chief People Officer Paul Rubenstein said. Visier had previously offered traditional wellness perks, with programs employees could attend, like fitness classes, or services they could access, like employee assistance programs or employee resource groups.

"It was one thing to flip those online, but those are designed to address a set of wellness issues that were rooted in a pre-COVID environment," Rubenstein said. Instead of just moving the programs into a virtual environment, the question became, "how do we get people to engineer their work differently as a part of wellness?" That might mean 90 minutes working and 20 minutes off; having teams declare quiet hours without meetings so people can get work done; or telling people they don't have to respond to emails immediately, he said.

Companies can also make sure employees aren't isolated, Rubenstein said. Through network analysis, employers can see if employees are talking to each other — or if some aren't and are lonely.

When employees first switched to remote work, they felt a certain excitement, Rubenstein said, but that has faded. The stress employees feel from health, economic and societal concerns are taking a toll, he said; "You can't just ignore what's going on outside."

As employers look at allocating funds for the rest of the year, the notion of wellness is no longer a perk, said Rubenstein. Instead, companies should take a holistic approach, with a focus on individual needs, he added.

"It's not about coddling employees," Rubenstein said. "It's about adapting to this set of norms and making it easy for people to bring their best selves to work."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/rethinking-employee-wellness-perks-in-the-age-of-the-coronavirus/583389/

21 HR Jobs of the Future (Harvard Business Review)

Bill Brewer — Thu, 13 Aug 2020 20:30:28 GMT

by Jeanne C. Meister and Robert H. Brown | August 12, 2020

The Coronavirus has drastically reshaped the economy and the labor force. Since its rapid spread around the globe, we have experienced titanic shifts in how we work, where we work, and the technologies we use to stay connected.

Such massive change is escalating the importance of HR’s role within organizations. Workers are turning to their managers and their HR leaders, in particular, for guidance on how to navigate their “new normal” — research indicates that 73% of workers depend on their employer for support in preparing for the future of work. Just as CFOs have greatly increased their scope since the 2008 financial crisis, CHRO’s now have that same opportunity to become central C-suite players.

We believe this is HR’s moment to lead organizations in navigating the future. They have a tremendous opportunity, and responsibility, to provide workers with guidance on the skills and capabilities they will need to be successful over the next decade as new roles continue to emerge.

With that in mind, The Cognizant Center for Future of Work and Future Workplace jointly embarked on a nine-month initiative to determine exactly what the future of HR will look like. We brought together the Future Workplace network of nearly 100 CHROs, CLOs, and VP’s of talent and workforce transformation to envision how HR’s role might evolve over the next 10 years. This brainstorm considered economic, political, demographic, societal, cultural, business, and technology trends.

The result was the conception of over 60 new HR jobs, including detailed responsibilities and skills needed to succeed in each role. We then created a ranking of each job by its organizational impact, allowing us to narrow the list to an initial 21 HR jobs of the future.

We arranged these HR jobs on a 2×2 grid; the X-axis depicts time, and the order in which we expect them to appear over the next 10 years, while the y-axis depicts “technology centricity” (i.e., all jobs will utilize innovative technologies, but only the most tech-centric will actually require a grounding in computer science). Furthermore, each job was analyzed in the form of a job description (overall requirements, specific responsibilities, skills/qualifications, etc.) similar to those an HR organization will need to write in the coming decade.

In some ways, the advent of Covid-19 compressed time like an accordion, resulting in a handful of these roles becoming “jobs of the now.” The 2020s will be a reset moment for HR. We fully expect to see more examples of these theoretical “jobs-made-real,” by visionary leaders in the coming months and years. As we’ve long maintained, before it can be built, it has to be dreamed.

While some of the roles we identified are entirely new positions, others are new responsibilities that are becoming increasingly important as HR re-imagines and reboots its strategy in light of the pandemic. All 21 jobs embody five core themes we came across in our research.

Individual and organizational resilience. The worldwide remote work measures taken in response to Covid-19 have caused the digital economy to grow more rapidly than ever before, along with our “always on” culture and the stresses of managing work-life balance. These challenges have put a new emphasis on the importance of worker health and wellness — and not just in terms of physical health. For HR professionals, this means the future of work will include developing a stronger focus and a more holistic view of employee wellbeing, one that encompasses the emotional, mental and spiritual health of workers along with the physical. (Even before the virus, Gallup reported two thirds of full-time workers experienced burnout on the job.)

This paves the way for a new HR role focused on well-being as a business strategy for increasing employee retention — and not just an office perk. For example, the role Director of Wellbeing could provide strategic management over wellness and design services and practices to nurture the emotional, physical, mental, and spiritual health of all employees. We are already seeing some companies hiring for the Director of Wellbeing role, and expect to see more within the decade as we believe the future of work will increasingly be the future of worker wellbeing.

Today, with more than 88% of knowledge workers now doing their jobs remotely, this role would need to work cross functionally to make sure employees outside of the office are receiving the same benefits as those working onsite. That’s where we see the role of a Work from Home Facilitator coming in. This person would ensure that the organization’s processes, policies, and technologies are optimal for remote workers. A key metric of success for this role would be to build remote workers’ strong sense of belonging within the organization, ensuring that they know their purpose and feel deeply cared for.

Organizational trust and safety. HR professionals are in a unique position to be guardians and models of an ethical and responsible workplace. As organizations invest in digital transformation initiatives and establish a “data culture,” we believe the expectations to uphold this responsibility will increase.

Just last year, joint research conducted on the attitudes toward AI in the workplace by Oracle and Future Workplace found many people were concerned about data-security breaches. Of the 8,370 HR leaders, hiring managers, and workers surveyed across ten countries, 71% were “at least sometimes concerned” and 38% said that they were “very concerned” about data breaches. In fact, 80% of respondents said their company should ask for permission before using AI to gather data on them.

This is a problem. LinkedIn research found that 67% of hiring managers and recruiters said AI saves them time as they source job candidates. But questions are now being raised around this technology and its potential for bias, inaccuracy, and lack of transparency. Every time an employee clicks, likes, and swipes on their social media channels, they reveal their interests, preferences, intent, and location to anyone equipped to collect this data — including HR professionals. As a result, employees’ awareness about privacy and how much they are willing to blithely share is intensifying.

The need for data privacy in the age of algorithms has amplified the need for more systems with humans in the loop to ensure fairness, explainability, and accountability among senior HR leaders. We believe this could lead to HR roles such as the Human Bias Officer, responsible for helping mitigate bias across all business functions. These professionals would ensure that people are treated fairly throughout the entire employee lifecycle — from recruiting to off-boarding — regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, economic status, background, age, or culture.

In addition to Human Bias Officer, another new role aimed at ensuring employee safety has already emerged: Strategic HR Business Continuity Director. This person leads the HR response team and works with the CEO, CFO, CIO and the Facilities Director to propose how to create a safe workplace — for both onsite and remote workers. Elizabeth Adefioye, Senior Vice President and CHRO of Ingredion, has incorporated emergency preparedness and business continuity in her senior HR role. Says Adefioye, “Since the Covid-19 pandemic, I have been partnering with our CEO and key executives from the technology, finance, communications, and facilities departments to develop a phased, safe global approach to returning to the workplace.” According to SHRM research, this is a key objective for CHRO’s as, 34% of organizations did not have an emergency preparedness plan prior to Covid-19 pandemic.

Creativity and innovation. As business leaders envision new ways to grow their organizations in the midst of rapid change, a new role at the intersection of corporate strategy and HR must arise. The Future of Work Leader, would be responsible for analyzing what skills will be most essential as the workforce continues to evolve. This role would focus both on setting the organization’s strategy for the future of work, as well as proposing reskilling and upskilling efforts for current employees. The position would also synthesize big-picture inputs from academia, industry association, and competitive threats in the marketplace to envision new jobs and skills critical to the organization’s continued success.

Furthermore, as meetings and trainings continue to go virtual, another role we imagine is the VR Immersion Counselor. This role would help realize the potential of using virtual reality to scale training programs for a number of use cases, including onboarding, coaching, reskilling, upskilling, and even medical, and safety training. H&R Block is an example of a company that has already been using virtual reality simulations to train customer service representatives to de-escalate customer interactions. By practicing how to respond to difficult customer questions in a virtual reality simulation, the company has seen a 50% decrease in dissatisfied customers with 70% of H&R Block customer service representatives preferring virtual reality simulations to traditional forms of learning. Already, research from ABI, sees the VR training market reaching $6.3 billion by 2022.

Data literacy. Currently, only a few HR functions are building analytics capabilities into their teams to solve key people challenges — such as uncovering why one team performs better than another, or how their organization can create a more diverse and inclusive culture. In the future, we believe more HR teams will follow in the footsteps of other departments, like customer experience and finance, and adopt this practice, taking on a more data-driven function. Doing so would allow them to provide more accurate insights around everything from employee performance and retention to the engagement level of C-suite leaders.

At a time when data scientists are in short supply, however, a new role, HR Data Detective, could help bring about this change. This person would be responsible for synthesizing disparate data streams (such as employee surveys, learning management systems, and benefits portals) to help solve business problems. Equally comfortable with being “in the weeds” of big data as well as seeing and explaining “the big picture,” data detectives would gather and compile HR-pertinent insights to help improve employee performance and drive better results for the whole business.

We predict companies like Genetech that have already begun building this kind of data literacy into their business functions will have a competitive advantage. Chase Rowbotham, head of People Analytics at Genetech , says, “As remote work becomes the new normal, we are able to gather insights from our HR information systems to develop a number of new HR practices such as training managers of remote workers on successful strategies for leading a remote global team to ensure both productivity and continued employee engagement.”

Human-machine partnerships. As the use of robots in companies continues to increase, it has become apparent that there is a need for human-machine collaboration in the workforce. Judgment is usually easy for humans, but still hard for computers. Robots are very good at the “science” of a job, especially when reliance on computational capabilities, analysis and pattern recognition poses questions on the most appropriate action to take next based on all data available. Humans are very good at assessing situations, or the “art” of the job, and essentially asking, “What is the right thing to do in a given situation?” Sorting out the balance of the “art of the job” (for humans) vs. the “science of the job” (for bots) will likely result in the creation of new HR roles focused on how both can work together intuitively.

One new job that could be created is the Human-Machine Teaming Manager, a role that operates at the intersection between humans and machines and aims to create seamless collaborations. These managers would look for ways to increase cooperation rather than competition.

For instance, James Loo, Head of Human Resources at DBS Bank (Taiwan) sees a possible new job role, ChatBot Coach, responsible for creating a seamless a candidate experience. According to Loo, “A Chatbot Coach would work with the DBS Bank recruiting team, to train the chatbot to handle the routine tasks of screening candidates and answering frequently asked questions of candidates, while the human recruiters have more time to focus on strategic areas such as engaging with hiring managers to better understand the need for a new job and the changing needs of the business for new hires.”

Keep in mind, many of these new roles would rely on the creation of other jobs of the future (predominantly in HR), some which have already been created and many of which haven’t been “invented” yet. For example, a Human-Machine Teaming Manager may find themselves working with a Chatbot Coach to enhance an AI-powered candidate experience. These dependencies would also inform career paths. Someone with several years’ experience as an HR Data Detective may be a prime candidate for the role of Head of Business Behavior, another new HR job of the future.

Does this all sound unlikely in the face of increasing unemployment? On the contrary, now is the time for HR leaders to plan for future growth. If we look back just a few years, several new HR jobs were just being created including the role of Financial Wellness Manager, which has now been widely adopted. In fact, a survey released by the Employee Benefit Research Institute shows that about half of companies with more than 500 employees now offer some sort of financial wellness program; 20% are actively implementing these programs for their employees today, and a further 29% are interested in implementing a financial wellness program in the future.

The Global Head of Employee Experience is another example of a new HR role that has emerged in the last few years. This role is best exemplified by the Chief People Officer of Airbnb who re-imagined the role by bringing together disparate people, technology and real estate functions to create a consumer grade employee experience. As of June, 2020, organizations such as ABN-AMRO, ING, IBM, HPE, Novartis, and Walmart have HR professionals with this title.

All this to say, change is coming, and it’s best to get a head start. Companies that can anticipate their organization’s future HR roles are not only in a position to outperform competitors, they are also squarely positioning HR as a strategic business driver. As new and existing roles evolve, the most successful organizations will have a clear understanding of what needs to change to meet future business priorities (both anticipated and unanticipated). You never know — one day soon, you might be recruiting someone to fill any of these 21 jobs, or doing one yourself.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Harvard Business Review

https://hbr.org/2020/08/21-hr-jobs-of-the-future

Vacation Travel Policies May Need to Be Altered Due to Pandemic

Bill Brewer — Wed, 12 Aug 2020 16:49:01 GMT

By Allen Smith, J.D.August 11, 2020

Employer attempts to restrict where employees go on vacation to prevent their exposure to COVID-19 are limited by laws and employee-relations considerations. However, pre-travel inquiries and advisories are allowed, so long as they are applied neutrally and uniformly.

"Employers across the country are grappling with the question of whether to change their vacation policies in light of the coronavirus pandemic and, if so, how to do it," said Anthony Mingione, an attorney with Blank Rome in New York City.

In general, employers may reject requests for vacations to hot spots due to the need to quarantine afterwards, according to Nancy Gunzenhauser Popper, an attorney with Epstein Becker Green in New York City.

"Employers have wide latitude in approving or not approving time off, and that does not change during COVID-19," said Michael Elkins, an attorney with MLE Law in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

But "it is very difficult to effectively monitor where employees go when they are not working, and even more difficult to try and control it," Mingione said.

Moreover, regulating where employees go on vacation could conflict with some state laws protecting off-duty conduct and could hurt morale, cautioned Carolyn Rashby, an attorney with Covington & Burling in San Francisco. Such laws exist, for example, in California, Colorado, Nevada, New York and North Dakota.

Pre-Travel Inquiries

Employers generally can require employees to inform them about travel plans. "However, employers should only require information necessary to discern whether the employee is traveling out-of-state or internationally and for how long, and should avoid asking personal details," Rashby said.

In addition, she cautioned that employees who telecommute during the pandemic should not be required to disclose travel plans to their employers. "The purpose of a travel policy would be to protect others in the workplace from COVID-19 exposure, and that concern is not present where employees are telecommuting," she explained.

Before implementing a pre-travel inquiry, employers should clarify their use of the information and goal of the policy, Mingione said.

"Will there be an attempt to discourage employees from traveling to certain places? This can create problems of enforcement and morale," he noted.

If a company with a pre-travel inquiry policy doesn't ask employees at all levels about their plans, employers should expect claims that the policy was applied unfairly or discriminatorily, Mingione cautioned.

Employers should consider amending vacation policies to require employees who plan to travel during their vacation to provide advance notice to their supervisors or HR about the details of their travel plans, including their intended travel destinations and means of transportation, said Paul Scheck, an attorney with Shutts & Bowen in Orlando, Fla.

Businesses also should consider requiring employees who travel to a country designated as a hot spot by the World Health Organization and/or the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to self-quarantine before returning to the workplace, he added.

Clear Communication

"Any such amendment to an employer's current vacation policy should be clearly communicated to employees in advance," Scheck said.

Employers should consider requiring employees who intend to travel to take their company laptops so they can work if they are stranded in another state or country or are required to self-quarantine on their return, Scheck added.

The policy also should specify whether employees who are required to self-quarantine must telecommute during the self-quarantine or use paid time off to cover that period.

An employee probably isn't entitled to paid sick leave under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) for having to self-quarantine after travel, said Suzanne Singer, an attorney with RumbergerKirk in Miami. "However, if the employee is able to get a doctor to issue a quarantine order or if the employee develops symptoms, the employee may become eligible for FFCRA sick leave," she said.

Travel Advisories

Employees can be required to sign a travel advisory before vacation, Singer suggested.

The travel advisory might ask the employee to acknowledge that if the worker travels to any area designated as a hot spot, he or she may be required to self-quarantine on return. The CDC's most recent guidance recommends self-quarantining for 14 days after a potential exposure or 10 days after a positive test.

Singer said that an employer's travel advisory also might state, "As your employer, we are responsible for providing a safe and healthy workplace. During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonessential travel is discouraged."

The advisory should add, she said, that if a worker intends to travel, the following guidelines, among others, should be followed:

Avoid close contact with others—keep a distance of at least six feet.
Clean hands often—washing with soap and water for at least 20 seconds.
Wear a face covering in public.
Notify the employer immediately if you or a family member has been diagnosed with COVID-19.

Health Screenings

"Employers should encourage good choices by employees, provide up-to-date information regarding policies and COVID-19 hot spots, and develop a plan for how to reintegrate employees into the workplace following time off," Mingione said.

Include the identification of recent travel destinations in any regular health screenings employers conduct, he suggested.

"If employees are accustomed to providing this information before each workday, this will hopefully motivate them to make safe travel choices and help employers avoid appearing overly involved in employees' personal lives," he said.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/coronavirus-vacation-travel-policies.aspx

If I Knew Then What I Know Now: Revisiting Incentive Payments and the FLSA

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:22:56 GMT

By Cheryl Pinarchick and Joshua Nadreau, Fisher Phillips | Jul 27, 2020

Incentivizing employees can be an important factor when it comes to an employer’s bottom line. Several common misconceptions about the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) have driven decisions regarding incentive payments for too long.

Over the last few months, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division has clarified how the FLSA applies to incentive payments made to overtime-eligible employees. While a wake-up call for some employers, these are not really changes in the law per se.

Rather, the change is that by announcing these clarifications, the agency has provided employers with more knowledge and empowered them to explore compensation structures that include incentives.

Whether adding, removing, or tweaking incentive payments, employers will want to revisit these three aspects of the FLSA in light of recent developments.

1. Not Everything Increases the Regular Rate for Overtime Pay.

Usually, we are reminding employers that all wages are factored into the “regular rate” when paying time-and-a-half unless it falls within a specific exclusion. But this year, we have regulations that help employers understand those exclusions.

Among other things, the agency addressed the exclusion of “perks” (such as gym access/memberships, employee wellness programs, and on-site offerings) from the regular rate.

2. Salaried Employees Can Receive Bonuses, Too!

Examples are great, but sometimes, the particular facts are mistaken as an exacting checklist. Thankfully, the DOL has set this record straight!

If you are paying based on a fluctuating workweek (a salary for all hours worked, plus the overtime premium) and thought you wouldn’t have to also pay incentive pay (or vice versa), there now is a regulation specifically permitting fluctuating workweek and incentive pay. Just remember to pay the overtime premium (halftime) on both.

3. Is That Employee Actually Exempt from Overtime?

In another area where (decades-old) examples have taken on lives of their own, the FLSA’s commissioned-employee exemption has been interpreted as applying to a smaller subset of employees than the actual test dictates.

This exemption from overtime-only has a few prongs, but one that has caused many employers to not even consider it is the requirement that it be a “retail or service establishment.”

Several businesses that are commonly used by individuals today were deemed to be “lacking” the retail concept (including banks, dry cleaners, insurance agencies, tax preparers, and travel agencies, to name a few), making the exemption an uphill battle despite the fact that a particular establishment might meet all of the relevant factors.

Now the infamous list has been removed, and employers that can meet the “retail” test just might be able to use the exemption for qualifying employees.

Of course, there are more details to consider before making a change, including taking state law into account. But at a time when employers are looking at their bottom lines and still want to incentivize employees, these developments might provide just the right balance.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Daily Advisor

https://hrdailyadvisor.blr.com/2020/07/27/if-i-knew-then-what-i-know-now-revisiting-incentive-payments-and-the-flsa/

'Posters aren't going to cut it': Open enrollment in a pandemic

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:15:56 GMT

AUTHOR Katie Clarey | PUBLISHED Aug. 6, 2020

As the term "virtual reality" comes closer to defining the year 2020, HR professionals will find the coronavirus has moved yet another thing online: open enrollment. The communication methods employers use to encourage workers to select benefits will need to follow suit. As DirectPath VP of Client Services Kim Buckey put it, "posters aren't going to cut it."

Like birthday parties and weddings, open enrollment education events have adapted to the virtual environment, said Buckey, whose company provides enrollment support services to employers and employees. DirectPath has noted a developing interest in virtual benefit fairs, for example. "You're not going to be able to set up something where people can meet with vendors, but you can certainly do that online," Buckey said.

Telephonic enrollment has also garnered more attention amid the pandemic. Employees can schedule an appointment to chat with a representative about an employer's benefits offerings and, in the same phone call, learn about their options and enroll on the spot.

Even as benefits education and enrollment mediums morph to the demands of COVID-19, HR professionals must clear the hurdles of informing employees they exist and convincing them to take action. Buckey offered three tips for practitioners heading into open enrollment season.

1. Start early. Communicate often.

If benefits professionals haven't initiated any open enrollment communications plans, they should start now, Buckey said. "Lay the groundwork. Remind people that enrollment is coming up."

Employees may welcome this information. The novel coronavirus has refreshed many employees' interest in their benefits, prompting workers to investigate the coverage they have and consider what they may want to change in the coming year, Buckey said.

While employees' attention lingers on benefits, employers can remind them to tend to benefits-related tasks. Workers need to check in with their primary caregivers, for example, to ensure they're still in business. "In some areas where there are primarily private practices, a lot of those practices have had to close because they lost so much income during the shutdown," Buckey said. "This is a good opportunity to think about where you're going to receive care going forward."

2. Bring communications into focus.

Open enrollment necessitates an overarching strategy. Employers ought to consider what they want to accomplish during the season, Buckey said. Employers may want to shift employees to a certain plan. They may want to increase participation in offerings such as health savings accounts. Or they may want to ensure workers looked into their options.

As employers deploy communications about open enrollment, they must ensure each message is crafted for a specific purpose and a specific audience. "Having a plan so you can target your communications is essential," Buckey said. "That way, you're not advertising student loan benefits to someone entering retirement."

Messaging should be brief. "Don't try and do all things with each communication. Have a reason for what you're sending out, and keep it short and simple," Buckey said. "No one these days, or even in the best of times, has time to go through a fifty-page document." Buckey suggested communications run no longer than half a page to a page. "That's about how much we can handle. Keep it engaging and visual."

Employers should make clear how the communications relate to employees. "Emphasize the 'what's in it for me,'" Buckey said. "If you can point out the value of an employee taking action, usually that translates into dollars."

3. Use a variety of employee-facing tools

"Meet employees where they are," Buckey suggested. The "overdone phrase" offers employers a useful open enrollment communication strategy, and one that's particularly applicable during a pandemic.

Employers can start by sending out mailers. "Get materials in front of other family members," Buckey said. Then go virtual. DirectPath serves clients who have used Facebook pages, Twitter chats and email campaigns to advertise benefits offerings. "There are so many tools out there that can be used," Buckey said. "There's no excuse for not taking advantage of these opportunities when these tools are so widespread."

***** ***** ***** ***** ******

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/posters-arent-going-to-cut-it-open-enrollment-in-a-pandemic/583001/

More Than Half Of Employees Are Afraid To Discuss Their Mental Health With Their Boss, New Data Shows

Bill Brewer — Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:07:56 GMT

Mark Murphy | August 7, 2020

It doesn't take a clinical psychologist to know that employees' mental health has declined precipitously during this pandemic. And even though I'm married to a clinical psychologist, the warning signs are apparent to virtually all laypeople.

Whether it's fatigue, loss of focus, anxiety, or guilt, the pandemic has taken a huge toll on our collective mental well-being. And there's an abundance of data to support that claim.

Paychex's recent study of more than 1,000 employees, called Mental Health at Work During COVID-19, discovered that not only has employee mental health suffered during the pandemic but that employees are afraid to discuss those effects with their bosses.

Out of the 1,017 full-time employees who took the survey, more than half of respondents (54%) said they felt uncomfortable talking to their managers and supervisors about mental health. And even worse is that 30% of respondents feared that discussing their mental health could lead to being fired or furloughed, and 29% thought discussing their issues could cost them a promotion.

Now, employees did share their concerns about their declining mental health, just not with their bosses or HR. According to 35% of employees who discussed their mental health concerns, they discussed their issues with coworkers. Only 21% discussed mental health with a supervisor, and just 5% said they spoke with an HR representative.

This should be troubling news for every leader. While it's great that lots of employees feel comfortable discussing their issues with their coworkers, it's disturbing that having a conversation with the boss is seen as so risky.

And yet, we shouldn't be surprised. In the study Why CEOs Get Fired, we discovered that executives who received bad news early were far less likely to get fired than those whose employees avoided disclosing harsh realities. In other words, while it's nice to hear positive news all the time, if you do not hear bad news, you're probably in real trouble.

And yet, notwithstanding those findings, we encountered an untold number of senior executives who simply wouldn't countenance bad news.

Let's be honest for a moment; in the past few months, have you felt a bit more anxious about your career than you were six months ago? Have you felt a bit less productive than you were six months ago? Have you felt, even a little bit, more irritable than you were six months ago?

Those are all warning signs of declining mental health. And if you haven't felt any of those, then you are truly unique, because virtually every worker has recently suffered at least a few of those symptoms.

The question isn't whether your employees have felt a decline in their mental health; the Paychex study is clear proof that lots of employees are suffering. The big question for leaders, and HR departments, is whether we're willing to hear those concerns and act appropriately (i.e., without punishing employees for raising their issues).

The Paychex data also found that nearly half of employees reported worsening mental health, motivation, morale, productivity and stress since the pandemic outbreak. So the big test for leaders is, do you hear those concerns? Have at least a third of employees come to you to share their concerns about increased stress or decreased productivity? And if not, how are you going to get them to share their issues?

We know from the Paychex data that remote employees have suffered a greater decrease in motivation than in-person employees. And we know from the more than 20,000 people that have taken the quiz "Is Your Personality Suited To Working Remotely Or In The Office?” that remote employees are more likely to say that, "being 'average' in my work is a truly terrible thought for me."

I want you to imagine that you're a high-achieving remote employee (this is not a stretch for most of my readers). Now imagine that, because of the pandemic, you're feeling stress levels you haven't experienced before; your kids are home, you're afraid of catching a potentially fatal disease, you're feeling socially isolated, etc. In the background of all these stressful feelings, you've got this idea that you need to deliver excellent work (e.g., being an average employee is not good enough for you).

You're experiencing exogenous stress, and at the same time, you're feeling some self-recrimination for not being your best self. This is a wildly complex array of emotions. And if you don't feel like you've got a smart trusted advisor to guide you through this psychological tumult, you're likely to feel far worse than someone who's mindlessly punching the clock.

So again, I ask every leader, are you hearing about your employees' deep concerns? Are they proactively sharing their expected declines in mental health? If they're not coming to you, as their leader, they may be approaching their coworkers. But they may also not be approaching anyone at all. And if you care about achieving your team's maximal productivity and performance, that should concern you greatly.

***** ***** ***** ***** ******

Source; Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markmurphy/2020/08/07/more-than-half-of-employees-are-afraid-to-discuss-their-mental-health-with-their-boss-new-data-shows/#4faddcfc694a

How Companies Lose Great Talent: 10 Counterproductive Actions That Are Too Common

Bill Brewer — Wed, 05 Aug 2020 21:19:02 GMT

Dawn Graham | Jul 22, 2020

If you ask leaders about their organization’s greatest asset, most will unhesitatingly respond, “our people.” However, if this were the case, it would be easily evident through visible actions and a clear money trail.

For every company investing heavily in their employees, dozens are not. And, although it’s currently an employer’s market, the pendulum will swing back as it always does.

Stellar talent - the kind that moves the dial on profits, brings an innovative mindset and influences others to drive the vision forward whether in the mailroom or boardroom - isn’t going to settle for a company who invests less in them than they invest in the organization as employees.

Here are 10 common counterproductive practices that cause companies to lose great talent:

Not compensating promotions adequately. This one is first because as a career coach who helps clients negotiate compensation packages, a huge pet peeve is how silly internal raise policies typically are. Many organizations put arbitrary limits on how much of a bump an internal employee can receive, even if promoted, taking on extra work or significantly outperforming peers. This is counterproductive for many reasons, but primarily because if an outside candidate was pursued, the combined cost of recruiting, training and compensation would far outweigh what they could rightfully pay an internal employee who is proven and can hit the ground running. There’s a lot of data showing people who stay with a company for several years are compensated lower than market rate, which means jumping to a competitor may be the best way to get a healthy boost. Employees be aware: If you don’t ask, you won’t get, so build your case and show your manager concrete results. While it may take time, notice if your manager is willing to go to bat for you or give you specific tasks to impact your compensation. If you get the, “that’s our company policy so there’s nothing I can do” reply, you may need to pursue external options to get a bigger boost.
The cookie cutter approach to rewards. In an effort not to rock the boat, many companies uphold policies which end up rewarding the lowest performers and punishing the highest performers. This leads to a performance culture of mediocrity as the A-players leave to find an organization that will reward them for their extra contributions. It really doesn’t make sense to invest extra time to be proactive, forward-thinking and exceptional in a department that rewards everyone in generally the same manner. If there are no incentives to rise to the top, you’ll be left with a bunch of employees who regress to the average. Employees be aware: If you’re okay doing twice the work for the same pay as those who are slacking, your company will be happy to let you. Be proactive in advocating for yourself with data, and if the response is lukewarm, consider future options where your abilities might be recognized.
Atrocious recruiting practices. Ghosting, a lack of transparency, dozens of application hurdles or putting candidates through hoops when an internal candidate has been identified are a few popular hiring practices that need to stop. If you’ve been in a job search over the last few years, you’ve likely experienced all of these. If this is how a company courts you, it’s likely an unfortunate reflection of how you’ll be treated once you join. No matter what the website highlights as their company values, if you’re not seeing these enacted during their first impression when presumably they’re displaying their best behavior, it’s a good sign of what’s ahead. Employees be aware: In the same way an employer is looking for red flags in candidates, you need to evaluate them for the same. Trust what you see, not what they say so you can make the best decision for yourself.
Cutthroat or club culture. Whether it’s using intense competition to drive productivity or a lack of diversity which creates an environment that suppresses certain groups and inhibits their success, a negative culture is a perfect way to drive good talent to a place where they feel appreciated and can do their best work. While I’d love to say this leads to automatic doom, many companies have flourished despite a well-known reputation for displaying this type of behavior. However, social media has become a platform for calling out some of these companies, so change is possible through the power of the masses. Employees be aware: Culture is strong and driven by leadership, so if a department’s values (the real ones, not what’s displayed on a website) don’t align with yours, you’ll likely be happier and more successful someplace else.
Short-term thinking. While this isn’t always evident on the outside, many companies survive without a viable strategy, focusing on short-term gains or spending money on optics and advertising versus viable, long-term solutions. When the timing and market are right, these companies can sustain and even thrive. However, when a crisis hits, the facade shatters quickly, and they throw even more energy into siphoning the water out of the boat instead of repairing the hole. Many companies are experiencing this now, so pay attention to how the impact of the pandemic is being handled. Employees be aware: Some less agile companies may need more runway to transform, but if you don’t see signs your organization is evolving in a direction consistent with the market of the future by taking risks, engaging different thinking, and being open to testing new ideas, it may be only a matter of time before you’ll be applying for unemployment.
Complacency. Similar to short-term thinking, complacency tends to be more of a standard operating procedure (SOP) of companies who believe they’re too big to fail, thrive on long-held traditions or are so insular they believe what’s happening in the world doesn’t impact them. Holding on for dear life to old ways of operating instead of trying innovative solutions has been a death sentence for many long-standing organizations. And many have become so large, agility and adaptability are all but impossible due to the internal systems that have been implemented. For motivated, inspired employees looking to make a difference, being told “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is soul-crushing. Eventually, they stop sharing ideas and instead put that energy into finding a role where they can have an impact. Employees be aware: The world is changing at warp speed and job security doesn’t exist, even in what may seem to be the most stable companies (see Enron, Arthur Andersen, Lehman Bros, Kodak, Toys ‘R’ Us, etc.). Stay vigilant - consistently build your skills, brand and network.
Treating performance reviews like a checkbox item. If you’re in an organization that actually takes the performance management process seriously, including aligning it with job descriptions in the hiring process, you’re in the minority. There are many reasons this process may not work - it’s not enforced, the forms are too cumbersome, measures aren’t actually measurable or don’t fit the role, no training is provided, etc. Regardless, it’s critical to know where you stand as an employee, and how you’re being evaluated. Employees be aware: If the performance process at your company is less than adequate, consider maintaining your own dashboard to capture what you’re doing and ask that it be included in the discussion (and your personnel file!) so you know there’s a record of your efforts. Here’s one way to do it.
Appeasing the incompetent. A common practice in large companies is to simply transfer difficult employees instead of doing the work to implement a performance improvement plan or to fire them. To avoid the hassle (and paperwork), the poor performer is passed to the next department or worse, promoted into another role. Some managers simply ignore the bad behavior and instead start to pile work onto the rest of the team, sometimes even masking this as a “reward” for doing such a good job. If you want to quickly tick off stellar employees, allow them to witness or experience this behavior. They’ll soon be updating their LinkedIn profile and resume. Employees be aware: While there’s little benefit to pointing out your teammate’s inadequacies (your boss likely knows and is choosing to do nothing), track your own output and results to show your productivity to your leader. Also, asking what to take off of your plate to accommodate extra assignments can be a diplomatic way to express you recognize the inequity of work distribution.
Not re-skilling/up-skilling. While no one could foresee the pandemic, technology was advancing at a record pace even before “Covid-19” became a regular part of our vocabulary. New industries were emerging, old industries were dying out, and organizations were learning the status quo wasn’t going to be sustainable for the long-term. The pandemic has accelerated that. In this brief video, Michelle Weise shares startling statistics regarding the future of work including that in 2014, LinkedIn’s top 10 jobs were roles that didn’t exist five years earlier (e.g., big data architect, cloud manager, UI/UX designer, etc.) Employees be aware: If your company is more focused on surviving than thriving right now, then reinventing yourself to align with the needs of the new market will fall on your shoulders. Don’t wait for your company to change direction - take charge now to ensure you have a marketable skillset for the future.
Requiring a 4-year degree. For decades, companies have used 4-year degrees as an easy way to whittle down the hundreds of resumes they received online, regardless of their relevance to the role. Thankfully, this is one counterproductive action that’s losing steam. With technology being part of nearly every job today and AI growing by leaps and bounds, many tech giants no longer require a college degree and instead are hiring coders and programmers who prove they have the chops. Google recently announced it’s offering 100,000 scholarships that will be treated like a 4-year degree when applying to related roles in the company. Forward-thinking organizations know the computer science lessons learned in universities are nearly history even before students walk across the stage to receive their diplomas and that education isn’t finite, but lifelong. Employees be aware: Coding bootcamps, MOOCs focused on programming, trade schools and several other real-world training is at your fingertips. Be open to options and ensure your education equips you with the skills you need to be employable.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawngraham/2020/07/22/how-companies-lose-great-talent-10-counterproductive-actions-that-are-too-common/#1a0c66c5ff4b

Caregiving prevents workforce re-entry, study finds

Bill Brewer — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 17:17:59 GMT

Katie Clarey | PUBLISHED: July 31, 2020

Dive Brief:

Caregiving responsibilities pressured workers into quitting their jobs and applying for unemployment benefits as the COVID-19 crisis developed in the U.S., according to the results of a July 23 survey by Morning Consult for the Bipartisan Policy Center. Of the 1,500 unemployment insurance recipients interviewed, most received the benefits because they were furloughed (35%) or laid off (37%). Six percent quit their jobs. Slightly more than half (52%) of parents who quit said child care or school closures caused their resignations. More than a third (37%) of caregivers who quit did so to look after a sick family member.
Caregiving responsibilities pose a barrier to workforce re-entry for unemployment insurance recipients, the survey found. Nearly 60% of parents receiving benefits who aren't looking to return to work said caregiving duties stand in their way, with 41% specifically citing school closures. This challenge is more pronounced among people of color. Fifty-five percent of Hispanic and 44% of Black parents are not returning to work because of caregiving needs.
Two in three respondents said they would be somewhat or very likely to return to work sooner if they had access to paid family leave, the survey found. Three in four said they would be somewhat or very likely to return on a reduced schedule, so long as they could receive partial unemployment benefits to make up for their reduced wages.

Dive Insight:

Paid leave will pave the way out of the caregiving crisis, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. "Wider access to paid leave is vital for creating the necessary flexibility for caregivers and workers amidst continuing school, child, and adult care closures, and intermittent reopenings," it said in a blog post analyzing its survey findings.

The organization called on Congress to improve access to paid leave by expanding the provisions in the next COVID-19 relief package. The existing package covers workers only at companies with fewer than 500 employees, and the coverage expires at the end of the year. "Congress should lift the 500 employee cap, expand coverage to new parents, and extend the program to June of 2021 to cover a likely second wave," the Center said.

The caregiving issue didn't arise during the pandemic, nor will it disappear with it. Caregiver service site Care.com found caregiving duties impacted workers' absenteeism and productivity before COVID-19 reached the U.S. in a May survey. Eighty-six percent of respondents said they had stayed home from work to care for a family member or pet at least a few times per year; more than half said they did so at least once every couple of months.

Despite the issue's persistence, a long-term legislative solution appears far off. During a June 18 U.S. Senate Committee on Finance hearing, lawmakers discussed the problems working families face and appeared to agree on the severity of the situation. But each potential paid leave provision faces hurdles.

Some employers have elected to add or enhance paid leave benefits for caregivers to aid them through the COVID-19 crisis. As employers consider how to address caregivers' needs in the longer-term, they may consider training for managers. Results of a recent Disability Management Employer Coalition survey found more than half of employers interviewed said supervisors had not received training on workplace benefits and resources available for caregivers.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/caregiving-prevents-workforce-re-entry-study-finds/582688/

Diversity officers are in demand across corporate America but are often underpaid

Bill Brewer — Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:07:41 GMT

PUBLISHED WED, JUL 29 202012:40 PM EDT | Seema Mody

KEY POINTS

Diversity officers across corporate America are under pressure to solve complicated, important and deeply sensitive issues related to race.
While demand for diversity officers is rising, their success depends on a number of factors including their access to the boardroom and the C-suite.
Financial compensation is another challenge faced by diversity executives.

Diversity officers across corporate America are under pressure to solve complicated, important and deeply sensitive issues related to race — all while trying to consult employees and help their C-suite manage any blunders of the past.

How do companies improve the diversity at the top? How do companies ensure executives aren’t using bias when promoting individuals? How do managers create an inclusive environment for all people of color? These are the type of questions diversity officers are addressing at major firms, and time is ticking for action.

“Often as a CDO [Chief Diversity Officer], you really have seven jobs in one. You’re PR, most recently a pandemic specialist. My number one job has been ‘counselor in chief,’ not only for our agencies in our networks, but certainly my fellow colleagues in diversity, equity and inclusion,” said Tiffany Warren, chief diversity officer at Omnicom Group, in an interview CNBC.

Financial compensation is another challenge faced by diversity executives.

Compiling data from 12 salary reports, Glassdoor found that the average salary for chief diversity officers is $127,239, which is less than the average pay of individuals who hold positions in the C-suite.

“I think in general, chief diversity officers are underpaid mainly because it’s looked at as overhead and it’s not looked at as a strategic position,” Warren said.

Warren said she is hopeful that as corporations prioritize diversity initiatives, more attention will be placed on equity and compensation of those individuals who help businesses drive these efforts.

While demand for diversity officers is rising, their success depends on a number of factors including their access to the boardroom and executives at the highest levels.

″[CDOs] have to understand the strategy, they have to craft a strategy that aligns with the business and they need to partner with leaders across the firm. They also need to partner with the board so the board can help to really drive this across the firm,” said Kara Helander, chief inclusion and diversity officer for The Carlyle Group. She also is a member of CNBC’s Workforce Executive Council, a network of C-level HR and inclusion officers.

Jacqueline Welch, chief diversity officer at Freddie Mac, agrees.

“If you don’t have that front line view of, ‘OK, here’s the business, here’s what we’re trying to accomplish,’ likely you’ll develop things in a vacuum that aren’t value add,” said Welch, who is also a member of CNBC’s Workforce Executive Council.

Both Helander and Welch said they do have that direct line of communication into their respective CEOs, which allows them to fulfill their broader objectives around diversity.

Warren said she, too, reports to the CEO of Omnicom and regularly presents to the board.

“I’m very connected to the board of directors. I present to them, I talk to them,” Warren said. “I’m included in many meetings. I do think that it’s important for the CDO to have a seat at the table, not to be shown the table and then told they can’t have that seat.”

Demand is rising for chief diversity officers across the U.S., with job postings for diversity and inclusion roles on Glassdoor up 55% since early June when the conversation around racial tensions — and corporate America’s response —took center stage.

Major companies on the hunt for a CDO include Illumina, Levi Strauss, Silicon Valley Bank, among others, according to a review of LinkedIn and Glassdoor listings.

Industry experts caution not to put too much emphasis on a company’s hiring of a CDO and instead track their progress in promoting people of color to senior management roles and address race-related issues.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/29/diversity-officers-are-in-demand-at-us-companies-but-often-underpaid.html

Employers Require COVID Liability Waivers as Conflict Mounts Over Workplace Safety

Bill Brewer — Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:33:56 GMT

After spending a May day preparing her classroom to reopen for preschoolers, Ana Aguilar was informed that the tots would not have to wear face masks when they came back. What’s more, she had to sign a form agreeing not to sue the school if she caught COVID-19 or suffered any injury from it while working there.

Other teachers signed the form distributed by the Montessori Schools of Irvine, but Aguilar said she felt uncomfortable, although it stipulated that staff members would be masked. At 23, she has a compromised immune system and was also worried that she could pass the coronavirus on to her fiancé and other family members.

Aguilar refused to sign, and a week later she was fired. “They said it was my choice to sign the paper, but it wasn’t really my choice,” said Aguilar, who’s currently jobless and receiving $276 a week in unemployment benefits. “I felt so bullied.”

As employers in California and across the country ask employees to return to the workplace, many have considered and some are requiring employees to sign similar waivers, employment lawyers say. And many employees, mostly lower-wage and minority workers in essential jobs, are calling lawyers to complain about the waivers.

“These are illegal agreements that are totally unfair to workers,” said Christian Schreiber, a San Francisco lawyer who represents Aguilar and other employees.

The California State Legislature last year passed a law, AB-51, prohibiting employers from requiring employees or job applicants to sign away their right to pursue legal claims or benefits under state law. The law, which also prohibits firing any employee for refusing to sign, is being challenged in court by business groups.

Only a few employers have forced employees to sign liability waivers, at least partly because these waivers likely would be held unenforceable by courts, lawyers who represent employers say.

“Courts don’t recognize them because of the unequal bargaining power between employers and employees,” said Isaac Mamaysky, a partner at the Potomac Law Group in New York City. “With so many unemployed, people would sign just about anything to get a job.”

Another reason they are considered unenforceable: Workers who get sick or injured on the job generally are compensated through state workers’ compensation systems rather than through the courts, and state laws don’t allow employers to force employees to sign away their right to pursue workers’ comp claims, Mamaysky said.

Companies may have the right to require nonemployees working on their premises to sign COVID waivers. When the New York Stock Exchange reopened in late May, it made floor traders sign a form clearing the exchange of liability if they contracted COVID-19. That was legally permissible because the traders were not exchange employees, an NYSE spokesman said. He declined to say whether any traders have become infected with the virus.

The Las Vegas-based restaurant chain Nacho Daddy, which did require employees to surrender their right to sue over COVID-19, reportedly fired some who refused. Following negative media coverage, Nacho Daddy removed the language that waived legal rights and instead had employees agree to follow safety rules such as masking and social distancing. The company did not respond to a request for comment.

Having employees agree to comply with safety rules is a more common and legally acceptable approach than waivers.

“I suggest my clients go to this reasonable middle ground: Here’s what we promise to you, here’s what we want you to promise to us,” said David Barron, an employment lawyer with Cozen O’Connor in Houston.

Business groups hope Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will make liability waivers unnecessary. He has proposed a Senate bill with broad liability protection for employers for five years against a range of coronavirus-related claims, and says he won’t back any COVID relief bill that doesn’t include such protections. President Donald Trump has said he supports the liability protection.

At least 10 states already have enacted laws providing some form of immunity for businesses from lawsuits brought by employees and others who contract COVID-19. Similar bills are pending in about 10 more states, according to the National Employment Law Project. The California Assembly is considering a liability protection bill for public K-12 schools.

Federal legislation to provide COVID liability relief for employers should protect only those that follow applicable health and safety guidelines, said John Abegg, executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, which supports McConnell’s proposal.

But even if McConnell is able to overcome Democratic opposition and pass liability protection as part of a new pandemic economic relief bill, that still wouldn’t shield employers from lawsuits claiming gross negligence or reckless or intentional conduct in failing to implement COVID-19 safety precautions.

Across the country, hospitals and nursing homes, as well as companies like McDonald’s, Walmart and Safeway, have been hit with wrongful death lawsuits filed by families of employees who died from the virus. They typically cite egregious conduct that goes beyond ordinary negligence, potentially erasing any statutory liability relief.

Nearly 50 COVID-related lawsuits have been filed relating to conditions of employment, including exposure to the coronavirus or the lack of protective equipment, according to data collected by the law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth.

In many states, alleging intentional misconduct also may allow workers harmed by COVID-19, and their families, to file lawsuits rather than go through the workers’ compensation system, and thus seek bigger damage awards.

For instance, a suit filed in Alameda County Superior Court in June by the widow of a longtime employee of Safeway’s distribution center in Tracy, California, alleged that the company had concealed a COVID-19 outbreak from workers and informed them that personal protective equipment was not recommended, contrary to guidelines from federal and state authorities.

“I don’t know of any jurisdiction that would allow a waiver against intentional misconduct,” said Louis DiLorenzo, head of the labor and employment practice for Bond Schoeneck & King in New York, who represents employers. “That would encourage misconduct.”

Worker advocates argue that lawsuits like the one against Safeway should be encouraged — rather than blocked by waivers or immunity laws — to bring to light serious public safety problems. Cases against McDonald’s in Oakland and Chicago — in which workers claimed the restaurants had created a “public nuisance” by not taking steps to adequately protect workers and customers from COVID-19 — resulted in court orders in late June for those McDonald’s restaurants to implement safety measures such as masks, social distancing and temperature checks.

“A very tiny number of cases are being filed by workers, and those cases are valuable,” said Hugh Baran, a staff lawyer at the National Employment Law Project. “These are the kinds of claims we should want workers to bring.”

Schreiber said he contacted the Montessori school about Aguilar’s firing, and it offered to reinstate her without having her sign the waiver. But Aguilar declined, saying the school was putting teachers at risk by not requiring pupils to wear masks. The school then offered her six weeks of severance pay, which she is considering.

By refusing to sign the waiver or accept her job back, she said, she was standing up for all the teachers at the school, many of whom have children and can’t afford to lose their job.

“I liked my job and I needed the paycheck,” Aguilar said. “But making you sign these papers is telling you that whatever happens, they really don’t care.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Kaiser Health News

https://khn.org/news/employers-require-covid-liability-waivers-as-conflict-mounts-over-workplace-safety/

Gov. Gavin Newsom Hopes California Lawmakers Will Make Worker Protections Permanent

Bill Brewer — Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:31:37 GMT

Chris Hagan | Friday, July 24, 2020 | Sacramento, CA

With state and federal worker assistance set to expire at the end of July, Gov. Gavin Newsom discussed efforts to extend protections for essential workers, but stopped short of further executive orders to lock in those measures.

During his Friday COVID-19 briefing, the governor focused on efforts to work with state legislative leaders on bills to extend some of his temporary executive orders. Those include expanded COVID-19 sick pay, worker compensation insurance for essential workers and eviction protections for renters.

As cases and death continue to rise — the state reported 9,718 news cases Thursday and a record 159 deaths — Newsom reiterated that Latino communities make up a large percentage of the state's essential workers and "disproportionately are being impacted by the virus."

Many of those essential workers have not received support to allow them to isolate or quarantine when they feel sick, he said. To combat that, the state is expanding its Project Roomkey program to help essential workers get hotel rooms or other housing to allow them to isolate from family members.

Newsom also introduced a new handbook for employers around worker safety and testing. He said the state will also be starting a public awareness campaign aimed at educating businesses and workers about the new rules.

Many businesses have expressed confusion over the rapidly changing regulations around the stay-at-home orders. Newsom said he takes responsibility, and will work to make new regulations simpler and easier for businesses.

"If I reflect back with objectivity … when we began to reopen the economy we focused so much on when. But we didn't focus on how, especially how to educate," he said.

Still, Newsom said the state will be looking at "strategic enforcement of labor laws," but focus more on education than punishing businesses.

Newsom did not announce any new protections for unemployed workers as the federal $600 of additional benefits are set to expire July 31, but said he had confidence in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi getting a deal done. He also hinted at an announcement next week around the state's embattled Employment Development Department, which has struggled to process 7 million first-time jobless claims since March 12.

The governor once again asked Californians to wear masks whenever they can't distance themselves from others. As the state moved into the weekend, he cautioned against unnecessary travel or gatherings.

Overall, California now has more than 425,000 confirmed cases, surpassing New York for the most of any state earlier this week. The state had two days in a row this week with more than 12,000 new cases, both records.

The state's positivity rate — the percentage of tests that come back positive — is at 7.5% over the past 14 days, and has stayed steady this week. Hospitalizations continue to increase but more slowly, while there was an 11% increase in ICU hospitalizations over the past 14 days.

On Thursday, Bay Area Democratic state Sen. Steve Glazer proposed new lockdown orders — with exceptions for essential trips for food and health care — in counties where the 14-day rate of positive tests exceeds 2% in either that county or its neighboring counties.

Asked about the impact another wave of stay-at-home orders would have on small businesses, Glazer said the economy and public health are “handcuffed together.”

“You can’t have one without the other,” he said. “No business is going to thrive unless we can kill this virus. I recognize the impacts a shelter in place has on people, but that really is the foundation for bringing our economy back.”

But not every lawmaker has approved of Newsom's use of executive power. Republican Assemblymember Kevin Riley of Rocklin posted a 123 page document laying out all of Newson's executive orders, saying it "lays bare the anatomy of one-man rule."

Newsom didn't announce any new executive orders on Friday.

****** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: CapRadio

https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/07/24/watch-live-gov-gavin-newsom-update-on-covid-19-for-july-24/

Employers are reconsidering workplace benefits for newly remote workers

Bill Brewer — Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:27:23 GMT

BY JARED LINDZON | 07-23-20

With no kitchens to stock or in-person classes to offer, some employers are rethinking what perks they offer employees.

Before Teampay was forced to close its Manhattan offices in early March, the company had a lot of the features you’d expect to find at a startup: a healthy snack bar and a much more popular unhealthy snack bar, coffee machines, and comfortable hangout areas where staff would gather for informal conversations.

Each week the distributed spend management software company invited a guest speaker to host a lunch-and-learn. Every other week they hosted a demos-and-drinks night where the engineering team would show off its latest development over beer and cocktails, and each quarter the team would venture off for a surprise team outing.

So when the coronavirus forced the company to send its staff home, CEO Andrew Hoag says he wanted to do what he could to continue offering a similar work experience from home. “We continued the lunch-and-learn and the demos-and-drinks,” he says. “For example, instead of us bringing a catered lunch into the office, we used our product to give every employee a $20-a-week delivery stipend so they could order lunch.”

Teampay also offered staff a $500 stipend to put toward their home office setup and a more flexible work schedule so they could work around family responsibilities.

Since COVID-19 forced many workers out of their offices, employers have had to choose between delivering traditional perks to employees’ homes, abolishing the in-person parts of their benefits programs, or reconsidering their approach to employee benefits altogether. As the world of employee perks evolves to meet the needs of a rapidly changing workplace arrangement, many of these changes are expected to become yet another part of the “new normal.”

REDEFINING BENEFITS FOR THE COVID-19 ERA

In a recent study by talent mobility platform Topia, the majority of respondents indicated that empowerment and trust were the most important factors that contribute to a “great employee experience,” followed by job training opportunities and technology. Only 16% of employees indicated that a “cool” office space, including perks such as free food and games, were a priority.

“The pandemic has highlighted an extreme shift in what we are all looking for from a work experience,” says Jacky Cohen, Topia’s vice president of people and culture. “It’s an opportunity to rethink the term ‘benefits’ in general and really think about what companies offer to their employees in the new world of the distributed workforce.”

In recent months employers and HR departments have also been turning their attention toward the perks that employees are more likely to need to get through this turbulent period, says Natalie Baumgartner, chief workforce scientist for employee engagement platform Achievers. “It’s definitely forcing organizations to ask the question ‘What’s most important? Where do we put our dollars? And what’s most valuable to our employees?'” she says. “The things that fundamentally support our well-being need to come first.”

Those perks, according to Baumgartner, include mental health resources, flexibility, and monetary incentives.

SHIFTING PRIORITIES—AND BUDGETS

“[Employers and HR departments] are changing their behaviors,” says Baumgartner. “What direction they’re changing depends on the financial viability of their company, the strategic direction—do we need to be literally together moving forward—and just their value system, which drives a lot of these decisions.”

Baumgartner adds that in the midst of an economic crisis many companies have had to tighten their belts and eliminate some of the benefits that they previously offered. For example, many are reducing benefits related to continuing education and employee training in the face of an uncertain economic future. “It was something that was offered by organizations as a massive perk—getting a higher education, going to business school. In many cases that’s gone by the wayside,” she says. “It’s something organizations simply can’t justify in this state of financial unpredictability.”

A REMINDER OF SIMPLER TIMES

While employees are seeking more meaningful perks such as mental health resources and greater flexibility, there is still a demand for traditional perks that can offer consistency and comfort in uncertain times.

Prior to the coronavirus outbreak, New York-based Stadium provided a service that allowed office workers at a company to order food from several different restaurants on the same order, meaning colleagues didn’t have to agree on a lunch spot. Since the outbreak, cofounder and CEO Shaunak Amin has launched another business, SnackMagic, that allows remote staff to receive personalized snack boxes at their home office anywhere in the country.

According to Amin, the custom snack delivery company has doubled every two weeks since its launch just over two months ago. “There aren’t many tools or services that are built for the remote setting,” he says. “Based on the initial interest we’ve seen, I think it’s here to stay.”

While Amin admits that snacking isn’t a top priority for most companies in the midst of a global pandemic, the cost of a few treats is minimal compared to what they would otherwise spend on stocking office kitchens, and the gesture goes a long way. “It makes the employee feel like the employer cares, not just for me but also for my family, because often the kids are picking the snacks,” he says.

NEW OFFICEMATES, NEW PERKS

Another major shift in the delivery of workplace benefits is the intended recipient. Prior to the pandemic, perks were primarily targeted toward employees, with family members occasionally added as a secondary recipient to health plans and other benefits.

“The biggest change we’re seeing with COVID is this understanding that no employee operates in isolation,” says Daniel Freedman, the cofounder and co-CEO of BurnAlong, a digital corporate wellness platform. “That’s the biggest shift that we’ve seen; families are central.”

BurnAlong offers a digital platform that allows users to receive one-on-one or group training sessions with hundreds of health and wellness providers, with classes ranging from traditional fitness to mindfulness and meditation to rehabilitation for medical conditions. Freedman says that the platform has doubled its client list since last year, with more than a quarter of all classes now dedicated to emotional support.

“That’s everything from parenting classes, arthritis, diabetes, adaptive workouts for people with disabilities, sleep, anxiety—and this mirrors what you’re seeing with a heightened focus on mental health and loneliness,” he says.

Some of the most popular options are also geared toward nonworking members of the household, such as virtual summer camp programs for kids. “If your spouse, your partner, your parent, your kids are struggling, that affects your productivity. So when it comes to health and wellness, every company is looking at how to deliver programming and support for families as well,” he says. “We even have pet workouts—workouts that people can do with their dogs. It’s all about meeting people wherever they are and with whoever their loved ones are.”

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Fast Company

https://www.fastcompany.com/90528761/employers-are-reconsidering-workplace-benefits-for-remote-workers

IRS INCREASES PREMIUM TAX CREDIT ELIGIBILITY AND AFFORDABILITY CAP

Bill Brewer — Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:18:14 GMT

JULY 27, 2020 JOANNA KIM-BRUNETTI

The IRS updated indexing adjustments for certain provisions under IRC Section 36B in Revenue Procedure 2020-36. See RP 2020-36. In particular, the initial and final premium percentages listed in the “Applicable Percentage” Table in Internal Revenue Code Section 36B(b)(3)(A)(i) were adjusted for the 2021 calendar year as follows.

Household income percentage of Federal poverty line:	Initial percentage	Final percentage
Less than 133%	2.07%	2.07%
At least 133% but less than 150%	3.10%	4.14%
At least 150% but less than 200%	4.14%	6.52%
At least 200% but less than 250%	6.52%	8.33%
At least 250% but less than 300%	8.33%	9.83%
At least 300% but not more than 400%	9.83%	9.83%

This Applicable Percentage Table provides a sliding scale range of percentages within an applicable tier of household income to calculate an individual’s premium tax credit.

The Revenue Procedure also adjusts the percentage for plan years beginning 2021 to 9.83%. This is the percentage under IRC Section 36B(c)(2)(C)(i)(II) that is determinative of “affordability” to comply with the ACA Employer Mandate. Under this Mandate, if an employer fails to offer “Affordable” coverage to employees, the employer risks being subject to penalties under IRC Section 4980H.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: The ACA Times

https://acatimes.com/irs-issues-revenue-procedure-identifying-applicable-percentages-to-determine-eligibility-for-premium-tax-credits-and-affordability/

Rethinking The Role Of Human Resources In The Future Of Work

Bill Brewer — Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:46:34 GMT

Yolanda Lau - Forbes Councils Member | Jul 27, 2020,08:10am EDT

The future of work is the liquid workforce, and as such, the role of human resources must evolve to meet today’s challenges. Yet, many HR leaders are only engaged in areas related to their full-time workforce and aren’t involved in the planning and management of the liquid workforce.

Here are some things to keep in mind as you rethink your HR role.

Automation Is The Future Of Work

A recent McKinsey report predicts that automation will result in many occupations — such as administrative assistants and bookkeepers — shrinking through attrition and reduced hiring. Millions of Americans will need to be retrained and redeployed during the coming automation age.

HR will need to take the lead in helping to develop a digitally ready workforce that can adapt to the changing needs of each company. But this workforce will also look very different from today’s — companies are migrating toward a blended workforce that includes full-time workers and liquid workers. HR leaders need to reconsider how they develop and retain the best talent. To do this, they need to fully understand the direction of their companies and the types of talent and skills needed to support that direction.

Digitalization Is The Future of Work

As HR leaders shift from managing full-time employees to managing talent, they will need to embrace digitalization. For HR, Gartner noted that digitalization is changing everything. With a blended workforce, your talent acquisition processes and systems must evolve to encompass traditional hiring and on-demand skills sourcing.

In many companies, HR leaders are not involved in overseeing the contingent or liquid workforce. Often the procurement or purchasing department takes the lead, resulting in an emphasis on cost over talent sourcing or management.

HR leaders need to develop a talent network that encompasses internal and external talent and focuses on identifying, matching and developing the skills that the company needs at any given time. As part of developing that talent network, HR must build relationships with global online talent marketplaces.

Shifting To A Talent-Based Workforce

As HR leaders rethink their workforce strategy, they need to assess where using the liquid workforce makes sense. What skills does the company have within its full-time workforce? What skills will it need in the near future? Are these long-term or short-term needs? Will the demand for these skills vary over time? HR leaders should assess these factors to determine where the liquid workforce should be integrated into their strategic workforce plan.

As the blended workforce grows, HR needs to reconsider not only how and where talent is sourced, but how to manage that talent. Organizations must have rigorous contracting and onboarding processes in place for their liquid workers. These processes protect the company, aid in meeting compliance requirements, and enable the rapid on-ramp of liquid workers. Also, a consistent onboarding process helps liquid workers instantly feel like part of the team and hit the ground running on projects.

Managing Performance With A Liquid Workforce

The skills required to engage with and manage a liquid worker are similar in many ways to those required with full-time employees. However, the “how” and “what” of using those skills are very different since liquid workers are entrepreneurs who are working in partnership with an organization. People managers will need support and training from HR to adapt their styles to partner most effectively with their liquid workers. HR leaders should encourage the sharing of best practices for working with liquid talent across the organization.

Performance management also needs to be rethought with a blended workforce. Having a performance management system with your liquid workers is essential. Every engagement with a liquid worker should be evaluated and assessed against performance metrics and goals. Evaluations should be maintained in your talent database.

Similarly, retention strategies need to be redeveloped for a blended workforce. Consider how to reward high-performing liquid talent. For example, some organizations offer performance bonuses, equity or back-end profit participation.

Modern companies are shifting to a more blended workforce where liquid workers represent a greater and greater share of the workforce. HR needs to take the lead on the workforce strategy and plan not only for full-time workers, but also for liquid workers. Liquid workers are human resources and, as such, should be part of the strategic remit of HR leaders rather than co-mingled and lost among vendor spending. It’s time for the role of HR to evolve and truly encompass all human resources.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2020/07/27/rethinking-the-role-of-human-resources-in-the-future-of-work/#779fb5715008

The Knee Surgeon Was In-Network. The Surgical Assistant Wasn't, And Billed $1,167

Bill Brewer — Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:58:46 GMT

MARKIAN HAWRYLUK | July 22, 20201:00 PM ET

Izzy Benasso was playing a casual game of tennis with her father on a summer Saturday when she felt her knee pop. She had torn a meniscus, one of the friction-reducing pads in the knee, locking it in place at a 45-degree angle.

Although she suspected she had torn something, the 21-year-old senior at the University of Colorado Boulder had to endure an anxious weekend in July 2019 until she could get an MRI that Monday.

"It was kind of emotional for her," said her father, Steve Benasso. "Just sitting there thinking about all the things she wasn't going to be able to do."

At the UCHealth Steadman Hawkins Clinic Denver, the MRI confirmed the tear, and she was scheduled for surgery on Thursday. Her father, who works in human resources, told her exactly what to ask the clinic regarding her insurance coverage.

Steve had double-checked that the hospital; the surgeon, Dr. James Genuario; and Genuario's clinic were all within her Cigna health plan's network.

"We were pretty conscious going into it," he said.

Isabel met with Genuario's physician assistant on Wednesday, and the following day underwent a successful meniscus repair operation.

"I had already gotten a ski pass at that point," Isabel said. "So that was depressing." But she was heartened to hear that with time and rehab she would get back to her active lifestyle.

Then a letter arrived that portended bills to come.

The patient: Izzy Benasso, a 21-year-old college student covered by her mother's Cigna health plan.

The total bill: $96,377 for the surgery was billed by the hospital, Sky Ridge Medical Center in Lone Tree, Colo., part of HealthONE, a division of the for-profit hospital chain HCA. It accepted a $3,216.60 payment from the insurance company, as well as $357.40 from the Benassos, as payment in full. The surgical assistant billed separately for $1,167.

Service provider: Eric Griffith, a surgical assistant who works as an independent contractor.

Medical service: Outpatient arthroscopic knee surgery to repair the meniscus.

What gives: The Benassos had stumbled into a growing trend in health care: third-party surgical assistants who aren't part of a hospital staff or a surgeon's practice. They tend to stay out-of-network with health plans, either accepting what a health plan will pay them or billing the patient directly. That, in turn, is leading to many surprise bills.

Even before any other medical bills showed up, Izzy received a notice from someone whose name she didn't recognize.

"I'm writing this letter as a courtesy to remind you of my presence during your surgery," the letter read.

It came from Eric Griffith, a Denver-based surgical assistant. He went on to write that he had submitted a claim to her health plan requesting payment for his services, but that it was too early to know whether the plan would cover his fee. It didn't talk dollars and cents.

Steve Benasso said he was perplexed by the letter's meaning, adding: "We had never read or heard of anything like that before."

Surgical assistants are not medical doctors, but serve as an extra set of hands for surgeons, allowing them to concentrate on the technical aspects of the surgery. Oftentimes other surgeons or physician assistants — or, in teaching hospitals, medical residents or surgical fellows — fill that role at no extra charge. But some doctors rely on certified surgical assistants, who generally have an undergraduate science degree, complete a 12- to 24-month training program and then pass a certification exam.

Surgeons generally decide when they need surgical assistants, although the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services maintains lists of procedures for which a surgical assistant can and cannot bill. Meniscus repair is on the list of allowed procedures.

A Sky Ridge spokesperson said that it is the responsibility of the surgeon to pre-authorize the use and payment of a surgical assistant during outpatient surgery, and that HealthOne hospitals do not hire surgical assistants. Neither the assistant nor the surgeon works directly for the hospital. UC School of Medicine, the surgeon's employer, declined requests for comment from Genuario.

Karen Ludwig, executive director of the Association of Surgical Assistants, estimates that 75% of certified surgical assistants are employed by hospitals, while the rest are independent contractors or work for surgical assistant groups.

"We're seeing more of the third parties," said Dr. Karan Chhabra, a surgeon and health policy researcher at the University of Michigan Medical School. "This is an emerging area of business."

And it can be lucrative: Some of the larger surgical assistant companies are backed by private equity investment. Private equity firms often target segments of the health care system where patients have little choice in who provides their care. Indeed, under anesthesia for surgery, patients are often unaware the assistants are in the operating room. The private equity business models include keeping such helpers out-of-network so they can bill patients for larger amounts than they could negotiate from insurance companies.

Surgical assistants counter that many insurance plans are unwilling to contract with them.

"They're not interested," said Luis Aragon, a Chicago-area surgical assistant and managing director of American Surgical Professionals, a private equity-backed group in Houston.

Chhabra and his colleagues at the University of Michigan recently found that 1 in 5 privately insured patients undergoing surgery by in-network doctors at in-network facilities still receive a surprise out-of-network bill. Of those, 37% are from surgical assistants — tied with anesthesiologists as the most frequent offenders. The researchers found 13% of arthroscopic meniscal repairs resulted in surprise bills, at an average of $1,591 per bill.

Colorado has surprise billing protections for consumers like the Benassos who have state-regulated health plans. But state protections don't apply to the 61% of American workers who have self-funded employer plans. Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, which helps consumers dispute surprise bills, has seen a lot of cases involving surgical assistants, said Adam Fox, director of strategic engagement.

Resolution: Initially, the Benassos ignored the missive. Izzy didn't recall meeting Griffith or being told a surgical assistant would be involved in her case.

But a month and a half later, when Steve logged on to check his daughter's explanation of benefits, he saw that Griffith had billed the plan for $1,167. Cigna had not paid any of it.

Realizing then that the assistant was likely out-of-network, Steve sent him a letter saying "we had no intention of paying."

Griffith declined to comment on the specifics of the Benasso case but said he sends letters to every patient so no one is surprised when he submits a claim.

"With all the different people talking to you in preop, and the stress of surgery, even if we do meet, they may forget who I was or that I was even there," he said. "So the intention of the letter is just to say, 'Hey, I was part of your surgery.' "

After KHN inquired, Cigna officials reviewed the case and Genuario's operative report, determined that the services of an assistant surgeon were appropriate for the procedure and approved Griffith's claim. Because Griffith was an out-of-network provider, Cigna applied his fee to Benasso's $2,000 outpatient deductible. The Benassos have not received a bill for that fee.

Griffith says insurers often require more information before determining whether to pay for a surgical assistant's services. If the plan pays anything, he accepts that as payment in full. If the plan pays nothing, Griffith usually bills the patient.

The takeaway: As hospitals across the country restart elective surgeries, patients should be aware of this common pitfall — and realize it's a fee they may have no recourse but to pay if their state doesn't have protections against surprise billing.

Chhabra said he's hearing more anecdotal reports about insurance plans simply not paying for surgical assistants, which leaves the patient stuck with the bill.

Chhabra said patients should ask their surgeons before surgery whether an assistant will be involved and whether that assistant is in-network.

"There are definitely situations where you need another set of hands to make sure the patient gets the best care possible," he said. But "having a third party that is intentionally out-of-network or having a colleague who's a surgeon who's out-of-network — those are the situations that don't really make a lot of financial or ethical sense."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: NPR

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/22/891909610/knee-repairs-use-of-surgical-assistant-leads-to-a-costly-surprise-bill?ft=nprml&f=1001

As Restrictions Lift and Summer Approaches, Will Employees Take Their Vacation Time?

Bill Brewer — Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:01:22 GMT

Namely

Jun 22, 2020, 07:00 ET

NEW YORK, June 22, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Namely, the leading HR platform for mid-sized companies, having recently analyzed aggregated data from its popular time and attendance management functionality, today released its findings regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on "paid time off" (PTO) requests. In January and February 2020, PTO requests stayed almost exactly the same as they did in 2019. As stay-at-home orders became mainstream in March 2020, Namely's platform saw a year-over-year decline in PTO requests (36 percent of employees requested off in March 2019 versus only 27 percent in March 2020); yet, the average length of requests was longer. In April 2020, employees requesting PTO plunged to 18 percent on average versus 38 percent during the same month in 2019. By May 2020, as restrictions started to lift, PTO requests were on the rise again, although still significantly lower (24 percent of employees requesting off) than in May 2019 (38 percent of employees requesting off).

According to a 2019 study by WorldatWork, 37 percent of employees do not use their allotted paid time off each year. To encourage utilization of this critical benefit, some organizations have established a "use or lose" policy. With so much uncertainty in today's workplace, a clearly stated vacation policy with an automated approval process helps employees feel empowered to take the time they've earned.

Industry analyst Madeline Laurano, Founder of Aptitude Research, commented, "COVID-19 has disrupted almost every aspect of work-life balance, from work-from-home to homeschooling. While it might feel like taking paid time off doesn't make sense right now, unplugging during the summer months can help employees manage the burnout of these pandemic times. In fact, it can actually result in improved productivity and employee engagement."

Namely's CEO Larry Dunivan added, "With travel restrictions in place, it might seem counterintuitive to take time off; however, taking a break from work can be restorative. Giving managers visibility into schedules in advance and communicating the ground rules to everyone ensures employees can leverage their PTO benefits. In helping employees achieve some of those restorative benefits, Namely added two company holidays and offered summer hours in July and August to encourage employees towards this objective."

Namely tracks PTO request data annually and compares the current year against the previous year. PTO – as in vacation requests – is tracked separately from longer-term leave requests. Data was normalized for fluctuations related to COVID-19.

For more information about Namely's time and attendance software, including online time tracking, mobile/geo-fenced time tracking, scheduling and reporting, please visit https://hubs.ly/H0rHvSb0.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Namely

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/as-restrictions-lift-and-summer-approaches-will-employees-take-their-vacation-time-301080597.html

JB Hunt agrees to $6.5M settlement in California driver misclassification suit

Bill Brewer — Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:01:12 GMT

AUTHOR: Jim Stinson | PUBLISHED - July 16, 2020

Dive Brief:

J.B. Hunt agreed to settle a February 2019 lawsuit alleging California drivers were misclassified as independent contractors (Duy Nam Ly, et al. v. J.B. Hunt Transport Inc. No. 2:19-cv-01334 (C.D. Calif. July 6, 2020)). The drivers' filing seeks approval for the settlement, which would award 312 drivers an average of $20,000. The total value of the settlement was pegged at $6.5 million by law firm Marlin & Saltzman.
In the most significant claim, J.B. Hunt allegedly failed "to reimburse for necessary business expenses" under California labor law, but the drivers also alleged failure to give breaks and failure to meet minimum pay levels. The claims came after J.B. Hunt allegedly put the drivers under Intermodal Independent Contractor Operating Agreements (ICOA), which asserted drivers were responsible for paying their expenses.
The case hinged on the drivers' claim that J.B. Hunt misclassified them, a huge labor policy issue in California. The lawsuit turned into a mediation and ended as attorneys for both sides agreed they did not want the case to drag on for years, according to the filing.

Dive Insight:

The J.B. Hunt case could have turned into a major application of the California Supreme Court's decision, Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, an April 30, 2018, ruling. The decision rocked California employers, who were thus instructed to classify persons as independent contractors only if they met three criteria.

Those criteria became known as the "ABC test." California companies, from trucking firms to hair salons, could classify workers as independent contractors if:

(A) The worker is free from the hirer's control and direction in connection with the performance of the work while under the contract for the performance of such work.

(B) The worker performs a job that is outside the usual scope of the hiring entity’s business.

(C) The worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hiring entity.

The drivers claimed they did not qualify to be listed as independent contractors, yet were denied meal and rest breaks, as well as minimum pay. The alleged expenses claimed exceeded $17 million, according to the filing.

It was not the first time J.B. Hunt has disputed California labor policy. In February 2018, J.B. Hunt asked the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the state's meal-and-break law. Under California law, employees must get a 30-minute food break if they work more than five hours a day. Employees who work more than 10 hours a day must receive a second 30-minute food break, according to Shouse California Law Group.

J.B. Hunt said California could not override federal law, which does not require meal or break periods. And on this point, California labor law has been hotly disputed by the California Trucking Association (CTA), which has sued to nullify AB5's effect on trucking.

In May, 13 industry groups and trucking firms signed on to four amicus briefs in support of the CTA in the AB5 lawsuit. Proceedings are ongoing in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The main argument against AB5 by trucking officials is that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 prevents states from legislating policy "related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier … with respect to the transportation of property."

J.B. Hunt officials did not immediately return a request for comment. The drivers will go to court on Aug. 17 in a Los Angeles federal court to seek approval of the agreement.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/JB-Hunt-settlement-lawsuit-truck-driver-misclassification-contractors-California-July-2020/581735/

10M could lose employer-sponsored healthcare as COVID-19 spurs job losses

Bill Brewer — Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:47:06 GMT

AUTHOR

Hailey Mensik

PUBLISHED

July 17, 2020

Dive Brief:

An estimated 48 million non-elderly people in the U.S. could be part of a household in which someone loses a job due to COVID-19 between April and December, according to an analysis from the Urban Institute and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. As a result, more than 10 million people may lose employer-sponsored health insurance during that time.
Some 3.3 million people are expected to regain insurance by being added to another family member's policy while 2.8 million people will enroll in Medicaid.
Another 600,000 people are expected to enroll in the individual market through the Affordable Care Act's marketplace. Still, 3.5 million people are expected to become uninsured.

Dive Insight:

Despite some gains in June, the U.S. unemployment rate is hovering around 11%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This February, the U.S. unemployment rate was 3.5%.

The latest findings predict ongoing pandemic-related job losses will lead to widespread loss of coverage, using projections on employment losses by industry, state, and demographic characteristics regularly published by the U.S. Department of Labor.

Of the 48 million expected to lose a job during the period, about 34% of the workers and family members experiencing job loss within the family had insurance through another family member's job, while 27% were covered by Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program prior to the pandemic.

Roughly a fifth of the group received insurance tied to the job they lost due to the pandemic. A smaller share were covered in plans through the non-group market, other public programs or were not insured.

Researchers also found that higher percentages of people will lose their coverage in states that did not expand Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act. Some 13 states, including many that have seen a recent surge in COVID-19 cases, have yet to expand Medicaid, including Florida and Texas.

The report estimates 34% of people losing employer coverage will become uninsured in Medicaid expansion states, and that number will hike to 55% in non-expansion states.

"The economic disruption caused by COVID-19 is a test of the safety net health insurance programs created under the Affordable Care Act," the study said. Unemployed workers who lost their employer-sponsored coverage may become eligible for one of the two major subsidized coverage programs established by the ACA: the Medicaid expansion for people with low incomes, and the ACA marketplaces.

It's the latest in myriad reports attempting to quantify the very real affects of the pandemic on the number of insured.

A recent study from Families USA estimates 5.4 million Americans have lost coverage amid the pandemic between February and May, while Kaiser Family Foundation estimates 27 million Americans lost coverage between March and May.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/10-million-could-lose-employer-sponsored-coverage/581818/

Gartner Survey Reveals 82% of Company Leaders Plan to Allow Employees to Work Remotely Some of the Time

Bill Brewer — Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:32:47 GMT

Mary Baker - Gartner

July 14, 2020

Now Organizations Must Manage a More Complex, Hybrid Workforce

A Gartner, Inc. survey on June 5 of 127 company leaders, representing HR, Legal and Compliance, Finance and Real Estate, revealed 82% of respondents intend to permit remote working some of the time as employees return to the workplace. For many organizations with employees working both onsite and remotely, adapting to a new, more complex hybrid workforce is the challenge as how people work together to get their job done evolves.

Nearly half (47%) said they intend to allow employees to work remotely full time going forward. For some organizations, flex time will be the new norm as 43% of survey respondents reported they will grant employees flex days, while 42% will provide flex hours (see Figure 1).

“The COVID-19 pandemic brought about a huge experiment in widespread remote working,” said Elisabeth Joyce, vice president of advisory in the Gartner HR practice. “As business leaders plan and execute reopening of their workplaces, they are evaluating more permanent remote working arrangements as a way to meet employee expectations and to build more resilient business operations.”

Figure 1: Company leader intentions regarding flexible working after COVID-19

Organizations that are welcoming employees back to the workplace are instituting a variety of safety measures. Respondents were nearly unanimous in planning to limit face-to-face meetings (94%) and providing protective equipment such as masks and hand sanitizer (91%). Eighty-three percent of respondents said they intend to limit or sequence employee attendance at the workplace.

“The question now facing many organizations is not how to manage a remote workforce, but how to manage a more complex, hybrid workforce,” said Ms. Joyce. “While remote work isn’t new, the degree of remote work moving forward will change how people work together to get their job done.”

As employers move toward a hybrid workforce, the productivity of remote employees is a frequent topic of conversation. However, just 13% of business leaders voiced concerns over sustaining productivity. While 61% of business leaders surveyed by Gartner have implemented more frequent manager-employee check-ins, 29% report not taking any measures to track productivity remotely.

Among the challenges of managing a hybrid workforce, 30% of business leaders are most concerned with maintaining corporate culture. Thirteen percent of respondents reported concern over creating parity between the remote and in-office experience; 13% also are concerned about providing a seamless employee experience.

“It is critical that employers get their corporate culture and employee experience right during this period of uncertainty,” said Brian Kropp, chief of research for the Gartner HR practice. “Both facets help ensure organizations achieve the financial, reputation and talent outcomes that will drive business outcomes and competitive advantage.

Gartner for HR clients can learn more by viewing the webinar Return to the Workplace: Benchmarking Against Your Peers.

CHROs and HR leaders can learn more about how to lead organizations through the disruption of coronavirus in the Gartner coronavirus resource center for HR, a collection of complimentary Gartner research and webinars to help organizations globally respond, manage and prepare for the next phase of COVID-19.

About Gartner

Gartner, Inc. (NYSE: IT) is the world’s leading research and advisory company and a member of the S&P 500. We equip business leaders with indispensable insights, advice and tools to achieve their mission-critical priorities today and build the successful organizations of tomorrow.

Our unmatched combination of expert-led, practitioner-sourced and data-driven research steers clients toward the right decisions on the issues that matter most. We are a trusted advisor and an objective resource for more than 15,000 enterprises in more than 100 countries — across all major functions, in every industry and enterprise size.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Gartner

https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2020-07-14-gartner-survey-reveals-82-percent-of-company-leaders-plan-to-allow-employees-to-work-remotely-some-of-the-time

Employer vacation, PTO policies worked — then came the COVID-19 stress test

Bill Brewer — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 16:33:35 GMT

AUTHOR - Ryan Golden | PUBLISHED - July 9, 2020

As the COVID-19 pandemic creeps into July, many employees are rescheduling, rethinking or outright canceling vacation and holiday plans. That's causing employers to question whether paid time off (PTO) policies are prepared to handle the fallout.

The pandemic had already disrupted employee benefits plans, and not just due to the impact of furloughs, layoffs and other employment actions. Healthcare has seen a dramatic shift in care delivery with the rise of virtual care. And specialized employee benefits, like fertility treatment, have been affected by shutdowns.

Yet state and local stay-at-home orders and other similar policies persist, and employees may find limited options to simply get away from work. Faced with that challenge, many are cutting back: a May survey of U.S. workers by Robert Half found more than one third planned to save vacation time for later in the year, and more than one quarter said they would take fewer days off compared to last summer.

"Universally, we're hearing from employers that employees are taking less time off than they would have when the pandemic started," Rich Fuerstenberg, senior partner at HR consulting firm Mercer, said in an interview. Jamie Coakley, VP of people at New York-based information technology services firm Electric, concurred in an email statement: "Many employees have paused upcoming vacation plans, not only for fear of traveling and keeping their families safe — but in many cases, because they're anxious about job security as well."

The trend has implications not only for employee well-being, but also for employers and their policies, even organizations that crafted leave policies to be flexible and prepared for any situation. "These plans got stress tested," Fuerstenberg said. Employers might have thought those policies were meeting employees' needs, but in light of the pandemic, he noted, "maybe it turns out they don't."

How to handle accrual

Accrual is likely to be the biggest issue in this space moving forward. Some companies employ use- it-or-lose-it rules that require workers to use the leave they've accrued before the end of the year, Fuerstenberg said. But it could be equally problematic for large numbers of workers to hold onto that leave at the end of the year, assuming travel restrictions ease up.

"That's an issue that gets compounded when employers start to look forward to the second part of the year," he added. "You have employers saying that all hands are on deck, and that we need to make up for sales lost earlier in the year, but employees saying they have all this paid time off." Fuerstenberg said he thinks employers may be especially worried about the implications of deferred time off during the holiday season.

Employers may decide to strategize around the problem in a variety of ways. One option is to change PTO rollover rules and extend the amount of time in which workers may take accrued leave, potentially after December. "While we've heard from many employers who have chosen to relax their 'use it or lose it' policies on vacations this year, it has definitely not happened across the board," Paul McDonald, senior executive director at Robert Half, told HR Dive in an email. Managers at companies that have not relaxed such policies should ensure employees are aware so that they don't leave unused vacation days on the table, he added.

Others have simply asked employees to take their accrued time sooner rather than later to avoid the problem of a "glut" of paid leave later in the year, Fuerstenburg said, even if there's nowhere for employees to go due to shutdowns. Employers might opt to close up shop entirely, he added, putting the entire organization on vacation.

A broader call to action?

Employers might also need to re-evaluate PTO policies on a more fundamental level, Fuerstenberg noted. Some of the clients he has spoken with are making more major tweaks, like moving to an unlimited PTO policy to preliminarily deal with accrual rates that are already building up.

Recent research shows a fair amount of organizations are at least willing to have a conversation about the issue. An April survey of employers by Willis Towers Watson found that one-third of the 816 respondents planned to make changes to their PTO or vacation programs. And in the Robert Half survey, 25% of employees said their manager encouraged them to take time off.

Regardless of the difficulties posed by travel restrictions, sources generally agreed on the need for employers to encourage workers to take time off during the pandemic. "If your employee is concerned about going on a trip, encourage a 'staycation' to at least take the planned time for themselves," Coakley said. "Everyone needs to reset at some point and that time will give room to come back with a fresh mind — ultimately allowing them to be more engaged and productive."

At Robert Half, managers are reinforcing this message at "every touchpoint," McDonald said, indicating to workers their concern for employee well-being. "This pandemic has forced organizations to be more creative and innovative in the way they serve their clients and do their work, and actually getting some time away to reset will offer the even greater benefit of boosting creativity and helping with overall productivity and happiness."

Sudden shifts to a remote work environment have brought, among other things, a sense of repetitiveness to the employee experience, Fuerstenburg said — he compared it to the movie "Groundhog Day" — and this can cause even more burnout and stress for employees than usual. But managers, executives and other organizational leaders must be willing to lead by example, he noted, so employees feel comfortable taking the time they need.

"If that means your vacation spot is not a cruise, so be it," Fuerstenberg said. "Still, it's important to unplug and recharge and not be working all day every day."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/employer-vacation-pto-policies-worked-then-came-the-covid-19-stress-test/581256/

The Art of Career Mapping: HR’s Guide to Reskilling the Workforce

Bill Brewer — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 16:24:28 GMT

David Rice | 07/09/2020

The fallout of COVID-19 has been significant for companies as HR teams scrambled to cope with the implications for their people and business models. As the dust has settled, life has needed to go on with the business facing new challenges, whether that is an increase in demand or figuring out new ways to keep things running.

To do it, HR leaders are having to encourage their current workforces to adopt a different mindset, one centered on flexibility and what’s best for the business as well as themselves. COVID has created a great deal of uncertainty, but problems can be mitigated through encouraging an open mind and creating meaningful discourse around career mapping and reskilling.

Reskilling or upskilling is something you hear a lot about these days. The focus for the current workforce typically falls into one of a few areas:

Preparing people for the challenges of tomorrow
Making people more flexible to deal with the current situation
Helping employees create new paths forward

Doing something that creates any one of these things as a result is a win-win for both people and the organization, but executing it is easier said than done. Rhonda Hall, VP of HR and Organizational Development for University Federal Credit Union reminds us, it’s important to keep in mind that effective reskilling and career mapping is a journey, not an exercise.

“When HR folks are talking about reskilling employees, the main focus should be two-fold: what serves the employee best and what serves the business best,” Hall said. “It is the careful balance of these two things that will ultimately result in success for all. Skewed too heavily toward the business, and you end up with a disgruntled employee. Skewed too much toward the employee, and you end up with roles and people in roles that the business can’t support long term. When walking the reskilling balance beam, be up front that reskilling isn’t a “one and done” experience. It should be gradual, with levels in mind, and iterative.”

The Keys to Career Mapping

Patience is indeed a necessity in effective career mapping. The fact is, employees are dealing with a lot right now, from the uncertainty around the economy to the ongoing stress around health hazards and social issues. To keep them engaged in thinking about their future within the organization, the career mapping and reskilling conversation has to be personal and transparent.

“Each reskilling event for each organization, for each position, is customized and could be any or all three of these (the bullets listed above), at any time,” Hall said. “If people think of this as a linear path, they will be frustrated. If thought of in a cyclical manner though, satisfaction is possible. For me, transparency is the key. An organization has to be willing to be transparent, to tell it like it is, help people understand what that means for them, and then together, through two-way dialogue design a path that works for that role and that employee, and they may be different for different roles and people.”

HR professionals can likely guess the impact of not doing this. It’s likely that without some engagement and improvement to the employee experience in how they’re growth and path forward is discussed, HR teams are going to have to spend a lot of time on recruitment and talent acquisition when things to return to something resembling normal.

“COVID has rocked our worlds,” Hall said. “Employees are being asked and given opportunities to flex their mental skills like never before. Shame on the company that doesn’t take the time to learn how that experience was for each employee.”

The Conversation

Hall suggests that companies should be looking forward to the individual dialogues that career mapping creates. The questions they should look for answers to include things like:

What did you like and not like about shifting to support another area?
Did you feel prepared to be successful at the beginning?
How did you learn the new role, processes and systems?
What about 30 days and 90 days into it, did you find that you did enjoy certain parts of the work? Which parts?
What fears did you have coming into that new/expanded role? What about now, what fears do you have now that you’ve been there for 4 months?
What else interests you? Where else would you like to learn more?

An organization that takes the time to learn what that experience was like for their employee, how they handled the change, and where they see themselves now and in the future is an organization that will increase their employee engagement and in the end have more satisfied employees. But Hall warns, this process is not entirely down to HR.

“The caution I have, is that this isn’t HR’s role, this is Leadership’s role,” Hall said. “Leadership should be skilled and trained by HR to be ready to have these conversations, and to be able to create a report out of what they learned to be consumed across the leadership team with HR at the table. It is in this manner that we as leaders grow to better understand our employees’ passion, strengths and opportunities.”

Career mapping conversations aren’t always comfortable, requiring a patient and empathetic approach that puts the employee at the center to help them see the possibilities.

“Enter into the conversation with a desire to understand what the experience has been like for that employee,” Hall said. “It’s the basic ‘seek first to understand’ approach that will make this conversation most effective. Approach with admiration, empathy and be inquisitive. Don’t judge their experience or their reaction to their experience, but hear it, honor it, and learn from it. If you listen deeply, beyond what is said, but also to what’s not said, you as an HR person will learn so much more and will be best poised to help that employee through this and future transitions.”

Building Business Resilience

For some businesses, coping with COVID-19 has meant re-evaluating their operational models. Supply chains have been disrupted and the budget to dip into the talent pool for a solution eroded. Even for those who have seen business boom or had little impact on what they do, it’s made clear the risk of not examining operational effectiveness and preparing for the unforeseeable.

A report from McKinsey & Company has taken a closer look at the talent landscape following the impact of COVID-19 and relays a message of needing to reskill and upskill the workforce to deliver on post pandemic business models.

For all the talk of automation, AI and remote work disrupting the workforce coming into 2020, it’s been a human factor (Coronavirus) that actually did change the way we do things and in the end it’s the human factors that are going deliver results in the future. Companies need to invest time into developing talent strategies which develop the digital capabilities of their people, along with their cognitive and soft skills to create a workforce that is adaptable and capable of rising to future challenges.

“Developing a digitally ready workforce requires assessing your company’s current talent in terms of both hard and soft skills. You also need to understand their passion for learning and curiosity,” writes Yoland Lau for Forbes. “Support continuous, ongoing learning within your team, and help individuals develop the best personal learning pathway. Developing digitally ready talent isn’t a one-size-fits-all journey.”

As of right now, there is something of a talent supply and demand imbalance. Gig economy workers, for example, may need to find work in related industries but under different conditions. Think of an Uber driver turning to something like Shipt or Amazon for example. More and more consumers are turning to e-commerce, meaning there may not be as much need in sectors such as retail or even hospitality and already we’ve seen stories of hospitality workers turning to things such as senior care as a new avenue of opportunity. That adjustment, however, takes a significant amount of reskilling and training for them to be effective.

It’s possible that some jobs which were offshored in recent decades may be brought closer to the point of sale in an effort to increase the effectiveness of supply chains. The automotive and manufacturing industries have already been on an automation journey for some time, but developing a digitally capable workforce closer to home is needed in order to make that new business model work.

The Learning Investment

Businesses have been ramping up their investment in developing a learning ecosystem, an environment where a variety of learning tools help drive employee development. At this stage, budgets dedicated to learning should not only be protected, but further increased to sufficiently meet the needs associated with the development of new business models.

As organizations identify the skills their new models rely on, they then have to tailor learning journeys that will help their people tackle the challenges the organization faces. Those critical skill gaps may not be easy to bridge, so, as the McKinsey report emphasized, be prepared to test different strategies and develop iterations.

Amazon, for example, recently partnered with Merit America, a non-profit dedicated to helping middle skill workers chart a path toward skilled technology careers. It’s part of its Career Choice initiative which aims to help prepare hourly employees for career opportunities in tech fields. Amazon employees can now take advantage of Merit America's training programs, which pair job-focused online learning with career coaching and mentorship.

"The mass displacement of workers that has resulted from the pandemic represents an unprecedented opportunity -- and responsibility -- to reimagine training and hiring, and ensure that the most vulnerable Americans don't get left behind," said Rebecca Taber, Founder and co-CEO of Merit America. "This program reflects Amazon's commitment to investing in its people -- in ways that can not only close critical near-term skill gaps, but also create opportunities for their employees in the long term."

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Exchange Network

https://www.hrexchangenetwork.com/hr-talent-management/articles/the-art-of-career-mapping-hrs-guide-to-reskilling-the-workforce