Menu
Log in

Hot Topics in Total Rewards

  • 20 Mar 2020 12:23 PM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    Image result for Taxes 2020: April 15 federal tax filing deadline extended to July 15

    Jessica Menton | USA TODAY | 3/20/2020

    The Trump administration will push the income tax filing deadline to July 15 from April 15, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Friday in a tweet.

    Mnuchin said that at President Donald Trump’s direction “we are moving Tax Day from April 15 to July 15. All taxpayers and businesses will have this additional time to file and make payments without interest or penalties.”

    Earlier this week, the IRS had deferred the payment deadline to July 15 but had left April 15 filing deadline in place.

    According to the latest government data available, as of March 13, the IRS has received more than 76 million returns and has issued more than 59.2 million refunds.

    The average refund check was $2,973.

    While the IRS is reportedly going to increase pressure to have states align with the new federal deadline, it is important for people to check with their local government to make sure they do not miss their obligation in their state. 

    ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

    Source: USA Today

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/03/20/taxes-2020-irs-delay-april-15-tax-filing-deadline-july-15/2883840001/

  • 20 Mar 2020 8:51 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    building a better employee experience

    March 19, 2020

    by Karen Shellenback - Global Products Leader, Analytics and Research, Mercer

    It is official! The World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 or coronavirus a pandemic. Organizations around the globe have implemented work-from-home policies as a key way to help reduce COVID-19 contamination vectors. Recently, Google (Alphabet) expanded its work from home directive (for those who are able), beyond Washington state to all of North America. The high-tech company also made this recommendation in Europe. Universities in the US have closed campuses and are providing virtual learning. Airbnb, Microsoft, Apple, the European Parliament, the Mayor of NYC, Marsh & McLennan, and many others have addressed the issue with employees and asked workers, especially the “health-vulnerable” to stay home and work from home, if able.

     

    The watershed has begun. Business operations today are all about continuity during crisis or potential crisis. But are most organizations ready? Are corporate clients fully prepared to leverage flexible work as a strategic approach to mitigating risk? The answer is likely, no … but there are ways to ramp up for success should your leadership require work from home as an emergency measure.

     

    Disaster preparedness, risk mitigation coupled with flexible work practices have not necessarily been top of mind for corporate executives — until now. One of the primary reasons organizations should have a flexibility strategy, policy, and protocol in place is for times such as these. However, our 2019 Mercer TAAP Design of Work research indicates that only 1% of firms have implemented a total “virtual workspace environment” where all team members (employees and/or contingent workers) work virtually from home, satellite offices, or third spaces. Only three in 10 organizations leverage virtual work, either full-time (29%) or as needed (31%). However, now that risk mitigation is setting in, 92% of companies surveyed are planning work from home scenarios in response to potential office closures and 66% report (Mercer COVID-19 survey live results: 3-18-2020) flex policy changes to increase work from home capabilities.

     

    The task may seem monumental for organizations that are now in a position to move from 0 to 100 on the remote work speedometer. Many employees, managers, and organizations will be thrown into new ways of managing, communicating, and delivering in an increasingly very real — virtual reality. The future of virtual work and workers is here in ways many did not conceive of six months ago.

     

    Organizations that have knowledge workers, who can work remotely, are now in the position of gearing up to mitigate further risk and keep business flowing. It is now about deployment and operational readiness and this crisis provides an opportunity for deep insights into what operational, business, and customer service processes are truly necessary to operate effectively and efficiently.

     

    Organizations that have already established remote work protocols and contingency plans are ahead in the game. Need a virtual workplace strategy quick? Here are some key considerations to get moving. These recommendations will set up your organization for continued efficiency and success — today and after this pandemic/health crisis has passed.

     

    1. Create a cross-functional response team.
    This team should include executives from business operations, finance, HR, IT, facilities, occupational health, travel, cyber security, risk, compliance, and legal to strategize and optimize potential operational and risk scenarios. Get ready to plan for multiple and fast-moving contingencies and establish directives for multiple trigger events. Please read COVID-19 – An employer’s guide: Ten considerations to support your workforce for more ideas.

     

    2. Assess which jobs, roles, and tasks can be worked virtually immediately, and as the situation progresses, as well as roles that could continue to work virtually on a more regular basis after the crisis response is over. Challenge the core response team to think differently about what tasks really need to be done on-site and which roles can be worked remotely with the use of new technologies and agile design thinking.

     

    3. The third and critical concern is technology.
    What technology (devices, process, and infrastructure) is needed? —
     Laptops, VPN (virtual personal network), “all in one anywhere access” apps, SaaS cloud platform, video conferencing, smart phones? What percentage of the workforce already has a company issued laptop? Will you require additional laptop purchases or rentals, or can desktops be taken home? Will the company reimburse individual employees for internet access (full or partial)? What is the minimum internet speed required? What about other equipment — headsets, printers, extra monitors, webcams, keyboards, docking stations, office supplies, tablets, chairs, and ergonomic desks? Are any of these items required for certain roles, or all roles, and what is the purchase policy or reimbursement policy on such items? Is there a need for specific technology for accessibility? Clarify in writing what equipment and supplies are owned by the company and which are considered company assets. Also clarify the policy for corporate equipment return upon termination of the remote work agreement.

     

    Budget: What is the budget estimate for the purchase or rental of new required technology? Whose line item will this new remote technology expense fall under?  Can HR or IT negotiate with video conferencing companies if your organization needs additional licenses or access?

     

    Security protocols: Are there additional firewalls, encryption, multifactor authentication systems (MFA) required? Which systems are required and in what timeframe?  As more and more companies allow workers to work from home the risk of attacks may increase. What is the cybersecurity education plan for remote employees? This large group of new users distributed in networks at home will require cyber risk mitigation training.

     

    Office space: Will the organization require dedicated office space, clear of physical hazards? Will the organization require a locked space for client security reasons? Will you establish a policy for dependent care? Normally, many organizations require that remote employees arrange for an outside caregiver or another adult in the home to provide dependent care while working from home. However, in this particular situation the essence of the matter requires flexibility and realistic expectations regarding dependent care. It is likely that employee children will be home from school and older parents may be living with their adult children.

     

    Tech staffing: Is your tech team staffed to install and configure new network security or VPN systems? If new company laptops are issued — do you have the staff to set up quickly (but securely) if the company goes 25%, 50%, 75% or even 100% remote within days? The IT team should streamline the number of collaboration programs and apps loaded on each computer to simplify the IT and user experience; which programs are simple, already in use and essential across all LOBs and functions? How will IT leaders scale the demand upfront and further scale as the work from home policy progresses? Will the organization be staffed with enough IT experts to troubleshoot technology issues — especially if a large majority of workers are now learning to use equipment at home?  

     

    4. Legal considerations.
    Are there national, regional or local laws that impact the distribution of your workforce into remote positions? There may be tax jurisdiction implications for workers who live (and now work) in a different taxing authority than the office/headquarters. Will your organization require specific personal home or renter’s insurance coverage for equipment? Will you forbid your employees to meet with clients at their home office? What are the legal ramifications for the company’s worker’s compensation policy for injuries incurred at an employee’s home while working? In addition, what policies are necessary to ensure accessibility/disability accommodations?

     

    5. Managing expectations.
    Get ready to assuage a lot of fear and assumptions and manage expectations. Both managers and employees may be fearful of working in new ways. A key component of making flexibility work is providing guidance on how to create effective working relationships with peers and managers that deliver results. However, only 33% of organizations offer training to managers on how to manage “flexibly.” Furthermore, even fewer organizations (14%) provide training to employees on how to “work flexibly.” (Mercer Design of Work, 2019) This status has just been upended — organizations that haven’t done this already are in for a crash course.

     

    Managers, supervisors, and leaders:

    • Managers often worry about: How will I manage my employees if I cannot see them? What if my reports do not want to return to the office after the risk is over? How will I assess performance? While the second question is addressed later in this article, the best response to fears number one and three is to ask managers who raise these concerns; “How do you manage your employees’ performance now while they are physically in the building?”  Managers answers should be the same for both remote and office workers: “I evaluate my direct reports based on results and execution against stated goals.”  This type of performance management is location independent.

    • Managers will also need guidance on assessing who is able to work more independently and in isolation from the office (if your organization rolls out partial work from home). HR can help supervisors assess which roles, functions, and jobs are most suitable and what personality traits are most likely to remain committed, motivated, and responsive while removed from face-to-face in-office interactions. Do not make assumptions about generations — i.e., “Baby Boomers may not embrace the required technology as well as Gen Y employees.” You may find that older generations are just as productive as the younger generations and actually enjoy the solitude more.

    • Managers will need extra help in facilitating the technology set-up required by the firm and potentially executing any written agreements that the organization mandates regarding remote work expectations, equipment, and security protocols.  Managers can help employees set expectations and help remote workers structure their daily schedule for success.

    • The feeling of isolation is real for distributed workers; especially if implemented in a quarantine situation. Set up weekly team conference calls and ask that everyone turn on their video to build camaraderie, if possible. Try to schedule half hour weekly video check-ins with each direct report to check in on them personally, build trust, delineate performance tasks, and provide support. Ask team members to check in on their fellow teammates too — to build cohesion and care. If your company already uses social recognition platforms — now is the time to push increased participation to help build confidence and connectedness among team members.

    Employees

    • Employees will need to know remote work expectations and some will require additional support to successfully make the change. Do not assume that all employees will easily make the switch even if your organization currently allows for ad hoc work from home. Some employees will fundamentally enjoy the solitude of full-time work from home and some will desperately miss the face-to-face interactions at the office. Be prepared to support employees as they transition to new ways to work. Help them understand how rituals like a walk or coffee before work can mentally help them start their day. Many remote workers dress business casual and avoid the yoga pants or pajama bottoms to help them feel professional and motivated.

    • Make sure that all employees working remotely understand how to use the required technology (such as video conferencing, access to shared drives or workflow/project management technology, IM, logging into email from remote location, and setting up call forwarding from office phones to smart phones or home phones) before deploying them to their home offices. This is not a time to upend current in-office systems. Try to minimize the implementation of new technology unless absolutely necessary during this phase of rapid change and potentially steep learning curves for many team members. Try to reduce the use of multiple collaboration products to the most effective and simple platforms across all work teams.

    • Communicate expected work hours, discuss with clients the changes in work location/venue, and expectations for response timeframes for both team members and customers.

    6. Communicate!
    The number one concern from the onset is communication.

    Communicate the near term scenario and expectations weekly — and immediately, if trigger events occur.  If policy changes to travel, face-to face meetings, and virtual work are planned — estimate the onset of the new policy and the duration of the change.  Please read COVID-19 – an employer’s guide: Ten considerations to support your workforce for more ideas.

     

    7. The genie is now out of the bottle. No more business as usual.
    Executive leadership and HR should be prepared for push back against old ways of working once the crisis is over. Employees may ask: “Why don’t we have more remote work options on a regular basis?” This crisis-based flexible work experiment will deliver new ideas for the design of future work models. Some employees may want to continue flexible and distributed work and some will want to return to the office as soon as possible, but as an organization your staff improvised and learned many new ways to deliver while working in a distributed network.

     

    Hone in on learnings from this endeavor. What worked, what didn’t work well, and how could little and big tweaks made a difference in negative outcomes or more positive results? What is the most fascinating learning that came from this experiment? Would a more permanent flexibility policy be advantageous for the business, your employees, and for future risk and crisis mitigation? What mistakes were made that can be fixed if a more sustainable flex policy were implemented? What were the costs and overall operational savings or ROI (return on investment)?  Can the travel budget be reduced in the future to allow for more video-based meetings?

     

    Either way — after implementing a mandatory, or a significantly large crisis-based work from home policy — we can bet your organization will not be the same as before COVID-19. You may find that your employees and organizational structures are inherently more agile and more resilient and that may be a silver lining.

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

    Source: Mercer

    https://www.mercer.com/our-thinking/covid-19-the-crash-course-for-going-remote-quickly-and-effectively.html

  • 20 Mar 2020 8:37 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    AP: Gov. Gavin Newsom 190916

    Weizhen Tan@WEIZENT | Riya Bhattacharjee@LOISLANE28 | PUBLISHED THU, MAR 19 20209:44 PM EDT

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday issued a statewide order for all residents to ‘stay at home’ amid a coronavirus outbreak.

    “We need to bend the curve in the state of California,” Newsom said, as he announced a statewide order for Californians to stay home.

    “There’s a social contract here, people I think recognize the need to do more ... They will begin to adjust and adapt as they have been quite significantly. We will have social pressure and that will encourage people to do the right thing,” he said, in addressing how this order will be enforced.

    Newsom added: “Home isolation is not my preferred choice ... but it is a necessary one ...This is not a permanent state, this is a moment in time.”

    The stay home order is in place till further notice.

    All dine-in restaurants, bars and clubs, gyms and fitness studios will be closed, according to the order. Public events and gatherings are also not allowed. Essential services will stay open, however, such as pharmacies, grocery stores, takeout and delivery restaurants, and banks.

    According to the orderCalifornians in 16 critical sectors are to continue working. Those include emergency services, energy and food and agriculture.

    Newsom said he made the decision “based upon some new information” and projections that came in from Johns Hopkins University.

    He reiterated throughout the press conference and in response to questions from reporters: “We need to meet this moment and flatten the curve together.”

    “We have 416 hospitals in CA, but within the hospital system we have a capacity to surge beyond the 78,000 currently staffed beds by an additional 10,000,” Newsom said. “If we change our behaviors that inventory will come down, if we meet this moment, we can truly bend the curve.”

    “It’s now just time to absorb and recognize that we need to change our behaviors in a way that meets this moment and allows a recognition that this moment will pass,” he added. 

    “The supply chain must continue, and Californians must have access to such necessities as food, prescriptions and healthcare,” the order said. “When people need to leave their homes, whether to obtain or perform the functions above, or to otherwise facilitate authorized necessary activities, they should at all times practice social distancing.”

    California estimates that more than half of the state — 25.5 million people — will get the new coronavirus over the next eight weeks, according to a letter sent by Gov. Gavin Newsom to U.S. President Donald Trump.

    “In the last 24 hours, we had 126 new COVID-19 cases, a 21 percent increase. In some parts of our state, our case rate is doubling every four days,” Newsom wrote in a letter dated Wednesday. Newsom asked Trump to dispatch the USNS Mercy Hospital Ship to the Port of Los Angeles through Sept. 1 to help with the influx of expected cases.  

    At Thursday’s press conference, Newsom said, “We believe the virus will impact about 56% of California’s population ... You do the math, that’s a particularly large number ... We believe with a 20% hospitalization rate, that’s about 19,543 people that would need to be hospitalized – above the existing capacity of our system.”

    California reported nearly 699 confirmed cases as of 9 p.m. ET Wednesday night, according to the California health department. Newsom said the virus is spreading in the community in 23 counties across the state. It is the third hardest hit state in the U.S., behind Washington state which has 1,376 cases as of 6 p.m. EDT Thursday and New York which has at least 5,000 cases. 

    Earlier this week, Newsom ordered all non-essential businesses to close, including bars, beer pubs and wineries. Grocery stores, pharmacies, banks, cannabis clubs and other businesses deemed as essential are still open, state and local officials say.

    San Francisco Bay area officials on Monday became the first in the country to issue a “shelter in place” order that will affect nearly 7 million residents of six counties in the Bay Area as the region tries to contain the COVID-19 outbreak.

    The order asks all residents of six Bay Area counties, including San Francisco, Santa Clara, San Mateo, Marin, Contra Costa and Alameda, to remain home as much as possible. It takes effect at midnight and will last until April 7, the order says.

    Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti on Thursday also issued a “Safer at Home” order, asking residents to stay home and limit all “non essential activities.”

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

    Source: CNBC

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/19/california-governor-issues-statewide-order-to-stay-at-home-effective-thursday-evening.html

  • 20 Mar 2020 8:33 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    Published on March 19, 2020 | William E. Brewer, CCP, MBA

    With uncertainty in the economy, many companies turn to laying off a portion of its workforce to reduce labor costs. After all, labor is often the largest expense to a business. However, it is very short sighted for a business to jump to layoffs (or reduction in force) as an answer for a downturned economy. When the economy is down, some business decision makers have a difficult time looking ahead towards recovery. It is as if these decision makers believe the down economy will never end. There will be a recovery and your business will need to be prepared for it. Through some simple research, businesses will learn that layoffs do not result in improved profits. Also, layoffs do not position a business for future growth.


    To clarify terms, a layoff or reduction in force (RIF) is a separation from employment with no likelihood or expectation that the employee will be recalled because the position itself is eliminated.


    On the topic of profitability and layoffs, I came across a note on a study that “examined a large specialty retailer found that conformance quality (how well an employee executes prescribed tasks) has a higher impact on profitability than service quality (defined as the extent to which the customer has a positive experience) … stores that cut staff were unwittingly cutting profits, and yet the practice was standard. Why? ‘An emphasis on minimizing payroll expenses and an emphasis on meeting short-term (often monthly) performance targets,’ the study found. Another consequence of understaffing at this retailer was lowered morale, a finding echoed in other studies.”[1]


    When a position truly goes away, such as something disruptive to the industry or business, the permanent closing of a job type would make sense in which those holding the job should be trained to a new role. When that cannot be done and the position is being permanently closed, the layoff would make sense. An example we have all seen is the growth in advertising revenue yet print publications continue to decline causing many jobs with print publications to truly go away.


    In looking at severance payments alone, if each person laid off receives an average of about six months’ worth of severance pay and outplacement services, it will take six months to start saving money. Recessions can last 12 to 18 months, and when demand picks up, it is common for a business to have to start hiring people about a year or so after its layoff. Thus, undoing the savings it began realizing six months earlier.


    In going through a layoff, most understand the direct costs of:

    ·      severance pay,

    ·      payment of accrued vacation or paid time off,

    ·      supplemental unemployment benefits,

    ·      outplacement services,

    ·      pension and benefits payouts,

    ·      administrative processing costs, and

    ·      costs of rehiring former employees.


    However, a layoff has indirect costs. These indirect costs could include:

    ·      recruiting and employment costs of new hires,

    ·      low morale,

    ·      risk-averse survivors,

    ·      decline in share price following a layoff announcement,

    ·      decreased productivity among survivors,

    ·      increase in unemployment tax rate,

    ·      lack of staff when economy shifts back,

    ·      training costs,

    ·      increased voluntary terminations from survivors,

    ·      opportunity costs of lost sales,

    ·      potential for legal action from upset employees,

    ·      potential strikes by unions in some countries,

    ·      loss of institutional memory and trust in management,

    ·      and brand equity costs / damage to the company’s brand as an employer of choice.


    Here are some ideas that could be part of a business leaders’ arsenal that can help a business steer away from terminating the people who show up each day to get the work done: 


    ·      Reduce your workweek. Going from a five-day workweek to a four-day workweek reduces payroll by 20 percent. The company reduces its need to rehire with an upturn in the economy. Employees stay on the job, supporting their families, in lieu of being out of a job.

    ·      Extend time off. Instead of offering two weeks of paid vacation, offer additional weeks, two of which are paid and the other weeks as unpaid but excused time off.

    ·      Incentivize employees to save money. An example, I came across an idea where for every $1,000 identified to be saved, there was a one-time 20% incentive. Your employees will feel empowered and they can be an excellent source in identifying money saving ideas.

    ·      Offer sabbaticals. “These extended periods of time away from the office are different from long vacations in that managers challenge employees to step away from the office, take a pay reduction, get some training or learn a new language, and then come back at full pay with more skills. Sabbaticals are successful with established, high-performing professionals.”

    ·      Hiring freeze / do not replace attrition.

    ·      Halt renewing contracts with existing non-employee workers.

    ·      If you need to increase staff for a short-term time in the middle of an economic downturn, consider bringing in non-employee (contract) workers.

    ·      Retraining employees for new positions.

    ·      Shutting down the business for short periods of time.

    ·      Offer job sharing.

    ·      Offer early retirement.

    ·      Reduce pay.

    ·      Freeze pay.

    ·      Reduce or eliminating paid overtime.


    What about the weak performers already in the company? An economic downturn is a poor excuse to remove weak performers. Independent of an economic downturn, a company should have already taking the correct steps to move the employee’s performance to a level that at least meets expectations and if the employee fails to improve within a reasonable timeframe, that employee should have been removed from the business. Ideally, the failing employee will recognize through a performance improvement plan process and resign. When this does not happen, the company should initiate the exit and not draw out the time of having an under-performing employee weakening the organization.


    As an adjunct professor teaching HR management, I have highlighted examples to my classes of well branded companies that took another path in lieu of layoffs. Some of these examples include Southwest Airlines, Joie de Vivre Hospitality, and Apple.


    Going through the 9/11 downturn, Southwest Airlines had a strong focus on its employees and a no-layoff focus which is among the core values that is part of the company’s human resource strategy. A layoff would weaken this strategy, so a layoff approach is not seen as an option for Southwest Airlines. During the same time period, other airlines took a layoff approach. Those airlines emerged from the downturn with a damaged employee and customer reputation (loss of trust and loyalty) where Southwest Airlines emerged strong in comparison.


    Southwest Airlines reduced costs leveraging its workforce that was very productive and flexible. Their high productivity turned into cost savings. Some of this cost savings was passed on to consumers who were also looking to reduce their own costs during the economic crisis. Southwest Airlines was also able to leverage that job security for its employees into creative thinking leaving the employees feeling comfortable that there would be no repercussions for making mistakes. The company maintained its positive image keeping them as an employer of choice when the economy turned upward again. Southwest Airlines also used its cash reserves to sustain the company through the poor economy as they had a large reserve with no debt. During this time, they delayed the purchase of new aircraft and stopped its plans to renovate the company headquarters. During the Great Recession, Southwest Airlines repurposed its recruiters to customer service / customer facing roles tapping into their people skills strengths.


    Another example was Joie de Vivre Hospitality, one of the largest operators of boutique hotels in the United States. During a recession period, they focused their efforts on making the line-level, hourly wage employees feel safe and secure in their jobs. Senior executives took a 10% pay cut and salaried employees took a 2 ½ yearlong pay freeze which allowed the line-level, hourly employees to receive benefits and an annual wage increase.


    As Apple was heading into the Great Recession, Steve Jobs had said, "We've had one of these before, when the dot-com bubble burst. What I told our company was that we were just going to invest our way through the downturn, that we weren't going to lay off people, that we'd taken a tremendous amount of effort to get them into Apple in the first place -- the last thing we were going to do is lay them off. And we were going to keep funding. In fact, we were going to up our R&D budget so that we would be ahead of our competitors when the downturn was over. And that's exactly what we did. And it worked. And that's exactly what we'll do this time."


    At Honeywell in the 2008-2009 recession, the leadership team agreed to ensure that any restructuring during that period would be permanent, not purely based on the recession and would be tied to what was best for business efficiency and profitability over the long term. In addition, they agreed that restructuring decisions would have no impact on Honeywell’s ability to outperform in recovery. Another tool Honeywell used was the use of furloughs. This helped Honeywell save on compensation costs, reduce rehiring needs, and gave some level of comfort to employees who know the furlough will be for only a short period of time.


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

    Source: LinkedIn Pulse

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/options-layoffs-create-employee-customer-loyalty-brewer-ccp-mba/

  • 19 Mar 2020 9:33 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    U.S. Capitol Building

    By Lisa Nagele-Piazza, J.D., SHRM-SCP | March 18, 2020

    [Updated March 18: The Senate passed H.R. 6201, and the president signed it into law. Watch for an updated analysis of the bill's provisions.]

    The U.S. Senate approved the Families First Coronavirus Response Act in a 90-8 vote on March 18, and President Donald Trump signed it into law a few hours later. The bill will provide free screening, paid leave and enhanced unemployment insurance benefits for people affected by COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus.

    The U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill late on March 13. After several days of negotiation, House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., announced that negotiators had reached a deal with the White House to pass the bill. "We cannot slow the coronavirus outbreak when workers are stuck with the terrible choice between staying home to avoid spreading illness and the paycheck their family can't afford to lose," Pelosi said.

    Republican senators were concerned that the bill might hurt small businesses, and Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said lawmakers are working on another bill that would include relief for small businesses. McConnell said he would not adjourn the Senate until the third COVID-19 economic stimulus package is passed, CNN reported.

    Trump declared a national emergency March 13, which frees up billions of dollars to fund public health and removes restrictions on hospitals to treat more patients. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (H.R. 6201) will provide:

    • Free coronavirus testing.
    • Paid emergency leave.
    • Enhanced unemployment insurance.
    • Additional funding for nutritional programs.
    • Protections for health care workers and employees responsible for cleaning at-risk places.
    • Additional federal funds for Medicaid.

    We've rounded up articles and resources from SHRM Online and other trusted media outlets on the news.

    Paid Family Leave

    As originally drafted, H.R. 6201 would have temporarily provided workers with two-thirds of their wages for up to 12 weeks of qualifying family and medical leave for a broad range of COVID-19-related reasons. The revised version of the bill will only provide such leave when employees can't work because their minor child's school or child care service is closed due to a public health emergency. Workers who have been on the payroll for at least 30 calendar days will be eligible for paid family leave benefits, which will be capped at $200 a day (or $10,000 total) and expire at the end of the year.

    (Littler)

    Paid Sick Leave

    Under the bill, many employers will have to provide 80 hours of paid-sick-leave benefits for several reasons, including if the employee has been ordered by the government to quarantine or isolate or has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine because of COVID-19. Employees could also use paid sick leave when they have symptoms of COVID-19 and are seeking a medical diagnosis, if they are caring for a relative who is in quarantine or isolation, or their child's school or child care service is closed because of the public health emergency. Paid-sick-leave benefits will be immediately available when the law takes effect and capped at $511 a day for a worker's own care and $200 a day when the employee is caring for someone else. This benefit will also expire at the end of 2020.

    (CNN)

    Large and Small Business Exceptions

    Private businesses with more than 500 employees are not covered by the bill. "I don't support U.S. taxpayer money subsidizing corporations to provide benefits to workers that they should already be providing," Pelosi said on Twitter. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also said that "big companies can afford these things."

    Covered employers that are required to offer emergency FMLA or paid sick leave will be eligible for refundable tax credits. Employers with fewer than 50 workers can apply for an exemption from providing paid family and medical leave and paid sick leave if it "would jeopardize the viability of the business." Gig-workers and other self-employed workers will be eligible for a tax credit to cover the benefits.

    (The Washington Post)

    Lawmakers Previously Approved $8.3 Billion Emergency Bill

    Another emergency spending package to fight coronavirus rapidly worked its way through Congress, and President Donald Trump signed it into law March 6. The measure will provide funds to develop a vaccine, provide protective and laboratory equipment to workers who need it, and aid locations hit with the virus.

    (SHRM Online)

    Coronavirus Prompts Employers to Review Sick Leave Policies

    Do employees have the right to take time off if they are concerned about contracting coronavirus? Can employers send sick workers home? Should employees be paid for missed work time? HR and other business leaders are likely considering these questions and more as COVID-19 makes its way through the United States. "We believe employers would be wise to review their paid-time-off practices immediately," said Francis Alvarez, an attorney with Jackson Lewis in White Plains, N.Y. "Employers are likely to face unique circumstances that were not anticipated when they prepared their attendance and leave policies."

    (SHRM Online

    ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

    Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

    https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/Pages/Senate-to-Vote-Soon-on-Coronavirus-Paid-Leave-Mandate.aspx

  • 17 Mar 2020 11:37 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    The Idea: When the Great Recession hit, many companies “restructured” and laid off thousands of workers. By asking employees to take unpaid leaves instead, Honeywell positioned itself for the recovery.

    When I arrived at Honeywell, in 2002, the company had gone through a challenging period. In 1999 it merged with AlliedSignal and shortly afterward closed on the acquisition of a company called Pittway. The three cultures were never integrated, Honeywell had repeatedly missed earnings, and the company had announced cumulative write-offs of $8 billion. Having been in the chemical industry for more than 100 years, it had environmental liabilities that had never been dealt with. Honeywell had gone through three CEOs in four years and had had a lot of turnover at the managerial level as well. Virtually no pipeline of new products existed, because managers had been disinvesting to boost profits.

    In my first five years here, we worked to fix many of those problems. We instituted more-conservative bookkeeping and addressed our environmental liabilities. We invested in new products and services, and we expanded abroad. The share of our revenue coming from outside the United States increased from 41% in 2002 to 54% in 2012. We built our management bench strength to the point where 85% to 90% of our top-level vacancies are filled by internal candidates; previously only 50% had been. Most important, we established a “One Honeywell” culture in which we focus on business acumen, listening to the customer, and doing what we say we’re going to do. By the end of 2007 we had reestablished our credibility with investors, our share price had more than doubled, and we were significantly outperforming the S&P 500 and our peer group averages.

    In September 2008, though, we began to see a shift in our business. Suddenly orders were being canceled, and no new ones were being placed. It soon became obvious that the U.S. was in a recession and that we, as a big industrial company, were going to see our results soften. The only businesses in our portfolio that held up well were defense, aerospace, and energy efficiency. Everything else was down.

    Businesses like ours have two primary costs: the material we use to make products, and people. In a recession, material costs (direct costs) drop naturally—you just buy less stuff as your incoming orders decline. You can also work around the edges by seeking opportunities to lower indirect costs such as travel and other non-business-critical expenses. Cutting the costs of people, which in an industrial company usually account for 30% to 40% of total costs, is more difficult. Companies typically react by “restructuring”: They cut, say, 10% of the workforce, take a big charge against earnings, and move on. We did do some restructuring in 2008–2009, but I’ve never been fond of that approach to a recession. So we made sure that any restructuring we agreed to during that period would be permanent—in other words, not solely in response to the recession but, rather, what was best for business efficiency and profitability over the long term—and would have no impact on our ability to outperform in recovery.

    As my leadership team began looking at options, we kept coming back to the idea of furloughs: Workers take unpaid leaves but remain employed. The conventional wisdom is that because furloughs spread the pain across the entire workforce, they hurt everyone’s morale, loyalty, and retention, so you’d do better to lay off a smaller number, focusing on weak performers. They’re also a challenge logistically. To implement them, we needed to comply with individual state laws and also laws in other countries where we do business. The process didn’t go perfectly. Looking back, I recognize some clear mistakes we made, and if I had to do it again, I’d do a few things differently. But on the whole, our decision to use furloughs rather than layoffs was a success.

    The False Promise of Layoffs

    When I arrived at the company, I thought we had too many people. Over the next five years we managed to keep employee numbers flat—even as sales increased at a compound annual growth rate of 10%—and we eliminated some lower-performing employees by doing more-rigorous performance reviews and not filling jobs that were vacated through normal attrition. When the recession hit, our head count still wasn’t as low as it could have been, so if we did layoffs, we wouldn’t be “cutting into bone.” But we opted for furloughs, for several reasons. Most managers underestimate how much disruption layoffs create; they consume everyone in the organization for at least a year. Managers also typically overestimate the savings they will achieve and fail to understand that even bad recessions usually end more quickly than people expect. We wanted to be ready for recovery as soon as it came, whether it was soft or V-shaped, and furloughs were one way of positioning us for any outcome.

    To understand that reasoning, look at what really happens when you do layoffs. Each person laid off gets, on average, about six months’ worth of severance pay and outplacement services. So in essence, it takes six months to start saving money. Recessions usually last 12 to 18 months, after which demand picks up, so it’s pretty common for a company to have to start hiring people about a year or so after its big layoff, undoing the savings it began realizing just six months earlier. Think for a minute about the costs of a layoff the way you’d think about a traditional investment in a plant or equipment. Imagine going to your boss and saying, “I want to spend $10 million on a new factory. It will take us six months to break even on it, and then we’ll get to run the factory for six months. But at that point we’re going to need to shut it down.” You’d never do that—yet when it comes to restructuring costs to lay off employees, everyone seems to think it makes sense.

    That’s because when faced with a recession, managers find it hard to look ahead toward recovery. If you worry that a recession is going to last forever, you may believe that the savings achieved by a layoff will be permanent. But that’s not really how it works. I’ve been a leader during three recessions, and I’ve never heard a management team talk about how the choices they make during a downturn will affect performance during the recovery. But in 2008 and 2009 I kept reiterating that point: There will be a recovery, and we need to be prepared for it.

    Both layoffs and furloughs can create behavioral issues and costs, and you could argue that furloughs are tougher in some ways. But one fact remains: Layoffs are much more disruptive to an organization in both the short and the long term. Even employees who stay are extremely distracted, because they’ve lost friends and are worried about their own jobs. To me, that’s no way to run a railroad.

    The Challenges of Furloughs

    We told our businesses to ask every worker to take a series of unpaid weeks off during the first half of 2009. The number of weeks varied by business—the average furlough was three to five weeks, taken in one-week blocks—and business leaders reassessed their situations every few weeks to see if additional furloughs were necessary. This approach presented its own difficulties. Some states have very strict laws about what constitutes work, so we sometimes had to take away people’s smartphones and laptops to ensure that they didn’t check office e-mail during a furlough. In some foreign countries, government regulations and approvals prevented us from doing furloughs at all. But in most places the program went pretty smoothly, at least in the beginning. During the first week or two we received positive feedback: People felt good about making sacrifices, because they knew they were helping to save jobs—maybe their own, maybe a colleague’s. As the furloughs kept going, however, their attitude began to change. Some people complained, “I can’t live on this salary.” Some concluded that they wouldn’t have been among the people laid off, so they started to resent the sacrifice.

    We also faced challenges when our top executives—my direct reports—felt that they, too, should be furloughed, as a symbolic gesture. To me this was mistaken solidarity and shortsighted. I told them we couldn’t afford to have leaders absent during this period. I also reminded them (and our employees) that as leaders, they received more than half their annual compensation in the form of a bonus, so although employees were losing five weeks’ pay, on average, leaders would be losing far more. “Trust me—on a percentage basis, you’re going to be severely affected,” I told them. The bottom line was that we needed them to stay at work.

    The rap on furloughs is that they penalize top performers and cause them to leave. But our “regrettable turnover” decreased significantly.

    By the summer of 2009 people were pretty anxious. They wanted to know how many more weeks of furloughs might be necessary. We still didn’t consider layoffs, but we did begin looking at benefits costs, to see if we could find ways to save more money without putting people out of work. I tried to explain to everyone—both employees and my top executives—that we had three constituencies whose interests we needed to balance: customers, investors, and employees. Penalizing customers wasn’t an option, and product programs had to go forward. So the pain would have to be divided between investors (in the form of lower returns) and employees (in the form of reduced pay). Finding the right balance was a challenge, but I think we accomplished that.

    Prepared for Recovery

    The economy stayed soft for most of 2009. During the first nine months of the year, our unit leaders had difficulty making their sales forecasts because demand kept weakening. However, despite lower sales in 2008–2009, the company stayed highly profitable and held its segment margin rates, which is very difficult to do in a recession.

    During the fourth quarter of 2009 our sales forecasts stopped going down, and by January of 2010 my team and I were starting to talk about a recovery. As orders began to pick up, it was clear that we were well prepared in comparison with our competitors: Our inventory and delivery times were better, and because we had held on to our people, we found it easier to win new business.

    We watched our turnover very carefully as the economy rallied. The rap on furloughs is that they penalize top performers and cause them to leave. But in fact our “regrettable turnover” (the number of employees we’d like to retain who nevertheless choose to leave) decreased significantly. That makes sense to me. Generally speaking, not everything is about money: People aren’t mercenary, and they want to be part of something successful that is bigger than themselves. We’d had a good track record since 2002, we had a lot of employees who believed in what we were doing, and we communicated it clearly. People could see that things wouldn’t stay awful forever, so they hung in.

    Even so, I believe that we made two mistakes in implementing our furlough program. The first was how we let employees know about the sacrifices I would be making. Very early in the recession I decided that I would not take a bonus for 2009. At the time, my annual bonus was around $4 million, so that was significant. When employees asked me in town hall meetings how the recession would affect my compensation, I always gave the politic corporate governance response: “That’s not my decision—it’s up to the board.” Everyone would have been better served if I’d just said that I’d already decided to forgo my bonus.

    The second mistake was that when we decided to let individual units determine how many weeks of furlough they needed, we should have made it clear that we didn’t want them imposing standardized furloughs across their businesses. For example, some of our units furloughed workers in China, where revenue was still growing. Employees in emerging markets have a lot of opportunities, and ordering furloughs in a fast-growing market created some HR problems and organizational angst that we could have avoided.

    Still, I believe that our decision to use furloughs instead of layoffs was the right one and that we managed to get about 90% of the implementation right. I hope we never have to do it again—but if we do, I’ll make sure we hit 100%.

    ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

    Source: Harvard Business Review

    https://hbr.org/2013/06/honeywells-ceo-on-how-he-avoided-layoffs

  • 17 Mar 2020 11:30 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    Image result for willis towers waTSON - COVID-19 (coronavirus) impact on metric and goal setting

    Amid continuing uncertainty, companies are adopting an informed wait and see approach

    By Heather Marshall and Derek Mordente | March 6, 2020

    With the ripple effect of COVID-19 being felt around the world, companies are reviewing the implications for their compensation plans.

    As uncertainty regarding the extent of COVID-19 (coronavirus) continues, companies are prioritizing the physical and financial wellbeing of their employees in the worst affected areas. Our early February work arrangements pulse survey in China found that most companies have either suspended work or implemented work from home policies. For those working from home over 80% of companies indicate that employees are being paid their regular wages, with additional pay for those that must resume work early or during the suspension period. Details of this and other COVID-19 studies can be found on our COVID-19 page.

    With the ripple effect being felt around the world, whether it is the manufacturing of products from heavily disrupted areas or the reduction in consumer activity, companies outside the region are reviewing their policies (e.g. travel bans, mandatory quarantine periods when returning from high risk areas, work from home advisories) and the compensation implications.

    Over 200 companies responded to our pulse survey, reflecting more than 30 industry segments. Around two in five respondents have some presence in Wuhan or the Hubei province, with the majority (>80%) having a presence in Greater China, and/or Asia and/or the rest of the world (i.e. outside North America and Asia).

    A short-term concern

    As we enter March, many compensation committees are being asked to approve performance goals for 2020. In recent weeks events and the economic impact of COVID-19 have been moving quickly.

    Fewer companies expecting moderate or large negative impact over the long-term

    Fewer companies expecting moderate or large negative impact over the long-term

    As part of a series of pulse surveys related to COVID-19, we collected information on the COVID-19 survey of benefits managers beginning on February 19.Their initial expectations on the economic impact were muted with 15% of firms expecting COVID-19 to have a moderate or significant negative impact over the next six months. In this second survey, focused on variable compensation implications and conducted entirely amidst the market correction that occurred during the week of February 24, compensation managers put that number at 34%. While this may reflect differences in the responsibilities and perspectives of the respondents, it is also aligned with the growing concern reflected in the market reaction during this period.

    Against that backdrop, 44% of companies indicate their annual incentive plan has been or they anticipate it will be impacted. It is notable that around 43% of those companies (around 20% of all respondents) indicated that while there is an anticipated business impact, no adjustments will be made to the annual bonus plan. Thirty-five percent of companies that operate performance-based long-term incentive plans anticipate an impact.

    Over two-fifths of respondents, almost half at a regional level, are yet to discuss the matter, although several respondents note it as an agenda item for their March meetings. At an enterprise-wide level, most companies that have discussed the impact on their plan are maintaining their existing goals but with the intention of applying discretion at the end of the year once the full extent of the impact is better understood. These answers reflect a lack of visibility for many in these relatively early stages of the year.

    Most employers have not yet discussed the impact of COVID-19 on short-term incentive goal setting

    Short-term incentive goal setting
    Most employers have not yet discussed the impact of COVID-19 on short-term incentive goal setting

    The minority actions already taken include reductions in goals, broadening of ranges and companies changing metrics to reflect their evolving strategies.

    As noted above, when it comes to performance-based long-term incentive plans only 35% of companies anticipate an impact. The vast majority indicated that at this time there is no intent to adjust goals or metrics given the long-term and multi-year nature of the plans.

    Expect discretion at the end of year

    75% of respondents are making no adjustments to sales incentive plans

    Sales incentive actions
    Three-fourths of respondents are making no adjustments to sales incentive plans

    The most clear-cut response across all variable compensation is in sales compensation where three quarters of companies are not making adjustments and are instead maintaining a “business as usual” approach. Respondents indicate that until there is clearer cause and effect between sales and the virus it is too soon to think about adjustments. While the role of the sales force may change with an increasing number of companies instituting travel restrictions, other mediums remain viable for interactions with customers.

    We anticipate that companies will continue to monitor their goals, and indeed broader HR policies and practices such as merit increases as the effect of COVID-19 on business becomes more apparent.

    ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

    Source: Willis Towers Watson

    https://www.willistowerswatson.com/en-US/Insights/2020/03/covid-19-coronavirus-impact-on-metric-and-goal-setting?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=N-A-EC-N-Executive%20Pay%20Matters%209%20Mar%202020%20-#15597%20(1)&utm_term=MTA5ODY1NTcxNjgwS0&utm_content=March%2009,%202020&spMailingID=31901864&spUserID=MTA5ODY1NTcxNjgwS0&spJobID=1663536190&spReportId=MTY2MzUzNjE5MAS2#15597%20(1)&utm_term=MTA5ODY1NTcxNjgwS0&utm_content=March%2009,%202020&spMailingID=31901864&spUserID=MTA5ODY1NTcxNjgwS0&spJobID=1663536190&spReportId=MTY2MzUzNjE5MAS2

  • 13 Mar 2020 12:30 PM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    Coronavirus Checklist

    Bob Nichols & Caroline Melo | MAR 09, 2020

    When Must Employee Illnesses Be Recorded for OSHA?

    The coronavirus and other contagious illnesses may qualify.

    Conscientious safety professionals typically devote a great deal of time over the course of their careers learning when particular instances of physical injury suffered by employees, such as back, knee or wrist pain, must be recorded on OSHA 300 and 301 forms.

    Recent contingency planning for potential employee coronavirus cases, however, has reminded occupational safety specialists that work-related illnesses generally must also be recorded if the condition meets the applicable recording criteria of OSHA regulations. Understanding when an illness is OSHA recordable can often be even more daunting than the task of recognizing when a physical injury is properly recorded.

    The Basics

    With the exception of certain low safety-risk industries, employers with more than 10 employees are required to record on certain OSHA-required records, namely OSHA 300 and 301 forms, “work related” injuries and illnesses meeting one or more specified criteria  of seriousness outlined by OSHA regulations—such as medical treatment beyond first aid or days away from work.

    As for the deadline to do so, generally an employer must record within seven calendar days after the business receives information that a recordable work-related injury or illness has occurred.

    The regulatory nuances of the determination of what is commonly referred to as “recordability” are many and complex.  Moreover, because the vast majority of recordable events are injuries, as opposed to illnesses, safety professionals spend much more time considering what is an injury that must be recorded as opposed to an illness.

    Additionally, because the vast majority of employee illnesses are not “work-related” and, therefore, not necessarily recordable, the requirement of recording illnesses, even when applicable, is often overlooked. This inattention can be costly. Specifically, employers may be fined substantial dollar amounts by OSHA for failing to record work-related illnesses - just like injuries.

    Moreover, as a practical matter, in some businesses there can be subtle, or not-so-subtle, pressure on supervisory and safety officials to minimize the number of recorded cases. This unfortunate reality exists in certain companies because low levels of recordable injuries and illnesses may be considered under bonus schemes or otherwise be used to judge the performance of managers or other employees. While these compensation incentives tied to achieving low recorded injury/illness levels are not per se unlawful, employers need to be careful to assure that these incentives do not lead to the failure to record. Specifically, to avoid potentially substantial OSHA fines, businesses must guard against under-recording and carefully consider every potentially work-related illness or injury to determine recordability.

    Contagious Illness

    Contagious illnesses that employees contract from a coworker, customer, contractor or other person while working are generally recordable if they meet one or more of the general recording criteria - such as medical treatment or days away from work.

    To illustrate this point, the regulations indicate that specific examples of potentially recordable contagious illnesses, if contraction is work-related, include “tuberculosis, brucellosis, hepatitis A or plague.”

    As an exception to the recording requirements, OSHA regulations specifically provide that employee cases of the “common cold or flu” do not need to be, and should not be, recorded. At the same time, OSHA has warned that this exception does not apply to other contagious viruses, even those that produce similar symptoms, that do not actually constitute the “common cold or flu” strain.

    As a result in 2009, OSHA warned employers that employee cases of the H1N1 virus that are “work-related” must be recorded on OSHA 300 and 301 forms.

    Importantly, this year, OSHA has reached the same conclusion about coronavirus cases that may occur may be work-related. Specifically, employee bouts with the coronavirus are recordable if, again, the particular case is work-related and other criteria meet the criteria test.

    Work-Relatedness

    Of course, with any illness, if it is not “work-related,” then it is not recordable. While that determination may seem simple, in reality it often is not.

    OSHA guidance points out that, for example, if “an employee reports symptoms of a contagious disease that affects the public at large, such as a staphylococcus infection (‘staph’ infection) or Lyme disease, and the workplace is only one possible source of the infection,” the employer must engage in an analysis of potential work-relatedness.

    OSHA instructs that “[i]n these situations, the employer must examine the employee’s work duties and environment to determine whether it is more likely than not that one or more events or exposures at work caused or contributed to the condition.” In engaging in that inquiry, if the employer determines that it is unlikely that the precipitating event or exposure occurred in the work environment, the employer would not record the case.

    Mental Illnesses

    Employers must bear in mind that OSHA takes a fundamentally different approach to determining when mental illnesses should be recorded - as opposed to physical illnesses. Specifically, OSHA regulations broadly direct that mental illnesses are not to be recorded unless “the employee voluntarily provides the employer with an opinion from a physician or other licensed health care professional with appropriate training and experience (psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse practitioner, etc.) stating that the employee has a mental illness that is work-related.”

    Notably, this general rule applies to when work-related stress disorders must be recorded. Specifically in 2004 guidance, OSHA explained that “[m]ental illnesses, such as depression or anxiety disorder, that have work-related stress as a contributing factor, are recordable if the employee voluntarily provides the employer with an opinion from a physician or other licensed health care professional with appropriate training and experience (psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse practitioner, etc.) stating that the employee has a mental illness that is work-related, and the case meets one or more of the general recording criteria.”

    Diseases Tied to Workplace Exposure

    Diseases such as silicosis, byssinosis, or asbestosis for which workplace exposure to substances may have been a contributing factor, are subject to the recording requirement just like other illnesses that are work-related. Determining work-relatedness in the context of these illnesses can be especially difficult, but that does not excuse employers from engaging in the required analysis as to whether such a case should be recorded on the employer’s OSHA recordkeeping forms.

    In fact, under OSHA regulations these types of “significant progressive diseases” once diagnosed may be subject to the recording requirement even before the illness requires medical treatment, work restrictions, or days away from work.

    Guidance for Employers

    1. Determining the work-relatedness of illnesses is often a difficult task, but engaging in the analysis is important – particularly when an employee or a healthcare provider reports that a disease or other illness stems, or may stem, in whole or part, from work-related conditions. When this issue arises, the employer should engage in a careful assessment as to whether that condition should be recorded through the OSHA 300 and 301 forms.

    2. As employers continue to worry about the spread of the coronavirus and the potential for future pandemics involving other viruses or other illnesses (other than the common cold or flu), they must not lose sight of the fact that if the employee contracts the illness at work, through a coworker or other individual, and the condition otherwise meets OSHA recording criteria, it must be properly and timely recorded.

    3. Employers should recognize that they can and should utilize the expertise of medical professionals when trying to ascertain whether a particular illness should be recorded.

    4. In engaging in these determinations, employers should also make full use of OSHA’s extensive online resources, including the OSHA Recordkeeping Handbook maintained on OSHA’s website.

    ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

    Source: Industry Week

    https://www.industryweek.com/operations/safety/article/21125685/when-must-employee-illnesses-be-recorded-for-osha?utm_source=IY%2BIW%2BWeekly%2BHotlist&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CPS200309027&o_eid=5043J3691490B3Y&rdx.ident%5Bpull%5D=omeda%7C5043J3691490B3Y&oly_enc_id=5043J3691490B3Y

  • 12 Mar 2020 7:48 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)
    Image result for remote work coronavirus

    03-11-20 | 6:30 AM | SECRETS OF THE MOST PRODUCTIVE PEOPLE

    8 strategies to set up remote work during the coronavirus outbreak

    The CEO of HackerOne, which features a community of over 600,000 people working remotely, offers tips for the best ways to set up remote workers to succeed.

    BY MARTEN MICKOS

    “Yesterday, we moved our company to a fully remote team in response to the COVID-19 threat. Now I’m the CEO of a company where I see zero people on my team. Every single day. ”

    Those are the words of one leader who is taking action and doing what’s best for employees.

    I have run companies with distributed teams for 20 years. We pioneered the model at MySQL with 350 employees of 500 working from home in 110 major cities in 32 countries across 16 time zones. Today at HackerOne, we employ a hybrid model where about a third of employees work from home all the time and another third work from home a few days each week. And we are surrounded by a hacker community 2,000 times larger. All 600,000 people work from home all over the world.

    Here is my advice to those who are making the jump right now amidst the outbreak of coronavirus.

    START FROM THE TOP

    The CEO must be present in online tools and channels, communicating proactively and engaging in timely conversations where they are happening and knowing when to bring things to video chats. Available, approachable, personable, showing their personal side and not just their professional side, showing vulnerability and not just strength, listening more than pontificating. Encouraging, praising, and high-fiving people across the company. When the organization sees that the CEO has gone completely remote and digital, they will be ready to follow.

    A risk with remote work is that people start spending too much time online without natural transitions throughout the day, working unhealthily long hours. It’s important for the CEO to set an example of going offline for the time when work isn’t being done.

    REINFORCE THE COMPANY’S MISSION, PURPOSE, AND VALUES

    Start there. Make sure you can explain in plain writing why the company exists and what it is trying to accomplish. From there, develop goals and objectives, as deep and detailed as possible. When employees have a vision that they can rally behind as a group, alignment becomes easier across time zones.

    BE OPEN AND AUTHENTIC

    Culture begins at the top, and any successful team begins with trust. To foster this trust, executives must be open and authentic across channels. When sensitive topics arise, run to the fire, not away from it. Deal with the issues raised by employees, don’t hide from them. Secrecy, intrigue, or hidden agendas will kill any effort to build internal digital trust, which all executives need in return. Learn to be courteous, diplomatic, and compassionate online, and the same ideals will manifest within your team.

    PROMOTE A DIGITAL COMPANY CULTURE

    In an office-based company, culture and interpersonal relationships happen spontaneously in the physical space while decisions and business happen in the digital space. When you go all digital and all remote, you must find online expressions for your culture. Jokes, high-fives, celebrations, gossip, community, family, personal interests, attention to the humans behind the professional persona—all these things need to be brought over to the digital world and given a worthy place and channel that allows for spontaneous and randomized encounters. You must create a virtual water cooler where employees can run into each other and play out their personal and human sides.

    USE THE RIGHT TOOLS, AND USE THEM ALL THE TIME

    Use every digital tool you have available to facilitate communication. Connect over text messaging, Slack, email, wikis, hangouts and video conferences. Use group chats as the backchannel during online meetings. Let people use what they are comfortable with to ease discussion. Copy and paste content if needed.

    At the same time, I must recognize that there are other successful distributed organizations that do the exact opposite. They choose a minimal set of online tools and are highly prescriptive as to which tool to use for which purpose. In my own experiences, being flexible has been most beneficial.

    CREATE REMOTE-FIRST EXPERIENCES

    In Slack or a similar tool, create a channel where employees can spontaneously issue high-fives to each other. Celebrate every high-five and add many happy emojis. You could also create a Confessions channel where employees can confess things to each other. And a Milestones channel to celebrate birthdays and promotions, but also announce departures. You can take it one step further and implement a discretionary bonus program, where bonuses are only nominated for exemplifying values. Not sales, not revenue, not “working late.” Values. That’s how GitLab does it.

    If you have meetings with people in the room and others remote, always stop to let the remote attendees speak first. If you are planning an event or meeting or some project work, start by considering the needs of the most remote attendees. From there, it is easy to accommodate everyone else, but the other way around would be much more difficult.

    BE CREATIVE WHEN HANDLING CONFLICTS AND PROBLEMS

    In the case of individual underperforming or problems with teamwork, in an office setting, you can call the person or people into a room to face the situation and deal with it. How do you do this if you can’t bring people into the same room? How do you fire someone remotely? How do you take disciplinary action?

    It is difficult, but it is not impossible. It just takes more communication and more time. You will need to write a detailed script for your call, thinking of all the possible interpretations and misunderstandings that your statements may cause, preemptively dealing with them. Your script should address the intent of those involved, talk about values and guidelines, and logically proceed to the conclusion that you have arrived at.

    SHOW COMPASSION

    In an office setting, people will find numerous ways to display their compassion for each other. They show they are caring by buying lunch for a colleague or cleaning up after someone. But in an all-remote environment, those mechanisms don’t exist. So you must look for other ways to care and show compassion. Learn to send caring emails or chat messages. Have flowers or a gift card to be sent to someone who needs or deserves it. Consider sharing photos of the gifts online for all to see.

    THE FISHING VILLAGE

    I use an ancient fishing village as a metaphor for the virtual organization. In the evenings, the fishermen get together to be social and have fun. But every morning before dawn, they each head out to sea alone in their individual small fishing boats. They can stay in radio contact with each other, but each fisherman is on his own. There is little direct help they can offer each other. There is no coming back until enough fish have been caught. But once they get back, they are together having fun again.

    The all-remote organization is like this. Each employee is alone in their boat, working until the work is done. Every now and then, the company brings everyone together to one place and there is time to be social and share fishing stories.

    There are many other metaphors for this working environment. They could be goat herders alone with the goats in the mountains, hunters away for days on end, or lumberjacks working in the forest. Being alone with your most immediate job yet being connected with others who are doing the same is nothing new for mankind. It has been like this for tens of thousands of years.

    The Industrial Revolution brought us the idea that work is a place different from home and that work is done in physical proximity of many other people. It is the idea of the joint workplace that is the anomaly. Working from home is natural.

    As you apply these guidelines, you will see that remote work is not a challenge to overcome. It’s a business advantage to achieve. The whole world is online. Our human civilization is digital. We will have distributed and remote organizations long after the coronavirus outbreak recedes. By not tying work or collaboration to any particular physical location or synchronous moment, we democratize opportunity and open up a world of new possibilities.

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

    Source: Fast Company

    https://www.fastcompany.com/90475330/8-strategies-to-set-up-remote-work-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak

  • 12 Mar 2020 7:43 AM | Bill Brewer (Administrator)

    ENR0628appren1.png

    March 10, 2020

    Tom Ichniowski

    Construction labor unions have scored a major regulatory victory as the U.S. Dept. of Labor’s long-awaited final rule on apprenticeships retains the construction industry’s exclusion from new “industry-recognized” training and education programs for those seeking to enter its workforce.

    That exclusion had divided the construction industry, with the building trades and some specialty-contractor groups supporting it and two of the largest contractor associations opposing it.

    DOL says that the overall aim of its new rule, announced on March 10, is to expand the use of apprenticeships in industries where such training programs aren’t greatly used. [View text of regulation here.]

    To achieve that goal, the regulation calls for allowing companies, industry groups, educational institutions, unions and other entities to set up and operate Industry-Recognized Apprenticeship Programs (IRAPs).

    Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia said in a statement, “This new rule offers employers, community colleges and others a flexible, innovative way to quickly expand apprenticeships in telecommunications, health care, cybersecurity and other sectors where apprenticeships currently are not widely available.”

    The Labor Dept. said the new rule would take effect on May 11.

    For construction, the key issue related to the regulation was whether DOL would keep the industry’s current exemption from a central provision of the rule.

    That provision is establishment of IRAPs, which would take on responsibilities for much of the apprenticeship standard-setting that DOL and state agencies now handle.

    The rule also would let companies, industry groups and other organizations apply to DOL to become Standards Recognition Entities (SREs). The SREs would determine the standards for the IRAPs’ training and curricula in specific industries or business sectors. SREs would be subject to DOL oversight.

    That would be a significant change from the current Registered Apprenticeship system, in which DOL or state agencies register and validate apprentices and apprenticeship programs.

    Wave of comments

    The department published a proposed rule last June and was inundated by more than 327,000 comments on that proposal. DOL said the total was the largest its Employment and Training Administration had ever received for a proposed regulation. [View ENR 8/30/2019 story here.]. It added that a majority of the comments were related to "form letter campaigns."

    The building trades unions strongly supported keeping the exemption and also wanted to make it permanent.

    Sean McGarvey, president of North America's Building Trades Unions, said last summer that nearly 325,000 of the comments supported the unions' position.

    Contractor groups that have joint apprenticeship programs and other relationships with the unions, such as the National Electrical Contractors Association, Mechanical Contractors Association of America and Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association, also supported keeping the exemption.

    Those opposing the exclusion were contractor groups such as the Associated General Contractors of America and Associated Builders and Contractors. They argued that construction has a major shortage of skilled labor and that IRAPs would provide a way to help ease that problem.

    No 'sunset' for exclusion

    In the end, the Labor Dept. came down on the side of the unions. In the rule, the department said that it “has determined that programs that seek to train apprentices to perform construction activities…will not be recognized as IRAPs.” DOL also decided not to include a “sunset” provision, that would end the construction exemption after a certain period of time.

    It added, “The department’s goal in this rulemaking is to expand apprenticeships to new industry sectors and occupations.
    DOL noted, “Registered apprenticeship programs are more widespread and well-established in the construction sector than in any other sector.”

    Labor Dept. statistics show that in fiscal year 2018, construction had 166,629 active apprentices, the largest total among industries. Ranking second is the military, with 98,435. Construction's total did decline 5% from the 2017 level.

    DOL said that it “has determined that a complete exclusion of construction, but no other sector, is most consistent with the goal of encouraging more apprenticeships in new industry sectors that lack widespread and well-established registered apprenticeship opportunities.”

    McGarvey noted that the building trades unions, working with construction contractors, spend more than $1 billion a year on their nearly 1,600 "teaching centers."

    He said that NABTU participated in an administration apprenticeship task force and the unions' aims included ensuring that the integrity of their Registered Apprenticeship programs would not be "watered down."

    McGarvey added, "With the issuance of the final rule, we now see that we were able to protect our industry's successful programs."

    Contractor groups comment

    David Long, NECA chief executive officer, welcomed the DOL rule and its continuation of the construction exemption. He said in a statement, “Given the high concentration of time-tested apprenticeship programs in the construction industry, there is no need to create a parallel program that would detract from our nearly 80 years of experience as the industry’s gold standard.”

    John McNerney, MCAA general counsel, told ENR via email, "We are pleased that the department heeded the overwhelming comments from the construction industry and maintained and strengthened the construction industry exemption—making it permanent and removing the looming threat of...rescission of the exemption in the near term."

    Stephen Sandherr, AGC CEO, said in a statement, “It remains troubling that the administration has wasted so much time, energy and political capital in creating a new apprenticeship program that is both deeply flawed and fails to address construction workforce shortages.”

    Greg Sizemore, ABC vice president of safety, environment and workforce development, said in a March 11 statement, "All U.S. workers should have the opportunity to participate in DOL's new industry programs, particularly as federal registered apprenticeship programs supply only a small fraction of the construction industry's workforce."

    Sizemore added that ABC would continue to use an "all-of-the-above" approach to worker education.

    He noted that ABC member firms spent $1.6 billion on worker craft, leadership and safety education in 2018, up 45% from the previous year and the number of participants in those programs almost doubled, to more than 980,000.

    Story updated on 3/11/2020 with comment from Associated Builders and Contractors.

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

    Source: ENR.com

    https://www.enr.com/articles/48850-labor-dept-sides-with-construction-unions-on-apprenticeship-rule

Member Login (click below)

© 2024 OCCABA

OCCABA
PO Box 9644
700 E Birch St
Brea, CA 92822

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software