WorkSource Blog

Well, this new proposed ruling affects hiring persons with disabilities. The OFCCP has published a proposal to improve job opportunities for individuals with disabilities. Therefore, the U.S. Department of Labor is proposing a new rule that would require federal contractors and subcontractors to set a hiring goal of having 7% of their workforces be people with disabilities.

When hiring, we need to be treating all applicants as if they may have a disability. That way, we are ensuring fair hiring practices to all. But how would we know for certain we’re in compliance with the proposed “7% rule?” The proposed rule includes modifying the invitation for workers to self-identify by requiring that contractors invite all applicants to voluntarily self-identify as an “individual with a disability” at the pre-offer stage of the hiring process. Contractors also will be required to invite post-offer voluntary self-identification and to survey all employees annually in order to ensure the self-identification is anonymous.

To find out where to go to make a public comment, go to www.worksourcestaff.com.

If the rule passes, accommodation requests would also require, for the first time, that contractors develop and implement written procedures for processing requests for reasonable accommodation.

So I don’t think we’re finished with regulations regarding hiring persons with disabilities or affirmative action requirements. As HR Professionals, we must always be sensitive to hiring fairly at all costs so we put ourselves in the best position to be in compliance with the ever changing rules and regulations.

To read the full proposed rule or to submit an invited public comment, go to www.regulations.gov. All comments must be received by Feb 7, 2012.

The quick and simple answer is, “No, you may not refuse to hire a person simply because she is pregnant or possibly going to become pregnant.” So you would think this issue would end without additional needed information, right? Well, according to the HR Daily Advisor Newsletter, “Some managers think that if the applicant is pregnant they should be able to refuse to hire because the applicant will be missing weeks of work right after starting.” So maybe there is some confusion among hiring managers and HR Professionals.

I recently interviewed someone who directly told me in the interview, “I am getting married and plan on starting a family.” She offered this information in response to a question I asked regarding future employment goals. So what did I do? Did I immediately “disqualify” her in my mind and create bias because of the possibility she might have a problem pregnancy, as well as potentially need time off after delivery of her baby?

I must admit, the potential time off issue entered my mind, and I did ask myself, “Will she want to work after having a baby?” Yet I dismissed these “what if’s” for exactly what they were: what if’s. After all, I had no idea what her future time off requirements might be, and I certainly had no idea what her health would be during a pregnancy so I realized I was creating stories in my head that quite likely would never come to fruition, opposed to simply looking for the best candidate for my company’s opening.

Additionally, I had a team in place that would handle whatever business needs came our way and I fully believed I was possibly speaking with the most qualified, suitable candidate for our open position. So after the selection process was completed, I hired her! She had the experience, skills and abilities our company needed and was looking for. So she got the job, irrespective of the fact she admittedly wanted to start a family soon. I looked at this candidate as any other candidate and asked myself, “Is she the person who can move our company forward in the capacity we need her to?” And that’s what I based my final decision upon.

I think if we stick to the basics and continually seek the most qualified, suitable applicants for our open positions, and maintain fair, equitable hiring practices that take our organizations where we want them to go, we can stop asking ourselves, “Can we legally refuse to hire a pregnant applicant?” and replace it with “What am I costing my company if I fail to hire a pregnant applicant who happens to be the best person for the job?”

Well, it’s that time of year again – the fantastic, wonderful time to process Open Enrollment. I hear more HR professionals tell me, “It’s Open Enrollment. I don’t have time for anything else,” than what I can share here. Suffice it to say, it’s a subject a lot of HR professionals wouldn’t mind doing without!

Yet, benefits are one of the most important aspects of the majority of employee’s jobs. Acceptable benefits increase retention. According to the 2011 Mercer Workplace Survey, 79% of employees agreed that “My benefits are one of the reasons I work where I do.” Further, 76% of respondents agreed with the statement, “My benefits make me feel appreciated by my company.” And 91% agreed that, “Getting health benefits through work is just as important to me as getting a salary.” So, it’s hard to deny the importance of benefits and the relevance they play in keeping valuable employees on board and engaged with your company.

So, if you’re sitting at your desk discouraged by the thought of open enrollment, remind yourself of the above and how what you’re doing is critical to your company’s success. After all, it’s your employees that bring the talent, knowledge, skills and abilities to the table to make your company productive and give it the competitive edge.

To learn more about the 3 trends leading businesses use who have demonstrated a commitment to offering outstanding benefits, go to www.worksourcestaff.com.

Over the past decade, the “best” U.S. companies have adapted their benefits offerings to meet changing employee needs, according to The Principal Financial Group’s annual 10 Best Companies for Employee Financial Security competition.

The 2011 winners demonstrate the following:

1. Shifting from do-it-for-them to do-it-with-them. The “best companies” make a commitment to share in the cost of benefits and help employees learn and make the best decisions possible about how to utilize their benefit dollars.
2. Changing from cookie-cutter to customized benefit programs: The leading companies build in flexible, creative benefit options that target younger workers’ needs versus older workers’ needs, for example. Different demographic groups have different priorities and look for benefits specific to their needs at the stage of life they find themselves in.

Additionally, “best companies” engaged employees in helping shape benefit programs, using employee surveys, focus groups and employee committees in order to understand their wants and needs.

3. Viewing security as financial and physical: “Best companies” use a holistic approach, tying financial security to physical health and wellness as a way to lower healthcare costs for both the company and the employee. Many employers reward employees for participating in wellness programs and ensure their companies offer biometric screenings, health risk assessments and health coaches
.
(Source: ‘Best Companies’ Take Collaborative Approach to Benefits, SHRM. 9/1/2011)

Do you know how many people falsify their education on job applications?
Believe it or not, it is estimated that as many as half of all job applicants falsify their educational credentials. The problem is so pervasive it’s been reported that two-thirds of college registrars say they’ve been asked to verify falsified information. Perhaps that’s why education is among the top five items the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) recommends that employers verify.

If applicants are willing to misrepresent themselves concerning education, what else might they be willing to put forward that’s flat-out untrue? As a hiring manager this would leave a bit of a bad taste in my mouth, and I would certainly question, along with honesty and integrity, the productivity and overall contributions such employees would bring my company. So, “Thanks, but no thanks” to candidates who aren’t honest from the get-go! And definitely, “No thanks” to the turnover these hires could end up costing my company.

So consider the benefits of outsourcing verifications to a third party vendor versus the headaches of “assuming” you’re getting correct information!

Some alarming statistics of how many applicants are guilty of misrepresentation:

• SHRM: More than 53% of job applicants falsify information on their resumes; one in four candidates misrepresents his educational attainment.
• ADP Screening Index: 45% of employment, education and or credential reference checks reveal discrepancies in the applicant’s information.
• Wall Street Journal: 34% of all application forms contain misrepresentations about the applicants’ experience, education, and ability to perform essential job functions,

(Source: National Student Clearinghouse)

Do not be afraid to check references! Checking references is a critical step in the selection/hiring process. By completing reference checks you help protect your business from being charged with negligent hiring practices.

Great reasons to check references:

1. To reduce legal liability for negligent hiring
2. To determine that credentials such as education, position or skills are accurately represented by the job candidate
3. To assess past performance and predict future performance
4. To reduce or prevent theft and embezzlement, along with other criminal activity
5. To ensure a safe work environment for employees
6. To comply with applicable state law requiring background checks for particular positions such as day care teachers or licensed medical practitioners
7. To assess the overall trustworthiness of the job candidate
8. To determine if salary history is accurately represented by the job candidate

Are you at risk when it comes to background checks? David Fortney, an attorney with Fortney & Scott, LLC, a Washington D.C. employment law firm, and a speaker at the National Employment Law Institute’s Employment Law Workshop in Washington, has some concerns about the way background checks are being utilized by some employers in the hiring process.

How does your company use criminal background screens in the selection process? Are you disqualifying potential new hires based solely on a candidate’s background information? If so, you need to be aware of the following:

Convictions, opposed to arrests, should be the only information considered. “Adverse-employment decisions based on the candidate’s arrest record are generally improper and may lead to liability for discrimination under Title VII and state anti-discrimination laws on either a disparate treatment or adverse impact theory,” Forney said.

Fortney recommends:

• Base adverse-employment decisions only on recent, job-related convictions.
• Conduct an individualized assessment of each candidate and his or her conviction records as to disqualification for employment. Policies without bright-line conviction rules are less likely to result in disparate-impact challenges than bright-line rules, but may still lead to disparate-treatment claims.

Further, The National Center for Public Policy Research issued a Press Release dated August 16, 2010, stating, “EEOC warns employers: If you don’t want to hire felons, you need a good reason.” Per the EEOC, it is illegal to use a prospective employee’s past conviction records, even for serious felonies, as an “absolute measure” as to whether they should be hired because this “could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups.”

According to the EEOC, prior conviction may be considered if job-related, given the following factors:

• The nature and gravity of the offense
• How old the conviction is
• How the job relates to the crime committed

Therefore, make sure you have business justification as to why you are making adverse hiring decisions based on criminal background records. And make sure you are not considering arrest records.

What’s up with the Form 1099 Reporting Requirements?

Well, many of us thought we’d have to file a form 1099 with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service for payments for goods and services totaling more than $600 in a calendar year, rendered by a single payee, including corporations. This provision was part of the health care reform law passed last year and is current law. Whew! What a bunch of paperwork!

But put your pens and Form 1099’s away! After months of debate and several previous unsuccessful attempts, The U.S. Senate finally approved HR 4, legislation to repeal expanded Form 1099 reporting requirements. President O’bama announced he will sign the bill when it reaches his desk.

When the president signs HR4 into law, it will mark the first significant change to the health care reform law that was enacted a little over a year ago.

The provision has been widely criticized by members of both political parties, as it is believed to be overly burdensome to small businesses. So, the question wasn’t whether to repeal the decision, but how to replace lost revenue the provision was expected to generate.

HR 4 addresses the revenue issue through tax credits in the health care reform law that would provide assistance in the payment of health insurance premiums. Where tax credits were overpaid, HR 4 would require recipients to repay a greater share. Not all were in favor of this approach, as some claimed it effectively would result in tax increases for certain middle-class taxpayers. Ultimately, however, this wasn’t a big enough concern to halt the legislation, which passed both chambers of Congress with veto-proof margins.

Is it strange I’m scratching my head regarding the ADAAA Final Rule?

No, it’s not strange at all. From my view, HR professionals’ heads should be spinning regarding the Final Rule implementing the ADA Amendments Act of 2008. From the various interpretations I’ve read, it’s enough to make you stop and say, “What?” There’s a lot of verbiage to untangle, that’s for sure.

Long story short, the ADAAA’s purpose is to make it easier for individuals to establish that they have a disability by expanding the definition of the term, “disability.” Therefore, discrimination claims will invariably be on the rise and employers are going to have to be much more cautious in how they deal with every candidate and employee.

The EEOC’s Final Regulations were published in the federal Register March 25, 2011 and take effect May 24, 2011.

Here are answers to some of the most common questions regarding how the rule applies to HR professionals:
1. Does the ADAAA apply to discriminatory acts that occurred prior to January 1, 2009?
2. What is the purpose of the ADAAA
3. Who is required to comply with these regulations?
4. How does the ADAAA define “disability?”
5. How do the regulations define the term “physical or mental impairment?”
6. When does an impairment “substantially limit” a major life activity?
7. Can impairments that are episodic or in remission be considered disabilities?
8. After an individualized assessment is done, are there certain impairments that will virtually always be found to result in substantial limitation in performing certain major life activities?
9. What does it mean for a covered entity to “regard” an individual as having a disability?
10. Do any of the ADAAA’s changes affect workers’ compensation laws or Federal and State disability benefit programs?

For answers to these questions and more, go to:

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/regulations/ada_qa_final_rule.cfm.

Does working overtime positively correlate with an increase of accidents/injuries in the workplace? According to RCS (Risk Control Services), studies indicate that employees working overtime were 61% more likely to suffer a work-related injury or illness than employees who did not work overtime.

Longer work days and work weeks were found to correlate with higher injury rates. For example, working at least12 hours a day was associated with a 37% increased risk of injury or illness, while working at least 60 hours a week was associated with a 23% increased risk.

The U.S, studies were based on survey responses from 11,000 Americans to the annual National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. The survey included questions about employment history, work schedules, and sick leave, covering the period between 1987 and 2000. The analysis included a study of over 100,000 job records and over 5,000 workplace injury reports. Over half of these were in jobs with extended working hours or overtime.

The increased risks were not concentrated in jobs traditionally considered to be “high hazard” in nature, either. The authors say their findings backup the theory that long working hours indirectly precipitate workplace accidents by inducing fatigue and stress.

Professor Allard Dembe, Center for Health Policy and Research, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass, headed the study which was published in the British Medical Journal.

Even though many companies require overtime to maintain productivity levels and scheduling demands, in many cases overtime hours should be considered a potential risk. This is especially true for jobs where safety is directly tied to reaction time and hand/eye coordination (i.e. manufacturing, assembly, forklift operation). In such positions, the effects of fatigue and stress from long work hours can reduce focus and slow reaction time, sometimes resulting in an injury.

Source: RCS (Risk Management Control)

Employee onboarding is a critical process for new hires. If done well it ensures new employees understand their roles and responsibilities, integrates them into the company culture, helps them feel welcomed and appreciated, and increases the likelihood they feel prepared to step into their new positions.

Through a thorough onboarding program, employees are given the confidence and resources to understand they can make a difference by contributing to the company goals and mission. So it is best not to cut corners in this arena. Proper onboarding can decrease training time and the frustrations surrounding employees not knowing important company policies and procedures. Further, it increases morale and reduces turnover by showing the employee he/she is valued.

New Onboarding Checklists can be an extremely valuable tool to ensure all steps have been taken in the process.

10 Commandments of Employee Onboarding:

1. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy employee: Be honest about the roles and responsibilities of the job. “No surprises,” is the best policy.
2. Thou shalt give a written plan of employee objectives and responsibilities: Provide a job description that suits the position.
3. Thou shalt give thy employ thy undivided attention: Provide an orientation with no distractions.
4. Thou shalt have relevant paperwork ready: Make sure all personnel/administrative forms are prepared and ready to be completed the first day of orientation.
5. Thou shalt introduce thy employees to thy neighbors: Assign a mentor or buddy to the new hire to get the employee acclimated to their new position and provide an avenue to ask questions and obtain important company information.
6. Thou shalt set up thy employee’s work station: Stock the new employee’s work station with all needed supplies, such as paper, business cards (if applicable), voicemail and email accounts, and leave a staff list/phone directory on the new hire’s desk.
7. Thou shalt schedule one-on-one time: Provide weekly or bi-weekly meetings to touch base with the employee. Also complete a 30 or 60 day review prior to a scheduled annual review.
8. Thou shalt create a balance: Give a bit of relief to the classroom orientation approach, such as going out to lunch or having other employees present information segments.
9. Thou shalt clarify the company culture: Make an employee handbook available to the employee. Ensure you review company policies and procedures, such as attire and attendance policies. Include company values and mission statements.
10. Thou shalt think beyond the first few days: After 90 days request formal feedback on the new hire’s performance from his or her supervisor. Be sure to solicit feedback from the new employee, as well. Take this opportunity to address issues before they become difficult problems to solve or reasons for the employee to give up and resign.

Source: CareerBuilder