Now That You Have Them...

Great article from Harvard Business Review about measuring employee productivity. Once you've found ways to attract & retain top talent, they need to perform at a level that meets or exceeds an organization's needs. The circle is then complete.

Here are some ideas:

http://www.peoconsulting.com/FreeStuff/PeoplePower.pdf

Garbage In, Garbage Out - Or Quality In Quality Out?

Those of you with technology backgrounds know that this is an old axiom in the software industry - though I think it applies to attracting & retaining top talent for your organization, too.

This link to a recent USA Today article highlights the challenges that small-medium sized businesses face in doing just that.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/2006-06-21-small-hire-usat_x.htm

It's worth considering an HR outsourcing company that has expertise in this area, along with getting coaching on just how to create a top-notch benefits package that will help in the war for talent - regardless of company size.

Still Want to Be An Employer?

I'm "stat guy" today, and here are 2 more - and they're equally "concerning":

• 49% of companies polled were sued by employees in the last 12 months. 1
• 65% of employees surveyed will consider looking for a job in the next 3 months. 2

1 Jackson Lewis Workplace Survey, March 2006

2 Salary.com Employee Satisfaction & Retention Survey, January 2006

Still want to be the employer of record? How about partnering with a firm that has expertise in attracting & retaining top talent along with HR compliance. Why contribute to these statistics? Keep focused on your business, not on "administrivia". Isn't that a sound strategy?

The Risks & The Numbers - Scary!

I continue to find stats that show the potential exposure companies face, just by being employers who aren't HR compliant. Here are some of the latest:

$166 million Collected in back wages for over 241,000 employees by the Wage and Hour Division in 2005 1
75,000+Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) lawsuits filed by employees against their employers in 2005 2
$867 Human resources expenditures per employee in 2005 3
$271,600,000+Monetary benefits awarded in 2005 for lawsuits filed by the EEOC 4

1 US Department of Labor, www.dol.gov/esa/whd/statistics/200531.htm

2 EEOC, www.eeoc.gov/stats/charges.html

3 Bureau of National Affairs, HR Department Benchmarks & Analysis 2005-2006

4 EEOC, www.eeoc.gov/stats/all.html

In a nutshell - troubling numbers. Doesn't it make sense for your company's leadership to engage an HR consultant or outsourcing company that has expertise in HR compliance, so you're not part of one of these statistics in the future? You pay money even if you win, so why not get it right from the start.

This Is Real

The baseball fans among you probably know about this:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/baseball
/mlb/07/26/reynolds.report.ap/index.html

Harold Reynolds is a respected baseball analyst, who apparently made an error in judgment which led to a sexual harassment claim against him, which led to his dismissal from ESPN.

The penalties for sexual harassment are very real - and so are the consequences. We'll wait to see how this all plays out, but I think erring on the side of caution, when it come to something of an inherently sexual nature in the workplace, is usually a good strategy. Harold Reynolds probably would have kept his job, had he exercised that choice.

It's Happening Everywhere!

Interesting news from Hewlett-Packard, relative to their foray into Human Resources Outsourcing (HRO):

http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/24/43/43.html

HRO is happening with multi-national corporations, along with the 10 person Doctor's office in your neighborhood. Why? Because it makes sense to offload adminstrative, non-revenue generating tasks that don't make money to companies that can provide the expertise and economies of scale that make it an incredibly easy decision.

Here are my favorite lines from the article, for those of you who like the Reader's Digest version:

"We are outsourcing processes that do not play an important role between the company and the employee"

"It's a very smart way to go"

"A lot of the vendors now are looking at how they can make their HRO deals more like F&A deals and shave away the complexities"

"More often than not, it's the desire for a technology refresh that is driving most of these HRO deals"

Right on! It just doesn't make sense, in a hyper-competitive business climate to handle HR "adminstrivia" on your own. Plus, if you can get a technology refresh to your old (or non-existent) HR information system (HRIS) - so much the better (and more efficient).

Consider whether your company's profitability, productivity and time would be enhanced by outsourcing everything that's "non-core". In many cases it will. HRO is just the newest kid on the block.

Non-Compliance - Part Deux

A footnote to my post from yesterday:

"In a move that experts are predicting will trigger a spike in employee lawsuits, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 22, 2006, that adverse actions aren't just limited to tangible employment actions in order to be considered illegal retaliation; adverse actions only need to dissuade a reasonable person from making a claim of discrimination. (Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad Co. v. White)
The long-awaited Supreme Court decision substantially expanded what most employers must recognize as an adverse action — a required element of any retaliation lawsuit. With retaliation claims already more than doubling over the past decade...comprising more than 30% of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) caseload...and costing on average more than $130,000 each to resolve"

Wow! The hits just keep coming!

My question to you HR professional or company leader: Are you confident that you, your managers, and your supervisors clearly understand what is and what isn't considered retaliation under the new Supreme Court decision and know what actions the EEOC requires to avoid retaliation charges?

What you don't know CAN hurt you - to the tune of $130,000 or more!

Details of the case (if you're really bored...)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/05-259.html

Non-Compliance = $$$$$$

The number of dollar signs is significant. 5 dollar signs, just like the restaurant guides, means "Very Expensive." Not that I'm big on drama, but if you're in the HR field long enough, you start seeing some of the judgments and awards for non-compliance with local, state & federal laws and it really gives you pause. Here are three recent decisions:

• Cracker Barrel, EEOC Violations - $2M (http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-10-06b.html)
• Carmike Cinemas, Sexual Harassment - $765,000 (http://www.eeoc.gov/press/9-27-05.html)
• Pfizer, Inc., Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Violation - $333,305 (Lawyers Weekly cover story, June 5, 2006)

It's interesting to me that fast-growing companies think HR compliance is important - in fact, it's their #1 concern: http://www.hroeurope.com/News.asp?id=827

Isn't is worth it to get this very important part of HR right in your organization? Even if you win these cases, it costs money, and your time defending it. Be smart, understand the rules, over-communicate, and if there's any "gray area", consult your company's legal counsel just to make sure. Of course, if you're in a Human Resources outsourcing arrangement, then consult with their company's attorney (why do companies really want to do this in-house anyway?).

Don't throw money away because you don't understand the rules. When it comes to HR compliance, rules & regulatory issues, it is often a case of "you don't know what you don't know". And that can hurt financially - big time.