Am I Missing Something Here?

I was watching the morning news this morning and across the bottom of the screen was a running display of the latest news. One such headline stated that the TSA had patted down an 89 year old man in the airport the other day. When you see the rest of the story at the end of this post you will understand the rest of the post more clearly.

 When I was in HS nearly 50 years ago, we were required to take a wide assortment of classes and have involvement within our local community. We totally understood who the players were and what their roles were. On the same broadcast the state of Florid was reporting a dramatic cut in the passage rate on the written part of the state assessment exam. I then hear employers who are telling us that they can't find qualified employees in the US.

I suspect that in the name of fiscal responsibility we have systematically over the years cut the very programs which make us viable parts of the community. Students today no longer get taught civics ( a fact that drove the actor Richard Dreyfus mad), we have watered down the history that is taught in order to meet the demands of right wing activists who dislike the teaching of real history or science and not made up theories of where we came from.

Unless we turn around the curriculum of this country to widen the knowledge of the students that are following us, they will not be able to function in a vital role within this country.

Now the rest of the opening scenario: the 89 year old man who was subjected to the pat down by TSA - Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State of the US.

Was the TSA patting down everyone who went through the airport, or was the education of the TSA agent so lacking in background that he or she did not recognize who this was and therefore probably not a security risk. Considering i would believe that he still holds high security clearance from the government.

What are your thoughts? Are we giving our students the education they need to function in the global workplace?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Am I Missing Something Here?

I was watching the morning news this morning and across the bottom of the screen was a running display of the latest news. One such headline stated that the TSA had patted down an 89 year old man in the airport the other day. When you see the rest of the story at the end of this post you will understand the rest of the post more clearly.

 When I was in HS nearly 50 years ago, we were required to take a wide assortment of classes and have involvement within our local community. We totally understood who the players were and what their roles were. On the same broadcast the state of Florid was reporting a dramatic cut in the passage rate on the written part of the state assessment exam. I then hear employers who are telling us that they can't find qualified employees in the US.

I suspect that in the name of fiscal responsibility we have systematically over the years cut the very programs which make us viable parts of the community. Students today no longer get taught civics ( a fact that drove the actor Richard Dreyfus mad), we have watered down the history that is taught in order to meet the demands of right wing activists who dislike the teaching of real history or science and not made up theories of where we came from.

Unless we turn around the curriculum of this country to widen the knowledge of the students that are following us, they will not be able to function in a vital role within this country.

Now the rest of the opening scenario: the 89 year old man who was subjected to the pat down by TSA - Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State of the US.

Was the TSA patting down everyone who went through the airport, or was the education of the TSA agent so lacking in background that he or she did not recognize who this was and therefore probably not a security risk. Considering i would believe that he still holds high security clearance from the government.

What are your thoughts? Are we giving our students the education they need to function in the global workplace?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Truth, Justice and Your Organization?

I can just hear some of you now, but in watching TV and reading the news I was hit with several points which made me question the direction our organization's are headed in. We strive to speak the philosophy that we want our employees to have full transparency into our organization. We expect our employees to be engaged in the processes. The we flip the coin and see stories like the following:

1) Local TV station ran a story about customer service. The owner of the business tells the reporter that if a customer complains directly to the company, they get less attention then if they post the same complaint on social media. In the same breath, we as organizations tell us that it is paramount that we cut off the conversation by limiting employee access to social media during work hours.

2) I for the most part shy away from discussing politics but there were several reports of misguided acts by politicians which had direct impact on the society in which we live. But in each case the acts were essentially thrown under the carpet.

3) The reports surfaced this weekend about the actions of the trade office of JP Morgan Chase. The CEO said that the Dodd-Frank legislation  was too restrictive yet they did exactly what caused the 2008 downturn in the first place. It was primarily caught because of the financial reforms put in place because of these types of actions

As leaders of our organizations, the expectation is there that we will function in an ethical manner with our customers, our vendors and just as important or employees In this 21st century it is no longer possible for us to expect that our employees will do what we expect when we tell them one thing and then do just the opposite.

Our organizations rely on our clients to provide the mechanism to keep the organization running. When we tell them "Hey if you broadcast to the world your problems with us, we will give it more weight then if you just call or write about your problems what picture are you delivering?

 We need to remind ourselves that shortly our organizations will be run by a different generation and for the most part the lack of  transparency and ethical behavior will not be tolerated.

So tell me, are you abiding by truth and justice or is your organization operating behind a set of smokey mirrors? Are you telling your human capital and your customers one thing while doing the exact opposite under the nomenclature of getting things done faster, better and cheaper?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Truth, Justice and Your Organization?

I can just hear some of you now, but in watching TV and reading the news I was hit with several points which made me question the direction our organization's are headed in. We strive to speak the philosophy that we want our employees to have full transparency into our organization. We expect our employees to be engaged in the processes. The we flip the coin and see stories like the following:

1) Local TV station ran a story about customer service. The owner of the business tells the reporter that if a customer complains directly to the company, they get less attention then if they post the same complaint on social media. In the same breath, we as organizations tell us that it is paramount that we cut off the conversation by limiting employee access to social media during work hours.

2) I for the most part shy away from discussing politics but there were several reports of misguided acts by politicians which had direct impact on the society in which we live. But in each case the acts were essentially thrown under the carpet.

3) The reports surfaced this weekend about the actions of the trade office of JP Morgan Chase. The CEO said that the Dodd-Frank legislation  was too restrictive yet they did exactly what caused the 2008 downturn in the first place. It was primarily caught because of the financial reforms put in place because of these types of actions

As leaders of our organizations, the expectation is there that we will function in an ethical manner with our customers, our vendors and just as important or employees In this 21st century it is no longer possible for us to expect that our employees will do what we expect when we tell them one thing and then do just the opposite.

Our organizations rely on our clients to provide the mechanism to keep the organization running. When we tell them "Hey if you broadcast to the world your problems with us, we will give it more weight then if you just call or write about your problems what picture are you delivering?

 We need to remind ourselves that shortly our organizations will be run by a different generation and for the most part the lack of  transparency and ethical behavior will not be tolerated.

So tell me, are you abiding by truth and justice or is your organization operating behind a set of smokey mirrors? Are you telling your human capital and your customers one thing while doing the exact opposite under the nomenclature of getting things done faster, better and cheaper?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is your Gay Index?

The term Gay Index was coined by Richard Florida in Fast Company severl years ago, but it brings up an ongoing issue I hear in the marketplace. When we are writing policies and procedures regarding discrimination aand harrassment in the workplace we know that we have a group of protected classes that are singled out in thesse policies as having their rights protected in the workplace.

Yesterday the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission just made your job a little bit harder. In a case which pitted and employee against the Department of Justice, the EEOC rulled that transgender employees are a covered class under Title VII.

In a landmark ruling, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has announced that Title VII, the federal sex discrimination law, protects employees who are discriminated against because they are transgender. In its unprecedented decision, the EEOC concluded that “intentional discrimination against a transgender individual because that person is transgender is, by definition, discrimination ‘based on … sex’ and such discrimination … violates Title VII.”

Based on this ruling it would be in the best interests of your organization to review your policies to ensure that you have updated them for the new requirements.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

That's Just the Way We do things here

I was watching the local news herein Tampa Bay the other night and a story came on that made we stop to think about how we do things within the HR arena everyday.

There is a local man who was scheduled to fly to NJ to be with his daughter who was undergoing a medical procedure. The problem is that he has been fighting cancer for a number of years but he went to an airline and purchased a non-refundable ticket for the trip. Then during a conversation with his doctor, he was told he could not only not fly but he had only about two months to live. He went to the airline and explained the situation and offered full medical documentation. The airline's response was if you died we would give you a partial refund, barring that our policy is that the ticket you bought is non-refundable.That's our policy and we will not make any changes.

I am a strong advocate of our policies and procedures having a standard of work, a set number of steps required to complete the process. But I also realize that in between we have migrated to a world which thrive on flexibility. This leaves us with two options within our organizations. One is to be like the airline and state that this is our policy and we are sticking to it. Or we can introduce the policies and procedures as guidelines and allow your organizations and its managers to use some judgment as to whether the organizational stability is really harmed by inserting some common sense to how we deliver those policies and procedures.

Being lock step into this is the way we do it within this organization does not service the organization nor your human capital assets. Within every policy and procedure, there should be room for some creativity in how we utilize them to resolve issues in the workplace.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

That's Just the Way We do things here

I was watching the local news herein Tampa Bay the other night and a story came on that made we stop to think about how we do things within the HR arena everyday.

There is a local man who was scheduled to fly to NJ to be with his daughter who was undergoing a medical procedure. The problem is that he has been fighting cancer for a number of years but he went to an airline and purchased a non-refundable ticket for the trip. Then during a conversation with his doctor, he was told he could not only not fly but he had only about two months to live. He went to the airline and explained the situation and offered full medical documentation. The airline's response was if you died we would give you a partial refund, barring that our policy is that the ticket you bought is non-refundable.That's our policy and we will not make any changes.

I am a strong advocate of our policies and procedures having a standard of work, a set number of steps required to complete the process. But I also realize that in between we have migrated to a world which thrive on flexibility. This leaves us with two options within our organizations. One is to be like the airline and state that this is our policy and we are sticking to it. Or we can introduce the policies and procedures as guidelines and allow your organizations and its managers to use some judgment as to whether the organizational stability is really harmed by inserting some common sense to how we deliver those policies and procedures.

Being lock step into this is the way we do it within this organization does not service the organization nor your human capital assets. Within every policy and procedure, there should be room for some creativity in how we utilize them to resolve issues in the workplace.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

The Global Marketplace changed, but did your organization?

I recently posted a blog entry entitled "open letter to the CEO" and one of the readers took me to task for posting something with a misspelling because I used the term Stakeholder instead of Shareholder.

While we might be talking semantics here, I thin for every organization there is tremendous potential to change the focus from shareholder to stakeholder. It encompasses a greater audience for the success of the organization. But assuming we are talking just semantics only let's look at the definitions of the two terms.

According to Dictionary.com, a shareholder refers to one who holds or owns shares of a company. In essence this means that the individual or organization holds a financial interest in the organization and looks at all decisions from a return on investment perspective. Every decision that is made is from the view of the effect on the bottom line.

According to Dictionary.com again, the stakeholder is a person or group that has an investment, share, or interest in the organization.

So here is where I part ways with the comment writer. The global marketplace has changed. Our success as organizations is now dependent on a rapidly growing resource base for our success. The correct term in the new arena is that of stakeholder. The investment does not have to be in the form of shares of stock. Consider these stakeholders and see how they differ from shareholders:

• Employees
• Vendors
• Customers
• Community
• Your industry
• Your competitors
• Potential talent resources
• Suppliers

Stakeholders look at our organizations to determine what is necessary for the organization to make them more competitive in the marketplace. We do this through our policies, our products, our customer service levels, the way we treat employees and how we treat the community in which we function everyday. The stakeholder has a vested interest in the success of our organization. Unlike a shareholder, if we are not meeting their needs they can easily pick up and abandon our efforts for someone who will meet those needs. This global marketplace we are now in demands transparency with all parties to the operations from the floor person to the executive suite to the customer and vendor. It demands a new focus on what makes all better not just one segment of the equation.

So next time you are reviewing the operation of your enterprise, consider broadening your focus to encompass the entire market rather then just those who have put their money where their mouth is in the form of a monetary investment within your organization. Consider that those individuals who help you make, sell and service your product or service are just as important as the shareholders.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Daniel Bloom SPHR,SSBB,SCRP
Performance Institute and DBAI partner to bring Driving HR 500 seminar to Washington, D.C.

Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc. has introduced a proprietary course entitled Driving the Human Resource 500: Achieving HR Excellence through Six Sigma. It is designed to show HR professionals how to utilize continuous process improvement to enhance their human resource processes and explain HR in terms of organizational strategy. The class lasts for two days and has been pre-approved for 13 strategic continuing education by the Human Resource Certification Institute. In addition all successful participants will receive certification as a Six Sigma Yellow Belt.

Performance Institute classes are scheduled for:

June 12-13, 2012 and October 24-25,2012 For more information visit http://ping.fm/Mpinc

We are also bringing the class to the St Petersburg College Corporate Training Center on April 26-27, 2012 in Clearwater FL
More information visit http://ping.fm/3Pvtq

Performance Institute and DBAI partner to bring Driving HR 500 seminar to Washington, D.C.

Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc. has introduced a proprietary course entitled Driving the Human Resource 500: Achieving HR Excellence through Six Sigma.  It is designed to show HR professionals how to utilize continuous process improvement to enhance their human resource processes and explain HR in terms of organizational strategy. The class lasts for two days and has been pre-approved for 13  strategic continuing education by the Human Resource Certification Institute. In addition all successful participants will receive certification as a Six Sigma Yellow Belt.

Performance Institute classes are scheduled for:

June 12-13, 2012 and October 24-25,2012  For more information visit  http://www.performanceinstitute.org/HRSixSigma

We are also bringing the class to the St Petersburg College Corporate Training Center on April 26-27, 2012 in Clearwater FL
                More information visit http://spcollege.augusoft.net/index.cfm?method=ClassInfo.ClassInformation&...

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Beware of the Social Media trogan horse

Growing up I heard often that you should be careful what you ask for. Apparently the organizations that thought that asking for social media passwords was a legitamate way to gain information about prospective new employees and whether they fit into the corporate culture are getting more then they bargained for.

Two U.S. Senators have asked the Department of Justice and the EEOC to investigate whether the practice violates both the Stored Computer Records Act and the Computer and Fraud Act. See http://www.dcemploymentlawupdate.com/2012/03/articles/publications/senators-a... for more information.

With the breadth of resumes you are receiving in today's market I fully recognize the need to find the best few candidates for your positions, but taking steps to open the pandora's box is not the way to go about it. Stop for a moment and consider how yu wuld feel if the shoes were on the other foot and you were the one being asked for the release of private information.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Are You Still Viewing the World from a MYopic Point of View?

I was in a discussion recently with an individual who I believe is destined to become a real leader within what ever organization they finally connect with. But they expressed the view that HR only meant hiring and staffing.

This point hit home the point Dave Ulrich made in his book, HR Transformation. As HR professionals we can continue to take this myopic view of the world and profess that this is what we do. In our two day workshop where we teach fellow HR professionals how to implement the six sigma methodology the improving the HR space, we suggest that as HR professionals,following this view is tantamount to accepting mediocrity and the eventual dissolution of what we do as a career.

It is time that we as the knowledge base of the assets that our human capital bring to the organization, we need to be involved in every step of the development of the organizational strategic planning. We are the ones that have a clear picture of the resources the organization needs to grow into this crazy global workplace we are so valiantly trying to fit into.

We have definitely not gotten the message across when both managers and the general public have the deep seated view that HR is to be avoided at all costs.The unfortunate part is that we have brought it on ourselves. For some reason we can't seem to get on the right playing page. We tend to be the fireman of the organization rather than the champions for reaching the most efficient and effective organizations possible. We make the outside world wonder where we are coming from. we push the organization to be more in tune with the technological world, then we have candidates apply on line, call them in for an interview and ask them to fill out a hard copy of what they filled out on line.

We have a choice and it clearly is an important one for the organization. Is HR part of the total organization and delivering real value to the operation? or Is HR this silo unto its own, that is the bane to everyone's existence out of touch with the world around them?

In today's global workplace we are more than hiring and staffing. We are the conduit for a wide assortment of data and metrics regarding the nature of our workforce both internal and external. We have the unique position of having our fingers on the pulse of the talent marketplace and their needs. Each of these factors will in the long run determine how successful our organizations are.

Which view do you have- a myopic one or a global one?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

OMG, Did we really create ths monster?

Sit down with any group of senior managers and ask them what is their primary complaint with the youngest workers in their organization. I am willing to bet ( and I am not a betting person, I am lucky if I even play the state Lottery) that the primary complaint will be something of the nature that they do not understand that there are dues to be paid. But take a moment and think back in time and realize you created this monster.

I can go back to the late 60s and find the forerunner of the monster. Think about this-- it is 1965 and  it was my senior year in High School. I never mention it on a resume but I lettered in track. I never ran a single race. I was the team manager. It was the policy of the school that everyone who was part of the team received the letter. Jump forward to when my kids were getting started in sports on the community soccer team. The policy was that everyone who played got a trophy at the end of the season.

So here is the nature of the monster. Based on the beliefs of some educators and late baby boomer and Generation X parents it was wrong to not place everybody on an even keel. All for one, and one for all attitude became prevalent in our lifestyles. What organizations are now seeing is the offspring of this group enter the workplace. Their first demand is that we are entitled to get that promotion or raise just like every other employee. Do not tell me about paying the corporate dues. I have come to work, done what was asked of me, and now I want that trophy. I want that raise. I want that promotion. Not years from now but in real time in the current time span.  We created the monster and now we have to deal with them.

The solution to the dilemma is that we need to accept the reason why the new generation of workers have reasonable demands based on what they have been taught by their parents. We cant change that. However we can work on ways to utilize that energy for greater corporate stability and good. Find ways within your corporate culture to modify  the corporate career paths to encompass their feelings of needing to move on up now rather then after the dues are paid. Remember these employees never saw a piece of new technology that they did not like. They quickly pick up how to best utilize the resources. They are the ones that are going to be the leaders/managers/teachers of the organization sooner rather then later. Utilize those skills to enhance your internal processes for the betterment of the entire organization.

We thought we were being helpful. We thought that we were being supportive. We were striving to make our children better community members by showing them the benefits of total team work. Now we have to live with the outcomes and understand on our watch the world has changed. It is up to us and them to decide whether it is for the better world we were seeking.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Open letter to the Chief Executive Officer

I need some help this morning. I need to understand what is in your head in today's economic climate. As I understand it your role as CEO is to protect the interests of the stakeholders and the bottom line of the organization. As a result you tell the market that you can not assist the unemployed because you need to protect the bottom line. I totally understand that.

What I do not understand is how you protect the interests of the stakeholders when by your very actions you and your peers have racked up a total of 64 billion dollars in fines from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission because you or someone in your organization has felt that under your direction it is totally acceptable to make some very dumb decisions.

How do you protect the stakeholder interests and your bottom line by charging against the organization bottom line a $3,000,000 fine for discrimination against your employees in your hiring process? This is on top of another fine of equal value for misclassifying your employees as 1099's instead of real employees. These are not isolated cases. Since August of 2011 I have received notices of 225 fines levied against your organizations for various forms of blatantly illegal actions on your part.

Where is your responsibility to protect your brand when as head of the organization you believe that discrimination is the way to protect the organization? Where is the responsibility to society to be a good citizen when you believe that discrimination is the correct path? Further what kind of message are you sending to your kids when they learn that their parent obviously believes that not every person in their organization is entitled to equal treatment under the law.

I have never been in your shoes but I am the offspring of a former peer of yours. So let me provide my take on the situation. You have the responsibility first to your organization to be watchful of the bottom line. You also have the responsibility to the greater community to be a good citizen. Take the time to really look at your organization and find out what they are really doing. Take the time to let the managers now that they also have these responsibilities even if it is just to protect the brand. Their purpose is to find the right candidate for the right position in the right place at the right time. Providing the model to the available human capital that your corporate ethics allow you to make some very dumb moves is not protecting the stakeholders or the return on investment. How many new employees who may very well assist you in being innovative in the marketplace could you hire for 64 billion dollars? I am not a math wiz but at an average salary of $50,000 plus benefits you could make a real dent in the unemployment numbers by directing fines for doing things that you know are wrong to hiring those wh can benefit your organization.

So before your management team members make another really dumb decision, ask them to stop and think about the interests of those they are supposed to be protecting before taking steps to protect the organization for the wrong reason.Show the world that in this tough economic tomes we are in that you understand your role as a world citizen. Show the world that you are in tune with the marketplace and that there is a need for providing a safe, equitable and professional environment within your organization.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is Your Focus?

Almost everyday you can pick up a copy of the newspaper or turn on the TV News and hear about an organization which has announced that it is cutting jobs to lower costs. In this current economic climate I can totally understand wanting to reduce costs. However I ask you what is your goal - to sustain the organization for the long haul or to satisfy the stockholders for a quick response to economic "dire" warnings?

Lets consider the two perspectives in place in many organizations. The first one is based in the concept that our human capital are nothing more than an expense item. When the organization is blowing results out of the water, we tend to hire based on the demand. s a result when we find that the economic conditions are headed in the opposite direction the first reaction by many management  members is to see how you can cut costs. This includes cutting staff. In order to meet the demands of the board of directors and other stakeholders the strategic direction is cut costs at any cost to the organization Never mind that as you cut overhead we forget that the workload does not get less. In its place you have added to the stress level within the organization. Typically we find eventually that work does not get don eon time alienating the organizational customers. While we may have helped meet the demands of the stakeholders we have not helped the future of the organization

Consider the other side of the coin if you will. In this scenario we find a total different view of management. They recognize that our greatest asset is the innovation and thought processes of our human capital. Management fully understands while the short term solution seems to be the logical route, in actuality we have failed to recognize what the knowledge drain will mean to the corporation.

Consider this: There was a company about five years ago who decided that the sure fire method to cut costs was to offer early buy out to anyone with 20+ years with the company. Almost all the employees took the corporation up on their offer and they were out of business in 6 months.

So lets turn this into a strategic discussion - You are in an industry where sales are dropping due to the economy and its trials and tribulations. So what do you do? The fir thing I would tell you that unless you are planning to close your doors, N0 ONE SHOULD BE LAID OFF. Let me repeat that, no one should be laid off. There are other ways to reduce costs and keep the organization flowing. Review the organizational widgets ( We all have them whether we make something or not) and locate the ways we are spending money out the door due to wasteful activities. If you are thinking, we don't do that here, go ask your clients how well you are meeting their needs. Jay Arthur in his book Free, Perfect and Now suggests that for every $100 of corporate spend, you are wasting between 25-40 in wastes. On a continuous basis review how you are doing business to cut these wastes from the operation.

Talk with your human capital assets and let them know a true picture of how the organization is functioning. Talk with them about ways to everyone pitch in to save the organization for the long term. Talk to them about TEMPORARY job sharing. Talk to them about shortening the work week.Each and everyone of these strategies is designed to save the organization monies and not hurt the future of the company. Understand that if you have a problem meeting customer needs, cutting staff is not going to meet the customer needs. If you are not meeting the customer needs there is something. wrong with the internal processes.

So here is your dilemma -  we recognize the value of the intellectual properties of our leased, non-owned corporate assets, but we are getting extreme pressure from stakeholders to maximize their return on investment.You need to demonstrate to the stakeholders that the maximum return on investment is not on financial returns for next week or next month. Maximum return on investment is based on what the organization looks like five or ten years down the road. We do not maximize the ROI on the back of our keys to innovation.

Take the time to review how you picture the organization in the future. Make the necessary changes to enhance the level of employee engagement within the organization. Think ahead as to what your product or service is going to look like in response to the voice of the customer and start preparing your human capital to be ready for when the time comes. Promise them that unless you are planning to go bankrupt or close your doors, we are going to plan on maintaining all staffing levels. We are going to the very best we can to establish our rightful place within the business community. We are not going to promise the rose garden if we can't deliver it.

So here is your path in front of you - one fork is to follow the path to short term responses to the demands of the organization. The other fork is to look at how to sustain the brand and the reputation for the long haul. One fork looks at the here and now the other looks at the future. A future which can be bright, vibrant and fully supportive of the path the organization has chosen. You make the decision.

By the way let me know are you stuck in the short term quagmire or are you following the yellow brick road to the future, where your bottom line increases because of the steps taken by the entire organization- rank and file and management together in consultation to improve the end result of the organizational voice of the customer requests.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is Your Focus?

Almost everyday you can pick up a copy of the newspaper or turn on the TV News and hear about an organization which has announced that it is cutting jobs to lower costs. In this current economic climate I can totally understand wanting to reduce costs. However I ask you what is your goal - to sustain the organization for the long haul or to satisfy the stockholders for a quick response to economic "dire" warnings?

Lets consider the two perspectives in place in many organizations. The first one is based in the concept that our human capital are nothing more than an expense item. When the organization is blowing results out of the water, we tend to hire based on the demand. s a result when we find that the economic conditions are headed in the opposite direction the first reaction by many management  members is to see how you can cut costs. This includes cutting staff. In order to meet the demands of the board of directors and other stakeholders the strategic direction is cut costs at any cost to the organization Never mind that as you cut overhead we forget that the workload does not get less. In its place you have added to the stress level within the organization. Typically we find eventually that work does not get don eon time alienating the organizational customers. While we may have helped meet the demands of the stakeholders we have not helped the future of the organization

Consider the other side of the coin if you will. In this scenario we find a total different view of management. They recognize that our greatest asset is the innovation and thought processes of our human capital. Management fully understands while the short term solution seems to be the logical route, in actuality we have failed to recognize what the knowledge drain will mean to the corporation.

Consider this: There was a company about five years ago who decided that the sure fire method to cut costs was to offer early buy out to anyone with 20+ years with the company. Almost all the employees took the corporation up on their offer and they were out of business in 6 months.

So lets turn this into a strategic discussion - You are in an industry where sales are dropping due to the economy and its trials and tribulations. So what do you do? The fir thing I would tell you that unless you are planning to close your doors, N0 ONE SHOULD BE LAID OFF. Let me repeat that, no one should be laid off. There are other ways to reduce costs and keep the organization flowing. Review the organizational widgets ( We all have them whether we make something or not) and locate the ways we are spending money out the door due to wasteful activities. If you are thinking, we don't do that here, go ask your clients how well you are meeting their needs. Jay Arthur in his book Free, Perfect and Now suggests that for every $100 of corporate spend, you are wasting between 25-40 in wastes. On a continuous basis review how you are doing business to cut these wastes from the operation.

Talk with your human capital assets and let them know a true picture of how the organization is functioning. Talk with them about ways to everyone pitch in to save the organization for the long term. Talk to them about TEMPORARY job sharing. Talk to them about shortening the work week.Each and everyone of these strategies is designed to save the organization monies and not hurt the future of the company. Understand that if you have a problem meeting customer needs, cutting staff is not going to meet the customer needs. If you are not meeting the customer needs there is something. wrong with the internal processes.

So here is your dilemma -  we recognize the value of the intellectual properties of our leased, non-owned corporate assets, but we are getting extreme pressure from stakeholders to maximize their return on investment.You need to demonstrate to the stakeholders that the maximum return on investment is not on financial returns for next week or next month. Maximum return on investment is based on what the organization looks like five or ten years down the road. We do not maximize the ROI on the back of our keys to innovation.

Take the time to review how you picture the organization in the future. Make the necessary changes to enhance the level of employee engagement within the organization. Think ahead as to what your product or service is going to look like in response to the voice of the customer and start preparing your human capital to be ready for when the time comes. Promise them that unless you are planning to go bankrupt or close your doors, we are going to plan on maintaining all staffing levels. We are going to the very best we can to establish our rightful place within the business community. We are not going to promise the rose garden if we can't deliver it.

So here is your path in front of you - one fork is to follow the path to short term responses to the demands of the organization. The other fork is to look at how to sustain the brand and the reputation for the long haul. One fork looks at the here and now the other looks at the future. A future which can be bright, vibrant and fully supportive of the path the organization has chosen. You make the decision.

By the way let me know are you stuck in the short term quagmire or are you following the yellow brick road to the future, where your bottom line increases because of the steps taken by the entire organization- rank and file and management together in consultation to improve the end result of the organizational voice of the customer requests.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is wrong with this picture?

CNN Money is reporting that US Manufacturing organizations are having so much trouble finding the essentiaal talent that they are going abroad to find the right person for the right job at the right time. At the same time local newspapers ran a syndicated column reporting that US employers see nothing wrong with refusing to interview the long term employed.

We reportedly have an unemployment issue in this country, organizations can't find qualified talent for their openings and yet we forget some of the tenants of why businesses were started in the first place. I am in the middle of reading the book "The Chocolate Wars" which discusses the creation and mission statement of the Cadbury Choloate Company. They operated under the premise of the Quaker Business Model which saw the mission of business entities to care for their employees. we do not do that anymore.

The Quaker Business Model was grounded in the following principles:

•  The real goal for an employer is to seek for others the best life of which they are capable
• Worked together towards a common goal which were in the community's best interest.e
• Pioneers in employee welfare and labor relations
• Employees encouraged to get further education at company expense
• Established medical and dental departments and pension funds

The result was that they had engaged, productive employees. We were not seeing this employee undercurrent of distrust and stress that we see in many of today's organizations. I hear many of my colelagues express that we need to change Washington to a more business orientation. But what about business once again recognizing that your employees are the life blood of your organization. They are the ones that pursue your brand to your customers. Take some time and think about what an orgnization of decicated engaged employees could mean to your operations?

 

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Listen to the voice, hear the disconnect

Almost everyday I open my email and see one report or another which reports that employers are complaining that in certain fields they are having problems sourcing, locating and hiring the right talent. The I turn around and see articles about where, like in Florida at the present time, where they are talking about cutting funding for the colleges and universities. Their first reaction is that they are going to have to in turn cut the research dollars.

I totally understand the impact that university based R&D has on society as a whole. However I would contend that these projects do nothing for resolving the talent shortage problems. They are great for the university image but the average student is not helped by them in a real way- finding a job and getting a paycheck.

We need to stop and listen to the voice of the customer--the business world--as to what they need to succeed in today's global workplace. We need to change the university system to be based on not what you can innovate or write but rather we need to move the concentration of the institutions to professors who are there because they want to teach. They are there because they want to be resources for the next generation of workers.

This concept was tried once before and the institution was crucified by the establishment universities and the politically based regional accreditation organizations. We are in a world of change but these organizations are stuck in a back to the future mode which says very little about their meeting the needs of the community. A new method or better way is suggested and like everyone else they hate change or the idea of it.This "new" concept was referred to as the Parsons Plan and it attracted some of the best educators in the country who saw the benefits of teaching not researching or writing.

The Parsons Plan recognized the unique contributions these individuals brought to the table and based their compensation on what they taught and how their students demonstrated the mastery needed to enter the workforce. It did not base the tenure of the professor on how much they wrote or how much time they spent in the lab.

I am all for standards of quality to ensure that we are turning out new talent who will become tomorrows leaders.Just make the standards stand for something that benefits all rather then a select few.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

EEOC weighs in on ADA and educational requirements

Do you have educational requirements for your positions? According to the EEOC you might be going down a slippery slope. In an informal advice memo they stated  the following:

If an employer adopts a high school diploma requirement for a job, and that requirement “screens out” an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the ADA’s definition of “disability,” the employer may not apply the standard unless it can demonstrate that the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity. The employer will not be able to make this showing, for example, if the functions in question can easily be performed by someone who does not have a diploma.

Even if the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity, the employer may still have to determine whether a particular applicant whose learning disability prevents him from meeting it can perform the essential functions of the job, with or without a reasonable accommodation.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Do you know what your Social Media ROI is?

The most recent article of CFO magazine contains an excellent article regarding how to calculate the ROI of your social media efforts. The article can be accessed at http://www3.cfo.com/article/2012/2/technology_social-media-roi

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

I Look but Do I see?

For about the last 3 weeks there has been a continuing post about an occurrence in the nation's capital from 2007 as part of an experiment of the Washington Post. You can see the link at . So here is my question how many of us go through the same kind of situation at work. How many of us as managers in or out of the HR staffing area tend to ignore what is going on around us?

Everyday we witness people within our organizations who are doing outstanding things with the tools we provide them. They are producing for our organizations above and beyond what we expect. Our usual response is a cavalier attitude which basically says that's great but you really do not need to spend the extra time. Do not spend the extra time to make a customer feel like the organization cares. Do not spend the extra time to assist your fellow employee because it might send the wrong message--What ever the wrong message is.

If we expect our human capital to be engaged in our organization we need to take the time to recognize the worth of our employee base and respect those who go out of their way to do more than just getting by.

For those of you who have not seen the story behind the above thoughts, see below:

"In Washington DC , at a Metro Station, on a cold January morning in 2007, a man with a violin played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, approximately 2000 people went through the station, most of them on their way to work. After about four minutes, a middle-aged man noticed that there was a musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds, and then he hurried on to meet his schedule. About four minutes later, the violinist received his first dollar. A woman threw money in the hat and, without stopping, continued to walk. At six minutes, a young man leaned against the wall to listen to him, then looked at his watch and started to walk again. At ten minutes, a three-year old boy stopped, but his mother tugged him along hurriedly. The kid stopped to look at the violinist again, but the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk, turning his head the whole time. This action was repeated by several other children, but every parent - without exception - forced their children to move on quickly. At forty-five minutes: The musician played continuously. Only six people stopped and listened for a short while. About twenty gave money but continued to walk at their normal pace. The man collected a total of $32. After one hour: He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed and no one applauded. There was no recognition at all. No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before, Joshua Bell sold-out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100 each to sit and listen to him play the same music. This is a true story. Joshua Bell, playing incognito in the D.C. Metro Station, was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people’s priorities. This experiment raised several questions: In a common-place environment, at an inappropriate hour, do we perceive beauty? If so, do we stop to appreciate it? Do we recognize talent in an unexpected context? One possible conclusion reached from this experiment could be this: If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world, playing some of the finest music ever written, with one of the most beautiful instruments ever made… How many other things are we missing as we rush through life?"

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Friday HR in the News

Issue #1: The EBINC.com website has reported that there are new guidelines for drug testing in the workplace. EBI reports that the changes are:

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) recently announced that the agency has accepted the recommendations of the Drug Testing Advisory Board (DTAB) to revise the DHHS Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs in the following two areas: 

1. Expand the drug testing panel to include additional Schedule II prescription medications (e.g. hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, and oxymorphone)  prescription painkiller opioid drugs, and;
2. Include oral fluid as an alternative specimen for Federal Drug Free Workplace Programs (DFWP) testing. 

This is certainly great news to help support workplace drug testing programs as it provides more tools for employers to detect drugs of abuse. The Department of Transportation (DOT) will now be tasked with making a rulemaking change to finalize this rollout.  Understand that there will be continued deliberation, debate and also comment before these changes are put into place.  It could take several months before this will actually affect federal drug testing programs.

Issue #2 : Wolters Kleurer reports that The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued a final rule that extends its existing recordkeeping requirements under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the ADA to entities that are covered by Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), according to a notice scheduled for publication in the Federal Register on February 3, 2012.

Title II of GINA protects job applicants, current and former employees, labor union members, and apprentices and trainees from discrimination based on their genetic information. Title II of GINA, like VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, covers employers with 15 or more employees, employment agencies, labor unions, and joint labor-management training programs, as well as federal sector employers.

GINA was signed into law on May 21, 2008; Title II became effective on November 21, 2009. The commission has issued interpretive regulations under GINA (75 FR 68912), as well as a final rule implementing changes to its administrative and procedural regulations (74 FR 63981).

Issue #3: Do you have operations in the state of Indiana? The Governor has just signed new legislation which makes the state the first state in the midwest and the first in a decade to proclaim the state of Indiana is now a right to work state.

:

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Mirror, MIrror Who Am I?

I received in my daily barrage of emails one that perked my interest. I apologize upfront because it got deleted by accident and I could not find it again.

The email was from a HR related blog and it began with a scenario in which the employees of a said organization received and email at their desk computers. In essence the message stated that management was informing the employee body that they no longer had to worry about their fellow employee who was holding up the organization because they were no longer with the company. It further announced that there would be a memorial for this person at 3pm in the company cafeteria. The scenario said that when the employees showed up for the memorial there was an open casket waiting for them. As the employees went up to the casket to see who had passed away, they found themselves looking in a mirror.

So here is my question to you. If you received the identical message and you saw yourself in the mirror what is your reaction as to whether you are holding up the organization's objectives. Are you so stuck in your silo that you are not able too see how you fit into the bigger picture? Are you so set in the philosophy that we do not need to change, things are fine just the way they are?

Our global marketplace is changing each and every day and it is incumbent on each of us to play a vital role in that change. Times require new approaches and new methods of problem solving. As HR professionals we need to be at the forefront of the change process not part of the problem.

So the next time you ask the mirror who am I, be prepared to provide the answer that will expand bot the organization and your futures by changing with the times. Find the path to work effectively and efficiently with cross functions within your organization. Be prepared to recognize the value of others view of the mirror as far as HR is concerned. Work around the problems and make the workplace a better place to be.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Reminder

OSHA Injru and Death Summary Report is due February 1, 2012

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

A New Generation is Coming, Are You Ready?

We have all seen the vast number of articles regarding the interactions between the different generations in the workplace. We all have our personal views regarding the roles of the Baby Boomers, Gen X , Gen Y or the traditionalists. But we are talking about an entirely different generational mix then we are used to hearing about.

For the past 15 years, I have religiously read one business magazine cover to cover each and every month. When you book marked it on your PC or Mac it cam up as the Handbook for the Revolution. The February issues discussed a new generation called Generation Flux.

Based in Chaos Theory it suggests that you as HR professionals need to change your perspectives. The idea of creating  precise long term business model or expecting that your human capital assets are going to remain part of your organization is dwindling. So what does this mean for our organizations?

The total organization, including HR, must learn to work in small segments. The article contains references from individuals who are part of this new generation which represent all ages. They look at the business world from the view of what is going to happen in the next several hours not fie or ten years down the road. This means that HR needs to embrace change and realize that our future as an organization is directly attributable to how well we adapt the organization to this state of flux. Consider these options for your organization:

1. Employees with a constant pressure to learn new things
2. Adaptation to changing environments that can happen in hours not years
3. Short-term careers
4. No guarantee that talent will stay in your industry
5. Human Capital resumes are a collection of roads that have no clear path of direction. Revising the resume opens new paths.

What this means is that nostalgia is a thing of the past. The future means we have to be ready at the drop of a dime to change our focus. We need to shift our focus towards hiring as the moment requires and understand when the need drops, the talent is going to move. It will play havoc on our hiring plans. It will have an adverse effort on succession planning. We can not rely on our HIPE employees being there when the C-Suite retires.  We can not rely on the department staffing needs to be placed on a plateau where we know who is going to fill the needs of the future.

The generation flux is going to be the indicator of the strength of our organization short term because that is way we need to look. Command and control and management expecting to have a strong presence in the wave of the future is winding fast.

In our presentations on Six Sigma and HR, we focus on an analogy of the fork in the road as the determining factor n the health of the HR function.  With the introduction of the generation flux, this even more true then before. We have a choice of staying the path of " hey this is the way we have always done it, and it works," or taking the path of moving with the flow which will cause us to review where we are, where we are going and how we are going to get there--hourly. It means we need to be able to assist the human capital assets to better prepared for the new world. Forget this attitude that we are not going to train them because they will just leave.They are going to leave anyway. Help them solidify the next skill set that goes in their backpack. These skills may be helpful in the next person you hire.

Stop, take a moment to smell the roses and prepare for the turbulent ride as we enter the world of Generation Flux. I highly recommend that you click on the link and read about what Generation Flux could mean to your organization. Contribute to the discussion. Get involved in laying out the future of your organizations.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is your Brand telling the world?

Let me set the playing field, this is NOT about marketing of an organization. This is about the message you as an organization send to two different stakeholders for your organization. The first is your customer base and the second are your current and potential employees.

Consider this scenario. I recently had to send some critical legal documents from my home in Florida to an attorney in NY. I decided the "safest" way was to send them next day early delivery by one of the largest service providers. The letter went from Florida to Philadelphia and then by some fluke it ended up in London. Before they could return it to the US it went to Germany.

When I called customer service I was told they were sorry about the delay but mistakes happen. I will give them that. But when asked how this could happen no one from executive offices to the customer service representative could explain the results.

So here is my question to you. What does your brand say, when the organization makes a mistake? Is your response that mistakes happen or do you work to try and a) find the reason for the mistake or b) make changes in your processes so that it does not happen again?

Your brand response to these matters of nature have a vital impact on your brand as an organization.Today's human capital assets seek organizations that care for their stakeholders. I am not suggesting that you need to be in love with them. What we are suggesting is that your organization as part of your culture need to strive to show the world that you at least care about their role in the success of your business.

Jim Collins in Good to Great suggests that the way for your organization to thrive is to have the right people on the bus, the wrong people off the bus and the right people in the right seats. If your management does not see the value in your employees and stakeholders then you do not have the right person on the bus. Management is the face of the brand you and if they are sending a message that these investors inn your organization are just a drag your brand is going to tell the world just that message.

Put yourselves for a minute in the role of the employee or stakeholder and you were confronted with a brand which tells you that we want your business but it has to be on our terms and if you don't like it go elsewhere. Would your tendency be to stay with that organization or find one that cared about your needs and issues?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

How Do You View the World?

To begin with on this first day of a brand new yea, may I wish you and yours a great new year.

I was reading the local newspaper this morning and a column by Bill Maxwell caught my attention. The column was entitled "White doubt reserved for black professional and it dealt with an effort of the local school district to enhance the number of black teachers that are hired.One of the members of the school board who is white is quoted as saying after the effort was announced who said the effort should be to hire quality over numbers.  The reason why this caught my eye was it gave me a moment to consider this from a broader perspective.

No one will deny that we have a large unemployment issue in this country. But how large would the problem be if we removed our preconceived notions from the staffing process. Over the past several years I have seen in the social media realm various posts which suggest that we are rejecting applicants because of these notions. Consider these examples:

• One recruiter posted that if she knew a candidate had grey hair she would automatically reject them from the candidate pool.
• Individuals who call themselves professional recruiters who really believe that those with disabilities do not belong in the workplace and should be relegated to a home or family residence.
• Disregard your political views for a moment and be true to yourselves and ask how many of you thought the President was not able to do the job because he was African-American? Be honest.
• How many of you believe that just because a fellow professional does not come from the same background as you they automatically are inferior in their abilities to perform the responsibilities of the position?

Maxwell in concluding his article asked what it will take for so many whites to stop automatically questioning the qualifications of black professionals who are not entertainers or jocks. I would carry this further and ask what will it take for corporate America to recognize the worth of EVERY employee regardless of their origin. In his book on the Toyota Culture, Liker states that the hiring managers at Toyota look at the skills the person has, even if they are not from the same industry. They discuss people who were managers in the grocery store industry who moved to the production floor as a lead person because of her skills. We all need to take the same attitude going into this new year. Many corporations are reporting that they are having a hard time finding the right talent for their operations. Could this view be hindering the hiring effort?

Thin about it for a moment seriously. Lets talk about how to change the hiring perspective to remove these illogical notions. We are not suggesting that you should hire anyone off the street That is equally illogical. We are suggesting that looking at the candidate pool with the eye that we will eliminate someone because they are not mirror images of the hiring manager is equally wrong.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is your legacy?

On December 12 my father passed away at the age of 92 after a career that took him to the level of  Vice Chairman of the Board of a Fortune 500 corporation. In thinking back over the time we had together I was presented with a picture with two sides to it. If you listen to his friends and neighbors they talked about how involved he as in the community and the business world. I can't dispute that in any fashion. Over my life he had been involved in local politics including serving on the town commission. He was greatly involved ,along with my mother, in the UN Association.In his business environment he traveled over to Europe on many occasions.

If I flip the coin ,if you were, to the father side I get an entirely different picture. I remember very few events in school that he attended because work always came first. He overly pushed us to achieve based on his educational record. So why write this piece?

I am not looking for sympathy. Rather I am suggesting that there may be a large number of parents out there who fall into the same track. whether it is by choice or the culture of the organization they worked for, families were left for second place. The result is are we  leaving a legacy as a great business person or a great parent?  Or even more important have we found a way to meld the two. Is the legacy we leave behind that we have helped the world be a better place through demonstrations of compassion for all aspects of their lives.

The impetus to achieve this goal is as much the responsibility of the organization and HR as it is on the individual. We seek to get our talent engaged within our organizations,but we can't accomplish that without a balance between work and outside life. we do not prepare our children for a future in the workplace when the model they have is that the primary expectations is work. Work at the expense of the rest of our lives.

So take a moment, as I have over the past several weeks and consider what legacy you are leaving behind. Think of ways how you can be of benefit to the organization and to your families at the same time. Think of ways to present the kind of model that considers the needs of the organization in balance with the needs of your offspring. The world will be a better place if you do.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Driving the HR 500: Achieving HR Excellence through Six Sigma 2012 Dates

Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc. will be presenting its look at six sigma for the HR space at the following locations at this time during 2012 with more dates coming:

February 7-8  Pensacola State College Pensacola, FL

February 22-23    Santa Fe College Gainesville, FL

March 22-23      Human Resource Association of Cental Ohio    Columbus, OH

                    This class is half full at this time

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Help possibly on the way

Associated Press reported this afternoon

By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN | The Associated Press
Published: December 15, 2011
Updated: December 15, 2011 - 4:41 PM

» 10 Comments | Post a Comment

NEW ORLEANS --

A Chinese drywall manufacturer has agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to resolve court claims by thousands of Gulf Coast property owners who say the product corroded pipes and wires and otherwise wrecked their homes, the largest settlement of its kind so far.

The deal announced Thursday by U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon calls for Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin Co. to create an uncapped fund to pay for repairing roughly 4,500 properties, mostly in Florida and Louisiana, but also Alabama and Mississippi. A separate fund capped at $30 million will pay for other types of losses, including those by people who blame drywall for health problems.

Russ Herman, a lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said the settlement is worth between $800 million and $1 billion, although an attorney for the Chinese company disputed that estimate.

"We're very thankful for our clients," Herman said. "What we've given them, hopefully, is a happy holiday season."

Knauf attorney Kerry Miller said the company "decided to step up and settle these claims and do the right thing."

"They want to get this unfortunate incident behind them so they can focus on manufacturing first-class building products," he said.

Herman said around 55 percent of the people who would benefit from the settlement live in Florida, while roughly 35 percent live in Louisiana. The deal would resolve cases filed in both state and federal court.

Chinese drywall was used in the construction of thousands of homes, mainly in the South, after a series of destructive hurricanes in 2005 and before the housing bubble burst. The problems it has caused range from a foul odor to corrosion of pipes and wiring.

Steven Roberts, a plaintiff who built a home in Boynton Beach in 2005 with Knauf drywall, said the first sign of trouble was a foul odor that smelled like "bitter sulfur." His family didn't suspect a more serious problem until electrical appliances started failing and corrosion formed on mirrors and bathroom fixtures.

Roberts, 37, a veterinarian, said he can't afford to repair all the damage or move his wife and daughter out, so he hopes the settlement can finally end their ordeal.

"It would be a huge weight lifted off our shoulders," he said. "It's been extremely challenging for my wife, very stressful. It's definitely a relief to potentially have the end in sight."

Virginia homeowners also filed many claims over drywall damage, but Herman said few of them would benefit from the deal because most received their drywall from other Chinese companies that haven't responded to lawsuits.

"They're the victims, innocent victims, of corporate malfeasance," Herman said. "To them we pledge, `Keep the faith.' Our journey does not end here."

Fallon must sign off on the settlement before any money is distributed. Although the judge could give his preliminary approval to the deal in January, it will likely take several more months for money to reach homeowners.

Knauf agreed to initially deposit $200 million in the repairs fund, which would be replenished as needed. Greg Wallance, an attorney for the company, said Herman's estimate that the deal could be worth up to $1 billion is "pure speculation."

"It isn't going to be anything approaching that," he said.

Attorneys' fees and costs paid by Knauf are capped at $160 million and will not be deducted from homeowners' shares of the settlement money.

New Orleans Saints head coach Sean Payton was one of the plaintiffs in the Knauf litigation. His attorney, Daniel Becnel Jr., said Payton already has fixed the suburban New Orleans home his family had to vacate. Knauf reimbursed him for the repairs.

Fallon presides over more than 10,000 claims involving Chinese drywall. The cases were consolidated in the New Orleans federal court in 2009.

Thursday's settlement isn't the first, but it offers the most to homeowners, so far. In June, plaintiffs reached a $55 million settlement with Banner Supply Co. — a Miami-based supplier of Chinese drywall — along with several related companies and Banner's insurers.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

IRS releases 2012 Mileage Rates

For business use of an automobile remains at 55½ cents per mile. For medical or moving expenses, it is 23 cents per mile (a half-cent decrease from the second half of 2011). For services to charitable organizations, the rate (which is set by statute) is 14 cents per mile.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Back to the Future

I opened the paper today and read where several organizations announced that they were cutting staff in order to control costs. In the same time span I saw several posting in the social media space which stated that C-suite office holders are saying that their greatest challenge in 2012 is going to be centered around talent issues especially talent retention. I must be missing something here. We can not state that we are concerned with retaining the talent e have at the same time discharge them in order to maintain costs.

Jeff Cox in his book Velocity tells us that unless the organization is on the verge of bankruptcy or closing its doors then there is no excuse for cutting headcount. Part of the dichotomy here is how the organization views its human capital.The majority of American corporations treat their employees a a commodity. When you are considered in this track, then the natural assumption is that  employees can be cut or hired based on the economics of the time However if you consider your employees to be valuable assets like Toyota does, then the solution to freeing up funds for headcount is not to cut heads but rather to deep dive your operations with the goal to remove as much non-value added activities as is possible. This in turn we will free up revenue that can be used to maintain headcount.

Jim Collins tells us in his book Good to Great that the key is to get the right people on the bus. I don't argue that point at all. What I  do argue is that all too often we get rid of the wrong people in trying to reach where we think we want to be. As a result we either eliminate people or screen candidates out because we are still working off of an ancient formula for assessing talent.

Think you have a talent problem going into 2012? Learn to think out of the box. I recently heard of a local car dealer who could not identify quality technicians for his dealership. Reach out to the training institutes in the area that are training mechanics and see what talent you can grow. I also heard of law firm that posted a position for a paralegal and out of 100 applicants could find only three that fit their mold. How about talking to the local Universities that have Communication programs. Get somebody who knows how to write and teach them the legal parts after they come onboard.

Talent is what you make of them. If you show them that you care and respect their input you will have a vibrant organization. If you show them that they are just an inconvenience then you get what you paid for.

We have been there before when talent was a luxury. It is plainly not prudent to in this knowledge/service age to approach your talent needs by cutting heads when there are better ways to control costs. Look at what you  do not have to do to meet client demands. The answers are right in front of you. They are hidden from your perspective because in many cases you have been too hesitate to look.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Expectations vs. Real World

I just returned from a hurried flight to New York due to a family medical emergency. I flew out of Tampa on Delta on a typical plane leaving the airport non-stop. Coming back we flew on US Airways and expected the same type of aircraft. When I arrived at the airport yesterday morning I found that the first leg of the trip to Florida was on a plane run by Air Wisconsin. It was a plane with four seats across and 14 rows and the typical carry on luggage did not fit in the overhead racks. The last leg was on a "normal" plane.

So here is my question to you, do you as an organization set up the environment for expectations on the part of your current and new hires as to what they think they are going to receive from your organization? In reality does the expectation meet what really happens?

We continually hear corporate management talking about the lack of commitment from the talent they hire. Have they stopped to consider that the message sent to the employees is I know what you expect but this is what really is going to happen.

Dictionary. com tells us that the word expectation can be defined as the act or the state of expecting, or the act or state of looking forward or anticipating or a mental attitude. So here is what happens, We interview that great candidate and essentially sell them a bill of goods and then they join the organization. One of the first things likely to happen is that some current employee gets into a casual conversation with your new hire and they talk about the workplace environment and the current employee tells the new hire that the promises made to them in the hiring process are just that promises with no teeth. So how does that new hire feel. I would bet pretty much like my thoughts when I boarded that puddle jumper" at 8:30 am yesterday.

We look at the average length of employment of the Generation Y and it runs somewhere around 18 months. The primary reason is that what they were told by the organization is not what they find when they start. It is imperative that the organizations begin to identify the discourse between the two messages. We need organizations that are comprised of dedicated human capital to achieve the things our organizations need and just as important what the talent needs. The lack of achievement is what brings about the many internal human capital problems we see.

I am currently reading Liker's Toyota Culture in which he stresses the involvement of the entire organization to encompass every employee and put them on an even playing field with every other employee including management. They talk about the Kentucky plant where there s no corner office or executive dining room. The workplace is organized around cross-functional teams which are designed to problem solve. The solutions are shared with the entire organization. There is no such thing as departmental competition.

As a consultant if I was hired to advise your management team on how to improve the workplace environment, my message would be simple and precise. It is one thing to try and tell a potential candidate how great your organization is. It is a totally different thing to tell the employee that this is the organizational world in such terms as to raise their expectations to a level where they are designed to fail. Unless you as an organization are determined to not create incorrect expectations on the role of the human capital assets within the business. Make the decision which road you are going to take before you begin the interview process.

Remember that the employee's view of the world is to them reality. Are you going to meet their view or continue to provide false promises? Your call. Your decision. Define the state of your workplace.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Circle the Wagons, the Indians are Coming!!!!

President Obama at a press conference in Hawaii referring to a question about the scandal at Penn State made the observation that protecting the innocent was more important than shielding institutions or organizations. I took in the premise and then looked at the daily RSS feed I receive from the EEOC and began to question the strategic moves many corporations are making in the marketplace.

I totally understand that as an organization you have a brand that you need to protect but when your managers are making stupid mistakes and are circling the wagons instead of taking the right path to resolve issues in the marketplace, you begin to wonder why organizations can complain about the lack of engagement and then provide the proof in their actions.

Since August 26, 2011 the EEOC RRS feed is reporting nearly 200 settled complaints or new actions regarding situations where an employee has a legal right to complain about working conditions and the organizational response is how difficult can we make their lives to the point of having them leave the company. Maintain the brand at all costs and the heck with supporting the individual who is being harassed or discriminated against.

Consider the case of  an acute care facility in California who will pay $530,000 to settle a lawsuit alleging the sexual harassment of its staff.  According to the federal agency, several of the female targets of the harassment were either retaliated against or compelled to quit after their complaints were ignored by hospital management.Is the brand that important that you tolerate a workplace where you demean the employee base.  That is an attitude from an era way gone from reasonable in today's workplace.

Look at your list of the best places to work or the companies founded on the principles of the Toyota Production System and they recognize the worth of employees to the organization. Look at the organizations being hit by the EEOC and you see organizations with the attitudes that we are doing the employee a favor by allowing them to work here and they need to take what ever conditions we want to expose them to.

In the 21st Century this is not how we encourage engagement. This is not how we encourage employee loyalty. This how we tell our employees that they are chattel, not valuable parts of our organization. So if you must circle the wagons, do so around the worth of all parties. Protect the organizational brand by telling the world that you value the employee and their contributions to the brand.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

we have met the enemy and they are us!!

Many of you who are old enough to remember this quote, will remember that it came out at the time of the first Earth Day. It was a call for improvement in the world we lived in at the time. I bring it up for you and a newer generation because I fear that we have met a new enemy and it is not environmental quality.

Read the newspaper or watch the evening news and you can't escape the circus centered around Herman Cain and his circumstances surrounding sexual harassment in the workplace while he was with the National Restaurant Association. Many of the local SHRM chapters hold an annual diversity and inclusion meeting and management calls for more employee engagement.

So tell me how do you preach diversity and inclusion when your walk says that we accept employees to be less then people? How do we send the message that there a certain levels of behavior that corporate policy condemns and then we let management, co-workers and suppliers openly violate the stated corporate policy.

To get an eye-opener, subscribe to the RSS feed from the EEOC and see the barage of charges that are behind the complaints. They clearly show a pattern with in our organizations for treating employees as less than the individuals they are. Some of the charges spank of a long go workplace environment where employees were treated as property rather than human capita assets.

Consider theses examples:

• well known medical company decided that a pregnant worker did not belong working for the company as an area leader because it did not fit their image.
• Sears just got fined for age, sex, and race discrimination of a 40 yr old African-American employee.
• Companies who got rid of the trouble maker who reported sexual harassment but left the employee who who took the actions in place despite the problems.

To make matters worse in many cases the person who made the complaint has shortly there after been dismissed from their jobs because of making the complaints. we conduct a seminar entitled "Who Am I- The Role of Human Capital in the Global Workplace" in which we talk about the new paradigms that come out of the work environment when employees are considered assets and not expenses.

One of those paradigms suggests that our human capital assets expect that they will work in an environment that is free from both harassment and violence. They expect that they will be treated as valuable part of the organization they represent. As a member of management you have the responsibility to ensure that the workplace is free of circumstances that could be considered harassment in nature whether they are brought about by management, supervisors, fellow employees or outside vendors and customers. It is your duty to route out these behaviors when you see them.

If you need a real picture of the aftermath consider hat could happen to Joe Paterno over the charges that someone who worked for him was guilty of harassment against children who were under his supervision. Paterno reported it but it still could come back to haunt his career.

So the next time you hear about a complaint of harassment in your workplace be sure you take the following strategic efforts:

1. Don't automatically dismiss the complaint under the believe that the person who the complaint is about would not do something like that.
2. Completely investigate the complaint, talking to all parties involved and any witnesses.
3. Document your findings without judging the outcomes.
4. If the complaint is substantiated, take concrete steps to find a solution which will make it less likely that this kind of behavior will continue.
5. Provide comprehensive training to both management and the rank and file as to what constitutes harassment in the workplace.

You have the tools in your hands to decide whether your organization is one of the best places to work or is considered a place where people go to just for the pay. You decide whether the workplace is one that is conducive to professional collaboration devoid of pressure to do a job based on what you are willing to tolerate. In this hard economic climate we are in, employees who feel that they are less than valuable assets will not be inclined to stay as part of your organization.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

CRP 2012 Boot Camp Dates Announced

Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc. will present it's 22nd Annual Review Seminar for Certified Relocation Professional examination facilitated by the worldwide ERC.This 3 day review seminar will be presented May 6-8, 2012 in San Antonio.
More information can be found at http://www.dbaiconsulting.com/pages/crpreview.php or by emailing us at crp@dbaiconsulting.com

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

What is My Generations Impact on Business?

This past week I had been invited back to a MBA Leadership class to discuss the topic "Who Am I: The Role of Human Capital within the Global Workplace.I spent about 40 minutes discussing the new roles of human capital within our organizations and then asked if their were any comments. One student in her 20's, asked me how realistic was it to think that employees would in essence no longer be considered just a number (i.e. an expense item). She had a valid point and our response was that you need to continue to present evidence to the workplace that you bring skills beyond the number on a balance sheet. The second question that struck was a more direct one, I guess.

I had a student, probably in his mid-20's, who asked me what I thought the contribution to the business world would be of his generation. I had to stop and think about it for a moment but the response came fairly quickly. I believe that when you take their contribution down to its bare essence, their contribution is going to be one of truly defining what collaboration means.

We all play the collaboration game. Whether you are a traditionalist, a Boomer or a Gen X'er we all say we want to consider other idea and views in our organizations. But if you look at the proof in the pudding so to speak, we are fine with new ideas and views as long as they do not rock the boat. When I was looking for a full time HR position I heard more often then not that the reason I was not considered was that the likelihood that I would fall into the meld, and go with the flow was slight because I worked as a consultant. As a whole we don't like surprises.

My response to the student was that I believe that Gen Y will teach corporations what the true meaning of collaboration is. They know. They have been involved in collaboration their whole lives. Need an answer to a problem, they will ask the world. Need some supporting data for a project, they know where to find it. Hey, I admit that is not the way the other generations were brought up, but it is the new reality. The only way for our organizations to survive in the new business word is through innovation. Innovation only come about by collaborating with everyone (management, fellow employees, vendors, internal and external stakeholders) to find new solutions to existing problems. This comes from an influx of new ideas as how to do things, how to resolve conflicts within the business world.

So what is their impact? Gen Y will lead the business community into a new world. One that is based on rocking the boat where it needs to be. Saving the boat when it is fine. But with some changes within the organization, they will show us the path to greater operational results going forward. They are truly corporate assets, we just need to adjust ourselves to the new reality. The old processes such as annual performance reviews are from the era of Authority and Control not this new environment. Every employee should be able to have a clear picture of how they are contributing to the organization on a 24/7 basis not once a year. They will change us.We just have to determine whether we are going along for the ride or are going to try and say hey your ideas are nice, but that is not the way we do things here or you have not earned your dues as yet?

Your choice, Your future.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed