First Comment

Back in February I wrote a blog post about the vicious cycle of unemployment where the unemployed find it harder and harder to get hired which just keeps them further away from being employed. Many states (like New Jersey) have gotten ahead of the federal government and has banned discrimination against the unemployed, but as a bill is going to be introduced before Congress banning this type of discrimination on a country-wide level, TIME Magazine took another look at what happens when companies refuse to hire the unemployed (H/T Wendy):

Refusing to hire people on the basis of race, religion, age or disability — among other categories — is illegal. But companies that turn away jobless people as a group are generally not breaking the law — at least for now.


Job seekers have long known, of course, that it's easier to land a job when you are still working. There are no hard data on discrimination against the unemployed. But there have been reports from across the country of companies' making clear in job listings that they are not interested in people who are out of work. Employment experts say other companies have policies of hiring only people with jobs — but do not publicly acknowledge their bias.

TIME did a lot of work in this issue profiling the out of work in America including profiles of some of those who are unemployed. Check it out and know that your refusal to hire someone who is unemployed could end up being illegal in the very near future.

I haven't disappeared--we merely have been having some technical issues with the blog. But I am back with a great guest post from Mariana Ashley on the departure of a co-worker who was a positive influence. We've all had this happen and this is some good advice on how to deal with it. Mariana is a freelance writer who particularly enjoys writing about online colleges. She loves receiving reader feedback, which can be directed to mariana.ashley031 @gmail.com. Here is her guest post:
-------
Think of the kinds of things that keep you happy at work. Probably you enjoy your job or some aspect of the work you do. You might have a great supervisor who understands your skills and needs as an employee. Maybe your commute is easy and stress-free and you have good benefits. And maybe you consider your co-workers to be your friends.

All of these factors can contribute to a great workplace atmosphere, especially if you have for a co-worker someone whom you consider to be a friend and a positive influence.

But what happens if that special co-worker leaves the office for greener pastures? How do you respond then in the wake of that departure? How do you maintain that great work atmosphere and keep up your productivity?

As an employee, you have to do your best to maintain your productivity, despite the departure of your friend. Because it's much easier to stay focused at work if you have a good work atmosphere, you should try to follow some of these tips in order to quickly help things return to normal.

Change Everything!

Okay, you don't have to change everything, but you should at least consider making some changes to your daily return in order to minimize the effect of your former co-worker's absence on your own day. If you and your co-worker often met for mid-morning coffee to talk about your latest projects, then avoid this habit. Do something different, such as going for a walk, instead. By changing up how you work through the day, you can help your mind focus on the tasks you have before you in new ways, thus minimizing the effect of your friend's departure.

Begin Working on a New Project

Another way to get your mind off of the departure of your friend is to lose yourself in a new project if possible. By launching a new project, you can refocus on your tasks, what you have to do, and the goals you'd like to accomplish. This is incredibly helpful, especially if your former co-worker worked on past projects with you. Without him or her, you'll have a chance to see how you work on your own. This new project doesn't have to be anything complicated either; it could be as simple as reorganizing your files or preparing a six-month evaluation of your productivity.



Expand Your Friendly Horizons

After your co-worker leaves, especially if he or she was a good friend, you're going to need to make a new friend or two to expand your social circle of co-workers. Go out on a limb and interact with others; go out to lunch with a group you haven't really met for lunch before. Seek out others who might be good members of your team and try to involve them in new projects. The increased social activity and the amount of interaction you have with others will boost your ability to focus on your work.

Flee Negativity

One of the biggest killers of a good office environment is negativity in any form. You're job as an employee is to flee negativity. Don't cultivate negativity and if others are negative, you have to try to keep them out of your day as much as possible. Yes, you'll be disappointed that your co-worker has left, but you should keep that disappointment to yourself. The best way to make yourself happy is to think that you're happy. Letting negativity in you workday, especially negativity associated with the departure of a co-worker, will hurt your mood and ruin your productivity.

Stay LinkedIn

Finally, depending on the nature of your relationship with your former co-worker, you could try to stay in touch, either through a social networking site like LinkedIn or Facebook, or by socializing with him or her on the weekends. This is a good idea if you think having such a contact could improve your own career path as well; however, it could also be nice to keep that person in your life in some way, especially if you were good friends at work.

When employees leave your organization, a lot of information tends to leave with them. As much as they document their everyday activities and hand off work to co-workers, there's always something that they forgot to leave behind. Most of the time the employee who leaves says "contact me for anything you need", and although this is just said as a courtesy, there may be times when contacting that employee for a quick question is absolutely necessary. But how much is too much and how long is too long to contact an old employee?

The question comes after I read an article from Ask a Manager about an employee who was being harassed by their old boss 16 months after leaving their old job. This is an extreme circumstance (it seems like the boss is an extra vindictive person) but it should prove a point that while it's okay to contact an old employee a few times, it should be done sparingly and it should be done with a great deal of gratitude.

In one of my old jobs, my predecessor left for another job within the company (at a new location). He was a really nice guy and had a hard time saying no to anyone so he let everyone know that he was available to help when he left for his new job. Well the problem was that everyone wanted to contact him and they wanted to contact him all the time. It not only made him feel that he really had never left his old job, but it also was really frustrating for me because--correct or not--it always made me feel that no one had trust in me to make the right decisions in these situations.

It's always nice to have old employees who are readily available to help, but it's always worth understanding that the person who left is under no obligation to actually help you--and it could be doing a lot of damage to the confidence of the people left behind. It's okay to contact old employees but, as they say in alcohol commercials, if you choose to do so, do so responsibly.

Yesterday President Barack Obama pushed 20 CEOs to "start investing in job creating enterprises." According to the Wall Street Journal, though, "nearly half of the executives [in a quarterly survey by the Business Roundtable]—45%—expected to hire within the next six months, compared with 31% who said that last quarter." As the article says, US businesses are sitting on $2 trillion in cash. Although slack demand is adding to their reluctance, hopefully a new year means new jobs appearing in the market.

In good news this morning, Bloomberg is reporting that jobless claims in the US unexpectedly fell to 420,000 last week. The bad news, though: "the total number of people receiving unemployment insurance and those getting extended payments rose." So what does that mean for hiring in the new year? "Fewer firings signal employers may be gearing up to add to their payrolls and help reduce a jobless rate hovering near a 26-year high. While the economy is gaining momentum heading into 2011, Federal Reserve policy makers said this week it isn’t strong enough to reduce unemployment."

And if you decide to look for one of those jobs in the new year, Simply Hired Blog has the best 50 careers of 2011 (H/T Wendy).

Way back in November of 2007 I wrote a post on the Astron Solutions blog titled "You're Fired...Wait...You're Hired" after Circuit City decided to rehire some of the employees they had fired. It continues to be one of our most-visited posts and even though Circuit City is no longer around, the themes in that post (and Michael Scott's words) continue to resonate, especially with the recent "resignation" of Shirley Sherrod.

I posted a little while back from HR hero's The Oswald Letter about terminating in haste can lead to regret at leisure. Last Thursday, Fistful of Talent (H/T Jennifer) looked at the process of welcoming back rehires (AKA "The Sacred Boomerang Ceremony"). The author describes the ceremony:

At Kahler Slater, not only do they accept employees back (the good ones of course) but they believe that having a strong employee come back is reason to celebrate. John Horky, the HR Guy, creates for each one of these employees a boomerang and presents it to them during a staff meeting with their very own “Sacred Boomerang Ceremony”.

Imagine, a celebration where the entire company is gathered to welcome an employee back into the fold. They present the boomerang, tell everyone what the employee has been doing since he/she left, and celebrate them coming back to the company. 

This isn't a process without problems, however. In finance, where there have been recent signs of hiring according to the Wall Street Journal (H/T Wendy), many firms are taking a strict stance against rehiring former employees. While one (or multiple) co-workers may vouch for them, there may have been reasons that the employee was let go during the layoffs. There may still be some bad blood there and rehiring can have negative effects on moral. In some instances, lesser employees may be hired because of a feeling of familiarity with the company they were let go by.

The lesson here is that while done right, rehiring can be a great idea, many other factors need to be taken into account--and it should never be done in haste.

We've all seen it at one point or another: a bully in the workplace. This person can be a boss, an owner, someone in power or someone just on a power trip. They can work in any department and they come in many shapes and sizes. But Human Resources needs to be aware of these people and take care of them before they dominate and intimidate the workplace. Like a school bully, it can be intimidating to stand up to these workplace bullies, but someone needs to do it. And that someone needs to be from either management or human resources.

A few articles on the subject:

Bloomberg Businessweek starts us out with ten signs of a fear-based workplace so you know what to look out for (H/T Wendy). Some of them are more obvious than others but #10 seems to sum it up: "When senior leaders make virtually all decisions in secret, dole out information in unhelpful drips, and base hiring on sheeplike compliance rather than energy and talent, and the PA system all but blares "Be glad to have a job, stop whining, and get back to work," your company's fear problem is off the charts."

TIME via Yahoo! News is next with an article saying that New York just passed a bill which may make workplace bullying explicitly illegal: "If New York's Healthy Workplace Bill becomes law, workers who can show that they were subjected to hostile conduct - including verbal abuse, threats or work sabotage - could be awarded lost wages, medical expenses, compensation for emotional distress and punitive damages"

This would seem to be good news for the group of workers who have filed a class action lawsuit against New York chain Pio Pio according to Grub Street New York.

Lastly, the Employment Law Blog cautions against terminating in haste and says that you need to have a total command of the facts before you decide to let someone go, even for what seems like a misdeed.

We've all been rejected. Whether it be in high school on the person we had a crush on, when we were applying to college, when we've interviewed for jobs, or even when some of us have been let go from that a job that we've all been told, at one point or another: "no". But there's many different ways to say no and doing it in the right way in both the hiring and firing process, a company can help candidates and former employees as well as helping their own self-image. Let's take a look at the three types of candidates and how is a bad and a good way to say N-O.

External Job Candidate

These are the easiest people to say no to out of the three groups we'll talk about, but there are still proper ways to go about this. I know one former classmate who was told they had a prestigious position at an investment bank coming out of business school only to have that invitation revoked once the company hit some skids. How did this person find out they weren't going to be employed at this large bank? The news. Seriously. Instead of calling/e-mailing/writing the candidates to let them know their signed offers were not going to be honored, they instead let the news organizations reporting the story know and the classmate found out by reading about the company online. That's rough--and wrong.

The best way to go about it was done a few years back for me. I applied for a job that was I pretty sure I was under-qualified for--but I really liked the company, job, pay, and thought it would be worth it to apply. After speaking with the Human Resources representative for a few minutes on the phone the day I applied, she told me they were sifting through applications and she would get back to me. She did get back to me--later that evening and told me that they were not going any further with my application. Instead of just not calling me back (which is happened to many people I know plenty of times recently), she called me on her drive home to discuss why they were going elsewhere. She talked me through the strong points in my resume and where they felt I may not fit for the job. She also told me they would keep my resume on file and I shouldn't hesitate to reapply in the future. I was shocked by this phone call and certainly appreciated it. "No" didn't sound like "no" that time.

Internal Job Candidate

Probably the most difficult person to say no to out of the group. At least when you're laying off someone you're ushering them out the door and outside job candidates you don't know from Adam usually--but internal job candidates who don't get the job are still going to be walking around those same floors every day. The worst way to do it is to do it impersonally and/or string that person along. Most internal job applications require a candidate to tell his or her boss and/or human resources representative. Then they need to interview at the same company they already work (which usually is accompanied by a good deal of inter-company gossip). To say the least, these people are sticking their necks out and putting their jobs on the line. Many bosses probably are not so happy with a candidate saying they're looking for another job in the company and if they don't get hired by the new hiring manager, fear of retribution from the original manager can be strong.

So it's not a surprise that I shook my head at one story I heard recently of how an internal job candidate was strung along for a month and half only to not got the job. Worse yet, instead of the hiring manager or human resources representative letting the candidate know they weren't going to get the job, they received a call from the home offices from someone they never spoke to before who was in charge of breaking the bad news to them. Not only does this person have to run into the people who didn't want to hire them every day, but they also had to deal with the fact that none of them would have the common courtesy to tell the candidate themselves.

Instead, internal candidates should be met with an open and honest process. Companies should clamor to keep good employees and if an employee is looking for a new position internally, it's a good bet they're looking externally as well. Even if the candidate is ultimately not hired, he or she needs to be given every form of support possible to make sure that they don't become angry, resentful or disenfranchised with the company. Sometimes this can be done in the form of offering the candidate more training to improve their skills or some sort of financial incentive to thank them for trying to stay but keeping them satisfied all at the same time.


Letting Go Of An Employee

In this economy, almost every company has at least had to think about cutting back on employees. The recession has hit every industry hard and difficult personnel decisions have had to be made all across the United States and the globe. But there is a right way and a wrong way about doing things. One prestigious investment bank--which has been in the news a lot recently for other unethical practices--certainly did this the wrong way. Instead of letting employees know that there would be some layoffs coming, they leaked it out to a few internal members and let them spread around the rumor. Hysteria set in for a day but no one was let go. The next day, when people tried to swipe their key cards to come into the building, some of the employees had key cards that didn't work. It wasn't a glitch--those employees had their key cards shut off because they had been laid off. How embarrassing must it have been for those people to stand in the lobby of this large building as their still-employed co-workers are passing by? How confusing must this have been for many of them. When these people went to security to find out why their badges weren't working, they were each handed an envelope with severance information and a number to call if they had questions. That's just awful.

I also heard of other companies doing right by their employees. There were stories of small business owners who knew they had to shut down operations and instead found creative ways to stay open--sometimes even getting the employees to sacrifice some benefits so that everyone could keep their jobs. There were stories of CEOs who instead of taking a fat paycheck for reducing payroll, took that fat paycheck and put it back into employees salaries so that no one would be let go. But when employees have had to be let go, there were right ways to do this too. Some companies offered long severance packages, vested previously unvested retirement investments, provided job search support or future job training, and some even kept the door open for rehiring. While sometimes there's very little way to avoid it, you want people to leave your company with the least sour taste in their mouth as possible.

So what way do you use to say no to employees? What are best practices that you've established? What about any horror stories you may know of? Let us know in the comments below

George Steinbrenner was known as "The Boss" in his time owning the Yankees. When he passed away last week, Steinbrenner took with him a complicated legacy as an owner who produced championships but a boss who could torment his employees. He was at the same time charitable (he had a saying that if more than one person knows about a good deed you've done, you've done it for the wrong reasons) and a criminal (made illegal contributions to Richard Nixon) but always interesting. Today the New York Post went through how to succeed the Steinbrenner way, but while they have praised the man and the team's success, it's also helpful to note that "The Boss" was not always the ideal boss:

BE FOCUSED From the day George Steinbrenner bought the Yankees for $10 million until he permanently stepped down last week, the former shipping executive had one all-consuming goal: to win. And he seems to have spent pretty close to every waking minute thinking about how to make it happen — just ask the minions who fielded his constant phone calls, endured his tirades and his meddling, and spoke of his obsessive attention to every corner of the organization. And his focus never let up, even in the off-season.

“Winning is the most important thing in my life, after breathing,” he famously said.

That was just one of the pieces of advice put forth by the post article. The others included "work tirelessly", "don't be afraid to shift gears--even if you swore you wouldn't", "fire when ready", "be a boss, not a friend", "hire top talent, and pay them well", "demand results", "set clear goals", "never always criticize your employees in public", "pay attention to the little things", "don't give your stars preferential treatment", "build your brand", "have a heart OK", and "don't rest on your laurels". All of these are good advice for someone running a business and while George M. Steinbrenner III was very good at accomplishing some of these in a way that helps an organization, some of his actions certainly hurt his organization and his employees. A good balance is certainly needed for an organization to have successful leadership.

Two interesting articles for your Thursday:

-The first is from Career Solvers and gives a lesson on how to get fired. Although the author is talking about firing her phone company, many of these same principles apply to the workplace. They are:

1. Not showing up for work
2. Coming to work unprepared
3. Blaming others for the team's errors
4. Not communicating with others
5. Telling the boss (me) you couldn’t get a project done because it was understaffed.
6. Asking for a raise before you have proved your value. 

The post ends with this bit of advice on why to eliminate these practices from your repotoire:

According to CareerBuilder’s 2010 Jobs Forecast a trend for 2010 may very well be replacing lower performing employees and taking advantage of the large percentage of top talent in the labor force to strengthen their work force. Because in this economy, employers have choices…and there are plenty of job seekers out there that would love to be employed by them.

-On the flip side, Easy Small Business HR has Do's and Don'ts (or is it "don't's"?) when firing employees. Some of those:

Don't: 

• Leave the task to someone who does not have direct supervision of the worker being fired.
  
• Fire an employee on the spot unless the actions are so egregious that it requires immediate removal from the workplace.

Do:

• Fire workers who have crossed the line of what is considered egregious inappropriate behavior if you are absolutely certain based on the facts that the employee is guilty of misconduct.
• Respect the privacy and confidentiality of everyone involved by meeting with your employee(s) in a private area
• Tell your employee the reason for the termination.

Some good advice from those two sources...though you should only be following the latter!

Yahoo! Tech has the news of one unfortunate woman who was fired for getting to Caps Lock friendly (H/T Wendy):

That's exactly what happened to Vicki Walker, who was abruptly kicked out of her job for sending "confrontational emails" with text formatted in a variety of red, bold, and all caps fonts. Walker had sent the emails to fellow workers within the company, usually with stern and detailed instructions on how forms should be properly filled out.

Someone at ProCare didn't like her approach, suggesting she caused "disharmony in the workplace" and was being too confrontational via email, eventually firing her without warning.

Walker, however, got the last laugh. She sued for wrongful termination and won the case, pocketing $17,000 in lost wages and for other unspecified harm caused due to the firing.

What do you think? Are Caps Lock really that big of a deal? Do you train your employees in proper e-mail formatting?

-We start out on this Wednesday with Human Resource Executive Online with some advice on how to understand Human Resources value

-Next is Market Mixup which says that instead of cutting jobs, think about cutting salaries

-Lastly, the Zanesville Times Recorder says that now that you have figured out the FMLA regulation, there may be more changes coming down the pipeline

-The South Florida Business Journal starts us up with a Society of Human Resources Management (SHRM) survey which says that hiring is slowly improving and the Central Valley Business Times has some more information on that

-CNNMoney says that after layoffs, layoff survivors are now stuck with more responsibilities and more stress but aren't getting any more money.

-Lastly, after we just quoted a few surveys from employees...word from the Associated Press (AP) that companies are turning away from employee surveys

While watching football this weekend, I saw a few commercials from Hyundai touting their new "Hyundai Assurance" (click here). In this new ad campaign, Hyundai goes after a consumer segment looking for an "out clause" in tough economic times. The ad tells buyers “we’re all in this together” and proceeds to give car buyers the security they need in a time of job uncertainty. This out clause allows the buyer to return the Hyundai if they lose their income within a year.

This seems to be a great idea for a large amount of Americans who are worried about buying a new car for fear they may lose their jobs. I wonder how successful the campaign will become, but judging from the amount of people I watched football with who seemed to respond positively to the ad, it could definitely work. It'll be also very interesting to see how many other companies copy this idea. Would a real estate company having a tough time selling condos try this? Or Best Buy selling you a new High Definition television? Interesting food for thought...

Ah, my long-suffering New York Jets. This weekend they once again snapped defeat from the jaws of victory.

The big news yesterday and today here in New York City is the firing of Jets head coach Eric Mangini. A few other NFL coaches also were let go, including record-breaking Detroit Lions coach Rod Marinelli, but none have received the airtime like Mangini's firing did.

From both a fan's perspective and that of an HR professional, I have mixed feelings on the sudden termination. This year the Jets had a winning season, so that in and of itself is an accomplishment and not something to be terminated for. But with the caliber of players they have, the Jets should have done better. However, is it all Mangini's fault, and therefore worthy of such a brisk termination? I can raise questions regarding other players' and coaches' performance, particularly near the end of the season.

I suppose that professional athletes and coaches go into the business knowing that the fates are fickle, opinions can change on a dime, and despite the lip service paid to "teamwork," in the end it is the individual's performance that matters. Do the rewards of high salaries and fame outweigh the risk of swift termination should things not go 100% perfect? Not every employee can be a A player, much as we might like.

Let's try to pull some good from Eric Mangini's experience, and consider our own organizations - how they are and how we'd like them to be. Is teamwork or individual performance more important? Is it OK to have B and C players to support our stars?

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution starts us off with an article about whether you should dress business casual for an interview: click here

A Human Resource Management Solutions article following up on a HR World article for our next entry on five quick hiring tips: click here

The Houston Business Daily has next for us a Human Resources Guide to employment issues resulting from Hurricane Ike: click here

The Gazette of Colorado Springs says that everyone, especially the employer, benefits by handling layoffs fairly and honestly: click here

Lastly, the Orlando Business Journal cites a study that says that most workers are puzzled about their benefits: click here

We start off on this Wednesday smack in the middle of the convention cycle and with an article from Human Resource Executive Online saying to brace yourselves for whoever is elected president: click here

Human Resource Executive Online also wants to talk about where HR stands today and who Human Resources Executives want as president and why: click here

Next, the Business Ledger tells HR professionals how sloppy Human Resources adds to employers' benefit costs: click here

Human Resource Management Solutions by People Wise then asks when does a small business need an Employee Handbook: click here

The Courier Post Online follows up by saying that you should take time to think if job is lost: click here

The Hartford Courant ends our post with an article that tells us that sometimes, following your heart works: click here

Riding the train this morning I happened to peek at a fellow passenger's Wall Street Journal and spied upon some great articles...

First, a front page article on layoffs...if you hear rumors they may be coming, here's some advice on what to do: click here

And with this advice, some thoughts should emerge for HR professionals on how to handle those types of situations. One of my friends worked for a large fashion company that had been rumored to be on the brink of bankruptcy. One of the actions taken by the company's management--that shocked him and others--was to fire one employee whose only misstep was talking about the rumors going around about the company. They said he was a poison to the company and got rid of him. A few days later, the company filed for bankruptcy and a lot more employees went. But if the company had not filed, that sole decision would have been viewed as a warning (whether right or wrong) to other employees who would think about discussing the rumors among themselves at work...

The Career Journal then gives some advice for those pushed to part-time work--make the most of it: click here

Next, a topic we've talked about in the past on this blog, workplace bullying takes center stage again as they reference a recent United States court case: click here

Lastly, an interesting article about summer jobs--selling knives--positioned with a great title: click here


Enjoy!

Somebody's got a case of the Mondays!

Here's a list of seven employee complaints for this Monday:

1) Your employer is watching over you...even as you work at home (an article about telecommuting surveillance from the Wall Street Journal's Career Journal): click here

2) Your former employer is delighting in your layoff (well this Workforce Management article says that if they do, they're going to hell -- Management hell): click here

3) Your former employer is suing you (this may turn out really, really poorly according to the Laconic Law Blog): click here

4) My employer is making me copy on both sides of the paper among other money-saving operations (Fistful of Talent talks about Budweiser's integration into InBev...a good article also about combining cultures in company's and HR's responsibility in that): click here

5) The superstar employee on my team is getting $20-$25 million in severance (while this is probably not your company, this article is an interesting view on the Brett Favre situation in Green Bay from the HR Capitalist and how they blow the term "Golden Parachute" totally out of the water): click here

6) My young co-workers are hopping from job to job and making more money than me (Perfect Labor Storm 2.0 has an article confirming job hopping among Gen Y/The Millenials): click here

7) I just have lots of complaints (well About.com's Human Resources blog compiled a list of the top ten employee complaints): click here