November 20, 2008

100 of the Leading Blogs on Leadership

Posted by Molly DiBianca On November 20, 2008 In: Internet Resources , Workplace Culture

Email This Post | Print this Post

100 of my favorite blogs on leadership and management.  Have a look around--it's Friday, after all!

  1. acidlabs
  2. Adventure of Strategy - Rob Millard
  3. Agile Management
  4. All Things Workplace
  5. Art Petty on Management
  6. Ask A Manager
  7. Ask the Manager
  8. Bailey WorkPlay :: The Alchemy of Soulful Work
  9. Bearing Fruit Consulting
  10. Billion Dollar Lessons
  11. Bold Leader Blog
  12. Bud Bilanich
  13. Business of Management
  14. Business Pundit
  15. Business Toolkit
  16. Cenek Report
  17. Center for Creative Leadership
  18. ChaosScenario
  19. Christian Anschuetz
  20. Coaching Tip: The Leadership Blog
  21. Contrarian Thinking
  22. ConverStations
  23. Cranky Middle Manager Podcast Show
  24. Dave Prouhet
  25. David Maister
  26. Dr. Z’s Leadership Institute
  27. Eclecticity
  28. Education Innovation
  29. Employee Engagement
  30. Enlightened Manager
  31. Eric Brown
  32. Escape from Excellence
  33. Execupundit.com
  34. Extreme Leadership
  35. Frank Kanu
  36. Get Me Jamie Notter
  37. Great Leaders Build Strong Relationships
  38. Great Leadership
  39. Great Leadership
  40. Great Management - Articles
  41. Joe and Wanda - on Management
  42. Kent Blumberg
  43. Lead on Purpose
  44. Lead Quietly
  45. Leader Business
  46. Leader Storytelling
  47. Leader’s Journey with Lee Thayer
  48. Leaders We Deserve
  49. Leadership is not rocket science
  50. Leadership Made Simple
  51. Leadership Turn
  52. LeaderValues
  53. Leading Agile
  54. Leading Blog
  55. Leading Questions
  56. Management by Baseball
  57. Management Craft
  58. Management IQ
  59. Management Issues
  60. Management Quotes
  61. Management Skills Blog
  62. Management-Issues
  63. Manager Thoughts
  64. Manager Tools
  65. Managing Leadership
  66. Managing with Aloha Coaching
  67. MBA by Blog
  68. Mission Minded Management
  69. NetSpeed Leadership
  70. Nina Simosko
  71. Organic Leadership Blog
  72. Passion, People and Principles
  73. Performance and Talent Management Blog
  74. Personal Leadership Insight
  75. Phil’s Leadership Blog
  76. Practice of Leadership
  77. Quantum Thinking
  78. Richards Leadership
  79. Robin Yap
  80. Servant Leadership
  81. Slacker Manager
  82. Slow Leadership
  83. Strength-Based Leadership
  84. SuccessFactors
  85. Talking Story with Say Leadership Coaching
  86. The Art of the 3 Disciplines
  87. The Bizzy Life
  88. The Blogging Boss
  89. The Happy Burro
  90. The Leader’s Journey
  91. The Leader-Follower
  92. The Leadership Revolution
  93. The Organic Leadership Blog
  94. The Practice of Leadership
  95. The Recovering Leader
  96. The Specialist
  97. The Sykes Group’s OnPoint Blog
  98. The Vital Integrities Blog
  99. Unfolding Leadership
  100. You Already Know This Stuff

November 20, 2008

People, don't you understand: More Teacher Social Networking Woes

Posted by Michael P. Stafford On November 20, 2008 In: Education Law , Electronic Workplace , Off-Duty Conduct

Email This Post | Print this Post

Employee foibles on social networking websites are back in the news.  According to the Raleigh News & Observer, a teacher in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools may be fired because of derogatory comments about students that the teacher posted on her Facebook page

facebook_large

The comments included referring to "teachin' chitlins in the ghetto of Charlotte."  The teacher went on to note in the "About Me" section of her Facebook profile that she is "teaching in the most ghetto school in Charlotte."  She also listed drinking as one of her hobbies.  Apparently, other Charlotte-Mecklenburg teachers also have objectionable Facebook pages as the news story reports that several other teachers from the same district have been also reprimanded for Facebook comments that show, in the district's view "poor judgment and bad taste."   

November 19, 2008

Federal Contractor E-Verify Rule Is Final!

Posted by Teresa A. Cheek On November 19, 2008 In: E-Verify

Email This Post | Print this Post

The E-Verify program took center stage when federal contractors were mandated to use the system in June. The mandatory E-Verify took many federal contractors by surprise and put other employers on high alert.  The federal government issued a proposed rule on June 12, 2008, and solicited public comments. About 1,600 comments were submitted.

On Friday, November 14, 2008, the final rule for the E-Verify program was published in the Federal Register, together with summaries of the public’s comments and the government’s responses to the comments. To see the rule without the comments, go to the end of the document, but the comments and responses are helpful to the big picture.everify USHS

Here’s the bottom line. 

Starting on January 15, 2009, once you are awarded a federal contract worth more than $100,000 that has a performance term of 120 days or more, or if you have a subcontract worth more than $3,000, you will have 30 days to enroll in the federal contractor E-Verify program.  Enrolling involves signing a non-negotiable Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Homeland Security and registering the individuals who will be using the system. I suggest that you take a look at page 5 of the E-Verify User Manual to get an idea of your options and what it will be like to use the system. The people you select to be “users” of the system will have to register and take the on-line tutorial before you can actually begin using the system.

You might want to register now and begin using the standard E-Verify system for new hires to give get a head start before the deadline. If you are already enrolled in the E-Verify program as of January 15, 2009, and you have a qualifying contract or subcontract, you will have to modify your enrollment to switch to the federal contractor version.  Within 90 days of enrollment as a federal contractor, you will have to begin using E-Verify for all new hires in the U.S. (including people who are not working directly on a federal contract), within three days after the employee begins working for pay.

There is one major difference between the federal contractor E-Verify process and the standard E-Verify process. Federal contractors will also have to run E-Verify on each current employee who was hired after November 6, 1986 and who is directly involved in work under the contract. The standard E-Verify process may be used only for new hires.

As you receive new contracts, or make new assignments of current employees to work on a contract, you will have 30 days to run those newly assigned current employees through E-Verify. You don’t have to run your current general administrative support and overhead employees through E-Verify if you don’t want to, but you will have the option of running all of your current employees through E-Verify. You might want to do this to avoid trying to figure out whether an employee is “directly” working on a contract. It’s also a good way to avoid accusations that you assigned an employee to work on a federal contract for discriminatory reasons. You have to give DHS notice if you decide you are going to use E-Verify for your entire post-11/6/86 workforce.

You will probably want to modify your employee information system now to include a way to track whether you have run each employee through E-Verify, and also (if you aren’t going to run all employees through E-Verify) to track whether the employee is working on a federal contract. You only have to E-Verify an employee one time, regardless of how many contracts the employee works on.

You will need to become familiar with some rules for avoiding discrimination while using the E-Verify. They are listed in the E-Verify User Manual. The most important ones are:

  • Employers may not verify newly hired employees selectively, and must follow E-Verify procedures for all new hires while their company is participating.
  • Employers may not request that the employee use certain documentation for Form I-9 or E-Verify purposes. (This would be considered to be “document abuse.”)
  • Employers may not use E-Verify to discriminate against any job applicant or new hire on the basis of his or her national origin, citizenship, or immigration status.
  • Employers may not use the system to pre-screen applicants for employment.
  • Employers must provide their employees with an opportunity to contest a Tentative Nonconfirmation (TNC). (This is what happens if the system finds a “mismatch” between database information and the information you submit about the employee.)
  • Employers cannot take any adverse action against an employee based upon E-Verify unless the program issues a Final Nonconfirmation.
  • Employee must continue to work during the verification process.

A good jumping off point for perusing the generous amount of information available on government websites about E-Verify is the USCIS web page.

Other related posts include:

DOJ: How to Prevent Discrimination Arising from the Use of E-Verify

E-Verify Employer Dos & Don'ts

GAO Says Universal Mandatory E-Verify Will Be A Challenge

November 19, 2008

A Season for Giving: How Ready Is Your Ethics Policy for the Gift Season?

Posted by Molly DiBianca On November 19, 2008 In: Human Resources (HR) , Workplace Policies

Email This Post | Print this Post

Employee handbooks often include an ethics policy that regulate the giving and receiving of gifts.  These "gifting" policies are not intended to regulate gifts among coworkers as much as the exchange of gifts with vendors, clients, and potential customers.  The provisions of gifting policies are dictated, in large part, by corporate culture. How restrictive your policy should be will be determined by a variety of factors, including how much direct interaction employees have with vendors and customers. 

For employers who may be considering implementing an ethics policy for gifting, the rules for federal employees are a good starting point.  The general rule for federal personnel is that supervisors may not accept gifts from subordinates or personnel who receive less pay.  But there are exceptions to the rule.

During the holidays, federal supervisors may accept gifts from their direct reports so long as the value of the gift is $10 or less.  Cash gifts are not permitted in any value.  The opposite is true when it comes to gifts from supervisors to subordinates--no restrictions apply.  Nor are there restrictions on personnel gift giving between peers.

These rules do not apply to office gift exchanges so long as gifts are chosen at random or recipients are able to trade gifts.  There are no limits on gifts here since the gift buyer does not know who will eventually receive the gift.  But, if the gift exchange is not random, i.e., if names are drawn in advance, the gift value rules apply. Holiday gift giving at work

The rules for gift-giving with contractors are only slightly modified.  Federal employees can accept gifts up to $20 in value--no cash gifts may be accepted.  Federal employees who want to give a gift to a contractor must first check with the contractor to be sure he or she does not have any ethics rules that would preclude them from accepting the gift. 

There are also rules regulating the ever-popular office holiday party.  Supervisors can participate in the office party and can accept food and refreshments when those items are being shared by others.  Supervisors can also contribute to the cost of the party.  And, if the subordinate attends a function at the home of a supervisor, the subordinate may give a host or hostess gift of the type and value customarily given.  Supervisors and subordinates can accept an invitation to the other's residence for a holiday party without restriction. 

One prohibition that seems grounded in common sense is the rule prohibiting federal employees from soliciting money from other employees or from contractors for the purpose of buying a gift for a supervisor.  Group gifts are limited to infrequent (as opposed to annual) occasions, such as baby showers and retirements.  And even then, contractors may not participate in the gift giving.

These rules may seem extreme when applied to your workplace.  But they're a good starting point for ideas on just how restrictive such policies can be.  These rules also point out some of the potential areas of concern for employees who may be uncomfortable with the gift-giving and party-circuit traditions in the office environment.

November 18, 2008

10 Most Important Changes to the FMLA Regulations

Posted by William W. Bowser On November 18, 2008 In: Family Medical Leave

Email This Post | Print this Post

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL,) formally published its long-awaited Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) regulations on Monday, November 17, 2008. The regulations contain hundreds of changes and become effective on January 16, 2009 – just a few days before President-Elect Barack Obama takes office. This post discusses some of the most important of these changes.

1. Military-Caregiver Leave.

Military-caregiver leave was mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Eligible employees are entitled to take up to 26 weeks of leave during a “single 12-month period.” The regulations make clear that the 26 weeks will be calculated on a per servicemember, per injury basis. The 12-month period begins on first day of leave and ends 12 months later and any unused leave cannot be carried over.

The NDAA states that military-caregiver leave can be taken by spouses, children, parents or “next of kin.” Under the regulations, “next of kin” is defined as the nearest blood relative (other than spouse, child, or parent). All family members sharing the closest level of relationship (i.e. siblings) are next of kin. Importantly, the injured servicemember can designate in writing who is next of kin.

In order to take military-caregiver leave the servicemember must be receiving treatment for a “serious illness or injury” incurred in the line of duty while on active duty. The servicemember must be undergoing “medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy, is otherwise in ‘outpatient status,’ or is otherwise on the temporary disability retirement list, for a serious injury or illness.” “Servicemember” is defined as member of the Armed Forces, including a member of the National Guard or Reserves. The regulations make clear that the illness or injury need not have occurred at a time near the need for leave.

2. Active-Duty Leave (Leave because of a qualifying exigency).

The NDAA also created another form of military leave. This leave is called “active-duty leave” or “qualifying-exigency leave.” Up to 12 weeks of active duty leave can be taken by spouse, parent, child. This leave cannot be taken by a servicemember’s “next of kin.”
Active-duty leave must be as a result of qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that a member of the Reserves or National Guard is on active duty or has been notified of an impending call or order to active duty in support of a contingency operation. It does not apply to family members of Regular Armed Forces.

The regulations define seven categories of qualifying exigency: short-notice deployment; military events; child and school activities; financial and legal arrangements; counseling; rest and recuperation; post-deployment activities; and a “catch-all” category of situations agreed to by the employer and employee. Details of these categories are set out in an earlier post.

3. Serious Health Condition.
The regulations also modify the definition of “serious health condition.” Period of incapacity, however, unfortunately stays at “more than three consecutive calendar days.” Incapacity must, however, be for “full” days. Moreover, the first visit to the healthcare provider must occur within seven days of start of incapacity and the visit must be in-person.

When relying on two visits to a health care provider to establish “continuing treatment,” the visits must occur within 30 days of the first day of incapacity. The second visit must be determined by the health care provider, not the employee.

Chronic conditions must involve treatment at least twice a year.

4. Light Duty.
The regulations now provide that time spent in “light duty” work does not count against an employee’s FMLA leave entitlement, and the employee’s right to job restoration is held in abeyance during the light duty period. If an employee is voluntarily doing light duty work, he or she is not on FMLA leave.

5. Perfect Attendance Awards.
Employers will now be allowed to deny a “perfect attendance” award to an employee who does not have perfect attendance because he or she took FMLA leave – but only if the employer treats employees taking non-FMLA leave in an identical way.

6. Employer Notice Obligations.
The new regulations reorganize and modify an employer’s notifications obligations under the FMLA. The first change involves how employers must inform their employees of the FMLA. This general notice may inform employees electronically, but a paper posting must be seen by applicants. Employers without handbooks must provide general notice at time of hire. Employers with handbooks can include prototype general notice found in Appendix C of the regulations in such handbooks.

Upon a request for FMLA an employer must provide an employee with an eligibility notice. This notice addresses only whether the employee meets eligibility criteria. Notice must be supplied to employee within five business days, “absent extenuating circumstances.” The regulations provide that eligibility is determined (and notice provided) at the commencement of the first instance of leave for each FMLA-qualifying reason. If ineligible, the employer need only provide one reason for ineligibility.

If leave is designated as FMLA qualifying, an employer must provide the employee with a designation notice. A designation notice must be provided in writing and provided within five business days after employer has enough information to determine whether leave will be designated as FMLA leave. Prototype designation notice is contained in Appendix E of the regulations.

Only one notice is required for each FMLA-qualifying reason per 12-month period, regardless of whether leave is taken in a block or intermittently. Employer must notify the amount of leave counted against the employee’s entitlement. If known at time of designation it must be provided with notice. If unknown, employer must provide upon request of employee, but no more often than every 30 days.

Along with the designation notice, an employer must provide a rights and responsibilities notice. This notice must be in writing and spell out the specific expectations and obligations of employee and consequences of failure to meet these obligations. If leave has commenced, the notice must be mailed. A prototype notice of rights and responsibilities is contained in Appendix D of the regulations.

7. Employee Notice Obligations.
The new regulations also place new obligations on employees seeking FMLA leave. These obligations depend, in part, on whether the leave is “foreseeable” or “unforeseeable.”

Notice for foreseeable leave must be at least 30 days or “as soon as practicable” taking into account all the facts and circumstances. It should be the same day or the next business day after learning of need for leave. There is no more “two-day” rule allowing employees two days after the leave need occurs to inform the employer. Employees can be required to explain why it was not possible to give 30 days notice.

While an employee need not mention the FMLA or specifically request FMLA the first time leave is need, the employee must reference FMLA-qualifying reason if employer has previously provided FMLA-protected leave for this reason. This should eliminate an employers need to guess on every absence whether is for the FMLA-qualifying reason or not.

Importantly, an employer may require an employee to comply with notice and procedural requirements (including call-in procedures) for requesting leave, “absent unusual circumstances. Foreseeable FMLA leave can be delayed until 30 days after notice from employee if unusual circumstance don’t exist.

In the case of unforeseeable leave, an employee must provide notice to the employer “as soon as practicable under the facts and circumstances of the particular case.” Generally, notice should be within the time frame prescribed by employer’s usual and customary notice requirements for such leave. Employee must provide sufficient information for an employer to determine whether FMLA applies. Calling in “sick” without more explanation is not sufficient to trigger employer’s obligations.

An employee need not assert FMLA in first request for leave, but must reference FMLA-qualifying reason if employer has previously provided FMLA-protected leave for this reason. Again, an employer may require an employee to comply with notice and procedural requirements (including call-in procedures) for requesting leave, “absent unusual circumstances.” FMLA leave can be delayed for failure to comply unless policy requires notice sooner than practical.

8. Medical-Certification Process.
The new regulations make a number of changes to the medical certification process. Most importantly, it changes the time frames for requesting a certification and responding to such a request. An employer now has five days to request a certification instead of two days. The employee must then provide the requested certification within 15 days, regardless of type of leave. The employee must, however, be given additional time if he or she is using “diligent, good faith efforts” and informs employer of such efforts. Employer need not send a notice indicating that certification has not been received. An employer may get a certification annually for conditions that last longer than a year.

Employer may generally get a recertification every 30 days. If the initial certification says that an absence will last longer than 30 days, recertification can be requested when the initial certification says the absence will end or six months, whichever is shorter. Recertification can take place any time the employee requests: an extension of leave; circumstances described in initial certification have changed significantly; or the employer has information that casts doubt upon the stated reason for absence or continued validity of the certification.

The regulations also set sure a procedure for curing an incomplete certification. The employer must first state in writing what information is required to make certification complete and sufficient. The employee then has seven calendar days to cure the certification.

9. Substitution of Paid Leave.
Finally, the regulations impose new limits on the ability of employees to substitute paid leave for unpaid FMLA leave. Under the new regulations, an employee’s right to substitute paid leave will be determined by the terms and conditions of the employer’s normal leave policy, regardless of the type of leave (including vacation and personal leave). For example, if sick leave must be taken in full day increments, an employer can refuse substitution for a partial day of sick leave. Employee can, however, take the entire day and a full day will count towards his FMLA entitlement. Similarly, if personal days can be used upon two days notice, the same requirement can be imposed prior to allowance of substitution. The employee will, of course, be able to take the unpaid FMLA leave. The Employer can, and in most case probably will, waive the procedural requirements with or without the employee’s consent so that substitution can occur.

10. Legal Fixes.

The new regulations make a couple of technical legal changes. The first brings the regulations into compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Ragsdale decision which dealt with the consequences of an employer’s failure to properly designate FMLA leave. In Ragsdale, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the so-called “categorical” penalty (requiring an employer to provide 12 additional weeks of FMLA-protected leave after the employee had already taken 30 weeks of leave) contained in the DOL’s earlier regulation was inconsistent with the statutory limit of only 12 weeks of FMLA leave and contrary to the law’s remedial requirement that an employee demonstrate individual harm. The new rule removes these penalties and clarifies that if an employee suffers individual harm because the employer did not follow the notification rules, the employer may be liable.

The regulations also remove an impediment for settling FMLA claims. The regulations clarify that employees may voluntarily settle their FMLA claims without court or DOL approval. Prospective waivers of FMLA rights will continue to be prohibited.

November 17, 2008

Sample Safe-Harbor Policy for Improper Deductions From Salaried Employees

Posted by Molly DiBianca On November 17, 2008 In: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

Email This Post | Print this Post

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), is the hottest law in employment litigation today.  And for good reason--the potential liability can multiply exponentially if more than one employee is found to have improperly paid.  A single claim quickly becomes a collective action. 

If an unauthorized deduction is made, that deduction could convert the employee's status to non-exempt for the period during which the deductions occurred.  This means that the employer would be required to pay an employee for all hours work plus time and a half for any hours over forty (40) per week.  The loss of exempt status applies when there is another employee for whom improper deductions were made in the same job classification and working for the same managers or supervisors responsible for the improper deductions.  Therefore, improper deductions have the potential to become costly.

The U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL), regulations provide employers with an affirmative defense if improper deductions are erroneously made by the employer.  An employee will not lose his exempt status if the employer has a clearly communicated policy that prohibits improper deductions and sets forth a clear complaint procedure.  This "safe-harbor" policy is considered "clearly communicated" if it is published in an Employment Handbook or located on the company intranet.  The employer must also include information that indicates how an employee should report the violation, such as to notify the human resources department, supervisor or owner in writing.

I've written here before about the dangers of improperly deducting the salary of exempt employees.  (See  The Effect of Improper Deductions on Exempt Status Under the FLSA).  The topic came up again last week during a seminar I taught with Scott Holt--Advanced Issues under the Fair Labor Standards Act.  In discussing the potential dangers of improper deductions, I mentioned the need for employers to check their handbooks and confirm that they have included a "Safe-Harbor" provision.  A lot of eyebrows were raised over that statement and so I agreed to send the attendees a sample policy for their reference.  And, because I'm a firm believer in sharing, I'm posting it here, as well:  


SAMPLE SAFE-HARBOR POLICY (IMPROPER DEDUCTIONS FROM PAY)
The Company complies with the salary basis requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Company does not make improper deductions from the salaries of exempt employees. Exempt employees are those employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity and who are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime pay requirements.

What Deductions Are Permitted?
There are certain circumstances where deductions from the salaries of exempt employees are permissible. Such circumstances include:

    • When an exempt employee is absent from work for one or more full days for personal reasons other than sickness or disability; 
    • When an exempt employee is absent for one or more full days due to sickness or disability if the deduction is made in accordance with a bona fide plan, policy or practice of providing compensation for salary lost due to illness;
    • To offset amounts received as witness or jury fees, or for military pay; or 
    • For unpaid disciplinary suspensions of one or more full days imposed in good faith for workplace conduct rule infractions. 

Also, an employer is not required to pay the full salary in the initial or terminal week of employment; for weeks in which an exempt employee takes unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act or; for penalties imposed in good faith for infraction of safety rules of major significance. In these circumstances, either partial day or full day deductions may be made.

What to Do If an Improper Deduction Occurs
If you are an exempt employee and believe that an improper deduction has been made to your salary, you should immediately report this information to your direct  supervisor, or to the manager of the Human Resources Department.
Reports of improper deductions will be promptly investigated. If it is determined that an improper deduction has occurred, you will be promptly reimbursed for any improper deduction made.

Worried that you're not up to speed on all of the requirements of the FLSA?  Don't worry, you're not alone.  Catch up on the FLSA basics with some of the materials from our HR Summer School series:

Top 5 FLSA Topics

Executive Exemptions and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

5 Words of Warning about Improper Deductions and the FLSA

FLSA FAQ: Overtime and Unpaid Leave

FLSA 101: Who Is Covered Under the Fair Labor Standards Act?

FLSA 102: Minimum Wage Requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act

FLSA 103: Defining What Constitutes "Hours Worked"

FLSA 104: Overtime and the Fair Labor Standards Act

November 17, 2008

FMLA and NDAA New Online Resource for Injured Vets and Families Who Care For Them

Posted by Molly DiBianca On November 17, 2008 In: Internet Resources , Military Leave , National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

Email This Post | Print this Post

Final regulations for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a recent amendment to the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), were released by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), today.  The NDAA, discussed in detail in previous posts, provides a new type of family and medical leave to employees whose family members are servicemembers and who are either called to active duty or who are injured while in active duty.  The NDAA has been in effect since being signed by President Bush in January 2008.  But, with the DOL's publications of the final regulations, employers can expect to see more specific questions relating to leave under the NDAA.   

There is a new online resource to help employees who may be navigating leave under the military-caregiver provision of the NDAA.   The National Resource Directory, a collaborative effort between the departments of Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs, is a Web-based network of care that includes resources for wounded, ill and injured service members, veterans, their families, families of the fallen and those who support them.  (Last week, in honor of Veteran's Day, we posted about  similar initiative, America's Heroes at Work, which provides employers with a variety of helpful information and tools to assist veterans in the reemployment process.)image

The scope of the Directory is comprehensive and includes information on topics such as available benefits, eligibility requirements, help filing claims and appeals processes.  Information on education and employment is also available, such as financial aid and scholarship information, apprentice and internship programs, and job training and placement.  Additionally, family support programs, child-care services, counseling and support group information is all available in the Family and Caregiver Support section. 

Information on housing, transportation, financial and legal support, assistive technology, medical care, psychological and behavioral conditions is also provided.  Finally, resources can be listed by geography--on either a state or local level.  This is an excellent resource filled with a tremendous amount of information that your employees caring for injured or ill servicemembers could potentially find very useful.  Employers, you may consider sending a notice to employees about the availability of this and other government resources being made available to them at no cost. 

The original press release, issued today, can be found here:  Department of Defense Launches National Resource Directory For Wounded Warriors, Families And Caregivers

November 17, 2008

Delaware's ING DIRECT Invests in the Health of Its Employees With Remarkable Returns

Posted by Molly DiBianca On November 17, 2008 In: Wellness

Email This Post | Print this Post

Delaware's ING DIRECT's employee wellness strategy and approach has been discussed in earlier posts.  The background of the wellness program was the subject of Part I of this post.  In Part II, we reviewed the principals underlying the corporate health and wellness program that shape the company's various health-centric initiatives.  In this final part, we'll look at the Returns on Investment ING DIRECT has seen since first implementing its wellness program.

image

High-Energy Initiatives at The Energy Zone

At the core of the ING DIRECT wellness program is The Energy Zone. The Energy Zone, is the company’s on-site exercise facility, which opened in March 2005. The facility is expansive, sprawling across 10,000 square feet of the company’s Delaware location. The Energy Zone is fully equipped with all of the cardiovascular and strength-training equipment found in a membership-based health club, including full shower and locker room amenities. These conveniences represent substantial time savings for associates. In turn, employees, who pay just $10 per month in dues, are more motivated to participate, in part, because of the ease of access to the exercise infrastructure.

And, once associates make their way to the fitness center, they can expect to have some company. The Energy Zone is staffed with a team of professionals dedicated to the promotion of health and wellness. The team offers members guidance on general fitness principles and the value of making healthy lifestyle choices. Nutrition counseling is available as an important auxiliary benefit to ensure associates are able to maximize their efforts in the gym. The Energy Zone staff is an enthusiastic group, implementing a number of interactive and motivational programs to get associates excited about wellness and to keep that enthusiasm in high gear on a long-term basis.

So how well has the Energy Zone worked? The gym sees, on average, approximately 150 employee-members per day. This number represents an increase in attendance by more than 70% since 2006. There is little seasonal fluctuation in attendance numbers. The Energy Zone’s attendance rate has virtually no decline in November and December—a time when the busy holiday season is historically linked to low attendance.

The Doctor Is In

What separates the ING DIRECT model from even most its highly regarded competitors is its on-site medical care. Employer-sponsored health clinics have experienced increased popularity over the last several years. And, as is not uncommon with this front-running company, ING DIRECT was one of the first large organizations to recognize the concept’s many values.

Until recently, the number of employers that provide on-site health clinics has been tiny. A recent study, though, found that 32% of all employers with more than 1,000 workers either have an on-site medical center or plan to build one by 2009. Again, ING DIRECT is far ahead of its peers.

The medical facility offered at ING DIRECT is available for associates on an appointment and walk-in basis. The facility is staffed by a board-certified family physician, and a registered nurse, both of whom are accessible to associates via phone and e-mail. The availability of on-site treatment for routine, as well as urgent issues, resulted in a direct and immediate savings of more than 1,300 working hours in 2006 alone.

Results and Returns

For many businesses considering a health and wellness offering, the lingering question remains, “Will it work?” Contributing to this question are a number of other questions such as, “How do we define success?” and “What will be the net gain?” All of these inquiries are legitimate and arise, and each arises in the context of keeping in mind the best interests of the business.

ING DIRECT has addressed the questions in a number of ways. First, ING DIRECT set clearly defined long-term objectives, such as reducing the cost of health care to its associates and to the productivity of the organization as a whole. With those objectives in mind, it was able to create a set of short-term goals, such as decreasing the number of tobacco users and increasing the amount of cardiovascular activity associates participate in on a regular basis. And, with these targets in mind, it set to work to get results.

And results have happened—far beyond the optimistic goals set by the program’s director, Don Baag, M.D. For example, one of Baag’s early initiatives was a campaign to decrease the percent of ING DIRECT employees who smoke by 5%. By all accounts, this is an admirable goal, and even more so in light of the fact that participation was entirely voluntary—no carrot or sticks required.

To measure the company’s effectiveness, a health survey was distributed to employees, who were selected at random at the beginning and end of the campaign. The results were remarkable. In a mere five months, the percent of employees who smoked decreased by 24%. Regardless of how “results” are defined, there can be no doubt that such a remarkable accomplishment is, by definition, a success.

The results of the wellness program also can be evaluated by referencing enrollment statistics. If associates are enthusiastic enough to enroll in continued short-term programs, they’re more likely to sustain a long-term lifestyle change. In this category, as well, the ING DIRECT wellness program sets the standard high. For example, in the first year it was offered, nearly 20% of employees participated in the company’s flu-shot program. Additionally, for employees who are not members of the on-site fitness center because of residency and traveling issues, ING DIRECT offers up to $40 per month in gym-fee reimbursement. Nearly 200 employees are enrolled in this program, which requires participants to provide proof of attendance at least eight times a month.

November 16, 2008

New FMLA Regulations Explain Military-Caregiver Leave

Posted by William W. Bowser On November 16, 2008 In: Family Medical Leave , National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

Email This Post | Print this Post

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), will be the talk of the HR world next week when the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), formally issues its new revised final regulations. The new regulations finally define the scope of two new types of FMLA leave that were created by the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 (NDAA). These two new kinds of leave, known as active-duty leave and military-caregiver leave, provide FMLA leave for the families of servicemembers called to active duty or injured in the line of duty. In an earlier post, (New FMLA Regulations Define Scope of Active-Duty Leave), we addressed the regulations dealing with active-duty leave.  Now we examine the regulations on military-caregiver leave.

The NDAA provides that “an eligible employee who is the spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin of a covered servicemember shall be entitled to a total of 26 workweeks of leave during a [single] 12-month period to care for the servicemember.”   This type of leave is different from other forms of FMLA leave, including Active-Duty leave, in that it provides for up to 26 weeks of leave rather than 12 weeks.  In addition, the NDAA also provides that a covered servicemember’s “next of kin” is eligible to take FMLA leave to care for the servicemember.

Defining "Next of Kin"

The NDAA left several questions unanswered. The first group of questions involved the phrase "next of kin."  Just who is a "next of kin"?  Is it just one person or a group of relatives? Can the employee designate his or her "next of kin"?  Can the employer require an employee to prove his or relation to the servicemember? The new regulations address all of these questions.

The final regulations define a servicemember’s “next of kin” as the servicemember’s nearest blood relative, other than the covered servicemember’s spouse, parent, son, or daughter, in the following order of priority: blood relatives who have been granted legal custody of the servicemember by court decree or statutory provisions, brothers and sisters, grandparents, aunts and uncles, and first cousins, unless the covered servicemember has specifically designated in writing another blood relative as his or her nearest blood relative for purposes of military-caregiver leave under FMLA, in which case the designated individual shall be deemed to be the covered servicemember’s next of kin.

The final regulations also provide that all family members sharing the closest level of familial relationship to the servicemember shall be considered the servicemember’s next of kin, unless the servicemember has specifically designated an individual as his or her next of kin for military-caregiver leave purposes. In the absence of a designation, where a servicemember has three siblings, all three siblings will be considered the servicemember’s next of kin.

Finally, the regulations permit an employer to confirm an employee’s status as a covered servicemember’s next of kin.

How Much Leave Is Available?

The next set of questions left open by the NDAA involved the amount of military-caregiver leave that could be taken by an employee. Is this type of leave a one-time entitlement?  Can an employee take more than one period of military caregiver leave to care for multiple covered servicemembers with a serious injury or illness, or the same covered servicemember with multiple serious injuries or illnesses? How should the “single 12-month period” should be determined?

The final rule explains that an eligible employee may take no more than 26 workweeks of military caregiver leave in any “single 12-month period.” This section also provides that the 26-workweek entitlement is to be applied as a per servicemember, per-injury entitlement, meaning that an eligible employee may take 26 workweeks of leave to care for one covered servicemember in a “single 12-month period” and then take another 26 workweeks of leave in a different “single 12-month period” to care for another covered servicemember or to care for the same covered servicemember with a subsequent serious injury or illness. The final rule also provides that the “single 12-month period” begins on the first day the eligible employee takes military-caregiver leave and ends 12 months after that date.

November 16, 2008

U.S. Department of Labor Issues Rule Requiring Heightened Union Reporting

Posted by William W. Bowser On November 16, 2008 In: Labor , Legislative Update

Email This Post | Print this Post

The U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL), Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS), issued a final rule that will provide union members with more complete information about finances held in union trusts.  Union trusts are established and maintained primarily to provide benefits to union members and their beneficiaries, and common examples include credit unions, strike funds, redevelopment or investment groups, training funds, apprenticeship programs, building funds and educational funds. Under the rule, unions will be required to annually file a Form T-1 for trusts in which a laborunion, alone or in combination with other unions, possesses managerial control or financial dominance.


The Form T-1 will use the same basic template as the existing Form LM-2. Only labor unions with total annual receipts of $250,000 or more will need to file a Form T-1. Additionally, labor unions will not be required to file a Form T-1 on trusts subject to certain other disclosure requirements.

The union-trust transparency rule was issued on the same day as the regulations dealing with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FLMA).