I'm Not Absent But I'm Not Totally Present Either

The majority of companies large and small have some type of applied policy regarding absences in the workplace.  Undoubtedly, the policy outlines some sort of threshold on what constitutes abuse and may even outline the measures that will be taken to address and curb abuse.  Having such a policy is part of Human Resources 101.  Any experienced manager can name which employees are reliable and which ones can't seem to get to the office on time on a regular basis.  It is easy to list the effects of employee absenteeism: you've got your usual negative affect on productivity, the cost of paying out sick leave while also having to incur the cost of another employee covering the absent employee's workload, and there are the associated administrative costs.  It can be fairly safe to say that much of what affects employee absenteeism is employee health.  The more health issues an employee has, the more likely (not in all cases but in the majority) that the employee will have a higher frequency of call-outs.  After watching an episode of HBO's documentary series The Weight of the Nation, I was reminded of another, greater, impact on a company's bottom-line......presenteeism.

               Presenteeism is defined by Dictionary.com as:  "the practice of coming to work despite illness, injury, anxiety, etc., often resulting in reduced productivity"   This definition can also be expanded to include the loss of productivity that occurs when employees come to work with general limitations as a result of their health status.  For example, WebMD cites a study that indicates presenteeism is a cost of obesity.  According to the 2010 study, "the health-related cost of obesity among U.S. workers is $73.1 billion a year - enough to pay the salaries of 1.8 million new workers".  Staggering figures, right? Remember, this is over and above costs to a company connected to absenteeism. 

What I think the great take-away here is that the importance of company health plans cannot be stressed enough.  Specifically those that have intertwined health tools, incentives, and strong support.  

Finding Your Super Stance!

It's time for another TED talk.  This time I thought I would throw in some self-empowerment that will assist you professionally but also personally.  Amy Cuddy, a social psychologist and professor with Harvard Business School, shares her research regarding power dynamics.  What I found interesting is a study that Cuddy mentions in the beginning of the talk.  The study had people observe doctor-patient interactions without sound; meaning, they could only infer how the interaction went and could not hear what was being said.  Based on simple observation, they were able to predict which doctors would have an issue with lawsuits.  Basically, how well you can interact non-verbally, as well as verbally, has a high impact on employee relations (when relating the study results to a business application). 

Now....go out there and display your best Superman or Wonder Woman stance!

Lessons in HR Courtesy of the IRS: People Are Not Widgets

Its April and its tax time - you know, the time of the year when procrastinators say "oh ____ (insert favorite expletive)". I know, the IRS is not your most beloved of U.S. institutions right about now but I thought I would take the opportunity to share something positive about the IRS with you (and yes, there is a connection to human resources). 

Nina Olsen is director of the little known Taxpayer Advocate Service and charged with helping taxpayers in disputes with the IRS - yes, you read that right - they actually work on your behalf and they are funded by the U.S. government - go figure!   Here's the HR connection: according to Businessweek article The People vs The IRS, Ms. Olsen is attempting a change of culture within the IRS. As Olsen states (referring to taxpayers who contact the IRS), "Don't think of these people as widgets". Lesson one. Lest anyone forget the basic foundations of human resources, Olsen's statement reminds us that we are dealing with people. People that have unique life experiences, unique work experiences, and unique strengths. I'm going to give you another quote from Olsen and we are going to play a game we have played before on The HRR: word replacing. Replace the word "taxpayers" with "employees" and replace "IRS" with your organization's name: "For the majority of taxpayers, the IRS has become faceless, nameless, with no accountability and no liability".  

If saying that sentence above made you feel a bit uneasy - good.  Lesson two: human resources is a partner in the success of the organization. Say it out loud.  Human resources is not to be considered "a necessary evil". People are our business and people can make the difference between an organization's successful rise and growth or the freefall of all that shareholders hold dear. Last quote for you from Olsen (just to bring it all home): "No business could stay in business behaving the way the IRS does towards its people".  Now go out there and make sure this last statement does not apply to your organization.

Give Me Your Lunch Money!

Bring up the topic of bullying and most people will conjure images of the classic school bully strong-arming their classmates for some "extra spending cash". Unfortunately though, bullying may not go away permanently along with the end of childhood. A growing number of employees are speaking up about subtle and overt bullying they have experienced in the workplace. The Workplace Bullying Institute defines bullying as:

repeated, health-harming mistreatment of one or more persons (the targets) by one or more perpetrators that takes one or more of the following forms: 

• Verbal abuse

• Offensive conduct/behaviors (including nonverbal) which are threatening, humiliating, or intimidating

• Work interference — sabotage — which prevents work from getting done

Many of us can attest to being either witness or victim of a workplace bully and can provide several examples. In fact a CBS News article, How to Handle a Workplace Bully, cites a 2007 study where half of U.S. workers state they have "experienced or witnessed some kind of bullying on the job".  Some bullies are quite hard to pinpoint and address and might be those employees labeled "difficult" to work with. For example, I worked with an employee who had been with the organization for several years. She was knowledgeable about her position but was also easily offended when given any direction or, even, when asked a question about her processes. She would then "freeze out" the offending person who dared ask a question. On occasion, she would have loud outbursts of anger at other employees. The result - employees whose processes were closely tied with hers would come to me and request that I act as mediator. The employees felt trepidatious around her.

Bullying has a wide range of negative effects for both the organization and the employees. For the organization the existence of bullying can mean lower productivity, higher turnover, higher training costs, and increased potential for legal action. Employees being bullied may experience stress-related ailments.

The best way to reduce bullying in the workplace? Make it a less conducive atmosphere for bullies. In the example I gave above the long-term employee had been allowed to display bullying tendencies for several years without firm consequences. This implied that it was an accepted behavior in the organization. Proactively put a policy in place that defines bullying, indicates the reporting process, and outlines that disciplinary action will be taken on employees found to be bullying. For some great information and a sample policy check out the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries' fact sheet on bullying.

Adventures in HR Law

Time.com's recent article "Hertz Fires 26 Muslims For Refusing To Clock Out During Prayer Breaks" had me once again considering how my organization would handle a legal situation making the news. I will not profess to a great expertise in human resource law and I can safely say that not many human resource professionals will run the risk of making decisions involving the law without research and confirmation (often from the legal department). What I am very adept at is having a cache of resources from which I draw from. You have to be accurate when working within the confines of human resource law. Mistakes are costly. Have you ever spent some time looking around the offices of your organizations' legal team (or any legal counsel's office)? What do you see? Hoards of books. Research. Reference. Point made.

When faced with a situation that spills over into the law, I have found something that is a superb frame of reference from which to begin. It is something I took away from professional development in employee relations at Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations. The tool is called the HR Law Navigator. The Navigator works like a flow chart that, depending on the answers, guides you in identifying the categories of human resource law that may affect the outcome. The categories are: [employee] treatment, benefits, compensation, and safety. As you work through the Navigator you are posed a series of questions that act to zero in on the law(s) relating to the situation.

Although the Navigator does not seems to be offered outside of Cornell's professional development you can construct one by utilizing a similar format. Construct a flow chart that starts by asking top-level questions and then drills down. For example: the first question may be to "Identify Employee's Status" (e.g. Does situation involve an independent contractor or employee?). The next flow chart step may be to "Identify Organization's Status" (e.g. Where does employee work?; How many employees work at the organization?). You would then proceed to consider the various issues at play and then identify which category (or categories) and which law(s) the issues relate to. 

Make sure to consider any local and state laws that may apply to the situation, seek legal advice, and formulate a plan for follow-up for prevention. Try using Cornell University's searchable human resource library as a resource. In addition, save as favorites the web sites of various agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the U.S. Department of Labor, and links for local and state agencies.

The Mapping of the Law

In my latest quest to get more in touch with my creativity and in my continuing quest to satisfy my interest in all things human resource, I decided to combine the two pursuits into a mind mapping project. Mind mapping, a technique used to retain information through visual representation, was developed by brain and learning lecturer Tony Buzan. Mind Maps, as the official technique is referred, are used to "turn on" parts of your brain that you may not typically utilize when attempting to commit information to memory. Most people take notes and try to study those notes - according to the ThinkBuzan web site this is called "linear notation". Often, linear notation is ineffective and forces individuals to learn strictly by rote rather than establishing associations, meaning, and connection.

Check it out - it's actually a very interesting way to put thoughts down on paper and the result looks like something between a diagram and the spreading roots of a tree. Here's my attempt at mapping employee relations-related laws (click on the map to open a larger view):