PAID SICK LEAVE Poster Available FREE!

The Healthy Workplaces/Health Families Act of 2014 requires employees to display a Paid Sick Leave poster where employees can easily read it by January 1, 2015. The law may involve additional costs — but the poster is available to you for free. 

Simply click this URL to access the poster http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSE/Publications/Paid_Sick_Days_Poster_Template_%2811_2014%29.pdf, print it out on an 8 x 11 sheet of paper and post it with your other employment posters before the New Year.

Sickening News for Small Employers?

California's new paid sick leave law goes into effect July 1, 2015.

Once we've all exhausted our complaints about how totally unfriendly California is to small business — what should employers do to inoculate themselves?

First know what the law mandates. Unlike most of California employment laws, this statute applies to companies as small as one employee. All employers (subject to some narrow exceptions) must provide one hour of sick leave for every 30 hours worked by their employees.

Lawyers are still working out the details of how this law will be implemented. My advice – wait until the dust settles before developing your own policy and procedure.

In a few weeks HR professionals and lawyers will be sending out free sample lists of things to do to get ready for the law's start date is July. Keep tuned to www.hrlegalresults.com for further updates.  Or call me with questions and concerns at 650-518-0327.

Anti-workplace bullying statute: A death knell for merit-based pay?

There's a new statute that applies to employers with over 50 employees known as “abusive conduct prevention training.” The law appears to be innocuous enough — it “simply” requires these employers to add anti-bullying training to their already existing sexual harassment prevention training classes.

That appearance is deceptive. On closer examination you'll see that the law isn’t simply addressing the obnoxious behavior of willful bullies. It also covers managers who undermine “a person’s work performance.”

Why do I think this law will lead to the curtailing of merit-based pay? Because the new working generations have been brought up in an environment where they are always winners no matter whether they score any points in the game. For them everyone goes home with a trophy just for showing up.

Traditionally work has been different. Not every employee’s performance makes them an MVP. The rule has been that merit is rewarded. In Silicon Valley companies best performers get the best performance evaluations, the best salary increases and the best stock options. On the other hand poor performers are transitioned out of the company.

Will the traditional merit-based system seem “abusive” to people who have never heard anything but “good job.” A recent article on workplace bullying in Health Magazine advised employees that, “If you have a bully, chances are it’s your boss.”

Should the younger generation’s idea of any comparative performance rating as “abusive” prevail under this statute then managers could only give merit-pay raises at their peril of being subject to discipline or eventually being sued. Although the statute does not include a private cause of action against an abusive manager at this point that seems to be the direction we’re headed for in California.

When you're looking to add this new “Abusive Conduct Prevention” training to your sexual harassment classes keep in mind the precarious situation managers are being put into based on the definition of managerial abusive conduct in today's environment. Make sure your training and your company policy clearly delineates the difference between merit-based pay for performance from willful conduct that undermines and sabotages an individual’s work performance.

Managers Come In All Shapes & Sizes — So Should Their Training

We know all managers aren’t created equal — yet we treat them as if they are. Don’t think we do? Look at how we deliver performance management training. We pretend that one size fits all.  Wouldn’t it make more sense to match training and development to specific abilities?

Here are snapshots of three types of managers who have vastly different training needs — along with practical training suggestions matched to their particular needs.

The Naturals & Near Greats

How to Spot: Everyone knows a natural when they meet one. Enough said. The Near Greats are the ones you catch reading the Harvard Business Review. Both kinds are rare and invaluable individuals. Either they just get it intuitively — or they pride themselves on figuring it out.

Suggestions: Why not unleash the talents of these masters of employee motivation?  Go crazy. Instead of requiring these superstars to give annual reviews, simply encourage them to continue using the alternative methods they’ve honed — which have already proven to get superior results.

The Clueless

How to Spot: Clueless is a harsh but accurate label for 1) Non- conversational English speakers and 2) Socially-challenged managers. Both have distinct problems but they share one common trait—disastrous results.  Some make stellar individual contributions but their expertise doesn’t transfer to people who work with them. 

·      Language-challenged managers star in the Silicon Valley version of  “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” Everyone simply ignores the language barrier.

·      Socially challenged managers typically can’t read social cues. This kind of person isn’t hardwired to understand team dynamics or individual motivation.

Suggestions: This special group cries out for individual, one-on-one performance training. It’s a glorious day for the company when these challenged managers “get it” through individually nuanced preparation for the job.

The Scoffers

How to Spot: Scoffers resist making any improvements in their methods. They refuse to acknowledge that quality management is a job requirement. This type won’t even admit, for example, that positive reinforcement is a proven management technique.

Suggestions: I would tell this group that developing and applying management skill is a condition of employment for managers. Then I would start a special program — called “The Door”— for managers who won’t do the job.

Myth: Only Big Companies Get Caught For Overtime Violations

Myth Busted: Small business owners forget that disgruntled employees can make claims for wages before the Labor Commissioner— without hiring an attorney— and more often than not they can recover a lot of money.

In the last six months I heard about two small employers whose employees became dissatisfied and went to the Labor Commissioner. The employer with four employees had an award of about $40,000 against it. The employer with 18 employees had to pay about $25,000. Now it is defending similar complaints from the other employees who were also denied overtime.

Suggestions for Reducing Risk

• Don’t rest on the idea that all of your employees love you and they would never turn against you. Sadly it happens much more frequently than you think.
• Get realistic human resources and legal advice about how the Labor Commissioner rules on overtime claims before you make your decision as to who will be paid overtime. In practice these agencies find against employers far more often than finding in favor of the employer.
• Pay overtime from the get-go. The law permits small business owners to manage the payment of overtime. Many business owners find they actually increase productivity and save money through a closely-managed overtime program.

When HR & The Supreme Court Are At Odds, What’s an Employer Supposed to Do?

Several human resources departments are instituting a radical idea. They’ve abolished all written performance documentation including performance reviews. Written documentation during manager/employee meetings is often out. Rating of individuals for compensation purposes is also abolished as is ranking of performers in a growing number of companies.

The desire to get rid of performance feedback in a documented fashion is in response to employee dislike of hearing feedback on only a yearly basis coupled with manager dislike of writing what are seen as valueless annual reviews.

In stark contrast to the jettisoning of traditional performance documentation, the legal world warns that managers act at their peril unless they maintain detailed personnel files on employees. Lawyers warn managers to rank employees and keep documents of performance so they can defend against wrongful termination, public policy and discrimination claims.

The necessity for documentation of performance as well as ranking was just reaffirmed in a US Supreme Court case called Lawson V. FRM, LLC. In the Lawson case the Supreme Court held for the first time that private employers can be held to federal whistleblower liability.

Courts and agencies require substantial documentation of terminations of whistleblowers. Without performance evaluations and ranking of performers everything devolves into ”he said/she said” proceedings.  Such contests are usually resolved against the employer.

I suggest there is a vast middle ground that answers many of these concerns. The middle ground is to train, train, train managers to give both positive and negative feedback as a matter of daily business. The middle ground approach is much more acceptable to employees and it is easier on managers.

This kind of exchange can be documented easily in notations in calendars, text messages, emails, customer meeting agendas, and project updates. Training managers to structure regular documented one-on-one sessions with regular written agendas can also be a terrific source of evidence of ongoing performance feedback.

Managers also need to be trained to identify who are top performers and who are poor performers. No matter how much these practices are repugnant to some HR professionals, managers, and employees these comparisons are necessary to justify why the whistleblower was terminated and others were retained. As a side benefit focusing development efforts on those ranked at the top helps to retain key employees.

HR Results provides two customizable courses designed to help managers bridge the gap between conflicting advice from legal and HR:

Coaching 101

Strategic Management 101

For more information, contact Judy Pearce at HR Results today.

650-518-0327 or judypearce@hrlegalresults.com.

Who's Got A Ticket To Ride? New Commuting Legislation For 50+ Employers

The new Bay Area Commuter Benefits Program requires employers with 50 or more full-time employees in the Bay Area (included counties listed below) to offer commuter benefits to their employees. Employers subject to the program must select a commuter benefit, register via the program website and implement their program by September 30, 2014.

The Bay Area Commuter Benefits Program requires these employers to offer one or more of the following commuter benefit options to their employees:

·      Option 1: Pre-Tax Benefit - Allow employees to exclude up to $130 of their transit or vanpooling expenses each month from taxable income.

·      Option 2: Employer-Provided Subsidy - Provide a subsidy to reduce or cover employees’ monthly transit or vanpool costs, up to $75 per month.

·      Option 3: Employer-Provided Transit - Provide a free or low-cost transit service for employees, such as a bus, shuttle or vanpool service.

·      Option 4: Alternative Commuter Benefit - Provide an alternative commuter benefit that is as effective in reducing single-occupancy commute trips as Options 1, 2 or 3.

Failure to comply may incur a financial penalty—amount determined on a case-by-case basis. Although the agency won’t be able to audit everyone, remember that employees who don’t get this benefit will be able to seek remedies at 511.org.

Employers can visit 511.org and click on Bay Area Commuter Benefits Program for program information and employer outreach staff assistance or call 511 and say “Commuter Benefits” at the first prompt to help employers get started or contact Judy Pearce, 650-518-0327.

*Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma