tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-86445044799728525532024-02-18T20:02:41.517-08:00Curiosity Killed the NatSince everything relates to HR, this blog, is about everything.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-76743958403219104442013-10-14T14:46:00.000-07:002013-10-14T16:21:23.783-07:00Fired for being pretty.<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">You heard me. In a recent case in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/iowa-court-reaffirms-dentists-firing-of-woman-he-found-too-attractive.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=3&" target="_blank">Ohio</a>, a guy fired his dental assistant
because he'd grown attracted to her and was afraid he'd start cheating on his
wife. The all-male court agreed that this was a sensible decision, since the
termination was motivated by "feelings" rather than gender. This reminded
me of a <a href="http://lawofwork.ca/?p=1022" target="_blank">Canadian case</a> in 2009 in which a
woman was terminated after telling her employer she didn't like being called
"Boobie girl."<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The similarity lies in the fact that
in both cases, the issues were deemed not sexual harassment on the basis that
the employers did not actively pursue or expect sexual favors. The guy from
Ohio fired his dental assistant because he was concerned about his growing
feelings towards her, while the woman from Ontario didn't mean "boobie
girl" in a sexual way, just a... fun? Cute? Way to refer to her
subordinate in front of other employees, superiors, and customers.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Here is my issue with both of these
rulings, and why I think they open the door to more harassment in the
workplace. In both cases, the person terminated was removed for something they
have no control over, and in both cases the sexuality of the plaintiff were at
the core of their termination.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The problem is that these decisions
intentionally disregard the purpose of legislation meant to prevent
discrimination, be it based on race,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>gender,
sexual orientation, or whatever else. The point of such laws is to prevent an
employer from mistreating or terminating an employee for reasons outside of
their performance. One of the reasons cited in the Ohio case was that
since the employee was terminated after the employer's wife saw a few texts the
two had exchanged, the employer was justified in terminating her <span style="background: white;">“because of the activities of her consensual personal
relationship.” Here in Canada, we'd like to think such a ruling would never be
accepted since an employee cannot legally consent to a relationship with a
superior because of the authority the employer holds over the employee. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">However, the
Ontario case does nothing to suggest the rights we have as employees are
sacrosanct. In the "boobie girl" case, the supervisor called a
subordinate the aforementioned title on a regular
basis, supposedly as a joke. Since she had no sexual interest in the
person, it was not considered sexual harassment, merely retribution when she
complained and was terminated, for which she was compensated. The issue here
lies in the fact that while her supervisor was apparently not interested in her
subordinate sexually, by calling her that, she was in fact turning her into a
sexual object in the workplace. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">If someone were to
point out a person's body part to you, would your first instinct not be to
look? Does it not make it seem to other employees that this may be acceptable
behaviour? What if other people in the department began to call her that as
well? What if she was sexually harassed as a result of this when another
employee took the joke too far? Would the courts still feel this harassment
wasn't sexual in nature?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">To compare, there
was a case prior to this in which a religious woman sued her company for sexual
harassment (and won) when the secretary's husband dropped off her forgotten
lunch and kissed her on the mouth on his way back out. Since this was
considered a sexual element in the workplace, even though the plaintiff was not
in any way related to the instance and the contact was between a married
employee and her non-employee spouse, she won her suit. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Granted, the court
decided that while she was prima facie right, she wasn't entitled to any
damages (and what possible damages could there have been in that case?), but
the precedent was set. Bringing in sexual content is not appropriate in the
workplace, and retribution against the employee who complains is absolutely
against the law, which <i>should</i> mean that neither of the cases
above should have happened, but here we are after all, in 2013, still talking
about employers being "justified" in firing an employee because they
feared their own impulses, as if that is the employee's fault or problem.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Get some therapy,
dude.</span></span><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-47096029044646711532013-10-06T09:09:00.004-07:002013-10-06T09:10:14.627-07:00Predictive HR Analysis<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGaLksGjkQZwwNp4j1hWikIdqhp0YVkUdms1NCg3p_d0hK5DJ03AwI5t6ZCsZzHx7T6U7RkgCEOp4yK_TvfBQPHf2NSSuPE0x5wGKlSm8FXzis2ginHiu_qJtDMf2YANU1ez7Z_U5RN84/s1600/ID-10054407.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGaLksGjkQZwwNp4j1hWikIdqhp0YVkUdms1NCg3p_d0hK5DJ03AwI5t6ZCsZzHx7T6U7RkgCEOp4yK_TvfBQPHf2NSSuPE0x5wGKlSm8FXzis2ginHiu_qJtDMf2YANU1ez7Z_U5RN84/s320/ID-10054407.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: xx-small; line-height: 20px;">janoon028/FreeDigitalPhotos.net</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There have been quite a few advancements in business in the past few years, but changes in HR have mostly been legislative or technological in nature. The basics of what we do is still very much the same as it was fifty years ago. Only in the last 10 years have we been able to even begin discussion about our strategic role in the company and our ability to contribute to the bottom line in earnest. Even now many companies don't have a full-fledged HR department, let alone a business partner that has equal say in the direction a firm takes moving forward.<br />
<br />
BUT! There is a light at the end of that tunnel, and that light, in my honest opinion, is predictive HR analysis. Change, I feel, must often come from the bottom, and in this case, using predictive tools and the bright minds of many HR professionals, we can solidify our value as more than just a cost centre because we will have proven metrics like never before about the cost and value of the workforce.<br />
<br />
Now, this type of thinking has been around for a while. In fact, a couple of years ago I conducted more than one predictive analysis (with varying levels of success). Analysis is where my passion really is, so I dig into such projects with an enthusiasm normally reserved for sporting events and cheesy 80's action movies (my guilty pleasure).<br />
<br />
The wonders of HR analysis is that it allows employers, with very little added resources if any, completely reshape they way they do business by changing the way in which they deal with the public (through recruiting), employees, and ex-employees. The best part is that it could very well have dramatic impacts on the bottom line.<br />
<br />
Some of the things an HR analysis can tell you:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>What are the characteristics and traits of your top performers? What credentials, experience, and education do these traits align with?</li>
<li>Why do your top performers leave?</li>
<li>What are the most effective incentives?</li>
<li>How can we get more out of our people?</li>
</ul>
<div>
A lot of these questions are pretty general, which means a good answer will require tremendous amount of data to play with. It is our most important tool. Being able to document every step of the recruiting process, keeping application forms on file, digitalizing any disciplinary action, these are all pieces of the best practices puzzle HR analysts can help you put together.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Some of these questions you can get with other means, but you will never get the full picture without an HR perspective, and HR analysis can help your company use your funds more effectively and turn your employees and HR policies into your competitors' worst nightmare.</div>
Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-42196624666787605062013-09-10T13:42:00.001-07:002013-09-10T13:42:52.348-07:00Women in the workforceThis is obviously a contentious topic, and like a few others out there (Syria comes to mind), the greatest disparity is in the solution. That's enough preamble, let's get to the good stuff.<br />
<br />
A couple of years ago, Harvard Business School decided that while they can't necessarily change the business world, they can change the people going into it by taking a long hard look at their own practices and how women do at their school. The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/education/harvard-case-study-gender-equity.html?smid=fb-nytimes&WT.z_sma=HCS_U.S._20130907&_r=0" target="_blank">resulting article</a> is quite thorough, but I'll give you the Cole's notes and a few thoughts. I highly recommend giving the original a read if you have time.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Case Study</h3>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi107hNWmsX7PWqX2TVMSavdgdrWyFXyG-LdTcC8gTeM1dFOhp-rNnXpEPExG56k21pY3v93vFyUg3FmL-TM54JNexldd1fSgyL5CBnFcBjZSeS-w3K7h-bK-fJXgu9cMPhopzDlOMMwDI/s1600/ID-100195357.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi107hNWmsX7PWqX2TVMSavdgdrWyFXyG-LdTcC8gTeM1dFOhp-rNnXpEPExG56k21pY3v93vFyUg3FmL-TM54JNexldd1fSgyL5CBnFcBjZSeS-w3K7h-bK-fJXgu9cMPhopzDlOMMwDI/s320/ID-100195357.jpg" width="211" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">A search of "Business Women" gives me this image <br />of a woman in a suit checking her make up. Seriously?<br />Image courtesy of mrsiraphol/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The basic line of reasoning used by HBR was what they saw as a hyper competitive environment <br />
(which makes perfect sense considering what it takes to get in) that seemed to foster almost hostile attitudes towards women. Interestingly, both female students and staff commented about the prevalence of this. It came in a variety of shades. Many women felt pressured to find a partner while there, which meant they would refuse to speak up in class to avoid being intimidating to potential spouses, miss out on opportunities to prepare for exams to go on dates with fellow classmates, and put more work into their appearance in school and their social ranking than their academic performance.<br />
<br />
There were citations of secret societies that network and get job opportunities that women were locked out of, men who ranked female students by their looks, and a very small number of tenured female professors (even less female professors that were popular with students). In fact, quite a few female lecturers have left in the past over a lack of support from administrative, lack of opportunity to get tenure, and being objectified by their students.<br />
<br />
So what did they do with all this information? Among other things, more extreme moves included cracking down on social activities, instituting hand raising in class, putting all female professors under review and auditing every single one of their classes to help them improve as lecturers, putting in stenographers into classes to ensure class participation grades aren't reliant on a professor's memory, and bringing in software that would give a professor a gender breakdown of their grades (to help with individual biases).<br />
<br />
A tremendous amount of students felt anything from angry at being guinea pigs (at $50k/year, that's a costly experiment to be a part of), to irritated by being treated like children, to resentful to grateful and every shade of grey in between. There were protests by students and the relationship between then and the administration was publicly very sour.<br />
<br />
Of course, by the end of year 2 of the experiment, female professors were receiving substantially better evaluations from students, female participation in class skyrocketed, and the number of women performing at the top 5% of the class was at almost 40%. In fact, in strange contradiction to the public feud, student satisfaction rates were the highest they'd been in years.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Commentary</h3>
What does this all mean though? On the one hand, I am offended by the idea that women need to be babied into performing at the same level as their male counterparts, and that these upper echelon professionals are sacrificing their future for a chance at nabbing them<span style="font-family: inherit;">selves a stockbroker husband, but on the other hand it is difficult to argue with results, even when they sort of infuriate me. Of course, even the administrator responsible for jump starting this experiment at HBR noted, when asked about whether it was succe</span>ssful, “We made progress on the first-level things, but what it’s permitting us to do is see, holy cow, how deep-seated the rest of this is.”<br />
<br />
First and foremost, I think it's commendable that such a high profile school (with no shortage of applicants) takes such a public and strong stance on its commitment to creating equal opportunity for all their students and staff regardless of gender. Secondly, one of the most powerful ways to influence the business world is to influence the people entering it, especially since the demands of the cream of the crop are more likely to be taken seriously by potential employers. I wish them all the best in their continued efforts to make their campus truly accessible.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, I fear that this experiment deals only with the symptom. The men and women that arrive there have been subjects to decades of social conditioning that affects their behaviour and simply catering to those mental roadblocks will never be enough to achieve legitimate and lasting equality. We as a society learn to treat women as equal members whose primary value is not to be decided based on her looks or male affiliations. Not only that, but we cannot celebrate one gender to the exclusion of the other. Alienating men because we want women to feel better about themselves is no better than the opposite. We need to get beyond gender in the workplace entirely. There are much bigger issues the world needs to deal with than the genitalia our coworkers have. <br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If nothing else, it certainly opens the door to a greater frankness on the subject I can't say I've seen before.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-6276189794271088902013-08-24T07:28:00.003-07:002013-08-24T07:29:22.418-07:00Incompetence in LeadershipA couple of days ago the Harvard Business Review released a <a href="http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/08/why_do_so_many_incompetent_men.html" target="_blank">post</a> on their blog that I thought, at first glance, I would likely approve of. The idea behind the article is this: while some people may argue that women are underrepresented in leadership because of disinterest, lack of talent, or an impenetrable glass ceiling (depending on one's political leanings), the actual reason is more to do with our culture attributing symptoms of "hubris" more commonly seen in men to good leadership, when this is often false in practice.<br />
<br />
Obviously the topic of women at work continues to be something of a hot button issue. To me, the idea that we still need to have discussions on the skills and roles of men versus those of women is as ridiculous as suggesting that different skin tones or musical preference somehow impacts one's ability to be productive at work, but that's not the point being made here.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_nDeqMO_NpyZW1bFpQGLqrL6kgtjtyI9SK_5MEqdqwaL_bM95xJxSp3yWS2sXTNqgrMdvt68gBl_TNsLyMEroY9odbh2Vw9B2xEIH5QUoHbkSuQZMjg1m36M8Rkxw_jcBHYmU0-O5YXU/s1600/ID-10079322.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_nDeqMO_NpyZW1bFpQGLqrL6kgtjtyI9SK_5MEqdqwaL_bM95xJxSp3yWS2sXTNqgrMdvt68gBl_TNsLyMEroY9odbh2Vw9B2xEIH5QUoHbkSuQZMjg1m36M8Rkxw_jcBHYmU0-O5YXU/s320/ID-10079322.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><h3>
<span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 20.796875px; text-align: start;">Image courtesy of </span>David Castillo Dominici<br /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 20.796875px; text-align: start;">/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net</span></span></span></h3>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The article is very specific in targeting research that suggests that while the people who typically get promoted are consistent with people with personality disorders such as narcissism or psychopathy (in fact, there have been several articles over the years that state in no uncertain terms that high functioning psychopaths perform disproportionately well in business), those are not the best types of leaders. Of course, the author then makes the connection that women tend to exhibit these types of destructive personality traits less often than men and as a result are overlooked when promotion time comes around.<br />
<br />
Here's my issue with the thesis of the article. If the article merely said that there are traits that get one promoted and traits that make one a good leader, that the two tended to be polar opposites, and that we as a culture need to shift away from overconfident, self promoting jerks as "leaders", I would be in complete agreement. But he doesn't. The author makes the next leap that women, naturally more sensitive and humble, therefore make better leaders.<br />
<br />
As a feminist, the suggestion one sex is inherently better than the other immediately puts me on guard. No where in the article is it mentioned that there are certainly large amounts of sensitive, humble, well reasoned men who too are overlooked during promotion time.<br />
<br />
We have a strange, somewhat warped view of what makes a good leader. This is absolutely true. The type of person that often reaches management levels are those that self promote and are in general more concerned with their personal success than that of the company they work at. However, and this is a substantial however, there are plenty of excellent managers out there, both men and women, and not all of them are the same because different traits will serve different people and different situations, you guessed it, differently.<br />
<br />
Rather than making blanket statements about how one gender does outperforms the other in some way or another (and at least the author made sure to note that whether this is by nature or nurture is unknown), why don't we talk about what qualities we want in our leaders and how to best fill the seats with those people? Women and visible minorities (every culture has their own group of underrepresented people) are woefully lacking in management, yes.<br />
<br />
The solution however, isn't to say that white men are simply worse leaders, it is to create holes in that ever present glass ceiling through mentorship programs, social programs that help fill the gaps in cultural expectations (such as child care or local experience), and moving, as a society, towards a culture where aggression or cockiness aren't considered a man's domain, just a jerk's, because they come in all shapes and sizes, and most should never be in charge of anything.<br />
<br />Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-39228867451116914462013-08-21T21:14:00.000-07:002013-08-21T21:16:24.054-07:00Back from the dead! and HR's role in controlling employee schedules.<span style="font-family: inherit;">Hello world!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">After having taken a nearly full year sabbatical from the blog while I focused on work, I am very happy to be back. Part of my return can be accounted for by my decision to pursue my CHRP designation, starting with writing the NKE in November. I'll be posting study tips as I go along since I have found that there doesn't seem to ever quite be enough of that when you're in the midst of studying.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">With that out of the way, we might as well jump right back in with some news from across the pond. A young man was found dead in his shower last week. Early reports indicate that this may have been, in some part, brought on by his working hours at Merrill Lynch.</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfdNblildMNAonaSrvH18VLS9zTofif-WG6sObLvbQTouGqKkjyLU74IMfzSxNwFqBIhCiH_n8giA6mnurMybSKFqo3KWQQ_WVMpwFIWKuNK70VJD-1F9-zDnXN8kaZvwzVY1p5UiEVwo/s1600/ID-10089862.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfdNblildMNAonaSrvH18VLS9zTofif-WG6sObLvbQTouGqKkjyLU74IMfzSxNwFqBIhCiH_n8giA6mnurMybSKFqo3KWQQ_WVMpwFIWKuNK70VJD-1F9-zDnXN8kaZvwzVY1p5UiEVwo/s1600/ID-10089862.jpg" width="212" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 20.796875px; text-align: start;">Image courtesy of </span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: xx-small; text-align: start;">imagerymajestic</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 20.796875px; text-align: start;">/ <br />FreeDigitalPhotos.net</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">This has brought on discussion about industries where working hours are less regulated and where the expectation is that the employee essentially devotes themselves to the company until they have earned their stripes, so to speak. This practice is fairly common place here in Canada too. Fields such as medicine, finance, and law have implicit (and sometimes explicit) expectations of their employees that they put in 60, 70, 80, even 100 hours in a given week.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In Ontario, there are strict regulations around how many hours an employee is required to work, as well as how many hours they can be asked to work. That number never exceeds 60 hours a week and anything above 48 requires ministry approval. <a href="http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pubs/hours/infosheet.php" target="_blank">The Ministry of Labour website</a> is very clear that the onus is on the employer to submit the appropriate documentation and follow the laws, but that it is the responsibility of the employee to come forward if the rules aren't being followed.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The fields where the violations are the greatest tend to be either the ultra competitive, well paying positions such as the young man who's death is now sparking a controversy in the UK, or the type of low paying, low skilled work given to people with little agency over their choice in job.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The question is, since inherently, the types of people who end up in these roles are the least likely to come forward (the fear of losing a hard-fought job being too much for most), how do we as HR professionals play our part?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">What would an HR person working in a law firm that mandates 3,000 billable hours (per year) from their associates do? How about simply rewarding the lawyers who pulled in the greatest amount of hours?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Where does an HR person step in if an hourly employee is being encouraged to work more hours than there is ministry approval for? This is especially troubling since in many situations like this there is no HR person involved.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At the end of the day, there is only so much HR can do if the employee isn't willing to come forward, but where do we draw the line?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Follow <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/aug/21/bank-intern-death-working-hours?CMP=OTCNETTXT8115" target="_blank">this link</a> to learn more about <span style="background-color: white; line-height: 16px;">Moritz Erhardt and the UK controversy on the Guardian. </span></span>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-69778961203759505892012-10-16T14:26:00.000-07:002012-10-16T14:26:32.017-07:00Penalizing Employees for Customer Theft<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://concert-2012.ca/wp-content/uploads/gas-price.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://concert-2012.ca/wp-content/uploads/gas-price.jpg" width="207" /></a></div>
The metro had an interesting article today about a new piece of legislation that will require that customers at gas stations pay before pumping as a way of preventing "gas and run" theft. This method is already used in the US, and frankly while it is deeply inconvenient, I understand the method to the madness.<br />
<br />
Having said all that, there was another tidbit that completely appalled me. Some stations owners apparently feel entitled to penalize attendants for this stolen gas by deducting the amounts stolen from their paycheques. That is absolutely unacceptable and I'm pleased that the legislation introduced will make the practice illegal. To suggest that an employee should risk life and limb to prevent a person from driving off with stolen goods just absurd.<br />
<br />
How are they expected to prevent this? Should they throw themselves in front of the car to keep it from disappearing into traffic? Perhaps take out a shotgun and riddle the car with holes? Or else use telekinesis to convince the person to turn back around and pay? How on earth does anyone verbalize a logical reasoning for why these minimum-wage employees need to take the brunt of someone's criminal activity?<br />
<br />
The whole story has me completely incensed and I will be tracking the legislation on this blog. Hopefully it won't be long before such nonsense is put to rest.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-331518568017581052012-05-22T15:54:00.000-07:002013-08-21T21:29:37.896-07:00NBC and poor HR practices<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiixFkfyGEv_ocuqG8BcPL4_3mqX2mgdc3pIBfxbFXen1_yqUwlnH3Y2IHk31rm8MQrxzrisxJECKLqR-NUqQA1csxAGgHDF1C0IFZIkdUmuD7ne_AE6wpQ34uB4rPRxjV5yCBcksgz4eQ/s1600/Community_dvd.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiixFkfyGEv_ocuqG8BcPL4_3mqX2mgdc3pIBfxbFXen1_yqUwlnH3Y2IHk31rm8MQrxzrisxJECKLqR-NUqQA1csxAGgHDF1C0IFZIkdUmuD7ne_AE6wpQ34uB4rPRxjV5yCBcksgz4eQ/s320/Community_dvd.jpg" width="232" /></a></div>
For
once I will stray from my typical rants regarding Rob Ford (not that
media blackouts and the illegal purchase of municipal land are boring)
and the TTC (not that rampant absenteeism and financial irregularities
fail to interest) and talk about TV. Mostly because I am both tired of
looking at how my city is handling itself, and because sometimes an
employer commits such a public faux-pas that it's impossible to think of
anything else.<br />
<br />
NBC has been known for making fairly
poor decisions, and is mostly considered to be justly last in American
networks. Since many of my favorite shows air on the peakcock, I was
inclined to disagree, but no more. Community is a show, for those who
don't know, that has been airing since 2009 when it was created by
writer and producer Dan Harmon. He has been in the news quite a bit in
the past few months for missteps such as publicizing private voicemails
from actors on the show, rumors circulating that he was failing to
finish scripts on time, and threw tantrums on set to get his way. It
seems the network has decided that they'd had enough, and the value his
creative mind generated presumably was outweighed by his behaviour.
Whether this is the case or not really isn't relevant here, nor do I
feel I know enough about the situation to comment one way or the other
(though as a fan, I fear change).<br />
<br />
The issue at hand is
how he was terminated. Technically, as a writer/producer he was on
contract, and that contract expired. They were under no obligation to
renew (though the assumption is that if you continue a project, you will
keep the driving force behind it) and, it seems, already had a couple
of people lined up for the position. They released a press release
indicating the new showrunners, suggesting that Mr. Harmon would take on
a consulting role, and that, prior to the internet, would have been the
end of it. Mr. Harmon posted on his tumbler later that night that he
had received no communications from NBC, nor did he agree to any
substitute position with the show. Since there had been no indication
that he would be removed from his position (even with all the errors in
judgement), to terminate a working relationship through the media seems
unethical to me. Not only does it disrespect the employee, but it
affects the morale of everyone at the company, who now know that their
jobs are on the line even if they are not aware of it - perhaps tomorrow
they will open the newspaper and their name will be there as an
ex-employee. Such poor judgement at the top level can put an entire
department at risk as stakeholders lose faith in the project's ability.
Where was the HR department to put a stop to this nonsensical level
of theatrics before the axe was dropped?<br />
<br />
The reaction has been fairly distinct. Fans of the
show have panned the decision, TV critics have noted that the decision
to continue a creative experiment without the creator was an exercise
doomed to fail, and employees have reached out in sympathy. It seems
quite a few of the writers will also be moving on, perhaps to an
employer that will offer them a little more respect.<br />
<br />
While
what they did was not illegal, it was downright distasteful, and shines
a bad light on everyone involved. Discretion in such situations is
paramount, and it is a lesson that NBC and Sony are now being forced to
learn through the public lynching they face.<br />
<br />
On a side note, if you have not seen this show yet, I suggest you take the time. You will not regret it. <br />
<br />
<br />
#sixseasonsandamovieTalihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-19526161529343276642012-03-25T09:23:00.000-07:002012-03-25T09:23:21.303-07:00Rob Ford and Ethics, a story of two things that do not mixAs a lover of Human Resources, and a true believer in the importance
of the protection of the law, especially when it comes to possible
victims (such as employees) who may be taken advantage of by those with
greater authority, the past year has been very difficult. While I have
always been a vocal opponent of Rob Ford, even I was stunned when he
fired TC chief general manager Gary Webster, at great cost to the City,
for providing an expert opinion in a subject he is well versed in. Of
course, this is not newsworthy anymore. He was replaced by someone
presumably more amiable to the idea of siding with the boss no matter
what. Of course, even he hasn't publicly supported Ford outside of a
comment suggesting that Toronto will still a long term subway plan,
especially for the busy downtown core (a statement I don't think would
meet with great disagreement).<br />
<br />
<br />
This, I find, is the best illustration for the two elements which
make Ford a terrible employer. (a) He violates the law by terminating
good employees without cause, (b) he doesn't seem to recruit correctly,
as he has consistently found his hires to fall short of his
expectations. That is the quintessential bad boss - can't retain good
people, and can't hire effectively (in this case, "effectively" would
mean finding the Yes Men he's looking for).<br />
<br />
<br />
Certainly, there has been growing animosity between the
Commission and its users, fortunately since the reign of Ford began, we
have seen a slow shift of that animosity towards his administration, and
Councillors from the suburbs (who would doubtfully ever replace their
gas guzzlers with a metropass) who are attempting to dictate how those
within the city will travel. His lack of ethics, complete disregard for
the rule of law, and manipulation of government contracts to profit his
family have done the impossible - they have boosted public opinion of
unions and public sector employees.<br />
<br />
<br />
Perhaps some good can come of this yet?Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-5231339006320003092012-03-02T18:24:00.001-08:002012-03-02T18:24:12.828-08:00Karen Stintz's Stint on Undercover Boss CanadaI know I've been harping on this topic a bit heavily, but it's my blog so if you don't like it go away.<br />
<br />
Earlier today I finally caught the Undercover Boss episode featuring our TTC warrior Karen Stinz in her battle to find a balance between Rob Ford's lunatic 10% budget cuts and a public that loathes them by getting to know how things are run on the front line.<br />
<br />
Fantastic idea. Especially in what I like to call a post-99% world, where there is an increasing anger from people in the bottom of organizations at the lack of real knowledge their higher ups possess in what it actually takes to make the company run (as opposed to the theoretical/strategic/etc), the idea to go under cover and gain perspective, knowledge from the trenches, and a well rounded view of your organization is excellent.<br />
<br />
Of course, praise is rarely worth a blog post, so here's my but. Granted, Karen detailed that the reason she selected work in maintenance as the primary areas of undercover work is that that is where she was hoping to find some ideas of saving costs without harming the services they offer. She worked assisting the cleaning staff, reupholstering, servicing buses and one day in a subway train. She said the number one complaints she gets are that the trains and buses and dirty. I find that difficult to believe.<br />
<br />
My issue with the way this was conducted is that it was quite clearly done in such a way as to avoid the actual hot button issues, and then conclude that the reason the public is angry is because the media tells them to. I have never seen a maintenance worker featured in an article on poor TTC staff. In fact, the only time I ever heard mention of them was when the drivers at the TTC were able to secure raises for themselves at the expense of wage increases for maintenance staff after the last threat of strike.<br />
<br />
I am deeply offended that Karen's conclusion was not that there were serious customer service... Let's call them areas of opportunity, because she met 5 of the very best employees on the TTC (they knew it was going to be televised, meaning they'd have chosen the best employees, who would have been on their best behaviour), but just that - clearly - the media has been brainwashing the imbeciles and degenerates that apparently use her system. It's not that many drivers and administrative staff are rude and incompetent (see previous blog posts for evidence of this), it's just the public's fault, because we apparently love killing ourselves on the tracks.<br />
<br />
Yes, some people are disgusting and will urinate on the stations. Some people are rude and they even showed a customer who spit on a driver as she was exiting the bus. Of course, one thing I learned from the pepper spray incident in the US late last year, is that editing is very important to the message, and as a result of personal experience, I would be very curious as to what the driver did that made this woman so angry (NOT that I justify her actions).<br />
<br />
My question is this, are Torontonians stupider than other transit users, such as in NY, Tokyo, or Moscow? Are we dirtier? Ruder? More violent? Are we more likely to slash seats? In my travels, I learned that the answer is most likely no. The question which follows is then, why do we have to accept a subpar transit system when compared with these other international cities? In the 70's, we had an amazing, well functioning, and clean subway. New York had a dirty and dangerous laughingstock. How is it that they have been able to reverse this, while we deteriorated? Why is it that in Tokyo it is unacceptable for a train to be 1 minute late, and here, I am yelled at for asking an operator if there is a delay when the signs say 15 minutes to the next train. Am I also being manipulated by the media to think that just because virtually every experience I have had in the last 2 years with ANY member of the TTC family has been at best neutral and at worst costly and frustrating? How about the fact that this whole customer service media nightmare of theirs started not with the media, but with a single photo posted on a blog of an operator sleeping on the job?<br />
<br />
I guess we're just wrong, stupid, and malleable by the malevolent "media". No trouble here, folks, just a few million confused citizens. So much for this being a learning opportunity, just a well organized photo op.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-65913884112313952682012-02-06T21:54:00.000-08:002012-10-16T14:38:25.134-07:00City Hall vs. the employeesIn a shocking(!!) turn of events, Rob Ford's cronies strong-armed the Union into accepting reduced job stability. Readers of this blog know that I do not enthusiastically nor unconditionally support unions, and have said on a couple of occasions that they need to reassess their function to remain relevant.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Rob_Ford_Mayor.jpg/220px-Rob_Ford_Mayor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Rob_Ford_Mayor.jpg/220px-Rob_Ford_Mayor.jpg" width="196" /></a></div>
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Having said that, employees being taken advantage of by a belligerent and malicious employer who has proven time and time again to be ignorant of the law and disrespectful of it is absolutely and unequivocally unacceptable.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The Ford steamroller has paved a new road for negotiations with unions by first taking down CUPE Local 416 and their unreasonable demands to maintain job security in a weak economy - even over pay increase (which would save the City money).<br />
<br />
This is just the latest in his HR gaffs. Though I suppose his biggest gaffe was hiring someone competent to head the TTC - someone not willing to follow the tagline of the day and collect her paycheck but indeed wants to improve conditions for Torontonians by stopping the Ford-made underground gravy train. People do sometimes forget that a political figure such as Mr. Ford is also a manager, and with such a title comes great responsibility. To be a great Mayor you need the same qualities as a great boss - listen to your subordinates, they may have some good ideas; respect your employees (and shareholders!); and absolutely most importantly of all - keep your ego in check, because when it's out of control it makes you and your company/city look like fools.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.johnbauldphotography.com/Images_Corporate/JBP-John_Bauld_Photography-Mike_Harris_Premier_Ontario.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.johnbauldphotography.com/Images_Corporate/JBP-John_Bauld_Photography-Mike_Harris_Premier_Ontario.jpg" width="248" /></a>Since being elected, he has successfully alienated many on his own team (another reflection of poor management - even the top dogs at the now disgraced Goldman Sachs had a strong core team of supporters). <span class="st">In fact, even the Ontario Conservatives have distanced themselves from his message. </span>He has also managed to alienate neighboring businesses, with Mississauga Mayor Hazel <span class="st">McCallion threatening to go after City Hall if the new transit plan intrudes on her own plans for developing transit in the West end. </span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">Just as Premier Mike Harris did before him, Mr. Ford is poised to leave behind a legacy of short-term decisions designed to support his allies and family-owned companies while leaving Toronto's vibrant community to pay for the increased tension between the Public and public employees, reduction in job security and quality of life (even if you drive, since one of the proposals would add tolls to Toronto roads to pay for the subway extension). We have yet to bring Ontario's standards up to pre-Harris era in terms of funding for education, health care, and public transit, and continue to pay for his costly decision to amalgamate the GTA (a direct cause to Ford's election). It seems we will now spend the next two decades digging ourselves out of the hole Mr. Ford is digging us into.</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">Bottom line - short sighted managers will lose their best employees, the loyalty of their staff, and the trust of their stakeholders. I do not expect to see Mr. Ford return after the next election, but I suspect he will continue to "manage" employees in the same negative and demotivating way.</span>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-61435015406788555362011-11-05T08:16:00.000-07:002011-11-05T08:17:31.371-07:00The TTC and their HR woes<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaK9iMdjw_HLAQYI54KbCOx9Ks-BuW5w0iqruQbxifahbztZ-5hTFdByXurfmxtGhZ7M-u5eLpc_pnfEKd_0cn7iZhWTP0FopGEt5eNekqGmVhLSAqidbRsiHnmgvJWPZ6phJbPXg7_bY/s1600/ttc+NIS" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaK9iMdjw_HLAQYI54KbCOx9Ks-BuW5w0iqruQbxifahbztZ-5hTFdByXurfmxtGhZ7M-u5eLpc_pnfEKd_0cn7iZhWTP0FopGEt5eNekqGmVhLSAqidbRsiHnmgvJWPZ6phJbPXg7_bY/s320/ttc+NIS" width="320" /></a></div>I have been holding my tongue about the TTC for a while, so I've decided I can throw in another rant. If you've read my previous TTC rants, you know I feel their bottom line issue is their industrial relations. Their Union has far too much power, and has pretty much dictated where every new cent goes - higher wages for people with a high school degree and a driving license to be able to make $75,000 driving a bus/train, often poorly, and sometimes under the influence of things that lead to passengers dying.<br />
<br />
In February I signed up for the MDP program. Through this, I could get the metropass 10 bucks off, so long as I agree to buy one every single month. The added bonus is that they mail it to you at least a week in advance, so no need to even get it, and you either pay for the whole year in advance or they charge you monthly. Over the past 8 months, I have learned that there is a special section in hell dedicated to the incompetent and rude people that seem to be specially picked out to work in this program, which is really something when one knows my already low opinion of most employed there.<br />
<br />
When we came down to submit the application, we had a member of their team help us complete it and vet it for correctness. We used 2 tokens to get down there. The next day, we get a call that the form was completed incorrectly, and that we'd have to return to complete it again. Two more tokens. The end of the month came, and no metropass. We call. We are told that because the form was completed incorrectly the first time, it was set to pick up only, and when we completed it correctly someone must have forgotten to remove that limit from the system. We have to come pick it up. Two more tokens.<br />
<br />
Two months later, the postal services stop. They say they'll have a driver deliver it, we just need to be home to get it. We stay home Monday. No metropass. Teusday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday all pass without delivery. We call every day, and are told it would either be there tomorrow or the day after. We ask if they think we're unemployed that we can just sit around at home all day. Our concerns are ignored. Friday, we go down there, and spend an hour yelling at their staff, who assure us it'll arrive between Monday and Wednesday. After filing a formal complaint and refusing to leave, we are given the metropass with reluctance. No one even attempts to acquiesce us, they just give us the product we have already paid for as a favor. Thanks, guys.<br />
<br />
Last month, we moved. Due to exceptional circumstances, we didn't know where to until October 6th or so. Once we moved, called their office to inform them of our new address, a couple of weeks before they're supposed to send out the metropasses. We said if it was too late to change it in the system, we would be happy to come pick it up. The result was another rude employee, telling us the cut off for address changes is the 5th, and then it goes to a different department. "Why can't you just not send it then?" That's the other department, we're told. "Ok, transfer us to that department." They don't take calls from the public, we're told. The metropass will be sent, to the wrong address, and there is nothing we can do about it. We went back there to check every day, but of course, it was not there. Either thrown out or stolen, who knows. As a result, I had to purchase a new November metropass. Another formal complaint is filed.<br />
<br />
To sum up, every single person working there, and we've dealt with MANY, is rude and incompetent. They have no ability to perform anything beyond the simple task of signing you up, which they do poorly, or changing your address, which won't help you get your metropass. Taking your money seems easy enough. As a result of their incompetence, this program, which should have saved us $100 over a year, has actually cost us $31 dollars more than just buying the passes every month from a dealer, and many hours and sleepless nights.<br />
<br />
This office is yet another example of how the TTC management is not only a pawn of the union, but even in running the TTC they fail to develop a working hierarchy or inter-departmental communication which would help them get more people to sign up for this program (which would guarantee them income and stabilize their balance sheet) and in general be more supportive of TTC initiatives (such as requests for additional funding from the government, or wage increases for their employees).<br />
<br />
To be honest, this program has made me lose faith in the TTC's ability to perform in their current set up. I used to be their greatest supporter, and now I resent having to use the system. At this point, they need to either restructure the entire system, force funds into maintenance (Especially for the new train, which seems to break down every time I use it), or they need to be sold to a private organization who knows how to operate a billion dollar business. It is of no surprise to me that every single economic survey done of Toronto says the same thing - great city, but your public transit is terrible and expensive.<br />
<br />
Time to change that, with HR - and if they can't, with a sale.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-88877162037436803552011-10-29T11:35:00.000-07:002011-10-29T11:35:50.262-07:00Work and lossA few days ago, a close member of my family passed on. She was 11 years old (but nearly 80 in human years). It has been a difficult few days, but nonetheless, my mind connects this to HR (coping mechanism?).<br />
<br />
I am fortunate enough to have a job I can do from home, and an understanding group of coworkers, so I was able to stay home rather than having to deal with these news in the office. However, if you are an hourly employee, work in emergency services, or have an un-sympathetic boss, coping with loss may become extremely difficult. As such, I've complied a small list of resources and basic rules that govern how employees who have lost someone (or about to) must be treated, and what rights you have.<br />
<br />
If you have a (close) family member who is suffering from a terminal illness, section 49.2 of the Employment Standards Act allows you to take up to 8 (unpaid) weeks to care for them. Note that a week is Sunday to Saturday, not necessarily a standard work week for you. It is also important to note that, if requested, you would need to provide proof that the family member's illness must be at a severity level "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 17px;">with a significant risk of death occurring within a period of 26 weeks or such shorter period". </span>Very sensitive. It also stipulates that once that person passes, you must return to work the week after (e.g. if they passed Saturday, you're back at work Sunday, even if you had another week or two left in the leave). However, if they do not pass during the leave, but the illness continues, you may be permitted a second leave.<br />
<br />
Note that the request needs to be made in writing, but interestingly, there is no minimum on the number of employees the company must have before this rule comes into effect.<br />
<br />
Another option is the Personal Emergency Leave (section 50.1). This applies if you or a family member (including children-in-law) have been injured or killed. There is a maximum of 10 days you can take off in this instance, and the company must have at least 50 people for this type of option to become available. You'll also need to provide proof of the need for a leave.<br />
<br />
Other that these, you're essentially out of luck. If you have vacation time you can use that, but conversely, I would advise informing your superior of the situation and see if they're willing to help. I know I've worked in places where I would not be eligible for these ESA rights, but at the end of the day most employers know they won't get much out of you for a little while, so a fair deal can often be struck.<br />
<br />
As for me, I'm just lucky my boss has a dog, too.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjryETuKVYZDGmibiTAPANupYWVlFTEcGJ4OWnbLwnh01lg97kXzoQtcQ9zG5UKbqU7GEkkMAaPTXBf1RYmLfOjt6rVxugM4bLnrPgjE2RDvjZWPu8bjJeD83L0Pg5z26bxTTWaIHvI65g/s1600/goof.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjryETuKVYZDGmibiTAPANupYWVlFTEcGJ4OWnbLwnh01lg97kXzoQtcQ9zG5UKbqU7GEkkMAaPTXBf1RYmLfOjt6rVxugM4bLnrPgjE2RDvjZWPu8bjJeD83L0Pg5z26bxTTWaIHvI65g/s320/goof.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"> Poochini</div><div style="text-align: center;">RIP</div><div style="text-align: center;">2000-2011</div>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-43068063288840677002011-08-21T19:45:00.000-07:002011-08-21T19:45:01.133-07:00the difference between American and Canadian Employment lawThere are, of course, many differences between the way the two countries deal with the employment relationship. However, those can all be boiled down to perspective. Since America, even through this self-created economic turmoil, believes in the invisible hand of the market, which given enough time will correct all wrongs, it stands to reason that they would not look too kindly at regulating the interaction between employees and employers. Why should an employee need rights? If an employer treats them badly, they will leave, and find work elsewhere. The invisible hand works. Canada, on the other hand, believes that there are minimum standards that ALL workplaces should meet, and any attempt to circumvent these is generally seen in bad faith and punished.<br />
<br />
As such, there are no such things as implied work contracts in America. Unless it specifies a time line in the employment contract (should the employee sign one), it is assumed that the relationship is brand new from one moment to the next, and that unless basic human rights are violated in easily traceable ways, the invisible hand will be the only judge of whether a company's hiring/employing/terminating employees is competitive. After all, a good candidate can pretty much write their own checks, right?<br />
<br />
Canadian law assumes that once a working relationship has started, the employee and employer immediately have certain rights, even if no contract is signed. They have a right to a reasonable amount of honesty from each other (e.g. don't lie on a resume or about how many hours are expected). They have a reasonable expectation of mutual respect, of vacation time, of not abusing drugs in the workplace, etc etc. Common sense things that essentially have been deemed by courts to be so fundamental to any employment relationship, that even if a contract was signed without any of these clauses in it, it will be implied that both parties wanted the clause in there, they just forgot or something.<br />
<br />
Having this difference makes a huge impact on the relationship because for one, a Canadian employee doesn't have to worry about arbitrarily being fired any day they walk into the workplace. They're not immune, but if they employer doesn't have a good reason, at least you'll be compensated. It also levels the power balance between the board room and the assembly line, and since the invisible hand seems to forget itself when the economy slows and jobs are few and far in between, its nice to have a back up - just in case.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-47941342289562286452011-03-26T09:41:00.000-07:002011-03-26T09:41:01.716-07:00TTC IncompetenceBecause I've held my tongue for a little while.<br />
<br />
The reason for the posting is because, hilariously, the TTC has decided to hire what they're calling a "Chief Customer Service Officer." He seems to be touted as The Man With a Plan. A man with years of experience in public transit who will come in and make the reputation that the TTC has worked very hard to earn over the past couple of years go away. Because clearly, since there were over 700 complaints last year the problem is customer service.<br />
<br />
Here is why the TTC is bound to go private in the fairly recent future. As always, it is HR which takes a company to the top (when managed well, e.g. Google) or takes it to rock bottom (when abused, e.g. the Enron debacle, or Nike's sweatshop problems in the 90's). The TTC's [solvable] problems are within the HR arena of Labour Relations. Yes, one of main reasons for all these slowdowns and service interruptions are most certainly due to the lack of funding for infrastructure, but this is largely out of the TTC's hands. However, the employee issues are mostly solvable.<br />
<br />
(a) Employee morale has most certainly suffered in the past couple of years, leading to the surly service the TTC is now known for.<br />
(b) Under a powerful union, the employees have been given rights that under normal circumstances would be considered anything from inappropriate (e.g. very high pay with very low education or experience requirements) to dangerous (not requiring drug testing for employees with a history of alcohol and drug abuse)<br />
(c) Lack of money due to excessively high operational costs due to HR costs (wages, benefits, vacation pay, mat leaves, detox programs, etc)<br />
<br />
And so on. How is that going to be fixed by adding a layer of bureaucracy? What they need to do is take some heat from their people in the short term to create a more efficient system. Firstly, in order to get consumer confidence back, they must institute drug and alcohol testing where relevant (e.g. employees with past problems, since only in the past year two employees have been fired for driving drunk, and those were the ones apprehended by customers, not TTC officials). If our safety is as important to them as they claim on their posters, this is a no-brainer.<br />
<br />
Next is compensation. Now it would be illegal to reduce their pay substantially without giving them something in return, but I do not propose their income be reduce, but its contents changed. Rather than a steep base pay, create a base pay plus performance bonuses. The employee ran his bus on time for an entire month (excluding things out of the driver's control)? They receive a bonus. They go above the call of duty? (e.g. the driver who helped a woman who fell near the bus by offering medical aid and dropping her off at her door) Bonus. Perhaps requiring some customer service experience before hiring may prove prudent in providing better service.<br />
<br />
Simple(ish) things such as modifying the compensation structure, being more selective during the hiring process, and rewarding good employees will easily alleviate the public pressure on the TTC. Spending more money on something other than service, that will doubtfully help the TTC make the tremendous turnaround it needs to stay a monopoly.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-8599940920246295122011-03-20T09:38:00.000-07:002011-03-20T09:38:27.078-07:00Modern day sweatshopsI recently spoke to an acquaintance of mine who was having trouble at work. Of course, trouble it seems, is not enough to describe it. He is currently attempting to enter a certain field as a professional, and such had a co-op opportunity arranged through his school to provide him with experience. An added bonus was that this job, though co-op, does indeed pay. The good news end there. On his first day he was coerced into signing a document agreeing to work more than 60 hour weeks, and has been working every day for the past month (i.e. not even a single day off) at over 10 hours per day. Even worse, since this is a special kind of illegal, the company is not paying him his full hours worked, presumably since doing so would shed light on their illegal actions. This has excabrated certain medical conditions this person already has, and substantially reduced his quality of life. He fears losing the opportunity altogether if he complains, and thus he tolerates.<br />
<br />
Really though, is this such a rare story? In this person's scenario, of course, he has options such as speaking to the co-op facilitator who sent him there in the first place. However, in most instances, people who find themselves in situations like this tend to be desperate, something the employer would know, and unfortunately sometimes exploit. The victims often feel that even such conditions are better than no employment at all, especially in such a weak job market, and tolerate it silently.<br />
<br />
It is truly unfortunate that such blatant exploitation still occurs, especially with the vast number of laws and regulatory bodies established with the exclusive intent of preventing employers from acting immorally. At the end of the day this sad story illustrates that until more people utilize the resources available at their disposal to prevent victimization, not all the laws and all the committees and lovely speeches will change the reality that sweatshops exist, and you don't have to be an illegal immigrant with no language skills to end up in one. Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-40110936191913595422011-02-01T13:10:00.000-08:002011-02-01T13:10:07.186-08:00CRTC and the day democracy diedWarning, this post will have little to do with HR, and only marginally.<br />
<br />
The purpose of this post is to express my utmost disappointment in the CRTC bending down to the will of the conglomerates purposefully to reduce access to information that is not a cable, satellite or printed source (strange that both Rogers and Bell have tremendous investments in such ventures). Thanks to their spineless move, people who use the internet for academic research, viewing news reports online, or using web-based messenger programs such as skype to connect to their world, will either have to stop or be willing to shell out 2,3,4 times more than they have.<br />
<br />
What confuses me about their ruling is that they just recently allowed foreign competition into the wireless phone market, suggesting they were finally going to open Canada's borders to something a little different than the stifling monopolies which allow overpriced service and unparalleled customer service (the dramas I could share about Bell and Rogers could probably not even raise a candle to some of the stories I do not yet know).<br />
<br />
I guess I was wrong.<br />
<br />
Good bye affordable communication, easy access to information, and as a result, a little chunk of democracy.<br />
<br />
<br />
I sure hope someone at the CRTC got greased for this, at least then this decision would have an, al bight less than acceptable, explanation.<br />
<br />
SIGN THE PETITION:<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><a href="http://openmedia.ca/news/openmediaca-crtc%E2%80%99s-half-measure-fails-safeguard-future-internet" style="color: #22229c;" target="_blank">http://openmedia.ca/news/openmediaca...uture-internet</a></span>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-61342215051204743022011-01-14T20:38:00.000-08:002011-01-14T20:38:01.508-08:00Knowing your limitsMy return to the gym has brought back to my mind the importance of knowing your limits. While this is important in the gym, to prevent injury and maintain progress, it is equally important at work. The reason for that is because stress is associated with nearly all illnesses, either as a cause or an aggravator. The thing is, though, that people generally tend to stress about the same things: money, family, work.<br />
<br />
There are lots of articles and professionals who will tell you all sorts of exercises and such you absolutely must do to overcome stress and stay healthy, but for me it comes down to two things: counting to 10 if I'm aggravated, and knowing my limits.<br />
<br />
These two principals manifest themselves in lots of ways. If I'm sent a snooty email, receive criticism, or given instructions, I pause, digest the information for a few seconds, and only then move forward. It's a tiny delay but it makes a big difference, especially if you're like me and your first instinct response has gotten you in trouble in the past!<br />
<br />
The other principle, knowing my limits, plays more specifically towards time management. You don't have to say yes to every damn thing that passes your desk, every favour to a friend, every chore at home. Prioritize, and develop a schedule that will allow you to take whatever time is necessary to get the job(s) done and done right. Anything else needs to be shelved, delegated, or scrapped. Just knowing you have the time you need to complete the tasks at hand can be such a huge weight lifted off your shoulders.<br />
<br />
Now I'll be heading off to stretch, as I overdid it in the gym, and then foolishly went back for more.<br />
<br />
KNOW YOUR LIMITS. Or suffer the consequences like me.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-36293110413857246882010-12-18T08:30:00.000-08:002010-12-18T08:30:46.019-08:00Happy holidays!I know I'm a little late, what with Hanukkah having come and gone quite a while ago, but I was getting acclimated at my new job. So happy holidays to everyone celebrating, and retroactively to those who have already celebrated. And in the spirit of the holidays, let's talk office parties.<br />
<br />
The holiday parties have a few commonly known obstacles:<br />
<br />
1. People forget how to dress appropriately<br />
<br />
<ul><li>This is still a work engagement. You may not have to wear dress clothes, but don't wear something you wouldn't want you boss or coworkers to see you in</li>
</ul><br />
2. Alcohol<br />
<br />
<ul><li>Even the appearance of hitting the bottle hard can have significant ramifications on your career, so even if you can handle 10 shots of tequila without impact, keep it to a glass of wine and take your binge drinking elsewhere</li>
<li>Getting drunk has obvious issues</li>
</ul><br />
3. Eating etiquette<br />
<br />
<ul><li>For most situations it's not a big deal if you don't know which is the salad fork and which is the dinner fork, but talking with food in your mouth, being a jerk to the server, spitting food into people's faces- you shouldn't do it ever, but definitely not when your boss is around</li>
</ul><br />
4. Inappropriate topics of conversation<br />
<br />
<ul><li>This is extremely situation specific, but understand the company culture enough to know what you can talk about, and when you should keep the information for your close friends or your diary.</li>
</ul><div><br />
</div><div>Good luck and have a good time!</div>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-30997973812761682382010-11-23T11:23:00.000-08:002010-11-23T12:17:16.313-08:00The truth about vacation payWith the holidays coming everyone wants to take a vacation. Of course, not everyone will be eligible for one, especially since the recession means that even if you are working, chances are you have not been there for a full year.<br />
<div><br />
</div><div>The ESA discusses some fairly complex calculations for vacation pay/time, but essentially it boils down to this: </div><div><br />
</div><div><ul><li>You are not eligible for a vacation unless you've been working there for 12 uninterrupted months</li>
<ul><li>Depending on the company's fiscal cycle (when the start vacation entitlement), you may have to wait longer than a year, but your vacation time will continue to accumulate</li>
</ul><li>At minimum, once you completed 12 months of eligibility you should have around 2 weeks saved up</li>
<li>You have 10 months from the day you're eligible to redeem those vacation days to use them</li>
<ul><li>If you're on some medical, parental, etc leave you must use up the days immediately upon return, unless there's a written agreement otherwise between you and your boss</li>
</ul><li>Companies are allowed to just pay out vacation time on each cheque if they are hourly employees</li>
<li>Vacation pay must be paid on the cheque on or before the payday on which the vacation falls</li>
<li>If the working relationship is terminated, you're entitled to being paid out the vacation time you have yet to redeemed</li>
</ul><div><br />
</div></div><div>Of course, if you're unionized, none of this will really apply to you, as vacation is generally a well-outlined issue on most collective agreements. Just ensure you're not getting less than the minimum.</div><div><br />
</div><div>So long as you know these fairly simple rules, you should be able to take at least a bit of time off this holiday season, and employers can be fairly accommodating, even if you're not yet entitled to vacation time; just ask respectfully and really early.</div><div><br />
</div><div><br />
</div><div><u><a href="http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pubs/guide/vacation.php">More on vacation pay</a></u></div>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-25378396632803196892010-10-24T00:41:00.000-07:002010-10-24T00:48:34.119-07:00A clarification on the laws of dismissalYes, the law is much stricter here in Canada than it is in the US in regards to firing someone. There is really no such thing as employment-at-will here, unless you count cash under the table type work. That said, it has come to my attention recently that some people have a misconception in regards to the rights of the employee; a misconception that may cost people their job. Thus, I clarify.<br />
<br />
An employer can, at will, fire an employee for any reason. This is true whether you are a salaried or hourly employee. Where it does matter whether you're salaried or hourly; whether they have a good reason or not; whether their behaviour is appropriate or not; etc is when it comes to what you get as they throw you out the door. As a Canadian employee, you are entitled to what is known as notice. Notice comes in 2 ways; (a) income in-leiu of notice and (b) time worked. (a) is obviously the most commonly chosen by employers, seeing as they tend to fear retribution unless they escort you out with security the second you're given the news. According to the ESA, statutory notice breaks down as such:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIrb4I4AGz4OCWBhi_F0K3YI2rrNwU20RIhYYpCcBMbu0_edYroMsLgOzxaLcgLMtzO-msmp-ziWOZWnYl-Fkb5xmH50L5m5zInxOkBv6bOypb8bCOP2qDiJIydpuncKaDQWugZB1X4nY/s1600/esa+notice+times.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIrb4I4AGz4OCWBhi_F0K3YI2rrNwU20RIhYYpCcBMbu0_edYroMsLgOzxaLcgLMtzO-msmp-ziWOZWnYl-Fkb5xmH50L5m5zInxOkBv6bOypb8bCOP2qDiJIydpuncKaDQWugZB1X4nY/s320/esa+notice+times.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<br />
This is, of course, assuming they detailed in the contract that they will be providing you with statutory notice if dismissed. Many contracts miss this, so if you are dismissed and no such clause is in your contract you're entitled to reasonable notice as determined by a civil court (this is generally more generous, and includes considerations such as age, experience, ability to find new work, tenure, management level, etc), but you will have to pay a lawyer.<br />
<br />
Finally, as I mentioned one of the impacts on notice is whether they had a valid reason. I believe this is where most misconceptions lie - this does not mean that if you don't agree with the reasoning they it was not just cause. Just cause dismissal means they feel you have breached the employment contract to a point where the contract itself has been made void, ergo you're owed nothing but a kick to the behind out the door. If you don't agree, sue, but think long and hard before you do. Just cause is very difficult to prove, and generally employers would rather pay notice even with just cause just to avoid possible litigation, so if they have indeed used just cause, they may have a fairly strong case. Standard reasons include severe breach of trust (violating company rules in a way which endangers jobs, cases, etc), breaking the law on the job, breaking the law off work hours in a way that very negatively reflects on the company, etc.<br />
<br />
This is just a brief overview, but it seemed necessary. While we're better off than our neighbours to the south, an employee's job is generally not as safe as I've come to believe some of our compatriots believe, and I feel it is my duty to put such myths to rest.<br />
<br />
For more on the subject refer to the <a href="http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pubs/guide/termination.php">ESA</a>.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-23499524814816757762010-10-06T23:26:00.000-07:002010-10-06T23:27:45.075-07:00Holiday payJust in time for Canadian Thanksgiving, I wanted to do a post just briefly reminding my readers about their rights for statutory holiday pay, and remove any misgivings some may have about what they may or may not be entitled to. Now, the Employment Standards Act is an excellent source of information for those in Ontario, and there are respective legislations in every other province, and in each American state for that matter.<br />
<br />
For those in Ontario though, this coming Monday is a statutory holiday, and for us hourly workers that means statutory pay, and furthermore, confusion. That said, here comes a bit of clarity.<br />
<br />
According to ESA, so long as you work your regularly scheduled shift before and after the holiday, you're entitled to holiday pay (the calculation itself is fairly complex, but essentially uses an averaging of the hours you worked the two weeks prior to the holiday). Holiday pay is thus essentially a paid day off work. That said, if you choose to (or are kindly requested to) work on the statutory holiday, the ESA is very clear about the expectations on part of the employer. You are still entitled to the holiday pay you would have received if you had not worked. Beyond that, you are also entitled to holiday pay, generally at a rate of 1.5 times your regular rate.<br />
<br />
In the words of the ESA:<br />
<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 20px; margin-top: 0.5em; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><blockquote>Most employees who qualify are entitled to <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">take these days off work and be paid public holiday pay</span>. Alternatively, they can <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">agree in writing to work on the holiday</span> and they will be paid:</blockquote></div></blockquote><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 20px; margin-top: 0.5em; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><blockquote><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px;">public holiday pay plus premium pay for the hours worked on the public holiday; or</span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px;">their regular rate for hours worked on the holiday, plus they will receive another day off (called a "substitute" holiday) with public holiday pay. If the employee has earned a <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">substitute</span>day off with public holiday pay, the public holiday pay calculation is done with respect to the four work weeks before the work week in which the <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">substitute</span> day off falls.</span></li>
</ul></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium; line-height: normal;">One thing to keep in mind though, is that not all jobs qualify for holiday pay. The ESA provides a lengthy al bight incomplete list of professions not covered by holiday pay, so before yelling at your boss, check to see if they're required to pay out <a href="http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pubs/guide/special.php">here</a>. I am curious as to the reasoning behind farm workers and tourism industry employees are excluded from this holiday pay.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium; line-height: normal;"><br />
</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium; line-height: normal;">For those getting the long weekend off, I hope you enjoy it, it looks like it'll be quite beautiful in most of Ontario.</span></span></div>Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-12713671587898143842010-09-30T11:28:00.000-07:002010-09-30T11:28:37.789-07:00All work and no careerI recently encountered a fellow jobseeker who was looking to get into a field she had no educational, work, or volunteer experience in. She did however, have a tremendous passion. This made it all the more difficult to break the news to her, as I was working on her resume, that finding work even remotely in her field, especially in an economy where people are downgrading their qualifications to get positions below their experience and skill level would be damn near impossible.<br />
<br />
However, I am an optimist. I believe that if we feel passionately enough about something, we can accomplish anything, and thus follows some advise to others in a similar situation.<br />
<br />
If you want to work in an industry or career path that you have no relation to in any conceivable way, do not lose hope. Every industry and career has related industries and careers that may be easier to get into. Take the law for example, if you wish to become a lawyer or paralegal, and have no office or legal experience, attempt to find work in the private security industry, or as a dispatcher. Volunteering is another excellent option - it may even result in a job. Start small and in time, your resume will begin to take shape in a more suitable way to your desired profession.<br />
<br />
The main thing is to not lose hope, and actually make an effort to get that resume aimed in the right direction.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-73183819074632365022010-09-13T23:37:00.000-07:002010-09-13T23:37:55.909-07:00Addressing health and safety issuesThe thing with some organizations, is that they let issues such as health and safety slip. They create all the appropriate paperwork to be legally compliant, they jump through all the hoops required to have a health and safety committee and employee representation; they may even move forward with monthly meetings.<br />
<br />
But is any of it actually making employees safer? Unfortunately, endless meetings and paperwork tends to generate nothing but more meetings and more paperwork. To be fair, I am a big fan of paperwork. If it's not worth writing down, I tend to doubt the worth of doing it, but that's the point, that after (or before) recording something, something needs to be done! ACTION needs to be put forward to reduce accidents and lost time. What frustrates me most is that employers tend to see these actions as costs, and fear that if they create real dialogue they're opening themselves up for endless vapid complaints from employees and a loss of authority. After all, the boss decides what's dangerous and what isn't, right?<br />
<br />
Of course, then something inevitably happens. An employee falls and breaks a hip. Or perhaps gets a disease caused by asbestus in the workplace. Or huge fine from the government for violating the law.<br />
<br />
Businesses need to understand the most financially viable solution is to invest short-term and collect long-term, rather than cheap out on getting the right equipment and ensuring everyone is following procedure (free since you need someone there to administer and make the policies regardless) to avoid such major costs that could shut you down, if not permanently, at least enough to seriously harm your business prospects.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-84632994724041923812010-09-02T18:37:00.000-07:002010-09-02T18:38:52.149-07:00The fad of EQI apologize for the hiatus, but I just didn't have any inspiration and did not want to fill this blog with drivel. Fortunately, the world of social science research has come to my aid, and as such, follows my rant.<br />
<br />
It seems these days all people in the business world and certainly in HR can talk about is the prevalence and importance of EQ, and the development of this new aspect of intelligence in our employees and leaders. In fact, in an article published in the <a href="http://hbr.org/2010/09/when-emotional-reasoning-trumps-iq/ar/1">Harvard Business Review </a>this month, a couple professors from a US university took to studying the brain of business managers while they are attempting to resolve complex hypothetical situations. They had assumed that the main aspects of the brain being used would be the ones that process information and higher level thinking, when in fact, the brain would go so far as to block off that part of the brain in their best performing subjects to allow more energy to go to the instinctual and emotional parts of the brain.<br />
<br />
Amazing, no?<br />
<br />
I tried to find the original study but a publication is not even posted on the university website. But I'd like to offer my two cents anyway. The thing is that at this day and age, no self respecting HR person can come out and say that EQ does not matter. It would be ludicrous, as there actually is quite a bit of research that supports that having EQ, especially in a management role, can increase morale and make your employees work harder for you. It improves your ability to communicate with employees as well.<br />
<br />
That said, however. To say that in a strategic situation, EQ is MORE important than IQ, even with MRI results to back you up, are absurd. First of all, the study is not even peer reviewed, hell, it's not even posted! Secondly, what the article claims is that "when we examined the best strategic performers in our sample, we found significantly less neural activity in the prefrontal cortex than in the areas associated with “gut” responses, empathy, and emotional intelligence." However, no explanation is made for what constitutes a top performer. Not only would any HR person tell you that you can't rank employees without a benchmark or some previously outlined expectation, any scientist would tell you such parameters are vital to both making sense of the results and having validity with the scientific community.<br />
<br />
Bottom line is that a good manager knows how to balance his or her IQ and EQ in a contextual, case by case basis. Rather than repressing their logic to best address "a hypothetical situation" (of which no details were given). Which is something I think the researchers backed up to saying by the end, but certainly not what they were spinning from the so-called results of the study.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8644504479972852553.post-27382198446101466062010-08-12T22:43:00.000-07:002010-08-12T22:43:37.853-07:00The Immigration DillemmaI think the biggest HR issue facing Canada is immigration. Here's why - our workforce is aging, yes? There is going to be, in the next few years, a tremendous demand for knowledge workers and labourers as they retire. There will be an insufficient amount of workers to fill the void.<br />
This is all, pardon the pun, old news.<br />
<br />
So if this is such an impending disaster, why is it that the think tanks that hide behind Harper, and the great minds behind other developed countries experiencing the same problem in the US and Europe remain adamant on keeping qualified immigrants at bay? They are allowed to immigrate as qualified professionals, and then prevented from working in their chosen field. On what planet does that make sense? Either tell them upfront they have no chance of finding relevant work for a few years upon arrival, or better yet, make a better effort at helping these people find work, or if need be convert their skills to ones that are usable. For example, it is pretty obvious that you can't just walk in from another country and be a doctor - the law is different, the language may be different, etc. But at the same time, they should not be starting from scratch, either.<br />
<br />
Would your employer be ok with you complaining about a problem that you have a solution for, just would rather not implement it, or implement it badly? The answer is that you would be fired. Especially with the amount of money and lives on the line.Talihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12572275199920762947noreply@blogger.com0