Employment Consulting & Expert Services

London | Miami

Articles

Filter
  • Results of the Bond Solon Annual Expert Witness Survey

    The 2019 Times and Bond Solon Annual Expert Witness Survey - involving 569 expert respondents - was recently conducted online.

    On being informed that there have been several cases over the past 12 months in which the expert witness has not understood the basic requirements of the role, the survey asked whether judges should have the power to permanently disqualify these experts. Nearly 60 per cent of respondents stated that they wanted all experts to understand their role and agreed that those who do not have the necessary understanding should not continue and that judges should permanently disqualify these experts.

    When questioned regarding an expert’s non-qualification to give expert evidence and asked whether instructing solicitors should be liable for costs when they fail to exercise due diligence, around 70 per cent of respondents considered the instructing solicitor should be liable for costs under these circumstances. 44 per cent of respondents stated that they had come across experts who profess expertise despite not being qualified, or the area concerned does not warrant expertise.

    The report stated that an ‘out of date or unsuitable expert witness is a dangerous expert witness’ and can create considerable risks for the instructing party – and it was suggested that a solicitor, before formally instructing an expert, should check that the expert is registered with their professional body confirming that the expert is up to date with continuing professional development; look for consistency in the way the expert’s details are presented to the public and - If reports are not court compliant - the instructing solicitor will need to guide the expert.

    Of respondents surveyed, 20 per cent said that retired professionals should not continue to act as expert witnesses as the longer the potential expert has not been in day by day practice in a field, the greater the difficulty is to instruct that expert.

    The survey showed that 61 per cent of all the experts surveyed act as expert witnesses in personal injury cases – making personal Injury cases a major area of work for expert witnesses.

    51 per cent of experts stated that they acted in legal aid cases - but experts are not obliged to accept legal aid cases and in fact, 73 per cent of the experts surveyed indicated that they would not continue working in legal aid cases if expert witness fees were further reduced, meaning that expert evidence might not be available any more for legal aid cases.

    Of the experts who act in personal injury cases, 31 per cent surveyed said that over the past 12 months they had been asked or felt pressurised to change their report in a way that harms their impartiality – as opposed to experts in other fields where it was only 14 per cent.

    One expert reported that:

    “A lawyer completely changed my report, put in extra paragraphs and deleted great chunks in order to make my opinion suit his client. We have historically been sending reports as Word documents, but now we will send everything as PDF files which cannot be altered.”

    Almost 40 per cent of the experts surveyed indicated that the number of instructions they had received have gone up, whereas 36 per cent said the number had stayed the same. 70 per cent stated that their rates remain the same as last year.

  • Southwest to share compensation from MAX grounding with their employees

    On Thursday 12th December, Southwest Airlines announced that they would share compensation received from Boeing regarding the grounding of the 737 MAX with their employees.

    While the total amount of compensation awarded remains confidential - as does what percentage of it that Southwest employees will benefit from - the airline are showing a $125 million charge as employee compensation in financial statements. The money will be given to the carrier’s employees in the form of incremental profit sharing. 

    Southwest’s Board Chairman and Chief Executive, Gary Kelly, stated:

    “Our people have done an incredible job managing through the MAX groundings, while providing the highest levels of customer service and one of the best operational performances in our history.”

    He added:

    “On behalf of the Southwest board of directors, we are grateful to our employees for their extraordinary efforts throughout the year and are pleased to share proceeds from our recent agreement with Boeing.”

    In their investor update published on October 24th the US airline, a low-cost carrier, estimated a loss of $435 million in operating income through September and reported a loss of $210 million in revenue, which they attributed to the MAX grounding.

    The airline, who operate a fleet of around 750 aircraft, only fly Boeing 737’s and about 34 of these are the 737 MAX model. They currently have around 260 MAX’s on order and so while the carrier continues to negotiate with Boeing for further damages, they could also accept other forms of compensation that Boeing may offer such as preferred delivery slots, or upgraded aircraft features. However, to date there is still no definitive news on when the MAX will be back in service with FAA Administrator Steve Dickson confirming on 11th December that the Max would not be cleared to fly until sometime in 2020.

    In total, Boeing have apparently set aside $5 billion to compensate airlines for MAX related costs, as well as around $50 million to compensate families involved in the Lion Air crash in October 2018 and the Ethiopian Airlines crash in March 2019.

  • Failure to be transparent about pay can lead to a perception of unfairness

    New data recently published by the CIPD has shown that some employers could be relying on ill-equipped line management to speak to their teams about pay processes - resulting in a difference between their perception of pay in the organisation and that of the workforce.

    The 2019 Reward Management survey reports that 75 per cent of HR professionals think that workers in their organisation are paid fairly - according to their experience and achievements. However, only 33 per cent of the workers agree and only 51 per cent think their own salary is fair.

    Of the HR respondents, 86 per cent agree that their Chief Executive is paid about right - against only 20 per cent of the rest of the workforce.

    Only a third of organisations were encouraging line managers to talk to their teams about pay fairness and of those who had, 60 per cent of the employees say their manager had done a poor or very poor job of communicating with them.

    Charles Cotton - Senior Reward and Performance Adviser at the CIPD - said:

    “Failure to be transparent about pay can make staff feel that they are being kept in the dark and feed a perception of unfairness. There’s a real opportunity for organisations to do a lot more around communicating their pay policies to staff, and encouraging line managers to talk to their teams about it, so staff understand how and why such decisions are made. But communication is only part of the story and won’t ensure people are paid fairly in the first place. Continued scrutiny over executive pay and gender pay gap reporting shows this is still an issue which many organisations are wrestling with, so businesses need to be on the front foot when it comes to understanding and assessing pay.”

    Of the 60 per cent of HR respondents who state that their organisation talks about the fairness of pay processes and outcomes, only 30 per cent have a clear definition of fairness. Just 10 per cent of the workforce says that their line manager always or often speaks to them about fairness and it was found that only 23 per cent of employers survey their employees to check whether they think pay processes are fair, whilst only 39 per cent of employers have carried out an equal pay audit in the past three years to ensure they are complying with the law.

    Just over half of HR teams inform staff about the factors they consider when deciding to increase employee salaries and around 50 per cent explain how their grade structures work - whilst 45 per cent tell employees what they need to do to increase their pay.

    In 2020, new corporate reporting requirements will come into full force and are likely to reveal further opportunities to improve fairness in pay processes and outcomes.

    Publicly listed companies with more than 250 employees are required to report the pay ratio between their CEOs and full-time workers - explaining how the pay-setting process for top executives compares with their pay policy for the wider workforce. In addition, they are also required to show how they take employee views and interests into account in business decision-making - to include views on how people are paid.

  • In the UK, over 15 million working days each year are lost to mental ill-health

    Recent statistics suggest that stress at work remains a growing problem.

    In the UK, around 15.4 million working days each year are lost to stress, depression or anxiety, which accounts for 57 per cent of all absences and costs UK employers between £33bn and £42bn a year.

    In addition to the financial costs, the undesirable effects on business of mental ill-health are employee absence; staff turnover; loss of skills and legal and reputational risks.

    However, in a recent poll by of more than 1,700 workers with mental health problems – by the charity Mind – it was found that more than two in five people did not realise that they could be missing out on legal protections and helpful adjustments at work.

    Of those polled, 44 per cent were unaware that they could be classified as having a disability if their ability to carry out day-to-day tasks were affected and their condition had lasted for - or was expected to last for - 12 months. After hearing the definition of disability - under the Equality Act 2010 - 54 per cent felt they met the criteria.

    Vicki Nash - Head of Policy and Campaigns at Mind - stated:

    “Among those of us with mental health problems, there is a huge gap in awareness that we could be covered by the Equality Act. This next government must commit to clarifying the definition of a disability under the Act. This will help to protect from discrimination in the first place and - if they are discriminated against on the grounds of a health condition - enable them to challenge this.”

    She added that:

    “....with the right support, those of us with mental health problems can and do make a valuable contribution to the workplace.”

    Rachel Suff - Senior Employment Relations Adviser at the CIPD - said the survey’s findings showed the need for more education and awareness around mental health in the workplace. She said:

    “The law doesn’t necessarily help because there’s quite a high bar in terms of a mental health condition meeting the definition in the Equality Act.”  

    Stating that organisations should not wait for an employee’s condition to be classified as a disability before making reasonable adjustments, she added:

    “It’s good practice for employers to make changes to support people’s mental health at work. Most conditions are at the lower end of the mental health spectrum, and just small changes to how they work can make a big difference to their ability to manage that.”

    Emma Bartlett - Partner at Charles Russell Speechlys - said:

    “Employers do not always understand that they do not need to have been told by the employee about their condition or have received a formal diagnosis for the employer to be fixed with knowledge that the employee should have the benefit of reasonable adjustments and protection from discrimination arising out of their condition.”

    She added that every case should be treated individually, stating:

    “Normal day to day activities for one person may not be the same for another, so you have to focus on how it affects each individual.”

    David Price - CEO of Health Assured - said:

    “If an employer were to take action against an employee for reaching pre-set absence levels, or deny an employee an attendance bonus based on a number of absences which included those related to mental health, there is a risk of a discrimination claim. Because of this, employers should think carefully when treating mental health days in the same way as all other sickness absence.”

  • Survey shows HR professionals do not think their role is valued

     After a Reed HR survey found that a quarter of UK HR professionals do not feel included in strategic business decisions, a poll by Natural HR - a UK software company - of 219 HR professionals, found that 22 per cent of those professionals did not think their role was valued.

    The reasons given by the 22 per cent of the respondents not feeling as though they are valued are not having a seat in board meetings and not being considered as part of the senior team in organisations - leaving them with a lack of respect for their profession. It also appears that many HR professionals believe that they are viewed as merely an administrative function.

    Recruitment and retention of staff was found to have been seen as a priority for next year by 68 per cent of the HR respondents, whilst 42 per cent cited recruitment as the area of their work they found most challenging. A third of those surveyed found employee retention a challenge, with 36 per cent saying they struggled with engagement and experience. 

    Tom Hadley - Director of Policy and Campaigns at the Recruitment and Employment Confederation - said:

    “Good recruitment helps employers find the right person for the right job and actively ensures they settle in well. This involves advertising to a wide and diverse pool of candidates and selecting people based on skills. Recruitment professionals can help businesses get the hiring and on-boarding process right and this can make all the difference when it comes to employee retention and productivity.”

    Sarah Dowzell - HR Specialist and Co-Founder of Natural HR - said:

    “A recent survey undertaken by HR tech platform Natural HR has revealed only 78 per cent of HR professionals feel that HR is valued within their business, leaving nearly a quarter of those surveyed feeling as though it is not. The core tasks of HR professionals cover an array of activities from hiring the right talent; ensuring meaningful professional development; considering staff well-being, to acting as an internal coach. With recruitment and retention of people increasingly a top priority for businesses, it is shocking that so many HR professionals still don’t feel included in top level strategic decision making. A HR strategy must be aligned with the overarching business strategy. The more the administrative elements of HR roles can be undertaken by tech solutions, the more time can be spent on the important strategic role of HR – and hopefully, the old-fashioned perception of the profession can become a thing of the past.”

  • NHS secretary sacked at 86 years old wins age discrimination case

    An NHS secretary - Eileen Jolly - who was sacked at 86 years of age has won a payout in an age discrimination case. She was awarded £200,000 which the Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust agreed to pay, despite saying that it was disappointed by the outcome.

    Mrs Jolly, who had been employed at the hospital since 1991, was dismissed from the NHS trust in 2017 after she failed to upload details of cancer patients awaiting non-urgent breast reconstruction surgery into a new database. The result of her omission was that three patients waited 52 weeks from the date of their initial referral for surgery - a breach of NHS guidelines. The NHS trust also described Mrs Jolly as being stuck in old secretarial ways.

    The Reading Employment Tribunal, led by Judge Andrew Gumbiti-Zimuto heard that in 2015 Mrs Jolly had been given a short training session on the computer when the waiting lists were made electronic. However, she told the tribunal that she had not been properly trained to use the new system, which led to mistakes being made.

    Mrs Jolly also claimed that there had been unpleasant remarks made about her age and health - in particular questioning her ability to walk the length of the building. She told the tribunal that, despite suffering a cardiac arrest in 2006, she had not been off sick. She said:

    “I felt as though it had been assumed that at my age and because of my health I was a liability and incapable of change, and had to go. It had been my intention to continue to work for as long as I could – until I was at least 90 years old.” 

    In 2016 she was suspended and described being humiliated when she was told to collect her things and escorted from the premises. In 2017, she was dismissed for a "catastrophic failure in performance".

    Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto agreed that her dismissal had been unfair and “tainted by discrimination”. He also found that her grievances had not been properly addressed and that sufficient training had not been offered to her.

    His judgment stated:

    “The claimant had not been carrying out the role in the way that the respondent wished the role to be carried out and had not understood the nature of the role that she was expected to perform by the respondent.

    Instead of the respondent addressing that issue directly and either training her and then requiring her to do the role as directed the claimant was dismissed. This was because of her age.”

    Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust was ordered to pay Mrs Jolly £200,000 within 14 days. A spokeswoman for the trust stated:

    "The trust has complied with the tribunal's order to pay the agreed sum to Mrs Jolly by way of compensation. Given that these proceedings have been upsetting and distressing for all concerned, the trust is pleased this matter is now concluded and parties can move on. It wishes Mrs Jolly all the best for the future.”

    The statement also said:

    “The trust is disappointed by the outcome in this case. However, the trust has and operates an equal opportunities policy and, following a detailed review of the case, is taking steps ensure that lessons are learned and that all reasonable steps are taken to prevent any form of discrimination from occurring in the workplace.”

  • Case study: Employee wrongfully discharged for performing jury duties

    In November 2019, a federal court in Missouri upheld the jury verdict in favor of employee Linda King, who claimed that she was wrongfully discharged from her job with Southwest Foodservice Excellence, LLC.

    The matter was originally tried by a jury who returned a verdict in King's favor and awarded her $156,500 in actual damages and $75,000 in punitive damages. The defendant - Southwest Foodservice - renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law and requested a new trial, which was denied. The employer’s contention that her recovery for emotional distress damages was barred by the state’s workers’ compensation law, was also rejected.

    Whilst employed by Southwest Foodservice, Ms. King had been summoned by the Circuit Court of St. Louis City to undertake grand jury service. After being selected as a grand juror, she informed her employer of the days she was required to serve. Jury service - under Missouri law - was a protected status subject to non-discrimination protections and the defendant was aware of this.

    Shortly after Ms. King began her jury service in early August 2014, she was informed by an HR representative that she would have to choose between her job and her jury duty.

    On August 21, Ms. King's immediate supervisor issued a disciplinary notice for her failure to perform a specific job on August 14 - a day the supervisor was aware that Ms. King was serving on the grand jury. This supervisor wished to terminate Ms. King for this incident but the request was denied by the food director.

    Ms. King’s supervisor then began to keep a detailed list of food deficiencies that occurred during the period of Ms. King's jury service. She did not, however, counsel Ms. King regarding these deficiencies - nor did she attempt to address any misconceptions regarding who had food-ordering responsibilities, as both Ms. King and a co-worker were subsequently found to be under the impression that the supervisor was equally responsible. The supervisor also complained that Ms. King's absence from the school during jury duty caused her to spend too much time at Ms. King's school, resulting in the other schools she supervised possibly being neglected.

    On October 15, the supervisor - with the assistance of HR - prepared Ms. King's termination notice and this was then presented to the food director, together with the prepared list showing the food-deficiencies. The director signed the termination notice - without verifying who was responsible for placing the food orders - and Ms. King was given the notice on October 20. It was at this time that Ms. KIing found out that she was being held solely responsible for placing the food orders during her jury service, which completed in November 2014.

    The District Judge, Catherine D. Perry stated - that from the evidence presented - “a reasonable juror could conclude that King's service on the grand jury was a contributing factor in defendant's termination of her employment, and that King showed with convincing clarity that such wrongful termination was, at the very least, in reckless disregard for her rights and interests, especially given defendant's knowledge that jury service is a protected status. Accordingly, given the evidentiary support for the jury's verdict, I must deny defendant's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law on the bases claimed. I will also deny defendant's related request that I vacate that portion of the jury's verdict awarding King punitive damages.”

  • Latest Hampton-Alexander Report shows the target for women on Boards by 2020 is likely to be met

    The government backed Hampton-Alexander review 2019 - just released - has found that 2019 was the most robust for women in senior leadership since 2011, when targets were set. The review is committed to achieving 33 per cent of women on boards and in leadership teams of FTSE 100 and 250 companies, by 2020.

    Sir Philip Hampton - Chair of the Hampton-Alexander Review - stated:

    “This is the penultimate Hampton-Alexander Report and we enter our final year with great momentum behind us. If this progress continues into 2020, our targets for Women on Boards will be met. Whilst this is a key indicator of change at the top, strengthening the number of women in executive positions is critical to achieving long-term gender balance. We are still a long way from reaching the target for women in senior leadership roles below board level. Unless half of all appointments made this year go to women – our target for 2020 is not going to be met.”

    Eight years ago female representation on boards stood at 12.5 per cent for the hundred biggest UK-based companies. The percentage now is 32.4 per cent - meaning that the FTSE100 is likely to meet the target set by the review.

    The latest report has also shown that women hold 29.6 per cent of all FTSE 250 board positions - witnessing a rise up from 24.9 per cent last year - meaning that the FTSE 250 can also meet the 33 per cent deadline provided sustained effort is made.

    In the FTSE150 and 250 there are now only two all-male boards but still forty four all-male executive committees. However, there are still dozens of companies who have progressed to no further than a single woman on the board.

    More concerning - according to the Mail on Sunday - there are only thirteen female CEOs at FTSE 250 level, with a few number of chairs.

    Charlotte Valeur - Institute of Directors Chairperson - stated:

    “Women must be trusted not just to be part of the discussion, but also to lead it.”

    She added that big firms should....... “take a long hard look at their recruitment processes and ask what barriers are being put up that prevent women and ethnic minorities from advancing both in executive roles and to the board.”

    Denise Wilson OBE- Chief Executive, Hampton-Alexander Review - said:

    “There are over 900 women now serving on FTSE 350 boards, providing an ever-increasing pool of women with substantial board experience, yet only 25 women have been appointed into the Chair role, even fewer as women CEOs and showing little sign of change. Strong foundations have been laid and significant progress has been made since the journey began in earnest in 2011. The very senior jobs were always going to be the hardest of challenges, however a stronger focus is now required at every stage of the appointment process to address the reasons why top jobs aren’t going to women.”

    Chris Cummings - Chief Executive of the Investment Association - said:

    "Great progress is being made with Women on Boards, but it's time for us to aim higher. This pace of change now needs to extend beyond the board to senior executive leadership roles if businesses are to demonstrate their diversity at all levels. The research is clear - firms with diverse boards and management teams make better decisions, drive innovation and outperform their less diverse peers."

  • Legislation introduced to promote career opportunities in the transportation industry

    Three members of Congress, Rep. Rick Larsen (WA-02), Rep. Don Young (AK) and Rep. Angie Craig (MN-02) recently introduced bipartisan legislation to promote career opportunities in the transportation industry.

    The Promoting Service in Transportation Act (H.R. 5118) will establish a series of U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) public service announcement campaigns to raise awareness about careers in transportation. $5 million in funding will be provided over the six fiscal years between 2021-2026, with $30 million allocated in total.

    The campaigns will include digital and print media public service announcement campaigns to promote career opportunities for pilots, safety inspectors, mechanics and technicians, air traffic controllers (ATC), flight attendants and other road and rail professionals.

    Selena Shilad - Executive Director of the Alliance for Aviation Across America - stated:

    “Our country is facing a critical shortage of aviation professionals, with an estimated need of over 131,000 commercial pilots, 60,000 business aviation pilots, and 21,000 civil helicopter pilots in the coming years. For this reason it is credibly important that we foster enthusiasm in flying and ensure that the many talented, skilled workers across our country are aware of the vast opportunities that exist within the aviation industry.”

    Rick Larsen - a senior member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee - added:

    “As demand continues to grow, it is important all Americans are aware of the career opportunities available in the transportation sector to grow the next generation workforce. I will continue working in Congress to make sure all Americans have access to good-paying jobs and more skills training to succeed.”

    Additionally, the campaign is aimed at improving the issue of diversity in the workforce - for example over 90% of professional airline pilots and truck drivers are white males. Therefore it is hoped that the campaign will help the gender, race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status of the workforce in this sector to become more diverse.

    On this issue, Angie Craig - a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee - said:

    “The transportation industry faces workforce and diversity challenges that we must address now."

    The bill is supported by many professional transportation Associations including - but not limited to - the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), Association of Flight Attendants (AFA-CWA), Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA) and the Helicopter Association International (HAI).

  • Large percentage of senior leaders admit to feeling lonely in the workplace

    New research from CV-Library, the UK’s leading independent job board, has revealed that 27.2 per cent of senior leaders in the UK admit to feeling lonely in the workplace.  

    The research - which polled 300 senior members of staff across the UK - found that senior leaders are the most likely to feel lonely with 40.8 per cent claiming that other people’s attitudes towards them changed after they moved into their management role. 

    Having little in common with their colleagues was cited by 42.7per cent of those questioned, working in an office on their own by 34.4 per cent and 24.4 per cent thought it was because their colleagues are much younger than them.

    More than 50 per cent claim that their home life has suffered as a result of their work, with a further 54.7 per cent saying that it’s not worth it to be where they are now professionally. 

    When asked what they think are the best ways for employers to prevent loneliness at work, 49.2 per cent of senior leaders suggested putting appropriate support in place; 34.5 per cent having more office socials; 32.9 per cent hiring a diverse team; 28.2 per cent constructing an open-plan office and 27 per cent improving the on-boarding process.

    Lee Biggins - founder and CEO of CV-Library - commented: 

    “Reaching the top is an attractive goal for many, but even the most senior employees need support in the workplace, particularly if you’re working long hours and shoulder huge levels of responsibility. Naturally, as a senior member of staff, you’ll have to remain neutral towards your teams, but this can result in feelings of exclusion. Moreover, you’ll have a responsibility to provide support to your employees, but don’t forget about yourself! Seek help from other senior members of staff, especially in the transition period after being promoted.”

    He continued:

    “As a senior employee, you may feel unable to talk about any feelings of loneliness because of your status in the company. To combat this, it’s important to prioritise your own wellbeing and work closely with other leaders. Whether you organise company socials to blow off some steam away from the workplace, or have regular catch ups with fellow manager, it will help you to forge stronger working relationships. In turn, this should encourage a more open and supportive atmosphere.”  

  • Supervisors spend more than half their working day on meetings and admin

    According to a new study from UK-based independent business operations consultancy firm Managementors, supervisors in the UK spend more than half their working day on meetings and admin - leaving little time to manage performance.

    Data is based on an average working day of seven and a half hours and is taken from interviews with, and observations of the working practices of over 100 supervisors and managers in a range of UK businesses.

    The largest amount of time was spent on meetings and doing unspecified tasks - almost three hours every day on average. Nearly one hour and a half was spent on email and admin and almost two hours each day on doing the tasks meant to be carried out by those that report to them. Fifty minutes each day was spent on passive management - dealing with issues that employees require help with.

    The research shows how supervisors - across all industries - are spending their working day and how it impacts on productivity. It was found that supervisors spend less than half an hour each day on active management i.e. the planning, strategy and active direction of staff that is so important to productivity and achieving business goals.

    David Beggs - Practice Director at Managementors - stated:

    “The reality is that supervisors are doing very little active management of employees in the field, and even worse are spending a major portion of their working day on a variety of tasks which, potentially should be done elsewhere in the business. Such tasks do need to be done, but for supervisors to be doing them raises important questions about productivity and what constitutes leadership in modern business.”

    When questioned about the time spent by the supervisors, it did not compare with what they actually thought they spent on the tasks. They believed they spent just under two hours and a quarter each day on active management - but stated that ideally they would like to spend 45 minutes longer than that.   In reality, they were found to spend only an average of 27 minutes.

    The research also covered how management required time to be spent - more on active management and less on administrative tasks. It was felt that supervisors should be spending around 40 per cent of their time on active management each day.

    David Beggs commented:

    “There’s a clear disconnect between what people think they spend their working day doing and what they actually do. Productivity depends on many things, such as strong leadership and providing clear direction and training to employees, but this is not happening as much as it needs to. People are spending far too long on meetings which have little output, email, admin and even stepping down to carry out the work of the people they are meant to be managing and it’s time for UK businesses to have a hard look at how they operate. There’s a longstanding issue with UK productivity and while some of that can be put down to how productivity is measured, it’s also true that as a collective economy we need to improve our outputs. A good way of starting this process is to look at the role of business leaders and assess how their time can be more productively spent.”

  • Over half of adults plan to carry on working in their retirement

    As a result of a poll of 2,400 people in the UK - conducted by investment company Fidelity International - it was found that despite the fact that most people expect to retire at an average age of 66 years, 45 per cent expected to work past the age of 70 and nearly 9 per cent planned to keep working into their 80’s.

    Maike Currie - Director for workplace investing at Fidelity International - said:

    “With 60 now widely seen as ‘the new 40’, today’s so-called retirees are healthier, living longer, and retiring at different ages. So, it is unsurprising that people have no desire to retire and are defying traditional expectations. The economic power of those who were once considered ‘past it’ can now be felt everywhere. This will transform the jobs market as more people work into their late 60s or even early 70s and they will have a growing influence on consumer spending as pension reforms allow them to cash in their lifetime savings and spend the money as they wish.”

    As over half of adults plan to carry on working in their retirement, experts highlight the importance of employers giving workers control over how they choose to retire.

    Jill Miller - Diversity and Inclusion Adviser at the CIPD - said:

    “Giving people choice about how they choose to work is important. Many people no longer want cliff-edge retirement where you just stop working one day. Instead, many are choosing phased retirement.”

    She added that as - according to government findings - the employment rate for those aged between 50 and 64 has grown from 55 per cent to 70 per cent over the past 30 years, so employers must ensure they’re prepared for this ageing workforce, saying:

    “With an ageing population, more people are working longer and employers need to ensure their people management approach fits the needs of a multi-generational workforce. Older workers bring with them a wealth of both job and life experience, but employers need to make people want to stay. For example, can people work flexibly to balance caring responsibilities with work?”

    The research by Fidelity International also shows that those with the highest household incomes - more than £50,000 - are more likely to plan to work in their retirement than those on lower incomes. People with a household income of more than £50,000 expect to retire at 65 - whilst for those earning under £50,000 the retirement age increases to 67 years.

    As the government is unlikely to consider any further increases to the state pension age, people may face some significant challenges to ensure their finances are stable for when they retire.

    Steve Webb - former Pensions Minister and Director of Policy at Royal London - stated that those who are better off might find it easier to secure a part-time role; change to being self-employed or become a member of a board in later life. He added:

    “For those who are in good health and who enjoy what they do, carrying on working, perhaps with reduced hours, can be fulfilling and rewarding. But it’s important not to forget the large numbers of people who expect to work on not because they want to, but because they have to. A growing number of people will reach retirement without enough pension saving for a comfortable retirement and they may have to go on working long past the point when they would have wanted to stop.”

  • Ten per cent of workers are not aware if they have a pension from a previous job

    New research by Portafina - pensions advice specialists - has revealed that 10 per cent of workers are not aware if they have a pension from a previous job, meaning that 34m could lose out on millions of pounds by not tracking their old pension pots.

    With regard to old pensions, 76 per cent of UK workers state that they are unaware of their value today. If not checked, high charges and poor performance could drastically reduce the amount in the pot when retirement is reached. Only 25 per cent of workers surveyed realise that on moving jobs a new workplace pension will be set up by the new employer - but they are responsible for managing their own old pots.

    The problem of pensions being forgotten is expected to worsen as a result of auto-enrolment - as since this was introduced more workers are enrolling in pensions schemes, but were not found to understand their pensions any better.

    In the research, it was found that 47 per cent of employees do not know how auto-enrolment works - with 1 in 7 stating that they did not know what it means.

    A third of those surveyed were not aware of how much they paid monthly into their pension pot and had underestimated how large a pension pot they would require to attain a wage of £15,269 at retirement.

    It was found that 71 per cent of pension holders in defined contribution schemes do not know what charges they are paying, despite the fact that by reducing the annual charge by 1per cent a year now, could mean over £27,000 extra in the pot - and improving their pension performance by 2 per cent a year now could eventually mean £54,000 more in the pot.

    Of workers questioned about seeking financial advice when it comes to moving or consolidating an old workplace pension, 90 per cent stated that they had not done so and 77 per cent stated that they unaware of the guarantees and benefits attached to a past pension.

    Jamie Smith-Thompson - Managing Director at Portafina - said:

    “Moving into the digital world is a big positive step forward for the pension industry. Initiatives like the Pensions Dashboard currently being developed by the government will go a huge way towards helping the nation to better manage and keep on top of their pension savings.

    While it’s great that there are more online options emerging for moving or consolidating pensions, it can come with huge risk. If it feels too easy to move your pension, such as only taking a couple of clicks to complete the process, then it’s time to think twice about whether this is the right move for your hard-earned savings.

    How your pension will be invested, the fees charged, and how your new scheme compares to the old one, are all questions you should confidently know the answers to before making any decisions to jump ship from your current provider.

    The bottom line is, it’s best to seek expert help before making any final decisions. Having all your pensions in one place can be very convenient and sometimes saves on charges. But depending on the pensions that you are consolidating, if you are not careful you could end up paying more in charges, losing valuable benefits and guarantees, or seeing your investments placed in funds that are not suitable for your goals.

    A regulated financial adviser will analyse every aspect of your pensions, giving you all the facts you need to make an informed decision, unlike most combine-and-go online platforms. With something as valuable as your retirement savings, it makes sense to be absolutely sure.

  • One in twenty workers does not get paid holidays

    According to a report by the Resolution Foundation think tank (an independent think tank focused on improving living standards for those on low to middle incomes) - after research into illegal work practices - it was found that one in twenty workers does not get paid holidays and one in ten does not get a payslip.

    The Resolution Foundation found that workers over the age of 65 are most likely to not have paid holidays, despite a legal entitlement to twenty eight days a year. Younger workers - those aged 25 and under - are most likely to be paid less than the minimum wage, which is illegal. It has been suggested that this is a trend which may have been caused by the growth of the gig economy.

    In addition, the research showed that workers in small firms, i.e. employing fewer than twenty five personnel; workers on zero-hours and those on temporary contracts are most likely to not get payslips and paid leave.

    Lindsay Judge - Senior Economic Analyst at the Resolution Foundation - welcomed the government's efforts to strengthen the resources of bodies such as HM Revenue & Customs.

    She said:

    "The UK has a multitude of rules to govern its labour market, from maximum hours to minimum pay, but these rules can only become a reality if they are properly enforced. Labour market violations remain far too common, with millions of workers missing out on basic entitlements to a payslip, holiday entitlement and the minimum wage. Our analysis suggests that, while violations take place across the labour market, the government should also prioritise investigations into sectors like hotels and restaurants, along with firms who make large use of atypical employment contracts, as that's where abuse is most prevalent."

    Lindsay Judge went on to say that UK workers relied on the Employment Tribunal system to rectify any unfairness and to challenge illegal practices. However, the workers most in need of redress were, in fact, those least likely to employ the system - the younger workers were shown to make fewer Employment Tribunal applications than any other age group, whilst managerial staff - who are less likely to be subject to labour market abuse - are amongst those most likely to resort to tribunal claims.

    Laura Pidcock - shadow Business Minister - stated that she recognised that many people worked in illegal conditions and said:

    “Behind the statistics are many hours of stressful and exhausting work, people's home lives being made so much harder than they need to be, an unchecked class of bad bosses and legions of workers who feel like they have no choice but to accept illegal poor conditions."

    A spokesman for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy stated:

    "We are extending state enforcement to cover holiday pay for vulnerable workers, as part of the largest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation.”

  • Under California Law employees have the right to receive a copy of their personnel records

    Most California HR professionals are familiar with requests from employees and former employees for copies of personnel records - as the right to inspect and obtain copies of certain records has been law in California for some time. Current and former employees - and their lawyers - have the right to request access to their personnel files and their payroll records.

    Under California Labor Code Section 1198.5 employees have the right to inspect and receive a copy of their personnel records. These are records which show performance; have been used to determine an employee’s qualifications for promotion; additional compensation or disciplinary action - including termination.

    Requests for records must be made in writing, within a strict time span and employers should provide the employee making the request with the appropriate form. Within 30 days of making the written request, the employee must be able to inspect their personnel file or be given a copy of it. Should a copy be provided, the employer may make a charge for the cost of copying the file.

    The labor commissioner has given examples of information that can be requested - which includes employment applications; performance reviews; warning notices and attendance records, but specifically excluded is anything relating to any investigation of possible crime, references or any documents obtained before the employee was actually employed.

    Employees also have the right - under Labor Code Section 226 - to inspect or receive a computer-generated record or copies of itemized wage statements received by the employee. As from January 1, 2019 employees now have the right to inspect or receive a copy of their records - as opposed to earlier when employers could require the employee to make their own copy.

    As with personnel files, the employee can be charged for the actual cost of copying the records. Only 21 calendar days is allowed for the employer to provide the pay roll information - a shorter period than that applying to the provision of personnel records.

    For failure to adhere to the strict timing code a fine of $750 can be made for each violation and the Private Attorneys General Act may provide for an additional penalty. In any lawsuit, a court can issue an injunction and require the employer to pay the employee’s attorneys’ fees and costs.

    Under Labor Code Section 432, employers must - when so requested - provide job applicants, employees and former employees with a copy of anything they signed relating to the obtaining or holding of employment. This request need not be in writing and there is no specified time for delivery.

    Employers are advised to send hard copy requiring proof of delivery and a covering letter detailing which documents are being sent in relation to the request received on a specified date. Plus, keeping an exact copy eliminates doubt and is also proof of what has been sent.

  • Survey highlights the perks on offer to expats

    According to new research from HSBC, the average expat - by moving overseas - earns an extra £21,000 over their annual salary and after surveying 163 countries the best-paid staff were found in Switzerland, the US and Hong Kong.

    The research - HSBC Annual Expat Survey - attracted a response from more than 22,000 people, most of whom were executives who already enjoyed a high level of income.

    Of these respondents, 45 per cent said they got more money for the same job by moving abroad - whilst 28 per cent said they got promotion.

    Andrew Talbot - who has been a certified financial planner for 18 years and currently works with Expat Financial Planning in Singapore - said:

    “One year as an expat could be the financial equivalent of three years back home”.

    John Goddard - Head of HSBC Expat - who is based in the Channel Islands and has himself worked overseas in Asia, the Middle East and Eastern Europe - said:

    “It absolutely is life-changing. That extra income helps people prepare for their future life. Over a third say they were able to put money away for retirement. Another third say they used it get on the property ladder.”

    When it comes to personal lives, it was stated that Singapore is considered the best country or territory in the world for education and 60 per cent of expat parents in Singapore found that their children’s health and well-being was better there than at home.

    Citing the huge number of perks on offer, HSBC said:

    “Singapore packs everything a budding expat could want into one of the world’s smallest territories.”

    John Goddard added:

    “A taste of life in a new location can be the key to unlocking your creative potential, finding the work/life balance you’ve been craving, or taking your career in a new direction.”

    A further study - conducted by the regulated property buyer Good Move - identified how much professions are paid in the UK and compared this against countries which are popular with people choosing to emigrate. 

    This study found that doctors can boost their yearly earnings by £118,675 by moving to America and nurses - by moving to Canada - can boost their salary by £40,000.

    The five professions which could increase their annual salary the most by moving abroad are doctors; nurses; directors; secondary school teachers and HR managers - who could earn £33,088 more by moving to Australia.

    Ross Counsell - Director at Good Move, a Property Buying Specialist - said:

    “The volume of people using our service in order to move abroad is continuing to grow, with more and more people looking to sell their property quickly and head overseas. Our research provides valuable insight into why this trend is occurring. The potential to earn more money abroad, across a large span of countries, evidently has huge appeal to those working in the UK. People are always looking to improve their quality of life and for an increasing amount of people, this now means moving to a different company.”

  • Case study: Employers must adequately test job shares

    Sheffield Employment Tribunal has ruled in the case of Mrs J McBride v Capita Customer Management Services, finding that Mrs Mcbride was indirectly discriminated against after her employer tried to change her role from a part-time to a full-time position.

    Before transferring to Capita Customer Management Services, Mrs McBride had worked with a company called Ventura – commencing her employment on 15 March 1999. Her position was that of Head of Quality and Compliance.

    In April 2015 she started maternity leave, returning to work on 24 April 2017 as Implementation Manager, within a partnership deal she had previously worked on.

    On 28 September 2017 – as a result of Mrs McBride having difficulty with the health of two of her children – she submitted a request to Mr Lovell, her Line Manager, requesting flexible working. This was refused.

    In October of that year, Mr Lovell informed Mrs McBride there was the possibility of a job share and Mrs McBride accepted this proposal. On 2 November, Mr Lovell wrote to her confirming that she would be employed on a permanent part-time basis – but on a different project. 

    However, Mrs McBride claimed that by December Mr Lovell had given her and the other employee sharing the job individual responsibility for separate projects and work streams - effectively weakening the original arrangement.

    Mr Lovell told the tribunal that he had had to review the make-up of his team to deal with the requirements of a new initiative implemented by Capita - and to ensure that business hours were covered, all roles within his team would need to be carried out on a full-time basis. He also stated that he had previously observed risks and problems with the job share - but did not provide any evidence to substantiate this.

    Mrs McBride felt the job share had not been adequately tested before the roles and workload were reorganised. She felt that the reasons given for not considering part-time working were not being based on a fair or reasonable benchmark - she believed a part-time or job share arrangement would work if the workloads were allocated appropriately.

    On 30 April 2018 Mrs McBride was informed that all roles would be full time and she was invited to a consultation meeting to take place on 2 May 2018. She also attended redundancy meetings in May and June to seek alternative posts but she rejected all the positions offered as they were full time.

    On 15 June 2018, Mrs McBride was given a formal notice of redundancy and despite her appealing against the decision, her redundancy was upheld on 16 July 2018. After working her notice period, her employment was terminated on 6 September 2018, resulting in her bringing claims of unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination on 28 November 2018.

    In upholding the claims of unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination, Employment Judge Robert Little stated that Capita had “endeavoured to distance itself from the part-time/full-time dichotomy” and stated that a reasonable employer would test whether or not making Mrs McBride’s job full time would ensure the role worked most effectively. He added:

    “We conclude a reasonable employer would have given the job share a fair trial period, respecting the detailed plans that the two senior job-sharing employees concerned had prepared and which plans presumably had at least tacit approval from the employer.”

    Andrew Willis - Head of Legal at HR-inform - said the ruling demonstrated to employers that the particulars of flexible working arrangements should be fully considered before a decision is made on their feasibility. He stated:

    “As seen here, if an employer feels that the job share situation is not working in their company, they should be prepared to provide valid business reasons for this. Simply informing employees that they will no longer be able to job share, without justification and not addressing their arguments against such a decision could quickly leave a company open to an unfair dismissal claim if the employees have the length of service.”

  • Survey shows the importance of technology skills

    A survey of 502 IT decision makers from different UK firms and carried out by Censuswide on behalf of tech jobs board CWJobs, has found that 68% of UK business leaders believe that employees with technology skills - such as coding and cybersecurity - are more valuable than those with traditional skills such as maths and science.

    It was also found that 53% did not think children were taught enough tech specialisms at school – with 71% of businesses urging candidates to learn tech specialisms in order to further their careers.

    The survey also found that 73% of employers felt that tech education needed to happen at either primary or secondary school level and, in order to help close the tech skills gap, 86% of businesses would consider partnering with a school or college.

    Dominic Harvey - Director at CWJobs - said:

    “The UK is facing a skills crisis and those with tech specialisms on their CV are being sought after by all companies, now more than ever. In order to plug that gap, businesses are calling for tech to be given more of a prominence in the school curriculum. What’s clear is that learning a tech skill isn’t just something that’s relevant for one role or one industry, but the entire UK workforce needs to be embracing it if the country is to remain competitive on the world stage.”

    Tech skills can put jobseekers high on the hiring list as 80% of employers stated that having a tech specialism is an important factor in their hiring decision and 63% said that they would hire someone with a tech specialism over a candidate without one – with 64% giving their reason for this as the fact that the candidate would be able to train others.

    Cyber security was cited by 79% of those polled as being the tech specialism most in demand.

    Of London’s employers, 73% said skills around the Internet were important for their employees to have and in Birmingham, 54% think coding is a vital skill.

    Within current UK workforces, 44% had Cloud skills - the most prevalent amongst employees, with Cyber security next at 43% but the majority of the UK workforces had no specific skill present.

    Top suggestions for remedying the lack of tech skills in future job candidates were increasing training programmes - cited by 52% of those polled, with 50% suggesting more government investment in the tech industry and 47% wanting more apprenticeships to be offered.

  • Court hands down judgement in pension age equalisation case

    In the recent case in the Royal Courts of Justice concerning pension age equalisation, Lord Justice Irwin and Mrs Justice Whipple handed down a judgement that stated:

    "The court was saddened by the stories contained in the claimants' evidence.

    But, the court's role was limited. There was no basis for concluding that the policy choices reflected in the legislation were not open to government. In any event they were approved by Parliament.

    The wider issues raised by the claimants about whether the choices were right or wrong or good or bad were not for the court. They were for members of the public and their elected representatives."

    The court had been hearing the case of two claimants - Julie Delve and Karen Glynn - who had taken the Department for Work and Pensions to court for discrimination on the grounds of age and/or sex and also stating that the government failed to inform them of the changes due to the increase in women’s pension age.

    Women who were born in the 1950s claim that the rise is unfair as they were not given sufficient time to make adjustments to cope with the years without a state pension. This is due to the rise of entitlement from 60 years to 65 years - in line with men - and will further rise to 66 years by 2020 and 67 years by 2028.

    The arguments put forward by the claimants were that the changes offended the EU law principle of non-discrimination, but this was rejected by the court who held that the legislation under challenge was not within the scope of EU law.  It also rejected the argument that the European Convention of Human Rights had been breached - as case law maintains that a new legislative scheme which effects changes from a given date based on age can be introduced.

    With regard to the argument of sex discrimination, the court ruled that ‘there was no direct discrimination on grounds of sex, because this legislation does not treat women less favourably than men in law, rather it equalises a historic asymmetry between men and women and thereby corrects historic direct discrimination against men.’

    When handed down, the judgment drew gasps from the public gallery and later - on the court steps - the group Women Against State Pension Inequality chanted ‘shame on you’.

    A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions said:

    "We welcome the High Court's judgment. It has always been our view that the changes we made to women's state pension age were entirely lawful and did not discriminate on any grounds."

  • Case study: Employer taken to Tribunal for racial and homophobic abuse of employee

    Carlisle Employment Tribunal recently ruled in the case of Hoch v Thor Atkinson Steel Fabrications of Cumbria. The ruling stated that Mr W Hoch had been subjected to racial and homophobic abuse by his employer, leaving him terrified.

    In the judgement, Judge Hodgson found that Mr Hoch, who worked as a buyer for Thor Atkinson Steel Fabrications in Cumbria from December 2014 until his resignation on 30 April 2018, was a victim of racial and homophobic comments.

    Despite the employer - Mr Atkinson - insisting that the comments were office banter and a sign of a good working relationship, the Judge found that Mr Hoch had not encouraged the comments.

    About one year after Mr Hoch has commenced working for the company, the owner - Mr Atkinson - began addressing Mr Hoch using racially offensive terms such as ‘foreign ****’ and the ‘N word’, with this form of address being used more frequently than his name. Other members of staff followed suit.

    Mr Atkinson later began using homophobic slurs, such as ‘gay ****’ to address Mr Hoch, and told him to ‘get back to the Wendy house’ - which led to him being regularly teased by other colleagues about his appearance. 

    In August 2017, Mr Hunter - a co-worker of Mr Hoch - posted a picture on Snapchat of Mr Hoch’s head superimposed onto the body of an emaciated black child. 

    Throughout 2017 and January 2018 the slurs continued until in January, Mr Hoch recorded an exchange between himself and Mr Hunter. During this exchange, Mr Hoch was addressed with a string of racial and abusive slurs, despite Mr Hoch threatening to report Mr Hunter.

    Mr Hoch resigned in April 2018 citing the fact that he frequently received abuse from Mr Atkinson and found it threatening, degrading, racist and a violation of his personal self - resulting in him having to seek medical attention.

    Mr Atkinson offered Mr Hoch a grievance hearing which Mr Hoch declined on the grounds that he hearing would be conducted by the company’s HR representative - who was also Mr Atkinson’s wife.

    Mrs Atkinson, who stated that she had more than 20 years experience in HR, then suggested that the hearing could be conducted by a cleaner employed by the company and who was a personal friend. Mr Hoch again declined.

    The Employment Tribunal said that Mr Hoch’s rejection of both meetings was entirely reasonable and that the suggestion by Mrs Atkinson that either she or a cleaner conduct the grievance procedure was clearly wholly inappropriate. As a result of this, the claim of constructive unfair dismissal was also upheld as Mr Hoch had no access to a fair grievance process, which resulted in him taking a lower-paid job elsewhere. 

    In evidence, Mrs Atkinson claimed to have processed written complaints about Mr Hoch’s difference in demeanour from other staff but could not produce the evidence. Accordingly, the Tribunal questioned how someone with her HR experience could misplace paperwork. The Tribunal found her to be totally lacking in any credibility.

    Mr Hoch and his witness - another company employee - were found to have given straightforward evidence.

    The Tribunal - in finding in favour of Mr Hoch - awarded him a total of £52,686, made up of the sum of £1,524 by way of basic award; the sum of £500 by way of compensatory award; the sum of £22,000 by way of injury to feelings award in respect of the harassment claim related to race; the sum of £5,000 by way of injury to feelings in respect of the harassment claim related to sexual orientation; the sum of £5,000 by way of aggravated damages; the sum of £4,500 by way of damages for personal injury; the sum of £10,804 by way of interest; the sum of £3,326 by way of grossing up of the taxable element of these awards and the sum of £2,032 in respect of the failure to provide written statement of particulars.

  • Health benefit costs still rising faster than overall inflation

    According to the latest Mercer National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans and based on responses from 1,511 US employers, Health Benefit costs will grow by 3.9 per cent in 2020.

    Just 43 per cent of responding employers indicated that raising deductibles or otherwise cutting benefits to hold down cost in 2020, i.e. cost -shifting to employees, will be less of a factor than in recent years.

    Since 2014, the amount costs would rise if employers renewed plans - without making changes - has gone down from 8 per cent to 5 per cent, taking off some of the pressure to make short-term cost cuts. Employers have been seeking to reduce costs by using improved health outcomes - such as targeted support for specific health conditions - and steering plan members to higher-quality providers.

    Tracy Watts - Mercer’s National Leader for US Health Policy - stated:

    “While the trend of low single-digit increases that began in 2012 continues, health benefit costs are still rising faster than overall inflation. And with the economy slowing, employers know they can’t afford to be complacent.”

    She added:

    “Rather than shift cost to employees, these approaches typically enhance the health care experience”.

    To assist with higher quality health care, employers are carrying on adding to tech-enabled programs especially designed to help members with specific health issues - such as diabetes, insomnia and infertility. For instance, a program for diabetes can significantly improve quality of life whilst reducing trips to the emergency room - which are very costly.

    In addition, 39 per cent of employers with 500 or more employees are also helping to ensure plan members receive high-quality care by providing access to a Center of Excellence for cardiology, bariatric surgery, cancer and other complex treatments - and 16 per cent say they guide employees to the Center with lower cost-sharing or even by requiring its use.

    In 2019, 62 per cent of the respondents with 500 or more employees were found to be offering one or more of such targeted solutions - compared to 55 per cent in 2018 (40 per cent of these respondents say that all or most of their benefit offerings are accessible to employees on a single, fully integrated digital platform - most often through a smartphone app). This is compared to 34 per cent in Mercer’s 2018 survey.

    Tracy Watts says:

    “Employers have been experimenting with new approaches to tackle high costs, inconsistent quality, and low patient satisfaction. While there’s still so much more to do, it’s encouraging to see signs that health innovation may be starting to slow health cost growth – without shifting cost back to employees.”

  • Large percentage feel that employers are biased towards graduates from Russell Group universities

    Research from Milkround - a graduate jobs board site - has found that 83 per cent of graduates feel that there is a bias by employers towards alumni from Russell Group universities.

    Between 29 April and 6 May 2019, Milkround asked the opinion of 7,000 graduates with further research on 1,500 recent graduates then being conducted between 11 August and 13 August 2019.

    According to the recruiter, Milkround, those surveyed stated that graduates of Russell Group universities - which are considered to be the best 24 in the UK - are more likely to find work soon after graduating.

    Four fifths of those graduating from Russell Group universities found full-time employment within just weeks of leaving, whilst only two thirds of those from the rest managed to do so. Of the graduates from Russell Group universities, 22 per cent reported failure to obtain employment, whilst this number increased to 30 per cent for non-Russell-Group graduates.

    In addition, almost 44 per cent of those who have attended a non-Russell Group university reported having to make frequent financial sacrifices. According to the Department for Education, those attending Russell Group universities are much more likely to earn a higher salary than those who do not attend these institutions.

    More than two-fifths of graduates are suggesting that employers should practice blind recruitment, the object being to create a diverse workforce and 24 per cent of this group is also calling for all prerequisites to be removed from the recruiting process - such as which university they had attended.

    Another improvement in the recruiting process - recommended by 15 per cent of graduates - was offering more opportunities to candidates in disadvantaged areas; 12 per cent stated that candidates should be supported with travel costs to attend interviews and 8 per cent suggested that employers could help graduates to find affordable accommodation in close proximity to their new job.

    Georgina Brazier - graduate jobs expert at Milkround - said:

    “Most graduates are left with the same level of debt or student loans (and same tuition fees) regardless of what university they attended. The investment students make to attend university and gain their degree is substantial and whilst academic success should be applauded, some graduates feel the return on investment when entering the workplace should be fairer. There’s no doubt that Russell Group graduates make for excellent employees but it’s integral that companies do not rule out the chance to recruit fantastic grads from other universities.

    Blind recruitment is necessary if businesses want to attract talent from the widest talent pool possible, with an excitingly diverse set of skills and intellects, rather than blocking perfectly good candidates because of their university or socio-economic background. It’s something that can be implemented quickly and simply for most companies. Moreover, many companies have made huge strides in increasing diversity in their recruitment and change is on the horizon.

    The best way to help graduates believe that firms can offer them a future whatever their background, is to break down communication with students and have face-to-face conversations by visiting universities around the country. This dialogue is key to easing the anxiety graduates may encounter before applying for jobs, plus encourage students from diverse backgrounds to apply to firms they may have previously viewed as having a challenging entry point.”

    Milkround infers that promising candidates are filtered out from those social and economic backgrounds less represented at the top universities but who also may be far more suitable and ready for work.

  • California endorses a Bill that could reshape the US gig economy

    California’s governor - Gavin Newsom - has endorsed a landmark bill that requires companies like Uber, Lyft, Postmates and Amazon Flex to treat contract workers as employees, paying holiday and sick pay to the workers.

    The bill was passed in the state Senate and despite their efforts to negotiate an exemption, will apply to app-based companies. It is expected to be signed into law, paving the way for California's 1 million gig workers to gain added rights next year.

    Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez - who introduced the bill - said in a statement:

    “Big businesses shouldn't be able to pass their costs onto taxpayers, while depriving workers of the labor law protections they are rightfully entitled to. This legislation is an important work in progress to provide certainty to California’s businesses, provide protections for California’s workers and guard the taxpayers from subsidizing unscrupulous corporations.”

    If the bill is signed into law it could reshape the gig economy - which has been a cornerstone of the model adopted by ride-hailing firms and food delivery apps - with some estimates suggesting that costs for firms affected would increase by 30% if they have to treat workers as employees.

    Opponents of the bill say it will hurt those people who want to work flexible hours but California state senator, Maria Elena Durazo, remarked that underpaying workers was not innovative.

    An Uber spokesperson, in a statement, said:

    "We support efforts to modernize labor laws in ways that preserve the flexibility drivers tell us they value, while improving the quality and security of independent work.”

    Uber and Lyft have both proposed a referendum on the decision and in a statement after the bill was passed, a Lyft spokesperson said:

    "We are fully prepared to take this issue to the voters of California to preserve the freedom and access drivers and riders want and need."

    Uber and Lyft - who have hundreds of thousands of drivers in California - have said that contract work provides people with adaptability and will hurt those people who want to work flexible hours. They have also warned that recognizing drivers as employees could destroy their businesses.

    Other states may be influenced by this bill as a coalition of labor groups is pushing for similar legislation in New York. New York City passed a minimum wage for ride-hailing drivers last year - but did not try to classify them as employees. In Washington State and Oregon similar bills were introduced but failed to advance. However, this bill could see them renewing impetus.

    Previously, California has led the way in introducing legislation that has been adopted elsewhere in the US. This has worried the Western States Trucking Association - which represents truck drivers - many of whom are temporary and freelance workers.

    Joseph Rajkovacz - Group Director of Governmental Affairs - told Reuters:

    “People ought to be very concerned because what happens here does tend to get copied in other states."

    Alex Rosenblat - a technology ethnographer at Data & Society and author of Uberland - thinks the bill is likely to pass in California’s Democratic-majority Senate and says:

    “They are setting a powerful political example for how to regulate tech and try and create better conditions under which people work in the gig economy. And that’s pretty important.”

  • Case study – expert witness criticised by Judge

    An expert witness was criticised by Mr Justice Martin Spencer in the case of Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

    Mrs Arksey brought a medical negligence action in relation to the NHS Trust’s failure to admit her to hospital after she had suffered from a cerebral aneurysm.  The Trust had admitted negligence - to a degree. It was denied, however, that the negligence made any causative difference to the outcome.

    Mrs Arksey suffered a sentinel bleed from a cerebral aneurism whilst at home. She attended hospital, but was discharged. The following day she had a major haemorrhage which resulted in permanent brain damage. The Trust accepted that a breach of duty had occurred when she was not admitted.

    The claimant’s case was that the hospital had a protocol for patients waiting to have a coil fitted in their aneurism, whereby they were admitted to hospital and given bed rest, blood pressure monitoring and appropriate hydration.

    A consultant neurosurgeon, her expert witness, stated that - in his opinion it was uncommon for a new haemorrhage to occur whilst awaiting a coil in hospital and therefore, had she been admitted it was unlikely that it would have occurred.

    The defence’s expert disagreed with this, stating that being hospital would not have avoided the haemorrhage the following day.

    Mrs Arkseys’s case rested on expert evidence, but the judge found that this evidence was subject to some shortcomings. He remarked that her witness’s evidence “fell far below the standard to be expected of a reasonable, competent expert witness both in the preparation of his reports and in relation to his preparing to give evidence.”

    “.....In addition, at one stage he even used an expletive, and there was a failure on his part to address the questions that he was being asked.”

    The judge also criticised Mrs Arksey’s lawyers for not ensuring the expert’s report was completely compliant with Civil Procedure Rule 35. He commented that they allowed the witness “....to go into the witness box despite there being clear and obvious deficiencies in his written evidence, and this was something which should have been addressed by the lawyers long before the trial.”

    Conversely, the judge found the defendant’s witness to be straightforward and reliable, having prepared reports which fully complied with Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules. He stated that he preferred the defence witness’s evidence on every point of dispute and found for the defendant on the main issue.

  • Court finds that VAT can be recovered on a medical reporting organisation’s fee

    In the case of British Airways Plc v Prosser it was found - on appeal - that a solicitor can recover VAT on a medical reporting organisation fee.

    Mr Prosser - an employee of British Airways - was injured in an accident at work for which liability was admitted. Damages of just under £15,500 were agreed. British Airways Plc paid Mr Prosser’s fixed costs, but the parties were in dispute about the VAT element of the charges made by the medical reporting organisation, Absolute Medicals Limited. 

    The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled that the District Judge had been entitled to allow the costs claimed by Mr Prosser - including the VAT - regardless of whether a medical reporting organisation, which the respondent's solicitors had commissioned to secure medical reports and records in relation to Mr Prosser’s claim, had actually been obliged to charge VAT.

    British Airways Plc’s position was that VAT was not chargeable on the medical services provided because the providers were not VAT-registered, or their supplies were exempt. They pleaded that VAT should only be charged by Absolute Medicals Limited on the portion of the invoice which represented its administration fees. 

    The disputed amount was extremely small but there was a wider issue at stake. Firstly, District Judge Temple - sitting in Newcastle County Court - held that VAT was recoverable on the entire Absolute Medicals Limited invoice and found that it would be:

    “Entirely unreasonable and disproportionate to expect the claimant’s solicitors to start questioning the VAT status of the invoice that was provided to them by the medical agency. That, in my view, is going way too far on the expectations that are to be placed on a claimant’s solicitor.”

    British Airways appealed and the appeal court, in dismissing their appeal, held that the District Judge had been entitled to take the view that the sums claimed in the relevant invoices had been reasonably and proportionately incurred and were reasonable and proportionate in amount - satisfying the requirements of CPR 44.3. It was stated that it was readily comprehensible that the District Judge had not thought that it had been incumbent on the respondent's solicitors to investigate the VAT position.

    Guidance was given on when VAT could be charged in cases where solicitors, instructed on personal injury claims, had used the services of a medical reporting organisation. Where the amounts in issue are more significant, it will be incumbent on solicitors representing the receiving party to make more probing enquiries about the VAT position. 

  • Why the reactive, proactive and predictive management of hazards is essential

    Article by Lloyd Watson published in New law Journal 16.09.19

    During my tenures both as an Airline Operations Director and a Director in a major Oil & Gas company - accountable for the aviation safety and assurance of a global operation - success in my view was making sure that every employee using aviation through the business went home safely to their families. In order to achieve this, we had to drive the highest risk management standards possible.

    A Safety Management System (SMS) saves lives and prevents injuries. It provides a systematic way to identify hazards, control risks and assure that the risk controls are effective. The reactive, proactive and predictive management of hazards is essential. To be a credible aviation expert it is, in my view, necessary to be able to demonstrate mastery of this elusive subject.

    An effective SMS should:

    1. Define how the organisation is set up to manage risk.
    2. Identify the risks inherent in aviation, the risks associated with a particular operation and implement suitable controls.
    3. Implement effective communications across all levels of the organisation.
    4. Implement a process to identify and correct non-conformities.
    5. Implement a continual improvement process.

    The terms hazards and risks appear interchangeable, but it is important to understand the difference. The identified hazard is something we want to prevent. The risk is a measure of likelihood and consequence and drives where we place our resources. If we measure a risk as high, the likelihood is that people will get hurt and we therefore need barriers (procedures, processes) to prevent the hazard. We also need to accept that the hazard may happen and additional barriers are needed to reduce the consequence.

  • Employees call for more help with mental health issues

    Research on mental health issues, involving 2,000 UK employees of working age from around the country, has been conducted by Slater and Gordon - a UK and Australian law firm.

    It was found that 14 per cent of employees - when they spoke to their boss about mental issues - were told to ‘man up’ and 13 per cent were either fired, demoted or forced to leave their job.

    Many of the employees recognised that their mental health was not as good as it should be but neither was their employer’s attitude towards it - with 65 per cent of workers calling for the provision of more support.

    On average, UK employees are taking four mental health days off each year, but are lying about the reason for doing so.

    It was found that one in five workers in Yorkshire is faking a physical illness in order to take time off work for their mental health - over fears of being judged or sacked - which is over the national average.

    Yorkshire was also above the national average for people staying in the job that was causing them stress, depression or anxiety, with 18 per cent of workers stating this was the case - compared to 16 per cent over the whole of the UK.

    The biggest causes of stress were found to be unrealistic deadlines and pressure from above, with 25 per cent of workers admitting to leaving at least one job due to the negative impact it was having on their mental health. Weekends were not being used to relax as 37 per cent of staff stated that they were struggling to switch off from work and 60 per cent admitted to suffering from ‘Sunday dread’.

    Peter Lyons - principal lawyer at Slater and Gordon - said that the firm regularly speaks to people who feel unable to work because of mounting stress and anxiety.

    He added:

    “We speak to a lot of people who are feeling so stressed and anxious with work they are forced into taking mental health days. Many isolate themselves, trying to work harder, which causes their personal lives to suffer and mental health to deteriorate further. The biggest thing we would say is don’t fight stress alone at work."

    Louise Aston - wellbeing campaign director at Business in the Community - said that the research shows employers still need to do much more to support staff dealing with mental health problems adding:

    “The statistics... show that there is a significant amount of work to be done to challenge the stigma of mental health in the workplace. Employers need to create the kind of culture where staff can be transparent about their mental health and they need to lead by example. Training and flexible working should be top considerations.

    It’s OK not to be OK. We need an inclusive targeted approach to ensure that managers receive quality training, are knowledgeable about key issues in the world of mental health, and are aware of reasonable adjustments that can be made such as flexible working. The business case is clear in terms of showing a clear impact on productivity and staff engagement and retention, and we challenge all UK businesses to make good employee mental health a strategic priority.”

  • Case study: HR should beware when making decisions about leaves of absence

    The risk to employers of taking employment actions when annoyed, rather than using reason - particularly when it comes to decisions about leaves of absence - was emphasized by a recent decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

    In the case of DaPrato v. Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, the Supreme Judicial Court recently upheld a $1.3 million damage award to Mr Daprato, an ex-employee of the Water Resources Authority.

    The damages consisted of $19,777 in back pay and $188,666 for lost future income and benefits; $200,000 for emotional distress and $715,385 in punitive damages plus $208,443 in liquidated damages and $605,690 in attorney fees and costs.

    Mr DaPrato was fired from his job as an Information Technology Manager - where he had worked for many years and received positive reviews - after taking a vacation to Mexico while he was on a medical leave of absence.

    He had informed HR that he was postponing a previously scheduled knee surgery to have a tumor removed from his right foot and his surgeon provided a medical certificate. This stated that the employee would require between four to six weeks of FMLA leave following the surgery and that he would need to wear a medical boot before being able to undertake weight-bearing activities.

    After surgery, Mr DaPrato wished to return to work earlier than previously thought, but on approaching HR he was informed that he could not do so without a certificate from his surgeon - who was not available for several weeks. Mr DaPrato then requested to be paid under the employer’s salary continuation policy.

    During the interim period, Mr DaPrato - who had a vacation to Mexico previously planned - went on the trip but curtailed his activities.

    On receiving his paycheck it did not show what he had been expecting under the salary continuation policy. He emailed the HR Director and requested an updated paycheck, also stating that he did not want any “surprises” when he came to request additional FMLA leave for the knee surgery. The HR Director did not provide this to the employee but forwarded Mr DaPrato’s e-mail to an HR manager stating:

    “Is he serious?”

    The HR Manager replied:

    “OMG.”

    HR learned that Mr DaPrato had made the trip to Mexico and launched an investigation. A video was obtained of Mr DaPatro lifting luggage out of a car and although he explained that he had tried to return to work early and that he was wearing a boot while engaging in the doubtful activities - and that these activities did not conflict with the limitations described in the medical forms from his surgeon - the HR Director, together with another person, recommended firing Mr DaPrato, which duly happened. The company was not given the FMLA forms.

    The HR Director testified to her belief that an employee on FMLA leave could not take a vacation and the company’s lawyers showed photos of Mr DaPrato standing holding a large fish - despite the fact that the company had no knowledge of the photos when the termination took place.

    The State Supreme Court gave the following analysis that an employer should use when deciding whether or not an employee has exploited his FMLA leave:

    “We clarify today that an employer may validly consider an employee’s conduct on vacation—or, for that matter, anywhere—that is inconsistent with his or her claimed reasons for medical leave, when the employer has such information at the time the employer is evaluating whether leave has been properly or improperly used.

    Here, [the plaintiff] took FMLA leave to allow his foot to recover fully from surgery. Such recovery could take place in a warm climate as well as in a New England winter. That being said, vacationing while on FMLA leave may take either permissible or impermissible forms. An employee recovering from a leg injury may sit with his or her leg raised by the sea shore while fully complying with FMLA leave requirements but may not climb Machu Picchu without abusing the FMLA process. Careful consideration of the reasons for the medical leave and the activities undertaken, including the timeline for rehabilitation and recovery, are required to determine whether FMLA leave has been abused.”

    In reviewing the punitive and liquidated damages awards, the State High Court found that despite the employer being honest in its belief that it was complying with the FMLA, it was not objectively reasonable in its belief.

    The Court found that the employer ignored Mr DaPrato’s medical records and FMLA application and made its decision based on “shock, outrage and offense” that the employee might request additional FMLA leave for knee surgery - as shown in the e-mail exchange between the HR Director and the HR Manager.

  • The biggest challenge to payroll professionals is a lack of knowledge of local regulations

    According to the latest industry trends report by the TMF Group (a leading provider of tax, accounting and HR services on an international scale), together with the Global Payroll Association, a lack of knowledge of local regulations is the biggest challenge faced by global and in-country payroll professionals.

    Of the in-country payroll professionals surveyed, 41% reported a lack of knowledge of local payroll legislation and requirements, which was an increase of 6% on 2016.

    Cited by 30.2% of those surveyed was a failure of in-house professionals to understand local rules and regulations and 29.6% said they were responsible for sourcing local payroll compliance information, but were often unaware of where to find it. These were the most common reasons given for payroll errors.

    Of the payroll professionals surveyed a high amount - 69.4% - reported having no or fewer than 50% of global policies that apply to all payrolls.

    The top four challenges faced by global and in-country payroll professionals were found to be lack of knowledge of local payroll legislation and requirements; vendor management; ability to find information on legislation and compliance and lack of consistency in policies and processes.

    Deborah Williams - Global Head of Service Lines at TMF Group - said:

    "The payroll industry is doing remarkable work despite facing increasingly complex rules and regulations. Nonetheless, the lack of local knowledge is of concern, as it has potential repercussions on compliance. Ultimately, it can affect the payment of staff and the performance of the business.

    It is encouraging to see that four out of five payroll professionals value having an in-country contact - such as ourselves - who speaks the local language to help them communicate more effectively."

    She added:

    "The lack of consistency and control that results from not having robust payroll policies and processes in place should be of concern to organisations operating in multiple jurisdictions as this leads to errors in payroll processing and increases risk of non-compliance.

    Our report with GPA also shows that many organisations are yet to adopt appropriate technology to support their payroll operations at an international scale. This contributes to the failure of policies and processes.

    There is a growing trend among organisations towards the adoption of middleware to solve the problem of trying to deal with a multitude of systems and suppliers across different territories. We now see many organisations turning to payroll outsourcing to fulfil these needs."

    Melanie Pizzey - CEO of the Global Payroll Association - stated:

    "Our second annual survey with TMF Group indicates that professionals responsible for multi-country payroll delivery are facing increased complexities on many fronts. As a result, global payroll transformation is - or will become - a priority for employers so they can achieve consistency in their global operations, and maximise the return on their investments."

  • Employers are placing more emphasis on skills, with qualifications only part of their requirements

    Whilst students might still be resting their hopes of landing their dream job on the A-level results they have received, employers are placing more emphasis on essential skills like teamwork, presenting and problem-solving - qualifications are only part of the requirement.

    Because of the difficulty in assessing at the recruitment and selection stage, for the first time leading organisations in the education and employment sectors - the CIPD, The Careers & Enterprise Company, Business in the Community, the Gatsby Foundation, EY Foundation and the Skills Builder Partnership - have joined forces to agree a universal framework for these essential skills.

    Already used by over 700 establishments, the new organisation will develop the ‘skills builder framework’ and set out the skills needed to thrive at work. In addition, it will show how these can be assessed and developed - and can be used by students, workers and employers.

    The benefits of the ‘skilled builder framework’ will include making those charged with educating students aware of the skills that are required by employers - so ensuring that they are well equipped to join the workforce.

    Also, it will help employers to hire the right people and provide the applicants with a better idea of the skills required for success in each role. Employers will be able to see what progression looks like for each of the different skills - thus enabling them to plan how to up-skill or re-skill their workers.

    Given the increasing use of technology in the workplace, employers also recognise that whilst automation can replace repetitive roles, the more creative and complex tasks need to be performed by humans - and require the essential skills.

    In his review of Modern Working Practices, Matthew Taylor - the RSA’s Chief Executive and champion of this project - called for a framework like this to be introduced. Employers from different sectors will be consulted about the framework and it will go through several development stages with the final version expected in spring 2020.  He said:

    “With the nature of work continuing to evolve, it is challenging to predict exactly what technical abilities and skills will be needed in years to come. However, there’s growing recognition that the core skills, which are essentially human and behavioural, will be vital in almost all jobs and roles. The work of the task force is an important step towards achieving a common understanding of these essential skills from education right through to our workplaces. Establishing a framework and a common language for these skills is vital in creating the clarity we need to achieve more productive, high-performing workplaces that enable people whatever their backgrounds to feel engaged and empowered in their jobs.”

    Sir John Holman - Chair of the Essential Skills Task Force - said:

    “If you ask employers what they are looking for in the people they hire, they increasingly specify essential skills like communication and teamwork. They take for granted that employees must have sound educational qualifications and what makes the difference is the higher order essential skills which a machine cannot offer. By producing a universal framework of essential skills that are clear, measurable and authoritative, we will give employers a toolkit that they can use to select and train the employees they need to succeed in tomorrow’s workplace. Equally importantly, it will be a toolkit that schools, colleges and universities can use to help the students develop these skills.” 

    Christine Hodgson - Chairman of Capgemini in the UK, Chairman of The Careers & Enterprise Company and a trustee of Business in the Community - said:

    “As an employer, we want to make sure we’re recruiting people with the right skills to thrive in the 21st century workplace. But without a common language and shared understanding, it can be difficult for employers to identify easily or communicate what they’re looking for. And it’s harder for schools to make sure they’re focusing on developing the right skills. By helping schools, young people and employers to all pull in the same direction, this work will help us prepare young people for the fast-changing world of work.”

  • Waiting times have risen yet again for Employment Tribunal claims

    For the fourth year in a row waiting times have risen for Employment Tribunal claims in the UK.

    Research by employment law firm GQ Littler has shown that the average waiting time - from the Tribunal receiving a claim and hearing it - is now eight months. This is up by 14% from last year, when the waiting time was 207 days.

    Since 2017, when the fees required to launch a claim were abolished, claims have been on the rise with 27% extra - a total of 35,430 claims - received in 2018/19.  This came about at a time when tribunal services were already struggling due to government funding cuts, resulting in HM Courts & Tribunals service finding it difficult to employ enough front-line judicial staff, such as salaried judges and key administrative support staff to deal with their caseload.

    Both employers and workers are disrupted by the wait and face months of uncertainty - with senior management often being distracted from more strategic management issues.

    Raoul Parekh - Partner at GQ Littler - said:

    “Many businesses facing an employment claim feel like they are operating under a cloud until that claim is dealt with. That’s why it’s important to get these claims dealt with quickly. But at current trend Employment Tribunals will soon reach breaking point. Eight month delays are just not sustainable and can be very challenging for both parties involved. On this kind of timeline, it is not uncommon for key witnesses to leave, move to other roles or countries, and memories can also fade. A severe lack of resources means delays are endemic across the whole tribunals system – even when calling the employment tribunal’s enquiries helpline, you can be waiting for hours. If no material increase in funding arises then authorities may need to look at more creative solutions. Options put forward include introducing a new step in the tribunal’s process which gives both parties a chance to settle before a case is heard in court.”

    Earlier this year, the Judicial Appointments Commission did launch a recruitment drive to hire an extra 54 salaried Employment Tribunal judges. As a result of this - by July 2019 - 27 new staff had been appointed and more are planned. 

    A recent report by the ‘all-party parliamentary group for whistleblowing’ showed that some whistleblowers were waiting between 18 and 36 months for their claim to be resolved, noting that the excessive duration of tribunal trials could discourage other whistleblowers from making a complaint.   Instead of confronting their employer, these employees were often just resigning or retiring.

    Making comment on the GQ Littler report, shadow Justice Secretary - Richard Burgon – said:

    “This is an unacceptable delay. Workers who have been unlawfully treated by bad bosses should not be forced to wait even longer for justice.”

  • More employers are relying on telephone interviews

    In the tightest job market since 1969, employers are attempting to draw in workers - at times after only one phone interview - without having a face to face interview. Finding and hiring top talent is no longer limited by proximity or the coordination of increasingly busy schedules.

    The practice has become most common in seasonal work, although it is spreading among in-demand white-collar roles, such as engineers and IT professionals.

    The world of freelancing - known as the gig economy - is one area in which hiring workers unseen is not uncommon.

    Remote.co surveyed more than one hundred companies with remote workers and as a result, Brie Reynolds - Senior Career Specialist at Remote.co and FlexJobs - stated:

    “…….the vast majority use phone interviews—more so than video interviews—for hiring."  

    Ira S. Wolfe - President of recruiting firm Success Performance Solutions in Wind Gap, Pa. - and an author who has emerged as one of HR's most visionary thinkers, said:

    "The success of hiring sight unseen depends on the role. For a recent web project, I never spoke with the developer. All communication was via messaging."

    He went on to suggest that - when hiring for traditional roles and full-time staff workers - consideration of whether the interviews should be conducted face-to-face; via video or teleconferencing, or without any visual interaction at all can be made based on very practical considerations - adding:

    "If physical on-site interaction with employees or customers is required on the job, then a face-to-face interview is recommended. But if the job will be conducted virtually, then a video or phone interview offers an excellent assessment of how the candidate will conduct work.”

    In Reddit - an American social news and discussion website - on a forum dedicated to Boeing Co, multiple users described being offered jobs for entry-level positions after phone interviews only.

    Former Boeing recruiters said the company hired sight unseen, particularly for tough-to-fill technical positions and engineering roles and a Boeing spokeswoman stated that the company aims to hire a diverse workforce from the most qualified pool.

    She said:

    “With almost 1 million applicants a year, we strive to create a contemporary candidate experience that uses the most current practices in candidate assessment.”

    However, Brie Reynolds commented that even when those being hired will have only slight interaction with others, there can be some potential drawbacks to remote interviews.

    "One downside is the ease with which an interviewer can be distracted by an e-mail or chat message, or any number of things happening around them. Some people also miss the body language aspect of interviewing."

    Denise Leaser -SHRM-SCP, President of GreatBizTools - an HR management company in Los Angeles, points to research carried out by job site Monster in which it was shown that:

    "70 percent of candidates will turn down a job if they are turned off by their first impression of the company."  

    She added:

    "Remote hiring puts even more pressure on companies to be engaged and provide a great experience throughout the candidate and on-boarding processes."

    Yet an elementary English language development teacher in Tulsa, Okla., had one phone interview with a school principal and received a conditional job offer days later. Getting hired sight unseen did not faze her because she had maintained plenty of relationships by phone and said:

    “That’s what the 21st century is.”

  • Bipartisan paid leave bill is introduced in Congress

    The first bipartisan paid leave bill has been introduced in Congress by Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) - marking a major achievement in the history of paid leave legislation in the United States.

    On July 24th, the paid-leave plan - that uses the child tax credit (CTC) to provide new parents with immediate funds to finance time off from work or to offset the cost of infant care - was released for discussion.  

    The new proposal by Senators Cassidy and Sinema suggests another original means by which families can be guaranteed some financial security whilst taking time off after the birth or adoption of a new child under the age of 6 years. The idea is to allow people to use $5000 of their Child Tax Credit benefits - repaying into the system in future.

    The CTC exists to help families with children. It has a minimum earned income requirement and is partly refundable. This allows families to claim cash benefits beyond their tax obligations - but does limit its benefits for the poorest households who do not have a tax liability.

    Families on low income who would not meet the criteria for the full, refundable CTC would be able to bring forward their CTC benefit, receiving the equivalent of 12 weeks' wage replacement and their adjusted CTC benefit over the next 15 years.

    In a statement, Senator Cassidy said:

    "In many cases, the first year of life is the most expensive for a family. This legislation addresses this, focuses resources and eases financial strain to provide a longer bonding period for the family."

    This proposal is thought to appeal to Republicans - it does not impose a new tax, nor requires people to seek money from Social Security - it simply allows people to take an interest-free loan from the government at their time of maximum need. Also, it offers flexibility - new parents can decide not to take the time off or alternatively, take advantage of an employer paid leave policy and still receive the regular CTC.

    However, Politico - an American political journalism company based in Arlington County, Virginia - reports:

    "The use of tax credits could win over reluctant Republicans worried about creating an expensive new program, but the lack of leave for family and medical emergencies will likely keep Democratic leaders from supporting the proposal”

    Senator Cassidy stated:

    "This is a common-ground solution that can pass Congress and become law,"

    Senator Sinema said that the proposal was an important first step that offers parents a new option to finance time off from work or to help pay for child care.

    She added:

    "Too many parents are forced to choose between losing time with a new child or taking on debt to make up for lost wages."

    Aparna Mathur - a resident scholar for economic policy at the American Enterprise Institute (a conservative-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C.) - wrote in an online post:

    "The CTC exists precisely to help families with children. It has a minimal earned income requirement and is partly refundable, which allows families to claim cash benefits beyond their tax obligations.

    Given the political divide on what constitutes a perfect policy when it comes to constructing a federal paid-leave policy, it makes sense to start with small wins and some compromises."

  • Case study - HR Administrator appeals against redundancy

    At a Reading Employment Tribunal, an HR Administrator - Mrs H Bagri - was found to have been unfairly dismissed by Oracle Corporation UK Limited.

    Judge Andrew Gumbiti-Zimuto found that after her employment was transferred from NetSuite - a cloud computing company - there was failure to consult with her during a company-wide restructuring exercise. 

    A further complaint of breach of contract was dismissed.

    Mrs Bagri commenced employment with NetSuite in November 2010 as an HR Administrator. She has a 1st class degree in Business and Human Resource Management and a Level 7 CIPD diploma.

    On 1st January 2017, Mrs Bagri was transferred from NetSuite to Oracle, having previously been told by her line manager at Netsuite - in November 2016 - that she was under threat of redundancy and that her employment could end in May 2017.  However, this information was not correct and in December 2016 Mrs Bagri was informed by the Vice President Human Resources at Oracle that - at that time - no decision on headcount had been made regarding NetSuite or Mrs Bagri.

    In February 2017, the Vice President HR undertook a review of the needs of the HR team. She concluded that a business reorganisation was required and that Mrs Bagri’s role would no longer exist. The reason for this was that her task - that of arranging the changeover of NetSuite employees to Oracle - could be automated.

    On 1st March 2017, Mrs Bagri was notified by letter that her role was at risk. She stated that after receiving the letter she had no further contact with the HR team about her role, nor did she have any consultation meetings. She was dismissed on 31st May 2017.

    Mrs Bagri appealed against the decision to dismiss her. She stated that she was made redundant because of the transfer from NetSuite to Oracle. She was informed that the appeal process was to be conducted on paper and by way of written correspondence, and was not invited to an appeal meeting dealt with by the Vice President EMEA HR for Oracle - who said that she “did not feel that the points raised within the appeal required any further direct questions to Mrs Bagri” and dismissed the appeal.

    When Mrs Bagri brought claims of unfair dismissal and breach of contract to the Reading Tribunal on 29th August 2017, she argued that the transfer was the reason for her dismissal. She said that she had been told there would be individual consultations but that Oracle had not invited her to any meetings and there was no evidence of any formal meetings - which Oracle said had occurred - taking place. Mrs Bagri stated that she was of the opinion that Oracle had no intention of retaining her after the transfer and did not try to incorporate her into the HR team or the company.

    Oracle argued that Mrs Bagri did not seem interested in remaining in the business and that despite her role as a qualified and experienced HR professional she did not complain about the redundancy process.

    The Tribunal, however, ruled that Mrs Bagri had been unfairly dismissed, stating that there was a “50 per cent chance that she would have continued in employment if she was not unfairly dismissed”. The Judge ruled that no proper consultation with Mrs Bagri had taken place about ways to avoid redundancy.

    Angela Brumpton - Partner at Gunnercooke - remarked:

    “Some employers see appeals as a box-ticking exercise, or a necessary evil, when actually a thorough appeals process can cure procedural defects. Savvy employers embrace appeals as an opportunity to review the initial process and plug any gaps.”

    She added that businesses should also use appeals as an opportunity to “fix any deficiencies in the initial dismissal”. 

  • Managers need to review their leadership style or face losing talent

    Bosses and managers have been called to review their leadership style and learn new skills, or face losing talent in their organisations.

    A survey was carried out in June and July 2019, by Jobrapido - a Symphony Technology Group company - and conducted on 1444 employees across more than twenty different industry sectors including sales, marketing, engineering, transportation, construction and technology. 

    The research shows that 36 per cent of workers in the UK are planning to leave their jobs in the near future - because their boss does not inspire them. In addition, they reported that there is no clear career structure created and that their boss does not listen to them.

    Two thirds of respondents stated that they planned to leave their employment within the next twelve months due to their boss’s poor leadership style.  

    When the respondents to the research were asked what would persuade them to remain in their jobs, 47 per cent stated that their boss should inspire them - making them want to stay with the company. An additional 39 per cent believed the most important quality for a manager was the ability to listen and 10 per cent thought that bosses should provide a clear career structure for all their staff - not just a select few.

    These latest statistics are further bad news for business owners who already face challenges in attracting and retaining their talent. Eurostat - the statistical office of the European Union - report a 2.7 vacancy rate in the UK, which is the highest level compared to the last decade.

    Rob Brouwer - CEO of Jobrapido - stated:

    “In the UK, the demand is becoming vigorously strong and far outstripping the supply for talent. There is clearly a need for bosses, line manages and HR departments to pay even more attention to the need not only to attract the best talents on the market but, once on board, to look at all the way to engage and retain them.

    The issue can arise because staff and senior management, whilst technically brilliant at the job and or excellent at running a business, have never received training of how to lead, manage and nurture the careers of other members of their team.

    If Britain’s bosses are keen to retain their staff, then they should look at way to inspire them and perhaps, getting direct and constructive feedback via 360 degree reviews from all their staff. Also, wherever possible, look at how they can address any concerns and give adequate responses.

    At the same time, no boss or line manager should think they are above learning new skills if it can help to bolster the company spirit and retaining talent. Embarking on the right leadership training or a series of courses will be an important step to inspire staff so they feel inclined to stay for many more years within the company, considering how crucial the talent is for a company business and its success on the short and the long term.” 

  • American Airlines sued for violating NYC’s Paid Safe and Sick Leave Law

    Whilst still in the midst of their labor-related legal battles, American Airlines (AA) has been hit with more litigation.

    Last week, New York City’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) announced it had sued AA in the City’s administrative court - the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings.

    The Department alleges the airline is violating NYC’s Paid Safe and Sick Leave Law by retaliating against workers who call in sick. AA ground crew workers including agents, reps, fleet service and mechanical employees are issued with disciplinary points for each sick day used and - contrary to the law - are required to produce medical documentation for fewer than three days of leave. They are also not paid at the required rate. 

    Commissioner of the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), Lorelei Salas stated:

    “We will not tolerate any employer that violates employees’ rights to their paid safe and sick leave.”

    The DCWP are seeking civil penalties and more than $375,000 in restitution from AA for more than 750 ground crew workers. 

    Salas added:

    “American Airlines is not above the law. Workers in major transportation hubs where thousands of people pass through everyday should not have to choose between going into work sick or getting in trouble for exercising their right to take a sick day.”

    In response, American Airlines issued a statement that:

    “Employees enjoy generous sick leave and benefits, including those set by union contracts with terms that are often more generous than required by the New York law”. They continued that they would work to make sure they continued to do so.

  • Only one-third of survey respondents support equally shared parental leave

    The latest survey undertaken by British Social Attitudes has found that only 40% felt that mothers should take the lion’s share of the paid parental leave. This is a smaller percentage than in previous years.

    In comparison, 34% supported equally shared parental leave. This was up from 22% per cent in 2012 – whilst only 12% felt that the mother should take the entire period. Less than 0.5% supported the father taking most or all of the paid leave.

    These figures were compiled by the National Centre of Social Research - who warned:

    “The fact that only one-third support an equal division of leave suggests that the default path prior to the introduction of SPL, for the mother to take all of the leave, may still be exerting some influence on attitudes.” 

                                                                                            

    Dr Jill Miller - Diversity and Inclusion Adviser at the CIPD - stated:

    “The take-up of shared parental leave remains low and requires concerted effort from employers to promote it as an option – and from government to identify and address the sticking points. Employers need to think more creatively about the types of flexible working they offer to retain talented people and ensure it is available at all levels of seniority. Otherwise the ‘sticky floor’ comes into play where people feel unable to progress without work-life balance support.”

    She added:

    “HR needs to be analysing workforce data to see what is happening in their organisation, and address any issues to give employees more choice over how they split childcare responsibilities.”

    The Court of Appeal recently ruled that it is not discriminatory for employers to enhance maternity pay while only offering statutory pay to workers on shared parental leave.

    The court upheld a previous ruling that the employers concerned were allowed to offer enhanced maternity pay without the need to provide the same benefits through SPL. The judges ruled that the main purpose of maternity leave - of whatever length - was not about childcare but for the mother to recover from the birth, which was not a need shared by her partner. Therefore, it is not discriminatory to offer more generous maternity leave.

    Beverley Sunderland - Managing Director of Crossland Employment Solicitors - remarked:

    “If the court had held that statutory paternity pay should be enhanced for men then the likely outcome would have been companies withdrawing enhanced maternity pay, so that they did not have to match it.”

    She added that while the decision may not have appeared fair to some, the decision will be welcomed by employers that pay higher rates to women on maternity leave than to parents on different types of family leave - and it’s also good news for women.

    Jenny Arrowsmith - Employment Partner at Irwin Mitchell - stated:

    “Had the decision gone the other way, employers may have reduced their maternity pay to statutory rates because they could not afford to equalise pay rates to those taking shared parental leave.”

  • Supreme Court rules regarding a restrictive covenant in an employment contract

    The Supreme Court – presided over by five justices, Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Briggs and Lady Arden – recently made a judgment in the case of Tillman v Egon Zehnder regarding the dispute surrounding a restrictive covenant in an employment contract.

    Mary-Caroline Tillman joined Egon Zehnder - a global management consulting firm - in 2004. She worked for the company for 13 years, eventually becoming joint global head of its Financial Services Practice Group in 2012.

    Ms Tillman had an employment contract containing a non-competition clause, preventing her from engaging or being concerned or interested in any business carried on in competition with Egon Zehnder for six months after her employment ended.

    In January 2017, she handed in her notice as she wanted to join US consulting firm Russell Reynolds Associates – a direct competitor of Egon Zehnder. She was then placed on gardening leave with Egon Zehnder seeking an injunction to delay her move.

    At the High Court, Ms Tillman challenged the validity of the contract, claiming that - although she had no intention of doing so - the covenant was unreasonable since it also prevented her from becoming a shareholder in a competitor.

    She argued that even holding a minority shareholding in a company could be seen as ‘being interested’ in the company and therefore this was too wide a restriction to be enforceable - which meant that the whole clause (including the part about not working for a competitor) was unlawful and should be removed.

    At the High Court, the case was heard by Mr Justice Mann who ruled that the covenant did not prevent her from becoming a shareholder in a competitor.

    Ms Tillman then took her case to the Court of Appeal, who overturned the previous decision. Lord Justice Longmore said that the clause would still be open to interpretation even if the words ‘or interested’ were omitted. 

    He stated:

    “The question would then be whether a shareholding was covered by the words ‘directly or indirectly engage or be concerned … in any business carried on in competition’. To my mind, being a shareholder in a company carrying on a business is being concerned in that business at any rate ‘indirectly’.”

    This is the first time that the Supreme Court has considered the law governing restrictive covenants. They were considering whether part of a restrictive covenant in the employment contract constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade and further, if this could be deleted from the covenant - leaving the rest intact.

    On 3 July 2019, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Egon Zehnder, after determining that if the parts that had been argued as unreasonable were found to be so, then in any event these could be deleted and the remaining non-competition clause would still be valid.

    Employers will approve of the decision as it clarifies the situation over whether post termination restrictions are reasonable and the effect if parts of those restrictions were found to be unreasonable, thus highlighting the need for carefully drafted employment contracts and restrictive covenants - especially for senior staff - to protect business interests.

  • Report shows concern for the number of ethnic minority women on boards

    The 2019 Female FTSE Board Report, published by Cranfield University, has found that the number of ethnic minority women on boards gave cause for concern. Using the data available, it was found that of the 297 female directors presently on a FTSE 100 board only 11% are from a black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) background.

    It was also found that the average term of a BAME female executive director is half that of a male director – just 3.3 years compared to 6.6 years for their male counterparts. However, the gap is not so great when considering non-executive directors, those not involved in day-to-day management responsibilities. The tenure then is an average of 3.8 years for women and 4.3 years for men. 

    One of the report’s authors, Dr Doyin Atewologun - Director of the Gender, Leadership and Inclusion Centre at Cranfield - stated:

    “This begs the question of whether women are appointed to FTSE 100 boards for symbolic rather than substantive reasons.”

    The report, however, states that it has found that the number of women in general has increased over the past 21 years from 6.7% to 32% today. The women come from particular educational backgrounds; they are a certain age; they have various racial/ethnic backgrounds and they have rich work experiences.

    It was also found that female board members tended to be younger than male board members with the average male director being over 59 years old, compared to over 57 years of age for women.  

    Dr Atewologun suggested that this could hint at a bias against appointing older women.

    Another of the report’s authors, Susan Vinnicombe - Professor of women and leadership at Cranfield - said at the launch of the report:

    “We get glass ceilings within glass ceilings – so we must be very aware, all of us, that it’s not just hitting the numbers. Once women get onto boards, we want to see them being taken seriously.”

    Speaking at the same event, Fiona Cannon OBE - Group Director for Responsible Business, Sustainability and Inclusion at Lloyds Banking Group, said:

    “It is hard yards work. Every week, I’m looking at the vacancy list to make sure that women are on the shortlists.” Every month, we look at all the data to see whether women are leaving, whether they’re being promoted. The chief of staff and myself sit down and do it. It’s that relentless attention to detail that’s important, because it can so easily go the other way.”

    She added:

    “Unless a CEO believes that’s really important for their business, nothing is going to happen.”

    Brenda Trenowden CBE - Chair of the 30% Club - added the fact that many companies were not undertaking enough data analysis to identify the causes of the failure of women to progress.

    She said:

    “People are throwing money at various things that are not really working. We’re still just tinkering around the edges of the pipeline and actually I believe that we really need to focus much more on culture.”

    The latest figures reported by a separate review - the government-backed Hampton-Alexander Review - also showed over 32% of board positions across the top 100 listed firms in 2018 were held by women.

    Sir Philip Hampton - Chair of the review - warned:

    “The FTSE 250 is working hard to catch up but still too many boards have only one woman and remarkably today there are four all-male boards in the FTSE 250.”

    He added:

    “We are expecting to see good progress in the number of women appointed into senior leadership roles this year, with those companies having worked hard for several years exceeding the 33 per cent target and reaping the benefits.”

  • Pension deficit for FTSE 350 DB schemes decreased in June

    Pension deficit for defined benefit schemes in the FTSE 350 companies decreased by £9 billion in June to £48 billion.

    In Mercer’s latest Pensions Risk Survey it was found that liabilities had increased by £4bn to £860bn - due to a .07 per cent fall in corporate bond yields. This, however, was mitigated by a .05 per cent decline in market implied inflation.

    The rising liability values were compensated by a £13bn increase in assets from the end of May - closing in June at £812bn.

    Mercer are advising that trustees must continue to prioritise risk management in the face of uncertainty with Brexit and the Prime Minister’s resignation – which is likely to cause the markets to be unstable in the coming months.

    Maria Johannessen - a Partner at Mercer - stated:

    “This month’s improvement in funded status is a positive turn after a period of three months where changes to the FTSE 350 pension deficit have been negligible. Despite a £4 billion uptick in liabilities, the £13 billion increase in asset values led to the deficit falling by £9 billion in June, the most significant monthly improvement in funding levels since November 2018. The fall in market implied inflation to 3.39% was enough to offset the drop in corporate bond yields which decreased by 0.7% to 2.25%.”

    Charles Cowling - an Actuary at Mercer - commented:

    “In spite of the welcome decline in the deficit this month, significant macroeconomic and political headwinds remain. The UK awaits a new Prime Minister following Theresa May’s resignation last month and Britain’s negotiating position on Brexit is far from clear. A combination of global trade tensions and an increased perceived likelihood of a no-deal Brexit, means we expect market volatility to be a consistent feature of the months ahead. Lower energy prices and weakening UK growth are reflected in CPI inflation falling back recently. However, a Brexit sterling crisis and resulting inflation shock is still a real possibility. In this uncertain environment trustees should continue to prioritise risk management and actively seek to take advantage of market opportunities to de-risk.”

    The data published by Mercer concerns about 50 per cent of all UK pension scheme liabilities and analyses pension deficits calculated using the approach companies have to adopt for their corporate accounts.

    The information underlying the survey is refreshed as companies report on their end of year accounts. Other measures are also relevant for trustees and employers considering their risk exposure.

  • Employers in Virginia now required to produce certain personnel information

    HR professionals need to know that - commencing July 1, 2019 - employers in Virginia are required, on receipt of a written request, to give current or former workers copies of personnel records containing certain information.

    At present, no federal laws govern employee access to personnel files and the new law passed by the Virginia General Assembly is the first of its kind in Virginia.  

    Theresa Connolly and Lauren Goetzl - attorneys with Fisher Phillips in Washington, D.C - state that the law does not require employers to give employees their entire personnel files upon request - only to produce documents reflecting the following details:

    • Dates of employment with the employer

    • Wages or salary history during the employment

    • Job description and job title during the employment

    • Any injuries sustained during the course of the employment with the employer

    Regardless of whether or not there is a subpoena, the employer must produce the documents requested within 30 days of the written request. If the employer is unable to meet that deadline, they must notify the person requesting of the reason for the delay. They will then have a further 30 days - and no more - to comply with the records request. The law also allows the employer to make a reasonable charge for the costs of making copies and processing the request.

    Theresa Connolly and Lauren Goetzl suggested:

    "We recommend that employers develop internal policies and procedures for reviewing and responding to personnel file requests, given that responses are required within 30 days - or within 60 days if the employer can provide a reason for the delay."

    Kristina Vaquera and Milena Radovic - attorneys with Jackson Lewis in Norfolk Va. - state that employers do not have to provide documents that are not on the list. For example, a worker is not entitled to notes from a workplace investigation or a manager's notes regarding a performance issue, providing the notes do not fall under any of the four categories specified in the law.

    If the employer does not comply with a lawful request by either the employee or their legal representative - either by failing to supply the documents or by charging an unreasonable amount for the records - a court can award the employee damages for all expenses the employee (or former employee) incurs to obtain the records, including attorneys’ fees.

    Theresa Connolly and Lauren Goetzl say that employers should consider appointing one person to receive and respond to all requests. They should also educate the HR department, information technology department and relevant supervisors and managers on complying with requests.

    Kristina Vaquera and Milena Radovic stated:

    "Employers should also check their handbooks and document-retention policies for compliance with the statute."

  • Gig economy working has doubled in the last three years

    Research by the University of Hertfordshire and funded by the TUC has revealed that in the last three years the number of people taking part in gig economy work has doubled. It now accounts for almost 5 million workers, with young people the most likely to be working this way.

    According to one definition, the gig economy is a labour market typified by the incidence of short-term contracts or freelance work.

    The study interviewed 2,235 individuals in April 2019, finding that 1 in 10 of working-age adults worked though gig economy platforms at least once a week in 2019 - compared with 5 per cent in 2016. It was also found that 15 per cent of respondents - equivalent to nearly 7.5 million people - said they had undertaken gig economy work at some point. This flexible type of work can be beneficial to both individuals and the country - in 2016, the gig economy contributed £119 billion to the UK economy.

    Due to the increasing popularity of app-driven purchases and services, 48 per cent of gig workers stated that they undertook gig economy jobs in addition to their full-time work and 12 per cent were found to be working part-time. Only 11 per cent classed themselves as self-employed.

    Nick Woodward - CEO of ETZ Payments - stated:

    “The gig economy is growing and evolving with more and more Brits choosing to work in this style. App technology is helping the gig economy to grow by providing needed work, but it needs to develop further to ensure that workers are getting paid for their work correctly and on time.”

    Frances O’Grady - the TUC’s General Secretary - said the explosion of the gig economy showed that working people were battling to make ends meet. She stated:

    “The world of work is changing fast, and working people don’t have the protection they need. Huge numbers are being forced to take on casual and insecure platform work – often on top of other jobs. But as we’ve seen with Uber, too often these workers are denied their rights and are treated like disposable labour.”

    The TUC also said the survey showed it was time for all workers to receive basic rights such as the minimum wage and holiday. 

    Late in 2018, the government stated its intention to introduce procedures to give better protection to certain workers - including gig economy workers. This would mean that staff must be informed of their rights from their first day of work. These would include eligibility for paid and sick leave and the right to request predictable hours.

    The Office for National Statistics has previously estimated the gig economy to involve 4 per cent of the UK population.

  • Employment Tribunal claims alleging pregnancy discrimination have risen

    Despite The Equality Act 2010, a survey of employment law experts by Direct Line Life Insurance has reported a significant increase in disputes where employees’ working hours were reduced when they returned from maternity leave.

    According to official figures, the number of employment tribunal claims alleging pregnancy discrimination has risen by 56 per cent in a year.

    Increasingly, employers are also using ‘gagging orders’ to ensure confidentiality when they settle pregnancy and maternity related discrimination claims.  Over the last 12 months - following pregnancy and maternity-related disputes - 84 per cent of employment law experts have seen an increase in the number of Non-Disclosure Agreements used by employers.

    Legal experts have reported a 64 per cent rise - in the last 12 months - of the number of cases where women claim they were demoted upon returning to work following maternity leave.

    In addition, there has been an increase in claims made by fathers, with a 63 per cent increase in cases where they have claimed demotion upon returning to work; a 61 per cent increase in disputes relating to promotion whilst on paternity leave; 59 per cent of men claiming unfair dismissal and 58 per cent claiming pay disputes while on paternity leave. 

    Despite it being a legal right, men are also claiming harassment from employers for taking paternity leave. Legal experts report an increase of 56 per cent in these disputes in the last 12 months.

    Jane Morgan - Business Manager at Direct Line Life Insurance - said:

    “In today’s world it is concerning that we are seeing an increase in mums and dads being seemingly penalised as a result of spending time with their children. Employers and employees have a responsibility to educate themselves about their rights, which could help to reduce the rise of discrimination claims and ensure parents have reasonable expectations.”

    Claire McCartney - Senior Policy Adviser at the CIPD - stated that whilst the removal of tribunal fees may have explained some of the increase, there has also been a greater awareness of maternity and paternity rights. She went on to say:

    “Around a third of private sector employers have said it’s reasonable to ask women about their plans to have children in the future in the recruitment process, so we know that that has been happening for some time. The legislation is really helpful, but it’s about creating culture change.   Prevention is better than cure, so it’s about organisations talking about the fact they’re not going to discriminate in this area, what their policies are, what their values are, making sure they are modelling these in general.” 

    Sophie Vanhegan, Partner at GQ Littler - which compiled the figures - expressed surprise at the increase in pregnancy-related cases. She stated:

    “I would generally say most sophisticated employers are very, very careful as to what they do when they’re dealing with pregnant employees in the first place. There are obviously employers out there who have not been as rigorous in trying to ensure they deal with such employees lawfully in the past.

    Things that may have simply just been accepted in the past are now being seen as unacceptable and people are feeling more confident in being able to challenge them. We’ve certainly seen that companies are seeing these issues called out more often now, and they also feel they have got to be seen to be taking more steps to proactively fix any cultural issues they might have on their side.”

    She added that there had been a ‘time lag’ in the change of business culture.

  • Survey shows job quality is affected by poor work-life balance

    New research from the CIPD finds that long hours, stress and poor work-life balance is damaging attempts to improve the job quality amongst UK employers.

    A total of 5,136 people were surveyed for the UK Working Lives Survey, which is an assessment of job quality over categories ranging from pay and benefits, contracts and employment terms and job design to health and wellbeing.

    Identifying poor work-life balance as a problem, 60 per cent of those surveyed stated that say they work longer hours than they wish to, with 24 per cent stating that they overwork by at least ten hours a week - and find it difficult to relax in their leisure time because they are thinking about work.

    The report also highlights serious fears about the workloads and the effect it can have on the health of employees - with 66 per cent saying they have experienced anxiety and sleep problems in the last 12 months.

    Peter Cheese - Chief Executive of the CIPD - said that the survey showed that work could sometimes be inclusive, putting too many demands on much of people’s personal time.  

    He stated:

    “At its best, work gives people purpose, a sense of identity and achievement, and allows them to contribute to society. But, as our research shows, work can sometimes be all-encompassing, demands too much of people’s precious personal time and takes too much out of them. It’s disappointing to see so many workers report they have a poor work-life balance and it is an issue which must be addressed by employers. They need to be offering all staff a wide range of flexible working arrangements and actively promoting their take-up.”

    He added:

    “As co-chair of the Flexible Working Task Force, we are working with the government and other business groups to bring flexible working to the masses and help reset the work-life balance. Not only will this help to improve people’s quality of life, but it will make their performance at work more sustainable over the long-term.”

    Louise Aston - Health and Wellbeing Director at Business in the Community - approved the call by the CIPD for employers to offer improved flexible working practices, but stated that it is only one part of the solution to addressing the problem of UK job quality. 

    She said:

    “More and more people are using their annual leave or time at home to work and alarmingly, according to our research, only one in four organisations are taking any steps to discourage this. A seismic cultural shift is needed across the board because the trend towards people working longer and harder than ever before looks set to get worse. Long term, this causes burnout, is unsustainable and has a significant impact on recruitment and retention.”

    The CIPD is also urging employers to fulfill their statutory duty of carrying out a comprehensive health and safety risk assessment and to provide effective training for line managers in people management practices.

  • High Court judges to receive a recruitment and retention allowance

    In response to an unprecedented recruitment crisis, an emergency pay boost of up to 25% of salary has been introduced by the Ministry of Justice.

    This is a recruitment and retention allowance representing a 25% increase for High Court judges and a 15% increase for Circuit and Upper Tribunal judges, but the extra money will not go to judges at the level where solicitors are most likely to be found - District and First-Tier Tribunal judges will receive only a 2% pay rise. It has been stressed that the allowance is only temporary until a solution is found to the recruitment problem.

    About a quarter of the 1,850 salaried judges will be affected and around 60 will qualify for the 25% allowance.

    At present, more than 10% of High Court positions are vacant with the Chancery Division being 20% below strength and – if recruitment is not more successful – by the end of the year the figure will have doubled to 40% below strength.

    The Ministry of Justice have said that the new figures will ‘strike a balance between an appropriate investment of public funds and addressing serious recruitment and retention problems’. This is despite the new figures being below those recommended last year by the Senior Salaries Review Body in its government-commissioned report, which found that changes to tax and pensions mean that the total remuneration for a new High Court judge is worth £80,000 less than it was ten years ago - showing a 36% decrease.

    David Gauke - Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary - said:

    “Our judges are a cornerstone of our democratic society - their experience draws billions of pounds worth of business to the UK, and without them people cannot get justice. We have reached a critical point. There are too many vacancies and with the retirement of many judges looming; we must act now before we see a serious impact on our courts and tribunals.

    Judges are in a unique position and once they join the bench are not permitted to return to practice. Without the best legal minds in these seats, everyone that uses our courts will suffer, as will our international reputation. This temporary allowance, pending long-term pension scheme change, will enable us to continue to attract the brightest and best and prevent delays to potentially life-changing decisions.”

    Lord Burnett of Maldon - the Lord Chief Justice together with Sir Ernest Ryder - Senior President of Tribunals - welcomed the announcement.

    They said:

    “It is an important step which we are confident will have a significant effect on addressing critical shortages in the judiciary.

    Judges understand very well how delays to the cases they decide can affect the people and businesses involved.  They do their utmost to ensure cases are dealt with both promptly and fairly, but are nonetheless concerned that there is an urgent need to recruit enough judges to tackle the workload in a sustainable way.

    Judges are conscious that they are well-paid compared to most in the public sector. They are continually finding ways to make the administration of justice more efficient both through the modernisation programme being run by HM Courts & Tribunals Service and more widely. We are pleased that the government is taking action to address the serious difficulties faced in recruiting to the judiciary.”

  • Court of Appeal rules on whether holiday pay should reflect voluntary overtime

    The Court of Appeal have found in favour of paramedic Neil Flowers and 12 of his colleagues - who all work for East of England Ambulance Trust covering Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire. Mr Flowers and colleagues had argued that their holiday pay should reflect the hours they worked - including voluntary overtime - rather than being calculated on their contracted hours.

    Lord Justice Bean said:

    “The employment tribunal in the present case made no error of law in finding that the remuneration linked to overtime work that was performed on a voluntary basis could be included in normal remuneration for calculating holiday pay.”

    Originally, the workers union - Unison - took the case to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) after they had partly won their employment tribunal cases - but lost the argument for voluntary overtime to be included.  Subsequently, EAT ruled that voluntary overtime should also be taken into account when calculating holiday pay, alongside mandatory and non-guaranteed overtime.

    Unison stated that as a result of staffing shortages across the NHS, the workers regularly volunteered to work overtime to ease the pressure on their colleagues - and to increase their pay. The union cited the government’s failure to recruit sufficient workers as the reason that working overtime had become the custom for most members of staff.

    Dave Prentis - Unison General Secretary - said:

    "Before this judgment NHS workers who did regular overtime or often worked well beyond their shifts saw a drop in their pay whenever they took a well-deserved break. Leave calculations that weren't based on the extra shifts and hours they did week in and week out meant many were considerably out of pocket. Unison always believed that the rules around NHS pay already allowed for overtime and working beyond the end of a shift to be taken into account when calculating holiday pay. This judgment confirms that but does highlight another pressing problem. The NHS urgently needs to recruit more staff so existing nurses, paramedics and other health workers don't have to regularly work overtime simply to keep the service afloat. This is a victory for all those health service workers who regularly go the extra mile to make sure we receive the best care possible at all times of the day and night."

    Employment lawyers have said that this judgment could have much wider implications for organisations - mainly, but not only - in the public sector, where the employees regularly carry out paid overtime. 

    Helen Beech - Partner at Clarkslegal - said:

    “Where the overtime, voluntary or otherwise, is sufficiently regular and settled, it implies that the employee relies on those payments as part of their regular remuneration, and the loss of such payments would result in a disincentive to take their annual leave which would mean the employer is in breach of the Working Time Regulations.”

    She added:

    “HR should also be mindful that under the Working Time Regulations, they should not be disincentivising employees from taking their holiday as this could lead to a claim.”

    However, Beverley Sunderland - Managing Director of Crossland Employment Solicitors - stated that the ruling “flew in the face of previous cases and the direction of travel for holiday pay”.

    She added:

    “No doubt there will be numerous cases on exactly what is meant by this.”

    More than 100 other cases awaiting hearings as a the result of this judgment may now face a longer wait as the East of England Ambulance Trust said it would be appealing to the Supreme Court and added:

    "As a trust we are committed to offering our staff good rates of pay, a generous holiday entitlement and great working conditions."

  • Court grants American Airlines a temporary restraining order against unions

    A federal judge in northern Texas has granted American Airlines (AA), a temporary restraining order against two unions - the Transport Workers Union of America and the International Association of Machinists (TWU-IAM) - to block an alleged work slowdown by their members.

    The TWU-IAM Association - which represents more than 30,000 employees in 12 work groups including mechanics, baggage handlers and airport ramp workers - have been told by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, to issue a notice to their workers to no longer continue activities such as slowing aircraft repairs (or indeed slowing any part of their job performance), refusing to work overtime or on assignments away from their normal location, or any other actions that would negatively impact AA’s operations.

    In documents filed with the Court, AA maintained that the union’s “illegal conduct has dramatically escalated and has become devastating to the airline’s operations, customers and employees.” The airline claimed that before the union began their alleged campaign, staffing overtime or field trips had not been an issue, yet since February of this year there had been periods with no overtime shifts worked and no field trips undertaken. As a result, since filing the original lawsuit in May, the airline have had to cancel 722 flights over 23 days, disrupting travel plans of around 175,000 passengers.

    AA therefore argued for the temporary restraining order, deciding that the trial due to commence July 1st was too long to wait. Court documents stated “illegal conduct has dramatically escalated” and that it is “creating an operational crisis causing significant damage to American, the traveling public and American’s employees.”

    The slowdown, according to AA, was instigated by the union as a method of strengthening their position in new contract talks that began in late 2015. TWU-IAM is the only major union that has not been able to agree contracts with the airline - regarding issues such as compensation and health and retirement benefits - since their merger with US Airways in 2013. The union have however denied encouraging any slowdown, claiming that it is a result of low worker morale, partly caused by a plan to outsource thousands of US jet mechanic jobs to South America.

  • Professional communication necessary between managers and employees

    Patricia Murphy, who worked for Northumberland County Council from 1999 until her dismissal on the grounds of ill-health in 2017, won her North Shields employment tribunal hearing alleging discrimination and harassment.

    A poor employee/manager relationship resulted in the claimant being asked how long “this disabled thing” was going to continue.

    Miss Murphy, who has a physical impairment to her feet following an injury, worked for Northumberland County Council as a social worker until her dismissal. She started work for the council in 1999, becoming a social worker in 2001. In 2008 she became a team manager, responsible for 9/10 social workers. She had an excellent attendance record.

    In 2014, Miss Murphy injured her foot.

    In 2015, the council received complaints and Miss Murphy was suspended and given a written warning. She was demoted from team leader to an independent reviewing officer, a role that required Miss Murphy to be fully mobile and involved travelling across the county to see children. 

    After the suspension, Miss Murphy had an x-ray taken which showed nerve damage. She was advised that surgery was needed to correct the condition and went off work in February 2016.

    Miss Murphy met Karen MacDonald - her line manager - and Amanda Atkinson - the HR Adviser for the council - in October 2016.   She was informed that she could not return as a team manager and she replied that she could not return to a full independent reviewing officer role - but could do some work. The tribunal had the impression that relations were strained between Miss Murphy and her two interviewers.

    It was agreed that Miss Murphy would to return to work on 7th November and a foot rest was provided for her. However, she was then away from work from 23rd December 2016 not returning until late in August 2017. During this period an occupational health report found that she was still unfit for work and despite two attempts by her line manager and HR Adviser, they were unsuccessful in arranging a meeting.

    On 14th August, a meeting took place between the line manager, the HR Adviser and Miss Murphy - where Miss Murphy requested that she be able to use her annual leave to extend her return to work. The request was refused and she was told that she would be expected back to work in the role of independent reviewing officer taking on a full caseload, four weeks after her return – failing which she would be dismissed. During the meeting, the line manager stated that Miss Murphy’s behaviour was like that of an angry, stroppy teenager’ and that she felt like she wanted to ‘poke Miss Murphy’s eyes out’ because of her behaviour during her first return to work in November 2016.

    On 21st August, Miss Murphy was given audit work to carry out. At the beginning of September, another occupational health report stated that, at that time Miss Murphy did not have the capacity to return to the independent reviewing officer role - and that this could be so for the following six months, with no certainty that she would be able to cope with all aspects of the role after that and suggested that the phased return should be extended by annual leave.

    In September another meeting was held with the line manager and the HR Adviser at which Miss Murphy asked if there were any roles she could move to while her feet improved. The line manager replied by asking how long ‘this disabled thing’ was going on. Miss Murphy was then told she would be dismissed and - at a final meeting at the end of September she was dismissed on the grounds of ill-health capability in ongoing health. 

    The tribunal found the council had failed in its duty to make reasonable adjustments; discriminated against Murphy because of her disability and unfairly dismissed her. It dismissed the victimisation claim.

    The Judge said that the line manager’s remark about feeling like poking Miss Murphy’s eyes out by reason of her behaviour ‘should never fall from the lips of a senior manager’ - but were not an act of harassment or discrimination. 

    He added:

    “The effect was to violate her dignity or at least to create an intimidating and hostile environment for the claimant. Instead they are indicative of the poor relationship which by then had developed between the claimant and her line manager.” 

    Andrew Willis - Head of Legal at HR-inform - said the case is a reminder of the need for professional and appropriate communication between managers and employees - regardless of how frustrating the situation is.

    “With disability discrimination tribunal claims notably on the rise, make sure managers have training on being emphatic, holding sensitive conversations and dealing with difficult members of staff. This can be the difference between an unlimited compensation award and managing the situation in line with best practice and the needs of your business.”

  • HMRC defend its Check Employment Status for Tax (CEST) tool

    After an 11-month investigation by freelancer website ContractorCalculator, HM Revenue & Customs have released figures suggesting that thousands of contractors could have grounds to appeal against wrongful tax treatment. This is a result of unlawful blanket assessments conducted by public sector hirers.

    A series of Freedom of Information requests from ContractorCalculator - which sought statistics detailing the results issued by the Check Employment Status for Tax (CEST) tool - were consistently blocked by HMRC, but an appeal which resulted in an intervention from the Information Commissioner’s Office finally provided the data requested.

    HMRC have been accused of acting in a manner ‘akin to climate change denial’ in its defence of its Check Employment Status for Tax (CEST) tool.

    Dave Chaplin - Director of the Stop the Off-Payroll Tax campaign and Chief Executive of ContractorCalculator - wrote an open letter citing ‘widespread and indisputable’ evidence of the shortcomings of CEST which he said HMRC ‘brazenly refused to acknowledge, let alone attempted to address’.

    He stated:

    “Our investigative work has unearthed a wealth of evidence exposing CEST’s inaccuracies and the unfair outcomes of the assessments, namely widespread false employment. To date, the taxman has repeatedly claimed CEST is accurate, despite widespread criticism of the tool and evidence suggesting otherwise. HMRC’s tin-eared stance on the matter is unacceptable and we are hoping that this open letter will prompt some answers.”

    When carried out across a number of public sector organisations, the data requested disclosed CEST assessments showing nearly unanimous inside IR35 results. Nearly 4,000 CEST assessments were inspected and 94 per cent were found to fall within IR35, meaning that for tax purposes contractors are treated as employees.

    Private sector companies will be responsible for determining the IR35 status of their contractors from April 2020.

    Dave Chaplin has argued that the recent tax tribunal victories for Lorraine Kelly and Kaye Adams have shown up the shortcomings of CEST and that until CEST is changed, a private sector roll-out of the off-payroll rules should not even be considered an option.

    He wrote:

    ‘How is the public expected to trust the output of a tool which has been shown to return the wrong outcome in the most straightforward of employment status cases? - or a tool developed by a government body which has only outright won one of its last 12 IR35 tribunal cases?’

    He added:

    “HMRC has had two years to provide us with evidence to support its claims that CEST has been rigorously tested and is accurate. Until CEST is fixed and the high risk of contractors being subjected to false ‘inside IR35’ assessments is negated, a private sector roll-out of the off-payroll rules shouldn’t even be considered as an option.”

    HMRC said in a statement:

    “CEST was rigorously tested against known case law and settled cases. It is accurate, and HMRC stands by the result if the tool is used correctly. CEST is not biased towards an employment outcome and in the last 12 months over 50% of determinations it has provided have been for self-employment or outside the off-payroll rules – this is in line with our expectations for the service. HMRC estimates only about a third of individuals working through their own company fall within the rules and should be taxed as employees. However, numbers will vary greatly between roles and sectors.”

    In the public sector, at present there is no known HMRC appeals process for persons wishing to contest their IR35 status decision. However, litigation or claiming unlawful deductions from wages through employment tribunals are possible routes to follow.

    Martyn Valentine - Director of The Law Place - said:

    “A large portion of contractors have been wrongly assessed as caught by IR35, forced into false employment, and consequently wrongly and overtaxed. They can litigate against the client and/or agency for unlawful deductions of tax. Even some contractors who are genuinely caught inside IR35 could successfully bring action. We know of numerous instances where public sector bodies have deducted their own tax burdens, including employer’s National Insurance (NI), from the rates agreed with contractors. Provided expert legal advice is obtained, the affected contractors can reclaim what is rightfully theirs.”

  • GDPR has had a positive impact on confidence around data security

    A survey - conducted by ADP Research Institute - shows that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into force a year ago, has had a positive impact on employee confidence around data security.

    In May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation was implemented to boost individual data protection and to guarantee the privacy of those living within the European Union and Economic Area.

    The survey found that 53% of the respondents said that their confidence has risen in the way their employer stores and secures their personal and private data - an increase of 6% on results from 2018.

    The ADP Workforce View in Europe 2019 surveyed over 10,000 workers in Europe - with countries including France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and the UK being researched. It reported that employees generally have been feeling more assured about their companies’ data protection efforts since the GDPR came into being.

    However, 34% of employees in France still had some concerns about the safety of their personal data and over a quarter of the UK employee respondents are still worried about the security of their personal data - with the biggest worry for 11% of the employees being the lack of control that workers have over their data storage.

    The next issue - reported by 9% of employees - is lack of confidence that the data is being held by systems in their organisations which are capable of withstanding cyber-attacks or data breaches. A further eight per cent stated that they are concerned that too much data is being held without proper consent.

    Cécile Georges - ADP Chief Privacy Officer - stated:

    “It’s highly encouraging to see that the implementation of GDPR has coincided with a significant rise in employee confidence, suggesting that employees feel more assured than they were prior to GDPR that companies will actually comply with Data Protection requirements that for the most part were already in force in the European Union.

    It is crucial for both the organisations and their employees that the former are complying with GDPR and have a thorough understanding of the impact of wrongfully processing data on employees.

    GDPR has already led to positive results but companies must continue to work to maintain data security and ensure their employees feel confident about the way their employers hold and process their personal data.”

  • The Court of Justice of the European Union hands down a judgment about working time

    The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has - in the case of Spanish Trade Union (CCOO) v Deutsche Bank SAE - handed down an important judgment about working time.

    The CCOO wanted a system in place for recording how long its members worked each day - including the number of hours worked overtime - to enable the verification that these complied with their stipulated working conditions.

    The group action against Deutsche Bank stated that, as a necessary measure, every worker is entitled to a minimum daily rest period of 11 consecutive hours per 24-hour period; that they should be guaranteed a minimum uninterrupted period of 24 hours plus the 11 hours’ daily rest and that there should be safeguarding against workers’ average working time for each 7-day period, including overtime.

    Under Spanish law, employers are only required to keep a record of overtime hours worked by each worker at the end of each month. Evidence was given to the court that these records were not accurate - and that 53.7% of all overtime worked was not recorded.

    The European Court of Justice ruled that employers must take steps to make sure their staff are not exceeding the 48-hour maximum working week and are taking adequate rest breaks.

    The CCOO said that the ECJ judgment made it clear that the previous Spanish legal framework did not comply with European legislation.

    Sybille Steiner - Employment Partner at Irwin Mitchell - said:

    “This decision is binding in the UK and will affect those employers who do not accurately record the numbers of hours their staff work – whether these are paid or unpaid.

    This decision arguably goes further than our laws require and employers should make sure that the systems they use to measure working time are ‘objective’ and ‘reliable’ and reflect all hours their staff work – not just those set out in their contracts of employment.”

    In the UK, under the Working Time Regulations 1998, employers have to keep records to show that workers are not working in excess of 48 hours a week and the rules around night work are complied with. They do not, however, explicitly require employers to record data to show that daily and weekly rest periods are met.

    Records have to be kept for at least two years and these rules are enforced by the Health and Safety Executive. Employers that breach them can be prosecuted and fined.

  • Survey into whether diversity should be prioritized over ability when employing

    According to a poll of 2,002 Americans conducted by John Zogby Strategies - an American public opinion pollster - 51 per cent of Millennials and Generation Z reported that ‘fair representation of race, ethnicity and religion is paramount to creating the ideal workplace' .

    Agreeing with that statement were 48 per cent of Generation X and 42 per cent of Baby Boomers - who also wanted employers to prioritize diversity over ability when it comes to hiring.

    Only 15 per cent of Generation Z and 32 per cent of Millennials believe that 'merit and competition supersede all, even if that results in a workplace that creates minimal diversity' - compared to 37 percent of Generation X and 45 percent of Baby Boomers who said that merit is more important than diversity.

    When questioned as to whether businesses should prioritize their impact on the environment - or focus on growing jobs and satisfying stockholders - 55 per cent of Generation Z; 42 per cent of Millennials; 41 per cent of Generation X and 40 per cent of Baby Boomers agreed with the statement 'major business decisions must first and foremost take into account their impact on the environment.'.

    Jeremy Zogby - a Partner in Zogby Strategies - commented:

    “There are really two opposing schools, I guess you could say that there's one that's on the side of progressive ideology, whereas the other one is more in line with the way business was always run. There is definitely a progressive slant in Millennials and Gen Z.”

    Alexandra Anders - EMEA Talent Director, Cornerstone OnDemand - writes:

    ‘Diversity over ability - that’s what matters to Millennials and Gen Z, research recently revealed. For these generations, an employee from all backgrounds being fairly represented is the key for a great workplace and diversity is more important than hiring new employees based on their skills.

    Yet, businesses are still failing to address problems of equality and transparency. Not to name names but we’ve all seen the ongoing issues at Google.

    While there may be no quick-fix or overnight solution, there are ways that you can and should take action now.’

    She added:

    ‘Recruitment is just the first step towards creating greater equality. When you’re looking to build a diverse workforce you also need to retain people. The recent revelations from companies submitting their pay gap reports shows how too often a company’s first and only response will be to launch a big diversity recruitment push. After that they see this as a job done – but that’s only the start. HR needs to reflect not only on hiring practices but also internal rewards and policies and the rest of the employee lifecycle’.

  • Fourteen percent of UK workers could see their jobs replaced by technology

    A report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) stated that 14% of UK workers fell into a high risk category where jobs could be entirely replaced by technology - and they have warned that the US and UK are among countries that need to do better on digital up-skilling.

    According to new research, more than one in ten workers in the UK are at such high risk of seeing their roles automated that they require up to a year’s training to secure a safer occupation. An additional 2.6% required more than three years of training to find an entirely new role.

    The OECD warns that there is a widespread global crisis when it comes to getting the skills in place to thrive in a digital economy.

    Despite the fact that governments and organisations have pledged to tackle the problem, only a few countries have managed to - with Belgium, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Sweden being the nations best placed for the future.

    The OECD report - Thriving in a Digital World - states:

    ‘Digitalisation presents immense potential to boost productivity and improve well-being. It can give people more power over what they learn, where and when they work, and how they engage in society. However, it can also increase inequalities if some people or regions are left behind. By improving the skills of their populations, countries can ensure the new technologies translate into better outcomes for all. This requires a comprehensive and co-ordinated policy intervention, with skills-related policies as the cornerstone of this package.’

    However, just focusing on digital and technical skills is not an appropriate plan of action, as workers in the future need training in cognitive and socio-emotional skills - providing the human x-factor not offered by their robot colleagues.

    At the Paris launch of the report, Angel Gurría - OECD Secretary General - said:

    “A well-rounded skillset is critical to unlocking the benefits of digitalisation. However, the OECD Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) reveals that 15% of adults lack basic digital skills, and 13% lack basic digital, numeracy and problem-solving skills. This is really scary, as citizens without basic skills are at risk of being left behind by the digital transformation. Moreover, on average in the OECD, 6.6% of young graduates have low literacy and numeracy skills. But this share goes up to almost 20% in some countries. This means that holding a tertiary degree does not always guarantee a high level of skills. New technologies are changing the way we carry out our jobs. In the digital age, workers must be mobile and able to retrain and upskill along the course of their lives. Our estimates suggest that 14% of jobs (on average) across the OECD face a high risk of being automated and many more jobs – 32% – are expected to undergo substantial changes in terms of the quantity and quality of their tasks. It is imperative that workers retrain and upskill to face these enormous challenges. However, workers in occupations at high risk of automation and the low-skilled are less likely to participate in on the job training than other workers.”

    He added:

    “In our rapidly digitalising world, skills make the difference between staying ahead of the wave and falling behind. Businesses have a key role to play in ensuring that employees upskill and reskill, adapting to the changing demands of the labour market. By improving our skills systems, we can ensure that today’s technological revolution will improve lives for all.” 

    Amber Rudd - Work and Pensions Secretary - recently called for a new government focus on helping people better themselves in work, enabling them to move to higher paid, higher-skilled roles.

    At the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, she said;

    “Automation is driving the decline of banal and repetitive tasks. So the jobs of the future are increasingly likely to be those that need human sensibilities, with personal relationships, qualitative judgement and creativity coming to the fore. And there is a clear role for government to help people take advantage of these changes, and to help businesses create high-quality jobs.”

  • SSE fined for unfair dismissal of employee

    Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) – one of the largest energy providers – has been ordered to pay £230,000 to an employee for unfair dismissal.

    In the case of Donald Nutt v SSE Ltd at Dundee Employment Tribunal, the Court criticised the extreme poor practice and genuine unfairness shown towards Mr Nutt by SSE Ltd. The judge stated that the HR process was "reminiscent of a show trial in the former Soviet Union".

    Mr Nutt - who had been employed by SSE Ltd for 16 years before his dismissal in October 2014 - raised safety issues in 2012 regarding free health checks for night shift workers and also that the company's night shift structure was causing health problems. He brought a formal grievance, which was not upheld.

    In March 2013, Mr Nutt received a poor appraisal report and was informed that he would be getting an informal warning. This was despite having previously received consistently excellent appraisals.

    The company accused him of refusing to accept the findings, telling him:

    “....you are free to raise any reasonable concerns you have with your manager, but once the outcome has been decided you should accept that outcome and move on in a positive and constructive manner. The topic should not be questioned again unless there is a change in the situation.”

    In July 2013, Mr Nutt was signed off from work for two months, due to stress. On his return, he had a meeting with HR - who decided to bring disciplinary action against him for failing to accept that he was wrong over the night shift complaint - and not accepting that his grievance had been properly investigated.  He was dismissed.

    The judge at the tribunal stated that the HR professional:

    “.....was demanding that Mr Nutt not only accept throughout that he had been wrong, but also accept a number of factual circumstances that weren't true – principally, that his grievance had been properly investigated. It quite clearly had not. At many instances during the meeting, it appears that SSE not only wished Mr Nutt to acknowledge that he was wrong, but express gratitude to SSE for treating him as they had. This is somewhat reminiscent of a show trial in the former Soviet Union rather than modern employment relations practice."

    The tribunal found that practically no investigation had been conducted into Mr Nutt’s alleged misconduct and that his crime was to have argued with the company. Judge McFatridge ordered SSE Ltd to rehire Mr Nutt and awarded him £140,000 compensation.

    However, when SSE refused to re-instate Mr Nutt, the award was increased to £230,000. Mr Nutt's other claim of unfair treatment - on the basis of whistle blowing - was not upheld.    

  • Growing number of employers are providing counselling services

    A new report has shown that more employers are becoming aware of the vital role they play in ensuring that good quality work is not only good for their employee’s welfare, but is also the key to productivity.

    A growing proportion of employers are providing counselling services as most organisations are increasing their focus on mental health - with 40 per cent having a standalone well-being strategy. Comparing figures with last year, 61 per cent of respondents agreed that employee well-being is now on the senior leaders’ agendas against 55% last year. However, 16.5 per cent are still not doing anything to improve their employees’ well-being.

    Unmanageable workloads - say 62 per cent of HR professionals - and management style quoted by 43 per cent, are two top causes of stress in the workplace.

    Poor financial well-being is cited as being a significant cause of employee stress by 25 per cent of respondents. Nearly 50 per cent state that they regularly communicate reward policies to staff so they understand the benefits on offer and the choices available - but fewer of them consult the employees to assess how well their benefit offering is meeting their financial needs.

    In nearly two-thirds of businesses, line managers are expected to take prime responsibility for managing short-term absence, despite the fact that only 50 per cent of organisations train managers to manage stress. Only 37 per cent of businesses provide any training or guidance for line managers to spot the warning signs of presenteeism – but 79 per cent rely on their managers to send people home when they are unwell. The average level of absence is 5.9 days per employee per year - or 2.6 per cent of working time lost - and is the lowest ever recorded by the survey.

    Mental ill health - along with stress, skeletal injuries and acute medical conditions - is increasingly prevalent as a cause of both short and long-term absence.

    The survey finds that when line managers are advised of the importance of health and well-being, businesses are more likely to report that stress is well managed. Training line managers and providing them with tailored support are among the most effective methods. HR should, therefore, look for simple, low-cost ways to start building healthier workplaces.

    Rachel Suff - Senior Policy Adviser at CIPD - who led the research, says:

    “Not only are most managers ill equipped to support their teams through times of stress, but if they don’t go about their role in the right way, the impact on people’s well-being can be harmful. Employers can introduce a suite of exemplary well-being policies and make a serious investment in employee health, but if their activity is not rooted in how people are managed, it will not have real impact.”

    She added:

    “Our research shows that manager buy-in is crucial, so HR teams should focus communications with managers on what’s in it for them: when their team’s happy, healthy and engaged in their work, they’re more likely to meet their goals and contribute to the team’s success.”

  • Survey shows despite the pay gap, women are happier at work than men

    Personal Group, a technology-enabled employee services business, has surveyed more than 1550 UK employees about their happiness, enthusiasm, pride and efficiency at work. The research is the second annual national survey of this kind from Personal Group.

    The results showed that despite a gender pay gap of 17.9% across all employees, women are happier; more enthusiastic and prouder about the work they do than their male colleagues. Almost 45% of women said that they are happy at work either quite often or most of the time. This compared with only 34.5% of men.

    Similarly, where enthusiasm was concerned, 42.8% of women felt enthusiastic about their work quite often or most of the time - versus 36.1% of men. Of the employees who rarely feel happy, enthusiastic and proud at work - men score 6.4% higher than women, across all categories. 

    However, men are keener than women to get to work in the morning and one reason for this may be that men feel more satisfied that they are recognised for their contribution at work. When questioned, 39.8% of men - against 47.2% of women - valued recognition as a preferred benefit. Overall, money was voted the most important benefit by both 60.9% of men and 63.3% of women. Men are more in favour of longer-term benefits, such as life and health insurance and 33.8% said these would make them happier at work, compared to just 27% of women.

    With regard to going to work each morning, men at a senior level are more reticent. Of the male company owners and directors surveyed, 44.4% are rarely keen to go to work, against 6.3% of their female counterparts. However, for frontline workers, the percentage of men and women reluctant to go to work is practically the same - 51.2% of women and 50.4% of men.

    Deborah Frost - Chief Executive at Personal Group - said:

    “I’m encouraged that Gender pay reporting continues to drive the conversation around pay discrepancies and we’re seeing progress at several large organisations including Greggs, H & M and Mitchell and Butlers. However, many organisations have seen their gap stall – or even increase and, although this may be due to positive initiatives such as increasing the intake of women at entry level, these short-term fluctuations in results are only forgivable so long as organisations are also implementing evidence-based initiatives to support a targeted plan and drive meaningful improvements.

    Regardless, it’s clear that UK businesses still have a long way to go. Our research echoes this frustrating state of affairs – it’s no surprise that more money and more recognition are the most in-demand benefits amongst women when asked how employers could increase their workplace happiness.

    Despite women being paid less, they are actually happier and more enthusiastic at work compared to men, with just 34.5 per cent of male employees saying they often feel happy at work. This is just as concerning and is something that British businesses must explore further and work to improve.

    Closing the gender pay gap and the gender happiness gap requires businesses to ask themselves some difficult questions - and a willingness to act if they discover less than satisfactory responses. Making progress will undoubtedly require changes to culture and strategy, but if businesses can make sure they’re communicating openly with their employees around both pay and happiness, everyone will benefit.”

  • New study looks into issues employees experience in the workplace

    More than 2,370 employees across the UK were questioned - as part of a new study by the Centre for People, Work and Organisational Practice at Nottingham Business School, in partnership with the CIPD and YouGov - about issues they experience in the workplace and whether they feel able to raise them.

    The respondents were asked which issues they experience, with the data showing that the most common issue experienced by 4 per cent of employees, is work pressure. Organisational change was cited by 29 per cent and 22 per cent who had raised an issue at work felt that they received no advice or support.

    The study found that - for 62 per cent of the respondents - the most common method for them to have a voice is by one-to-one meetings with a line manager. Team meetings accounted for 49 per cent of employees expressing their concerns and only 17 per cent approached a trade union.

    Professor Helen Shipton - lead researcher; Director of the Centre for People, Work and Organisational Practice and author of the report -‘Talking about employee voice: employees’ experiences’ - said:

    “Nearly three in ten employees report low psychological safety at work. Employers therefore need to create safe environments for people to speak out, which can positively impact well-being and organisational effectiveness. Line managers are shown to have a critical role in this by enabling employees to voice their issues and ideas in one-to-one meetings. This shows a need for all line managers to be trained to understand the value of employee voice, encourage individuals to voice issues that are important to them, and to suggest improvements to the way things are done in the organisation, or share innovative ideas.”

    Just half of the respondents were found to be satisfied - or very satisfied - with the amount of involvement they have in making decisions at work. Employees working in small and private organisations were more satisfied compared with those working in large and public sector organisations, but only a quarter stated that they feel free to express themselves - with another quarter stating that they chose to remain silent even though they had something they wanted to say.

    Terms and conditions of employment - such as pay, holidays and flexible working - were cited by 38 per cent of employees as areas in which they had little or no control.

    Daniel King - Professor of Organisational Studies at Nottingham Business School and co-author of the report - said:

    “Our findings suggest that organisations offer limited scope for sharing matters that their employees consider to be important. However, there is a positive link between voice and job satisfaction - which means employers should create ways for all staff to have a voice, which can in turn boost their attitude and motivation at work. These findings are important in the context of creating good work and quality jobs, because they point towards factors that can empower or disempower people in shaping their working lives.”

  • EAT finds health trainer on maternity leave was unfavourably treated but not discriminated against

    A recent judgement by the Employment Appeal Tribunal has found that Emma Pease - whilst on maternity leave - was unfavourably treated, but not discriminated against by the South West Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.

    Mrs Pease was employed by the Trust as a health trainer and during her maternity leave the Trust carried out a redundancy exercise. A meeting took place - which Mrs Pease attended - and at that meeting she was informed that she was at risk of being made redundant the following day. Two days later, she was sent an email, attaching a deployment document and guidance notes, stressing that the document should be completed and returned to HR as soon as possible. However, because the email was sent to her work email address, she did not receive it.

    Shortly afterwards, Mrs Pease found out that she had missed the email. She obtained a copy, completed the document and returned it immediately.

    Mrs Pease was eventually made redundant and she subsequently brought a claim for unfair dismissal and a claim for maternity discrimination. Her claim stated that she had been sent an important email to her work email account, which - as she was on maternity leave - she did not use. As a result of this, she missed being considered for redeployment by a period of nine days.

    The Employment Tribunal agreed that she had been disadvantaged - meaning that she missed three job opportunities - which they attributed to the ignorance of the email requiring her to inform HR of her details. It was concluded that the Trust had discriminated against Mrs Pease because she was on maternity leave and she was awarded £5,000 compensation.

    The Trust appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal, who upheld the previous ruling that this amounted to unfavourable treatment by her employer.

    It overruled, however, the initial Employment Tribunal’s verdict that it also amounted to discrimination as, although the way in which Mrs Pease was treated would not have happened if she had not been on maternity leave, the Employment Tribunal had not considered whether her maternity leave was the reason why she was unfairly treated. The Employment Tribunal should have gone into the reason why the disadvantage occurred and enquired as to whether the person who sent the email in the first place had any discriminatory motive in mind. The Employment Appeal Judge added that the evidence given at the Tribunal hearing suggested that the mistake with the email was down to an administrative error and nothing more. He then sent the case back to the Employment Tribunal to consider why the email was sent to the work email account.

  • Analysis suggests that the gender pay gap is getting worse

    New analysis by the BBC suggests that the gender pay gap is getting worse - and critics say that making businesses report their inequality is not enough.

    According to the results, four in ten private companies that have published their latest gender pay gap figures have reported wider gaps than last year. It was found that male employees - in every sector of business - were paid more.  

    Of the companies that have reported up to now, 74 per cent have a pay gap that favours men and only 14 per cent favour women. However, the utilities company Npower blamed their pay gap increase from 13% to 18% on the fact that more female than male employees are choosing to go for a salary sacrifice scheme.

    Npower company spokesperson said:

    “Npower implemented a cost reduction programme in 2017 which, along with the trend of more women than men taking advantage of salary sacrifice employee benefits designed to promote flexible working, had an impact on the pay gap.”

    Car mechanics chain, Kwik Fit - in 2017 - had a negative gender pay gap of minus 15.2 per cent, showing that their female employees were paid more, but its 2018 figures show a 14 per cent median gender pay gap in favour of men. They attribute this to a number of senior female employees leaving the company.  

    A spokesperson for Kwik Fit said:

    “We are keen to both promote from within the company as well as recruit more women to help redress this balance.”

    Financial Services is one of the worst performing sectors, with several banks -including Lloyds Banking Group and RBS - reporting median gender pay gaps in excess of 30 per cent. According to the research, the construction industry is also showing a high median gender pay gap of around 26 per cent.

    Martha McKinley - Solicitor at law firm Stephensons - remarked on the fact that the growth in the gaps at some companies signalled how challenging it is to deal with pay imbalances.

    She said:

    “The introduction of this type of reporting makes the issue more transparent and forces employers to sit up, take notice and hopefully take action. It will be interesting to see how the land lies after the April 4th reporting deadline.”

    Rebecca Hilsenrath - Chief Executive to the Equality and Human Rights Commission - said:

    “Transparency is brilliant and the first year of gender pay gap reporting has had an immense impact in raising awareness of workplace equality, but the truth is that transparency is not enough. Just reporting figures is not going to eliminate anyone’s pay gap.

    Now that employers have met their legal duty to report their pay gaps, they should have worked out what has caused them and what they need to do to narrow them.  We believe that it should be mandatory for employers to publish, alongside their pay gap data, action plans with specific targets and deadlines.”

    Sam Smethers - Chief Executive of the Fawcett Society - agreed and told the Telegraph:

    “Initial findings look worrying with 40 per cent of those who have already reported showing pay gaps widening not narrowing.  Women will be wondering what is going on. We need to require employers to publish action plans that we can hold them accountable to.”

  • Workplace pension scheme rises again

    Ten million workers in the UK will now see more of their wages automatically diverted to a pension, starting from 6 April 2019 when the workplace pension scheme will rise again - to a total of 8%.

    The Government is giving a tax relief to those contributing to their pension. For basic rate payers, a £100 contribution to the pension will cost £80 - due to the 20% tax relief - and higher tax brackets will receive a larger percentage of relief.

    However, it will mean less take-home pay for people who are automatically enrolled into a workplace pension - a person earning £30,000 per annum will pay an extra £32 a month into their pension. This has caused experts to worry that these employees will see the short term income loss as a reason to opt out of the auto-enrolment.

    Employees are being urged to remain enrolled in the scheme to reap the long term benefits, as an annual pension contribution of 8% of salary, from the age of 30, could mean £125,000 in their pension pot at retirement.

    Analysts say that by choosing to opt-out of this automatic pension saving, workers would actually lose out on the money their employer puts into their pension pot.

    Tom Selby - Senior Analyst at investment company AJ Bell - stated:

    "Anyone who chooses to opt-out is basically taking a voluntary pay cut. If you turn down the matched contribution from an employer you won't get it back elsewhere."

    Advice for workers who are worried about what happens when they move employers is that most modern pension schemes are portable - meaning it can be moved through employers, roles and industries. Moving employers does not mean the pot will be lost.

    Michelle Gribbin - Chief Investment Officer at Profile Pensions - advises:

    “The workplace pension scheme is to the benefit of UK employees and designed to help everyone prepare for their financial future. Together, the employer contribution, tax relief and investment growth offer the ability to significantly increase the value of your money for a time in your life when you will really need it.

    Straightforward pension advice is a vital step in the personal finance education process. When people really understand what these contributions mean, where they come from and how opting-out impacts their financial future, they become empowered to make their own informed decisions and potentially be over £125,000 better off in retirement.”

  • HMRC investigates under-payment of the apprenticeship levy in 2018/19

    According to analysis by national accountancy group UHY Hacker Young - after a Freedom of Information request - it was found that HMRC (Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs) has made 84 separate investigations into under-payment of the apprenticeship levy in 2018/19.

    The HMRC collected £6.2m through these investigations last year - an increase from £5.2m in 2017/18 - but they state that collectively businesses have underpaid £13.6m in 2017/2018.

    As part of the apprenticeship levy, businesses running a payroll over £3m must pay 0.5 per cent of their total wage bill (minus £15,000 allowance) into a fund to be used for government approved training schemes. As these schemes do not always match their requirements, some businesses perceive the apprenticeship levy to be an extra employment tax. Research showed that more than £3bn of funding has not yet been taken up - data from HMRC indicated that only £480m had been used by 30th November 2018.

    At the beginning of the year, a survey by the City and Guilds found that of the 745 levy-paying companies polled, 92 per cent reported they would like greater flexibility in how they spent the funds - 45 per cent said they would like to be able to allocate the funds to non-apprenticeship training courses.

    UHY Hacker Young stated that a number of employers found the levy complicated - which meant that they accidentally underpaid, leaving them open to possible fines.

    HMRC has the power to fix penalties for inaccuracy of up to 30 per cent of the amount owed for unintended non-payment. Deliberate avoidance of the levy can attract a fine of up to 100 per cent of the outstanding amount.

    Clive Gawthorpe - Partner at UHY Hacker Young - stated that the increase in investigations suggested that HMRC had initially been focusing on larger businesses but is now also including smaller businesses.

    He added:

    “We have seen additional problems arise among large businesses where several different parts of the same business group may be liable to pay the levy. The high number of investigations HMRC is launching into underpayment is a symptom of the wider problems that are hampering the scheme’s effectiveness. These urgently need addressing.” 

    The Institute of Directors have brought to notice the new levy reforms which will come into effect next month. These will present greater flexibility in the use of funds.

    In his spring statement the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, announced that the amount SME’s will be expected to contribute towards training apprentices will drop from 10 per cent to 5 per cent, which he claimed would bring businesses a saving of £695m. He also brought forward the increase in the amount of levy funding that businesses will be allowed to share with their supply chain - an increase from 10 per cent to 25 per cent.

  • DOL proposes a new rule affecting overtime eligibility

    The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has proposed a new rule affecting overtime eligibility.

    The salary threshold for employees eligible to collect time-and-a-half pay for hours worked over 40 in a work week, would increase but would still be fewer than the one the Obama administration attempted to enact in 2016 – which was struck down by a federal district judge in Texas before it was to have taken effect.

    Under the new proposal exempt employees would have to earn at least $679 a week or $35,308 a year to be classified as exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. That is higher than the current level in which employees must earn at least $455 a week or $23,660 a year, the threshold that has been in place since 2004.

    Executive, administrative or professional employees would become exempt from overtime requirements from $23,660 to $35,308, a big difference from the $913 per week - or $47,476 per year - set by the previous administration.

    In addition to the salary test, exempt employees must also pass the duties test - in other words, they must perform work that is executive, administrative, or professional.

    Employers would be able to satisfy up to 10 per cent of the salary minimum through nondiscretionary incentives and/or commissions that are paid annually, more frequently, or even in a catch-up payment at the end of the year.

    The threshold for exemption as a ‘highly compensated employee’ would rise to $147,414 in total annual compensation - higher than the Obama administration’s threshold of $134,004.  

    If the proposal comes into force, the employers of workers who are no longer exempt - based on their level of compensation - will have to decide whether to pay overtime or increase the salaries to over the threshold.

    Kara Shea - an attorney with Butler Snow LLP in Nashville, Tennessee and coeditor of Tennessee Employment Law Letter - said:

    “Increasing pay will not be enough if the employee is not performing exempt job duties. Employers should first make sure the employees are correctly classified to begin with, based on job duties, before they decide whether to preserve the exemption by raising pay.”

    Attorney Alexander Passantino of Seyfarth Shaw, commented:

    “Paying overtime on $125,000 per year is a huge economic burden, but it still may be less expensive than going to the new level.”

    The new rule will be up for public comment for 60 days and could be revised or challenged in court again - but as it calls for less drastic change than the previous proposal, it is thought more likely to succeed.

  • UK employees cannot do enough basic HR admin tasks on mobile devices

    A new survey from SD Worx - provider of global payroll and HR services - has looked into the extent of the digitisation of the workplace. The result showed that UK employees cannot do enough basic HR admin tasks on mobile devices. On average, only 12 per cent of HR admin tasks are possible on mobile devices only - and 49 per cent are still completed offline.

    Of the tasks that can currently be undertaken electronically, 14 per cent request leave electronically only, whilst 30 per cent still submit non-digitally. A further 13 per cent complete the job through both fixed and mobile devices and 43 per cent by fixed devices only. This was found to be the most popular administrative task to be completed digitally.

    Only 13 per cent of UK employees submit expenses on a mobile only and 40 per cent still submit expenses non-electronically.

    Employees not working digitally spend too long on HR admin tasks, preventing them from completing more valuable work - and ultimately having a negative impact on employee engagement.

    Employees were shown to want to do more HR admin digitally, with the UK scoring highest for those wanting digital HR tasks. The survey also showed that what people have the option to undertake digitally is different according to their work location. Out of the countries surveyed, Germany was found to score lower across all categories, with the UK and the Netherlands coming out on top across the activities that employees can currently do digitally.

    Of those surveyed in the UK, 59 per cent can submit expenses online, compared to only 33 per cent in Germany where employees appear to be the least concerned out of the six countries surveyed. Where requesting and arranging business travel is concerned, 55 per cent of UK employees are able to do it digitally – but only 36 per cent in Belgium.

    In general, the UK had the highest number of respondents wanting the ability to do more tasks digitally at work, suggesting that the more access they have to carry out work electronically, the more they want to see these options increase in the workplace.

    Brenda Morris, Managing Director of SD Worx UKI stated:

    “Nearly all areas of our lives have been changed by technology. While it’s been the case in our personal lives for some time now, in some instances it’s been slow to take hold in the workplace. As seen in this report, employees want to be able to carry out basic HR admin on mobile but they are not always given the opportunity to do so. In order to keep employees engaged and productive, it is vital for employers to listen to these concerns and adapt to this new way of working.”

  • Family Court Judge criticises expert witness

    A family court judge has criticised a consultant paediatrician in an open judgment after becoming deeply concerned about her behaviour as an expert witness in a child care case.

    The family court judge - after discussing the circumstances with the president of the family division and the family division liaison judge for that region - decided, unusually, to publish his concerns.

    The expert witness was instructed to prepare reports for two brothers, X aged 10 years and Y aged 17 years, suffering from hereditary hypomyelination syndrome causing severe dysplastic diplegia and requiring full time, lifelong care. However the paediatrician, who is held in high esteem and has regularly been instructed as a medical expert witness in cases proceeding in the Family Court, did not deliver the reports.

    Six months after the paediatrician was instructed to prepare a report on the younger brother and four months after she was asked to prepare a report on the older brother, the reports had not been written. Neither had she had she seen X or Y and it very much appeared that the consultant had spent little, if any, time reading the medical records that have been made available to her.

    The parties involved came to the conclusion that in terms of both time and cost it would be appropriate for an alternative expert to be instructed.

    The judgment stated:

    ‘........The Family Court is heavily dependent upon medical experts from a wide range of specialties to assist it in dealing with some of the cases that come before the court. Experts are required to assist the court in determining threshold issues – for example, in determining whether a child’s injuries have been sustained accidentally or whether they are inflicted injuries, in identifying the likely mechanism by which injuries were caused, in identifying the likely window of time within which the injuries were sustained. Experts are also required to assist the court in making welfare decision – for example, as to whether the child is suffering from any mental or psychological difficulties and as to her treatment or therapeutic needs. The Family Court simply could not operate without the assistance of medical expert witnesses.

    However, it is also the case that although the Family Court needs the assistance of medical experts it also owes a duty to the child concerned to determine the proceedings without delay. That is a statutory obligation clearly set out in s.32 of the Children Act 1989. As Paediatricians as expert witnesses in the Family Courts in England and Wales: Standards, competencies and expectations’ makes clear, it is also an obligation that is placed on medical expert witnesses.

    There will always be occasions when, despite an expert having genuinely believed that he or she could complete a report by the date set by the court, circumstances change and that is no longer possible. Where that happens, the expert should let his or her instructing solicitor know promptly, giving reasons for the delay and indicating the new date by which the report can be completed. An application should be made to the court for the timetable to be varied. Where there are justifiable reasons for adjusting the timetable it is unlikely that the court would refuse. What is not acceptable is what has happened in this case where the expert has given a succession of dates by which her reports would be delivered but, as is patently obvious, with no genuine or realistic expectation that any of the dates suggested could, in fact, be met. Courts and experts must work together in a co-operative co-ordinated way. That simply has not happened in this case.’

    His Honour said a draft of the judgment was provided to the expert witness before the hearing and she was invited to attend and make representations before the judgment was handed down.

    He said:

    “She handed in a letter explaining the personal difficulties she has faced in recent months. The explanation she gave was much the same as the explanation she has previously given to the parties' solicitors. She was profusely apologetic for her failings in this case. She indicated that she has decided not to accept any further instructions in cases in the family court.”

    His Honour went on to say that he was deeply concerned about the way the expert witness had behaved in this case and added:

    “It does not meet the standards expected of an expert witness or the expectations of the court in this particular case. It cannot be allowed to pass without comment. That comment should be placed in the public domain”.

  • Only a third of workers use mobiles for admin tasks

    A recent research of 1246 employees in the UK and commissioned by ABBYY - a global provider of content IQ solutions - has found that only 35 per cent of workers use mobiles for administrative tasks, despite 43 per cent wishing to use them for this purpose.

    Most workers - 91 per cent - still prefer to use a laptop or desktop and 28 percent still want to use pen and paper for admin tasks, as 46 percent of employees admit to finding that simpler to use. Desktop is still the most popular in the UK workplace, regardless of today’s remote working climate. Almost half of workers - 48 percent - use a desktop or laptop because it is easier and 41 percent because it is quicker.

    In particular, millennials are eager to use mobiles for admin with 55 per cent wishing to, but only 43 per cent actually doing so. Older generation - GenX - was also found to be open to using mobiles for admin as 41 per cent would like to do so, but only 35 per cent were using them currently.

    The survey demonstrated that some employees were finding the latest technologies, such as mobile, too difficult to use and showed that - while many believe we live and work in a smarter, digital-first era - technology still is not being used to its full potential.

    Automation is lagging behind. Previous ABBYY research showed that in an average week, 39 per cent of workers spend 1-2 days a week on maintaining databases and 18 percent of millennials spend 2 days inputting data. Two thirds - 63 percent - of UK workers want to delegate these tasks to robots and without this option, 15 per cent try to avoid doing tasks they dislike. This results in some tasks being completely overlooked.

    Bruce Orcutt - Senior Vice President of Product at ABBYY - stated:

    “It’s very surprising to see that mobile and automation still aren’t being used to their full advantage, especially when we have these capabilities at our fingertips. Businesses and software developers must continue to work to make mobile interfaces more user friendly, and boost their convenience, ease and speed. However, the onus is also on businesses to harness mobile solutions and evolve the way their staff work.”

    He added:

    “As we prepare for the workforce of the future, based on a culture of convenience driven by mobile, organisations must champion smarter working practices, and educate staff on how to make the most of these platforms to drive productivity – and improve employee experience in the process.”

    Bruce Orcutt continued:

    “Working with companies offering specialist mobile platforms centred around user technology is crucial. This will enable workers, young and old, to harness technology to make their everyday administrative tasks easier, simpler and more convenient.........”       

  • Survey shows a severe skills gap in the American workforce

    With the employment rate in the US still being high - and the increase in the number of those looking for employment - it would appear on the surface that employers seeking quality staff would find it easy, but 82 per cent of HR professionals stated that they have had difficulty recruiting suitable job candidates in the last 12 months. According to a poll of 500 senior executives, there is a severe skills gap in the American workforce. The poll includes which skills employers feel are most lacking.

    Of the business leaders polled, 92 per cent are of the opinion that Americans are lacking essential skills and 44 per cent think that they are lacking in soft skills – which include communication, creativity, critical thinking and collaboration. Thus, whilst candidates may look good on paper, they do not know how to work effectively within a team or in an office environment.

    Other areas senior executives thought workers to be lacking in skills were: 22 per cent technical; 14 per cent leadership and 12 per cent software.

    When asked which industries are most affected by the skills gap, 30 per cent of the respondents stated manufacturing; 21 per cent technology; 19 per cent professional services and 16 per cent engineering and construction. Finance and the Leisure Industry were each showing 2 per cent.

    Of the business leaders polled, 64 per cent stated that they thought the lack of skills would result in less investment in US companies; 34 per cent thought product development would suffer; 45 per cent thought growth opportunities would be missed and 30 per cent were of the opinion that profits would suffer.

    Executives were asked if they thought the education system was to blame and 59 per cent stated that they did – with 54 per cent stating that they did not think the education system taught the skills needed. Lack of interest in the job sector was cited by 23 per cent of the respondents and 22 per cent stated they thought there was a lack of training and enrichment opportunities.

    On being asked what executives believed would alleviate the skills gap, 89 per cent stated corporate apprenticeships or training programs. However, when questioned as to why all companies were not implementing training programs, 10 per cent of executives cited lack of personnel to administer them; 18 per cent said lack of interest by employees; 30 per cent do not think the executive team believe it is a priority and 42 per cent think it is because of the cost of development.

    The skills gap issue brings an opportunity for HR professionals to better understand the skill needs of their organizations.  

  • Tribunal finds that the office of National Statistics were discriminatory

    Economist Olwen Renowden has been awarded £19,000 at an employment tribunal in Cardiff. The tribunal found that Mrs Renowden - an experienced economist employed by the office of National Statistics (ONS) - had been denied promotion because of her gender.

    Mrs Renowden was employed by the ONS in 2016. On commencing her appointment she noticed that there were no female economists employed at the Grade 6 level - despite there being 114 men economists in total.

    Prior to her joining ONS, Mrs Renowden had worked in London for - amongst others - the Bank of England and the International Monetary Fund, in addition to holding several senior Whitehall posts. She had a total of more than 20 years experience, had previously worked at Grade 6 level and had experience in macro-economics.

    In February 2017, the ONS advertised two Grade 6 posts and Mrs Renowden, together with another female economist - who also had held senior posts and with 20 years experience - applied.  

    In April 2017, Mrs Renowden was told that she had failed to get an interview for either post. She queried this with management requesting an explanation but none was forthcoming. It was suggested that she contact HR.

    It was announced the following month that the successful candidates were both male. They were young and inexperienced; neither had been employed at Grade 6 level previously and neither had experience in macro-economics. In addition, they each had less than six years professional experience. A third post - created later - was also given to a man.

    Mrs Renowden raised a grievance and was represented by the Prospect Union National Secretary. Her grievance and subsequent appeal were not upheld and she resigned from the ONS in August 2018. She then applied for her case to be heard by the employment tribunal - which took place in Cardiff in January 2019.

    The tribunal found that “favouritism” existed towards male staff and that had not been addressed by those who should have addressed it, stating that “the approach to gender balance…pointed towards a culture where discrimination and in particular, sex discrimination, is not properly understood by those who are required to ensure its elimination”.

    It added that it was “reasonable to infer that the culture of the respondent is one where advantage and favouritism to males is not recognised as potentially discriminatory”.  

    Sue Ferns - Prospect Senior Deputy General Secretary - commented:

    “This case reveals a shocking lack of diversity among economists at ONS and what seems like the deliberate overlooking of female candidates in favour of men. It’s 2019 but it seems we still have a long way to go to overcome stereotypes in the workplace”.

    She added:

    “The finding of the tribunal puts employers on notice that unequal employment practices will not be tolerated. It also sends a message to anyone who has suffered at the hands of their employer that they can expect redress, and that unions are standing by to help their members achieve justice.”

    A spokesperson for the ONS said:

    “The ONS values the contributions of all its people and is continually working to support everyone in progressing their careers. We are considering the ruling in this case very carefully.”

  • Employment Tribunal claims have more than doubled after the scrapping of Tribunal fees

    Statistics released by the Ministry of Justice show that Employment Tribunal claims have more than doubled after the scrapping of Tribunal fees and – according to the figures – there is a big increase in the number of employees bringing claims themselves without legal representation. This often makes defending claims more onerous for employers, who will be expected to take on more of the case preparation work by the Tribunal.

    Since the Supreme Court ruling abolished all fees for bringing Tribunal claims, the number of claims increased by 165% compared to the same period in 2017. In answer to this, a new helpline has been launched by UNU Group.   This is a free legal helpline – founded by a group of industry experts. It is designed to offer support and impartial advice on employment law queries and has access to a network of partner legal firms who will assist with the cases, if necessary.  

    Nigel Allen - UNU Group Director – stated:

    “We know it can seem daunting to open an employment tribunal claim, especially if it’s against a larger company and many people simple don’t know where to start so sadly they are left suffering in silence.

    Abolishing fees was a huge step in making the process fairer for everyone and we wanted to mirror that by offering out services without any cost implication. Hopefully, we can offer anyone who has a claim the confidence to seek compensation.”

    It has been rumoured that the government may be working towards the re-introduction of tribunal fees. However, many in the legal sector disagree strongly with this.

    Chairman of the Bar Council - Andrew Walker QC - stated:

    “People in need of justice have enough hurdles to overcome already.”

    He added:

    “Justice is not a service bought by individuals for their private benefit, nor should it be treated in this way.”

  • HR Manager role ranks in the top ten most desirable in the UK

    Prospects for HR roles are looking healthy - a recent Glassdoor report has ranked the role of HR Manager among the top ten most desirable roles in the UK, with a high rating for job satisfaction.

    However, it was pointed out that HR specialists cannot afford to stand still if they want to remain current and marketable to employers. During a recent CIPD careers event, it was suggested that they focus on transferable skills, getting experience of different disciplines - even if it is just as a short term project - and find alternative ways to gain knowledge.

    Recently speaking at a CIPD careers event, Ruth Stuart - Head of Strategy Development - remarked that it is impossible to predict accurately what HR roles will look like, going forward.   She stated that she did not think they needed to worry too much regarding the greatly talked about advance of the robots - artificial Intelligence will undoubtedly make a big difference to the way tasks and processes are managed - but the future of HR will still be human.

    She highlighted the five key skills that will stand HR people in good stead for the future:

    Remaining calm and clear headed and making the right decision for the situation at hand is a key skill. HR managers frequently have to cope with awkward situations and there are no easy answers.

    Commercial awareness is a competence that HR is often unfairly accused of lacking. The most successful will have a clear understanding of their organisation’s business model and the risks and reputational challenges it faces – together with an in-depth knowledge of the way the business creates value.

    A World Economic Forum report has dubbed critical thinking as one of the most important skills for the future world of work and HR will require the ability and the courage to question and challenge - where necessary - decisions that are being made within the business.

    Digital literacy is one area where HR professionals are not alone in acknowledging they need to raise their game. They also need to learn how to exploit data to support better decision making within the business on everything from recruitment and workforce planning to e-learning and employee engagement.

    Lastly, Ruth Stuart stated that in the last year alone everything from environmental, whistle blowing and money laundering scandals had been reported. HR needs to develop the skills to deal with inappropriate behaviour of all kinds and employees should be able to speak out without fear of negative consequences.

    It is suggested that career success in the future will depend on HR practitioners being principles-led, evidence-based and outcomes driven.

  • The proposed Paycheck Fairness Act

    In January Republican Rosa DeLauro introduced the Paycheck Fairness Act, a measure intended to strengthen equal pay protections for women.

    The landmark Equal Pay Act of 1963 had made it illegal for employers to pay unequal wages to men and women who perform substantially equal work, but these laws have not closed the persistent gap between men’s and women’s wages.

    Women who work full time are paid, on average, only 80 per cent of every dollar paid to men. This happens in every state - regardless of geography, occupation, education or work patterns.

    The proposed Paycheck Fairness Act would ban employers nationwide from asking job applicants about their salary history and employers would be required to prove that any pay gaps between men and women are legitimately job-related.

    With regard to employees, the Paycheck Fairness Act would protect against retaliation for discussing salaries with colleagues and prohibit employers from screening job applicants based on their salary history - or for requiring salary history during the interview process.

    In addition, it would provide plaintiffs who file sex-based wage discrimination claims under the Equal Pay Act, with the same remedies as are available to plaintiffs who file race or ethnicity based wage discrimination claims under the Civil Rights Act; remove obstacles in the Equal Pay Act to facilitate plaintiffs’ participation in class action lawsuits that challenge systemic pay discrimination and create a negotiation skills training program for women and girls.

    On February 13th during a joint hearing of two U.S. House of Representatives Education and Labor subcommittees, Republican Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore pointed out that equal pay for equal work - regardless of sex - is a fundamental concept that has been a part of the law for more than half a century, but women still face barriers to equal pay.

    She went on to say that it is difficult to prove pay discrimination, especially when businesses keep information about wages and raises a secret - and that discriminatory pay practices are keeping some women in poverty.

    Republican Bradley Byrne, R-Ala, whilst agreeing that women deserve equal pay for equal work, said that the Paycheck Fairness Act offers no new protections against pay discrimination. He added that it also imposes an inflexible mandate on employers that strictly limits their communications with employees during the hiring process, but that it would be a "cash cow" for the attorneys of plaintiffs' by making it easier to sue employers - resulting in long legal battles for the women who bring claims.

    Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York said that the bill would force employers to make salaries transparent and stop them from asking about pay history.

    She said,

    "It is time that we pay people what they are worth and not how little they are desperate enough to accept. And that has nothing to do with their history - it has everything to do with what they are worth today”.

  • Discussions held on whether HR should play a more powerful role on remuneration committees

    On 5th February 2019, an event was jointly held by the CIPD and the High Pay Centre, where an expert panel suggested that HR should play a more powerful role on remuneration committees (RemCo).

    The event was set up to accompany the recent RemCo Reform report from the CIPD. This report made a case for RemCos to grow into broader people and culture committees, overseeing pay and setting it in the context of genuine performance and business value.

    Speakers argued for a greater voice for HR professionals on the committees that set pay strategies, with a view to curbing soaring pay among senior executives.

    At the heart of the discussion was the news that the average FTSE 100 CEO is now paid £3.92m a year - a figure which has risen 11% in the past 12 months - and is way above the increase enjoyed by the UK workforce as a whole.

    Luke Hildyard - Executive Director of the High Pay Centre - stated that there were far more people from marketing backgrounds than HR professionals serving on remuneration committees.

    He added;

    “When you think about the insights that people from HR could bring in terms of reward and motivation...that seems to be remiss. The HR perspective is missing in RemCos.”

    Shadow Business Secretary - Rebecca Long-Bailey - told delegates;

    “Time and again, we hear about record-breaking pay packets for so-called fat cat bosses. We have the slowest wage growth among G20 countries, but that hasn’t been the case for executive pay at the very top and that’s not fair. The prime minister has said it’s not anti-business to suggest big business needs to change on remuneration. For once, I agree with her.”

    Iain Wright - Director of Corporate and Regional Engagement at accounting body ICAEW and former Chair of the parliamentary business select committee - said executive pay had become, “.......like a virility symbol, a statement of a company’s ambition”.

    He added:

    “........how much do we need to be paying to attract the best, while also being mindful of our responsibility to the company, to other staff and to society in general?”

    Long-term incentive plans came in for heavy criticism with Sandy Pepper - Professor of Management Practice at the London School of Economics - stating that there was evidence that long-term incentive plans were a major factor in inflating executive pay. He said the cost of a long-term incentive plan was greater than the value placed on it by a senior executive - which was the opposite of what companies were trying to do.

    He added:

    “They are value destroyers.”

    Louise Fisher - Chair of the CIPD and member of its remuneration committee - writes that HR data and insights are key to effective RemCo practice, and that means committees need high quality HR leaders to execute their responsibilities.

  • Women less inclined to engage in bigger risk taking at work

    KMPG LLP recently conducted a survey of over 2,000 professional women with full time white-collar jobs in the U.S. This demonstrated that - whilst women are willing to take on what they consider small risks such as a new project or pitching an idea - they are less inclined to engage in bigger risk taking such as asking for a higher salary or moving for a job.

    The survey showed that 69 per cent of women will take on a small risk to further their career and 43 per cent will take on bigger risks where these are associated with career advancement. However, as women become more experienced and attain more self-confidence, their inclination to take risks declines - with 45 percent of women with less than five years of experience open to taking big career risks - and only 37 percent of women with 15 or more years of experience willing to do so. 

    Michele Meyer-Shipp - Chief Diversity Officer at KPMG, Newark NJ - said:

    “When it comes to their careers, many women find themselves in a bit of a bind. They’re trying to preserve their gains, so instead of playing to win, they’re often playing not to lose – whether hesitating to take perceived big risks, or feeling the need to take outsized chances.”

    More than half - 55 per cent of the respondents to the survey - acknowledged that those who take career risks progress more quickly than those who do not, thereby developing new skills and earning the respect of colleagues. According to 40 per cent of those surveyed, the biggest incentive is the opportunity to make more money, although only 35 per cent said they were confident about requesting a higher salary from their employer.

    Only 8 percent of respondents said that risk taking has been most valuable in their professional success, citing other task-oriented factors over leadership traits – such as, 73 per cent stated working hard; 45 per cent said being detail oriented and 45 percent said organized. Attributes such as being strong-willed, creative or a good leader were low on the list of accomplishments and only 43 percent say they have talked about what they have attained over the past three years.

    Doug Sundheim - author of Taking Smart Risks When the Stakes Are High - is of the opinion that women are risk takers but are not seen that way as the risks are defined in physical and financial terms.

    He wrote in Harvard Business Review:

    "Those terms don't point to risks like standing up for what's right in the face of opposition, or taking the ethical path when there's pressure to stray - important risks that I've found women are particularly strong at taking." 

    In the survey, the small risks that KPMG asked women if they were confident in taking included voicing a point of view or opinion - even if it conflicts with others; taking action to raise their visibility - such as attending a networking event and offering to mentor or sponsor someone they did not know well. The big risks were cited as requesting a more flexible or accommodating working situation; questioning the status quo and re-entering the workforce if planning to leave it for a while.

    Although women are less confident about requesting a salary increase, the study found that money is the top motivation for taking a career risk and a supervisor who encourages employees to try new things also prompts risk taking.

    Respondents stated that they would like to see more encouragement and support from their organizations for risks taken and the failures that may result.

    Michele Meyer-Shipp remarked:

    “Women may benefit by taking more risks over the course of their careers, but they can’t go it alone. Organizations must provide supportive structures including inclusive and diverse workplaces, professional development, mentorship and sponsorship opportunities, all of which set up women to achieve, thrive and reach the highest levels.”

  • Survey highlights what employees believe shapes an organization

    New research from Paychex - a leading provider of integrated human capital management solutions - went directly to employees, not employers, to gain their perspective on what shapes an organization.

    This research could be useful for any HR professional who wonders what the employees are thinking about benefits, retirement, pay equity, ghosting, HR technology and corporate social responsibility, etc. The survey was conducted on 750 full-time employees working in companies with 1,000 workers or fewer across the United States.

    Maureen Lally - Paychex Vice President of Marketing - said:

    "As businesses shift into the future of work, it's as important as ever to understand employees' workplace expectations, challenges, and requirements. While employers can implement changes from the top, employees ultimately define what the American workplace looks like. Their habits, preferences, and behaviors are what shape company culture.”

    On the most complicated aspect of making annual benefit elections, of those surveyed 29 per cent said that it was keeping up with plan changes and 28 per cent stated attempting to envisage personal and family needs. Evaluating all of the providers and plan options was also cited by 28 per cent of the respondents - with 33 per cent of women stating that trying to predict personal and family needs when making benefits selections is the number one most complicated. For men, however, that appeared at 24 per cent - ranking third.  

    With regard to retirement savings, 51 per cent of employees feel confident in their levels but 25 per cent added the qualification that their confidence is dependent on Social Security remaining intact. As employees get older - those aged 50-65 years - their confidence in their retirement savings increases to 58 percent.

    Regardless of gender, 48 per cent of employees surveyed say that at least once during their career, they have expressed verbal or written concern to their current employer that their rate of pay was not equitable to another employee with a similar role and responsibilities.  

    Referring to the auditing of employee pay for gender equity, 77 per cent of men and 74 per cent of women are confident that their employer is acting on this.

    Of the employees surveyed, 71 per cent state that they expect their employers to give them a high level of employee self service - to enable them to complete HR tasks (such as update addresses, fill out tax forms, etc.) independently. Of these employees, 85 per cent expect that the self-service applications will be similar to the consumer apps used in their personal lives.

    When questioned about leaving a current job or not reporting for a new job without informing the employer, 27 per cent of employees admitted that they had done so. In the age group 18 - 34 years, 33 per cent stated that they had ‘ghosted’; 30 per cent in the 35 - 49 years group and only 7 per cent in the 50 - 65 years of age group.

    Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) - caring about the impact the business and its employees have on things like the environment and the well-being of the local community or region - is extremely important to all employees, regardless of their age, with the lowest percentage being 90 per cent.

    Laurie Zaucha - Paychex Vice President of HR and Organizational Development - stated:

    "CSR is an important driver in attracting and retaining talent for companies today. More than ever before, candidates research prospective employers before applying and are looking for organizations whose values align with theirs."

  • Three in ten millennials have already had five or more different jobs

    The latest research from Tempo - an end to end hiring platform that uses video, intelligent matching and automation to connect great candidates with temporary and permanent jobs - showed that three in ten millennial workers have, so far, had five or more different jobs in their careers.

    More than 2,000 UK employees took part in the poll and it was found that 28% of those between 18 and 34 years of age had already worked at more than five jobs, with the average millennial worker having had 3.4 different jobs. Those in the over 55 years of age bracket had been employed in 5.9 jobs.

    The region of Northern Ireland showed that 16% of respondents reported having had ten jobs or more - making that the area where the most job moves took place.

    The survey also reveals that millennial workers are striving to progress in their career paths and not just seeking new jobs - with 52% stating that they plan to move within the next two years and 34% hoping to move within the next year. Tempo’s research showed that 64% of under-35 year old workers wish to change sectors - against 39% of 35 - 55 years old workers.

    The reasons cited for changing to other jobs was shown to be different according to sexes and generations, with 83% of over 55 years old workers stating salary as one of their top three incentives for changing roles. However, of the millennial workers surveyed, only 67% gave this as one of their top reasons.

    Where the sexes were concerned, 46% of women cited flexible working as a priority against 29% of men - 23% of whom gave career progression as important against 15% of women.

    Ben Chatfield - CEO and Co-Founder at Tempo - remarked:

    “Employers have found it notoriously difficult to understand millennials and their outlook on work. As a consequence, they have struggled to meet their needs. This generation has a different appetite for learning and self-improvement. They don’t see a portfolio career as “job hopping” as older generations might. Instead, change an opportunity to develop key skills and try something new.”

    He added:

    “There are multiple advantages to have a diverse job background. People who embrace variety are more adaptable, likely to have a range of soft skills, and a wider pool of professional contacts. Employers must realise the opportunity they present and do more to attract them. This means creating a recruitment system that supports a flexible employment structure and enables them to hire at speed.

  • HR directors surveyed about their biggest challenges in 2019

    UK software provider Cascade HR recently surveyed 423 HR directors with reference to what they regard as being their biggest challenges in 2019.

    For the second year running - of the respondents surveyed - 40% identified engagement of staff as the major issue, with recruitment and retention of existing staff coming a close second and third at 36% and 37%.

    At 29%, absence management was quoted as being another of the main challenges - whilst 22% cited wellbeing as the main focal point.

    HR directors, managers and executives were also asked to indicate which their toughest problems were during the previous year and the results showed 45% cited recruitment; 36% retention and thirdly, 35% GDPR compliance.

    Fortunately, despite finding retention difficult, 35% of HR teams feel that they had success in that area - as, indeed 32% also did in wellbeing; 32% in L&D and 30% in diversity.

    Where GDPR is concerned, 66% of respondents stated that it had been tricky - but manageable.

    Oliver Shaw - CEO of Cascade - showed a particular interest in the results of the HR replies to questions about automation - with 46% of respondents believing that automation is extremely important for the HR department to become more efficient; 29% thinking it had a partial role to play and only 2% stating that it is not important in their business.

    He commented:

    “HR has embraced automation and machine learning on varying levels this year. But there is a clear desire to know more about the power of tech.”

    Head of Sales - Marc Greggain - commented:

    “It is important that HR professionals can cut through the A1 hype and understand how to benefit from things like automation, predictive analytics and workforce planning, without losing the ‘human’ from Human Resources. Their existing HR software will invariably hold the answer.”

    Despite not being the most common subject, Brexit figured in the survey with 52% of HR professionals stating that they are slightly worried about the uncertainty and the impact of leaving the EU. However, only 19% said they are extremely worried.

    Oliver Shaw stated:

    “It’s been an interesting year for UK organisations, with Brexit, compliance and employment tribunals dominating the headlines. But I believe some of the most pivotal developments have surrounded the future of work debate.”

    He added:

    “This year, the HR landscape has seen employees push back on the traditional nine-to-five more than ever before. Flexible working has stepped up a notch, and organisations that bury their head in the sand when it comes to what staff wants from employment will be those that struggle the most with recruitment and retention in 2019.”

  • A festive bonus could improve staff retention

    A new calendar year often brings resignations as employees seek a change in career, but new research has shown that a festive bonus could improve staff retention.

    Rewards and incentives specialists - One4allRewards - recently surveyed a total of 1,096 UK employees. It was found that 46% of the respondents admitted that a December bonus or gift from their HR bosses had persuaded them to remain loyal to their employer by not searching for a new job, or allowing themselves to be poached. Additionally, 45% stated that they would be less likely to accept a new job even if offered one.

    According to the research, December is the ideal time to thank the top performers as employees appreciated bonuses more during this month - leading up to the festive season - than any other.  

    Workers are more likely to look for a new job in January than any other month of the year, so December bonuses could not be timed better for staff retention purposes.

    UK managing director at One4all Rewards - Alan Smith - said:

    “It’s interesting to see just how far a token bonus can impact on the loyalty of those in the HR industry. Even if you just consider the amount of money that can be lost through recruitment costs when a member of staff resigns – never mind the softer negative impacts and knock-on effects that employees leaving can have, in terms of morale in the workplace – it is clearly something that is worth investing in.”

    He added:

    “And thanks to HM Revenue and Customs’ recent introduction of tax exemptions on trivial benefits of £50 per employee or less, it has never been more affordable for businesses to gift staff a little something to make sure they feel valued, ahead of the busiest time of the year for staff departures.”

    The Chartered Management Institute - in their research - found that the average bonus payment to directors has slumped by 16% since last year, from an average of £53,504 to £44,987. This decline in rewards has happened in spite of the stressful working culture experienced by many managers.

    Although the cost of December staff bonuses may seem high to some, it is dwarfed by the cost of replacing staff - not to mention negative impact and knock-on effects that employees leaving can have in terms of morale in the workplace.

  • Research around distraction techniques at work

    New research shows that 69% of UK employees are currently unhappy at work.  

    The purpose of the report is to gather insights from the “non-work related activities” campaign survey results. This survey was carried out on behalf of Hitachi Capital Invoice Finance and includes responses from 2101 individuals, focusing on how much time people spend at work doing non-work related activities; what these activities are and if they waste time at work because they are unhappy in their job.

    In addition, respondents were asked if they thought their managers were lenient and what would make them feel more motivated to perform better and to be more productive.

    To identify any trends, gender; age; industry worked and the region they reside in, were collected.

    Of the 2,101 respondents surveyed, 61% said that the biggest distraction at work is gossiping to other co-workers. This was followed by 45% who said they spent time on Facebook and 44% using personal email.

    Other admissions included 35% clock-watching; 29% making drinks or spending time in the kitchen to make the day go quicker; 25% using shopping and banking apps; 19% looking for other jobs and 17% taking bathroom breaks when not always needed.

    The study shows that personal mental health is the largest distraction for younger workers aged 16-24, with 35% distracted by related symptoms when trying to work and younger employees tending to be unhappier at work than those that are older. Of those aged 55 and over, 43% stated they are always happy at work - compared to 22% of those aged between 16-24 years.

    In general, men appear to be happier at work than women - 67% of men state they are unhappy against 71% of women.

    The happiest at work are those in the East of England where 36% said they are happy - with the North West being the least happy at 22%.

    Of those admitting to not doing their proper work, HR came out in front with 33% spending over two hours wasting time, compared to Education at 8% - the most dedicated industry.

    Most people think that their manager is lenient with only 20% of them thinking that that their manager was not.

    The older the person, the more productive they are and the less distracted they get. However, older people did tend to find that their managers are less lenient.

    Andy Dodd - Managing Director at Hitachi Capital Invoice Finance - commented:

    “Our survey has also highlighted that employees feel least motivated at work during winter, which is likely due to the weather, dark nights and activities that take place during this time. Although it can be hard as a business owner to energise staff all-year round, it’s important to take small steps to ensure that you are doing what you can to promote an exciting and rewarding culture in the workplace. This can be anything from improving internal communications within a business to effective incentive schemes.”

     

  • Case study: Williams v The Trustees of Swansea University Pension & Assurance Scheme

    The Supreme Court has ruled that basing a disabled employee’s pension on the number of hours he worked – due to his disability – did not amount to discrimination.

    In the case of Andrew Williams v The Trustees of Swansea University Pension & Assurance Scheme and another, the Court of Appeal considered for the first time what it means to be treated unfavourably under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010.

    Swansea University employed Mr Williams from June 2000 until his retirement on the grounds of ill-health in June 2013. He suffered from a disability - which fell within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 - causing him to reduce his working hours to part-time working and then to take retirement at the age of 38, on the grounds of ill-health.

    During his employment with Swansea University he was an active member of the Swansea University Pension Scheme and was entitled to an ill-health early retirement pension under the Scheme, which was a DB scheme. At the time that Mr Williams retired, the accrual rate was on the basis of Career Average Revalued Earnings and an element of the benefits was calculated by reference to final salary. Therefore, as he had been working on a part-time basis, the benefits were lower than they would have been if he had been in full-time employment when retiring due to ill-health.

    Mr Williams complained to the Employment Tribunal against the trustees of the Scheme and Swansea University. He stated that - by using his part-time salary rather than a full-time equivalent - the calculation of the enhancement to his benefits after June 2013 amounted to unlawful discrimination arising from disability under sections 15 and 61[1] of the EA 2010.

    An initial tribunal concluded that he had not been treated fairly since his disability was the reason he was working part-time at the point of retirement, which then led to his reduced pension benefits. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) disagreed - with Judge Langstaff saying:

    “Mr Williams’ reasoning could not possibly be sufficient to establish disability discrimination. If it were, it would be difficult to see why it would not apply to a disabled claimant who applies for and secures a part time job because that is as much as he can manage, but would otherwise have worked full time.”

    However, the Supreme Court has now dismissed the first ruling, stating that calculating a disabled employee’s pension based on the reduced hours he worked due to his disability did not amount to discrimination.

    When commenting on the decision, Employment Partner at Trowers & Hamlins - Nicola Ihnatowicz - said:

    “The policy behind an employer's duty to make reasonable adjustments is to help overcome barriers and disadvantages faced by disabled employees at work. It is not uncommon for employees who are suffering from a disability to reduce their hours, and correspondingly their pay, as a reasonable adjustment which enables them to continue working.  If the employee then takes ill-health retirement, it is likely that the provisions of any defined benefit pension scheme will base the pension on their final reduced salary at retirement or a career average, without requiring employers to incur the significant cost of making up the difference.”

     

  • Connecticut bans employers from asking candidates salary information

    A new law prohibiting employers from asking job candidates about their salary history took effect on January 1, 2019 in Connecticut. It bars employers from asking job applicants how much they earn currently - or previously.

    Connecticut Governor, Dannel P. Malloy, signed off Public Act No. 18-8 – ‘An Act Concerning Pay Equity’ on May 22, 2018 – to take effect on January 1, 2019. This made Connecticut the sixth state to prohibit employers from asking applicants about salary history and is intended to help remedy the pay gap between men and women. 

    At that time, Dannel Malloy said:

    “Income inequity is perpetuated by the practice of asking for salary history before an offer is made, which can disproportionately assure that women are underpaid at their first job and continue to be underpaid throughout their careers, creating a cycle of poverty.”

    The new law states that prospective employees may not be asked about past wages and compensation histories at any point during the hiring process - although they can choose to volunteer such information. Also, prospective employees may be asked generally whether the previous employer had stock options or other equity incentives, but may not be asked to specify the value of such benefits.

    In addition, the new act will add prospective employees to those entitled to sue employers who infringe any of these legal protections. Employees and prospective employees - whether or not they are hired - will be authorized to sue within two years after any alleged violation. Employers found liable for violations may be required to pay compensatory damages; attorney's fees; costs and punitive damages and may also be subject to any legal and equitable relief that the court decides is just and proper.

    Although the intention of the law is to reduce pay gaps that disadvantage women, it also applies to men. Employers cannot ask men or women what they make or used to make. It does, however, contain an exception for employers, employment agencies and employees who must ask for salary information under federal or state law.

    An employer is generally defined as anyone or anything that can be thought of as an employer - unlike other laws that apply only to businesses that have a certain number of employees.  

  • Defined Benefit schemes expected to be better funded in three years’ time

    Global Human Resources Consulting firm Mercer forecasts that - for the first time ever - nearly one third of a trillion pounds will be paid by UK private sector defined benefit pension schemes over the three year period 2019 - 2021.

    This record amount is due to large numbers of active and deferred members being expected to transfer the value of their entitlement to another arrangement, plus a rapidly growing buy-in and buy-out market where the forecast is for unprecedented premium volumes to be paid to insurers - with more than £20bn of defined benefit pension scheme obligations being insured.

    Mercer expects the result of these payments to lead to private sector defined benefit pension scheme in aggregate being better funded with a lower risk profile.

    Andrew Ward - Partner at Mercer - stated:

    “A third of a trillion pounds is a huge sum of money and shows how the UK’s DB pension landscape is changing rapidly. In aggregate, UK company DB schemes are expected to be better funded and bear less risk in three years’ time. There are headwinds, not least the potential for Brexit to disrupt the landscape, but the direction of travel is clear.

    As the UK DB landscape further matures, there is potential for an emerging DB Consolidator market. How this will impact the amount paid by DB schemes depends on how the new offerings are received by scheme sponsors and trustees. The recent consultation announced by the Department of Work and Pensions and the Pensions Regulator’s guidance will propel discussion in this area.”

    Mercer Partner - David Ellis - commented:

    “Better funded and increasingly mature pension schemes have taken advantage of excellent pricing from insurers in 2018. Mercer expects the buy-in and buy-out market to smash the record again in 2019 as well-organised schemes take advantage of attractive pricing from insurers. Overall, Mercer forecasts DB schemes will pay around £90bn in premiums to insurers over the next three years.”

    Mercer also highlighted how aggregate transfer values of around £20bn for the whole of 2018, based on data for the first three quarters, will be far more than the £3bn annual average.

  • “Ghosting” by job candidates is on the rise

    According to the latest report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are now more job openings - 6.6 million as of June 1 - than there are unemployed people - 6.1 million - making job seekers and workers in the driver's seat in today’s market.

    This has resulted in no-shows and mysterious disappearances happening nationally across a wide range of industries - known as ghosting.

    Many HR professionals and hiring managers are baffled when great job candidates either do not respond to calls, texts and e-mails about a job offer; do not show up to work or - having been hired - walk out without a word, never to be heard from again.

    Michelle Madhok, CEO and founder of Shefinds.com - stated:

    "Job candidates have been ghosting lately. There was a woman we interviewed several times. She came in, did a presentation and expressed excitement in a follow-up email. I was going to make her an offer, but she vanished. She wouldn't respond to the recruiter either. I don't get it. Just say you are going somewhere else or decided to do something different!"

    Eugene Hunt - Principal of At Trevi Communications Inc. in Danvers, Mass. says that managers no longer get too excited when their company receives an e-mail from a well-qualified candidate. He states:

    "Now we see every applicant as another move in a game of chance, since the odds are about 1 in 4 that they will go through the process without becoming distracted or disengaged-and disconnect-at some point."  He added that:

    “….it is a case of a buyer's market … with myriad opportunities and no consequences if you just walk away from an employer or job offer without ever communicating or engaging."

    However, management is known to be notorious for ghosting - they tell you that they want to hire you - they want to move fast - and then you never hear from them again. There are many examples of candidates who have applied for jobs, been interviewed and even been asked to write proposals. Once sent, HR is never to be heard from again.

    Susan Hosage, SHRM-SCP, Senior Consultant and Executive Coach for OneSource HR Solutions in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Recruiters commented:

    "For years, candidates anxiously awaited responses from employers after meticulously preparing their resumes and cover letters, attending interviews and then-cricket sounds-nothing. Recruiters dodged phone calls and deleted messages from candidates who wanted to know their hiring status. Now, the tables have turned."

    Susan Hosage also commented on possible reasons for ghosting by experienced candidates - lack of a sense of loyalty or obligation to the company/ managers or possibly because of a generational trend to avoid conflict.    However, she pointed out that:

    "Conflict management is a necessary skill in almost any job, since most people don't work with complete autonomy."

    Peter Cappelli - Professor of Management and Education at The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and director of the school's Center for HR – said:

    "Employers have been ghosting applicants for decades, so I'd say turnabout is fair play.”

    He suggested that employers concerned about job candidates ghosting them should give the candidates a deadline to withdraw from consideration.   He added:

    “……if the problem is you think it's rude - well, now you know how candidates feel."

  • Increase in employment claims can mean longer wait for trial dates

    According to an update from the National User Group (NUG) regarding employment tribunals, some new claims may not be heard until 2020 – at the earliest. This is raising concern amongst employers that the system is losing pace.

    The NUG held a meeting in September, the minutes of which stated that there had been an increase - compared to last year - of 165% in single claims. This figure repeats the recent figures from the Ministry of Justice, which advised that the number of outstanding single cases was 130% higher in the second quarter of 2018 than the same period in 2017.

    Raoul Parekh, a Partner at G Q Littler, told People Management that employers should ensure – as a matter of urgency – that they have HR systems in place to stay out of the tribunal process. He said:

    “If that’s not possible, one thing for employers to do is to gather and collect all notes and documents they can ahead of the tribunal hearing.”

    He added that the longer the employers wait to gather the evidence, the more difficult it is to provide a defence to the case and can also increase the spending on legal advice.

    During the NUG meeting, Judge Brian Doyle - President of the Employment Tribunals England and Wales - agreed that the lengthy tribunal times could be because of the reduced number of judges. He went on to say that, hopefully, the allocation of new judicial resources in 2019 would ease the problem. A recruitment campaign had been launched to recruit 54 salaried employment judges in an effort to meet the demands of the system.

    However, some employment lawyers were not convinced that the appointment of the additional judges would solve the problem.

    Employment law barrister at Old Square Chambers - Katherine Newton – tweeted that a colleague had a listing at Croydon Employment Tribunal for 2021 and also said that Manchester Employment Tribunal was listing 10 day hearings in 2021. She went on to remark:

    “Are the 54 Employment Judges being appointed nationally in the New Year really going to make a noticeable improvement to these sorts of waiting times?”

    Senior Associate at Winckworth Sherwood - Tim Goodwin - said:

    “The employment tribunal system has been defunded when the fee regime collapsed. All elements of civil law have faced cuts and the government cut back on judges.”

    Paul Holcroft - Associate Director at Croner - said he imagined that more employers would turn to settlements to “get rid of the issue at the earliest opportunity”. 

    He added:

    “While this may be good practice to get rid of the claim, it calls into question whether these delays are prohibiting access to justice, as neither party may have the opportunity to put forward their case where the matter is resolved through a settlement, for reasons of time.”

     

  • High percentage of UK employees feel they are not performing to their best

    According to a survey - Voice of the Workforce in Europe - by Deloitte, more than 27 % of employees are not performing to their best and experts say that HR could play a strategic role in motivating staff – thus increasing business productivity.   The European average is 21% not attaining their finest.

    The findings show that many employees lack enthusiasm - 32% of UK workers said that they are not stimulated by what they do. A further 36% said what they do is not meaningful, but in comparison24% European workers said they are not stimulated by what they do and only 18% believe what they do is not meaningful.

    The report surveyed a total of more than 15,000 workers across 10 European countries, including 2,043 from the UK.

    Workers in the UK said that they need to learn new skills to do their job effectively and when asked which key skills they needed to develop, 61% cited advanced IT; 57% technical knowledge; 35% said problem-solving skills and 31% said they would need teamwork skills.

    It was also found that UK workers were feeling the impact of automation - 44% said that robots or software had taken over some of the tasks they did five years ago. This compared to a European average of 38%. In the UK, 34% said that entire business processes relevant to their job have been automated and this compared to 30% for European workers.

    UK Human Capital Leader at Deloitte - Anne-Marie Malley - said:

    “Businesses are facing an uphill struggle to address these factors, which is leading to dissatisfaction, disengagement and despondency among employees. Employers must offer more support to strengthen their workers' skills and communicate the value their roles are bringing to their company, the economy and ultimately society as a whole.”

    She added:

    “It’s striking that the vast majority of workers do not expect to see any significant changes in their jobs over the next decade. The reality is that the future of work is now, and automation is already affecting day-to-day roles. Awareness will provoke action, so it’s important for businesses to educate workers on how their roles will be augmented by technology over the next decade. This will provide transparency within organisations; allowing them to transition their workforces through training opportunities and bolstering the skills that will be required as a result of automation.”

    Career transition ​and on boarding coach at Rebel Road Coaching, Jenn Fenwick, said that although HR departments already knew the importance of investing in skills-related training in order to boost motivation, they were being let down by the failure of organisations to invest in their employees. 

    Jenn Fenwick stated:

    “I think this is where HR could play a really strategic role in businesses. For them to get the budget, it’s important for HR to investigate what’s impacting staff productivity, put monetary value on it and present that number to senior leaders as a worthwhile place to put funding.”

    The research found that older workers were the most motivated with 87% of those over 55 years of age saying that they went the extra mile to deliver good work. Fewer than 18 per cent reported lack of stimulation in what they do.

    Managing Director of McManus HRD - Laurell Hector - commented that it was important for businesses to invest in skills development for older generations in addition to younger workers and that senior business leaders need to understand that older workers want to add value.  

    She added:

    “Businesses also need to look to develop all people in the business to drive performance, not just “spotting talent in younger workers.”

  • Culture fit is expected to become a more important part of hiring

    Pre-hire assessment specialist, ThriveMap, recently commissioned a survey of HR decision makers – the results of which showed that 93% expected culture fit to become more important with regards to hiring in 2019.

    As 96% are already saying that hiring for culture fit is crucial, the topic will doubtless be well discussed in the coming year.

    Predictions made by ThriveMap are that describing what culture fit is and putting procedures in place that will measure it accurately and objectively, will be the focal point for employers in 2019.

    At present, only 11% of employers are satisfied with how they assess culture fit in their interview process, leaving almost nine out of ten employers struggling to come up with a system that will do this accurately over their business.

    Fifty-three per cent of employees are leaving their companies because their style of working does not fit in with their organisation - costing employers valuable time and money. Employers are now becoming aware of innovative assessments that will measure - not only whether an applicant is capable of fulfilling the role - but also whether they will flourish in the business as competition for talent is expected to be fierce in 2019.

    Chris Platts - Co-Founder and CEO of ThriveMap - says:

    “We believe employers should consider the following areas in 2019 to ensure they hire the candidates that are the best fit for their business.

    Match the recruitment process to the vacancy – decide what are the most important skills and characteristics for the vacancy and create an assessment process that measures these.

    Keep the candidate journey as short as possible – a candidate’s time is important too. Don’t lose the best talent by asking them to jump through unnecessary hoops.

    Tell a consistent and honest employer brand story – everything is out there about your organisation. Don’t shy away from this, but face it head on and build a narrative that hiring managers believe and embrace. This will be far more appealing to prospective employees.

    Add value for candidates – recruitment is a two-way process that should benefit everyone involved. A candidate is someone who has shown a desire to work for you - respect this interest and provide practical feedback on how they performed. Word will spread, encouraging more people to want to work for an organisation that is honest and fair.”

  • Case study: Samantha Walker v The Co-operative Group and Mr Richard Pennycook

    In the case of Samantha Walker v The Co-operative Group and Mr Richard Pennycook, Manchester Employment Tribunal has ruled that Mrs Walker - former Chief HR officer of the Co-operative Group - was discriminated against. They did, however, reject claims she had been dismissed for raising concerns about being paid less than male board members.  

    After an annual review that ranked her performance as only ‘partially achieved’ her employment was terminated. Judge Sherratt, the employment judge, wrote in his judgment:

    “Where they seem to have had performance issues, the comparators - or male employees - were arguably not treated as harshly in their assessments as was the claimant.”

    In 2014, after Mrs Walker was appointed group HR Director of strategic projects and joined a newly set up executive team, she raised concerns about her pay to the then CEO Richard Pennycook. At this time, the business was facing considerable financial instability. 

    Initially, Mrs Walker was given the title of Chief HR Officer with a proposed base salary of £500,000.   However, the group remuneration and appointments committee decided to reduce her base salary to £425,000 as they took the view that she was “newly promoted to the executive and unproven at that level, unlike everyone else on the team at that time.”  

    In 2014, the Co-op Group instigated a new grading system and Mrs Walker told Mr Pennycook that it was “not looking good from an equal pay perspective”, despite an independent assessment finding that her role was equal or above some of the male executives. She added that she wanted to be recognised as being – at least – of equal value to the board and Mrs Walker’s counsel at the tribunal claimed that this statement clearly implied that Mrs Walker was the victim of unequal pay. 

    In December 2015, Mrs Walker was told by Mr Pennycook that “he did not think that they would authorise any more pay for her and suggested that she consider other roles such as the MD of Co-operative Funeralcare or “‘something’ with the Legal Services business.” 

    Mrs Walker stated that her heart was firmly in HR and that her desire was not solely about her wish for a pay rise, but also to be recognised as equal alongside her male colleagues and she said that Mr Pennycook clearly understood that.

    Two dates for Mrs Walker’s end of year review were cancelled with no explanation and – in his judgment – the judge stated:

    “Thereafter, their conversations were essentially about possible other roles rather than dealing with concerns over her existing role.” 

    Despite Mr Pennycook’s evidence that he had concerns about Mrs Walker’s ability to fulfill the role of Chief HR Officer, the tribunal ruled that her work was equal to her comparators and that she had been directly discriminated against on the grounds of sex in relation to her performance rating.

    Mrs Walker made a statement that the company had been found wanting and that she hoped it had changed as a result. She said:

    “Going through this process has also revealed to me that the law is fundamentally flawed and must change.”

    A partner at CMS – Anthony Fincham – said:

    “The case serves as a reminder of the consequence of any study which amounts to a job evaluation, and the difficulty of resisting its conclusions by relying on the material factor defence. Equal pay law accords a proper job evaluation study, an almost infallible status and employers commissioning one should be fully alert to the fact that they are likely to be bound to implement the results. The case also serves as a reminder that certain claims run not only against the employer but also against the individual employee who may have been responsible for the matters in question. I do not imagine that the CEO had any inkling he was exposing himself to possible legal liability as he handled what must have been a challenging situation”.

  • FCA latest rules and guidance in relation to pension transfer advice

    The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published - in relation to pension transfer advice - its latest rules and guidance.  

    The FCA is going ahead with most of the proposals put forward for consultation earlier in 2018, mainly relating to transfers from defined benefit (DB) to defined contribution (DC) pension schemes.

    This consultation suggested changes to its rules and guidance on advice being offered on transferring from safeguarded benefit schemes - where there is a form of guarantee about the rate of secure pension income that the holder of the scheme will receive, or have an option to receive.

    After the introduction of pension freedoms, the demand for pension transfer advice has increased considerably, as have actual transfers.   The FCA are concerned that many persons may be receiving inappropriate advice when transferring away from their DB pension and may not be aware of the valuable benefits they could lose on the transfer of their DB pension.

    The new rules should provide the holders of the schemes who are considering transferring, with improved advice. The changes will include a requirement for all pension transfer specialists to be in possession of a specific qualification - for providing advice on investments - by October 2020. This will enable advisers to recognise whether the proposed pension scheme and investment solution will suit the client’s needs and objectives.

    The FCA will expect all advisers to take into account the client’s approach to - and awareness of - the risks of forfeiting safeguarded benefits in exchange for flexible benefits.

    The FCA’s Executive Director of Strategy and Competition - Christopher Woolard - said:

    “These new rules will mean advisers have greater certainty and confidence in what we expect when they offer pension transfer advice.

    We expect our interventions to improve the quality of advice which will help to reduce the number of complaints against advisory firms. We will measure consumer outcomes through our supervisory work.

    Any changes to our rules on contingent charging could have implications for the supply of advice. Because of the significance of this issue to all stakeholders in the market, we will carry out further analysis and consult on new interventions if appropriate in the first half of next year.”

  • Report states most HR professionals are happy and fulfilled in their work

    According to a recent report from the CIPD entitled The People Profession in 2018: UK and Ireland - HR professionals are happy and fulfilled in their work.

    Almost 1,000 HR, L&D and OD professionals across the UK and Ireland were surveyed to assess the current state of the profession.  It found that 70% of respondents said their work makes them happy and 67% felt energised. Most of those working in this area feel confident exercising their judgment and 64% are of the opinion that their job gives them the opportunity to fully express themselves as a professional, giving them a sense of purpose and a meaningful career.

    Over two-fifths of respondents said they regularly challenged the purpose of the jobs they were asked to carry out and felt they could propose alternatives. They based their decisions on a several factors - with 76% citing personal experience, 55% organisational data and 49% intuition.

    But the research does draw attention to the fact that there is room for improvement. The professionals could be more confident in showing courage and challenging unethical practices – 28% feel there is a controversy between their professional judgment and what is expected of them, resulting in a compromise of their ethical values. Nearly a third of the respondents stated that managers in their organisation often participate in behaviour that they consider to be unethical.

    The report also showed that it was important to possess the right skills, with 38% saying they could cope with more challenging duties but with16% thinking they lacked the skills required for their current role – with this increasing to 22% among those with less than six years’ experience.

    Research advisor at the CIPD - Louisa Baczor - stated:

    “A career in the people profession is about working with people, bringing them into the right jobs and helping them reach their potential at work. But it’s also about applying expertise in people, work and change to ensure that work is a force for good for everyone. It’s great to see so many people professionals experiencing meaning in their work and feeling confident to stand up for what they believe in. The future of the profession is exciting and will require capabilities in managing new organisational models, the supply of skills, the shaping of jobs and improving people management and organisational cultures. But the skills mismatches and ethical conflicts highlighted by the survey show that there’s no room for complacency. Continuing professional development is the key to keeping our own skills current, so we can innovate and adapt as professionals, and champion better work and working lives in all that we do.”

    CIPD Chief Executive - Peter Cheese - said:

    “The role of HR is becoming increasingly vital as the world of work evolves and organisations and people need to adapt. People professionals have the opportunity to shape these developments by bringing their unique insight, skills and practice to create a future of work where organisations, their people, and the communities they’re part of can all thrive. Having confidence in our own professional judgment is crucial to making better decisions in the workplace. Even though it might challenge some of the norms or expectations, having the self-assurance with knowledge, insights and evidence, to make good and fair judgments is key to helping our profession build trust and credibility, and help us stay at the fore of business development and change.”

     

     

     

  • Bond Solon releases its Annual Expert Witness Survey

    At the recent 2018 Bond Solon Expert Witness Conference, the results of the Annual Expert Witness Survey in Collaboration with The Times were published. The total number of respondents - over a varied range of topics - was 607 and of those surveyed, 81% of the experts are mainly instructed in civil cases.

    In answer to some questions posed in the survey –

    • 10% of the experts surveyed indicated that they are mainly instructed in family cases and the steep decline in the use of experts in these cases may be attributed to the introduction of the Family Procedure Rules in January 2013.
    • On the subject of legal aid cases, the expert witnesses who accept or do not accept legal aid cases were evenly split. Despite the ability of everyone to be able to resolve their legal issues as being vital to a just society, experts are not obliged to accept legal aid cases. There have been significant cuts to fees for legal aid work over the past few years.
    • 80% of the experts surveyed do not think that many parts of their expert witness work could be done using Artificial Intelligence (AI) reducing the need for full reports as it exists now. AI-based technological solutions have been developed to assist with the e-disclosure process.

    Lord Chief Justice says,

    “The ability of computers to analyse vast quantities of material to enable accurate predictions in many areas of human activity is one of the most exciting developments of the age.”

    The majority of the experts surveyed do not believe that the increased use of IT in courts will lead to the decline, or the end, of expert witnesses giving evidence.

    • 43% of the experts surveyed indicated that they have come across an expert they consider to be a ‘hired gun’. Pressure from instructing parties will be one of the reasons that could lead an expert to be a hired gun. Lord Woolf made it clear in the Civil Procedure Rules 1999 that an expert’s duty is to the court not the side paying. In the last 12 months, 25% of the experts surveyed stated that they have been asked - or felt pressurised by an instructing party - to change their report in a way that damages their impartiality. 75% of the experts surveyed consider that professional bodies should play a more active role in situations where experts are incompetent or behave as a hired gun. Almost 50% of the experts surveyed have come across experts who profess expertise in an area in which they are not qualified or does not warrant expertise.
    • 86% of the experts surveyed do not consider that fake news has affected the evidence experts give.
    • 60% of the experts surveyed have concerns that courts find it hard to distinguish the truth between conflicting opinions. Experts already have to confirm in their reports that they are true and they have to swear under oath in court to tell the truth but difficulties arise when two experts have differing opinions.
    • 65% of experts consider that courts struggle to understand the evidence of experts as it becomes more complex. The explanation needs to be in clear language that a non-expert can understand and act upon. Experts should make sure that their reports are clear and fit for purpose.
    • Almost 50% of the experts surveyed indicated that the number of instructions received was at the same level, but 37% said they had increased.
    • 80% of the respondents indicated that their rates remain the same as last year, with 32% of the experts stating that have considered stopping their work as an expert witness in the last 12 months. One of the main reasons mentioned by the experts is the expert’s fees.
  • HR professional's e-mail cited as evidence of discrimination

    An employee cited an HR professional's e-mail to raise concerns about his health as evidence of discrimination. A federal district court relied on the e-mail to let the claim move forward.

    The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleged in a lawsuit filed in New Orleans federal district court, that Mid-South Extrusion, Inc. - a plastics manufacturer based in Monroe, La. - violated federal law by firing an employee because of his perceived disability.

    Keith Hill - Field Director for the EEOC's New Orleans office - stated:

    "It is unlawful for an employer to discharge an employee with a disability because of his medical condition(s) if he is able to perform the essential functions of his job with or without any accommodation."

    According to the EEOC's lawsuit, maintenance technician Jeffrey Wyant was discharged after he informed the company of his 50% lung capacity breathing restriction resulting from undiagnosed childhood tuberculosis. He was able to perform the essential functions of his job. The lawsuit also alleges that the company did not conduct any intensive individualized assessment of Mr Wyant - as required by law - to determine if his condition affected his ability to perform the essential functions of the position before discharging him.  

    The EEOC sought a permanent injunction prohibiting the company from engaging in employment discrimination, as well as back pay, compensatory damages, pecuniary losses and punitive damages for Mr Wyant.

    In September 2014, Mr Wyant was hired as a maintenance technician by Mid South and after accepting the job offer, he completed a post-offer medical history questionnaire. He divulged that he had a previous shoulder injury that limited his range of motion and overhead lifting ability but did not mention any other impairments or conditions.

    Mr Wyant completed his 90-day probationary period and received a pay increase. However, soon after, his supervisor noticed performance issues and had concerns about his ability to safely work in the plant. Complaints were also received that he smelled strongly of alcohol. In addition to this, it was alleged that he delegated work to untrained employees and for these incidents he received verbal warnings.

    In June 2015, Mr Wyatt began having breathing problems and was diagnosed as having reduced breathing capacity - due to breathing asbestos at a prior job - and undiagnosed tuberculosis as a child or young man, now dormant. It was decided that he needed a heart catheter and the procedure was arranged for Aug. 18, 2015.

    Prior to this, he had a meeting with an HR manager and as a result of that meeting on Aug. 13, 2015, the HR manager e-mailed Mr Wyant’s supervisor writing that Mr Wyant "stated that his doctor says he doesn't need to be working in this environment with all the health problems he has" and he "should get out on disability." The HR manager went on to say that this "raised a red flag" for her and added that Mr Wyant’s issues originated from a previous job. She then wrote that this "really bothers" her.

    Mr Wyant had the heart catheterization on Aug 18, 2015 and returned to work 3 days later but mid Sep 2015 he suffered a breathing difficulty, which he claimed cleared 10 minutes after the use of his inhaler.

    He was scheduled to receive his annual review, at which he would have received a raise, 10 more sick days per year and 40 hours of paid vacation per year - but in an e-mail dated Sept. 21, 2015, his supervisor told the HR manager that Mr Wyant was being fired because he “was not qualified to be a maintenance technician.” Mr Wyant claimed that his supervisor told him that management wanted him gone.

    A charge was filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Mr Wyant, alleging that he was fired in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The EEOC agreed and issued a letter of determination in favor of Mr Wyant and later brought a federal lawsuit. Mid South filed a motion for summary judgment, which was denied.

    Michelle Butler - Senior Trial Attorney for the New Orleans Field Office - said:

    "Mr. Wyant was performing his duties without any restrictions, but once he informed the employer of his medical issues, he was discharged based on an unsubstantiated determination that he was not able to perform his duties. This is unlawful as well as unjust, and the EEOC is here to fight such discrimination."

  • Survey shows how pension information is communicated is vitally important

    A new research report named ‘It’s Time to Change’, from Punter Southall Aspire - a major investment and savings business - offers UK companies fresh look into how HR, pensions and benefits professionals can change their pensions communications.

    Employee communication is an essential part of business and HR's role and valuable internal communication develops confidence within organisations, showing an important influence on employee productivity. However, research by CIPD implies that many employees feel they receive limited or very little information.

    In compiling the report, Punter Southall surveyed over 2000 employees aged between16 and 65+, from across the UK. From that survey, they were able to pinpoint four major issues affecting pension savings.

    • The research found that current finances are of more concern than looking to the future - the reason for this being that many have competing financial pressures - a loan or credit card debt. It was found that 30% regularly use an overdraft facility and 45% financially support dependants. Eighty eight per cent stated that they would prefer to have £400 now as opposed to £800 in the future and would be more likely to react to communications reflecting that.
    • People are also failing to think about their future retirement. Nearly half say their biggest worry for the future is not having enough money in retirement, but almost a third confessed that retirement is not part of their current financial planning and 66% said they are unaware if their savings will prove sufficient for retirement. Seventy eight per cent of people are budgeting monthly and only 28% claim to stick to their budgets.
    • The survey found that nearly one in five respondents aged 16 to 24 did not know if they have a pension and 30% did not think that a pension is important. Thirty two per cent surveyed were not aware of their contribution rate, stating that it was the amount set by their employer.
    • A major discovery of the report is that employers need to do more to guide and support their workforce. It was found that 82% of those surveyed want their employers to steer them in a positive direction about pensions and 72% would welcome education in planning for the future - 68% want their employer to remind them to review their pension and take action, if necessary.

    The research also found that only 38% of respondents stated that they would respond to scare tactics in pension communications but 76% would react to exciting messages. This drew attention to the need for companies to use positive and relevant messaging and emphasise the benefits of saving more. The research also showed that the people’s attention was drawn to powerful imagery, humour, moving words and colour in communications.

     Johanna Nelson - Associate Director of Punter Southall Aspire - stated:

    “From a communications perspective, employers can tackle these issues and increase pension awareness with a constant ‘savings drumbeat’ – using regular positive messages that encourage better savings behaviour. People are more concerned with now rather than then, so companies can tap into this by providing financial education on issues that concern them such as debt management or budgeting. The positive benefits of pensions and auto-enrolment can be introduced as part of this conversation.”

    She added:

    “There is a real need for employers to improve their pension communications and this means getting proactive and stop relying on the material produced by pension providers. Arguably employers have a duty of care to help ensure employees have a positive retirement and are in a strong position to make this happen. Employees want financial education and guidance on current and future financial issues and by promoting positive communications and financial education they can encourage a savings culture."

  • Work demands, insecurities and financial insecurity contributes to poor mental health

    According to a survey commissioned by Business in the Community - in partnership with Mercer - employees have been found to be struggling with work demands, insecurities and financial insecurity. This has contributed to poor mental health across the nation with employers being warned that work-related stress has now become an epidemic.

    Over 4,000 people were surveyed - the results showing that two thirds of respondents said that their mental health and wellbeing is being affected by job security, the state of the economy and the cost of living.

    New figures from the Health and Safety Executive have revealed that in 2017/2018 a total of 15.4 million working days were lost through the effects of work-related stress, depression or anxiety - affecting 595,000 workers. This was a huge increase on the previous year.

    Partner/Workplace Health Consulting Leader for Mercer - Dr Wolfgang Seidl - said:

    “The prevalence of mental health issues has now reached a crisis point. Half-hearted attempts to help those affected are no longer enough. Instead, employers need to urgently identify and collectively address the root causes of the problem.”

    He added:

    “Instead of enabling people to thrive at work – with reasonable demands being placed on them, control over their workload and supportive management in place – unhealthy working conditions are being allowed to fester. As this continues, disjointed wellbeing initiatives, such as standalone mindfulness seminars or one-off wellbeing days, will not even begin to address the current epidemic.” 

    As a result of other research previously carried out by the CIPD, employers were being urged to ensure that line management were equipped to recognise signs of stress and mental ill-health, as they often represented the first port of call for struggling staff. The findings of the CIPD were supported by a study from the Mental Health Foundation, which showed that less than a sixth of staff felt comfortable talking to their line manager about their stress levels.

    Rachel Suff - Senior Employment Relations Adviser at the CIPD - said:

    “The HSE’s findings chime not just with recent CIPD research but also countless others out there. It’s of particular concern that the CIPD research also found that just 58 per cent of organisations carried out stress risk assessments, despite it being a statutory requirement. Stress risk assessments are hugely important preventative steps which organisations should be taking. The HSE provides several valuable tools to support employers with this.”

    Business in the Community is asking companies to do more to encourage conversations between staff and their line managers about all aspects of wellbeing - including financial. They state that other staff, line managers and H.R. should suggest that free help and guidance be sought from organisations such as the Money Advice Service (for general money issues) and the Pensions Advisory Service for advice on specific pension issues.

    Louise Aston - Wellbeing Director at Business in the Community - said:

    “There is a two-way causal relationship between financial wellbeing and mental health, but very few employers support employees experiencing financial difficulties. Employers have a role in educating employees in financial literacy and signposting to appropriate sources of professional support. There is huge financial pressure on employees, with stagnant wages and living costs which continue to rise, so employers have an important role in educating employees in financial literacy and signposting them to appropriate sources of professional support.”

    TUC general secretary - Frances O’Grady - said:

    “Work-related stress is a growing epidemic. It’s time employers and the government took it more seriously. Warm words are not going to fix this problem. Managers need to do far more to reduce the causes of stress and support employees struggling to cope.”  

     

     

     

     

  • Hiring employers state the ability to communicate well with a team is essential

    According to Netquote - an insurance lead provider for insurance agents - who commissioned a survey of 800 professionals in charge of hiring, there are quite a few similar issues that take the attention of the hirers and assure that the applicants will get noticed - or otherwise.

    The respondents to the survey stated that their opinion of the applicant began when they received the resume which, if it was accompanied by a photograph, 42% stated was a poor start. Following that, 36% of the hiring managers do not like a nontraditional resume - whilst 35% do. Twenty nine per cent had no preference at all. Three pages of resume were considered to be in excess by 51% of the respondents and just under 25% thought that two pages was too long.

    In the actual interview, 32% of managers selected the ability to communicate well with a team as being essential; 30% of hiring managers said time management was important in potential applicants; 21% stated they like to hear about honesty in their candidates and 20% of managers opted for determination.

    Rita Murphy of Netquote - stated:

    “Compared to some other strengths problem solving can feel like a more concrete skill that yields immediate benefits.                                                               Communication encompasses not only speaking skills, but also your ability to lead, critique, and ask for help. Being adept in various communication methods also shows emotional intelligence.                                                                        

    Time management is more than just completing tasks on time. An employer cares about how you spend the time leading up to a deadline as well.”

    She added:

    “Hiring managers want to know that you will be trustworthy in your position. It can be difficult to maintain a workplace that fosters integrity, especially in heavily competitive industries. If the person is going to be in a management role, it is even more important to have demonstrable honest skills.”

    The top questions that interviewers put the most store by, were:

    • Sixty-nine per cent asked how the applicant managed a conflict
    • Sixty-eight per cent asked how they learnt from a mistake
    • Sixty-five per cent wished to know when the applicant left their previous employment
    • Sixty-four per cent asked about their biggest strength
    • Fifty-six per cent asked them what type of learner they were

    However, it would appear that when making their selection, the view of every H.R. professional is dissimilar.

  • HR overvalues the satisfaction employees feel about their rewards and benefits

    During a survey commissioned by Hawk Incentives - a leader in corporate benefit and reward solutions - together with Sapio Research, it was found that HR professionals in large UK organisations tend to overvalue the satisfaction felt by employees with regard to rewards and benefits received.

    The survey was conducted on 103 HR professionals and 500 employees to compare perceptions between HR departments and the general workforce.

    It was found that just over half of employees - 52% - stated that they are satisfied with the benefits offered by their company, but at the same time 77% of the average HR professional asserted that their workforce was noticeably happier with its benefits package. When asked to rank on a ‘happiness scale’ they maintained that the ranking was 7 or above on a scale from 1 to 10.

    The extensive report - ‘Pulling the benefits lever, closing the gap between HR expectations and employee satisfaction’ - revealed the challenges that HR departments confront in making certain that the benefits and incentives that they offer are appropriate to a varied workforce.

    Almost half of employees surveyed agreed with the statement that their organisation does not appreciate the real needs and wishes of its employees, whilst 62% of employees said their employers’ rewards and incentives schemes are not applicable to them. Fifty nine per cent of employees stated that their company did not regularly surprise them with new incentives and benefits programmes, as had been claimed.

    When the influence of specific benefits on employee acquisition was researched, 69% of HR professionals said they still felt that classic benefits such as private healthcare would be an attraction to potential workers, but only 49% of employees stated that it would be a strong enough reason to influence their decision to work for a company. However, 52% of employees and 57% of HR leaders stated that prepaid shopping cards have a strong impact - which validates the finding that 77% of employees of all ages and grades wanted benefits that assist in cutting the cost of living.

    Heather Rogers - Senior Sales and Marketing Director at Hawk Incentives - said:

    “What this research shows is that HR leaders’ are now actively deploying their rewards and incentives programme to help them achieve their business goals. But simply offering a range of rewards is not enough – we know that the real results come from fine tuning your packages to reflect the current needs and wishes of your people, as they progress in their careers and personal lives.”

  • Most employees are loyal to their employers, provided conditions are right

    A recent survey of 2,000 full-time employees by West Monroe Partners, a business and technology consulting firm - found that the majority of employees are loyal to their current employers, provided that the conditions are right.

    The survey established that 82 percent of employees have a high sense of loyalty to their current employers, but 45 percent of employees who have been with their companies for less than a year have actually applied for new jobs after experiencing a bad day at the office. Also, 59 percent said they would leave their present employment if they received a more appealing offer from a new company - even if they were happy with their current company.

    West Monroe Partners commented that “………in a time when U.S. job openings are at a record 7.1 million, employees have the pick of the litter when it comes to employment options. Overall, employees want to stay with their current companies. But in a tight labor market, there will always be other options for those who feel stuck or idle in their current jobs. If you don't provide your employees the professional opportunities they want they can, and will, find it elsewhere."

    Mike Hughes - Managing Director at West Monroe Partners - said:

    "Today's definition of loyalty isn't what it once was. Some define loyalty as being focused and giving their best efforts during their time with an organization. Others consider themselves loyal after they hit their one- or two-year anniversary with a firm. In our survey, nearly 90 percent had been with their employer over a year, so that may be enough for them to say 'yes, I'm loyal.' "

    Aon, a London-based global professional services firm, conducted a survey which showed that 4 out of 10 workers are passively looking for jobs. They are not actively searching, but would consider another job opportunity.

    Ken Oehler - Aon's Global Culture and Engagement Practice Leader - said:

    "Most would like to stay with their company. But they are open to see what else is out there."  He added:

    "The West Monroe Partners findings indicate that the compact between employer and employee is fragile and that loyalty has its limits. There are many points of vulnerability where an employer could frustrate and disengage an employee and where a competitor could offer something better. Higher pay can certainly lure employees away, but even if pay is in the right place, lack of strategic direction from leaders, frustration with work processes or technology, or lack of development could create the opening for another employer to steal top talent."

    In general, employees were found to have high ambitions to stay with their current employers for the long term. The research showed that half of the respondents to the survey plan on staying at their current employer for another five years or more. In addition, more than a quarter said they if they received a new offer they would require a 20 percent or higher pay increase to justify the move.

    However, a lack of professional growth opportunity was shown to be the employees' main reason for leaving their company - according to the West Monroe survey - with 46 percent of respondents saying that they left their previous company because they did not witness any opportunity to move up.

  • Staff could be leaving their DC pension schemes because employers are not explaining them properly

    At the 2018 Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) conference in Liverpool it was suggested that staff were leaving their defined contribution pension schemes because employers had not explained them properly.

    A study conducted by research consultancy Ignition House has shown that 42 per cent of people did not know how much was in their defined contribution scheme, and 26 per cent did not know how much they were paying in.

    Director of Ignition House and co-author of the research - Janette Weir - stated that there appeared to be a lack of understanding about details of the employer’s pension schemes.  She said:

    “It became clear to us that workers who opted out were making decisions very quickly – with very little input from their employer. There was no evidence that any employer was encouraging them to join. There was very little interaction, and it was often just a leaflet or a booklet given to them.”

    Evidence was found that implied that pension members in the UK are not engaged with their annual statements and - even when they are engaged - do not fully understand the contents.

    Janette Weir added:

    “The annual statement is currently a missed opportunity for companies to communicate properly with their members. Worse than that, members taking part in the research told us that their statement is actually contributing to their confusion, making them feel stupid and leading to apathy.”

    The TUC’s policy officer for pensions - Tim Sharp - said that it was a matter of concern to him as to who was explaining pensions to employees.  He stated:

    “People get pension statements, but many employers typically outsource their pensions to another provider so it’s not their responsibility to talk about it. But the provider also says it’s not their responsibility to talk about it.” 

    Respondents in the research felt that their pensions are important as they recognised that it is likely to form a main source of income for them in the future.

    One female aged under 35 years had received her last statement - but did not read it.  She reported:

    “It is something that I think about more now I am 27 and in the process of buying my first home – before that I didn’t understand any of it and I would have thought pensions are only for old people. A pension is important to me if I ever want to retire.”

    A male respondent, aged over 35 years stated that he had read his last statement and understood it well.  He said:

    “Although I still have a while to go yet, I try to keep an eye on my workplace and private pensions, because they will be what I will have to live on when I do retire.”

    The Simpler Annual Statement - developed by Ruston Smith - which was launched recently will try to provide simple and personalised information on an employee’s retirement savings. 

    Ruston Smith - co-chair of the Department for Work and Pensions’ 2017 Automatic Enrolment Review Advisory Board and chair of the Tesco Pension Fund, alongside experts with the pension industry – said:

    “We have a responsibility and the ability to help our members achieve the best outcome they can in retirement. By working collaboratively together and making statements and other communications we send them simpler; more readable and consistent across the industry are important steps in our journey to engage with them.”

  • Managers are failing to make HR aware of employees' FMLA leave requests

    It has been established that managers often fail to make HR aware of employees' FMLA leave requests – leaving it open to intermittent leave misuse.

    Managers need to know - when employees request time off because of a health condition or to care for a family member’s health problem - whether that leave could qualify under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

    Stephanie Dodge Gournis, an attorney with Drinker Biddle in Chicago, has commented that managers should be trained to notify HR when they become aware that an employee is requesting time off for a medical condition. The employees requesting the leave are not required to specifically say that they need FMLA leave – it is the responsibility of the employer to identify where leave requests could qualify as job-protected FMLA leave. If it is suspected, HR should be notified immediately.

    Managers should know that employees with serious health conditions may qualify for FMLA leave. The 1993 law allows for qualified employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave each year for the birth or adoption of a child; to care for their own serious health condition, or to care for an immediate family member who has a serious condition. The FMLA has defined a serious health condition as an illness requiring inpatient care or continuing treatment. This could include three consecutive calendar days of inability to work or perform other regular daily activities; two or more visits to a medical provider within 30 days or one visit with a schedule of ongoing treatment.

    However, employees must not only have a serious health condition - but also must have worked for 1,250 hours for the previous 12 months for an employer with 50 or more employees within a 75-mile radius of the worksite.

    Camille Toney, an attorney with Greensfelder Hemker & Gale in St. Louis, stated that HR should be notified by management if any employee is absent for three consecutive days in order that they can provide the employee with the required notices in a timely manner.  She added that waiting for the three days of absence to have occurred "may result in employees taking more leave than they are entitled to and also creates a risk that an employee may inadvertently be disciplined under the company's attendance policy on account of FMLA-qualifying days of absence."

    A recommendation that employers should introduce a written policy stating that any employee who wants FMLA leave should contact HR has been suggested by Joan Casciari, an attorney with Seyfarth Shaw in Chicago – in order that employers may avoid liability if the manager fails to realize that an employee has asked for FMLA leave.

    Medical certifications should be sent to HR within 15 calendar days of receiving the form or as soon as is reasonable given the circumstances and managers should be aware of this.

    Stephanie Dodge Gournis stated:

    "Managers should be made to understand that FMLA medical certification forms provide employers the best weapon for preventing potential employee abuse of intermittent FMLA leave, as the medical certification forms provide the employer with important information regarding the expected frequency and duration of intermittent leave."

     

  • Survey looks at identifying and developing future leaders

    A report by Business Linked Teams - Grow Your Own Leader - has found that 45 per cent of one hundred senior UK HR professionals felt that the responsibility of identifying and developing future leaders should fall to line managers. A similar percentage were of the same opinion regarding making sure existing leaders are continuously developed. 

    However, more than two thirds found there was a requirement to cultivate the future leaders in their business.  Eighty nine per cent believed succession planning was their organisation’s main concern, 51 per cent believed that face to face workshops were key elements to a leadership development programme and 37 per cent of those surveyed recognised that a structured, individual personal development plan was very important.

    The report went on to point out that it is not only vital that HR leaders get the development plan under control in HQ, but also in each different region where the leadership development programme is being carried out. It is important to ensure that the programme is tailored to each different region – allowing for the various local and cultural factors.  Only 16 percent of HR decision makers admitted to having a global strategy in place with localised leadership training programmes.

    Samantha Caine - Managing Director at Business Linked Teams – stated:

    “It’s clear that HR leaders are placing too much expectation on line managers without providing the right levels of support. As a result, line managers are struggling to overcome the challenges identified on top of their existing day to day challenges.”

    She added:

    “As organisations face the challenges of a globalised marketplace, they require experienced leadership that knows the business inside out and can seamlessly succeed current leadership while demonstrating the skills and behaviours required to bolster the organisation in each specific market.” 

    The report ended by stating:

    “HR professionals must ensure that line managers are fully on-board and not simply delegate the task of identifying leaders and expecting them to do the rest.”

    Dan Lucy - Principal Research Fellow at the Institute for Employment Studies -commented:

     “Unfortunately, it’s still the case that too many individuals attain leadership positions as a consequence of technical competence without any real interest or capability in managing or developing people. HR has a huge and important role to play here in ensuring that the right people are put in leadership positions, and their capabilities developed.”

  • Online job applications that take too long are likely to be abandoned

    According to Hays UK and Ireland in its What Workers Want Report 2018, over 70 per cent of job applicants would abandon their online application for work if it took more than 15 minutes to complete.  Alternatively, 49 per cent would instantly show interest in applying if the procedure was simple.

    Simon Winfield - Managing Director of Hays UK and Ireland - said:

    “Today’s candidates are more digitally fluent than ever before. They have become accustomed to doing everything online; from communicating with friends and catching up on news to managing their finances and booking their holidays.  As a result they have come to expect a very slick and intuitive user experience regardless of service or function. Not unreasonably, they expect the same ease of use when applying for a new role." 

    He added:

    “Too many employers have been very slow to recognise the applicant’s user experience as a key tenet of their recruitment strategy, and by extension the potential it has to paint either a very positive or negative first impression of the company. In neglecting to invest in the applicant’s user experience many employers may be undermining their ability to compete for the best talent.”

    The survey - in which 14,600 employers and employees took part - showed that the majority of employers are failing to make online application processes part of their talent attraction strategies, despite 41 per cent of employers being aware that they offer a bad online experience.  Fifty per cent of applicants gave poor ratings for their experience when applying online using the employer’s website, with 72 per cent of those citing a lengthy process as the chief reason.

    However, despite applicants placing importance on a simple online process, the report found that they still valued personal communication - with over 69 per cent of applicants saying that it is essential that they should be in contact with a person who can provide information on the progress of their individual application.   

    Deborah O'Sullivan - Operations Director at recruitment experts Ten2Two - remarked that it was a mistake for employers to ignore their online application’s user functionality. 

    She said:

    “It creates an overall impression of a brand and a first impression of what it might be like to work for that business. If the user experience and recruitment process is unresponsive, prolonged or difficult, it doesn’t tell a great story and could lose great talent from the outset.”

    The Managing Director of an online recruitment and job site emphasised that, whilst user functionality is important, employers also need to take care not to lose the human touch altogether when using online application processes. For instance, responses need to be sent, even if these are automated and all candidates should be kept up to date, even if their application hasn’t been successful.

    Previous research - a survey published by Indeed in collaboration with Censuswide - revealed that online reputations were increasingly becoming necessary for attracting top talent.  Seventy per cent of jobseekers would not apply for a position until they had carried out research into the potential employer’s online reputation - and 57 per cent reported that they would distrust and not apply to a company with no digital identity.

     

  • Research shows most teenagers overestimate their prospective salary

    As a result of analysis - published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) - regarding teenagers misjudging their future salaries, HR departments have been advised to team up with schools to inform their scholars about the business world.

    The research showed that most teenagers hoping to attend university were overestimating their prospective salary by about £11,000 - expecting to be earning £35,000 by their 30th birthday when, in fact, data published by the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings 2017 showed that the average wage for a 30-year-old was £23,700. 

    In addition, teenagers who did not aspire to attend university also overestimated their future earning but not to the same extent, as they cited £25,000.

    Some young people were even more ambitious in their expectations for future earning potential.   Five per cent thought that they could earn £80,000 or more at the age of 30 but in reality, only 2 per cent earned £80,000.

    Senior reward and payment adviser at the CIPD - Charles Cotton - said that the findings highlighted:

    “....the importance of the HR profession working with schools and universities to talk about what the world of work looks like and involves and what pay expectations they can get”.  He added:

    “It’s a case of working out, if you want to earn that amount of money, the careers you’ll need to go into.”  

    The ONS found, however, that young people were more interested in job satisfaction and security rather than earning capacity. Seventy one per cent of those aged 16 to 21years - surveyed in 2015 to 2016 - said that having an interesting job was very important; sixty per cent felt job security was most important, whilst just 25 per cent thought a high income was very important. 

    But the ONS analysis also revealed that many young people failed to land their dream jobs. The top five types of employment designated as dream jobs by teenagers previously surveyed were in media; teaching and education; health professionals; public services - such as police or fire fighters - and nursing and midwifery.  Of these, only teaching ranked in the top five in which 22 to 29-year-olds found employment during 2017.

    Separate research by the ONS revealed that 12 per cent of young people without a degree were working in jobs usually assigned to graduates. Fifty four per cent of graduates held a comparable job, with HR roles being acknowledged as one of the most common graduate jobs being allocated to non-graduates - and attracting an average salary of £26,319.

     

  • Gender and age can have negative impact on confidence in management capabilities

    A survey, conducted by Avado Learning in collaboration with Arch Apprentices, has found that 15% of 16 to 25 year olds were not confident in their management capabilities. Sixteen per cent stated that they had asked their employer for more training - which they had not received. Various reasons were given for the lack of training, with 45% saying that cost had been cited; 42% mentioned lack of time and 19% stated that they would have been required to pay for their own training.

    The survey has also highlighted a confidence gap between male and female managers in the UK workplace. Almost half of the men polled said that they were very confident in their management skills, compared to only 30% of women polled - and a fifth of female managers even admitted they would rather be managed by a man.

    The findings showed that age also played a part in the way management was perceived - with 68% of 20-24 years-olds saying they felt their age was a hindrance to their colleague's confidence in them as a manager. Nearly half of UK managers felt their gender or age had diminished their colleagues' confidence in them.

    The Chief People Officer at Avado - Dean Corbett - said he did not believe that dealing with these issues was exclusively the responsibility of HR, but he added that it was commercially essential. He said:

    “On a basic human level, no one should be made to feel there is a cap on their potential. It might be suggested by some that a lot of previous attempts have been box-ticking exercises. To address this, businesses need to be clearer and more direct about action.”

    Amy Crawford - Managing Director at AVADO - stated:

    "It is disappointing to see the negative impact gender and age has on confidence in management capabilities but encouraging to see the powerful impact that being qualified can have on employees."

    Unison Assistant General Secretary, Christina McAnea, recommended that businesses should run regular courses to tackle any sexist or ageist beliefs - adding:

    "Employers must make sure their managers have the best possible support, so that no one is ever made to feel they're not up to the job.”

  • Nearly half a million pounds granted through the Returners Fund

    The Minister for Women, Victoria Atkins, has announced funding grants through the £1.5m Returners Fund - which was set up with the intention of helping people get back into work after having taken career breaks. Five organisations have been granted a total of almost £500,000 to help in this respect.

    Reviews have shown that those who take lengthy career breaks – and most are women – find it difficult to make progress on their return to work and this is one cause of the gender pay gap.

    The five recipients of the grant will sustain those returning into the workplace through refresher training and updating of their skills and will also work directly with 79 employers from a range businesses including communications; technology; law; finance; retail and advertising/marketing.

    Victoria Atkins said:

    “For too long, taking time out of work to care for others has cut short careers and brilliant, talented women are unable to re-enter industries which will not support them to return. This is a huge loss, not only to those individuals, but to our economy and businesses all over the country.”   She added:

    “We are investing in returners to work – giving them the opportunity to refresh and grow their skills and encouraging employers to change their outdated recruitment processes. By taking action on this issue we can grow the economy and achieve true equality in our workplaces.”

    The organisations that have been granted money are:

    • £95,000 for national charity, Changing Lives
    • £110,000 for social consultancy, Women Returners
    • £187,000 for chamber of commerce, St Helens Chamber
    • £65,000 for creative industries organisation, Creative Equals
    • £32,000 for Back2businessship, which is being delivered by f1 Recruitment.

    One of the organisations to receive funding – Changing Lives – is a national charity who, with their grant, has said that they will assist 80 persons returning to work in the North East.  Their CEO, Stephen Bell said:

    “We are delighted to have been successful in securing funding from the Returner’s Fund. Here at Changing Lives we are dedicated to supporting those with multiple and complex needs to overcome the barriers they face. This fund will allow us to develop our Employment Services to empower women to move back into employment and fulfill their potential.”

    The government guaranteed £1.5 million to get people with caring responsibilities back into work and a further £1,010,950 funding will be awarded this autumn.  This support will assist carers from across the country to return to work; boost the economy and help to tackle the gender pay gap.

    The November 2017 budget announcement of a £5m pledge to support persons returning to work followed recommendations made by the Women and Work All Parliamentary Group - which called on large businesses to provide paid return-to-work programmes for women.

    Since last April, businesses with 250 or more employees have been required to publish details of their gender pay gap on an annual basis.

  • Greater flexibility at work is more important than how many days worked

    According to a recent report from the TUC - “A future that works for working people” - UK employers are being asked to consider changing to a four-day week, but experts stress that greater flexibility is more important than focusing on the days worked.

    For some time, a shorter working week - bringing more control over everyone’s time - has been promised as a result of the progress made in technology.  However, it has been found that new technology is actually likely to increase the working life as workers are required to be constantly available for work.

    In their survey, the TUC found that over 1.4 million people are now working on 7 days of the week and 3.3 million people work more than 45 hours a week.  It also found that stress and long hours are workers’ biggest concerns after pay and they struggle to get the hours they need to fit in with family life.

    The TUC’s report makes a case for technological advances reducing workload and boosting productivity without the necessity to forgo pay. The survey - consisting of 2,145 UK workers - found that 81 per cent wanted to reduce their future working time and 45 per cent chose a four-day working week. 

    TUC General Secretary, Frances O’Grady stated:

    “Working people deserve their fair share – and that means using the gains from new tech to raise pay and allow more time with their families. If productivity gains from new technology are even half as good as promised, then the country can afford to make working lives better.”

    The report showed that 74 per cent of workers want technology to give them more control over their working lives, but 51 per cent expected that the benefits of new technology would be kept by management - whilst a third considered that benefits would be equally shared between employers, shareholders and employees. 

    CIPD Diversity and Inclusion Adviser, Claire McCartney commented:

    “Some people might be working quite long hours, which works for them and their employer. If people have greater flexibility to choose what works for them, they are able to control their work-life balance.” 

    Jobs Expert at totaljobs, Lynn Cahillane advised:

    “In the shorter term, there are simple ways companies can improve productivity without taking Friday off. This could be as simple as shortening meetings, implementing email blackout periods and encouraging full-hour lunch breaks away from desks.” 

    Matthew Buskell, Area Vice President for EMEA at corporate learning leader Skillsoft, was of the opinion that employees should be trained in the new skills essential to overcome the paradox of automation.  He stated:

    “As we become more reliant on technology, the less inclined we are to take control of exceptional cases when technology fails. Keeping human skills sufficiently fresh to know when and how to intervene will become increasingly critical."

  • Survey shows most firms think HR must take the lead on IT security

    A recent survey by Willis Towers Watson showed that 54 per cent of organisations believe that HR must take a lead on IT security in the workplace.

    The survey - How Boards Can Lead the Cyber Resilient Organisation - consisted of respondents from 452 global companies and showed that 66 per cent were of the opinion that HR and security departments held the answer to fighting cyber crime.

    Anthony Dagostino - Global Head of Cyber Risk with Willis Towers Watson - said:

    “These findings are encouraging because they signal that more organisations are involving their HR function in addressing cyber risk. Organisations need greater collaboration between their chief human resources officers and information security officers to truly assess the organisational cultures driving cyber risk in the first instance.” 

    HR professionals - as keepers of data on employees - have an immense responsibility to store personal information safely and to ensure that all staff follows procedures rigorously to reduce the risk of data breaches caused by employee error.  Ascertaining that workers only have access to the data they need to do their job can help to safeguard sensitive information.

    Training staff on the latest breaches of security; changes to the Data Protection Bill; the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and phishing scams can encourage good habits and procedures.

    Head of Solutions Delivery and IT at the British Standard Institute, Stephen Bowe, stated that businesses should provide training and education to increase awareness of data security challenges among staff. He said:

    “Different organisations are at different stages of their digital journey, and as the pace of IT innovation and digital transformation continues to quicken, there are inconsistencies in how prepared organisations are in the event of a cyber-attack or a data loss incident. Data is as important to public services as personnel and physical infrastructures, and everyone has a responsibility to protect it.” 

    The survey found that 29 per cent of UK companies had experienced a serious cyber incident in the last year and 18 per cent of these companies believe they will suffer an incident in the next 12 months.

    In addition, a report published by the British Standard Institute’s Cybersecurity and Information Resilience centre and GovNewsDirect, stated that 77 per cent of UK public sector organisations had experienced a cyber security breach in the last year and 32 per cent of these breaches were caused by staff error.

    Anthony Dagostino remarked:

     “The solution isn’t always more security awareness training. It could be a leadership or incentives and rewards issue, things that fall squarely within the function of the chief HR officer.”

  • Government intends to increase the small claims limit in minor injury cases

    Under plans by the government to double the lower limit for recovering costs in minor injury cases, critics have warned that it could be discouraging to thousands of injured workers wishing to bring cases against their employers. 

    What is known as the small claims limit presently stands at £1,000 but the government intends to increase this to £2,000 - which personal injury experts consider could affect as many as 350,000 persons per year.  The change is part of the government’s wider reforms programme for the civil justice claims system.

    The Civil Liability Bill - designed to amend the claims process for whiplash injuries - was debated by MPs.  The changes would be brought through via a statutory instrument rather than in the bill itself - and MPs were disapproving of the proposed new limits.    

    Richard Burgon - Labour MP for Leeds East - stated:

    “We fear a fall in claims similar to 2013’s introduction of employment tribunal fees in personal injury cases, with genuine victims priced out of justice and deterred from pursuing a claim for an injury that was not their fault.”

    Under the changes, employees who suffer injuries worth less than £2,000 will not be able to recover the cost from the persons they are suing, of any legal advice and according to unions and legal advisors, the probability of them succeeding in their cases will be weaker against employers who instruct lawyers.

    However, Associate Director at Croner - Paul Holcroft - warning that the changes could encourage employees to represent themselves rather than hire a lawyer. He stated:

    “This could result in an upsurge of claims against employers where individuals do not have specific legal advice at the outset to determine whether a claim is worth pursuing or not.  Although the small claims track is viewed as simpler and more informal, an increase in litigants in person is likely to result in proceedings becoming lengthier and more onerous for employers, due to a lesser understanding of the court process. This will, in turn, cause employers to spend more on defending the personal injury claim.”

    The Ministry of Justice gives the reason for the reform - which is due to come into force on April 2020 - as the fact that the £1,000 limit was set in the 1990s and needs to increase to keep pace with inflation.

    A spokesperson from the Ministry of Justice said:

    “Compensation in personal injury cases should be fair and proportionate, and making a claim should be as simple as possible. That is why we are making the system fairer for all – not least the taxpayer – and increasing the support available for claimants. The claims limit was last set in 1991, and our proposed increase for personal injury cases is in line with inflation.”

    The Shadow Justice Minister – Gloria de Piero – stated:

    “These changes mean more workers will be faced with a choice - either pay for legal help out of your own compensation, continue unrepresented and face large insurers who will continue to be able to afford lawyers or simply drop the claim.  Disgracefully, the government won’t even be bringing these changes to the floor of the House of Commons where they would be fully scrutinised and debated by MPs. Instead, they’ll be using a statutory instrument; a legislative technique that allows ministers to alter existing regulations without having to have a full debate in the Commons.  The Tories are trying to avoid the full scrutiny these changes desperately need.”

    The Civil Liability Bill has now passed to committee stage but the implementation of the changes has been delayed whilst the courts service develops an online claims system.

  • U.S. Secretary of Labor opens the Office of Compliance Initiatives

    On August 28th, U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta announced the opening of the Office of Compliance Initiatives (OCI) - a cross-agency effort to complement the Department of Labor’s enforcement activities.  This was in collaboration with federal employment agencies and the Department of Labor (DOL). In addition, several new ‘opinion’ letters that provide guidance to employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act were issued.

    The object of the OCI is - amongst other matters - to provide both employers and employees with access to high quality and up-to-date information about their rights and obligations under federal labor laws and regulations; to assist enforcement agencies in developing new strategies to use data for more impactful compliance and enforcement strategies and to encourage a culture that promotes compliance assistance within the Department of Labor.

    Two websites - worker.gov and employer.gov - were immediately instigated by the Office of Compliance Initiatives to provide information about worker’s rights and concerns in the workplace.

    Worker.gov covers information about wages payment; rights to protected leave; retirement security and other benefits, together with information concerning rights protected by other agencies.  It is focused on helping employees.

    Employer.gov provides employers with information about their responsibilities and includes a section specifically intended for small business owners.

    The Department of Labor, in a release stated:

    “OCI will promote greater understanding of federal labor laws and regulations, allowing job creators to prevent violations and protect Americans’ wages, workplace safety and health, retirement security, and other rights and benefits. As part of its work, OCI will work with the enforcement agencies to refine their metrics to ensure the efficacy of DOL’s compliance assistance activities.”

    The creation of the Office of Compliance Initiatives has been criticized by some who consider it reflects the Department of Labor’s growing emphasis on compliance rather than aggressive agency enforcement. However, Secretary of Labor, Alexander Acosta remarked during his announcement of the Office of Compliance Initiatives:

    “……..vigorous enforcement and compliance assistance go hand in hand.”

    In addition to providing information through the websites and other efforts, the Office of Compliance Initiatives plans to assist enforcement agencies in the development of new strategies - to use data for effective compliance and enforcement strategies.

  • Increase in minimum contributions hasn’t meant mass departure from pensions

    There have been some concerns lest the increase in contributions to auto-enrolled pensions schemes cause a mass departure by employees.  However, experts have stated that they believe it is unlikely that this will happen.

    Employees appear to have accepted the increase in minimum contributions - which took place in April - from 2 per cent to 5 per cent (with the employer’s contribution rising from 1 per cent to 2 per cent).

    According to research by pensions and investment firm Aegon, it was found that UK workers have welcomed auto-enrolment - to the extent that 25 per cent said that being auto-enrolled was the nudge they needed to save for retirement.

    In addition, it showed that the average worker is willing to pay a 7 per cent contribution with nearly one in six of those in their 20’s willing to pay between 11 per cent and 15 per cent of their salary towards saving for their pension.                                                                                    

    Head of Pensions at Aegon – Kate Smith – said:

    “There was some concern that increasing auto-enrolment contributions for employees would result in some people stopping their contributions. However, our research is a strong endorsement that not only will people take the increases in their stride, they’re realistic to appreciate that a comfortable retirement requires saving at higher rates and are prepared to pay more.”

    She said that the company’s books reveal that few people have opted out of their workplace schemes and that the opt-out rates for new members had “slightly gone up, but it was marginal”.

    She added:

    “We did a lot of media around April when the pension’s contributions increased. We emphasised that staying in meant that not only would you be saving more, but Aegon would be contributing more as well. I understand for a lot of people that saving can be an affordability issue, but we haven’t seen a lot of changes in our numbers. We are concerned about what will happen next April when rates go up again.” 

    Chris Curry - Director at The Pensions Institute - believes that the principle of opting out of a system, rather than joining in, seems to play an important part in the number of people remaining in their workplace pensions.

    He stated:

    “Inertia still seems to be playing an important role, almost certainly helped by the fact that other changes, such as changes in income tax and national insurance, will have partially offset increased pensions contributions. We shouldn’t be complacent – there is little data to go on at the moment, and people may take a little time to respond to the change.”

    Aegon’s survey consisted of 14,400 employees and 1,600 retired people in 15 countries.  Globally, it found that workers in the UK were the second most likely to give – as their reasons for saving for retirement – employment-related reasons. 

    Kate Smith stated:

    “Saving in a pension through your employer has become a natural part of working life in the UK today, with people embracing saving in this way. There’s also a growing appreciation that the level of retirement income is dependent on the contributions individuals and their employer make throughout their career, leading to a desire to pay more.”

    Ros Altmann - former Minister of State for Work and Pensions - said it was encouraging to see such low opt-out rates after the increase in contributions.

    She added:

    “It is now up to pension providers to ensure workers have a positive experience of pensions, and I encourage employers to explain the benefits and extra money which they are providing for their staff.”

     

     

  • Postponement figures suggest the tribunal system is under strain

    Data obtained under a Freedom of Information request has shown that 3,365 employment tribunals were postponed within 48 hours of the scheduled hearing, between 1 August 2017 and 31 March 2018.  Cases that were adjourned on the actual day of the hearing have not been included in these figures. 

    A survey of Employment Lawyers Association members - which received 320 responses - revealed that 90% of respondents had experienced delays in tribunals dealing with interim paper applications; 57% had experienced delays in receiving reserved judgments and 45% reported postponements of a hearing due to a lack of judicial resources.

    These figures suggest that the tribunal system has been under strain since last year when the Supreme Court determined that tribunal fees were unlawful and should be abolished. 

    In June, The Ministry of Justice published figures revealing that the number of claims brought by a single person - rather than by a group of people - in the first quarter of 2018, increased to 9,252.  This was up 118% in comparison with the previous year. During this time, the caseload which was outstanding increased by 89%.

    A spokesperson from the Ministry of Justice said that the employees bringing the claims had requested postponements in 87% of the cases and added:

    “Every effort is made to ensure delays are kept to a minimum.”

    Barry Stanton, Head of Employment Law at Boyes Turner, told People Management:

    “There have always been postponements; postponements cause stress to the parties (and the lawyers). Claims languish, often for months, before everyone has to refocus their efforts with a renewed hearing date. Those costs – and the need to recall events which are now even older – lead inevitably to dissatisfaction.” 

    He continued:

    “Sadly, postponements seem to be an inevitable part of the tribunal system. The alternative would be listing cases to be heard, with a guarantee that each case will be heard on the scheduled date. Doing that would lead to significant delays in getting cases to a hearing or significantly increasing tribunal resources, with the inevitable result that tribunals will incur costs without any tangible benefit and sit idle.”

    Chair of ELA’s tribunal resources working party and Head of Employment at UK firm Kingsley Napley - Richard Fox - stated that reports had been received of delays of 'many weeks and in some cases, even months’, before tribunals dealt with claims. He added that many employment judges are dealing with the administration themselves – which includes typing up their own orders and directly distributing them to the involved parties and lawyers had been informed that it may take a year before there are appreciably more judges in place.  

    He said:

    “Our findings are deeply worrying. Tribunals are plainly under intense strain at the moment. Some of these issues are down to a lack of judicial resource; others to the lack of support at an administrative level. What is particularly concerning is that we are still far short of the number of claims being brought before the tribunal fees were introduced in the summer of 2013. So, in all likelihood, the pressures on the system are only going to get worse before they get better.”

     Croner's Associate Director - Paul Holcroft – said:

    “The tribunal process can be distressing for all parties and postponements will only add to the distress felt – something which will be even more heightened when the postponement occurs so close to the hearing date.”  

    He added:

    “Although some postponements can be completely unforeseen – for example, those relating to adverse weather or hearing centre facilities – the lack of judicial resources must be a huge contributory factor and the quicker this problem is fixed, the better.”

    In June, the Judicial Appointments Commission finished a recruitment drive for 54 salaried employment tribunal judges and Judge Brian Doyle has forecast that offers for positions will be made in January 2019.

     

     

  • Millions of UK workers are overqualified for their jobs

    The UK Employer Skills Survey - undertaken by IFF Research for the Department for Education - and involving 87,000 employers, found that 2.5 million UK workers are overqualified for their jobs. This is an increase of 8.7 per cent of the workforce.

    It was also found that 35 per cent of employers were employing staff that were not being used to the best of their ability, due to either not being fully trained or for being overqualified for the job they were holding. This is an increase from 2015 when just 30 per cent of businesses said they had employees who were being underutilised and the equivalent of 7.1 per cent of the workforce was identified as being overqualified.

    Many graduates are finding themselves working in jobs that would - in previous generations - have been filled by non-graduates and comparisons across Europe have suggested that this is a particular problem for the UK, with 58.8 per cent of graduates working in jobs that could have been filled by non-graduates.

    However, 13 per cent of the employers surveyed stated that they had skill gaps in their workforce and 4.4 per cent were found to be lacking the expertise required to fulfill their role.  This was an improvement from 2015 when 5 per cent of the workforce was found to be lacking the appropriate knowledge needed to carry out their work competently.

    Duncan Brown, Head of HR consulting at the Institute for Employment Studies – stated:

    “Employers need to invest more in training and the right sort of training - and HR functions need to do a better job in evidencing the business case for this and showing that such investments pay off, particularly in SMEs.”

    He added:

    “We need to continue to improve relationships between employers and education providers, strengthen careers guidance services and do more to encourage lifelong learning.”

    The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices - published in July 2017 -recognised that, going forward, there was a deficiency in jobs which match the UKs talent profile as a key labour market.

    The report drew attention to the fact that the proportion of graduates working in low-skilled employment had increased from 5.3 per cent in 2008 to 8.1 per cent in 2016.

    However, a report published by the Open University last month found that 91 per cent of all businesses had found it difficult to find skilled staff in the last year - with skills shortages costing companies £6.3bn annually in recruitment fees; inflated salaries; hiring temporary staff and training workers.

     

  • Final salary pension deficits almost halved in top 350 UK companies

    According to research carried out by Barnett Waddingham – a UK independent provider of actuarial, administration and consultancy services – final salary pension deficits of the top 350 UK companies has been almost halved from £62bn to £35bn by the end of June. This is the third year in a row that deficit contributions have increased.

    Now, the scheme shortfalls account for just 17 percent of total profits, which 18 months ago were showing a shortfall of 70 percent.  The research showed that part of the reduction was due to companies contributing more to their schemes – but Barnett Waddingham also observed that it was related to better performance of investment portfolios.

    Nick Griggs - Partner at Barnett Waddingham – advised:

    “With the health of the UK and global economy threatened by a lack of progress with Brexit and the threat of a trade war from Trump’s America First assault, there could a major impact on the size of pension deficits and the ability of FTSE 350 companies to pay the contributions needed to clear these. Companies should ensure they are comfortable with the level of investment risk being taken by their DB schemes and that the appropriate controls are in place to manage these risks.”

    Recently, the collapse of British Home Stores and Carrillion – who both had large funding gaps in their schemes – highlighted the problems with DB pensions.  Lesley Titcomb, Chief Executive of the Pensions Regulator, wrote to the Work and Pensions Select Committee stating that the average length of recovery for those DB plans which were in deficit, was 7 years. However, 20 per cent of schemes have a recovery plan of 10 years or longer and 5 per cent of schemes have a recovery plan of 16 years or longer.

    Steve Webb - Director of policy at Royal London – stated:

    “While some firms are in a much stronger place and some schemes are now in surplus, there will be others with a toxic combination of a weak employer covenant and an underfunded scheme.”

    He added:

    “The overall trend is very much in the right direction but it is too soon to be popping the champagne corks.”

    Barnett Waddingham’s Nick Griggs said:

    “The majority of companies ended 2017 with their DB scheme in a healthier state than the previous year. While this is positive news, it would not take much to tip the balance the other way. Our analysis suggests that a 0.5 percent fall in bond yields in 2017 would have pushed the aggregate deficit of the FTSE350 DB schemes up to £85bn.”

    Currently, the government is considering what steps it could take to make DB pension schemes more secure.  A white paper has been published by the department of work and pensions outlining possible crackdowns on bosses who mismanage final salary schemes and the government is considering whether the Pensions Regulator should be given greater powers. 

  • Survey on how companies retain top talent

    An online survey on how companies retain top talent was developed by Robert Half - a large specialized staffing firm - and conducted by a leading independent research firm.  It included responses from more than 5,500 decision makers across a variety of professional fields in the US.  

    When asked if they ever extend counteroffers to employees to keep them from leaving for another job, 58% of the respondents replied that they did, whilst 42% stated that they did not.  The respondents included senior managers in finance and accounting; technology; legal departments; advertising and marketing and human resources.

    It was found that many employers did not want to upset employee morale or to go through the lengthy hiring process to replace the departing employee and their only option appeared to be to make a counteroffer.  However, the study found that this solution was only temporary as, on average, employees who accept counteroffers only remained with their company for 1.7 years. 

    Paul McDonald - Senior Executive Director for Robert Half – stated:

    "Counteroffers are typically a knee-jerk reaction to broader staffing issues. While they may seem like a quick fix for employers, the solution is often temporary. When employees accept a counteroffer, they will likely quit soon afterward."

    He advised professionals not to accept these offers and added:

    "Money doesn't solve everything. If you accept a counteroffer, your employer may question your loyalty to the company. And, more importantly, the root causes of why you were looking to leave in the first place may still exist."

    Ladders - a job board specializing in six-figure positions - confirmed that offering money to solve retention problems does not bring the right result, as only 30% of employees questioned for their research stated that money was their reason for leaving.

    Of the employees surveyed by Ladders, 94% said they would take their dream job right away; 31% would take a pay cut for their dream job; 67% would change jobs immediately – even if it was not for their ideal job – and 23% would take a position with a higher title in preference to a raise in money.

    Paul McDonald suggested that employers conduct stay interviews to get a sense of who is not happy and why, stating that these interviews will establish trust between the managers and employees - which would help identify problem areas in the organization before they become deal breakers.

  • Number of employers inducing employees to opt out of pensions is up

    As a result of a freedom for information request, new data has revealed that significant complaints were received by The Pensions Regulator (TPR) alleging employers had been inducing employees to opt out of pension schemes during the following time periods: 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014; 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015; 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016; 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017; 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018.

    Ninety nine cases - which primarily relate to employers inducing employees to opt out of pensions - and a further 15 cases which do relate to inducement, were found.  Twelve cases were found during the period 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016; thirty eight cases between 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017 and sixty four cases between1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018 – an increase of 68%.

    As it is an offence for employers to attempt to induce an employee who is eligible to be enrolled into a workplace pension to opt out - regardless of whether that inducement is successful or not - this has resulted in the watchdog being called upon to penalise the wrongdoers.

    Senior performance and reward adviser at the CIPD - Charles Cotton - said;

    “This can have a detrimental impact on what kind of retirement these individuals will enjoy, as well as undercutting those organisations complying with the regulations. Law-abiding firms will want to see those companies deliberately flouting the law pursued by TPR and punished.”

    Steve Webb - Director of Policy at Royal London - said that 114 reports was a small amount compared to the total number of employees who had been auto-enrolled and stayed in a scheme but nevertheless, it was a worry.

    He stated:

    “The very low opt-out rate that we are continuing to see suggests that there is unlikely to be a general problem with employers actively encouraging opt-outs.” 

    He then added:

    “But it is important not to be complacent and a clear signal needs to be sent that membership of a workplace pension is a valuable employment right and that employers should not be seeking to put pressure on their staff to give up that right.”

    A spokesperson from The Pensions Regulator said:

    “The number of whistleblowing reports we have received must be taken in the context that more than 1.3m employers have completed their declaration of compliance – almost all of them in the last three years – as automatic enrolment has expanded. Nevertheless, we would encourage any workers who are not being given the pensions they are entitled to or who believe their employers are committing pension offences to contact us and we will investigate...We will take action against employers who fail to comply with it.”

    In the meantime, data released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed that 44% of employees felt their employer’s workplace pension scheme was the safest way to save for retirement – but the research also revealed that many were not aware of auto-enrolment. Ninety one per cent of those eligible for auto-enrolment thought they had not yet been enrolled into a scheme when, in fact, they had been.

  • HR has the power to improve employee wellbeing

    Recent research has found that HR has the power to improve employee wellbeing - provided it gets line manager support. 

    The research - Developmental HRM, employee well-being and performance: The moderating role of developing leadership - was conducted by by IÉSEG School of Management and researched the effect of HR practices on wellbeing and performance.  

    The study examines the link between developmental human resource practices and employee task performance and includes both happiness and health related effects - such as exhaustion.

    Seven organisations - 403 employees and 53 line managers - were questioned and the conclusion was that manager commitment carried a heavy influence.

    The lead researcher, Professor Elise Marescaux of IÉSEG, said:

    “Overall, we found that developmental HR practices increase employee wellbeing. When an organisation offers more training and self-development options, employees feel more committed and are less exhausted. But we also find that supervisors play a key role in ensuring the success of HR processes.”

    The data obtained by the researchers show that distinct emerging HR practices influence the well‐being and employee performance differently and suggests that the leadership behaviour of line managers has an influence on the way in which HR practices affect employees.

    However, Dr Charmi Patel, Professor of International and Strategic HRM and Organisational Behaviour at Henley Business School, said:

    “Middle managers are very important, despite not necessarily being involved with HR. Every line manager should have training in people management practice, which people often confuse with back office HR.”  

    She added:

     “Rather than saying line managers need to be up skilled in HR work, organisations should be promoting general people management training.” 

    Skills policy advisor at the CIPD, Elizabeth Crowley, commented:

    “Line managers are critical in ensuring policy is effectively implemented, but it’s also important that employees themselves are aware of the learning and development offers available to them, and are confident in having conversations with their line managers regarding their development needs and progression opportunities.  HR devises learning and development strategy, and line managers should be equipped to implement these opportunities, but enabling employees to have those conversations is equally important.” 

     Adding:

    “We don’t invest in line managers in the UK to the extent that other countries do, and many receive no training at all, so it’s important to address that. Much of the time this can be achieved through short, bespoke blended learning opportunities around mentoring, coaching and performance, and having difficult conversations, enabling people to have those conversations and dealing with difficult employees.” 

    In the meantime, BSI - the business standards company - has launched a new code of practice for organisations to help tackle a crisis in the mental health and wellbeing of Britain’s workforce.

    The code of practice - PAS 3002 - provides recommendations for establishing, promoting, maintaining and reviewing the health and wellbeing of workers within organisations. It reflects on how health and wellbeing should be incorporated into the working environment and how leadership can ensure health and wellbeing related services are available to employees.

    The document recommends capitalisation on diversity and inclusion as an organisational strength and proactive support for the physical and psychological health and wellbeing of workers.  In addition, a work culture that offers strong, ethical relationships, a collaborative and communicative management style, and an organisational culture in which learning and development are encouraged should be engaged; jobs designed so that they offer meaningful work and good people management policies and practices should be supported.

    Anne Hayes, Head of Governance and Resilience at BSI, said:

    “Health and wellbeing should be everyone’s concern within an organization. Increasingly, organizations are being asked to meet their responsibilities in relation to health and wellbeing in order to provide healthy workplaces and to protect people from harm. Enhancing employee wellbeing and engagement is at heart of this code of practice, and PAS 3002 provides guidance for organizations to provide early intervention to help prevent people being absent for health reasons and to use the workplace to promote individual health and wellbeing.”

  • Millions of employees missing out on minimum paid leave

    According to TUC analysis, 2.2 million employees are not getting the minimum paid leave entitlement they are due, with 1.2 million not getting any paid leave at all.

    This has been attributed to one in 12 UK workers bearing unrealistic workloads, holiday requests being denied by employers, or employers not keeping up to date with the law. Employees are entitled to a statutory annual minimum of 28 days paid leave.

    It was shown that 9.2% of female workers and 7.2% of male workers were affected, resulting in nearly £3 billion worth of paid leave being lost each year.

    The TUC stated that HM Revenue and Customs should be given new powers to clamp down on employers who deny staff their statutory entitlement and went on to say that minimum holiday entitlements are vital to reducing overwork, stressing that working excessive hours can severely affect an employee’s health.

    TUC general secretary - Frances O'Grady - said:

    "We're now in peak holiday season, but while many workers are away enjoying time off with friends and family, millions are missing out. And that puts them at risk of burnout. Employers have no excuse for robbing staff of their well-earned leave. UK workers put in billions of hours of unpaid overtime as it is. The Government must toughen up enforcement to stop bosses cheating staff out of their leave."

    Adrian Crawford - a partner at law firm Kingsley Napley - stated that it had not been made clear whether employees are being denied leave or are choosing not to take it. 

    He said:

    “The suggestion that there are employers who are manipulating the system seems difficult to believe, so there needs to be further analysis in that respect. It’s certainly possible for employers to get things wrong. Education plays a really important role here, and a lot of smaller businesses who might not have strong HR departments might not fully understand the law. 

    He added:

     “Annual leave is a health and safety issue; we know that taking time off is important in terms of staying healthy. Forcing companies to pay compensation over missed leave seems retrograde, and as we often see with millionaires, having more money will not make you happier.”

    An employment lawyer at Howes Percival - Simon de Maid - stated:

    “Some employers may get caught out by issuing old contracts that do not have the correct number of minimum days of annual paid leave. They can also slip up with self-employed and casual workers where there’s an assumption that because they’re not employees they’re not entitled to leave. This isn’t a case of unscrupulous employers, it’s much more likely that people just haven’t kept up to date with the law,”  adding that HR and line managers play an important role in making sure workers take their leave entitlement. 

    He advised:

    “Have appropriate procedures in place, communicate with employees, and keep track of who is taking leave, when they’re taking it, and how much. Taking annual leave is really important for employees' mental health, and if someone isn’t taking it there could be an underlying reason for that. It could be that they’re afraid they’re under-performing, that they’re stressed, or that they don’t want to lose out on income. Employers need to monitor leave and work on the underlying causes to address the problem."

  • US employers added over 200,000 jobs in June

    Surpassing all expectations by U.S. economists, employers added 213,000 jobs in June - reported the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The average employment growth in 2018 has averaged 215,000 jobs per month.

    In its monthly report, the Labor Department said that six hundred thousand people joined the work force in June, actively hunting for a job. The number of Americans working part time - because of their inability to find a full-time position - fell.  So, also, did the number of those too discouraged to search for work.

    Andrew Chamberlain, Chief Economist at Glassdoor, stated:

    "Today's jobs report marks the economy's 93rd consecutive month of positive job gains, by far the longest streak on record. Despite growing uncertainty about a possible U.S. trade war, the economy continues to run hot this summer with many employers riding a wave of tax stimulus."

    The labor force in June rose to 4 percent – up from 3.8 percent in May – which provided more good news.

    As Cathy Barrera, the Chief Economist for ZipRecruiter, an employment marketplace based in Santa Monica, California, said:

    “I’m really excited to see that the labor force is growing.”  

    She added:

    "Given the talk about labor shortages, it is great to see this increase in labor force participation. While the unemployment rate did uptick, it is due to more individuals looking for jobs, which is good news for the labor market."

    She went on to explain:

    “The increase in the labor force size came solely from those with a high school degree or less—good news that the participation of this group is increasing. The anecdotal evidence of labor shortages tend to center on entry-level jobs. So those who have re-entered the labor force this month are a good fit for positions that employers have been struggling to fill.”

    Agreeing with Cathy Berrara - Marc Cenedella, the CEO of Ladders, a careers site from New York City, stated: 

    "For employers concerned about a tightening labor market, the continued growth in the workforce and the return of workers who had dropped out during the recession indicate that the strengthening economy will continue to deliver newly available employees for hire in the years ahead.”

    The more immediate challenge for employers, however, is finding qualified and reliable workers at the going wage rate, as the 2.7 percent increase in the average hourly wage was found to be disappointing by workers.

    Martha Gimbel, Research Director for Indeed's Hiring Lab, stated:

    "Wage growth continues to bounce around in the range that we've seen since the beginning of 2016.  With payroll growth continuing at this pace, and several measures such as the prime-age employment rate still not fully recovered, it seems likely that workers may have to continue to wait to see wage growth show up."

    However, the competition is giving more employees the confidence to quit in search of a better deal. Job openings are striding ahead of the number of workers ready to fill them. Several employers said their reluctance to raise prices limited the wages they could offer.

    But Joan Burke, Chief People Officer of DocuSign, an electronic-signature company with more than $500 million in annual revenue and who added 100 sales; engineering and technical workers last month, remarked:

    “You just cannot be in this game without being competitive.”

     

     

  • Employers are relying on gut instinct when hiring

    According to a recently published survey - consisting of more than 1,000 company decision makers - employers are mainly relying on their gut instinct when hiring staff.

    The survey, by Indeed UK, found that 28 per cent of respondents cite gut feelings as their reason for offering work to an applicant, as opposed to considering their experience, interview performance or qualifications.  Only 23 per cent of those questioned gave relevant experience, or the fact that the interviewee acquitted themselves well, as the chief reason for employing an applicant. A good qualification was the reason given by only 8 per cent.

    Bill Richards - Managing Director of Indeed UK – said:

    “While it is obviously important to get your CV looking good; do your homework and perform well at interview, the fact that most hiring managers ultimately go with their gut shows how a lot of our nervous energy about the application process may be misplaced.”

    He also commented that these results demonstrated that applicants could be centring their efforts to obtain work on the wrong areas.   

    The research from Indeed also showed the main reasons that a job applicant was not hired.  The chief reason - given by 21 per cent of respondents - was lack of experience, followed by 19 per cent stating unsuitability for the work being offered and again, 19 per cent for grammar and spelling errors.

    Other research by TotalJobs - who are part of the Totaljobs Group Ltd, the UK's largest online recruitment company - found that 74 per cent of employers used social media to research an applicant before interview, which developed their gut instinct in advance.

    In addition, the research showed that only 36 per cent of applicants knew that employers undertook this research of social media, causing Steve Warnham,Jjobs Expert at TotalJobs, to remark:

    “This lack of awareness could catch candidates out, leaving them with an uphill battle to prove themselves.”

    Lee Biggins, Founding Manager and Director of CV-Library, voiced concerns at the findings and stated that although gut feeling played a vital role it could lead to bias amongst employers.  He stated:

    “Unconscious bias can cause problems when recruiting, which could cost business potentially great employees.”

    He then suggested that employers should give careful thought to all issues concerning the employing of new staff, to include but not only, their gut feeling.

  • Survey shows IR35 reforms are not popular

    Calculator Consultants surveyed over 1,500 contractors and freelancers regarding the reforms to IR35 in the public sector - and of those interviewed, 98% said that they would actively turn down work that could lead to them being paid through PAYE. 

    A change to the enforcement of IR35 rules has meant that public sector organisations taking on workers through a personal service company have had to judge whether to deduct tax and national insurance payments.

    Contractors deemed to be subject to IR35 changes are taxed in the same way as employees. However, they may not be eligible for typical employment rights, such as holiday and sick pay - which has led to claims of unfairness.  

    The survey revealed that 76% of public sector departments lost highly skilled contractors; 71% of projects were delayed or cancelled; 27% of public sector contractors left after the reforms went live; 38% of contractors could not be replaced and 24% of projects lost at least half of their contractor workforce.

    It had been believed that an extension of the rules into the private sector would happen - and in May the government opened a consultation that is expected to lead to a broader IR35 regime, causing concern among HR professionals.  They are fearful that increased administration will be required to apply the rules and that there will be a shortage of available talent.  

    It is proving challenging replacing the highly-skilled workers in the IT industry and finding expensive major consultancies to fill the gaps has not been possible.  It was found that 52% of contractors who have left the public sector have not been replaced and consultancies have only managed to fill 15% of vacancies.  Of those who abandoned the public sector, 37% were IT contractors, which caused 79% of IT projects to suffer delays.

    ContractorCalculator CEO Dave Chaplin said:

    “Despite repeated warnings, HMRC completely underestimated the damage that the IR35 reforms would cause. These findings should be a wakeup call to Government, prompting a repeal of the legislation. Instead a private sector rollout of the changes appears more likely, which will cause even more damage.”

    He added:

    “With Brexit and other challenges right around the corner, this was the worst possible time for HMRC to cripple the public sector’s IT capability.”

    Julia Kermode - Chief Executive of the Freelancer and Contractor Services Association - said HR departments needed to factor in the IR35 changes by educating themselves about the rules and considering external support to help navigate the process.  She said:

    “The earlier you start to prepare for a likely roll-out the better because every contractor’s individual circumstances should be considered on a case-by-case basis when it comes to IR35.”

    Senior associate at BP Collins, Chris Brazier, said the results of the survey were not a surprise. He said:

    “The majority of contractors I have acted for have indicated that they would step away from contracts where IR35 applied and this does not seem to be an empty threat. Simply put, there is no benefit to being a contractor if IR35 applies, as they are treated like an employee without any of the protection that goes with it.”

  • SHRM produces Employment Verification Survey

    SHRM - The Society for Human Resource Management - has released the results of their Employment Verification Survey on the challenges related to the Employment Eligibility Verification Form, Form 1-9 and E-Verify.  This is the process by which employees produce documents that will verify their identity and entitlement to work in the US – after which the employers check the documents and complete the Form 1-9.

    From more than 600 HR professionals who were randomly selected, the survey revealed that 44% of respondents indicated that they do not face any challenges associated with the Form I-9 verification process. However, 34% reported difficulty maintaining records - when keeping track of documents with an expiration date - and 18% had issues with the authenticity of the documents presented. 

    The administration of Form 1-9 is one of the most routine tasks handled by HR and Benefits and Payroll departments and can be the subject of a federal visit where any, even minor discrepancies - such as a missing signature - can prove costly.  Many firms may want to do away with the bother of completing Form I-9 but in reality, they cannot do this.

    The survey also found 56% of respondent organizations took part in E-Verify. Of the organizations that were publicly owned for-profit, 79% were most likely to use E-Verify and of the privately owned for-profit organizations, 62% were most likely to use it. It was also found that organizations with 100 or more employees were more likely to use E-Verify and of those 38% participated voluntarily while 36% were satisfying federal contractor requirements.

    When respondents were asked why they opted out of E-Verify, 45% of indicated the reason was the fact that E-Verify did not eliminate the need to complete Form I-9 and 34% stated that they did not participate due to lack of familiarity with the program.

    According to the survey, 83% of employers would support a mandatory electronic verification system. It also appeared that backing for such a system would be even higher if it helped to avoid allegations of employment-based discrimination; included a strong safe harbor to protect employers; verified identity and eliminated Form I-9.

    All employees hired on or after November 6 1986 must have a completed Form I-9 on file and employers are required to keep documentation for former employees for one year after their departure - or three years - whichever is later.   

  • Employment Appeal Tribunal Case Study

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) last week gave out a ruling showing that underneath all the practices and codes and assumptions which govern the conduct of HR matters, the law still prevails.

    Despite it being generally considered, in cases of misconduct, that an employer can only dismiss without prior warnings where there has been a finding of gross misconduct, the EAT recently decided - in the case of Quintiles Commercial -v- Barongo - that this is not always so and that serious misconduct may also result in dismissal without warnings.

    Mr Barongo was employed as a medical sales representative with Quintiles Commercial UK Ltd (Quintiles) - a pharmaceutical agency - from October 2012.  He was the subject of disciplinary proceedings in respect of two acts of misconduct, failure to complete an online training course and failure to attend a compulsory training course.  This took place in November 2015.

    Prior to the incidents taking place, Mr Barongo was given a performance review plan and he ascertained that his reason for not completing the training courses was that he was concentrating on improving his performance.  

    The company refused to accept his explanation and dismissed him - on notice - for gross misconduct.  Mr Barongo appealed, following which the company gave a mixed message by reducing the class of his actions from gross to serious misconduct, but they upheld the decision to dismiss on notice.

    Having taken his employer to a tribunal, Mr Barongo’s dismissal was found to have been unfair. The tribunal stated that after Quantiles Commercial downgraded Mr Barongo’s misconduct from gross to serious, he should have received a warning instead of dismissal. They awarded him £30,078.16 in compensation. 

    Later, Quantiles Commercial - on appeal to EAT - was found to be within their rights in dismissing Mr Barongo, according to the law. Section 98(2) says that a dismissal is capable of being fair if it is for a reason which “relates to the conduct of the employee” which in this case it clearly did. Section 98(4)(a) says that whether the dismissal actually is fair depends on “whether in the circumstances…the employer acted reasonably or unreasonably in treating that reason as a sufficient reason for dismissing the employee”.

    The ruling of the EAT Judge Eady QC stated:

    “The tribunal’s approach in this case was flawed: it unduly limited the potential range of reasonable responses by applying a general rule as to when dismissal might be fair in cases of conduct falling short of gross misconduct, when no such rule is laid down by section 98(4)”. Adding:

    “Further, or alternatively, it fell into the substitution trap, imposing its own view as to the appropriate sanction rather than conducting an assessment of the respondent’s decision against the band of reasonable responses test.”

    Judge Eady then added that it would not be appropriate for the EAT to reach its own view over that of the tribunal and remitted the case to be heard by a different employment tribunal.

  • Supreme Court makes final judgment in the case of Pimlico Plumbers

    Following appeals in the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court recently made a final judgment in the case of Pimlico Plumbers v Smith.  Their decision to dismiss the appeal has now been regarded as one of the most significant in years.

    In unanimously dismissing the appeal, the five judges sitting at the Supreme Court held that Gary Smith, a former engineer, was a worker and not self-employed.

    Mr Smith had worked for Pimlico Plumbers - based in London - from August 2005 until April 2011. He suffered a heart attack and subsequently requested a cut in his working hours, from five days a week to three days. Pimlico Plumbers did not accede to his request and took back the company-branded van he had been allocated for work. 

    In order to be classed as a worker, Gary Smith had to show that he was obliged to personally carry out his work for Pimlico Plumbers and that the nature of their contract meant that Pimlico Plumbers was not his client or customer.

    The Supreme Court concluded that Gary Smith was a worker as his contract with the company had put emphasis on the obligations he had to carry out the work personally and the requirement to maintain a certain appearance. This suggested that the business exercised a high level of control - which would not have been appropriate if they were his customer or client.  He had to use their branded van, wear uniform, be available for 40 hours work per week and sign restrictions regarding his work after leaving Pimlico.

    As a result of the decision by the Supreme Court, there have been intensified demands for clearer gig economy laws. 

    Some employers carefully design their arrangements to give their customers the impression that persons working for them are part of their workforce - whilst giving the staff the impression that they are self-employed - and at present, there appears to be a trend towards courts being unsympathetic towards these arrangements.

    The TUC called on the government to bring in better regulations and TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said:

    “People shouldn't have to go to court to get a fair deal at work. Companies that treat their staff like disposable labour must be brought to book.”

    Director of Policy at IPSE - which represents self-employed persons - Simon McVicker said:

    “The best way to address this legal uncertainty is to write into a law a positive definition of what constitutes self-employment. This would send a clear signal about who is and who isn’t self-employed, and would mean that people wouldn’t have to go all the way to the Supreme Court to get a resolution.”

    Andrew Willis, Head of Legal at CIPD HR-inform stated:

    “While the legal provisions examined in this case have been in place for many years, recent cases have changed our understanding of how they should be interpreted and organisations will need to exercise caution in the arrangement they agree, and then follow in practice, with those they wish to engage as genuinely independent contractors.”

    Founder of Pimlico Plumbers Charlie Mullins has written in People Management:

    “.......We do, however, need a law change to give businesses and their contractors a sense of certainty. God knows, with the mess that is Brexit, there’s enough business uncertainty around at the moment.

    It cannot continue to be the case that a plumber, earning a six-figure salary for his or her labour, who is making a profit on materials, while claiming tax advantages of being self-employed, can demand benefits as if they were a PAYE tax-paying employee.

    The 21st century UK working landscape has been transformed, sometimes for the better, and sometimes – as in the case of zero hour contracts – for the worse. In 2008, there were 3.8 million contractors in the UK economy. That figure rose to 4.6 million by 2015.  This is not a passing fad, and many of these contractors have a single source of income. What we need now is for employment law to catch up with employment.”

  • DOL releases its final rule on Association Health Plans

    The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has recently released its long-anticipated final rule on Association Health Plans (AHPs).  This will allow small businesses to group together - by area or commerce - to create health plans as if they were a single large employer. Sole proprietors, as well as their families, will be permitted to join such plans helping millions of working Americans gain access to quality, affordable health insurance for themselves and their families.

    Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta said:

    "President Donald J. Trump is expanding affordable health coverage options for America's small businesses and their employees. Many of our laws make healthcare coverage more expensive for small businesses than large companies. AHPs are about more choice, more access, and more coverage. The President's decision helps working Americans – and their families – purchase quality, affordable health coverage."

    The Association Health Plans will not be subject to the essential health benefits requirements of the Affordable Care Act, which necessitate cover for mental health, substance abuse, maternity care – amongst other matters. 

    The DOL states that, as many small businesses and their employees have struggled with government restrictions that limit access to quality, affordable health coverage, this AHP reform will address many of the inequalities between small and large businesses in access to that coverage.  The reform allows small employers – many of whom are facing much higher premiums and fewer coverage options – a greater ability to join together and gain many of the advantages enjoyed by large employers.

    The administration’s plan is to encourage competition in the health insurance markets and lower the cost of coverage.   In co-operation with the executive order - issued by the president in October 2017 – AHP’s will not be able to restrict membership based on health status or charge higher premiums to sicker individuals, which were two of the biggest fears about expanding AHP’s.

    Alexander Acosta has stated that in the future, as many as 4 million people will take advantage of coverage under the new plan offerings. This is in accordance with the estimate of Avalere Health – a DC-based healthcare consulting firm – who has predicted that as many as 4.3 million people will leave the individual and small-group insurance markets to enroll in association health plans over the next five years.

    The Association Health Plans will become available on September 1, 2018.

    Self-employed workers can join the plans under the new regulation and in addition, groups that want to form an association plan do not need to have another purpose beyond providing health coverage to members.

    The Labor Department's Employee Benefits Security Administration will monitor the new plans to ensure compliance with the law and protect consumers. Also, States will continue to share enforcement authority with the Federal Government. 

  • Large percentage of firms don’t have access to people data when making business decisions

    Research carried out by software provider, Workday - in association with the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) - revealed that only 52% of organisations were using people data to deal with issues in business.  This has resulted in experts calling for specialist data training.

    Of the 3,852 business professionals surveyed in the study of HR departments’ experiences, it was found that 39% did not have access to people data for the purpose of making decisions but 35% of non-HR professionals thought that their HR team was expert in people analytics.

    Workday identified a link between the use of people analytics and business performance, with 65% of the respondents who worked in people analytics cultures feeling that their business performed better than competitors who were less data-driven. 

    Human capital and governance adviser for the CIPD - Edward Houghton - said:

     “We need to see greater investment in the skills needed to understand people data and we need to encourage the use of people analytics across different functions in organisations, and in finance in particular.  HR must lead the development of cultures that share a ‘common language’ when it comes to people data and a shared understanding and appreciation of the positive impact people data can have on business outcomes.”

    Gonzalo Benedit - President of EMEA and APJ at Workday - stated:

    “People analytics should be available in real-time, and on demand so that that they can be quickly used to make effective decisions. While the business case for people analytics may be clear, the data must be accessible and used as only then will businesses have the confidence to use it most effectively."

    Bernard Marr - author of Data Strategy - speaking at the Cognition X conference in London, warned that “people people” were sometimes in want of the mathematical know-how needed to properly take advantage of HR analytics.  He argued that by splitting the function in two, those with stronger people support skills could create a positive employee experience and those who were more analytical could focus on capturing data and insight. He stated:

    “The two functions don’t always blend well.”

    Also warning that HR was currently failing to appreciate the true workplace potential of artificial intelligence (AI), Bernard Marr said they were “just jumping on the bandwagon” rather than taking time to assess the strategic points and identify the genuine issues that AI could solve.

    Colin Strong - Global Head of Behavioural Science at Ipsos Mori - told People Management that he was not convinced that the case had been made for people analytics as a driver of business success.  He said:

    “Workplace metrics are important but they are only part of the story. There’s more to people management than can be reflected in a set of data.”

  • One in four would leave their jobs if they were not allowed to work from home

    According to a new survey by Total Jobs, one in four workers would leave their jobs if they were not allowed to work from home.  Amongst millennials, that percentage increases to 45 percent.

    The survey - consisting of over 1,000 workers and 260 employers - showed that remote working is in the top five most important benefits when looking for a new job and surpassed other perks such as enhanced parental leave, travel allowances and learning and development.

    Of those seeking employment, 20 percent said that they would choose to take employment where they were offered remote working in preference to one where they were not.  

    Women were found to appreciate the flexibility that remote working offers, with 24 percent preferring the option of working from home or in the office compared to 16 percent of men.

    Of the bosses surveyed, two-thirds stated that they offer remote working to their employees.  The reason given by 38 percent of bosses for offering this perk is that it assists staff in their work-life balance – whilst 25 percent stated that it was to reduce sick leave.

    One-fifth of employers consider that their staff are more productive and happier when working remotely and that is why they offer it.   Employees agree with this – 21 per cent of workers believe they are more productive when working from home and 28 percent also believe that it is a show of trust from their boss.

    However, contrary to this, 12 percent of bosses do not allow remote working – citing difficulty in managing those employees working from home.  In addition, colleagues of those working remotely do not believe that the home workers are putting enough effort into their work.

    Two-thirds of UK employees are allowed to work from home whilst 35 percent are still not given that option. 

    Analysis by the TUC shows that the number of people working from home has slowed down with one in 16 of the workforce working from home in 2016 and 2017 and with managers as the most likely to work from home - followed by Associate Professionals such as architects, engineers and designers.

    The Group Marketing Director at Total Jobs - Martin Talbot, said:

    “With the UK in the throes of a productivity crisis, now is the time for employers to find ways of addressing this issue. The research finds that many people work best from home, however, many employers don’t trust their team enough to work independently.  Companies, as well as the wider economy, would benefit from improving embracing remote working.  Our research also confirms a shift towards remote working, with an increasing number of millennials viewing the option to work remotely as a priority when looking for a new job.  With news that 28% of workers would change jobs if their current employer did not offer remote working, it is more important than ever for businesses to improve their work from home offering.”

  • The Pensions Regulator instigate their first prosecution

    Amongst the staff at recruitment agency Workchain – who were prosecuted for illegally opting staff out of workplace pensions – was an HR and compliance officer.  She was one of five senior employees, who had been encouraged by two directors of the company, to mislead the National Employment Savings Trust (NEST).

    By logging in to the organisation’s online pension system and using employees’ personal details followed by termination of temporary employees’ workplace pension membership, the company failed to pay money on employer pension contributions.  If employees wish to opt out of the pension, auto-enrolment regulations state that they have to do it personally. 

    After concerns about Workchain by NEST to TPR - the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate - Derbyshire Constabulary and Nottinghamshire Constabulary conducted an investigation which resulted in prosecution by the Pensions Regulator (TPR) - the first that they had ever instigated.  The accusation was that the parties used unauthorised access to a computer programme under section 1 (1) of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.  By using the pass codes of 67 workers to log into NEST’s online portal, the senior staff members of the company had opted them out of their pension.

    Darren Ryder, director of automatic enrolment at TPR, said:

    “Workchain’s directors saw denying their temporary workers pensions as a quick and easy way to save the company money. Both they and their senior staff thought nothing of misusing NEST’s online portal. Thanks to the vigilance of NEST, their attempt to cheat the automatic enrolment system failed.  Automatic enrolment is not an option; it’s the law and the law is clear – no one can opt a worker out of a pension scheme, even if the worker agrees. Those who try to avoid their pension responsibilities in this way face prosecution.”

    All seven of the defendants pleaded guilty at Derby Magistrates’ Court and District Judge Jonathan Taaffe committed the case to Derby Crown Court for a sentencing hearing on 28 June 2018.  In the Magistrates’ Court, the maximum sentence for computer misuse is six months’ imprisonment and an unlimited fine.  However, if sentence is passed in the Crown Court, the sentence can be up to two years’ imprisonment and an unlimited fine. 

    Nathan Long, Senior Pension Aanalyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, stated:

    “The Pension Regulator rightly continues to clamp down on rogue employers who ignore or disobey workplace pension rules. The country’s retirement prospects depend on everyone squirreling money away for the future and unscrupulous employers simply cannot be allowed to undermine this vital initiative.  Employers are responsible for enrolling their staff into pensions, but staff have ultimate responsibility for their financial future. This particular case involved treating temporary [employees] differently to permanent staff, which given more modern, flexible working patterns makes it particularly important. Any employers who are not doing their bit should get their house in order quickly, as the regulator once again shows it is not to be crossed.”

  • Rolls-Royce to cut 4,600 jobs

    Rolls-Royce have announced they are to cut 4,600 jobs over the next two years, with full implementation by 2020.

    Chief Executive Warren East stated that the reorganisation will be the company’s biggest in the last 20 years and will affect around 10 per cent of management and back-office staff. About two-thirds of the cuts will be at their Derby headquarters, with around a third expected to happen by the end of this year.

    Since the first of five profit warnings were given in 2014, 5,000 jobs have been cut, with a saving of £250m. Whilst this restructuring will cost £500m to carry out, it is expected to save the company £400m a year by the end of 2020 and will allow for future investment in civil aerospace, defence and power systems. Warren East state:

    “We have world class technology [but] we are just not a world class business to go alongside it.”

    Added to Rolls-Royce’s difficulties have been the cost implications associated with the issues on the Trent 1000 engine. Parts on the engine - which powers Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner - have been wearing faster than anticipated, causing more than 30 aircraft to be grounded. The problems of premature corrosion will take years to modify and has been estimated by some experts to cost in the region of £1bn to rectify.

  • Inquiry looks at how the Government can SMEs improve their productivity

    The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) have stated that - for business owners - talking to HR professionals can be enlightening.

    More than half the UK’s employment and turnover is comprised of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) – but at the recent meeting of the business, energy and industrial strategy (BEIS) committee, it was suggested that there were a number of barriers preventing the achievement of better productivity.

    The scope of the inquiry was to look at what the Government can do to help small businesses improve their productivity, particularly through access to management training; the latest best business practices; and information on the availability of financial support.

    In addition, the enquiry would also look at the subject of late payments to small suppliers and study the role of the new Small Business Commissioner in tackling deliberate poor treatment by major companies.

    In its evidence to the enquiry, the CIPD argued that the majority of SMEs required constant external support to improve their management and development capabilities – and added that the government should be prepared to offer this.

    Ben Willmott, Head of Public Policy at the CIPD told People Management:

    “Many owner-managers of SMEs have very limited experience around managing people and, if you ask them about the challenges facing their organisations and businesses, they won’t say they’ve got people management issues, they will talk about the business challenges. But if they talk to an HR consultant who recognises these challenges as people issues, they can have that ‘eureka’ moment. This is why a relationship with an HR consultant can, for SMEs, be as important as a relationship with an external accountant.” 

    Further evidence submitted repeated the suggestion made by the CIPD that HR managers should be given additional skills, but also stressing the requirement for a system that accommodates the miscellaneous needs of SMEs.

    Professor Mike Wright, fellow of the British Academy of Management stated:

    “If we are to improve management capability, it is important to recognise that not all SMEs are the same and they require training and support targeted to their specific needs.” 

    He added:

    “There is a need to develop support mechanisms that improve the high-level management skills of family-owned SMEs, and enhance their understanding of governance options through better training.” 

    The BEIS Committee has published submissions - in writing - from a range of businesses and organisations including Zurich Insurance; the Rail Supply Group and the CIPD.  At the beginning of June, they will hear from SMEs and training providers with witnesses including representatives from the CIPD; Goldman Sachs; Open University; Monster Group UK and the Federation of Small Businesses.

    The Chair of the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee - Rachel Reeves MP said:

    "SMEs make up more than 99% of private businesses and account for more than half of turnover and employment in the UK. Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy and it's vital that that we get the business support right to boost innovation and the productivity of our SMEs. The written evidence we've received highlights a range of issues which hinder small businesses and damage their productivity, but two main themes emerge - the often crippling impact of late payments by major companies and the lack of effective management training.
     
    The devastating problems for small firms posed by delayed payments by large suppliers were highlighted by the recent collapse of Carillion, which left unpaid debts running in to the millions of pounds. We've questioned the Small Business Commissioner on what is being done to tackle the poor treatment of small and medium-sized businesses and we shall continue to monitor action in this area during this inquiry.

    In our evidence hearing on Tuesday, we will focus on the issue of management training, hearing from SMEs and from training providers about some of the issues in providing effective management training to help develop leadership in SMEs.”

  • Employers can make workers use individual mediation instead of class-action lawsuits

    The rights of tens of millions of employees have possibly been limited after the US Supreme Court ruled that employers can force workers to use individual mediation instead of class-action lawsuits to press legal claims.

    By a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled - for the first time - that employees cannot join together to challenge violations of federal labor laws if they sign employee agreements to arbitrate claims.

    This is a ruling based on the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) - which could affect the rights of tens of millions of private-sector workers who do not belong to a union - and the ruling develops previous Supreme Court decisions that let companies channel disputes with consumers and other businesses into arbitration.

    The decision applies directly to wage-and-hour claims.  But in addition, it is thought that it may let employers avoid class-action job discrimination - although the court did not directly address that issue. Civil rights advocates have suggested that the ruling will threaten class-action discrimination lawsuits. 

    Fatima Goss Graves - President of the National Women’s Law Center said:

    “The Supreme Court has taken away a powerful tool for women to fight discrimination at work. Instead of banding together with co-workers to push back against sexual harassment, pay discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, racial discrimination, wage theft and more, employees may now be forced behind closed doors into an individual, costly -- and often secret -- arbitration process."

    On behalf of the majority of judges, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote:

    ".......The policy may be debatable but the law is clear: Congress has instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must be enforced as written.  While Congress is of course always free to amend this judgment we see nothing suggesting it did so in the NLRA – much less that it manifested a clear intention to displace the Arbitration Act. Because we can easily read Congress’s statutes to work in harmony that is where our duty lies.”

    Employment groups and attorneys everywhere celebrated the ruling and employers are now likely to get their employees to sign the type of employment agreement that the High Court has ruled effective.  This will have great power in protecting businesses from costly wage-and-hour lawsuits.

    An attorney who represents management in labor-management disputes - Ron Chapman – stated:

    “It gives employers the green light to eliminate their single largest employment law risk with the stroke of a pen.

  • HR professionals frequently feel overwhelmed by work-related stress

    According to a People Management poll of 600 people, HR and L&D professionals frequently feel overwhelmed by work-related stress. This may put their mental health under greater pressure than the rest of the population. 

    The poll consisted of 641 individuals who were questioned in depth about their working lives, aspirations and personal background.   It was found that 37 percent felt extremely stressed or overwhelmed - because of work - at least four times a month and 50 percent at least once a month. 

    The results offered an insight into the good and bad of HR life. Findings showed that flexi-work is being embraced, with 56 percent taking the opportunity to work from home.  Automation was welcomed – again, with 56 percent seeing it as a positive for HR and generally, it was found that their pay and progression opportunities were viewed as being satisfactory.

    However, for 44 percent work is too often detrimental to their mental health and for 38 percent to their physical health, with concerns over bullying and - in some cases - lack of access to learning opportunities.  Only 26 per cent of those in the study gave a positive reaction to the question on mental health and 20 percent on physical health.

    CIPD’s UK Working Life Survey found that 22 percent of the general working population was of the opinion that work was bad for their mental health, which pointed to the fact that HR professionals reporting negative mental health was significantly higher. 

    In the CIPD magazine, chief executive Peter Cheese wrote that:

    “It is noticeable that perceived levels of stress and concerns around mental and physical health are higher among our profession than we observe in the population as a whole.”

    “This is such an important issue in the wider workforce today, but we must also make sure we look after ourselves – we can’t be the cobbler’s children.”

    “We need to ensure the proper training and support is in place to be able to manage our stress, particularly as we are also a key point of support for many in the workplace.” 

    At an event to mark the launch of the report, Peter Cheese stated:

    “The lower end of the workforce spectrum are not always feeling well supported, not given a lot of resources in terms of training, and lack sight of progression. Then above them you have managers who are very broadly stressed. That’s a pretty heady mix.”

    He added:

     “The reality is if you’re over-stressed as a management team, you’re not going to be so good at managing or looking after your people, and stress flows downhill. Those are some very important dilemmas to understand.”

    The changing nature of HR duties was also highlighted, with a report that an average of 32 percent of the day was spent answering emails and 22 percent in meetings.

  • Are employers beginning to move away from formal performance reviews?

    According to a 2018 WorldatWork survey - which reflected responses from 867 WorldatWork members - it is suggested that employers are beginning to move away from the practice of conducting formal performance reviews.

    Fewer employers conducted reviews in 2017 compared to 2016 - 91 percent against 94 percent. In addition, fewer employers gave formal performance ratings - 80 percent in 2017 against 85 percent in 2016.

    Alison Avalos, CCP, GRP – Director of Research and Certification for WorldatWork – said:

    “This move away from some of the more traditional elements of performance management is consistent with the expectations we had going into the survey.  There’s been a lot of buzz about organizations moving to nontraditional programs, and while they aren’t abandoning traditional performance management systems entirely, there is evidence that they are looking at emerging practices and implementing individual components of cutting-edge programs. What we’re seeing this year is that continued shift toward potentially more effective ways of driving and assessing performance.”

    On the same subject, survey results released from Korn Ferry say that formal performance reviews fail to achieve the intended result of helping employees become better at their jobs. More than 500 professionals were surveyed by Korn Ferry and of these more than 75 percent said they have annual performance reviews with their boss. However, nearly 42 percent said that their annual performance review had no effect or was ineffective at improving their professional performance.

    Katie Lemaire - Senior Client Partner at Korn Ferry - stated:

    “Organizations realize that managing business performance is a very dynamic process, so having a once-per-year meeting that hopes to both evaluate and improve performance is a tall ask. It is still critical that employees receive regular feedback and companies have the opportunity to re-evaluate their processes.”

    The Korn Ferry survey also found that annual performance reviews take a large amount of time - with seven or more hours being cited by the largest percentage of respondents - as the period spent on their review.

    One of the most forceful reasons for performance reviews is to establish rewards and pay for employees. However, Katie Lemaire said:

    “It’s critical that managers regularly have conversations about performance throughout the year, which is far more effective in driving performance improvement than trying to have a conversation about what people could or should be doing differently at the same time that you are sharing compensation information with them.”

    James Pennington - an attorney with Ogletree Deakins in Birmingham, Alabama, referred to the 2018 WorldatWork survey at the firm's recent 2018 National Workplace Strategies Seminar and suggested that managers who intend to continue conducting formal performance reviews should write goals at the start of the performance cycle, adjusting them if necessary.  They should also give leaders guidance on making feedback an ongoing conversation and using objective criteria as much as possible; request comments and examples to support ratings and allow an employee comments and an appeals process.

  • General Data Protection Regulation comes into force soon

    On 25 May 2018, the UK will implement the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and there will be significant changes of which employers will need to be aware.  GDPR replaces the Data Protection Act 1998 in the UK and marks the start of a radical new data protection - with significant penalties for non-compliance.

    The new regulation brings into line data protection laws across the EU and it will apply not only to EU companies, but to any company processing the personal data of individuals in the EU. This can be in regard to offering goods or services - or to monitoring the behaviour of individuals.

    Under the GDPR, employers will need to provide detailed information, such as how long data will be stored for; if data will be transferred to other countries; information on the right to make a subject access request and information on the right to have personal data deleted or rectified in certain instances.

    Public authorities and private companies involved in regular monitoring - or large-scale processing of sensitive data - will need to appoint a data protection officer to give advice on GDPR obligations, monitor compliance and liaise with the data protection authority.

    Head of content at XpertHR, Jo Stubbs stated:

    “The clock is ticking to the introduction of the new GDPR. However, businesses that haven’t yet started their compliance journey shouldn’t panic. There is still time to start the process, and employers should focus on the most important elements first. The GDPR is an opportunity for organisations to embed a cultural change. By championing privacy ‘by design and default’, HR can seize the positive aspects of the new Regulation.”

    It is suggested that as HR teams are used to handling data and data requests, they can help their business to identify and help solve any existing problems and anticipate any that may arise later.  As HR teams write policies to secure workplace compliance, they can use their knowledge to draft GDPR policies.

    As it will be vital that it is documented that their business has complied with the GDPR obligations, HR can use their risk management experience to assist in this.  In addition, HR teams can provide training to employees to operate effectively in a GDPR-compliant situation, ensuring that their organisation understands their obligations. 

    Employers that breach the GDPR can be subjected to major penalties which include fines of up to €20 million or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is the greater. The level of the fine will depend on the sort of breach and if there are any mitigating factors to be taken into account.  

     

  • Increase in zero hours contracts

    A new Office for National Statistics (ONS) report – ‘Contracts that do not guarantee a minimum number of hours: April 2018’ – plus data from the latest Labour Force Survey and an ONS business survey, estimated that 6% of UK employment contracts were carried out on a zero hours basis in November 2017.    This equates to 1.8 million contracts, which is an increase of 100,000 on the equivalent figures for November 2016. 

    Zero hour contracts refer to those where no guaranteed hours are offered to the worker.

    According to the report, over 54% of those on zero hour contracts were women and 66% work part-time.  Of younger workers, over 8% are still in full-time education and 36% are aged between 16 and 24. 

    Head of policy at the Recruitment & Employment Confederation, Sophie Wingfield, said:

    “Many people on zero-hours contracts are in full-time education – the advantage of having that flexibility allows students to fit in hours around their studies. Flexible contracts also offer employers the ability to respond quickly to the fluctuating demands of the economy.”

    She added:

    “When managed well and by choice, such contracts are an important means of offering people increased choice and flexibility in their working lives. These contracts also offer a part-time option that people choose to fit around their other commitments and data has shown that more than half of employees on zero-hours find that it creates a positive work-life balance. For some workers it won’t be their only job, but a way to top up with additional income or get experience in a new or different field.” 

    However, Catherine Sermon, Employment Director at Business in the Community, stated that many people were facing a choice between jobs that fail to lift them out of poverty or continuing in unemployment, which she considered was no choice at all.

    Low pay experts have been approached to formally seek their views on the impact of higher minimum wage rates for those on zero-hours and non-guaranteed hours contracts.  The government has promised to review the recommendations made in the Taylor review in July 2017 but the experts say the real test will be whether it is implemented in the future. 

    Diane Nicol, Partner at Pinsent Masons - and a Taylor review panel member - stated that the review “considered the thorny issue of how to protect those who are in more precarious engagements – such as zero-hours contracts and non-guaranteed hours contracts.”

    She also asked the Low Pay Commission to consider how a higher national minimum wage might “apply to these more precarious workers”.

    The Low Pay Commission is presently consulting on the minimum wage and will publish its findings with its annual wage report.  This will also take into account the impact of the wage proposal for zero hours contractors.  It will also consider practices employed by countries where zero hour contracts are banned, or where employers are fined for giving less than three hours notice of work shifts.

  • Case study regarding when notice of termination of employment takes effect

    The question of whether notice of termination of employment takes effect when posted, when delivered, or when received personally - if the employment contract does not state it - was the subject of a hearing at the Supreme Court in April 2018.

    In the case of Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood, the decision - by a majority - was in favour of Mrs Haywood, a long time employee.

    The facts stated in the case were that Mrs Haywood had told the Trust that she would be on annual leave from 19th April until 3rd May 2011.  On 20th April 2011, the Trust sent her three letters terminating her employment - by reason of redundancy - with 12 weeks' notice.  

    One of the letters was sent by recorded delivery and was picked up from the Post Office on 26th April by a relative, who left it at her home to be opened upon her return on 27th April.  The second letter was sent by standard post and the third to her husband’s email address, which he did not read until the morning of 27th April. Mrs Haywood was out of the country during her holiday time.

    Mrs Haywood’s contract of employment did not state when notice given under the contract would be deemed to be received.  The Court had to decide whether the notice of termination expired before Mrs Haywood’s 50th birthday on 20th July 2011, as she was entitled to an enhanced early retirement pension if she was still employed on her 50th birthday.  For the lower pension to be due, Mrs Haywood would have to been given notice by 26th April 2011.

    The argument put forward by the Trust was that notice was given when the letter was delivered - as in when it would have arrived in the ordinary course of post - whilst Mrs Haywood argued that notice was not given until it came to her attention. In those circumstances, the notice would have started to run on 27th April and would have expired on 20th July - her 50th birthday - entitling her to the enhanced pension.

    In finding for Mrs Haywood, the court stated that in the absence of an express contractual term dealing with the situation, notice of termination is only effective when it comes to the employee’s attention and they have had a reasonable opportunity to read it.  Therefore, Mrs Haywood was entitled to an enhanced pension.

    The implication of this case serves as a reminder of the importance of contracts providing certainty where the issuing notice of termination of employment is concerned - particularly where the date of notice expiry is vital.

  • Over half of millennials think it’s the employer’s responsibility to help them plan for retirement

    Aegon, with the Aegon UK consumer and customer panel, recently conducted a survey on 685 adults - 380 with workplace pensions - which found that 58% of millennial respondents think it is their employer’s responsibility to help them plan for retirement.  In addition, it was found that 23% of millennial respondents had no idea how much their employer is paying into their occupational pension and 41% with workplace pensions said they were not aware that they get tax relief on their workplace pension contributions.

    The research also found that 51% of respondents aged between 18 and 34 with a workplace pension are not actively encouraged by their employer to check their occupational pension pot.

    However, of the 72% of people with workplace pensions, millennials were the most likely to have picked their own investment fund – in fact, 30% selected their own investment fund rather than staying in their scheme’s default option.

    Kate Smith, Head of Pensions, Aegon – stated:   

    “Choosing their own investment funds is a promising sign that the younger generation is open to taking responsibility for their retirement planning and making active decisions. It also suggests young people are taking a greater interest in what their savings are invested in, and there’s evidence to suggest they are more likely to opt for socially responsible investment strategies. The onset of pension digitization also makes it easier to switch between funds, which is likely to appeal to a more tech-savvy generation. We hope this trend towards increased investment engagement continues for generations to come.”

    The survey also found that millennials are looking to their employers for help with their retirement planning.

    Kate Smith commented:

    “..............We’d like to see more employers encouraging their younger employees to get into the habit of saving through their workplace pension.

    While auto-enrolment gets people out of the starting blocks, it’s only a small part of the solution to saving for retirement. Employees should be encouraged to build on this to take an active role to grow their retirement savings.” 

  • Annual contribution limit to HSAs is restored to previous level

    At the end of April 2018 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced that the 2018 annual contribution limit to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) for persons with family coverage under a qualifying High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP) is restored to $6,900.  

    This follows a confusing series of IRS actions whereby in May 2017 the IRS announced in Revenue Procedure 2017-37 that the 2018 family-coverage contribution limit for HSAs would be $6,900, but in March 2018 they announced the 2018 family limit was reduced by $50, from $6,900 to $6,850.

    As the current tax year was already in progress, this change would have entailed HSA trustees to implement fixes to their systems. The IRS listened to appeals from the industry, and has now reinstated the original 2018 family limit of $6,900.

    An HSA is a tax-exempt savings account employees can use to pay for qualified health expenses. To be eligible to contribute to an HSA an employee must be covered by a qualified high deductible health plan (HDHP); must not have any disqualifying health coverage; must not be enrolled in Medicare and not be claimed as a dependent on someone else’s tax return.

    Chatrane Birbal - senior advisor of government relations at the Society for Human Resource Management – stated:

    “SHRM applauds the new IRS guidance to allow employees with family coverage under a high-deductible health plan to proceed in contributing up to $6,900 to an HAS. The abrupt announcement earlier this year to lower the 2018 contribution level to $6,850 created confusion for employees and an administrative burden on employers that offer HSAs, especially since benefit offerings were solidified last year. Some employers had already begun making the necessary changes to comply with the IRS earlier guidance, which required employers to update payroll systems and revise employee benefit communications, among a number of other systematic updates."

    Information will be available to employers from HSA administrators or trustees regarding any updates they will require for their payroll systems.  However, some HSA administrators had not introduced the changes as they were hopeful that the IRS would restore the original limit.

    Ryan McCostlin - a team member at Bernard Health, a benefits brokerage and HR software company in Nashville, Tennessee – said:

    "Generally, employees who over-contribute to an HSA and don't correct it will get hit with a 6 percent excise tax. Most people who maxed out their HSA contribution schedule early in the year probably didn't do anything after getting an e-mail from HR notifying them that the 2018 limit had been reduced back in March, and they would have been hit with an excise tax if not for this most recent change. The good news for them is that as a result of their inaction they're back in a good spot!"

  • Case study regarding overtime pay under FLSA

    In the case of Paganas v. Total Management Solution, LLC (TMS) and others, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently stated that Mr Paganas - the plaintiff - could still be entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  This vacated a decision by the District Court who were instructed, on remand, to consider whether Mr Paganas qualifies for the administrative exemption under 29 C.F.R. § 541.200.

    Mr Paganas had filed a complaint alleging that TMS violated the overtime wage provisions of the FSLA and the NYLL.

    The plaintiff was employed by TMS as a building manager at St. John's University in New York from July 2007 to May 2014.  His annual salary was $80,000 and his duties included ensuring the cleanliness of buildings; supervising 6 to 15 cleaners; directing cleaners in their work; reallocating workers when short-staffed and setting up rooms for meetings or events.

    He attended a daily management meeting with his supervisor Richard Rossi, who was a director of site maintenance for TMS from December 2007 to March 2011.  At these meetings Mr Paganas was given orders – by Mr Rossi – after which he (the plaintiff) selected the cleaners to carry out the orders and supervised them.  Mr Paganas also had a separate agreement in which he was paid for overseeing athletic facilities during basketball games.

    Although a collective bargaining agreement banned him from performing cleaning duties, Mr Paganas testified that he had performed nonsupervisory cleaning duties for 90 percent of the time. The District Court held that this testimony was not credited and found it to be untrue - determining that Mr Paganas’s primary duty was management.

    In the discussion of whether the plaintiff’s primary duty could be classified as management under the executive exemption, the District Court cited language from 29 C.F.R. § 541.200(a)(2) - which addresses the administrative exemption. The executive and administrative exemptions should be treated separately as they require the employer to prove different facts regarding an employee’s work.

    The Appeals Court stated that the District Court did not address the administrative exemption in its decision, remanding the case for further proceedings.

    Professionals have pointed out that this case should serve as a reminder that employers should make periodic analysis of exempt employees' actual job duties, as despite an employee being called a manager and having authority to supervise, it does not always mean that the employee is exempt from overtime obligations.

  • Huge percentage have experienced symptoms of poor mental health where work was a contributing factor

    A survey conducted by the National Employee Mental Wellbeing has shown that 84% of employees have experienced physical, psychological, or behavioural symptoms of poor mental health where work was a contributing factor. 

    Ciara Morrison, Head of HR and Talent at Instant Offices, has also been researching into the importance of addressing Mental Health in the workplace and how businesses can assist in promoting a healthy work-life balance, as around 91% of managers agree that their actions affect their staff’s wellbeing.

    The National Employee Mental Wellbeing survey found that only 22% of managers have admitted to receiving some form of training on mental health at work, whilst 49% say that they would find it useful to receive even basic training in common mental health conditions.

    Whilst 60% of board members and senior managers believe their organisation supports people with mental health issues - only 11% discussed a mental health problem with their line manager.   

    Although 76% of line managers believe that employee wellbeing is ultimately their responsibility, in the case of a staff member with depression, only 68% of female managers and 58% of male managers were found to feel confident enough to respond to the issue.  

    The same survey showed that 35% of employees did not approach anyone for support on the most recent occasion they experienced poor mental health and where they were concerned about a colleague’s mental health, 86% would think twice before offering to help. 

    Sadly, it was found that 9% of employees who experienced symptoms of poor mental health experienced disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal.

    A new research from the Deloitte Centre for Health Solutions states that workplace mental health and wellbeing is at a tipping point and the report is designed as a call to action for employers - whatever their current performance regarding mental health and wellbeing strategies.

    According to Deloitte, mental ill-health is one of the leading causes of absence from work in the UK with one in every six employees suffering from mental health issues – stress, anxiety and reduced focus also taking a toll on relationships and physical health.

    Their findings show that:

    • progress towards greater awareness and recognition of mental health is occurring at a slower rate in the workplace compared to in public spaces more generally;
    • costs associated with poor mental health and well-being result from absence costs, from presence and turnover costs - as well as from staff that are not fully enthusiastic and engaged due to low mental wellbeing;
    •  greater public awareness, increasing political attention and an increased emphasis on employer responsibilities are driving an increased interest in workplace mental health and wellbeing.

    Amongst the suggestions Deloitte make to employers are to get workplace mental health on their agenda and to encourage employees to support colleagues.  At present, it was found that employers failed to see mental health and wellbeing as a priority.   

  • Demand for H-1B visa doubles

    H-1B visa is in more demand this year than last – in fact, demand is nearly double what it was in 2016. It is not an immigrant visa, although it does allow for foreigners to work legally in the US for at least two years. 

    Republican Senators Orrin Hatch and Jeff Flake introduced legislation that aims to increase the annual quota of H-1B visas to around 100,000.  It also lifts the cap on the 20,000 visas going to recent graduates of U.S. schools - if the employer agrees to sponsor the applicant for a green card. The bill would also provide a special visa to work for spouses of H-1B holders.

    However, it is one of the most controversial immigration topics. The visa program has been widely criticized by US technology workers who have been replaced by foreign workers - or feel their salaries have affected.

    According to a survey by Chicago-based Envoy Global (an immigration services firm) on 401 HR professionals and hiring managers, it was found that demand for foreign workers remains high despite stricter federal immigration policies. 

    Fifty-nine percent of respondents said they would be hiring more foreign employees at their U.S. offices - up from 50% in 2017 and 34% in 2016.

    Richard Burke, CEO of Envoy, stated:

    "The survey respondents tell us they need higher skilled immigrants and think Washington should increase the cap for the H-1B."  

    He added:

    "The U.S. issues 85,000 new H-1B visas annually, including 20,000 that go to foreign nationals graduating from Masters or Ph.D. programs in the U.S. A similar number of H-1B visas get renewed each year.  We asked if human resources executives would prefer a merit-based immigration system and 77% of them said yes.”

    The competition is especially fierce for those who possess high-level skills in technology and Richard Burke said:

    "There is a continuing imbalance between supply and demand for talent. The jobless rate is very low by historic standards, and even lower if focused on college-educated workers. But companies are hiring. Employers are bullish about the economy. And driven by the lack of U.S. universities graduating people with STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) degrees, they look overseas."

    Because the demand is so high, employers are offering attractive perks to prospective employees including immigration-related perks.  Some 92 percent are offering dependent support - primarily in green card application processing, cultural assimilation and language instruction.

    Relocation expenses are being offered by 41% and 39% offer housing costs, with 71% saying they will pay for temporary housing and 32% for mortgage-related benefits.

    Seventy-two percent of the 30% offering travel expenses also offer free airfare for the foreign nationals to visit their home countries and 59% also include immediate family members.

    Transportation costs/rental cars/company cars and cars for an employee’s spouse are also some of the perks on offer, as are local orientation services and home and school searches.

    The ultimate perk for talent from abroad is the chance to attain permanent residency in the United States. Employers are offering green card sponsorship sooner and more often.

    Richard Burke said:

    "We believe green card sponsorships are going up because of the uncertainty around the H-1B program and other temporary work visas."

    Ann Cun - founder and managing attorney of Accel Visa Attorneys, an immigration law firm in San Leandro, California stated:

    "I have seen that trend increase in the past five to 10 years. We have an increasingly mobile and global workforce. And if you move individuals around the world, you have to offer incentives in order to entice them to take on life-altering decisions that don't just impact the worker but their entire family."

    She added:

    "Companies willing to take the additional steps to adopt a formal, proactive program to help promote employees in a way that builds their professional dossier so that they can qualify for a shorter, more expedited priority classification will boost the value the worker feels within the company, strengthen loyalty and increase retention."

     

     

  • Gender pay gap reporting reveals huge inequality in the airline industry

    As UK employers with more than 250 staff were required by the Government to report their gender pay gap by 4th April 2018, it exposed the huge inequality in pay in the airline industry.

    Over 10,000 companies submitted their data by the Government deadline, including all applicable airlines.  The data is shown as both mean and median figures - median being calculated by ranking all employees from the lowest to the highest paid and simply taking the wage of the person in the middle. By measuring in this way, the average is not distorted by just a few who are excessively higher or lower than most.

    What the final data revealed was that the median pay gap across all industries ran at 9.7% - however the airline industry sat well below this figure with the Irish carrier Ryanair producing the worst figures with a massive 72% median pay gap.

    The second worst figure was for Jet2.com, with a median gap of 49.7% and the best - although still below the average for all industries - is British Airways with a median of 10%.

    When questioned about the reason for such inequality, many of the carriers cited the imbalance in the gender ratio of more highly paid flight crew roles as a major factor.

    A spokesperson for Ryanair said:

     “Like all airlines, our gender pay in the UK is materially affected by the relatively low numbers of female pilots in the aviation industry.”

    And British Airways stated:

    “The airline recognises that there is a gender imbalance within its pilot community and is working to address this in part through greater visibility of its female pilots to inspire the next generation.”

    Whilst the exact number is difficult to count, the International Society of Women Airline Pilots maintain that females account for only between three and six percent of pilots employed by airlines worldwide. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) believes that 4.36% of all airline pilots in the US are women, while the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) states it is 4.77%.

    As part of the study, the Government also required companies to report on bonus pay. In the aviation industry, almost all of the airlines disclosed that women were either on a par or ahead of men regarding who received a payout. However, the actual value of the bonuses given to women was almost always below that given to men.

  • Open University analyses the apprenticeship levy

    According to new data analysis commissioned by The Open University (OU), more than £1.28 billion paid by employers into the apprenticeship levy is still unused and held in National Apprenticeship Service accounts. 

    Just 8% (£108 million) of apprenticeship levy funds, out of the original £1.39bn paid in by businesses, had been spent in the 10 months since the scheme’s launch.

    Since April 2017, eligible organisations i.e. those with an annual wage bill of more than £3m, have had to pay an apprenticeship levy to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA). Companies can then recoup the funds from a digital ESFA administered by the National Apprenticeship Service under a PAYE scheme. However, any funding that remains in their National Apprenticeship Service accounts will expire after 24 months. The OU’s report states that employers must, therefore, act quickly to make the most of the fund, as if organisations in England continue to use the funding at the same rate, they risk losing as much as £139 million a month from April 2019.  

    Concerns have been expressed that organisations could be writing the levy off as a tax and not choosing not to spend it. In the report released by the OU, it was found that 40% of business leaders reported treating the levy as a tax, and 17% stated they had no expectation of recouping their funds. These figures were confirmed by the Department for Education and Skills. 

    However, Anne Milton - Apprenticeships and Skills Minister stated:

    “I’ve met lots of businesses up and down the country that have already kick-started amazing apprenticeship programmes and are using their levy funds to help change lives and get the skills they need.”

    She added:

    “It has taken some businesses longer to get going on their apprenticeship programmes using the levy, while many that I have met are forging ahead growing the numbers of apprentices within their businesses, getting a skilled and loyal workforce.” 

    Chief policy officer at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers - Simon Ashworth - stated that levy-payers were aware that there was a two-year funding window and added:

     “We don’t recognise the gloomy picture that this report paints and remain convinced that the levy will be a success. Our training provider members tell us that the levy-payers they are supporting are well aware of the two-year window in which to utilise their funding, and are strategically planning the roll-out of their apprenticeship programmes accordingly.”

    “Many employers are still waiting for the apprenticeship programme they specifically want to be available to spend their levy on. We have also made it clear to the government that the absence of proper end point assessment for many standards has the making of a car crash unless action is taken quickly.”

    David Willett - Corporate Director at The Open University - said:

    “With such a huge amount being paid into the apprenticeship levy, it’s essential that employers in England get return on investment by embracing apprenticeships.”

    “While it’s encouraging that the majority of business leaders agree with the levy in principle, it’s clear that adjustments are needed to make the levy work harder for employers. The lack of flexibility needs to be urgently addressed to ensure that organisations get value for money, and we think that modular apprenticeships, which allow organisations to develop tailor-made programmes that fit their specific needs, could be an attractive solution for both employers and the UK government.”

    The full OU analysis can be read here.

  • Only 8% of employers find it very difficult to ban salary history talk in interviews

    According to a recent survey released by WorldatWork - a non-profit total rewards association - 44% of employers who have applied a ban on asking job candidates about their salary history stated that doing so was very or extremely simple. Only 8% reported it to be very difficult and 1% said extremely difficult. The survey consisted of 838 compensation and benefits professionals.

    It was found that 37% of employers have employed a policy prohibiting interviewers from enquiring about a candidate’s salary history in all US locations - whether or not a law exists - and 35% do not ban questions about salary history.  The companies applying the ban were found to be, in general, larger organizations.  Of employers who have not implemented the ban, 40% are "somewhat likely" or "extremely likely" to do so in the next 12 months.

    Sue Holloway, WorldatWork Director of Executive Compensation Strategy, said:

    "As more cities and states pass laws prohibiting employers from asking job candidates about salary history, more employers are adopting nationwide U.S. policies. I'd expect this trend to continue, especially as pressure builds for employers to justify their pay practices and ensure gender pay equity."

    She added:

    "The idea of having to craft a total rewards offer without salary-history information can be daunting to some managers and employers, but when hiring managers and recruiters are educated and given reliable compensation data on market rates and pay ranges, the need for a candidate's salary history diminishes."

    Salary history data may still be used when internal candidates are being considered for new roles, as the survey found that 84% of employers do not prohibit consideration of an internal candidate’s current pay for setting pay in a new role. Furthermore, 80% of employers rely on salary history in determining an offer that is acceptable to the candidate.

    Kate Bischoff, founder of tHRive Law & Consulting based in Minneapolis, said:

    "This one is tricky, because in many organizations the person putting together the offer is the person who also knows the salary. The temptation would be to increase salary based upon what someone is currently making but maybe not to where the market would put the salary—to save the organization some cash while knowing that the individual will say yes to the new job." 

    But she added that the use of the current salary is not what the salary history ban laws are designed for – adding:

    "They are designed to limit the use of current and previous salaries at the offer stage. So, while I get the inclination, I would still recommend employers use market rates to base salaries." 

    The WorldatWork report - “Quick Survey on Salary History Bans U.S.” - summarizes the results of the survey,  gathering information to understand approaches organizations are taking to comply with new laws and the changing landscape of U.S. salary history bans. 

  • A pension is more important to employees than other benefits

    According to research carried out by Vitreous World on behalf of Jobsite (a leading job board for skilled professionals) on 500 UK professionals, 82% stated that a pension scheme is more important to them than a bonus or private healthcare. 

    It was found that more than two thirds - before accepting a job - take into account the pension policy, on which they place more importance than other benefits.  A performance related bonus was viewed as important by 65% of those interviewed; 51% stated that medical care is an important benefit and 55% highlighted mental health and stress support as important.

    By comparison, the least important benefits quoted were the season ticket loan; time off to volunteer for good causes and a day off for birthday celebrations.  

    Kate Smith, Head of Pensions at pension provider Aegon, told People Management:

    “Eighty-two percent is an extremely high statistic, which is great news. It shows that auto-enrolment is working and people are hearing the pension-saving message.”  

    The research also showed that there was a significant difference between what employees valued in their benefits packages and what they actually received. For example, only 23% of employees received private medical cover as part of their rewards package, the same number as those stating they had access to mental health support services.  This is despite the 51% placing great importance on private medical cover.

    Jamie Smith-Thompson, Managing Director at pensions advice company, Portafina said cost was an issue which forced HR to make choices over which benefits to provide. She stated:

    “The pension budget is the largest so employers have to provide it by law. But with benefits like PMI, employers either don’t provide it at all or provide it only for those in senior roles.”

    Jeff Fox, Principal at Aon Employee Benefits said:

    “There has always been a balancing act between what the employer deems to be important versus what the employee wants. Will we ever see a complete alignment? Arguably not until we see an employer fully place the employee at the front and centre of the benefits strategy.”  He added:

    “Most employees recognise that they may not want to work for the rest of their lives - they ‘work to live’ not ‘live to work’.  A pension will never be a cool benefit, but we should give employees credit for seeing its importance.”

    Nick Gold, CEO of Jobsite commented:

    “Many employers often believe that offering higher salaries is the way to improve the quantity and quality of applicants they receive through the door for a vacancy. Nowadays professionals are not just looking for more money in their pockets right now – especially where many feel they are subject to pressures of increasing working hours. Some are thinking more long term, and how their employers can help them reach their retirement goals sooner.”

    “The answer might lie instead in diversifying their attraction strategy by highlighting other elements of their company benefits packages, in particular their pension schemes. Despite the media attention pension funds are currently receiving as big businesses struggle financially, workers are still placing trust in their employers to help them grow their retirement investment funds. Employers would be well advised to address this demand and advertise new vacancies accordingly. In doing this, potential employees looking to safeguard and maximise their finances in later life apply for jobs that offer them truly valued benefits.”

  • BUPA study shows trust in the workplace increases retention

    With the average price of replacing a colleague at more than £30,000, employee turnover represents a significant cost to UK businesses.

    A new study - commissioned by BUPA UK - which looked at trust in the workplace and its impact on employee wellbeing, shows that 53% of employees considered it to be a major factor in whether they resigned or stayed in their present employment.  The Bupa research also found that 24% of UK employees have left their company due to issues around trust.  

    Commercial Director for BUPA UK Insurance, Mark Allan, stated:

    “Retaining talented people and boosting productivity is a key focus for many employers. As we spend the majority of our time in the workplace, it’s important we work in an environment with a good business culture. Our latest findings pay homage to this – suggesting that good relationships are more likely to boost engagement and influence whether someone stays at a company.

    Within many businesses across the UK, wellbeing is now a boardroom priority and it’s clear that trust is key to building a healthy business culture – increasing motivation, engagement and colleague retention as well as employees’ wellbeing. This latest research highlights the importance of creating a workplace culture that allows people to thrive and also that businesses are recognising the importance of promoting a trustful workplace.”

    The study confirms that a reliable work environment increases retention, productivity and employee wellbeing - whilst also promoting a better business culture. It highlights how important trust is and the contribution it makes to the wellbeing of employees and the overall performance of a company - despite the fact that it is not a physical benefit such as salary, bonus or other perk.

    The ability to depend on others benefits the business and also impacts in a positive manner on the wellbeing of employees as - in the study - 23% of UK employees said they would feel more motivated if trust was placed in them, while 22% said it would help them to feel happier and 18% said it would make them more productive.

    Bupa’s research also reveals that business leaders and managers can promote trust through praising employees when they’ve completed a job; letting them get on with tasks independently; taking interest in their health and wellbeing and providing staff with opportunities to progress in their career.

  • Court of Appeal judgment on how overtime pay rate should be calculated is reversed

    On March 5th 2018, in the Supreme Court of California, the case of Hector Alvarado v Dart Container Corporation of California was decided – by the reversal of the previous judgment of the Court of Appeal.

    The case was decided on how an employee's overtime pay rate should be calculated when the employee had earned a flat sum bonus during a single pay period.   Specifically, it was considered as to whether the manner of calculating the per-hour value of the bonus should be:

    • the number of hours the employee actually worked during the pay period, including overtime hours
    • the number of non-overtime hours the employee worked during the pay period
    • the number of non-overtime hours that exist in the pay period, regardless of the number of hours the employee actually worked.

    The conclusion was the second of these options.

    Hector Alvarado worked for Dart as a warehouse associate in California. He was, together with other nonexempt warehouse associates, paid on an hourly basis and received a flat-sum attendance bonus of $15 if he completed a full shift on a Saturday or Sunday.

    Hector Alvarado brought a lawsuit against Dart alleging that it failed to properly calculate and pay overtime wages to him and to similarly placed employees.

    He claimed that Dart calculated an employee's overtime compensation by dividing the amount of the bonus by the sum of all the hours the employee worked - as opposed to dividing the amount of the bonus by the non-overtime hours worked.

    Dart had maintained that they used this long-accepted methodology set forth in the federal regulations - Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). These regulations provide that the "regular rate of pay" for calculating overtime must be determined by dividing the sum of all remuneration by the total hours worked, including any overtime hours.

    However, Hector Alvarado contended that Dart should have followed the method set out in the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement's "Enforcement Policy and Interpretations Manual" (DLSE manual).  This states that the rate should be arrived at by dividing the bonus amount by only the non-overtime hours worked. For a full-time employee, this would be a maximum of 40 hours a week. 

    The trial court had agreed with Dart and – at a later hearing – the Appeal Court affirmed the ruling, stating that there was no valid California law or regulation explaining how to factor a flat-sum bonus into an employee's regular rate for purposes of computing and paying overtime wages. The trial court noted that the DLSE manual is not binding and in the absence of any binding California law or regulation, they concluded that Dart was permitted to follow the relevant FLSA regulation.

    The Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts' finding that the DLSE manual was not binding authority but, however, they believed that the DLSE's interpretation of that controlling state law may be influential. They also observed that it was bound to favor an interpretation implying that the principles of California law discourages employers from imposing overtime work - by making overtime as costly as possible - and that California's labor laws should be liberally construed in favor of workers.  It also rejected pleas by Dart that it would be unfair to impose this new rule retrospectively.

    As a result - to conform to Californian payroll practices - special attention is necessary by employers.

  • Summary of National Apprenticeship Week 2018

    As National Apprenticeship Week 2018 ends, many examples of the great contribution that apprentices are bringing to organisations - and the way good apprenticeship programmes can develop skills and careers have been seen.

    In the Chancellor’s spring statement he has promised to make money available for smaller employers to take on apprentices, which has been welcomed by experts.   

    Philip Hammond said the Education Secretary would release up to £80m to support small businesses to employ an apprentice.  He added that the current system was challenging for these firms.

    Geraint Johnes, professor of economics at Lancaster University Management School and research director at The Work Foundation said:

    “Small enterprises with fewer than 50 people employ some 48 per cent of all private sector workers. He added:

    “So, they offer a significant engine for employment creation, and facilitating the adoption of apprenticeships in this area is likely to prove fruitful.”

    At present, the Government’s own figures show just a quarter of apprenticeships are going to those aged under 19 years of age, compared to 29% going to those over 25 years of age – and  two-thirds of all apprenticeships go to existing employees, leaving no chance for new people to enter the labour market.

    Recent research by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) has shown that the levy - raised from all larger employers as a means of funding more apprenticeships - looks unlikely to improve the figures as nearly half of levy-paying employers will use the existing training as apprenticeships for current employees.

    The apprenticeship levy, introduced last April, has been met with criticism from some employers and in February, at a government select committee hearing it was described as “woefully inadequate.”

    The levy is paid by larger employers with pay bills exceeding £3m, who set up an account with the National Apprenticeship Service, through which they can access funds.

    Geraint Johnes is of the opinion that one of the reasons smaller firms have struggled with the funding opportunities for apprenticeships is that they will not automatically have an account with the service - limiting their use of apprentices. He says:

    “The extra support implies a transfer of resource from larger to smaller firms, but larger employers will continue to benefit directly from the apprenticeship training when the smaller firms are in their supply chains.”

    National Chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, Mike Cherry – in welcoming the promise of more funding, said:

    “It’s good to see £80m of much-needed dedicated funding for small firms that are keen to take on an apprentice. Small businesses are key to delivering the government’s target of three million new apprenticeships by 2020.”

    However, Elaine Gibson, Education Director at the Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals, said:

    “While access to more funding will be useful to businesses, we would like to see wider training opportunities being included through the levy. This would really benefit small businesses that could strengthen the skills and knowledge of their employees through funded opportunities that they may not be able to afford any other way.”

    The CIPD state that business must play its part by ensuring that pursuing recovery of the levy does not mean that other forms of training investment suffer.

  • EEOC guideline limiting use of criminal background checks when hiring is unenforceable in Texas

    Recently, Federal District Judge Sam Cummings - sitting in Lubbock, Texas - ruled that an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guideline limiting employers' use of criminal background checks in the hiring process is unenforceable in the state of Texas.   

    Judge Cummings stated that the EEOC's guidance is invalid because it was issued without notice or opportunity for public comment.  He further ruled that the federal government is unable to enforce the EEOC's interpretation of the guidance within the state of Texas until the agency complies with the notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act.  The plaintiff at the hearing – Texas – had claimed that, in addition to overstepping the EEOC’s authority, the guidance was an “unreasonable interpretation” of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    The Judge also found that:

    “....a categorical denial of employment opportunities to all job applicants convicted of a prior felony paints with too broad a brush and denies meaningful opportunities of employment to many who could benefit greatly from such employment."

    He added that there were instances where an employee's prior felony conviction would not affect public safety or the employee's ability to perform a job.

    Despite Judge Cummings ruling to prevent the EEOC from enforcing their guidance, he did not disagree with its overall intent and refused to state that Texas could categorically exclude felons from jobs and allowed the EEOC to issue right-to-sue letters to claimants who allege illegal discrimination by employers in Texas.

    Rod Fliegel, an attorney in the San Francisco office of Littler, stated:

    “Although the injunction itself is specific to the state of Texas, the order opens the door to other, similar lawsuits against the EEOC and is likely to push the EEOC to reconsider the guidance.”  

    He added:

    “It remains to be seen how the EEOC will react to the ruling, including whether it will reintroduce the guidance for public comment.”

    If the Court’s decision remains, Laura Maechtlen, an attorney in the San Francisco office of Seyfarth Shaw and the national chair of the firm's labor and employment department, believes:

    "…it puts employers on notice that courts will likely give strong deference to the EEOC's guidance when considering categorical bans regarding the hiring of felons. While employers in certain industries may have legitimate reasons for not hiring particular felons—for instance, a bank refusing to hire a felon convicted of embezzlement—businesses need to be cautious about implementing blanket hiring prohibitions of felons. The best practice for employers is to focus on the qualifications of applicants, and make hiring decisions based on merit."

    She also remarked that as a result of this case, she expects to see more aggressive enforcement of hiring bans

  • Case study – BA employee sues for unfair dismissal

    An employment tribunal hearing recently took place in Watford, UK, when Mohinda Sangha, an airport logistics agent, accused British Airways of unfair dismissal.

    The judgment favoured Mr Sangha and awarded him over £19,000 in compensation – taking into account a deduction of 33.33% in respect of the claimant’s own conduct.

    Mr Sangha had been employed by British Airways between May 1995 and his dismissal in March 2016.  His duties included driving in the vicinity of aircraft.

    Whilst at work on 9 December 2014, Mr Sangha suffered a knee and back injury, which resulted in him being signed off work until 15 January 2015.  He was sent a letter that day, from his performance manager, informing him that a meeting would take place on 26 January 2015 to discuss his sickness absence. The letter also stated his performance manager would support his return to work within a reasonable period and that his termination may be considered as a last resort.

    If an employee’s absence, or inability to carry out their duties to the required standard, is likely to be long-term, their line manager will seek health advice from British Airways Health Services (BAHS) asking for an informed opinion on the employee’s ability to do their job to a reasonable standard in the foreseeable future.  If BAHS advises that they will not – due to medical incapacity – they may advise on whether an employee would be able to do an alternative job.

    On 4 February 2015, BAHS stated that Mr Sangha would be fit to resume work from 17 February 2015 – which he did – and at a review on 13 April it was agreed that Mr Sangha would remain at work.  Following this, he was informed in writing that his performance would continue to be managed and reviewed in three months or before, if necessary.

    Around July 2015, management of Mr Sangha’s performance was transferred to a different person who was not as experienced as the previous performance manager and the three-month review did not take place.

    Around this time, Mr Sangha went on holiday and on his return he developed an eye infection affecting his ability to drive.  He was signed off sick on 20 October 2015 and he was referred to BAHS.

    In November 2015 Mr Sangha had a conversation with his performance manager during which he told her that his eye was blurry and during another conversation with an occupational health advisor, he said that he could not drive at night due to experiencing glare.  She, however, decided he was fit to return without adjustments.

    Mr Sangha was seen at Moorfields Eye Hospital who confirmed that he was fit to drive but should avoid night driving until the problem of the glare had ceased.  However, there was a question over when he received that letter.

    Following his conversation with the occupational health advisor he drove to work that day - in the dark - but was involved in an accident and having informed management, he left work.

    In December 2015 another review took place between Mr Sangha and his performance manager, where Mr Sangha eventually produced a certificate stating that he was fit to resume work provided he was taken off driving duties, but his performance manager stated that she had already told him that he was being dismissed and the certificate was only produced after that decision. This meeting was attended by a union representative.

    The dismissal was confirmed by letter to Mr Sangha on 23 December 2015 and included the statement:

    “Given that BAHS have declared you fully fit for all duties on 20 November 2015 yet you have remained off sick I do not believe there are any changes that could be made that would significantly improve your attendance in either your current job or a different role within the company.”

    It also stated that his sickness days since 2010 amounted to 106.

    Mr Sangha appealed against the decision to dismiss him and the appeal was heard by BA general manager for World Cargo.  Before attending the appeal, Mr Sangha’s union representative submitted a medical certificate stating that he could return to work if taken off driving duties.  When asked why this had not been submitted previously, Mr Sangha said that he had not thought to do so.  The appeal was dismissed as it was claimed that Mr Sangha’s record was “unacceptable and unsustainable.”

    Mr Sangha submitted his claim to the tribunal and it was heard in December 2017 before employment Judge Bloch, QC.  The judge allowed the unfair dismissal claim stating:

    “I concluded that whilst conduct and capability were running in parallel as reasons for the dismissal in this case, the respondent has shown that the principal reason for the dismissal was capability.  He added:

    “However, the respondent did not act reasonably in treating that reason as a sufficient reason for dismissal.”  

    Allison Whiston – Head of Employment and Commercial Law at DAS Law commented that employers must know the company’s management policy and how it operates. She said:

    “Employers should confirm they follow procedure carefully and, before any decision to dismiss for capability, check that they have considered all medical evidence, whether any reasonable adjustments can be made to enable the employee to return to the workplace, and whether there are any alternatives before making any decision to dismiss. Dismissal should always be the last resort.”

    A spokesperson for British Airways said:

    “We are disappointed with the decision and believe we have acted reasonably throughout. We are considering whether an appeal is appropriate.”

     

  • Tax Cuts and Jobs Act could make recruiting difficult in high tax states

    Persons attempting to recruit staff in California - and other high tax states - are facing a big challenge, as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) could now create an added financial burden.

    The TCJA limits the amount of deductions people can claim on their federal returns to $10,000 and deductions include property taxes and state and local taxes - known as SALT.

    The effect of the act could be to discourage staff from applying for employment in these states - opting to work in lower tax areas and having a big impact on how businesses recruit.

    Michael Letizia, a human resources consultant in Stockton, California said:

    "I'm fearful that it will have a negative impact, especially to the middle class, middle managers. Those are the backbones of a lot of organizations.”

    Most Americans, particularly middle-income workers, will see only a small increase, a reduction or no change in the federal taxes they owe due to the TCJA but the SALT cap could still hurt some families in high-tax states.

    According to Michael Letizia, California's property taxes are not as burdensome as some other states - such as New Jersey or Illinois - but the SALT deduction cap has caused some recruiters to rethink their recruitment strategies and devise ways to offer other benefits and compensation that would help to offset any higher taxes and cost of living.   He said:

    "What are the key changes we're going to have to put into our recruitment, compensation and benefit strategies that are going to continue to attract talent, irrespective of the tax changes? I think we're all kind of scrambling to see what information we can find from whatever resource we can find." 

    Alex Thornton, Senior Director of tax policy at the Center for American Progress, stated:

    “Most workers have a home on which they pay property taxes … and, if they can no longer deduct those property taxes, that's going to have a serious financial impact on them. In states that have high income taxes, as well—high state taxes generally—it's going to present a problem and, in a very real sense, reduce their after-tax income."

    However, the true impact of the new law will not be known until taxpayers begin filing their 2018 federal income tax returns.

    In some states, California and New York for instance, legislation has been brought in to reduce the effect of TCJA-related burdens on their constituents. Both those states have considered introducing wage taxes on employers to help mitigate the exposure workers would face. In addition, the California Senate, in a bipartisan vote, has passed a bill allowing state taxpayers to make charitable donations to the California Excellence Fund and for their contributions they would receive an 85 percent tax credit.

    The author of the bill, Kevin de León, said it gives Californians "a measure of control over their tax dollars."

    Frank Sammartino, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, disagreed with the assumption that middle-income earners would be most affected and said that the true tax burden would fall on those earning more than $200,000 a year and not middle-income families as reported. He stated:

    "The SALT limit is really something that hits higher income people much more."

    Michael Letizia, however, said that for companies in California, the new tax law could lead to them losing out on good staff as candidates may decide to opt for jobs in states with relatively lower taxes - like Florida or Texas. According to the Tax Foundation, in 2017 Californians paid the highest income taxes - at up to 13.3 percent - and they also paid the seventh-highest gas taxes during that same period.

    Michael Letizia went on to say:

    "It's almost hilarious when you take Interstate 80 out of California and you cross over the Nevada state line. The amount of industry that has positioned itself just over the border in the state of Nevada to get out of California's control—distribution centers; a huge amount of commerce—just over the border in Nevada; just over the border in Oregon and just over the border in Arizona.  Our border states have definitely been able to take advantage of unhappy California businesses by positioning very lucrative tax incentives and other things just on the other side of the border."

    He stated that the HR professionals he works with are mostly concerned about finding and keeping candidates for jobs paying between $70,000 and $130,000.

    "We're looking to recruit people out of current positions to gain critical talent," he said. "In order to do that, especially if we're going to recruit into major metropolitan areas in California, coming up with an incentive that isn't going to cost people more money is going to be very interesting. You're looking at manufacturing - you're looking at middle management, middle class - and that is for the Los Angeles area and for the Northern California Bay Area. Those are important groups of people that these regions cannot be short on. Without that worker population, their bosses have no way of getting the job done." 

    Michael Letizia has stated that he is also of the opinion that California's perks should continue to win over top-tier, executive-level candidates who will not be as greatly impacted by the tax reform law. 

  • Supreme Court will hear case which is likely to affect gig economy worker’s rights

    The Supreme Court is about to hear a case – the result of which is likely to greatly affect gig economy worker’s rights. The hearing will take place before Lady Hale, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lady Black.

    The case concerns plumber Gary Smith who, between 2005 and 2011, worked exclusively for Pimlico Plumbers on a self-employed contract working a five-day week of at least 40 hours, wearing the company uniform and hiring its branded van.  He provided his own equipment, accepted personal liability for his work and was covered by his own insurance.

    The decision will be made by the Supreme Court as to whether he is an independent contractor or whether he has the rights of a worker - such as receipt of holiday pay, minimum wage, etc. 

    It could be a landmark case for gig economy workers’ rights with the decision affecting about 15% of the working population and also could have implications for other employment status cases currently in the English courts.  This includes appeals involving Uber drivers’ - amongst others - attempting to obtain workers’ rights through union recognition.

    Gary Smith took Pimlico Plumbers to an Employment Tribunal in 2011, claiming that he was wrongfully dismissed: discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments.  He had suffered a heart attack in 2010 and had requested a reduction in his working week to three days.  This was refused and his hired branded van was taken from him, resulting in him bringing the action for unfair dismissal.

    A pre-hearing review took place to address whether Mr Smith was an employee or a worker. At the tribunal hearing, it was decided that he was a worker under section 83(2) of the Equality Act 2010, and he was, therefore, a worker within the meaning of section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

    Pimlico Plumbers and its CEO, Charlie Mullins, appealed against the decision to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) and the Court of Appeal. In February 2017, the Court of Appeal upheld that Mr Smith was a worker, which then entitled him to bring legal action against Pimlico Plumbers, but it did not find him to be an employee.

    Purvis Ghani - Employment Partner at Stephenson Harwood, stated:

    “The case is a timely reminder of the significance of employment status for many businesses in the UK. If the Court of Appeal's decision is overturned, this could have significant ramifications for the wider economy, including many businesses that use independent contractors that operate outside of the gig economy.  It would be surprising if the Supreme Court took a different view – although it could provide further guidance that might help businesses to navigate this tricky area in future.”

    Blair Adams - Partner at law firm Wedlake Bell, said:

    “This could be a very important decision on the question of self-employment vs worker status, affecting both technology-based ‘gig’ economy businesses and more traditional companies.”

    He added:

    “False self-employment continues to be attacked by the courts on a number of fronts, as shown by the recent tax tribunal decision on the use of a PSC by a BBC presenter.”   

    Former BBC presenter Christa Ackroyd was found by HMRC to be an employee - not a contractor - and was ordered to pay a tax bill of more than £400K.

    Harry Abrams - Solicitor at Seddons, stated that a Supreme Court confirmation of worker status in the Pimlico case may result in such companies having to pay unpaid holiday going back indefinitely. 

    Jason Moyer-Lee, General Secretary of the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain, said that the rise of the gig economy means the issue of employment status is more important than ever.

    He stated:

    “So far tribunals’ and courts’ interpretations of these issues have done quite well to keep up with the times — that’s why nearly all high profile ‘gig economy’ cases have declared the individual to be a worker, and consequently entitled to minimum wage rights and holiday pay.” 

    The hearing will take place over two days and the judgment is expected in March.

  • Demand for new IT security skills dropped in the past year

    Tech Cities Job Watch – who provide employers with an indicator of hiring, demand and salaries for IT jobs within the UK tech sector – have published their latest report showing that demand for new IT security skills has dropped by 5% in the past year – from the fourth quarter of 2016 to the fourth quarter of 2017.

    The report shows that there was a 24% year-on-year increase in the demand for contractors but that this was overshadowed during the same period by a 10% decrease in demand for the larger market of permanent IT security staff.  However, salaries increased by 4% - the average salary for an IT security role standing at £60,004 but still remaining much lower than that of a Big Data Specialist who can expect to earn £70,945.

    Ten UK cities - London, Birmingham, Brighton, Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Manchester and Newcastle upon Tyne - are developing reputations as technology cluster hubs and are set to face challenges as hacks and security breaches are getting more prevalent.  Businesses could be vulnerable to more cyber attacks as budget cuts and the introduction of IR35 could create a disparity in the supply and remuneration in the industry.

    The Director of Specialist Markets for Experis UK & Ireland, Martin Ewings, commented:

    “These figures paint a complex picture of the cybersecurity landscape. While hacks are on the rise, the slowing demand for permanent IT security staff indicates that businesses are focusing on up-skilling current employees to ensure that they have the skills needed. The Internet of Things (IoT) has transformed the way that companies across every industry work; and cyber security is now everyone’s responsibility – not just the IT departments. From Web Development to Big Data and Mobile, businesses are conscious that IT Security needs to be factored into all digital projects from the start and employers are up-skilling their existing workforce in response. However, in what is being dubbed ‘the year of regulation’ and following several years dominated by major hacks and security breaches, businesses need to ensure that they are not resting on their laurels when it comes to keeping pace with the ever more sophisticated cyber threats they will face.”

    He added:

    “This trend is the result of a combination of different factors in the public and private sectors. On the one hand, businesses are plugging their short-term skills gap with more contractors but allocating them to lower value, higher volume security tasks; freeing up the permanent staff to focus on their more complex workload. But developments in the public sector are having an even bigger and long-lasting impact on the short-term market. Budget cuts and the introduction of IR35 have artificially forced down the market value of IT Security contractor day rates.” 

    And he concluded with:

    “The complex architecture and high-profile nature of public sector work will always ensure the volume demand of IT Security contractor work, but the downward pressure on day-rates could see the supply of workers transition to permanent roles in the private sector – potentially leaving the public sector understaffed and vulnerable to attack. Many contractors are uniting in response to this, forming their own contractor businesses to work on a subscription-based model. If this trend continues, we could see these new players disrupt the traditional large enterprise outsourcers in 2018 and beyond.”

  • Many employers are expecting to receive tax savings from the new tax law

    According to Mercer’s Impact of US Corporate Tax Reform on Employee Rewards poll which was conducted in January, 79% of employers are expecting to receive tax savings from the new tax law. 

    Approximately, one-third - 32% of the 241 companies who participated - expect to redirect some portion of corporate income tax savings into their employee reward programs.  47 percent have stated that they do not plan to redirect the savings to any employee programs and 22% state that they do not expect any tax savings.

    HR professionals have seen many stories about giant organizations passing their savings to their employees but, until the study, it has not been possible to get a true picture of just how many employers - percentage wise - that will be. 

    Since the U.S. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed there have been several high-profile reports from companies announcing plans to redirect tax savings into increased minimum wages or one-time bonuses for their employees, either of which would be welcomed by their employees. 

    The survey results reveal that employers are also considering a broader range of actions.  Some survey participants said that they anticipate increasing investment in employee training and development programs - with redirected tax savings - than any other action.  This is a sign that many companies are looking for longer-term investments in human capital.

    Mary Ann Sardone - a partner and the North America Workforce Rewards Practice Leader with Mercer - says the findings suggest that companies are thinking of tactical ways to use the tax savings for long-term goals.  She stated:

    “Using redirected tax savings for employee training and development signals that many companies are looking for longer-term investment in their human capital.  While tax reform is still new, many companies are considering a wide range of potential employee investments as they evaluate their approach.  As with any strategic human capital investment, alignment with overall business and people strategy is critical to having a lasting impact.”

    One major example is AT&T. The company announced it would give a $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 U.S. workers and invest $1 billion in the U.S. economy because of the new tax law.

    Adam Michel, policy analyst for economic studies at The Heritage Foundation, thinks the moves that businesses are making show proof that tax reform is working.  He stated:

    “Raises, bonuses and new investments spurred by tax reform show that the Republicans tax reform is working how they said it would. Businesses across America are putting their tax cuts to work for the American people.  This first wave of stories is great news, but the real benefits are yet to come.  Tax reform expands the economic pie so that more Americans will be better off.”

  • Case study - $4.5 million for an employer's failure to grant additional leave

    $4.5 million for an employer's failure to grant additional leave under state law was recently granted by a Californian court – in the case of Hill v. Asian American Drug Abuse Program Inc.  

    Although several previous court rulings have come down on the side of the employers who denied extended leave under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), it would now seem that this issue has not been established.

    Della Hill worked as a counselor for a nonprofit drug abuse program in Los Angeles County - and in 2014, she was honored by that county for her work.  However, in 2015 she injured her arm and subsequently took time off to recover from the injury and also from a diagnosis of severe depression. She was scheduled to return to work on March 23, 2015 but she then asked for an extension of her leave, under state law, until April 11, 2015 - an additional 18 days.

    Della Hill’s employers ignored her request and she did not return to work. Instead, she was fired from her job on March 31, 2015 without further discussion about any alternatives or possible re-employment.

    As a result, Della Hill filed a suit under Californian law - which is analyzed similarly to federal anti-discrimination law - and last month the jury found in her favor, awarding her $550,000 in past and future wage loss, $1.35 million in compensatory damages, and $2.6 million in punitive damages, the latter due to the fact that the employer failed to engage her in any interactive discussion.  The jury decided that this was evidence of "malice, oppression or fraud". 

    Ms Hill was represented by the Los Angeles-based employment discrimination firm Shegerian & Associates.  Carney Shegerian, trial lawyer and founder of the firm, said:

    "Ms. Hill was a hard-working employee who was dedicated to her work with AADAP prior to her termination. After breaking her arm, Ms. Hill took a protected leave of absence, which was when she was diagnosed with major depression.” 

    He went on to say:

    “Employers have a legal obligation to make reasonable accommodations for disabled employees and to engage in a dialogue to gauge their needs. But instead of accommodating Ms. Hill after learning of her diagnosis, AADAP chose to wrongfully terminate her employment because of her disability."

    Carney Shegerian added:

    “Ms. Hill was not only a victim of discrimination in the workplace, but her firing was covered up under the excuse that it was a financial hardship to keep her out on a leave of absence despite such leave being unpaid.  The termination, without warning or legal justification, forever changed Ms. Hill's life.  This sizable verdict should serve as a warning to other employers that there are serious consequences for not only violating an employee's rights in the workplace but for covering up such violations based on unfounded reasons.”

     

  • The American workforce is aging

    The population in America is ageing – and so is its workforce.  There are now more Americans aged 65 years and older than in almost two decades. Early retirement seems to be a thing of the past, as the seniors are predicted to be the fastest growing section through 2024 and reasons for this are suggested as long life, lack of retirement savings, high housing and health care costs. 

    Jen Schramm, SHRM-SCP - who is senior strategic policy advisor for labor market issues at the AARP Public Policy Institute – said:

    “Several factors influence how long people stay in the labor force. Increasing longevity means that people need to finance a longer period of retirement. Many people have not saved enough money for retirement and are facing increased costs of living—particularly burdensome are housing costs and medical expenses.”

    Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics was analyzed to understand which jobs older Americans were taking and how the workforce had changed since 2006.  According to a December 2017 study by SeniorLiving.org, it was found that the number of employed senior Americans had risen by 35 percent between 2011 and 2016.

    The study also found that management, sales and office support were the top three occupations for the over 65s - having remained relatively the same since 2011, but with the numbers of employees having increased.  The top field for older Americans is management - employing 1.4 million seniors in 2016.

    Jen Schramm said:

    "Workers with higher levels of education often have more opportunities to remain in the workforce at older ages. Workers in occupations and with skills that are in high demand may have the opportunity to work longer if employers provide incentives to remain in the workforce."

    The second highest number of older Americans was employed in the Sales industry - about 1.2 million.  Sales consists of cashiers; counter and rental clerks; advertising positions; insurances and financial services; travel and real estate – among others.

    Production occupations employed the smallest number of older Americans and this could be due to the fact that over time, certain skills become harder to maintain due to normal ageing effects.  This limits the number of jobs an older person can perform.  However, production occupations still showed a 36 percent increase in the employment of seniors from 2011 – 2015.

    Americans still see retirement as their goal but are not all in a hurry to do take it up. 

    The study points to the fact that the percentage of older American women who stay at work is lower than the percentage of older American men – but the women plan to work longer than the men, according to Melody Kasulis, project manager for SeniorLiving.org.  She remarks:

    “I'd speculate and say that it could be for multiple reasons like better health, length of life, desire to stay busy after their children have left the household.  The cost of living has a lot to do with the extra years people in the retirement age group are trying to put in."

    Jen Schramm said:

     "AARP research has found that among people ages 65 to 74 who are currently working or looking for work, 35 percent cite the need for money as the most important factor in their decision to work. Finances are therefore likely a key factor for many women working later in life. Approximately 19 percent of people ages 65 to 74 say that the most important factor in their decision to work is that they enjoy working."

  • New law developments for 2018

    During 2018 there will be a number of important law developments – including the response to the Taylor report. 

    Employers will be continuing with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) compliance and gender pay gap reporting, along with preparations for Brexit. 

    The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which updates data protection law across the EU, will come into effect on 25 May 2018 for all EU member states - including the UK.  Data audits and policy reviews will be carried out by employers to make certain that their data protection meets the terms of the regulations.

    Organisations in the private or voluntary sector with 250 or more employees will be required to publish their first gender pay gap report by 4 April 2018 and certain public-sector employers with 250 or more employees have until 30 March 2018 to publish. Employers are required to post their reports on their own website and also on a Government website.

    Reports of incorrect gender pay gap submissions have shown up the difficulties that organisations have in completing the calculations correctly.  At present, more than 350 employers have published gender pay gap reports on the Government website.

    Minimum wages rise each April, and this year will increase to £7.83 for employees aged 25 and over; £7.38 for those aged 21 to 24; 18 to 20-year-olds are due to be paid £5.90; under 18’s will receive £4.20 and apprentices £3.70 with the accommodation offset increasing to £7 per day.

    Workers must be at least school leaving age (last Friday in June of the school year they turn 16) to get the National Minimum Wage. They must be 25 or over to get the National Living Wage.

    Contracts for payments below the minimum wage are not legally binding. The worker is still entitled to the National Minimum Wage or National Living Wage.

    Workers are also entitled to the correct minimum wage if they are:

    • part-time
    • casual labourers - for example, someone hired for one day
    • agency workers
    • workers and home workers paid by the number of items they make
    • apprentices
    • trainees, workers on probation
    • disabled workers
    • agricultural workers
    • foreign workers
    • seafarers
    • offshore workers

    The weekly amount for statutory family pay rates will also increase to £145.18 on 1 April 2018 and this rate will apply to maternity pay, adoption pay,  paternity pay, shared parental pay and maternity allowance.

    With regard to the Brexit preparations, the terms of the initial agreement with the EU protect the rights of EU citizens currently residing in the UK – providing employers with more confidence.  However, the agreement does not include the ability of new EU workers to work in the UK after Brexit and employers in sectors that rely on considerable inflows of European workers are still waiting for confirmation of immigration arrangements following withdrawal from the EU.

  • Nearly £2m refunded for the illegal charging of Tribunal fees

    According to the Ministry of Justice, more than £1.8 million has been processed since the charging of employment tribunal fees was declared illegal.  Over 4,600 applications for refunds had been received between 20 October and 18 December 2017 and this had resulted in £1,808,310 being refunded to claimants.

    In July of last year, the Supreme Court ruled that the Tribunal fees regime, where a claimant was required to pay a fee to bring their claim against an employer to Court, was unlawful as it infringed the rights of employees - in some circumstances making access to justice impossible. This followed a legal challenge by Unison.

    Justice Minister, Dominic Raab told the Justice Committee that employment tribunal fee refunds were expected to be in the region of £33m, based on the fees paid since they were introduced in 2013.  It is likely the number of people entitled to a refund could reach 100,000.

    It is thought that the refunds consist of the actual amount a claimant paid for the Tribunal - plus interest of 0.5% calculated from the date of the original payment to the refund date. 

    Catherine Greig, a senior associate at MacRoberts, commented on the refunds already made, saying,

    “The numbers are so small at the moment because of the small timeframe. However, bigger legal firms could be doing a lot of admin for claims behind the scenes and it could be a case of the floodgates opening soon because they’ll be sitting on claims.”

    Nicholas Robertson, head of employment at Mayer Brown’s London office, said,

    “There may have been some late claims lodged immediately after the Unison case, where claimants were prevented from suing by the potential fees and are bringing older claims now, as quickly as possible, and relying on the tribunal to permit such out of date claims to go ahead. This feature by its very nature will be short-lived.”

    “I said after the outcome of the Unison case that my instinct was that there would be more tribunal claims, but it remains to be seen if tribunal claims will return to the levels before the introduction of the fees regime. My view is that they will not return to those levels.”

    He added that fewer claims were being lodged by multiple claimants - which may suggest people were being advised that it was safer to bring a claim individually.

    “The tribunal system’s resources were reduced to handle a reduced level of anticipated claims. So increased hearing times are not surprising even if there is only a relatively modest increase in the number of claims.”

    The removal of the Tribunal fees leaves a gap in Government funding increased by the refunds that will be paid.  However, there is no indication as yet that a new fee regime will be introduced.   

    However, it has been advised that employers should be vigilant in their treatment of staff to ensure fair practice is maintained across the workforce and that policies and procedures are in not only in place, but followed.      

  • Survey suggests the number of permanent staff placements increase at the end of 2017

    The Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC) survey and HIS Markit’s Report on Jobs have released figures suggesting that the number of permanent staff placements - and starting salaries - increased at the fastest pace in four months, at the end of 2017. 

    They also reported that the growth of temporary placements was high with a marked decline in staff availability - the sharpest decrease reported in the last two years - contributing to steep increases in pay. Overall demand for staff remained sharp, firmly above the average seen over the 20-year survey history.

    The REC/HIS Markit’s Report on Jobs provides the most comprehensive guide to the UK labour market, using original survey data provided by a panel of 400 UK recruitment consultancies.  

    Figures released by Totaljobs on their website also reflected the recruitment boom, suggesting that there had been an increase of 20% in the number of jobs advertised in the first week of 2018 compared to the same period in 2016.

    On a regional basis, the Midlands continued to show the fastest increase in permanent placements at the end of the year and the least rate of growth was seen in London - but London registered the fastest increase in temp billings of all five monitored UK regions in December. Expansion was also sharp elsewhere.

    December data pointed to rising demand for staff, both in the private and public sector, although growth remained sharper for the private sector.

    This information, however, contrasts with the official statistics from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) which revealed that there had been a 2% overall fall in employment, together with 0.2% fall in real weekly earnings, including bonuses.

    Charles Cotton – reward adviser at the CIPD – stated:

    “The REC survey is focusing specifically on recruitment and individuals being placed in organisations but is not necessarily looking at those who are leaving or being made redundant. The broader picture, including labour market issues, must be taken into consideration to reach a balanced view of what is really happening in the recruitment market.”

    REC chief executive Kevin Green said:

    “Employers, as a response to these candidate shortages, are offering increased starting salaries to attract staff – but while this has been the case for some time, it isn’t translating into significant wage growth across the economy yet,”

    Charles Cotton warned that increases in starting salary may not be good for employees in the longer term:

    “Organisations are increasing starting salaries to get people through the door but, once they are in there, then this does not improve particularly fast, and if they have been appointed to the top of their pay range they may not see much of a pay rise at all.”  

    He added:

    “That is an issue we called out last month in the CIPD’s latest reward management survey, which could throw up a number of employee relations issues in the longer term. Employers should always seek to confirm how long and enduring the recruitment surge will be before taking people on to permanent contracts.”

    “Whether taking on new staff permanently or shifting existing employees from temporary to permanent contracts, it’s important to be creative and consider your working culture, what people are being paid, and non-financial benefits that could put you ahead in terms of recruitment, as well as ensuring you don’t undersell or oversell for the job you advertise.”

    Kevin Green, REC Chief Executive says:

    “Early in the New Year, people often think about changing jobs, so employers are going to have to think carefully about how they can both retain existing capabilities and find the new hires they need as competition for people intensifies. Bosses should consider going to wider talent pools and to be inventive about how to improve their employer brand and make themselves an even more attractive place to work.”

  • IRS extends the deadline for distributing ACA forms to individuals

    The Department of Health and Human Services and other executive departments and agencies have been given the authority and discretion to roll back certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) after President Trump signed an executive order.

    As Congress had tasked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with the enforcement of several key components of ACA - including the individual mandate, it was unclear as to what that actually meant.  

    However, it appears that the IRS - despite warnings to employers that it would not be giving extensions or penalty relief - will not be enforcing the mandate and the IRS has said that they will be extending the deadline for distributing Forms 1095-B and 1095-C to individuals by 30 days to March 2, 2018.  The date for filing Forms 1094-B and 1094-C (and Forms 1095) with IRS has not been extended and remains at February 28, 2018 for paper forms and April 2, 2018 for electronic filing.

    In addition to extending the deadline, the IRS will once again offer penalty relief if a company can show that it has made good-faith efforts at complying with the demands of ACA reporting, such as gathering necessary data and transmitting it to a third-party to prepare required reports; testing the ability to transmit data to the IRS and taking steps to ensure compliance for the 2018 tax year.

    At the end of 2017, the IRS announced it would begin assessing employer mandates penalties on companies for their 2015 reporting but now the IRS has revealed the specific letter it will issue, when the letter will be issued; the time frame for which the letters apply and an official sample of the letter it will be using.

    If it is determined that an applicable large employer company did not fulfill the ACA’s offer of coverage rules or had one or more of its full-time employees receive a premium tax credit for at least one month in 2015 - the IRS will issue a letter. 

    A response to the letter will be required by the date shown on the letter - which is usually 30 days from the date of issue.

  • Employers are required to show Labor Law posters

    Employers with at least one employee or more are required to conspicuously show Labor Law posters in an area frequented by all employees – for example, locations could include designated bulletin boards in the break room, above time clocks, in the employee lounge or in a cafeteria or a lunch room.

    Failure to fulfil the posting requirements can result in a steep fine. Most federal, state and local penalties range from $500 to $10,000 per offense; however, agencies retain discretion about whether to assess or reduce such statutory penalties but penalties may also be escalated after the first offense.

    The new year of 2018 brings in new compliance standards – meaning that employers will have to update their posters.  The new information required concerns federal and state minimum wages, safety at work and health regulations.  However, only some employers are required to display some of the posters – for example the Family and Medical Leave Act needs to be shown by employers of over 50 workers and small businesses would not be subject to the Act's posting requirements.

    To assist employers, the Department Of Labor can provide electronic copies of the required posters and some of the posters are available in languages other than English.

    Franklin Wolf, an attorney with Fisher Phillips in Chicago, stated: “Employers should not be shy about conferring with counsel about any updates in the law.”  He added: “Laws applicable to employers may change at a rapid pace and without much mainstream news coverage. This is particularly true for state and local laws."

    Aaron Warshaw, an attorney with Ogletree Deakins in New York City, said: “Consulting with counsel may lead to a more detailed compliance discussion. For example, you may start a call asking about the poster requirements under New York state law, but the attorney may say, 'Hey, by the way …,' and you end up talking about the recently enacted New York City Fair Workweek Law."

    He added, “Whenever a client asks me to handle an onsite inspection by a government agency, one of the first steps I take is examine the site's workplace posters". He continued "If a government investigator sees that the employer has not updated its EEO and wage and hour posters since the Bush administration, then he or she may reasonably conclude that the employer's general employment practices have not been updated either."

  • Survey pinpoints strengths and weaknesses of HR leaders

    In a survey of 2,187 CEOs and business leaders, the leadership consulting firm of Zenger Folkman identified "establishing stretch goals" as the No.1 competency gap among HR leaders.  These leaders are spread across hundreds of different organizations with 68% located in the US, 11% in Asia, 8% in Europe, 7% in Latin America, 4% in Canada, and 1% in Africa.

    Steve Rice, CHRO of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in Seattle, said:

    “HR leaders can be overly risk averse to their own detriment. Fear drives mediocrity. It's necessary to take risks to move forward.”

    After comparing an appraisal of leaders in the HR function with those of leaders in other functions, the data suggests that the typical HR leader is seen as six percentile points below average. HR seems to have become every manager and employee’s favorite corporate punch bag, competing with IT for the title of the most-irritating function.  

    The data was analyzed in two different ways. The results for the 2,187 HR leaders in the dataset was compared with those of 29,026 leaders in other functions. A few key skills that were common strengths of those in HR and also some that appeared as weaknesses were identified.

    Generally speaking, one of the most positive areas for HR leaders was that they were very concerned about developing other staff. This separated them from leaders in other functions, who did not score highly on this skill. They also rated positively on providing coaching, acting as a mentor and giving feedback in a helpful way.  The persons taking the survey were also asked to indicate the importance of each competency measured - they rated this skill eleventh of 16 for HR leaders. Therefore it could be that developing others is not taken as seriously as other competencies that are highly valued by the other functional leaders.

    Areas where HR leaders scored higher than leaders in other functions were in building positive relationships, role modelling and having functional knowledge and expertise.

    When comparing HR leaders to all other leaders they were not rated positively on their ability to understand the needs and concerns of customers. The function of HR appears to focus on internal problems - and the apparent lack of understanding of the external environment causes others to view some HR leaders as not in touch with the issues facing the organization.

    Other weaknesses pinpointed were their inability to view the larger picture, focusing instead on the day-to-day issues and a general lack of speed and urgency to respond and react quickly to problems.

    The survey did show, however, that HR leaders were among some of the best leaders in the world.

  • EAT rules that unions must consult employers when employees are signed to collective bargaining

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that employers must consult unions when changing employees’ terms and conditions when they are signed up to collective bargaining.

    The EAT upheld a decision made by the Sheffield Employment Tribunal to compensate employees of Kostal UK – an electronics manufacturer – for the breaching of collective bargaining rules. The employees were members of the trade union Unite.  It was found that the company had made unlawful inducements to the employees to sign a new contract without consulting with the union and ruled that it must pay its employees compensation of £3,800 for each unlawful inducement made.

    Eat judge Mrs Justice Simler stated that section 145b of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992 seeks to prevent employers “going over the heads of the union with direct offers in order to achieve the result that one or more terms will not be determined by collective agreement with the union if the offers are accepted”.

    The claims resulted from a failed agreement between Kostal and Unite, following a proposal for a 2% increase in basic pay, plus an additional 2% for those earning less than £20,000 – together with a Christmas bonus payable during the 2015 festive season.  In addition, Kostal sought a sick pay and Sunday overtime reduction for new employees and consolidation of the two 15-minute breaks currently in operation, into one 30-minute break.

    In December 2015, Kostal wrote to employees asking that they sign a new contract containing the new terms and conditions or risk losing their Christmas bonus.  Those who did not accept the offer were again urged to do so in January 2016.  The union was not aware of this contact and subsequently – on behalf of the employees – sued Kostal for compensation, which they won.

    Kostal appealed and argued that it had not intended to encourage employees out of collective bargaining but to inform them that there was a time limit on the offer of the Christmas bonus.  Agreement was eventually reached on pay and amended terms and conditions, but by then the offer of the Christmas bonus was no longer applicable.

    In her judgement, Mrs Justice Simler said that the law prohibited offers made to workers who are members of a recognised trade union – or one seeking recognition by their employer – if acceptance of the offer would have a prohibited result and the sole or main purpose in making the offers is to achieve that result. The prohibited result is that the workers’ terms of employment, or any of those terms, “will not, or will no longer, be determined by collective agreement negotiated by or on behalf of the union”.  She also quoted a government review of the law that confirmed the law should explicitly prohibit inducements or bribes being made to trade union members to forego union rights.

    Ranjit Dhindsa, Partner and head of the employment, pensions and immigration team at Fieldfisher stated:

    “That means employers or unions cannot go behind the veil of collective terms by going directly to employees when it suits them. A lot of employers get frustrated with collective bargaining, as seen here when Kostal couldn’t come to a pay agreement with its union.”

    She added:

    “….a lot of employers may have tried this tactic and got away with it, but they can’t now assume that they will”.  

    Howard Beckett, assistant general secretary for legal services at Unite, said:

    “The decision confirmed employers cannot dip in and out of collective bargaining when it suits their purposes and this is key to protecting workers and trade unions from underhand employer tactics.”

     

  • Korn Fery announces 2018 global salary forecast

    A forecast issued during December 2017 by the Hay Group division of Korn Ferry shows that salaries are to rise by only 1.5% globally, when adjusted for inflation. This is considerably down on 2017’s prediction of 2.3% and 2016’s prediction of 2.5%.

    The figures were calculated using Korn Ferry’s pay database and according to their website, contains data from more than 20 million job holders in 25,000 organizations, across more than 110 countries. Using predicted salary increases for 2018 as forecasted by global HR departments and comparing them to predictions made at this time last year regarding 2017, it also takes into account 2018 inflation data from the Economist Intelligence Unit.

    In the US, an average increase of 2.8% is predicted – this is about the same as last year. However, when adjusted for inflation (expected to be 2% in 2018) the real wage increase is only around 0.9% - which is down from 1.9% last year.

    Western Europe, which incorporates the UK, fairs less well with an average increase of 2.3% predicted and the inflation-adjusted real wage giving an increase of only 0.9%.

    Bob Wesselkamper, who is Global Head of Rewards and Benefits Solutions at Korn Ferry stated:

    "With inflation rising in most parts of the world, we're seeing a cut in real wage increases across the globe."

    He added:

    "On average, employees are not seeing the same real pay growth they did even one year ago."

  • Employment Tribunal claims up since fees were abolished

    According to Government data, in the 3 months since Tribunal fees were abolished in July, the number of claims have risen by 66 percent – one of the strongest indicators that introducing fees for Employment Tribunals was discouraging employees from making claims.

    Following a Supreme Court ruling that said the Government was acting unlawfully to introduce them, the Ministry of Justice “took immediate steps” to stop charging fees for tribunals and also rolled out a fee refund scheme for claimants who had paid fees between 2013 and 2017. Individuals who paid tribunal fees between these dates can apply to be reimbursed and it is estimated that 100,000 claims are eligible for a refund, which could cost up to £27m.

    The newly released statistics show that the number of single claims for individual grievances such as unfair or wrongful dismissal increased dramatically, with claims for unlawful deductions from wages, for example, now re-emerging from a low of 549 in July 2017 to a high of 2926 claims in August 2017. It is thought that many workers found the cost of bringing a claim for something such as underpaid holiday often exceeded the amount being disputed and therefore did not proceed.

    However, whilst single claims appear to be on the increase, multiple tribunal claims fell to 23,297 which is a decrease of 15 per cent over the same period as last year. Experts have reasoned that this could be because during the period when fees were charged, it was cheaper to work as a group, rather than bring a single claim, which would seem to be borne out by the recent rise in single claims.

    Obviously these figures only reflect the very recent trend and experts have said that more figures would be needed before they could tell whether this is the new norm.

  • How to improve retention rates in entry level employees

    In order to understand how employers can improve engagement and retention of employees, FSG - together with Hart Research Associates - surveyed over 1,200 entry-level, hourly workers between the ages of 17 and 24 years of age.   Dozens of companies were also interviewed to find out how they have improved staff retention.

    The young people that were surveyed worked in a wide range of jobs, which included health care, manufacturing, retail, and hospitality.  More than half of these 1,200 young people working in entry-level jobs said that was their intention to leave in less than a year. Less than a quarter stated that they were highly satisfied with their job.

    As turnover can cost up to 200% of an employee's annual salary, depending on what their role is, it can therefore cost businesses billions of dollars each year.  

    Employers wanting to improve retention were advised of key ways this could be achieved - by improving manager training; diversity and inclusion and scheduling – although it was found that some employers are already improving in these areas.

    Job satisfaction amongst the young people surveyed was found, in a large part, to be determined by how they perceived the way their manager treated them, with being treated fairly and with respect often more important than income. Nearly 50% of the women and 40% of the men surveyed said that they had struggled at work because they felt they were treated unfairly by their manager and 32% said they had previously lost a job due to unfair or disrespectful treatment. 

    HMSHost - the largest provider of food and beverage services for travelers in North America - used its Engagement Training Program to help frontline managers provide authentic recognition to its employees, to listen and solve problems and deliver specific, actionable feedback to their teams. Where it tested this training, it received enthusiastic feedback from managers and associates and saw early improvements in associate engagement and retention.

    Research showed that young people are more than twice as likely to stay in their employment for more than a year if they see the job as a career - or a stepping stone to a career. However, only 35% of young people surveyed described their current employment in those terms. It was suggested that employers could offer meaningful opportunities for professional growth within the company.

    In addition, employers can support educational achievement for young people, as 45% of those surveyed wanted to go to college and the responses indicated that those who enrolled in school whilst working are much more likely to stay in their current jobs.

    Starbucks recently expanded its College Achievement Plan - offering free tuition for online classes and removing cost, knowledge and schedule barriers for employees. Early results show that the changes are paying off, as employees enrolled in the plan are being retained twice as long and promoted four times as often as employees not participating in the program.

    Employers could also create a more diverse and inclusive work environment as there is clear evidence that doing so is good for business. For example, Gap Inc. is a leader in this area, creating a program called This Way Ahead for teens and young adults facing barriers to employment.  Sixty five percent of its participants are women, 98% people of color and all are from low-income backgrounds. After training and a 10-week paid internship, 75% of This Way Ahead graduates received offers of employment at Gap, Old Navy and Banana Republic stores. Gap Inc found it to be an effective talent strategy and the retention rate for these employees is double that of their peers. Their performance ratings are on par with their peers and graduates have higher-than-average engagement scores.

    Of the youths surveyed, 83% said they would be more likely to stay in their current job if they had more control over their work schedules. Predictability and flexibility were most important - they want to know, in advance, the days and times they are going to work and they also want their managers to be flexible when unexpected events such as sickness or transportation challenges, arise outside of work.

    Young people value good benefits and wages, however research showed that whilst they value benefits like overtime pay, a 401k retirement-savings plan and paid time off, the most important benefit by far is health insurance. That is why companies like UPS, Lowes, REI, and Starbucks are in high demand - they all offer some form of health insurance for part-time, hourly employees.

    More than 50% of the youths surveyed wanted to more work hours and research suggested that offering existing workers additional hours, rather than hiring new workers, may be one way to save on costs and improve employee satisfaction.

    There is also a business case for raising wages. In 2014, IKEA decided to raise its minimum wage, which led to a 5% improvement in retention in less than six months. It was so successful from a business perspective that IKEA raised wages again in 2015. Other low-cost retailers, from Costco to Trader Joe's, have also shown that raising wages can create a competitive advantage.

    Research finds that there is a clear business case for putting these ideas into practise and employers who are leading the field in these areas are surpassing industry averages when it comes to retention and employee engagement. This not only makes them better places for young people to work but it also makes them stronger businesses.

     

  • Half of US workers say they have been affected by organizational changes

    According to APA’s 2017 Work and Well-Being survey - released by the American Psychological Association - half of American workers (50 percent) say that in the last year they have been affected by; are currently being affected by; or expect to be affected by organizational changes.  The survey was conducted online by Harris Poll among more than 1,500 American adults who were employed full time, part time or self-employed.

    The survey findings show that workplace changes may affect employees’ job attitudes and experiences.  Staff who reported being affected by organizational change (71 percent) currently - or within the past year - reported lower levels of job satisfaction compared with employees who reported no recent, current or anticipated changes (81 percent).

    Also, Americans who reported recent or current change (34 percent) were almost three times more likely to say they have no trust in their employer (12 percent) and more than three times as likely to say that they intend to seek new employment within the next year (46 percent) compared with those who suffered no recent, current or anticipated change.

    David W Ballard, PsyD, MBA – head of APA’s Center for Organizational Excellence, states,

    “Change is inevitable in organizations, and when it happens, leadership often underestimates the impact those changes have on employees. If they damage their relationship with employees, ratchet up stress levels and create a climate of negativity and cynicism in the process, managers can wind up undermining the very change efforts they’re trying to promote.”

    Other findings of the survey are:

    • 78 percent of U.S. workers reported average or better levels of work engagement - as characterized by high levels of energy - when being strongly involved in their work and feeling happily engrossed in what they do.
    • 22 percent reported low or very low levels of engagement at work, but 30 percent of workers who felt they were treated fairly by their employers were more than five times as likely to report high or very high levels of work engagement, compared with 7 percent of employees who felt unfairly treated.
    • Although 71 percent of employed adults felt that their organization treats them fairly, 21 percent said they did not trust their employer.
    • Employees who had no trust in their employer (70 percent) were likely to say that they were tense and stressed at work – and indicated that they intended to look for a new job within the next year - compared with 23 percent who trust their employer.  

    Trust and engagement play important roles in the workplace.  In predicting well-being, engagement and trust accounted for 53 percent of the variance. Employees reported having more trust in their organizations when their contributions are recognized and opportunities for involvement are provided. 

    Employees also experienced higher engagement when they had more positive perceptions of their employer’s involvement, growth and development and health and safety practices.

     “For organizations to successfully navigate turbulent times, they need resilient employees who can adapt to change,” David W Ballard said. “Disillusioned workers who are frustrated with change efforts, however, may begin to question leaders’ motives and resist further changes. To build trust and engagement, employers need to focus on building a psychologically healthy workplace where employees are actively involved in shaping the future and confident in their ability to succeed.”

  • Research shows managers can improve staff performance by focusing on strengths not weaknesses

    The CIPD - the professional body for HR and people development - have published new research showing the value of strength-based performance conversations.  It shows that line managers can improve their staff performances by focusing on their strengths and not their weaknesses.

    This method endeavours to move away from a ‘shortfall’ approach, which is focused on identifying and fixing the weaknesses of team members; analysing what is wrong and deciding how that can be avoided.

    Jonny Gifford, Senior Research Adviser for organisational behaviour at the CIPD, said:

    “The strengths-based approach marks a big shift in mind-set for many, if not most of us. Our default mode when looking for improvements tends to be deficit-oriented – we hone in on what’s gone wrong and consider how we can avoid that in the future. There will always be cases where it’s imperative to do this, but our research shows the benefit of making the norm in performance conversations to reflect instead on what worked well, why, and how it can be replicated. The research demonstrated that by focusing on the positives and building on what works, we can actually boost employee performance and help with the learning and development of our teams.”

    The research done by the CIPD concentrated on workplace involvements in three government organisations:

    • Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
    • The National Offender Management Service (now called Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service - or HMPPS)
    • The Valuation Office Agency (VOA), as well as work with the Civil Service Employee Policy team.

    The study involved before-and-after measures comparing control groups who were not given any training or support, with treatment groups who attended a training workshop on leading strengths-based performance conversations.

    In the Valuation Office Agency there were added interventions, including a change in HR policy on performance management.

    After the study, it was found from employee feedback that there was a marked improvement in the usefulness of performance conversations when they were focused on strengths rather than weaknesses – 9.7% of employees agreed with the statement, “My meetings with my line manager help me learn and develop as a professional”.  It was also found that 7.4% agreed with the statement, “My meetings with my line manager help to improve my performance”.

    In the civil service, it was shown that employee performance improves with simple training which focuses on building strengths and not dealing with weaknesses.  It is also possible to increase the results with changes to HR policy and further training for managers.

    The published report also shows how robust and useful research can be conducted into people management practices.  HR and people development needs more research of this nature. 

    Andrew Kean, Deputy Director of Civil Service Employee Policy, said:

    “In the Civil Service, we know that the quality of the performance conversation between the manager and their employee is fundamental to any good performance management approach. So we are delighted that this research, which has centred on the nature and quality of performance conversations, has provided such clear results. In particular, that a simple training intervention focused on building strengths instead of fixing weaknesses positively influences the performance conversations that take place between managers and their staff.” 

    David Ede, Director of People and Organisational Development at the Valuation Office Agency, stated:

    “It has been a really useful experience to have the CIPD research running alongside our own internal performance management pilot. This has allowed for a comparison between a holistic approach to performance management (complete policy change and cultural shift to coaching conversations) and a more discrete strengths-based intervention where the policy has remained unchanged. VOA has been doing its own internal evaluation of our pilot and worked alongside the CIPD to feed into their research.” 

  • Survey reveals thoughts on the present and future of HR

    Paycor, a Human Capital Management company, have released the results of a survey they have conducted about the present and the future of HR.

    The nationwide study - conducted by Harris Poll - surveyed 500 HR professionals and C-suite executives and was undertaken to understand how HR leaders in small and medium businesses saw the future of the industry in five years and how they could prepare for changes.

    Approximately half of the HR and business leaders who were surveyed believe that many core HR functions will be automated by 2022.  Whilst being optimistic about their businesses in 2018, 45 percent are apprehensive about recruiting and retention of staff.  The two major concerns they have are finding the right people for the job and then keeping them motivated.

    The survey also reveals that small and medium size businesses will focus more on using information that can be interpreted quickly and used to drive business decisions and help solve challenges without widespread vetting from the leadership.

    Experts stated that Initially HR technology was built to guarantee conformity - but that is rapidly changing.

    Karen Crone, Chief HR Officer of Paycor stated:

    "Most people embark on a career in HR to make a difference, but many get stuck in the administration.”  She added "HR technology wasn't built to make HR's job easier or to give HR time back to focus on people. Over the next five years, look for the most successful teams to embrace technology and focus more on performance."

    She added: "Armed with the tools to add more strategic value, HR leaders will be able to evangelize a holistic approach to the entire employee life cycle—from hiring and on-boarding through career development, learning and training—so they can spend less time on the administrative work that has kept HR in a box and more time enhancing their company's people power."

    According to the survey, 82 percent of respondents say ‘soft skills’ will become more important as HR becomes less administrative and 47 percent expect their roles to become more data-driven strategic. By 2022, HR professionals predict that their teams will have three top priorities - training and development; employee morale and employee retention.

    Stacey Browning, President of Paycor stated:

    "As technology continues to disrupt the HR status quo in ways big and small, it's critical that small to midsize business HR professionals are able to minimize their focus on administrative tasks and achieve a more strategic position in their organizations."

    The survey report indicates that HR leaders are gearing up for the challenge - but many HR leaders will find it difficult to invest in the necessary tools to assess data as they could be obstructed by cost, especially if they are unable to power new technologies - and new systems are unaffordable.

    Karen Crone stated:

    “HR leaders should start small……they do not necessarily need a system to look at data in new ways. Take attrition data, for example. We often look at the monthly rate or voluntary versus involuntary, but what about other factors?”

    She added, “Just by stringing together data that is seemingly unrelated, you might find a meaningful pattern for your business."

  • Expert’s testimony blocked for not meeting Daubert standards

    This month, Judge William L Witham Jr of the Delaware Superior Court granted a request to block the testimony of a doctor appearing as an expert witness in a medical malpractice case.

    The plaintiff, Amanda Norman, filed the lawsuit against Dr. Christine Maynard and the clinic All About Women.  She claimed that, while performing a diagnostic laparoscopy on Amanda Norman in October 2013, Dr. Maynard perforated the plaintiff’s bladder.  The mistake was not realized prior to completing the procedure – which led to further surgery and hospitalization for Amanda Norman.

    The defendants sought to exclude evidence and testimony concerning their write-off and payment of medical expenses; limit the testimony of Dr. Kenneth Woo; exclude apologies; exclude evidence of other injuries and exclude the evidence of Dr. Jeffrey Soffer – the expert witness.

    Resident Judge William L. Witham determined that there was no evidence that Amanda Norman’s expert witness - Dr. Soffer - had based his definition of the standard of care on information broadly accepted within the medical community. Therefore, the judge granted Dr. Christine Maynard - and her clinic All About Women - their request to exclude his testimony.

    The order states that Dr. Soffer was offering expert testimony for the plaintiff to support the argument that Dr. Maynard had violated the standard of care while performing the surgery on Amanda Norman. The defendants argued that Dr. Soffer’s testimony lacked foundation - being based only on the fact that the bladder injury occurred - and that he had failed to explain in which way Dr. Maynard’s actions did not comply with the standard of care.

    The decision states, “In this case, Amanda Norman has failed to meet her burden because no evidence has been presented that Dr. Soffer’s opinion is ‘based on information reasonably relied upon by experts’ in his field.  Therefore, the court must exclude Dr. Soffer’s testimony.”

    Dr. Christine Maynard and the clinic had argued that Dr. Soffer’s testimony was only reliant on the fact that Amanda Norman’s bladder had been injured but did not elaborate on what would have been required of Dr. Maynard to abide by the standard of care. They added that he had failed to provide any explanation as to how he reached his standard of care opinions. 

    Conversely, Amanda Norman argued that Dr. Soffer’s testimony indicates that a doctor exercising care and diligence would not injure a patient during a diagnostic laparoscopy.  She also stated that the evidence pinpointed specific deficiencies in Dr. Maynard’s surgical procedure.

    In considering the argument, the court used a five-step test set out in the U.S. Supreme Court case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals to determine the admissibility of the expert testimony.

    The order states that to be allowed –

    • the witness must be qualified as an expert:
    • the evidence must be relevant
    • the opinion must be based upon information that other experts in the field rely upon
    • the testimony must help the court understand the facts of an issue
    • it must not create unfair prejudice

    The court found that Dr. Soffer’s testimony was inadmissible because it failed on the third point of the test.

    According to Judge Witham’s decision, Amanda Norman had not shown that Dr. Soffer’s opinion was based on information that experts rely upon. In fact, he had stated himself that he did not rely on any publications in reaching his conclusion and that it was based on his own knowledge.

    Judge Witham wrote, “This contention in no way alludes to whether his analysis of the facts in this case is consistent with other experts in his field.  Therefore, the court must exclude Dr. Soffer’s testimony.”

    The Court issued the decision on November 16.

  • Applications for refunds of Employment Tribunal fees now open

    The Ministry of Justice has announced that applications for refunds of Employment Tribunal or Employment Appeal Tribunal fees, will now be processed.

    Employment Tribunal fees that were charged between July 2013 and July 2017 will be considered for refunds, after the Supreme Court found, on 26th July 2017, that the Employment Tribunal fee system was unlawful. As the rule of law requires people to have access to the Courts unless Parliament has clearly said otherwise, the introduction of fees was found to have obstructed access to justice. A review of the impact of the fees appeared to support this, as it showed there had been a 70 per cent drop in the number of cases brought in the Employment Tribunal since fees were first introduced.

    After the ruling, Justice Minister Dominic Raab stated: "The Supreme Court recognised the important role fees can play, but ruled that we have not struck the right balance in this case.”

    Initially, there was a four week trial phase before the scheme was fully rolled out, where around 1,000 people were contacted by the Government and offered the chance to apply for reimbursements. It has been estimated that 100,000 claims could be eligible for refunds now the scheme is fully open.

    Applicants can apply for a reimbursement through the gov.uk website but if an employer was ordered by the Tribunal to reimburse a fee paid by the Claimant - and the employer can prove they did so - the employer instead of the Claimant can reclaim the fee. In addition to being refunded their original fee, successful applicants will also be paid 0.5 per cent interest, which will be calculated from the date of the original payment up until the refund date.

    It has been reported that since the ruling, the number of Employment Tribunal claims is beginning to increase. However, it is conceivable that fees may be brought into force again in the future, as it was only found that the fee system from July 2013 was unlawful, not that any type of fee system is. This was highlighted by the Lord Chancellor David Lidington during a justice select committee recently, when he verified that the Government were intending to charge in the future

  • CIPD labour market outlook survey released

    Only 24% of employers in the private sector say they are under pressure - to any degree - from the majority of their workforce to raise wages, whilst almost four in ten private sector firms say they face no pressure at all.   These are findings of the latest quarterly CIPD/The Adecco Group Labour Market Outlook survey conducted on more than 1,000 HR professional and decision makers.    

    However, a slightly higher proportion of private sector employers state that, particularly among high and middle-skilled jobs, there is either some or significant pay pressure to raise wages for certain roles.  23% of private sector employers stated that the reason for the lack of pressure to raise wages is the fact that workers recognise that the business cannot afford more generous pay increases - which underlines the productivity challenge facing many firms.       

    In the public sector almost three-fifths of the organisations state that they are under pressure, to some extent, to raise wages for the majority of their employees - which may partly reflect the recent debate about scrapping the public sector pay cap.  In addition, 25% of public sector organisations say that they are under some or significant pressure to raise wages for certain roles. 

    The survey also suggested that a noteworthy majority of employers do not face any significant difficulty accessing the skills they require.  Only 13% of all current private sector vacancies are skill-shortage vacancies and only 29% of all employers with a vacancy report that it is from skills shortages.  This suggests that any pay pressure is not likely to come from a lack of skills in the current labour market. 

    Employers report that average basic pay increases are expected to reach 2%, which is higher than the previous quarter’s figure of 1% - but is still in line with official data that shows wage growth as being between 1.8 and 2.2% over the past six months. 

    The survey also shows that - consistent with the trend over recent years, the average basic pay increase expectations are higher in the private sector (2%) than in the public (1%) and voluntary (1.5%) sectors.  However, whilst overall pay pressure is quiet in the private sector, some parts are under more pressure - for example, 38% of construction employers say they are under some or significant pressure to increase earnings for the majority of the workers.

    Gerwyn Davies, CIPD Senior Labour Market Analyst, states, “This survey provides further evidence that productivity has a far more significant bearing on pay growth than the tightness of the labour market. Over time we might expect low unemployment levels to lead to increased pressure on pay, as the Bank of England has predicted. However, it’s the UK’s ongoing poor productivity growth that’s currently preventing employers from paying more, not their inability to find or retain staff. This is why the Chancellor in this month’s Budget has to prioritise investments that will support workplace productivity improvements - for example, investing in support for small firms and skills development initiatives that can help to drive productivity gains over time.

    In terms of employment, despite the evident optimism in this quarter’s survey, it remains likely that the sharp increase in the number of people in work over the past year will ease during the course of 2018. This is due in part to the impact of continued slower economic growth, the uncertainties associated with Brexit and the prospect of further interest rate rises. However, employment prospects for the manufacturing sector look bright, perhaps buoyed by the benefit of a weaker currency and the strength of global demand.”

  • British employees trailing behind in terms of flexible working and extended breaks

    Travel specialists Opodo recently conducted new independent research which reveals that British employees are trailing behind those from other countries across Europe and the USA when it comes to flexible working hours and taking a sabbatical.

    Although 65% of British employees said that they would consider taking a sabbatical, it appeared that they would not actually take the extended break - risking burn-out in the process.

    The research showed that, despite UK employees being amongst the Europeans most likely to be allowed the extended leave by their companies, more than half stated that it would be hard to return to work after taking a sabbatical.  One in five of those polled in the UK feel that it would harm their career prospects with their current employer, compared to almost two-thirds of people in Spain who believe that taking extended leave will help them in the future in terms of employability.   More than half of the people in Germany said the same, whilst 49 per cent of people working in France also believe sabbaticals can help with future employment.

    The major factors that influence interest in sabbaticals include stress in the workplace, which was cited by 50% of those polled; mental health - 43% and physical health - 32%. 

    The research suggests that an extended break from work would actually be useful for many, despite the British employees being least likely of all the nations surveyed to return refreshed from their summer holiday. 

    A spokesperson for Opodo stated:

    “It is all too easy to become overwhelmed by the stress of working life, particularly now we are working longer hours until later in life. 

    Given the advancements in modern technology, many now also have their work emails and calendar synced to their phone, meaning we’re no longer simply working 9-5 but are clocked on 24/7.

    Taking a sabbatical can be a great release valve for this stress and offer the opportunity to do something you’ve always wanted, whether that’s going travelling, learning a new language or skill or just taking some time off to focus on yourself.”

    Worldwide, it seems that reducing stress and improving health are the main factors behind employees needing to have a sabbatical. British employees are the most likely to want to go it alone and are only half as likely as those in the rest of the world to use their leave as an opportunity to learn a new language.

    The study shows that just 30% of British workers feel they have a good work/life balance - less than the worldwide average of more than 34% of people surveyed. The countries that rated themselves with having the best ratio of work and personal life are Portugal with 43% and the USA with 41%.   Germany has the least with 27%. 

    Although UK employers were rated among the most generous of the nations polled when it comes to leave - with more employees here saying they had a generous holiday allowance - the nation that offers the most flexible working options is Spain, followed by the USA and Germany.  And, when it comes to other forms of flexible working benefits that can help to improve employee welfare, the study reveals that British companies are lagging behind businesses in other countries.

  • Glassdoor “fights our users' First Amendment rights to freedom of speech”

    The Ninth Circuit has upheld a district court’s denial of Glassdoor, Inc.’s motion to quash a grand jury subpoena requiring it to disclose identifying information about eight anonymous reviewers.  Rejecting Glassdoor’s First Amendment challenge, the appeals court found that the company failed to allege - or to provide evidence - that the government’s investigation of the employer for fraud was conducted in bad faith.

    Glassdoor operates a website where employers promote their companies to potential employees.   Employees post reviews of what it is like to work at their companies and in these reviews - which are anonymous - employees rate employers in a variety of categories.  These categories include interviewing practices, salaries and workplace environment.  

    An employment attorney - Jadzia Butler of Covington and Burling in Washington D.C. - has stated that a recent court order requiring Glassdoor to reveal the identities of eight users of the website, may have an effect on internet free speech.  She says that it is “particularly concerning” if a subpoena can compromise the anonymity of the internet users and added, “Some employees use the platform to report managers' or co-workers' problematic behavior. Without their identities being kept confidential, they may be less likely to do so. That's bad for the employer, who could have been made aware of things it did not know were happening.”

    Although the reviews are anonymous, users have to provide their email addresses to Glassdoor in order to post on the website and they are warned that such information may have to be disclosed if required to do so by law.  Glassdoor warns that they “will disclose data if we believe in good faith that such disclosure is necessary . . . to comply with relevant laws or to respond to subpoenas or warrants or legal process served on us.” 

    Their Terms of Use state that Glassdoor reserve the right “….to take appropriate action to protect the anonymity of users against the enforcement of subpoenas or other information requests”. 

    Glassdoor was attempting to do that, despite an on-going federal criminal investigation where anonymous reviews were posted about an unspecified federal contractor.  These reviews criticized the company's management and business practices – with one anonymous review stating that the company "manipulates the system to make money unethically off of veterans/VA.”

    Glassdoor raised First Amendment concerns and the government agreed to limit its request for reviewer details to just eight example reviews, in order to “contact those reviewers as third party witnesses to certain business practices relevant to the investigation.” 

    However, the court stated that, "The speakers whose identities the government seeks may well be witnesses to this criminal activity, perhaps even participants in it.”

    Jadzia Butler said that the employees are not implicated in a crime and are mere witnesses. She stated, "They did not ask to be dragged into this legal process. Now they and those who hear about their story will think twice about expressing themselves in this way."

    Mark Kluger, an attorney with Kluger Healey in Florham Park, N.J. said, "Since most employees who post on Glassdoor probably don't work for criminal enterprises or those that are targets of FBI investigations, the average contributor likely has nothing to worry about."

    An attorney with Foley & Lardner in Miami - Mark Neuberger - agreed, "This subpoena is not and should not be the end of sites like Glassdoor or other ones where people can comment about their doctors, restaurants or anything else."

    However, Charles Krugel - an attorney in Chicago - stated that, "This decision should make employees think twice about using Glassdoor when employees accuse their employer of serious criminal misconduct."

    In a statement Glassdoor said, "We are disappointed in the 9th Circuit's decision to deny our appeal to protect the identities of eight Glassdoor users whose contact information was being sought in connection to a federal criminal investigation linked to alleged fraud, waste and abuse of federal funds."

    It added, "Glassdoor vigorously fights our users' First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, including sharing opinions online about their workplaces anonymously."

  • Survey shows managers feel Generation Z will be hard to manage

    Generation Z - those born from the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s - are now entering the workforce and according to a new poll, they will be difficult to manage, hard to communicate with and will not have a particularly strong work ethic. 

    APPrise Mobile, a mobile employee communications and engagement solution,  has released a national survey of workplace managers (which relied on a Google Consumer Survey) showing that more than a third believe that managing employees from Generation Z will prove more difficult than the management of previous generations. So far, Generation Z has not impressed their more experienced co-workers according to APPrise Mobile.

    More than a quarter of workplace managers anticipate having major communications and training-related challenges.  Twenty six percent believe that it will be more difficult to communicate with employees from Generation Z; 29 percent expect it will be more difficult to train them compared to older generations and 1 in 10 managers (16 percent) also expect Generation Z to negatively impact their company culture. 

    Two percent of respondents feel that phone calls will be an effective way to communicate with Generation Z - however, the authors of the report wrote that ‘connecting over the phone could become a thing of the past’.

    Jeff Corbin, founder and CEO of APPrise Mobile said, "To the extent Millennials are associated with 'entitlement,' there probably is a level of fear that Generation Z will turn out worse.  The farther away in age, the greater the likelihood that they (the managers) believe they won't be able to relate to Generation Z."   He went on to say that as most of Generation Z grew up with a mobile device in their hands, "there is a tendency and expectation of instantaneous gratification. They want the answers now. They are all about tweets and short responses. As a result, many Generation Zers are going to be too quick to respond rather than deliberate and thoughtful……the concept of professionalism, formality and quality in communications may be a foreign one to many in Generation Z, which could be problematic to older generations."

    Bruce Tulgan, founder of New Haven, Connecticut based consultancy Rainmaker Thinking, agreed that fears about Generation Z may not be unfounded.  He said that his own research shows that managers’ biggest worry is that Generation Z will view jobs as short-term transactional relationships and that they will demand a great deal of flexibility and responsibility early in their working lives. 

    He stated, "It may be attributable to being raised by helicopter parents who have provided more guidance, direction, support and coaching to young people than any generation in history. Thus, these young people often have unrealistic expectations about where they stand in relation to others and what they can hope to achieve and receive in the first years of employment. They aren't going to want to take it slowly, get a feel for the place, learn who's who and what's what before starting to add value.  They want to be set up for success, and they want to start proving themselves on day one."

    The poll found that 44 percent of managers believe that the reliance that Generation Z have on technology will be an advantage – but then not all companies will have the technological tools expected by Generation Z.

    Jeff Corbin stated, "Companies aren't necessarily on board with mobile as a business strategy. Yes, they recognize that it's important - but what about the ways they are doing business that hasn’t changed - even though the people they are dealing with and their ways of living have changed considerably?"

    He cited that many companies still spend considerable resources creating lengthy newsletters which are distributed as print, intranet and email.

    Generation Z has always lived in world of internet connection, smartphones and tablets.  Managers responding to the survey saw this as a positive and 42 percent said that they plan on introducing more technology tools. 

    “Most Millennials remember a time when fax machines and landline phones were commonly used and AOL dial-up was the only way to access the internet, but their incoming Generation Z colleagues only know of these things from history books and movies. Bottom line – this new generation of workers expects technology to touch every facet of their life and companies should embrace this sooner than later,” said Jeff Corbin, CEO of APPrise Mobile.

  • Court rules that policies cannot stop workers from talking about pay

    The National Labor Relations Board originally heard a complaint from an employee, Mr Navarro, against Banner Health System – an organization that had adopted a confidentiality agreement covering the sharing between employees of private employee information concerning pay rates and disciplinary actions. Banner was told by the court that policies cannot stop workers from talking about pay.

    Banner Health is a large healthcare system in Phoenix, AZ. James Navarro worked at Banner, sterilizing surgical equipment. On February 19th 2011 Navarro could not use the autoclave which is a large, pressurized steam sterilizer normally used for sterilizing reusable medical instruments.  This was because the hospital's steam pipe was broken.

    He was instructed to use hot water from the coffee machine for the first step in the cleaning process and then to use a low-temperature sterilizer with hydrogen peroxide.

    Mr Navarro was concerned that those procedures violated the established protocol, which caused him to raise questions with various supervisors and do some quick research – none of which allayed his concerns.

    After confirming there were adequate clean instruments available for the day's scheduled surgeries and deliveries, Mr Navarro did not sterilize any additional instruments.  He spoke to several other workers at the facility about the problems, and was disciplined for it.

    A couple of days later, Mr Navarro visited Banner's human resources consultant, reported his discomfort with the prescribed procedures and expressed concern for his job. That same afternoon, Mr Navarro's supervisor gave him a “non-disciplinary coaching” and - a few days later - a negative yearly evaluation.

    The main evidence supporting the claim was the confidentiality agreement and an interview of complainant form – referred to by the human resources consultant – which was the primary evidence in support of the charge that Banner maintained an over-broad investigative non-disclosure policy.  The introduction included the wording, “I ask you not to discuss this with your co-workers while this investigation is going on, for this reason - when people are talking it is difficult to do a fair investigation and separate facts from rumors.”  However, the HR consultant stated that she did not request non-disclosure from Mr Navarro and he did not testify that he was asked to keep the matter confidential – nor his interview with HR.

    It was held that Banner's confidentiality agreement violated the National Labor Relations Act but that its investigative non-disclosure policy and treatment of Mr Navarro did not.

    On later appeal by Banner, it was found that Banner’s policies could discourage discussions about working conditions - a right guaranteed under labor law, the court said.

    This ruling impacts on all employers and shows that even non-union businesses must watch speech restrictions.

  • BA announce consultation exercise regarding closing its New Airways Pension Scheme

    British Airways (BA) recently announced that a consultation exercise would shortly commence regarding the proposals to close its New Airways Pension Scheme (NAPS). A significant and growing funding deficit was cited as the reason for the closure. 

    Because of this, thousands of British Airways employees’ retirements have been plunged into uncertainty. 

    British Airways stated that the NAPS scheme’s deficit reached £3.7bn in March of this year, making it the largest of all UK company pension black holes relative to the firm’s overall value. The airline said it had paid £3.5bn into the scheme since 2003.  They also stated that in 2015 they had committed to pay between £300m-£450m a year into the NAPS scheme until 2027 and this was regardless of whether new contributions from employees are stopped.

    If NAPS remained open to accrual, the cost of providing future benefits could rise to 45% of individuals’ pensionable pay in 2018 – more than four times the typical employer contribution for UK airlines.

    The trade unions Unite and GMB slated the move and conveyed their dismay and disappointment at proposals from the airline to shut NAPS to future contributions from its existing 17,000 members. 

    It is understood that discussions between the airline and the unions had focused on ways to make the scheme sustainable and the possibility of it closing had not been brought up, until the statement by British Airways.  

    In a joint statement, the two unions said, “Our team of financial analysts has worked tirelessly with the airline over the last few months to explore ways to keep the pension scheme open and secure it for the future.”  They added, “This announcement sadly confirms that our advice has gone unheeded and that we have been unable to convince British Airways that keeping the scheme open is the right thing to do, for both the company and its employees.”

    British Airways have stated that members would still receive what they were due in their retirement – meaning payments from the Scheme would likely continue for decades. NAPS was created in 1984 and offered members lower benefits in return for a lower contribution rate than its predecessor, The Airways Pension Scheme (APS).

    British Airways lost a High Court battle against the Trustees of APS in May after they pushed through a £12m discretionary payment in 2011 to make up for a change in the inflation link.

    A challenging period lies ahead for BA, with the company likely to face strong opposition from members, unions and the Trustee Board. However, having regard to the level of NAPS’ deficit and the trend for final scheme closures generally, it should perhaps come as no surprise that BA wishes to close to accrual.

    Many defined benefit pension schemes are under pressure due to increased life expectancy of the members and record low interest rates. Pension schemes invest greatly in Government bonds – whose yields have fallen to historic lows in recent years – meaning that the money earned from these investments fails to cover the liabilities that the schemes face.

  • Report predicts AI will eventually create more jobs

    Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the way in which organizations innovate and communicate their processes, products and services. Practical strategies for employing artificial intelligence are available to data and analytics leaders now.

    This is according to a report by Gartner Inc. - based in Stamford, Connecticut - which has predicted that within the next four years jobs will be eliminated by artificial intelligence.  However, that will only be in the initial stages, as more jobs will then be created.

    According to the Gartner’s ‘Top Strategic Predictions for 2018 and Beyond....’ employees will turn to chatbots to replace apps to complete their work – forcing HR to adapt how it manages the way its employees’ interact with the new technologies.

    The report states that "….today, chatbots are the face of AI and will impact all areas where there is communication between humans. Bots will take over some of the functions of apps and change the way users interact with technology. Bots will also increase employee engagement and automate tasks faster."

    Daryl Plummer, vice president and Gartner Fellow, Distinguished Companies, states,

     "Technology-based innovation is arriving faster than most organizations can keep up with. Before one innovation is implemented, two others arrive. Companies will be required to develop a discipline around how pace can be achieved..….Speed of change will require variability of skills and capabilities to address rising challenges."

    Gartner report forecasts that by 2020, artificial intelligence will have eliminated 1.8 million - but created 2.3 million jobs.  The report states that in 2019 more jobs will be eliminated than created, but it is believed that the number of jobs created by artificial intelligence in 2020 will overcome the shortfall.  The report carries on to say that the elimination of jobs will vary considerably industry by industry, with some - such as healthcare and education - not being affected.  Of the organizations with artificial intelligence already in operation, 77 percent have reported that they have more job gains than losses.

    Gartner forecasts that by 2021, 40 percent of IT staff will hold "multiple roles, most of which will be business, rather than technology-related." They predict that by 2019, IT technical specialist jobs will fall by more than 5 percent as digital business initiatives require increasing numbers of IT employees to be more versatile (in 2017, IT specialists represent about 42 percent of the entire IT workforce).

    In future, employees will constantly need to keep their skills upgraded and permanent learning will be vital to keep pace with all the technological changes in the workplace. Regulations will need to change to ensure that companies are keeping data safe and as more devices connect to the Internet, HR professionals will need to make certain that all devices connecting their organizations to the web are safe.

  • Survey shows that women feel that they can't speak with candor in the workplace

    During a recent webcast, speakers from Mercer Sirota (a global consultancy focusing on talent, health, retirement and investments) stated that women - more than men - feel that they can't speak with candor in the workplace.

    The speakers cited the fact that women feel they cannot be up front about ethical concerns and are not treated considerately by managers.  They based this on the results of a recent 80 question survey of 3,010 U.S. workers - and on findings from five years of surveys given to about 1.3 million employees. The study related to what drives engagement and satisfaction in the workplace for men and women.

    The survey found that 68% of women who responded agreed that they are satisfied with their jobs compared to 73% of men - and although both men and women reported that the type of work they do is the key factor that engages them, they were found to differ on the other factors that motivated them. 

    The question of whether pay in the workplace is fair and transparent was put to the respondents of the survey and 41% of women said they believed it was compared to 51% of men.  According to a Mercer webcast speaker, complementing pay to performance keeps men and women satisfied at work - but the absence of fair earnings is especially discouraging to women.  

    However, women are more concerned than men about the consequences of being candid at work.  A third of women stated that the do not feel able to express their views or ideas without fear of repercussions.  This compared with 29% of men.  When interviewed, Megan Connolly - a senior consultant at Mercer Sirota - stated that since the results were based in part on Mercer Sirota's ongoing survey of about 1.3 million employees worldwide, even a 4-percentage-point difference is something to pay attention to.      

    The webcast speakers pointed out that if employees cannot be candid about new ideas or concerns in the workplace, they are less likely to feel positive about their career advancement and development opportunities.

    Sixty-six percent of women believe that employees can get a fair hearing for their complaints, compared with 70% of men and women are also less comfortable than men speaking out about ethical concerns. More than 1 in 4 female employees, 26%, said they do not believe they can report an ethical concern without retaliation, compared with 21% of men.

    Fifty-one percent of female employees said they believe that managers consider the impact of their actions on staff before making decisions and 56% of male employees believe the same.

    Megan Connolly said, "A common theme in each of these differences is perceived fairness. We know that fairness is a crucial factor when it comes to building engagement."

    Mercer Sirota principal, Pete Foley stated, "This research clearly suggests that companies that measure these gaps and focus efforts on closing them can not only improve engagement but help women thrive in the workplace." 

  • EAT makes decision on case concerning past misconduct

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has found that an investigation into an employee’s misconduct could not be regarded as unfair because the investigation report included details of the employee’s previous acts of misconduct, for which no disciplinary action had been taken.

    In the case of NHS 24 v Pillar, Ms Pillar - a nurse - was dismissed for gross misconduct after a third patient safety incident (PSI).

    Ms Pillar had previously been responsible for two similar incidents - one of which was two years before her dismissal and the other four years before her dismissal. Neither of those previous incidents had been treated as disciplinary matters at the time. However, the manager who investigated the third patient safety incident included details about the two previous PSIs in his report and this investigation report was used at the disciplinary hearing which resulted in Ms Pillar’s dismissal.

    Ms Pillar claimed unfair dismissal and at the Employment Tribunal it was decided that it was reasonable, based on patient safety, for the employer to have treated the latest PSI as gross misconduct.  However, to dismiss was unfair as it was not reasonable to rely on the investigation report from the disciplinary hearing - given that the report relied on the inclusion of details concerning the two previous PSIs which had not led to disciplinary action.

    The employer appealed and the Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed with the arguments presented by the employer and decided that dismissal was fair.  Ms Pillar’s argument was that the investigation report included too much information regarding the two previous incidents for which she had not, in fact, been disciplined. 

    However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal stated that this was not a case of ‘totting up’ warnings - as none had been given - but an overall lack of clinical competence and it was wrong of the Employment Tribunal to decide that background information relevant to patient safety should have been withheld. A dismissal could be rendered unfair if the investigation is overzealous or unfair, but the role of the investigator is to put together all the relevant information and in this case, the fact that the employee had committed two prior PSIs was relevant information, which was entitled to be taken into account when the decision was made regarding dismissal.

    This case could be assumed to give some reassurance to employers but it also reminds them that a fair investigation must be carried out by a separate investigating officer - and that it is possible for dismissal to be unfair if the investigation is not sufficient.  Also, in relation to past misconduct which has not been the subject of disciplinary action, employers should consider carefully its relevance to the case in question.  

  • Female HR managers earn approximately 10% less than males

    Research by the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) and XpertHR has found that female HR managers earn £4.5k less than their male counterparts – which equates to approximately 10% difference.

    New analysis carried out by CMI and XpertHR shows that while the average salary of a female manager is £40,177, male managers have an average of £44,646. This vast difference of £4,469 includes salary, bonuses and perks such as car allowance and commission.

    The gender pay gap in the HR sector although significant, is considerably lower than it is across other sectors in UK businesses where the average male manager earns 26.8% more than their female colleagues.

    This is the first year that research on management pay has been published and the CMI and XpertHR note that only 77 of 7,850 UK companies to which the new regulations apply have published their gender pay gap.

    The new research shows that the gender pay gap is particularly high in finance jobs -where male managers earn 33.9% more than their female counterparts, which is equivalent to a salary difference of more than £18,000.  It is lowest in IT, where male managers earn just over 8% - or £3,758 - more than their female colleagues.

    The study also found that women are less likely than men to fill junior management positions - 66% of jobs going to men whilst only 34% were given to women. Men were also found to be more likely to occupy senior positions - with only 26% of director roles being filled by women.  What is most discouraging is that even when women do obtain the senior roles, the pay gap widens to £34,144 with men earning an average of £175,673 and women earning just £141,529.

    Ann Francke - CMI’s chief executive - comments: “Too many businesses are like ‘glass pyramids’ with women holding the majority of lower-paid junior roles and far fewer reaching the top. We now see those extra perks of senior management roles are creating a gender pay gap wider than previously understood. The picture is worst at the top, with male CEOs cashing-in bonuses six times larger than female counterparts. Our data shows we need the Government’s gender pay gap reporting regulations more than ever before. Yet, less than one percent of companies have reported so far. Time for more companies to step up and put plans in place to fix this issue. It’s essential if UK companies are to survive and thrive in the post-Brexit world.”

    This year’s analysis also suggests that whilst salary and bonuses are increasing for both men and women, the benefits are going, to a greater extent, to men. Male directors received a 5.8% increase in pay and bonuses - compared to 3.7% for women.

    Mark Crail - XpertHR content director said: “We have always known that the gender pay gap appears to widen with seniority. But the results we are publishing today enable us to quantify the gap using a large volume of reliable, checked and verified pay data, drawn directly from employer payroll systems. Some people have tried to explain the gender pay gap away as being the result of different working hours or individual career choices, but when the analysis is based on the pay of more than 100,000 individuals in well over 400 organisations, it is clear that the pay gap is a very real fact of life for UK managers.”

  • Could micro-chipping employees become the new ‘norm’?

    Three Square Market, a technology company in River Falls Wisconsin, recently became one of the first companies in the world - and the first in the US - to microchip staff.  It was approved by regulators in 2004.

    Three Square Market is taking its lead from Sweden, where several companies are pioneering the employee microchip movement.

    Although other companies in Sweden, the Czech Republic and Belgium have previously offered similar programmes, fewer than 10 per cent of workers have taken up the idea.  However, at Three Square Market more than 50 out of 80 employees have volunteered so far making this the largest uptake of any scheme yet.  This should now herald the way for other such schemes to be commonly adopted.

    The chip costs approximately £230 each and is the size of a grain of rice.  It uses RFID - or radio-frequency identification technology - which is also used by postmen who scan parcels on barcodes and the same technology is used in a contactless credit card.  It is implanted between the thumb and forefinger.

    Employees will not be required to have the implants and the chip will not track employees or have GPS positioning. 

    Todd Westby, CEO of Three Square Market explained: ‘We foresee the use of RFID technology to drive everything from making purchases in our office break room market, opening doors, use of copy machines, logging into our office computers, unlocking phones, sharing business cards, storing medical/health information, and used as payment at other RFID terminals. It's the next thing that's inevitably going to happen, and we want to be a part of it. Eventually, this technology will become standardised allowing you to use this as your passport, public transit, all purchasing opportunities."  He added, “We think it's the right thing to do for advancing innovation just like the driverless car basically did in recent months.”

    Mr Westby stated that the response among staff ‘exceeded my expectations’.

    In the UK, biometric access systems such as facial, eye and fingerprint recognition have grown in use without any legal challenges and as, so far, there are no reported cases concerning the use of implanted microchips in employees in the UK, there has not been a legal challenge. However, if considering implementing this in the workplace, employers should tread very carefully.

    Employees would have to give full and free consent to having microchips implanted – and be able to withdraw consent at any time as an employee who was instructed or who felt pressured to accept could potentially resign – claiming constructive dismissal.

    Human rights, religious objections, personal injury claims (if the chip was incorrectly implanted) and the forthcoming General Data Protection Regulation will also have to be taken into account.  However, just as CCTV grew to be universally accepted, micro-chipping employees may soon be the new ‘norm’.

  • EEOC brings lawsuit regarding parental leave policies

    Estée Lauder are being sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for giving new mothers more paid leave for care giving and child-bonding than new fathers.

    If the lawsuit is successful, it could alter common parental leave policies in the U.S.

    On Aug.30, the EEOC alleged in their lawsuit that Estée Lauder Companies Inc. infringed federal law by giving female employees who are new mothers more parental leave benefits than male employees who are new fathers. 

    In addition to the paid leave provided to new mothers to recover from childbirth, Estée Lauder provides new mothers with six additional weeks of paid parental leave for child bonding. New fathers receive two weeks of paid leave for child bonding. The lawsuit - filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia - also alleges that new mothers are provided with flexible return-to-work benefits that are not similarly provided to new fathers.

    The EEOC asserts that this policy violates the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibit discrimination in pay or benefits based on sex.

    The agency began the case after Christopher Sullivan, a stock worker at a Maryland store, requested six weeks of leave for the birth of his child - but was only granted two.  Mr. Sullivan informed Estee Lauder that he would be the child’s primary caregiver, but he was told that the company only applied the primary caregiver title in surrogacy situations. Estee Lauder’s parental care policy was implemented in 2013 and provides primary caregivers six weeks of paid parental leave.  Fathers at Estée Lauder are eligible for secondary caregiver leave only. 

    The EEOC's lawsuit against Estée Lauder is the most recent to be brought against a company for having different parental-leave policies for their female and male staff.  In June, a male fraud investigator at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. alleged that the bank discriminated against him, saying that fathers were denied equal paid parental leave with mothers.

    Supporters of equal paid leave say that the imbalance reinforces traditional gender roles by encouraging new mothers to stay at home and discouraging fathers from taking time off to care for a new child.

    Mindy Weinstein, Acting Director of the EEOC’s Washington field office praised Estee Lauder for its parental leave policy and flexible work arrangements which were great in their intent.  However, she added,  “… federal law requires equal pay for equal work, and that applies to men as well as women.”

     

  • Research shows wellbeing programmes not giving employees what they require

    Results of recent research by employee engagement specialists, Reward Gateway, shows that employees are not getting what they require from their current wellbeing programmes - despite the fact that their wellbeing has been a top agenda point for HR for some years. 

    The research surveyed 250 employees and 250 employers (senior decision makers) and was conducted in September 2017 by Censuswide.

    The disparity of opinion between employee and employers has been shown in the results - over half of employers agree that their company shows that they care about employee’s mental, physical and financial wellbeing - whilst only 14% of employees say that their company could not do more to show they care about their mental, physical and financial wellbeing.

    Research states that it is in the employer’s interest to care about their employee’s wellbeing as it was shown that more than half (52%) of UK employees agree that they would choose a company that cared about their wellbeing over one that pays more.  It is even more urgent to address the closing of the gap when consideration is given to the following results:

    • 33% of those surveyed said that their company currently offers no wellbeing programmes
    • Only 29% said that their company currently offers a physical wellbeing programme
    • Only 23% said that their company currently offers a financial wellbeing programme
    • Only 22% said that their company currently offers a mental wellbeing programme
    • Over 22 million British workers, or 7 in 10 employees (71%), have felt stress or financial strain in the last five years

    Head of Wellbeing at Reward Gateway, Lucy Tallick said,

    “Employee wellbeing is not about crisis management and fixing problems. It’s about helping your people live better and feel better by facilitating sustainable lifestyle changes that really make a difference.  Employers should take into consideration that everyone has unique desires and needs, and, in order to gain buy in, it's much better to give the employee solutions that provide choice and flexibility. By creating an inclusive programme, you’ll also hugely increase your engagement.”

    Doug Butler, CEO at Reward Gateway said,

    “Wellbeing is a crucial part of employee engagement and, as the research shows, companies are struggling to implement the wellbeing initiatives that their staff need.  We continue to innovate our wellbeing offering in order to help our clients on their engagement journey. The selection available is wide-ranging, inclusive, and designed to enable our clients to support their employees’ unique wellbeing needs. By offering a broad range of wellbeing solutions that include educational content on how to live a healthier lifestyle, impartial advice from money experts, an employee assistance programme (EAP), and industry leading discounts and payment plans on gyms and fitness equipment, our goal is to support what we believe to be the three key pillars of holistic wellbeing; Physical, Mental and Financial.”

  • Government being called upon to invest money to provide HR support to small businesses

    The Government is being called upon to invest £13m a year to provide HR support to small businesses - as new research shows that it could be a key part of finding the answer to the problem of productivity.  

    The new research by the CIPD (supported by J P Morgan through the J P Morgan Chase Foundation) suggests that giving small businesses basic HR support can help in this respect.   The pilot scheme, ‘People Skills’, ran from July 2015 to October 2016 and was based in Hackney, Stoke-on-Trent and Glasgow.  It has been evaluated by a team at Manchester Metropolitan University through surveys and interviews with project stakeholders.

    In each of the three locations, a small bank of independent HR consultants was recruited to provide free employment and people management advice to small businesses on demand.  The CIPD’s HR Inform online support system was also made available to project participants.

    More than 400 small businesses - employing between 5 and 50 employees across the three areas - were helped.  In Glasgow, it was regarded as being so successful that when the research grant ran out, the city council continued to fund the programme. 

    CIPD Head of Public Policy, Ben Wilmott said:

    “People Skills’ shows the potential benefits of targeted investment to improve small firms’ capability around the management of people through co-ordinated high-quality, locally-delivered business support via channels such as Local Enterprise Partnerships, chambers of commerce and local authorities.”  He continued, “ If policy makers are serious about addressing the UK’s long-standing productivity deficit - particularly among the nearly 1.3 million small businesses that employ between 1 and 50 people - then they have to start seriously thinking about how to improve management quality, which the Bank of England’s chief economist Andy Haldane has identified as a key area for focus. ‘People Skills’ provides a template of how to actually do this on the ground among small businesses.  We calculate that about £40m from the Government’s National Productivity Investment Fund would support the £13m annual cost of running a ‘People Skills’ type service across all 38 Local Enterprise Partnerships in England for three years and could revolutionise the quality of business support for small firms.”

    Hang Ho, EMEA Head of the J P Morgan Chase Foundation, said:

    “Small business success is an essential element of the UK economy and a critical component in creating thriving local communities. Today’s report shines a light on the importance of basic HR practices to the success of small businesses, whether that is improving productivity, boosting the effectiveness of the management team or handling crises. While we hope the ‘People Skills’ pilot will benefit participating companies in the long term, the findings clearly also demonstrate to policy makers a real need for HR support amongst SMEs.”

    The key findings are that online business support is inadequate unless supplemented by personal advice and support - with face-to-face advice particularly valued by small business owner managers; that existing fragmented business support provided at a local level should be justified to prevent duplication of provision and confusion among SMEs; that policy makers need to re-think how they encourage SMEs to employ and train young people in the workplace - for example through apprenticeships - as in most cases they don’t have the interest or capability to do this. Re-focusing a proportion of government investment in skills to providing enhanced business support around people management capability for SMEs would, over time, give more small businesses the capability and confidence to engage in programmes supporting young people into work in the future.

  • Are retaliation claims becoming more prevalent than discrimination claims?

    In employment lawsuits being filed now, retaliation claims appear to be more prevalent than discrimination claims. Despite an employer having strong evidence of poor performance and misconduct, they may still be held liable for retaliation if they take adverse action soon after protected conduct occurs.

    For example, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has ruled that a Maintenance Director at a nursing care facility can pursue his Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) claims to trial, despite being fired for monitoring his supervisor's work attendance.  

    Louis DeCicco was hired by Mid-Atlantic Healthcare LLC as the Director of Maintenance for Maplewood Nursing and Rehabilitation Center – providing long-term nursing care and rehabilitation services.

    During a meeting in January 2012, Mr DeCicco was issued with a performance improvement plan by his supervisor, Sarah Balmer.  The performance plan informed Mr DeCicco that he was under review for:

    • not providing adequate training and mentoring to a subordinate
    • failing to resolve long-standing issues with security staff
    • failing to respond to facility phone calls
    • failing to take a more active role in resolving the facility's maintenance issues

    However, at about this time, Mr DeCicco began monitoring Sarah Balmer's work attendance, reviewing footage installed at Maplewood.  He also reviewed Sarah Balmer's timesheets and prepared logs of her absences from the facility – which he was not authorized to investigate.  

    Five months later, a second performance improvement plan was issued to Mr DeCicco by Sarah Balmer. On the same day he also received a written warning for addressing a contractor in an unprofessional way and a verbal warning for allegedly not taking certain action, which resulted in the facility at Maplewood being short of one bed.

    Later that month, Maplewood Human Resources Director, Stephanie Massey, was asked by Mr DeCicco to supply FMLA paperwork. As Mr DeCicco was the primary caregiver for his disabled father he intended to use FMLA leave to care for him. Stephanie Massey provided the paperwork to Mr DeCicco immediately.

    Mr DeCicco met up with Caroline Eldridge - who was the new Human Resources Director – on June 15, to discuss several issues. They included Mr DeCicco's performance improvement plans; the alleged absenteeism of Sarah Balmer and Mr DeCicco's perceived lack of support from Mid-Atlantic. At that meeting, Mr DeCicco told Caroline Eldridge that he expected to have his employment terminated.

    Three days later, Mr DeCicco returned his FMLA certification of health care provider form to Mid-Atlantic's human resources department.

    Later the same evening, Sarah Balmer e-mailed John Fredericks (Regional Director of Operations), stating that she intended to terminate Mr DeCicco in two weeks time. She added that she had become aware that Mr DeCicco was monitoring her attendance and stated that he was not the type of person she wanted working for her.  She explained that he had been on a performance improvement plan since January 2012 and that his comment on her attendance was a ‘lie’.

    On June 19, Sarah Balmer issued a final written warning to Mr DeCicco and placed him on another performance improvement plan, which was due to expire on July 3.

    On June 20, John Fredericks terminated Mr DeCicco’s employment in the presence of the regional HR Director.  At that time, Mr DeCicco was 47 years of age.

    He was replaced by a man Mid-Atlantic claimed was 43 years old at the time he was hired.

    In May 2014, Mr DeCicco filed a lawsuit claiming age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Pennsylvania Human Rights Act.  He also claimed interference with his rights and retaliation under the FMLA.

    The court found that Mr DeCicco was placed on several written performance improvement plans warnings during his employment and had not contested that he reviewed camera footage, etc to conduct an independent investigation of Sarah Balmer’s attendance record – which he did only after he was placed on a performance improvement plan.

    The court found that Mr DeCicco failed to show that any of Mid-Atlantic's reasons for firing him were misleading and dismissed his age discrimination claims.

    However, with regard to Mr DeCicco's FMLA claims, the court found that his FMLA request and completed application were so close in time to his final warning and dismissal that it was unusually suggestive of retaliation. The court denied Mid-Atlantic summary judgment on Mr DeCicco's FMLA claims and allowed them to proceed to trial.

  • Brexit implications for employers and employees

     A number of questions for employers and employees are being raised due to the vagueness resulting from the Brexit referendum and the prospect of the UK leaving the EU. 

    Dominating the HR agenda will be projects for data protection and gender pay reporting. The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into force in May 2018 – when employers will be required to carry out audits of employee personal data that they collect and to make certain that it meets the conditions for employee consent.  Employers will also have to create new record-keeping requirements.  As this will come into effect before the UK leaves the EU, organisations not compliant will risk a fine of up to 20 million Euros or 4% of worldwide turnover.  

    Organisations with 250 employees or more are also being required to publish gender pay gap information for the first time.  This will apply to the private sector, voluntary sector and public sector organisations.  The gender pay gap regulations are expected to have an implementation deadline of April 2018.

    In addition employers are likely to experience increasing costs as the apprenticeship levy and extra fees for foreign worker sponsorship are introduced.  There were financial changes for employers sponsoring foreign workers which took effect in April but some new entrants to the job market - and some health and education staff - will be exempt from the new salary threshold until 2019.

    Tax savings for employee benefits are also likely to be reduced and many employers will have had to reconsider their schemes, as salary-sacrifice schemes have been abolished.  However childcare, cycle to work and low emission car schemes have not been affected and all schemes in place prior to April of this year will be protected until April 2018.  Arrangements relating to car, accommodation or school fees are protected until 2021.

    The alignment of rates for the national living wage - plus current and future rates for statutory maternity, paternity, adoption, shared parental and sick pay have already taken place.

    New trade union balloting rules will apply too.  Under these rules, a successful vote for strike action will mean that 50% turnout and a majority vote in favour will be required.  Important public services will need a vote of 40% of all eligible voters.

    The HR profession is being expected to help managers and employees to navigate their way through the short and medium-term implications of Brexit, especially as the effects of HR policy and practice become clearer.

  • Many organisations finding gender pay gap reporting confusing

    Where gender pay gap reporting is concerned, new research has shown that many organisations are finding the process confusing and misleading and fewer than half of UK companies think the requirement to publish their gender pay gap will have any impact on closing it.

    Mercer’s 2017 Gender Pay Gap Reporting survey was to further last year’s research conducted to gain information from HR and Reward professionals on their awareness, concerns and plans surrounding the legislation. It was also seeking to discover how far organisations had progressed.  Participants were found to welcome changes in the regulations and are in favour of the legislation in principle. It is clear that HR professionals implementing the legislation are concerned about the complexity, difficulty and misleading nature of the measures used and therefore, a lot of effort is expected to be made in clarifying and explaining the results - both internally and externally.

    A study by Mercer of 165 companies revealed that 41% found the process complex; 29% thought it was confusing and 28% found the rules misleading. Just 7% described the process as comprehensive and only 3% said it was simple.

    Of the businesses taking part in the survey, almost 44% plan on reporting later in the year –whilst 28% said they do not know when they will report.

    Charles Cotton, senior performance and reward manager at the CIPD stated, “Employers shouldn’t be tempted to put off reporting to the last moment. If they haven’t already started, they need to think about how they communicate to employees, potential workers, existing customers and other stakeholders, what the figures mean, and what action they are going to take and why.”

    Mercer also found that 70% of the organisations surveyed would release an explanation of their gender pay figures along with the hard data.

    Chris Charman, principal and reward expert at Mercer said, “Although committed to the principle of reporting, many UK companies feel the figures will show an overly simplistic view and so see a need to explain further to their staff and shareholders.  Many companies are concerned about the risk of reputational damage when publishing their figures, especially as there still seems to be much confusion between the gender pay gap and the legal requirement of equal pay for equal work.”  He added, “Most organisations are focused on getting to grips with the figures and developing a narrative to explain. Leading organisations are well advised to think about how they can be looking ahead in order to be making improvements in future years. At the heart of this is looking at root causes, which can be found in pay, female promotion and the jobs that men and women predominate in.”

    Mercer’s point of view on Gender Pay Gap reporting is partly about pay, but largely about workforce profile and dynamics - such as hiring; promotion rates of women versus men and occupational segregation. They state that understanding the wider issue requires insight, but real success comes from recognising this as a business issue – higher levels of diversity in organisations are associated with greater business performance and innovation.

  • Changes to the U.S. EEO-1 have been ‘stayed indefinitely’

    The controversial, workload-increasing changes to the U.S. EEO-1 have been ‘stayed indefinitely’.

    The new ruling was announced by Randel Johnson – the VP of Labor, Immigration and Employee Benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – who addressed the members of the Chamber’s Labor Relations and Employee Benefits Committee by saying:

    “We have just learned that the deadline for compliance with the new EEO-1 form reporting requirement for data on hours and compensation will be stayed indefinitely.  According to our sources (The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the office of Management and Budget) based their decision on two grounds, one of which was the appeal submitted by the Chamber that highlighted the new form’s problems with cost, utility and confidentiality.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission will be publishing further details about what actions they will be taking and any future deadlines and timelines in the Federal Register.  This is a victory – not just for the business community but for common sense in the world of regulations and information collection.  As you know, the Chamber was at the forefront throughout the development of the revised form in crafting arguments opposing EEOC’s gross overreach in expanding the existing EEO-1 form to unmanageable proportions, without any discernible benefit.  We will provide more details on this important development as they become available....”

    As it has previously been reported, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was to require employers of 100 or more employees – and federal contractors with 50 or more employees – to give compensation data with their EEO-1 reports.

    In addition, the EEO-1 filing deadline of September 30, 2017 was to be moved to March 31, 2018 with reports due on March 31 of every subsequent year.

    Employers would continue to categorize employees, first by EEO-1 job category using EEOC’s 10 job categories and then by sex and ethnicity or race.

    These have not changed but after reporting those details, employers would then categorize their employees by pay bands. The EEOC has added a total of 12 pay bands to the form – starting with $19,239 and under and ending with $208,000 and over.  Employers would add up the number of employees in each pay band by sex, and ethnicity or race. Finally, the new rules require firms to report the total number of hours worked by employees in each pay band.

    Victoria Lipnic, Acting Chair of the EEOC received a memorandum from the Administrator of the OIRA, Neomi Rao stating that the new form can continue to be used but only to collect the usual EEO-1 information, i.e. the number of employees by race, sex and ethnicity in each of the 10 EEO-1 categories.

  • Job seekers becoming frustrated with excessively automated recruiting experiences

    Randstad US - one of the largest national staffing and HR service organizations - released a report in August stating that 82 percent of job seekers are frustrated with an excessively automated recruiting experience.  Candidates who apply online for jobs and never hear back from potential employers about the status of their applications are particularly affected.

    Research findings are based on an OmniPulse survey fielded by national polling firm Research Now on behalf of Randstad US and was fielded for four days in June 2017.  It reviewed approximately 1,200 respondents over the age of 18 years with a nationally representative sample balanced on age, gender and region. Most applicants for jobs agreed with the technology used but were irritated when it replaced the human side of the recruiting procedure. 

    The report found that 95 percent of those reviewed stated that technology should be used to assist recruitment – not replace it; 85 percent said technology made seeking employment more impersonal and 82 percent said that ideally, innovative technologies should be used in the background and come second to personal interaction.   In effect, in working with staffing or recruitment firms, candidates named ‘a company that uses innovative technologies to find me jobs but puts human interaction first’ as the most appealing. 

    Linda Galipeau, North America CRO of Randstad based in Atlanta said:

    “The findings reinforce what we've believed for quite some time - that successful talent acquisition lies at the intersection of technology and human touch.  If done correctly, the right combination of personal interaction with the power of today's intelligent machines can create an experience that is inherently more human."

    William Tincup of SHRM-SCP, an expert on recruiting technology and president of recruitment media company RecruitingDaily stated:

    “Artificial intelligence (AI) programs may help improve the candidate experience.  For example - recruiters are horrible at letting candidates know where they are in the recruiting process - AI will make it so that feedback is consistently given."

    Linda Galipeau also remarked:

    "Employers today and in the future will be judged by the experience they create for prospective new hires. Job candidates are empowered to provide instant feedback on employers, rating a company's candidate experience just as they would rate a movie. In a tightening labor market, companies cannot afford to lose potential talent due to a poor hiring experience. And in a technology-driven world of talent, it's not only about how a company markets itself but what others say about the company that has a positive impact on employer branding."

    Pete Lamson, CEO of JazzHR - a recruiting software company based in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania - agreed and stated:

    "I think certainly being highly responsive helps, respond back, it reflects back on the employer's brand."

    Job seekers have become increasingly savvy about what makes a great candidate experience and what leaves them with a less-than-favorable impression. Respondents to the survey named "the degree of personal, human interaction during the process," and "the recruiter/hiring manager I worked with," as having most influenced their positive impression. 

  • Trump alleges America’s unemployment rate does not tell the whole story

    A new report found that nearly four in ten American adults don't have a job and are not looking for one.

    President Donald Trump alleged – in his election-season – that America’s unemployment rate did not tell the whole story and is ‘one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics’.  He claimed that the real unemployment rate could actually be 40 percent higher.

    Anyone without a job and who has been actively seeking work in the last four weeks is considered, by the government, to be unemployed.  Slipping through the cracks are those who have simply given up trying to get back into the labor force.

    A new study by Brookings Institution’s Hamilton Project, takes a closer look at the more than ninety-four million Americans not counted in the labor force.  In this analysis, the following questions were explored.  Of the approximately twenty four million men and women of working age who were not in the labour force in 2016:

    • What are the reasons given for not working or seeking work?
    • With whom are these persons living?
    • How are they making ends meet?

    The findings were that women with a high school education or less are overwhelmingly the largest group out of the labor force.  Excluding the care givers - who make up approximately forty percent - men and women give the same reasons for not belonging to the labor force.  Almost thirty per cent report being ill or disabled; eight percent are students and five percent have retired early.

    Male and female nonparticipants were found to have different living arrangements, with females living with a spouse or partner and males living with parents.  Almost seventy five percent of these live in a household with earned income and only eleven percent report claiming income from a safety net when they are not receiving earned income.  More than 1.3 million Americans who are not in the labor force report having no income at all.   Forty five percent of households with a male prime-age nonparticipant and twenty eight percent with a female prime-age nonparticipant are in the bottom income group.

    Researchers also found that more women than men sat on the sidelines in every educational subgroup, despite the fact that more women hold advanced degrees than men.

    The report said, "Interestingly, the gender ratios among nonparticipants become more imbalanced as education increases. Among nonparticipants with a high school degree or less, there are nearly 2 women for every man; at the bachelor's degree level, three-and-a-half times as many women as men are nonparticipants."

    Roughly 13 percent were not in any of the categories but had worked in some capacity over the course of the past year.

    "Labor force participation is the key channel through which Americans contribute to and benefit from their economy, making it vital that we understand who is left out of the labor force," the report said. "Economic growth and broad sharing in that growth are both enhanced when the labor market makes the best possible use of workers' talents."

  • Survey shows hiring demand is strong and unemployment at a record low

    A survey by CIPD (the professional body for HR and people development) and the Adecco Group - of more than 1,000 employers has identified that hiring demand remains strong, whilst unemployment is at a record low.  This is in comparison with a May 2017 report and it suggests that UK employment will grow strongly in the third quarter of 2017.  However, wage growth is likely to remain weak and basic pay award expectations for the next 12 months remain at just 1%.

    The quarter’s net employment balance – which is a measure of the difference between the proportion of employers who expect to increase staffing levels and those who expect to decrease them – shows an increase from +20 to +27 during the past three months.

    The restraint on the basic pay award outlook can be put down to various reasons. 

    Gerwyn Davies, Senior Labour Market Analyst for the CIPD said:

    “Predictions of pay growth increasing alongside strong employment growth is the dog that hasn’t barked for some time now, and we are still yet to see tangible signs of this situation changing in the near-term. The facts remain that productivity levels are stagnant; public sector pay increases remain modest while wage costs and uncertainty over access to the EU market have increased for some employers. At the same time, it is also clear that the majority of employers have still been able to find suitable candidates to employ at current wage rates due to a strong labour supply until now. The good news is that the UK labour market continues to go from strength to strength. This is particularly good news for jobseekers, especially the long-term unemployed, who have recently been able to move into work more quickly than in the past. We believe therefore that the Bank of England was right to give more weight to the prospects for pay and productivity than to the rise in employment in their recent interest rate decision. Against the backdrop of future migration restrictions and a tight labour market, the need for a workforce development plan is greater than ever.”   

    In the private sector, 23% of firms quote that delivering the National Living Wage is a brake on pay growth; 21% cite uncertainty over access to the single market and 21% suggest the Government’s auto-enrolment pension’s scheme is acting as a challenge. Another 21% of firms report that affordability is keeping down pay - which underlines the urgent need to address the weak productivity growth in the UK.  In the meantime, around three quarters of public sector employers state that restraint in the public sector is the main reason why they cannot complement the inflation rate target of 2% in their next basic pay award.

    Research by the CIPD also indicates that employee pay expectations are weaker this year compared with last year.  This may suggest that employers are not coming under any additional pressure to raise pay from workers, despite the low unemployment rate.

    In retrospect, the standard for all basic pay decisions taken in the first six months of 2017 is 1.5%. This may mean that employers have become more negative about basic pay growth over the past six months due to a slowing economy. 

    Alex Fleming, President of General Staffing at the Adecco Group UK remarked:

    “This quarter’s report demonstrates strong and stable employment intentions. These have remained in a positive range for the last two years during which time we have seen unemployment consistently fall. Context is important here though: employers continuing to hire isn’t, necessarily, an indication that they are convinced of a bright economic future, rather that nothing significant has changed in recent months. Many employers are getting on with the day-to-day hiring required to keep their businesses ticking along until they have enough information to build concrete recruitment plans. Overall, our labour market picture looks promising especially considering the unknown future impact of Brexit on the flow of talent in and out of the UK. Strong labour supply is a key contributor: the long-term unemployed are finding work more quickly and the amount of workers aged 50-64 who are in employment has risen by around 200,000 during the past year. However continued subdued wage growth that the labour market is currently facing is a real issue that employers need to tackle head on. Employers must to invest in staff to increase productivity, thus in-turn providing them with the opportunity to increase wage growth.” 

  • Retiring fully and relying on a pension no longer an option for most

    Although the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has revealed that the number of people at retirement age in the UK who now receive a private pension income has almost doubled, The People’s Pension (TPP) has reported that retiring fully and relying solely on a pension is no longer an option for the majority.

    Whilst almost 80% of retirees received a private pension last year, 52% of 4,000 expectant retirees polled believe that their financial situation will not support the lifestyle they would want in retirement. To supplement their pensions, 39% said they would have to continue to work on a part time basis, with 24% stating they will rely on inherited wealth.

    Darren Philp, who is Director of Policy and Market Engagement for The People’s Pension stated:

    “This research confirms that the concept of a “carriage clock” retirement, whereby people completely stop work and rely on their pension savings is consigned to history. Instead, people appear to be planning for a phased retirement, where they may choose to work part-time, or surviving on uncertain funding sources such as an inheritance or property. Most worryingly, these “precarious pensioners” are not solely the generations of the future but include those over 55, many of whom may be unprepared financially for imminent retirement.”

    Even though state pension income has almost doubled in the last 40 years, the ONS disclosed that over half of the increase in gross income for average retirees is a result of an increase in income from private pensions. Retired households with private pensions had 60% more income than those relying on a state pension.

    At the end of 2016, whilst the average income for a retired household was less than the average income for a non-retired household, data does however show that it has grown at a faster rate than the average non-retired household over the last 40 years.

    Steve Webb, Director of Policy at Royal London said:

    "In previous generations being elderly was a by-word for being poor. That has changed dramatically in the last 40 years with pensioner incomes nearly trebling whilst the incomes of the working age population rose much more slowly.”

    Experts believe that while automatic enrollment will go a long way to improving retirement outcomes in the UK, the minimum contributions still won’t be sufficient. Workers will need to build up their pensions from the earliest possible age and at a faster rate than at present.

  • EAT rules voluntary overtime to be included in holiday pay

    An important decision by the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) regarding holiday pay for employees who regularly work voluntary overtime beyond their contracted hours, could have massive implications for UK businesses.

    The EAT recently heard a case concerning Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council v Willetts (and others) where they upheld a previously made decision that voluntary overtime worked for a sufficient period of time on a regular and/or recurring basis should be included in the first four weeks’ paid holiday.

    Holiday pay claims had been brought against the Council by a group of 56 employees responsible for the repair and maintenance of council houses.   These employees normally worked 37 hours per week but once in every four or five weeks, they were on an ‘on call’ register and they worked additional voluntary hours. However, these voluntary payments had been excluded from their holiday pay and the workers argument was that this was contrary to the Working Time Regulations 1988 (WTRs).

    When their initial claim was successful, Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council appealed to the EAT.  On upholding the earlier decision, the EAT referred to previous ECJ decisions which had stressed that all workers should receive their ‘normal remuneration’ when they take a holiday.  They should not be discouraged from implementing their right to take paid annual leave – and any decrease in their salary is presumed to be a deterrent.

    The case was sent back to the Tribunal to determine whether or not Mr Willett and his co-workers had been underpaid their holiday pay.

    Glenn Hayes of Irwin Mitchell stated, “This decision is extremely important and it is the first occasion the EAT has heard cases relating to purely voluntary overtime. Many businesses have adopted a ‘wait and see’ approach to voluntary overtime but this option is no longer possible and overtime that is worked regularly, must now be included in holiday pay.

    “Not all voluntary overtime will have to be included but the EAT made it clear that overtime that ‘extends for a sufficient period of time on a regular or recurring basis’ will.

    “There is no statutory definition of what amounts to ‘normal pay’ and Tribunals will continue to hear arguments about whether overtime, of whatever nature, has become part of an employee’s normal pay.”

     

  • US unemployment rate falls in July

    According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the United States economy produced 209,000 jobs in July.  This meant that the unemployment rate was down to 4.3 percent in July – beating all expectations from economists.

    Jed Kolko, chief economist for job search engine Indeed said, "This was a banner jobs report. Job growth in the past three months is ahead of the 2016 pace and way ahead of what's needed to keep up with population growth. Working-age adults are now more likely to be employed than at any time since the recession."

    Since a peak of 10% in 2009, the unemployment rate has been steadily falling.  In July, the unemployment rates were 4% for adult men and women, 13.2% for teenagers 3.8% for Asians, 7.4% for blacks and 3.8% for whites – all showing little or no change,  However, the unemployment rate for Hispanics was up to 5.1% from 4.8%.  Long term unemployed rose slightly to 1.8 million – 25.9% of the total unemployed.

    According to the BLS, some unemployed people – although out of work and available for work – were not actively seeking a job as they believe there are none available for them. Others did not seek work due to family responsibilities.

    Jed Kolko stated, "Today's low unemployment rate masks some reasons for concern.  Today's unemployed are more than twice as likely to be out of work for more than six months as the unemployed in April 2001. They're also more likely to be underemployed, as measured by the broader U-6 unemployment rate. Finally, a larger share of prime-working-age adults is not employed today versus April 2001 because they're out of the labor force.”

    President Trump has tweeted encouragement to those who have given up looking for a job altogether, to start trying again to join the labor force.  He promised that he will continue to roll back "stifling regulations" that hurt jobs.

    Cathy Barrera - the chief economic adviser for the online jobs platform ZipRecruiter – had been worried about younger workers falling behind since the recovery from the recession.  However, she stated, "……. we're starting to see a trend for that particular group with modest rises in labor force participation and downward ticks in unemployment.  We're seeing more jobs that don't require a college degree get posted. As more jobs become available for them, we could see their labor force participation return to pre-recession levels."

    In July, food services gained 53,000 jobs; professional and business services gained 49,000 jobs and health care gained 39,000 jobs.  Employment in other major industries, including construction; manufacturing; wholesale trade; retail trade; transportation and warehousing; information; financial activities and government showed little change over the month.

    Jed Kolko pointed out that "The fastest job growth in July was in lower-wage industries. That's helping the least-educated Americans get back to work. The recovery is now strong and long enough to lift many of the people hurt most by the recession—except in manufacturing, which continues to lag overall jobs growth."

    Wage growth remains sluggish - with average hourly earnings for all private-sector workers rising by 9 cents in July to $26.36. Over the year, average hourly earnings have risen by 65 cents, or 2.5 percent.

    Cathy Barrera observed, "While we're still mystified by the muted wage growth, wages among the lower 25th percentile is growing a lot faster than those who are at the top 75th percentile.  This is one indication that the job market for younger workers and/or workers without college degrees may be heating up, which is great news because this is the group that has not seen as full a recovery as everyone else."

     

     

  • The Taylor Review into modern working practices has recently been published

    The Taylor Review into modern working practices has recently been published, with Matthew Taylor - and his colleagues on the Taylor Review, writing: “The starting point for our review has been the strength of our labour market and of the key features of our system of employment regulation, what we refer to as the British way.  Record levels of employment, low levels of unemployment, high levels of voluntary flexibility, wages now growing fastest amongst the lowest paid; these facts provide a very positive backdrop – one that would be envied in many other advanced economies – for our consideration of how to improve the quality of work.”

    Peter Cheese, Chief Executive of the CIPD (the professional body for HR and people development) commented on the publication, saying, “The Taylor Review has the potential to change how we look at the future of work, which is about quality of work and not simply quantity. Translating the ambition into practice has an added importance given some of the additional challenges we face in the UK, from access to skills to labour market regulation post Brexit.” 

    Some proposals suggested in the report include ‘a new role for the Low Pay Commission exploring how to improve quality and progression in sectors with a high proportion of low paid workers; a national framework for employability skills so we can develop the kind of transferable capabilities that can be acquired in formal education and also informal and on the job learning; recognising and supporting the role that employers can play in promoting health and wellbeing at work and making it much easier for employees to access rights to independent representation, information and consultation.’

    It further read...‘to increase clarity for business and workers we propose primary legislation to define the boundary between self-employment and worker status; moving towards aligning the categories used in tax regulation and employment regulation and that the employment status boundary should be defined - as is the tax boundary - in terms of the level of control and supervision experienced by individuals.’

    Peter Cheese declared, “We have been calling for greater clarity over workers’ rights for a long time, and therefore welcome the main thrust of the recommendations to ensure fairer treatment for gig economy workers without losing the flexibility which we know many of them value. We also support the proposals to clarify people’s employment status and rights and back plans to require employers to provide details of terms and conditions of employment to workers as well as employees.”

    He also commented, “While we welcome the proposals for a stronger test of supervisory relationships in order to ensure workers get the benefits they are entitled to, we need to ensure that the framework for enforcing this is practical, otherwise we risk discouraging employers from providing flexible roles and opportunities that many people benefit from.” 

    Peter Cheese added, “Crucially, Taylor stresses that the best way to improve the quality of work is through effective corporate governance, good management and strong employment relations within organisations and flags the need to boost productivity and job quality through working more closely with low pay employers and sectors. It is vital the Government develops these ideas as part of industrial strategy to ensure that the Taylor Review has lasting impact on work quality in the UK.”

  • DOL asks if employing multiple salary levels is a good idea

    The Department of Labor has asked if employing multiple salary levels for white-collar overtime exemptions is a good idea and in its request for information (RFI) on July 25, it suggested more complex alternatives to the Obama administration rule - which has been blocked.  This included adjusting the levels according to different costs of living in different states. 

    It added that gathering public input on the following questions will aid in the development of a notice of proposed rulemaking:

    • Should the regulations contain multiple standard salary levels?  If so, how should these levels be set - by size of employer; census region; census division; state; metropolitan statistical area or some other method
    • Should there be multiple total annual compensation levels for the highly compensated employee exemption
    • Would updating the 2004 salary level for inflation be appropriate and, if so, what measure of inflation should be used
    • Should the standard salary level and the highly compensated employee total annual compensation level be automatically updated on a periodic basis

    Alexander Passantino, an attorney with Seyfarth Shaw and former acting administrator of the DOL's Wage and Hour Division said, "Employing a cost-of-living-based salary test certainly would address a number of the concerns raised by employers in the previous go-round.  "A salary level that works for New York [City] or D.C. does not necessarily work for the rural South. Because of the way the duties test works in connection with the salary, however, the reverse is not necessarily true. The salary is a screening mechanism; if it is low enough to ensure we are not inappropriately screening out exempt employees in the rural South, it likewise serves that function in New York City."

    The attorney went on to say that the DOL will have difficulty implementing different salary levels due to the fact that it will be hard to establish exactly where an employee works.      He added, "Imagine a company incorporated in Delaware with headquarters in New York; a regional office in Denver; a field supervisor working out of his home in Santa Fe who services a district covering El Paso, Texas, to Phoenix.  Then imagine he spends half his time in the Denver office and half his time working out of his home. The DOL would need to provide guidance on how to apply the proper salary level, which would be much more challenging for the department than setting one standard salary level. The multiple standard salary levels are "a great idea in principle—somewhat difficult in application."

    Alfred Robinson Jr – an attorney in Washington D.C. and former acting administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, commented on the multiple standard levels by stating it ".......could result in some positions and employees being classified differently in different regions of the country even though they perform the same job duties."

    Conversely, Jeffrey Brecher - an attorney with Jackson Lewis in Melville, N.Y. – said, "One of the criticisms of the original final rule was that it established a salary level that more than doubled the prior salary level and took no consideration for differences in salary levels among geographic areas. So setting a standard salary level that makes adjustments based on geographic location makes sense. Employers are used to variations in salary levels at the state-law level, so this is something the DOL will likely give serious consideration."

  • Homeland Security Secretary discloses why PED’s were allowed in the hold

    Speaking at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado on 19th July, John Kelly, US Homeland Security Secretary, discussed the decision taken earlier this year to allow personal electronic devices (PED’s) to be checked into baggage placed in aircraft holds, despite them being considered a risk in the passenger cabin.

    Since March of this year until the end of June when they were eventually lifted, new security measures had been implemented which meant that passengers on US-bound services from some airports were forbidden from taking large electronic devices into the cabin. The ban affected 180 airlines and 280 airports globally.

    However in June, DHS announced the lifting of the ban and issued a statement which read; “These airports and airlines have successfully implemented the first phase of enhanced security measures. There are currently no airlines under restrictions for large personal electronic devices. Airlines worldwide have implemented additional security measures that ultimately make the global aviation community more secure.”

    The US government lifted the laptop ban as concern about the safety of PED’s in checked baggage heightened.  Counterterrorism analysts were puzzled as the same explosive detection technology is used for both hand and checked baggage and testing by FAA’s Fire Safety Branch  showed that PED’s packed in suitcases in the cargo hold could have serious consequences to aircraft.

    At the security forum this month, Kelly detailed the reasoning behind the sanctions, stating that on his appointment to the position in January, he was informed that there was a very sophisticated threat.

    "It was not only sophisticated but it was real, and it was targeted at certain airports," he said.

    Just as importantly however, Kelly also learned that remote detonation of the device was not a possibility and direct access would have been required – hence allowing the PED’s to be placed into the hold.

    Although the ban has now been lifted, Kelly insisted that there has been "no compromise" and security measures have been enhanced. He stated, "I am reasonably confident that we can detect the devices, given all of the things that we are requiring people to [do]," he says.

  • Supreme Court rules Employment Tribunal fees unlawful

    In 2013, the government introduced employment tribunal fees under a secondary legislation rather than a full Act of Parliament.   After losing its case challenging the government’s decision - at both the High Court and the Court of Appeal - the trade union Unison appealed to the Supreme Court and won.  As a result, £27m in fees paid will be returned by the Government to those who paid to take their employment complaints to tribunal.

    A unanimous judgment of seven Supreme Court judges noted that employment tribunals “are intended to provide a forum for the enforcement of employment rights by employees and workers, including the low paid; those who have recently lost their jobs and those who are vulnerable to long-term unemployment.” 

    The judges concluded that the fees were preventing access to justice and as women were more likely to bring more serious and costly Type B cases - rather than Type A cases - the charges were also deemed to be discriminatory towards them.

    Labour’s shadow justice secretary Richard Burgon said: “The Conservative Government should do the right thing, accept the ruling and consign their immoral Employment Tribunal Fees to the dustbin of history, rather than spending more taxpayers’ money trying to defend the indefensible. It’s an important day for access to justice for ordinary working people everywhere. The Conservative Government – which in coalition with the Lib Dems brought in this immoral restricted access to justice – must now pay a £32 million price for attacking workers.  Labour’s manifesto pledged to abolish Employment Tribunal Fees. Labour’s position has been vindicated by the highest court of the land and Unison should be congratulated on winning a victory for working people everywhere.”

    Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said: “The government is not above the law. But when ministers introduced fees they were disregarding laws many centuries old, and showing little concern for employees seeking justice following illegal treatment at work.”

    Jason Moyer-Lee, the general secretary of the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB) which represents workers in the so-called gig economy, welcomed the “momentous decision”.

    Experts have pointed out that the decision would probably lead to a sudden increase in the number of tribunals.  During the course of the case it was suggested that the number of tribunals brought since fees were introduced has dropped by as much as 70 per cent.

    Paul McFarlane, chair of the Employment Lawyers Association’s legislative and policy committee and partner at Weightmans, called the result ‘dramatic’ and explained: “Once fees are scrapped it is likely that there will be a significant rise in the number of claims being brought. This will have knock-on implications for business, Acas and the employment tribunal system itself – all of whom will have to deal with the increased volume of claims.”

    Head of the employment department at Trowers & Hamlins, Emma Burrows also agreed that claim numbers could increase and added: “Employers will also need to reassess their approach to risk when facing potential disputes with employees.”

  • FCA publishes interim findings of the Retirement Outcomes Review

    The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published interim findings of the Retirement Outcomes Review, the first major comprehensive study into how the retirement income market is changing since the pension freedoms were introduced.   The review considered how the income market is developing, focusing mainly on those who do not take any advice.

    They found that consumers welcomed the pension freedoms and over one million defined contribution pension pots had been accessed since the reforms took place.  The early access of pots has resulted in 72% being accessed by consumers less than 65 years of age – most of whom took lump sums.  Over half of the accessed pots have been fully withdrawn and over half of these have been transferred into savings or investments. No evidence was found of persons being careless with their pension savings.

    Since inception, tools have been developed to help consumers understand the changes.  In addition simpler flexi-access drawdown products, which consumers can buy without taking financial advice, have been introduced.

    The review found however, that the market is still growing and adjusting to the changes, leaving certain issues identified - those who withdrew their pots did so partly because of mistrust of pensions and they accepted the drawdown option offered by the pension provider without shopping around; 30% did not take advice on how to manage the drawdown and, as the decision is complex, it is questionable whether further support is required.

    It was found that some annuity providers were leaving the market, reducing choice for consumers and weakening competiveness. This could result in more charges/tax being paid, consumers investing unsuitably, missing out on valuable benefits or running out of savings sooner than expected.

    The FCA has stated that they will carry out further assessment of the harm these issues may cause and consider remedies.

    Commenting on the interim finds of this review, Tim Gosling – Policy Lead of the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association – said,

    "The FCA's interim retirement outcomes review makes for disturbing reading. Without timely action now, those retiring in the near future who are dependent on defined contribution (DC) pots and who have no access to advice will not receive the retirement they hope for.

    “We need two things. First, we need a smoother customer journey at retirement that makes the line of least resistance an income product rather than cash. This may mean a form of "soft" default, intended to preserve consumer choice but designed to connect savers to the income 84% say they want1.

     “Second, we need a new generation of high quality retirement income products. These need to have strong independent governance and be suitable for those needing an income but who do not have access to advice. Government and the FCA should be mindful of lessons learnt in the workplace pensions market after the 2013 Office of Fair Trading Report to ensure product quality and also ensure they are open to fresh thinking about how to stimulate the development of new products.

    “Over half (52%) of fully withdrawn pots have not been spent but moved into other retirement savings or investment vehicles – with associated tax, investment and benefit risks. The report suggests that this may be due to lack of public trust in pensions so we need to work hard to address this issue by helping the industry to evolve to meet the expectations of consumers saving for and transitioning into retirement.

    “The industry does not have long to get this right."

  • UK already starting to feel the effects of skills shortages in the labour market

    Brexit negotiations have only just begun but already the UK is starting to feel the effects of skills shortages in the labour market.

    The latest CIPD/Hays research found that three-quarters of HR professionals are already experiencing recruitment difficulties and - as a result of the UK’s decision to leave the EU - they expect competition for well-qualified talent to increase over the next three years.  As a result, they have highlighted the need for smarter, more targeted recruitment strategies, such as combining in-house and outsourced approaches.  If used well, this can be a positive resource for HR teams particularly when they require larger volumes of recruits as it can lessen the burden of administration.

    Data from the survey shows that employers are endeavouring to use many options to increase their labour supply, especially in relation to younger applicants.  These include increasing the skills in their existing workers; offering apprenticeships; work placement and work experience schemes and developing a close relationship with schools and colleges.

    The Resourcing and Talent Planning survey reports that there is an added cautiousness in prospective candidates and around the same proportion of increased cautiousness in businesses recruitment. Three-fifths of businesses also anticipate that as a result of the Brexit vote, they will experience increased difficulty in recruiting senior and skilled/ technical employees, whilst two-fifths anticipate increased difficulty in recruiting operational staff.

    However, the survey shows that despite the Brexit decision, when it comes to employing migrants the proportion of businesses anticipating that they will recruit EU migrants in 2017 is similar to that of 2016 across all sectors.

    According to the latest Labour Market Outlook findings, approximately 12% of private sector companies are considering locating their business operations abroad - with the Republic of Ireland, Germany and France as the most popular destinations.

     

  • Women interviewees who don’t reveal their salaries tend to earn less than those who do

    According to a new survey by PayScale, women being interviewed who will not reveal their salaries tend to earn an average of 1.8% less than women who do disclose their compensation.  

    Lydia Frank, vice president of content strategy at PayScale, which provides compensation data and software, states "There's a lot of research out there around unconscious bias that shows that we expect women to be cooperative and collaborative, so when a woman refuses to answer that question, it could rub people the wrong way."  

    Between April and June, PayScale interviewed 15,413 job applicants and the survey asked the following question:   

    At any point in the interview process, did you disclose your pay at previous jobs?

    The replies received were:

    1. No, and they did not ask.
    2. No, but they asked.
    3. Yes, they asked about my salary history.
    4. Yes, I volunteered information about my salary history.
    5. I do not recall.

    PayScale analyzed the responses by industry; job title; job group; job level; gender; age and income bracket - it was found that when it came to job groups, 44% of those applying for jobs in HR, 43% in marketing and advertising and 40% in accounting and finance were the most likely candidates to disclose salary history during an interview.    

    Lydia Frank said "With HR, if you've been on the other side of the table discussing compensation with candidates, where salary history is something you asked of candidates, being asked yourself might feel pretty typical."

    Of the applicants for C-suite jobs, 40% said they were asked about their compensation whilst 26% refused to answer the question.  However, when job candidates did refuse to say what they earned, they tended to earn more than those who revealed their salaries.

    "When it comes to higher-paying positions, an employer doesn't want to waste anyone's time - theirs or yours," Lydia Frank said. "….so making sure you really understand salary expectations for those roles makes a ton of sense."  Where executive-level candidates had a tendency to sidestep the question, "….that has to do with confidence," she said and added, "If you know your skills are sought after and you're at a level in your career where you're in a highly paid role, you probably know your value and are more confident in saying hey, I don't really want to talk about my salary, I want to talk about the position and what the role is worth.”

    When it came to industry, those most likely to be asked about their salaries were people applying for jobs in finance and insurance - 45% and 49% percent of the applicants revealed their compensation.

    However, when it came to the older applicants they were more likely to refuse to disclose what they earned.   The survey showed that 28% of baby boomers refused to disclose their salary histories when asked; 22% of members of generation X refused and 18% of millennials also refused.

    Lydia Frank remarked that by forbidding the question in the first place, women won't be put in the position of having to refuse to answer and said, "That's absolutely the advice we're giving to employers: Don't ask the question and put candidates in an awkward position of having to decide whether to answer. It's easy enough to switch to 'salary expectations,' and that's really what the employer and candidate should be talking about anyway-the market rate for the position, not an individual's salary history. If salary history does manage to influence the offer then that could lead to internal pay inequities and employee turnover."

    In at least six states or cities the question of salary history being asked by prospective employers has been banned - or the possibility is being considered.   Delaware; Massachusetts; New York City; Oregon; Philadelphia (effective May 2017, but delayed pending litigation) and Puerto Rico are those already banning or planning to ban, whilst California is considering similar legislation.

  • US DOL alleges manufacturing business guilty of Profit Sharing Plan embezzlement

    The US Department of Labor alleged that a Florida manufacturing business in Flagler County is guilty of Profit Sharing Plan embezzlement and filed a complaint against the company and its owner.  According to the allegations the owner embezzled $111,624 between January and June 2009 from the company Profit Sharing Plan. 

    United States Attorney A. Lee Bentley, III has now announced that the 63-year-old owner, from Volusia County, has pleaded guilty to embezzlement from an employee benefit.  According to the plea agreement, the owner embezzled all of the funds from the business’ corporate Profit Sharing Plan and unlawfully used the pension funds to pay personal and other unrelated corporate expenses.  She used some of the funds to pay personal investment obligations in another company she co-owns.  The corporate Profit Sharing Plan was a federally protected plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

    In 2009, the manufacturing company was having financial issues.  To meet the company’s payroll; pay vendors; fulfil the company’s mortgage payments and pay the financial obligations of her unrelated company, the owner of the manufacturing company made 15 separate and illegal electronic funds transfers from the company’s Profit Sharing Plan’s account.  This was carried out by electronically transferring funds from the Plan’s account to the company’s operating account.  Checks were then written from the operating account to cover personal and business obligations.  As a result, the employees’ Profit Sharing Account was depleted.

    The owner and another were held to be jointly liable and, as a result, are permanently banned from acting as a fiduciary, trustee, agent or representative for employee benefit plans (as defined by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) in the future.  In addition, they have been ordered to pay restitution plus an additional $25,253 in interest on lost earnings.

    The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Jacksonville Division, appointed administrators to terminate the Plan, collect and administer the Plan’s assets and make distributions to the affected participants.

  • Affluent male pensioner’s life expectancy is rising faster than other groups

    Affluent male pensioner’s life expectancy is rising faster than other groups - as revealed by a new longevity trends report published by the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) in conjunction with longevity experts, Club Vita. 

    The report suggests that this trend could have major implications for Defined Benefit (DB) pension schemes, as over half of their liabilities will be in this group - showing that a scheme with a high proportion of more affluent members might need to make more provision than a scheme with a more mixed demographic.

    Between 2011 and 2015 men in this group continued to have rapid rises in longevity - gaining 17 weeks of life expectancy and maintaining the increasing trend from the previous 10 years, whilst other groups saw no increases.  In contrast, for men on a modest retirement income and those who are living in deprived areas on a low income, life expectancy has remained unchanged since 2011.

    The importance of having an insight into the economic dynamics of longevity trends has never been greater.  Recent differences in life expectancy amongst socio economic groups is likely to be caused by a combination of factors - harsh winters, flu, access to social care and economic slowdown, to which issues the affluent group have proved to be more resilient. 

    Steven Baxter, Head of research for Club Vita states, “.......Trustees of DB schemes are faced with tough decisions to make. Standard actuarial projections have shown a slowdown in rising life expectancy and some have even questioned whether DB schemes should be funding for future, uncertain increases in longevity.  However, our evidence that life expectancy is still rising at the same pace amongst affluent males is highly significant.” 

    He continues, “While the nation has seen a slow-down in rising life expectancy over recent years our analysis has shown that men in ‘comfortable’ socio economic groups are, in contrast, maintaining a consistently rising life-expectancy. There has been a divergence in longevity expectations between these groups and the lower socio-economic ‘making do’ and ‘hard pressed’ groups, with the longevity improving twice as fast for the ‘comfortable’ group.  At a societal level it is concerning to see a halt in the narrowing of the longevity gap amongst different parts of society that we had seen previously.”

    Graham Vidler, Director of External Affairs, Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) commented that trustees have to take a view on the longevity outlook for the future and this report was designed to help them with decision-making and scheme management.

  • Supreme Court of Florida backs lower court on capping non-economic damages

    A variety of state statutes and legal concepts have limited damages in personal injury cases. 

    The Supreme Court of Florida has backed the ruling made by a lower court that caps on non-economic damages (in the case of medical malpractice) violate the Equal Protections Clause of the states constitution.

    This decision was made after a lawsuit was brought by a woman who suffered a complication after surgery at North Broward Hospital District.

    During intubation in the administration of anesthesia, the patient's oesophagus was allegedly perforated and – despite complaining of chest pain – her condition was not fully discovered until the next day when she had to undergo emergency surgery to repair her esophagus.  However, the complaint stated that she had never regained her full health and she was awarded $4 million in non-economic damages by a jury.

    Non-economic damages are injury damages for various types of pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life damages.  They are unlike economic damages in that a jury does not base a plaintiff’s non-economic damage awards on past losses and future calculations but makes a more subjective evaluation.

    In the case of the Florida plaintiff, the trial court had issued a final written judgment that limited the non-economic damages by the caps defined in the Florida Statutes, which resulted in the award being reduced by about $2 million. Added to that, the court ruled that a further $1.3 million should be taken off the amount as the hospital's share of liability was capped at $100,000.

    These caps were originally put into place to reduce the cost of malpractice insurance, but the Supreme Court justices wrote that putting the caps in place did not prove that insurance premiums were reduced and drew the conclusion that the caps were illogical “......because of the arbitrary reduction of compensation without regard to the severity of the injury does not bear a rational relationship to the Legislature's stated interest on addressing the medical malpractice crisis.”   The court also concluded that the statutory caps were unreasonable and arbitrarily limited rewards for those who were grievously injured by medical negligence.

    Justice Ricky Polston disagreed and stated that the Legislature did what it had to do to ensure the quality and availability of health care for the residents of Florida. He also stated that if the policy of caps on non-economic damages affected insurance premiums, it was immaterial and concluded by saying that it was not the place of the majority in the court to change a statute or policy that it did not like and wrote that doing so “improperly interjects the judiciary into a legislative function.”

    Many states have non-economic damage caps for medical malpractice cases and a smaller number, less than a quarter, of states have in place non-economic damage caps for any personal injury claim. However, the damage cap laws all make exceptions, either permitting a higher damage cap or eliminating it, for cases involving death and serious injury such as the loss of a limb or organ. 

  • Boeing announce plans to flight-test an artificial intelligence system

    Mike Sinnett, vice president of product development at Boeing Commercial Airplanes, recently announced that in the next two years they plan to flight-test an artificial intelligence system capable of flying a civil aircraft. Having already started simulations and ground-based experiments this year, they aim to progress to flight tests on real aircraft by 2019, with the tests proving whether or not aircraft with reduced crew or even no pilot could be operated safely for passenger and freight flights.

    Since US airlines have not had a fatal accident since 2009, the safety standards for autonomous flights will need to be “as good as zero” said Sinnett. He added “There’s going to be a transition away from the requirement to have a skilled aviator operating the airplane tactically, to having a system that operates the vehicle autonomously – if we can do that at the same levels of safety, integrity and availability that we have today.”

    Aviation industry trends appear to be the driving force behind these tests. Boeing forecasts sales of about 40,000 new aircraft in the next two decades and Sinnett believes that “More of those will be growth than replacement.” He added “It begs the question, where are all those experienced pilots going to come from?” Whilst historically airlines have looked towards the military to fill their pilot shortages, recently the military have implemented changes in a bid to level the playing field so that leaving for an airline career becomes a much tougher decision.

    The use of autonomous systems is not a new experience for Boeing - earlier this year for example, a research project demonstrated a robotic system called ALIAS (Aircrew Labour In-Cockpit Automation System) which helped a pilot fly and land a Boeing 737.

    However, while pilots already use autopilot systems and fly-by-wire controls for level flight and landings, Sinnett believes that in time automation could handle auto-takeoffs as well “The airplane is capable of doing it, but not capable of doing it at the same level of integrity as with a pilot in the loop,” he said. Ultimately, Boeing needs to develop artificial intelligence tools that can replicate the same decision-making processes that pilots use

  • Experts state age discrimination continues to steer older workers out of the workplace

    At a meeting held in Washington, D.C. entitled ‘The ADEA @ 50—More Relevant Than Ever’, which took place on June 14, experts told the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that age discrimination and typecasting of older workers continues to steer older workers out of the workplace – thus limiting further economic growth.

    Acting EEOC Chair, Victoria A. Lipnic stated, “With so many more people working and living longer, we can’t afford to allow age discrimination to waste the knowledge, skills, and talent of older workers.”  She went on to add that “….outdated assumptions about age and work deprive people of economic opportunity and stifle job growth and productivity”.

    In a 2017 AARP Foundation study, nearly two-thirds of workers age 55-64 reported that their age is a barrier to getting a job.  Laurie McCann, a senior attorney for AARP Foundation Litigation, stated that hiring discrimination and obligatory retirement are constant problems that older workers face across industries. She called on the EEOC to strengthen ADEA protections and enforcement, saying, “The ADEA should not be treated as a second-class civil rights statute,” and went on to tell the Commission, “On this 50th Anniversary of the ADEA, AARP Foundation urges the EEOC to take bolder action to ensure older workers are treated fairly at work.”

    Jacqueline James of The Center on Aging & Work at Boston College said that “….employers have been slow to innovate,” as far as it relates to addressing older workers’ preferences in recruitment and hiring; retention and preventing age bias. The Center and AARP have teamed up to develop a standard tool to assist employers to manage the current multigenerational workforce as experts anticipate that the older worker population will continue to grow. 

    A director of the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement, Sara Czaja, told the Commission that research has disproved assumptions that older workers are less productive, technophobic or inflexible. She illustrated the practical ways in which employers better integrate older workers into the workforce - by recognizing their value and by complementing their skills and abilities with work environments.  She said, “Unfortunately, numerous negative stereotypes about older workers still exist that often prevent or have a negative impact on employment opportunities for older people.  These stereotypes can also prevent organizations from realizing the wealth of positive assets, such as wisdom, experience, and reliability that older workers can bring to the table.”

    John Challenger, CEO of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. informed the Commission that a combination of communal tradition and damaged business practices “….that channel older people out of the workforce, especially skilled workers, is damaging the economic health of our country.”   He quoted this from the Bureau of Labor Statistics data and went on to suggest that if older workers were allowed to remain in the workforce, it would significantly reduce the skilled worker shortage in the United States.

  • PMI survey asks whether employers should have more power to renegotiate DB schemes

    According to research by the Pensions Management Institute (PMI), one third of pension professionals believe in employers having more power to renegotiate defined benefit (DB) schemes.   During their research the PMI surveyed 235 UK pension consultants, in addition to trustees, administrators, actuarial, legal and investment consultants.

    At the PMI’s annual conference the president, Kevin LeGrand, stated that those sponsors wishing to see more flexibility were concerned for the security of members.  He said, "This is a big issue that has been debated a lot over the past year or so, particularly in regard to the impact on deficit reduction.  Not surprisingly, there was a strong majority for not allowing employers to renegotiate DB pensions and accrued benefits. The implications here are to ensure that members' benefits are properly protected."

    There is a reluctance to permit DB pensions reviews and this could be explained by the fear - expressed by 94%  surveyed - that unscrupulous employers could set up a state of affairs that would enable them to renegotiate accrued DB benefits and reshape or reduce them.

    When asked whether the Government should consider a statutory override to allow schemes to move to a different index - provided that they are still protected against inflation - 55% of pension professionals stated that the Government should be allowed to reassess both the preserved benefits and the indexation of benefits in payment.  However, 31% stated that it should not be allowed.

    Views were equally divided in response to the question of whether schemes should be allowed to suspend indexation in some circumstances, with 57% of pension professionals against.  Of the 43% in favour to suspend indexation, 34% would permit it to keep a stressed scheme out of the PPF and 21% would allow it when funding levels fall below a prearranged threshold.

    Kevin LeGrand declared,“Defined benefit pensions are often seen as sacrosanct, therefore renegotiating accrued benefits or reducing them is a very controversial issue. They are all too aware of how introducing a degree of flexibility could open Pandora’s box, leading to various unintended consequences or risks, most notably abuse.  However, our survey shows that pension professionals are willing to be pragmatic in extreme situations in order to protect benefits and secure the best outcome possible for members.”

  • Providing financial wellness training expected to be a key workplace trend for 2017

    New research findings show that providing financial wellness training and tools was expected to be a key workplace trend for 2017.   Forty nine percent of employers offer some type of financial advice - which included providing resource materials or referrals; online assessment; advice tools; group instruction and one-on-one advice with a financial counselor.

    The Society for Human Resource Management's (SHRM's) 2017 Employee Benefits survey report - based on a survey of SHRM members conducted earlier this year - found that more organizations are offering financial advice compared to 2016 and to five years ago.

    SHRM researcher Tanya Mulvey, the survey project leader said, “"This benefit can help employees improve their financial management skills, plan how to manage debt, and hopefully alleviate stress and worry as a result."

    Carla Dearing, CEO of SUM180, an online financial wellness service in Louisville, Kentucky, stated, "We are seeing a big jump in the number of companies saying they intend to offer financial wellness support to their employees,"  She added, "For those employers that 'get it right,' financial wellness has tremendous potential to drive engagement and retention."

    “For one company, financial wellness may be managing day-to-day finances," Carla Dearing said. "For another, it may be providing employees with a comprehensive financial plan that includes tax strategy and estate planning."    She then advised that a three point action plan should be followed to “cut through the confusion”.  This would incorporate defining financial wellness, reviewing current offerings and determining financial wellness goals.                                                                   

    A recent survey by financial services firm Charles Schwab shows that fifty-nine percent of U.S. and Canadian corporate executives say the best way to structure financial wellness programs is to integrate the offering with the rest of the employee benefits package. When discussing the fact that 37% of employers expressed concern over the potential cost of implementing a financial wellness program, Nate Bidner - managing director of workplace financial solutions at Schwab - said, “.......many of the features typically overlap with those already used by employers."  He went on to say, “Today's 401(k) and equity compensation plans are already structured to arm participants with knowledge and encourage active engagement, and as such, these plans may be leveraged to build a financial wellness program without adding cost or significant resource demands. Implementing a financial wellness program doesn't need to be disruptive to existing benefits and compensation programs - it should complement them," and added. "Current programs should be evaluated for their effectiveness in meeting the challenges, whether simple or complex, that employees face. Employers can then incorporate additional elements to help educate employees and enable them to make better use of company offerings." 

    Other research also shows why these benefits are needed - PricewaterhouseCooper's (PwC's) 2016 Employee Financial Wellness Survey, with responses from 1,600 full-time employees, showed that 52% of workers overall are stressed about their finances - and the younger the worker, the more likely they are to be worried; 46 percent of workers spend three or more hours during the workweek dealing with or thinking about financial issues and 45 percent said their finance-related stress had increased over the last 12 months.

    Andrew Brickman - Wayne, Pa. based director of benefits administration at consultancy Corporate Synergies - noted that PwC's survey found that 14% of employers had a budget for financial education and another 25 percent were looking to add budget dollars for these programs.  He said, "But as with health and wellness programs, it can be daunting to encourage upper management to allocate dollars for financial education and support programs and then motivate employees to participate once executives give the nod." He added, "How well your plan is designed can impact employee participation."

    Andrew Brickman noted that as with most benefits programs, "an effective financial wellness program won't be one-size-fits-all and will depend heavily on the resources made available to it."

  • Percentage of US employers intending to employ graduates is at 10 year high

    According to a recent survey from CareerBuilder, the percentage of US employers that intend to employ college graduates is at a 10 year high. Seventy four percent of employers say they plan to hire recent college graduates this year, which is up from 67 percent last year. Half of those employers plan to offer recent college graduates higher pay than last year and 39 percent of employers hiring recent college graduates will pay a starting salary of $50,000 or more - this compares to 27 percent last year.

    Roberto Angelo, CEO and co-founder of AfterCollege, a student and graduate career network based in San Francisco stated, "I'm hearing employers saying that they're not finding the right people so they are turning to new graduates. You can either poach workers-which is hard-or you can go out and recruit them on campus." He added, "Traditionally, large companies have done a really good job of campus recruiting. I'm hearing that small ones are doing better than in the past."

    Heidi Soltis-Berner, evolving workforce talent leader and managing director of Deloitte University for consulting firm Deloitte in Westlake, Texas states, "They're bringing new thinking, new ideas and new ways to innovate." She also remarked that, "We're continuing to look at how and when we visit campuses," and added that she has witnessed that the norm for employers is to approach students "earlier and earlier."

    Initial indications are that the classes graduating in 2017 comprise the leading edge of Generation Z, who could possibly differ from the Millennials inasmuch as they would be prepared to remain with a new employer for a decade or more and in addition to receiving a sturdy education, many students have demonstrated - by entering internships and co-op programs - that they have work-ready skills.
    The Career Builder survey reports that the IT and customer service functions are those that employers most want to staff with new graduates. Top of the list of functions for which employers are looking to recruit recent college graduates are Information technology (33 percent) and customer service jobs (24 percent). Also, there are opportunities in business development (23 percent), finance and accounting (20 percent) and production (18 percent).

    According to a previous college graduate employment study by Accenture, four out of five graduates said they considered the availability of jobs in their field of study before deciding on their major and that pragmatism appeared to have paid off.

  • Will review give workers on zero-hours contracts the right to request a fixed number of working hours?

    According to reports, it is suggested that Matthew Taylor’s review into modern employment practices – due to be published this summer – could give workers on zero-hours contracts the right to request a fixed number of working hours. The right to request more hours will be along the lines of the regulations such as the right to request flexible working, as employers will have to base their refusal on specific grounds such as the burden of additional costs; a detrimental effect on the business’ ability to meet customer demand; or an inability to reorganise work among existing staff.

    Almost 1 million people now rely on a job that does not give them any fixed hours for their main source of income, leaving many without the security of knowing they will be able to pay their bills. In addition, critics say that the contracts allow employers to avoid their responsibilities towards workers - including paying holiday and sick pay - and make it difficult for people to plan for the future.

    It is reported that the leader of the inquiry, Matthew Taylor, who is the head of the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce, will say that some employers are using the controversial contracts to exploit workers and he suggested that non-guaranteed hours could command a higher minimum wage, although he also said, “.......we don’t want a proliferation of different minimum wages, because there’s something good about the fact the minimum wage is simple and everyone understands it.”

    Sources have revealed that Matthew Taylor was impressed by MacDonald’s Restaurants, who offered workers at 23 restaurants - on zero-hours contracts - the option of changing to fixed contracts with a minimum number of guaranteed hours. This was a pilot scheme reporting that 80% chose to remain on their zero-hours contracts, whilst 20% opted for the fixed number of hours. As a result of its success, the fast food giant announced it will offer its 115,000 UK employees the opportunity to switch from zero-hours contracts to fixed hour contracts. It is reported that the Taylor review will make a recommendation similar to that adopted by MacDonalds Restaurants. Mr Taylor’s plan is aimed at retaining flexibility for those workers who value their zero-hours contracts, while also opening up more options for people who need more certainty in their employment.

    In its manifesto, Labour has pledged to ban zero-hours contracts.

    However, the CBI states in a written submission to the Taylor review that a policy to reduce the number of flexible contracts or to increase the number of guaranteed hours in employment contracts would be misguided, as “it assumes that all employees want the same thing”.

  • Political parties announce plans for ethnic pay gap reporting

    The Liberal Democrats have announced their plan to introduce mandatory reporting on the ethnicity pay gap for organisations with 250 employees or more.

    Jo Swinson, the former Business Minister, commented:  “....the country is failing to make the most of talent in the workplace. Information is powerful, and while organisations are allowed to get away with keeping patchy records, we'll never know the full extent of the gap.”    She continued: “Transparent data on the Black and Minority Ethnic pay gap will help employers focus on what they need to do to ensure equal opportunities at work for people of all ethnic backgrounds.”

    According to a Fawcett Society report, Pakistani and Bangladeshi women see the biggest overall gender pay gap at 26% and Black African women experience the largest full-time gender pay gap at 19.6%.  Black African women have seen virtually no progress since the 1990’s in closing the gender pay gap with White British men, with a full-time pay gap of 21.4% in the 1990’s and 19.6% today. When part-time workers are included, this figure rises to 24%.

    The report by the Fawcett Society – the UK’s leading charity for women’s equality and rights at home, at work and in public life - monitors the progress over more than 25 years and the analysis reveals real inequalities.  As the data is not routinely collected by the Office for National Statistics, it was calculated using the Labour Force Survey.

    The report shows that:

    • Pakistani and Bangladeshi women experience the largest aggregate (i.e. including full-time and part-time workers) gender pay gap at 26.2%.
    • Indian women experience the biggest pay gap with men in their ethnic group at 16.1%.
    • White British women have a larger pay gap than Black Caribbean women, Indian women or those who identify as ‘White Other’.
    • Women who identify as ‘White Other’ are the only group who have seen their pay gap widen since the 1990’s from 3.5% to 14% today. This is mainly because the composition of this group has changed over time and today it is largely comprised of central and eastern European migrant women - many of whom are in low paid work.

    Sam Smethers, Chief Executive of the Fawcett Society commented, “This analysis reveals a complex picture of gender pay gap inequality” and added “For these groups this is a story of low labour market participation and low pay when they are in work together with high levels of unpaid caring work.”

    However, the report also reveals some women experiencing real progress.  Black Caribbean women in full-time work have overtaken Black Caribbean men so that they now have a reverse pay gap of -8.8%. They also fare better than White British women when compared with White British men (a 5.5% versus 13.9% pay gap).

    Gender Pay Gap by Ethnicity in Britain calls for the gender pay gap ethnicity to be routinely measured and, after calculation, the ONS should release figures on a regular basis.  In addition they say, pay for the lowest paid should be increased - as many of those women experiencing the largest ethic gender pay gaps are working in some of the lowest paid jobs.

    As part of their manifesto, the Labour Party is stating that they would introduce a civil enforcement system to ensure compliance with gender pay gap reporting and the Conservative Party have also pledged to introduce ethnicity pay gap reporting if they come to power in June.

    Dr. Jill Miller, diversity and inclusion adviser at the CIPD, states that a Tory or Lib Dem government would inevitably consult with the HR community to ensure that race pay gap reporting proposals were “fit for purpose”.   If they were not, Dr. Miller fears that “pay reporting could end up being seen as a burdensome tick box exercise that’s another cost of doing business, rather than a driver of workplace, economic and societal change”.

  • CIPD campaign for better work and working lives in run up to the Election

    The CIPD - professional body for HR and people development - maintain that the General Election 2017 is an opportunity for them to underline their views on what should be addressed by the next, and future, governments. They state that the HR profession can play a significant role in debating this issue as they are experts on people, work and change.  Championing good work will involve everyone making a commitment to encourage accountability, good principles and behaviour, as well as sustainable practice in the workplace.

    Work plays a fundamental role in success and prosperity as individuals; in organisations and collectively as a society and as such, the wider HR profession is being encouraged to challenge their local candidates to encourage better work and working lives.

    Workers' rights protections have been promised by the Tories with Theresa May assuring what she says would be the biggest expansion of workers' rights by any Conservative government, if the party retains power.  The manifesto releases 11 pledges of workplace reforms - promising to solidify laws currently guaranteed by the EU, after Brexit is finalised. It is also claimed that pensions will be protected and provision made for employee rights to training.

    Proposals announced by the Labour Party are also hailed, but it is thought that more clarity is required on skills policy and plans to modernise employment rights. 

    Ben Willmott, Head of Public Policy at the CIPD said:  “The strong focus on skills and lifelong learning is welcome, given the challenges the UK’s ageing workforce faces in terms of skills and investment in training, as well as the impact of technology on jobs and the labour market. Plans to boost investment in further education and improve the quality of skills advice and guidance are also positive”.  He added, “To further boost skills in the UK we would call on the next government to pilot revised Individual Learning Accounts to provide people with more opportunities to invest in their skills development. We would also urge them to reframe the Apprenticeship Levy as a more flexible Training Levy, so the funds can be used for a much wider range of training opportunities that include more people in the workforce.”

    The CIPD have produced a manifesto setting out proposals which will improve corporate governance; the quality of people management; investment in and better use of skills and ultimately how a future of work can be created that will enable people to return the best value to themselves, their organisations and society as a whole. 

    Katerina Rudiger, CIPD Chief Community Officer, commented:

    “We’re encouraging and equipping the HR community to take social action both as good citizens and on behalf of the organisations they work for. Campaigning for better work and working lives during the run up to the Election is a great way for people to share their voice on issues that are important to them and the toolkit we’ve created makes it as easy as possible to do this”.

  • EAT finds applicant with Asperger’s was unfairly disadvantaged in recruitment process

    Following an Employment Appeal Tribunal decision, an applicant with Asperger’s syndrome was found to have been unfairly disadvantaged by an online multiple-choice psychometric test and in future, persons recruiting for employees will have to – where necessary – make adjustments to the format of recruitment assessments for the disabled.

    The claim was brought by an aspiring lawyer, Ms Brookes - who has Asperger’s syndrome and who applied for a job as a trainee solicitor with the government Legal Service (GLS), having successfully completed her university law degree.

    To test candidates’ ability to make effective decisions, the very competitive recruitment process - with several thousand applicants a year applying for just 35 places - starts with an online situational judgment test (SJT), which uses multiple-choice questions.  Because of her condition, Ms Brookes asked the GLS if she could submit her answers in a short narrative form, but she was informed that an alternative format was not available.  However, GLS did inform Ms Brookes that provision could be made for an extension of time to complete the SJT. She completed the SJT in its multiple-choice format, but she only scored 12 out of 22 and the pass mark to enable her progression to the next stage of the recruitment process was 14.

    Ms Brookes represented herself successfully throughout the tribunal.  She brought claims against GLS for indirect disability discrimination; discrimination arising from a disability and failure to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

    The employment tribunal accepted that the multiple-choice format put her at a particular disadvantage because of her condition.  Ms Brookes provided the ET with extensive medical evidence that her Asperger’s meant she "lacked social imagination and so had difficulties in imaginative and counter-factual reasoning in hypothetical scenarios".  This is an essential requirement for success in the multiple-choice SJT.

    The employment tribunal accepted that GLS’s testing for core competencies in an efficient manner was a legitimate aim, but decided that it was not ‘a proportionate means of achieving that aim’, as there are other less discriminatory methods of testing.  GLS’s actions were also found to amount to ‘discrimination arising in consequence of Ms Brookes’ disability’. By refusing to allow Ms Brookes to provide answers in an alternative format to multiple-choice selection, the employment tribunal found GLS to have failed in its duty to make ‘reasonable adjustments’.

    The employment tribunal recommended that GLS issue Ms Brookes with a formal written apology and review its recruitment procedures in relation to disabled job applicants.  Ms Brookes was also made a compensation award.

    GLS appealed the decision, but the Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed with the employment tribunal assessment that the adjustments suggested by Ms Brookes had been reasonable, and GLS’s unwillingness to implement them amounted to a failure to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

    This case shows the dangers of rigid thinking by employers when it comes to recruitment, and the importance of considering reasonable adjustments for disabled applicants. A willingness to be flexible and to consider potential alternative methods for such assessments is essential to avoiding successful claims of disability discrimination

  • Concerns that AHCA could jeopardize the ability to provide care

    A proposed health law sparked concerns about further Medicaid reductions, as some providers say the proposed American Health Care Act would jeopardize their ability to provide care.

    Local and statewide health care groups joined their national counterparts late in slamming the U.S. House of Representatives, which voted 217-213 to narrowly pass the American Health Care Act as a replacement for the Affordable Care Act.

    The American Diabetes Association states that they are deeply concerned with the AHCA.  

    The most alarming last minute changes to the bill will allow states to waive the requirement for essential health benefits and health status rating. Weakening these rules will give insurers the ability to charge people with pre-existing conditions - such as diabetes - higher prices.  It will also allow insurers to deny people with diabetes coverage for the care and services they need to treat the disease.

    Although states that waive these protections would be required to set up a risk sharing program, which could include a high-risk pool, historically high-risk pools have resulted in higher premiums plus long waiting lists and inadequate coverage.

    Charlie Baker, Governor of Massachusetts, stated that it would drastically reduce federal funding to MassHealth, a program that covers 1.9 million mostly low-income people. 

    He added, “Massachusetts leads the nation in health care coverage and I am disappointed by today’s vote as this bill would significantly reduce critical funds for the Commonwealth’s health care system.  As the U.S. Senate takes up this bill, we will continue to advocate for the Commonwealth’s priorities so that all residents have access to the health coverage they need. Maintaining flexibility through the Medicaid program is critical to the Commonwealth’s ability to provide coverage for the needy and I urge Congress to reject this bill in its current form.”

    The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) anticipates that up to 24 million people would lose their coverage should the AHCA become law.   This would leave vulnerable Americans stripped of their health insurance.  According to the Washington Post, it is planning to release - during the week of May 22 - an assessment of how the health-care legislation that the House just passed, will impact federal spending but it is not known whether the analysis of the Republicans’ Affordable Health Care Act will include a forecast of how the bill would affect the number of Americans with health insurance.

  • Restrictive covenants

    Every business has valuable knowledge and confidential information - for example, knowledge of clients and contracts or technology - that it considers invaluable to its success.  If an employer wishes to protect the use of this information both during and after a period of employment, restrictive covenants may be included in an employee’s contract.  

    The standard types of covenants are where restrictions are placed on a former employee being able to work in similar employment for a competitor. This is to prevent poaching of clients or customers of the former employer, or to prevent a former employee from dealing with former clients or customers, regardless of which party approached the other.  Where employee poaching is concerned, a non-poaching covenant can also be used, which prevents an employee poaching former colleagues. 

    Restrictive covenants can be introduced as part of specified employment contracts before commencement of work but should not be used for all staff as this would only be frowned upon if it was later taken to court.

    It will be largely applicable to the more senior staff - those in contact with the sensitive information that it is necessary to protect.  Having such clauses set out in the contract from the outset may help to deter employees from joining competitors and may warn off potential new employers. 

    However, it can also be put into operation at a later date if an employee accepts promotion, or if their duties have changed.  In this case, negotiation may be required as some will not willingly agree to the restrictions being introduced and it could be crucial to be able to prove that the employee agreed to the clause. 

    In order for a restrictive covenant to be enforced it must be considered to be reasonable and necessary to protect the business interests. Therefore, it is important that a restrictive covenant is carefully drafted and regularly checked to ensure that it is updated if necessary.

    When invoking restrictive clauses, employers should consider what they want to achieve and the commercial repercussions of taking a particular stance in relation to publicity, client relationships, management time and cost, etc.   Legal action in this area can involve a substantial amount of time and money.

  • Up to 30% of UK jobs could be at risk of automation by the 2030’s

    Recently released research has revealed that nearly a quarter (23%) of employees are concerned that at least part of their job could soon be automated, as employers flock towards the latest technology. 

    Analysis suggests that up to 30% of UK jobs could potentially be at risk of automation by the 2030’s - lower than the US or Germany, but higher than Japan.    More than 10 million UK workers are at high risk of being replaced by robots within 15 years as the automation of routine tasks gathers pace in a new machine age. However, in many cases the nature of jobs will change rather than disappear.

    Those with the highest risk are male workers and certain industries, such as transport, retail and manufacturing.  Education, health and social care are not likely to be as affected, as it is difficult to automate tasks undertaken in those areas.

    Jon Andrews, the head of technology and investments at PwC, said: “There’s no doubt that AI and robotics will rebalance what jobs look like in the future, and that some are more susceptible than others.”

    He went on to say, “What’s important is making sure that the potential gains from automation are shared more widely across society and no one gets left behind. Responsible employers need to ensure they encourage flexibility and adaptability in their people so we are all ready for the change. In the future, knowledge will be a commodity so we need to shift our thinking on how we skill and up skill future generations. Creative and critical thinking will be highly valued, as will emotional intelligence.”

    The report predicted that automation would boost productivity and create fresh job opportunities, but it also stated that action was needed to prevent the widening of inequality that would result from robots increasingly being used for low-skill tasks, such as in the construction industry.

    Robots that can lay six times as many bricks a day as humans have already replaced humans on a handful of sites in America.  The firm who developed the robots - called SAM (Semi-Automated Mason) plan to introduce them into the UK within the next two years.

    Scott Peters, president of Construction Robotics, told The Times, “We are going to be going over to the UK in the coming months to meet with some companies and see if we can find a home for Sam there.”

    According to Construction Robotics, SAM has the ability to pick up bricks, apply mortar and lay the bricks but humans will still need to set up the robot and supervise.

    Australian company Fastbrick Robotics has also developed a proof of concept for a commercial bricklaying machine called Hadrian X which can, from the computer aided design of a house structure handle the automatic loading, cutting, routing and placement of all bricks to build a complete house in two days. Delivery of the first commercial prototype of Hadrian X is due later this year.

    Some of Britain's biggest construction firms have warned that the automation of the industry is likely to result in mass layoffs and Alison Carnwath, chairwoman of Land Securities, stated at the Institute of Directors' annual convention, “Five years ago I'd have smiled wryly if somebody had said to me that robots would be able to put up buildings in the City of London. I tell you we're not that far off, and that has huge implications."

  • Injured employee who refused to return to work has wrongful discharge claim

    From time to time, employees sustain injuries - either occupational or non-occupational - which involve them having a prolonged absence from work.

    Often, a number of these employees have major difficulty in recovering enough to be able to return to their former jobs within a suitable time-scale.  As a result, employers must consider how to terminate the relationship without infringing federal or state law.

    Most employees want to get back to work as soon as possible after an injury. No one expects to be fired from work after returning from a painful recovery. State and federal laws protect workers from unjust and illegal firings based on breach of contract, various forms of discrimination, employer retaliation and disability.

    In most states, any employee is liable to be terminated at the will of the employer, provided it is not for a reason prohibited by law, public policy or a contract right. An employer cannot terminate an employee because the employee has filed a workers’ compensation claim, or has a health condition that constitutes a disability; has taken a qualified leave of absence for a serious health condition, or has rights under a labor agreement or employee handbook.  Montana is the only state which requires an employer to have just cause to fire an employee, once the employee has completed a probationary period.

    The U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas recently ruled that a railroad employee with carpal tunnel syndrome who re-injured his hands at work could pursue his wrongful discharge claim even though he chose not to return to work when instructed.

    Millennium Rail Inc. employed Danny Smith in February 2012 as a repairman/welder to fix rail cars.  According to Millennium Rail, Smith was an inefficient worker and during the twelve months from January 2013 the company wrote him up three times for being inefficient - and suspended him for three days.  The next month, he took approved leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to have carpal tunnel surgery and returned from this leave with the same pay, title and responsibilities as before. Soon after returning to work, he fell and re-injured his hands.  Smith's workers' compensation attorney sent Millennium Rail a letter seeking coverage for surgery related to the fall.  Smith's doctor sent Millennium Rail a note stating that until Smith had surgery, he would be unable to use the tools essential to performing his duties. At this time, Smith and another employee - Lee Davis - applied for a switchman position with the company. Millennium Rail selected Davis for the position and Smith was left in a job that he was not able to do.

    Smith submitted FMLA paperwork to take leave to have the surgery but did not confirm that the paperwork was approved.  Millennium Rail had Smith assessed by another physician, who was of the opinion that she could not detect any sign of pain or weakness in his hands and that Smith could work without any restrictions. No third assessment was undertaken.

    On April 1, 2014, Smith attempted to take FMLA leave. He moved to Oklahoma to stay with his brother as he could not afford housing while not working - and his FMLA paperwork was never processed, although it was apparently discussed internally at Millennium Rail. The company's compliance and claims specialist wrote that Millennium Rail's doctor believed Smith could return to work and that the company either needed to bring him back to work or terminate him.

    On April 10, Smith was sent a letter instructing him to return to work on April 16 or he would have voluntarily resigned. Smith did not receive the letter until April 15 and as he realized that he could not return to work he did not respond to the request, so therefore was deemed to have resigned.  He filed claims against Millennium Rail under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the FMLA and under Kansas law for workers' compensation retaliation and violations of OSHA and also sued his supervisor under the FMLA. Millennium Rail sought summary judgment against Smith's claims and to bar Smith from receiving damages.

    The court granted summary judgment against Smith's ADA claim for failure to accommodate him by promoting him to the switchman position, finding that Millennium Rail legitimately believed Davis to be more qualified. They also dismissed Smith's OSHA retaliation claim, finding that he had not submitted an OSHA claim before his termination.

    However, the court denied summary judgment as to the remaining claims. They found that Smith could establish that he was constructively discharged by Millennium Rail as Millennium Rail's requirement that he return or quit was not clearly supported by medical evidence and supported a potential claim of constructive discharge.

  • PwC analysis shows senior executive pay is falling for the first time in recent history

    As some of the larger businesses begin to publish pay ratios, many executives will fail to receive a pay increase this year.   A new analysis by PwC shows that the pay of senior executives is actually falling for the first time in recent history.

    In one fifth of the cases reported, CEO’s decided to voluntarily waive their salary increase.  However, it would appear that most companies have introduced best practice remuneration as a result of shareholder activism, rather than the decision being made by the CEO of the company. 

    Tom Gosling, head of PwC Reward Practice says, “There’s no doubt the new voting rules introduced last year have given shareholders more power and helped to bring stability to executive pay.”

    The report goes on to state that 98% of companies have introduced ‘clawback’ which is a measure to reduce or recover bonuses and long term incentive plans in certain circumstances.

    The Investment Association Executive Remuneration Working Group and the BIS Committee have both recommended significant changes to pay design, but FTSE 100 companies are showing no signs of making a fundamental change. Whilst 63% of the forty FTSE 100 companies evaluated are proposing new remuneration policies, there is very limited structural change in pay arrangements with conventional long-term incentive plans remaining the usual. 

    Tom Gosling states, “Pay is getting harder to earn, with almost all companies introducing the ability to claw back bonuses and many lengthening the time executives have to hold on the shares they get from long term incentives.  Remuneration committees are really raising the bar for executive pay.”

    There is also increased attention to fairness in pay policies, as shown by four of the forty companies covered by PwC’s report, disclosing a ‘CEO to average employee’ ratio.

    This month, the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee said businesses needed to improve corporate governance and tackle excessive executive pay to restore public trust.  It highlighted the damage done at Sports Direct and BHS and the extreme executive salaries paid in recent years despite no wage increase for many workers.  It continued by suggesting that employees should sit on remuneration committees.

    Tom Gosling - of PwC - added, “Although we don’t think pay ratios are the answer, it’s good to see companies taking steps to address the fairness question.  This is an area where business will need to do more to rebuild trust with the public and we’re likely to see proposals from the government to encourage this in due course.”

  • Gender pay gap – employer requirements

    This month a new requirement comes into force that necessitates the gender pay gap being published within the next year – and every subsequent year.    It applies to both private and voluntary employers with 250 or more employees and any employer failing to comply by April 2018 will be contacted by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission.

    Gender pay is the difference in average pay between the men and women in a company and is different from equal pay - which means men and women must be paid the same for equal or similar work.

    Sam Smethers of the Fawcett Society, which lobbies for gender equality, says that this new rule is “...the most significant legal change since the Equal Pay Act”.

    The rules will be enforced by the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the companies affected must publish details on their own websites and through the government gender pay gap reporting website.  They are obliged to provide data about their pay gap; the proportion of male and female employees in different bands; the gender bonus gap and a breakdown of how many men and women get a bonus.

    A new study by TotalJobs points towards the fact that a significant number of employers are unprepared for the new requirements.  The survey of 145 employers found that 82% were not reviewing their gender equality and equal pay policies as a result of the new legislation, whilst 58% did not have complete salary information across roles and gender.  A third of employers were not reassessing remuneration as a protection against gender discrimination.

    MP Justine Greening stated, “I am proud that the UK is championing gender equality and now those employers that are leading the way will clearly stand out with these requirements.”  She added that the government would prefer to work in partnership with employers on conformity rather than imposing sanctions.  “......we’ll keep an open mind about whether we need to go further in terms of regulations and sanctions, but the important thing is to win over hearts and minds.”

    The Equality and Human Rights Commission stated on their website that where they had evidence that companies were not publishing the data, they will take steps to make sure that they do, by improving companies’ awareness and understanding of the new requirement.

    Research by the Commission has found that there are still substantial pay gaps throughout Britain.  This year, they intend to publish a report that will help employers to look at possible causes of their pay gap and suggest action they can take to improve it.  In addition, they will make recommendations to the government to help close the gender pay gap across Britain.

    The Women’s Equality Party have said that the current proposals do not go far enough and that businesses should be leading the way in tackling the complexity of the gender pay gap.

  • Millennials in the workforce are on the increase

    By 2025, millennials have been projected to make up 75 percent of all U.S. employees - an increase from about 1 in 3 workers today.

    The number of young people completing a college education and looking for quality jobs continues to grow and as companies everywhere get bigger, they are establishing a fully integrated base of millennials in their workforce.

    Despite the fact that younger workers are often stereotyped as being too reliant on technology and hopping from one job to another, many employers value their new and fresh perspectives and attitudes.   Lisa Chui, vice president of finance and HR at Ubiquity Retirement and Savings (a San Francisco based retirement benefits company) states, “They speak up and if they have ideas, they want to share them.”

     “They walk in the door with a greater awareness and a greater sense of balance and new ideas” says Steve Wolfe, executive vice president of operations and administration at the Chicago-based staffing and employment agency Addison Group. “That contributes to bringing about better solutions. They can come in and contribute right out of the gate if they have the right environment.”

    However, many HR professionals are finding that they may need to update their recruitment strategies to successfully connect with younger workers who expect faster and more-informal communications as well as frequent feedback.

    “What recruiters fail to grasp is that this is a generation where the accelerated speed of communications is extraordinary,” says Warren Wright, president of consulting firm Coaching Millennials of Washington, D.C. 

    But their work does not end when they employ a millennial – they must update their strategies for retaining younger workers by showing them a clear career path forward for promotion.  Lisa Chui says, “The trend is for HR to be a resource, not just a rule enforcer.”

    A LinkedIn survey of more than 13,000 members of that generation found that 93% are interested in hearing about new job opportunities and 66% are open to speaking to a recruiter.  Thirty per cent state that they can see themselves working at their current company for less than a year.  However, by comparison, the Bureau of Labor Statistics states that older US workers tend to stay in their jobs for over four and a half years.

    The same LinkedIn survey shows that there is often a divide between recruiters’ messaging to millennials and what these young people want to know about new job opportunities.  It found that when millennials hear about a new job opportunity, they are less likely than members of other generations to know anything about the company; to find out more about the organization, they are more likely than members of other generations to follow it on social media and the most important information they want to know about the company is its culture and values.   

    The top obstacles to accepting a job for millennial workers are not knowing what the organization is like, applying and not hearing back and not understanding the role.

    Hannah Ubl, a generation expert at BridgeWorks, a generational consulting company in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area states, “Millennials are looking for authenticity. They want to understand what the company is about and who works there”.  She also pointed out that, “You lose millennials when you don’t respond right away.”

    She went on to say that recruiters should reach out to thank an applicant for applying and then offer a timeline for when he or she will hear from HR again. “Texting might feel like it’s bridging into personal space, but millennials don’t see it as an issue”, she says. “It’s old-school to wait for a phone call.”   She added, “If applicants sign a waiver, you can text them”.

    It falls on companies to adjust their recruiting procedures to accommodate the influx of the millennial generation and where successful, this will minimize staff turnover rate.

  • Can W2’s be used to verify the salary of a job applicant?

    Is it OK to request W2’s from job applicants to verify their income before extending a job offer?

    According to employment attorneys, the practice of employers asking job applicants for copies of their W2 forms to verify employment and compensation comes with substantial legal risks.

    Technically, requesting a W2 from a job applicant is not prohibited, but it can raise issues that HR experts suggest should be considered before taking this step.   The tax forms disclose information that could be related to the applicant’s health – for example, sick pay could suggest that the applicant has a health problem; previous salary, if used to determine future salary could form the basis for a claim of discrimination; periods of unemployment would be revealed which, in certain states, is a protected trait when it comes to hiring staff.

    W2 forms also include a section that details dependent care benefits an employee has received, which can give a hint as to parental status.  According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, questions about marital status and the number and ages of children are often asked, which can be construed as evidence of intent to discriminate against married women or women with children – violating the Civil Rights law of 1964.  To circumvent this, companies may try to obtain the information by requesting the tax form, W2 which - on the face of it - would not be illegal but could be a cover for illegal activity. 

    In addition, requesting W2’s could have a negative effect on the applicant, who may consider this action to be inappropriate and intrusive and not wish to continue with the job application.

    Although a federal bill - sponsored by Republican Eleanor Holmes Norton - aimed at preventing employers from asking job applicants to provide a salary history has stalled, many employers still avoid asking questions about an applicant’s salary history.

    An increasing number of states and cities are also passing their own versions - New York City and New Orleans have already instigated salary history laws which prohibit city agencies and public and private companies from requesting pay history. 

    Massachusetts has passed a law that bans employers from asking for salary history until the offer of employment has been made.  This will become enforceable in July 2018 and in Rhode Island, it is unlawful for an employer to require an applicant to provide a federal or state income tax return or related tax documents as a condition of being considered for employment (RI Gen Laws Sec. 28-6.9-1).

     

  • Employees think ageism is the most frequent form of discrimination in the workplace

    TotalJobs has stated that in 2011, a government report declared that ‘over the next decade, the changing age profile of the workforce will be the most significant development in the UK labour market, as a third of workers will be over 50 by 2020’. 

    The report explained that employers will be expected to respond to this demographic shift, by making work more attractive and feasible for older workers – enabling them to work up to and beyond pension age. However, older workers are not yet seeing this level of progress and half of employees aged 45 years and over believe that workplaces ‘naturally cater towards younger employees.’

    According to research by Lee Hecht Harrison/Penna, employees believe that ageism is the most frequent form of discrimination in the workplace.  They found that a fifth of UK employees feel discriminated against in promotion decisions and of these the most common cause of inequality is age (39%), followed by gender (26%) and employment status (22%).

    HR professionals were also surveyed but they were most likely to be of the opinion that gender was the most widespread form of inequality – but that 94% of all promotions processes were fair.  However, 29% of the employees surveyed felt that the promotion processes at their company was unfair.

    In a recent TotalJobs survey, when older workers were asked about their main fears in the workplace, health issues topped the list with 30% of the employees surveyed citing it as their main concern. This was followed by 27% concerned about being out of touch with technology and 24% worried about not being able to learn new things quickly. Despite these concerns, two thirds of those surveyed stated that their desire to adapt to changes in working practices had either been sustained or increased with age.

    A spokesperson for the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) stated that the wealth of experience that older workers bring to the workplace must start to be embraced - sooner rather than later - and added, “HR needs to start encouraging employers to see older workers as an opportunity rather than a challenge.  These skills and lengthy experience can benefit the wider workforce and the business as a whole.”

    The report suggested ways for employers, employees and HR to manage workplaces with a diverse age range, using tools such as a space created to encourage knowledge sharing; an area designed to support and maintain cognitive health and alertness and standing desks and ergonomic furniture.  Another recommendation was a ‘meal consultant’ to encourage healthier eating.

    Lynda Gratton and Andrew Scott, professors at London Business School and authors of The 100 Year-Life, warn that many companies could resist having a diverse workforce in the future stating that for organisations – and especially HR departments – it “.....sounds like a nightmare as companies like conformity and simple predictable systems that are easy to run and implement.  So don’t be surprised if large numbers of institutions resist these changes.”

  • The UK Pensions Regulator publishes new investment guidance for DB trustees

    The UK Pensions Regulator has - as part of its strategy to provide simpler guidance for occupational pension schemes - published new investment guidance for Defined Benefit (DB) trustees.  It follows the general principles outlined in its Defined Contribution (DC) investment guidance with some special issues designed for Defined Benefit schemes.

    The Regulator said in a statement accompanying the report that it expects trustees to have ‘suitably documented investment arrangements that are appropriate for their scheme’s circumstances, including their level of complexity’. 

    The guidance covers Investment governance, setting investment strategy, implementing the investment strategy and monitoring investments.  Effective governance is needed to provide a good investment strategy.  This will involve delegation and monitoring; forming part of an integrated risk management process; having stable scheme objectives and long-term plans; having total risk consistent with risk appetite; involving risk-taking that is understood and balanced, and allowing for the scheme’s future cash flow and liquidity requirements.

    The law requires that trustees are familiar with the basic legal principles of pension scheme investment and the guidance includes factors and approaches to consider when investing scheme assets to fund defined benefits. It emphasises the importance of “focused, timely monitoring” and how trustees may benefit from putting together an investment monitoring dashboard. It is suggested that this could provide an “at-a-glance financial position” of a scheme’s current state in terms of meeting objectives, potential risks and issues.

    Fred Berry, TPR head of investment consultancy said: "Good investment governance is essential to all pension schemes, indeed to any institutional investor, and we expect them all to adhere to those common principles.

    The investment strategy is one of the most important drivers of a scheme’s ability to meet the objective of paying the promised benefits as they fall due, and we expect trustees to set this in the context of their integrated risk management approach.

    It’s important to set clear investment objectives for your scheme and to identify how and when they should be achieved. Our guidance states that trustees should focus on areas that have the most impact for meeting their scheme’s objectives, and identify the necessary skills for the board of trustees of their scheme. It also provides some practical guidance on how to get the best from their advisers."

     

  • Proposed law could require genetic testing for employees

    In March, a controversial bill called the Preserving Employee Wellness Program Act (H.R.1313) was introduced to the House by Republican Virginia Foxx, who stated, “Employee wellness programs have long enjoyed bipartisan support because they result in lower health care costs and a healthier workforce.” 

    She added that the legislation, “....will ensure employers have the legal certainty they need to offer this innovative benefit, which provides working families with greater control over their health care dollars.”   

    According to the House Education and the Workforce Committee, which last week passed the new legislation by 22 to 17, an increasing number - about 61% - of companies offer workplace wellness programs.  Nearly 90% of large organizations offer them, with participation growing when Obamacare allowed employers to offer 30% of the value of their benefits in incentives, although surveys have shown that few do offer that big a benefit.

    Experts say that these programs were originally introduced to assist employees to get and stay healthy and to improve their safety.  It was also the aim of companies to increase productivity and to keep down health insurance costs, but there are those who raise privacy concerns.  

    Opponents of the bill believe that employees should not feel under pressure to participate in health screening that collects blood samples to check for high levels of cholesterol, or other factors that when discovered, enable treatment to be given to help prevent diseases such as diabetes and heart disease.  They claim that compelling employees to undertake genetic counselling would leave them open to discrimination by employers, who are being empowered by the bill to penalize those employees not joining workplace wellness programs that collect this type of information. Additionally, they are also against employers providing incentives - for example, discounts on health care premiums - for screenings that ask about family medical history.

    However, the sponsors of the bill say that it would clarify conflicting rules for incentives paid to employees who participate in voluntary health screenings – some of which could include genetic testing.  The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) reports that a fact checking website states:

     “H.R.1313 does not allow employers to force all their workers to submit to genetic testing.”     In short, “The bill allows offering benefits for ‘voluntary’ workplace programs that may include ‘health risk assessments’ but does not enable mandatory genetic testing of employees.”

    Currently health and genetic information is protected under federal nondiscrimination and genetic privacy laws. This means employers are not allowed to use workers' genetic information in employment decisions and they are not allowed to request or purchase their employees' genetic information unless it is a part of a wellness program that is voluntary.

    SHRM’s Vice President of Government Affairs, Mike Aitken told NBC News, “Employers do not have access to this genetic information.  Information can only be collected and shared with a third-party provider such as a health care professional.”

    But critics say the new bill could provide employers with a way around.

     

  • Asda offers new deal to replace the zero-hours contract

    Asda, which is owned by the US giant Walmart, claims that 95% of its staff will be better off under a new deal, due to be introduced in October. 

    Staff will be offered a higher wage - £8.50 per hour - for a new contract, but signing up to the new contract will be voluntary.  It has been designed to replace the zero-hours contract presently in force and given the seal of approval by the GMB union who state,  “These new flexible contracts will help to ensure job security; ensure those accepting them are on the same terms and – best of all – ensure that people will earn more money as a result.  The new contract involves quite a few changes, but as it’s voluntary, this allows colleagues to choose whatever suits their circumstances best.”

    The ‘flexible’ agreement means that Asda’s staff can work around the store on different days and hours to suit their circumstances, but they must be available to work on Bank Holidays, if required.  However, if they wish to take this time off, it will come out of their 28 days annual leave. 

    In addition, all breaks will be unpaid and the night shift deal presently in place will alter.  Instead of receiving an extra £2.04 per hour for work between the hours of 10pm and 6am, the unsociable hours will be cut down to 12 midnight to 5am – but the extra wage earned will rise to £2.54 an hour.

    Asda stated that it was “maintaining its commitment not to use zero-hours contracts and staff will be guaranteed minimum hours.”   They added, “Whilst the new contract will require colleagues to be flexible, fair and reasonable notice will be given for any changes to rotas and consideration will be given to those with care requirements outside of work.”

    Despite the GMB approving the use of the new contract, concerns have been expressed that employers are using them to take the edge off the increase in the national living wage, due to come in force in April.  Last year, People Management reported that some organisations had cut overtime rates; reduced premiums for weekend or evening work or cut perks offered to employees in response to the new national living wage. 

    Research by the British Chambers of Commerce showed that ‘sharp increases’ in the national living wage would cause many employers to put into practice cost reduction measures such as cutting staff hours or increasing the cost of goods and services. 

    But Andrew Weir, employer services manager at HR and payroll firm Moorepay, expressed the opinion that Asda’s measures were sensible.  He called on other employers to follow suit, provided that legal minimums such as provision of adequate rest breaks, etc. are upheld.

    Sarah Peacock, partner in the employment team at law firm Blake Morgan, told People Management “There was a lot of publicity when the national living wage was introduced about employers that were changing terms and conditions to minimise the detrimental impact on their business, leaving some employees no better off.  It may be that employers like Asda are now taking a long term view to make sure they can offer well above the NLW while achieving benefits for the business.”

  • Study shows parental leave in the US has not changed significantly since 2012

    According to a study conducted by the Families and Work Institute, the average amount of parental leave offered by U.S. employers has not changed significantly since 2012. 

    It was reported in December 2016 that high profile companies such as Amazon, Microsoft and Ernst & Young had announced that they intended to increase parental leave and in December 2016, American Express did increase its paid parental leave to 20 weeks.

    However, the National Study of Employers found that 14.5 weeks is the average maximum amount of maternity leave that U.S. companies offered in 2016.  This is a rise from 14.2 weeks.  Paternity leave offered is a little over 11 weeks - a rise from 10.6 weeks.  The report noted, “...that while there has been much talk in the press of the laudable changes instituted by these large organizations, they do not represent a sea change in the length of parental leave options offered by the majority of organizations.”

    The percentage of organizations offering some replacement pay for women on maternity leave increased from 46% to 58% during 2005 to 2016, but most of that change occurred between 2005 and 2012.  Among employers offering replacement pay, the percentage offering full pay continued to drop from 17% in 2005 to 10% in 2016.  Only 6% of employers surveyed - who had 50 or more employees - offered full pay during maternity leave.

    The study was based on a national survey which was carried out on-line and by telephone between 2015 and 2016.  It was conducted with 920 HR directors at for-profit and non-profit organizations employing 50 or more staff.

    Ellen Galinsky, co-founder and president of the Families and Work Institute, notes that there is a greater expectation of flexibility in the workforce among younger employees, who have grown up in the ‘work anytime, anywhere’ world and would take less pay for that flexibility.  A survey by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the average employee would give up 20% of their wages in return for flexible scheduling or working from home.

    The Families and Work Institute also found that between 2012 and 2016, 81% of employers allowed at least some employees to return to work gradually after childbirth or adoption – up from 73% in 2012

  • Zero-hours contracts hit a record high but may now be on the decline

    It is reported that the number of workers on zero-hours contracts hit a record high in the last three months of last year, rising by 13% to 910,000 but may now be on the decline.

    A zero-hours contract is that which does not guarantee a set number of working hours, but the employee must be available for work when required - making budgeting nearly impossible and having a detrimental effect on the living standards of workers and their families. 

    Trade unions have regularly raised concerns about zero-hours contracts and the possibility of the exploitation of employees.  In addition to the lack of guaranteed minimum working hours, the employee is not guaranteed sick or holiday pay, either.  On average, workers on zero-hour contracts earn £1,000 less per annum than contemporaries in staff roles. 

    Len McCluskey, General Secretary of Unite – Britain’s largest union – has stated,      “Let us learn from New Zealand – put workers’ welfare first and outlaw these hire and fire contracts.”

    The Resolution Foundation think tank reports that the growth of these contracts may now be slowing. This could possibly be due to negative publicity surrounding companies such as MacDonald’s, Wetherspoons and Homebase, who are all well known for using them - and also in the wake of the furore reported over the use of zero-hour contracts by Sport Direct.   Another factor suggested is the record high rate of employment, as after Brexit employers may struggle to find employees due to the prospect of the supply of EU labour being limited.

    Sports Direct have now announced that following a review of working practices, they will scrap zero-hours contracts for casual workers.  Other major employers have stated that they will also finish using zero-hour contracts or offer these workers the chance to have a fixed-hour agreement.

    Employers have stated that the zero-hour contracts are popular amongst many workers as it gives them flexibility.  Analysis shows that older workers, aged 55 – 64 years, accounted for almost half of the net increase in the past year.  Resolution Foundation says that the challenge now is to ensure that these popular contracts are reserved for cases of genuine desired flexibility for worker and employer.

    A release from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), referring to the second quarter of 2016, maintains that fewer than 3% of the UK workforce on zero-hour contracts classes itself as being on this type of contract in their main employment and 70% of those are happy with the number of hours they work.

  • Millennials have a new target to hit for their retirement pensions

    It depends upon which decade they were born as to how much they should aspire to save, to enable them to have the benefit of a similar standard of living in retirement to that enjoyed during their working life.

    According to estimates made by experts and through studies undertaken, those born in the 1980’s will need to salt away about $1.8 million.  The younger millennials – those born in the 1990’s - are worse off as they will need upwards of $2.5 million. 

    These equations have been arrived at on the assumption that, from their savings, the millennials could generate $30,000 - $40,000 and that the rate of inflation will be a modest 2%.

    However, the math changes if more than $40,000 dollars is required or if inflation runs at 3%, which is the long term historical average.  It has been estimated by a financial adviser that in those circumstances, $3 million would be required in savings.

    Doubtless, 20 and 30-somethings will find it very difficult to put aside a chunk of money each month, as young adults in America are faced with two major financial hurdles that prevent them from having a lot of extra wealth to invest for retirement i.e. high housing costs and student-loan debt. Data from the Pew Research Center states that for the first time in over a century, more Americans between the ages of 18 to 34 are having to live in their parents' home than with a spouse or partner and in addition, college graduates under the age of 35 years with student loans are paying one-fifth of their salaries on repayments.

    According to a survey from Franklin Templeton Investment, despite 70 percent of the younger employees feeling anxious when thinking about retirement savings and investments, 40 percent of them have no strategy in place. This highlights the importance of financial education for younger generations who are in the early stages of their careers and have the most to gain from thinking about retirement now.

    Employers should encourage their younger workers to contribute into company-sponsored retirement plans. Despite the fact that the younger millennials need to save approximately $1,000 dollars a month for 48 years and also need to get a 5% growth on their investments to hit the $2.5 million dollar target, if they increase their savings only slightly the employers will have done their jobs responsibly. Every dollar counts.

  • The challenges for potential interns are increasing

    he market for American Internships was rather sluggish in 2016 and the challenges for potential interns are increasing.  The total number of internships posted was actually lower than in the last two years, presenting an 8.3% decrease compared to the openings in 2015 and 2% below those of 2014.  

    However, the concentration of postings in March has risen steadily over the past 5 years, showing that there is a narrow season for internship recruitment. This peak happens ahead of when many students are beginning to think about summer opportunities and if a prospective intern waits until the end of the semester to apply for an internship, they have waited too long.  After March, demand diminishes until a second, rather smaller, opportunity occurs for term-time internships as the school year begins in September.

    Employers are expecting interns to arrive on their first day already expert in critical skills in software and business, together with specialized knowledge of particular fields.  Internships offer experience, not training.  Analysis has shown that there is a more complicated relationship between broad business skills and industry specific skills, which sheds new light on what interns are required to know to succeed. There are a number of skill groups in postings for internships and there is a slight interaction between them, with some skills overlapping. 

    The main internships requiring industry specific skills are Marketing, Engineering and Sales.   Social media and marketing research skills are required for a Marketing internship, whilst Sales will require business development and sales management skills. 

    General skills are required in 27% of internships, whilst 73% require industry related skills. 

    As a rule, internships are for undergraduates as 71% of the posts require a bachelor’s degree or less, whilst 29% look for graduate enrolment.  However, there are exceptions such as in the fast-growing area of Data Analytics - and again, in Economics and Policy - where more than four in ten internships call for a graduate degree.

    Analysis shows that geographically, Engineering is the most sought after specialized internship.  There are noticeable areas where there is most demand for different internships;  Marketing is required in California and New York, IT Development in Massachusetts and Science and the Environment in Alaska and Maine.  Business has been excluded from this analysis as it is so widespread and applies to so many areas.

  • Bill could allow tax-free student loan repayments to be made by employers

    The Employer Participation in Student Loan Assistance Act (H.R. 795), re-introduced by Republican Rodney Davis on February 1st, 2017, is seeking to allow tax-free student loan repayments to be made by employers.  This bipartisan bill would amend Section 127 of the Internal Revenue Code, which presently allows an employee $5,250 exclusion from tax to cover such essentials as books, tuition, equipment and fees.  Currently, student loan repayment benefits are not included and the $5,250 tax-free allowance has not been raised since inception. 

    The bill, which has been introduced to the House and referred to the Ways and Means committee, has support from both Republicans and Democrats in addition to prominent HR organizations such as the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM).  It would allow for employers to reimburse student loan repayments but it would fail to increase the amount the employer could offer the employee, which some employers wish to do as education costs are becoming more expensive. 

    Students of 2016 were reported to have graduated with the highest student loan debt in history, more than $35,000.  Although they were able to borrow at historically low interest rates, more needs to be done to help pay down their debts as it is affecting the economy.  Fewer people are managing to start their own businesses, make property purchases and especially for millennial employees, make retirement savings. 

    A small number of employers have already decided to begin offering student loan repayment assistance.  This will help graduates pay down their loans more quickly and help businesses attract and retain young talent in their employment.   Although the administration of this is an arduous and time-consuming labor for most companies, one California based company has begun offering loan repayment contributions of up to $6,000 a year for up to 5 years, as a benefit.  Employees have to apply for this benefit within three years of their graduation.  Millennials account for about 20 per cent of this company’s employees and so they are hoping to boost those figures by offering a benefit especially attractive to people of that generation.

  • T. Rowe Price Group defend accusations of self dealing in 401(k) plan

    T. Rowe Price Group, a global investment management firm, has been sued by a 401(k) participant who is saying the company’s plan offered only T. Rowe Price investment options, without considering less expensive ones.

    David G. Feinberg vs T. Rowe Price Group Inc. et al. was filed on February 14 in US District Court in Baltimore. The participant claimed the plan “favored the economic interests of T. Rowe Price Group Inc. and its affiliates over the interests of their employees.” 

    The lawsuit also alleges that the defendants frequently offered the higher cost retail class versions of their mutual funds in the 401(k) plan, despite the fact that significantly cheaper versions of the funds were available. Thisfavored the economic interests of the company over the interests of its employees.

    Feinberg is seeking class-action status in challenging the management of the retirement program.  According to the lawsuit, the T. Rowe Price U.S. Retirement Program had more than $1.7 billion in assets in 2015 alone.

    In a recent email, a T. Rowe Price spokeswoman said that the group believes the suit is without merit and intends to defend itself.

    This case follows on from several similar 401(k) self dealing lawsuits filed within the last year against financial services firms.

  • Facebook announces enhanced bereavement leave policy

    Facebook is making headlines yet again in the human resources space.  Earlier this month Facebook Chief Operating Officer, Sheryl Sandberg, announced employees will now receive up to 20 days of bereavement leave in the event a family member passes.

    Sandberg lost her husband in 2015 and said that “amid the nightmare of Dave’s death when my kids needed me more than ever, I was grateful every day to work for a company that provides bereavement leave and flexibility. I needed both to start my recovery. I know how rare that is, and I believe strongly that it shouldn’t be.”

    The Society for Human Resource Management’s 2016 Employee Benefits Survey Report revealed that just over 80% of companies provided any paid days for bereavement leave last year.  On average, four days of bereavement leave were awarded following the passing of a spouse or child.  In the event of a domestic partner, foster child, grandchild, sibling or grandparent passing, only three days were typically awarded.

    Facebook has historically been known for granting generous amounts of paid time off.  Paid leave for new parents includes 100% weekly earnings for four months.

    HR experts explain that this is an extremely significant move for Facebook since it is paving the way for employee appreciation, employee satisfaction and employee benefits.

  • Age discrimination plaintiff awarded $51 million

    A New Jersey jury recently awarded an engineer $51 million after claims he was discriminated against because of his age. Human resource experts say this may be the largest award ever in an age discrimination case. 

    Robert Braden had been employed by Lockheed Martin for almost 30 years when he was suddenly laid off in July 2012 as part of an organization-wide reduction in force (RIF).  Months after, Braden filed a charge of age discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  He claimed he was the oldest of 6 people in a company unit but the only one from the unit fired.

    Braden said that he felt as if he was selected for the layoff due to his senior age (66).  The two other employees in Braden’s unit had the same title, were significantly younger and allowed to keep their jobs. He also alleged that the company had a pattern of giving younger employees better reviews and better raises in order to keep them at the company.  Older workers were given lower ratings and lower raises because, “they had nowhere else to go.” 

    Braden withdrew his claim with the EEOC so he could sue Lockheed Martin in a New Jersey federal court (2014).  Lockheed Martin defended the claims and said Braden had a below average record of performance, lacked many skills and was not terminated because of any discriminatory reason.  The jury ended up siding with Braden and awarded him almost $50 million in punitive damages and $520,000 for lost wages.

  • Pension Advice Allowance

    The government have revealed plans whereby people planning their retirement will be able to withdraw up to £1500 from their pension pots, tax-free, in order to pay for financial advice.

    Pension Advice Allowance, as the plan is being called, was first announced in the Autumn Statement 2016.  The plan will allow people to withdraw £500 on up to three different occasions from their pension pots, tax-free.  The only catch is that the money has to be put towards the cost of pensions and retirement advice.

    The Economic Secretary to the Treasury announced that the £500 allowance can be used a total of three times, in a single tax year.  This will allow people to access advice at different stages of their lives.  Additionally, the money can be redeemed against the cost of regulated financial advice and extends to ‘robo advice’ in addition to face-to-face advice.

    Research revealed that only 22% of people approaching retirement know the value of their pot.  Less than 15% of people would be confident planning for their retirement without financial advice.

    UK savers with a pension of £100,000, according to Unbiased, save an average of £98 more every month if they take financial advice.

    The Government published a response to the consultation on the introduction of Pensions Advice Allowance, and HMRC will have a three-week technical consultation on the draft regulations.

  • DC participants now outnumber those in DB schemes

    The Pensions Regulator (TPR) announced that for the first time ever the number of participants in defined contribution plans in the UK outnumbered those in defined benefit funds, primarily due to automatic enrollment.

    In the annual DC report, TPR said defined contribution arrangements had 14.8 million participants (2016).  Defined benefit plans only amounted to 11.7 million.

    Executive director for regulatory policy, Andrew Warwick-Thompson, said that 7 million workers joined pensions for the first time thanks to automatic enrollment.  Warwick-Thompson however, did express concerns over the fragmentation of defined contribution arrangements.  He said, “we strongly believe that it is unacceptable to have two classes of DC pension saver – those that benefit from the premium scale and good governance and administration, and those that do not.”         

    Details of a trustee initiative will be released later this year and will include clear objectives that will help raise standards of trusteeship and take regulatory action against those who fail to meet a required level of competence.

  • £9.2 billion cashed from pensions since 2015

    Since the government’s pensions freedoms were introduced in April 2015, savers have cashed in £9.2 billion from their pension pots.

    According to recently released HMRC figures, over 1.5 million payments have been made using pension freedoms.  Additionally, 162,000 people accessed £1.56 billion flexibly from their pension pots over the last 3 months.

    The Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Simon Kirby, explained that giving people freedom over what to do with their savings is just the right thing to do. 

    Those who are choosing to access their pensions are also able to take advantage of the free and impartial government provided guidance service, Pension Wise, which has had over 3.7 million website visits and over 100,000 appointments to date.

  • Personalized benefits packages becoming the norm

    New research conducted by Aires, a relocation services provider based out of Pennsylvania, says the practice of offering relocating employees a core set of benefits in addition to optional, flexible add-ons is becoming more of the norm. 

    According to the data, about 25% of Aires’ clients use this kind of flexible approach in order to create personalized packages for talent.  This practice has been increasing in popularity pretty steadily over the course of the last few years.

    Core benefits include reimbursement for things like travel, household goods, automobile and storage options and different kinds of cash allowances.  Flex benefits, on the other hand, include things like reimbursement for home-seeking expenses, temporary housing, home sale and purchase assistance and spousal assistance.

    Companies that utilize this kind of core-flex procedures typically set model parameters around the flex benefits, often times allowing the employee to dictate different pieces that will be included in their model.

    One human resource expert suggests these packages are increasing in popularity because they become customizable to each situation. Giving employees the ability to dictate what goes into their package based on what is most important to them, according to HR experts, increases engagement and satisfaction.

  • IAM announce it will petition the NLRB to conduct a union election at Boeing

    On January 20, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), the largest union representing workers in this industry, announced it will petition the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to conduct a union election.

    Unfortunately for Boeing this is the second time in two years this union has expressed its desire to organize employees in North Charleston where 787 Dreamliners are currently assembled.  The IAM first filed a petition with the NLRB two years ago but withdrew it before the scheduled vote.

    In the press release announcing the NLRB filing, the union cited “numerous workplace concerns that remain unaddressed, including subjective raises, inconsistent scheduling policies and a lack of respect on the shop floor,” as leading to the arranging of this campaign.

    IAM’s lead organizer at the Boeing South Carolina plant, Mike Evans, said employees aren’t asking for anything out of the ordinary.  They just want to be treated with respect and with the same set of standards that are present in other Boeing plants.

    Boeing released a statement saying it “firmly believes that a union is not in the best interest of Boeing South Carolina teammates and their families.”  If the NLRB allows a vote to take place, employees will ultimately decide whether or not they’ll turn over their rights to the IAM or maintain their direct relationship with the company they work for.  Obviously, Boeing wants to avoid a vote at all costs especially if there are murmurs of a strike.

    The political situation in the United States isn’t helping the situation either as there are many uncertainties surrounding NLRB members

  • New regulations will clarify federal agencies’ affirmative action obligations as employers

    As per the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, new regulations will take effect on January 3, 2018 to clarify federal agencies’ affirmative action role and obligations as employers under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 501).

    The new regulations, which will not affect private businesses and state/local governments, move to consolidate affirmative action requirements including procedures for providing reasonable accommodations.  In addition to current action items, there will be two additional items included in the regulations.

    Federal agencies must take specific steps to gradually increase the number of employees they hire who have a disability as defined under Section 501, as well as to increase the number of employees who have what the government defines as a "targeted" disability—including autism, blindness, deafness, mental illness, paralysis and convulsive disorders. Targeted disabilities are thought to pose the greatest barriers to employment.

    These regulations say, in layman’s terms, that agencies should aim for employees with disabilities to make up over 10 percent of their workforce.  Employees who have a targeted disability should make up another two percent of each agency’s workforce.  These should also apply to workers at all ends of the pay spectrum, high and low.

    One human resource expert explained that in the United States there are about 1.2 million people with a targeted disability who are unemployed and actively seeking work.  These new regulations are working for more equality in the workplace when it comes to those with disabilities. These new rules provide some sort of accountability. 

  • Pension scheme deficit on the rise

    By the end of December 2016, the aggregate deficit of the almost 6,000 schemes included in the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) 7800 Index had risen to £223.9bn. 

    In November 2016, there was a deficit of only £194.7bn.  Andy Tunningley, head of UK strategic clients at BlackRock, recently weighed in on the latest figures saying for UK pension schemes, “2016 was like a marathon on a treadmill.”  He went on to explain how the aggregate funding ratio went up and down all year long, ultimately to end very close to where it started. The only schemes that avoided playing this up and down game were those that implemented LDI, according to human resource experts.

    HR experts say that as pension funds age, the cost of making any kind of wrong decision gets greater and greater.  Strong risk management is extremely important now, especially when you consider the volatility of the UK economy.  Buyer beware, however, it is important to note that risk management alone is simply not enough. 

  • Fair Labor Standards Act violators can be hit with emotional distress damage payouts

    As per the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Court, Fair Labor Standards Act violators can now be hit with emotional distress damage payouts as well.

    The ruling came as the result of a case involving Santiago Pineda, a maintenance worker and his employer/landlord JTCH Apartments.  As part of Pineda’s compensation, he was given a discounted rent.  When Pineda filed a wage-and-hour lawsuit against the apartment complex to recover overtime pay for work he said he performed, JTCH reacted by evicting Pineda and his wife. 

    In the notice Pineda and his wife received, the reason for eviction was cited as a failure to pay rent in an amount equal to the discount he received.  On top of the original lawsuit, Pineda tacked on a claim of emotional distress due to the fact that he could lose his home.  At this point, the court needed to determine whether or not FLSA allows for the recovery of emotional distress damages.

    The court ultimately said that the FLSA’s damage provision allows for “such legal or equitable relief as may be appropriate,” and is expansive enough to include emotional distress damages.  The court remanded the case to a jury to determine the amount of emotional distress Pineda would be entitled to.  The jury ruled that JTCH owes Pineda $6,600 for overtime and retaliation, in addition to $76,000 in attorney fees.  However, this does not include emotional distress payouts, since this number has not been decided on yet.

    According to HR experts, employers need to be making sure they’re following laws now more than ever because any employee who feels they’ve been wronged can collect on multiple claims, including emotional distress.  

  • Californian workers not required to remain on duty during their breaks

    The California Supreme Court ruled employers in California cannot require workers to remain on duty or “on call” during their rest breaks.

    In a statement made by the state high court on December 22 it was determined that “during required rest periods, employers must relieve their employees of all duties and relinquish any control over how employees spend their break time.”

    In Augustus v ABM Security Services, Inc., the state high court was asked to rule on whether or not a security company violated California law because it required guards to carry radios and remain on call during rest periods.  The guards argued that since they were on call and could be contacted at any point on their break, they weren’t actually on a break.  A trial court found in favor of the guards, granting them $90 million in damages, interest and penalties.  The California Court of Appeal vacated the judgement but the California Supreme Court reversed the court of appeal, agreeing with the trial court.

    Additionally, employers also shouldn’t suggest or require that employees carry company cell phones, pagers or any other kind of communication device during their rest breaks.  This doesn’t mean employees cannot, just that they should not be required to.    

    Typically, a nonexempt employee in California is entitled to a paid, 10-minute rest break for every four hours that are worked.  Violating the Supreme’s Court ruling could cost a company big time.  If a company violates this law, the employee must be given an additional hour of pay for each workday their full rest breaks are not provided.

    HR experts suggest that to avoid any kind of confusion, employers should encourage workers to take any kind of break away from their workstations, that way there is no chance of the employer inadvertently breaking the law.

  • Salary threshold increases for New York

    State-level changes spelling out salary threshold increases for administrative and executive exemptions from overtime pay have been updated for New York employers. 

    Although the federal overtime rule remains undecided, the final rule on increases took effect on December 31 and was published just a few days earlier by New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL). 

    For the most part, increases are different in each geographic location, with changes in New York City based on the size of the employer.

    HR expertsexpect that most companies already had a plan in place to deal with the changes since a proposed federal rule would have raised the exempt salary threshold much higher under the Fair Labor Standards Act. 

    The current statewide exempt salary threshold in New York is approximately $675 per week.  The increases by geographic area and employer size are as follows: 

    New York City (employers with 11 or more employees)  
    $825.00 per week ($42,900 annually) Dec. 31, 2016
    $975.00 per week ($50,700 annually) Dec. 31, 2017
    $1,125.00 per week ($58,500 annually) Dec. 31, 2018

    New York City (employers with 10 or fewer employees)  
    $787.50 per week ($40,950 annually) Dec. 31, 2016
    $900.00 per week ($46,800 annually) Dec. 31, 2017
    $1,012.50 per week ($52,650 annually) Dec. 31, 2018
    $1,125.00 per week ($58,500 annually) Dec. 31, 2019

    Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester counties  
    $750.00 per week ($39,000 annually) Dec. 31, 2016
    $825.00 per week ($42,900 annually) Dec. 31, 2017
    $900.00 per week ($46,800 annually) Dec. 31, 2018
    $975.00 per week ($50,700 annually) Dec. 31, 2019
    $1,050.00 per week ($54,600 annually) Dec. 31, 2020
    $1,125.00 per week ($58,500 annually) Dec. 31, 2021

    Outside of New York City, Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester counties  
    $727.50 per week ($37,830 annually) Dec. 31, 2016
    $780.00 per week ($40,560 annually) Dec. 31, 2017
    $832.00 per week ($43,264 annually) Dec. 31, 2018
    $885.00 per week ($46,020 annually) Dec. 31, 2019
    $937.50 per week ($48,750 annually) Dec. 31, 2020
  • Study looks into reducing the growing trend of age bias

    A recent study by the Academy of Management says that trying to change the minds of old workers’ managers isn’t enough when it comes to reducing the growing trend of age bias, as baby boomers extend their time in the workforce. 

    A better idea, according to the study, is to create mature-age practices to engage older employees, counter their fears of bias and suppress bias tendencies occurring around them.  HR experts explain that policies created specifically to recognize and encourage mature-age workers sends a consistent and constant signal that tends to lessen their concerns about age bias. 

    The study sampled 666 employers, ages 45 and up and proved that mature-age practices are scarce in most organizations.  One human resource expert explained that older workers don’t necessarily want anything that is too different from what younger workers want. 

    At the end of the day, all employees should be getting performance-related feedback relevant to their career stage regardless of their age.  Companies not only need to be thinking about individual practices for older workers, but they also need to be thinking about nurturing a work atmosphere with a culture that encourages workers of all ages without bias.

  • Decision from a federal district court is a reminder of the importance of following legal compliance laws

    A recent decision from a federal district court in Wisconsin is a great reminder of how important it is to follow legal compliance laws in compensation. 

    Lenore O’Brien, a female employee began working for Unity Health Plans Insurance Corp. in May 2009 as a large-group account executive, for a salary of just over $67,000.  At around the same time, Unity also hired a male employee, Ryan Pelz, under the same job title as O’Brien but with a starting salary of $75,000.  Over the course of time, both O’Brien and Pelz received merit increases in base salary but because of the starting salary difference, O’Brien’s salary never matched Pelz’s.  In October 2014, O’Brien resigned from her position and sued the company for unequal pay under the Federal Equal Pay Act.

    The court immediately denied a motion for summary judgement filed by Unity and noted that an Equal Pay Act plaintiff only needs to prove a few things: different wages paid to employees of the opposite sex, these employees performed equal work with equal skill and effort and the employees had similar working conditions.

    Unity didn’t want to go down without a fight, of course.  The company argued that O’Brien was paid less because she had less experience than Pelz in selling group health insurance.  The court reviewed the terms of the job description for O’Brien and Pelz at the time of hiring and said the job description wasn’t detailed enough for Unity to make that kind of claim.  The court actually found that O’Brien and Pelz both matched the primary qualifications that had been spelled out in the description and ultimately favored O’Brien.

    HR experts urge companies to use this case as an example of what to avoid.  Consistency and accuracy in HR-related records is imperative to avoiding, or at least limiting, legal liability.  

  • Whistleblower claims may mean J.P. Morgan Chase have unfinished business with the IRS

    It seems J.P. Morgan Chase may have unfinished business with the IRS over a year after it paid more than $300 million to resolve regulators’ claims that the bank failed to explain to wealthy clients why it was steering them into its own funds.

    While the bank said its actions were unintentional and promised to be more transparent moving forward, it did admit to disclosure lapses at the time of the settlement among securities and commodities regulators.  A whistleblower is now claiming, however, the misdeeds extended beyond a lack of disclosure. 

    The whistleblower is claiming that a portion of clients’ money was in tax-advantaged pension funds potentially skirting IRS rules while favoring its own funds.      

    The whistleblower is an unidentified former J.P. Morgan employee who started working with the Securities and Exchange Commission early on in the investigation.  The whistleblower filed a previously unreported claim to the IRS over this retirement funds issue, potentially leaving the bank on the hook for another sum of hundreds of millions of dollars in tax penalties.

    HR experts explain the whistleblower is being represented by Dean Zerbe, and Zerbe’s client will remain out of the public.  Zerbe feels that it is the IRS’s duty to subject the bank to substantial bank penalties. Of course, the IRS does not have to move forward and endorse the whistleblower’s claim for any legal action.  There is no indication that the IRS is leaning either way at this time.

  • Government launch consultation around consolidating three money guidance services into one body

    In a consultation launched on 19th December 2016, the government is looking for opinions on which body should replace the Money Advice Service (MAS), The Pensions Advisory Service (TPAS) and Pension Wise.

    The plan is to consolidate publicly funded debt advice, pensions and money guidance into one body, as opposed to having three separate services.  Human resource experts further explain that this new body could take on an even more important role working with the charity sector and financial services sector to understand consumer needs.

    Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Simon Kirby, said the goal is really to help people take control of their money and ensure they make the right decisions.  Minister for Pensions, Richard Harrington, also chimed in saying that financial guidance for everyone is of the utmost importance to ensure people can make the most of their hard-earned savings.

    “This new single body will be a place people can go for free, impartial financial guidance,” Harrington said.

    The single financial guiding body, hoping to be in place by autumn 2018, will be responsible for: debt advice, occupational or personal pensions guidance, guidance on how to avoid financial fraud and scams, the coordination of non-government financial education programmes for the young and guidance on wider-money matters.

    In the interim, while the new governing body is put together, the MAS, TPAS and Pension Wise will continue to operate business as usual.

  • Pension Protection Fund publishes 11th edition of the Purple Book

    According to the 11th edition of the Purple Book, trends in DB pensions have stabilised within this past year, bumping the future of defined benefit pensions way up on the public agenda.

    In the last twelve months, the data shows that scheme funding has changed ever so slightly.  Overall, the aggregate deficit fell a few points while the aggregate funding ratio increased very little.

    The Purple Book was published on 8th December 2016 by the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and covers the 5,794 DB pension schemes it protects.  Most of the data is based on information from any eligible DB schemes and analyses performance from 1st April 2015 - 31st March 2016.

    Most of the change in habits is found in asset allocation with the average allocation invested in bonds increasing to over 50% for the first time ever.  On the flip side, the proportion invested in equities fell slightly from 33% to 30.3%, which continues to drive a trend that was seen since the Purple Book was first published.

    Human resource experts unanimously agree that 2016 has been very interesting for defined benefit pensions, also agreeing that more needs to be done to instigate progress.  The average recovery plan length has barely improved at all.

    Overall, the Purple Book 2016 does a great job of highlighting the need for effective risk management and also affirms the importance of the PPF safety net for members of schemes who fail to pay exactly what they promised to pay.

  • HR Experts predict “inflation-adjusted wage increases” in 2017

    Workers all over the world should brace themselves for what human resource experts are referring to as “inflation-adjusted wage increases” in 2017.  In 2016, workers received wage increases of about 2.7 percent but should only expect an average of 2.3 percent in the coming year.

    Luckily for North America, the rapid rise in market pay in certain countries over the last few years is helping dissuade US businesses from outsourcing jobs to other countries.  Moving jobs to countries like China typically benefits the US because they are low-wage nations, but this wage gap is closing quickly.  Ultimately, the case for sending work overseas is becoming less clear from a financial perspective. Next year alone, salaries in Asia are expected to increase by 6.1 percent.  Latin American workers are forecasted to see the largest salary increases in 2017 at a solid 7 percent.   

    The US and Canada will see slower salary increases overall when compared to other regions, according to regional and country-specific global pay findings released earlier this month.

    The data comes from Hay Group’s client database and analyzes pay information for over 20 million job holders across 110 countries.  One HR expert explained that while salary increases will be lower this year, there will still be salary increases – this is really a glass half full or a glass half empty kind of scenario.  

  • Study reveals women are being pushed into supporting roles and men into leadership

    A study from Stanford University revealed managers of both sexes might be inadvertently pushing women into supporting roles and lifting men into leadership ones.

    A Stanford research team analyzed hundreds of performance reviews and found that women were often described as “collaborative”, whereas men were often described as “driven.”  While both of these adjectives are positive, when it comes to promotion time some characteristics hold more weight than others.  The study explained that because women are praised more for being good team players they are placed in more supportive roles because this is where they “excel.”

    On the flip side, men are more often promoted because they are described as driving outcomes for the business.  One HR expert explains there is another reason this happens – the Meritocracy Paradox.  Even though we want to believe we judge on merit, studies show this just isn’t true. 

    Fortunately, human resource professionals recommend a few steps that can help members of management avoid any kind of unintentional bias.  First, it is important to stick to the facts and get multiple opinions.  If a manager hones in on hard performance data and sticks to the facts, there will be little room for bias based on anything.  Additionally, employers should encourage workers to give anonymous feedback on management so that biases can reported.  Finally, HR experts encourage management to assess employees based on multiple reviews.

  • Saving into workplace pensions on the increase

    The number of people saving into workplace pensions is still on the increase with 15 million people and counting.

    A primary reason for the 4.4 million-person-increase since 2012 is the amount of people being auto-enrolled.  The Institute for Fiscal Studies recently completed an analysis that revealed between 2012 and 2015, 95% of the rise in private sector membership was attributed to auto-enrolment.

    Auto-enrolment was launched in 2012.  The plan is to have it fully rolled out by 2018.  The fact that millions of people are set up in a workplace pension means that workers will be able to benefit from years of saving, thus granting them a more secure retirement. 

    Minister for Pensions, Richard Harrington recently chimed in on the subject singing praises of auto-enrolment.  He also explained how the long-term plan is to build on the success of auto-enrolment by finding new and innovative ways to continue to encourage people to save.

    In April 2018, minimum contribution rates are scheduled to rise from 2% to 5%, and then from 5% to 8% the following year.

    Before the year comes to a close, the Department for Work & Pensions will announce the scope of the 2017 review on auto-enrolment.  This review will be make sure auto-enrolment continues to work for everyone involved.

  • Millions at risk of falling short of the minimum income standard in retirement

    The minimum income standard (MIS) in 2016 as defined by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation equates to just £9,500.  Unfortunately, 1.6 million people out of the 25.5 million in the workforce are at high risk of falling short of this minimum income standard in retirement. 

    The Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) recently did an analysis of the incomes of different UK generations and what they can expect in retirement. The Retirement Income Adequacy: Generation by Generation report found that well over 13 million people are still considered at risk of not meeting their target replacement rate, or TRR. 

    Millennials:  This generation is considered the auto-enrolment generation.  Millennials are actually the first generation to experience the UK pensions system the way that reforms intended it to be.  Unfortunately for Millennials, those in a defined contribution scheme will need to do more than just that to achieve their TRR.  They will need to contributmore than the minimum and probably work longer.

    Gen X:  This is the generation that falls in the middle of all of the reforms.  They are witnessing the slow decline of defined benefit schemes and the introduction of auto-enrolment.  Many people in Gen X didn’t start saving in their pension early on and are now saving at a lower level via auto-enrolment.  Just an increase in contributions is definitely not enough to achieve TRR.  They may need to dip into assets like property to generate a higher retirement income.

    Baby Boomers: This generation is split.  Baby Boomers who have accrued defined benefit pension entitlement have great retirement income prospects.  Those on the flip side, though, are facing grim conditions. Any Baby Boomer who does not have a defined benefit scheme could enter retirement with less than 10 years of savings through auto-enrolment and will probably end up depending on State Pension.  This generation, however, is synonymous with property wealth which may be enough to generate a comfortable retirement. 

  • Texan Judge halts the DOL’s new federal overtime rule

    Less than two weeks before it was supposed to get implemented, a federal judge in Texas halted the Department of Labor’s new federal overtime rule.

    This new rule would have doubled the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) salary threshold for exemption from overtime pay.  Twenty-one states submitted an emergency motion for a preliminary injunction back in October to stop the rule from passing, claiming the DOL exceeded its authority.  These cases were consolidated with another lawsuit filed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, among other business groups, which raised similar objections to the rule. 

    This new overtime rule was set to take effect on December 1 and would have significantly raised the salary threshold.  Judge Amos Mazzant of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas said the preliminary injunction “preserves the status quo while the court determines the department’s authority to make the final rule as well as the final rule’s validity.”

    Many human resources experts and professionals have rallied together to showcase the difficulties of the rule and the negative impacts it would have had if it took effect.

    The preliminary injunction isn’t permanent, though.  While the overtime rule didn’t take effect on the first of this month, that doesn’t mean it won’t take effect at a later date.  Employers will be able to follow the existing overtime rules until further direction is given. 

    Some employers have already either raised exempt employees’ salaries or already reclassified employees who are still earning less than nonexempt workers.  HR experts are urging these employers to leave these decisions in place, especially if they already provided salary increases.  In the event there are exempt employees who are going to be reclassified but haven’t been yet, these are cases where employers should consider holding back until litigation plays out.

  • UK defined benefit deficit down since Trump elected

    Since the election in the United States, the total UK defined benefit deficit has gone down by £35bn. 

    Additionally, according to Hymans Robertson, the defined benefit deficit is also down by over £200bn from a record high of over £1 trillion in August.  Human resource experts explain this is driven by rising bond yields, partially due to inflation expectations from the policy pledges promised by President-Elect Donald Trump.

    One partner at Hymans Robertson goes on to say that there have been signals from the Federal Reserve of higher economic growth and rising interest rates which have been “amplified significantly by what the market has been calling the ‘Trumpflation trade’.”

    The real question remains, though: what does this mean for defined benefit schemes?  HR experts unfortunately cannot give a straight answer.  If anything, what we already know about deficits is that they can be extremely volatile.  Scheme holders should still keep their eye on the long-term goal and try to remain unaffected by short-term political uncertainties.

    HR experts advise that in order to maintain a long-term focus it is important to know what your long-term target is, and what the measurements of success look like.  

  • Survey reveals over half of US workers feel appropriately compensated

    It appears that just under half of United States employees believe they are not being paid fairly compared to workers who hold similar jobs, new research shows.

    Managing director of talent and rewards at consultancy Willis Towers Watson, Laura Sejen, explains how pay equity is becoming one of the highest priorities for employers.  This comes as no surprise when you consider the fact that base pay continues to be the most cited reason employees choose to join or leave a company.

    The firm’s 2016 Global Workforce Study polled over 3,000 employees in the United States earlier this year and found that while a large percentage do not feel appropriately compensated, over half of respondents reported believing they are paid fairly.  Among other things, the survey set out to measure whether employees actually understand how their base pay is calculated.  A whopping 65% of employees said they do understand how their salary is determined.  On the other hand though, only 39% of polled employees understand how their total compensation compares with other “typical” employees within their organization.

    A companion study found that employers haven’t really laid much groundwork when it comes to ensuring employees are paid fairly.  In this study, only half of senior executives polled reported having a formal process in place to ensure fairness in pay.  Given the increasing competition in the workplace and the way that millennials function, this will have to be on the radar of any company that wants to attract and retain talent.

    Multiple states have adopted pay equity laws which require companies to disclose the ratio of CEO pay to median employee pay.  This kind of transparency will likely fuel already existing concerns over pay equity and employee understanding.

  • Paid parental leave

    This past September, President elect Donald Trump revealed a plan to guarantee six weeks of paid maternity leave for new mothers after childbirth, excluding new fathers, adoptive parents and those who have children via a surrogacy.

    Furthermore, a document obtained on the Trump campaign website explains same-sex couples would also receive the six weeks of paid leave under the policy if and only if the marriage is “recognized under state law.” 

    The United States is the only nation without some form of national paid parental leave for employees with newborns, per a survey by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.  In over 10 countries, paid parental leave extends beyond 12 months.  Unfortunately, in the US less than 15 percent of employers offer paid leave.

    Human resource experts explain one of the measurable outcomes of paid parental leave is the effect it has on infant health and development.  There are also psychological benefits for the parents, especially when it is considered that in nearly half of US households both parents work full-time jobs. 

    Thomas E. Perez, Secretary of Labor, has actively promoted paid family leave legislation through his Lead on Leave campaign.  Unfortunately, legislation that would accomplish most of the paid parental or family leave goals have been stalled in Congress.

    Although national paid parental leave law is stalled, some states have adopted paid family leave on their own.

  • Corporate rates for leisure travel offered as an employee benefit

    The benefits world seems to be upping their game these days.  Hotel Engine, a company that provides hotel booking solutions for business, officially launched in the employee benefits space last month.

    People can now use Hotel Engine for their own personal travel as a benefit, with zero cost to the employee or the employer.  People can take advantage of discounted hotel prices that mirror corporate rates for leisure travel.

    Sonia Reid, vice president of marketing and communications at Hotel Engine, said the product is already receiving lots of positive feedback. 

    “It’s one of the benefits that more and more employees are looking for, and so being able to offer them these deeply discounted rates to use when they have vacation is huge,” Reid said.

    Hotel Engine also helps outs on the implementation and marketing side of things to make sure a new rollout goes smoothly for the employer.  Taking things one step further, Hotel Engine offers employees traveling for leisure the same level of customer service as they do for business travel clients. The only caveat is you have to work at a business which offers this as a benefit.

    Hotel Engine saw a hole in the market and filled it up.  It will therefore be interesting to see how many employers adopt something like this in the future.

  • CIPD survey into workplace absence

    A new CIPD survey reveals employers aren’t giving line managers the necessary tools they need to manage workplace absence effectively.

    The 2016 CIPD/Simplyhealth Absence Management survey found that now more than ever employers are giving line managers the responsibility of managing short-term absence.  25% of surveyed employers said giving line managers information about absence rates, causes and trends was one of the most effective ways to manage short-term absence.  Unfortunately, the number of employers giving managers the tools they need to manage absence has decreased over the last year.  Less than half of employers in the survey trained managers to handle short-term absence.  Additionally, only 38% said managers were even trained to manage long-term absence.

    The survey also uncovered decreases in the provision of tailored support for line managers.  Although these employees play an essential role in businesses, training and support for these managers to make sure they are efficient and effective is lacking.  Line managers, according to HR experts, are usually the employees making day-to-day decisions about work allocation and staffing arrangements and therefore it is imperative they are equipped with the necessary knowledge and feel confident. 

    The survey did reveal the current average level of staff absence is 6.3 days per year, slightly down from 2015.  The most common reasons for short-term absence were minor illnesses and stress.

  • Barnado’s pension cannot switch from RPI to CPI for revaluation purposes

    The Court of Appeal decided that the trustees of Barnado’s pension scheme cannot switch from the Retail Prices Index, or RPI, to the Consumer Prices Index, or CPI, just for revaluation and indexation purposes.

    Some HR experts feel this particular ruling comes in the form of a blow to employers with multiple pension schemes, with inflation protection wording similar to this case.  If the judgement was in favour of the change, according to some human resource experts, this type of employer could have seen a way forward in reducing scheme deficits.  Now, since the statutory power cannot be overridden, this will all depend on the wording of each scheme’s rules.

    In the aforementioned case, the Court of Appeal ruled the scheme’s deed doesn’t necessarily afford the trustees the ability to select the index by which increases are measured.  However, there is still a lot of uncertainty about how this will work even for schemes that have clear built-in discretions to switch to another index.  

  • Public sector jobs could be lost to automation by the end of the next decade

    The State of the State report suggests that over 850,000 public sector jobs could be lost to automation by the end of the next decade.

    The research, conducted by Deloitte and the University of Oxford, insinuates a side effect of automation could be a reduction in the taxpayer funded wage bill by as much as £17bn.

    The report even breaks down which sectors would be most affected. It is predicted that just 4,000 local government administrative positions will remain in 2030. This prediction is based on the fact that these types of roles already seem to be diminishing. Additionally, over half of care workers and home care jobs are predicted to disappear over the course of the 15 years leading up to 2030.

    The report also outlines what will replace all of these workers. It is predicted that robots will replace people in data input roles, since robotic process automation already provides a software alternative. In the analysis, the report found that this level of predicted automation could significantly reduce costs and boost productivity.

    The report does make the point that automation will not replace human beings completely or overnight. This type of impact to the workforce is something that will be gradual, but social and political resistance should be expected along the way. The report also claims that while automation displaces certain jobs, new and higher skilled and better-paying jobs could be created as a result.

  • No secondary annuities market

    After much consideration, a fairly extensive programme and engagement with many different kinds of human resource experts, the government decided not to move forward with any plans that would introduce a secondary annuities market.

    The primary reason for this decision is that the consumer protections required could undermine the market’s development. Ultimately, creating conditions to allow a competitive market to emerge with numerous buyers and sellers of annuities couldn’t be balanced with enough protection. Although many firms have come forward and said they are willing to allow customers to sell their annuities, the government has made their voice heard.

    One of the government’s top priorities is consumer protection and the government is just not willing to create circumstances that could produce poor outcomes for some people. Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Simon Kirby, said that the decision to allow consumers to sell their annuities always depended on balancing “the creation of an effective market with making sure consumers are properly protected.” He continued to say that this is not something the government can guarantee.

    HR experts also point out that the government has long been preaching that for the majority of people, keeping their annuity income would be their best option.

  • Are employers’ leave policies reinforcing gender role stereotypes?

    The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) said employers’ leave policies are often reinforcing gender role stereotypes by providing more leave for mothers.

    According to the Paid Leave in the Workplace Survey, women on average receive 41 days of paid maternity leave, while men receive 22 days. This particular imbalance, according to SHRM’s director of workforce analytics, proves that employers still expect women to take on a majority of the care for a new child. This type of gender inequality could discourage fathers from taking a similar amount of days off to help with a new baby.

    The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission chimed in with the fact that these type of policies are not discriminatory, but implementation is key. Employers should really distinguish between types of leave. “Leave related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions can be limited to women affected by those conditions,” the commission says in its Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues.

    SHRM found through its survey that these kind of differences in paid paternal leave benefits could easily be questioned by employees of both sexes on the grounds of gender equality and equality between same-sex couples. SHRM is warning workers to expect their employers to start pushing back on these policies.

  • Charity warns gender pay gap could cause damage to productivity levels

    Fawcett Society, a gender equality and women’s rights charity, is warning the government and employers that if no action is taken against the gender pay gap there will be serious damage to the UK’s productivity levels.

    New research, according to the Fawcett Society, revealed that more than half of women and men believe it is the responsibility of businesses and employers to work on reducing the gender pay gap. A majority of respondents also said the government should be responsible for solving this issue.

    Fawcett Society Chief Executive, Sam Smethers, said research shows reducing the gender pay gap would equate to over 800,000 more women in work, adding £150bn to the economy by 2025. Human resource experts and other sceptics are unsure of where these estimations originated.

    Of course there are also socioeconomic reasons for why the gender gap is so prevalent. In the UK there is still a very unequal distribution of responsibilities, with women usually acting as the primary caregiver for children and the elderly. Employers are making this type of issue worse by being reluctant to institute shared parental leave at a rate of pay that matches the enhanced pay that many women get for maternity leave.

    Some HR professionals feel as though progress is already being made with the move towards gender pay audits. Additionally, some finance firms are reportedly committing to have women fill at least 30 per cent of senior roles by 2021

  • ‘Women in the Workplace 2016’ study says women face greater challenges

    Released by McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org, Women in the Workplace 2016 is a comprehensive annual study that analyzes the state of women in corporate America. Per the study, women fall behind fairly early and face great challenges the more senior they become. Additionally, women are far less likely than men to receive an initial promotion which is critical to growth. Due to these core issues the higher you look in a company’s hierarchy, typically the less women you will find.

    Women in the Workplace 2016 is part of an ongoing partnership between McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org that helps give companies the information they need to promote female leadership and generate more equality in the workplace between men and women.

    The data for the report is based on information regarding HR practices from 132 companies that employ over four million people. Companies like Visa, Facebook and General Motors are just examples of companies included in the study. Over 34,000 employees completed a survey for the study created to analyze their experiences surrounding gender, opportunity, career and work/life issues.

    Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook COO and founder of LeanIn.Org, stated that diverse teams tend to perform better overall proving there is a huge incentive to fix this issue of gender inequality in the workplace.

    Global managing partner of McKinsey & Company, Dominic Barton, explains that in order to accelerate any progress there must be a thorough understanding of what is actually holding women back.

    Contrary to popular belief the report did show that women negotiate for promotions and raises just as often as men do, however they face far more pushback. The study also found women who negotiate are more likely than men to get feedback that they’re “intimidating” or “too aggressive.”

    Overall, company commitment to gender diversity is reportedly at an all-time high, but companies are finding it difficult to make this commitment actionable. Luckily, the 2016 report outlines steps companies can take to progress their efforts in gender diversity.

  • Court rules savers facing bankruptcy should not be forced to cash in their pensions

    Following a recent Court of Appeal ruling at the beginning of the month, any saver facing bankruptcy should not be forced to cash in their pensions in order to pay off any outstanding debts.

    Horton v Henry was a case based on whether a bankrupt person who is subject to an Income Payment Order, or IPO, can be forced to cash in their savings to pay off the impending debt. As per the rules of an IPO, a person subject to such is required to pay a proportion of their income to the bankruptcy trustee usually in the form of salary or wages.

    This case was initially heard about two years ago when the Judge decided there shouldn’t be any entitlement to undrawn funds in a pension under the aforementioned circumstances. This same principle applies to lump sum rights.

    This ruling ran counter to Raithatha v Williamson heard in 2012. The Court in this case held that individuals with pensions that had not been crystallized could be forced to take them under an IPO. If this particular ruling had set a precedent, anyone over the age of 55 facing a bankruptcy could potentially be forced to draw their pensions whether they really wanted to or not.

    Fortunately for savers, an appeal against the ruling in Horton v Henry was dismissed. One HR expert said this kind of pension freedom really changes the way savers can choose to spend their retirement pot. Other human resource experts also agree this kind of UK legal system decision really indicates how the legal system acknowledges the importance of the pension and the fact that it should truly belong to the saver.

  • Under 35’s represent largest group who contribute to personal pensions

    It appears the younger generation might not be as fiscally irresponsible as previously reported. New figures released by HMRC show that under 35’s now represent the largest group of people who contribute to personal pensions.

    This age group makes up 34% of all people who contribute to personal pensions, the largest percentage of any age group. Auto-enrolment has been cited as largely responsible for the vast year over year improvement. Human resource experts explain that auto-enrolment has had a positive effect on all age groups, not just the under 35’s. More people, overall, are contributing to personal pensions. Furthermore, this number is the highest it has ever been since 2001 when records first began.

    While all of this news is extremely positive, one area of concern circles around the self-employed group who seem to be saving less. The number of self-employed people saving in a personal pension has fallen to less than 400,000 in 2014/2015. This is the lowest number since records began in 2001. This number is alarming, according to HR experts, because self-employed workers make up approximately 15% of Britain’s workforce.

    Alistair McQueen, savings and retirement manager at Aviva, says that even though the harsh reality of the self-employed group cannot be ignored, the amount being saved overall is approaching an all-time high and should be celebrated. He goes on to say the financial challenges facing the under 35’s are well documented and include issues like increasing property prices, student debt and job insecurity. Yet, with all of these challenges, the fact that this age group has managed to save is to their credit. This age group is certainly helping lead the way in Britain’s pension revival.

  • London’s mayor’s office planning to create a London work permit

    Directly following concerns that employees and business owners will desert the capital after Britain leaves the EU, London’s mayor’s office is outlining a plan to create a London work permit.

    Mayor Sadiq Khan recently told Sky News that a group of business reps were working on a model to ensure London organisations will still be able to recruit and attract the right skilled talent. Mayor Khan explained to Sky News that the office is speaking to business leaders, business representatives and businesses themselves to see what can be done to make sure London doesn’t lose out on the talent needed to ensure innovation.

    Khan has already discussed the plans with Chancellor Philip Hammond, Brexit Secretary David Davis and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson. Next, Khan will meet with Prime Minister Theresa May to discuss the proposal further.

    While all of this is going on, it’s been revealed that Scotland will not receive any special power over migration. Separate controls would actually harm the integrity of the United Kingdom system, according to Immigration Minister Robert Goodwill. Any application of different immigration rules to different regions of the UK could complicate the entire immigration system.

  • Report states that employers are increasingly offering paid time off for adoptions

    Consulting group Mercer recently explained in a report that employers are increasingly offering paid time off for adoptions, partly due to the ever-changing definition of “family”.

    Mercer further explained the findings by saying that providing leave for all parents is just a way to accommodate varied families, whether they be same sex couples or otherwise.

    In its 2016 Global Parental Leave report, Mercer shows that United States employees enjoy 12 weeks of unpaid leave for adoptions, as long as they meet the Family and Medical Leave Act’s eligibility requirements. The report goes on to say companies are beginning to provide more generous leave, though. The 2016 Global Parental Leave report is based off findings from a study which surveyed companies around the world. The survey was able to show employers in countries with generous mandated leave really leaned on the applicable law. In areas of the world like the US, however, employers have “filled the void” with more paid time off.

    When it comes to providing any kind of leave for adoption, United States companies rank the highest while Asia ranks the lowest.

    Potentially the most interesting part of this report is that there is a complete lack of government mandates in the area of human resources. Many countries require paid maternity leave, but far less require the same paid time off for new fathers.

    For companies who do offer this kind of paid time off, human resource experts are urging these organizations to use this as a recruiting and retention tool. This kind of thinking is still considered progressive and new, so highlighting something like this during a hiring process could provide a competitive edge.

  • Membership of occupational pension schemes at a high

    Total membership of occupational pension schemes in the UK was at the highest level ever in 2015, according to the ONS’s Occupational Pension Schemes Survey series.

    Active membership of occupational pension schemes exceeded 11 million in 2015, considering both private and public sectors. Total memberships in the UK equated to 33.5 million last year, or a 10% increase over 2014. An analysis of private sector defined contribution schemes showed the average total in 2015 was quite comparable to 2014 numbers, but membership and contribution rates are likely to have been influenced by factors like workplace pension reforms.

    General Secretary Frances O’Grady recently replied to the staggering statistics saying auto-enrolment certainly started with a bang by bringing “millions more people into workplace pensions.” He continued by explaining the job isn’t nearly done, though. He said the UK should be extremely concerned about plunging pension contributions. More work definitely needs to be done by the government to provide a long-term plan for how pensions will provide retirement pots sufficient for low and middle-income earners.

    Additionally, Tom McPhail of Hargreaves Lansdown reminds the government of the many millions of people who are opting for self-employment who are not enrolled in a pension. Between self-employment and the shift away from defined benefit pensions in the private sector, HR experts are predicting increased financial pressures on employers and employees alike.

  • Pensioners not taking advantage of guaranteed annuity rates

    Just Retirement, a specialist financial services company, says thousands of retirees are opting for higher risk and lower returns versus high performance pension incomes.

    Official figures show that over 50% of people accessing pension money whose plans include a guaranteed annuity rate are not choosing to take advantage of this option. This number is even more surprising when you consider the fact that over one million savers have plans that offer a guarantee to pay income for life of five to ten times the return received from even the best savings accounts. Even more astounding, about one third of the people who are taking cash from pensions are storing it in savings accounts.

    One human resource expert explains that if a person has a plan that offers a guaranteed rate for life this person should consider themselves one of the lucky few. This is considered a high performance option. Giving something like this up could be a very expensive mistake.

    Breaking this down even further, Just Retirement found that years ago when rates were higher pension providers made promises they are now having to honour. From a guaranteed annuity rate the usual income paid was between nine and 12 percent. However, in some cases it was as high as 14 percent. Furthermore, these guarantees are such a big deal that providers are obligated to tell holders if your pension plan has one.

    So, why are some people exploring this option while others are not? The research revealed that holders with smaller pension pots were more likely to shun a guaranteed annuity rate while those with bigger pots proved more open to advice.

    HR experts are urging pension holders to examine all the facts prior to making a decision. There is no reason why a pension provider’s loss can’t be a pension holder’s gain.

  • Amazon test Part-Time Team Initiative program

    Amazon is known for being innovative and progressive in the digital and ecommerce space, but now they’re making strides in the human resources department too.

    The online retailer juggernaut announced a pilot program where designated teams will be made up of part-time employees only.

    The program, called Part-Time Team Initiative, allows employee teams to work 30-hours per week for 75% of their salary WITH full benefits. HR experts are referring to the concept as groundbreaking. The goal of the program, according to the company itself, is to recruit and retain talent and diversify the workforce.

    These teams will be made up of current and new employees. Current employees will have to transfer from a current position to one of three very large teams being formed under the new test program. Amazon is already reporting a few dozen engineering and tech employees who are taking part in the program. These employees work 10am to 2pm, Monday through Thursday and can take advantage of flextime hours throughout the week.

    However, a company spokesperson stated that there won’t be any kind of companywide change any time soon. This is a pilot program strictly created for learning to see if this kind of team can work. The goal is to see if these people are as productive, more productive or less productive during a 30-hour workweek versus 40-hour workweek.

    This program sets itself apart from other companies who have run similar programs because these will be entire teams comprised of part-time employees. Similar studies have paired part-timers with full-timers.

    HR experts are pondering whether this test is in response to a New York Times article published about a year ago calling the company “unforgiving” with “grueling” work schedules. Amazon has not confirmed or denied this.

  • TUC research into early retirement for medical reasons

    TUC research revealed approximately one in eight men and women stop working before state pension age due to bad health or disability.

    The report called, Postponing the pension: are we all working longer? finds that almost 500,000 workers who are within five years of state pension age have to leave the workplace for medical reasons. The report also shows a clear North – South divide. In the South West of England sickness and disability is only cited by one in 13 people who have left the workplace in the years approaching state pension age. In the North East however, the number rises to one in seven, proving a more significant health issue across northern regions of the UK.

    Additionally, people who work in lower paying jobs like carers, cleaners and more manual jobs are twice as likely to stop working prior to retirement due to sickness and disability.

    The TUC feels that raising the state pension age is far too simplistic of an approach to increase the number of people working later in life. Of course this criticism doesn’t come without possible solutions. The TUC feels there are multiple other ways to encourage older people to remain in the workforce including things like flexible work schedules, statutory entitlement and auto-enrolment expansion.

    The TUC report was submitted to the Independent Review of State Pension Age and will be used to consider what will happen to the state pension after 2028.

  • Female airline employee wins sex discrimination case

    An airline employee recently won a sex discrimination case against her employers, after being denied flexible hours when returning from maternity leave.

    Emma Seville worked for Flybe airline as part of the cabin crew, for over a decade. Prior to going on maternity leave, she worked full time on a flexible schedule working any 22 days in a one-month period. After Seville gave birth to her son, she wanted to go back to work but requested a pre-arranged rota of 11 days each month. Seville asked for this special schedule because she was having difficulty finding nurseries or daycares for her child due to her unusual work situation. She felt that the updated schedule would remedy her issues. As an alternative, Seville also proposed job sharing. Both of these requests were denied by Flybe. Seville appealed the decision internally prior to taking her case to a tribunal. She claimed that the current arrangements for female cabin crew members were disadvantageous when compared to male counterparts.

    Flybe responded by saying the request for flexible hours was definitely considered but that the scheduling would cause problems. The company added that there were fixed rota systems in place and shifts could be swapped between employees.

    Seville won her legal claim for sex discrimination but lost the claim for flexible working hours. Human resource experts say the hearing is a fairly significant test case that could lead to flexible working schemes being adopted by female cabin-crew staff at other companies in the future. HR experts continue by explaining it will put all airlines on alert when it comes to making sure they are complying with principles laid down in this case to avoid any claims against them.

  • Fewer working mothers in employment than fathers

    After hearing about research that suggests mothers with young children are less likely to be in work than men with children the same age, the TUC felt compelled to call on employers to offer greater flexibility for working mothers.

    The TUC’s analysis of the Labour Force Survey Q2 2016 shows that on average, over 60 percent of mothers with children up to age four were in paid employment. While this number doesn’t appear too bad on its own, when you compare this to the 93 percent of fathers in paid employment with children of the same age, this number becomes far less impressive.

    The research goes on to suggest the age of a female’s youngest child influences whether or not she works at all. Regional differences in the data also support certain theories. Maternal employment rates are influenced by such things as the cost of childcare, transport and housing, and access to quality jobs around the area they live in. For example, in London, the West Midlands and Yorkshire less than 60 percent of mothers with pre-school children are in work. When mothers in Wales, the South West and Scotland are analysed, this number increases to 70 percent.

    HR experts suggest employers and the government need to do more for working mothers. Flexible scheduling is extremely important to working mothers and affordable childcare should be more attainable.

    While the TUC analysis paints a fairly grim picture of the percentage of mothers in the workforce, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) also released some data showing 66.5 percent of single parents were in work between April and June of this year. This is a 22.7 percent increase since 1996.

  • New advisory scheme, ‘At Retirement’, launches

    Capita Employee Benefits, Foster Denovo Limited, LV= and Towry have partnered up to offer guidance and financial advice to members who are rapidly approaching retirement.

    The service, coined At Retirement, was formed in response to the massive demand directly following the introduction of freedom and choice within pension schemes. The programme is being led by Rob Tinsley formerly of Aspire to Retire and is primarily targeting employers and trustees with defined contribution schemes.

    Pension freedoms give members more choice when it comes to at-retirement solutions. Unfortunately for employees and scheme holders, advice has been few and far between for the mass market. This lack of direction and help is the catalyst for ill-informed decisions concerning long-term financial wellbeing. HR experts also explain that while employees may know that hiring someone to advise them on their retirement is beneficial in the long-run, the short-term fee is a large deterrent.  Managing Director of retirement solutions at LV=, John Perks, said that nearly half a million people retire each year without taking any kind of advice.

    Human resource experts explain At Retirement lends employers the ability to offer advice services to their employees, ultimately helping protect their workers’ financial welfare well into retirement.

    The programme is divided into three different tiers of advice. The first runs through LV= and is called non-advised. This tier is for members who have an understanding of what retirement strategy they want. In many cases, these members will probably want some kind of annuity purchase.

    Tier number two is named robo-advice, also via LV=. This tier accommodates straightforward, medium sized savings and offers guidance in the form of telephone support from regulated advisors.

    Finally, tier three is full advice. This tier runs through Foster Denovo or Towry and features face-to-face or telephone based advice. This is reserved for scheme holders with larger sums with more complexity, or for those who do not want to take advantage of online services.

    The goal of At Retirement is really to help minimise risk and to help employers “demonstrate good governance” while offering “an enhanced retirement process” to employees. Human resource professionals also believe this kind of service will actually increase member engagement with their schemes.

  • The Employment Appeal Tribunal looks at the issue of ‘protected conversations’

    For the first time in EAT history, the Employment Appeal Tribunal looked at the issue of ‘protected conversations’ in Faithorn Farrell Timms v Bailey.

    Protected conversations were introduced in 2013 under section 111A of the Employment Rights Act. Human resource experts define these types of conversations as those that are intended to enable an employer and an employee to have confidential discussions about ending employment, where a dispute concerning the termination is nonexistent. In the event there is an existing dispute, the legal without prejudice rule might very well apply. In layman’s terms, this means that if there is an attempt to settle a dispute, these statements and discussions cannot be used as evidence in court.

    In Faithorn Farrell Timms v Bailey, a part-time secretary in a law firm claimed her employer made it abundantly clear in 2014 that she would no longer be able to work her part-time hours. To maintain her employment, she would have to transition to full time. Bailey did not want this and initiated settlement discussions with the firm under the protected conversation rule. In early 2015, without prejudice letters were sent by her solicitors which included proposals for a settlement. The employer’s letters in reply were not marked without prejudice.

    The settlement discussions proved unsuccessful and Bailey raised a grievance, referring to the contents of her without prejudice letters. The law firm didn’t ever question the inclusion of these letters and actually referred to them in the outcome of the grievance procedure.

    Bailey ended up resigning and claimed constructive dismissal and sexual discrimination.

    While Bailey’s employer never questioned whether any of the reported discussions and letters were admissible as evidence, this question did come up at the preliminary tribunal hearing. The employment tribunal decided the documentation pointing to the protected conversation and any without prejudice letters were not inadmissible. At this point, both parties appealed to the EAT.

    The EAT ruled that the protected conversation rule actually protected the content of the discussions, as well as the fact that these discussions ever took place. Furthermore, there wasn’t anything in the legislation that even permitted the employer and the employee to ‘waive’ this confidentiality.

    At first, the EAT found the discussions did not have to be disclosed to any third party thanks to the without prejudice rules. Unfortunately, the employer referencing contents of the communications and not objecting to Bailey doing the same, was enough to show the employer had by implication given up this privilege.

    HR experts feel that protected conversations have been used by employers time and time again, especially when the employer has concerns about employee performance and this particular case should be encouraging to employers since it shows that confidentiality does exist.

  • Nestle agrees terms to safeguard the company’s career average DB scheme

    A recent agreement between Nestle and GMB and Unite trade unions will cover over 7,000 United Kingdom employees and safeguard the future of the company’s career average defined benefit scheme.

    The primary points of the package include:

    • Career average defined benefit pension based on an 80th accrual for all existing members
    • A salary cap for defined benefit pensionable earnings of £45,000 (per the consumer price index)
    • Normal pension age linked to state age of retirement
    • Closure of the scheme to new Nestle employees from July 1st
    • Current Nestle employees who aren’t presently members of the defined benefit scheme get one last opportunity to join.

    Although the agreement is still subject to trustee approval, members of the trade unions GMB and Unite were thrilled to accept the package after negotiating for a whole year. The deal includes a two-year three percent pay increase for production workers for 2016 and 2017. This is to help lessen the impact of the increased contributions for employees.

    Many of the 7,600 employees affected work at the Nestle head office in Gatwick, while others work in York and Staverton amongst other areas. Nestle acknowledged that the package took quite some time to put together, but said they knew how important this would be to the lives of their employees and wanted to have ample comprehension on the situation.

     

  • Employers may be able to change the status of an employee on job-protected leave

    Human resource experts were asked to weigh in on an issue brought to light by a recent employment law case. What happens when an employee is out on job-protected leave and the company realizes business is fine without the duties this employee performs? Furthermore, what happens if the business realizes during this time that it may not be worth the 40-hour work week they pay for?

    Although federal employment law typically requires an employee be reinstated at the end of a medical leave, many organizations do not know they have options under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer actually has entitlement when it comes to changing an employee’s full-time status if it is discovered the duties did not require this kind of schedule.

    In Mendoza v. Roman Catholic Archbishop, No. 14-55651 the court had to review ADA claims filed by Alice Mendoza. She was a bookkeeper for the church and took 10 months of leave for a disability. During this time, the pastor took over her duties. He decided after performing her job duties that this job didn’t require a full-time employee. When Mendoza’s leave was over she returned to work only find that her full-time position had been changed to a part-time position. At this point Mendoza declined the position and filed suit.

    The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted summary judgement to the employer because Mendoza was unable to dispute the church’s legit and nondiscriminatory reason for reducing her hours. Mendoza appealed but the 9th Circuit upheld the lower court’s ruling.

    HR experts are urging companies, however, to note that this decision might only actually apply when the ADA is implicated without the Family and Medical Leave Act. When FMLA is involved, things typically play out much differently.

  • Deficit of DB pension schemes increased by £20 billion in less than a month

    Mercer’s Pensions Risk Survey data shows the accounting deficit of defined benefit pension schemes for the UK’s 350 largest listed companies increased by £20 billion in less than one month.

    At the end of last month, asset values showed a £23 billion increase when compared to the end of June, whilst liability values also showed a fairly sizeable increase. Human resource experts said that pension liabilities have reached an all-time high when analysing Mercer monthly deficit data.

    One senior partner in Mercer’s Retirement business said the continued fall in high quality corporate bond yields meant an increase in liability values.

    HR experts also explain that the vote for Brexit is obviously playing a factor. Depending on a person’s investment strategy and the nature of a sponsor’s business, some people will be more affected than others.

    It is recommended that pension holders work through a series of scenarios and situations that might happen. These can be ranked in order of likelihood, which will then help identify threats and opportunities.

    The Mercer data relates to about half of the all UK scheme liabilities. The survey’s underlying data is refreshed as companies report their year-end accounts. It is also important to note, data released by the Pensions Regulator tells a very similar story to the Mercer data.

  • Older workforce doubles since 2004

    The Department for Work & Pensions recently released data that shows over one million people 65-years-old and up were employed in the UK last year, approximately double the figure from 2004.

    The data shows that more than one in 10 of those people were working full or part time last year. These government stats also revealed 69% of those aged 50-64 were in work, the highest number on record. This news comes just four years after the abolition of the default retirement age.

    Human resource experts have been chiming in singing the praises of age diversity in the workplace. There is research that actually proves this kind of diversity increases productivity.

    Of course a mixed workforce poses different issues for management and business owners. HR experts suggest management and authorities be trained on recognising generational differences. When you have five different generations working together at the same time, differences and conflict are bound to present themselves.

    Former pensions minister Baroness Altmann reacted to these figures saying it is a “social revolution”. On the flip side, Age UK is afraid that this might not be such a positive thing. There is fear that many people are delaying retirement because they cannot afford to do so.

    Whilst there is no support for these statements, the government has said that it is committed to supporting older workers.

  • Increasing number of companies opting to self-insure health plans

    An increased number of small to midsize companies are opting to self-insure their employee health plans, partly to avoid the coverage mandates and costs imposed by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

    Of course, there isn’t data that conclusively demonstrates the ACA is the sole reason for the shift, but findings do support it is a big driver. Employer-sponsored health plans are categorized into two different groups – fully insured plans and self-insured plans.

    Fully insured plans mean employers pay premiums to an insurance company, which in turn pays health care providers for enrollees’ claims based on the outlined benefits in the plan.

    Self-insured plans mean employers keep the plan premiums and pay the actual cost of the claims. An insurance company is contracted to process claims and provide admin services. Employers who opt for this type of insurance typically purchase a separate stop-loss policy from an insurance company to help cover very large claims.

    Between 1996 and 2015 the percentage of United States private sector employers offering at least one self-insurance health plan massively increased to 39%.

    Overall, HR experts explain that when it comes to self-insurance many companies will save money most of the time, but lose money in scattered years when some employees suffer any kind of major illness. Some companies will find this type of self-insurance advantageous in the long run, but not all.

  • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission proposes moving survey deadline

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have proposed to move the deadline for employers to submit the EEO-1 survey from September 2017 to March 2018, as part of a new proposal to collect pay data via the Employer Information Report (EEO-1).

    As per the EEOC’s announcement, employers will have until August 15, 2016 to submit any written comments on the revised proposal, which should simplify reporting.  The change will allow employers to use existing W-2 pay reports, which are calculated based on calendar year.

    On January 29, an EEOC announcement revealed the agency was proposing to use the EEO-1 survey in order to collect summary pay data from employers with 100+ employees, including federal contractors.  The due date switch came about as a result of comments the agency received after the announcement.

    The EEOC and the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs want to collect pay data to help in the fight against pay discrimination.  Currently the EEO-1 survey requires employers to provide demographic data, but the revision would require employers to report on other things like hours worked and pay ranges.  

  • Majority of post recession jobs in the US go to the college educated

    Research from Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce revealed out of 11.6 million jobs created in the post-recession economy, 11.5 million went to workers with at least some college education.

    The report titled, “America’s Divided Recovery: College Have and Have Nots” revealed half of the jobs went to workers who held a bachelor’s degree or higher. Director of the Georgetown Center and lead author of the report explained that today’s society continues to “leave Americans without a college education behind.” He goes on to explain that over the course of the last few decades this split between the educated and non-educated has continued to grow.

    This year, for the very first time, workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher are a larger proportion of the workforce than those with a high school diploma or less. HR experts explain that major drivers of change in the labor market are occupational and industry shifts. Production industries do not employ as many workers as they once did. On the flip side, healthcare, business and government services are accounting for a higher proportion of the workforce than ever before.

    While it seems we have officially recovered from the recession and jobs are steadily coming back, not all new jobs are replacing jobs that were once lost. Many jobs that were lost during the recession included blue collar and clerical jobs, but human resource experts are reporting a surge of managerial and professional jobs. This further proves the change in the American workforce.

  • Case study – sexual discrimination case

    The EEOC have determined that Pallet Companies, doing business as IFCO Systems, should pay just over $200,000 to settle a case involving a gay employee at one of IFCO’s Baltimore facilities.

    The employee, who will also be provided with other relief settlements, claimed she was repeatedly harassed by her supervisor due to her sexual orientation. According to the suit, her supervisor made numerous comments to her about her sexual orientation and appearance.

    The EEOC charged that the supervisor did in fact make sexually suggestive gestures. IFCO retaliated against the female employee by firing her mere days after her official complaint was filed with upper management. She also placed a call into the employee hotline to report the harassment around this time.

    At this point, the EEOC filed suit against IFCO in the US Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division.

    In addition to the monetary payout, IFCO will have to:

    • Retain an expert on sexual orientation, gender identity and transgender training to assist in developing a training program for management and employees;
    • Redistribute equal employment opportunity policies to all employees in its north region;
    • Give a letter of reference to all female employees;
    • Post a notice about the settlement and report to EEOC on its compliance with the decree.
  • Pension transfer values reach new highs since vote to leave

    Pension transfer values have reached a new set of highs since the vote to leave the EU, per the Xafinity Transfer Value Index.

    At the end of last month the Xafinity Transfer Index was at £223,000, the highest reading of the index since 2015. This Xafinity Transfer Index tracks the transfer value that would be given by an example DB scheme to a 64-year-old member who is entitled to a £10,000 a year pension starting at age 65.

    This recorded increase in transfer values has been largely attributed to significant reductions in gilt yields since the votes were announced.

    One representative of Xafinity said that while the reductions in gilt yields are good for members looking to take a transfer value of their defined benefits, it’s not necessarily great news for pensions themselves. Most schemes will see their deficits increase at least slightly.

  • Huge percentage expect to work part-time once retired

    Old Mutual Wealth conducted a survey of over 1,600 United Kingdom adults undertaken by YouGov.  It found that 30% of people not retired expected to work part-time to fund their retirement needs once they reached retirement age.

    This figure, which takes into account adults between the ages of 50 and 75, is higher than last year by four percent.  When existing retirees were examined, the number of people currently working part-time to supplement other sources of retirement income is much lower.  Part-time work is valuable for both current and future retirees, since both groups of people expect to secure 30% of their total retirement income from employment income.

    The survey also revealed that over half of the respondents suggested one reason they will work part-time into retirement is to make ends meet.  Others cited social reason for their choice.

    One human resource expert explained that many of the certainties that once existed are no longer.  There are many decisions people have to make on their own in order to structure their retirement the way they want it.  In some cases, this planning fails in execution.

    HR experts are urging those approaching retirement and even those who are not but who qualify, to take advantage of free government services like Pension Wise.

  • Volatility a massive issue for defined benefit schemes

    Hymans Robertson have reported that the UK DB pension deficit reached £850bn, a £120bn increase over a six-week period.  Shortly thereafter, this number bounced back proving volatility is a massive issue for defined benefit schemes. 

    Jon Hatchett, partner and head of corporate consulting at Hymans Robertson said when the figures were reviewed the numbers were jarring.  Uncertainty over Brexit “led to falls in growth asset prices.” 

    HR experts say pension deficits are hitting organisations particularly hard.  Most major companies are large enough to support schemes, but high profile cases have helped shine the spotlight on the potential and very real risks that come along with schemes. 

    This is not the first spurt of volatility DB pensions have seen this year.  Last February the collective UK DB deficit hit its highest level followed by another swing of more than £100bn in a six-week period.

    Some human resource experts don’t feel that schemes need to be so volatile.  There are many schemes that take too much growth risk on with too little protection.  Many people also invest without a clear disinvestment plan, which can exacerbate market volatility.

    Although it is a natural emotion for scheme holders to be worried and nervous, employment law experts urge people not to make knee jerk decisions based on current conditions that will pass.  DB schemes are long-term and it would make sense to have contingency plans in place to help during these rough waters.

    While Brexit has already had an effect on pension funds, there is extreme uncertainty surrounding what kinds of challenges will present themselves for pension funds following this monumental event.

  • Supermarket giant fails to stop equal pay claim

    Asda has failed to stop an employment tribunal brought by over 7,000 of the supermarket giant’s former and current workers over equal pay.

    The claimants are arguing that their roles are comparable to the organisation’s warehouse roles, which are generally held by males who earn better pay.  According to the claimants who are primarily women, employees in the warehouse earn up to £4 an hour more than shop-floor workers. The law firm representing the workers, Leigh Day, claims this pay discrepancy is a clear result of gender bias.

    Asda, of course, refuted the claims saying discrimination does not exist and requested to have the tribunal proceeding stayed indefinitely.  If this were to occur, the case would have had to have been taken to the High Court by the employees.  The stay was rejected.

    The Court of Appeal judged felt the case was “highly exceptional”, and that an employment tribunal would be better suited to deal with this case.

    Some human resource experts and employment law experts are describing this case as the “most complex and financially significant equal pay claim to be pursued in the private sector.”  

  • Over 50’s predicted to be the largest group in employment by 2024

    One insurance firm have predicted that workers aged 50 years and over will become the largest group in employment by 2024, as per new data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

    The ONS found that approximately 10 million workers aged 50+ are now in employment in the United Kingdom, representing one in three employees.  The data reveals that the overall proportion of “older” workers in the workforce has dramatically increased since the 1990’s.  If trends continue, human resource experts are confident this age group will eventually dominate the workforce.

    PwC also released some research that estimated the UK could add almost six percent to its GDP if employment rates of this age group matched the highest-performing EU country. 

    What does this all mean for employers, though?  HR professionals explain that employers will need to adapt their rules to these older workers.  Companies may want to adopt flexible working policies, or consider redesigning offices and factories to suit older workers.

    Age diversity should also be considered.  Employers should start opening up apprenticeships to this age group as opposed to targeting college students and millennials.  This is the time to capitalise on the experience that younger people just don’t have.

    Businesses seem to believe that the future of their workforce lies in the millennial but this may not actually be the reality of the situation. 

  • ‘Right to return’ period called for to slow unemployment for the disabled

    A new report aimed at improving the unemployment rate of people with disabilities, says workers with long-term health conditions should have the same right as new mothers to return to their employer within one year.

    The Resolution Foundation completed a study and is calling for a 12-month ‘right to return’ period from the beginning of absence, to help slow the unemployment rate for disabled employees.  The report showed that just over two percent of disabled people who were out of work for more than a year went back into employment every quarter.  The report is calling on the government to pursue a “damage prevention” approach that will have a primary focus on keeping people in jobs.

    The report explains that communication between an employer and an employee in this kind of situation could work very similar to maternity leave.  Ultimately, dismissals on sickness ground would not be allowed within the year, unless there are certain circumstances.  The Resolution Foundation also proposes that firms could be offered a rebate on statutory sick pay costs when a staff member comes back to work after long-term sick leave.

    Currently, employers have a duty to avoid any kind of direct or indirect discrimination against disabled people, as well as other minorities.  Businesses have a duty to also make ‘reasonable adjustments’ for disabled employees.

    Resolution Foundation reported that almost half of disabled people were currently in jobs, compared to 80% of non-disabled people.  Closing this gap even just half way would mean a 1.5 million increase in the number of disabled people in the workforce.

  • Survey reveals medical insurers estimate healthcare benefits costs to increase

    Willis Towers Watson is reporting that the cost of employee healthcare benefits around the world is trending higher, mostly driven by increased costs of hospital and inpatient services, different technology and overuse of services.

    Willis Towers Watson completed a survey called The Willis Towers Watson Global Medical Trends Survey, between October 2015 and November 2015.  The results reflect the responses from 174 medical insurers from 55 different countries from all over the globe.  Many of the participants have at least a 10% share of the group medical insurance market in their respective country.

    The results revealed medical insurers are estimating the cost of healthcare benefits to increase by almost 10% this year.  Insurers in certain areas, like America and Africa, are projecting double-digit average increases for the third year in a row.  European regions, however, continue to show the lowest level of increase. 

    Human resource experts feel that medical costs will continue to rise as long as hospital and inpatient service prices continue to increase.  When it comes to the most significant cost drivers outside of employer or vendor control, more than 50% of respondents cited the extreme costs of medical technology, with providers’ profit motives as a close second.

  • Survey shows almost 30% of employees work through their lunch break

    The National Charity Partnership recently conducted a survey of 1,700 workers to determine what employees are actually doing with their time during lunch.

    The survey found that almost 30% of employees work through their typical lunch break, while almost 50% of respondents said they spend their lunch break on the Internet.  Following this data, human resource experts are urging employers to encourage their employees to take proper lunch breaks since unbroken days in an office could affect an employee’s mental and physical wellbeing. 

    Potentially the biggest question among human resource professionals is why employees are choosing to stay inside during lunch.  More than 30% of the workers polled said they simply had too much work to do, one in eight blamed stress levels and workplace culture.

    When gender was analysed, women were found to spend their breaks inside more often than men.  Employees older than 24 were also twice as likely to work through lunch when compared to 18 to 24-year-olds.

    Those who did take lunch breaks, however, said that going outside made them feel happier and more positive.  One human resource expert said that managers and staff all have the responsibility of making sure everyone takes regular breaks throughout the day.  Employers need to work on creating an environment where people feel comfortable leaving the office for lunch.  Encouraging healthy activities may also benefit an organisation.  If workers are happier when they are able to take breaks and go outside, they will often times be more productive once they’re back in the office.

  • Can a religious dresscode ban be discriminatory?

    A lawyer of the European Court of Justice ruled it is acceptable for an organisation to prevent Muslim female employees from wearing religious headscarves, as long as all religious and political symbols are banned across the entire organisation.

    This type of ban would not be considered “direct discrimination” and could be “justified in order to enforce a policy of religious and ideological neutrality,” according to the non-binding decision.

    This particular case follows Samira Achbita, a secretary who worked for G4S.  Achbita was dismissed in 2006 after she refused to remove her religious headscarf.  Although at the time of the dismissal this rule was unwritten, the company claimed her refusal to remove the headscarf violated their dress code. 

    The day after Achbita’s dismissal, G4S updated its code of conduct to ban “any visible signs of their political, philosophical or religious beliefs.”  Achbita sued the Belgian division of the company with the support of the Infederal Organisation for Equal Opportunities.  Achbita claimed she was discriminated against on religious grounds.

    A G4S spokesperson said that all the company was trying to accomplish by implementing such dress code rules was to create an inclusive environment where people felt comfortable.

    Achbita v G4S won’t see a final resolution or ruling until later this year, but it is sure to be a landmark human resources decision.

  • EAT helps clarify whether overtime should be included in holiday pay

    Numerous employment tribunal cases have challenged the widely accepted and longstanding idea that employees with regular working hours should not have variable payments included in any holiday pay calculations.  In Bear Scotland v Fulton, the EAT was given the daunting task of hearing the evidence, to make a final decision on the subject.  The EAT confirmed in this case that non-guaranteed overtime should be included in holiday pay, but did not provide any ruling that could apply to voluntary overtime.  White v Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council helped provide some clarity on this pressing issue.

    Voluntary overtime is best defined as work an employee can technically refuse and work the employer isn’t obligated to offer.  Non-guaranteed overtime is work the employer does not have to provide but employees are obligated to work if required.

    White v Dudley (2016) was based around 56 employees who were working on repairing and maintaining the local authority’s social housing.  These employees had the option of working additional time on Saturdays, but could also choose to go on standby every four weeks to deal with emergency callouts and repairs.  When it came to pay, the local authority calculated their holiday pay based on their basic pay alone.  Were these hours being worked during on-call rotation and voluntary overtime considered ‘normal pay’?  It turns out, yes.  The employment judge ended up ruling that since the hours worked became part of the normal workweek, it should be reflected in their holiday pay based on time period and regularity.

    Whilst a ruling was made here and while there is a little bit more clarity surrounding this issue, human resource experts are urging the court to determine what can be considered “regular” since it would factor into “normal pay”.  In this particular case, working Saturdays or working on-call was easily proven to a regular occurrence.  In other cases, however, it may not be as black and white.

    HR experts feel that after this landmark win employees will feel liberated and be more prone to challenging their organisations.   The problem is that regularity has yet to be defined.  Additionally, human resource professionals feel as though a blanket rule cannot even be applied to determine regularity, since each business in each sector operates differently. 

    The possibility of an appeal is still imminent and employers are all waiting with bated breath to see how this will truly pan out.  In the meantime, clarity from the EAT certainly wouldn’t hurt as it will be hard for businesses to protect themselves if there isn’t a clear understanding of the rules.

  • The Annual Fraud Indicator finds billions are being lost to fraud

    The Annual Fraud Indicator 2016 found that businesses in the private sector are losing billions a year through fraud, with £12bn being lost through payroll fraud and even more being lost through procurement fraud.

    The report was conducted by the UK Fraud Costs Measurement Committee in conjunction with Experian, PKF Littlejohn and the University of Portsmouth’s Centre for Counter Fraud Studies.  The report found that the annual total cost of fraud in the United Kingdom is as high as £193bn per year.  Payroll fraud was found to be responsible for just below 10% of all losses in private businesses, but the largest source of loss was related to procurement.

    Human resource departments play a pivotal role in combating fraud.  It is a human resource department’s duty to educate employees on acceptable behaviour and spot potential scams.  If this department isn’t the first line of defence, human resource experts feel nobody else will step up to the plate.

    Businesses generally split fraud into two camps, low-level fraud and high-level fraud.  Low-level fraud has minimal affect on a business.  This could be an employee adding a few extra miles onto an expense report.  High-level fraud occurs on a much larger scale and has more intense affects on the overall business. 

    Of course every business is susceptible to fraud.  Payroll fraud is a regular occurrence in businesses with employees trying to trick the time clock to get paid more for less hours worked. 

    HR experts suggest implementing some kind of audit system for employees and for the systems they use.  It’s important for a business owner, or person in charge, to understand who is responsible for what within a business.  Audits should look for things that are out of place like duplicate bank transfers, or duplicate employee numbers.

    When it comes to procurement audits, management should look at all costs listed on an invoice and make sure to keep track of any completed work.  In this line of fraud, scammers are banking on employees not keeping track of work that’s been completed, work that’s been paid for or work that just never existed. 

    HR professionals suggest the strongest way to avoid being a victim of fraud is to make sure procedures are in place.

  • RAF’s Airbus A330 refuelling tanker will soon gain F-35 certification

    The Voyager, which is a modified version of the A330-220 airliner designated KC-30, has performed five out of 20 planned test flights and the final test to achieve F-35 tanking certification should be completed by mid-June this year.

    The Voyager has a maximum fuel capacity of 111t and will be a vital asset when it comes to the future RAF and Royal Navy short takeoff vertical landing F-35B operations from RAF Marham.  Refuelling is also extremely important since it is a necessary step on the path to the 617 Sqn declaring initial operational capability in just a few years.

    The United Kingdom currently has just under 20 personnel assigned to the Lighting II development team at NAS Patuxent River.  Most of these personnel will take part in the third and final F-35B sea trial aboard a Marine Corps Wasp-class assault ship later in the year. 

    The Royal Australian Air Force has its own version of the Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT).  It completed its F-35A refueling trials in California late last year.  An Italian Air Force KC-767A was actually the first tanker not owned and operated by the United States military to receive the F-35 certification.  

  • Increase in employees who work from home

    Over the past decade the number of employees who say they typically work from home has increased by almost one fifth, finally passing the 1.5 million mark.

    Research conducted from the TUC found that 1.52 million employees categorised themselves as working from home last year and millions are expected to follow this trend.  To no HR expert’s surprise, IT, agriculture and construction were the most frequently cited industries with the highest penetration of home workers residing in the south west and the east of London.             

    Flexible working and flexible working hours have been at the forefront of human resource discussion for quite some time now.  However, whilst there is evidence of increasing acceptance for flexible working practices, the TUC suggests that the take-up of working from home could actually be tapering down.  Ultimately, many companies have trust issues with their employees.  They don’t trust them to be as productive when they work from home without management supervision.

    The TUC also reported that the biggest growth in home working has actually been seen amongst women.  This does make sense.  The ONS reported that since the retirement age for women has been pushed up over recent years, many female workers who would have probably retired have remained in the workforce. Furthermore, the employment rate for women reached its highest since comparable records began in 1971.  Overall, the number of employed people has reached a record high.

  • Rise in employers use social networking to research potential employees

    IT and marketing employees aren’t the only workers browsing social media during the workday in the office.  CareerBuilder reported that approximately 60 percent of employers use social networking sites to research potential employees.  This is about 50% higher than last year.

    CareerBuilder has performed its social media recruitment survey every year since 2006.  The survey was conducted by Harris Poll from February 10 – March 17 and included representative samples of over 2,000 hiring managers and HR professionals, and over 3,000 full time United States workers in the private sector.  The survey included people from all industries and all company sizes.

    Social media allows HR experts and human resource managers to gauge what a candidate is really like outside of what’s on paper.  Hiring managers in IT and sales proved to be the most likely to screen candidates using social media as a tool.  Professional and business services were least likely, according to the survey results.

    These hiring managers aren’t always looking for something negative either.  Some managers admit that they are looking for anything that supports their qualifications for the job, while others say they want to see what other people are commenting about the candidate online.

    Keeping social media profiles private might also hurt in the long run.  About 41% of employers say they’re less likely to interview candidates if they’re unable to find any info about the person online.  In that case, it’s important to carefully screen what goes live on a profile page.  Human resource experts urge employees and potential employees to steer away from things like inappropriate content, anything that suggests drug use, and anything that might suggest ill will towards a previous employer.

  • Claimant argues for entitlement to DB pension plan because of verbal agreement

    In the case Prometric v Cunliffe, the claimant argued that he was entitled to membership of a DB pension plan, instead of his employer’s DC scheme, because of an alleged promise made to him a by a group director 16 years previously. 

    Cunliffe was a senior human resources executive who joined a company called Sylvan Prometric in 1999.  When he was appointed, his letter clearly stated that he could join the DC pension scheme, which he ended up doing in 2000.  In 2001, the company was taken over and Cunliffe joined the new owner’s DB pension scheme.  According to Cunliffe, a conversation between him and the new company’s international human resources director occurred where he was told that his senior position entitled him to benefits offered to all the company’s directors and senior staff.  This included the DB pension scheme.

    Approximately six years later, the company was sold yet again and Cunliffe had to move back to the original Prometric’s DC scheme.  Cunliffe’s argument was that the conversation he had with the international HR director back in 2000 was contractual and he was entitled to be part of a DB scheme.  Prometric accepted the conversation had taken place but was not at all willing to acknowledge there was any kind of contractual effect, since there was no documentation.  Cunliffe, who clearly was not playing around, began legal proceedings at this point.

    The High Court refused the employers request for the court to strike out the claim on the basis it had no reasonable prospect of success.  It was clear that Cunliffe, at this point, had an arguable case where a conversation could have amounted to an official agreement.  What that agreement was would have to be figured out at the trial.

    However, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision and agreed with the employer and the claim was struck out.  The court felt that a conversation held between two HR executives would have been documented.  The claimant, as a matter of fact, had never requested or received documentation.  Furthermore, the court felt that the fact he was treated as a member of the DB scheme when Prometric was taken over wasn’t any kind of evidence that suggested a binding agreement but rather a discretionary arrangement.

    This case stresses the importance of clear and written forms of documentation.  It also stresses the important of education on the employees behalf, who should always know what their options are and what choices they have.

  • CIPD reports number of new job seekers reaches a two-and-a-half year high

    The CIPD is reporting the number of employees who are looking for a new job reached a two-and-a-half year high. Additionally, job satisfaction has reached the lowest level since 2013.

    The CIPD/Halogen Employee Outlook surveyed over 2,000 people, finding that approximately one quarter of employees are seeking a new job. This number is 20% higher than last year.   When the survey inquired about job satisfaction, the data revealed a substantial decrease from last autumn. Last year, the net score was +48 and this year the net score is +40. There wasn’t much discrimination by industry, either. Job satisfaction seemingly fell in all areas of the economy, though the private sector fared the worst.

    One of the research advisers for resourcing and talent planning at the CIPD said that while the current state of economic uncertainty is clearly fueling this issue, many employees complained about lack of career progression opportunities and the lack of developmental training. These are two areas that human resource experts have been urging organisations to focus on, for the sake of their staff.

    Also very telling about the survey was the fact that there was an increase in employees who believe they are over-qualified for their position. Women and part-time workers seemed to express this feeling the most. Additionally, one fifth of surveyed employees felt their organisation’s approach to performance management was “somewhere unfair” or “very unfair”.

    On the flip side of all of these complaints, however, the research found that overall, employees were happy with their line managers. This is a big win for employers.

    Human resource experts are still adamant that employers really need to focus on development and position progression to keep their talent satisfied. The survey proved that workplace stresses are not what are causing this increase in employees looking for new jobs. One HR expert believes that it could potentially be linked to a lack of appreciation in the workplace. Doing little things like providing a developmental plan and training courses for employees who are motivated to learn, can go a very long way.

  • Director General of the CBI calls for a “radical rethink” of the apprenticeship levy

    The Director General of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), Carolyn Fairbairn, is shaking things up after calling for a “radical rethink” of the government’s flagship apprenticeship levy. She is warning officials that the fundamental flaws of the new levy will drive the “wrong outcomes” and encourage “rogue employer behaviour”.

    Fairbairn spoke to a group of business leaders recently to further expand on her statements. She said employers would be encouraged to “rebadge their existing programmes” and even go as far as abandoning “much training that’s already working” in order to meet costs and required specs outlined by the new levy guidelines.

    The new levy will become effective next April at an initial rate of 0.5 percent of the employer’s total payroll. The percentage will apply to firms with salary costs higher than £3 million. In 2018, however, all other organisations looking to run an apprenticeship programme will have to use the government’s Digital Apprenticeship Service.

    The government did release an initial set of guidelines with a simple framework of how the levy will work, but promised more clarity come summer. Fairbairn emphatically believes firms still lack crucial information about the levy and are handicapped by the unfair and unrealistic lead-in time to prepare.

    Fairbairn said:

    "Firms across the UK are emphatic that tackling skills shortages is the only way to succeed and create prosperity. They want to create quality apprenticeships and they’re ready to work with the Government to do this. But as it stands, that’s not what the levy is doing.

    Today, firms are having to treat the levy as a tax, because the headline cost is all they’re certain of. Businesses of all sectors and sizes are still in the dark – cutting corners isn’t in anyone’s interest."

    Fairbairn is urging the government to rethink the new levy before an employer-wide chaos occurs.

  • Lawsuit against union filed in 1971, finally resolved

    A labor union and its apprenticeship program are finally paying up after a ruling was made in a decades long case.

    Local 25 of the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association and its associated apprenticeship school settled race discrimination claims made by the EEOC to the tune of $1.65 million with “substantial remedial relief.”   The first suit was actually filed in 1971.

    The decades-old lawsuit addresses allegations that Local 25 in conjunction with Local 25 Joint Apprenticeship Committee, discriminated against black and Hispanic journeypersons during their hiring and assignment processes. Local 25 is the trade union for sheet metal journeypersons in northern New Jersey.

    The lawsuit was originally filed in 1971 by the US Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, but the EEOC took over as prosecuting council in 1974. Originally, according to human resource experts, the case was filed against Local 25’s predecessors. In 1981, Local 10 merged with other unions into Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Works’ International Association and the Local 28 JAC of Northern New Jersey. Local 25 demerged from Local 28 in 1991.

    The settlement only covers violations that occurred from April 1991 through December 2002. When an analysis was conducted of hours and wages it became increasingly clear that African- American and Hispanic workers received fewer hours than their white co-workers for a majority of the 10-year period. HR experts say that prior court actions in the lawsuit were able to resolve violations that happened before April 1991 and that although there has been a settlement, the case will surely continue.

    In addition to the $1.65 million in damages that will be paid out to victims of discrimination, Local 25 actually agreed to an injunction against discrimination on the basis of race and national origin with regard to different human resource processes including termination and hiring.

  • Minnesota Supreme Court Allows More Time For Whistleblower Claims

    The Minnesota Whistleblower Act (MWA), was set in place in order to help protect employees who engage in a wide range of “whistleblowing” like reporting illegal activity, refusing to engage in illegal activity or aiding with government investigations.

    The MWA helps employees by prohibiting an employer from retaliating against an employee through discharging, disciplining or penalizing for an act that appears to be whistleblowing. In a recent case, the Minnesota Supreme Court extended the MWA’s 4-year statute of limitations by an additional four years.

    In November 2006 Yvette Ford began work for Minneapolis Public Schools, (MPS), in the English Language Learners department. According to Ford, during her time with MPS she made multiple reports about unethical and illegal activities occurring in this department.

    About two years into her employment, Ford was informed that her full-time position would no longer be available at the end of the fiscal year. Ford said that the day before her last working day she made additional reports to the MPS about financial misconduct, disability discrimination and retaliation.

    On June 29, 2010 Ford brought suit against MPS claiming her termination was in retaliation for the reports of all the wrongdoing she witnessed. This, if ruled in her favor, would be considered a clear violation of the MWA. Initially, the District Court dismissed her claims because of the two-year statute of limitations. Ford would have had to file the suit by April 2010 for her suit to be heard. Ford immediately appealed.

    The Minnesota Supreme Court completely disagreed with the lower court on appeal and claimed the statute of limitations is actually 6 years – not two. It said that the two-year statute of limitations applies to common-law claims, but the longer statute of limitations exists for liability created by statute.

    The court ultimately held that Ford’s claim only exists because the MWA created it. In this case, the six-year statute of limitations does in fact apply.

    Human resource explains this case could easily stir up some confusion because of all of the different circumstances that applied. Since it is now abundantly clear that the statute of limitations can clearly extend far beyond two years, HR experts say human resource departments should consider keeping paperwork just a little longer to be on the safe side.

  • Increase in unemployment a result of global economic uncertainty

    Human resource and employment experts said official figures reveal a reduction in wage growth with an increase in unemployment in the UK as a result of the uncertainty in the global economy.

    The April UK Labour Market report from the Office of National Statistics (ONS), shows an increase in unemployment of 21,000. This is compared to the previous three-month period between September and November (2015).

    Employment law experts predict that these figures are an indicator that employers are currently being affected (or planning to be) by a “series of costs” extended by the government. These costs include the National Living Wage (NLW), pensions auto-enrolment and the apprenticeship levy that’s upcoming.

    The data also showed the employment rate was holding at 74.1%, or the joint highest level since records began in 1971. While wages are still growing, the rate at which wages are increased has definitely slowed. Human resource experts explain that these changes can be a sign of a slowing economy. Companies are trying to be smart, and conserve. When trying to conserve for most businesses, the first place to save is typically employee pay.

    One report produced by Begbies Traynor monitors the health of companies in the United Kingdom and how they are affected financially. The most recent results showed that 60,000 businesses in industries most affected by the NLW were already in a wave of financial distress at the beginning of the year.

    The mindset in HR departments has seemingly shifted as well. As opposed to looking for places to bring in new hires and find ways to train up, the thought process now seems to be trying to consider ways to keep current workforces motivated. A more productive and happy set of people doesn’t cost the company anything.

    HR experts follow up explaining the ONS stats were “pretty modest,” since they still outstripped inflation. It only makes sense that companies now would be more cautious about giving raises and bonuses.

    Finally, the ONS figures also found that for the three months to February over 100,000 people had been made redundant. While this was unchanged when compared to the previous year, it was 10,000 more than the previous three months that were examined.

     

  • Disability discrimination case

    RockTenn Company and RockTenn Services, Inc. will be forced to pay $187,500 to settle a disability discrimination suit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of a former HR manager.

    The Michigan paper and packing manufacturer violated federal law by failing to accommodate the disability of Glenn Janisch. During a pre-authorized short term disability leave, due to his severe coronary artery disease, Janisch was informed that he was terminated.

    According to the EEOC, Janisch started working for RockTenn at the end of 2010 as the Human Resources Manager for the Battle Creek plant. Janisch had open-heart coronary bypass surgery in January 2011 and was authorized for short term disability leave through mid-April 2011.

    In early March, however, Janisch received great news from his doctor that he was cleared to return to work, initially for half days. He quickly notified RockTenn that he would be returning to work on March 21. On March 10, RockTenn terminated Janisch.

    In addition to the $187,500 awarded, the settlement prohibits RockTenn from any such discrimination in the future and is required to post a notice about the lawsuit and employee rights under the ADA. RockTenn will also have to train their Human Resource Managers and the Battle Creek Plant Location Managers on disability discrimination.

    Human resource experts urge employers to take the time to understand employment law. In this particular case, the law is extremely clear – medical leave of absence is a reasonable accommodation under suitable circumstances.   A lack of federal law understanding cost this company far more than just an employee.

  • Research shows one in four expect to work past the age of 65

    Research presented by Canada Life Group Insurance shows that approximately one in four (7.2 million) United Kingdom workers say they expect to work past the age of 65 due to low interest rates. 

    Since the 0.5% Bank of England interest rate was introduced seven years ago, over 20% of UK employees say they have seen their retirement plans negatively affected. This figure includes a group of workers who had no intention of working past the age of 65, but now feel as though they don’t have any other option.         

    Human resource experts cite the rising State Pensions Age and the abolition of the default retirement age as driving the increase of UK employees who will work beyond the traditional retirement age.        

    These HR experts explain that younger generations will really feel the changes. Eighty-five percent of people between the ages of 21 and 30 believe they’ll have to work well beyond the age of 65. 

    Of course when asked why they will choose to work past the age of 65, most people cited financial pressures. Over 40% of those researched claimed their pension pot simply just wasn’t sufficient enough to enter into retirement. Surprisingly, though, another reason was just mere enjoyment of the job. Almost 40% said they didn’t want to leave their job because they would miss it in retirement.

    Reforms announced a few years ago put retirement planning on the radar for many people who just weren’t thinking about it. Since reviewing their savings after the freedoms were announced, many employees realized they will have to work for a longer period than initially expected.       

    Additionally, multiple years of having poor interest rates seems to be having a lasting impact on today’s generation who are struggling with insufficient pension contributions.   

    With all of this said, employers are being urged to take into consideration this older employee set. They will soon be faced with a larger number of health issues that will have to be factored in and older workers are more likely to experience injury and illness. Flexible working and workplace wellbeing initiatives will start to prove invaluable.

  • Trade union GMB calls for an investigation of British Airways

    Trade union GMB is calling for an investigation of British Airways, after a plan came to light of the airline’s intention to outsource up to 900 IT jobs to an Indian contractor. The union claims this could be a potential breach of immigration rules.

    If the plan were to move forward GMB said that these IT roles at the airline would be made redundant prior to the transition to Tata Consultancy Services (TCS).

    The new IT workers would return to the United Kingdom under an intra-company transfer and earn £10,000 per year with £8,400 in expenses. Home Office rules currently require a minimum yearly wage of £24,800 for foreign workers under the Tier 2 visa.

    GMB represents a large number of British Airways employees and first questioned the airline’s plans by writing to the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) and the Home Office in December 2015. As it stands, under current Tier 2 visa rules, a non-EU worker cannot replace a permanent United Kingdom employee and cannot be sponsored to undertake an ongoing routine role. Foreign workers can only be used during a time-restricted service or project.

    This intervention actually follows research from the MAC in January when it reported the misuse of Tier 2 visas. The research revealed that Tier 2 visas allowed IT suppliers with UK operations to hire staffs from overseas, cutting IT costs but not actually contributing to the stock of IT skills within the UK.

    The GMB national officer said he believes there was “no way” this many workers could be classed as contractors working on a specific project. If the plan commences, non-EU workers on Tier 2 visas will be performing the same job functions as current full-time staff, just at half the cost for the airline.

    British Airways has responded saying, “IT services are now provided globally by a range of suppliers and this is very common practice across all industries”.

               

     

  • State Pension changes

    Starting earlier this month, any person reaching state pension age will be part of the new state pension.

    The new state pension is designed to be easier for pension holders and will allow people to easily plan their private or workplace pension savings.  Additionally, the new pension will help get rid of social inequalities allowing women, lower earners and the self-employed to benefit just like others.

    Due to the changes, millions of women will receive an average of £11 more per week by 2030.  Research has predicted that over 75% of women and over 70% of men will gain in the first 15 years of the new pension – extremely optimistic numbers.

    Human resource experts are referring to the change as one of the biggest overhauls the state pension system has seen in generations, and one of the best.  This new process has been designed to make saving more appealing since it will be simpler and far more straightforward than ever before.

    Under the new system, if a person has 35 years of National Insurance contributions, they pensioner could receive around £155.65 a week.  Human resource professionals say that these changes, coupled with open enrollment, will encourage more people to save creating a more financially stable retired generation.

    One caveat is that some people, like those members of defined benefit schemes who have contracted out of state second pensions, will not get the full pension.

    Human resource experts are urging anyone and everyone to request a detailed state pension statement to determine what these changes mean to them.

     

  • B&Q accused of cutting benefits to offset costs of the national living wage

    A petition drafted by a B&Q manager has already earned over 120,000 signatures and has put human resource managers on high alert. The petition accuses the company of cutting employee benefits as a way to offset the costs of the national living wage (NLW).

    B&Q is a DIY store that has recently earned itself a lot of negative attention. According to the change.org petition, a B&Q employee claims that the retailer suggested removing time-and-a-half pay for working Sundays and double time for working bank holidays. Additionally, the company suggested a restructuring of allowances for employees working in certain parts of the UK and the removal of a summer and winter bonus. The petition also states that B&Q made it mandatory for employees to accept the new conditions, or job loss could be a reality.

    While the suggestion is that B&Q is making these changes using the NLW as an excuse, a B&Q spokesman denied this:

    “Our aim is to reward all of our people fairly so that employees who are doing the same job receive the same pay,” the spokesman said. “This isn’t the case at the moment, as some have been benefiting from allowances for a long time when others have not, and that can’t continue.”

    Some HR experts explain that sudden reactions to the national living wage will not benefit any company as they can actually have long-term, negative consequences.

  • Research reveals around one in five members of DB schemes have transferred out to access retirement options

    Willis Towers Watson research reveals that approximately one in five members of defined benefit schemes who have had access to free financial advice, have transferred out of their scheme in order to access retirement options.

    The research analysed 15,700 DB scheme members who had been offered some sort of independent financial advice. This was offered at the expense of the scheme’s sponsoring employer since April of last year. Most of the members covered by the survey were offered the free advice as part of a one-off exercise run by their scheme. All pension holders were 55+ but hadn’t started drawing from their pension. The data was supplied to multiple leading financial advisory firms.

    The data showed that of those who were offered access to an advisor, 50% of scheme holders took up the offer. Of that 50%, over one third chose to transfer out of their DB scheme.

    Head of liability management at Willis Towers Watson said that members of DB schemes don’t always realise that pension freedom doesn’t automatically extend to them. Even less people realise that in order to take advantage of it they have to take financial advice.

    When the data was broken down even further, it was revealed that members with bigger DB pensions were even more likely to transfer out. Those who had transfer values that exceeded £250,000 were actually the most likely to transfer out.

  • House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee release The Gender Pay Gap report

    In one of the latest attempts to address the issues causing the gender pay disparity, the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee released The Gender Pay Gap report. The report states that currently, there is a “lack of effective government policy” in many of the different areas that contribute to the gap. Additionally, the report says that the flagship policy of shared parental leave has made very little difference since its implementation.

    This was not the only policy or regulation the report attacked. The report also said that the forthcoming regulation, which will hold larger companies accountable for reporting their pay gap, hasn’t gone far enough to make any kind of difference either.

    While there were many criticisms in this report there were also recommendations. The report suggests that three months of parental leave be automatically granted to the second parent on top of current parental leave benefits. It is also recommended that paternity leave increase to 90% of salary with the three months non-transferable paternity leave paid at 90% for the first four weeks.

    The House of Commons also suggested that the government look into the benefits of offering all forms of parental leave on a part-time basis.

    The report also addressed a topic that is on the top of many human resource professionals lists – flexible working. One of the keys to addressing the gender pay gap, according to the report, is flexible working hours.

    Some HR experts feels as though the report criticized the government too much but did praise the report for establishing strategies for lower-paid sectors with an abundance of female employees.

  • Tyson employees claim for overtime compensation

    On March 22, 2016 the United States Supreme Court made an extremely important decision involving a very large United States based food industry corporation. In Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo the Court held that when certifying a class or collective action, differences between members of the class do not prohibit the formation of a class in a situation where statistical techniques, which assume the class members are all identical, will be used to determine the company’s liability and damages awarded.

    Employees at Tyson claimed they didn’t receive any kind of overtime compensation for time they spent enrobing and shedding protective gear before entering and after exiting the slaughterhouse. Depending on the employee’s position, each job required different gear according to what was happening on that given day. Some employees were compensated, but others weren’t. Tyson didn’t keep any kind of specific time records for the act of enrobing or shedding the protective gear.

    Class members said the protective gear was integral and indispensable to the work and thus should be something that was paid for. Therefore the employees filed a lawsuit claiming they were owed overtime pay.

    Tyson, a multi-million dollar company, said that since the employees were wearing different kinds of gear that required difference amounts of time to put on and take off, the employees’ claims weren’t sufficiently similar to constitute a class. Tyson Foods also argued that there has to be a way to identify uninjured class members and ensure they don’t contribute to the amount of damages awarded and do not receive damages.

    In Iowa, the District Court agreed with the class of employees whose question was whether time spent putting on and taking off protective gear was compensable and could be resolved by a class action lawsuit.

    Unfortunately, Tyson Foods did not keep any kind of adequate time records and statistical data was used to estimate the time putting on and the time taking off the protective gear. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision.

    The Supreme Court confirmed this decision stating:

    “Whether a representative sample may be used to establish classwide liability will depend on the purpose for which the sample is being introduced and on the underlying cause of action. In FLSA actions, inferring the hours an employee has worked from a study such as [the one used in this case] has been permitted by the Court so long as the study is otherwise admissible…The fairness and utility of statistical methods in contexts other than those presented here will depend on facts and circumstances particular to those cases.”           

    Tyson claimed that the use of statistical data led to incorrect financial judgments in the class action lawsuit and is unfair.

    When it came to whether or not there would be some kind of mechanism to root out employees who didn’t technically suffer any kind of injury, the Court said since the damages haven’t been awarded and since it hasn’t been determined how the damages will be disbursed, this isn’t a fair question for this case at this point in time.                  

    Tyson Foods will have to wait for the case to return to District Court for any further questions to be addressed.

  • No increases in statutory maternity, paternity, adoption and shared parental pay

    Each year around April, all of the payments due for statutory employment rights and benefits typically rise. This year, however, only some of them are increasing and these increases are dwarfed in comparison to recent years.

    For the tax year commencing on April 6 of this year, statutory maternity, paternity, adoption and shared parental pay will stay as they are at almost £140/week. Statutory sick pay will also remain as is.

    These rates are remaining unchanged because of the low inflation rate.

    This year, there will be a rise in statutory redundancy pay as well an increase in the amounts that can be awarded in tribunal claims, like those for unfair dismissals. This change will apply to dismissals that have termination dates of April 6 or later. The new rate includes a maximum amount of a week’s pay for calculating statutory redundancy pay and the basic award for unfair dismissal up from £475 to £479. Additionally, the maximum basic award for unfair dismissal increased to £14,370 from £14,250. The maximum compensatory award, which can be made after a successful unfair dismissal tribunal claim classified as “ordinary” was increased by £627 and the maximum potential award for unfair dismissal when the basic and compensatory awards are combined, increased by £747.

    Human resource experts explain that since these increases aren’t as significant as predicted, it won’t make a huge difference to employers. In any case, even the increase in the maximum compensatory award for unfair dismissal will really only apply to the most highly paid employees.

    Arguably though, the most important change made is the new statutory redundancy payment figure. While the increase in cost is minimal, a case involving individual redundancy could potentially result in large additional costs for employers undertaking large-scale redundancy exercises.

    Prior to Budget discussions, Chancellor George Osborne announced increases to the national minimum wage as well. Beginning in October 2016, the minimum wage for 21-24 year-olds and 18-20 year-olds will increase by 25 pence per hour. Apprentice hourly rates will increase by 10 pence.

  • Committee to decide if the TSA are able to demand involuntary reassignment for employees

    The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is looking to determine whether or not the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been abusing its power to relocate employees to different workplaces.

    TSA Administrator Peter Neffenger recently received a letter from committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Ranking Member Elijah Cummings (D-Md) who questioned whether agency workers were wrongly given involuntary assignments and/or retaliated against.

    A memo sent out by TSA’s Office of Human Capital that halted the agency’s pending requests to involuntarily relocate employees spurred the committee’s inquiry.

    The memo was sent out on February 29 and read:

    Until further notice and effective immediately, Directed Involuntary Reassignments must be routed through the Office of Human Capital (OHC) for review and approval. …All Directed Reassignments current in process will be halted, reviewed, and possibly returned to the program office for further action, if the nature of action is unclear or isn’t clearly supported as outlined in policy.      

    Prior to the memo however, TSA employees who were not part of the Senior Executive Service were required to accept involuntary reassignment to “any location with minimal notice to support the agency’s staffing needs.”

    The committee’s letter asks for a few things. The letter requests TSA provide copies of all policy documents related to involuntary reassignments that have been in effect since 2012. Additionally, the letter also requests that the agency provide disciplinary records on employees dated within six months of the reassignment.

    TSA has until the end of March to respond to the agency’s questions. The American Federation of Government Employees who represents the majority of TSA employees, has declined to comment.

  • Digital fluency can help women narrow the gender pay gap

    A new report reveals that while gender inequality is still a very prominent reality, being digitally fluent can help women narrow the pay gap.  

    The study, Getting to Equal: How Digital Is Helping Close the Gender Gap at Work defines digital fluency as the extent to which people embrace and use digital technology in order to become more knowledgeable, connected and effective at work. A global consulting and technology services company, Accenture, put the report together. The report examined the extent to which men and women adopted digital technology while analyzing the influence it has on their education in preparing for work, employment and career advancement. Almost 5,000 men and women were surveyed and millennials, generation X and baby boomers were all equally represented.

    One human resource expert acknowledged that there are many different ways the gender gap can be closed, but digital is one of the more promising.

    Accenture used a Digital Fluency Model to gauge respondents’ use of digital technology, looking at the devices they had access to and how and when they used them. The model also looked at whether or not respondents had taken virtual or online classes, or used digital collaboration tools like chat or webcams to assist in the workplace.

    Nations with the highest rates of digital fluency among women (US, Netherlands, UK, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland) also had the highest rates of equality in the workplace.

    Digital fluency also leads to flexible working. Almost half of the women respondents said they use digital technology to work from home and to access job opportunities. The same percentage also said that technology helps them balance their lives.

    Another human resource expert praised digital fluency for the influence it has on collaboration too. Websites like GoToMeeting and WebEx allow for virtual meetings while Google Docs allows users to share documents anywhere in the world. It is way easier to collaborate today than it was a decade ago.

    Digital fluency is only one factor and cannot single handedly bridge the gender gap. There is, however, ample evidence that digital fluency can help accelerate equality in the workplace.

  • The EEOC files its first two sexual orientation discrimination cases

    The EEOC announced that it has filed its first two discrimination cases based on sexual orientation.

    The agency’s Philadelphia District Office filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania against Scott Medical Health Center. A separate suit was also filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division, against Pallet Companies (doing business as IFCO Systems NA).

    In the first case against Scott Medical, the agency charged that a gay male employee was subjected to harassment due to his sexual orientation. It was cited that the employee’s manager repeatedly referred to the employee using anti-gay slurs and made offensive comments about the employee’s sex life.

    When the employee initially filed a complaint to the clinic director, the director responded that the manager was simply “doing his job” and refused to take any kind of action, according to the suit.

    The employee eventually chose to quit rather than continue to work for a manager who disrespected him.

    In the second filed case against IFCO, the EEOC charged that a supervisor harassed a lesbian employee. There were numerous comments made by this supervisor about this employee’s appearance including, “you would look good in a dress,” and “I want to turn you back into a woman,” the agency said.

    This harassment extended far beyond comments as well. The supervisor would reportedly blow kisses at the employee and make suggestive gestures.

    The female employee complained to management and even called the employee hotline but the company ended up firing her just a few days later.

    While these are the first two lawsuits to be filed by the EEOC against private employers, human resource experts feel that this has been a long time coming. The EEOC has maintained its stance that sexual orientation bias is covered under Title VII. HR experts do point out though, that there hasn’t been a single federal appeals court that has ruled Title VII covers sexual orientation.

    A ruling from last summer that covered only federal employees and contractors, which involved the EEOC, determined that sexual orientation discrimination is discrimination by sex.

    Employment law experts and human resource professionals all agree that the outcomes of these cases will surely be interesting since a number of courts have ruled that sexual orientation is not covered under federal anti-discrimination law.

  • Supreme Court finds firm liable for the behaviour of its employee

    Legal and human resource experts have concluded that employers could be deemed legally responsible for a vaster range of employee behaviours than originally thought. This ideology comes after a Supreme Court ruling that a supermarket firm was accountable for one of its employees attacking a member of the public.

    A five-judge panel found that Morrisons was liable for the behaviour of Amjid Kahn, an employee who punched and kicked a man (A Mohamud).

    Mohamud went to the petrol station on the morning of March 15th, 2008 to find out if it was possible to print some documents off of a USB stick. Transcripts reveal that Kahn replied with foul language to which Mohamud protested. Kahn used racist and threatening language and eventually followed the customer to his car, where he opened the front passenger door, continued yelling and eventually launched into a physical attack.

    Prior to going to the Supreme Court, this case was tried twice including once by a Court of Appeals. Both times, the court dismissed the claim. It was dismissed because the court felt it failed the “close connection” test. In case law, this test meant that there needed to be a closer link between the misconduct of the employee and the nature of the employment for any kind of vicarious liability to be established.

    Unfortunately for Morrisons, the Supreme Court felt a connection did exist because the man attacked was a customer. Ultimately, according to the court, the employer trusted him with the position and they should be held just as accountable for the abuse that ensued.

    One HR expert, Martin Pratt a partner in the employment law team at a legal firm, said the court’s decision “massively increased employers’ potential liability for their employees’ actions”.

    According to Pratt, prior to this case an employer would only have been liable for an assault like this one if it were done while an employee was performing a duty directly related to the employment position. Ultimately, this ruling deems that a company could be liable for any person in a customer-facing role.

    Human resource managers will have to consider increasing the amount of training employees get before being placed by themselves and consider more rigorous background checks. It will have to be crystal clear what is and what is not accepted in the workplace.

    Damages in this case are still to be decided. Morrisons released a statement saying they were appalled when the incident was first reported and did offer a settlement, which was refused.

  • Restaurant sued for reducing working hours to avoid providing healthcare insurance

    Human resource experts explain that you can now be sued for reducing an employee’s hours – plain and simple. Or is it?

    If an employee can prove that the intent in reducing their hours was to deny the person access to some sort of benefit, then the employer can be sued. This is now true after a new ruling by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

    The landmark lawsuit involved popular United States establishment Dave & Busters and employees who sued the restaurant claiming the company reduced their working hours to avoid having to offer them health insurance.

    The employees were able to sue under ERISA Section 510, which was primarily written to apply to retirement plans. Section 510, however, can be applied to multiple other benefit plans as well including healthcare coverage, as it turns out.

    Section 510 states:

    “It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline, or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan, this subchapter, section 1201 of this title, or the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act [29 U.S.C.A. § 301 et seq.], or for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under the plan, this subchapter, or the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act. 29 U.S.C. § 1140.”

    The court said that Dave & Buster’s health insurance plan is considered an employee welfare benefit plan under ERISA. HR experts explain that employees sued claiming the chain violated Section 510 by reducing hours to under 30 per week in order to avoid Obamacare’s employer mandate that says employers must provide full-time employees with health insurance.

    Lawsuit paperwork claims that during a Dave & Buster’s single location meeting attended by the lead plaintiff, a general manager said this exact mandate would cost the company around $2 million. In order to avoid some of these costs, the company planned on cutting hours of full-time workers. This type of meeting, according to the suit, was eventually held company-wide. Ultimately, the case depended on whether or not ERISA could actually be applied to health plans. It was ruled, they could.

    Of course Dave & Buster’s tried to get the lawsuit thrown out claiming there was not enough legally sufficient evidence. Unfortunately for them, the court said the employer’s “intent” is what really mattered. In order for the lawsuit to proceed to trial, according to the court, the plaintiffs needed to prove the employer specifically intended to interfere with their benefits. The court, obviously, felt they succeeded in doing so.

    The lawsuit will now proceed to trial where Dave & Buster’s will be facing, at the very least, a very costly defense bill and/or massive settlement.

  • HR experts predict flexible working schedules will become more common

    HR experts are predicting that flexible and mobile working schedules will become more common next year than actually working from an office.

    A report produced by Lancaster University’s Work Foundation argued that flexible working could potentially lead to increased productivity in employees. This would in turn improve employee wellbeing, help retain talent, attract new talent and reduce accommodation costs.

    The report is called Working anywhere: A winning formula for good work? and predicts that by 2020 approximately 70% of employees will be working under flexible schedules. The research looked at 500 managerial level employees working for medium to large businesses.

    The benefits of working from a mobile location were understood by about 44% of respondents who believed it allowed employees to get more work done. Forty-two percent of them felt like this type of scheduling helped them (employees) feel trusted and 35% of them felt it was essential to maintaining a certain work life balance.

    The author of the report claims that the evidence showed that there are clear trends towards a more flexible way of working in the United Kingdom. Organisations that have already adopted flexible working for its employees claim to have an improvement in productivity while reducing staff turnover.

    The report did remain unbiased as well. While singing flexible working praises, the report also made sure to highlight barriers to the change. Over one third of managers believed that mobile working would make them feel disconnected from their teams and felt it could block the ability to successfully oversee work.

    Human resource professionals have also come forward and said that these kinds of schedules could make their jobs harder. A shift towards flexible working scheduling that would affect the masses would require changes to performance management and employee terms and conditions.

               

  • US job relocation rates on the decline

    The latest data on relocation rates released by consultancy firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, reveals that the number of job candidates in the US who relocate for employment is on the decline.

    The global outplacement consultancy firm’s data shows that on average, only 11% of new hires in each quarter of 2015 moved for their new position. This number is down from an average of 15% during the final two quarters of 2014.

    HR experts are attributing this decrease in relocation to an increase in economic improvement, specifically at the local level. This would eliminate the need for most people to relocate for a job. Overall, unemployment rate in the US is one of the lowest it has ever been.

    John A Challenger, Chief Executive Officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas said

    Relocation activity plunged after the first half of 2009 as home values continued to decline, which made it virtually impossible to sell an existing home without taking a significant loss. The housing market improved in enough places by the second half of 2014 to, once again, make relocation a feasible possibility for more people when conducting a job search.

    There is more to this data than simply less relocation, however. The trade group for the relocation services industry, Worldwide ERC, projects that the United States transfer volume results for 2015 will show an increased new-hire relocation when compared to previous years.

    Human resource experts also point out that the growth in temporary assignment positions could be another reason for the decline in relocations. US companies are offering more temporary employment opportunities for workers, because it is often a less expensive option for the company.

  • Study shows the UK has frugal benefits offerings compared to other European countries

    In a study of benefits, Glassdoor research revealed that the United Kingdom has one of the “most frugal” benefits offerings out of 14 European countries.

    The pan-European study ranked the UK in the bottom three when maternity/paternity entitlement, annual leave, sick pay and unemployment benefits were considered.

    At the other end of the list, the top countries with the mot generous in-work and welfare benefits were Denmark, France and Spain. When this data is further broken down by benefit type, the list changes. When just looking at in-work benefits like sick paid time off, the Netherlands was named the most generous. Here, employees can be absent from work for up to 104 weeks and receive 70% of their wages for the entire period of absence. Unfortunately, the UK was still one of the least generous countries. In this particular country, workers are offered a flat rate of approximately £88 a week.

    Although the European Union offers a statutory minimum of 14 weeks of paid leave for maternity, this was one area where the United Kingdom came out on top. British workers are offered the most leave with 52 weeks. While the UK offers the most leave, they do not offer the most pay (which some will argue is more important). Austria, Denmark and Germany were among some of the countries that offer new mothers 100% of their earnings for the entire maternity leave period.

    Paternity is a different story. This rule does not fall under EU regulation and while the UK just offers 10 days of leave for new fathers, countries like France don’t offer too much more. Paternity leave is still a fairly new concept for businesses. Facebook recently made headlines for offering an extremely generous amount of time off for new fathers.

    Glassdoor chief economist, Andrew Chamberlain, said that governments all have limited budgets but perception has always been that the United Kingdom does provide a generous benefit scheme for all people. Now, it could be argued that parental leave, sick pay and unemployment benefits are not as rich in quantity in the United Kingdom. If perception truly is reality, the United Kingdom may have some very angry employees after the release of this report.

  • More US workers quit their jobs in December 2015, since December 2006.

    In the United States, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is reporting that more workers quit their jobs in December 2015 than at any other point in time since December 2006.

    The monthly report on job opening and labor turnover showed that over three million people gravitated toward the exit sign while employers took on over five million workers. These numbers account for some of the highest reported since the 2007-2009 recession began.

    Human resource experts fear that the market has become too much of a candidate’s market, spurring more voluntary separations from employers. Candidates know that they’re able to demand more pay with more benefits and employees are more confident now than ever before.

    Unemployment rate in the United States is at an all-time low of 4.9 percent, which is within the range considered to be full employment. With this increase in the quit rate, human resource professionals will really have to amp up their retention program to keep valuable talent. Unfortunately, wage increases are probably at the top of these retention programs, as employees are well aware of their worth.

               

  • Gender pay reporting

    Beginning in 2018, companies that employ over 250 people will be required to make their gender pay gap publically available online.

    The government, in a statement, said that any company that fails to address gender pay disparities would be highlighted in new league tables in hopes of driving progress.

    Nicky Morgan, Women and Equalities Minister, said that in addition to forcing medium to large sized organisations to publish their gender pay and bonus pay gap detail annually, these companies will also have to publish how many women and men are in each pay range.

    In an effort to highlight and measure where the gap actually falls across the United Kingdom, companies’ pay gaps will be ranked by sector, in a league table that will allow women to see where the gap is and is not being addressed. Morgan is calling on women across Britain to leverage this new reporting. She hopes that it will encourage women to demand more from their organisations while pushing them to recognise and reward women for their talent and skillsets.

    Morgan also announced that a new £500,000 support package would be introduced in order to help companies implement the new regulations. Additionally, a new ministerial group will be set up to help evaluate how the government supports women in the workplace and targeted support will be provided for industries which are typically male dominated.

    The latest ONS Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings revealed the gender pay gap for median earnings of full-time and part-timers sits at just under 20% when combined. This is completely unchanged since 2014. If this pace continues, the TUC is predicting it will take almost 50 years for any kind of parity between the sexes.     

    Frances O’Grady, general secretary of the TUC, said there is really no need to delay the reporting until 2018. O’Grady also feels that bosses should explain why the pay gap exists within their organisation, in addition to simply releasing the numbers.

    Human resource experts hope this reporting will lead to a reduction in bias and introduce a whole new level of transparency.

  • What are the differences between US and UK employment terms?

    It is often said that lawyers who work with United States companies with workplaces in the United Kingdom often come across differences between employment law in the US and Britain. This is especially true when it comes to contracts of employment.

    The US views employment as an “at will” activity, which means an employee can be terminated for any lawful reason, with or without cause. The United Kingdom has concepts like fair dismissal and statutory minimum notice periods, which the US would know nothing about. The same goes for amending contracts.

    If employment is not to be “at will”, a United States written contract should lay out the terms that apply to the agreement.

    In the United Kingdom, the EU dictates working time restrictions, which sets limits on average weekly working hours, work breaks and rest days. In this case, the law in the US differs from state to state, although most states do require rest breaks after a certain length shift. Overtime is also awarded when an employee works over 40 hours in one week.

    The EU law also dictates annual holiday entitlement. In the United States, holiday entitlement does not really exist. Many employees are granted 11 federal holidays off with some other holidays as well. Something that these two countries do have in common when it comes to time off is that they both pay, in some way, for untaken time off. In the US, in some cases, an employee could be granted pay in lieu of accrued untaken paid time off. In the UK, untaken holiday pay is paid out to employees.

    Both countries also prohibit any kind of discrimination (including age) as well as victimisation for whistleblowing. The UK protection age discrimination protects employees of all ages, however in the US, this same protection only covers an employee if they are 40 or older. This remains true unless a local state government lowered the age limit, like in New York.

    US law requires companies with 100 or more employees to give their workers at least 60 days notice when considering mass redundancies that involve 500 or more dismissals at one site, or when a third of the total site workforce are being dismissed. Of course, the state can always dictate otherwise. The United Kingdom says companies must consult with employees at least 30 days ahead of time when it comes to the first redundancy when 20 or more redundancies are proposed within a period of 90 days at one establishment.

    Whilst many laws are different between these countries, the foundation of employment law in both countries remains similar. In both of these countries, employers and employees are protected.

  • Supreme Court ruling on stock-drop cases

    Participants in employee stock ownership plans will have a harder time bringing stock-drop cases after a Supreme Court ruling.

    A stock-drop case involves plan participants suing plan fiduciaries when company stock prices drop, often times claiming that the company should have sold the stocks based on information it had about the value of the stock itself.

    A recent class action suit involves Amgen Inc., a pharmaceutical company based in California, and former employees. The plaintiffs alleged the fiduciaries breached their duties, including their duty of prudence, because they knew the stock price was inflated. While the district court granted a motion to dismiss, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling.

    In Fifth Third Bancorp vs Dudenhoeffer, the Supreme Court made a ruling that said there is no presumption of prudence for fiduciaries. The court also noted, however, that the lower courts facing stock-drop claims should always consider “whether the complaint was plausibly alleged that a prudent fiduciary in the defendant’s position could not have concluded that stopping purchases - which the market might take as a sign that insider fiduciaries viewed the employer’s stock as a bad investment - or publicly disclosing negative information would do more harm than good to the fund.”

    The high court ended up vacating the 9th Circuit’s Amgen ruling and actually sent the case back to the lower court for proceedings more consistent with Fifth Third. Ultimately, the Supreme Court felt that the lower court did not accurately assess whether the complaint plausibly alleged that stopping stock purchases would do more harm than good. The 9th Circuit ended up reversing the dismissal of the complaint, again. At this point, the Supreme Court granted review, yet again.

    The Fifth Third case isn’t necessarily bad for fiduciaries, according to human resource experts. It may actually be good for them since plaintiffs must plausibly allege that selling the stock would not do more harm than good. This, in and of itself, is an extremely difficult feat.

    There has yet to be a resolution in Amgen v Harris. The case has, most recently, been sent back to the district court.

  • Cities Outlook 2016 investigates the economies of the UK’s largest cities

    Although almost one million new jobs were created in the United Kingdom over the last four years, wages for those living in urban areas decreased by five percent in the same amount of time. Now, each urban worker earns a wage of approximately £1,300.

    The data was revealed in the report Cities Outlook 2016, which investigated the economies of the United Kingdom’s 63 largest cities. From 2010 - 2014, over 980,000 new jobs were created. The research revealed that 29 of the cities that accounted for many of these new jobs qualified as ‘low wage, high welfare’ economies.

    This report comes at an interesting time. It was released after the Summer Budget 2015, which calls for higher wages with lower welfare levels.

    Human resource experts however explained that 14 British cities are already achieving this high wage low welfare kind of economy, meaning that it is possible. The report suggests that government policy makers could learn from these cities, which include London.

    The report also states that cities with higher wages had enjoyed faster job growth when compared to other, low-wage cities. The report goes on to explain that cities should really focus on supporting high-skilled employment in knowledge-intensive sectors, like digital and professional areas, because these jobs help raise average pay. Higher average pay for some could fuel other parts of the economy, like retail and leisure.

    The report did prove to have some geographical evidence of wealth distribution as well. There was a true North/South divide, with eight of the top 10 high wage and low welfare cities located in the South East. Nine of the bottom 10 cities were located in the North or Midlands.

    The authors of the report are urging the government to increase investment in regional economies and are advising to give more control to cities over local tax revenue, skills, infrastructure and housing.

  • Whistleblower case study

    In a recent human resource case, Balfour Beatty paid £137,000 to a whistleblower that said he was bullied out of his job.

    Nigel McArthur was a pre-construction manager for Balfour Beatty in Exmouth.  McArthur claimed that managers at the company hounded him after he expressed concerns over the true cost of an £18.5m building project in Cardiff.

    The Welsh Government awarded Balfour Beatty a contract to construct a building in Callaghan Square.  After construction began it was halted before the structure was finished.  Balfour Beatty was paid for the work that was completed, which was approximately £600,000 worth.     

    According to McArthur, Balfour Beatty overcharged the Welsh Government for the construction work by hiding the true costs of the construction.  He found that the true sub-contractor costs were hidden in order to increase profit margins from the agreed 3.3% to 7.34%.

    When McArthur initially shared his findings with his line manager he was told, “he should not have investigated the costs or alternatively that he should not be concerned about it”.  After the conversation, McArthur claimed his fellow employees bullied him until he finally left the company in February 2015.

    Terry Falcao, of Stephens and Scown, said that McArthur’s claim was originally met with denial by the construction firm.  This stayed true until November 2015, just two weeks before the employment tribunal hearing was due.  It was at this time that Balfour Beatty admitted liability for not supporting its employee, but did not admit to carrying out any kind of criminal activity or breaching legal obligations.  Additionally, the company did apologise for failing to treat McArthur with proper care when he raised concerns. 

    Balfour Beatty ended up paying McArthur £137,000 after admitting to their “wrongdoing”.  There is no word on whether the Welsh government intends to finish the construction and if they will allow Balfour Beatty to do so.

     

  • UK defined benefit schemes have huge unhedged interest rate exposure

    Hymans Robertson reported that UK defined benefit schemes have over £1trn of unhedged interest rate exposure, even though the value of assets held in bonds have nearly tripled over the last ten years.

    Human resource experts feel as though this really highlights the need for schemes to understand what their largest risks are and how to manoeuvre them strategically.  When the FTSE350 is considered, most companies have paid in £250bn to try and help funding holes since the onset of the millennium.  Risks need to be supreme in people’s minds, but this will never happen if companies continue to clean up the mess.

    The £1trn of unhedged interest rate exposure is a prime example of why risk management needs to be considered for DB schemes. 

    When the UK is analysed in conjunction with DB schemes, schemes are being paid out around £20bn more per annum than they receive in contributions across the whole private sector.

    Cashflow negative schemes are becoming more and more of a reality and face a whole arsenal of risks that most people aren’t aware of.  “Market volatility is an inescapable reality.”  This kind of risk should be at the forefront of investors’ minds.

  • The EEOC resolve discrimination claims: case studies

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, recently resolved two separate cases of discrimination for thousands of dollars.

    The first case revolved around Seymour Midwest, who selected Steve Maril from a pool of applicants to participate in a preliminary email-based interview, for a senior vice president of sales position.  Seymour Midwest is a hand tool manufacturing company based out of Warsaw, Indiana.

    Maril received questions about previous work experience, willingness to relocate and a question about age.  Seymour Midwest’s ideal age for the position fell between 45 and 52.  When the company learned Maril was older than the ideal age range, the company refused to hire him.

    At this point, the EEOC filed suit in the US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana claiming that Seymour Midwest violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

    The company was ordered to halt all questions surrounding age during the hiring process prior to making a job offer.  In addition to having to provide training to hiring personnel, Seymour Midwest will also have to adhere to periodic compliance reporting and pay out $100,000.

    Another case involved a food service distributor, Gilbert Foods LLC, trading as Hearn-Kirkwood.  This company was ordered to pay $63,500 and furnish significant relief to resolve a pay discrimination and retaliation lawsuit.

    This case also included some gender discrimination.  EEOC charged that Hearn-Kirkwood paid Sonia Coates significantly less than her male counterparts, even though she had far more experience.  Once Coates learned that a new male employee was getting paid more than she was, she told co-workers she planned on filing a charge of discrimination.

    Word travelled fast throughout the office and according to the lawsuit, once a Hearn-Kirkwood manager learned of Coates’ plans he premeditated them by firing her, without making it appear unlawful.  Coates was eventually terminated due to a string of unwarranted disciplinary actions, according to the EEOC.

    The company violated the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, per the EEOC.  A suit was filed in US District Court for the Northern District of Maryland.

    In addition to the monetary consequences, Hearn-Kirkwood will also report to the EEOC about its compliance and will post a notice about the settlement, amongst other things.

                

  • The British Psychological Society says networking could help women progress in their careers

    A new report by the British Psychological Society, BPS, claims women could progress further in their careers if they learned how to use their social capital to help them reach the top of the ranks.

    The findings from the report were presented at the BPS’ Division of Occupational Psychology annual conference held in Nottingham.  The data revealed women who held positions like CEO and Managing Director felt their ability to build, maintain and capitalise on their social abilities helped them get to where they are today.

    A majority of the conference participants voiced their concerns over the general population of women lacking the ability to expand their network of contacts.  While it may not be right, the “who you know and who knows you” kind of networking mindset is seemingly responsible for a large percentage of career progression.  Limited access to certain social “platforms” could hinder a female’s ability to be promoted.  These kinds of social capital tools, according to HR professionals, should be revered and not feared.

    The report’s findings come on the heels of the recent Davies review, which set a target for FTSE 100 firms to have 33 percent female board members by 2020.  The FTSE 100 have done an extraordinarily good job at integrating more women into their boardrooms, as since 2011, they have nearly doubled the amount of women on their boards.

    Although we may be seeing more women in leadership roles, the pendulum is still not evenly set.  A government consultation called Closing the Gender Pay Gap disclosed that many women in the UK earn approximately 29% less than their male counterparts.   With more eyes on gender equality than ever before, Section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 is expected to come into force in Spring of this year.  This will require employers with over 250 employees to publish information about the amounts they pay female and male staff.

    While strides have certainly been made in gender equality in the workplace, the human resources industry collectively believes there is still a long way to go.

  • Resolution Foundation think thank analyse wage growth

    The Resolution Foundation think thank conducted an analysis of wage growth and found some disappointing realities.

    Think tank is estimating that real-time pay is more likely to increase by a mere one percent by this time next year, due primarily to Britain’s productivity problem and history of inflation.  Predictions made last year optimistically estimated an average of a two to two and a half percent increase year over year.

    A human resource expert affiliated with the Resolution Foundation revealed there are actually “signs of flattening-in measure of slack, and the expectation remains that inflation will soon start rising.” 

    The analysis argues that if productivity growth didn’t increase at all and remained the same while inflation increases to what the Bank of England wants, by the end of 2016 real wage will only increase by an approximate percentage point.

    While the Resolution Foundation certainly presents a valid argument, not all human resource experts believe this to be truth.  One HR professional recently expressed how UK employees should really feel optimistic.  Although some sectors are seeing a slowdown in wage growth, the economy is still technically playing catch up after the many post-recession years. 

    There is not one economy that won’t feel the ups and downs of the marketplace, and not all sectors are created equal.  Some HR experts suggest that wage growth cannot even be measured through an overarching number accounting for all sectors, but needs to be evaluated sector by sector.

  • Employment Appeal Tribunal case study

    Is a dismissal for gross misconduct fair, if the terminated employee was not made aware that a previous behaviour may lead to a termination?  This was the question the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) had to ask in the case of John-Charles v NHS Business Services Authority.

    In this case, John-Charles worked as an IT network engineer from September 2009.  After a history of failing to follow “reasonable management instructions”, a written warning was issued in January 2013.

    A few months prior to this written warning in October 2012, it was alleged that this particular employee breached the employer’s IT policies by using an unauthorised device, as well as entering an office building against instructions.  As a result of these actions, a formal disciplinary hearing was heard in March 2013.  The employer told John-Charles that the manager in charge of the hearing wouldn’t be told about the written warning unless the allegations surrounding the 2012 incident were actually proven to be factual.

    The disciplinary manager upheld some of the allegations and did find that John-Charles was guilty of committing gross misconduct.  This manager, however, did not decide on the sanction.  She did consider giving him a final written warning, and at this time became aware of the written warning that was already issued. 

    At this point, the HR advisor told the disciplinary manager that issuing a final written warning would actually lead to John-Charles’ dismissal, due to the other written warning already on file.  The manager in charge decided it was best to dismiss the employee because the other written warning helped prove that he was unable to follow reasonable directions given by management.  He was therefore dismissed for gross misconduct.  John-Charles brought multiple claims at this point, unfair dismissal being one of them.

    An employment tribunal decided that the employee was dismissed for his conduct back in 2012, which was potentially fair.  The employer didn’t necessarily act unreasonably taking the written letter into account, so it was at this point that the tribunal found the dismissal to be fair.  John-Charles appealed.

    The EAT allowed the appeal and decided that John-Charles was unfairly dismissed because he hadn’t been told the true significance of his written warning.  Additionally, the EAT found that he hadn’t been given any chance to make representations on what had become an issue during the disciplinary process.  The EAT claimed these two issues made the dismissal unfair and a “breach of the rules of natural justice”.

    The EAT also felt that it wasn’t completely unreasonable for the employer to take the written warning into account since it directly related to behaviour.  It was the mere fact that there was not a single opportunity for the employee to address this in front of the disciplinary board.  This error in procedure is what made the employee’s case.

                

  • Research from the Chartered Management Institute on the gender pay gap

    Less than one month after Office for National Statistics (ONS) data proved that the gender pay gap stood at 9.4%, research from the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) reveals that the gap gets worse as women rise up through the ranks.

    The data submitted on behalf of the CMI found that women over the age of 40 years old who hold management roles receive pay that is approximately 35% lower than men in comparable positions.  When women hit their 60’s, the gap widens to about 38%.

    The research was presented by CMI chief executive, Anne Francke to a select committee during a discussion surrounding gender equality.  Francke said:

    Anyone who thinks they’ve abolished the glass ceiling just by hitting Lord Davies’ targets is misguided.  Equality and fair progression means much more than having the same number of men and women on boards.  Female managers face what I believe is a ‘glass pyramid.’ The walls close in with every step, and women are likely to slip down the pecking order when it comes to pay.

    Lord Davies made recommendations that organisations should aim to have a boardroom that is at least 33% women.  Human resource experts also agreed when Francke said that managers at every level should really be held accountable in some facet for equality in the workplace. Francke goes on to state that if women aren’t getting paid whatever the average going rate is for any given position, it could be considered discrimination.

    The select committee Francke presented to will consider all of the evidence in order to determine areas for improvement.  Regulation on gender pay reporting is already on the list. 

  • Will interest rate increase be an advantage or disadvantage to 401(k) participants?

    Last month, the Federal Reserve announced that benchmark interest rates would rise by a quarter of a percentage point with similar increases expected in upcoming quarters.  This news comes after almost a decade of keeping interest rates down to close to zero.  For workers who participate in 401(k) programs, there will be some advantages and some disadvantages that will come with this change.

    For many participants, the fact that rate hikes bring higher returns paid on savings is a good thing.  For those investing in mutual funds, higher interest rates are not a good thing but will be welcomed by plan participants who want to avoid as much risk as possible.  People close to retirement tend to invest more heavily in mutual funds because of the low level of risk involved.

    Human resource experts explain that while some things are predictable, the effects the interest rate increase will have on the stock markets is extremely variable.  The increases have some people worried about higher borrowing costs for individuals and businesses.  The fact that higher rates bring about more stock market uncertainty makes a higher probability of a stock decline very real. 

    Higher interest rates can also mean that long-term bond funds, traditionally known to be less volatile than stock funds, are likely to come under pressure due to their value decreasing when new bonds are issued with higher interest payouts.

    The fact that bond fund payments come from two sources should help ease some of the concern.  One HR expert explained that higher rates could actually boost interest payment and serve as a buffer for negative price returns.  Bond funds, in theory, should actually see growth over the course of the next decade.

    Higher interest rates are also expected to improve the funding issues for defined benefit pension plans because this trend will lower plan sponsors’ required contributions to achieve full funding. 

    At the end of the day, 401(k) participants should be looking at the long-term effects since they are long-term investors.  Day-to-day and month-to-month changes will happen. Typically, it is expert advice to stick with their savings and investment plan even during periods of market change and uncertainty.

                 

  • Using the internet for job searching

    All industries have undoubtedly evolved due to the introduction of the internet and human resources are certainly not exempt.  Job search behavior has dramatically changed as technology has progressed but research has found that many employers and HR professionals are still relying on older, traditional methods of seeking and attracting talent. 

    The joint study conducted by The Boston Consultancy Group and Recruit Works Institute looked at jobseeker trends and found that a third of employees who switched jobs in 2014 rated internet sites at the most effective outlet for finding a new job posting.  The study questioned more than 13,000 people from 13 countries in order to get a clear reading on channels used throughout the job search, time spent and the income change experienced within different regions.

    Each year, approximately 20 percent of workers worldwide end up changing jobs and 55 percent of those jobseekers cited internet recruitment sites as their go to for postings.

    The United Kingdom jobseekers serve as an example of how to use this new kind of technology advantageously.  Fifty-two percent of respondents stated that internet job sites were most effective and most important when it came to finding a new job.

    When UK citizens were questioned about the length of time their job search lasted, respondents reported spending an average of about 14 weeks, between nine weeks of research and applications and five weeks until an offer was received.

    In addition to searching and perusing these different online feeds, jobseekers are also able to subscribe to numerous job updates, which are sent via email. 

    Although most employers seem to understand the importance of the internet, the survey found that HR professionals were failing to capitalize on the shift when it comes to attracting and finding new talent.  Many employers are still relying heavily on referrals and word of mouth but the introduction of the internet allows companies to process a much higher volume of applications at a much faster rate than ever before.  These job postings are also able to reach more people than ever before, potentially even better talent.

    HR experts feel as though using the internet in job searching is still a fairly new concept and although many employers and companies have yet to adapt, at a certain point in time they probably won’t have any other choice.

  • Damages awarded in the UK’s first case of caste discrimination

    An employment tribunal recently awarded £183,773 in damages in the UK’s first case of caste discrimination, causing many human resource experts to wonder if employers could be facing an increase in these kinds of claims.

    The landmark case is centred around Permila Tirkey, who came from Bihar (one of the poorest parts of India) and was recruited to work in the United Kingdom.  Shortly after being recruited Tirkey was kept in domestic servitude and forced to work as a maid and nanny.

    When the claim was initially made, many employers didn’t feel as though it could ever apply to them.  This case, however, proves that the Equality Act can be used to argue caste discrimination.  Although the Equality Act doesn’t directly cover caste, it does in fact cover ethnicity under race discrimination.  This is the part used to drive Tirkey v Chandok.

    Tirkey’s solicitor, Victoria Marks, works for the Anti Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit and explains that this was a very useful judgment for victims facing modern day slavery.

    While £183,773 may seem like a hefty number, this payout only covers compensation in relation to unpaid wages.  The case is due to go back to tribunal in order to determine the discrimination part of the reward.

    One human resource expert, Audrey Williams from law firm Fox Williams, feels as though this is a positive development because it confirms that caste discrimination can be argued, regardless of how much uncertainty surrounds to what extent.

    Since caste is now at the forefront of the human resource industry, it is highly important that all employers within the UK be aware of any biases in judgment, leadership or harassment that could specifically be due to caste discrimination.

  • US discrimination case study

    It has now become abundantly clear what an employee must allege in order to successfully file an employment discrimination or retaliation claim against an employer, thanks to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.

    In April 2009, Dawn Littlejohn (an African American woman) started work as the director of the New York City Administration for Children’s Services’ (ACS) equal opportunity office.  Littlejohn was the employee who investigated claims of discrimination and was responsible for staff training, monitoring hiring practices, organizing diversity activities and advising the rest of the staff on equal employment opportunity policies.

    About 8 months after Littlejohn joined the team, her boss (also African American) was replaced with Amy Baker, a Caucasian woman.  Shortly after joining the Administration, Littlejohn alleged that Baker distanced herself from her and began treating her with a lack of respect.  Baker, according to Littlejohn, demanded work to be redone, wrongly reprimanded her and started taking away some of her responsibilities.

    Littlejohn also alleged that Baker had an overall attitude when she interacted with her.  She quoted Baker as saying that she didn’t “understand the culture” at the ACS.

    In 2010, New York City announced that the ACS would merge with the Department of Juvenile Justice.  As with any merger, there were multiple changes about to take place.  There would be layoffs, demotions, reassignments, transfers, etc.  Littlejohn alleged that she asked to be a part of the decision-making process to make sure that there was EEO compliance.  Littlejohn claimed that Baker and other white managers worked to prevent this from ever happening.

    Littlejohn felt that Baker and other upper management favored other white employees during the merger and continuously mistreated employees of other races. 

    Littlejohn ended up being involuntarily transferred and demoted.  Her old position was then filled by a white female who allegedly had zero previous EEO experience.  Littlejohn also revealed that this other woman was getting paid significantly more than she ever was in that position.

    Littlejohn sued the city claiming discrimination and retaliation.  The city, of course, requested that the court dismiss her claims citing her lack of sufficient evidence.  The court agreed and dismissed the case, but Littlejohn appealed to the 2nd Court.

    Ultimately, in order for an employee to demonstrate a prima facie case of discrimination the following criteria has to be met: 1) the employee must be a member of a protected class 2) qualified for the job 3) it has to be proven that the employer took an adverse action against the employee 4) a connection must exist between the allege adverse action and the protected class.

    The court also clarified that an employee “need not give plausible support to the ultimate question of whether the adverse employment action was attributable to discrimination.”

    When it came to Littlejohn’s case, the 2nd Circuit found that the allegations were, in fact, sufficient to support her claims of discrimination and retaliation because she was able to prove everything she needed to.  In regards to the retaliation claim, the court rejected the so-called manager rule, which excludes from protected activity any EEO opposition that falls within an employee’s scope of duties.  The 2nd Court felt that her complaint was against what she viewed as discriminatory conduct, which was technically protected.

    The 2nd Circuit ended up throwing out the order dismissing the claims and sent Littlejohn’s claim back to the lower court.

  • Theater of the Absurd: The NLRB Takes on the Employee Handbook

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Workforce Freedom Initiative released a report called, Theater of the Absurd: The NLRB Takes on the Employee Handbook, which reviews cases where the NLRB negated workplace rules, amongst other things.

    The author illustrated many examples of how the NLRB interprets policy language.  The report outlines cases where the NLRB found that policies against disruptive behavior like: intimidation, harassment, insubordination and profanity were unlawful. The study also looked at other cases where the agency voided policies requesting things like protecting trade secrets and confidentiality rules.

    Some human resource experts feel as though the NLRB is using an interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act to negate commonplace handbook policies.

    Below is a sample of company policies the NLRB has ruled on:

    Illegal Handbook Policy: “You must not disclose proprietary or confidential information about [the Employer, or] other associates (if the proprietary or confidential information relating to [the Employer’s] associates was obtained in violation of law or lawful Company policy).”

    Legal Handbook Policy: “Misuse or unauthorized disclosure of confidential information not otherwise available to persons or firms outside [Employer] is cause for disciplinary action, including termination.”

    Illegal Handbook Policy: “[Be] respectful to the company, other employees, customers, partners, and competitors.”

    Legal Handbook Policy: “Each employee is expected to work in a cooperative manner with management/supervision, co-workers, customers and vendors.”

    HR experts aren’t really sure how the Chamber report will be received as the NLRB doesn’t appear to care about the report’s release or to be changing their course of actions.

     

  • “Real progress” in gender equality

    A McKinsey study found that women have become more confident about career opportunities and that signs of “real progress” in gender equality exists for leadership roles.

    Many employers have moved gender diversity to the top of their priority list.  The study was performed on behalf of the 30% Club and was first presented at its Leadership Forum.  The research dissects gender balance in the United Kingdom, honing in on the professional services sector.  The report acts as a follow up to research published by the 30% club almost four years ago.

    Since 2012, the promotion gap between men and women in law firms has started to close.  The expectation that men were more likely to be promoted than women fell from 10 times more likely to just three times more likely as women push themselves to the forefront of opportunity.

    Women are also showing equal career confidence and ambition in sectors like accountancy and consultancy firms.

    Chair of the 30% Club Professional Services Firms’ Initiative, Caroline Carr, said, “It is good to see that three years from the first results we are seeing improvement in the rate of getting more women into UK partnerships in law firms and a consistent focus on gender balance as a business priority across the sector – although there is of course still some way to go…”

    While this data shows an increase with positive results, a separate report by Clyde and Co shows there have been zero increases in the proportion of female high earners in the past four years.  The employment law firm analysed data from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and found that while the number of higher rate tax payers has become larger, women accounted for less than 30 percent of higher rate tax payers in each of the past four financial years.

    Human resource professionals are urging employers to focus on diversity programmes that will help close the gap and get them ahead of the game.

  • Facebook extend its paid paternity leave

    Facebook is making headlines once again, but this time for something HR related.  The social media company has extended its global paid paternity leave to four months for new fathers.

    The decision comes after Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg took two months leave after the birth of his daughter, Maxima.

    Starting on January 1, 2016, all new dads and same-sex partners (including those who adopt) will be eligible for this paid leave.

    Facebook’s vice president of Human Resources and Recruiting, Lori Goler, made the following statement:

    "I am proud to announce today that we are extending our parental leave policy for full time employees to cover four months of paid baby leave for all new parents, no matter their gender or where they live."

    The final decision to bring males into the mix was made because the company simply felt like it was, “the right thing to do”.  The new benefit really affects men and people in same-sex relationships out of the United States since the new rule won’t affect the maternity leave rule currently available.

    Human resource experts explain that when working parents take time off to be with their newborns overall outcomes are better for the children and families.  The United States Department of Labor revealed that, currently, only 12% of private sector employees are entitled to paid family leave through their employment. 

    Last April, the United Kingdom introduced a new rule on shared parental leave, allowing men to top up their right to two weeks of paternity leave with up to 50 weeks of leave shared with the mother.  HR experts say that this leave can be split between the couple and can be taken at any time before the child’s first birthday (or within the first year of adoption).  It is reported that fathers have been slow to start using their new entitlement.

  • Sexual harassment case study

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit ruled that if an action isn’t based or motivated by a person’s sex, than it may not be considered sexual harassment.

    Loretta Rester was a graphic designer for the Hot Springs Village Voice, an Arkansas newspaper owned by Stephens Media.  At one point, Rester got into a heated argument with her supervisor William Elderton over a project.  During this argument, Elderton “slammed his hands on the desk and began screaming and cursing at her,” as per court documents.  When Rester tried to leave and remove herself from the situation, “Elderton put his hands on her three times, and physically prevented her from leaving until she began ‘wailing and cursing and screaming and hollering.’”

    Not long after the altercation, Rester filed suit against Stephens Media claiming she was the victim of sexual discrimination and citing that the company forced her to work in an environment that was nothing less than hostile.  Stephens Media requested to have the claim thrown out.

    The company prevailed on both counts and the court decided to toss Rester’s lawsuit.  The court decided that in order to prevail on sexual discrimination claims Rester would have to prove that she suffered some kind of adverse employment action and that she was treated differently than other employees.

    The court said that “Rester suffered no termination, did not lose pay or benefits, and her job duties or responsibilities did not change. Thus, she cannot establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination.”

    In order for Rester to prove that she worked in a hostile environment she would have to prove that there was an occurrence of unwanted sexual harassment, that the harassment occurred because of her sex and that the harassment affected a term or condition of her employment.  Ultimately, the court said that the incident related more to a work disagreement and did not relate to a sexual discrimination claim.

    While it may not be 100% professional to get into a workplace disagreement to this extent, it isn’t illegal either.  In the words of the court, in order for a work environment to be deemed “hostile,” there must be “extreme” conduct “rather than merely rude or unpleasant” conduct.

  • Lack of salary growth in the US means looking for other ways to retain talent

    While the United States economy and job market are both on the incline, salary increase budgets continue to remain stagnant with few (if any) signs of growth.  This lack of growth is causing companies to tie base pay increases to performance as well as providing alternative forms of rewards.

    Mercer’s 2015/2016 U.S. Compensation Planning Survey reveals that next year’s average salary increase budget is expected to increase by a mere 0.1% from 2015 to 2.9.  Human resource experts explain that the Planning Survey includes respondents from approximately 1,504 midsize and large United States employers, reflecting pay practices for over 17 million employees.

    The lack of growth is forcing human resource management within companies to look for other ways to retain talent.  Differentiating salary increases by employee performances still seems to reign supreme with companies rewarding top-performing employees with more significant pay increases than lower performers.  Mercer’s survey shows that top-performing employees received average base pay increases this year that were nearly quadruple what low performers received.

    Although this may seem like a short-term fix to the lack of budgets, some human resource departments feel as though this is a fairer way of providing increases to employees.  Why should a low performing employee be rewarded the same as a top performer who may value their position more?  This methodology also allows companies to vary increases by category, segment or department.  Companies are able to weight the importance of an employee based on where they are in the company hierarchy.  So while it appears to be a supplement, these short-term incentives might not go away any time soon, regardless of budgets.

  • Lowest performing DC funds up to 6% less

    JLT Employee Benefits revealed that employees who have been auto-enrolled into the lowest performing defined contribution (DC) default funds have been losing out on approximately 6% return per year, or approximately £500,000 over a lifetime.

    Aside from pointing out the differences between the lowest performing and the top ten defined contribution default funds, the research also uncovered massive variations in volatility levels ranging from 5.3% to 11.3%.

    According to human resource experts, this clearly outlines the importance for companies to choose the best default strategy and the best provider for their employees when they are setting up DC pension schemes. It also defines the importance of monitoring performance on the default fund. While it is understood that providers and default strategies are initially chosen for a reason, it is becoming increasingly more obvious that these things should be regulated on a consistent basis to account for any changes in regulations and other variable factors.

    When an employee is unknowingly losing out on a 6% return per year, their retirement funds could be severely affected, having an adverse effect on their quality of living later in life.

  • Volkswagen urge whistleblowers to come forward

    Volkswagen (VW), is seemingly giving their blessing to whistleblowers. They are urging employees with information about the emissions scandal to blow the whistle before November 30th so that they do not lose their job or face damage claims.

    VW brand chief Herbert Diess sent a letter to employees letting them know that union employees who contacted internal investigators would be exempt from dismissal, although this does not apply to managers. Although some employees, per this letter, would be exempt from being dismissed, they wouldn’t be exempt from the possibility of being transferred to another position with different duties.

    A few months ago it was revealed that VW cars were producing approximately 40 times the nitrous oxide emissions legally allowed in the United States. The German car manufacturer is now under investigation by American law firm, Jones Day. VW has yet to produce an explanation as to what happened or who in the company is responsible.

    Diess’ letter urged employees who are covered by collective bargaining agreements to get in touch promptly, but no later than November 30th, 2015. Unfortunately for whistleblowers, VW can protect their jobs but the company cannot protect their employees from criminal charges.

    This is the reason human resource experts feel as though some employees will feel overwhelmed and confused over if or how they should act. It is expected that most of higher management probably knew what was going on behind the scenes and neglected to say anything due to reputation.

    HR experts also feel as though there is a double-edged sword for whistleblowers that do come forward in this case. Although they won’t necessarily be losing their jobs, they can be charged criminally which to most people is worse. It is more of an ultimatum and less about employee rights. It is only fair to assume that some lower-level employees who knew about the emissions were bullied into remaining quiet. Although they are not any less guilty than any other person who chose to remain quiet the question remains whether they should be held as accountable as those in higher power.

  • The importance of fostering good relationships between apprentices and their employer

    Human resource experts revealed at the CIPD annual conference that while apprentices and graduates are showing an increased amount of loyalty to their career, they are not showing the same loyalty to their companies.

    Graduate recruitment and development manager at L’Oreal UK&I, Negin Cooper, said that while company loyalty might be decreasing this isn’t a reason to “get lazy” with talent programmes. Cooper explained that there has been a total shift in graduate behaviour over the course of the last year. Young people are taking their time to consider their options, so schemes really have to be worth their time. L’Oreal, for example, said that it is relying on the new blood in the labour market to “challenge the status quo”.

    For L’Oreal, the goal is to gain another one billion customers by year 2020. Graduates are at the forefront of the L’Oreal audience, so the company would be doing itself a disservice if they weren’t taking advantage of this new workforce that will double as a built-in focus group.

    Other companies aren’t as lucky though. UK missiles manufacturer, MBDA has had a skills shortage forcing the organisation to take on apprentices every year for 20 years. HR director for MBDA, Aileen Randhawa, said the average age of an employee at MBDA is 45 years and the average tenure is 27 years. At this point in time, approximately three quarters of the MBDA workforce is retiring in the next 15 years, making it imperative that the company invest in apprentice programmes. The MBDA apprenticeship scheme is four years long but includes extensive training packages and full employment from the start.

    For companies like MBDA it is more important to foster the relationship between the company and a new employee, so they are motivated to stay.

    Both L’Oreal and MBDA agree that it is quite hard to attract new recruits. L’Oreal tries to combat the struggle by holding “lock-ins” where representatives visit universities and host a session on skills.

    While both companies work very hard to maintain their employees, data still shows that one in four young people leave a company after the end of a scheme. This leaves many HR experts wondering if it is really worth the time and money companies are pumping into these recruitment and training programmes.

  • State pension top-up being offered

    Men and women are both being offered the chance to increase their state pension by £25 a week, which will give them guaranteed extra income for life.

    Men who are 65 and upwards and women 63 and older are able to take place in a scheme that will remain open for 18 months from 12th October. Any person who fits the age requirement will be able to buy additional state pension worth up to £1,300 a year.

    Human resource and pensions experts explain that this is a great opportunity for people to increase their guaranteed retirement income with a boost that will be index linked. This means that there will be a level of protection for pensioners and their spouses against inflation. In many cases, surviving spouses and partners will be able to inherit, hopefully, at least 50% of the extra pension.

    Minister for Pensions Baroness Altmann said that this is an opportunity for those who are also already retired to boost their income later in life.

    Ultimately, the cost of a state pension top up is based on the age of the person and takes average life expectancy into account. For instance, an extra £10 of pension a week will cost a 65-year-old man approximately £8,900. The contribution rate for the same amount of pensions for a 75-year-old man, however, is less at £6,740.

  • Court case over FMLA abuse

    The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) can be a tricky thing, even when a company proves that an employee is abusing the policy.

    Lucy Fitterer worked for the State Washington Employment Security Department and was granted intermittent FMLA leave at different points throughout her employment, in order to help her deal with migraines.

    In January 2011, Fitterer requested two weeks of FMLA leave. Unfortunately for her, Fitterer’s step father mentioned to one of her co-workers that she and her husband were planning on using her FMLA leave to take a vacation on a two week cruise.

    HR heard about this through the employee grapevine and decided to reach out to the listed doctor to verify her need for the leave. The doctor told Fitterer’s HR department that she was not incapable of working during the time she would be on leave and also indicated she would not be receiving treatment during the cruise.

    When Fitterer returned to work, she was welcomed back with the news that she had been terminated due to a violation of the company’s leave policy.

    After finding out about her termination, Fitterer sued the company claiming FMLA interference. The only reason Fitterer’s claim could have worked is because failing to get the employee’s permission to contact a listed doctor is grounds for suit. The court, however, ruled that her termination should uphold. The court said Fitterer had zero evidence that she was incapacitated during her two weeks of leave and ruled that a two week cruise was unnecessary to deal with her reported medical condition.

    Human resource experts explain that this is great news for employers everywhere but also an extremely important lesson. This employer was very lucky that the termination was upheld, even though it technically broke the rules. It is highly important for human resource professionals to follow rules and procedures even when foul play is suspected.

  • Hiring in the fourth quarter is expected to be robust

    Full-time hiring in the fourth quarter is expected to be the most robust since 2006. CareerBuilder’s recent research also revealed that seasonal hiring is also slated to outpace last year’s projection.

    Harris Poll conducted the national survey online for CareerBuilder. It included a sample size of 2,326 hiring managers and HR professional across different industries and different company sizes.

    Data has historically outlined that there are a substantial number of working employees who say they are actively looking to change jobs. This remained true despite reporting to be happy and content with their current workplace and position.

    In Q4, 34% of United State’s employers plan to hire full-time, permanent staff, and almost the same amount of seasonal staff. Luckily, seasonal workers will most likely be able to reap the benefits of the recent minimum wage increase. Many companies claimed they were prepared to increase pay for seasonal staff.

    It’s not just retail companies that are looking to hire for these positions either. This wave of employment stretches across multiple industries like customer service, technology, marketing and inventory management.

  • Court of Appeals upholds termination decision

    The 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a black employee was unable to successfully prove that alleged discrimination by his supervisor is what led to the termination of his employment.

    Karry L. Thomas worked at Berry Plastics Corp. (BPC) as a printing operator and then as a printing technician from 2003 - 2010. During this employment period, Thomas was subject to 13 disciplinary actions and as a result, his employment was terminated.

    Jason Morton became Thomas’ immediate supervisor in 2009. While Morton did not have the authority level to personally terminate Thomas, he had been involved in some of the disciplinary actions that led to Thomas’ termination. A little while before his termination, Thomas alleged that he was subject to racial discrimination. Just a few months later, Thomas received a disciplinary report for a print-quality issue that occurred in September 2010.

    Since Thomas challenged his termination, he was given the opportunity to sit in front of a BPC termination review panel, which was comprised of two independent BPC managers who received his full disciplinary history. Thomas, at this point, was able to make a statement in his own defense. The panel still decided that the decision to terminate Thomas was just and it was upheld.

    At this point, Thomas filed suit against BPC under a “cat’s paw” theory of liability. He alleged that Morton took disciplinary action against him because of his race.

    The Kansas District Court ruled in favor of BPC as well as the 10th Circuit. The appeals court felt as though Thomas was unsuccessful at proving Morton had retaliated against him based on race. Additionally, Morton didn’t have the authority to make any kind of human resource termination decision on his own.

    Human resource experts and professionals feel that this particular case highlights the extreme importance of an independent review of employee discharges. These panels become even more important in cases revolving around claims of retaliation and racism as they can help a company disprove these kinds of claims.

  • The Pensions Regulator release a warning to savers about scams

    Every industry can become victim to scams and the pensions world is not excluded.  The Pensions Regulator released a warning to savers to remain aware of the on-going threat of scams while explaining the details of a recent £13.7m pensions theft.

    Three trustees were acting on third party instruction from David Austin and were all deemed by TPR to have misappropriated scheme funds.  TPR also explained how these trustees exercised extremely poor trustee governance.

    Austin was described in the report as acting “as a shadow trustee in control of the funds paid into a number of pensions schemes.”  Upon investigation, TPR believes there was foul play to the tune of £13.7m, which has mysteriously disappeared.  This lump sum of money belonged to approximately 242 members.  The £13.7m includes fees and commission payments.

    The regulators’ Determinations Panel appointed an independent trustee to administer 17 pension schemes in order to prevent any more loss and to help claim back some of the funds.

    Human resource experts are urging savers to be cognizant of warning signs that could indicate a potential scam.  The list includes things like mass marketing techniques, suspicious activity like fund transfers, incentives for lump sum payments or incentives for transfer completions and lack of documentation.

    While the case of this scam and its details are certainly devastating for those involved, HR experts hope that it can serve as an example and a reminder as to why vigilance and attention to savings is so important.   

  • Report says digital skills decline in the 45 and over age bracket

    Digital skills charity Go ON UK, is reporting that about 12.6 million people in the United Kingdom lack at least one of five digital skills it deems as important in their Basic Digital Skills UK report, 2015.

    The charity defines these skills as managing information, communicating, transacting, problem solving and creating basic digital content.

    The report proves that the digital world is really a millennial’s playground with basic digital skills starting to decline in the 45 to 54 year-old age range. One of the most important pieces of data, however, is the one that shows that less than 50% of the people observed in the 65-year-old age bracket demonstrated all five of the skills mention above.  This particular callout is important because workforce reports show that people are starting to work well past the age of 65.  In order to stay relevant and valuable, they will need to catch up.

    Go ON UK is also reporting that substandard digital skills are causing recruitment problems because almost all jobs are advertised online only, and are applied for online only.  If a person lacks the skills necessary to even search for a job, he or she will certainly never be a candidate.  HR experts are trying to convey to organisations that, although these skills are more prevalent now than they used to be, these skills are not as common as we think.

    The good news is that almost 90% of currently employed people in the UK exhibit these five skills.  Greater London has the highest levels of people with all five skills, while Wales has the lowest.  Unsurprisingly, students and people in school have the highest levels of digital skills.

    The findings from the report have been incorporated into the charity’s Digital Exclusion Heatmap, an easy to digest representation that illustrates the level of digital skills across the entire United Kingdom.

  • Stronger hiring plans predicted for the final three months of this year

    Human resource experts and United States employers predict the strongest hiring plans since the fourth quarter of 2007 in the final three months of this year, according to ManpowerGroup’s latest Manpower Employment Outlook Survey.

    While hiring plans in the United States seem to be a cause for celebration, globally things still appear to be a bit patchy. Brazil, Italy, France, Greece and Finland all report “negative” hiring intentions and China plans to add staff at the slowest rate in over six years.

    The Manpower Employment Outlook Survey had over 11,000 United States employers participate. Chief executive officer of ManpowerGroup explained that the US labor market continues to show “broad-based, stable growth, with significant milestones over time”. Unfortunately, as the job market tightens up, employers are reporting that it is becoming more difficult to find skilled candidates.

    Globally, approximately 59,000 employers were surveyed in 42 countries and territories. Overall, hiring prospects strengthened in 15 of the 42 countries while it declined in 20. HR experts feel that this varying degree of intent proves that there is a lack of widespread economic momentum. Politics and economic difficulties clearly play a role in these intentions to hire and as a result, employers are being extremely cautious when choosing when to bring on more working staff.

  • Life expectancies have fallen when compared to 2014

    Some bad news for the UK, it appears that life expectancies have fallen when compared to 2014. The Institute and Faculty of Actuaries CMI Mortality Projections Model released last week was used for the comparison, and is used by the vast majority of UK pensions schemes when making assumptions about the life expectancy of their members.

    The model shows that a male is expected to live, on average, four months less than the 2014 model predicted. United Kingdom pensions experts estimate that this will reduce the liabilities of the UK private sector pension schemes by approximately £15bn.   Public sector pension liabilities could decrease by an estimated £70bn, including state pensions.

    HR experts feel that this information will have to be taken into consideration by trustees and employers, who will have the option of adopting the new projections when updating their figures. These new life expectancy figures could technically just be a “random variation” or they could potentially indicate a slowing of any improvements that have been seen over the last few years. Human resource professionals feel that trustees and employers may even have to wait for another major mass lifestyle change or more medical advances before any kind of life expectancy or longevity begins to accelerate.

    This new model should serve as a reminder to employers and trustees that this is simply a guide and not written in stone. As with any model, it should be taken lightly and not as the be all and end all.

  • Nine in 10 employees want more support with health care decisions

    Year after year it seems that health insurance costs continue to soar and while insurance plans help to a certain extent, employees are being asked to take on more of the financial load.

    According to a series of annual workforce surveys conducted by Aflac, nine in 10 employees claim they expect more decision-making tools and support when they’re making their benefits selections during open enrollment. Since they’re expected to pay more now, HR managers are reporting employees asking for more involvement than ever before. A majority of the surveyed respondents said they want more brand name options, since a good reputation is important to them. Thirty-five percent of employees also agreed when asked if they needed to be more engaged in health insurance coverage decisions. This is a 21% increase from 2014.

    When considering which insurance plan to select though, the number one factor employees said mattered was price. The survey also revealed that many individuals reportedly regretted choosing a high-deductible health plan because they didn’t fully understand what they were signing up for.

  • Research highlights that tax relief on pensions is barely understood

    The majority of working age people with pensions do not understand the tax relief that they receive on their contributions.

    A YouGov online survey conducted for The People’s Pension found that 15% of the respondents had never even heard of tax relief.   This statistic was proven by half of those with a workplace pension who said they’d be more likely to increase the amount they saved if they received a form of tax relief on their contributions.  This response was given despite the fact that most of these people were already receiving tax relief.

    Director of policy and market engagement at The People’s Pension said that this research really highlights the fact that tax relief is barely understood.

    Human resource experts were quite surprised by the results of this survey, due to the fact that there has been widespread publicity about pensions following the introduction of the freedom and choice reforms in April.  This publicity also directly followed the launch of the Chancellor’s consultation into tax relief at the Budget in June this year.

    The survey also found that there was strong support for a system where the Government matched savers’ contributions.  Additionally, if this were to actually happen, over half of the surveyed said they would be more likely to increase the amount they saved.

    As smaller businesses begin to stage for auto-enrolment, millions of people could possibly be introduced to the idea of a pension for the first time.  HR experts believe it is more important now than ever that people understand what a pension is, what comes with it and how to maximize their savings.

  • EAT ruling could pave the way for further caste discrimination cases

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal ‘EAT’, who recently ruled a woman had been discriminated against because of her caste, gave a “warning’ to employers to make sure they’re recruiting, paying and promoting on merit.

    Permila Tirkey was recruited from India and paid only 11p an hour to assume her position as a cleaner and nanny for a family living in the United Kingdom.  The tribunal heard that Tirkey’s family are Adivasi people of “low caste” and her employers made her work 18-hour days, seven days a week as a domestic servant.  Tirkey was awarded £184,000 in unpaid wages in a landmark case deemed “the first successful case of its kind.”

    This was not an easy process for Tirkey, though.  The case against her employers was originally dismissed prior to going to an Employment Appeal Tribunal in January of this year.  Tirkey originally claimed compensation for direct (as well as indirect) race discrimination, harassment and religious discrimination.  In May 2013 her claim was amended to say the treatment she received was also due to her ethnic and national origins (status, caste and descent).

    Tirkey’s employer fought back citing her claim should be struck out because the Equality Act 2010 doesn’t specifically include caste.  Unfortunately for her employer’s, the EAT upheld the case.

    This particular case has implications for the Equality Act and could potentially pave the way for further caste discrimination cases, according to human resource experts.  There are multiple questions surrounding what a caste actually is and how broad this definition extends.  Since this particular case is so highly publicised, HR experts expect to see further caste discrimination cases being brought to tribunal.  The only reason this may not happen, according to sceptics is the recent change to employment tribunal fees.

  • The UK government finish a consultation aimed at helping to close the gender pay gap

    Women in the United Kingdom still earn almost 20 percent less than men (Closing The Gender Pay Gap).  Fortunately, the government have just finished a consultation on new regulations aimed at helping to close this gender pay gap.

    Currently a gender pay gap exists in every EU country, although some governments are starting to tackle this matter by introducing legislature that requires employers to report on information like pay equality. 

    Whilst the United Kingdom is therefore not alone in the fight for gender pay equality, they are trying to stifle this raging issue.  New regulations which are due to come into force in March 2016, will require large private and voluntary sector employers to publish data on gender pay gaps within their organisations.  While the full details surrounding these regulations haven’t been released, human resource experts do believe that the reporting transparency will apply to UK-based employers with 250 or more employees. 

    Unfortunately for some employers, reporting duties currently differ from country to country.  This means businesses with employees across Europe will face a range of different rules, regulations and requirements.

    HR experts explain that since all of these potential changes are now starting to come to light, some international businesses might decide that it’s worth governments considering a more uniform approach to gender pay gap reporting.  Ideally, one kind of requirement or compliance regulation globally for gender pay rate reporting would be a better scenario for certain businesses.  However, the issue with this is that a global rule would potentially affect countries that do not have a commitment to promoting gender equality.

  • Aegon not allowing access to pension freedoms without advice

    Aegon is not allowing its customers to access pension freedoms unless they obtain some form of independent financial advice.

    Unless these customers pay for advice, the pension provider company has completely prevented savers from having flexible access to their own retirement funds until April of next year.  Those who choose not to pay for advice can do one of three things: cash in the entire pension and face a tax bill, exchange the entire fund for an annuity, or transfer to another pension provider.

    This particular decision, according to human resource experts, follows Friends Life’s decision.  Back in June, this company decided not to offer its customers any kind of flexible drawdown.  These decisions are leaving many left to wonder if pension freedoms are even being used in the way the government originally intended.

    Aegon does say that it will possible launch a flexible plan next year, but nothing is set in stone.  This news comes at the same time as Sky News reported that the insurer hired investment bank Citi to oversee the possible sale of its UK assets. 

  • European Court of Justice ruling on travel time

    The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that time spent travelling to and from home by employees who do not have a fixed working base should count towards time worked.

    This landmark decision will affect how maximum weekly working hours and rest break entitlements are calculated.  It will only affect peripatetic workers, or those without a habitual workplace.  This ruling will not affect how commuting is treated for any other kind of worker.  Unfortunately for businesses, human resource experts predict this will mean the possibility of increased pay on behalf of employers since they will have to pay employees for their “drive time”.  The UK government has already vehemently expressed its concern over this.

    This ECJ ruling directly correlates to Federacion de Servicios Privados v Tyco Integrated Security.  This case’s focus is regarding staff at a Spanish security company, but since the ruling covers the EU’s Working Time Directive, it also affects UK employers.

    The TUC is absolutely elated with this ruling since it feels as though this will prevent “unscrupulous employers” from forcing workers into a 60-hour workweek.

    General Secretary for the United Kingdom’s largest healthcare trade union said that he approves of this decision.  He welcomes the idea that home care workers will all be getting the true wages they deserve.

    As with any other ruling, this decision is not without criticism.  The UK government has already expressed its feelings on the matter and the Institute of Directors has also slammed the ECJ for the ruling.  One member of the Institute released the following statement:

    “The notion that the period mobile workers spend travelling between home and their first client in the morning must count as working time goes above and beyond the protections intended by the law.”

  • Few employers plan to offer drawdown as part of their pension plan

    Towers Watson research is reporting that less than half of employers plan to offer a drawdown option as part of their pension plan.  Regardless of organisation plans, the survey also found that 87% of employers believe their staff will still want access to some or all of their pensions using the new drawdown flexibilities after the age of 55.

    Some pension plans are reluctant to offer drawdown because many believe the management of drawdown is far too difficult, aside from the fact that there are governance issues and barriers to adoption.  Currently, many trust-based schemes are still targeting annuity purchase for their default.  Over half of trust-based schemes haven’t even rolled out targeted communications to members 55+ since these new pension rules came into effect.  HR experts warn that without communication, some people won’t know what their options really look like.

    Ultimately, the ability to use drawdown is just as important as the option to purchase an annuity for many members.  Unfortunately, there are some obstacles that make it a bit more challenging to make the new drawdown rules work in practice, but change is inevitable.  Whether this change was rushed or not is irrelevant, it’s now time for employers to adapt.

  • Oil field discrimination lawsuit settled

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that An Iraan, Texas oil field construction and services company, will pay $30,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit.

    The suit, filed in US District Court for the Western District of Texas, charged that Garrison Contractors, Inc. fired its only female roustabout after she reported being sexual harassed on the job in the field.

    The company hired Elma Garza as a dump truck driver in January 2012.  Garza spent most of her time employed with the company as the only female oil field worker.  Garza did everything from fixing oil and gas leaks to digging ditches, all alongside her male counterparts and fellow employees. 

    The suit claimed that throughout her employment, Garza was the victim of lewd comments about female organs and sex.  The suit further explains that when Garza formally reported the behavior of her male peers, the company fired her.

    Aside from the settlement fee, the consent decree settling the lawsuit also requires the company to implement a written anti-retaliation policy that protects employees from adverse employment action for filing complaints.  The company must also conduct annual training for all officers, managers, gang pushers and roustabouts for three years regarding the law against retaliation in the workplace.  Finally, the company has to post an anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation notice.

  • Cutting pensioner benefits will not improve economic prospects for the young

    A recently published TUC report revealed that young people’s failing long-term economic prospects will not be improved by cutting pensioner benefits in order to fund more public spending on younger people.

    The publication titled, ‘Young against old? What’s really causing wealth inequality?’ found that the younger generation’s deteriorating prospects are due primarily to a combination of; increased university tuition fees, unemployment, poorer job opportunities, lower pay and a pretty consistent increase in housing prices.

    Young people are often compared and contrasted with the older generation in these kinds of reports - an older generation which tends to have high levels of wealth.  This has left many human resource experts questioning the validity of certain report results.  This report, however, found that pensioners do not comprise the majority of the UK’s wealthiest households.  The TUC actually found there are wealth inequalities within different age groups as well, which makes sense.  Not all 60-80 year olds are wealthy, just like not all 20-30 year olds are poor.

    The report did find patterns among different age groups that do offer up trends.  For example, workers in their 40’s and 50’s who are high earners and home-owners proved more likely to be wealthy. 

    Ultimately, the report debunked the theory that wealth inequalities are strictly age driven.  Beyond differences in wealth by age bracket, ‘Young against old?’ found wealth variations by region and nation.  Again, certain HR experts wonder why a report even had to be performed in order to prove that wealth inequality exists, theoretically, in any kind of population segment.  For example, there are multiple tiers to poor just as there are multiple levels of wealth.

    Thankfully, the researchers were able to clearly show that removing certain benefits from pensioners to give the younger generation an easier time would not fix the wealth gap that currently exists.  At the end of the day, at some point the government will have to step in and provide some sort of education.

     

  • European Directive could make it harder to review long-term DC pension offers

    Towers Watson is warning that a proposed revision to a European Directive could potentially make it harder for employees to review their long-term defined contribution pensions offers.  The revision, in light of ‘pension freedom’, requests that employers do not move employee’s existing savings to a new vehicle. 

    These potential changes, which haven’t been approved or denied, could also hurt an employers’ ability to consolidate pensions schemes in any kind of merger or acquisition.

    While the European Parliament and Council of Ministers are commenting on the Commission’s proposal for a revised Directive, many HR experts aren’t overly concerned that this revision will make it through to a final. 

    The Commission already proposed that any bulk transfers of members across borders should require the approval of scheme members, or at the very least some kind of representative. 

    If any kind of final Directive does contain these requested provisions, HR experts are urging authorities to provide the necessary clarity about who could count as a member’s representative(s).  Currently, it is not clear whether the trustees of a UK pension scheme could fill this role.

  • Research conducted by Retirement Advantage

    Research conducted by Retirement Advantage found that six percent of over 50’s have no plan to ever retire.

    Although almost half of the respondents did state that they wanted to make sure they always had enough money to do the things they wanted to do, one in five said they were worried about losing the social aspect of work.  The same number said they were concerned about possibly being plagued by boredom!

    In another report conducted by YouGov for Retirement Advantage, a majority of the workers who didn’t want to retire switched to part-time employment, whilst others opted to take an unpaid voluntary kind of position.

    HR experts explain that it really comes down to quality of life for this age group.  Staying active and social is great for the mind.  Human resource professionals also declared that employees who work but don’t have to, can be some of the best employees an organisation has on staff.

    The research shows that patterns are shifting.  It used to be that when a person hit retirement age, they simply retired.  Now, we’re seeing this happen in a more phased approach. Retirees expect to continue to work in some way or capacity beyond their traditional retirement age. The research also shows that the genuine interest in unpaid roles shows how important it is for this age group to make a contribution to society. 

                

  • Young adults unrealistic about their pension goals

    New research from Aegon UK says that young adults between 16 and 24 are the most unrealistic when it comes to their pension goals.  The report cites that this age group is hoping to retire with an average annual income of  £64,000 a year, which is almost six times the average income they are actually on track for. 

    These 16 to 24 year-olds, according to the data, are hoping to retire at 63.  Unfortunately for them, Aegon UK broke down the numbers to determine if this is even really plausible.  In order to achieve a pension pot that would fund an annual income of £64,000, a 20-year-old aiming to retire at 68 would have to save £500/ month, assuming a 5% return.  In order to retire at 63, this number increases.  Realistically, over half of this age group doesn’t contribute any of their money currently to a pension pot at all.

    HR experts chime in explaining that as people get older their retirement ambitions do tend to tail off, meaning their overall hopes and dreams for a certain income number become more realistic.

    Oddly enough, although 16 to 24-year-olds are the most ambitious when it comes to their pensions, they are actually the least involved or engaged with their pension savings.  Approximately seventy percent of this age group has never done anything to review or affect plans for retirement.  Over half don’t even know whether they are eligible to be enrolled in a pension via their workplace.

    The findings of this Aegon UK report, while not very pretty, are very realistic when it comes to the expectations of the youth.  If things don’t change for this age group, many people will fall short of the retirement income they want.

  • Coles v Ministry of Defence (MoD)

    The primary principle of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 is to protect the rights of temporary agency works and make sure they receive equal treatment in relation to their permanent employee peers.

    The Agency Workers Regulations 2010 actually implements the EU’s temporary agency worker directive 2008.  Under Article 6 of the directive, agency workers must be informed of any kind of internal vacancies at their job in order for them to receive the same opportunities as their full time counterparts.

    Coles v Ministry of Defence (MoD), examined Article 6 and whether it gives temps an additional right to apply for internal vacancies on an equal footing with permanent workers.

    The MoD employed a mixture of permanent and temporary workers in Wales.  Coles was a temporary agency worker who acted as a technical liaison officer.  When the MoD advised of internal vacancies, all workers could see the openings, but permanent employees in the redeployment pool were given priority.

    At this point, Coles argued that this kind of prioritisation denied him the opportunity to apply for any job that he had held temporarily.  He further claimed that this was in fact a breach of Article 6 because he wasn’t given the same opportunity to find a permanent position as other permanent employees.

    The employment tribunal disagreed with Cole and ruled against him but he appealed.  The EAT also agreed with the tribunal and dismissed Cole’s appeal.  It was found that although temporary agency workers do have multiple different rights relating to equal treatment, Article 6 only refers to providing information about vacancies.  What this Article does not do is prevent any kind of preferential treatment between permanent and temporary employees.

    Human resource experts refer to this case as a useful clarification of the meaning of Article 6 and a great win for employers who abide by these rules and regulations.

  • The gender pay gap – consultation paper outlines new reporting arrangements

    The government is finally taking action to even out the playing field where the gender pay gap is concerned.  The recently issued consultation paper, ‘Closing the gender pay gap’ outlines plans to implement section 78 of the Equality Act 2010, which has been dormant for five years.

    The new arrangements will effectively require any UK employers with 250 employees or more to report on their gender pay gap on a regular basis.  The paper outlines the request for a view into exactly how, when and where the reporting should occur.

    Of course with any change come questions.  Some HR experts are already asking whether an employer should report on the overall pay gap figure, or whether that should be broken down by full and part-timers.  Human resources experts claim that in order to compare apples with apples, job grade and type should really be considered.  There are also questions about what will happen if a company doesn’t have a pay and grading system.

    The suggestion from many HR professionals is that the implementation of the reporting should really be completed in phases.  For example, the recommendation is that larger employers should be given earlier compliance dates than smaller employers.

    Once reporting commences, government officials assume that a gender pay gap will be present.  If this is the case, the real issue may be the gender talent gap.  It wouldn’t be fair to pay a woman with less experience or less certifications the same as a man who has more of both.

    The Women’s Business Council issued a report this year identifying reasons for the current pay gap.  While it is noted by the Women’s Business Council and the government that the causes are “numerous and varied” one of the main culprits stems from women’s career decisions and the advice they receive.

    The aim for the new reporting system, according to government officials, is really to shine light on each organisation’s gap.  There will not be any action or request for action unless there is meaningful data reported.

  • Case study: The definition of a disability

    The definition of a disability has been expanded to the point where almost anything can be considered.  Unfortunately for one woman, even she couldn’t get past a California court with the story she was trying to pitch.

    Michaelin Higgins-Williams was a clinical assistant at Sutter Medical Foundation.  Approximately three years into her employment, she visited her doctor complaining about stress.  Higgins-Williams claimed that this “stress” was caused by interaction she had with her manager and the foundation’s human resources team.  She was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with anxiety.

    Due to this diagnosis, Sutter granted Higgins-Williams a stress/disability-related leave of absence under California’s Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act and the FMLA.  Once her leave was over, Higgins-Williams returned to work.

    Shortly after returning to her job, she received a negative performance evaluation from her manager.  At this point, Higgins-Williams claimed that her manager was singling her out.

    One month into her return, Higgins-Williams requested additional time off as an accommodation for her disability.  Sutter Medical Foundation approved her request and granted her additional leave.

    Right before she was scheduled to return to work, her doctor submitted a status report to Sutter that said Higgins-Williams needed to be transferred into another department and be under the supervision of another authority.  The doctor also requested additional leave for Higgins-Williams, which again was granted.

    Two months after this request, Higgins-Williams’ doctor requested an additional month of leave and also requested that following the additional leave Higgins-Williams be put in a lighter duty position.  It was at this point that Sutter informed their employee that her doctor hadn’t provided any kind of information as to when she would be able to return to her position.  Her doctor had also neglected to provide information proving additional leave time would help her return to work.  Sutter Medical informed Higgins-Williams that without either of those documents she would be terminated.  The doctor failed to provide these pieces of information and Higgins-Williams was fired.

    Higgins-Williams sued claiming disability discrimination, failure to engage the interactive process and failure to provide reasonable accommodation under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, or FEHA.  In order for Higgins-Williams to even have a case, it needed to be determined by the court if she was even really considered disabled.  The court said:

    “An employee’s inability to work under a particular supervisor because of anxiety and stress related to the supervisor’s standard oversight of the employee’s job performance does not constitute a disability under FEHA.”

    Eventually the court found that Higgins-Williams was treated fairly by her employer who complied multiple times.  She was also fully capable of performing the duties of her job since she wasn’t plagued by anything that would prevent this.  This is considered a huge win for human resource departments because it proves that complying with standards and procedures could help the company come out on top.

  • Maternity discrimination

    A new study shows that the treatment of women during pregnancy and maternity is continuously deteriorating.  Research from the Equality and Human Rights Commission found that thousands of new mothers are being forced to find new work after being dismissed, made redundant or treated poorly.

    The research surveyed over 3,000 mothers with a child or children under two years old from over 3,000 workplaces across the entire United Kingdom.  Over ten percent of the women polled reported, “being edged out of work”.   If these results were to spread across the entire United Kingdom, human resource experts estimate that over 50,000 women could lose their jobs each year.

    On the flip side, employers who were surveyed claimed to support pregnant workers throughout pregnancy and their maternity leave. This conflicts what the rest of the report presents, such as ten percent of the females surveyed who said that their employer discouraged them from attending antenatal appointments.

    Although it was reported in the results of the survey that some of these expectant mothers were allowed to work by a flexible schedule, these same women complained that their careers suffered as a consequence.  They reported less work opportunities and feeling as though their opinions weren’t valued as much as they were previously.  One HR expert explains that this may not be isolated to pregnant women but that many people who work flexible schedules complain of the same thing.  It is possible that because they aren’t in the office as much, the office and their peer’s perceptions of them have changed.

    Of course, discrimination of any kind is both unlawful and bad for business.  This research comes at a time when certain talents are in high demand.  For women, bad reviews from pregnant women or formerly pregnant women weigh heavily.

    This research was released simultaneously with the launch of the #worksforme awareness initiative aimed to reduce pregnancy and maternity discrimination.

  • More small businesses means more pension auto-enrolment duties

    More start-up businesses are opening than ever before and less and less of them are having to close.  This equates to more small and micro employers

    having auto-enrolment duties – actually more than even the Pensions Regulator formerly estimated.

    The Pensions Regulator’s third annual automatic enrolment commentary and analysis was recently published, revealing that a total of approximately 1.8 million small businesses will need to meet their pension duties over the next 3 years.  This number is almost three times the previous estimate.

    The analysis also showed that in the summer of 2017 a small peak will arise of about 350,000 small and micro employers whose automatic enrolment duties will come into effect.

    HR experts use this report to identify changes in trends in the pensions landscape.  So far, human resource professionals feel that saving for a pension is becoming the norm.  Most employers are now choosing to use DC pensions with a fairly even split between trust-based and contract-based schemes.

    The Pensions Regulator executive director of auto enrolment said auto enrolment has had a dramatic impact on the number for people saving for retirement in the United Kingdom.

    The automatic enrolment commentary and analysis report also revealed that most small and micro employers completely understand their automatic enrolment duties.  

  • The EEOC files a religious discrimination lawsuit against UPS

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against UPS after the package delivery company allegedly violated federal law.

    Papers filed in federal District Court in New York State allege that United Parcel Service discriminated against applicants (and its current employees) worldwide, based on religious practices that conflict with their uniform and appearance standards.

    UPS does not allow male employees in customer contact or supervisory positions to wear any kind of beard and prohibits the growth of hair below collar length.  Records indicate that since 2004, UPS has failed to hire or promote any individual who does not comply.  This includes any employee or applicant whose religious practices conflict with the policy.

    The issue is that UPS does not appear to provide any kind of religious accommodations, specifically at its facilities throughout the US.

    There are also situations noted in the filed papers that “prove” UPS violated anti-bias laws.  For example, one anecdote told the story of a Muslim who wears a beard as part of his religious observance who applied for a driver helper position.  This man was told he had to shave his beard in order to get the position and was also told “God would understand”.   Additionally, he was informed that he could apply for a lower-paying job if he wanted to keep his beard.

    UPS is the United States’ largest package delivery company and operates in every state of the country.  They have yet to release an official statement.

  • Patterson v Castlereagh, no reason why voluntary overtime should not be included in holiday pay

    In the case of Patterson v Castlereagh Borough Council, the Northern Ireland appeal court deemed that there was absolutely no reason why voluntary overtime should not be included in holiday pay.

    In the United Kingdom, there has been an ongoing human resources issue concerning how businesses should calculate holiday pay for their employees.  Many of the relevant provisions in the Northern Irish working time regulations reflect the same as those in the United Kingdom.  While there have been multiple overtime claims brought against local authorities, Patterson’s was run as the test case on the issue.  HR experts explain that voluntary overtime is just that; this is agreed overtime which the employer is not obliged to provide and which the employee can either choose to work or choose to reject.

    Patterson worked 52 hours over a period of approximately 13 weeks.  This equates to about four hours of overtime per week, or an additional £60 of pay per week.  Patterson reported that he only received basic pay during his holiday.  The industrial tribunal found that purely voluntary overtime should not be included in the calculation of holiday pay, as it said this had been specifically excluded by the EAT in the Bear Scotland case.  This case looked at overtime that workers were required to accept in situations where it was offered to them.  At this point, Patterson appealed to the NI Court of Appeal citing that the industrial tribunal made a mistake in the interpretation of the EAT’s comments.

    Lawyers acting on both sides ultimately agreed that the tribunal had mistakenly interpreted the Bear Scotland decision.  The appeal court agreed with both sides and found there was no reason in principle why voluntary overtime shouldn’t be included in holiday payment.

    Patterson v Castlereagh Borough Council truly is a landmark case in the long running debate surrounding the calculation of holiday pay and overtime.  Human resource experts urge companies to clearly state their rules when it comes to overtime and overtime payment to avoid any issues in the future.

  • Pension liberation scams still a problem

    A pension liberation scam is when scheme members are encouraged to transfer their benefits to another scheme, in circumstances that are not in their best interest. These scams are still very much a problem.

    In 2014, the Finance Act tried to address the issue on a small scale by making it easier for HMRC to de-register schemes and making it harder for schemes to become registered.

    Regardless of whether or not trustees suspect that a proposed receiving scheme is a liberation vehicle, scheme members still have a statutory right to transfer.

    Linklaters, however, feels there is a better way to approach this growing issue. A Linklaters pensions partner says that most pensions liberation vehicles will already be registered and probably are under the radar. He added that instead of making it harder to register, “HMRC should publish a list of those registered schemes that it is content to see receiving transfers. The question of whether a member has a statutory right to transfer to a given scheme would then depend on whether that scheme was on the list”.

    Linklaters believe that it shouldn’t be very difficult for HMRC to check whether or not a scheme should be put on the transfer list, by using existing tax info about the scheme and the sponsor or info from the FCA.

  • Due diligence to make sure successor companies are not liable for past violations of their acquired company

    A human resources occupational safety expert recently concluded that a new trend exists in the business world that deems successor companies liable for past violations of their acquired company.

    When it comes to mergers and acquisitions, it is extremely important for companies to perform safety and health due diligences, because once the paperwork is signed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration will not show leniency to the new company owner. A full safety and health review should therefore be completed so that the buying company understands what obligations they are buying into and what safety record it is adopting.

    Certain repeat offenses can cost an employer upwards of $70,000. Violations attached to repeat penalties are often characterized in one of three ways: Having been committed by the same employer, the same employer received a prior citation for the same or a very similar condition/hazard, or the prior citation became a final order of OSHRC.

    The line becomes blurred when the idea of what constitutes the “same employer” is questioned. HR experts typically identify the same employer as the same corporate entity. In some cases, multiple corporate entities within a corporate structure could be protected from repeat liability.

    OSHRC uses two different tests to determine successor ship for repeat liability. The first test is known as the “alter ego” analysis. This applies to any employer that commits violations confirmed through an OSHA settlement or an OSHRC decision goes out of business and later resurfaces under a new or different name. OSHRC asks multiple questions in their analysis including, is the same work being performed in the same manner?

    The second test is called “substantial continuity” which says that an employer can be cited for violations of a prior employer if the two companies operate with substantial continuity.

    At the end of the day, human resource professionals urge companies to avoid getting hit with repeat violations by keeping the lines of communication open throughout the entire corporate structure.

  • United settle lawsuit regarding disabled employees

    Question: If an employee is no longer capable of performing his/her essential job functions due to a disability, does the employer need to reassign this employee a new position (which he or she is qualified for) ahead of better-qualified employees?

    Answer: Yes…Well, sometimes.

    The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals made the ultimate ruling that if a disabled employee needs a transfer in order to keep working, an available position for which they are qualified has to go to that employee. This remains true unless the employer can prove that offering the person the job over another candidate would amount to an unreasonable accommodation.

    The ruling came from a lawsuit filed by the EEOC against United Airlines. The agency claimed the airline illegally required workers with disabilities to compete for vacant positions that they were qualified to obtain. The EEOC claimed that this requirement violated the ADA. United refuted the statements and initially won the suit.

    Unfortunately for United Airlines, when the decision was further reviewed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals it was overturned. The Seventh Circuit Court felt that United’s requirement for disabled employees to compete for positions worked against the ADA’s requirement to provide reasonable accommodations.

    The airline did petition the Supreme Court to review the case, but the request was denied. This allowed the EEOC to pursue its case against United.

    Instead of waiting for the EEOC, United decided to settle the lawsuit to the tune of $1 million. The money will be paid out to a class of former United employees with disabilities. United also agreed, as part of the settlement, to revise its reassignment policy, train employees and management on the changes and provide reports to the EEOC on disabled individuals who are denied reassignment.

  • Employees claim company violated ERISA’s Section 510 to avoid paying health benefits

    Section 510 of Obamacare’s employer mandate reads:

    “… it shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline, or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary of an employee benefit plan for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under an employee benefit plan …”

    Since its enactment, Section 510 of ERISA has caused many employment law experts to question if it could be used to bring lawsuits against employers who cut workers’ hours to circumvent the mandate.

    Employees at Dave & Buster’s filed a class action lawsuit against the restaurant chain saying that the company violated ERISA’s Section 510 by reducing their hours to below 30 per week.  The employees are saying that the company did this in order to avoid Obamacare’s employer mandate to provide full-time employees with health benefits.

    According to the lawsuit paperwork, during a meeting at a Dave & Buster’s location, a company general manager said that Obamacare would wind up costing the company over $2 million.  In order to avoid this, the plan was to cut the hours of full-time workers.  According to the plaintiffs, similar meetings were held at Dave & Buster’s across the company.

    While this has yet to go to court, employment experts are calling this a landmark case.  Currently there is no answer to whether or not ERISA can actually be applied to health plans.

  • Pensions savings may be hit by IHT

    Although the Government has stated otherwise, some people using the new pensions flexibilities might find their saving are hit by inheritance tax (IHT).

    It was announced last September that defined contribution pension scheme members dying before the age of 75 would be able to leave any remaining drawdown funds to their survivors completely tax free.  Many people are keeping this statement in mind when making retirement decisions.

    Unfortunately, unless the existing legislation is amended, drawdown funds will actually fall into the member’s estate upon death.  A member’s estate is subject to inheritance tax.

    Human resource professionals explain that this completely contradicts what the Government stated last September.  If it is enforced, it could potentially lead to a double taxation of drawdown funds where a member dies after reaching age 75.

    HR experts are pleading for the Government to address this issue before another Finance Bill passes.

  • Executives in the US report that Millennials are driving IT departments to adapt their infrastructures

    When the generation shifts, so too must the workplace.  IT executives across the United States are reporting that the recent surge of Millennials in the workplace is reshaping business environments and driving IT departments to adapt their infrastructures. 

    While approximately one third of respondents from a Randstad Technologies and IDG Research Services study said they have not addressed any issues, the rest of the respondents said they are slowly adapting a plan to address Millennials’ needs.  There is a reported massive gap between what this generation wants and expects of internal IT departments and what is actually being offered.

    The survey looked to CIOs, CTOs, directors and IT architects to examine perception and plans for changes that will need to be made in response to the generation shift. 

    HR experts believe this shift is partly due to the way Millennials have grown up.  This age group wants the same technology capabilities inside work that they do outside of work.  This remains true whether employers look at communication, social media, or cloud storage.  Human resources experts also explain these IT shifts are absolutely necessary in order for employers to attract and retain Millennial talent.

    The survey found that mobile technology is one of the most essential shifts in supporting Millennials’ needs.  Over 75% of IT leaders have witnessed an increase in their organization’s mobile and remote workforce.  Seventy percent of the survey’s respondents listed mobility as a technology essential to supporting the Millennial shift. 

    Other things listed as essential to supporting this shift included communication tools, collaboration tools to address evolving work styles and cloud computing and storage so work can be completed from locations outside of the office.

    Upper management absolutely realizes that security management will also have to evolve in order to support these new technologies.  Over half of the surveyed population has a plan to increase investments in security management systems over the coming year.

  • Thousands of contracting out records need reconciling by April 2016

    Equiniti is estimating that about 17,500 contracting out records will need to be reconciled per day because of the end of contracting out in April 2016.  At this time, flat rate single-tier pensions will be introduced.

    Currently, reconciliation errors reach as high as 50% in some of the schemes that use Equiniti to manage the process and most of the queries that Equiniti are addressing directly relate to issues like membership reconciliation and incorrect scheme data.

    HR experts explain that with HMRC withdrawing its support for benefit queries in December 2018, schemes should consider putting measures in place immediately in order to hit the April 2016 deadline for registration.  It is expected that around 10% will not register to take advantage of HMRC’s free and dedicated contracting out reconciliation support team over the next 41 months.

    Equiniti and HMRC have been spreading as much awareness as possible to educate on the upcoming deadlines and key factors in reconciliation consideration.  Equiniti’s operations director explains that contracting out reconciliation hasn’t really received the attention it needs and that in many cases many schemes that were thought to be in good shape were actually not.

  • New out-of-pocket limits for non-grandfathered health plans

    A new FAQ on Obamacare has caused quite the ruckus in the world of human resources.  In 2016, new out-of-pocket limits kick in for non-grandfathered health plans.  This will make the single coverage limit rise to $6,850 and the family coverage limit increase to $13,700.  These limits will apply to every single individual under a plan, regardless of whether that person is enrolled in family coverage or not.

    The HR world is referring to this as the “embedded rule”.  In a nutshell, this is how this rule will work:

    Consider having four individuals enrolled in family coverage under a non-grandfathered group health plan that has an out-of-pocket limit of $13,000.  If one of the individuals under your plan has  $12,000 in expenses they can only be held responsible for $6,850 of those charges. This places the plan on the hook for the rest of the money.  In this case, the rest of the money equates to $5,150.  Basically, the rest of the individuals on your plan could still rack up $6,150 worth of out-of-pocket charges before reaching the plan limit of $13,000.

    The rules currently still in place dictate that the individual could have ultimately been held responsible for the entire $12,000 bill.  Once the embedded rule fully kicks in, this will no longer remain true.  The maximum an employee could be made to pay under a non-grandfathered group health plan will be $6,850.  End of story. 

    Currently, most employers’ plans are not in compliance with this “embedded rule”.  One analysis found that only 17% of firms have an embedded out-of-pocket limit in their high deductible plans.  This will need to change and fast, since the rule kicks in no later than 2016.

     

  • Defamation claims on the rise

    HR experts in the United States are reporting an increase in the amount of defamation lawsuits. 

    A news outlet for tech-focused legal professions, The Recorder, recently spoke to employment lawyers in the Silicon Valley and found that when it comes to wrongful termination and discrimination lawsuits against employers, many are adding defamation to their claims.

    The Recorder said that one source claimed at least 60% of his wrongful termination and harassment cases include some sort of defamation claim.  This same source claimed that defamation claims are being tacked on whether they’re applicable or not.

    Why, though?  Well, a defamation claim gives the plaintiff yet another way to recover money, while increasing their chances of doing so.  Basically, terminated employees are citing that the reasons for termination are hurting their reputation, making employment hard to find.

    While it is admitted that defamation was always an avenue terminated employees could take, it is just now becoming more and more prevalent in wrongful termination cases…mainly because it’s working. One employee managed to collect over $5 million dollars because of the defamation claims. 

    Thankfully, employers aren’t completely powerless in these cases.  As long as there is proper documentation, it is hard for a judge to rule against the employer.  Many times, terminated employees win in defamation cases because the employer doesn’t have incidents properly recorded. If the employer claims an employee is constantly late, tardiness needs to be documented in the form of time cards or attendance records.  All the employer has to do in these cases is prove that the alleged defamatory statement is true.    

  • Plans to repair deficits of pension schemes have been derailed

    Towers Watson are reporting that plans to repair deficits of pension schemes with actual valuations this spring have been derailed. 

    For a scheme with a March/April 2015 valuation, the contributions being paid by the employer would have to rise by about 30% in order to get the scheme on course to clear the deficit by the date agreed upon. 

    If the contributions do not see a 30% increase, the date by which the plan would be fully funded against its target would have to be pushed back approximately two years.

    HR experts explain that over the course of the last three years, investments have performed strongly but lower bond yields have increased liabilities. 

    “Typically, cash deficits will be about where they were three years ago: the significant sums that employers have paid into their pension schemes have only allowed them to tread water.”

    Some employers, of course, will increase their contributions but some scheme sponsors will want to resist this increase.  No word from the Pensions Regulator about if there will be consequences for resisting the increase, or if there will be incentive to comply.

  • Employers recommendations wanted regarding saving for retirement

    Employees definitely want their employers’ recommendations when it comes to saving for retirement, according to a new study from financial services firm Northern Trust.

    The survey accessed 1,000 participants in workplace 401(k) programs, or other defined contribution retirement plans.  The results found that almost 90% of respondents strongly favored their employers providing tools to determine if they are saving the correct amount for a secure retirement.  Only a little less felt that employers should encourage their employees to contribute to their retirement plan.

    Not only do employees want their employers’ advice, but most of the respondents said they would actually consider using the advice when it came to determining what their contribution should be.  This would turn this advice into something actionable. 

    The study also interviewed plan sponsors who had reservations about taking a more active role in employee schemes.  Targeted recommendations, especially at salary levels, create an abstract form of liability that many employers aren’t willing to take on.

    As time goes on, most Americans have to save more and more to achieve a financially secure retirement.  HR experts explain that certain actions can be taken to achieve financial security in retirement.  Employers can easily increase their role in encouraging general retirement savings, like recommendations by age.  It would also help if employers provided employees with tangible numbers, like savings projections.   Of course, these numbers would be strictly estimations, but it could help certain employees understand how a little bit of money from each paycheck could add up.

  • UK companies are prioritise compliance requirements for pensions over adequacy

    Research by Towers Watson shows that with the amount of change pension legislation has seen over the last five years in the UK, companies are beginning to prioritise compliance requirements over adequacy in order to remain in line.

    Over half of the companies surveyed in the FiT for Retirement report, claimed that compliance was their number one priority when it came to their defined contribution pensions.  This emphasis puts their workers’ education and understanding much lower on the totem pole. 

    Unfortunately, according to many HR experts, the emphasis on compliance is forcing the issue of adequacy to sit on the back burner.  This isn’t entirely surprising to human resource experts, however.  Given the number of changes the pensions world has seen, it only makes sense that employers are working overtime to make sure they are following the rules.  Although it is understandable, is it right? 

    Many workers feel as though the heavy emphasis on compliance takes away from why employers offer pensions in the first place; either for attraction and retention, or for employees to use during retirement.

    The survey did find that UK employers were hoping to decrease the amount of emphasis that is being placed on compliance and shift to an increased focus on effective pension management. 

    In the United States, compliance is the lowest priority for employers but pension regulations are far more stable in the US than they are in the UK. 

                

  • Survey shows female managers are better at boosting employee engagement than males

    Gallup recently released a report that indicates female managers are better at boosting employee engagement than their male counterparts, by six percentage points. 

    In the report titled State of the American Manager: Analytics and Advice for Leaders, Gallup says that employees who work for a female manager in the United States are, on average, more engaged. 

    Gallup used data it has compiled over the years to create a checklist of positive qualities employees find in their managers.  The topics range from whether or not the employee feels their ideas are valued, to the type of feedback received from their manager.

    State of the American Manager also compared the 2015 survey results with their 1953 survey results.  In 1953, only 5% of respondents stated that they would prefer a female supervisor.  This year, that number jumped to 20%. 

    The report also showed that female employees who work for female managers are the most engaged type of worker.  Male employees who report to a male manager are actually the least engaged, according to the results.

    Why are female managers considered better at building employee engagement, though?  The answer is, quite possibly, because they are more engaged themselves.  Forty-one percent of female managers are engaged at work while only 35% of male managers showed the same level of engagement. 

                 

  • Annual survey reveals signs of compensation increases for IT professionals

    Results published in April 2015 from Computerworld’s 29th annual IT Salary Survey, revealed that after several years there are signs of compensation increases for IT professionals.

    The survey was conducted through December 18, 2014 and included over 4,500 IT professionals based in the United States.  In 2015, the average total compensation for IT professionals increased by 3.6%.  The survey revealed that the average in the three preceding years was only 2%.

    A major reason for the rise in salaries is the increasingly competitive nature of the hiring market.  Managers are finding it harder and harder to fill empty positions, especially for those that are looked at as high demand.  For example, application development remains the most in-demand skill and a hard one to find in applicants.

    Raises were also more prevalent than in past years.  Sixty-seven percent of the respondents reported receiving salary increases in 2015, but only 60% reported the same thing in 2014.  The most common bonus types came in the form of annual bonuses, performance-based bonuses and profit-sharing bonuses.

    Money is a huge motivator in all sectors and IT isn’t any different.  The survey also showed that 60% of the respondents were highly motivated by higher compensation.  This was true even for IT professionals who were not actively seeking a new job.  A salary increase for this group would instigate a change in jobs.

    Even though salaries and bonuses are on the incline, only half of the respondents reported that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their total compensation.  One quarter of them said they were dissatisfied or verydissatisfied.

  • Court rules employees must prove “serious health conditions” to succeed in FMLA cases

    An 8th Circuit recently made a decision that proves in order to succeed in an FMLA case, an employee must prove that he or she suffers from a “serious health condition” as defined by the Act.  A single doctor’s visit can be found insufficient in proving this. 

    Kendrick Johnson worked at U.S. Steel in Arkansas.  He was scheduled to work from May 12 through May 15 but on May 12 he informed his supervisor that he had blurred vision, a stiff neck and back pain.  At this time Johnson tried contacting the company’s employee-relations supervisor, Tammara Love, but was unsuccessful.  He then left a message explaining that he was going to see a doctor.

    When Johnson went to a nearby clinic, Stephen Steward a physician’s assistant who had never seen him before, examined him.  Stewart diagnosed Johnson with high blood pressure and also prescribed medication for the condition.  At the same time, Stewart told Johnson that he should follow up with his regular physician.  Stewart also provided a note to Johnson that explained why he was absent and that he could return to work on May 16. 

    Johnson took this note and delivered it to his supervisor and explained to coworkers that he would be absent for a few days as per doctor’s orders.  The very next day Love called Johnson and requested he come in to discuss the note.  She explained to Johnson that another note was necessary.  Johnson then left and returned with a note signed by a paramedic, because Stewart was busy.  This new note was rejected.  It was then suggested that Johnson seek out a note that had more detail surrounding why he had missed work.  The clinic refused to provide another, more detailed note.  Johnson was then suspended and terminated two days later on May 18.  The company stated that Johnson had altered, falsified or forged the work excuse.  U.S. Steel never provided Johnson with a notice of his FMLA rights/obligations.

    After his dismissal, Stewart faxed new copies of work excuses to Love and explained that nothing had been forged. However Johnson still was not re-employed.  When Johnson finally got around to seeing his normal physician he was told his blood pressure was normal.  Johnson eventually filed suit against U.S. Steel alleging interference and retaliation under the FMLA.

    In order to prove a claim under the FMLA an employee must show that he was entitled to the leave and then entitled to be re-instated.  The FMLA states that in order to be entitled to leave, an employee must have a “serious health condition that makes him unable to perform the functions of the position.”

    Johnson claimed he qualified under the continuing treatment heading but after evidence evaluation, the court found that Johnson did not have “continuing treatment,” and did not qualify for FMLA protection. Since Johnson had very little evidence of subsequent visits to any doctor, the court found that his “condition” was more likened to a minor illness. Since he wasn’t entitled to the FMLA leave in the first place, his claims for interference and retaliation failed.

    The bottom line and human resources takeaway is that if an employee cannot show he suffers from a “continuing” health issue that requires ongoing treatment, it isn’t likely that he will prove entitlement to FMLA leave.  In many cases, a single doctor’s note can prove insufficient, like in Johnson’s situation.

  • Warning to savers that retirees need greater protection from insolvent firms

    The Money Charity is warning savers that retirees will need greater protection if firms become insolvent.

    Since the beginning of April, retirees have had different options when it comes to what to do with their defined contributions, or DC pots.  Unfortunately, HR experts reported that all have significant gaps in how each are protected.  The Money Charity identified that if a firm collapses while a consumer is building up their pot, they’ll receive 90% of the fund value under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).  Once they access those savings, though, the levels of protection will vary greatly.  For example, if a person puts a lump sum in savings or a current account they’ll be covered up to £85,000 per banking licence holder.  However, if a user buys an annuity they’ll be covered for the entirety of their policy.

    Overall responsibility for setting the compensation limits is split between the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.  The Money Charity is calling on both parties to review the levels of protection available to consumers across the market, as well as anyone who may try to access their retirement savings.  The Money Charity is requesting that these people in particular have access to guidance that will help them make fully-informed decisions on how to use their savings.

  • US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission discusses workplace bias

    Some human resource experts recently discussed workplace biases against women, older workers, minorities and people with disabilities at a public meeting in Miami (April 15).  While the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, EEOC, certainly improved job opportunities for these workers, it certainly did not eliminate any kind of obstacles.

    During this meeting, the EEOC’s efforts to eliminate employment barriers and increase job opportunities for these Americans was applauded, but several voiced their concerns about the EEOC’s enforcement efforts.

    At one point, the discussion centered on ways the EEOC could further help to break down barriers for minorities in the workplace.  One idea was to convince business leaders that corporate diversity and inclusion programs add value to the business.

    One HR expert said that encouraging businesses to develop voluntary diversity programs that fit the needs of the organization is probably the best and most effective approach.  These programs include webinars and seminars on appropriate workplace behavior and discussion.      

  • A busy first week of enquiries for pension providers

    The Association of British Insurers (ABI) revealed that the first week of new pension freedoms has been quite a busy one, with high but manageable, levels of inquiries flowing into providers.

    This early feedback confirms what many HR experts guessed; there is a lot of focus from savers on how to release cash from their pensions.  With this said, providers’ experiences in the first few days of these freedoms have underlined things customers should consider when they want to cash out their pension.

    The first thing to consider according to providers, are the implications.  While many people think they’ve made up their minds about their money and what to do with it, customers should still consult Pension Wise, as well as their provider to understand what could happen. 

    Additionally, customers should understand that if they turn their entire pension pot into cash a hefty tax bill could be incurred.  This would, ultimately, reduce the amount of money available to them.  People using UFPLS to release several lump sums should really expect to see emergency tax imposed on these payments.  They will then need to reclaim from HMRC.  The way the tax system is designed, tax payment happens upfront and if there is an over-payment it is corrected later.

    Finally, customers with a valuable guarantee in their pension are actually required by the Government to take financial advice prior to cashing in if their safeguarded benefits are worth at least £30,000. 

    Many human resource experts feel that this is definitely a new era for pensions and that this is kind of an exploration period for customers.  At the same time, customers shouldn’t feel pressure to make any sudden decisions.  Companies are taking their time in explaining options to individual savers, even those who think they’ve made up their minds already.

  • Parental leave pay debate

    Women might not be the only gender to reap the benefits of maternity leave anymore.  New shared parental leave and pay rights apply to the parents of babies due, or children matched for adoption, on or after April 5th.

    The government has long been encouraging employers to enhance shared parental pay.  However, its view is that companies are not legally obligated to do this on the basis that the appropriate person for a male employee to compare himself with is not a woman receiving enhanced maternity pay, but a woman on shared parental leave.  If a man and a woman were to take parental leave, get treated the same way and paid the same wages, there would be zero claims for any kind of direct discrimination.

    Unfortunately, the rules might not be completely without grey area.  Men can take shared parental leave from the birth of their baby.  This potentially leaves room for men to compare themselves with a new mother who is receiving an enhanced maternity pay.  In turn, this could lead to claims of discrimination because men would not be receiving any kind of enhanced pay during this shared parental leave period.

    HR experts feel that even if direct discrimination claims don’t fully succeed, the indirect claims would still be an issue.  In one recent case, an indirect discrimination claim did not succeed because the employment tribunal agreed that while the male was treated differently, the female’s enhanced maternity pay was “objectively justified”.

    One way, according to human resource experts, to avoid these kinds of claims, is to match the company’s maternity pay provisions for the male.  If this would not be feasible, an alternative could be to offer some form of enhancement during the shared leave.

  • Labour’s plans for zero hours contracts

    Many human resource experts are already sounding off on Labour’s most recent plans to overhaul zero hours contracts.

    In what some are calling an aggressive promise, Labour is looking to reform the much-criticised contracts.  By changing the law, Labour leaders say that the growing issue of zero hour contracts will come to a slowdown.  While the proposal seems bold, there will of course be exceptions to the rule.  For example, agency nurses who request the contracts so that they can work at more than one hospital would be an exemption.

    Unfortunately for Labour, Conservatives and business leaders are highly against the idea.  Some Conservatives are calling the move, “unnecessary” and “potentially damaging”.  They are calling this an example of politics trumping good policy.

    The CBI’s director, General John Cridland, has also been pretty vocal about his dislike for the idea.

    “The UK’s flexible job market has given us an employment rate that is the envy of other countries,” Cridland said. “Proposals to limit flexible contracts to 12 weeks are wide of the mark.”

    The Conservative party is claiming that only one in 50 jobs is actually a zero hours job and that three quarters of new jobs created since this particular government came into office are, indeed, full time.

    In the event that he wins this upcoming election, Ed Miliband has already promised to introduce legislation that would force employers to give staff a permanent position if they have already completed 12 weeks’ continuous zero-hours work.

  • Starbucks “Race Together” campaign halted

    Many employment law and human resource experts are calling Starbucks’ most recent campaign that urged employees to “Race Together”, “absurd” and “irresponsible”.

    On March 15th Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz, said he wanted to help improve race relations by having baristas write the words “Race Together” on their famous white and green coffee cups.

    The campaign was trying to promote conversations about issues such as race relations.  Schultz called the campaign “well-intentioned” right before he abruptly ended it on March 22nd, approximately one week after the launch.  The initiative was ended with a letter written to the employees by Schultz.  In the letter Schultz expressed the empathy he had for the employees and the way they felt about “Race Together”. 

    The days leading up to the decision were filled with criticisms about the program.  Many HR experts said the campaign would breed workplace complaints about discrimination, harassment and hostile work environments.  Some critics questioned why the campaign was even created.  It circulated that Starbucks may only have run the campaign to capitalize on sensitive subjects. 

    Some HR experts pointed out that a campaign like “Race Together” could make it difficult for the company to discipline employees if the former has expressed certain opinions about race.

  • Many people have no idea how much they have saved for their upcoming retirement

    A recent survey found that three in five workers and people aged 65 and under who have pension savings and are looking for work, have no idea how much they have saved for their upcoming retirement.  Human resource experts are highly concerned that this lack of knowledge might prevent savers from making the most of the pensions freedom and choice agenda after April 6th.

    The survey was conducted by YouGov on behalf of B&CE, provider of The People’s Pension, a large private sector multi-employer scheme in the UK.

    Contrary to the aforementioned data, almost 90% of people know how much money is in their bank account, while almost 75% of respondents know how much they have in other savings accounts.  Overall, however, women were far less likely to know how much they saved in their pension than men.

    Numerous HR experts feel that the data isn’t overly surprising.  Many people reported that they find it difficult to keep track of their savings, especially when they have more than one pension pot in different schemes. 

    Due to all of the concern, HR officials like the Pensions Minister, the Financial Conduct Authority and the Work and Pensions Select Committee are calling for a pensions dashboard.  They are requesting a one-stop-shop for savers that would alleviate any confusion and allow pensions to be managed with ease.  The survey found that public opinion was divided when it came to who should be responsible for producing the pensions dashboard.  While there is division surrounding the technicalities of the request, most people agree that the dashboard should be one of the government’s priorities.

  • Associational ADA bias case

    Most employers understand that when an employee is disabled, they have an obligation to comply with the ADA.  Most employers, however, are unaware that this might still hold true if an employee’s relative is disabled. 

    Elizabeth Manon was a receptionist at the Globe Institute of Technology.  Manon had an infant daughter who suffered from an asthma-like condition called Reactive Airway Disease. 

    Due to Manon’s daughter’s health issues, she often came in late, left early or missed whole days of work to attend to her daughter.  Over the course of her 6-month tenure at the Globe Institute, Manon left early 54 times, came in later 27 times and was absent for a total of 17 days.

    She did her best to give notice when she could, especially on days where she wasn’t going into work at all and Manon’s manager was fully aware of Manon’s situation.  Although Manon came to work late or left early many times, Garcia only reprimanded Manon once for being late.  However, Manon was eventually fired after she returned to work from unexpectedly being out for several days to care for her daughter.

    Manon and her manager participated in a termination meeting where she was told that he needed a person who “does not have kids who can be at the front desk at all times.”  Her manager went on to ask “How can you guarantee me that two weeks from now your daughter is not going to be sick again…So, what is it, your job or your daughter?”

    It was at this point that Manon sued for associational ADA bias, claiming that she had been fired because she had to care for her disabled daughter.  The company tried to get the case thrown out because her absenteeism was, allegedly, the real reason behind her termination.  Unfortunately for the Globe Institute, a judge ruled the case should go to trial because a jury could reasonably believe the manager’s comments were a “smoking gun”, and because Manon’s constant communication could lead a jury to conclude that the manager knew the situation when he fired Manon.

    HR experts say that the Globe Institute is now facing a very costly lawsuit or settlement and employers should always remember to incorporate tact and sensitivity into conversations about disabled relatives and disability in general.  

  • Court case regarding an employee with Aspergers

    In 2006, Mark Bellerose started work at a school as a custodian. The following year Bellerose received his only annual performance appraisal. He was rated “Very Good” and “Outstanding”, receiving a total of 52 points out of 55.
    Over the course of his employment, Bellerose made multiple oral complaints to various different people about the conditions at the school and the supervisor’s failure to address them. For example, one time Bellerose reported that his supervisor made no attempt to shut off the water supply to the school when the power was out for days. He also reported instances of mold growing on classroom walls, ice dams on the roof and even the school’s failure to inspect the smoke alarm system.
    At one point, Bellerose received a warning about his failure to follow the correct “chain of command”. However, according to Bellerose, he was never notified of a chain of command. After the verbal warning, he received a written warning where he was reprimanded for failing to “complete the task of snow removal” during a holiday break. It should be noted that there was never a need to shovel snow because it didn’t snow during that week.
    Bellerose received a “final warning” for using profanity in front of a citizen and two children. He was able to obtain statements from two other school employees who denied ever hearing him say anything inappropriate.
    After learning that his Asperger’s could potentially qualify him for a disability, Bellerose provided info about his condition to the principal. A few months later, the principal informed Bellerose that his contract would not be renewed because his “Asperger’s got in the way of [his] ability to interact with [his] boss, and we are tired of it.”
    The school argued that Bellerose didn’t have Asperger’s during the relevant time period and that he wouldn’t qualify under the ADA for disability. Unfortunately for the school, Asperger’s is defined as a lifetime condition that substantially limits life activities including social interaction. The court concluded that the school district’s evidence that it did not renew his contract for reasons outside of his disability just created a credibility determination for a jury to sort out at trial.
    The court concluded that Bellerose’s submission of documents merely explaining what Asperger’s is wasn’t an explicit request for a reasonable accommodation. It was also noted that Bellerose didn’t allege that his provision of the information was related in any way to his warning letters or his write-ups for behavior.
    In order for Bellerose’s wrongful termination claim to proceed to trial, Bellerose would have to establish that the school terminated him in bad faith. The court allowed his wrongful discharge claim to proceed because the school district failed to challenge the public policy element of his claim.
    HR experts urge employers to understand that an employee with Asperger’s may be able to point to “sufficient facts to prove that he or she has a disability within the meaning of the ADA.” This can pose a dilemma for an employer since it could become their responsibility to accommodate them.

  • Charge cap for default funds used for automatic enrolment to be implemented

    The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), confirmed final rules, which will require firms operating pension schemes to implement a charge cap for default funds used for automatic enrolment.

    The FCA has been working hand-in-hand with the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to make sure that all members benefit from a pension scheme, regardless of what kind it is.

    Default funds are best defined as what is used when a pension scheme member has not actively chosen a fund to invest in.

    Beginning on 6th April, firms providing workplace pensions used by employers for automatic enrolment will have to cap charges within default funds to 0.75% per year of funds under management.

    HR experts explain that those saving into a workplace pension should get value for the money they save, even if they aren’t actively playing a role in where their money is invested.  The charge cap should help ensure this. 

    Additionally, under the new rule, firms won’t be able to pay for or receive consultancy charges and commissions for advice not expressly agreed upon by scheme members.  Firms also will not be able to charge active and deferred members of schemes differently based on whether or not they are contributing to a scheme.

  • Budget proposes allowing early withdrawals from 401(k) for the unemployed

    President Obama’s planned 2016 budget is proposing for a provision that, if passed, would allow unemployed citizens to withdraw up to $50,000 from their individual 401(k) accounts without penalty.

    Currently in the United States, early withdrawals are subjected to a 10% penalty plus income tax requirements.  An “early withdrawal” is a withdrawal made before age fifty nine and a half.

    Whilst the proposal does get rid of the 10% penalty, there are some other rules attached to the plan.  These include:

    • Withdrawals would still be subject to income taxes;
    • Any person wishing to make a withdrawal must have received unemployment compensation for more than 26 weeks;
    • Participants could withdrawal at least $10,000;
    • If a participant has more than $10,000 in their account, the person could withdrawal half of their plan-balance up to a total withdrawal of $50,000 per year;
    • Participants would have to withdrawal the funds either in the year they received unemployment compensation or the following year.

    Right now, human resource experts are really not sure how likely the provision is to pass but NBC News is reporting that it appears to have bipartisan support.

  • Wal-Mart settle an ongoing age and discrimination claim

    Wal-Mart recently agreed to pay $150,000 to settle what was an ongoing age and discrimination claim.
    The EEOC claimed that Wal-Mart discriminated against the manger of the Keller, Texas location by subjecting him to harassment, discriminatory and unfair treatment. Furthermore, the retail juggernaut failed to provide a reasonable amount of accommodations for David Moorman’s disability. Moorman submitted a request after being diagnosed with diabetes to be reassigned to a store co-manager or an assistant manager. It was at this point that Wal-Mart refused to engage in the interactive process of discussing the request and/or why it was made. The request was eventually rejected.
    It was also alleged that this manager was discharged because of his age.
    According to the lawsuit, Moorman was ridiculed and frequently bullied by his direct supervisor who called him an “old man” and an “old food guy”.
    Wal-Mart will now pay $150,000 in relief to Moorman, as dictated by the terms of the two-year consent decree that settled the case. Wal-Mart also agreed to provide training for employees on the ADA and the ADEA. This training will include instructions on the kind of conduct that may constitute unlawful discrimination or harassment. It was also explained to employees how procedures for handling requests for reasonable accommodations work. Finally, Wal-Mart will have to post a notice to its employees notifying them about the settlement and they will check in with the EEOC to prove compliance with the decree.

  • Supervisor’s enforcement of company rules leads to his termination

    One supervisor, Ethan Moody, strictly enforced his employer’s rules and regulations so much that it prompted investigations of employee misconduct. The final investigation led to disclosures that he sexually harassed employees, ending in his termination. After being fired, Moody alleged that he was falsely accused and terminated based on race and gender.
    Moody had a long history with his workplace, the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD). He worked there for over 20 years working from the bottom up. In 2007, Moody reported an incident that occurred between two of his crewmembers. It was reported that Wanda Aldrich (Caucasian) held a knife to the throat of Earnest Russell (African American). Both employees denied the incident and no action was taken but Aldrich told Moody that someone would pay for what happened.
    One year later, Moody had earned the reputation of strictly enforcing workplace rules. Moody reported incidents like cell phone use while driving, swimming under a bridge while on the clock amongst other things.
    In 2010, Moody reported that morale would suffer immensely if a certain employee were to be promoted. Due to his statements, his supervisor began investigating members of his crew to better understand Moody’s concern. It was during this investigation that Moody was accused of sexual harassment. Both women that reported the sexual harassment had been formerly investigated because of Moody. The harassment was allegedly physical and verbal. Moody denied the allegations and said that the two women were just trying to retaliate against the discipline they received from breaking workplace policies in the past.
    The AHTD has an official policy against sexual harassment. Based on the results of the AHTD’s investigation, Moody was terminated for violating its sexual harassment policy.
    In response, Moody filed suit saying that the accusations against him were not true and that he was really terminated because of his race and gender. His lawsuit was dismissed by the trial court and he appealed.
    The 8th circuit court felt that the fact that his accusers were of the opposite gender did not provide sufficient evidence to establish any kind of discrimination. Since Moody had no evidence the employer’s reason for discharging him was unworthy of belief giving his lawsuit zero basis to proceed to trial.

  • Will the government’s Fit For Work service force people back to work before they are ready?

    There is an ongoing debate in most workplaces about sick employees. What is a reasonable amount of time for the employee to be absent and should they really come into work if they’re sick? GPs have warned that the government’s Fit For Work service could force people back to work before they are ready.
    Launched at the end of last year, the voluntary scheme enables GPs and employers to refer people to be assessed by health professions and assisted in returning to work. These employees would have to have been absent from work for at least four weeks for the referral to take place. GPs have been very outspoken when it comes to the level of support a scheme will receive. Already, they said that they won’t support something that is “punitive” and anything that pressures patients to go back to work or come off benefits.
    HR experts wholeheartedly agree that the best thing a workplace can have is a healthy and productive workforce. The British Medical Association recently said it would boycott the scheme if doctors believed it was forcing people to work too soon. At the same time though, human resource experts are explaining that the system isn’t designed to force people back to work prematurely but to make sure that employees aren’t abusing their benefits.
    Whilst HR departments across many industries feel that a plan to support a reduction in absence is a great thing, they also feel the service shouldn’t replace any kind of existing occupational health provisions.
    Employers do not have to use Fit For Work but it does provide impartial health expertise and work advice to both the workplace and worker. The Fit For Work scheme will be rolled out to the entire nation in May.

  • Pension Wise awareness

    It is reported that about 77% of people have absolutely zero intention of using the Government’s free retirement guidance service. Possibly even worse, only 3% know what Pension Wise is.
    Portal Financial surveyed a population containing people over 55 years old and found that these people were less likely to use the service as they got older. The results remained consistent across the entire UK.
    The survey also looked at respondents based on income. The results were almost identical with the exceptions being those earning between £70,000 and £99,999 a year and over £200,000 a year. Almost 40% of the former said they would use the service while nobody in the latter would.
    One of the HR experts that helped manage the survey said that the results may indicate that the government hasn’t done enough to educate people on the benefits of the Pension Wise service. Experts are urging the government to increase awareness of Pension Wise so that people approaching retirement at least know that the option exists.

  • Study finds low compliance rate for paying Employment Tribunal awards

    After conducting an in depth study, Acas found that a high proportion of employment tribunal awards aren’t paid, requiring payments to be enforced. However, when Acas mediates, payments are often made without any kind of enforcement.

    IFF Research conducted the study for the service using a pool of 1,500 claimants who settled with a COT3 agreement in both Pre Claim Conciliation cases and individual cases. The study only viewed cases closed between the beginning of January and the end of March of last year. This was before Early Conciliation was introduced.

    The Acas research found that just over half of claimants collect their employment tribunal awards without any kind of hassle. More than nine out of 10 employers pay compensation without the need for additional enforcement.

    Acas and the team of HR experts that conducted the study also examined different types of workplaces involved in disputes and the different compensation levels for pay awards. Most of the time, settled disputes related to unfair dismissal and wage claims. On average, the compensation was about £3,000.

    Acas Chair Sir Brendan Barber said that while low compliance rates with tribunal awards will remain a major concern, he was happy to see what the data said.

    “It shows the crucial value of Acas’ impartial conciliation service in securing agreed settlements to disputes,” Barber said.

  • National Association of Pension Funds and Pensions Management Institute will not merge

    The National Association of Pension Funds (NAPF) and the Pensions Management Institute (PMI) announced that any plans on merging the two organisations have been closed.

    The PMI is the professional body which supports and develops the HR experts who run United Kingdom pension schemes. It has 6500 members who are dedicated to maintaining the highest levels of pensions knowledge.

    The NAPF is the voice of workplace pensions in the UK. It spreads best practice among its 400 members and promotes policies that add value for savers.

    Paul Couchman, President of the PMI said that the discussions with NAPF had been positive and that there was a long exploration of the many complementary areas of expertise that both organisations offer.

    The Chairman of the NAPF, Ruston Smith, also released a statement that seemed a bit more disappointed.

    “We must…respect the PMI’s decision not to pursue this opportunity,” Smith said. “The NAPF continues to fulfill the needs of our members by providing them with the high quality services they require, including education and policy solutions.”

  • The cost of workplace injuries

    The leading cause of workplace injury in 2012 was attributed to overexertion in the workplace, according to the Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety’s 2014 Workplace Safety Index.

    Injuries related to lifting, pushing, pulling, holding, carrying, or throwing represented 25% of the top 10 work hazards, costing US companies $15.1 billion in the same time period.

    The index ranks the 10 leading causes of workplace injuries and then associates them with direct workers’ compensation costs. The report draws information from Liberty Mutual’s workers’ comp claims, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Academy of Social Insurance. Researchers then looked at the BLS injury event coding to see which injuries caused employees to miss six or more days of work. These events were then ranked by total works’ compensation costs.

    The top 10 causes are as follows:
    1. Overexertion (25 percent, costing $15.1B).
    2. Falls on same level (15 percent, costing $9.1B).
    3. Struck by object or equipment (9 percent, costing $5.3B).
    4. Falls to lower level (9 percent, costing $5.1B).
    5. Other exertions or bodily reactions (7 percent, costing $4.27B).
    6. Roadway incidents involving vehicles (5 percent, costing $3.18B).
    7. Slip or trip without fall (4 percent, costing $2.17B).
    8. Caught in/compressed by equipment or objects (4 percent, costing $2.1B).
    9. Repetitive motions involving micro-tasks (3 percent, costing $1.84B).
    10. Struck against object or equipment (3 percent, costing $1.76B).

    In total, the listed injuries amounted to approximately $60 billion in US workers’ comp costs in 2012, the last year this data is available.

  • Results from Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics

    The United States economy added 252,000 jobs in December 2014 pushing unemployment to fall from 5.8% to 5.6%, according to the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).    

    These very encouraging numbers also show that unemployment fell an entire percentage point in 2014 from 6.6% in January to 5.6% by the end of the year.  Growth in multiple industries occurred last year.  Professional and business services employment rose by 52,000 in December, while construction added 48,000 jobs in the same month.  Manufacturing saw an increase year over year from 2013, while employment in retail grew by almost 250,000 in 2014.     

    While the news of job growth is extremely encouraging, these statistics were a little bit offset by a dip in the average hourly earnings, which fell by 5 cents in December from the month prior.  On average, however, hourly earnings did rise year over year, although it was extremely small.     

    The labor force participation rate also decreased and the number of people who are referred to as “involuntary part-time workers” remained the same.  Another number that remained the same was the number of people classified as wanting to work but who aren’t actively seeking work.         

    To some HR experts probably the most important part of the BLS data was the fact that the number of “discouraged workers” dropped by almost 200,000 year over year.  This is defined as a group who have given up looking for work.  Overall human resource professionals are calling the data from the BLS proof that the country is moving in the right direction.

  • Wyoming employees fired for misconduct not entitled to unemployment benefits

    In most cases, a Wyoming employee who is fired is entitled to unemployment benefits.  This remains true unless the termination was due to a form of misconduct. 

    Tommy Doggett worked for Strokers, Inc. repairing and servicing Harley Davidson motorcycles.  In 2011, Doggett was instructed to repair a motorcycle that belonged to Strokers owner, Jeff Martin.  When Martin returned home from an extended vacation he found that Doggett had not fixed the motorcycle.  Doggett said that he had been unaware of the request to service the bike and immediately went to work on it. 

    In the middle of servicing the motorcycle, Doggett chipped a fin on the motor.  He quickly repaired the fin but did not tell Martin about the damage or the repair.  After five years of employment, Martin fired Doggett.  Martin said that Doggett was terminated for customer complaints and additional costs to fix his errors.  Doggett, however, claims Martin told him he was fired because he wanted to take the shop in a different direction and could no longer afford his services.  Doggett filed for unemployment benefits and pursued his case via several different decision makers, including the Wyoming Supreme Court.

    Doggett’s claim relied heavily on his employer’s knowledge of his poor work performance at the time of the termination.  The Unemployment Insurance Commission found that Doggett’s admissions of chipping Martin’s motor and other incidents supported a denial of benefits.  The commission also decided that Doggett’s intentional disregard justified his termination for misconduct.  The Supreme Court, however, reversed the denial of unemployment benefits. 

    The Court held that a denial of benefits couldn’t be based on something that the employer didn’t know of at the time of the termination.  In order to be denied benefits, the employee must have been terminated due to misconduct.  This meant it would have had to have been documented.  HR experts explain that Doggett couldn’t have been punished for chipping the fin of the motorcycle because Martin didn’t know about it when it happened.  He found out long after the fact.

    HR experts urge employers to take the time to document any customer complaints or misconduct in order to avoid a case like this. 

  • IPB reports on legacy schemes at risk of being subject to charges

    Approximately 407,000 savers who joined pension schemes within the last three years could be subject to a charge of over 1% in the future.  Over a quarter of these savers could be exposed to charges of over 2% - 3%.

    These were only some of the results contained in the final report of the Independent Project Board’s (IPB) audit of charges and benefits in legacy defined contribution workplace pensions schemes.  The Board was asked to look at legacy schemes at risk of being subject to charges of a certain percentage.  It was also asked to recommend what actions should then be taken by the new Independent Governance Committees and Trustees.

    The IPB gave recommendations such as pension scheme holders should review their data to pinpoint any factors that may have justified high charges.  Furthermore, the IPB recommends that the Department for Work and Pensions and the Financial Conduct Authority review industry-wide progress in fixing poor value schemes and is asking that they publish a report by the end of 2016.

    HR experts are commending the board on the recently released report explaining that it may not solve any problems, but it is definitely shining light on the issue and exposing these very harsh truths that many people are not fully aware of. 

  • Court orders the EEOC to disclose its own background check policy

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, as an agency, feels that an employer’s use of an applicant’s criminal history in making employment decisions might be in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    On December 9th, a federal court ordered the EEOC to disclose its own background check policy to an employer.  In EEOC v BMW Manufacturing Co., LLC, the EEOC filed suit on behalf of a class of 69 black employees working for a contractor that staffed a BMW-owned warehouse.  Once the contract came to completion between BMW and the contractor, the employees were required to reapply for employment via a new contractor in order to continue employment at the warehouse.  The contract though, was required to implement BMW’s own screening policy.

    As a result, many black employees that had previously worked at the warehouse under the first contract were denied employment with the new contractor.  The complaint filed on behalf of these works claims that BMW’s background check policy creates a “blanket exclusion” without an “individualized assessment of the candidate or the nature of the position.”

    At one point the EEOC was ordered to produce all documents that “constitute, contain, describe, reflect, mention, or refer to relate to any policy, guideline, standard, or practice utilized by the EEOC in assessing the criminal conviction record,” of a potential applicant for employment within the EEOC itself.  The EEOC refused and declined citing that the request had nothing to do with the case at hand.

    The court, on the other hand, firmly disagreed with the EEOC and felt that it shouldn’t be too burdensome to turn over its own policies.

    Human resource experts explain that in this case, BMW was able to present an interesting question about the EEOC’s ability to enforce its position on background checks.  Is the EEOC actually having issues with its own policy, and is it so different from every other company?

  • Extended leave

    In Judge v. Landscape Forms one former employee posed the question: Does an employee have to specifically ask for additional leave once Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave is exhausted, in order to receive it?

    Mark Judge took his FMLA leave after a shoulder surgery that stemmed from a non-work injury. Judge informed his employer, Landscape Forms, that the recovery period was expected to be about four to six months long.  Once Judge’s 12 weeks of FMLA leave expired, he did not let his company know about his expected return date.  He also did not specifically ask for any additional leave time as accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

    Based on a conversation he had with a benefits specialist for the company, Judge was eventually fired.  The work benefits specialist informed Judge that Landscape Forms decided it “couldn’t accommodate his existing restrictions, could not leave his position open indefinitely and needed to maintain appropriate staffing levels.” At this point, Judge filed an ADA lawsuit, claiming that the company should have accommodated his disability by granting him a leave of absence.

    In this particular case, the court was in favor of the company ruling that it had zero obligations to accommodate this employee.  The court cited the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations regarding the ADA.  Essentially, the court ruled that unless an employee makes a specific request for additional leave as an accommodation, employers never have to grant it.  Unfortunately, this type of ruling is truly a case-by-case basis.  Many other courts have sided with the employee saying that employers need to be all but clairvoyant when it comes to extended leave.

  • Sefton Borough Council vs Wainwright

    In the case of Sefton Borough Council vs Wainwright, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) analysed the rights of women on maternity leave to be offered a suitable available vacancy in a redundancy situation.

    Suitable available vacancy is best defined as a job that is both suitable and available. 

    The employer in the case came to the conclusion that two jobs would be replaced by a single and newly created position.  Wainwright, who was on maternity leave and the employee who occupied the other position made redundant, were both interviewed for the new position.  Wainwright was not offered the job and was made redundant.  She claimed discrimination and unfair dismissal. 

    Wainwright’s claim succeeded mainly due to the fact that her employer did not comply with its duty to offer her a suitable vacancy where one was available.  In this particular situation, the redundancy arose as part of a restructuring and reorganisation.  The EAT said that “where this involved a reduction in employees doing a particular type of work, without any change in the terms and conditions of those who retained their jobs,” there was no right to be given preference in the redundancy selection processes. 

    In Wainwright’s particular case, the new post was a suitable available vacancy. Had she been the only candidate she would have been slotted automatically and wouldn’t have had to compete for the position.  In this case, if the employer offered Wainwright an appropriate job, not a new role, it could have possibly avoided any liability of unfair dismissal. 

    The EAT did overturn the tribunal’s decision that the employer’s failure to offer the vacancy also constituted maternity discrimination.  

  • $185 million awarded for sex and pregnancy discrimination

    A recent verdict shook up the human resources industry after one jury severely punished a business found guilty of sex and pregnancy discrimination.

    A California jury awarded Rosario Juarez $185 million in punitive damages in her sex and pregnancy discrimination lawsuit against a large retailer.  Juarez worked for AutoZone in National City as a store manager.  Her lawsuit claimed that after she informed her district manager of her pregnancy, her work conditions took a drastic change. 

    In one verbal exchange, her manager even said, “I feel sorry for you.”  After the exchange her work responsibilities nearly doubled.  Additionally, even though Juarez met all of her sales goals she reported being constantly berated by her manager.

    Juarez was eventually demoted.  At that point, she filed a complaint with the state and was fired shortly after.  She then filed a civil suit claiming gender and pregnancy discrimination.

    HR experts believe that while Juarez will receive money, the $185 million award probably won’t stick, as punitive damages must bear some sort of relationship to the compensatory award.  Typically, these can’t exceed a 9:1 ratio.

    Unfortunately for AutoZone, the case did make national headlines and while the $185 million payout might not stay, they still have to deal with public opinion.

  • Success of offering unlimited vacation time

    The Society for Human Resource Management, SHRM, said that roughly 1% of companies nationwide offer unlimited vacation.  This list of companies includes heavy hitters like Netflix, Ask.com, and SurveyMonkey, all which have been named some of the best places to work.  The question still remains, though, whether this kind of rule really encourages good or bad behavior within the workplace.

    Lotte Bailyn at Quartz said that “numerous studies have found that time away from the office and more frequent vacations lead to greater productivity, improved job performance and lower levels of stress.”

    Obviously, unlimited vacation time is great for an employee.  Workers who have kids or lots of extended family often find themselves eating up their precious days off with kindergarten plays or family functions.  What if unlimited vacation actually has the opposite effect though?  What if the absence of a vacation policy actually discourages employees from taking any days off because they’re unsure of what normal time off looks like?  This has become a real problem for companies that have unlimited vacation. 

    Most of the time data shows that companies who offer unlimited vacation know that their employees probably won’t take advantage of it.  Employers offering unlimited vacation usually have workers with A-type personalities.  These workers are driven and successful and the health of their job is of the utmost importance to them. 

    If looking at unlimited vacation from an employer’s perspective, a company that offers such a perk will never be hard-pressed to find employees.  This is an excellent recruiting tool.  Once employees are hired, companies are also more likely to retain employees because of this policy.

    This kind of policy can actually save companies money, too.  Employees, in these cases, aren’t responsible for tracking vacation days so there is no concern over paying employees for unused time off.

    HR experts explain that ultimately the success of the approach within any company really depends on how well it fits the company’s business model.

  • Pension liabilities double in six years

    Despite employers contributing £75bn to schemes, pension liabilities of UK plc have doubled in six years, with deficits rising by approximately £120bn.

    The data was released by Hymans Robertson and found that over the past six years, asset performance has been failing to keep pace with the growth in liabilities.  When you look at the amount of money that has been funded for pension schemes, it still was not enough to mend the gap. 

    HR experts believe that the data sends a strong message to organisations and pension trustees to place a greater emphasis on managing the risks in pension schemes.

    Figures released by the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and The Pensions Regulator (TPR) show that de-risking has come to a screeching halt. The numbers show that even the FTSE 350, despite paying in cash contributions, ended up in a worse position than in the year previous.

    Human resource experts explain that all of this data underlines why pension scheme trustees and sponsoring companies should take more of a slow approach to funding pensions.  They should take the time to carefully consider what the risk truly is, to help reduce the possibility of deficits becoming worse over time.

  • Survey reveals that most workers still prefer to be managed by an older leader

    A new survey revealed many telling truths about the current situation in the workforce, including the fact that most workers still prefer to be managed by an older leader.

    Kelton, a leader global insights firm, conducted the survey.  The results were released by Addison Group and helped to further explain various generation preferences, the importance of the managerial role and Millennials’ appetite for leadership.  The survey was commissioned to gain more insight, which is exactly what it did.

    HR experts feel that the more managers can understand about what Boomers, Generation X and Millennials want and need in the workplace, the more they can accommodate their workers to increase their retention rates.

    Millennials will ultimately make up a majority of the workforce by 2015, and it appears that this age group is quickly promoted into management roles.  Seventy percent of workers prefer to oversee someone younger than himself or herself.  Often times, when a Millennial is promoted, this doesn’t happen.        

    The data showed that managers who foster growth and wellbeing are preferred over those that have more authoritarian characteristics.

    Millennials, out of all of the different age groups, seem to have the most focus on interoffice relationships.  This group was twice as likely to hope that they are perceived as their direct report’s best friend.  All age groups, however, agreed that honest feedback, trust and experience are some of the top characteristics they look for in a manager.

    The survey also found that in order to attract new candidates while retaining top talent, a work environment needs to be created that fosters and encourages career development and collaboration. 

  • Survey results regarding regulation on greater pension flexibility

    A major survey found that 9 out of 10 employers who have not reached their staging date want the process delayed until pending regulation on greater pension flexibility has been completed.

    The survey polled firms with 249 employees or fewer.  The staging date referred to in this survey is defined as the date by which employers must auto-enroll their eligible employees into a workplace pension.  The survey also looked to find whether the auto-enrolment of employees working in ¾ million micro employers should go ahead as planned without changes to the auto-enrolment trigger.

    According to the data, 62% of employers with 10 or more employees now completely understand their timeline for auto-enrolment.  This number does continue to rise, but experts feel that this percentage is still too low.

    In regards to employers that have already auto-enrolled their employees, non-joiners and new entrants have mainly been enrolled into multiemployer arrangements, including NEST.

    The average opt-out percentage of employees from auto-enrolment came in at 11-15%.  The main reasons provided for the opt-out percentage were employees preferred to spend their income in other places and they simply could not afford the pension contribution.

    Some other key findings from the survey included the fact that employers are still opting for face-to-face meetings over other web-based tools as a means to providing guidance to employees.  In an age of technology, this was something that caught the data analysts off guard. 

                

  • Taxes on death benefits

                

    If they delay taking payments until new rules come into force, loved ones of those who are due a lump sum death benefit could be thousands of pounds better off. 

    Currently, in the event of a drawdown member’s death (remaining drawdown savings), if paid out as a lump sum the funds are taxed at about 55% prior to the sum being passed to a beneficiary.  The Chancellor announced new rules that stated if a drawdown customer dies before the age of 75, there would be no tax to pay on the remaining funds being paid out.  If the person dies after 75 years old, the remainder will be taxed on the beneficiaries’ at their marginal rate of income tax (if taken as a series of payments).

    If the person dies under 75, the tax-free payment has to be made within two years of the scheme being notified of the death.

    One human resource expert weighed in on the Chancellor’s announcement saying that this is a very significant change for drawdown customers and their loved ones.  Loved ones can potentially come out thousands of pounds better off if they can delay taking payments until the new tax rule comes into play next April.  Assuming that all goes well with this new rule, the Treasury has indicated that it makes the most sense for most people to wait six months until these new rules take effect, so long as they can afford to wait.

  • Seventy percent increase in the number of centenarians

    New Office for National Statistics (ONS) data shows that over 13,000 people in the United Kingdom are 100 years old or older, a 70% increase in a decade. This means that one in three children born today will reach 100.
    Broken down even further, the data reveals that over 11,000 women are 100 years old or older, while only a little over 2,000 men are considered centenarians.
    After the release of these statistics, the Minister for Pensions Steve Webb decided to further explain what all of this really means.
    “Many of these people will have retired for 30 years or more, meaning inflation may have taken a toll on their pension and savings,” Webb said.
    It is for this reason that the Triple Lock guarantee has been set in place. This will ensure that the State pension now rises by whichever is highest, out of earnings, prices, or 2.5%. He also said that as the nation’s demographics change, the nation is actually committed to continue to provide a basic level of income so that people never forget that their hard work will continuously be rewarded well into retirement.

               

     

  • HR experts predict that less than half of a company’s employees will buy an annuity at retirement

    When the new Defined Contribution (DC) pension changes officially take effect, human resource experts predict that less than half of a company’s employees will buy an annuity at retirement.
    A survey conducted by Towers Watson revealed that employers are unsure what retirement options their employees will actually choose. Many companies are preparing for employees to explore alternative forms of income when they reach retirement age. HR experts explain that companies and management teams need to try to define what employees are anticipating as retirement approaches, to be able to take the first steps towards predicting what will be expected of the company.
    Research also shows that incomes offered to retirees looking to buy an annuity have actually started to decline since the budget announcement at the beginning of the year. Of course, the best available annuity depends on the size of a DC pension pot. Larger pension pots have seen less of a decline in annuity.
    HR experts explain that given the way different markets have moved in the last five or so years, it was expected that rates would have been worse than they are. Regardless, the decline does help to explain the accelerating loss of interest for those with smaller pension pots.

  • Should workplace dress code be covered by an anti-harassment policy?

    It’s true that you can’t please everybody, but in the workplace it might be worth trying. What does and what doesn’t offend someone seems to change daily, but when it comes to workplace attire, management attorneys are claiming it should be more intuitive.
    Casual Fridays come around but once a week and it’s what some employees look forward to. Workers come in wearing jeans and T-shirts with graphics or sayings because, after all, it’s casual Friday. One employee found himself in quite a predicament after being called out by management for wearing a T-shirt with a confederate flag on it.
    Some human resource experts feel that if an employee is wearing a potentially offensive image that they should be sent home or told to cover or change the garment. Many courts feel the same way. “Regardless of the intent behind the employee’s decision to wear the shirt, several courts have held that coworkers wearing Confederate flag clothing can be a contributing factor in finding the existence of a racially hostile work environment”. 
    The banning of the Confederate flag in the workplace is actually quite controversial. This “rebel flag” was flown by Navy ships in combat in the South Pacific during World War II. For some people, however, this flag is a symbol of slavery and resistance to integration.
    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has actually issued decisions reviving claims that employers who let workers wear shirts with the flag unlawfully permits race discrimination.
    HR experts feel that at the end of the day employers should have two policies that regulate clothing in the workplace. One should be a personal appearance policy and the other should be an anti-harassment policy. Employees should understand that they are a reflection of the company during the workday and dress codes should always support the business operations.

  • Pensions respite

    The European Commission have just agreed to extend pension schemes’ exemption from centrally clearing over the counter derivatives under the European Markets and Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR), until 2017. Following the agreement, pension schemes that aren’t ready by the expiry of the clearing exemption will have some explaining to do.
    The extension was announced on August 15. The Commission pointed out that schemes need to move along ahead of deadline and that three years is more than a sufficient amount of time.
    Trustees now have a legal obligation to ensure timely confirmation, position reconciling, dispute resolution procedures, portfolio compression and reporting.
    One very challenging area is current legislation that allows only for cash variation margin to be posted for derivatives. So far, Consultancy Europe Economics has been researching alternative systems for the EC, coming up with seven possible solutions.

  • Most employees would rather use ACAS Early Reconciliation scheme

    Official figures reveal that most employees would rather settle disputes using the Acas Early Conciliation (EC) scheme than employment tribunals.
    The report showed that over 17,000 employees used EC during the first three months after its launch on April 6th. Employees made over 16,000 enquiries to the service, while employers made 540. This high engagement can partly be attributed to the law requiring anyone considering an employment tribunal claim to contact Acas first.
    In the month of April alone, 1,000 people per week contacted the service, increasing by another 600 in May and June.
    Another reason for the high engagement could be because of the introduction of tribunal fees in July 2013. Human resource expertsexplain that many employees, especially the low paid ones, cannot afford the tribunal fees. Additionally, many employers are cooperating too. The new system is relieving the burden of tribunals and is helping to prevent claims from going all the way. 
    This new, early conciliation is helping to resolve many workplace disputes without the need for claimants to go to an employment tribunal.

  • Termination of long term absentee may violate ADA

    Despite having a considerable time off, one US District Court decision is suggesting that the termination of someone on leave for over one year may make a company vulnerable to claims of failure to accommodate and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    The case involved Rose Cook who worked with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney as a complex risk officer in downtown Houston. Cook was informed that she needed to improve her communication with a new boss. While this was all going on, Cook was diagnosed with premature ventricular contractions and general anxiety disorder. She decided she needed to take a leave of absence, which began on November 8, 2011. This was, coincidentally, the day before a scheduled meeting with her boss to improve the aforementioned communications. On November 9, the company decided that Cook should work at another location to improve communications, cross-train and learn new policies and procedures.
    Instead of working at this different location, Cook thought it would be a better to remain on leave and also objected to the transfer.
    On December 12, Cook’s primary care physician authorized her to work for four hours per day with no travel. She was authorized by her doctor to work at the main office location. When she returned to work, she was informed that she was reassigned to the new office. Cook was under the impression that this violated her physician’s order and she contacted her caseworker who instructed her to return home on medical leave.
    Two months later, Cook’s primary care physician wrote a letter to her caseworker authorizing Cook to work on a part-time basis for three weeks and only at the downtown office “to eliminate stress and new challenges.”
    Morgan Stanley Smith Barney’s executive director of human resources told one HR representative that the doctor’s request was “not an accommodation that a physician can or should request,” and instructed the HR representative not to make the modifications.

  • Four in 10 Americans will not use up their earned time off this year

    Four in 10 Americans will not use up their earned time off this year due to the fear of being replaced.
    A new study called, Overwhelmed America: Why Don’t We Use Our Paid Time Off? revealed that coupled with work piling up, many Americans are afraid to take a vacation because of a lack of employer support and/or communication.
    This completely contradicts the widespread acceptance of how important PTO time is to the health and happiness of employees. Forty percent of employees will actually leave vacation days on the table instead of using them. American workers are starting to adopt more and more of a martyr complex in order to show their worth.
    One HR expert explains that some employees wear their lack of used vacation time as “a badge of honor”.
    A cited reason for the fear of using PTO time is because many Americans are still mentally stuck in a recession. An overwhelming number of people lost their jobs when the economy was in a slump and it took, in some cases, years to become employed again. To prevent being laid off American employees will work to the bone to show that they aren’t replaceable.
    The effects of a poor economy still prevail with one third of the respondents saying they can’t afford to use their PTO time even if they wanted.
    This work martyr complex is reinforced by some company cultures as well. It starts from the top. If C level management doesn’t communicate the importance of PTO, employees will not see the importance in it either. Management, sometimes, sends mixed messages about taking time off which can actually further discourage it. Many senior business leaders have stated that they never, or very rarely, talk with employees about the benefits of taking time off. While this may be completely unintentional, the message is still sent and received that time off is probably frowned upon.
    In cases of “use it or lose it” policies, five out of six workers say they plan on using most of their PTO by the end of the year. Unfortunately, 26% of workers reported working for a company that had a “use it or lose it” policy.

  • Do interviews come down to attitude rather than education?

    It may not necessarily matter where you went to school or what grades you got because at the end of an interview, it might just come down to attitude. The Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC) found that employers are placing a greater value on attitude than academic scores when recruiting young people.
    The Job Outlooks survey asked employers about their hiring intentions for the upcoming quarter, as well as next year. Approximately 200 employers were surveyed and almost half of them said attitude was the most important factor when hiring a young person. A mere four percent of the employers cited specific academic milestones as an important factor when hiring.
    Some human resources experts say that qualifications can be a great indicator of ability but attitude tends to show whether initiative exists.
    These findings support research conducted last year by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills.   The UKCES found that 38% of employers actually rejected certain applicants because they lacked a “professional hard-working attitude”.
    The REC’s survey did provide a very positive outlook for the job market. Many of the employers said they planned to increase their permanent staff in the next three months.
    This is actually the best time to be a young person coming into the job market because of all the opportunities opening up. Employer hiring intentions are at a high and other employers are considering taking on more staff.

               

  • Fixed leave policy costs company $1.35M

    A fixed leave policy recently cost one company a hefty $1.35M in settlement fees.
    Princeton HealthCare System, which operates several medical facilities, recently settled a disability discrimination lawsuit that all started due to a fixed leave policy that was in place.
    The EEOC reported that Princeton’s leave tracking system only accounted for the requirements of the Family Medical Leave Act, commonly referred to as the FMLA, when handling any kind of worker on medical leave.
    It was because of this that the EEOC sued for the termination of certain employees. The EEOC stated that these workers were not yet eligible for FMLA after having only a “few absences,” and stated that some employees were automatically terminated once they’d been out on FMLA leave for over 12 weeks. The EEOC claimed Princeton failed to seek out reasonable accommodations for employees who were absent for any kind of medical-related reasons.
    The Commission proclaimed that these types of actions “robbed employees of rights they may have been entitled to” under a different act. The Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, may have actually protected some of the terminated employees from losing their jobs. The EEOC went on to explain how hardline fixed leave policies do not allow for reasonable accommodations under the ADA that may allow employees to return to work after any kind of medical leave.
    In the settlement agreement, Princeton agreed to a myriad of things including:
    No longer requiring workers returning from disability leave to present a fitness-for-duty certification explaining that they are able to return to work without any restrictions.
    Not to subject any employee to progressive discipline for ADA-related absences.
    The company also agreed to provide ADA-training for its workforce.
    The $1.35M will be allotted to any worker who was unlawfully terminated under the former fixed-leave policy.
    Human resource experts explain that while it may seem like the EEOC is trying to make an example out of Princeton, they are only trying to make employers aware of the responsibilities they have when it comes to their employees and their continued employment.

  • Centralised system for apprenticeships being proposed

    Employers have finally had enough of the chaos that comes with apprenticeships and internships and are calling for a centralised point where information can be found.
    Companies are asking for a system, much like the UCAS system for degrees, which will help students to navigate the many options they have when it comes to educational work routes.
    Currently, human resource experts have many concerns over the public’s understanding of any benefits an apprenticeship may have for students and how it can help young professionals choose a career route.
    One HR expert praised the vocational request from employers saying, “for university courses the UCAS system means students can access information easily. Why isn’t their something like this for alternative routes?”
    Employers would also like to see more in-school education about the options offered by apprenticeships. Although, it would be great if all students took the university route, unfortunately it is unrealistic to think 100% of high school students will move on to university.
    Members of the panel at a recent recruitment specialist debate told the audience that teachers and parents had originally been dismayed when they announced their intentions to sign up for a vocational qualification. Employers feel that apprenticeship education is extremely important because of this very reason. There is a negative stigmatism attached with the word apprenticeship, however, “apprenticeships are a real alternative”.
    One HR panel expert suggested more education through social media and online advertisement. This is more of a “straight to the source” approach since the target demographic is always online and plugged in.
    The benefit for an employer is very clear; the company is guaranteed to have a young person in their company who is willing to learn. Companies are urging for more apprenticeship education so that students can see why it will benefit them as well.

     

  • FTSE 100 companies paid less to pension schemes in 2013

    Despite an increase in pension scheme membership, recent data suggests that FTSE 100 companies paid almost £2bn less to employee pension schemes in 2013.
    In a report released by LCP, data shows that FTSE 100 employers finally got a break after many years of consistent cost increases. Thirty-eight of the companies, however, did say they added additional security to their pensions schemes that came in the form of guarantees, pledges or even charges over assets. 
    Reforms announced in this year’s Budget are allegedly already having an impact on the UK’s pensions outlook. Human resource experts explain that this is being predicted long before the changes take full effect in April 2015.
    Some of the major reforms include removing the obligation to buy an annuity, with savers in defined contribution schemes given full flexibility in deciding how to draw funds. Additionally, those in defined benefit schemes have the ability to transfer their benefits to a defined contribution scheme. HR experts firmly believe that this option encourages great pension savings.
    Ultimately, the 2014 Budget makes retirement-saving plans appear more attractive for individuals. “Economic growth brings investment opportunities for pension schemes and their sponsors.”
    The government still has quite a bit of work ahead of them before the reforms become active. It still has to implement the free guidance for all defined contribution scheme members, but even with the amount of work ahead, HR experts are extremely optimistic.  

  • DWP finds that millions aren’t saving enough for retirement

    Recently published research shows that millions of working age people in the United Kingdom could secure a financially comfortable life in retirement if they make minor changes to their saving habits.
    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) found that 11.9 million people aren’t saving enough for their retirement. Half of those people have almost reached their retirement income target.
    “The number of people classified as under-saving is defined by a replacement rate which measures retirement income as a percentage of working age income.”
    The research pinpoints three key factors that lead to poor retirement preparation. The first is not having a full work history, which can reduce entitlement to the State Pension. The second is not contributing to private pensions while at work. Finally, not contributing enough is cited in the research, which is more typical of those in higher income brackets.
    The Government recognises that this is an issue, which is what spurred many of the landmark reforms that have recently been made to the state pension system. These changes have been made to help reignite workplace pension scheme importance, education and interest. The introduction of the triple lock has also made a major impact. This is the commitment to increase the state pensions by whichever is highest of earnings, prices or 2.5 percent.
    The research also revealed that people in middle and higher income groups are actually the worst financially prepared for retirement. These income groups actually face the biggest income hit when they stop working.
    The research models how different increases could have different impacts on the number of people facing insufficient retirement funds. Experts have described this report as “extremely eye opening”.

  • ONS figures on the gender pay gap

    The gender pay gap, while it still exists, has decreased significantly since the 1970’s however the difference between what men and women take home today still differs greatly after the age of 30.
    The Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that figures show that in 1975 16-18 year old men and women were paid close to the same amount, yet after 18 this changed in the men’s favour. At that time 38-year-old men received, on average, 61% more than their female counterparts.
    Analysis of the ONS figures show that the average UK hourly wage for men today is £12.64 and £10.38 for women; this is a gap of 21 per cent.
    It seems that wage parity between the sexes lasts until around the age of 30. After this age, men start to out earn females.
    Some HR expertsbelieve that one explanation for this gap could be because of what is referred to as the “cohort effect.” Factors like gender discrimination legislation and changes within the United Kingdom economy, labour market, social attitudes and school achievements have come into play and have had a great impact on younger women.
    Human resource experts also point out that the figures released by the ONS do not account for the different type of occupations men and women hold. So, the fact that women are more likely to work part-time jobs once they start a family is not taken into consideration.
    Additionally, some HR experts believe that part of the discrepancy can be attributed to maternity leave and the fact that some women have had career gaps spanning several years. It shouldn’t be expected that after a hiatus a woman would walk in and receive the same salary as a man that has not taken any breaks.
    Experts urge management to remember that secrecy clauses have been outlawed, so employees are actually well within their rights to discuss and compare pay. Management should reward and pay employees based on business rather than bias and prejudice (deliberate or otherwise).

                                                                                                       

     

  • Report reveals Government policies to reduce migration have reduced international talent available to British employers

    A recent report revealed that government policies designed to reduce net migration have reduced the international talent available to British employers.
    The report was generated by the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford and outlines how the talent pool has been hurt since the introduction of major immigration policy changes.   The UK experienced a 30% decrease in highly skilled workers arriving in the country between 2007 and 2013.
    Migrants from outside the European Economic Area have been the most affected by the government policies, as migrants have decreased from 155,000 in 2007 to 94,000 in 2013.
    Human resource experts explain that the goal to cut immigration levels is actually having an adverse effect on UK businesses, something not taken into consideration.
    Business secretary Vince Cable explains that the harder it is for international companies to employ the best executives, the harder it is to sell the UK as a place to do business.
    This new policies may not necessarily be the only reason for this growing problem. Figures also show that economic events, like the 2008 downturn and Eurozone crisis may have something to do with the erratic figures as during this time, figures actually showed a significant rise in the number of highly skilled migrant workers arriving from within the EEA.
    The number of educated migrant workers holding manager, director or senior official roles was at its lowest level in 2010.

               

     

  • New Jersey woman sues her company over work scheduling

    A New Jersey woman sued her company because it would not allow her to come in late and leave early.
    Andrea DeGerolamo worked at Fulton Financial Corporation as a marketing consultant for about five years before things started to go array. At about the five-year-mark, DeGerolamo began to feel mass amounts of anxiety and depression, which was allegedly aggravated by crowded roadways found during rush hour traffic.
    DeGerolamo’s attorneys argued that her condition could qualify as a disability, especially considering she left the Lancaster-based company on medical leave for several months in 2012. When she returned to work, she requested that the company allow her to work a schedule “by which she could come in after morning rush hour and leave prior to evening rush hour".
    The company obliged the request for a short time but later refused to continue to accommodate her needs.
    DeGerolamo also claimed that when she returned from medical leave that her duties were downgraded “improperly” to clerical-type work. When she filed a complaint to the ethic board the only response she heard was that she was being terminated.
    She filed suit in Camden County, New Jersey initially. The case has since been moved to federal court in Camden at Fulton Financial’s request.
    It is still unknown when the case will actually be heard.

     

  • Hiring new employees just became even harder

    Hiring new employees just became even harder…if that’s possible. A federal judge ruled that if an applicant is not hired because she complained about discrimination or harassment to a former employer, the company that refused employment could actually be liable for retaliation.
    A female clerk at a Kauai athletic club accused a male coworker of sexually assaulting her. The lawsuit claims that she reported the incident to her immediate supervisor two days after it occurred but the employer failed to investigate the complaint. She is alleging that she, instead, was actually discouraged from continuing her employment with the company.
    After the alleged assault, the athletic club was sold and employees were released from their jobs but were told that they could reapply to work for the new owners.
    It was at this point that the clerk claimed she was discouraged from applying at all. She claims that she did submit an application anyway but was actually denied an interview altogether with the new owner.
    The clerk sued both the company that previously owned the athletic club and the new owners who refused to hire her asserting sexual harassment, retaliation and wrongful discharge (amongst other things).
    The former club owner asked a federal judge to dismiss the sexual harassment claim saying that he could not be held liable for another person’s actions. The judge responded that since the alleged perpetrator wasn’t a supervisor the employer could actually be held liable only if the clerk could prove that the club knew about the harassment and failed to take any action. The judge concluded that the clerk was allowed to proceed with the harassment claim.
    The new owner claimed that it couldn’t be held liable, simply because it never employed the clerk. The judge, again, rejected the new owner’s argument with respect to the retaliation claim. The judge explained that the new owner could be held liable if the clerk was able to prove that the company refused to hire her because she “engaged in protected activity”.
    The judge’s ruling focused on whether the allegations were sufficient enough to allow the clerk’s case to actually proceed to the next stage of litigation. “The judge did not conclude that either the clerk’s former employer or the new owner of the club had violated the law.” This case is still currently pending in federal court in Hawaii.
    HR experts are looking at this case as a learning experience. One expert states that the lesson that can be learned from this is that each sexual harassment claim needs to be taken seriously. Another expert explains that refusing to hire someone because they complained about something occurring in the workplace is completely unlawful.
    Management should be trained on the criteria they may have to consider when making employment decisions, to prevent any further legal issues from happening.

  • Government plans to ban zero hours contracts with exclusivity clauses

    Officials are claiming that government plans to ban zero hours contracts with exclusivity clauses may not actually be enough to stop employers from tying down their workers.
    Zero hours contracts have been a heated topic of debate for the past 12 months and have been criticized by multiple unions.
    As it stands, there are approximately 125,000 people on zero hours contracts that are prevented from looking for additional work with a different employer (CIPD). Business secretary Vince Cable announced this week that a crackdown would begin on these exclusivity clauses.
    Unfortunately, one HR expert explains that employers could then opt to offer workers employment on limited one-week or one-month contracts. This would guarantee hours and pay but still tie employees into an arrangement of working for one employer for short periods of time.
    These short-term contracts would create less certainty for staff because they wouldn’t be offered a rolling contract. CIPD research also found, however, that workers on zero hours contracts were equally happy with their job and actually more satisfied with their work-life balance than “regular” employees.
    Cable declared that he will be working with unions and businesses to develop a best practice code of conduct aimed at employers who want to use zero hours contracts.
    Any company that currently employs staff on zero hours contracts will have to remove any exclusivity clauses by the time the legislation goes through parliament. This is expected early next year.

  • Communication may be the difference between keeping and losing top talent

    Communication is often an issue in many businesses, large and small alike. As if it weren’t important enough, research has actually found that communication may be the difference between keeping and losing top talent.
    MetLife’s 12th Annual US Employee Benefit Trends Study recently uncovered that when workers think their employer does a good job with communication regarding their benefits, they’re more than twice as likely to say they are “very loyal” to their company.
    The study also found that employees are more satisfied with their benefits now than at any point in the last 12 years. Certain employees actually cited the benefits they receive as the reason they joined (or remained with) their company in the first place.
    Human resource experts explain that while an organization’s employees may currently be happy with the benefits communication, there is always room for improvement. The study said that 40% of employees are actually looking to their firms for help achieving security via benefits and half of the respondents stated that they needed help understanding their benefits and how they work.
    HR experts encourage management to dedicate time to benefits communication. Some companies are even holding open forum meetings once a quarter to allow employees to address any concerns they may have in regard to their benefits.

  • Survey shows nearly 70% of employees would like to work flexibly

    Flexible work schedules have been at the forefront of the employment industry the last five years. Current research is now suggesting that nearly 70% of surveyed employees would like to work flexibly at some point in the near future. One third of these respondents, although they would like a flexible schedule, feel that they will never be able to have one.
    The Timewise survey polled a little over 1100 United Kingdom workers and managers. The research, called A Flexible Future For Britain?, was gathered in two parts.
    Senior leaders usually do not speak openly about alternative working solutions offered within their company. Approximately 91% of the managers surveyed for the research said they would be willing to talk to a candidate about a potential flex schedule, yet only 25% of the vacancies advertised explicitly stated this. Many workers looking for jobs that allow these kind of schedules have described their job search as a “hidden market”.
    Many workers currently searching for jobs feel as though the topic is still considered taboo by companies and find it to be a topic that shouldn’t be discussed during the interview process.
    One human resource expert explained that more and more workers want flexible schedules for multiple reasons. The main reason, however, is that top talent want more choices when it comes to where and when they work. Reduced hours in the office do not mean less commitment, or less work.
    Some companies have even gone on the record to state that flexible schedules have helped them attract and retain the “best and brightest talent”, in turn helping propel the company to greater forms of success.
    Ultimately, cultural changes are inevitable. The employment industry doesn’t necessarily see changes like this come often but the faster companies adapt, the easier it will become to unlock opportunities for talent and the employer.

  • Survey reveals many businesses not ready to promote their talent

    A recent survey reveals that numerous organizations aren’t necessarily ready to promote their current talent to higher-level positions within their company.
    The survey was conducted by a talent consulting group that polled more than 100 senior-level executives from 49 countries.
    Over half of the surveyed population revealed that their organizations don’t have the right kind of talent to succeed in a changing industry environment. With that said, almost a third of the respondents said that the companies they worked for aren’t ready for any kind of global change due to the company’s leadership.
    While many of the surveyed people said they wouldn’t necessarily promote their current talent, over half of them did say their talent had the right experience to succeed in the business world. Some human resource expertsfeel that it isn’t quite fair for these respondents to make these kinds of statements about their employees because a person needs training and development for what they do and not for who they are. This mindset would mean that with the proper training, any worker could be promoted.
    One HR expert said that companies need to find and develop talent that “possesses the right blend of competence, experience and personal traits” in order to groom employees for promotions.

  • Government advised to offer pensions advice earlier

    Many people only seek human resource or accounting advice about pension savings right before they retire. While this is the norm, it isn’t necessarily the best-case scenario. Human resource experts explain that people should really seek out pension guidance throughout their entire working career.
    Currently, an independent third-party organisation is offering free guidance that will help people approaching retirement make the right choices, but this isn’t enough. This is the message Zurich tried to convey in its submission to the Government’s consultation on the pension changes announced in the Budget.
    In the submission, the insurer is asking that the Government actually enable employers to offer their workers guidance on saving for their retirement. If the employer were offering this kind of guidance for free, it is believed that more workers would take advantage of pension programmes and/or get involved in saving for their retirement at a much earlier age.
    This type of workplace guidance would allow workers to understand what level of savings they will need in their old age and even what kind of savings account will be best for them.
    Unfortunately, there may also be some negatives associated with offering advice in the workplace. If employers were to offer pension guidance, HR professionals could be overwhelmed with the fear of a potential lawsuit from a dissatisfied employee. If the UK were to set up safe harbours like the ones set up in the US, they may be protected from litigation as long as designated standards are met.

  • The right to request flexible working will soon become law

    June 30th will be a landmark day in the world of employment. On this last day of June, the right to request flexible working will officially become law.
    UK employees will have the legal right to ask for a flexible working schedule, which means the employer has a legal obligation to answer the worker’s request. Additionally, the employers must provide a written, valid reason if they cannot agree to a flexible schedule.
    Flexible scheduling encompasses things like compressed hours, flexi-time, home working, job-sharing, staggered hours and term-time only working.
    Currently, the right to request a flexible work schedule is reserved for parents of children under the age of 16 and
    those registered as careers for children or adults, which may make their home situation better. On June 30th any worker will have the right to make this request, however, it is important to note that this is just a request.
    Employers will still need to follow all the processes they have now when a worker requests a flexible working schedule. This entails a meeting to discuss the application and a written explanation of why such a working pattern would suit the organisation.
    There are also different kinds of conditions to the application process. The application must be made by someone who has been employed for 26 continuous weeks of employment and the law will not be applicable to agency workers or members of the armed forces. Also, the worker must not have made another request to work flexibly under the Right to Request Legislation in the preceding year.
    The employer does have the right to reject the request, they can refuse in the event that the company would have to incur additional costs, have an effect on the ability to meet customer demand, have an effect on quality or performance or have unplanned structural changes. The company can also refuse if it had an inability to recruit new staff and/or an inability to reorganise work.
    Regardless of the company’s decision, all requests must be decided within a three-month period (unless an extension is agreed upon).
    HR experts are proposing that company’s prepare for this new law by updating their existing flexible working policies, creating a clear and concise explanation and providing training for management.

  • Labour proposes to lower AE eligibility threshold

    A recent Labour proposal has been introduced that is looking to lower the eligibility threshold at which workers are auto-enrolled into a workplace pension. The proposal is asking that the threshold be changed from £10,000 to £5,772.
    HR experts explain that this change would have a direct effect on lower level earners and could bring another 1.5 million workers into the national insurance arrangement.
    Initially, the Government objected to the lower threshold stating that contributions of those that earn less would be minimal. While this is an extremely valid concern, some HR experts feel that this is the type of proposal that would get lower earners engaged. Furthermore, the thought process is that if these workers were engaged, they would start to understand the value of their contributions, increasing their level of contributions in due time.

               

  • SHRM study regarding paid time off (PTO)

    A recent study conducted by the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) revealed that workers today are placing an increased amount of importance on their time outside of the office.
    The survey was conducted using 2,000 employees and found that overall workers are highly interested in flexible schedules and greater autonomy in managing their time away from the office. The survey was mostly private employers with 500 employees or less. Answers came from all different sectors including manufacturing, scientific, insurance and technical.
    Over half of the HR professionals surveyed explained that the organizations they belong to offer their full-time employees some amount of paid time-off, or PTO. These types of plans include time for illness, vacation or personal time.
    Many HR experts said that they have seen an increase in human resource management interest in these types of leave plans because the question concerning whether they exist is coming up more and more in the interview process. Some applicants find PTO to be so important that it is a “make it, or break it” factor in the decision to sign on with a company.
    The survey found that while most companies offer a fixed number of PTO days, some companies set an unlimited number of paid leave days as long as the employee doesn’t abuse the privilege.
    For companies that do have a fixed number of days, employees are able to accrue this time by calendar year or pay period. Sometimes, employees accrue more time depending on their tenure with a company. The longer the employee has been with the company, the more time they have. This is strictly up to the company, though.
    Some HR experts explain that having a PTO plan in place acts as a trade-off for employees that really want to work from home. The plan allows for some flexibility and makes the employee feel as if they have more discretion when it comes to when they are, or are not, in the office.

  • LLP’s now under obligation to auto-enroll equity partners into pension schemes

    May 21st marked the day that the Supreme Court made its final decision in the case concerning the extent to which a partner in a law firm could benefit from the protection afforded to whistleblowers under the Employment Rights Act.
    Prior to the judgment call, statutory protection as a whistleblower was only available to employees and workers within a law firm. Now, the Supreme Court holds that members of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) are considered “workers” for the purpose of employment law. This would make a “self employed partner” in a law firm eligible for protection now too. They are likely to be “workers” for auto-enrollment purposes as well.
    One of the ramifications of the ruling is that LLP’s are now under an obligation to auto-enroll all of their equity partners into pension schemes. In the event that an LLP doesn’t comply, some people within the partnership might have to face criminal sanctions.
    If an employee is failed to be auto-enrolled, as required by section 3 of the Pensions Act 2008, it will be considered a criminal offence. Liability will not stop with the employer, either. Any officer of a corporate body, with “whose consent an offence is committed” will also be held liable.
    The Pensions Act 2008 clearly defines what equals “qualified earnings” which ultimately determines if a person is eligible for auto-enrollment. Some HR experts believe that due to the recent Supreme Court ruling, human resource departments will be inundated with paperwork from officers rushing to get certain employees enrolled.

               

  • Mentoring scheme designed to boost the number of women on boards

    Many industries see a lack of equilibrium when it comes to the amount of men versus women in authoritative positions. To combat this issue a mentoring scheme is being designed to boost the number of women on boards.
    The scheme, scheduled to launch in September, was created after a series of successful pilot programmes run by the 30% Club. A survey of pilot participants revealed that 95% of mentees saw an improvement in their development areas. Eighty-six percent of the participants said they believed it had increased their confidence as a leader.
    Many of Britain’s top companies have been scrutinized for their lack of women in leadership roles. Glencore Xstrata has even had three years to address this very issue and has yet to “resolve it”.
    This new scheme will work to balance the pyramid and help develop a pipeline of women throughout different organisations. The overall intention of the scheme is to enable talented women. Mentors and mentees will be paired up according to key criteria that include professional experience, competencies and sector.
    Right now, the mentoring scheme will include mentors and mentees from businesses like BAT, BDO, EY, Centrica, Freshfields, GE, Marks & Spencer and more. The programme will run from September to June every year.

  • The change in expatriate arrangements

    The world of human resources and employment is forever changing. Many companies used to have a standard long-term assignment policy for expatriates, a short-term assignment policy and even a permanent transfer policy. Today, the employment industry is seeing a change in these very practices and policies.
    Current assignment policies, all of a sudden, are taking on alternative forms. Human resource expertsexplain that over the last decade companies have introduced a commuter policy, a lump sum policy and even a developmental assignment policy.
    HR professionals and global mobility managers explain that the reasoning behind these somewhat recent changes can be attributed to the constant spotlight on costs. These assignments can cost a company up to three times a base salary figure. This number can be even higher if an assignee has a partner, or a dependent. Organisations want to ensure that the assignees aren’t making less than they would if they stayed in their original locations but they also want to make sure they don’t make any significant financial gains.
    Additionally, assignee administration is extremely time-consuming and cumbersome. The amount of paperwork that comes with an expatriate staff member is far more than that of an average employee. This amount of paperwork can cause an increased number of human resources administration errors and could spur feelings of disparity among assignees.
    Global mobility functions are also working towards a transparent international assignment policy. By creating a transparent policy, global mobility managers are hoping to cut the number of individual assignment negotiations and clearly set expectations from the very beginning.
    There has also been a shift amongst a new generation of assignees that look at their careers as “borderless”. These workers view an international assignment as merely part of their career plan. This is an opportunity where they can develop new skills and further their careers. Due to this new way of thinking, some mobility managers started offering a “core-flex” policy, which provides a basic set of fixed elements, as well as some optional benefits.
    The core-flex policy helps a company tie in an assignee’s personal requirements with their own budget restraints.
    At the end of the day, organisations are quickly learning to become more creative in balancing cost control while encouraging international experience.

  • Workers would give up some pay for guaranteed retirement benefits

    Retiring comfortably equals having a lot of money in the bank. A new HR study by Towers Watson reveals that about two out of three workers would be willing to give up some pay for guaranteed retirement benefits. At the peak of the recession, circa 2009, this number was about 20% lower.
    The Towers Watson survey polled over 5,000 full-time employees. Approximately 2/3 of the population said they were satisfied with their company’s sponsored retirement plans, which is a huge improvement from 2009. With this said, the number of employees who are satisfied with their health care benefits have declined greatly. This downward trend can be attributed, according to HR experts, to ageing workers whose health may be deteriorating. Overall costs of living have also increased greatly, while these benefit programs have basically remained the same.
    While some workers would be willing to sacrifice some of their salary to receive better retirement services, these people weren’t willing to do the same in exchange for better health services. Reasoning for this is possibly because retirement security became ever more important during the recession when many employees decided to prematurely tap into their 401-k funds as a means for survival.
    One human resource professional also said that this thought pattern could be contributed to recent cutbacks in DB plans.

  • New employee probation periods

    When people start new careers many of these new employees are under a 30 to 90 day probation period, where the employer can choose to terminate the worker without reason. Spring Personnel conducted a survey comprised of managers and employees and revealed that nearly 1/5 of new recruits do not pass their probation period.
    Overall poor performance was cited as the number one reason employees were let go. A close second, coming in at 50%, was absence and finally, poor punctuality. The most surprising reason some new workers were let go prior to the end of their probation period was “personality clashes”. Twelve percent of respondents pointed to an argument as a cause to refuse an ongoing contract.
    Businesses are not prone to extending a probation period for a worker, even though this can be an option. Most employees, according to the survey, feel extremely insecure during their probation period. Some went as far as saying they put more effort in during the first few months than when they were assured their role was permanent.
    In some cases, landing the job role might be the easy part while maintaining the position can be harder.
    The survey was conducted by an independent research firm and questioned 403 UK workers responsible for employees going through probationary periods at work. It also included 1,498 UK adults who have held permanent roles in the last year.

  • Proposed solution to the death benefit tax charge on pensions

    Standard Life is claiming that in response to the budget changes to pensions, a clearer and simpler approach to the death benefit tax charge is needed.
    The Government acknowledged in its consultation paper that the 55% tax charge could be too high in a majority of cases. This new death benefit tax charge only applies in two circumstances where a lump sum is paid out (most commonly with a SIPP).
    Situation number one occurs when a person dies age 75 or older, applying to the entire fund regardless of whether the customer had taken any withdrawals from their pensions or not.
    Situation number two occurs if a person dies before the age of 75 and had started to take withdrawals. The rule applies to the part of the pension that has been “touched” also referred to as “the crystallised fund”.
    Human resource expert and Standard Life head of customer affairs, Julie Hutchison, said that she believes a simpler and fairer way of doing things is to align the death benefit tax charge for crystallised funds to the IHT regime. This particular solution makes sense for a few different reasons. It is fairer because the tax charge gets reduced to either 40% or 0% in line with IHT. Whether or not tax is due depends on the identity of the recipient and wealth of the person. Any money that would get passed to a spouse, civil partner or charity would be exempt from tax.
    Expertsexpress that a charge of 55% risks driving the wrong customer outcome and acts as more of a penalty for people that choose to “do the right thing”. An IHT alignment would mean removing this stigma from those that choose to create a sensible income from their pension. Additionally, the age of 75 shouldn’t be used as a trigger point for tax. This would be removed in the proposed solution for the new regime.

  • Does the First Amendment only apply to the expression of view and not to the conveyance of facts?

    Edward Lane was employed as the probationary director of Central Alabama Community College’s program for at- risk youth. The program was titled, “Community Intensive Training for Youth Program,” or CITY.
    Lane found that the then-state representative, Suzanne Schmitz, was on CITY’s payroll yet not reporting for work and had not contributed any tangible work for the program. When Lane voiced his concerns about this, he was warned that terminating her would have potential negative repercussions for Lane and the community college as a whole. Lane ignored the warning from the community college president and fired Schmitz after she refused to report to work.
    Schmitz filed a lawsuit looking to get her job back and allegedly told another CITY employee that she vowed to “get Lane back” for terminating her.
    Not long after, the FBI started an investigation and contacted Lane for information regarding Schmitz. Schmitz was prosecuted by the US Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama for fraudulently arranging and concealing a no-show job for herself with CITY.
    Lane was present before a federal grand jury where he testified and at the rest of Schmitz’s trials for fraud involving a program receiving federal funds. She was convicted on all counts but one.
    After Schmitz’s first trial, Lane was actually let go from his job as part of a layoff that involved 29 employees. All but two of the 29 laid-off employees had their terminations rescinded when Steve Franks, the community college president, realized that most of them weren’t probationary employees. Lane ended up suing Franks for damages.
    The district court ruled that Lane’s testimony was made as part of his official duties as CITY’s director, and not as a regular citizen, citing that this would mean his First Amendment protections didn’t apply. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, but also added a tiny footnote.
    The Court said that because there is a split of authority over whether a subpoenaed testimony is speech as a citizen or of public concern, Franks would have qualified immunity from any damages lawsuit.
    Ultimately, Lane should have been protected under the First Amendment because he was speaking as a citizen on matters of public concern.   At the time, however, this First Amendment entitlement wasn’t exactly crystal clear.
    If employees aren’t protected under a First Amendment and they are subpoenaed for any reason, what kind of message is that sending to workers who don’t have a choice but to testify?
    Franks attorney argued that it is the character of the speech that has to be looked at to determine if the speaker should be protected under the First Amendment.
    HR experts explain that it needs to be clear whether the First Amendment only applies to the expression of view and not to the conveyance of facts.
    The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision by June.

  • No-hire agreement lawsuit settled?

    A case largely built on emails among top executives, including Steve Jobs and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, seems to have reached a settlement.
    Four major technology companies, including Apple and Google, have agreed to settle a large antitrust lawsuit over no-hire agreements in Silicon Valley. The suit began after technology workers filed a class action lawsuit against Apple, Google, Intel and Adobe Systems back in 2011. Workers alleged that the companies conspired not to poach each other’s employees in order to avert any potential salary wars. The trial was set to begin at the end of this month on behalf of approximately 60,000 employees.
    While the companies did admit that there were no-hire agreements, they disputed the allegation that there was some sort of conspiracy to drive down wages. The case was based on a series of emails about very explicit incidents. For example, after an instance where a Google recruiter solicited an Apple employee, Schmidt emailed Jobs and said that the recruiter would be fired. An email was then forwarded to a top Apple human resources executive with a smiley face emoticon.
    Terms of the deal made between the technology juggernauts and the 60,000 employees have not been disclosed at this time.

  • Unpaid interns now protected by human rights law

    The job of an unpaid intern has just been made a little more bearable for the struggling student and…well, everyone. New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio just signed a bill that protects unpaid interns from discrimination and harassment by employers covered under the city’s human rights law.
    HR experts explain that time and time again interns tell horror stories about how they were abused and taken advantage of at their internships, as employers often see interns as free labor.
    The new legislation was passed unanimously by the City Council last month in response to a ruling where an unpaid intern wasn’t protected from unlawful harassment because she was not an employee. This ruling was made despite the fact that the law prohibits an employer from discriminating against any “person”.
    Mayor DeBlasio said that the bill is being passed to help clarify human rights for anyone who may be interpreting the law too narrowly, especially in respect to interns. At the end of the day, an intern is just as protected as a full-time employee.
    The amended law states that an intern is to be considered a “person” under the sections of law that prohibit any type of discriminatory practices. An intern is described in the amendment as a person who is performing work for the purpose of training.
    This new law is effective starting on June 15, 2014.

     

  • Are female service personnel too terrified to complain?

    A Labour MP has made a serious claim against the British Army, stating that female service personnel are “too terrified” to make formal complaints over harassment and bullying. Madeleine Moon, who sits on the Common Defence Select Committee, cited the culture of fear that exists within the British Army as what is leading women to be fearful of the impact a complaint may have on their career.
    “You get the general statement about ‘we abhor all discrimination and we are opposed to and will strike it down’, but actually there is not a clear message coming all the way down,” Moon said.
    HR experts claim that female personnel face an overwhelming amount of discrimination at every level of the Army, which includes things like sexual intimidation. It is also suggested that this type of bullying is more prevalent in the Army than in the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.
    In 2012, service complains about bullying, harassment and discrimination accounted for 43 percent of all Army allegations. This was up by 1/3 from the year before.
    Moon also said she feels like there is a total sense of denial within the Army about discrimination against women. To fix this, she suggested enlisting better role models and more help lines for personnel to access in an anonymous fashion.
    Under a new watchdog, military personnel will be able to make complaints against peers to an independent official from the service complaints commission.

  • The Co-operative Bank announce losses

    The Co-operative Bank recently announced losses of £2.5 billion for 2013. It also announced that it would not be paying out bonuses to former executives adding up to £5 million.
    Last year a £1.5 billion hole was discovered in the bank’s finances causing it to nearly collapse. Due to this, the employer is being forced to cancel outstanding deferred bonuses for executives that left the bank. This news was released at the same time as the bank’s apology was issued to its customers after revealing it did not expect to make a profit this year or next.
    The Co-op Bank recently came under fire after news of payoffs and reward packages for the whole leadership team was released.
    Pay details for the bank’s chief executive were also published that revealed he would collect a remuneration package totalling £2.9 million. He could also receive a three-year incentive scheme based on future business performance.
    Many who oppose these types of payouts are calling the row over remuneration levels “rewards for failure”.
    The bank separated from its parent company at the end of last year and was acquired by a group of US hedge funds.

  • Number of people tracking lost pensions reaches a high

    Research by Pinsent Masons revealed that the number of people trying to track down lost pension pots has reached a four year high.
    It is believed that more than one million pensions totalling £3b have been abandoned and left in dormant accounts.
    The firm found that requests to the Pensions Tracking Service (PTS) to assist in tracing lost pensions increased by 83% (per month) from 2010/11 to 2013/14.
    This percentage equates to about 100,000 people a year that the PTS has to help search for these missing funds. Human resource experts explain that while most of the requests do end successfully, there is still a burden created with the increase in requests. It is because of this burden that the government proposals to introduce ‘pot follows members’ legislation have been put under the magnifying glass. These proposals would ultimately allow for pension schemes to automatically follow an employee once the workers changes jobs.
    Experts reveal that many people don’t stick with a company for decades the way they used to. The UK workforce has become completely mobile and the government needs to adapt to this change. Pensions become even harder to keep track of when companies merge or get acquired, when they rebrand or change addresses.
    On the other hand, some experts are looking at the increase in PTS requests as good news, saying that this shows an increase in awareness among workers when it comes to pension issues. Due to a number of people facing inadequate retirement incomes, the need to keep track of pensions is becoming increasingly more important.
    ‘Pot following members’ legislation is due to come into force in 2015.

  • Background checks for older workers

    Lying about your degree qualifications might not get you in as much trouble as you think, if you’re over a certain age that is. Figures have revealed that older workers that lie about their degree qualification in order to get a job or a promotion are more likely to get away with it than their younger counterparts.
    CV checks are actually often overlooked for older workers. The Higher Education Degree Datacheck (HEDD) sent out a warning to employers that UK workers who graduated in or before the 90’s could be tempted to exaggerate on their resumes. The government’s verification service said this is because this generation is facing the pressure of being in a job market with fresh graduates. Out of over 20,000 requested references over the last two years, 76% have been to check qualifications of those who graduated after the start of the millennium. Less than 20% of these, however, were about qualifications for people who graduated in the 1990’s.
    Only 8% of the enquiries were classified by HEDD as “unverified”, which could mean anything from incorrect information from a candidate to grade inflation and fake certificates listed.
    One expert explains that graduates who are further into their career generally have more opportunity to tell blatant lies because they simply aren’t being checked out. When a person has been an industry for a while, it is common for HR departments to assume that the previous employer completed an academic background check.

  • Reform called to zero-hours contracts

    Recommendations made by the Resolution Foundation think tank say that workers on zero-hours contracts should be given a fixed-hours agreement after one year.
    The Resolution Foundation was very quick to reject a union request to completely ban these types of contracts, which fail to offer guaranteed working hours causing accusations of worker abuse. This comes as no surprise to many HR professionals since the population of workers on zero-hours contracts is estimated at approximately one million people.
    The report, titled Zeroing In: Balancing protection and flexibility in the reform of zero-hours contracts, says there is a true need for a better balance between protecting the worker’s rights with their right to choose and maintaining employer flexibility.
    Additionally, the think tank recommended that exclusivity clauses be banned. These situations can lead workers to have employment that may disappear at any minute and the inability to look elsewhere for work.   Some HR professionals feel that these types of clauses work against the employee because it is the same as telling someone they cannot make more of a living if their current work situation isn’t enough.
    The report also highlights gaps in knowledge that exist around an employer’s obligations under current zero-hours contracts. Resolutions to this issue include more funding and additional information that identifies what this kind of abuse looks like.
    While the CIPD found that many workers on zero-hours contracts do not feel exploited by their employment situations, the TUC feels as though “urgent legislative action” is needed. The Foundation is trying to protect those that do not feel satisfied in their current zero-hours contracts.
    The TUC would actually like to take things a step further and is requesting the government ensure that staff on zero-hours are properly rewarded for their flexibility. The Resolution Foundation has yet to comment on this request.

     

  • New penalties for non compliance with the national minimum wage

    The penalty for not complying with the national minimum wage (NMW) could now set an employer back £20,000.
    New sanctions raised the maximum penalty from £5,000 to £20,000 and employers that fail to pay their workers minimum wage will not be let off the hook for claiming an oversight. With this new regime come very few exceptions. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills published a policy describing just how HM Revenue & Customs will deal with employers that fail to comply with the revised law. It cited that the aim of the new enforcement is not to nail businesses with hefty fees but to ensure workers receive what they are entitled to.
    The reasoning is because evidence supports that employers have been disregarding the NMW for years. A report recently released by the Centre for London and Trust for London found that over 300,000 people in the United Kingdom earn less than the NMW but only nine employers have actually been prosecuted for this. Only one has ever been publicly named.
    If an employer is found to be outside of compliance requirements, HMRC will issue a notice of underpayment. The notice will explain both the penalty as well as the wages payable to the employees in question. If the employer does not comply within the stated amount of time, HMRC is allowed to take further action under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. This can even include seizing goods from the business.
    It is going to be partly up to HR departments within each company to school management on what counts towards minimum wage. For example, meals can be included in NMW calculations but tools and uniforms cannot. Calculations can become extremely complex when it comes to employees that receive any kind of consistent accommodation as well. Human resource experts are urging HR professionals that in this particular case, knowledge is power.

  • Potential effect of proposal to raise minimum wage

    President Obama has proposed that the United States minimum wage be raised to $10.10/hour. A recent study revealed that if this were to occur, almost 40% of employers who currently page minimum wage would have to let some employees go.
    In order to offset the increase that these employers would have to incur because of the pay increase, the only option some small business owners feel they would have is to cut their staff. Additionally, out of the same population, over half said they would reduce hiring and increase prices on their goods and services.
    A press release from Express said that the increase in minimum wage would put pressure on almost all companies to increase pay for their entry level employees, even those that don’t pay minimum and those that do.
    It is also expected by experts that workers already receiving the soon-to-possibly-be minimum wage will seek pay raises since they previously would have made more than the minimum. This would mean costs would increase for companies that don’t even typically worry about minimum wage.
    While minimum wage seems to be a recurring topic every few years, if the government were to decide to make this change experts are saying it will result, without a doubt, in layoffs.

  • Having children doesn’t prevent women from reaching senior positions

    The 30% Club released research last week that had some very interesting statistics. The most profound, however, is the fact that having children isn’t what prevents many women from reaching senior positions.
    A male starting a career in an FTSE 100 business is 4.5 times more likely than a woman to make it to the executive committee but this isn’t necessarily because women are the ones having babies.
    The overall career impact of having a family, according to the study, is less than people initially thought. The research found that whilst childrearing could slow down a woman’s career, it doesn’t affect their overall ability to make it to the top.
    Rachel Short, director at business psychologists YSC, said that the gender gap between men and women turns out to be between those who do not have children.
    Childrearing has also been ruled out as a major setback because careers are likely to last longer in today’s society. Nowadays, most professionals have careers that span four to five decades. Therefore five years of childrearing shouldn’t be the difference maker. Women actually become more ambitious about senior leadership the more their career progresses.
    The report, which surveyed FTSE 100 and FTSE 250 companies, found that men and women share many similar career aspirations when it comes to leadership behaviour. The study revealed that while their aspirations may be the same, even the slightest differences could lead to very different outcomes.

               

               

  • EEOC files against pharmacy chain over their severance agreements

    Most of us are familiar with severance agreements.  Typically, a company decides to downsize and offers departing employees some kind of financial package in exchange for their silence and pledge not to divulge proprietary information.  Usually, these severance agreements include an agreement on behalf of the departing not to file an employment lawsuit.  Recently, however, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed suit against one very popular company and the lawsuit revolves around their severance agreement.    

    The EEOC filed suit against well known pharmacy chain CVS alleging that their severance agreements are overly broad, interfering with the employee’s right to file complaints with them.         

    Human resource experts are referring to this lawsuit as a landmark one since the wording in CVS’s agreement is found in virtually all companies’ pacts.  The Agency said the drug store’s, “five page single spaced Separation Agreement…deters the filing of charges and interferes with the employees’ ability to communicate voluntarily” with federal agencies.         

    The EEOC cited six specifics within the severance agreement that they felt were too vague.  These were found under headings titled: Cooperation, Non-Disparagement, Non-Disclosure of Confidential Information, General Release of Claims, No Pending Actions, & Employment Breaches. 

    Hidden within the document is a statement that says:

    “[n]othing in this paragraph is intended to or shall interfere with Employee’s right to participate in a proceeding with any appropriate federal, state or local government agency enforcing discrimination laws, nor shall this Agreement prohibit Employee from cooperating with such agency in its investigation.”

    This small disclaimer was not enough to appease the EEOC though, who are requesting that CVS stop using the separation agreement altogether and wants to order them to institute policies informing employees of their rights.  Furthermore, the EEOC would like CVS to create a 300-day window for former employees who were subject to this agreement to allow them to file a charge of discrimination, requiring CVS to cover legal costs.

    CVS has yet to respond to the lawsuit. 

  • Four in ten graduate jobs go to interns

    New research revealed that four in ten graduate jobs go to those that have done internships.

    With tuition fees reaching well over £9,000 per year, students are sometimes thinking about their career path before even stepping foot into their first college class.

    One HR expert explained that just a decade ago many recruitment companies focused their efforts on students that were in the last six months of their three-year degree course.  Now, however, the recruitment process begins much earlier.

    With that said, competition has become much more fierce.  Applicants these days aren’t just required to submit a CV, but they have to undertake critical reasoning tests, practical exercises, multiple interviews and evidence of existing relevant work experiences…all before they even step foot into their university.

    Human resource experts also revealed that there is what seems like an underground internship bucket system of what are called “pipeline” interns and “referral” interns.

    Pipeline interns are recruited via programmes that aim to attract the best future employees.  Whereas referral interns are often found through unpaid schemes and word of mouth.

    Referral interns have a reputation of being at the right place at the right time or just plain knowing the right person.  Time and time again, the same old story is told of someone entering the workplace because they are so-and-so’s son or daughter.  While this is not always true, some companies have set rules against this type of procedure, outlawing it for the sake of workplace morale. 

    Regardless of the type of intern, experts warn that even interns sometimes need to put their foot down.  Companies with interns can be infamous for exploiting them to run errands that have nothing to do with the type of work they are there to do.   It is reported that this type of exploitation is seen the most in jobs focused in the media, advertising and marketing sectors.  It appears that it happens in these types of companies the most because there are so few openings and so many candidates vying for positions.

    If an intern feels exploited, experts say that it is okay to voice that opinion as long as it is done respectfully.   

  • Shell develops an unleaded Avgas

    After rigorous initial testing and 10 years of R&D, Shell’s new lead-free formulation is finally ready.  Shell has officially become the first major oil company to develop a lead-free replacement for aviation gasoline.  The new fuel will now begin a strict regulatory approvals process.           

    Avgas is one of the last common transportation fuels that contains lead and is used by light aircrafts and helicopters.  It only includes lead to meet fuel specifications and to boost combustion performance.  To counter these issues, Shell developed an unleaded Avgas that meets all of the key properties needed to achieve an acceptable and exceptional Motor Octane rating. 

    Shell’s aviation technologists have carried out intense laboratory programs to ensure that the fuel would pass any regulatory processes needed for approval.  The program included in-house altitude rig and engine testing.  Alliances were formed with aviation companies like Piper Aircraft Inc. and Lycoming Engines to achieve industry opinions and concerns.  Shell was able to have the fuel successfully evaluated in an industry laboratory engine test by Lycoming and flight tests by Piper.

    Senior Vice-President and general manager of Lycoming Engines, Michael Kraft, said that Lycoming really commends shell on this launch and achievement.

    “They engaged Lycoming to test their fuel on our highest-octane demand engine and we can confirm that it’s remarkably close to Avgas 100LL from a performance perspective,” Kraft said. “This initiative is a major step in the right direction for general aviation.”

    Shell is now ready to fully engage the entire aviation industry, regulators and authorities (US Federal Aviation Administration, American Society for Testing and Materials and European Aviation Safety Agency) in order to achieve approvals for their unleaded gas.

  • Last McDonnell Douglas DC-10 to be pulled from service

    On December 7, Bangladesh Biman Airlines said that it would pull from service what is believed to be the last McDonnell Douglas DC-10 still carrying passengers.            

    The McDonnell Douglas DC-10 originally entered service in 1971, flying passengers between Los Angeles and Chicago.  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) once grounded the entire fleet of DC-10’s for more than one month after a crash where an engine separated from the airframe during its takeoff run.

    The landmark move on behalf of Biman is part of routine commercial service.  Aviation experts and fans are hoping that they will have at least one more chance to fly on the craft…and they might just get their wish.

    The big jet is primarily used for cargo carriers, like FedEx.  The major airline said however, that fans and experts interested in flying on a passenger version of the airplane will get their chance to live out their dream in February 2014.  Biman plans on making seats available on the jet for a final flight from Bangladesh to England.

    In the event that interest persists, some scenic flights may be flown from England, as long as enthusiasm encourages this.

    McDonnell Douglas produced its last DC-10 in 1989 after a run of nearly 450 examples.

  • Government’s future economic plans outlined

    Chancellor George Osborne announced a “job-rich recovery for all” while he outlined the government’s future economic plans in the Autumn Statement.           

    The key announcements included a few plans that came much earlier than expected.  The first are the plans to increase the state pension age to 68 in the mid 2030’s and to 69 in the late 2040’s.  Under the new rule, the age will vary based on an average life expectancy.  Ultimately, people will spend no more than a third of their expected life drawing a pension.  The “rule” is set to be reviewed every five years.

    The second announcement that was released earlier than anticipated is the personal tax allowance plan.  This is said to go up to £10,000, meaning that a typical basic rate taxpayer will pay £705 less income tax per year compared to 2010-11.

    The Chancellor also addressed the high levels of youth unemployment and the plans to require any young person (18-21) to undertake training from their first day of claiming benefits.  If they fail to do so, they will lose their entitlement.  Furthermore, funding for an additional 20,000 Higher Apprenticeships over the next two years will be increased.

    The hope is that this measure will encourage many businesses to take on young people, to help reduce risk and cover the costs of the additional training that under-21’s require.

    Osborne’s confirmation that the state pension age would increase attracted criticism from multiple unions.  One human resource expert said that the new plans would condemn millions of people to work until they drop.  This will effectively mean poorer people with lower than average life expectancies, which will fund the pensions for the more wealthy.

    As the workforce becomes more age diverse, the workplace will need to adapt in multiple ways, including management and development.  This proves especially true when the average working life span of a person could last over 50 years.

    While the overall impact of a growth on reducing the fiscal deficit is welcome, HR experts are still adamant about addressing this management deficit. 

  • Cookies & Privacy Policy

    Cookies & Privacy Policy

    GMR Consulting's privacy statement describes the information we collect from clients and visitors to this site and explains how it is used. Please be assured that we will protect the privacy of users and ensure that any data is not misused in any way.

    Information Collection and Usage

    The information we may collect is comprised mainly of Anonymous Information. This is gathered from users to the site and is compiled using an analytical tool. The statistical information gleaned is compiled of IP address, duration of visit, which pages were looked at and for how long etc. The information is used internally to work out which website pages are working and which pages users bounce off. We can then design the necessary improvements to our website.

    Personally Identifiable Information is collected from users who use the online contact form or who subscribe to our blog. Specifically, this may include name, user name, address, telephone number and email address. This information is treated as strictly confidential and will not be passed to any third party unless permission is given, or in legal circumstances.

    Cookies

    A cookie is a small file which asks permission to be placed on your computer’s hard drive. The cookie helps analyse web traffic or lets you know when you visit a particular site. Cookies allow web applications to respond to you as an individual. The web application can tailor its operations to your needs, likes and dislikes by gathering and remembering information about your preferences.

    GMR Consulting uses traffic log cookies purely for analytical purposes, as described above, and essentially track which pages have been visited so we can improve our website. Cookies in no way give us access to your computer or any information about you, other than the data you choose to share with us.

    You can choose to accept or decline cookies. Most web browsers automatically accept cookies, but you can usually alter your browser setting to decline cookies if you prefer. This may prevent you from taking full advantage of some websites, however.

    Other Websites

    This site contains links to other websites. However, GMR Consulting is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of these websites.

  • Human Resources Consulting: Case Studies

    Management Restructuring

    GMR managed the restructuring of a public sector college management team, following the appointment of a new Chief Executive. We developed a new leadership structure, including evaluating existing talent against future roles and responsibilities.

    Pension Scheme Buy-out

    GMR managed the review and subsequent buy-out of defined benefit pension scheme liabilities for an international bank. We developed management recommendations, member communication and selected the insurance company that ultimately became responsible for all pension liabilities.

    Remuneration Review

    We were retained by a property management company as independent remuneration consultants to develop annual pay review proposals. GMR established recommendations for the Remuneration Committee, including salaries, bonuses and long-term incentives, following extensive benchmarking using external surveys. We completed a comprehensive analysis of their benefits structure, including car allowances, pension, medical and life assurance provision.

    Return to Human Resources Consulting

  • Employment Expert Witnesses: Case Studies

    Personal Injury: Plaintiff / Claimant

    GMR provided expert services in a personal injury case following a fatal accident involving an Investment Banker. This involved an evaluation of the banker’s entire career path and projection of future of loss of earnings. As a result, his dependants received very substantial damages in recognition of his significant skills, experience and proven track record as a financial services professional.

    Divorce Litigation: Defendant

    We provided career evaluation in connection with complicated divorce proceedings for a New York Hedge Fund Manager. Following his redundancy in the recent economic crisis, it was necessary to determine his future job prospects in the US and Europe, together with potential compensation, after which he was able to mitigate his divorce settlement.

    Employment Dispute: Plaintiff / Claimant

    GMR was retained in connection with an employment dispute regarding severance terms for a former Chief Executive Officer in a multinational business. GMR researched market data and provided strategic advice, including a range of scenarios for mediation purposes, which ultimately led to favorable settlement of the dispute.

    Employment Contract Dispute: Defendant

    We reviewed the long-term incentive program for a major US industrial corporation, following a discrimination claim brought against the company by a former employee whose incentives had been lapsed on leaving service. GMR assisted the employment tribunal with written evidence and oral testimony regarding the definition and consequences of career retirement, as established under the company’s long-term incentive scheme rules.

    Click here to return to Employment Expert Witnesses

  • Aviation Expert Witnesses: Case Studies

    Air Show Fatality: Plaintiff

    Following a fatal incident at an air show, GMR was asked to evaluate the probable causes of the accident and identify areas of liability. As a result of reviewing all of the available evidence, including the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident report and video footage, it was possible to carry out a detailed risk analysis of the event. As a result of the expert evidence, the plaintiff / claimant was awarded significant damages.

    Airliner Turbulence Injury: Defendant

    GMR was retained by attorneys representing one of the major US airlines in a case involving a passenger injured during turbulence on a commercial flight. Following an extensive review of the circumstances surrounding the incident, written evidence was submitted, followed by a deposition with oral testimony. Key aspects of the case included meteorological data analysis, flight crew and cabin service protocols and procedures for the safety of passengers. As a result of the evidence submitted the damages were significantly reduced.

    Helicopter Fatalities: Defendant

    Following a fatal helicopter accident, GMR was asked to provide an expert opinion on whether the pilot was in breach of certain air navigation orders by electing to fly in adverse weather conditions. GMR reviewed the AAIB report, meteorological data for the day in question and the pilot’s licenses, qualifications and experience. Having evaluated the evidence, it was our expert’s opinion that the pilot was not flying in contravention of any regulations.

    Helicopter Fatality Whilst Working Abroad: Claimant

    GMR were instructed by the aviation department of a leading UK law firm following the death of an executive whilst on a business trip abroad.

    Expert opinion was required regarding the risk assessment practices amongst employers proposing to send their employees to travel and work abroad.

    Following a High Court trial, where GMR provided written and oral testimony, the employer was found responsible for the fatality and in breach of their duty of care to their employee.

    Click here to return to Aviation Expert Witnesses

  • Aviation Consulting: Case Study

    Wind Turbine Planning Proposal

    GMR was asked to prepare an aviation report in connection with a planning application proposal for a single wind turbine located next to a residential helipad. GMR found that the wind turbine would not adversely affect the operations into and out of the helipad and that it remains the pilot's responsibility to avoid collision with an obstacle. Therefore, the planning application for the wind turbine should not be declined.

    Click here to return to Aviation Consulting

  • Employment Services

    GMR Consulting offers Human Resources Consulting and Employment Expert Witness Services, worldwide.

    HR Consulting

    Our team of highly experienced HR consultants focus on strategic human resource solutions, with particular emphasis on employment policies and procedures, executive compensation, ethics and compliance and pension scheme trusteeship. GMR consultants offer knowledge gained from many years experience across different business sectors, thereby ensuring that HR policies are tailored to meet client needs.

    Click here to read some case studies

    HR Expert Witness Services

    GMR HR Experts provide written and oral testimony in cases of complex, high-value employment related litigation. Our experts are professionals who are currently engaged in HR projects across a wide range of industries and can therefore offer up to date knowledge and experience of the marketplace. They maintain their expertise by continuing these activities and with ongoing memberships of HR associations and/or expert professional bodies.

    Our HR experts have been instructed by both Plaintiff / Claimant and Defendant lawyers and as Single Joint Experts, to provide bespoke career employment and remuneration reports for Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice, Divorce, Unfair Prejudice and Employment litigation, worldwide.

    Click here to read some case studies

  • Julia Stevenson

    Click here to view printable PDF version

    Julia Stevenson
    Marketing & Communications Consultant

     

    Contact:

    This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

     

    Qualifications:

    BEng Extended, HITECC Diploma – First class honours
    Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) Advanced Certificate
    Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) Certificate

     

    Career History:

     

     

    Jan 2009 - date

    Julia Consulting Ltd,Worldwide

    Provide bespoke marketing and brand communication services across all industries. Develop marketing strategies and communication programmes for clients to drive awareness across a variety of channels whilst delivering a range of marketing collateral.

              (July 2013 - Dec 2013)

    Acted as Internal Communications Manager, BP Trading. A strong focus on communications and project management requiring the ability to build relationships with a range of stakeholders across BP (including group and internal communications, the values and behaviours team, HR, senior BP leaders and the BP Integrated and Supply Trading Executive Team). Responsible for the delivery of the culture change communications around values and diversity and inclusion to drive the right behaviours within the BP Trading organisation.

              (Jan 2011 - July 2013)

    Acted as BP Ethics and Compliance Communications Manager, delivering the ethics and compliance communication strategy across the organisation. Launched new code of conduct and speaking up programme aligned with the new values and behaviours. Embedded employee helpline as a channel for creating a speaking up culture. Created communications for Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer and the Ethics and Compliance Function whilst networking with key stakeholders. Prior to launch of their new code of conduct, sat as an advisor on the values steering committee.

     

    Dec 1999 - Jan 2009

    BP plc, Worldwide

         (Dec 2004 - Jan 2009)

    Brand Identity and Engagement Manager, Brand Team, Group Marketing
    Delivered workshops on a global basis to engage staff and agencies on the brand. Developed brand guidelines for range of applications, created internal identities and managed network of brand advocates to assist in delivery of guidelines. Handled relationship with design agencies, branded merchandise team, print management team and distribution. Developed materials to communicate brand values and managed the process of expanding new product and service brands across the group.

         (Aug 2003 - Dec 2004)

    Communications Specialist, HR, Chemicals

    Developed and delivered the separation communications strategy for the sale of the Petrochemicals Division of the Group. Designed and implemented the transformation communications strategy for Petrochemicals Europe. Created communications for Diversity and Inclusion Function on a global basis.

         (Sep 2001 - Aug 2003)

    Marketing Change Manager, Global Special Products (GSP), Downstream

    Facilitated the behavioural change in GSP to achieve the group performance target for 2002. Managed the relationship with PwC and delivered all communications for the Change Enablement Project. Introduced code certification that was adopted and rolled out across the organisation. Assessed current and future status of GSP and developed a plan to achieve goals, ensuring strategies were completed and communicated. Delivered original approach for promoting a new manufacturing site via a virtual tour website. BP Schools Link Officer and Mentor.

         (Dec 1999 - Sep 2001)

    Account Executive, Marketing Communication, Chemicals

    Worked with 19 business units worldwide to provide communication to their customers. Solely responsible for chemicals global gateway and rebranding of all websites including strategy, design, implementation, advertising, brochure production, exhibition promotion, internal communications, graduate recruitment, intranet and newsletters. Managed and reported on budgets, dealt with ongoing relationships with third party suppliers on a global basis.

     

    1998 - 1999

    Fulcrum,UK
    Marketing Manager

    Responsible for re-branding of the corporate identity and creating communications for the Oracle consultancy including brochures, website, and merchandise.

     

    1997 - 1998

    Constellar Corporation,UK and US
    Marketing Executive

    Responsible for a range of internal communications including newsletters, merchandise and brochures.

     

     

  • Cary Crawley

    Click here to view printable PDF version

    Cary Crawley
    Hot Air Ballooning Consultant & Expert Witness

     

    Contact:

    This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

     

    Flying
    Qualifications:

    CAA Commercial Licence (CPL) - Balloons (Categories A, B and C)
    CPL Instructor - Balloons
    CPL Examiner - Balloons

    CAA Revalidation Examiner of Type Rating Examiners, Balloons
    CAA Check Flight Examiner for initial PPL and CPL Examiner authorities
    Airworthiness Inspector - Private and Commercial Balloons
    Commercial Licence - Balloons (USA, Chile, New Zealand, Egypt)
    PPL - Balloons (Fiji, France, Switzerland, Pakistan)

     

    Maintenance Qualifications:

     

    British Balloon and Airship Club appointed authorised Airworthiness Inspector
    Chilean D.G.A.C. Part 66 Maintenance Mechanic
    Chilean D.G.A.C. part 66 Maintenance Supervisor

     

    Flying Hours:

    4300+ total hours
    750+ instructor hours
    1500+ Group C balloon hours
    100+ special shaped balloon hours

     

    Career History:

     

    2014 - date

    GMR Aviation Consulting, UK and USA
    Hot Air Ballooning Consultant and Expert Witness

     

    1984 - date 

    Commcercial Balloonist, UK and worldwide

     

    Career Summary:

    Since 1984 I have worked continuously as a commercial balloonist with virtually all of my balloon flying being business, rather than sport-related.

     

    I have flown commercially in twenty five countries, with a combination of instruction, advertising and special stunts. However the greater majority of my ballooning work is in the field of flying large, commercial passenger balloons (1400+ hours flying Group C balloons), instructing commercial pilots and advising on the set-up of businesses in this area.

     

    I am a UK hot air balloon Commercial Pilots Licence (CPL) Examiner, Instructor and Airworthiness Inspector for all types and size categories (A, B and C) and a CAA approved Revalidation Examiner of Type Rating Examiners, Balloons (i.e. an Examiner of commercial balloon pilot Examiners who require renewal of their ratings). I am also authorised by the UK CAA to conduct observation check flights for the assessment and recommendation of new applicants for the role of PPL and CPL Examiner (Balloons).

     

    Additionally, I hold CPL’s for balloons issued by the relevant authorities in the USA, Chile, New Zealand and Egypt and Private Pilots Licences (PPL) for balloons in a number of countries where a CPL is not locally available. These include Fiji, France, Switzerland and Pakistan.

     

    I have instructed pilots at various locations throughout the world, including the UK, Italy, the USA, Spain and New Zealand. In Egypt, where I spent about five years commercially flying and instructing over a thirteen-year period, I trained fourteen balloon pilots and was the only foreigner ever to be issued with a full Egyptian Commercial Pilots Licence for hot air balloons - as opposed to a local validation of a foreign national licence. Additionally, I instructed the first licensed balloon pilots in Pakistan and I currently perform the role of Training Captain, Quality Manager and Flight Examiner for the largest commercial ballooning company in Asia.

     

    I set up and gained approvals for the first and largest balloon Maintenance Organisation (M.O.) in Northern Chile, as well as gaining approvals for the founding of the first commercial A.O.C. holding ballooning company based in the Atacama Desert.

     

    I have acted as a consultant and commercial pilot for balloon operators starting new businesses in many countries where ballooning has not been established, or is still in its infancy. These countries include Chile, Egypt, Spain, Fiji, Myanmar (Burma), Dubai, New Zealand and Bulgaria. I also advised and assisted with the launching of the first officially approved Maintenance Organisation for balloons in Myanmar, where I currently act as Quality Manager.

     

    I have frequently acted in an advisory role to a number of National Aviation Authorities where private ballooning and also commercial ballooning have been developed as activities and industries.

     

    I have acted as contributor to the EASA rulemaking process and am a member of the British Balloon and Airship Club, the Balloon Federation of America and am a Freeman of the City of London.

     

    I have been instructed in the UK and USA as an expert witness in connection with hot air ballooning.

     

     

     

  • Stuart J. Baxter OLD

    Click here to view printable PDF version

    Stuart John Baxter
    HR Consultant & Expert Witness

     

    Contact:

    This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

     

    Professional Bodies:

    Associate of The Institute of Financial Services
    Affiliated Member The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
    Member of The Association of Professional Pension Trustees
    Member of The Academy of Experts
    Member of The Expert Witness Institute
    Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) 1st Tier Expert
    American Association of Justice (AAJ) Expert
    Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

     

    Professional Awards:

    The Cardiff University Expert Witness Certificate

     

    Career History:

     

    2003 - date

    GMR Consulting
    HR Consultant, Compensation and Employment Expert Witness

    1998 - 2003

     

    Merrill Lynch Europe PLC 

    Managing Director International HR

    1989 - 1998

     

    Mercury Asset Management Group plc 

    Managing Director HR

    1972 - 1989

    S.G. Warburg & Co. Ltd.
    Director from 1987

     

    Career Summary:

    Since 1972 I have been continuously employed in the Financial Services industry and involved in all aspects of HR with particular emphasis regarding remuneration, benefits, payroll and policy.

     

    I was a member of the S.G. Warburg integration committee in 1986 (“Big Bang”) when the business was merged with Akroyd & Smithers, Mullins and Rowe & Pitman and a key responsibility was the harmonization of the remuneration and benefits strategy. In 1989 I transferred to Mercury Asset Management to establish a dedicated asset management HR function, S.G. Warburg having floated the initial 25 per cent of its share capital. I subsequently became the Head of HR for Mercury Asset Management, working for the Chairman and the non-executive directors who constituted the Senior Appointments and Remuneration Committee.

     

    I was responsible for the delivery of the Mercury Asset Management remuneration strategy and this involved establishing both approved and unapproved share schemes. The role was closely aligned to the business giving me the opportunity to work with both the Deputy Chairman and Chief Investment Officer.

     

    In 1989 I was appointed as Secretary to the Mercury Asset Management Group plc pension scheme and in 1998 became a member of the takeover deal team negotiating with Merrill Lynch the remuneration and “lock in” strategy.

     

    After the takeover I worked to align the Mercury Asset Management benefits with the Merrill Lynch total remuneration model, eliminating car, loan and mortgage subsidy schemes. I was also extensively involved in a complex pension integration resulting in the Mercury Asset Management Scheme becoming part of the Merrill Lynch UK Pension Plan in 1999.

     

    In 2002 I was appointed Head of Compensation, Benefits and Payrolls for the Europe, Middle East and Africa Region (EMEA) for all the Merrill Lynch businesses. I integrated the individual teams working in these areas moving towards a shared service model eliminating cost, headcount and inefficiency. During that time I reported to the Head of International HR in London and Head of Global Remuneration and Benefits in New York.

     

    I am currently a Director of the Bank of America Merrill Lynch (UK) Pension Plan Trustees Limited, having been appointed in 1999. I am Chairman of the Merrill Lynch (Channel Islands) and Isle of Man Pension Schemes, the Merrill Lynch (UK) Healthcare Trustee Limited and the Fleet National Bank UK Pension Plan. I am also a Trustee of Lord Rayleigh’s Farms and Strutt and Parker (Farms) Ltd. Staff Pension Scheme.

     

    Since joining GMR Consulting in 2003 I have been involved in a wide range of HR consulting projects in both Financial Services and other industries. These include mandates in the remuneration, pensions and redundancy areas.

     

    I have also been instructed by lawyers acting for both plaintiffs / claimants and defendants to prepare career employment and remuneration reports. These are in connection with personal injury, clinical negligence, commercial litigation and Employment Tribunal claims, in which I have given evidence.

     

  • Catherine Bolz

    Click here to view printable PDF version

    Catherine A Bolz
    HR Consultant & Expert Witness

     

    Contact:

    This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

     

    Qualifications:

    Bachelor of Science, Accounting

    Masters of Business Administration

    FINRA Series 7 & 66

    Career History:

     

     

    2014 - date

    GMR Consulting, USA and UK

    HR Consultant and Expert Witness

    Provide international HR consulting services to all business sectors. Experienced in designing, developing, implementing and managing innovative global compensation and benefit programmes. Highly experienced within the Financial Services industry and in providing advice as a senior HR Business Partner.

    Accept instructions from lawyers acting for both Claimants and Defendants to provide employment expert witness reports in connection with personal injury, clinical negligence, commercial and employment litigation.

     

    2011 - 2013

    Bank of America, USA

    Executive Client Relationship Manager, Retirement Services

    Managed several key relationships with large corporate clients (> $5 Billion in retirement assets), ensuring their retirement and stock award programmes were administered in a manner consistent with plan design, current laws, regulations and best practices. 

    Created and presented strategic business plans for client stakeholders to enhance relationships and develop new business opportunities. Chaired Client Advisory Council, a forum through which key clients are given the opportunity to provide feedback on services and products being developed by Retirement Services.

     

    2006 - 2011

     

    Blackrock, Inc, USA

    Managing Director, Human Resources

    Created and implemented a full range of new, competitive compensation and benefit programmes, policies and processes across 24 countries and 3 continents.  

    Designed and managed executive compensation programmes, including stock awards and deferred investments.

    Established a governance model for all ERISA plans.  Developed the framework for global governance of all benefit programmes and was a member of the Retirement Committee.

    Responsibilities rapidly increased as the company expanded through Mergers and Acquisitions.  Held management responsibilities for a team of 20 and played an integral role in managing and leading all HR functions through M&A activity, including acquisition of Merrill Lynch Investment Managers (2006), Quellos Group (2007) and Barclays Global Investors (2009).  Led due diligence activities for compensation and benefit programmes.

    Recruited, managed and developed a team of global HR professionals located in New York, London, Tokyo and Hong Kong.

     

    2003 - 2006

    Platinum Underwriters Reinsurance, Inc, USA

    Senior Vice President, Head of Human Resources

    Led and managed the Human Resources function for a newly public company with operations in the US, UK and Bermuda.

    Partnered with Executive Management and the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors to develop, implement and communicate competitive compensation and benefit programmes that aligned the interests of employees and shareholders.  Significant focus on equity award programmes for key executives and high-potential employees.

    Developed a succession plan for key employees and a played a critical role in planning and executing significant organisational changes, including change in CEO and CFO.

    Involved in all key-staffing decisions in all locations.

    Served as Director on the Board of Directors of Platinum Administrative Services, Inc., a subsidiary of the parent company.

     

    2000 - 2003

    Merrill Lynch, USA

    Human Resources

    Hired as HR Chief Operating Officer and promoted to lead the benefits function as Global Head of Benefits in 2001.  Designed and launched unique compensation plans, including private equity investment programmes, to attract and retain key employees; conducted comprehensive review of health and welfare plans to assess alignment with healthcare strategy and current business environment and introduced updated programmes that resulted in significant annual savings.  Management responsibilities for a team of 45 including 5 direct reports.

     

     1994 - 2000

    Morgan Stanley, USA

    Human Resources

    Held various roles including Director, Benefits; Vice President, Executive Compensation; Vice President, Senior Human Resources Business Partner.

     

     Pre 1994

    Utilised accounting degree as an auditor before taking on roles managing retirement plans and administering payroll for various companies.

     

  • Julia Stevenson

    Julia Stevenson is a Marketing, Branding and Communications Consultant.

    Specialist areas include:

    • Former Brand and Engagement Manager at BP. Managed communications for Ethics & Compliance
    • Experienced in compliance communications around Anti-Bribery and Corruption (ABC), Anti-Money Laundering (AML), Bribery Act and corporate compliance standards
    • Experienced in managing and implementing global brand workshops
    • Responsible for video production management at CEO level for top FTSE 100 company
    • Provides website rebranding and implementation
    • International engagements accepted

    Julia Stevenson, Ethics & Compliance Consultant

    Click here for her full CV.

  • Catherine A. Bolz

    Cathy Bolz is a Senior HR Director, providing consulting and expert witness services on a global basis.

    Specialist areas include:

    • Extensive knowledge of Employment laws, regulations and governance regarding retirement and stock award schemes
    • In depth knowledge of  local and international compensation and benefits programmes, through design and implementation
    • Highly skilled senior HR professional with many years experience within the Financial Services industry
    • Former Client Relationship Manager for key corporate clients within the Retirement Services Division of a top tier bank
    • Previously held recruitment and management responsibilities for a team of global HR professionals located in the US, Europe and Asia
    • Provides expert witness services to lawyers
    • International engagements accepted

    Catherine Bolz, HR Consultant & Employment Expert Witness

    Click here for her full CV.

  • Stuart J. Baxter

    Stuart Baxter has over 30 years Human Resources experience based in the Financial Services Industry.

    Specialist areas include:

    • Currently engaged in HR consultancy projects across a wide range of industries and occupations, using an extensive network
    • Provides career employment and remuneration reports for Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice, Divorce, Unfair Prejudice and Employment litigation, oral testimony given
    • International board level HR experience with knowledge of both local employment terms and expatriate arrangements
    • Specialist in executive compensation and benefits strategies including benchmarking individual roles against comparators
    • Research expertise including total employment market analysis
    • International instructions accepted
    • Memberships and Affiliations:
      • The Academy of Experts
      • The Expert Witness Institute
      • Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) 1st Tier Expert
      • Cardiff University Expert Witness Accreditation
      • Pensions Management Institute Award in Pension Trusteeship
      • Chartered Institute of Bankers
      • Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development

    Stuard J Baxter, HR Consultant and Expert Witness

    Click here for his full CV.

    Click hereto read articles.

  • Employment Expert Witnesses

    GMR employment expert witnesses provide expert testimony worldwide in cases of complex, high-value employment related litigation.

    The team is led by Stuart Baxter, who has over 30 years of Human Resources experience based in the Financial Services Industry. Stuart has international board level HR experience, with knowledge of both local employment terms and expatriate arrangements. A specialist in executive compensation and benefits strategies, including benchmarking individual roles against comparators, he has research expertise including total labor market analysis. Currently engaged in HR consultancy projects across a wide range of industries and occupations, he uses an extensive network and has an established international track record in preparing comprehensive employment reports and giving oral testimony.

    GMR experts have been retained on behalf of plaintiffs / claimants and defendants to provide in-depth expert reports and oral testimony. Our work is always confidential.

    Click here to read some case studies

    Areas of specialty include:

    • Loss of career earnings and wages
      • Benchmarking remuneration for specific roles
    • Career employment and remuneration reports
      • Review of pre-claim employment history and remuneration
      • Quantum analysis of prospective career path(s)
      • Assessment of residual employment prospects and post-claim earnings
      • Estimation of future earnings potential using salary survey data
    • Employment and workplace discrimination
      • Sexual harassment  
      • Racial discrimination  
      • Age discrimination  
      • Wrongful termination  
      • Compensation, including claims for unequal pay, bonus and incentive scheme disputes  
    • Employment legislation
    • Labor laws  
      • Workers compensation 

    Examples of types of claim in which we have been retained include:

    • Personal injury
    • Medical malpractice and clinical negligence
    • Divorce
    • Minority shareholder disputes
    • Employment contract disputes
    • Employment tribunals regarding unfair pay, unfair dismissal and workplace stress
    • Whistleblowing
  • Human Resources Consulting

    GMR’s human resources consultancy focuses on strategic human resource solutions, with particular emphasis on employment policies and procedures, executive compensation and pension scheme trusteeship. Our consultants ensure that HR policy is aligned to meet your needs on issues such as executive remuneration, including bonus and incentive plans and board level HR strategy.

    Our highly experienced team has a wealth of personnel knowledge gained from different international businesses over many decades. We have a comprehensive understanding of employment issues and extensive experience in management, recruitment and consultancy.

    Click here to read some case studies

    Our areas of expertise include:

    • Executive compensation strategies, including Remuneration Committee recommendations
    • Terms and conditions of employment
    • Individual contract negotiation, including structuring offers of employment
    • Management restructuring
    • Redundancy and severance policy design and implementation
    • Share option, deferred stock and phantom long-term incentive schemes
    • Salary benchmarking
    • Pension scheme trusteeship
    • Expatriate compensation
    • International pension plans, including defined benefit and defined contribution schemes
    • Life assurance, permanent disability and medical scheme reviews
    • Executive search and recruitment
    • Flexible benefits strategy
    • Performance management review, including appraisals
    • Merger and acquisition integration

     

  • Clients

    Some of our clients who have instructed us in the UK and the USA include:

    • Addleshaw Goddard
    • BLM
    • Charles Russell
    • Clyde & Co
    • DAC Beachcroft
    • Debevoise & Plimpton
    • DLA Piper
    • Eaton Peabody
    • Eversheds
    • Fisher & Phillips
    • Herbert Smith Freehills
    • Hofheimer Gartlir & Gross
    • Holman Fenwick Willan
    • Hugh James
    • Kennedys
    • Leigh Day
    • Irwin Mitchell/MPH Solicitors
    • Mayer Brown International
    • McDermott Will & Emery
    • McGuireWoods
    • Mishcon de Reya
    • Radcliffes LeBrasseur
    • Reed Smith Richards Butler (Hong Kong)
    • Rumberger Kirk & Caldwell
    • Russell-Cooke
    • Simmons & Simmons
    • Stewarts Law
  • About GMR

    GMR Consulting has offices in London and Miami and operates worldwide.

    The company offers expert witness and consulting services, within the human resources and employment sectors.

    GMR works with some of the largest multi – national corporations in the world, providing human resources expertise in employment policies and procedures, executive compensation and pension scheme trusteeship.

    All our consultants and experts provide testimony for both plaintiff / claimant and defendant lawyers and offer expert opinion in complex and high value litigation.

    GMR consultants are frequently recommended by clients who include leading law firms and legal professionals, as well as international companies. GMR’s reputation has been established as providing a high quality, reliable and personal service aligned to meeting client needs and deadlines.

  • About GMR Consulting

    About GMR Consulting

    GMR is an independent international consultancy and expert witness business based in Europe and North America, founded in 2002. Our team of consultants has extensive experience gained from operating in different business sectors over many decades.

    GMR aims to develop long-term, confidential client relationships. Our key strengths include providing up-to-date, detailed and relevant solutions to meet a variety of corporate and legal requirements. GMR clients include some of the world's largest global companies, small and medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurial boutiques across all industries. Our proven track record means a large percentage of business comes from previous clients and their recommendations.

    Click here for more information.

  • What's it like flying a Boeing B777?

    Although each aircraft responds differently to inputs, weather, routes and everyday piloting skills, the B777 was developed to ease many of the usual distractions from older warning systems, poor pilot technique and recognition of a scenario that could be going very wrong.

    The B777 is an advanced wide bodied aircraft which handles more like a bus than a sleek sports car meaning it takes more time to react, make a control input to the flight control systems and wait for a response. A captain has to make sound and concrete decisions quickly to ensure the safety of his or her passengers.

    The B777 is completely “fly by wire” meaning transmitters and receivers have replaced any control or lever which used to be manipulated by cables and pulleys. All the flight controls as well as throttles, speed brake, parking brake, etc are completely controlled electronically.

    The first thing that a pilot notices is the size of the cockpit. The B777 is like a B767 on steroids. The second thing he notices is that the glareshield controls (Mode Control Panel) as well as the front instrument panel is much less cluttered, thanks to the six large EFIS screens which replace smaller, dimmer screens.

    Another difference between the B777 and other conventional airliners is the span of the wing (201 feet) and length of the fuselage (212 feet). When a pilot is being trained on the B777, extended training is spent on making wide turns while taxiing, knowing where the wingtip is during these turns and paying close attention to your ground speed. Due to the cockpit being two stories high, the aircraft seems to be traveling slower than it actually is.

    On the outside, a quick sign that an aircraft is in fact the B777 can be verified by looking at its main landing gear. It has six wheels on each main gear with the two rear wheels being “steerable” to help in turns. Further, the B777 has fantastic stopping capabilities due to the additional brakes located on the main gear wheels. A B767 for example has eight brakes (four on each main gear). The B777 has an additional four brakes due to the added wheels on each main gear.

    In my opinion, the best thing about the B777 is its range. My office changes each and every flight. Due to the long range capability, I am liable to be in Asia one week, the Middle East the following week or South America/Europe the next. What a dilemma!

  • Changing demographics in the US

    During the recent economic downturn it has become apparent that the cost of retirement provision has become very expensive. Coupled with an era when asset values have declined, this has led to increasing concerns: Governments, employers and employees alike have now realized that there will not be sufficient savings to enable employees to retire as early as in recent years and maintain their standard of living. Indeed, the need to further increase Pension Age has already been highlighted and many of the closed Defined Benefit Pension Schemes (“DB”) are now seeking additional employer contributions to fund enormous deficits.

    Costs have not only been driven up by asset valuations declining but over the last few years actuaries have determined that mortality tables need to be strengthened. This is to reflect the fact that people are on average expected to live longer and will therefore draw their pensions over an extended period. Obviously this will also have an impact when assessing the financial implications of a personal injury claim.

    Why has this come about?

    There are several reasons why the retirement landscape is changing so significantly.

    The first is increased longevity which means that providing a pension based on only a small proportion of your total life is an unreasonable expectation. For example, if an individual starts work at age 21 and retires at age 55 that will represent an employed period of 34 years service. If the same employee lives to age 90, that means they will enjoy 35 years of retirement whilst drawing a pension. It is totally unrealistic to provide for a pension over such a short period of time and then expect to draw it for another 30+ years. Periods of absence from the workplace due to redundancy or career breaks only increase the pension problem.