by Christian Schapp
It’s possible employers could be in for more than just a whopping increase to the overtime exemption salary threshold.
From the questions it asked employers in its proposed changes to the FLSA’s overtime exemption rules, the DOL is considering changes to the “white-collar” duties tests.
The DOL hasn’t proposed any changes yet, and it has provided little in the way of clues as to what changes it’s considering — other than the indication that it’s mulling the adoption of a California-style rule requiring more than 50% of an employee’s time be spent exclusively on exempt duties for the person to be classified as exempt.
But employers are still fearful significant changes to the duties tests could force the reclassification of a great deal of employees — beyond the number of employees who’ll have to be reclassified as a result of the proposed increase in the salary threshold from $23,660 per year to $50,440.
Click here for entire article.
by Tim Gould
It’s worse than we thought. Workplace rudeness isn’t just corrosive — it’s catching.
Alisson Clark, writing on the University of Florida website, reports that a recent U of F study indicates that encountering rude behavior at work makes people more likely to perceive rudeness in later interactions.
The perception makes them more likely to be impolite in return, spreading rudeness like a virus, she says.
“When you experience rudeness, it makes rudeness more noticeable,” Clark quotes lead author Trevor Foulk, a doctoral student in management at UF’s Warrington College of Business Administration. “You’ll see more rudeness even if it’s not there.”
The study findings were recently published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. The researchers say they’re the first hard evidence that everyday impoliteness spreads in the workplace.
The study tracked 90 graduate students practicing negotiation with classmates. Those who rated their initial negotiation partner as rude were more likely to be rated as rude by a subsequent partner, showing that they passed along the first partner’s rudeness. The effect continued even when a week elapsed between the first and second negotiations.
Click here for entire article.
by Christian Schappel
As you know, taking FMLA leave can’t completely shield an employee from termination, especially when the person’s performance warrants him or her being fired. But the FMLA very much complicates the matter. So what do you need to be able to safely let under-performing FMLA-takers go?
Answer: Documented evidence that the employer isn’t meeting performance standards.
A recent lawsuit in which the employer’s decision to terminate an employee on intermittent FMLA leave was upheld by a federal appeals court provides a good example of when it’s permissible — and what it takes — to safely let these kinds of workers go.
Multiple stints of FMLA
Elizabeth Burciaga sued her employer, Ravago Americas LLC for FMLA retaliation after she was terminated following several FMLA-related absences.
Burciaga was a customer service representative, who was responsible for contacting sales representatives and customers, receiving and processing orders, scheduling shipments, and resolving customer issues.
Click here for entire article.
by Christian Schappel
The DOL has said it expects its new overtime exemption rule changes to make roughly 4.6 million workers eligible for OT, resulting in bigger paychecks. But is that really what’s going to happen?
Talk to just about anyone who’s not in the Obama Administration, and the answer you’ll get is “no.”
While the rule changes, which President Obama ordered the DOL to make, may sound good to members of the voting public who’d like to make more for working above and beyond the standard 40-hour workweek, it’s unlikely employers will take the changes lying down.
Attorneys and consultants nationwide have been quick to point out that the vast majority of employers won’t just hand over the $1.5 billion in extra wages the DOL estimated could be generated from the rule changes.
Click here for entire article.
by Tim Gould
Take a deep breath, HR professionals. You’re stepping up to the plate with the game on the line.
In a complex post-recession job market with a growing talent gap, top executives are looking to HR leaders for innovative business strategies grounded in data, according to a recent CareerBuilder study.
A majority of CEOs (65%) agree that post-recession, HR opinions carry greater weight with senior management; nearly three fourths (73%) say that their HR leader has provided data that they have incorporated into their business strategy.
Shaping this new era is a post-recession landscape defined by increased competition for skilled talent in the face of shrinking labor pools and demands for higher salaries. Sixty percent of CEOs reported their companies have not been able to reach their full potential because they cannot find enough qualified candidates, and almost one fourth (23%) say the pressure to raise wages is among the issues that keep them up at night.
HR’s new mission
And nearly half of CEOs (48%) say their companies have lost money due to inefficient recruiting.
Click here for entire article.
by Christian Schappel
The same-sex marriage argument has finally been settled in the U.S — at least from a legal standpoint. Every state is now required to allow and acknowledge same-sex marriages. This has significant implications for employers. Here’s a breakdown of what they are.
As complicated and as sensitive of an issue as this is, the fallout from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges is actually quite simple: Same-sex married couples will — in most cases — need to be treated exactly the same as opposite-sex married couples (one exception may be in self-insured health plans; it’s still unclear how the ruling will apply to these plans).
The good thing about this ruling — at least from an employer standpoint: It streamlines the benefits administration process significantly. In a nutshell, if a benefit is offered to employees’ opposite-sex spouses, it should also be offered to employees’ same-sex spouses.
In instances were federal and state law doesn’t specifically carve out protections for same-sex spouses (again, like in self-insured plans), employers would run the risk of violating anti-discrimination laws if they end up treating same-sex spouses differently than opposite-sex spouses.
As a result, the best — and certainly the safest — move is to treat everyone equally.
Click here for entire article.
by Jared Bilski
It’s getting more and more difficult to dismiss telemedicine as a healthcare fad that won’t catch among employers.
But things have changed, and firms are starting to warm up to this option.
For starters, there are fewer barriers in place. One of the greatest obstacles to telemedicine usage has been insurers’ refusal to cover this option.
Now, however, Washington recently became the 24th state that required health plans to reimburse providers for telemedicine services – and others are likely to follow suit.
Plus, prominent insurers – such as Aetna, United Healthcare and Wellpoint/Anthem – are convinced telemedicine is here to stay and are planning accordingly.
$6 billion reasons
Telemedicine generally involves a patient speaking to a physician via a video stream (e.g., Skype) or over the phone for a diagnosis or treatment.
Click here for entire article.
