Top 10 mistakes managers make when giving feedback

by Christian Schappel

Orchestrating a great feedback session is as much about what you shouldn’t do as what you should. 
According to Suzanne Lucas, the Evil HR Lady (EvilHRLady.org), giving feedback improperly is as bad as not giving feedback at all.
Adding to the equation is the fact that many companies, during manager training, tend to focus entirely on what should be done and said in employee feedback sessions — rather than also training mangers on what costly actions and phrases should be avoided at the same time.
So Lucas shared in her always-excellent Inc. Magazine column 10 mistakes that should never be made when providing employee feedback.
Pass these abbreviated versions along to your managers (and go to Lucas’ column for a full breakdown):

• No. 10: Forgetting to say what you want. Don’t just tell employees what they screwed up. Tell them what you want them to do going forward.
• No. 9: Failing to document. Create a paper trail. It helps when you have to justify a decision. Document not only what the employee did wrong, but also what goals you set for them in the future.

Click here for entire article. 

Tip Tuesday! Here’s what trashing resumes, applications can cost you

by Christian Schappel

A recent settlement of an EEOC lawsuit is a powerful reminder of just how important it is to retain job seekers’ application materials — and what it can cost if you fail to. 

Last fall, HR Morning reported that Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Mobile, an Alabama-based subsidiary of Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated, was being sued by the EEOC.

The agency claimed that soda maker and bottler twice violated federal law when it refused to hire Martina Owes.

Specifically, the EEOC accused Coca-Cola of:

• Sex discrimination. The EEOC claimed Coke violated the Civil Rights Act when it refused to hire Owes. It said the company hired two less-qualified men to fill vacant warehouse positions over Owes, despite the fact that she had all of the warehouse and forklift experience required for the positions.
• Recordkeeping violations. The agency also claimed Coke violated federal recordkeeping requirements by not preserving all of the application materials related to those positions.

The agency sued only after attempts to reach a settlement through its conciliation process failed.

But, apparently, Coke had a change of heart while preparing its defense strategy. The EEOC just announced that it has reached a settlement with the Mobile bottling plant.

What’s it going to cost?

Coca-Cola has agreed to pay Owes $35,000 to settle all the charges against it.

The terms of the settlement also dictate that Coke:

• cease from future discrimination

Click here for entire article. 

New FMLA poster issued by DOL: But do you have to use it?

by Christian Schappel

The DOL just issued a new General FMLA Notice for employers to hang in their workplaces. 

The notice can be found here.

Now on to the big question: Do employers have to use it?

The answer: Employers covered by the FMLA must hang the new poster or stick with a pre-existing poster that outlines the same info.

In other words, you’re not required to swap out your current poster for the new one. But there are some reasons you may want to.

For starters, the new poster is organized in a much more reader-friendly way than the DOL’s last poster.

So if you’re not a fan of your current poster’s layout, this may be a more attractive option.

The requirements

Just to be safe, let’s recap the DOL’s regulations regarding the poster.

Employers covered by the FMLA must display in a conspicuous place — and keep displaying — a General FMLA Notice explaining the law’s protections and requirements, as well as how employees can file complaints of violations of the FMLA with the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division.

The notice — i.e., poster — must be:

• prominently displayed where it can be easily seen by employees and job applicants
• displayed even if no employees are FMLA eligible, and

Click here for entire article. 

One surprising upside to DOL’s overtime rule change

by Christian Schappel

The DOL’s change to the FLSA’s white collar overtime exemptions aren’t all doom and gloom for employers. There’s at least one silver lining. 

This “glass half full” scenario comes from employment law attorney Leonard V. Feigel of the law firm Foley & Lardner LLP.

He said for those looking for a positive spin on the rule change, this could be it:

“The publication of the final rules may provide a hidden opportunity for employers to reclassify some positions that may have changed over the years and may no longer qualify for an exemption.”

In other words, the new regulations have presented employers with the opportunity to audit employees’ job duties against their job descriptions/classifications in an attempt to make sure employees are still properly classified — and, if not, change their classifications using the umbrella of the rule change as a way to minimize any potential legal liability.

It can happen to the best of us

Even the best employers can fall victim to misclassification if they’re not keeping a close eye on the evolution of employees’ work assignments.

Click here for entire article. 

2 ACA rules changes that may have flown under HR’s radar

by Jared Bilski

In just the past year, we’ve seen wholesale Obamacare changes, like the delay of the employer mandate and the Cadillac Tax, as well as the death of the automatic enrollment provision. But there have also been a number of minor tweaks that weren’t as highly publicized.  

Just because these ACA changes haven’t been met with the same fanfare as a lot of the major reg overhauls doesn’t mean HR pros don’t need to know about them.

Inflation adjustments

Here are two minor health reform changes:

Inflation adjustments for the affordability safe harbor percentages. Under the ACA, the threshold for determining whether a health plan is “affordable” to an employee is “9.5% of household income.” In other words, the cost of coverage cannot exceed this amount. But the law provides for inflation adjustments of this percentage.

So for plan years beginning in 2016, the 9.5% of household income threshold has been adjusted for inflation and becomes 9.66%.

Click here for entire article. 

Tip Tuesday! Workers can get away with what? A ruling you have to see to believe

by Christian Schappel

A U.S. appeals court just issued some news employers will find very disturbing: There are times when employers have to just stand by and watch their workers disparage their businesses. 

Grab a vomit bag. This could make you a little sick (pun intended).

What happened?

A group of workers employed by MikLin Enterprises Inc., the owners of 10 Jimmy John’s sandwich shops in the Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN, area, asked MikLin for sick leave benefits.

And when the employer declined, the employees hung posters in public near its 10 restaurants.

The poster depicted two identical sandwiches sitting next to each other.

Displayed over one were the words:

“Your sandwich made by a HEALTHY Jimmy John’s worker.”

And over the other:

“Your sandwich made by a SICK Jimmy John’s worker.”

Underneath the photos was:

“Can’t tell the difference? That’s too bad because Jimmy John’s workers don’t get paid sick days. Shoot. We can’t even call in sick. We hope your immune system is ready because you’re about to take the sandwich test …”

Click here for entire article.  

Beyond fines: DOL takes rare step against FLSA violator

by Jared Bilski

If the thought of the DOL hitting firms with high fines and penalties for FLSA violations doesn’t scare you, maybe the prospect of being hit with additional administrative work will.

That’s what happened to one firm after the DOL uncovered a series of particularly egregious pay violations.

According to a recent DOL investigation, Colmonero’s Pallets Inc., a pallet manufacturing firm in Phoenix, had a real knack for skirting major FLSA requirements, specifically those involving the law’s recordkeeping provisions, in an effort to avoid paying overtime.

The DOL claimed the company:

• Paid employees as vendors who only received a flat rate
• Doling out under-the-table cash payment instead of time-and-a-half
• Distributing checks under false names to avoid paying overtime, and
• Destroying employees’ timecards at the end of each pay period.

$300K in wages and damages plus …

When the DOL completed its investigation, Colmonero’s was ordered to pay $139,154 in back wages, an equal amount in damages and an additional $21,692 because of the willful nature of the violations.

But the agency didn’t stop there.

Click here for entire article.