5 ways Obama could quickly impact HR
November 18, 2008 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Discrimination, FMLA, Special Report
Now that the election’s over, experts are focusing on what legislative changes can be expected under the new president. HR pros will be watching a few big items on Obama’s agenda.
To promote the new administration’s plan, the Office of the President-Elect has set up a Web site to outline key initiatives.
Several of the proposals, if successful, will have a huge impact on HR:
1. More power to unions
Obama is a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), a bill which could greatly expand the power of labor unions. Experts say the EFCA has a good chance of passing with Obama as president.
Under current regs, employers can require a union to hold a secret ballot vote before being certified by the National Labor Relations Board. The EFCA, however, would allow certification of a union if a majority of employees sign authorization cards.
Opponents of the bill claim the elimination of the secret ballot will diminish workers’ rights to freely decide whether they want to be represented by a union. They argue the card system leaves employees open to greater pressure from both sides.
2. Increased FMLA coverage
The President-elect has proposed several expansions to the Family and Medical Leave Act, including:
- expanding coverage requirements to include companies with at least 25 employees
- granting employees leave to address domestic violence and sexual assault, and
- giving parents 24 hours of leave a year to participate in their children’s academic activities.
3. Expanded paid leave
Several cities and states have passed or proposed laws giving workers the right to paid family and medical leave. Obama plans to set aside a $1.5 billion fund to help companies and governments with the cost of implementing paid leave programs.
Also in the works is a proposal requiring all employers to give full-time workers seven paid sick days a year.
4. More protected classes for discrimination cases
Obama also supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which was passed in the House of Representatives last year but has yet to be voted on in the Senate.
ENDA would prohibit companies from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
5. Greater protection against pay bias
The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was drafted in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber. Ledbetter sued Goodyear, claiming she was paid less than men doing the same job for more than 20 years.
The case was thrown out because the law says she had to sue within 180 days after the biased pay decision was made — i.e., when she was hired. The new law would give plaintiffs 180 days from the time they learn about possible discrimination.
Obama supports the law, and experts say it’s likely to pass with him in the White House and a greater Democratic majority in Congress.
Tags: change.gov, Employee Free Choice Act, Employment Non-Discrimination Act, Fair Pay Act, Obama, unions
November 19th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Okay, I’ll stick my neck out here and get the conversation started.
First, isn’t the labor union system one of the factors that got U.S. auto makers into the predicament they’re in now. Paying high salaries and benefits to plant workers, being forced to pay high severance packages when lay offs take place, both of which pushes the companies’ expenses way up? Do we want to repeat that pattern? I think the whole labor union system needs to be revised so that it protects workers without driving American industry out of business.
Giving parents an extra 24 hours of leave to attend children’s activities may be nice for the family, but that is 24 hours per year that the employer now has to eat in terms of productivity and it seems a little discriminatory to non-parents.
And if a company already gives its employees a large number of PTO hours that is intended to cover both vacation time and sick time, will the company have to change their system so that sick time and vacation time are separate for the sake of proving the 7-day sick leave requirement is being met?
I’m an Obama backer, but some of these possible measures and the related expenses seem destined to make it harder for companies to stay afloat, especially in a struggling economy.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:33 am
I agree with you completely regarding unions. Also, I’ve heard of horror stories regarding coercion of individuals to sign cards. Many of these individuals are immigrants with limited education and feel no other alternative but to give into this pressure. Where are the safeguards to insure this doesn’t happen?
November 19th, 2008 at 10:33 am
It’s just getting started. If the new tax laws come into play a lot of small businesses are going to be in big trouble.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:37 am
I get what you are saying, but my questions to you are as follows:
What about the impact on family structure success due to employees requirement to work a 40+ hour work week in order to make ends meet. I truly believe that the overworked family has contributed to a lot of the teen/young adult issues we are facing in our society. Absenteeism in the family unit equals more availability for disfunction and parents unaware of what their children are going through. Now that we are in economic times where a 1 income family is few and far between, both parents are forced into the 40+ hour workweek. Leaving kids forced into adult behavior far before they should be, and definitely before they are ready to be (ie: getting themselves ready for school on their own, packing lunches, making dinner, coming home to an empty house until mom and dad get home at 6 or later, etc)…or relying on daycare providers (ie: strangers) to become the parental role.
I’m aware an addition of 24 hours a year that parents can use to attend academic functions is not going to make a huge difference, but I believe it could help. Parents can have the opportunity to become more engaged in their child’s educational experience. Perhaps a better communication line could develop between parent and teacher (who also tends to take on some kind of parental position). Perhaps then, when a problem is brewing it can be taken care of before it explodes.
Regarding sick pay — right now I am in a second job where the only paid time off is vacation (which you need to be employed for 1 year to get). If you are sick, 9 times out of 10 you are not paid for that time. If your child is sick, 9 times out of 10 you are not paid. I get the mind set of the employer…if employee is not here, not producing for me, I’m not paying. However, if the employee is at the work place, either sick or has a sick child, 9 times out of 10 the employee is not going to be producing at the same quality as they would when well. I think 7 sick days for FULL TIME workers is only right to enable employees to be able to take care of themselves and their families. In NY we go through a winter that creates a lot of bad colds, flus, etc. Maybe we could fight those off a little better if we had the opportunity to take care of ourselves.
And I get the struggling economy sense. We all feel it and are stressed about it. I’m not offering up that my ideas better your concerns - and are the answer. Just a different perspective. Money isn’t the only factor affecting our society. I think our overwhelming reliance and drive to get the bigger buck has impacted the more important, basic human needs.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I agree DRitchie - the day of the union to me, has passed. Unions were necessary and very effective in the days before there were laws protecting American workers. I believe that today, the unions put more workers out of work (due to company closings, and less hiring to offset higher expenses) than they do to protect workers.
I do like the paid time for childrens activities and sick time, but for small companies, that could mean eliminating a job to pay for others to have these benefits.
Some of the ideas may be great for large employers that can afford them, but for companies who are trying to stay in business, who have already cut as deep as they can, it may be the last straw.
I guess we will see what happens. On a good note - you can voice your opinions to President Elect Obama on his website http://www.change.gov.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:40 am
okay, here are my two cents—i agree on the labor union system with drichie but how about employees that are not parents or thier children are grown get the same 24 hours to volunteer at thier local school? that would be non-discriminatory plus it does take a village to raise a child. the company i work for gives the hourly employees no sick time and no vacation time—so wrong in many ways—so i love the idea of requiring full time employees get 7 paid sick days.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:41 am
First, I’m not an Obama supporter because most of these were known prior to the election but insulated from the publics scrutiny. And the issue is one of control. Control of peoples lives from cradle to grave and MOSTLY control of businesses. I hate to allude to the term Marxist but for the purpose of discussion - that’s what it is. Combine this with social policies that encourage time away from work or control by the workers over the employment process can only lead to a further deterioration of productivity and positive ROI per employee. Prior to the election we could witness this reduction in productivity by the younger workfroce, this will only make it worse.
As a small business owner (rapidly approaching the midlle from small) it is discouraging to see all of the rules and regulations being imposed which only serve to weaken the potential for continued growth of this once rich employment sector.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Welcome to Democracy. As was predicted by most Republicans, now even more people will have their hands out. You said yourself you were an Obama backer. You obviously made your bed, and now we all have to lie in it for the next four years. Lucky us.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:43 am
None of these possibilities will really effect most business owners to any large degree. On the other hand, under the upcoming administration, you have a better chance of KEEPING YOUR JOB.
Under the current administration, your job and wellbeing are being threatened, so instead of focusing on the possible NEGATIVE sides of the upcoming administration, rather than letting a republican biased group TELL YOU what is going on, get out there, look into the proposed programs YOURSELF! Get with the program people or you will find yourselves out with millions of other people looking for non-exixtant jobs!
November 19th, 2008 at 10:45 am
I agree with Ritchie. The whole labor union system needs to be revised so that it protects workers without driving American industry out of business. The original purpose of the union was to prevent companies from working employees undue long hours in harse conditions and for little pay. But, the union has gotten out of hand and grown into a MONSTER.
We do NOT need to give addtional 24 hours FMLA to parents a year to participate in their children’s academic activities. That is what vacation and PTO time is for. It also discrimanates against childless employees. Not every employee is a father or single working mom.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:46 am
I didn’t vote for Obama, however, I do agree with most of the ideas laid out in this article except the one regarding UNIONS. All voting should be in secret ballot, period. Anything else, is not democratic.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Khandi is right. All of the people who voted for “Change” are going to see it in a big way starting in January. Obama has been listed as the most liberal senator in congress for a reason…funny how the liberal media played it down during the election campaigns. Watch out, business owners…
November 19th, 2008 at 10:48 am
I concur on the Union Business. It’s a crock. Work because you have to and because you are getting paid at the end of the week, not because you are part of a union so you can sit on your can and get paid for doing little to nothing. My husband is a mason and when he went to Oklahoma to work, he was paid union wages. However, there was a “supposed” limit of how much block or brick could be put in the wall a day and he was exceding it and was frowned upon by the other long time union bricklayers. It was a set back for that particular company and I assure you that that was not the only company that was going on at or only union that does have a limit of items, limit of production, just limits on everything. Unions create a different world of people, they create people who don’t think out of the box, who don’t strive to become better at what they do because of limits, who don’t get any better at their job unless they can get something for it, like an extra 2 days of PTO. Unions are not good for USA, you work, your produce, you get a raise, period…..not the barter system here.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Unions were needed before all the labor laws were in effect. If you don’t like working somewhere, quit and find another job (Iknow, tough in the current market).
Sick days are a benefit and not a privelage, besides 7 days is way to much.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:54 am
I hope that all of you have the courage to stand up and call your newly elected Senators and Congressmen/Congresswomen and tell them to vote no on some of these changes. I am not afraid to use the word Marxism. If you read the Communist Manifesto this is how it all begins. It doesn’t work. Never has. Never will. Unions are not a great idea. They cause the cost of doing business to go up and eventually companies to go under or move their products to a more friendly business environment i.e. The auto manufacturers. To the lady who said she works for a company who doesn’t give part-time employees sick days or PTO, has it occurred to her that the people who “Choose” to rent their time to her employer don’t have to. That business owner still has the freedom to offer whatever benefits they choose. That sounds harsh but it is the truth in America none the less, it’s not so in some countries.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Oh Lisa, Lisa
Don’t get me started on the election and why I chose to back Obama this time. I am a former Republican who feels like the GOP has been hijacked.
Please remember that this article was about things that MAY happen under an Obama Administration. And while there may be pain in some areas under a Democrat-dominated system, we HAD to have a change after the past 8 years and the chaos the country is in now. And McCain was just too disappointing as a leader of his own campaign to trust with running the country.
The so-called Republicans can say “I told so after” Obama’s first term if they feel the need. It’s a little early to start now.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:57 am
DRichie I agree with your commentary and I hope that the 24 hrs of leave to attend children’s function be tied in with the Paid Time Off and not made additional. Also, the unions must be reorganized to comply with the global economy otherwise, America won’t be able to compete globally and unnecessary cost can be reduce.
Companies need to do a better job of fairness pay with employees, such as profit sharing or create total compensation bonus system that reward all employees based on productivity and profit. When everyone shares in the pie, then companies become more efficient and competitive. If companies take the short cut, such as the American automobile industry, then they would suffer as they’re doing now. And on that subject, if one American is spent on them, then they need to replace the management and put a team of visionaries that innovate and develop, such as Honda or Toyota. These companies are competing because of a good product and management.
Obama has a lot of his plate, but I have confidence that he’ll do the right thing for our country.
November 19th, 2008 at 10:58 am
UNIONS ARE HORRIBLE AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY SET UP!!!
Right on about these unions! All the dues the workers pay goes right into the big wig’s pockets. It’s only used for the union if they hire their lawyers to bargin better benefits. Usually the benefits are not that great in the end. My dad worked for Bethlehem Steel and always thought he had the best health care. When I went to work for that same insurance company I found out it was one of the worst. I did some calculations and found that had he saved those “donations” or union dues he could have purchased 3 luxury cars in his lifetime and paid cash for it.
I understand people’s concern that they can’t negotiate for themselves but we do need reform to control the greed on the union side-just as the car companies have PROVEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
November 19th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Good stuff. Protected Classes? The number of protected classes is at the point where it almost includes everyone in one way or another. Maybe it is time to give the rights that protected classes get to everyone.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:01 am
7 sick days mean 7 days paid vacation; if they have kids add 3 more days…that gives every employee 10 days paid vacation ( I realize it doesnt say this is paid, but it will eventually get to that w/ a Democratic President & Congress); that is all we need ANOTHER protected class - the white Christian middle class is now about the only non protected class (Oprah & the media will be happy with this one)
I’m in education and I guarantee that we will receive NO funding regarding family medical leave, so we will have to eat all of this leave
Why have unions when you have a government to provide the handouts?
November 19th, 2008 at 11:03 am
HERE WE GO TROJANS!—JUST THE BEGINNING. — LOOK OUT FOR THAT BILL THAT REQUIRES CERTAIN CRITERIA BEFORE ANY COMPANY CAN LAY OFF BECAUSE THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO STAY IN BUSINESS AFTER ALL THIS CRAP.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Maybe the answer to offseting the cost of government mandated paid leave would be the removal of paid vacation and/or PTO - which as of date of this posting is not yet a mandated benefit (who knows however, what the future may hold).
One wonders how many non parent and/or healthy employees would protest the loss of a current benefit that is available for everyone to use, simply to offset the cost of government mandated benefits that would only be available to those who have children, or who have health issues.
I’m all for allowing time off to address critical issues (health/birth/violence) but there are other avenues, aside from the employer bearing the burden of the payroll expense, out there to finacially protect the employee, i.e.; Short Term and Long Term Disability Insurances, Accident Insurance, Mortgage Insurance, etc. etc. etc..
We are legislating employers into an ever expanding paternal role. Is this what we are in business for? And where does it stop?
November 19th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Once, when I was younger, I too believed that the day of the union was gone. Unfortunately, some 20 years later, my belief has changed. Corporate America serves the executives and the boards only now. Don’t get me wrong, I do not think that business should act in-loco parentis to the employees but employees have earned a greater share than they receive. I now think that due to greed, the corporations have earned everything they’ll receive from the EFCA.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:13 am
I echo “Ron D’s” remarks…word for word. Everyone was so excited about “change”…no one stopped to really analyze what “change” was coming or ask the questions when the obvious voids and descrepancies leaked out during the election. No one wanted to tarnish the “Golden Boys” image. And “PS” I don’t buy that all these changes are saving our companies/jobs…these requirements are exactly why businesses are cutting back, moving to foreign countries or just plain shutting down. When the government puts these type financial requirements on employers it just makes it harder for them to survive. Unions say they are not making concessions; well they are going to strong hold the very people they are “representing” right out of a job…go talk to any of the steel workers in PA…they’ll tell you. I don’t understand why people feel that government should require an employer to be responsible when granting paid time whether it be sick or vacation. If the company you work for isn’t offering the paid time off you need…look for another job. “HR girl”…I am a mother of three…two of which are teenagers…I don’t participate in PTO and on occassion will go to a school event. I do however stay involved…talking with my kids teachers and talking with my kids. They know I will know and they know that I will take action if they are not towing the line. I’m calling “bulls**t” on the 24 hr paid time to allow me to be “involved”. If as a parent you want to be involved you will! So…change we will see…I’m betting that it will not the be the change everyone assumed it was going to be and we will all be sitting here saying “Ooops”.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Unions were necessary and very effective in the days before there were laws protecting American workers. They have gotten way out of line and need to be curbed.
This country needed a change and I did vote for the change. We all need to pull together and give Obama a chance. The changes this country needs are not going to happen today, tomorrow or even in the next four years.
Positive thinking takes a lot less energy!!
November 19th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Now calm down everyone… This article is a “proposal” of what “some experts” suggest. This doesn’t mean that Obama is going to impliment these so-called “5 ways Obama COULD impact HR” changes. HOWEVER, I’m sure everyone would agree this country is in shambles and is in a huge mess. We HAVE to change it, and Obama is the best man for the job. It’s not going to be a picnic, and I’m sure there will have to be some sacrifices made by both employer and employee, but it is all for the greater good. Our country is the best country to be in, we have to support our leaders and trust that they will do what is best for us as a whole. (not everyone can be pleased) Obama is not the sole decision maker, there are still Republicans in Congress that will be making their case as well.. Let’s all get back to prospering in this Great Country.. Like Tim Russert said “What a Country!” Only in America can dreams come true!
November 19th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Even though PS doesn’t want to admit it for some reason, the Obama adminstration is likely to be extremely employee centric. One major exception to this is his support of the “Employee Free Choice Act” which is clearly more advantageous to the Union Businesses than union members. This will obviously have significant impact on business owners, employees and stock holders.
My question for the group is this; is there even one pro business development initiative expected from the Obama administration? I have looked and can not find anything more than obscure lip service. I am looking for a silver lining here.
For PS I have two specific questions. What is one specific action from the current administration that threatened more jobs than it created? What is one specific action you expect from President Obama’s adminstration that will increase employment security?
November 19th, 2008 at 11:26 am
I agree with Ray D. Lisa, Chris Mann and Private Party. DRitchie, you may have been a republician and now a democrat but hold on to your boot straps because it is only the beginning. The VERY liberal media painted a picture that was incredible for Obama and the voting public has spoken you will get change just like you the voters of Obama asked for but I must say, be careful for what you wish for….rough times are coming
November 19th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Give me a break people.
DRitchie is right, it too early to complain. And the 5 listed things are not fact yet, but proposed change. The process takes awhile and things can change along the way.
I am a Democrat, my Husband a former Republican and a former Bush supporter. Things had to change, with change there are growing pains. People can always find what is wrong with the unknown, but the current known was killing us. Let Obama have a chance, it will really take at least 100 days of him in office before we can make any comments for certain.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:29 am
My only comment is…. Bush is getting blamed for a lot of things that CLINTON set up while he was in office. Businesses closing in the US to move over seas - thank Clinton. We didn’t HAVE to have a change from Republican to Democrate. All I want to know is, were these the best two possible canidates for president that our country had to offer?? Things are not going to be any easier on anybody and unfortunately all we can do now is ride it out and keep our fingers crossed!
November 19th, 2008 at 11:35 am
If companies are going to have to give special time off for parents then they must also give special time off for non-parents. Giving parents special treatment in the workplace is insane. I, for one, am tired of employees with children getting special treatment. That is all fine and good if your single or childless employees are also getting the same benefit.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:37 am
I do not have children and yet I don’t think that giving time off to parents for them to attend their childrens’ activities is discriminatory toward non-parents. But I guess I don’t get bent out of shape when it is bring your child to work day or someone goes on maternity leave either.
Personally I think it is encouraging to see a President that sides with the individual and their family rather than the employer who may have otherwise denied this time off (so that they can increase profits I’m sure).
November 19th, 2008 at 11:38 am
DEAR PS—-YOUR COMMENTS ARE BS—-DO YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT TAKES TO OWN A BUSINESS? QUOTE “NONE OF THESE POSSIBILITIES WILL REALLY EFFECT MOST BUSINESS OWNERS TO ANY LARGE DEGREE” TAKE SOME TIME TO CLEAN YOUR CRYSTAL BALL AND SEE THE REAL PICTURE. SURE LET GOVERMENT PUT AS MANY NEW FRIVOLOUS LAWS INTO YOUR WORK PLACE SO YOU WILL BE ASSURED OF KEEPING YOUR JOB. NOT SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE H.R. PROFESSIONAL-
November 19th, 2008 at 11:39 am
I think most of you folks are misinformed. There are many reasons why labor unions are still needed and will, hopefully, experience a resurgence. Just to name a few, unions require adherence to OSHA standards. Do we all recall the horrible nightmare of mine collapses with fatalities, crane operator accidents, with fatalities? It’s also the case that unions require standardization in training. Ever have work done by an “electrician” who uses the name but hasn’t had to make it through a five-year apprentice program?
My organization gladly pays a bit extra to hold our events at union facilities and take pride that we’re supporting entities that are willing to pay their employees a living wage!
November 19th, 2008 at 11:44 am
I’ve read some of the responses here and agree that unions (as they now operate) are not effective and cause more harm than good. I’ve seen the impact in my area on small non-profits who ended with a union and all that happened is that the union found out there were no additional dollars in a budget determined by funding sources. Staff just ended up putting more out of their checks for union dues with no return. As far as saying that giving staff more time off is unproductive, take a look at other countries who allow up a year of paid time off to care for families, a month vacation in the summer months, etc. - they are not causing employers to go out of business! In fact, the per capita income is higher, the schools are better and the companies are doing fine (Scandinavia anyone?). Yes, they have problems, but they are not blaming workers for their own bad business practices. There is nothing wrong with making a profit, but the days of the “sweat shop” are long over and I, for one, believe there is still too much of that mentality out there. We need new ideas and new ways of doing business. Some of our most successful companies do not require strict adherence to rigid rules and, surprise - they have productive and loyal workers who don’t want to work anywhere else (Google for one). Old school thinking got us into the mess we are in now, and if anyone remembers Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) - his definition of insanity (”doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”) certainly fits!
November 19th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Well said both times DRitchie.
While giving parents 24 hours of time may be considered by some people to be discriminating, it’s in our future generations best interests to have involved parents in their lives. I’m an HR Mgr who sees people take advantage of every kind of thing they can to work the system, as some will attempt to do so if this is passed. However I also know how important it is for kids to have their parents involved in their school life. Our company happens to be very lenient in allowing parents to attend their children’s activities. I think FMLA and these kinds of policies were created because there were to many employers unwilling to let people take time off for illness, time off for their kids. Employers should care about their employees enough that laws don’t have to be passed to legislate these kinds of things and employees should care enough about their jobs so employers feel like they can do these things. It’s called mutual respect, something that is sorely missing in almost every area of our lives and carries over to the workplace.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Employee Free Choice Act is the worst thing that can happen to America. Currently a balance exists in America between the union and non-union employers. What this law will do is two things;
First it will circumvent the union voting process to certify a union vote much, much more easily. This is not good.
Second the law brings a whole new aspect to the negotiating process. Currently if an employer does lose a union election they only need to negotiate in good faith for one year. If after this one year process the employer and the union cannot come to terms then there is no union contract. The new law will change this. The new law will require that an arbitrator be assigned to the case. If the parties do not have an agreement in 90 days the union can request the arbitrator establish the terms and conditions of a contract and put it in force. This is unbelievably one-sided and will give the union’s total control over employers in America. After that it will only be a matter of time until what has happened to the auto industry caused by the UAW will happen throughout America. Cost will escalate, productivity will diminish, fringe benefits will continue to escalate and the entire nation will need a bailout.
This is a repayment by Obama of support from the unions in the election. It will be the demise of America.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I want to begin by stating that I have been through three union campaigns and negotiated two union contracts. While I am not necessarily in favor of unions, I am in favor of businesses having equal opportunity. Unions are in fact a business, even if they produce grief to many employers. If the unions are to survive moving forward, they will need to reinvent themselves and adapt to the current workforce and economic climate similar to the way we as Americans need to reinvent ourselves in many of the things we do and the ways that we do them. I am not in favor of eliminating the union vote component primarily because I have witnessed first hand that many employees from other cultures do not understand how the union component works and they are often told things by the union that are simply just not true. Unfortunately, it is after the union is voted in that the employees realize that the union representatives were not completely up front with them. The vote component is important so that employees get a chance to hear both sides and make an informed decision after hearing all the facts. If the union is being upfront and honest with folks, they should not fear the vote -it’s just that simple.
In conclusion I will simply say that with change, there is always risk; and yes, there will also be some failures along the way by the new administration. However most folks that I speak with do have at least a renewed sense of hope which is a key element to moving us out of the status quo. By working together, hopefully we can move in the right direction to be once again prosperous in a global workforce environment.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I work for a Union contractor and I agree with the concerns of all regarding the Union. I also agree with the statement that Unions have become monsters.
As far as being an Obama supporter, I did not vote for him myself. I hope, as I’m sure you all do, that what ever his promises are to improve our economy, he comes through with.
Good luck to us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
November 19th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Sure, I will give him (Obama) a chance, something that they (people who didn’t vote for Bush) NEVER gave Bush. But what will all you say when it turns out that we were right.
As a business owner, they tried that forced 7-day sick leave BS here in Ohio, and Gov. Ted Strickland (D) realized it was nothing more than a job-killing issue, or at best, nothing changed at all.
Like many companies, we just changed our policy and took away 1 weeks worth of vacation to offset the so-called sick leave. If I couldn’t afford to offer the extra leave before, what the hell makes you think just because the legislature tells me too, that I can now. Earth to idiots- I CAN’T.
The more we get an “Us vs. Them” stand, the more it hurts everyone. If I do well, my employees do well, and vice-a-versa.
November 19th, 2008 at 11:54 am
I love the Debra S. idea of FMLA expansion allowing for 24 hours of leave for folks who are not parents. My company (687 emlpoyees) struggles to engender coverage for folks who “call in” (or “call out” if you’re so inclined) unexpectedly so that they can tend to some aspect of their personal lives. It could be a youg one’s graduation from kindergarten ot the necessity to be home to meet the cable TV guy “sometime between 1:00 and 5:00.” This provision would at least give us as company leaders an opportunity to make some in-advance strategic staffing adjustments to cover the expected absence - rather than scramble reactively to cover, staffing-wise, unexpected absences. This way, if a parent wants to attend a parent-teacher conference - or if a non-parent wants to volunteer, vote, meet the cable guy or visit an infirmed friend - an employer can make arrangements beforehand. AND, it is likely that absences may take up only portions of a shift rather than an entire day. In the long run, it has some solid soft-dollar merits. As for labor unions, what would Samuel Gompers and Eugene V. Debbs be thinking now?
November 19th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
I always get a kick out of this argument. It always mirrors what our representatives do and nothing gets done.
The US constitution states why government exists- “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Now if the government promotes the general welfare directly, it is called “communism or socialism.” If the government ensures that business and the market promotes the general welfare, it is called “capitalism” and is called “too expensive.” The fact is that either way, “We the people” pay.
So the pendulum swings as to HOW the general welfare is provided, but the government is charged with ensuring that it happens. Now we spend BILLIONS to lobby politicians and promote parties and campaigns, to keep this tug of war going.
I remember that years ago they did a study with kids to see how they would play the game “tug of war.” They promised a nickle to the kids if they could pull a knot in the rope to their side. The first kids struggled and one kid got a nickle. The kids, being more savvy, clarified the instructions and then took turns pulling the knot to their side. Each kid made $1.50. Once everyone knows what needs to happen, then we can all agree on how to pay for it and get it done with the least cost.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
When I first read the part of this article about more power to unions as a possibility under the Obama administration, I have to say that as a huge Obama supporter, I balked.
As HR Manager at a social service agency that has a service workers’ union, I am experiencing for the first time working with a bargaining unit, and dealing with a more complex HR/administration process where a union is involved.
After reading the full article, though, it was comforting to know that “The EFCA, however, would allow certification of a union if a MAJORITY of employees sign authorization cards.”
I believe that as a new stream of workers (namely, Gens X and Y) enter the workplace, we are seeing less and less interest in union involvement. More employees are expressing disinterest or even opposition towards the union, as they see their paychecks shrink, and don’t see the ROI as a union member.
As labor laws and employer requirements grow ever more stringent at the federal, state and local levels (especially for those of us with federal or state funding and grants!), there is less of a need for unions, and workers are seeing this and speaking out against joining the union. At least this is what I am seeing within our organization.
The truth is that if the employer is taking good care of the staff and is fair in its employment practices, there is no need for a union. If the company or agency is doing its job as being an advocate for its staff, a majority of employees are not going to sign union authorization cards, as required by the EFCA, so the potential for increasing union power becomes a moot point. This is my long-winded way of saying; Take care of your staff and you will not need to be concerned with this issue! =)
November 19th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
What a bunch of sour pusses!!! How about if you don’t want these things for yourselves and your employees, then don’t allow your elected officials to have them either.
But you don’t know how to stop them from having all that govenment employee help/subsidy/welfare, do you?
And no one commented on 4 & 5…why? Are you all already in the protected classes?
You are so programmed to be or hire unquestoning worker bees, instead of thinking outside the boxes you are in, to question, challenge, consider, offer new ideaso of your own, to create a society in which those who do work are fairly compensated. Why can the bosses/owners/officers leave the job whenever they want, to get a haircut, have a liason, go to a kids spelling bee, etc, but when the mom or dad, on whom those bosses & stockholders makes their $, want to leave for a few hours without fear of being fired to do something as valuable as involvment in education, he/she shouldn’t have that right?
Do you all really beleive the workers have so little value? That workers are just people with their hands out? You do have a right to fire anyone who isn’t getting the job done. But if they are why shouldn’t they have some rights that increase their quality of life? Do you want to bring back the days of child labor as well? It took forward thinking people to stop child labor, to create the 40 hr instead of the 56-70 hr work week. People tend to take for granted what has been made possible for themselves, by progressive thinkers who went before them, while disregarding the big picture.
McCain said workers are the “fundamentals of our economy,” so why shouldn’t they all have rights?
And if Lisa doesn’t like Democracy perhaps she should move somewhere it doesn’t exist.
Or did she mean “a gov’t run by Democratics instead of Republicans?” I thought Democracy was what our troops are fighting for and defending around the world?
Perhaps someone should have given a little more attention to her education, as she was coming up?
As far as the bed we are going to lay in, are you loving the delapitdated condition of this current one that was created over the last 8 yrs? Please!!!!
Stop swallowing little snippets of information that is often biased to lead you down a certain path, and start reading multiple books from varied sources on these subjects. Take some time away from your tv’s and educate yourselves.
I can tell you one thing, blogging on this site doesn’t change anything…If you don’t want 1-3, petition your representatives. Get involved on grass roots levels where laws are being made in your city, county, and state. Have your Congresspersons & Senators numbers on speed dial and talk to their offices regularly.
There is so much more to the big story of our country, it’s potential and history, than these 5 truncated issues…
Example, the reason people are NOT buying cars from the BIG 3 is because they are mostly gas guzzlers, not because they employ union members. It is lack of sales that is causing their problems, not the cost of the union drones puttting in thier 8hrs/day. The Big 3 were encouraged rather than discouraged to compete with car makers who are not going under…someone wanted us be guzzling the gas/OIL…did you know our government gives tax breaks to busiensses for buying those huge hogs.
Educate yourselves, please and think for yourselves please….explore the issues from all sides, instead of just knee jerk reacting like robots. Yours truly, Middle Mngmt
November 19th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
It was easy to be attracted to Obama and his surface message. But if you bothered to dig into his background and ideology, you knew these things were coming (plus the legislation was already drafted for an incoming democrat to sign off on). He’s a pro-union, anti-business, left-leaning liberal. Not sure why you’d expect anything different. You don’t need 100 days to figure that out.
Unions (and their associated wage/benefit/pension costs to business) are the reasons why there is very little manufacturing left in the US. It’s all moved off-shore to countries that are pro-business.
I agree that unions served a terrific purpose in their heydey, and all workers (union or not) have benefited. But they are mostly unneeded now with all the employment legislation already on the books (look at how union membership has fallen off the cliff in the past 30 years).
November 19th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
After reading about the possible changes, here are my comments.
1) While many people do not like unions, I have benefitted as the child of a union worker. While there are abuses in the union system, the workers do need some protection against greedy management. Let’s be honest. While the lay workers get 3 to 6 percent raises in a good year, manangement often gets bigger raises plus bonuses. Could they get anything done without the workers ? However, I do agree that any ballot should be secret.
2) Many samller companies do not have the staff and/ of knowledge of FMLA details to keep up with all this. Keep the number of employee’s limit where it is now.
3) Why are seven sick days needed ? Many companies have PTO to use. I think three or four days are sufficient, and base it on the number of employees, so smaller companies are not penalized.
4) As for discrimination, what about religious organizations ? Are they going to be required to hire people who do not share their beliefs ?
5) Pay bias is tough. I think many people agree that it exists, but I have no suggestion here, other than the employee should only be required to prove it exists once they become aware of the possibility.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
What are you people talking about. Our country it turning into a joke. Who cares about the President. Obama, he has great stage presence and we vote him president, fantastic. McCain, an absolute moron on camera with some great experience. Whats the difference. We live in a society where we choose one of two people who have completely different views on how to fix our major issues. As if we have any clue. 99.7% of the population has no idea what the details are of each issue but yet we vote. And we voted for someone who looks different than what we normally see. I have news for you folks, the way someone looks and how they speak will not turn the US around. It may make you sleep better at night but its not the answer. Ignorant people will soon see what they voted for.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Wait a minute….this sounds like a rerun. Giving parents addition time off for activities at school has already been visited…twice. The “Small Necessities Act” hit in the late 90s and once again Hilary Clinton presented the idea a few years ago. Haven’t we already spent millions going down that road and both times decided not to? Does someone in Washington need to look at their notes?”
November 19th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Umm, Lisa,
I hate to tell you, but I think tough times have already arrived. We need someone with a fresh perspective, a little charisma, and the ability to bring people together to straighten them out.
According to Oxford, in a political sense the word “liberal” means “favoring political or social reform”. I would say that America could use at least a little of both, so branding the media as “liberal” isn’t necessarily quite the slam so-called Republicans intend it to be. Interestingly enough, another meaning of “liberal” is “open minded”…
And just for the record, I’m an independent who votes for the person, not the party. The problem with the so-called two party system is that most people seem to think they have to be on one boat or the other.
Back to the subject at hand, whatever laws or regulations are passed down, distinctions need to be made about what size businesses they apply to and how. What may be appropriate for a large corporation where executives make 6 or 7-figure incomes shouldn’t necessarily apply to a business where the owner can’t afford to upgrade the office computers or throw a holiday party for the employees.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
I’m a South African citizen working as an expat in the USA. I can attest first hand that defining a legislated number of sick days will have a very negative impact on an economy and on companies. In South Africa, the basics of days off for health reasons is “30 days in a 3-year sick-leave cycle”. This allowance could be taken all at once in a single incident (serious health issue/accident for example) or 30 single incident in those three years. You can imagine what the 30 single incidents do to a company in terms of planning and productivity. Guess how many days the average hourly paid person took at our plant in South Africa: 9.78 days per year! Not because they necessarily needed this time off but because it became a right and the average person planned his/her sick leave to perfection and added to an already very healthy 15 days of vacation time per year! There is also 3 days per year legislated for “Family Responsibility Leave”. This covered a multitude of defined events but you could be guaranteed that the average hourly paid person would plan those into his/her entitled time off too! Absenteeism rates averaged between 5% to 7% with an industry average showing similar trends. Companies then need to devise “incentives” for employees to be at work which sometimes included attendance bonuses. Just having a job should be enough of a bonus for someone in an economy where unemployment officially stands at 24% and unofficially (and more accurately) at 35%! Why should employers need to create further incentives for people to come to work?
In relation to the Union issue, I’ve had more than my fair share with dealing with Unions. My idealistic view is if the union is prepared to become a “business partner” to a company, then they certainly have their place and can add value. The reality of the situation is however that they are not business partners to a company and become a burden; adding costs and ultimately looking out for their own interests rather than that of their members.
The flip side of this is that I believe companies need to adopt a socially responsible stance to all this. If companies are truly looking out for their employees, providing decent benefits and making the workplace a positive place to be, then there isn’t a need for external interference from unions or government. It all comes down to what is and isn’t feasible and the way the company is managed. We shouldn’t need others defining more entitlement.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Wow! There are so many thoughts that are running through my head. Just a few observations that I believe are necessary to share.
1. The state of the automotive industry, should make every industry evaluate how they are conducting business. Do their processes acknowledge and reward productivity, efficiency, adapting to a changing world and marketplace? We can all acknowledge that we live in a global marketplace and as such we have to expand our concepts of how we are conducting business.
I am not a fan of the labor union; however, labor unions were created based on how employers were treating their employees. Unfortunately, we still have issues of pay equity and benefit equity. In some cases, labor unions can help stabilize these type of issues. Employers have a responsibility to make sure that excellence is expected and rewarded in the work environment regardless of a union status.
Seniority is a major tenet of labor unions. I know seniority is a tenet that can be successfully challenged. I have work with labor unions and have added the language “qualified” as an important tool for creating excellence in an organization. Seniority in and of itself does not connote excellence. One would hope that a person is doing something for a period time would be excellent at the task or responsibility; that is not always the case. As HR professional we work with many people who are managers and have managers for many years but are poor at managing people and processes.
The automotive industry and all other industries have to work and demand excellence in what is being done. Process improvement is very necessary in today global economy. There is much that has to be done.
2. HR professionals have a unique opportunity to challenge the status quo and push for improvements in their organizations. I believe that transparency in organization is important. Be willing to share what is working and what is not. As a group, we must challenge our organizations to be forthright with their employees.
My personal experience has taught me that change is difficult but can be achieved. We just have to be committed to making the difference. During my professiona career, I have shared with my owners, presidents, and CEOs the importance of being fair and consistent. It has not always been an easy battle with swift results. Sometimes, I had to be very patient and show how the words and deeds much be in sync with each other.
3. Finally, I am a supporter of Obama. I am glad that he was successful in his bid for the White House. Yet, I am also very aware that his election in many ways has made me want to strive for and achieve excellence.
I shared with my staff that the bar has been risen. What used to do to just get by is not good enough. I believe that holds true in all aspects of my life. Yes, I believe it is important that parents are involved with their children’s life. I also believe that we have to hold each other accountable.
I ask people to challenge me when you think I am not doing my best. I may not always like the challenge but at least I have to think about what is being asked of me.
I love my work in human resources, I know that I can shape and impact lives for the positive. So, as new challenges are unfolding; I am ready to stand up and make a difference. How about you?
November 19th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Gompers forever parted ways with his old allies:
“I want to tell you Socialists,” he said, “that I have studied your philosophy … I have kept close watch upon your doctrines for thirty years; have been closely associated with many of you, … And I want to say that I am entirely at variance with your philosophy … Economically, you are unsound; socially you are wrong; industrially, you are an impossibility.”
…And history repeats. Unions need to go–in our company we’ve fired employees for STEALING, and it never fails– we get a grievance from the union, usually followed by an NLRB charge saying the employee was unfairly dismissed due to his/her “union activities” Don’t you know that stealing is considered a union activity? We’ve won on these charges but, it still costs our company money to defend.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
I am the HR manager of a small PEO with 27 internal employees that has been dramatically affected by the recent issues with the economy. Since our business revolves around servicing small companies, and we are a small company ourselves, we are taking huge hits. The union issue doesn’t affect us (although I agree with the masses about their “value”) but the rest could in very negative ways. I am hopeful the more moderate Democrats in the houses keep to the center to balance out this potential landslide of bad laws.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Regarding the proposed 24 hours of paid leave time for full time employees annually:
-I do not want to be “policing” whether or not employees are actually using this time for child related events!
-Am I also supposed to require employees to prove they are parents?
-It is discrimatory to give paid leave to parents but not to employees who are not parents.
To HR Girl-I am sure your employer would allow you to use what you termed “vacation time” to cover days you are ill. My guess is your employer is granting the time and trusting employees to use it cover any personal time off.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
i am new to the conversation and see the diversity of opinions- i have had many of the same questions and to me the answers are obvious- what happened to being self-reliant and to the founding American ideal of rugged individualism? are we, as individuals, that incompetent or incapable that we need government or at least someone else to do everything for us? cradle to grave and marxism is on target- “from each according to their ability and to each according to their need”- the ironies here are limitless- if government is the reason you succeed, is it really your success ? if the unions cause you to succeed, is it really your success? i dont think so because if you were able to succeed on your own, i hope you would have had the sence to do so- take a look at your paycheck and think about the tax burden currently that will only increase- what if you could take home more of your gross pay or maybe all of it? would you still need two incomes or two jobs? how much more time would we all have for personal pursuits including children and well-being if we did not have to work to support the bloated government and their first priority which is always their own self-preservation- i see government contracting day in and out and the real business world would be stunned if they knew what waste and corruption goes on, all legal and mandated by some form of government- see the recent financial disasters as fannie mae and freddi mac for a great example, then the bailout of private companies for the next best irony-the best thing government can do is get out of the way and let us all succeed on our own- guard the borders, build the roads, keep us safe and let us continue to lead the world
November 19th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
All I have to say is I am so glad Obama won- I hated Bush and McCain would have driven our retirement into the dirt…sorry conservatives….
November 19th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I agree everything is proposed however the “Employee Free Choice Act” is the Obama way of paying back for the huge support from the unions to get him elected. Our houlry staff is unioned and if you ask them why the voted for Obama they would tell you that it was recommended by the Union. Also remember Obamaa got elected by a secret ballot - why would we not keep union elections secret after all that is democracy.
During union negotiations it is always about “more” for the employee and never about the struggling employer. Our staff has amazing pay and benefits however when our health care expenses have tripled per employee in the last 5 years the union employees would not even consider a weekly co-pay EVEN though the mediator thought they should. Also the employees sold out future hires so as not to lose any benefits themselves. I don’t see unions as a good thing.
Also, the mandatory time to attend children’s function is discriminatory against employees who do not have children. We offer persoanl time and having children is a personal decison and the employee should make the decsion (on their own) about the best way to be involved in their childrens lives.
The mandatory sick time could very easily force smalll business out of business. Both of my parents are small business owners and would need to hire another employee to cover the time off. Another employee would force the “employer” to cut hours for the existing staff which would make keeping staff an issue.
I think more government regulations for employers will have companies closing or moving out of the USA. We need to protect our employers also not just the people who work for them.
November 19th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
HR Girl: I am not sure where you work or have worked but if your company 9 times out of 10 doesnt pay your employees, perhaps YOU should go to upper level management about it with a solid reason as to why they should implement sick time (employees rely on you to get involved and be an advocate) or find another job that will give you this time. My company is great as far as family is concerned, but I have worked at some that expected employees to be married to the business (I chose to leave.)
Also, it is not a company’s responsibility to help a person rear their children and give them mental and emotionaly growing or give them time to go to conference’s, activities, etc. This is all about prioritizing and time management. If you work for someone who will not give you the ability to go to your child’s activities etc perhaps you need to go somewhere else, people have businesses to run and needs of a business. Strong HR people can have an impact on this by taking it to upper management, as long as you have a good arguement) as to why or how a policy to allow people to go to their childres’n activities etc.
As far as I see it, with this new administration, there is way too much control over my civil liberties and businesses. But it is what it is and we either deal with it or leave. I dont believe in government handouts and giving people sick time is a type of handout. I also strongly disagree in the government dictating what businesses need to give employees.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Here in the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, we have just been informed that we have to pay for 9 sick days for our employees. If you add on the 24 hour FMLA extension, in addition to all of the vacation that employees have (some have 5 weeks), we’ll be hiring temps to fill in year-round. Our Union is even saying that 9 paid sick days is excessive! And by the way, I believe that Unions have a purpose, but unfortunately some of them want to run the companies. Do we really need to give them more power?
November 19th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Why does anybody think 24 hrs to spend with your children and 7 paid sick days is fair? What ever happened to the idea that you get paid for hours worked and if your employer offered vacations and PTO that was just a benefit and that was great? I have 3 kids ages 5, 8, and 20 I work 45-50 hours a week but when I go home in the evening and on the weekends my time is strictly spent with my family. I do not think it is my employer’s duty to aid me in this because it was MY CHOICE to have these children. It should be our responsibility to provide for and support our families financially and mentally. Remember people the employers did not tell us to have children and if you chose to work for them you knew what you were getting into and if is not a pleasant working situation then you have the option to go elsewhere. Employers having to pay employees for sick days and time to spend at school functions will hurt alot of small & medium size business and cause layoffs. I dare any of you to go to your employees and say “Okay this is the deal I now have to pay you guys 7 sick days and 24 hours to spend with your kids at school but I have to let 1 or 2 of you go” then ask them if the paid time off was worth off the loss of their coworker or worse yet their job? I don’t think most people would think no pay was worth a week of pay.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Just a note regarding the sick days for FULL TIME employees. If that passes what would stop employers from making all employees part time? Then they would have no benefits at all. I worked for a company that gave sick days and it was great, however their’s was geared for long term illnesses. It can be done. An extra 24 hours for children’s activities…..I have children and as wonderful as that would be it is unfair to childless people.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I guess I must take offense at the apparent hatred displayed by many. Folks wake up!!! It is all about polictics. AT blame who you want. But, who are you going to blame when your comapny closes and you are without income because your party won the election and President-elect Obama taxes business and individuals to the point where they cannot enjoy any quality of life? Bush and McCain won’t be around to kick no more.
By the way if you are interested in redistributing any of your wealth please send to me. I certainly could use a bail-out. That way I can quit working and live off of the government.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
PS, you live in a very simple world. Business of any size is more complex than most people understand. Company’s have to comply with Federal, State and Local regulations that require a massive amount of attention as such the last thing they want is more regulation. Open card Union registration is one that should not be supported. If this bill passes it opens the road to membership intimadation. In this day and age most work environments do not require Union over site. Employers that treat their employees with respect, pay a livable wage, offer retirement and health benefits can easily select the cream of the crop and leave little reason for Union Organization.
As for FLMA and PTO I believe as an employer we should allow it any way, paid or unpaid, based on the ability of the employer.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
I’m very concerned about our country. Concerned and scared.
I’ll join the parade of those who believe labor unions served their purpose once upon a time, but that they are now a big business and that they don’t do anyone any favors (workers or employers). Before employment laws, they were needed because workers were exploited. It’s no longer legal to exploit or treat an employee unfairly, so why line the pockets of the union executives?
I believe we will see loss of benefits in other areas to offset the expense of adding government mandated benefits. It’s the only way businesses will be able to survive.
That said, I do believe in working with employees to give them time off when needed. We have a very flexible schedule where I work. If people will schedule ahead of time, we allow parents and grandparents to take time off to attend children’s or grandchildren’s events. We allow people to take time off to meet the cable person or repair person. We allow them to schedule off for any personal business they need or want to attend to because life is complicated, difficult, busy, hard and stressful. Sometimes, a person just needs a few extra hours to get everything taken care of…and who hasn’t needed to take off work for personal reasons? They have the option of taking the time paid or unpaid, using sick or vacation time if they want to be paid. We do give 5 days of sick time and 10 days of vacation after 1 year. I think it’s all about working WITH the employee to get the job done and to still give them some flexibility. It really isn’t that hard and our employees appreciate it and tend to do their best to make sure their absence isn’t a hardship for others. When you treat people like adults, they tend to respond more that way (big generalization, I know…sorry!).
Regarding discrimination based on sexual preference, I personally don’t think discrimination is ever right. Not based on race, gender, weight, lifestyle, whatever. In the business world, people should only be judged by skill, experience, qualifications, attitude, job-related behavior, performance…things that are work related and not subject to personal bias. I don’t think any person should be given preference because of their sexual preference, sex, race, weight, religion, etc., either. I just don’t think these kinds of things have any place in business. They should be non-factors.
Level-headed common sense instead of reactionary behavior would be a better course. The underlying issue is fairness and integrity. If more people would act with these two components in the forefront of their mind, we wouldn’t even need to have a discussion. But in this very frightening and imperfect world, who knows what will happen? It doesn’t look promising to me, regardless of who is in office. There are too many hidden agendas, too many people talking out of both sides of their mouth and no one is really getting much accomplished. I just don’t know if more government control is the best course of action.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
When a number of senior school officials in NJ were under scrutiny for getting what we used to call “matchbook cover degrees” to inflate their salaries and retirement payments (significantly)…one of these “degree mill” founders was indicted for fraud - a union official came out and said that whether or not these bogus, worthless degrees (write a paper and get a Ph.D) should be left to collective bargaining bewteen local unions and their LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS…another champion of quality education weighs in !!!!
As someone who came into human resources over 35 years ago and remained committed to the value of people..their development, involvement, performance, reward, contribution….I am not ready to retire, but I have had it with human resources….not the profession, but what government, unions AND unscrupulous business executives have done and plan to do to people…time for me to do something different where I feel that I might still be able to make a difference.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
What distresses me most about this conversation is the vitriolic tone. We should be able to have an intelligent conversation without being so stuck on an “I’m right/You’re wrong” mentality. Free sharing of ideas makes us all stronger and may even bring up points we haven’t considered. Trash talk just makes us all weaker.
For everyone who has had a bad experience with unions, someone else has had a positive experience. Most union workers I know are hard working, loyal, honest employees who are a great asset to their employers. Most non-union workers are also hard working, loyal, honest employees who are also great assets to THEIR employers. Some employers need unions to keep from adopting a ’sweat shop” mentality. Other employers do the right thing, regardless. Unions are no more monsters than emplyers are monsters. Every system has good and bad of both.
Liberal isn’t a bad word. Socialism isn’t a bad word. It all comes down to a matter of degree. After all, we have socialized education in our K-12 system and America has a great educational system. Could it be better? Of course. Everything can be better. However, it will take ALL of us, with our myriad viewpoints to make it happen. And it will happen best if we realize that we all need to be sitting on one side of the table, with our problems on the other side.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
After reading all of these posts, the only thing I can say is; as an HR manager, we give our employees 15 days a year plus 9 holidays to use for leave, we do not distinquish between sick or PTO… We still have problems getting our employees to come to work. I don’t see “giving” them more leave is going to help our current situation, in fact I see productivity going further down the toilet.
As for Unions… I was a union worker for many years and it has its benefits and it has its drawbacks, just like any other thing.
As for Obama… he is here, he is going to stay… nothing will change that, but we the people do have a voice and we can use it…
I would like the democrat/republican/independent “sides” to just forget it… do the job, work together for a change… I vote for the person, not a “side”… and no I wouldn’t vote for O’bama, I stand on Christian values, which is MY choice,for those who voted Obama, they wanted change…. well its here…
Lets start “crossing the aisle” roll up our sleeves and do the job.
All of this negativity and finger pointing is going to hurt businesses and employees alike…
What was that old saying (why can’t we all just get along)
As so many others have said… use your voice, contact your congressmen, women, senators, be heard.
And for goodness sake, respect others have an opinion or view that you might not agree with… that is one of our founding ideals… freedom of choice.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
While he’s at it I’m sure closing down G’tmo is next. BO will put all of those poor mistreated terrorists on a cruise ship to Miami. Upon disembarkation they will be given social security cards, state unemployment forms and a list of attorneys who specialize in filing discrimination charges. “Repentant Terrorists” - the next union to be recognized by the NLRB and next group group to be added to ENDA’s list. Wonder which political party they will join.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
AT - you state that you hated Buch and McCain and they would have driven our retirement into the dirt. I suggest you check you facts. President Clinton was quoted as stating that much of the housing mess that started this (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) should be laid at the doorstep of the democrates in Congress. He stated that both he and President Bush tried to rein in the excesses of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae but were unable to persuade Congress. There is also a video of a speeck McCain made in Congress before he ran for president trying to convince Congress to rein them in. But Congress wanted all those poor people who weren’t getting loans to get them. It was not good business to give people loans they couldn’t afford. And so started this mess.
Everyone talks about change. I wonder when was the last time you hired a very important executive to lead your company who had absolutely no experience at all.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Thanks, AT. Same here. As a benefits counselor, I have watched our health insurance premiums go up and our benefits go down for years now. McCain’s plan would have been an end to group health insurance in this country and would have greatly expanded the rolls of the uninsured. Obama’s plan, if implemented, will finally start to address in a responsible way the health insurance crisis in this country.
My brother is a small business owner and he is excited about Obama’s loan programs for small businesses. Also, he has always wanted to be able to extend benefits to his employees but was never able to aford it. He has a lot of hope that Obama’s health plan and the tax credits he will extend to small business owners who provide health coverage to their employees will finally allow him to provide his employees with benefits.
November 19th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
This certainly turned into a Republican vs. Democrat forum! Let’s talk about the issues and not bash one another’s political views!
I voted for Obama but I don’t agree with his views of paying for FMLA time off. The “intermittent” leave is the most widely abused “right” that employees currently have.
In all my years I’ve never seen a President successfully achieve all of his campaign promises!
November 19th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
You know as HR professionals we are all Manager’s and are at the will of those who have protection. I work for a State Agency and have seen the Union get things that I did not dream of when I was a union member. They have gotten way to much in the past 5 to 10 years that cost our state million’s of dollars in retroactive payments and still cost millions each and every pay day. I will not reveal what state or agency I work for, however when it comes to a union employee in this particular union getting paid for “Walk Time” because they clock out 1 min. or 14 min.’s after thier shift ended is very petty. I was told to suck it up and I accepted and didn’t expect anything for it. Why because it all works out in the end some way shape or form.
However now that this union has fought for its people and won so many rediculas things our state has well passed the beginning of going down hill to almost crashing, we can not hire to fill positions because our budget projections show that if things continue in our current trend or if we fill positions there will be no money left to pay anyone. I don’t blame anyone for my personal financial situation, however if things get to the point that I get laid off I will lose everything I own. Now does our economy depend on me to make it thrive no, but if others are in the same boat I am it will affect the economy to the point of a depression.
I am a Repulican, however I don’t care who the President is they don’t run the country, Congress and the Senate do! Yeah the President may have some sort of final say, however they don’t! This race was all about money and you see he who had more money won! Good for him and I can say I am not mad because McCain didn’t win, what I am trying to say is now that the election is over Obama won he has alot to deal with, but Congress and the Senate will have to agree on alot to allow him to be able to deal with it.
I think an economic bail out is a nice idea, however it should have started at the bottom with people like us give us the money to pay off our homes, or the many bills we have and then the money we earn from working would be spent on products others make and would stimulate the economy more than bailing out the top and making it harder for us to get loans or make money to pay our bills.
Let’s see what happens before we pass judgement and not give him the same and fair chance that Bush recieved before all the critizim and scrutiny he is currently under!
November 19th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
I love how conservatives keep saying they are “scared” of an Obama administration. What are you afraid of?
Do you think Obama will oversee the largest expansion of the federal government in 60 years? Whoops, that’s right. Bush already did that. Do you think Obama will appoint only yes-men and incompetent cronies to key positions in his administration? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will use his powers to illegally spy on Americans? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will politicize the Justice Department so that he can use it to pursue his political adversaries? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will use his powers to defy the Geneva Conventions and torture our enemies, thus endangering our own troops? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will give himself the power to arrest anyone in world that he wants at anytime and hold them without trial? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will display complete and utter incompetence in the face of a natural disaster that kills thousands of Americans? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will lie to the American people in order to justify war? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think he will endanger the safety of the nation by exposing undercover CIA operatives in order to settle political scores? Whoops, Bush already did that. Do you think the major financial institutions of this country will collapse under the shortsightedness of his administration? Whoops, Bush already did that.
If you are “scared” of Obama, then you simply haven’t been payiing attention for the past 8 years. All Obama has to do is show a modicum of competence and his administration will be judged a resounding success after the national embarrassment that has been the George W. Bush administration.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
My company employs 300 employees and we give our employees 1 week of vacation after 1 year, 2 weeks vacation off after 2 yrs, and 3 after 10 yrs. We also give all our employees 3 PTO days. We offer a very comprehensive health insurance benefit package for our employees paid in full by the company and we match 50 cents on the dollar for 401K contributions. We have a pro family attitude but if we are forced to add more paid time to the list of benefits we will be looking at a reduction in force. This is something we have already been forced into due to the economic factors in our industry. (construction) I know I sounded off earlier but while I do think we should be responsible for our families as an emplpyer I know the realities of the employees and their familial responsibilities. I do not think making paid time off mandatory is going to help the employees in the long run if jobs are eliminated because of mandated paid time. Just thought I would let people know that companies like mine who do value their employees will be paying the price the hard way.l
November 19th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
The time to say ” I told you so is NOW” just look at his website. Now the truth is coming out, a little at a time. He doesn’t have the media to hide behind and make him look like something he is not. Now he has to DO all the things he says will help this country. We will all see the true beast that is OBAMA.
Business owners beware!!!!!
November 19th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Bravo Sheila!
Everything under the sun has been tried concerning sick days, annual leave ect. As of yet the country operates and each fear mongering stage that people set themselves up for falls by the wayside until the fear mongerers can find something else to build their fear upon.
There have been a lot of good opinions here and I appreciate them. That is why I’m on this forum. Personally, though unions can be problematic, some of the stated opinions here are the best selling point to keep unions active. Many have made statements that simply reinforce why unions came into existence. Self serving, not sensitive to very real human issues, backward thinking not realizing that the “ME’s” and “Echo” generation could give a hoot about personal scraps about what party is in power. They are seeking fairness not personal leverage. Many countries value their workers as people with families. Yet we demonstrate time and again a selfishness that is beyond compare when it comes to extending some little perk to the American working family. Makes me quite tired.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I’m not going to weigh in on the labor unions, as I come from a union family and gotta admit, there are times when being in a union is helpful.
With regards to the FMLA, I think it should be left alone. 24 hours for parents to attend their children’s ‘activities - what the heck - I would take time off for my child’s activities and then make up the time later - what’s wrong with that system? You want to have an hour off to see the Xmas play at pre-school, be prepared to work thru lunch, come in early or leave later. I no longer have children at home, so I’m pretty darn sure that I’m not going to be well served by that sort of foolishness. Federally mandated sick days? I work, for the first time in 35 years, for a company that does not have a sick leave policy - we get vacation time after a 1 year (5 days), what I see is every employee coming to work sick because they can’t afford the time off, hence their sickness becomes everybody’s sickness down the line regardless; besides which, the employee who is sick and in work, isn’t doing work at their peak performance level anyway. While I don’t think 7 days is fair to the employer - I think requiring some sort of ’sick leave’ policy or a larger PTO policy would provide employees with an option other than to expose the workplace to contagion.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
The auto industry is in trouble because they are in bed with the oil industry. Instead of exploring other energy options after the gasoline crisis in the 70’s, they’ve continued to produce nothing but gas guzzling, polluting vehicles that can’t compete mileage-wise with the dozens of other nations producing vehicles.
Unions brought us 40 hour work-weeks, paid time off, employer-provided healthcare and comparable pay across the nation. This is real life folks, not some movie where everyone is bashing each other’s heads in with baseball bats. Unions today represent working families and that is their motivation — providing a living wage for everyone. Everyone benefits whether you are in a union or not and no one is forced to join a union. If you don’t want to join the union on a union-only job, then you simply can look for employment elsewhere.
Forming a union is almost impossible in most places. In SC the workers can vote to form a union but the employer can fire them if they do. It’s called “at-will” employment and the employee has no rights. Once the majority of the workers decide they want a union, they still must have an election by secret ballot AFTER the employer has had a chance to encourage them not to do so. In SC, if an employer has a contract with a union, all employees are not required to be union but they all get the same benefits as if they were union members. In a dispute, the union has to represent the non-union employee even though that person has never paid union dues.
Someone above pointed out that these are ideals the Obama campaign has, not mandates, which would have to be passed by Congress. Most would not effect small employers with 25 or less employees, which is the largest percentage nationwide.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
It is a shame that no one has recognized the risk a business owner makes every day. It is their investment, their livlihood, their future on the line just to keep the doors open. For the government to continue to add more burden to these individuals in the form of mandates to provide what essentially amounts to “handouts” to employees only succeeds in sending business out of the area and out of the country. There is no incentive to become an entreprenuer and certainly no incentive to become competitive and, heaven forbid, successful.
Unions have had a terrible impact on the economy. They’ve done a disservice to our country as a whole creating an “entitlement” mentality and fostering mediocrity. The successful auto companies are those without unions (Toyota, Honda) who have more than enough applications from individuals beating down their doors to have a chance to work there. They stay afloat because they expect high levels of quality and productivity from their employees as well as from their employers. As a consumer, am willing to bet that you would prefer to own a Camry or an Accord than a Malibu or a LeSabre. And don’t get me started on teacher unions who keep individuals who have no business being in a classroom in place where they have a negative impact on our children and society as a whole. As a former teacher who refused to join a union, I was the black sheep but I knew that my success was because I put effort into my plans, not because the union told my school board they had to retain me.
Also keep in mind that Mr. Bush was not given a blank check to do anything. Current Congress is largely responsible for the fiasco we have in front of us and last time I checked the liberals were in the majority.
I’m disappointed that the vast majority of voters in this country didn’t take the time to do more than read and listen to the sound bites and failed do their research or pay attention to their history lessons. Obviously folks forget just how bad the Carter years were with gas shortages, high interest rates (mortgages were north of 15%!), etc. and are willing to live through a repeat if not worse.
FDR produced the beginnings of a socialism in this country, LBJ made it worse (and he even admitted that he had), and now we’re on the verge of Marxism. We see just how well that has worked in China and Cuba.
Believe someone made the comment about jobs being more secure under Obama. Oh, honey, what have you been smoking? What is going to be the incentive for employers to hire workers? Just wait until you see how high unemployment can go. As an HR person, if you are not watching out for the health of your business instead of soley focusing on the bennies you feel should be provided to the employees, you are not doing your employer any favors.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
In reality, regardless of who is the president or what party is in power, there is not going to be much difference overall. The major change will be a shift as to HOW the bills get paid, through businesses or through taxes. Most of what is feared about and discussed is “cosmetic” and doesn’t make a big difference in our budget.
The game over the past 20 years by the parties is to get people scared and focus on the “little things” while the big things are avoided.
As I said in my earlier post, government has a responsibility to provide for the general welfare. Once you determine what is a NEED and what is NICE TO HAVE, it becomes so simple. If it is a NEED, the government should ensure that everyone has their NEEDS met. If anyone provides more that a person NEEDS on a consistent basis, they set up a “dependency” relationship and this is a form of slavery and is immoral.
The big issues ignored is HEALTHCARE, where there are many people who don’t have their NEEDS met. SOCIAL SECURITY, where many of our seniors depend on this income to meet their daily NEEDS. I don’t know any seniors getting Social Security and living the life of luxury. DEFENSE, what is NEEDED to defend the country, as opposed to OFFENSE and staying because we can’t figure out a way to “save face.”
Finally, concerning “unions.” Several posts indicated that Unions do not thrive where companies treat their people well. A “Union” is just a collection of people with a common cause. If the cause goes away, the reason for the union goes away, except when we decide to make the “union” an institution. Many of our quality of life issues today in the workplace are thanks to people forming unions. Before unions, the workers had no seat or voice in the decision making. If the worker’s interests are fairly represented, there is no need to organize. I do feel that over time and with the fear of losing in the world market, there is going to be a continued push for workers to do more with less for much less compensation. When profits and return for investors take primacy over the workers needs and interests, then there will be a need for people to organize again.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Tell me someone, was there any of these types of posts or newspapers articles bashing how any of the other past President-elect’s was going to impact HR? It seems that by the tone of many of you, you’re still looking at the Man, not the House or the Senate nor the party (Republican or Democratic). This is the United States of America….right?? The items mentioned here are all ways for each employee and employer (small/middle-sized and large) to take a look at all of their policies. We’re facing issues that haven’t been faced in years. (The last great depression) We didn’t have any types of rules, regulations or laws for family, unions, etc. It is time for a new mindset in the HR Agenda and it should start with us.
Many of us so called HR Practitioners who complain and complain, never write into their Congressman or Senator to voice or everyday concerns that we face and deal with, yet balk when a new Reg. comes out for more HR work for us to do.
Yes I agree with many of you on the Union issue. Again, it’s like any of us in HR we’re suppose to look at everything fair and equal to the whole population. Well, think about it in their terms, they’re trying to do for the majority of companies that don’t have enough time off for families who need it, for those organizations that a union would benefit, because of stiff necked companies that balk on any issue of benefits.
I say we need a new Human Resource Administration in the United States!!
Oh well…what do I know!
November 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
AT and Charlie Brown, consider the fact that the President does not create jobs nor do elected officials on the “Hill”! The GOP and the Dems are not the creators of economic development. All they can do is create conditions that encourage development, which hopefully will result in jobs. Also keep in mind the general public affects the work environment more than any other force in government, assuming of course we want to get involved. We can voice our opinion with regard to legislation, encourage the production of made at home goods and services by limiting our purchases of foriegn products- easier said than done given we have lost nearly all of our production capacity. We should be demanding that whenever American technology and jobs are sent abroad there be penalties. We should not be offering tax credits under the guise of re-organization.
If we sit idle and let government run as it wishes than we can expect a larger bureaucracy, poor performance of Government leadership, and critical programs of social redeeming value to be pushed aside by partism divide. When was the last time voters had a say in Congress’ benefit package, have you ever been requested to approve pay raises for Washington officials? Washington has the best retirement and benefit program in the Nation and we pay for it! So what happended to the government of the people, for the people, by the people? It got pushed aside and we allowed elected officials to declare themselves the elite. So if your looking who to blame when people lose their jobs, their mortgage is foreclosed, Social Security tanks out, our education system is sub-standard to the competition, etc. take a look in the mirror because we own a part of the blame to ourselves. No one party created the mess this country is in. And Bush did not create this mess on his own - even though the administration was a sleep at the wheel and denied reality we sat idle and let it happen as well.
Now ask yourselves two questions: When the Nation borrowed money from CHINA, to pay for the stimulation checks, who’s economy did we stimulate the most? Given that we are a debtor nation can you explain why we settled for a $700 billion dollar stimulation program, targeted at Wall Street and banks - using a trickle down theory, when in reality we have a bottom up economy? Our economy is based on a catch 22. For the economy to run people have to buy goods or services. To make these purchases people have to have money to spend. To have money one must work. To work there has to be a demand for goods and services. Maybe we need Washington to put the money back in Main Street America, so we can purhase goods, pay off dept (which makes more money available at banks), increases the value of the dollar (a stronger dollar has more purchasing power), more goods purchased encourages manufacturing (which increases the GNP), improved demand and production developes new investments and more employment…
So it is not a matter of who is in the White House or on the Hill but rather how much WE hold ourselves to oversee what WE the Government are doing for WE the people.
November 19th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
GREED , GREED, GREED is what has gotten US in this situation. The blame should be spread across the board from Main Street to Wall Street. Now congress has to get a handle on it and separate the PIGS from the HOGS…… All the HOGS need to get slaughtered and sold off as feed. The PIGS will still take from us, but need to be controlled. We as common people need to rethink how we live and live within our means financially. So there is enough blame for all to share. We all have to sacrifice to get this monster we’ve created back in order. Yes, I’m a small to medium business owner and the US system allows us to just screw the common person……
November 19th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Forist
I read with interest your post. I have a simple question. With all of the nice sounding “we” in your post tell me how this “we” acts in the manner that you suggest and don’t suggest at the same time. Good speech but short of an armed revolt how do “we” do it?
November 19th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
My friends, this has nothing to do with employee rights, anyone can see that, it only has to do with a political payoff. The group that will pay the tab is the American Employer and then the American people. There is a wave of socialism spreading across America and this is its current permutation. All good capitalist should find a safe place and let the storm pass. Those that cannot find safety need to be battened down the hatches and have all loose articles fastened tight. The winds of change will be fierce.
Obama and his socialist allies will show themselves for what they are. They wish to create a welfare state and a socialist’s community. Gone will be the hardworking, get ahead American principles of success, achievement and prosperity. Instead they will wish to create New France, a great place to be taken care of. Where you can go on holiday for six weeks, get “free” paid medical insurance, and complain often and loudly how the government owes us all.
Where is Alexis de Tocqueville when we need him the most?
May God save the Republic, because Obama will not.
November 19th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
I have just unsubscribed to this blog - you all are scary - on both sides!!
November 19th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
My question is - who is going to track all of the New FMLA employees will be able to take for all the “extra” stuff? It’s hard enough tracking sick/maternity/care for spouse and children.
November 19th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
rukidding. . I’m with you. Nut jobs have started to show up. I’m gone.
November 19th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Ya’ll should have thought about it when you voted Obama in!!!! Did you NOT think all these things were NOT going to hit the bottom line, particulalry to small business owners??? Then
all of us, ultimately the taxpayers! Sure, we’d all like to help everyone out, but we can barely take care of ourselves in this economy as it is! Wait until the medical “promises” he made start to float up!! DUH!
November 19th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Good morning,
Unions- As a fan of US history I’ve watched how union organization occurs, what the reasoning behind it is, what unions have achieved and where they are now. In many cases Union organizations that started out doing well for the employee–keeping the employee’s interests at mind and protecting them from hazardous working conditions and wages that allowed them to buy food but not pay the rent, those were good. What I see now is different compared to what it set out to be. Many unions end up having a large administrative staff and seem to be in the union business to make money rather than protect the employee. Then, when an employee goes to the union and makes a claim, the union representative doesn’t seem to look at the facts involved they just take the easy line of “union activities” and run with it. Then again, if they refused to defend an employee who was “misappropriating” items from the workplace and everyone knew it and why they were released, the need for the union would then be called into question. In Australia unions are run by volunteers and a handful of paid positions. Counsel they have on retainer rather than in house thus keeping overhead cost down (from what a friend of mine has said who worked in Social Security in Australia). Additionally Union membership isn’t manditory in a workplace (if a union is present) but it is normally seen as a good idea as there are perks, of course, to union membership. The union is still the middleman between the employee and employer, but it isn’t as much of a mob presence as US unions can be. Rather than looking at union cards and voting I think the first step is to take a look at unions themselves, do union reform and then take on the ideas about how to vote in a union.
Increased FMLA coverage–I don’t have much to say on this one, as a California employee, as I work with CFRA which has the limit of 5+ employees in a 75 mile radius. The federal government can drop the employee count to 25 and it won’t have that much of an impact on CA as our state has stricter guidelines for companies to operate within.
Additionally California labor law already allows for domestic violence leave and crime victim/witness leave. Having, unfortunately, had an employee require the crime victim leave I know that for the sake of the person’s family (getting everyone settled in a family member’s home rather than their own) that took time that the employee wouldn’t have been eligible for under FMLA as their health condition was not considered serious but mentally they weren’t present enough to do the work we do. It meant increased OT costs, but we were able to have some of our part-time employees step up to the plate to help out.
Regarding additional family time for school related activities–that’s another leave that California has legislated. The way it was done though made the difference. First, the leave is for a school related activity and not specificly related to a child’s school activity. Thus anyone who qualifies for the leave under the very specific guidelines can go ahead and take it. It isn’t JUST parents.
Expanded paid leave is a bit silly in my humble opinion. Small business can’t afford it these days, moderate sized employers/business’ can afford paid leave, but not much, and the large business look at the overall cost and don’t want to do it. Having said that there are affordable ways to get paid time off for employees. Europe, Germany for instance, grants 3 weeks paid vacation to full time employees and, if I remember correctly, half that for part time employees. The down side of comparing Germany to the states though are the number of people involved. Regardless, it boils down to the fact that the money may not be there to do it. I don’t think we (the US) should make the same mistake Argentina did when the Peron’s were in power–if they needed money they just printed it regardless if the gold reserves were there to support the currency. With the national debt continuing to rise, I don’t think this new type of bail out is a good idea.
Regarding #4 (protected classes) who really gives a flying fish what people do behind bedroom doors, what color they are, where they come from, what gender they are if they can get the job done? He can go ahead and designate a new protected class–as HR professionals there shouldn’t be any job related actions performed based on any PERSONAL characteristic rather than job performance. The question should always be “Is this person able to do this job with or without reasonable accommodation and has there been any benefits to, or concerns with, their past performance to believe otherwise”. If a supervisor makes the best decision for the job that needs to be done rather than anything else and documents it the company should be fine. Additionally, no supervisor should make a hiring decision on their own to avoid any allegations of favoritism, nepotism or discrimination.
When pay discrimination is discussed I cringe. Decisions on pay should be based on the experience a person brings to the table and past employment rates. This has the potential to be seen as discriminatory but if a woman has more experience than her male counterpart who’s fresh out of college then she could be paid more if the job pay was open to negotiation because she wouldn’t need as much training as the male counterpart (theoretically). The male counterpart would need to be brought up to speed on the other things he would need to know for the job. If the positions were reversed the same would still be true. Just as with protected classes HR and the supervisor must document everything. Maybe a disclosure on the cover of the application would be appropriate. If a company doesn’t want to hassle with it they either hire everyone at a flat rate and give standard raises or be very clear in their policies.
As we all know we cannot order employees not to discuss wages. We can indicate that while employees can talk to one another we, the company, respectfully request that any corrective action or wages not be discussed. If a company indicates that they will