A Consultant's Chronicles

Yesterday's Jobs Bill: Not The Solution To Today's Unemployment Problem

The fact that we need a jobs bill in this country is by itself, not news. With Washington "on vacation," there's lots of talk but barely a whisper of any kind of solution from today's pols. The one person who has actually outlined a jobs plan is pundit Chris Mathews who used to work as an aide to the late Speaker of the House, Tip O'Neal as well as speechwriter to former president Jimmy Carter. In other words, when it comes to the ways of Washington, he knows the terrain.  His jobs proposal sounds extremely pragmatic which is to go state by state, get a list of the bridges & roads that need fixing & basically challenge the House members to vote against such proposals when not only is it in their own personal interest [to bring jobs to their district] but an outright threat if those infrastructure problems present a credible yet unattended danger. Everyone who hears the Mathews proposal thinks it sounds good...except me.

The Solution Proposed Is Out Of Step With The Times

Don't get me wrong. I applaud Mathews for at least attempting to talk constructively about something that no one else seems to be addressing [including the president]. I simply think the solution he is shopping is out of step with the times. Why? Mathews is proposing this strategy to get people back to work making a good middle class income but recent history shows us that this is no longer how construction & repair jobs are done today. They are first privatized & then outsourced so that you no longer have Americans working these jobs [especially union workers who come with the unwanted "baggage" of healthcare, benefits, & safety concerns] ; additionally the jobs are no longer necessarily done with American material [also an engine for jobs]. Case in point: the San Francisco Bay Bridge has desperately needed to complete the retro-fitting & reconstructing required since it fell apart in an earthquake in 1989...1989!!!! It took the San Francisco & Oakland politicians forever to settle on a design, to put the funds together, & then to hire a company to actually do the construction. As they played politics year after year, the cost for the job kept going up. Therefore while this is essentially a classic example of what Mathews is suggesting, it doesn't exactly play out the way he has proposed even though it sounds promising on its face. Why? The job is being done by a Chinese company, employing Chinese workers & using Chinese steel [do we really need to import cheap Chinese steel when we have high quality Pittsburgh steel; constructing a bridge is not the time to cut corners]. This is just one example of why in today's market, the kinds of jobs that Mathews is suggesting will no longer address the unemployment problem of today.

 

The Recovery: Is It Harder On Women

After reading an article yesterday about the end of the so-called "mancession," a recession where men were harder hit than women, I was surprised to read that the author concluded that women now stand to lose more ground as men find jobs [to be fair, the author notes that generally speaking jobs are still hard to come by for al]. My surprise didn't stem from her conclusion, I was surprised that this was somehow "news" when the "handwriting" has been on the wall for a while now.

New Jobs Are NOT White-Collar Friendly

As it has already been reported here, the government did not target white-collar jobs when they distributed its stimulus funds. No, those white-collar jobs that have left are not coming back for totally different reasons. Companies have found ways to be productive & make more money with less human capital either through technology or by shipping those jobs overseas where they can pay far lower wages & don't have to worry about "little things" like spiraling healthcare costs. Even once recession-proof jobs like lawyers & doctors are drying up, paying less, or going overseas. Now no job is 'safe." Whenever the subject of job creation comes up, the first thing people talk about is "rebuilding our infrastructure" referring directly & indirectly to so-called "shovel ready" jobs, positions that will be filled largely by men. As a result, while women now surpass men in the number of those who are college educated, their more familiar white-collar jobs are getting slashed both in the private & the public sector [even every college educated person's "backup job" teaching is seeing cuts]. With white-collar jobs getting hit from all sides, of course women will experience a harder time, at least in the near term. That is even before factoring in the societal bias that still exists when it comes to viewing men as the primary "bread earners" which may put them ahead in line for an available position. 

 

NBC: A Refresher In Succession Planning The Hard Way

Like so many others, I am a bona fide news junkie, & all of us addicts have our favorite shows to watch [some people stick with a favorite channel but I like diverging points of view]. However, like many people I also have a favorite morning show for news which is Morning Joe featuring former Congressman Joe Scarborough [R-Fl] & Mika Brezinski. They regularly feature a different mix of journalists but one of their mainstay guests has been NBC's Norah O'Donnell who used to have a show of her own & is a guest on a lot of news panel shows. O'Donnell came up from the ranks of Washington-based journalists from the D.C.-centric online vehicle Roll Call, which covers Capital Hill & was mentored by some of the best veterans like the late Tim Russert & Chris Mathews. She earned her stripes building relationships & sources in all the branches of government; for ournalists, a wide swath of relevant sources are their "bread & butter."  Given the fact that journalism when practiced at the highest level is still very much a man's game, O'Donnell was presumed to be "waiting in the wings" so to speak to fill the void left by Andrea Mitchell when she retires. However, while NBC hit the "snooze button," & let O'Donnell kind of hang on the vine, CBS swooped in, made her a great offer & capitalized on all of the great training she got at NBC's expense. Now it is being said that her defection is one of the biggest in the last 20 years! That's not only bad business and bad management but bad PR!

Succession Planning Is Essential

Do not let this happen in your company! Succession planning at all levels is an essential duty of any HR department when they are doing their staff & performance evaluations. Like any professional sports organization, not only do you need a strong "A team" but you need a strong bench. Life happens; people get sick, leave, retire, or unforeseen circumstances occur which require personnel changes & you have to be ready. NBC did the right thing in mentoring & grooming O'Donnell. Their big mistake was letting a now skilled & respected journalist with their company imprimatur slip through their fingers. The task seems simple enough:

• Assess your staff
• Identify the needs
• Promote or hire staff
• Mentor & groom them
• Keep them happy & challenged so you don't lose them

Remember, it costs far more to go out & get new talent or to begin the process anew than it does to keep the bench you have happy.

 

 

 

What About Wisconisn: Part II

Throughout the debate in Wisconsin, I have been listening for a more thorough discussion on a larger but very related issue relevant to all workers public & private but all I have heard is silence. Quite aside from the Wisconsin's Governor's goal to break collective bargaining, this whole dispute has crystallized something far bigger for me. Companies public & private have been playing fast & loose with their pension funds for years, which is the unspoken piece of fact in this debate. It seems to me that at least in part, public employees are being asked to provide a solution to the state government's own greed & mismanagement. Why? Now that the bill is about to become due for scores of retiring employees, these governors are in a panic. Retirement funds have been in greater danger than social security for the last 10-15 years. The current debate is like a "fig leaf" designed to mask the larger reality. As retirement of the baby boomers begins to roll out, new retirees are going to have a rude awakening at precisely the same time when our national debt requires that we make cutbacks in social security.

The By-product Of Ending Collective Bargaining

Howward Feinman of MSNBC & other pundits have also suggested that the GOP as a whole sees this as a means of diffusing a powerful political machine that always operates against them in every election. More significantly, the net result would be to stick a dagger in the Democrats financial machine. They speculate that if Walker & other governors are successful, it could translate to something like a 200 million dollar loss to the Democrats' electoral machine.  If Walker & the other governors succeed, get ready for a very different looking electorate as well as a different definition of the "American Dream." That's my opinion. What's yours?

What About 'Wisconsin'

Unless your head is buried in the sand or you've been on another planet, you can't help but take notice of the battle raging in Wisconsin these days over their state debt & governor Scott Walker's desire to break collective bargaining in his state. However, as someone who works with employers & employees, I have been peppered with a lot of questions so here's my take. It's near impossible to clearly favor one side or the other on the issues. Why, because BOTH sides are being disingenuous when it comes to telling the whole truth. Having said that, I think there are 3 things that most people [who are being intellectually honest] can agree with: 1- these are tough times & sacrifices along with some very tough choices are going to have to be made in order to get our fiscal house in order at both the state as well as the federal level; 2- again, assuming that people are being intellectually honest, collective bargaining by itself did not create this problem so "breaking it" won't guarantee a solution. Most people don't realize what happens in collective bargaining. It is through this kind of bargaining, that you get safe workplaces, a framework for how to resolve grievances, & a ton of other workplace related measures having nothing to do with pay or benefits; & lastly, 3-while the unions did not steal their benefits, which is to say that they negotiated for them fairly, there have been circumstances where they have taken advantage of the taxpayer's generosity. 

Governor Walker's Problems

On the merits of fiscal solvency, it is really hard to defend a governor who will not take "yes" for an answer because the unions have already said they understand that when it comes to money, the cuts have to be made. At this point, they are fighting for a "seat at the table" over all other workplace issues. That seems like a fair request & one thing we voters like to see is "fairness." Another problem for the governor is that his rationale has changed. He started out saying that this is strictly a budget issue but since the unions have yielded, he can no longer make that claim & is now fighting an ideological battle. Fairly or unfairly, this last point was driven home when he was publicly caught in a fake conversation with one of his ideological & financial backers [at the time, the governor thought the conversation was legitimate]. Politicians of all stripes miss the mark when they fight an ideological war instead of "solving the people's problems." It should be noted that while the current battle is being fought in Wisconsin, other governors in the "rust belt" [nearby states] are considering similar measures adding to the seriousness of the debate.

In My Opinion 

When a state like Wisconsin [& this is also true for my own home state of CA] finds itself in dire financial straits, cuts have to made & that is just fact. However, the cuts should start top down in areas & with people who will feel the pain the least although it will have to be experienced by all in order for it to be fair. If the government is going to cut the pay & benefits of public employees, he & his administration should experience those same proportionate cuts. There are also other nice little perks that come with administering government that he should trim whether they make a financial difference or not. Why, because such sacrifices even when they are only symbolic count when you are asking people who make far more modest money to make significant cuts. I was listening to a pundit this morning comment about the Wisconsin democratic state senators who have fled Wisconsin so that a vote cannot be cast on the governor's bill. He said that such behavior goes against the covenant that these officials have with the people. Well, the government made a covenant with the public union members too. They said to public workers if you do these necessary jobs to run the state for modest wages, i.e.; teach our children, keep us safe, put out our fires, etc, we in turn will be sure that your health insurance & retirement is secure. Right now, it almost seems as if no side has kept their word.  

Does Your Business Need A Social Media Policy

Back during the 90's when Bill Clinton was president, in one of the commencement speeches he gave, he told the graduating class the following: "some of you will have jobs we haven't imagined yet." Truer words have never been spoken because at this point IF Google was around, it was in its nascent stages & Mark Zuckerberg was just another kid who hoped to go to Harvard some day. The internet was still young & new so no one was talking about web 2.0 yet. It wasn't until 2004 that a new layer of the web known as the blogosphere started to flex its muscle trying to get Howard Dean nominated  [instead of John Kerry] to run against George W. Bush. While Dean's troops were not successful, a whole new medium was born in earnest with sites like Facebook &Twitter on its heels with much more to follow. Now even if you are not digitally fluent, you know there is important information to be acquired through this new medium. It's an easy way to keep up with family & friends or to interact with business in a whole new way.

Social Media: Now An International Force To Be Reckoned With

Even stodgy politicians across the globe have come to recognize that sites like Facebook & Twitter are forces to be reckoned with; the uprising in Cairo is just the latest example. Now that everyone is literally "twiddling their thumbs" on their mobile phones, it's increasingly more important to have a social media policy in your employee handbook. In fact sometimes fiction & reality go hand in hand so just to prove a point, one of the central themes in a recent episode of Grey's Anatomy was whether or not "tweeting" about the surgery underway should be permitted in the operating room. The chief of staff's concern of course was liability n the event that surgery was not a success.

What Topics Might Be Covered In This Policy

I have been thinking about this topic for a while now but I have to give credit where credit is due to author Karen Klein for "inking it" first. So what might be covered in this particular policy? The list could be long & would undoubtedly vary from company to company but here are just a few topics to contemplate:

•  Privacy issues-theirs & the company's
•  Posting on the job [about non-business related issues] or checking personal social media sites
•  Creating posts that have some direct effect on individuals in the company or that may have an effect on the company's brand, products, or other in-house issues
• Revealing proprietary practices of your employer either directly or indirectly
• Misrepresenting the views of a company
• Writing anything that reflects poorly on company or brand that may lead to a loss in revenue 

No Cost-benefit Analysis Required

I could continue but it should be apparent that there is no need to do a cost-benefit analysis to see that for most any company, NOT having a social media policy which would serve as protection for both the employer & the employee alike is a potentially expensive risk that is simply not worth taking.

 

Hiring: A Primer For Attracting & Keeping the Best Personnel

Here in "Silicon Valley's backyard" there's sort of an ongoing HR duel between Facebook & Google for the best & brightest engineers & those considered the best in other areas as well. Not only has it been reported that Mark Zuckerberg went so far as to camp out at a recruiting table himself on behalf of Facebook but he allegedly even stole their chef. For their part Google just gave every single employee an across the board raise. Whether all these reports are fact, fiction, or a little of both, its people are the lifeblood of any organization so how do you go about attracting & keeping the best employees? Here's a 6 point guide for getting & keeping the "best & the brightest:"

• Pay as much as as you possibly can -A company known for for paying higher than average salaries & being one that bases bonuses & raises on the market & not to some pool will probably not have many people likely to look for "greener pastures" Avoid the practice of paying what you can get away with. As celebrity chef & restaurant mogul Mario Batali once pointed out, you risk losing too many good people over a 10 percent pay differential that way
• Offer choices when it comes to compensation-Some people want more stock, others more cash, while others are willing to trade some of one or the other for more flex time- let them choose
• Encourage a "trust market" for new hires-tap your present employees to recommend those people they've loved working with for jobs in your company. Turn every employee into a "recruiter" & evangelist
• Keep the rules to a minimum-Rules inhibit leadership & keep people from making decisions. They also create mountains of "red tape" squelching creativity
• Always use an scalpel & not a butterknife-Don't  give under-performers a token raise & don't mislead or surprise them. However, if an employee isn't working out, let them go quickly, with a reasonable amount of cash. If business finances demand letting many people go, cut once & cut deep. Better to make one deep cut than leave employees wondering if they will be next instead of being productive. Always allow people to leave with their dignity
• Spend company discretionary cash on people-Outsized perks & lots of time off are fast becoming the norm in these parts. Of course the same companies that offer these great "people perks" also demand & get long, hard workdays from their employees in return. People need the chance to recharge; make sure they get it

Customized Business Cards: A Powerful Job-hunting Weapon

It's tough out there in the job-hunting jungle so in order to find your way through successfully, you need to be armed.  According to personal branding expert Laura Allen [a.k.a. "the pitch girl"] a jobseeker's best weapon is the handy business card. The trick is to make yourself stand out, especially in a large group like a convention or other networking function. She suggests providing professionally customized business cards* with a catchphrase that really makes you stick in people's minds. Sounds like a challenge right? Well it doesn't have to be because she also provides an extremely helpful guidepost:

"...clear & concise equals cash; vague & verbose equals trash..."

It reminds me of what an old supervisor of mine used to say all the time. She maintained that you could never go wrong adhering to the "kiss principle:" better known as 'keep it simple stupid.' " Apparently it's better advice then I thought.

 

*For this, check out Vista Print because while they are hardly the on company to make business cards, theirs are so inexpensive but nonetheless professional in their appearance that it makes such customization very possible to do.

College GPA & Admissions Scores: The New Code For 'How Old Are You'

In this election season, if you live in CA, you cannot turn on the TV without seeing a commercial paid for by Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay who is now running for Governor here. In many of these commercials, she extols the virtues of the way business is done in the Silicon Valley. While it's true that there are lots of awesome companies based there & it is certainly an engine of innovation for the state, it is also something else. According to a source who works there & has close ties to many of its power players, it is an open secret that many of its top companies endorse age discrimination in their hiring practices.

 Your College GPA & Admissions Scores: The New Code For 'How Old Are You'

While age discrimination is illegal, getting away with it is easier than one might think. For example if on a hiring application, it is required that you provide your college GPA &/or entrance exam scores, that will pretty much exclude anyone over 40. Not only is that kind of data irrelevant by that time but very few people will be capable of accurately summoning them to memory [unless you were a returning student later in life]. Basically, with that requirement, they may as well say, "middle aged applicants needn't apply!" When one extremely successful & well known company was actually confronted with this accusation, a representative from management didn't confirm or deny it...he simply smiled. Now we can argue all day long about the wealth of experience they are missing in an older but nonetheless skilled workforce; age discrimination however, has always been one of the tougher practices to prove. If it's hard to prove, it makes the practice mighty tough to change. Moreover, given our current economic environment, never have the consequences been so grave.

Applying The 'Carrot & The Stick'

 

When you consider that the latest "jobs report" reflects an unemployment record somewhere around 9.6% we can no longer afford to let the practice slide by with a "wink & a nod!" The Silicon Valley is a place where new jobs are being created all the time so what's the solution? Instead of giving these companies "special dispensation" to hire workers from overseas [or worse, moving large chunks of their workforce outside the U.S.], force them to play by the rules using the "carrot & the stick". The "carrot" could easily be tax incentives especially if they provide targeted re-training & the "stick" of course is to re-shape the law making it more eaisly enforcable by providing stiffer penalties for those that try to circumvent the rules. After all, a jobless rate of 9.6% reflects a large swath of Americans who are not employed but the number is even higher because it does not take into account the number who are under-employed, working only part-time [not by choice], & worst of all, those so broken that they have stopped looking. 

 

Employee Disputes & Arbitration: Not A 'Knee Jerk' Process

These days, getting hired for a new position typically means signing your legal rights away...or does it? By this I mean, the usual standard operating procedure of HR is to give you a copy of the company handbook along with a request that you return the last page signed indicating that you've read it & agree to the terms. Today most companies request that all legal disputes with the employer be resolved through arbitration [typically companies resort to arbitration if mediation has failed]. The question is "have you really signed away your rights to take your dispute to court?" Recently the courts have said "not so fast." The list below can be used by employers & employees alike to determine where the the lines have been drawn by the courts. For employers this will mean structuring your employee handbook accordingly & for employees it will be a clearer definition of your rights.

According to attorneys from the national law firm Baker Donelson, arbitration agreements must:

» indicate a “meeting of the minds” between employer and employee
» provide “consideration” for the employee for signing the agreement –
   in other words, the pact can’t tilt too far in favor of the company,
   and
» not be “unconscionable” - so restrictive as to be unreasonable

This finding is provides critical information for employers as well as employees as well as some clear visuals in sometimes murky waters.