Millennial women and work: Tackling the recruit and retain challenge

August 16, 2015 - by: Tammy Binford 0 COMMENTS

Employers can turn up reams of research on millennial employees. They’re generally considered well-educated, tech-savvy workers who crave flexibility and collaboration. But the research rarely focuses on millennial women in the workplace, so employers are left wondering just how they can most effectively recruit, motivate, retain, and get the most out of their female millennial employees.  Happy african student

New research from a consortium of employers and business schools aims to shed light on key factors employers should understand about millennial women. The study from the International Consortium for Executive Development Research (ICEDR) released earlier this year says its conversations with high potential young women show what they want to tell employers. While pointing out that much of the research applies to men as well as women, the report hones in on women and identifies five main themes. read more…

Preventing workplace bullying: Start with training and a good policy

by Sue Woods

Generally, workplace bullying can be defined as repeated unreasonable actions directed toward an employee or a group of employees that are intended to intimidate, degrade, or humiliate. In some cases, workplace bullying may involve misuse or abuse of power by supervisors or managers. In other cases, it may involve a group of coworkers targeting another worker, which is frequently referred to as “mobbing.” Bullying on the job meeting

Legislative bills that propose to address workplace bullying often contain a more detailed definition of unacceptable conduct. For example, in California’s antibullying training law, “abusive conduct” is defined as the conduct of an employer or an employee, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to the employer’s legitimate business interests. It could include verbal abuse, verbal or physical conduct that is intimidating, threatening, or humiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work performance. Proposed bills in other states have differing definitions of abusive workplace conduct.

read more…

Categories: Flashpoint

Tags: , , ,

Training too weird even for Austin

by Mark R. Flora

Perhaps you have already heard about the recent firestorm created during a diversity training session for city employees in, of all places, Austin, the capital of political correctness. The training was actually held in March, but the uproar followed an article in the Statesman in May. The hue and cry was loud enough to be heard in Washington, D.C., after the Washington Post weighed in. How can diversity training, which is good, go so bad? Business training

By way of background, I should explain that the Austin City Council now has a female majority for the first time, which may well have been the impetus for the training session. City spokesman David Green said the intent of the training session was to celebrate the female commissioners’ success stories and provide an opportunity to learn from the women themselves. As we all know, however, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

read more…

Long wait for Dodd-Frank standards turns out to be much ado about nothing

by H. Mark Adams

“Much ado about nothing” is just one literary turn of phrase that comes to mind when considering the initial uproar over Section 342 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the long wait for its implementing regulations. Here’s some background to add some perspective to that observation.  Compliance Headlines Newspaper Torn New Business Regulations Com

Section 342 of Dodd-Frank, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama at the end of 2010, directed each of 12 affected federal financial industry regulators to establish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (OMWI) and to publish, no later than January 21, 2011, proposed regulations designed to increase diversity in the financial industry, in both employment and contracting. Now, nearly five years later, six of the agencies have finally met their “deadline” with the joint release on June 9, 2015, of their final diversity and inclusion standards.

read more…

Interactions with Asperger’s: Discrimination, wrongful discharge claims go to trial

Soon after an employee provided his employer with information about his Asperger’s syndrome, it informed him that his contract wouldn’t be renewed because “Your Asperger’s got in the way of your ability to interact with your boss, and we are tired of it.” Afterward, the employee brought claims of wrongful termination and discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The employer attempted to persuade the court that even if all the evidence he presented was true, the employee would still be unable to prevail at trial. Let’s see how things turned out.  You Are Fired

Background

read more…

Gender identity in the workplace: Employers face emerging discrimination issue

July 19, 2015 - by: Tammy Binford 0 COMMENTS

When the Olympian and reality TV star the world knew as Bruce Jenner announced this spring that he identifies as female rather than male, the resulting publicity put a new employment issue into focus: Controversy surrounding gender identity is more than fodder for reality TV. It also poses workplace discrimination questions as well as practical dilemmas such as restroom access. Transgender Bathroom

Although Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 doesn’t specifically address gender identity, more and more that granddaddy of discrimination laws is being interpreted as prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity. In December 2014, a memorandum from then U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder stated: “I have determined that the best reading of Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination is that it encompasses discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status.” He went on to say that the U.S. Department of Justice “will no longer assert that Title VII’s prohibition against discrimination based on sex does not encompass gender identity per se, including transgender discrimination.”

read more…

We’ve come a long way, maybe

by Susan G. Fentin

I’m old enough to remember a time when sexual harassment wasn’t illegal, in the era before the courts began to apply Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to such claims. I have vivid memories of getting a “back rub” from a manager in the small office where I was doing temporary secretarial work during a college vacation. It was, frankly, creepy, but I had no real recourse. I needed the job, and from a practical standpoint, there really wasn’t anyone I could complain to. From a legal standpoint, sexual harassment didn’t become actionable under Title VII until 1977, and it wasn’t until 1988 that the courts began to consider “hostile work environment” a valid claim of sexual harassment.  Sexual harassment

Now, of course, hostile work environment is a term that covers all forms of harassment focused on or because of an individual’s membership in a protected class, and it’s also used by employees who are merely objecting to a boss they believe is harsh or unreasonable or a workplace environment that’s toxic because employees just don’t get along. But you would think employers have learned that sexual conduct in the workplace is simply too risky to tolerate.

read more…

Referral bonuses, diversity, and disparate impact liability

by Andy Rodman

Q My company is having difficulty attracting qualified candidates for high-tech positions. We’re considering implementing a referral bonus policy, under which a current employee would be paid $500 for referring a candidate who is hired. Is this type of policy legal?  Many People Hands Holding Red Word Bonus Blue Sky

A There is nothing inherently illegal about a referral bonus policy. In fact, many companies have successfully implemented such policies to attract and retain qualified employees. Some studies have shown that employees hired through word of mouth are less likely (perhaps up to 15 percent less likely) to quit.

read more…

Nonreligious observance may require religious accommodation

by Maggie LeBato and H. Mark Adams

Both federal and state laws prohibit employers from discriminating against employees because of their religion. The courts have further ruled that the prohibition against religious discrimination requires you to accommodate your employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs unless it would cause undue hardship to your business. You might assume, then, that for an employee to prove religious discrimination, she would have to demonstrate both the sincerity of her belief and that the belief is actually “religious” in nature. According to a recent decision from the 5th Circuit in New Orleans, however, that isn’t necessarily the case. Church

read more…

Unemployment rate for veterans at lowest point since 2008

On March 24, 2015, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released unemployment numbers showing that the 2014 unemployment rate among military veterans dropped to its lowest point since 2008. Employers’ recognition of the strengths that veterans bring to the workforce is at least one factor for this drop in unemployment. Veteran at Work

Numbers continue to improve

read more…

Categories: Just the Facts

Tags:

 Page 1 of 42  1  2  3  4  5 » ...  Last »