Talent Shortage is Spreading

The shortage of skilled trade talent is spreading....

-Editor

The skills and talent shortage toolmakers have worried about for years is growing, and it's hitting more than tooling shops. It's also reaching the point that it is affecting the auto industry's production schedule.

"We received a call a couple of years ago from one of the automakers saying, 'We've got a problem in our industry involving talent. In fact, it's at the point where it's affecting [product] launch. We will have to delay and push back launches,'" Jay Baron, president and CEO of the Center for Automotive Research, said at the group's Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City.

Baron recalled that after that call, Ann Arbor, Mich.-based CAR contacted other automakers.

"Every other automaker we called said, 'Yes, they're right. This is a systemwide problem in the industry.'"

The Rest @  Plastic News

I-129 petition

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1996 says employers with four or more employees may not discriminate against noncitizens with proper authorization to work. Employers are also responsible for verifying that employees are authorized to work in the United States.

Employers can demonstrate compliance with IRCA by treating all new hires -- citizens and noncitizens -- the same. Thus, many employers now routinely ask for proof of citizenship or work authorization documents from all new hires. According to the 'Lectric Law Library, this includes establishing a policy of hiring only individuals who are authorized to work; a "US citizens-only" policy is illegal except in cases where US citizenship is required by federal, state or local law, or government contract.

Documents Needed for Authorization to Work

Employers should complete an Employment Eligibility Verification Form (Form I-9) for all new hires, regardless of citizenship. To complete the form, employers must permit employees to present any document or combination of documents acceptable by law. The list includes a US passport, resident alien card ("green card") or a long list of documents showing identity and authority to work, including a driver's license, an ID card with a photograph and identifying information, US military card or draft record, Social Security card, or an original or certified copy of a birth certificate. Not all aliens authorized to work are issued green cards. Employers are also responsible for keeping track of expiration dates on the documents presented.

According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service, employers can terminate an employee who fails to produce the required document, or a receipt for a replacement document, within three business days of the date employment begins. An employee who presents a receipt for a replacement document must produce the actual document within 90 days after employment begins.

Employer Responsibility for Verification

Employers must examine the documents and, if they appear to be genuine and to relate to the person presenting them, accept them. To do otherwise could be an unfair immigration-related practice. If a document does not reasonably appear to be genuine and/or does not appear to relate to the person presenting it, an employer need not accept it. Contact the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement office for assistance.

If law enforcement authorities discover an employee is not authorized to work, employers who properly complete Form I-9 cannot be charged with a verification violation. However, an employer cannot knowingly continue to employ that individual. IRCA also makes it illegal to knowingly hire any alien not authorized to work.

Hiring Nonresident Workers

Employers who want to hire someone who lives outside the US for permanent work, must file Form I-140, Petition for Alien Worker, and may also have to complete a labor certification request (ETA 750) from the US Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration's Division of Foreign Labor Certification.

Employers must file an I-129 petition to hire foreign workers for temporary -- though not seasonal -- services or labor, or receive training.

Hiring noncitizen seasonal workers (usually agricultural workers) means employers must apply for temporary labor certificates from the US Department of Labor, under the H-2A Temporary Foreign Worker Program.

Employers who want to hire noncitizens who live outside the United States to work temporarily in the US must show their actions will not negatively affect the job opportunities, wages or working conditions of workers already residing here by demonstrating there are not enough such workers available and that the proposed wages and working conditions meet regional standards.

The employer must also actively attempt to recruit workers already residing in the US to fill the position, including newspaper and radio advertising. Employers must also provide free, approved housing for workers unable to go home each day, as well as certain types of transportation, workman's compensation or equivalent insurance and appropriate tools and supplies at no cost. Employers must also show that the position is not open because of a strike or lockout.

If certification is granted, an employer pays a fee of $100, plus $10 for each job opportunity certified, up to a maximum of $1,000 for each certification granted.

The Rest @ Monster

In Some States, You Cannot Request a Credit Report for Most New Employees

In their quest to hire reliable and trustworthy employees for open positions, many employers have turned to credit reporting agencies for applicant background information. Although such information may be readily available, obtaining it could lead to possible liability if the appropriate policies and procedures are not in place.

Discrimination Claims
Under Title VII, employer practices – such as basing hiring and other employment decisions on credit history information – that weigh more heavily on individuals within protected categories could lead to discrimination claims. For instance, if an employer’s use of credit reports has the effect of excluding women or minorities from certain positions, that practice could lead to liability.

In addition, a number of states have enacted or are considering enacting laws that explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of credit histories. For instance, Illinois’ newly enacted Employee Credit Privacy Act, which goes into effect on January 1, 2011, prohibits employers from inquiring about an applicant’s or employee’s credit history and from ordering or otherwise obtaining an applicant’s or employee’s credit history or credit report from a consumer reporting agency. Despite the potentially broad reach of Illinois’ new Act, there are several exceptions including:

• Situations where an employer can show that a satisfactory credit history is a “bona fide occupational requirement” for a position, which is further defined in the statute;
• Employers who are banks, savings and loans, or certain other financial institutions; insurance or surety businesses; state law enforcement or investigative units; state or local government agencies that otherwise require use of the employee’s or applicant’s credit history or credit report; and entities that are defined as debt collectors under federal or state statute; and
• Background investigations that do not include a credit history or report as permitted under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Employers that violate the Illinois Act could face damages, injunctive relief, and liability for attorneys’ fees and costs and could also face liability for any retaliatory conduct under the Act.

Along the same lines, legislation has been introduced in, among other states, Michigan and Ohio as well. In Michigan, House Bill 4528, also known as the Job Applicant Credit Privacy Act, would prohibit an employer from failing or refusing either to hire or recruit an individual because of the individual’s credit history and from inquiring about a job applicant’s or potential job applicant’s credit history. As with the Illinois Act, certain exceptions would apply for individuals who hold positions with identified types of companies including, for instance, banks or other financial institutions.

In Ohio, House Bill 340, which was introduced on October 28, 2009, would make it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to use a person’s credit rating or score or consumer credit history as a factor in making decisions regarding that person’s employment. House Bill 340would allow a person to file a charge with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission and would provide similar penalties for violations.

As these examples show, a blanket policy of requiring credit reports for all employees or applicants could lead to possible discrimination claims under state or federal law or both.

The Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act
Moreover, even when employers are permitted to obtain applicant or employee credit reports, liability can still attach if the detailed procedures set forth in the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) are not followed. Specifically, the FCRA requires employers to inform applicants that a credit check will be performed and to obtain the applicants’ written permission in a stand-alone document that is not part of the employment application.

In addition, if an employer decides to take an adverse employment action against an employee or applicant based on the credit check, the employer must first give that individual a “pre-adverse action disclosure” that consists of a copy of the credit report and a written summary of rights under the FCRA before taking the adverse action. Presumably, this requirement is intended to allow an employee or applicant an opportunity to attempt to correct any inaccuracies on the report. Once the adverse action has been taken, the employer must provide the applicant or employee with an “adverse action notice.” This notice must alert the recipient that the employer, not the credit reporting agency, made the adverse decision; inform the recipient that he or she has a right to a free copy of the report; and provide the name, address and phone number of the agency that provided the credit report so that the recipient can dispute any inaccurate information.

Employers that fail to comply with the FCRA may face liability for actual damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and punitive damages. Criminal penalties are also possible for any employer that obtains a credit report under false pretenses.

Minimizing The Risks
Some of the ways you can minimize the risks of obtaining employee or applicant credit reports are by:

• Determining whether state laws govern your use of applicant/employee credit reports;
• Evaluating whether the benefits of obtaining credit reports for various positions outweigh the risks of doing so;
• Developing appropriate policies and procedures to govern procurement of credit reports; and
• Ensuring compliance.

The Rest @ HR Bits

 

ll Rules to Sell to Sell To Me

As recruiters and vendors heat up with the economy, so will the time I spend with Vendors. So I like these "rules of engagement" by Donato Diorio....


11 Rules to sell to Donato Diorio

1.     Get my name right. I can see how people mistake my first name for a last name, but it’s not brain surgery. It shows respect.

2.     Personalize. I will not respond to a mass emails. Period.

3.    Understand what my company (Broadlook) does. Can you believe that there is some idiot out there that keeps trying to sell me a list of recruiting firms? Talk about selling ice to an Eskimo.

4.   Show me that I am special. Customize your sales pitch for my company. Don’t use generalities. Research what my company does and ask me good questions. I don’t have a burning need to seek others approval, but if you take the time to tell me.

5.  Call and email. You will probably get voice mail, but I will listen to it. The email will give me your contact information if I like what I hear. Tell me you will also be sending me an email. Be articulate, gosh, I’m sorry, but if your accent is so heavy that I have to listen to your voice mail a few times to understand it, it will get deleted at the very beginning.

6.  In your voice mail, say your phone number two times. Give me a chance to write it down if I like what I hear. Don’t use a voice mail script. If you do, you are not at the level yet to successfully sell to me. Try again next year.

7.  Don’t use a negative sell. i.e. The economy is bad, and you can help. Bad for who? Do your homework.
8.  I’m an optimist. I love hanging up on pessimists. Realists welcome.

9.  Know your product inside out. If you can’t answer nearly all my questions, you should not be reaching out to me. Have you manager or top sales rep do it.

10.  Don’t call me if someone else at my company makes the decision. I don’t make the decisions on office supplies.

11.  Did I mention… get my name right?

The Rest @  Sell2me

Seven Things Human Resources Wants to Know During Your Interviews

The Human Resources Interview is an early, if not your first contact with a company. keep in Mind HR can say no to you, though they cannot say yes by themselves. Therefore, don't overlook this part of the interview process. (Thanks Z). The objective for HR is to eliminate fakers, assess your reliability and fit for your prospective team and company. They also want to assess the risk of your committing organization-damaging behavior.

There are several things they want to know; Help them answer these questions without evasion, while demonstrating respect for them and your former organization, and you will do well.

1. Are your resume credentials and experience real or exaggerated?
This will be checked outside the interview.


2. Why did you leave your last job, or why are you seeking to leave your current company? Do you treat your previous company and colleagues with respect?


3. Is the company a stepping stone or rest stop in your career, or do you really want to find a home here? How long do you really intend to stay?

4. How would you interact with their company's culture? Is your humor appropriate? Do you listen Well? (etc)

5. What is your potential for long term employment and development within the company? Do you want to make a contribution to the company, you want to work hard and grow in the company, or simply rent your time by the hour?

6. Are you going to be happy with the money they can pay you now, and is their room to grow in the future? IF you must have the top pay in a given range, you may not get a raise for a couple of years. This makes for an unhappy employee in the future.

7. Are you here to serve and make others around you better, or are you there to be served, and use the others around you to enhance your own objectives?

Keep in Mind, two key Human Resources roles are risk management and to be the keepers of the company culture. treat them and their roles seriously, with respect, and not just a gate keeper, and you will do well.


Lee Royal

Hiring Military On Twitter

Can Facebook be used for Hiring Decisions?

Social media permeate the employment life cycle
Employers must address their use and misuse before, during and after an employee's tenure.
Renee M. Jackson

January 11, 2010

Social media are any type of Internet-based media created through social interaction in which ­individuals primarily produce, rather than consume, the content. In the workplace, the prevalent social media are video-sharing Web sites (YouTube), social ­networking Web sites (Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, Twitter), online multiuser virtual worlds (Second Life, World of War­craft) and personal or corporate blogs.

The increased use of social media in the workplace, by employees and employers alike, presents both opportunities and risks for employers because social media now permeate the entire life cycle of employment: during pre-employment inquiries, throughout the period of employment and after separation from employment. Employers must consider and address the use and misuse of social media at each stage.

Employers can now access more information about applicants through social media than was previously available through traditional hiring practices.

On Dec. 9, 2009, a privacy policy change affecting all 350 million Facebook users made each Facebook user's name, profile picture, current city, gender, networks, list of friends and list of "pages" publicly viewable by other Facebook users and also set some users' photo albums to public.

Only through obscure privacy settings can Facebook users affirmatively make some, but not all, of this information private.

Through standard disclosures such as these, or through voluntary disclosure of other personal information such as commentary and photos, applicants may reveal more information about themselves through social media than they normally would during the hiring process.

•  In making hiring decisions, employers can lawfully use information relating to an applicant's illegal drug use, poor work ethic, poor writing or communications skills, feelings about previous employers and racist or other discriminatory tendencies.
• Employers may also lawfully consider an applicant's general poor judgment in maintenance of his or her public online persona.
• Employers, however, may face liability under federal, state and local law for using any information learned from social media about an applicant's protected class status — race, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, etc. — in a hiring decision.
• It may be hard for the employer to prove in later litigation that it only viewed, but didn't actually use, the information obtained in a social medium when making its hiring decision.

Employers should consider whether the benefits of using social media to screen applicants outweigh the risks. If an employer wants to supplement traditional hiring practices with a social media search, the employer should consider the following approaches.

• Employers should screen applicants in a uniform manner by creating a list of the social media they will search for each applicant and the lawful information about each applicant desired from the social media search.
• If all applicants cannot be screened using the lawful criteria because an employer does not have the time, resources or inclination to do so, employers must be consistent, objective and nondiscriminatory in selecting subsets of applicants to screen.

• Employers should have a neutral party, such as an employee in a nondecision-making role, conduct the social media search, filtering out any protected class information about the applicant and reporting only information that may lawfully be considered in making the hiring decision.

• Employers' representatives should not "friend" applicants in order to gain access to their nonpublic social networking profiles.

• Employers must be able to point to a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the hiring decision, with documentation to support the decision.

• Employers that are considering making an employment decision based on information found in social media should consult with counsel prior to doing so.

DURING EMPLOYMENT

Employee use of social media can result in external business generation and internal creation of a collegial atmosphere through less formal interaction and shared experiences between co-workers. On the other hand, employee use of social media can create awkward and potentially harassing situations when such use turns inappropriate.

For example, when a supervisor wants to be a subordinate's friend on a social networking site, it can create awkwardness between the supervisor and subordinate. If the subordinate accepts the invitation, the supervisor can access the subordinate's potentially inappropriate or revealing nonpublic profile.

If the subordinate doesn't accept the invitation, he or she may be concerned that his or her employment opportunities may suffer or that the supervisor will be offended. In more extreme cases, misuse of such sites can give rise to claims of co-worker or supervisor sexual harassment or hostile work environment.

The most obvious hazard regarding the use of social media during employment is internal to the organization: Employees may spend so much time using social media during working hours that productivity decreases.

However, the biggest risk of social media in the workplace is external employee misuse: Employees can easily make unauthorized disclosures of confidential company information, such as trade secrets, proprietary information and personnel matters. Employees can easily disparage the company or its customers in a way that leads to corporate embarrassment, public relations problems or damage to the employer's brand or image.

To address these risks, employers must first consider the proper level of encouragement of social media use in the workplace.

For some industries or positions, the use of social media might be appropriate for business development. For others, an outright ban may be appropriate because the work force has no business reason to use social media at work or while using the company networks, facilities or equipment.

At a minimum, employers must insert broad language encompassing social media into existing information technology, code of conduct, harassment and confidentiality policies. Employers should consider adding the following features, if appropriate, to such policies:

• A clear statement that misuse of social media can be ground for discipline, up to and including termination.
• A prohibition on disclosure of the employer's confidential, trade secret or proprietary information.
• A request that employees keep company logos or trademarks off their blogs and profiles and not mention the company in commentary, unless for business purposes.
• An instruction that employees not post or blog during business hours, unless for business purposes.
• A request that employees bring work-related complaints to human resources before blogging or posting about such complaints.
• A prohibition on using company e-mail addresses to register for social media sites.
• A prohibition on posting false information about the company or its employees, customers or affiliates.
• A general instruction that employees use good judgment and take personal and professional responsibility for what they publish online.
• A demand that all employees with personal blogs that identify their employer include a disclaimer that the views expressed on the blog are those of the individual and not the employer.

All supervisors and human ­resources professionals must be trained in the appropriate use of social media and how to consistently enforce the employer's social media policies. Any policy addressing social media during employment must use broad language and be updated frequently because social media will change quickly over time. Employers should consider incorporating language specifically referencing social media into the confidentiality provisions of separation agreements.

THE RECOMMENDATION DILEMMA

Even post-employment, social media creep into the relationship between the employer and the former employee. Supervisors and co-workers are increasingly asked to "recommend" former employees on LinkedIn after separation from employment. This "recommend" feature allows people in a professional network to write positive professional reviews about other people in their network, which will be visible on the former employee's LinkedIn page.

A positive recommendation on a person's LinkedIn page is the same as an employment reference, and should uniformly be treated as such under the employer's post-employment reference policy. Employers could also consider adding to their post-employment reference policy a prohibition on managers from "recommending" or commenting on the job performance of former employees via social media without prior specific authorization from the human resources department.

The takeaway message regarding social media in the workplace is that employers can no longer ignore the risks. Employers must be cautious in addressing these emerging workplace issues, even though employment-related litigation over social media is in its infancy. First, employers must understand the myriad issues surrounding social media in the workplace in order to strike the appropriate balance in the eyes of their employees and the law. Then, employers must craft appropriate policies and procedures regarding social media that are consistent with their industry and firm culture, and apply such policies in a consistent, objective and nondiscriminatory way.

Renee M. Jackson is an associate in the Boston office of Nixon Peabody and a member of the firm's labor and employment practice group.

The Rest @ Law.com










Lee Royal