HR Metrics

Interesting article by L.Ruettimann with lots of good comments, checkit  out....

-Lee Royal



When I talk to HR professionals about social media tools and social recruiting, I’m always asked, “What should we measure?”

Back in the day, I learned about corporate recruiting from HR professionals who were rooted in the manufacturing industry. Recruiting was an extension of the supply chain. Demand planning principles were invoked. We used math. (Well, they used math.) Some forecasting involved. Recruiters worked like cost accountants and forensic scientists to understand how headcount was tied to the business. A workforce plan was created, and it was aligned with products and services. No one assumed that headcount lasted forever. You weren’t entitled to replace an employee who left your department. You budgeted for your headcount like you budgeted for the cost of paper, chemicals, and supplies. Then entry-level Corporate Recruiters, like me, would have to fill openings that were approved through the workforce plan.

I realize that no one does recruiting like that, anymore. Corporate leaders hang onto headcount with ever fiber in their being. Those slots on the org chart might be lost through attrition, but no one in marketing will give up headcount to sales or IT. That’s just not how the world works.

*

So when I’m asked what HR should to measure when it comes to their social recruiting efforts, I shrug my shoulders. What’s your brand strategy? What is your organization trying to accomplish? What do you need to learn? What’s the time frame? What story are you trying to tell?

You can’t measure anything until you have a recruiting strategy, and you can’t have a recruiting strategy until you understand how your hiring process links into the way you operate your company. You can’t operate a company by hiring people through job boards, employee referrals, and social media tools and THEN ask, “What should we measure?”

*

Unfortunately, corporate strategery is hard and everyone likes a road map and a list. So here are some ideas of what you can measure to determine if your social recruiting strategy is working. There are 1,000 more ideas. Suggest some. Please.

• Speed/length of recruiting cycle
• Source of hire
• Time to fill
• Quality of hire: skills and cultural fit
• Online viewing patterns/behaviors
• Conversions from blog/email/twitter campaigns to candidates to hire
• Career site conversions from passive viewer to candidate to hire
• SEO/Job Board/Advertising campaigns, conversations, and conversion to hires
• Costs for traditional recruiting events versus enhanced online presence.
• Retention rates based on sourcing methodologies
• Sentiment of candidates sourced online — positive v. negative experiences
• How interactive tools on your career website are being used
• Subscribers to career website blog/email/newsletter
• Comments/engagement on posted material on career website
• Number of downloads of career materials
• Inbound links to career website/blogs
• Fans/followers/group members for corporate social profiles
• Lawsuits
• Workplace violence incident ratios
• Turnover
• Ennui

What am I missing?

The Rest @ Punk Rock HR by L.Ruettimann






Lee Royal
********
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

California Pregnancy Rights

Policy Tracking

HR Interview

What do I do if My Non-Compete Agreement Has Been Broken?

About once a month I get a call from an attorney or a client asking me to get my scorched earth battle gear on because they want to go after an employee/former employee who is competing against them in business after having signed a non-compete agreement.

Sometimes, their stories are compelling and the facts are clear that action must be taken. Sometimes, however, the battle is one of principle that, ultimately, will cost the business owner more in heartache, time away from their own business, and legal warfare fees than the fight is worth.

Whenever the situation is such that the fight is one of pride and principle rather than of solid legal merit, I point my client or colleague to Jay Shepherd’s (Shepherd Law Group) excellent blog post “Eight Ways to Lose a Non-Compete Case.”

His bottom line advice: If you’re truly wearing the white hat (i.e., are the “good guy”), and your agreement is narrowly drafted, and your secrets or customer relationships are indeed in imminent peril, then you’ve got a fighting chance of winning. Otherwise, wave goodbye to the former employee and get back to work.


The Rest by  Mary Ann Hisel    @ Texas HR Law

The 8 ways to lose a noncompete are:

1. Put your faith in the language of the noncompete agreement.
2. Try to enforce against any old employee.
3. Make sure the noncompete is broadly drafted.
4. Focus [only]on geography, duration, and scope.
5. Wait a while to file.
6. Ask for the injunction before you've developed enough evidence.
7. Don't worry about which state to file in.
8. Focus on the law instead of on the story.

Details.... from Jay Shepheard

Lee Royal

EFAST2 Goes Live 1/1/2010

When Congress passed the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA), it enacted several provisions that affect your Form 5500 filing. The first provision requires that you file Form 5500 electronically, thereby eliminating the expensive paper processing system currently in use by the government.

The second important provision of the PPA relating to reporting and disclosure is the creation of an electronic public disclosure “room” on the Department of Labor’s (DOL) web site. Both of these provisions apply to just about every Form 5500 filing made after December 31, 2009.

Meet EFAST2

The new fully electronic processing system is known as EFAST2 and is scheduled to go live on January 1, 2010. Electronic filing applies to all Form 5500 reports filed for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2009, except Form 5500-EZ which will be filed directly with the IRS on paper. In addition, any amended or late filings submitted after December 31, 2009 must be filed electronically using the new system.

Three Components
EFAST2 has three components:

• I-REG, the Internet registration system, used to apply for credentials to, among other things, sign Form 5500 on behalf of the plan sponsor, the plan administrator or both;

• I-FILE, the Internet filing system, which provides the ability to go online to create, edit and submit filings for a valid form year and plan year; and

• I-FAS, the Internet filing acceptance system, which is the function that actually processes the transmitted filing.

Internet Registration System (I-REG)
I-REG is the first stop for anyone wanting to interact with the new EFAST2 system. Each person will need an Internet connection and an email address to sign up for credentials via the I-REG program. There’s more about establishing your electronic credentials below.

Internet Filing System (I-FILE)
I-FILE is a free, limited-function, web-based application that provides the ability to create, edit and submit filings for a valid form and plan year. The I-FILE application includes validation, authentication and specific edit tests/checks to make sure the filing is complete before it is submitted. While most third-party preparers will opt to use software created by an EFAST2-approved vendor, a plan sponsor may find the application useful for preparing filings for welfare plans or small retirement plans.

Internet Filing Acceptance System (I-FAS)
I-FAS, as previously noted, actually processes the filings as they are electronically submitted. The most important feature of I-FAS is that it establishes the “filing status” of the transmitted filing. The possible filing status messages are:

Filing Unprocessable: Generally indicates that the EFAST2 system could not open the file that was transmitted. In this case, the filing is not treated as filed.
Processing Stopped: Indicates that the file could be read but that critical errors were detected. The filer should plan to file an amended return to perfect the data. The filing is treated as “filed” for purposes of the “timely filing” rules.

Filing Error: Indicates the file contains errors that are less onerous than indicated by a Processing Stopped filing status; however, the filer should plan to file an amended return to perfect the data. As with the Processing Stopped filing status, the Filing Error status message is treated as “filed.”

Filing Received: The optimal filing status message inasmuch as it indicates to the filer that the filing appears to be complete. Of course, the DOL or IRS may later request additional information; however, the filing is treated as complete until and unless there is further notification from the agencies.

Who Needs Credentials?
The person(s) who signs the face of the Form 5500 on behalf of either the plan sponsor or the plan administrator (or both) must apply for “signer” credentials using the I-REG system. Plan sponsors will receive a postcard from the DOL, probably in January 2010, inviting them to apply for their credentials. There are several important rules about these electronic credentials:

Only one set of credentials will be issued for each email address. Signer credentials permit the user to sign as the plan sponsor, the plan administrator or both. If, for some reason, a person wants multiple credentials, he or she must use distinct email addresses to apply for such separate credentials.

An individual may apply for credentials as a filing author, filing signer, schedule author, transmitter or third party software vendor. Typically, persons who sign Form 5500 will require only the filing signer credentials because they will rely on their service providers to actually author and transmit the filing.

The credentials belong to the individual, not the business for which he or she works. Think of the credentials in the same way you think of an individual’s social security number—the social security number always follows the individual, no matter where or whether he or she is employed. For this reason, individuals who have signer credentials will want to update their profiles whenever their email addresses change so that any notification from DOL is delivered to them in a timely fashion.

The majority of I-REG applicants will be seeking signer credentials only. The individual applying for credentials will log in to I-REG at www.efast.dol.gov to register for his or her credentials. There will be a series of input screens for the person to act upon, culminating in the assignment of specific electronic credentials, comprised of a User ID and PIN.

Form 5500 preparers may apply for author and/or transmitter credentials in a similar fashion, although the need for such credentials will be driven by which EFAST2-approved third-party software vendor is selected.

Where Do I Sign?
While the new system is referred to as a paperless system, that is only on the part of the government. Plan sponsors must maintain a fully executed (wet signature) copy of the Form 5500 with all schedules and attachments. If the filing is for a defined benefit plan, the wet signature copy of the actuarial schedule, Schedule SB or MB, must be part of the plan’s permanent records as well.

The instructions for the 2009 Form 5500 indicate that the filer may store the plan’s copy electronically, so long as the electronic copy captures the handwritten signatures.

The electronic “signing ceremony,” as it is dubbed, will be a new process for plan sponsors next year. Depending on the software used by your service provider, you will receive a notification (most likely by email) inviting you to link to the provider’s software. There, you will be presented with a series of screens to act upon, thereby executing the signing ceremony. By inserting your User ID and PIN, you will have effectively signed the filing electronically.

The plan sponsor will no longer ship a paper filing off to Lawrence, Kansas. Instead, in many cases, the service provider will transmit the electronically signed filing and provide the plan sponsor a copy of the filing status report for its records. The filing status, as described earlier, is proof that the filing was processable and verifies the date and time of receipt by the EFAST2 system of the electronic filing.

Electronic Public Disclosure Room
The DOL has long maintained a Public Disclosure Room that holds all of the Form 5500 filings ever filed by any plan; however, access to data is available only by phone or by making a written request. Beginning with the 2009 Form 5500, the DOL will be building an electronic public disclosure function on its web site.

Only the filings processed by the EFAST2 system will appear on this database and information also will continue to be accessible through the old Public Disclosure Room. The DOL expects to post filings to the new site within 24 hours of receipt by the EFAST2 system.

What Do I Need To Do?
Fortunately, your service provider will be able to manage much of the transition to the electronic filing system for you. Software providers are still working out the details of their solutions so that everyone is ready for the January 1, 2010 go-live date. Watch for specific instructions from DOL and your service provider so that you are ready to make the jump to electronic filing.

The Rest @ Midwest Pension and Profit Sharing Services