Tag: Inc.

Will Unlimited Vacation be the Death of Vacation?

by Jeanne Knutzen | November 21, 2014

0 Blog, INFO AND RESOURCES FOR EMPLOYERS Employment Vacation Policies, Inc., Michael Haberman, Omega HR Solutions, Paid Vacation Days

By Mike Haberman As many of you have probably heard by now, Richard Branson has created a "non-policy" vacation policy. He said he modeled it after the Netflix policy. According to writer and entrepreneur Daniel Green, "Branson described the 'non-policy' as giving employees the flexibility to take as much vacation time as needed when they feel 100% comfortable that they are up to date on every project and that their absence will not in any way damage the business or indeed their own career.'" Green then raised the question, "Is this a good or bad thing?' I raise the question of whether this could be the death of vacation time in the United States. AMERICANS ARE NOTORIOUS American companies are notorious for their vacation policies that give just about the least amount of time off in the entire world. Denmark is a much happier place because of time-off, and more productive, too. Despite having the least amount of vacation in the world, many U.S. workers still don't take all their allotted time. According to Venessa Wong at Bloomberg Businessweek, as quoted by Anna North, "Already, some 40 percent of American workers don't use all their paid vacation days." The criticism of Branson's move is that the non-policy states that:

The policy-that-isn't permits all salaried staff to take off whenever they want for as long as they want. There is no need to ask for prior approval and neither the employees themselves nor their managers are asked or expected to keep track of their days away from the office. It is left to the employee alone to decide if and when he or she feels like taking a few hours, a day, a week or a month off, the assumption being that they are only going to do it when they feel a hundred percent comfortable that they and their team are up to date on every project and that their absence will not in any way damage the business–or, for that matter, their careers!"
The emphasis in the criticism is the statement that the employee must feel "100% comfortable that they and their team are up to date on every project and that their absence will not in any way damage the business–or, for that matter, their careers!" The naysayers feel that few Americans will ever have that confidence in their work and thus by that being the provision to live by, this policy could actually spell the doom of vacation. Not only will employees not take unlimited vacation, they will resort to taking no vacation because the work is never caught up and most people are unsure of their standing in the company to feel absolutely sure their careers will not be harmed. THERE ARE COMPANIES WHERE IT DOES WORK. Branson, by his announcement, got a lot of press; but in reality there are many companies that offer unlimited vacation. The Motley Fool is one such company. If you want to read some testimonials on this policy read the comments attached to Anna North's article in the online version of the New York Times. US VERSUS THEM One problem I see in these policies is the potential "us versus them" situation that is being set up. These unlimited vacation policies only apply to salaried exempt employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act does not allow them to be applied to non-exempt employees because you have to track their time. That is the basis on which they are paid. Just saying "work whenever you want" becomes very difficult with an hourly, non-exempt employee. Additionally, many of those positions are not ones where the employee can just take off anytime they want. Customers have to be served, food has to be delivered, and products have to assembled. That is a much different situation than that of a manager, consultant, advisor, marketing specialist, IT professional, etc. With this divide, what are the employee relations issues that companies will be faced with? I like the idea of unlimited vacation, but I have to tell you that even I, as an independent consultant, feel guilty if I take too much time off. I don't think I am alone in that mental dilemma. Michael Haberman is cofounder and senior HR consultant of Omega HR Solutions, Inc. His company offers HR solutions that include compliance reviews, wage and hour guidance, supervisory and managerial training, strategic guidance, executive advisement, and more. He can be reached at mhaberman@omegahrsolutions.com.

How Long Should I Keep Electronic Recruiting Correspondence?

by Jeanne Knutzen | September 29, 2014

0 Blog, Management.Supervision Electronic Recruiting Correspondence, Hiring Practices, HR Management, Inc., Strategic Human Resources

By Strategic Human Resources, Inc. Question: Much of our recruiting is now done online and via email. Do I need to keep the emails generated from our last round of hiring? Does it matter if the candidate followed through with a response or not? Answer: You need to keep any records from the search for one year–those that you were considering AND those that you were not (even those that applied but may not have followed through with a response to your email). Keeping them in an electronic file is great–date it and pitch it next year. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) requires employers to keep employment records for one year. After that time, employers can either discard the record or archive it, provided they maintain the confidentiality of information contained in each record. Suppose you have a resume, cover letter, list of references, and brief notes from a telephone screening, yet you decided to select other candidates for in-person interviews. The records generated, including electronically, during the course of the preliminary screening are, in fact, hiring records. They must be kept for one year, pursuant to EEOC regulations. Another important reason to keep hiring records on file even if the applicant wasn't hired is so applicants don't have possible recourse if they are rejected during the hiring process. Applicants who claim they weren't hired based on factors not related to the job (i.e, race, sex, national origin, age or religion) have up to one year to file a formal discrimination charge with the EEOC. Should the EEOC decide to investigate the applicant's complaint, the agency can ask employers to produce records used during the hiring process. The company's hiring practices don't look favorable if the employer can't comply with the request because it has discarded the hiring materials. Strategic Human Resources, Inc., is a national full-service HR management firm based in Cincinnati, Ohio. Our president and founder, Robin Throckmorton, can be reached at Robin@strategichrinc.com.