How Will We Work In the US.

I recently attended a conference where one of the speakers was discussing the future workplace. As one of the only countries where health benefits are tied to employment, we in the US may be at the beginning of a significant shift in the way we work. In the US approximately 2% of the workforce is "temporary" or "contingent". In Europe - where healthcare benefits are not tied to employment - that percentage increases to 8-10%. Workers move from job to job, or company to company based on how the skills and experience they have match the needs of the corporations hiring them. Companies need core employees to run their everyday business and then supplement those employees when seasonal needs change, or projects require specific skills.

I believe that there are forces that are working toward this model becoming more common in the US.

1. The business world is getting more and more competitive, and this trend will continue. Successful companies look at every cost. The most flexible companies will be the most profitable and survive. Does it make sense to have employees on the payroll who's skills they only need for three or four months a year?

2. The X and Y generations are different. They grew up in an era where they watched the loyalty their parents gave their employers rewarded with layoffs. They don't feel they can trust corporations, and they are well suited intellectually and emotionally to work in "alternative" arrangements. They will work for short periods of time, gain skills and experience, and then take those skills, and experience to their next job.

3. Healthcare reform was recently passed and how healthcare benefits will be delivered in the United States is uncertain. When healthcare benefits are tied to employment there exists a significant incentive for employees to work for an employer in a "permanent" capacity. If access to healthcare benefits is shifted away from the employment relationship, those incentives are removed, and workers are more freely able to work in "non-traditional" positions.

As the delivery of healthcare benefits are shifted from employers to the government (if you don't believe me save this email and check back in a few years), a significant incentive to a "permanent job" will be removed. Companies who best manage their workforces will be the most competitive and survive. Younger workers are very comfortable working in non-traditional arrangements. These forces are heading to convergence, and when they do the way we work in the US will look different than it does today.

Here is a link to an article I saw in the New York Times today that relates to this topic:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/business/economy/20contractor.html?emc=eta1

The Changing Workforce - An EAP for Homesickness?

What a difference a generation or two makes. This question was recently posted on LinkedIn...


"Has anyone implemented a successful employee support programme that helps employees cope with homesickness?


I used to suffer from homesickness when I first moved away from home. It is common when relocating to a new role, but I wanted to gather opinions on ways of how to combat this using innovative or traditional methods of support provided by the employer (emphasis added). I have worked for firms in the past that have had external employee assistance programmes to help with problems outside of work, but wondered if there are any other effective ways of handling this type of problem. Thanks in Advance. "


Now I understand that there are differences in the four generations in the workplace, but I must admit that seeing this question caused me to do a double take. My first impulse was that this must be a satirical post. While I did not immediately click to view the whole post, I felt an urge that people get when passing a highway accident, I don't want to look, but I have to look. So I broke down and looked, and lo and behold, there was the post, and beneath it, serious answers.


Whoa, I thought. I guess I am older than I thought. Programs to help adults deal with homesickness? Is it really the responsibility of the employer now to help people with homesickness? Well, in my opinion I hope not. For me this is a parenting issue. I know that many will disagree with my opinion, and that's fine - in fact I would be very interested to hear anyone's thoughts on this.

I look at this issue as a Gen X'er just on the cusp of the Baby Boomers. As a generation we were the latch key kids, our parents hadn't yet climbed into their helicopters, and our lives were not structured and scheduled to the minute. We met at the nearest field and picked our own teams for the baseball game (yup the better athletes got picked first, and we most certainly kept score). We hopped on our bikes and disappeared all day, solving our own problems, and making our own fun. We are the me generation. We grew up and left. We and the Boomers are managing and leading now, and as a group I don't think we would be very open to our employees having performance issues due to homesickness.

That said, maybe we do need to be somewhat understanding, since we are the parents of the generation that is now feeling homesick. We've structured and scheduled our kids to a level never before seen. We not only went to their soccer games - we pulled up chairs for their practices. When our kids hop on their bikes to play - they have a cell phone and we are in constant touch with them. When they struggled in school we went in to "discuss" the grades with the teacher. The cord is still firmly attached.

What's my point, and what worries me? There are millions of kids in India, China, and all over the world who are bright, creative, and they will be entering the workforce soon. The number of honors students in India right now outnumbers the WHOLE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES. That's a lot of really smart kids. That's a lot of really smart kids that want a job. My parents used to tell me to "eat my dinner, there were millions of starving kids in China who would love the food on your plate". I've started to tell my kids, "do your homework, there are billions of kids in China who want your job", and they won't be asking for an EAP for homesickness.

President Obama's 2010 Budget Targets Independent Worker Misclassification

On February 1, 2010 President Obama released his FY 2010 federal budget. Included is a proposal, to be jointly administered by the Departments of Labor and the Treasury, to eliminate legal incentives for employers to misclassify their employees. The proposal sets aside funds to enhance the two agencies' ability to penalize employers that misclassify employees as independent contractors, and restore protections to employees who have been misclassified. It also allocates $25 million to hire 100 new enforcement officials to target worker misclassification and establish competitive grants to encourage states to address this issue. According to the budget, this proposal will increase Treasury receipts by $7 billion over 10 years.

If you have questionls about the status of any independent contractors TriStarr Staffing can help. Contact me at scott@tristarrjobs.com

A $138,350 Mistake. Why We Do Background Checks, and Why We Sometimes Cost More

Often, when I am talking to clients I am asked "why are your rates, or fees higher than some of your competitors?" While I have numerous responses to that question, a recent court decision came to my attention that will provide me with another answer to this question in the future.

As I read through the case, it became clear to me that the various background checks that we conduct on all of our candidates, along with the extensive skills, and personality assessments we perform are critical to our success. Do they costs me more money? Sure. Do they then lead to some price differences with my competitors? Absolutely. More importantly, do they help me provide better candidates and reduce mine, and my clients risks? You bet!!!

To summarize the case, a national staffing firm was contacted by a prospective client to supply a secretary / bookkeeper on a temp to hire basis. The staffing firm supplied an employee, but formal background checks were not part of their normal procedures. They failed to determine that the candidate they supplied, and whom the client eventually hired, had been previously convicted of felony fraud. NOTE - I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS RELEVANT FOR A BOOKKEEPING POSITION - NO?) The candidate did not check "felony", or "breach of trust" on their application to the staffing firm. (NOTE - A CANDIDATE NOT BEING TRUTHFUL ON AN APPLICATION? - THAT NEVER HAPPENS RIGHT?!?!). What really flabbergasted me was that this national staffing firm - come on they have more resources than my little company - stated that background checks were not a company policy or industry standard.

Well, it turns out that unfortunately the client lost the case due to background checks not being policy, among other things (I've provided a link to the decision below so you can read more). The damages listed in the case are reported at $138,350! A simple, and relatively inexpensive background check performed by the staffing company should have shown the felony conviction and either resulted in that candidate not being selected, or at the very least allowed the client company to impose strict monitoring and controls should they have chosen to hire the candidate.

At TriStarr Staffing we perform background checks on ALL candidates as part of our screening process. We also do a lot of other things that our competitors may not. Among other things, we ask for detailed job descriptions so the we know all the duties that the position requires, and we ask to meet with hiring manager to further identify what tasks and responsibilities are required of the position. Does this cost me more money? Yup. Does this lead to the prices for my services possibly being higher than my competitors? It may. Are my prices $138,350 higher than my competitors? Not to the best of my knowledge.

If you would like to read more specifics about the case they can be found here: http://bit.ly/9wX3mQ

Today, criminal background checks, skills assessments, personality and behavioral assessments are relatively easy and inexpensive to conduct. In my opinion, these services are part of what the clients of staffing service providers should come to expect. Shaving these costs in the name of price competition can be dangerous. I urge all hiring managers to think about and ask their staffing services provider what types of background checks they conduct. A couple of bucks saved during the hiring process could cost a lot of money later - in this case $138,350! Would you really want to have to explain that to your CEO, CFO, or shareholders?

Texting, "What Hath God Wraught?"

As the father of two teenage girls (my young son hasn't yet started texting - although he is already asking for a "phone"), I certainly can relate to this article. Changes in communication trends also impact my business. Communicating quickly is often the key to to our success. And like Ira points out below - we have to communcate with four different generations, and they all communicate differently.

Texting, "What Hath God Wraught?"
by Ira Wolfe

When Samuel Morse sent the first electronic message from the U.S. Capitol to his partner in Baltimore nearly 170 years ago, he typed "What hath God wrought?" I believe nearly every parent of a teenager today might be muttering the same words.
We are in the midst of four distinct generations of Americans trying to communicate with one another using different media. Communication gaps between parents and kids or managers and employees are nothing new. It's been the subject of thousands of books. Experts have made millions and millions of dollars prescribing remedies to bridge the gaps and mend fences. But they've seen nothing like the gaps occurring today between the Veterans (born before 1946), Baby Boomers (born 1946-64), Generation X (1965-79), and Millennials (born 1980-1999)... or have they? Has anything really changed over the past 170 years?
Take the phone for example: According to Nielsen Mobile, in the first quarter of 2009, the average U.S. teen made and received an average of 191 phone calls and sent or received 2,899 text messages per month. By the third quarter, the number of texts had jumped to a whopping 3,146 messages per month, which equals more than 10 texts per every waking non-school hour. Just for the sake of comparison, at the beginning of 2007, those numbers were 255 phone calls and 435 text messages.
It's hard to believe that little handheld device we used to call a phone is quickly joining the transitor radio and 8-track cassette in flea markets and garage sales. Don't believe me? Just try calling anyone born during the 90s or later. Good luck on getting a real person on the other end to answer it. Voice mail? Good luck on getting a listen before it's deleted. Email? You've got to be kidding. That's old school, baby.
That makes the term "phone" almost obsolete. Using that mobile device to call someone is just a vestige of old technology. The older Millennials, also referred to as the iGeneration because these young people have been raised on the iPod and the Wii, rarely if ever use their "phone" to call someone. They communicate almost exclusively by instant messaging and Facebook. (I intentionally excluded Twitter because contrary to popular belief, young people "don't get Twitter."
This explosion of text messages, tweets, and updates of non-verbal communication is stunning. It has many peoples' shorts tied up in a bunch. "How will kids today ever learn how to communicate?," is often the cry heard from multi-generational training audiences. And the spelling and grammar? "Well...it's horrific," parents and teachers proclaim. But historians might see this revolution in communication as just another lesson in history repeating itself.
Isn't instant messaging today just Morse Code v2.0? What's changed since Morse tapped in that first message? Upon brief reflection, it seems eerily familiar. One person taps a bunch of keys on an electronic device which transmits a message to another party. Only this time the code, all those texting abbreviations that drive grammar and spelling cops crazy, is translated on the spot by the recipient.
Ironically even Morse's first message reverberates loudly with today's texting dissidents -- "What hath God wrought?" It seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

"Reprinted with permission from Ira S Wolfe and Success Performance Solutions. Copyright 2009 Ira S Wolfe."

Improving the Chances of a Successful Hire

At TriStarr, we have long believed and preached that the more objective your selection process the greater your chances are of making a good hire. If your hiring process is composed of simply reviewing resumes and interviewing candidates, your statistical chances of making a good long term hire are basically 50/50 - a coin flip (email me for an excellent graphic that illustrates these odds). By adding relative hard skills tests, personality assessments, work examples, and other tools you can significantly increase those odds.

Here's a link to an article that was forwarded to me recently that speaks to this issue. I hope you find this useful -and as always if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Scott

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/136/made-to-stick-hold-the-interview.html

University Study - "Temps Not Trapped"

The following story was published by Staffing Industry Analysts today.

Temporary workers employed through agencies earn higher hourly wages, are better educated than traditionally employed workers and move quickly between temporary and traditional jobs, according to a study announced today by the University of Florida.

"There has been concern by some advocacy groups that the temporary help industry is creating an entire class of people who are churning through temporary-help jobs and can't escape from that cycle," Sarah Hamersma, University of Florida economist and lead author of the study, said in a press release. "We find no reason to believe that a large number of temp workers are 'stuck' in a secondary labor market."

Hamersma and Carolyn Heinrich, a University of Wisconsin public affairs professor, studied occupational records, wages and earnings for 5,877 Wisconsin workers between 1995 and 2004.
Of 3,964 employees who held at least one temporary job, 3,947 held a permanent job at some time in those 10 years, according to Hamersma. In an analysis of a subsample over a four-month period, three-fourths of those in temporary jobs moved into traditional jobs and only 23% took another temporary job.

Temporary employees received about 15% more in pay per hour than traditional employees, according to Hamersma. However, quarterly earnings tend to be lower for temporary workers.
"We learned that the shorter duration of temporary jobs means the employees work fewer hours, which translates into lower quarterly earnings than for traditional employees, but they actually end up getting paid more for the hours that they do work," she said.

The findings in the study were presented in November at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management in Washington DC.