Here is the latest issue of “This & That” Tuesday. I hope you find it to be informative and useful.

 

Announcements

You can always check out my website for upcoming speaking engagements that are guaranteed to be of value to business owners. More details about the events and Human Resources 4U can be found on my website.

 

My next engagement is entitled "Labor Law Update: 2013" It will be held on January 23 and is sponsored by the Irwindale Chamber of Commerce. For more information please go to my website.

 

Labor Law Update 2013: If you are interested in having me give a “Labor Law Update for 2013” presentation to your organization early next year, please contact me so we can schedule the event.

 

HR4U 101 for 2013Workshop

My next full day workshop will be held on January 9, 2013. This is a practical workshop that focuses on all the things you need to know to comply with California employment law and some guidance on best practices for all your employee related efforts. Download the flyer for all the workshop details. There are only 2 spots left!

 

 

Rounding Policies OK in California

The 4th District Court of Appeal recently issued an employer-friendly opinion by concluding that, under California law, employers may round employee timecard entries to the nearest tenth of an hour. This ruling is particularly important because there is no statute or prior case law that expressly authorizes this common practice, which is permissible under federal law and followed by California’s labor agency.

 

In the case, Silva v. See’s Candy, See’s used a timekeeping software system to keep track of its employees’ working hours. The software system required employees to “punch” into the system at the beginning and end of their shift. Adjustments to the timecards were made only in accordance with two See’s policies: (1) the nearest-tenth rounding policy; and (2) the grace period policy.

 

Under the nearest-tenth rounding policy, in and out punches were rounded up or down to the nearest tenth of an hour. Under the separate grace period policy, employees whose schedule had been programmed into the timekeeping system could voluntarily punch in up to 10 minutes before their scheduled start time and 10 minutes after their scheduled end time. Employees, under See’s rules, were not permitted to work during that time, but could use it for personal activities.

 

In reaching its conclusion, the court relied upon the federal Department of Labor rounding standard in determining that rounding policies are permissible provided the policy is “fair and neutral on its face” and over time does not result in failure to properly compensate the employee. In addition, the court was persuaded by the fact that the federal standard also was followed by the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement.

 

See’s was able to demonstrate that its nearest-tenth rounding policy went up and down and, that the policy, over time, did not result in a loss to the employee. In addition, See’s was able to present evidence that employees knew about the rounding and grace period policies. Because See’s policies were clear and understood by its employees and because See’s could show that the policies did not result in its employees being underpaid, See’s prevailed in the action.

 

Vitol and Johnson Controls to Pay $62,500 to Settle Retaliation Claim

 A Houston-based oil company and a Wisconsin-based energy and manufacturing company will pay $62,500 and furnish other relief to settle an employment discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC.  The EEOC had charged that both Vitol, Inc. and Johnson Controls, Inc. were responsible for unlawfully firing an employee for filing a sex discrimination charge against Vitol.

 

The EEOC said that after serving as executive secretary to the president, Lucinda Gonzalez was fired by Vitol in July 2008 and subsequently hired by Johnson Controls as a sales assistant. In December 2008, Gonzalez filed a charge of sex discrimination with the EEOC in good faith against her former employer, Vitol. Shortly after receiving a copy of the charge and learning that the EEOC would not be investigating it further, Vitol forwarded a copy of the charge and the EEOC notice to management at Johnson Controls, where Gonzalez was employed at the time. According to the lawsuit, on the very same date that the charge and dismissal were received by Johnson Controls and reviewed by her supervisor, that company made the decision to fire Gonzalez as part of a purported reduction-in-force.

 

The EEOC argued that both companies' actions were retaliatory — Vitol, by forwarding the charge to Gonzalez's new employer, and Johnson Controls, by acting on the information that Gonzalez had filed the charge by terminating her employment.

Retaliation against an employee for complaining about discrimination violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The suits were settled by two separate consent decrees.

 

Under the Vitol Decree, the company agreed to pay $62,500 in monetary relief to Gonzalez; provide her with a neutral job reference when requested by a prospective employer; and keep confidential all documents relating to this suit and the underlying charge and investigation. Additionally, among other things, Vitol agreed to implement and/or enforce policies prohibiting workplace discrimination and retaliation and to specifically address, through professional training, the issues of employment discrimination, harassment and retaliation with all managers, supervisors and officers.

 

Under the Johnson Controls decree, to be effective for 18 months, the company agreed to injunctive and non-monetary relief, including the separation of documents pertaining to the lawsuit from Gonzalez's personnel file and the provision, upon request, of a neutral employment reference. Additionally, Johnson Controls is required to provide training on employment discrimination and retaliation to its management and non-management employees; maintain and enforce policies which prohibit discrimination and retaliation in the workplace; and post a notice of non-discrimination in a location readily and normally accessible to employees.

 

Time Wasted on Poor Performers

Supervisors spend 17 percent of their time, or nearly one day per week, overseeing poorly performing employees, according to a survey released today by Robert Half International Inc. Additionally, 95 percent of respondents said a poor hiring decision at least somewhat impacts the morale of the team and more than 35 percent saying morale is greatly affected.

 

Bad hires are costly, not just for the drain they place on the budget but also in terms of lost morale, productivity and time. Underperforming employees also require significant attention from employers, distracting managers from business-critical initiatives and causing other team members to pick up the slack.

 

The survey is based on interviews with more than 1,400 CFOs from a stratified random sample of U.S. companies with 20 or more employees.

 

Factoids

• Median base salary increases for 2013 are projected to be 3% (Hay Group)

• According to NIOSH 41 million workers get less than 6 hours of sleep each night. That means that 30% of the workforce is getting less than the recommended 7-9 hours of sleep per night. It is estimated that insomnia causes $63.2 billion per year in lost productivity. That equates to 11.3 lost days and $2,280 per employee.

• Sleep apnea affects 1 in 5 people (18 million) in the U.S. It is estimated that for this group work performance can decrease by 30% and they are twice as likely to have a workplace accident.

• 69% of adults who smoke say they want to quit but while over 50% tried to quit only 6% succeeded in 2011.

 

Quote

“I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody."

~Lily Tomlin~