The fact is, my perspective is colored by the many different hats I wear in my daily life, including being the editor of a publication and Web site that focuses on how to better manage a workforce.
That’s also why I’m probably more attuned than most to drums I hear beating in the workforce jungle, and the message they seem to be signaling to me. And, here’s what I am hearing:
• The first message is that the long and unrelenting recession has pounded into workers a pervasive sense that their jobs, their livelihoods, and perhaps even their lives and well-being are at great risk every day. People everywhere are down, depressed, and many are close to giving up hope, if they haven’t reached that point already.
“Bob Watson feels lucky to have a job,” the story begins. “Lindy Cosme has a job, but not one she went to college for. Ronnie Woodfork has been looking for a job every day and still doesn’t have one. Three Hoosiers with different situations, and all three remain worried about the economy.”
The story says: “Faced with increasing job losses, worries about having enough money for retirement and continued difficulty in paying for basic items such as food, those ages 45 to 64 are one worried group,” according to a survey released this week by AARP. “… The survey, called ‘A Closer Look,’ was last done about eight months ago. The recession’s full effect is now being felt, new findings show.”
“A recent spate of suicides at France Télécom has revealed a paradox at the heart of French society: Even with robust labor protection, workers here see themselves as profoundly insecure, with many complaining about being pushed beyond their limits by the pace of economic change.” The newspaper adds, “What has caught the attention of the French media, public and government is that many of the suicides and more than a dozen failed attempts have been attributed to work-related problems by some experts and labor officials.”
It makes me wonder: If workers are so depressed and tormented that they are kicking up the suicide rate in highly unionized France, what does that mean for us across the pond in America, where we toil in a largely at-will, you-can-be-terminated-tomorrow work environment?
What is this going to take? As I said in my “Last Word” column, I think it’s simpler than most managers think: “More communication from the top would help. So would some sense of when the pay freezes and furloughs might end—even if that’s not right around the corner. And a greater recognition (and appreciation) of the sacrifices everyone is making would help build a sense that ‘We’re all going to get through this together.’ ”
That’s my formula for getting America’s workforce out of the funk it’s in. It’s not particularly complicated, but it begs the question: Where are the business leaders who have the courage to be trailblazers and take the first step? I pray it won’t take too long, because I’m still listening for those drums and that message.
According to The New York Times’ college sports blog, “The university announced Monday that Locksley had been reprimanded for punching Jonathan Gerald, the team’s wide receivers coach, before the Lobos’ 37-13 loss to Air Force on Sept. 19. Gerald, who is known as J.B., has been on leave and missed Saturday’s 20-17 loss to New Mexico State.”
No one knows exactly what caused the fisticuffs, but New Mexico’s terrible 0-4 start this season may have factored into it. Coach Locksley has apologized for his actions (To wit: “I apologized to Coach Gerald, the coaching staff and our team for my poor judgment. I would also like to apologize to Lobo fans. Like I remind our players, when mistakes are made, you acknowledge them and deal with the consequences.”), but it looks like he will remain on the job for the time being despite his actions.
As I’ve written before, violence has no place in the workplace, and getting physical with a boss or co-worker is usually a surefire way to get fired in any universe. That’s what I thought was true, but now I would amend that statement and add, “unless you are a head football coach at the collegiate or professional level.”
“Boeing’s main white-collar union said … that the company’s plan to cut a generous education perk can’t be applied to its members without negotiations,” the Seattle Times reported, although it looks like the aerospace giant is going to fight with the union about that.
“The [Boeing] company, while acknowledging that union members will retain the benefit for now, said it does want the new restrictions that it’s imposing on college-course subsidies for nonunion employees to apply equally to union members, too,” the Times story said. That’s because “the benefit is not written into most of Boeing’s labor contracts,” according a company spokeswoman, and “whether Boeing can impose the change against the union’s will appears to be a gray area.”
I’ve dealt with unions over items not in the actual labor contract, and it is a marvelous little thing called “past practice,” which generally refers to a labor practice “that has been recognized and accepted by the parties and used several times in the past.”
Boeing management asserts that most of the company’s union contracts “include no specific reference to the [educational reimbursement] program but only a general clause stating that Boeing cannot impose benefit changes ‘without at least sitting down with the union.’ ” Boeing management plans to do that, they say, but the fact that this was all announced before the big sit-down gives you a pretty good clue as to where this is all going.
I’m all for educational benefits, and there’s no doubt that this is a great perk that has benefited a great many Boeing workers over the years, as I’ve seen firsthand. But, it may just be a perk that’s unsustainable in this severe and turbulent economic environment. Here’s hoping that Boeing and its unions can get together and discuss this in the context of how to help the company to succeed and get through this recession. That would be a win-win negotiation both sides could be proud of.
Back when I was in grad school at Pepperdine University, I was amazed at all the workers from Boeing who had decided to go back to college to get their MBA.
It wasn’t because Boeing employees were any more motivated or industrious than people working at other companies. No, the huge number of Boeing employees enrolled in grad school was due to one thing and one thing only—the company’s longstanding policy to pay 100 percent of tuition for any employee enrolled at an accredited educational institution.
“Until now, when a Boeing employee enrolled for any class at any accredited college, the company picked up the tuition—with no restrictions,” says a story in the Seattle Times. “But many of those enjoying free classes will lose that benefit at year-end, when Boeing starts limiting its subsidy to cover only courses that further an employee’s career at the company.”
This was not only a generous benefit, but a lot of Boeing employees took advantage of it—21,000 nationwide, according to the Seattle Times.
And that may have been part of the problem, at least when Boeing started looking at the cost-benefit analysis for this pricey perk in today’s turbulent economic environment.
“Boeing spokeswoman Karen Forte said the company’s support for employees’ continuing education previously was almost unlimited,” the Times story notes. “It was pretty much an open-checkbook program,” she said. In addition, “there was no requirement to stay with the company after finishing the coursework, no limit on what kind of classes were covered. … We’ve had everything from mortuary science to sports and hobby programs,” Forte told the newspaper.
In addition to getting rid of the “anything goes” approach to paying for employee education, Boeing is also limiting the program in other ways:
• Starting in October, Boeing will pay for new enrollments only in courses that are considered “strategic” to its business. “So no more free wine-appreciation classes, culinary-arts degrees or soccer workshops,” the Times says.
• In addition, the days of unlimited educational reimbursement by Boeing, even for a “strategic” educational program, are gone as well. The company’s contribution will be capped at $15,000 a year, period.
• Boeing will also require employees to stay at the company for at least two years after finishing a course for which they are getting reimbursed. If they don’t, the employee must reimburse the company.
This benefit change may cause problems for some Boeing workers who are in the middle of an advanced degree program that they were expecting the company to pay for, because if it’s not deemed “strategic”’ they now have to foot the bill. That may not be something workers who got into these educational programs can afford right now.
Unless you work for Boeing, I doubt you’ll be shedding a tear for anyone losing this generous (and some might say unsustainable) benefit, but it is another sign of the economic times we’re in. Benefits are going to cost employees more and they will be getting less in 2010, and that’s a trend that isn’t going to change.
Here’s a new survey that is worth noting but that will not surprise any manager or executive who has a pulse: The deep cost-cutting that so many employers have been making to deal with the current economic crisis have “contributed to a sharp decline in the morale and commitment of their workers, especially top performers, according to an annual survey by Watson Wyatt, a leading global consulting firm, and WorldatWork, an international association of human resource professionals.”
Yes, if you have been managing and awake at all during this Big, Bad Recession, you know that A) organizations have been slashing budgets and cutting costs in order to survive; and, B) that such large-scale cost cutting tends to have a highly negative impact on the most critical part of your organization—your workforce.
According to the 2009/2010 U.S. Strategic Rewards Survey, “employee engagement levels for all workers at the companies surveyed have dropped 9 percent since last year and close to 25 percent for top performers. Additionally, 36 percent of top performers say their employer’s situation has worsened in the past 12 months and the number who would recommend others take jobs at their company has declined by nearly 20 percent. Compared with last year, top-performing employees are 26 percent less likely to be satisfied with advancement opportunities at their company. They are also 14 percent less likely to want to remain with their company versus take a job elsewhere.”
In addition, the survey found that “high-performing employees are 29 percent less confident in management’s ability to grow the business. And 41 percent believe that pay and benefit changes made by their employer in the past year have had a negative effect on work quality and customer service.”
“The fallout from the actions employers have taken in response to the recession is now coming to light, and it is significant,” said Laura Sejen, global director of strategic rewards consulting at Watson Wyatt, in what seems like a bit of an understatement. “Having less engaged and committed workers is a major concern for employers. This could have a long-lasting and detrimental impact on productivity, quality and customer service, as well as an increase in the risk of companies losing their best employees.”
From my perspective as editor of a publication that closely follows how organizations manage their workforce, this survey simply puts a spotlight on what many have seen for some time: that there is going to be a long-term impact on organizations due to the sometimes cavalier, sometimes ham-fisted and often less-than-skillful ways that some businesses have chosen to cope with the worst economic downturn in 75 years.
I’ve argued recently that businesses everywhere need to truly engage workers and help them get past the bad feelings that so many have about their organizations and their jobs. With a possible economic recovery on the horizon, it is time for America’s business leaders to step up and start helping America’s workforce out of its funk.
The Watson Wyatt/WorldatWork Strategic Rewards Survey should be a wake-up call for all employers that there will be fallout from all that has happened during this downturn long after we are back in a strong recovery mode. And as bad as the results of this survey are, here’s something to keep in mind: The survey was conducted in May, more than three months ago. My guess is that these survey results would be much, much worse had they been taken in July or August—and if you’re a manager, that’s a scary prospect to contemplate.
Here’s what I’m talking about: In Barcelona, Spain, a judge has ruled that “insulting your boss with one particularly foul obscenity is not grounds for dismissal,” according to an Associated Press story in the San Francisco Chronicle.
The obscenity in question “translates as ‘son of a bitch’ and was used by a worker against his boss during a January 2008 money dispute in the northeastern city of Gerona. The worker, who also called his boss ‘crazy,’ was promptly fired,” the AP report says.
The worker lost his first court challenge but later won on appeal with the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia. “Without a doubt, both expressions (either calling the boss ‘crazy’ or an ‘SOB’) are insulting,” Judge Sara Maria Pose Vidal said in the ruling, a copy of which was obtained by the AP.
But she noted that when the man called his boss crazy, he had been on his way out of the office and the boss did not hear it. She also wrote that the “son of a bitch” remark “should be viewed in linguistic context.”
Here’s the part of the judge’s ruling that I love: “The social degradation of language has caused the expressions used by the plaintiff to become commonly used in certain settings, especially in arguments,” Pose Vidal wrote, calling the dismissal a disproportionate punishment.
In other words, the Spanish court said that the term “SOB” is common—so common (at least in Spain) that it has passed the point of being considered something that someone should get fired for.
The AP story didn’t say this, but it seems clear that calling your boss a “son of a bitch” is now considered protected workplace speech in Spain. How long before that ruling makes it across the pond and takes root here in America’s workplaces?
My guess, given the rise in so much boorish behavior, is that we’ll see it sooner than anyone cares to imagine.
= Member Only
