« January 2007 | Main | March 2007 »

February 2007

Meet Your Future In Controlling Healthcare Costs - Scotts Miracle Gro

You know the drill as a HR Generalist on managing your Healthcare Plans - double digit growth in Bw_cig expenses, the push to share more of the total cost with employees, maybe even a push to embrace Wellness Programs as a progressive means to hold down the growth in overall costs.

Ever fired anyone for smoking? Scotts Miracle-Gro has. In an effort to push a progressive Wellness Program to the limit, Scotts recently termed its first employee for failing a nicotine test during his probationary period. It's all just a part of the Scotts mentality pushing a Wellness Program to the max to push employees to live healthier lives, and of course, to control the rising costs of providing medical coverage. To be fair, the program cuts both ways - the pressure on employees to live healthier lives has resulted in terminations, but has also saved lives like Joe Pellegrini:

In August, Joe Pellegrini got yet another nagging phone call. It was his health coach, a woman working on behalf of his employer, the $2.7 billion lawn-care company, Scotts Miracle-Gro Co. (SMG ) The 48-year-old executive knew the spiel by heart. "Have you been to your doctor yet? When are you going?" Then the prescription: "You need to lose weight and you really, really need to lower your cholesterol."

Pellegrini is a supply-chain executive at Scotts' headquarters in Marysville, Ohio, a land of all-you-can-eat buffets smack in the middle of America's obesity belt. At Scotts the hallways are filled with ldl-abusers and overweight diabetics. Pellegrini, by contrast, is an Armani-swaddled triathlete who often cycles 36 miles to and from work. Lose weight? "Give me a break," he thought. "It's all muscle, folks."

But a time bomb was ticking beneath the taut physique. Medical specialists working on behalf of Scotts had been scouring every aspect of Pellegrini's health. His profile--athletic, high body-mass index, and bad cholesterol (brought on by a love of 28-ounce sirloins)--triggered an alarm.

Eventually, Pellegrini succumbed to the company-applied pressure and agreed to abide by his health coach's action plan, which included an immediate visit to his doctor. A few weeks later, a specialist studying Pellegrini's angiogram spotted the heart valve of what should have been a dead man. Within hours, two stents were installed. The surgeons later told him the 95% blockage would have killed him within five days. "It was that close," Pellegrini says.

While it's good to see the live saving story, the Scotts example offers up a clear vision of the future - employers will begin to offer up the "Get Healthy - Or Else" proposition to candidates and employees alike over the next 5-10 years. The only question is how far this proposition will go regarding the slippery slope - smoking would seem to be a fair target regarding the recent changes in societal acceptance level of nicotine, but does the same hold true for obesity, which probably causes more health-related issues? Can you not hire someone or move someone out for not responding to weight reduction programs?

Companies like Scotts are leading the charge, and the results of the "fired for smoking" lawsuit (and others like it) will tell us much regarding how fast the landscape will change in this area... Read the BW article on Scotts, its a fascinating read...


Just Take A Pill - More Employers Offering Free Drugs...

After years of raising employee's health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket medical expenses to saveHealthsocialcare_bottleofpills  money, the New York Times reports some employers are reversing field and offering free prescription drugs to employees with chronic health conditions.

In a stated attempt to avert greater health costs down the road, a number of major companies, including Marriott International, Pitney Bowes, and carpet-maker Mohawk Industries, are providing free drug programs to help employees manage chronic health conditions like diabetes, high blood pressure, asthma, and depression.  The move runs counter to the currently popular concept of consumer-directed health care, with these companies said to recognize the limits to shifting too much of the cost of health care to employees, especially when it results in poor patient compliance with drug regimens.

I get this trend for chronic items where the payoff down the road is clear.  That being said, there is a clear slippery slope to this trend.  Today it's chronic disease management, but if you look closely at the article, categories like depression are already a part of the mix for the companies experimenting with this type of program.   Can it really be that long before other items clearly not falling in the disease management category are a part of the mix?  What about diet and exercise to control many of the conditions already part of the mix?  How are the companies incenting true behavioral change as a path to control the conditions?

Also, expect the mainstream media to focus on the benefits to consumers/employees without focusing on the downside for many companies thinking about this type of program,  Companies with high turnover may not have employees around long enough to reap the benefits, and small employers may be attracting candidates with costly conditions without having a large enough pool of employees to absorb the costs.  Buried on page 2 of the NYT article:

Companies with high rates of worker turnover may believe that they will not get their share of the eventual savings from a free drug program, while smaller employers may fear attracting too many workers with chronic illnesses, according to the article by Michael E. Chernew, a health care policy professor at Harvard, and Dr. Allison B. Rosen and Dr. A. Mark Fendrick, both of the University of Michigan.

Be on the lookout for employees with some the listed conditions to bring these programs up to you. 


Automated Card Check - Coming to Your Next Round of Organizing?

Under ordinary circumstances, I don't spend a lot of time on this site talking about union organizing.2g6udmzgua  However, since many readers have background in this area and want to stay up on recent trends, I have to point out the recent developments surrounding the Employee Free Choice Act that was the subject of a recent National Review article...

With union participation on the decline, a new proposed bill, the Employee Free Choice Act, would make it easier for workers to unionize. Most pro-union organizations say that the current unionization process, which involves a secret-ballot election, often drags on and enables retaliation against union supporters, thereby eliminating employee's free choice. Under the new legislation, workers could unionize if a majority of workers signs cards indicating they want a union—a process otherwise known as a card check or majority sign up. While union groups are in strong support of the bill and hope it would help boost union participation, business groups have mounted a campaign to stop the bill. The House is expected to pass the bill next week; however, the legislation is likely to face tougher challenges in the Senate and by President Bush.


HR Pro Cheat Sheet - Why Productivity Indexs Matter...

OK, I don't mean to go all "Greenspan" on you (shout out to Al at the right!!), but do your eyes everGreenspan glaze over when you see the headline on the latest US Productivity numbers?  Then this post is for you - a quick cheat sheet to make you look like the smartest one at the table when Productivity comes up (because this is actually kind of important when it comes to compensation and performance management)...

Click on this link for a normal blah/blah/blah from Forbes on Productivity... Now here's the only paragraph you need to key on as a HR Pro:

"Productivity is the vital element needed to boost living standards. It allows businesses to pay workers more, because of their increased output, without having to raise the cost of their products."

So now you have the data.  When your workforce becomes more productive (maybe via good Performance Management?), you can afford to spend more on talent via merit increases and even market adjustments.  If the workforce doesn't become more productive, there are scarce resources for all (including investors and employees), especially if your business is already in a competitive space with pressure on margins.  Big Al at the right also correlates much of the stock market gains of the last two decades to increases in productivity, because shareholders almost always make out better when productivity growth is healthy.....


Jobster links with Facebook, Targets Craigslist...

Jobster, the long trendy but at times hard to figure out job site, has announced some big changes that impact recruiters and candidates alike.  Here's the breakdown of what you need to know:Jobster

--Previously, Jobster offered referral program optimization to companies large and small.  The idea was gaining traction, but apparently not quickly enough to further delay the ultimate goal - to become a job aggregator for companies and employees alike.

--For Employers, Jobster is scrapping its focus on referral programs to become a Craiglist (for jobs only) with more eye candy.   Recruiting folks will migrate to the site for the free job postings (yes, free) and the Facebook relationship and the social networking angle that is part Facebook and part LinkedIn...

--For Candidates, Jobster offers the ability to create a heavily branded, trendy/potentially dangerous video profile as well as their own online profile complete with self assigned, descriptive tags.  I have to admit, it looks pretty groovy when it is well-done.

What should you do?  If you are an employer, you have to experiment, because the price is right.  Additionally, if you haven't used CraigList as a recruiter or a candidate, you'll want to check them out and get started at the same time.   For the candidate, you have the opportunity to create some trendy stuff - if you are comfortable with some of the features, then you are likely to find a company that matches some of your needs and values.

So, the bottom line for both recruiters and active/passive candidates alike is to hit jobster, get involved and evaluate.  Hit CraigsList also if you haven't already.  And be careful with the video profiles and pictures - they haven't won a lot of jobs for candidates, but certainly have lost some jobs when not well done...  As for the long-term viability of Jobster, time will tell.  Either they get enough eyeballs to compete on their own or they find themselves acquired - by Monster, CareerBuilder, or in the ultimate example of how things can change in five years - by social network king FaceBook....


What the Bush Proposal Means to You and the State of Healthcare

If you manage the health care plan for your employer, or even as a field HR generalist, you are feelingBush the pinch and influence of the overall cost of health care.  While that fact is not news, the recent proposal by President Bush is brand new - to create a standard health insurance tax deduction, which would also act as a cap on the amount of employer-provided health care benefits that are exempt from taxation. 

The goal of the proposal is to provide equity in benefits for those Americans who have to buy their own health care insurance.  Under the proposal, employer-provided health care insurance would be treated as taxable income. The proposal would allow a standard tax deduction for health care insurance of $15,000 for people purchasing a family policy (through an employer or on their own) and $7,500 for those purchasing a single policy (through an employer or on their own).

Bush's primary hope - that the plan would expand health care coverage by offering the uninsured the same tax breaks as those who receive health care insurance through their employers, is debatable.  The uninsured still need the cash flow to purchase a policy.  For employers, if passed the plan is not expected to have a great deal of impact since the cost of family coverage offered by most employers comes in below the 15K cap.  With this in mind, the paycheck might look a little different, but it won't have a lot of impact until the cost of family coverage moves north of 15K annually.

For an educated read on what it means, check out Jeff Jacoby's column in the Boston Globe.  Jacoby believes that the proposal might create some free market dynamics in the rush to cover the non-insured.  While that's not perfect, it's a start to create some price pressure in the system and start leveraging providers to use technology to measure the efficiency of doctors, hospitals and other entities currently driving costs....


Employees Want to Trade Stocks in your 401k? Here's Some Talking Points....

For most employees, the selection of mutual funds in your 401k fits the need - serving to offerJim_cramer_book_1 simplicity of choice as well as diversification.  Both are valid goals in the structuring of any defined contribution plan.
However, regardless of the size of your company, you have a small percentage of employees (is it 1%?  5%?  15%?) who want an open source 401K, my term for the option on your plan that allows them to open a brokerage account and trade almost any active security as a part of your 401K.  Read more about this type of option here (Note - the most actively marketed benefit of this to HR Pros is that it will meet your fiduciary liability to a greater degree, not a terrible idea..)
To make sure you are armed with the facts on active trading as you talk to these employees, take a look at the recent set of articles by Henry Blodget on Slate.com.  In these articles, Blodget takes a critical stand towards securities marketers like Jim Cramer (pictured at right), reinforcing the view by folks like Bogle from Vanguard that the smart individual investor buys a diversified set of index funds and holds for the long term.   His main point is that very few professionals beat the market while focusing solely on it full time, so how will the part-timer fare?  Additionally, he cites the numbers for the professional fund managers are worse than even the poor numbers advertised once the various costs are factored in...
Great read and should arm you with talking points for your most active group of investing employees, whether you decide to open up your 401k to a managed account option or not.  Also, note of disclaimer - Blodget is one of the most famous "flameouts" of the dot.com era....  To me, the history behind Blodget offers more credibility to his current ideas...

What's the Litigation Value of Each Crazy Action In The Office?

No doubt as a HR Pro you routinely assign potential legal expenses to things you see or hear about inJulietag our field, an area of your practice well covered by a couple of blogs I recommend - see Jottings By An Employer's Lawyer and George's Employment Law Blog...

To make sure you aren't taking it too seriously, Julie Elgar of HRHeroblogs takes a stab at estimating the litigation costs of the wild managerial behavior displayed on a weekly basis on NBC's "The Office".  Julie's an employment law attorney from Atlanta, and her analysis comes off as pretty sound, including advice that being a jerk doesn't have any litigation value as an individual event, but it usually comes back to haunt managers moving forward..

For a real world view into the life of employment law, check out Julie's disclaimer on her site.  Sad but true, she knows all too well she has to spell that stuff out.  Great stuff, take a look and bookmark if you like, no RSS available at this point...


Using CraigsList to Find Fresh Candidates

Let's face it - there aren't a lot of fresh recruiting ideas out there.  Most recruiters and HR people areCraiglist_1 doing the best job they can to drive traffic to their postings - via corporate employment site branding, the job boards via Monster and CareerBuilder and niche sites like Dice, and if they are really frisky, via social networking sites like LinkedIn and Jobster.  That's about it in terms of driving traffic, and most recruiters have resigned themselves to the fact that they have to deal with the volume generated to get the quality candidates...

One fresh idea that I thought everyone would know about, but it seems no one does, is CraigslistCraigslist is a centralized network of online urban communities, featuring free classified advertisements (with jobs, housing, for sale/barter/wanted, services, community, gigs and resumes categories) and forums sorted by various topics.

It was founded in 1995 by Craig Newmark. After incorporation in 1999, Craigslist expanded into nine more cities in 2000 (all of them in the U.S.), four each in 2001 and 2002, and 14 in 2003. As of November 2006, Craigslist had established itself in approximately 450 cities all over the world.  As of 2007, Craigslist operates with a staff of 23 people.

Craigslist allows employers to post jobs, mostly for free (unless you are in SF, LA or NYC), and the traffic driven to the site is decidedly tech savvy.  Perfect for a software company like SourceMedical.  My experience as a recruiter using Craigslist is that some markets are very hot (Chicago, Charlotte, Atlanta and Dallas have always worked well for me), while others are fairly slow.  Additionally the tech and training/education segments have worked the best for me in those markets that show a lot of activity.  I've made 7 hires off Craigslist that I wouldn't have gotten elsewhere in 2006, and I plan to be a good bit more disciplined in my approach in 2007.  You should try it as well - The quality of candidates is much better than you would expect from a free service, which in part has to be due to the tech savvy nature of the clientele...

Reviews of the Craigslist recruiting experience can be found here, and don't miss the traffic/cost chart included in that post found on Craigslist...


Fitting In at the New Gig - Even If You Are Smarter Than Everyone...

If you have had at least two or three stops in your career, you know the importance of getting off to aRoehm_walmart_1 running start at your new job.   In addition to the importance of a running start and some "early wins" in your new position, you also face the burden of "fitting in" and showing that you can deliver unique results while fitting in with the culture and overall value structure of your new employer.  Ignore the "fitting in" part, and you can count on a lot of hurt feelings and outright backlash from the incumbents you work with and rely on for assistance.

Business Week recently focused on one such cautionary tale - WalMart's Julie Roehm.  A high-profile veteran of the upscale marketing department at Chrysler, Roehm was recruited to WalMart as a marketing executive (part of the Marketing team, not the lead Marketing Officer, a key point) to shake up the mix and modernize ad campaigns.  As the article notes, she went in viewing herself as a change agent (not a bad thing) and undervaluing the culture at WalMart (smart change agents never undervalue the need to understand this), and within ten months she was bounced out after Bentonville determined her approach didn't match the value structure at the retail giant. 

Lots of other factors involved in this one, but its clear when you make a transition to a new company, you have to be focused not only on delivering results and the change you were hired to create, but also keep an eye on how your communication/delivery is being perceived.  A nice summary of the obligation of both sides appears in this open letter from David Kiley.