SHRM-Atlanta

By: Natasha L. Wilson, Esq. and Sumaya S. Ellard, Esq.

Unpaid summer internships have seemingly always provided mutual benefit to both employers and interns.   Interns have the opportunity to gain experience, build relationships, and learn about a particular career or industry in a “real world” setting, and employers gain support, albeit unskilled, from an enthusiastic worker.

However, the legality of the internship relationship is subject to increasing scrutiny.  In 2010 the Department of Labor (“DOL”) set forth new guidance to help determine whether interns must be paid minimum wage and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) for the services provided to “for-profit” private sector employers.  Since the introduction of the DOL’s guidance there has undoubtedly been a surge in wage and hour lawsuits filed on behalf of unpaid interns to seek wages. The Charlie Rose show has reportedly settled for $250,000 in back wages to 189 interns.  Notably, the emerging trend in litigation is not limited to unpaid interns. In New York, a former Intern/Assistant Football Coach filed suit against Hamilton College’s Athletics Department alleging that he was paid the same monthly stipend regardless of the number of hours he worked, in violation of the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime requirements.  The plaintiff is representing a class of forty former interns, and is seeking unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

The potential costs of internship litigation are daunting; however, internships are still a valuable resource for employers and interns.  Accordingly, employers should structure their internship programs to comply with DOL guidance.  Pre-planning is critical.  Questions regarding the applicability of the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime requirements should be assessed using the DOL’s promulgated criteria.  A private sector employer should be able to answer the following questions before classifying an internship as exempt from FLSA wage and hour requirements:

• Is the employment experience primarily for the benefit of the intern and not the employer?
• Is the internship comparable to training offered in an educational environment?
• Does the intern displace a regular employee?
• Does the intern work closely under close supervision of existing staff?
• Is the intern not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the internship?
• Does the employer derive immediate advantage from the activities of the intern?
• Does the employer make clear to the intern, from the outset, that the internship is  unpaid?

After an employer makes a final determination regarding the classification of the internship, it may be helpful to take some additional steps.  Before hiring any interns, employers may want to consult legal counsel to draft a written agreement setting forth the goals, duties, and objectives of the internship program.  The agreement should explicitly outline any compensation or academic credit that will be awarded.  Employers should keep diligent records of the internship program, including time records of interns.  If an employer has an existing internship program, it may want to hire legal counsel to conduct an audit of the program to determine compliance with the FLSA.  Further, it may be helpful to train the supervising staff regarding the roles of interns.  Ultimately, employers should be diligent in their creation and execution of internship programs to minimize liability.

Natasha L. Wilson and Sumaya S. Ellard are Attorneys in the Labor & Employment Practice Group in the Atlanta office of the law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP.  Please stop by Exhibit Booth 201 in the Resource Partner Showcase to learn more about the firm and the services they provide.  Their colleagues will also present during this year’s SHRM conference.  David Long-Daniels and Brett Lane will present the topic “Gender Stereotypes and LGBT Employees – Turning a Powder Keg Into a Respectful Workplace,” on April 29, 2013 at 3:30 pm.  Todd Wozniak and Pete Hall will present the topic “Whistleblower & Retaliation Law Update,” on April 30, 2013 at 3:00 pm.  Natasha, Sumaya and the Greenberg Traurig attorneys look forward to meeting you at the 23rd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference.

Natasha L. Wilson focuses her practice on labor and employment law and devotes her legal practice to representing management in all aspects of employment law, from prevention and compliance issues to arbitration and litigation. She has litigated a wide variety of employment issues on the federal, state and local levels before courts and administrative agencies. Natasha works closely with her clients to provide counseling and consultation on employee matters, policy revisions, litigation prevention, and the implementation of sound employment practices.

Prior to joining the firm, Natasha was an associate with one of the largest law firms in the Southeast. Her prior litigation experience includes representation of clients in environmental and toxic tort defense and general business litigation. She also has experience in white collar criminal defense and corporate investigations, electronic discovery and digital information. Before entering law school, Natasha worked as a television journalist for seven years.

Sumaya S. Ellard focuses her practice on labor and employment matters. She has advised employers on Fair Labor Standard Act (FSLA) classifications and has represented clients in wage and hour issues. Sumaya has counseled employers on various employment laws, policies and employee matters, including separation and settlement agreements along with discrimination, harassment and retaliation matters. She has represented clients in discrimination cases involving age, race, gender, religion and national origin.

By: Harold G. Ford III, SPHR

As we look at Human Resources disciplines in 2013, there are many significant HR technology trends returning to the forefront. Over the past five years, many HR budgets were slashed in great proportions, with training and technology leading those cuts. But in 2012, we saw that trend shift, as a Towers Watson survey reported a strong and increased level of HR technology spending. More and more companies looked to leverage the HR department through technology. This trend will continue in 2013, with three major HR Technology trends at the forefront.

Talent Management continues to be the top HR service delivery issue in organizations. With online tools, social media, and Software-as-a-Service applications on the rise, companies are evaluating Talent Management systems at a rapid pace. Because of this HR need, Talent Management systems are plentiful in number, and most are still silo applications that are difficult to integrate with core HR Management Systems (HRMS). In 2013, these systems will get more flexible, and integration and other challenges attributed to these systems will be decreased. Talent Management applications will also increase the strategic value of HR in a company, allowing HR to contribute to long term talent issues for an organization. Organizations will utilize these systems to tie employee goals and objectives, link goals to performance measures, and integrate measurements to long term business strategy.

In addition to getting strategic through talent management, HR will leverage their HRMS to generate meaningful business analytics on their human capital. Workforce analytics are an imperative part of HR technology, and are an integral component in corporate-wide decision-making. HR must meet the demands of their organization by delivering analytics that can be integrated with other key corporate data in order to predict workforce demands for the future. HR departments must also be able to sift through the ever increasing amounts of Big Data in the organization to transform it into valuable information and business intelligence. In 2013, organizations will harness the power of their HRMS via robust reports, dashboards, and business alerts in order to meet this demand.

As mentioned in the other trends, integration with other data in the corporation is critical to HR technology needs. HRMS must integrate with a plethora of applications, including talent management, accounting systems, and CRM in order to provide valuable metrics and insight. Data integration is intricate and complex, and does not only involve on-premise solutions. With the introduction of other trends in HR technology, including cloud-based systems, social networking, and workforce mobility, integration has become even more complicated.  Ultimately, each of these systems must work together to provide the organization with relevant, worthwhile information. These systems must also synchronize in order to manage the quality of employee data.

In conclusion, these trends will increase the visibility of HR technology in a company, and will fundamentally change the way HR works in an organization. Companies will be challenged to meet these trends, but will benefit greatly by adapting to these changes.

Don’t forget to visit Dresser & Associates at  the 2013 SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference booth #204 to enter for a chance to win an iPad Mini. You can also obtain a free copy of the Health Care Reform Checklist. 

Harold G. Ford III, SPHR, is the Regional HRMS Manager for Dresser & Associates. For the past twenty years, Harold has helped HR and Payroll teams build strategic value in their organization utilizing today’s technology.

Over the past 10 years, social networking sites, such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc., have burst onto the scene providing a playground for people to post personal thoughts or feedback and prompt discussion on everything and anything. However, these same playgrounds provide ample fodder for employers seeking background clues on potential hires.

What can Social Media Reveal?

Consider profiles or feeds you’ve seen on social media sites. What do you post? What do your friends or (gasp!) children post? What do the pictures, article links, status updates and other information say about you? How is that information used when employers are making hiring decisions? Is it legal or even fair to use information obtained from social media about a candidate for hire?

Many employers are using social media to gather intelligence on applicants and employees. Hiring managers are able to see how a potential employee presents himself, whether there are discrepancies in someone’s work history or even if a candidate has made discriminatory comments or remarks.

What Are the Risks Involved?

Employers need to understand the risks in using social networking sites to research job applicants. There are “off-limit” areas that employers cannot use against a candidate when making hiring decisions. Certain laws such as the Stored Communications Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act dictate how information can legally be obtained and used.

Outside Vendors

As social media sites have sprung into existence, so have social intelligence and monitoring services. Some offer services to monitor and analyze a company’s social media presence across the various social media platforms. Others offer to gather intelligence about a person from these same platforms.

While social media isn’t still a “new” phenomenon, the law and courts are playing catch-up. We can expect increased scrutiny and new regulations as more lawsuits with social media elements land in our courtrooms.

Want to hear more?

Steve and Kristie will discuss the risks and benefits in using social media for employment screenings during their presentation, Background Investigations in the Information, at the 2013 SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference on Tuesday, April 30 at 11:15 a.m.  Be sure to come by this session to learn more and stop by booth 405 to learn more about Troutman Sanders and labor & employment practice. We’ll see you there!

Steve Riddell is partner in the Labor & Employment group at Troutman Sanders with 30 years of experience in litigation and arbitration. Steve has served a counsel to companies such as Georgia Power and Chick-fil-A in a variety of labor and employment issues, including employment disputes, discrimination claims and class action lawsuits and labor arbitrations. He is a member of the American Bar Association, the State Bar of Georgia and he is a certified arbitrator with the American Arbitration Association. He can be reached at stephen.riddell@troutmansanders.com.

Kristina Klein, an associate in the Labor & Employment group at Troutman Sanders, counsels employers in all types of employment litigation matters including discrimination claims, wage and hour violations, and non-compete issues. She frequently writes and speaks on labor and employment issues, and is an editor for the firm’s HRLawMatters.com blog site. She can be reached at kristina.klein@troutmansanders.com.

By: Mark Butje

While some turn-over is unavoidable and to some extent even desirable, turnover among your top performers is largely avoidable. And it is certainly worth the investment. People don’t necessarily tell the whole truth in exit interviews about why they are leaving. Managers should, of course, know in advance who is leaving and why.

A high turnover rate is likely due to a combination of reasons. Thus, increasing employee retention also requires a combination of measures. An employee will be motivated to stay at a company when they feel comfortable, well respected, fairly compensated, and (dependent on position and character) see possibilities for growth and personal development. Here are some of the areas an employer can invest in to lower the employee turnover rate:

Information

It is clear that no manager can make informed decisions without proper information. HR or employee analytics can help management decide where to invest, identify the top performers, determine what employees need to best perform and what they value. Analytics also give provide a consistent way to monitor the results of any measure taken, HR analytics really are the ace up your sleeve.

Modern human resource management systems contain a wealth of information that can give managers and executives the insight needed to make the best possible decisions about the workforce.

Communication

A lack of (or poor) communication, both top-down and between teams or peers, causes frustration and misdirected energy. For HR departments, communcation is key and company communication can be greatly enhanced by publishing the company’s values, vision and mission. Provide easy access to the company handbook. Make use of the technology for employee self-service portals and performance appraisal systems and encourage employees to use these available resources.

Work environment

BusinessWeek cites that a “San Francisco design firm Gensler found that of more than 2,000 workers around the U.S., two-thirds believe they are more efficient when they work closely with their colleagues. But 30% said that their workplace doesn’t promote spontaneous interaction and collaboration—a sentiment that’s leading many companies to rethink the office environment.”

Widespread usage of social media and web 2.0 technologies has proven that these spontaneous interactions and collaboration are no longer limited by physical borders. Employee collaboration and business social networking have already demonstrated value in terms of improved employee performance, creativity, communication and informal learning.

Employee Recognition

Most companies reward employees and recognize a job well done with a combination of compensation and benefits. But there are many more tools in the employee reward arsenal. To compete in the global workforce environment, an effective employee recognition program is a necessity.

Successful recognition programs motivate workers in ways that increase their level of engagement. According to the Human Capital Institute (HCI), “best practices” for applying recognition programs include:

• Creating      a culture of recognition in the workplace that includes both formal and      informal methods of recognition.
• Making      sure that employees get rewarded in a way that is valuable to them by      providing a wide variety of recognition rewards. Emphasizing higher      quality performance, rather than just increased amount of effort.
• Recognizing      employees frequently to maintain consistent engagement.
• Ensuring      that rewards are linked solidly to business objectives and/or desired      business cultural values.

Training

Effective training and development programs are excellent instruments to reduce employee turn-over. When employees feel like their careers can develop no further at an organization, it is often time to leave. Good training programs can help your employees learn the skills needed for new projects and challenges, or even a higher position within the company.

Compensation and Benefits

Without an adequate and competitive package of compensation and benefits, it is difficult for any company to hire or retain top talent. The challenge for small-business owners is figuring out how much their competitors pay, and what package of benefits deliver the best retention results. If the main goal is to motivate talent to stay with the company, in other words to create ‘stickiness’, it is important to choose a balanced package of benefits from many available programs:

• Work/Life      balance: Holidays, paid time off,      flexible work arrangements
• Financial      security: Retirement plans, pensions,      disability insurance, life insurance
• Health      and medical insurances:      health insurance, dental, vision flexible spending or health savings      accounts, gym memberships
• Career      development/Personal growth:      Tuition reimbursement, onsite lectures, computer based training      subscriptions
• Other: Discounted auto, home, or pet insurance, savings clubs      for shopping, employee loan programs to purchase computers.

What do you think?  Does that list do a good job summarizing it?  Has your company offered any other benefits to help increase employee retention?

You can see Mark’s session, Make Your Talent Even More Talented: The Power of Learning in an Organization, at the 23nd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference at the Cobb Galleria Centre in Atlanta, on Monday, April 29 from 2:00 to 3:00 or stop by booth 207 to speak with a Sage representative!

Mark Butje is Director of Product Marketing with Sage and is responsible for positioning and product direction of the Sage Employer Solutions product offering, which includes the market-leading Sage HRMS brand.

Mark has more than 20 years of experience in the software and hardware industry and joined Sage in early 2010. Prior to joining Sage, Mark served in various marketing and product marketing roles at Apple, Gateway, Brodeur Marketing and medium size software companies in both the US and in Europe.  He holds a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Utrecht, The Netherlands and is a published author, Product Marketing for Technology Companies (Elsevier Science 2005).

By: Natasha L. Wilson, Esq. and Keshia A. McCrary, Esq.

In a highly anticipated case, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania District Court recently held that an individual who creates a LinkedIn account associated with his or her employer owns the LinkedIn account, not the employer.  Eagle v. Morgan, Case No. 11-4303 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 12, 2013).  In a Pyrrhic victory, though, the Court further found there was no liability against the employer for denying access to its former employee’s LinkedIn account because the former employee could not establish damages with reasonable certainty.

Plaintiff Linda Eagle (“Eagle”) co-founded Edcomm, a banking education company in 1987.  In 2009, with encouragement from Edcomm’s co-founder, Eagle created a LinkedIn account using her Edcomm e-mail address to promote Edcomm for business development purposes.   It eventually became the policy for Edcomm to urge employees to create LinkedIn accounts and to become involved in the account content, though Edcomm never required employees to create a LinkedIn account.  Eagle then gave her password to fellow Edcomm colleagues to enable employees to respond and update her LinkedIn account on her behalf.

Another company eventually purchased Edcomm and subsequently terminated Eagle’s employment on June 20, 2011.  Immediately after her termination, from June 20 to July 6, 2011, Edcomm employees accessed Eagle’s LinkedIn account, changed the password and effectively locked out Eagle from her account.  Thereafter, Eagle was unable to access her LinkedIn account.  Eagle then sued Edcomm under several state law tort claims.

The Court sided with Eagle noting that she was able to establish claims of unauthorized use of name, invasion of privacy by misappropriation of identity, and misappropriation of publicity because she owned the LinkedIn account and maintained an exclusive right to control her LinkedIn account.  However, because Eagle could not establish a single contract, client or even prospective client that she was unable to procure due to Edcomm denying her access to her LinkedIn account, the Court did not award Eagle any damages.

Because there is such a prevalence of social media in the course of everyday life, it is no surprise that those same social networking sites play such an important role for employers.  Companies should accordingly establish and enforce clear social media policies and ownership agreements regarding social media accounts.  These policies and agreements should clearly delineate who owns the account and the procedures for returning login and password information if an employee is terminated.  Indeed, the Eagle Court noted Edcomm’s “intense interest” in ownership of LinkedIn accounts, such as the one at issue in this case, yet Edcomm still refused to adopt a clear policy stating as much.  Employers must therefore remain alert.

Natasha L. Wilson and Keshia A. McCrary are Attorneys in the Labor & Employment Practice Group in the Atlanta office of the law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP.  Please stop by Exhibit Booth 201 in the Resource Partner Showcase to learn more about the firm and the services they provide.  Their colleagues will also present during this year’s SHRM-Atlanta conference.  David Long-Daniels and Brett Lane will present the topic “Gender Stereotypes and LGBT Employees – Turning a Powder Keg Into a Respectful Workplace,” on April 29, 2013 at 3:30 pm.  Todd Wozniak and Pete Hall will present the topic “Whistleblower & Retaliation Law Update,” on April 30, 2013 at 3:00 pm.  Natasha, Keshia and the Greenberg Traurig attorneys look forward to meeting you at the 23rd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference.

Keshia A. McCrary

Natasha L. Wilson

By: Mike Psenka

One thing we know is that healthcare reform is a reality and it’s not going anywhere. Although the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was passed in 2010, employers will be hit the hardest in 2014. You may have heard that the only two options are to “pay” the fines or “play” by offering the minimal coverage. But another approach that employers are taking into consideration is adjusting their workforce by outsourcing labor, decreasing hours, adding more part-time workers, or even reducing headcount.

Regardless of the path you decide to go down, there are numerous variables to consider – and most employers are “missing the mark” by thinking solely about ACA’s impact on benefit costs and government fines. So where exactly are most employers missing the mark? Here are the 5 most common things that organizations are not thinking about:

1. Turnover: The decisions you make around healthcare coverage can lead to increased turnover – and huge impacts on your bottom line. Just think about the time it takes to fill an open position, get employees ramped up, and the time away from the job for employees that are needed to train new hires.
2. Unemployment costs: With turnover comes the risk of increased unemployment claims. Employers that reduce hours or do not provide minimal coverage to eligible employees are likely to see a higher turnover rate – leading to a spike in unemployment costs.
3. Workforce management:  The number of salaried vs. hourly employees, actual hours worked, and overtime pay are crucial in determining the law’s impact. And don’t forget about workload. Do you have employees working overtime while some are underutilized? Creating a workload balance can be the life or death of measuring both employee eligibility and unemployment costs.
4. Unanticipated costs: More and more, employers are starting to see the unanticipated costs of ACA. A great example is the potential government fines outside of ACA non-compliance. For instance, adjusting your workforce can lead to EEOC violations. Another example that’s catching organizations off guard is that while providing healthcare coverage is perceived as generous, this can actually cost employees more when considering all factors.
5. Ongoing management: When considering the impacts of healthcare reform, the only thing constant is change. There are still many aspects of the law that have yet to be ironed out – and employers are left with more questions than answers. Naturally, questions will continue to rise as the law changes over time. That’s why you can’t afford to view your strategy as a “one and done” decision. Ongoing management, evaluation, and analysis of your strategy are crucial to ensuring that your approach evolves with both the law and your workforce.

Healthcare reform is here to stay and it’s not a onetime thing. There is a lot that goes into your healthcare coverage decision… are you missing the mark?

You can see Mike’s session, PPACA Healthcare Reform:  Managing Unemployment Costs, Government Fines and Turnover, at the 23nd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference at the Cobb Galleria Centre in Atlanta, on Tuesday, April 30 from 8:15am – 9:15am.

Mike Psenka is the founder of eThority, a provider of world-class analytics to the human capital, higher education, commercial, and government markets.  In 2011, Equifax Workforce Solutions acquired eThority to offer an unparalleled analytics tool to its customers. Prior to founding eThority, Psenka worked with PricewaterhouseCoopers within their Open Systems Technology group implementing financial and manufacturing systems. He graduated from Princeton University with a degree in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering.  Psenka has focused a great deal of passion toward the creation of ‘user-obvious’ platforms. When not executing day-to-day business operations, he dedicates himself to the development of innovative solutions that provide vital answers to the marketplace.

By:  Natasha L. Wilson, Esq., and Sumaya S. Ellard, Esq.

Senator Patty Murray (D. WA) and co-sponsor Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D. NH) recently reintroduced the Protecting America’s Workers Act (“PAWA”).  PAWA is designed to expand the protections and enforcement scope of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”).

PAWA increases OSHA protections to include state, county, municipal and U.S. government employees.  Moreover, PAWA increases whistleblower protections and improves OSHA reporting, inspection and enforcement. Specifically, PAWA increases coverage to include more of the 8.5 million federal, state, local government, and private sector employees that are currently outside of the Act’s protections.

PAWA expands whistleblower protections by including a number of procedural and administrative options that are unavailable under OSHA.  Significantly, PAWA authorizes private rights of action if an employer fails to comply with an order providing relief.  PAWA further allows complainants to move their cases to the next judicial stage if the appropriate administrative ruling body has not issued a decision in a timely manner.  The most significant change to procedure is the increase of the statute of limitations period from 30 days to 180 days for filing a complaint with the U.S. Department of Labor.  The longer filing period facilitates the filing of more retaliation cases previously foreclosed by the 30 day statute of limitations.

Moreover, PAWA increases the penalties for law breakers.  The bill authorizes felony charges for an employer’s repeated and willful violations of OSHA that result in a worker’s death or serious injury.   PAWA increases civil penalties and sets a minimum penalty of $50,000 for a worker’s death caused by a willful violation.

PAWA increases OSHA’s enforcement by mandating the investigation of all cases of death or serious incidents of injury of two or more employees.  To that end, PAWA includes provisions requiring employers to take measures to protect against the spoliation of evidence.

Overall, PAWA clarifies an employer’s duty to provide a safe worksite. It amends the General Duty Clause to include all workers on the site and clarifies employer responsibility to provide necessary safety equipment.

Employers should stay abreast of PAWA’s movement in Congress because if it is passed PAWA could significantly impact employers by increasing the breadth of OSHA’s application to employers that were never previously covered, increase civil penalties for violations, expand employee protections and rights, and impose heightened safety guidelines.

Natasha L. Wilson and Sumaya S. Ellard are Attorneys in the Labor & Employment Practice Group in the Atlanta office of the law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP.  Please stop by Exhibit Booth 201 in the Resource Partner Showcase to learn more about the firm and the services they provide.  Their colleagues will also present during this year’s SHRM conference.  David Long-Daniels and Brett Lane will present the topic “Gender Stereotypes and LGBT Employees – Turning a Powder Keg Into a Respectful Workplace,” on April 29, 2013 at 3:30 pm.  Todd Wozniak and Pete Hall will present the topic “Whistleblower & Retaliation Law Update,” on April 30, 2013 at 3:00 pm.  Natasha, Sumaya and the Greenberg Traurig attorneys look forward to meeting you at the 23rd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference.

Natasha L. Wilson focuses her practice on labor and employment law and devotes her legal practice to representing management in all aspects of employment law, from prevention and compliance issues to arbitration and litigation. She has litigated a wide variety of employment issues on the federal, state and local levels before courts and administrative agencies. Natasha works closely with her clients to provide counseling and consultation on employee matters, policy revisions, litigation prevention, and the implementation of sound employment practices.

Prior to joining the firm, Natasha was an associate with one of the largest law firms in the Southeast. Her prior litigation experience includes representation of clients in environmental and toxic tort defense and general business litigation. She also has experience in white collar criminal defense and corporate investigations, electronic discovery and digital information. Before entering law school, Natasha worked as a television journalist for seven years.

Sumaya S. Ellard focuses her practice on labor and employment matters. She has advised employers on Fair Labor Standard Act (FSLA) classifications and has represented clients in wage and hour issues. Sumaya has counseled employers on various employment laws, policies and employee matters, including separation and settlement agreements along with discrimination, harassment and retaliation matters. She has represented clients in discrimination cases involving age, race, gender, religion and national origin.

By Jeff Tobe CSP

Most HR professionals worldwide agree that customer service has a lot to do with what they do!  Who told you that?  It’s NOT TRUE! You are not in the customer service business but you ARE in the customer EXPERIENCE business. A negative experience will hurt your department or your organization but a positive experience—shared with others—is one of the most powerful tools available to you.

We have all heard of the phenomenal experience offered by Nordstrom—an upscale department store chain found in major cities around the U.S. There has even been a book written about their outside-the-lines customer experiences.  I wanted to share my own experience.

I walked into Nordstrom in the Dallas Galleria intent on purchasing a pair of running shoes I knew they carried.  After being approached by a friendly (but not overly-friendly) salesperson named James, he asked me a series of questions about my desire for that particular shoe.  By analyzing my answers, James convinced me that another shoe was far more appropriate for the multi-use needs that I had.  He went to get me the shoes to try on.

James returned with nothing in his hands and a disappointed look in his eyes.  He informed me that he was out of stock but that he could order them and have them delivered to me.  Quite honestly, I didn’t want the shoes that badly.  I am a ‘instant gratification” kind of guy and if I couldn’t have them now, I could find them back home.

James persisted. “Mr. Tobe, are you going to be in the Mall for awhile?”

I hesitated but informed him that I planned on having lunch before I left.  He replied, “Let me try to find the shoes.  Come back when you are finished eating.”

I agreed and left thinking that this was odd.  There is only one Nordstrom store in Dallas, so how could he produce my shoes in the next 45 minutes?

When I returned, James was beaming.  He had the shoes!  As I tried them on I noticed a price tag on the box from an athletic shoe store also found in the mall; a competitor!  James had gone to the other store, purchased the shoes and had them ready for me.  Not only that, but the price on the tag was $2.00 more than the price James was quoting me.  When I inquired as to why he had done this, he replied, “Mr. Tobe, it is worth the effort and the extra $2.00 to make sure you come back to us next time you are in Dallas”

Needless to say, I had no choice but to buy the shoes right then and there.  More importantly, I have now shared this example with 100’s of people in my recent workshops and keynotes.  And now I am sharing it with 1000’s of you!

You see, if you believe you are in the customer service business, you are looking for a satisfied customer (internal and external).  But, once you make the leap to customer experience thinking, you are now looking for a more loyal external customer and engaged internal customer.

A recent poll conducted by the Gallop Organization found that only 43% of Americans are engaged at what they do every day in their jobs.  Most employees have the attitude that “Customer Service is NOT my job” but by changing their focus, employees begin to understand that their daily contribution—no matter how small—is part of the customer experience. When that happens, we have found that engagement can increase by 2-3 times!

The bottom line is that HR has to be the EXPERIENCE CATALYST in the organization.  It is a natural place for the focus to change.  In an effort to have a bigger say at the table you have to make the shift from being the HR department to becoming a strategic partner.  The experience mindset will start the ball rolling.  Like my Nordstrom salesperson James, you just need to shatter the stereotype people EXPECT to have with you.

Certified Speaking Professional, Jeff Tobe shows organizations how to design and implement the ideal customer experience.  His newest book, ANTICIPATE: Knowing What Customers Need Before They Do, is one of the hottest business books on the market today.  Jeff will be presenting at 23rd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference on Monday April 29^th at 3:30pm.  To get more information on Jeff, visit his website at www.JeffTobe.com or follow him on Twitter @JeffTobe

By: Allison O’Kelly

In the past couple months, two particular announcements got attention and prompted intense debate from both employees and business leaders—Yahoo and Best Buy’s decisions to halt their alternative and flexible work programs. Each shared similar reasoning behind the change, citing more face-time would bring each of the wavering organizations together. But why are corporate CEOs viewing alternative work solutions so myopically? Stopping all remote work is not the solution for bringing a company together.

There is a common misconception among business leaders that “workplace flexibility” is just a concessionary benefit for employees that comes at a cost to employers. But like many things, it is fear of the unknown that propagates perception. In truth, the benefits to employees translate to strong, measurable positive outcomes for companies. They go hand in hand, and as skilled workers and professionals in general become more of a premium, organizations that offer progressive workplace programs will remain highly competitive. What we are seeing play out today is the pursuit of short-term results, which may help with shareholders now, but not their most important asset in the long run: human capital.

An article in The Houston Chronicle cited five steps to making ethical business decisions, and this one seemed particularly relevant: Consider the effects of your decisions on all stakeholders. Decisions are often made to address one or a small number of issues, such as revenue growth, cost control or client-specific issues, but it is important to realize the wider implications of your decisions on everyone affected. Business decisions made in the best interest of stockholders, for example, can have effects on employees, clients, suppliers, people living and working near your operations, the natural environment and even future generations of people. Consider how stakeholders will be affected if the decision turns out the way you plan, and how they will be affected if things go wrong.

Certainly some face time and in-office collaboration is good practice for having everyone understand the big picture and strategic direction, meet with team members, and foster innovation. But those things don’t stop when employees are given a little bit of say over how they work and when they are most productive. If implemented correctly, alternative work options don’t reduce speed and quality; countless workplace studies have actually proven the opposite. The premise of ROWE, for example, is built on empowering employees to succeed and be more productive … however, it does need to be managed and managed well. I think this may have been part of the problem.

Flexible work options have long moved past the effusive HR conversations for moms who need to pick their kids up from school. It is a human capital and business strategy integral to the fundamental shift in how businesses operate today and particularly in the next 5-10 years. Where do you see this work trend leading?

You can see Allison’s session, The ROI of Workplace Flexibility, at the 23nd Annual SHRM-Atlanta HR Conference at the Cobb Galleria Centre in Atlanta, on April 30 from 1:45 to 2:45 pm.

Allison O’Kelly is founder/CEO of Mom Corps, a national professional talent acquisition and career development firm, with a focus on flexible and alternative work options. She has been noted as an expert, advocate and consultant on the subject of workplace flexibility and alternative work options. Her ideas and experience have been quoted in the national press and she currently serves as an expert contributor for Huffington Post. She was named to Ernst & Young’s Entrepreneurial Winning Women Class of 2012. You can find her at @AllisonOKelly and @MomCorps.

By: Aegis Sciences Corporation

Synthetic cannabinoids are designer chemicals that mimic the effects of THC, the active component of marijuana. These compounds are commonly purchased in head shops, tobacco shops, various retail outlets, and over the internet.  However, these compounds are structurally unrelated to THC and cannot be detected by marijuana drug tests. For this reason, use of these products has become very popular among drug users seeking a “high” without the danger of being caught by drug testing programs.

Most synthetic cannabinoids are marketed as drug-laced herbal incense products called “Spice,” “K2,” “Black Mamba,” and others. These products are designed to be smoked or otherwise ingested, despite listed warnings on the packaging. There are thousands of synthetic cannabinoids, and manufacturers may choose to fortify their products with any one of these chemicals and retain the marijuana-like effects. Unfortunately, there is already evidence that manufacturers are switching the compounds laced in their products, likely in effort to avoid detection.

The most commonly-referenced synthetic cannabinoids are JWH-018 and JWH-073. Several European countries have banned JWH-018 and at least some of the related agonists. On November 24, 2010, the Drug Enforcement Agency temporarily placed five synthetic cannabinoids into Schedule I of the Controlled Substance Act, including JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47, 497, and cannabicyclohexanol. The ban went into effect on March 1, 2011.

Drug testing for synthetic cannabinoids poses a very great challenge.  Each cannabinoid’s agonist likely has a unique pattern of absorption, distribution and metabolism as well as its own unique urinary excretion profile. It has been shown that the urinary metabolites of synthetic cannabinoids are not the same as those of marijuana and, therefore, cannot be detected by conventional immunoassay screen and confirmation methods. To detect these compounds, new analytical methods must be developed for each compound and its metabolites.

To speak with a representative or to learn more about Aegis Sciences Corporation, be sure to visit booth number 431 in the Resource Partner Showcase at SHRM-Atlanta’s Annual Conference April 29 & 30 at the Cobb Galleria Centre in Atlanta, GA.

Aegis Sciences Corporation founded as a sports anti-doping laboratory at Vanderbilt University, Aegis Sciences Corporation has evolved into a full service forensic sciences company providing toxicology and consulting services to sports organizations, medical examiner systems, crime laboratories, physicians, corporations and other organizations throughout the U.S. and the world.