HR Morning News, Page 30 Category

We’re all looking for ways to separate the wheat from the chaff in the hiring process. Well, one company found a pretty unique trait a lot of lesser-performing candidates share. 

What is it? They use Internet Explorer or Safari — over other non-default Web browsers like Chrome and Firefox.

That may sound pretty absurd, especially for those of you reading this using Internet Explorer or Safari, but let us explain.

Cornerstone OnDemand is a talent management software company, and it recently analyzed data on roughly 50,000 people who took its online personality test and were eventually hired by firms using its software.

During its analysis, it found out something interesting about people’s habits online that many HR pros probably would’ve never considered.

According to a report by The Atlantic:

“Cornerstone’s researchers found that people who took the test on a non-default browser, such as Firefox or Chrome, ended up staying at their jobs about 15 percent longer than those who stuck with Safari or Internet Explorer. They performed better on the job as well.”

Overall, Firefox users were the most likely to stay at least 90 days, followed by Chrome users, Safari users and then Internet Explorer users.

But why?

What’s the reason for all of this? Unfortunately, Michael Housman, chief analytics officer at Cornerstone, said the company’s research wasn’t able to identify any specific reasons why Safari and Internet Explorer users tend to make poorer hires.

Still, that didn’t stop Housman from offering up his own opinion. He surmised the fact that a person took the time to download a non-default browser says something powerful about a person — and that something is the person made a choice to do something that wasn’t default.

In other words, Chrome and Firefox users are people who are looking for a better way of doing things.

Of course, whether or not Chrome or Firefox are superior Web browsers is a topic of much debate. But you can’t deny the fact that if someone went out of their way to install one of them, they’re at least attempting to improve the way they do things — and that’s a trait any employer wants in a job candidate.

The problem with all of this, of course, is figuring out what kind of browser candidates actually use. After all, it’s not exactly something a person would put on his or her resume.

But if candidates are visiting your website, like to fill out or submit an application, or take an assessment (as was the case with Cornerstone), there are tools available to track the browsers being used to do it.

For more HR News, please visit: Wait, what? Internet Explorer, Safari users make poorer hires

Source: News from HR Morning

The National Labor Relations Board new election rules, dubbed the “ambush election” or “quickie election” rules by critics, is a big windfall for unions. So, naturally, the GOP is staunchly opposed to them. 

The NLRB’s rules were introduced in the waning days of 2014, and are slated to take effect in a little under two weeks (April 14). They reduce the amount of time between when a group files a union representation petition and when a union election will be held.

Some ways the rules accomplish this (among a host of others) include:

• allowing union petitions to be filed electronically
• decreasing the amount of time employers have to produce a voter list to labor organizations from seven to two days
• requiring a pre-election hearing to be schedule to begin eight days after a petition is submitted
• mandating regional directors schedule an election through a direction of election rather than permitting the parties to agree on a date, and
• eliminating the 25-day stay of election following the regional director’s decision and direction of election.

As a result of these rules, a union election can take place in less than two weeks after a union requests a vote. Typically, the process takes longer than a month.

In addition, the rules state employers must provide the personal email addresses and phone numbers of voters on the voter list so that labor organizations can communicate with those voters about the upcoming election.

House and Senate fight back

Upset by what seems like the extremely union-friendly nature of these rules, Republicans tried to block the rules from taking effect using the Congressional Review Act. Under the act, both houses of Congress can vote to pass a resolution disapproving rules created by an executive agency.

With votes mostly along party lines, the House and Senate approved such a resolution to block the NLRB’s election rules.

Obama’s response after seeing the resolution: Nice try. He then pulled his trump card, signing a memorandum of disapproval (essentially a veto).

The Obama Administration hasn’t been shy about creating policy via executive order — rather than going through the typical Congressional legislative process — and it doesn’t appear ready to back down now.

Lawsuit pending

For now, it appears the best hope opponents of the rule have in terms of halting the new regulations is a lawsuit that was just filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Filed by a coalition of organization and industry representative groups — including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, National Retail Federation and Society for Human Resource Management — the lawsuit seeks an injunction prohibiting the NLRB from enforcing the rule and an order vacating the rule.

Stay tuned: We’ll keep you posted on the outcome of this suit.

For more HR News, please visit: How Obama responded to GOP’s attempt to burn down union-friendly election rule

Source: News from HR Morning

Good news: The major changes the feds recently proposed to the Summary of Benefits and Coverage (SBC) statements won’t be finalized until at least 2016.
And that means employers have a good amount of breathing room until they must comply with the wholesale changes to the SBCs.

As HR pros know, the Affordable Care Act’s Summary of Benefits and Coverage (SBC) statements rule require all health plans (grandfathered and non-grandfathered alike) to supply plan participants with SBCs and a glossary of commonly used terms during their open enrollment period.

These SBCs were created to help simplify health info for employees, but they’ve also caused HR and Benefits pros as well as plan administrators some major headaches since the regs took effect.

So when the feds essentially proposed an overhaul to the SBCs that employers were finally getting used to, you can imagine not everybody was thrilled.

Originally slated for 2015

If you remember, the feds issued the new proposed SBC rule right at the end of 2014.

This included reg changes as well as wholesale amendments to the proposed templates of the SBCs, a revised instruction guide and a revised uniform glossary.

Originally, when the feds rolled out the proposed SBC reg, they said the changes would take effect for healthcare coverage beginning on or after September 1, 2015.

Now, according to a new FAQ on DOL’s website, the new SBC templates and documents are expected to be finalized by the Obamacare agencies in January of 2016.

The new forms will then apply to insurance coverage that renews or kicks in on or after Jan. 1, 2017.

So this is quite an extension.

You can view the DOL’s latest FAQ for more details.

For more HR News, please visit: DOL grants employers a major Obamacare break

Source: News from HR Morning

There are innovative strategies that address the changing landscape of digital relationships and networks, and powerful new tools that can seem magical when you’re trying to find the perfect candidate for the available position. Understanding these strategies and harnessing these tools will prepare you to source, screen, interview and hire the best talent for your growing organization. Read this ebook to learn more.

Click here to learn more!  

For more HR News, please visit: How to Become a Recruiting Powerhouse: A Practical Guide for HR and Hiring Managers

Source: News from HR Morning

Just when HR pros were starting to lose hope the EEOC would ever issue any guidance and rules on the impact ADA and GINA have on wellness programs, the agency made a major announcement.   

After months of inaction, the EEOC just sent a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) about wellness programs to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to get an OK.

This marks the first action step in the official regulatory process.

Ire of the industry

Following a string of high profile wellness plan lawsuits filed by the EEOC, the benefits industry and several prominent business associations have had some harsh criticism for the agency.

The lawsuits, which HR Benefits Alert had covered in greater detail previously, each center around companies with “involuntary” wellness programs that the EEOC claims violates the ADA or GINA or both.

Specifically, in each of these lawsuits, the agency claims the wellness programs aren’t truly voluntary either because of “dire consequences” the program imposes on workers who choose not to participate or because of health assessments which are not “job-related and consistent with business necessity” (because they were preventive in nature) and violate the ADA’s rules regarding employee medical exams and inquiries.

The major complaint about the lawsuits from the benefits world: How can the EEOC possibly sue employers for involuntary wellness programs when there isn’t any official guidance on what the agency considers involuntary?

A chance to weigh in

According to the press release, the EEOC’s proposed rule would amend the regs that apply to the equal employment provisions of the ADA — and address the interaction between Title I of the ADA and financial incentives that are part of wellness plans offered through firms’ group health plans.

If the OMB approves the proposed rule, it will be published in the Federal Register for a 60-day public notice and comment period.

That means HR pros will have a chance to weigh in on the EEOC’s rule.

This EEOC announcement comes on the heels of new legislation introduced to confirm employers’ legal rights to offer financial incentives to staffers who voluntarily complete wellness programs or make healthy lifestyle changes.

So even though we still have a while until the EEOC’s final rule is published, at least employers have a concrete idea of what’s going to happen and when.

For more HR News, please visit: Finally! EEOC issues guidance on what wellness programs can and can’t do

Source: News from HR Morning

Regardless of your industry, the population of millennials, employees who reached working age after 2000, is probably growing rapidly at your company. As the generation that grew up with technology, they know how to stay hyper-connected with people and information. This capacity, combined with young people’s natural energy and tendency to generate novel ideas, can accelerate innovation and productivity at any company if people and processes are properly managed. This ExecBlueprint describes effective approaches for recruiting and retaining this creative generation.

Click here to learn more!  

For more HR News, please visit: Managing Millennials: Engaging with the Newest Generation of Workers

Source: News from HR Morning

Wondering what’s become of the FLSA overtime revisions the feds have promised to issue? Don’t worry, you haven’t missed them. The DOL just keeps pushing back their release. 

Initially, after President Obama issued an executive order telling the DOL to rewrite the nation’s overtime exemption rules, the agency assigned a date of proposed rulemaking of November 2014 to the regulations.

But shortly before that soft deadline, the agency said the proposed revisions were “months away.”

The feds then said the nation could expect the proposed rules sometime in February. But February’s long since been in the rear-view mirror, and still we’ve seen nothing.

So what’s going on?

In a hearing held by the House Education and Workforce Committee to discuss President Obama’s 2015 budget proposal for the DOL, the agency’s Secretary Thomas Perez provided testimony that touched on a number of topics, including the proposed rewrites to the overtime rules.

While being somewhat tongue-in-cheek, Perez said that his agency is “working overtime” to get the proposed changes on the table, but nothing was imminent. However, he did indicate that they could be made available “sometime this spring.”

Perez also offered no clues as to what the revisions may look like, but he did indicate that the salary threshold would be a point of emphasis.

Threshold to rise significantly

As you know, the current minimum salary a worker has to be paid to be exempt from overtime is $455 per week or $23,660 per year. Well, the Obama Administration and Perez have openly said that threshold is no longer relevant in today’s economic environment.

As a result, it’s going to increase and, most likely, pretty significantly.

Earlier this year The Huffington Post reported that Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute, an organization that holds a lot of sway with Democratic policymakers, told the news outlet that his talks with White House officials have lead him to believe the threshold will be increased to somewhere around the $42,000 mark.

The Post’s report said that, according to Eisenbrey’s calculations, a $42,000 threshold would cover 35% of salaried workers. That’s a far cry from the 12% of salaried workers covered by the existing threshold. Still it wouldn’t make as many employees OT-eligible as some smaller firms had originally feared.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill had been estimating the threshold would increase to $51,000 — an amount that had been advocated by the likes of Vice President Joe Biden and former chief economist Jared Bernstein. That threshold would make somewhere in the neighborhood of 47% of salaried workers OT-eligible.

Stay tuned: When the proposed rules are issued, we’ll have a full breakdown.

For more HR News, please visit: What’s going on with those FLSA overtime revisions?

Source: News from HR Morning

Variety is the spice of life. It’s also pretty important when it comes to the group health insurance plans you offer employees. While health insurance is one of the most important benefits employees look for, they also want a say in the type of coverage they’ll receive and how much they’ll have to pay out of pocket. The days of offering traditional insurance plans are just about over. High premiums and out-of-pocket expenses (as much as 25% of each visit) made them difficult to sustain. Instead, most companies typically offer managed care plans to share the expenses with employees and provide a greater variety of options. Let BuyerZone walk you through the various types of coverage, describe how to shop for a plan and give you tips on getting the most out of your health insurance coverage. They’ll also provide you with free price quotes from several qualified brokers in your area so you can select the coverage that’s best for your employees.

Click here to learn more!  

For more HR News, please visit: Compare Free Price Quotes on Group Health Insurance

Source: News from HR Morning