When United Airlines announced earlier this month that it was replacing its quarterly performance bonuses with a chance for eligible employees to win prizes in a quarterly drawing triggered by reaching certain performance goals, the blowback from employees was swift and fierce, forcing the airline to quickly backtrack on the plan. By swapping out the modest quarterly bonus for a chance of up to $100,000, United President Scott Kirby had hoped to make the bonus program more exciting for employees, but the Kirby and the rest of United’s leadership misjudged how employees would react to what many saw as a cost-cutting measure that would make it harder for most of them to earn bonuses.
What happened at United can serve as a learning opportunity for other CEOs and rewards leaders, underlining the risks the come with using gamification to motivate employees. Workplace games can sometimes be more effective motivators than cash, as “winning” offers a form of social recognition that financial rewards don’t. Employees can write off losing out on a cash bonus as the price of taking it easy at work, but recognition that is visible to one’s co-workers and serves a social function can motivate them in a different way.
Gamified motivation tactics can also be cheaper and more cost-effective than extra cash, the New York Times‘ Noam Scheiber points out, even if the only prize the game offers is a compliment from the boss. United’s mistake was not in introducing a gamified element to their rewards program, per se, but rather in what it took away to make room for it. In other words, the psychological rewards of winning a competition can be motivational when they come on top of regular compensation, but they can’t be a substitute for it:
“Shareholders and management get the monetary rewards, and ‘meaning’ and ‘excitement’ are consolation prizes that go to workers,” said Caitlin Petre, an assistant professor of media studies at Rutgers University who has examined similar practices at media companies. “This is very much in line with my understanding of how the gamification trend in workplaces operates.” …
Freedom Studio /Shutterstock
While federal law in the US does not require organizations to provide their employees with paid family or medical leave, American companies are facing more pressure than ever to do so, from state governments, the labor market, activist investors, and the court of public opinion. All of the 20 largest US employers now offer some kind of paid parental leave benefit to employees who welcome a child into their families, while companies that employ large numbers of hourly workers are offering these employees paid parental and sick leave for the first time.
Of course, family leave encompasses more than maternity or paternity leave: New state family leave laws also obligate employers to grant paid time off when an employee or a member of their family experiences a serious health condition, while sick leave mandates and policies often allow employees to use that leave to care for a sick child or family member. Letting parents take paid sick leave to care for a sick child is not uncommon, but in recent years, progressive employers like Deloitte, Facebook, and Microsoft—to name just a few—have begun adopting more expansive caregiving leave policies. These companies recognize that the aging of the US population is putting many mid-career professionals, especially women, in the position of helping take care of their elderly parents and other relatives. The business case for caregiving leave is persuasive, as such policies help retain valuable talent and avoid losses due to turnover or reduced productivity.
Now that family care leave has entered the American mainstream, however, a new question has arisen: Who counts as family for the purposes of these policies? Some states and localities’ sick leave mandates entitle workers to apply their leave to caring for loved ones to whom they are not related by blood or marriage, the Associated Press’s Jennifer Peltz reports. That’s the case in the states of Arizona and Rhode Island, as well as the big cities of Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and soon, Austin and St. Paul.
The concern among some skeptical employers and their advocates, however, is that the more-flexible family designation will encourage the abuse of sick time. But there’s a simple solution to that problem, Brookings Institution senior fellow Richard V. Reeves tells Peltz, which is to sidestep the question of defining “family” or “family equivalent” altogether and simply let workers use their sick leave to care for themselves or another person, whoever that may be. After all, this doesn’t increase the amount of leave to which employees are entitled.
Several major financial institutions in the UK have submitted their gender pay gap figures to the government in recent weeks in compliance with the law requiring them to do so by April 4. The data illustrate just how far the sector has still to go if it intends to achieve gender parity in earnings and career progression. The most recent bank to release its pay information is HSBC, which on Thursday reported a median pay gap of 29 percent and a mean gap of 59 percent based on hourly pay in 2017, the BBC reports. The bank also a median gap of 61 percent for bonus payments.
HSBC says these discrepancies are due not to pay discrimination, but rather to the underrepresentation of women in its leadership:
HSBC said its pay gap was largely down to the fact it – like its rivals – has fewer women in senior roles, with just 23% of higher positions held by women. Across the whole organisation, however, 54% of its workforce is female. HSBC has a target to try to improve its gender balance and aims to have 30% of senior roles held by women by 2020.
Barclays, meanwhile, revealed a median hourly pay gap of 43.5 percent, the BBC reported last month, greater than all but 28 of the 1,154 companies that had published their data so far. Lloyds Banking Group and the Royal Bank of Scotland reported average gaps of 33 percent and 37 percent, respectively, Bloomberg reported, highlighting that these wide gaps also reflected a dearth of women in senior roles—an imbalance the banks said they were committed to addressing:
The gender pay gap “is not where we want to be,” RBS Chief Executive Officer Ross McEwan, said in a call to reporters Friday. “We need to have more females in senior roles and we set some ambitious targets in the next three years to improve it and that’s what affects the gender pay gap.” Men make up about 70 percent of the employees in RBS highest-paid quartile, mirroring the proportion of women in the bank’s lowest-paid quartile. … Lloyds said Friday that its bonus gender gap was around 65 percent.
That the financial sector suffers from significant gender gap is not new: It’s one of the reasons why London’s overall gender pay gap is higher than any other region of the UK. Common among these firms is the concentration of women in lower-ranking roles with less bonus potential than their mostly male superiors.
Last month, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision in Mosby-Meachem v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division, which expanded on the court’s view of when remote work qualifies as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act for an employee who is unable to come into work. Back in 2015, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission vs. Ford Motor Company, the same court had ruled that telecommuting was not a reasonable ADA accommodation unless the employee could demonstrate that regular on-site attendance was not an essential part of their job.
Workforce employment law columnist Jon Hyman, a critic of the Sixth Circuit’s decision in EEOC v. Ford, highlighted the Mosby-Meachem case last month as a welcome sign that case law may be shifting in favor of remote work as a reasonable accommodation:
The plaintiff, Andrea Mosby-Meachem, worked as an in-house labor and employment attorney for Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division. Her boss, MLG&W’s general counsel, Cheryl Patterson, had a written policy requiring strict attendance at work for all who worked in her office. Yet despite that policy, employees often worked from home, including Mosby-Meachem. She had telecommuted for two weeks, without incident, while recovering from neck surgery.
As seasonal industries like construction, landscaping, and home improvement ramp up hiring for the warmer months of the year, the tightness of the US labor market is requiring employers to embrace new technologies to recruit at a faster pace, and engendering unusually stiff competition for seasonal talent. Candidates for part-time and temporary work don’t normally hold much leverage when it comes to negotiating pay and benefits, in this economy, they are increasingly able to demand more flexibility in terms of scheduling, Steve Bates writes in an overview of the seasonal hiring landscape at SHRM:
“The old way was ‘You’ve got to work certain shifts,’ ” said Greg Dyer, president of Randstad Commercial Staffing, who is based in Atlanta. “Now the workforce is demanding ‘I want to work when I want to work.’ “
Low unemployment and improved technology have empowered the full-time workforce. That trend is filtering down to seasonal hiring as the gig economy grows and increasing numbers of U.S. workers—particularly Millennials—value flexibility over pay rates and long-term job security.
“It is a worker’s market,” said Jocelyn Mangan, chief operating officer of online employment platform Snagajob, which is headquartered in Arlington, Va. “Employers are having to work harder.” … In addition to using traditional online job postings, employers are experimenting with kiosks, social media and mobile apps to find, schedule and keep seasonal hires.
The scarcity of available seasonal workers was also a challenge for retailers, shipping companies, and other employers in the winter season, leading many companies to start their search for holiday workers earlier than usual last autumn.
Last November, Amazon announced that it was bringing its voice-controlled assistant Alexa into the workplace, launching Alexa for Business at its its annual AWS re:Invent conference. This week, the company revealed how far the enterprise version of Alexa has come, who is using it, and how the product is being applied in business settings. Amazon Chief Technology Officer Werner Vogels expanded on these points in a post on his blog, All Things Distributed:
Voice interfaces are a paradigm shift, and we’ve worked to remove the heavy lifting associated with integrating Alexa voice capabilities into more devices. For example, Alexa Voice Service (AVS), a cloud-based service that provides APIs to interface with Alexa, enables products built using AVS to have access to Alexa capabilities and skills.
We’re also making it easy to build skills for the things you want to do. This is where the Alexa Skills Kit and the Alexa Skills Store can help both companies and developers. Some organizations may want to control who has access to the skills that they build. In those cases, Alexa for Business allows people to create a private skill that can only be accessed by employees in your organization. In just a few months, our customers have built hundreds of private skills that help voice-enabled employees do everything from getting internal news briefings to asking what time their help desk closes.
Alexa for Business is now capable of interfacing with common enterprise applications like Salesforce, Concur, and ServiceNow, Vogels added, while IT developers can use the Alexa Skills Kit to enable custom apps as well. WeWork, one early adopter of the service, has “built private skills for Alexa that employees can use to reserve conference rooms, file help tickets for their community management team, and get important information on the status of meeting rooms.”
The important conversation that has been taking place over the past six months in the US and around the world about sexual harassment in the workplace has focused mainly on the challenges women face in male-dominated industries where men in power feel free to take advantage of their female employees. Indeed, as the #MeToo campaign has highlighted, women experience sexual harassment and misconduct in the workplace at alarming rates, while many more are treated as inferior to their male colleagues in other, less overt ways.
The victims of sexual harassment are by no means exclusively women, however. Marketplace reports on a new survey it conducted in partnership with Edison Research in which 14 percent of men said they had personally experienced sexual harassment in the workplace. Also, 17 percent of all sexual harassment allegations filed with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2017 were filed by men.
If sexual harassment of men is less often discussed than that of women, that may be because men are less likely to report when they have been sexually harassed. “For men,” Marketplace’s Peter Balonon-Rosen and Kimberly Adams write, “stigma attached to sexual harassment can be a barrier to reporting it”:
“The biggest factor is that men are embarrassed,” said Todd Harrison, a partner at a California law-firm that specializes in employment law and sexual harassment cases. “They have pride that gets in the way, they don’t want to complain about it, especially to their male co-workers.” …