How Can We Design Flexibility to Meet Different Employees’ Work-Life Balance Needs?

How Can We Design Flexibility to Meet Different Employees’ Work-Life Balance Needs?

In a meta-analysis of recent studies on flexible work policies, professors Ellen Ernst Kossek and Brenda A. Lautsch looked at whether these programs had consistent benefits for all types of workers: e.g., hourly or salaried, managerial or professional, and high- or low-income. Discussing their findings at the Harvard Business Review, Kossek and Lautsch register their dismay that in most of these studies, these distinctions weren’t even explored. “Despite the many studies on the topic,” they write, “it is rare for scholars to consider occupational differences across workers in the need for, and experience of, work-life flexibility.”

That’s a problem, the authors underscore, because employees in different roles and circumstances diverge significantly in terms of access to flexibility and other work-life balance programs, with varying consequences for their quality of life and work:

What exactly do we know about how kinds of work-life flexibility benefit employees in different jobs the most? First, not every employee faces the same work-life challenges, has access to the same types of flexibility, or experiences outcomes from them in the same way. For example, retail, food, and other workers in hourly jobs that pay at or close to the minimum wage often struggle to get sufficient predictable (and sometimes enough) work hours to care for their families. They would benefit from being able to control their work hours through flex time and having greater control over schedules and time off, as well as the ramping up of hours when it fits their lives. Yet these are the workers who rarely have access to control over when they work.

In addition, access to other work-life flexibility practices that affect the ability to take time off and the continuity of work, like paid sick and parental leaves, is critical to these hourly workers. It is also largely unavailable to them.

These authors’ point about how employees differ in their work-life challenges and the kinds of benefits they need resonates with something we’ve observed in our research at CEB, now Gartner, over the past several years and that is coming into ever greater focus in our ongoing work: Work-life balance is a broad category of need, for which no HR department can possibly design a one-size-fits-all solution.

Last week, we hosted Genentech’s Head of People Analytics Chase Rowbotham for a webinar. One of the projects he described was an analysis his team did to understand the effects of commute times on employees’ likelihood of leaving. Based on those findings, Genentech is rolling out a new “Working Flexibly” philosophy and toolkit, among a series of initiatives geared toward improving the employee experience. It’s intentionally a philosophy, not a policy, precisely because of this variation in what working flexibly can and should look like for different segments of the workforce. (CEB Corporate Leadership Council members who missed the webinar can watch a replay of it on our member site.)

Read more

Platforms and Governments Take Steps Toward Sexual Harassment Protections for Freelancers

Platforms and Governments Take Steps Toward Sexual Harassment Protections for Freelancers

The freelance hiring and management platforms Fiverr and AND CO have teamed up to create a new standardized work contract for freelancers that they are calling the first of its kind to include built-in protections against sexual harassment, Ephrat Livni reported at Quartz on Wednesday:

The new contract explicitly states that harassment by clients or staff isn’t tolerated, which may seem obvious but isn’t a fundamental aspect of most freelance arrangements. The agreement also gives freelancers the right to terminate an arrangement if offending behavior continues after the client has been informed of it. A contractor who quits on these grounds must then be paid in full for the project or the month—depending on the terms of their arrangement with the client—and must receive that pay within 30 days.

Sounds decent, right? Well, it is. But it’s also not much, as the companies also admit. “We recognize this is a small step in a much longer journey, but it’s an important one,” they state.

After all, a big problem with harassment in the workplace is that it’s awkward to report in the first place, and all the more so when the perpetrator of the abuse is responsible for the paychecks. Despite the new clauses, contractors who are harassed by the clients who hired them aren’t very likely to feel comfortable demanding that abuses stop—not if they want to work for that client again. And few freelancers who are in an office on a contract basis will find it easy to complain about abusive staff with permanent positions.

These caveats highlight one of the fundamental perils of a labor market in which more workers are self-employed and fewer enjoy the protections that come with a formal employment relationship with a single organization. The #MeToo movement has sparked a long-overdue conversation about sexual harassment and misconduct in US workplaces, which has sent organizations and governments scrambling to find better ways to protect workers against these crimes. Most of these laws and policies, however, focus on employees, with independent contractors getting less robust protection, if indeed they have any at all.

Writing these protections into contracts is one way to help address the abuse of freelancers; another is to enshrine them explicitly in the law.

Read more

Class of 2018 Has High Expectations for Pay and Career Progression

Class of 2018 Has High Expectations for Pay and Career Progression

Every spring, the talent acquisition software company iCIMS surveys college graduates in the US to gauge their expectations and ambitions as they prepare to enter the workforce. This year’s survey, which SHRM’s Roy Maurer flagged earlier this week, finds that this year’s graduating class is expecting higher starting salaries than their peers in recent years: On average, they expect to earn $54,010 in their first job, slightly more than the class of 2017 and almost $8,000 more than the class of 2016. Last year’s graduates were a bit unrealistic in their pay expectations, despite a tight labor market, with recruiters reporting starting salaries well below grads’ aspirations.

This year, Maurer notes, employers’ pursestrings are looking a little looser:

“This year’s graduates are confident in their ability to find the job they want after graduation, and a well-paying one at that,” said Susan Vitale, chief marketing officer at iCIMS. … The data revealed that recruiters estimate they will pay entry-level employees $56,532 on average this year—a substantial jump of more than $10,000 since last year, when the estimate was $45,361 on average. “For employers, even with an abundance of educated candidates, nearly 80 percent of recruiters are finding filling entry-level positions more challenging than they did three years ago,” Vitale said. “In response, recruiters have upped their game by offering better salaries and benefits, increasing training and development, and enhancing their employee referral programs.”

Maurer also highlights another survey from Yello, which found that a majority of graduates were putting priority on career advancement in their first job searches. Nearly half of respondents to the Yello survey said they were planning to stay with their first employer for more than three years, in another point of evidence against the myth of the millennial job hopper (though these graduates might properly be classified as members of Generation Z). These findings, Yello CEO and co-founder Jason Weingarten told Maurer, suggest that recruiters should be focusing their value propositions for graduates on opportunities for long-term growth and development. Some employers are already responding to the demand these surveys show for higher salaries and clear career paths, such as Morgan Stanley, which recently raised starting pay and accelerated the promotion path for its junior investment bankers.

Read more

In Time Management, Anticipating Interruptions Can Boost Engagement and Productivity

In Time Management, Anticipating Interruptions Can Boost Engagement and Productivity

Time management is a perennial challenge for any professional. As HR practitioners’ roles become more strategic, they find themselves under increasing pressure mitigate the time costs of non-strategic activities, as well as to figure out ways to improve time management throughout their organizations. A recent study led by London Business School professor Michael Parke points toward a possible solution.

Parke and one of his co-authors, Justin Weinhardt from the University of Calgary, discussed their findings in a recent Harvard Business Review article. Workers juggling competing demands on their time, they explain, can significantly increase their engagement and productivity at work by moving away from the traditional time management approach, toward a new approach they call “contingent planning.” In this type of planning, people “consider the possible disruptions or interruptions they may face in their work day and devise a plan to address them if they occur.”

“Contingent planning is less commonly used than time-management planning because individuals frequently make plans that overestimate how much they will get done and underestimate (or fail altogether) to account for how their work will be disrupted,” they add.

The researchers found that either type of planning positively impacted daily engagement and daily productivity in the absence of significant interruptions. However, when employees faced many interruptions in the course of a day, only contingent planning had a positive impact.

Talent Daily reached out to Parke for more ideas about how professionals can practice contingent planning in their day-to-day work, and he provided the following five tips:

Read more

Labor Department May Ease up on Federal Contractor Pay Discrimination Investigations

Labor Department May Ease up on Federal Contractor Pay Discrimination Investigations

Last month, Bloomberg BNA’s Ben Penn and Porter Wells reported that the US Department of Labor was planning to relax a policy put in place by the Obama administration to vigorously enforce regulations prohibiting gender pay discrimination by organizations that contract with the federal government. The department was said to be issuing new guidance to supplant a 2013 directive that had given the Office of Federal Contract Compliance a mandate to audit federal contractors for salary bias and make its own determinations as to whether workers were employed in identical or comparable roles for that purpose.

The OFCCP had used that directive to force substantial settlements from several large employers over alleged pay discrimination, and it has been at the center of the ongoing dispute between the Labor Department and Google over pay discrepancies the office has said indicate widespread discrimination (Google vigorously denies this and claims to have no statistically significant gender pay gap at all).

The new guidance, Penn and Wells explained, would “allow businesses to shape the random Labor Department audits by determining which workers investigators should be comparing for possible pay bias” instead. This change would be in keeping with Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta’s approach of assuming good faith on the part of businesses and allowing them to admit and correct compliance issues without fault rather than pursuing investigations and lawsuits. After these plans came to light, however, the department may be backtracking, Allen Smith reports at SHRM. Mickey Silberman, an attorney with Fortney & Scott in Denver, tells Smith that the OFCCP, Labor Department, and various stakeholders are now discussing the proposed changes.

Read more

Is Benefits Equality the New Frontier in HR as PR?

Is Benefits Equality the New Frontier in HR as PR?

Over the past two years, we’ve seen a growing number of organizations leverage their HR strategies as a means of enhancing their employer and consumer brands simultaneously. The idea behind this “HR-as-PR” strategy is to make the organization more attractive to candidates—a growing concern in a tight labor market—while also cultivating a reputation among increasingly values-focused millennial customers as a progressive or socially conscious company.

Viewed through this lens, Rent the Runway CEO and co-founder Jennifer Y. Hyman’s recent op-ed at the New York Times illustrates the emergence of a new theme in HR as PR: ensuring that different classes of employees enjoy equal access to benefits like parental leave:

Like so many companies before us, my company, Rent the Runway, had two tiers of workers. Our salaried employees — who typically came from relatively privileged, educated backgrounds — were given generous parental leave, paid sick leave and the flexibility to work from home, or even abroad. Our hourly employees, working in Rent the Runway’s warehouse, on the customer service team and in our retail stores, had to face life events like caring for a newborn, grieving after the death of a family member or taking care of a critically ill loved one without this same level of benefits.

I had inadvertently created classes of employees — and by doing so, had done my part to contribute to America’s inequality problem. …

Read more

Vermont Enacts Law Restricting Salary History Inquiries

Vermont Enacts Law Restricting Salary History Inquiries

Vermont Governor Phil Scott signed legislation on May 11 that will bar employers from asking job candidates about their salary histories during the recruiting process, Littler Mendelson attorney Joseph A. Lazazzero reports at Lexology:

The new law, H. 294, effective July 1, 2018, prohibits asking a prospective, current, or former employee about or seeking information regarding his or her compensation history. For these purposes, compensation includes base compensation, bonuses, benefits, fringe benefits, and equity-based compensation. Under the new law, employers are also prohibited from requiring that a prospective employee’s current or past compensation satisfy minimum or maximum criteria for employment. If an employer discovers a prospective employee’s salary history, the employer may not determine whether to interview the prospective employee based on this information.

Like similar prohibitions in other states, Vermont’s new law still allows employers to confirm a candidate’s past pay if the candidate discloses it voluntarily, as well as to ask about candidates’ salary expectations. When the bill was introduced in the state legislature in January, its sponsors told Vermont Public Radio that it would help close the state’s gender pay gap, which stands at around 16 percent for full-time workers. The original bill also instructed the Vermont Department of Labor to collect new data on gender pay disparities in the state, VPR reported at the time, but this provision does not appear in the final bill signed by Scott last week.

Read more