| View this email online if it doesn't display correctly |
| | Newsletter #95 August 12, 2021 |
|
We have Fall
In-Person Training
2021 Leadership Training Series
A Six Part Series for Lead Personnel, Team Leaders, Supervisors and Future Front-Runners
Time and Dates
All workshops will be held from 9:30 am – 4:30 pm.
Printed materials will be provided the day of class.
08/25/2021 Leadership I 09/15/2021 Leadership II 10/06/2021 Leadership III 10/27/2021 Leadership IV 11/17/2021 Leadership V 12/01/2021 Leadership VI
Location
Fickling Building
577 Mulberry Street, Macon, GA 31201
16th Floor Cherry Blossom Suite
Visit Website for Overview and Pricing
|
| | Pete Tosh's Corner - Article 6 |
| Toxic Employees: Unfortunately, Most Organizations Have One
All of us have days when we do & say things that we later regret. But then there are those employees! Those are the toxic employees we often refer to as control freaks, manipulators, bullies, narcissists & gossips.
Toxic employees displaying an ongoing pattern of counter-productive work behaviors are prevalent in the workplace. Employees say that:
• 95% have & 64% are working with a toxic employee
• 50% have thought of quitting & 12% did
• 25% have reduced their work effort due to a toxic employee
• 20% feel they are a target weekly & 10% see toxic behavior daily
Even so, I was still surprised when 66 people participated in a webinar I recently facilitated on this topic.
Toxic employees cause significant overt, covert, people-related & financial damage with their visible behavior just being the tip of the iceberg. Toxic employees cleverly:
• Utilize their technical expertise to intimidate & manipulate
• Know who to flatter & who they can abuse - turning their toxicity on & off depending on the impression they want to make
Organizations can prevent & address toxic language & behavior by:
• Using behavioral-based interview questions to screen out toxic applicants
• Conducting employee feedback surveys - allowing employees to identify any toxic behavior in the workplace
• Defining appropriate & inappropriate interpersonal interactions - with behavior-specific descriptions & standards
• Utilizing Executive Coaches to work with toxic employees who are in key roles
• Training managers in how to address toxic behavior
Sometimes managers attempt to fix this problem by addressing a toxic employee's attitude. While a toxic employee's attitude certainly affects his/her behavior, managers usually find that influencing an employee's attitude is next to impossible. Managers can be much more effective by:
• Focusing their counseling feedback on the inappropriate behavior
• Using positive & negative consequences to influence that behavior
• Asking toxic employees to describe in writing how they will change their behavior
The following three models are being utilized by many managers to navigate these difficult counseling conversations:
1. Starting the Conversation:
• We may have different views about … so I’d like to present mine & hear yours
• We’ve had some difficulties recently & I’d like us to agree on how to address two issues
• I have not effectively talked to you about how your behavior has impacted the team. So, I’m going to start now. I want to discuss an incident that occurred this week
2. Conducting the Conversation:
• I would like to talk to you about …
• I’ve observed … [the inappropriate behavior]
• I am concerned about this behavior because … [the negative impact]
• What do you think will be the consequences if you continue to …?
• What are you going to do to correct this behavior?
3. Ending the Conversation:
• I wish we had had this conversation sooner, but I’m now pleased with our direction
• I feel that if we had not talked, our relationship would have deteriorated
• I appreciate your candor. It was not pleasant for either of us. But I am hopeful for our positive working relationship in the future
4. These folks can be a challenge and their behavior is not likely to change if we:
• Wish & hope they will change – Management’s silence is approval
• Appease them – ‘I don’t want to bother you but…’
• Abdicate our responsibility – ‘Just stop’
• Are bureaucratic – ‘The policy says …’
• Are two faced – ‘It doesn’t bother me but …’
Many times, organizations wait, wait, wait & then terminate. But even termination is often not a cure-all because:
• Toxic-enabling people & cultural reinforcers may remain
• Employees impacted by the toxic employee may resent not only the way they were treated but also the time it took the organization to react
• The toxic employee’s competencies & experience are lost
The GEA can provide your managers with a Toxic employee workshop that provides numerous techniques for addressing the ‘Toxic Employee Issue.’
Contact information:
Pete Tosh
The Focus Group
Office: 478-746-6891
Cell: 478-960-0076
pete.tosh@thefocusgroup.biz
www.thefocusgroup.biz
and Buddy McGehee or Chris Murphy Georgia Employers' Association
Phone: 478-722-8282
georgiaemployers.org
director@georgiaemployers.org or chris@georgiaemployers.org |
| | US Chamber of CommercePath Forward - Delta Variant: Ask Me Anything
AUGUST 19th, THURSDAY 2:00PM ET - 2:30PM The Path Forward Series is hosting an Ask Me Anything on the Delta Variant, Friday August 19th.
About Path Forward
Path Forward, a series produced by the U.S. Chamber Foundation, is designed to help business and community leaders find the answers they need to execute a responsible reopening strategy and plan for a post-pandemic world.
|
| |
Constangy.com Blog
Harassment prevention tweaks for our weird timesBY ROBIN SHEA ON 8.6.21 POSTED IN HARASSMENT What should employers be watching for?
Since COVID hit in full force in March 2020, many employees started working from home and having work-related discussions -- and even parties -- via videoconference.
Now that people are returning to the workplace in person, the risk of harassment claims is going to increase. There are at least two reasons for this. First, Jeffrey Toobin is an outlier. (Let us hope.) For most people, it's easier to harass a co-worker in person than on Zoom. Second, employees who have been cooped up in their homes for a year and a half may be a little "restless," if you know what I mean and I think you do.
So what, as an employer, can you do to keep the return to the workplace from becoming a harassment disaster? Here are a few areas to watch:
No. 1: Make-up harassment training. Chances are that you didn't have harassment training during the lockdowns for obvious reasons: Too difficult to have "virtual" training that is effective, less concern about harassment with everyone remote from everyone else, more important things to do during a pandemic that required massive furloughs and layoffs and other disruptions to your business. If that describes you, then go ahead and get harassment training on the calendar to take place before the end of 2021. Ideally, you'll have separate sessions for management and non-management employees. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission encourages employers to use an "interactive" format -- either in-person training, or a computer program that requires some sort of active participation by the user.
No. 2: Eavesdropping and recording precautions. Of course, with the Delta variant, not quite everyone is rushing back to the workplace. If you are investigating a harassment allegation and have to do your interviews via videoconference, take a few precautions:
Ask the person you are interviewing to not record the conference without getting your permission in advance.
Ask the person you are interviewing to assure you on the record that he or she doesn't have someone else hiding out in the room or within earshot of the interview.
If you record the interview, get the consent of the interviewee beforehand (and, needless to say, record the consent). Even if you're in a one-party consent jurisdiction, getting the consent of the interviewee is a best practice. If you're in a two-party consent jurisdiction, then you don't have a choice.
No. 3: The joy of texts. In any harassment investigation, don't forget to review text messages. Text messages are making all the difference in some cases I've been handling recently, and in a good way. Emails are fine, but people have become more professional and businesslike in their email communications. This is email:
On the other hand, texts are the Wild, Wild West -- anything goes:
And that immediacy, spontaneity, and lack of filter in text messages can really help you determine whether a harassment claim has validity. Don't overlook this critical evidence!
No. 4: Sexual orientation and gender identity. You will want to make sure that your harassment policy specifically references harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity. (You knew that already, right? Of course you did. I was just testing you.)
"Bostock, dude. Duh!"*
Also, be sure to treat allegations of harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity as seriously as you would treat other harassment allegations.
*Justice Amy Coney Barrett was not on the Court when Bostock was decided. In late 2020, she replaced the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who had voted with the 6-3 majority.
No. 5: Tougher state laws. In a state like my dear North Carolina, we usually follow federal law because we don't have much state law relating to workplace harassment. In California, it's a different story. California laws are more pro-employee than federal law, to the point that Californians often choose to not even bother with the EEOC or Title VII. The good part is that if an employer is in compliance with California law, it should be in super-duper compliance with federal law. You'll definitely want to be conscious of the state (and even local) harassment laws in the jurisdictions where you have employees.
And, in conclusion . . .
One final bunch of words. All the old advice still applies, too. You want to have a policy that is in plain language and easy for employees to understand. (And if you have a multilingual workforce, you want to have your policy translated into all the languages that your employees speak.) You want to act promptly to address complaints of harassment, and you want to conduct a thorough investigation that is fair to both the accuser and the accused. Assuming your policy has been violated, you want the punishment to fit the crime. You want to prohibit retaliation against the complaining party and any witnesses who participated in the investigation. And you want to follow up periodically with the accuser to make sure there are no remaining concerns. (This is especially important if the accused employee is still working there.) Finally, you want to do a sober self-assessment when it's all over to determine whether there are things you could have done better. If so, go ahead and make those changes right now, before a million other things happen and you forget all about it.
Still Image Credits: Dali wall by keith vaughton, from flickr, Creative Commons license. Supreme Court group photo (2021) by Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Tags: Bostock v. Clayton County, Coronavirus, Gender Identity, Harassment, Jeffrey Toobin, Sexual Orientation, Text Messages, Videoconferencing
|
| | FEDERAL NEWS
¶46,021 New employer drug cost reporting mandate will pose significant challenges, industry groups say — ,
(Aug. 11, 2021) Taken from GEA HR Answers Now
The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), along with HR consulting and asset management firm Mercer, responded to the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury, and the Office of Personnel Management’s Request for Information (RFI) regarding new employer requirements related to reporting on pharmacy benefits and prescription drug costs.
ERIC’s and Mercer’s comments highlight the challenge inherent in attempting to collect information from employers, who are unlikely to have immediate access to prescription drug cost, coupon, and rebate information. More often, this information lies with pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), insurance carriers acting as third-party administrators (TPAs), and sometimes pharmaceutical manufacturers. Additionally, employers raised concerns that the new rule comes as employers are expected to be already undertaking significant new administrative burdens to comply with both the Transparency in Coverage rule and the No Surprises Act rules that both come into effect in January 2022. As such, the RFI response requests that the agencies consider delaying the final rule.
“Employers work hard to provide the best health care benefits to their employees, and they engage with numerous different vendors to build and administer their suite of health benefits. Much of the information called for in this RFI is not in the hands of the employer. It is owned and often kept as proprietary by PBMs, insurers, and pharmaceutical companies. The Tri-Agencies should either collect this information directly from those vendors or overtly require the vendors to supply this information to employers. Otherwise, it will be impossible for employers to comply,” said James Gelfand, Senior Vice President of Health Policy, ERIC.
Employers do not have total access to the information required by the new rule. They would be reliant on PBMs to provide information about prescriptions filled through the pharmacy benefit. In contrast, drugs administered in an in-patient setting (like a hospital or physician’s office) are likely to be under the auspices of a medical plan benefit, meaning that an insurance company most likely keeps the information. And when a patient uses a coupon or copay assistance program, the only reliable source on where that money comes from and goes is the pharmaceutical company that pays it. Additionally, even if the Agencies do mandate transparency requirements on these vendors, it will take time for employers to collect and organize this information, necessitating a delay in implementing the rule.
ERIC and Mercer also raised concerns about duplicative reporting requirements, including drug cost information already required under the Transparency in Coverage rule. The RFI requests that the Agencies do an audit to confirm which information will already be collected elsewhere and streamline the rules accordingly.
“ERIC implores the Agencies to work with employers to ensure the correct information is collected and done so in a way that is practical, efficient, and enforced with good faith compliance,” said Gelfand.
SOURCE: www.eric.org
|
| | | |
Georgia Employers' Association |
|
|
| |
