Preliminary results from the CompData 2008 survey shows pay budgets essentially remaining flat from 2008 to 2009.  According to the survey, salary increase budgets were reported at 3.60% for 2007 and 2008, and are projected to be 3.62% in 2009.

Although these early figures are a little lower than those released at the beginning of May by the Economic Research Institute, which reported average 2008 salary increase budgets of 4.1% and 2009 projections of 4.0%, they do reinforce the theme of flatness.  Based at least on what we are seeing so far, it doesn't appear that 2009 increases, on average, will be substantively different from 2008.

Pay increase budgets vary slightly by industry. Companies in the technology industry had the highest pay increase budget, 5.52 percent while organizations in distribution and warehouse had the lowest with 3.43 percent.

U.S. employers are required to begin using the revised 2008 version of Form I-9, which employers use to verify their employees’ identities and authorization to work in the United States, beginning June 30, according to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

The new form includes the date, June 16, 2008, and replaces the June 5, 2007 version of the form, which expires on June 30. After June 30, employers should use the new version, which contains no substantive changes.


In response to soaring gas prices, the IRS has announced it will raise the standard mileage rate that taxpayers use to deduct business miles to 58.5 cents a mile, an increase of 8 cents.  The new rate will apply to miles driven from July 1 through December 31 this year.


Indiana employers - The Indiana Breastfeeding Bill will take effect tomorrow, July 1, 2008, to protect breastfeeding in the workplace.  For a reminder about this bill see my March blog entry regarding this topic.
 

On June 6th, President Bush signed an amendment to Executive Order 12989 requiring all federal government contractors to use E-Verify to confirm the employment authorization of new hires.

 

E-Verify is the Internet-based system operated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in partnership with the Social Security Administration to electronically verify employment eligibility of newly hired employees.  This is done by comparing information electronically from Form I-9, the employee eligibility document used for new hires, against more than 425 million records in the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) database and, for noncitizens, against more than 60 million records in the DHS immigration database.  Some officials believe the system should be mandatory nationwide.

 

The amended Executive Order requires all federal agencies and departments that enter into contracts to require, as a condition of each contract, that the contractor agree to use an electronic employment eligibility verification system (E-Verify).  This applies to: (1) all persons hired during the contract term by the contractor to perform employment duties within the United States; and (2) all persons assigned by the contractor to perform work within the United States on the federal contract.

The amended Executive Order directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue rules and regulations to implement the requirements.  According to DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, the implementing rule is being sent to the Federal Register for publication.  This will be followed by a 60-day public comment period.  Secretary Chertoff indicates the new system could be up and running later this year.

The original Executive Order 12989 provided for debarment of federal contractors whenever the Attorney General made a determination that a contractor had violated the Immigration and Nationality Act's employment verification provisions.  The regulations implementing the amended Executive Order will be updated and will presumably make the debarment penalty applicable to federal contractors that fail to use E-Verify.  Secretary Chertoff declined to comment on whether subcontractors will also be required to use E-Verify, but it is likely that such a requirement will be specified in the forthcoming regulations.

The International Association for Human Resource Information Management announced the development of a new professional certification at the IHRIM Conference and Technology Exposition at Walt Disney World Resort in Orlando, Florida on June 3.

While several professional certifications have been available for HR professionals (e.g., SPHR, PHR, CEBS, GPA, CCP, etc.), this will be the first certification designed specifically for human resources information management professionals.

Work on the certification is already under way, and the IHRIM pass to have its first exam in 2009.  The certification will be the first of its kind. 

Comments (0)

Want to become your boss's favorite? Alison Green’s U.S. News & World Report column this week suggests 10 habits that, if cultivated, will have your boss showering you with lavish praise.  I suggest you take a few minutes to read it. 

I value –

·         Staff who embrace #4: When you bring a problem, also suggest a solution

·         Coworkers who embrace #6:   When you make a mistake, take responsibility for it

·         Teenagers who embrace #5: Putting all the facts on the table and disclosing all relevant information

I hope you'll weigh in on these and other items you’d add to the list.   

On May 27^th, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the ability of employees to sue for retaliation.  The Court held that a federal statute enacted shortly after the Civil War granting all citizens the right to enter into and enforce contracts (commonly referred to as "Section 1981") can be used to bring a claim of employment-related retaliation.  The case referenced here is CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, No. 06-1431, U.S. Supreme Court (May 27, 2008).

Hedrick Humphries, an African American assistant manager at a Cracker Barrel in Illinois, alleged that he was fired based on his race and because he complained to managers that an African American co-worker was also dismissed for race-based reasons.  Humphries sued Cracker Barrel under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 1981.  The trial judge granted summary judgment to Cracker Barrel on all of his claims.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals generally agreed with the trial judge, with one exception.  The appellate court held that Humphries should be allowed to proceed with his claim that he was unlawfully retaliated against in violation of Section 1981 for complaining about the alleged discriminatory treatment of a co-worker.  Cracker Barrel turned to the Supreme Court, arguing that Section 1981 prohibits only discrimination, not retaliation.

In a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the Seventh Circuit, thereby allowing retaliation claims to be brought under Section 1981.  In reaching this conclusion, the Supreme Court relied upon four points:

1.       Section 1982, a Civil War era law which protects rights in the purchase of real property, had previously been found by the Court to prohibit retaliation.  

2.       Section 1981 and Section 1982 have consistently been interpreted alike. 

3.       In 1991 Congress passed legislation reversing an earlier Supreme Court decision and specifically declaring that post-contract formation conduct, including retaliation, should be prohibited under Section 1981. 

4.     Since the law was revised in 1991 the lower courts have consistently found that Section 1981 prohibits retaliation.

A strongly worded dissent written by Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia, concluded that the statute does not state that it prohibits retaliation and when Congress revised the law it didn't include a provision barring such.  According to Justice Thomas: "Retaliation is not discrimination based on race.  When an individual is subject to reprisal because he has complained about racial discrimination, the injury he suffers is not on account of his race; rather, it is the result of his conduct."  Therefore, the dissent found, the Court should not imply a claim for retaliation into a statute that exclusively prohibits discrimination.

The Supreme Court’s decision means we're probably going to see more race discrimination and race-based retaliation cases.  Also, more of these will be brought under Section 1981, rather than Title VII.  Section 1981 provides several benefits to the plaintiff, including:

• a significantly longer statute of limitations
• no administrative remedies to satisfy
• no damages caps as under Title VII. 
  
  It will be interesting to see how this ruling unfolds in future court decisions. 
  
  

What are your vacation plans this summer?  Are you taking time off from work?  

I was reading a survey by Yahoo HotJobs which found that of 1,100 workers, 51 percent plan to skip summer vacations this year. 

Why? 

Well, many are fearful of a possible recession and/or are burdened by too heavy a workload.

• 44 percent of workers say they shoulder greater workloads than they did a year ago, yet most of them (35 percent) can’t escape mounting pressure to boost their job performance.
• 25 percent of workers are looking around for new jobs or are updating their résumé in anticipation of doing so.
• 57 percent of workers cite employee burnout —this is up from 49 percent a year ago.

Having an opportunity to get away from work on a regular basis is beneficial to both the employee and the organization.  Employees with no escape tend to burn out much more quickly.  Vacations provide employees with a new perspective on their work and allow them to return refreshed.  Also, many organizations such as financial institutions require employees to be away for 5 consecutive days as a security check. 

 

 

According to a variety of sources, there are anywhere from 2 million to as many as 40 million workers who telecommute for at least part of their work week.  Telecommuting, or using computer technology to work from home, became a buzzword in the 1990s, but as the nation struggles with soaring gas prices, air pollution and traffic congestion, telecommuting is again appealing to many workers and employers.

At different times in my career I have been fortunate to be allowed to telecommute.  I’ve had great bosses who didn’t have to see me every day. I was evaluated on what I accomplished, not where I accomplished it at.  The office environment can get very hectic and the quietness of being at home for one to two days a week helps to work uninterrupted on big projects. 

Currently we are seeing a resurgence of telecommuting because of fuel prices.  In the mid '90s, you saw it in companies where employers were trying to keep the talent they had. There hasn’t been a decrease in telecommuting, because where it's worked, it's typically worked well.

Companies offer telecommuting for numerous reasons –

·         Reduces vehicle emissions

·         Reduces commuting cost, employees can save money in fuel costs

·         Employees can put in more hours by working during times they would ordinarily be commuting

·         Increased worker productivity with fewer interruptions

·         Improves work-life balance

·         Reduces absenteeism

·         Allow employers to keep valuable employees

In 2007 the Society for Human Resource Management conducted a study to determine how many U.S. companies offered telecommuting as a benefit to employees.  The results were eye-opening.    

Telecommuting Trends

·         56% of those polled indicated their company offered some form of telecommuting

·         33% offered telecommuting on a part-time basis

·         21% provided telecommuting on a full-time basis

Trends by Industy

Industry	Percentage
Finance	47% part-time & 22% full-time
Services (Profit)	37% part-time & 23% full-time

Since many companies are either experiencing layoffs or keeping reducing expenses in this economy, it’s harder for managers to argue against telecommuting as they see their employees and themselves hammered by escalating fuel prices.  And it seems employers are becoming more receptive to the idea.

In fact, last month the House Speaker of the state of Georgia told state employees to start working from home one day a week as a way to fight high prices at the pump.  By telecommuting one day a week, employees can save 20 percent on their gas bill. Gas prices hit a new record last week, closing in on $4 a gallon.

Two years ago the Telework Consortium provided this analysis:

When gas is priced at $3 per gallon, it would take an employee earning $65,000 per year who commutes 40 miles roundtrip per day more than two months to pay for commuting. That is nine weeks and three days of his/her take-home pay, just to pay for a daily commute.

Quite an effective illustration, I think — even more so now that gas at $3 a gallon would have people lined up down the street.  The bottom line is, telecommuting can provide big payoffs for both the employee and the employer.

Ivy Tech Community College has been selected as Indiana’s only college to offer the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Global Professional in Human Resources (GPHR™) certification.  In fact, Ivy Tech is one of only 27 universities and colleges across the country to offer this certification.

What a great honor for Ivy Tech to have been chosen as the school to offer this certification.  Ivy Tech is Indiana’s second largest public post-secondary institution with more than 110,000 students enrolled annually on its 23 campuses.

The Global Professional in Human Resources (GPHR™) certification assesses the mastery of HR knowledge to be successful in companies conducting business worldwide. Globalization is the defining political and economic force in the world today. It requires new ways of thinking and responding. For HR professionals, recognizing and understanding this phenomenon is fast becoming a job requirement.

The GPHR course is delivered in 35 contact hours over 12 weeks of instruction and is scheduled September 2 to November 18, 2008. The course fee is $995 and includes the GPHR Learning System manuals, software, access to the Resource Center and instructor handouts.

Yesterday, President George W. Bush signed into law the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA).  This act prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants and employees based on genetic tests or genetic information. The new law also prohibits health insurers from restricting enrollment and premium adjustments for health insurance on the basis of genetic information or genetic services.

Effective Dates

Title II (Employment Discrimination) requires the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to issue final regulations within one year of enactment, and the law’s effective date is 18 months after enactment. Title I (Health Insurance) requires the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to issue final regulations within nine months of enactment, and Title I becomes effective one year after enactment.       

The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 95-0 and the House by a margin of 414-1 reflecting bipartisan support. 

What is "Genetic Information"?

Under the new law, "genetic information" is defined as: (1) an individual’s own genetic tests; (2) the genetic tests of family members; and (3) the manifestation of a disease or disorder in family members. 

GINA prohibits the collection of genetic information as well as its use in the workplace, with a number of important exceptions. For example, as a result of several carefully crafted exceptions, the law does not prohibit acquisition of genetic information of an individual or family member which is inadvertently disclosed or received by the employer (e.g., during "water cooler" conversations), or where health or genetic services are offered by an employer (i.e., "wellness" programs), or where genetic information and family medical history are "commercially and publicly available" (e.g., obituaries of family members in newspapers, magazines, periodicals and books). Also, an employer may receive such information based on the individual's prior, knowing, voluntary and written authorization, or where it is received in compliance for medical certifications under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or similar state laws, or in several other specified circumstances.

However received, such information may not be used for purposes of prohibited employment actions based on genetic information.

What GINA Requires

Title II (Employment Discrimination) 

Specifically, for all employers, under Title II (Employment Discrimination) the new law:

(1) prohibits discrimination on the basis of genetic information, without regard to how the information is derived by the employer, in hiring, termination, compensation, and other personnel actions such as promotions and assignments;

(2) broadly prohibits employers from requiring genetic testing and from purchasing or collecting genetic information, except in several limited and clearly-defined exceptions such as where the information is: (a) required to comply with medical certification requirements of state or federal family and medical leave laws, (b) to be used to monitor the adverse effects of hazardous workplace exposures, and (c) the employer conducts DNA analysis for law enforcement purposes as a forensic laboratory;

(3) prohibits disclosure of genetic information, except: (a) upon the employee's request, (b) to an occupational or other health researcher, (c) pursuant to court order, (d) to a government official investigating compliance with this law, (e) in connection with the employee's compliance with the FMLA or state family and medical leave laws, and (f) to a public health agency; and

(4) provides for genetic information received by the employer to be maintained confidentially and disclosed to the employee only.

Remedies and enforcement of Title II (Employment Discrimination) under GINA are the same as those under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, with the exception of "disparate impact" claims which are not allowed under GINA (see below under "Important Amendments").

Title I (Health Insurance)

As to health insurers, under Title I (Health Insurance) the new law applies to group health plans, individual plans, and Medicare supplemental plans. Title I:

(1) prohibits the use of genetic information in enrollment restrictions and premium adjustments;

(2) prohibits health plans and insurers from requesting or requiring genetic testing; and

(3) applies to all health insurance plans, including those under federally-regulated ERISA plans, state-regulated plans, and private individual plans.

GINA requires amendments to the privacy regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), providing that "genetic information" must be treated as health information and that use or disclosure of such information will not be considered a "permitted use or disclosure" under those regulations. Especially for self-insured employer plans, Title I provides significant new penalties.

Important Amendments

Litigation under the new law is limited to acts of intentional discrimination. "Disparate impact" on the basis of genetic information does not establish a cause of action under the new law. Also, GINA includes protections between the employer and health insurers to prevent multiple actions (i.e., "double-jeopardy").

 

Are your workers happy?

I recently read an article by a Purdue University expert, Rodney Vandeveer, who says good communication is a key element in keeping workers happy.  Well, I’m not an “expert” and I could have told you the same thing!  Vandeveer says the number one cause of employee turnover is a lack of organizational commitment.  He believes that the way to establish that commitment is through communication.  When people are informed they feel connected and valued and want to invest more effort into the company.

He says a recent study found –

·         62 percent of employees don't feel that they are well-informed by management

·         64 percent said management does not involve them in the communication process, and

·         68 percent don't believe the information they are being told.

When workers aren't informed of what’s happening in the organization on a regular basis, it makes them feel insecure.  This absence of information creates unhappy employees who don't trust management and they are much more likely to leave the organization.

Here are some ideas of how managers can improve communication:

-Make sure the lines of communication are open.  In top-down organizational structures, people feel intimidated talking to managers, but in an effective workplace, employers sincerely listen to all concerns.

-Make yourself visible. That includes getting out of your office to talk with workers, not just about work issues but also about personal subjects.

-Create a balance between ensuring a task gets done and creating relationships with workers. 

My household of three sons drinks a lot of chocolate milk.  We are not sporadic, random chocolate mike purchasers, but rather consistent 2 gallon a week chocolate milk drinkers (pushed as a more fun option than white milk and healthier than soda or juice).  So, when the formula for the milk changed to a version with much more chocolate, I noticed immediately.  It looked like my 9 year old had made it with too much Hersey syrup.  As a parent focused on their nutrition I was immediately concerned. 

So, what were my options-

• Stop buying chocolate milk
• Shop at a different grocery store
• Buy it and not be happy about the product
• Complain to everyone I know
• Complain to the store

Well, I am a very engaged consumer and consequently chose the last option – complain to the store.  Since I made my purchase on a Sunday, I knew the Marsh corporate customer service department would not be open.  So, as someone who works for a technology firm, I opted to go to their website and select the Customer Feedback link. 

Now I know you are thinking (and I thought the same thing), this made me feel better since I “did something”, but I didn’t really expect that they would care.  Much to my surprise, when I came home from work on Monday I had a voicemail from a manager of milk products at Deans Foods.  She apologized that the product was not to my liking, promised to look into the matter and provided a refund for the milk I had purchased. 

And that I thought was the end of it.  But wait….there’s more.  About a week later I received another call from her letting me know that they were going back to the original formula for the milk.  I was really surprised.  A VP from Deans Food also called to let me know my comments were heard and that I was a valuable customer.  Wow!!

And as I talked about earlier, this provided excelled word-of-mouth marketing for them.  A customer service recovery intervention is one of the most powerful tools of an organization.  Service recovery is a key intervention and point of great leverage to bring a customer focused strategy to life on the front lines of an organization.

Assume a customer has a very positive and memorable experience with you.  The experience somehow exceeded his expectations, whatever they were.  Perhaps the waiter was more attentive than expected, or the price was better than expected, or he received an immediate return phone call with a resolution to his problem. 

How many people will he tell about that experience?  Given the fact that service that exceeds expectations is quite rare, I would suggest that he will tell everyone he knows.  Positive word-of-mouth referrals will exceed the success of your marketing program every time.  Satisfied customers will provide a limitless number of referrals for an organization.  But just remember, the opposite of this is also true. 

Think about a time when a company exceeded or failed to meet your expectations.  How many people did you tell?

With any organization, there will be times when their service level leaves the customer feeling dissatisfied.  We all expect that their will be some problems, the true test of the company is how they respond to those problems. 

Step 1 - The Apology
Let the customer know that you are very sorry that the product didn't meet their expectations, wasn't delivered on time, fell apart, or was missing parts.  It is not the customer’s problem, it’s yours.  Simply apologize sincerely for not meeting their needs, and offer to do what it takes to make it right for their complete satisfaction.

Step 2 - Make it Right
Probe and explore with the customer what "making it right" means for them.  At this point in the service recovery process most customers will have appreciated your interest in their satisfaction and will come to terms with what they require to 'make it right.'  Getting to this point may in itself be a 'wow' factor for many people... but there is more..

Step 3 - The Wow Factor!
This is a mandatory step in service recovery.  You have apologized, taken full accountability for your problem, explored and agreed with the customer on how to make it right to their complete satisfaction.  It's about whatever it takes, in this situation, to demonstrate to the customer that you are accountable for their complete satisfaction, you value them as your customer, you have pride in the products and services you provide, you regret the inconvenience you have caused them and ... you care.

Tomorrow I will tell you about a great customer service experience I recently had. 

Service recovery is a foreign concept to many businesses.  They don't understand it, so they don't practice it.  As a result, they are struggling to survive.  Service recovery doesn't just happen.  It is a systematic business process that must be designed properly and implemented into the very core of an organization.  At Achievant we have made it a fundamental element of our business model, core values, culture and operating strategy.  When done correctly, service recovery can create customers for life.

Service recovery is putting a smile on a customer's face after you've made a mistake.  It's solving a customer's problem or complaint and making them feel as if they’ve just done business with the greatest company on earth.  Service recovery is the step that should follow a mistake.  You must apologize, take responsibility for the error and let the customer know you value them as a customer and want to continue to do business.  

We recognize that it is the customer experience that will bring our customers back to us.  Every company—no matter how excellent their products or employees—occasionally makes a mistake.  When you effectively practice service recovery, you are creating customers who will be so satisfied that they will tell anyone who will listen about the wonderful service your company provided.  Nothing is as powerful as a personal recommendation from a satisfied customer

We believe that the service recovery we provide our customers is a memorable service experience and in the execution of service recovery achieve a significant and powerful differentiation from our competitors.

Say what you mean and do what you say. 

Failure to uphold this customer service tenet is often the crux of miscommunication.  We tend to think that whatever we say is always clear, obvious and should be easily understood. But the fact is, others don't always see things as we do, and therefore we need to make allowances for this. We each tend to have our own view of the world which acts as a filter through which we perceive everything that happens in our lives.  

When looking to improve our communication skills two thing you can do to avoid miscommunication, is:   

Learn to Listen

We know that communication is plagued by difficulties in the way we express ourselves and how we perceive others.  It is also easy to see how important it is to learn to listen properly. This is different to the type of listening we are probably used to.

I know that there are all sorts of things going on in my mind when others speak to us. Real listening (and I mean totally paying attention, not just periodically listening and occasionally nodding our head) means that we become open to what others are saying, without interrupting them, without justifying our own position in our minds, and without mentally formulating a response while the other person is talking.

Either the vendor or client believes they communicated something that the other party did not hear or understand.  It is important to take time to ensure that you have communicated the message you intended to.  This can be especially difficult when using various technology devices.  

Do What You Said You’d Do

In addition if you’ve communicated that you will take some action, be certain that you follow though.  I try to make a point of responding to client’s emails advising them that I am working on their issue so they know their request hasn’t fallen on deaf ears.  I also regularly touch base with them on the progress I’ve made throughout the resolution of the issue.  A common mistake is assuming the other party knows you’re working on the issue.  In reality, I know when I am the customer if I haven’t heard from them; I think I’ve been forgotten. 

These days we have less and less human contact.  We shop at a supermarket with self-checkout lanes, we pay bills on-line, we order food from a drive-thru, and get cash from an ATM.  It’s no wonder that with all of these high-tech options that customers look for high-touch service people. 

When we have a problem we can become frustrated very quickly when we try to find a “real person” to assist us.  We’ve all gotten lost in the maze of an automated attendant answering system with an endless list of “press 1 for ….., but no option that is actually what we’re looking for and certainly no option to speak to an actual person.  Or we’ve initially been pleased when a web-site offers “live chat”, only to learn that no one is available to chat with us for hours.  These are both excellent technologies, but must be used with caution. 

At Achievant, we have real people who answer our telephones.  Clients can always obtain customer service assistance from a live person almost immediately if they need help using our HRIS software.  We recognize that people don’t want to communicate with an “organization” or a “computer”.  They want to talk to a real, live, responsive, responsible person who will assist them and resolve their problem satisfactorily.   

What kind of access and response time have you received from your vendor?

Yesterday afternoon I had the opportunity to talk to a potential client.  Invariably I am asked what differentiates us from other HRIS technology providers.  My response always includes the words “customer service” and “partner”.  So today I am beginning a series on Customer Service Assassins.  I will discuss some of the things that will “kill” customer service and customer relations.   

I manage the Services area at Achievant, which is a huge responsibility and one I don’t take lightly since I am the person who has the most contact with our clients.  I know that to our customers, I am the company.  Their feelings about our company will relate directly to their experience with me.  I believe that in any company, the sales force can be limited or enhanced by the efforts of Services group.  You can have a great technology product, but no one will want it if they check references and hear horror stories about poor customer service. 

Usually when a vendor client relationship goes awry it doesn’t happen all at once, it usually happens over time, little by little - one defining moment at a time. Don't be a victim to these subtle assassins.  As a new client you get pretty good customer service, but over time you see that change.  Some of the tell-tale signs are –

• it takes longer and longer for your calls to be returned, if they are returned at all
• you’re on your fourth service rep in one year
• you know more about the product than your service rep
• you don’t know who your service rep is and you haven’t heard from then yet this year

Some of the assassins I’ll discuss are Technology, Miscommunication, Responsiveness and Service Recovery.   

A bill that would ban employment discrimination based on a person’s genetic makeup received overwhelming approval (414 to 1) by the House of Representatives on Thursday, May 1, sending it on to the White House.  President Bush is likely to sign it into law.

This bill prohibits employers from linking hiring, compensation or other personnel decisions to an employee’s genetic predisposition to a disease.  It also prevents health insurers from using genetic information to deny coverage or charge higher premiums.

Although generally in support of the spirit of the bill, businesses are concerned about the day to day ramifications of the bill.  The bill has been criticized for not including language giving it authority to supersede state genetics laws, for allowing punitive and compensatory damages and for potentially holding employers liable for information they gather through common HR practices like processing leave requests.

This will be one more area of regulation that will have to have the details worked out through litigation and legislation.

This morning I read an article by Anthony Balderrama who is a writer at CareerBuilder.com.  Anthony asserted that we all tell lies at work.  Now I don’t know about you, but that wasn’t a news flash for me.  Our workdays are filled with many “little lies” or exaggerations and they have become part of the corporate culture norm. 

 

The good news is that much of our dishonesty doesn't result from bad intentions; it often is the results of trying to please other people, even at our own expense.  Although telling a lie can be easy, and you might even get away with it sometimes, you're not creating the best work environment.  To help bring more honesty into the workplace, Anthony identified five lies we're all guilty of telling. 

 

You might ask yourself if you are guilty of telling them and assess how you could better handle them.

 

1. "I'd be happy to"
   
   Think about the last few times you've said you'd be happy to do something.  How often was that statement sincere?  I oftentimes find these words coming out of my mouth before I think the assignment all the way through.  If I accept a task then my boss expects me to get it done.  So if I’m afraid that a new assignment might interfere with my other work I usually try to review my workload with my boss to clarify priorities and remind him what else I have on my plate.   
   
   
2. "No, I don't have any questions"
   Ok, who hasn't been given an assignment that just didn't make sense, but when the boss asked if you had any questions you said no?  Usually this is based on the fear of believing that if I ask questions, they’ll think I don’t know what I’m doing.  However, in reality the opposite of this is true.  Projects usually turn out better with clarification. 
   
   
3. "My alarm didn't go off"
   This one is not a problem for me as I am rarely late for work.  I tend to take the straightforward approach of, "I'm sorry I was late", and then get right to work.  If it happens infrequently, it probably won’t be a big deal.   
   
   
4. "I'm not sick – it's just allergies"
   The only thing worse than being sick is having to use personal time to cover it and getting even further behind on your work.  If you think you have too much work to take a day off you might be tempted to pull one over on your cold and flu-fearing co-workers and attribute the sniffles to allergy season – don't.  Your coworkers won’t be pleased that you're putting their health at risk and lying to them.  If staying home is not an option for you, at least barricade yourself in your office and try to minimize contact with co-workers.
   
   
5. "I'm right on schedule"
   As someone who has project management responsibilities, I am very cognizant of meeting deadlines.  When asked about the status of a project it can be very tempting to say everything is going as planned, when it’s not.  "I am working on it," might be the better response, but you need to develop a timeline to put the project back on track.