Stimulus = Free COBRA: Say What?????

According to an alert sent out by the law firm SeyfarthShaw, LLC, one of the provisions of the "stimulus" bill (also known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009) is subsidised COBRA for people involuntarily terminated. Depending on what the final version is, employers will have to subsidise COBRA payments by either 50% or 65%. This will be available to anyone involuntarily terminated since September 1, 2008. If someone did not elect to have COBRA at that time they will be given a 60 day opt-in period.

The ex-employee would pay their portion to the employer or insurer and the employer would make up the remainder. The employer would then apply that amount as a deduction against payroll taxes. If that is insufficient to cover the COBRA expense then the U.S. Treasury would pay the remaining amount. This payment would continue for a period of 12 months, rather than the 18 months of COBRA. They would cease if someone became covered by other insurance, including Medicaid.

An additional provision would allow involuntarily terminated workers over the age of 55 to take COBRA on a permanent basis.

All of this could be effective as early as March 1st of 2009. To read SeyfarthShaw's full alert click here.

Welcome to the Brave New World. (I have provided a link to a description of Huxley's work in case you missed it in high school.)

Career Opportunity for HR in the EFCA

Here is a great blog post by Alan Collins on the HR opportunity in the Employee Free Choice Act. I could not have written this any better (or for that matter even as well as). It is a discussion about the four opportunities for HR. Read it and learn.

On an information level visit LaborPains.org , scroll down and watch the video. Then scroll down and read the list of "notables" that are against the EFCA. Very informative blog.

Card Check, Email and Social Media: A Clash of Interests

If you have been reading these posts at all, you know by now that the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) contains a provision allowing unions to organize using a method referred to as "card check." Wikipedia defines card check "...as a method of organizing employees into a labor union in which employers enter into an agreement to recognize the unionization of its employees if a majority of employees in a bargaining unit sign authorization forms, or "cards". " What most people do not realize is that the signed "card" does not need to actually be a card, that is a holdover from the days when it actually was a card, back in the days when there was nothing like email and electronic signatures. Many experts feel today that union organization will be done in large part by use of email and to a lesser extent through the use of social media, such as FaceBook, MySpace and Twitter. Their recommendation to employers is to severly restrict the use of email to business only purposes and eliminate access to social media from work computers.

Unfortunately, this butts heads with the increasing trend of (primarily) younger workers using email and social media for personal communication throughout the day. In fact many recruiters are using social media for recruitment purposes. People access and read blogs throughout the day. Web 2.0 use is a mix of work and personal that becomes almost impossible to limit. If you try you may have push back from younger workers who complain that this makes the workplace too stifling, which is the opposite type of workplace you want to have to remain union free.

It will be a fact that unions will use your email system to try to organize workers against you. Expression of interest through an email response may very well count as having "signed the card." So what do you do? You need to educate your workers. Educate them on:

• The company position on remaining union free. Let them know how the company will be harmed economically.
• Educate them on how unions may try to organize them, forewarning them about emails and contacts on social media. Letting them know not to respond to these contacts without first checking out the facts that may be presented.
• Encourage open communication with your employees about the economy, unions and the continued well being of the company.

You can draft tighter non-solicitation policies, which includes the use of email. But it may be difficult to totally control email use. But there is software to monitor email traffic if you want to do so.

I would like to hear from some of you who have email policies that restrict use of email. Please leave a comment and let us know how you do it, monitior it, and how effective that has been.

As a closing note, the card check provision is getting alot of attention. This attention may be a diversion to keep our attention away from the second provision of EFCA, Interest Arbitration and enforced contracts, which is the much BIGGER EVIL of EFCA.

Update on Hilda Solis

A report in the Los Angeles Times indicates that the reason Solis' nomination is being held up is her membership in American Rights at Work, a tax-exempt group dedicated to helping workers unionize. Her membership in this group, and her continued work on behalf of the EFCA, may violate House ethics rules on lobbying or assisting lobbying. Causing some additional concern was the fact that she didn't report this membership in House documents. The White House called this an "unintentional oversight." (Hmmm, that sounds vaguely familiar.) So the wrangling over the nomination goes on. You can read the article by clicking the link above.

In the meantime, President Obama has named Ed Hugler, a career Labor employee and the deputy assistant secretary for operations, to serve as acting secretary, as reported in The Hill.

Carnival of HR: The 4th of February Edition

It is time for another visit to the Carnival of HR, which should not be confused with the circus we are currently witnessing in Washington confirmation hearings. So step up, step up Ladies and Gentlemen. Read the best, the most incredible, the most stupendous blog posts in the world!Visit Wally Bock's Three Star Leadership to get some of the best recent HR blog posts.

Andy Sterns: Business' Biggest Enemy?

Andy Sterns is the president of the SEIU, Service Employees International Union, an AFL-CIO breakaway and the fast growing union organization in the United States. He is also one of the biggest threats to American businesses. In an interview in the Wall Street Journal in December called Let's 'Share the Wealth' : America's most powerful union boss says Europe offers a good economic model Sterns makes it no secret that he feels unions got Obama elected and he intends to hold Obama's feet to the fire. "Mr. Stern sets this simple bar for the Obama presidency: "I expect nothing less than what he said he was going to do, and we should hold him accountable."

And Stern seems to have Obama's ear. Stern recommended Rep. Hilda Solis as a nominee for Labor Secretary (see yesterday's blog post) and was on the inauguration stand right beside the new President as he was sworn in. Stern is obviously a big proponent of the Employee Free Choice Act. So he will be bringing a great deal of pressure to bear on Congress and the Obama administration to get it passed. After all $450 million buys alot of favors.

Stern is not your stereotypical leader. He is highly educated and articulate. He has never held a blue collar job and had been trained in union tactics by a reputed socialist organization. He has been able to team with WalMart, a hated enemy, to argue for universal healthcare (see my post from Feb. 08, 2007 called Strange Bedfellows.)

However, he is not without his warts. There are union members in California who feel that he has run roughshod over their rights and many union leaders are unhappy with his strong-arm tactics against unions he wants possession of. See SEIU President Andy Stern is a threat to labor soul published at NYDailynews.com.

So do not take this man lightly. He is out to get business. And other unions. And, by the way, politicians if they do not do what he wants. The WSJ had this fact and quote. "The bit about accountability is no idle warning. Organized labor put up some $450 million to get Democrats elected. The SEIU accounted for $85 million of that, making Mr. Stern's union the single biggest contributor to either party in this election cycle. And just in case, the SEIU set aside an additional $10 million fund to get people unelected if need be. "We would like to make sure people appreciate that we take them at their word and when they don't live up to their word there should be consequences," he says."

Oh Where, Oh Where Is Hilda?

Representative Hilda Solis, the congressional representative from California's San Gabrial valley, is one of the remaining Obama nominees that has not yet been approved. Apparently her confirmatin as Secretary of Labor is on hold because of her refusal to answer questions about her views on the Employee Free Choice Act. Why she is hesitating is strange. Her views are well known. She is a liberal Democrat and daughter of a Teamster local president. She co-sponsored the EFCA along with then Senator Obama. So why she is stalling is a puzzle.

I can understand why the Republicans are holding up her confirmation. She will become unions best friend in Washington when confirmed. So I have no problem with her cooling her heals.

Here is an article from sgvtribune.com that has a different take, though they too are puzzled by her hesitancy to answer questions.

Do Women Make Better Recruiters and HR Managers?

I watch little TV beyond the DIY channel. However, I have become a fan of the new show Lie To Me. It is all about body language, which has been an interest of mine since I studied monkeys in a previous life. Monkeys major form of communication is body language. I picked up The Definitive Book of Body Language by Allan and Barbara Pease last night and have already started reading it. It is an interesting read and I am looking forward to finishing it.

Early on in the book I came across this statement. "Most women have the brain organization to outcommunicate any man on the planet. Magnetic Resonance Imaging brain scans (MRI) cleary show wy women have a far greater capacity for communicating with and evaluating people than men do. Women have between foruteen and sixteen areas of the brain to evalutate others' behavior versus a man's four to six areas."

My first question upon reading this was "Does this mean that women make better recruiters?" Are they are more "tuned in" in the interview? For that matter, does that explain why there are so many women in HR, the field where people "reading" skills are supposed to be at a premium?

Perhaps so, and I would like you views on this matter. The good news is, for us males in HR and recruiting, reading body language can be learned. So even though we have a brain handicap at the outset we males can catch up some, though supposedly will never be as good.

As a last note, one thing else mentioned so far in the book, is that women lie better than men do! Anyone shocked by that?

Employee Engagement and the Recession

I have been pretty sick the last couple of days and have not felt the "creative bug" to write a new post. So I thought I would direct you to a very good one. Ann Bares, of Compensation Force, talks about the recession driven opportunity to enhance employee engagement in Recession-Driven Sense of Shared Destiny - Are We Missing An Opportunity?

Check it out.

More on the Employee Free Choice Act

I had the opportunity to attend a seminar/briefing conducted by two notable attorneys from two well known law firms in the Atlanta area, Bennet Alsher of Ford & Harrison LLP and Daniel Shea of Nelson Mullins Riley and Scarborough LLP. They discussed alot of the impending legislation that will be introduced by the Congressional Democrats, supported by the Obama administration. They, Dan Shea in particular, discussed the EFCA, starting with a little history.

But first, let me remind you of the provision of EFCA. First, there is card check recognition, which would allow unions to declare a victory in organizing employees simply by getting 50% plus 1 signatures. It would eliminate the use of secret ballot elections. Secondly, there is First Contract Arbitration. This would require the government to impose terms of agreement if no agreement is made within 180 days. This binding agreement would be in force for 2 years. Thirdly, there would be increased penalities for Unfair Labor Practices to the tune of $20,000 per violation and the potential for treble damages. Oh, by the way, these penalties are for managment only! Now onto the information.

Dan Shea pointed out that originally, the Wagner Act had card check as the prime method of unionization written in the original law. The abuses by the unions, such as coercion, intimidation and threats of physical violence, forced lawmakers in 1947, in the Taft-Hartley Act, to change the process to secret ballot election. Dan also pointed out that Canada, which has a workforce that is 30% union (down from 40%) originally had card check solely as the method of union organization. The abuse of this method was so bad that the two largest provinces changed to secret ballot election. I confirmed this by some investigation and found this bit of research from a researcher named Sarah Johnson. "In the last 25 years, a major change has occurred in the way unions are recognised in Canada. In 1976, every jurisdiction in Canada used card check. Today, more than 50% of the Canadian labour force is covered by mandatory vote legislation and union recognition procedures continue to be a matter of policy concern and debate ..."

In case you think it is only business leaders and Republicans who find the use of secret ballot elections preferable here are quotes from some primary Democrat leaders. From The Union News we have "The leading House sponsor of card check is Rep. George Miller, who also served as campaign manager of Mr. Waxman's race against Mr. Dingell, settled by secret ballot. What's more, along with 10 House Democrats, Mr. Miller wrote a 2001 letter to Mexican government officials encouraging the "use of secret ballots in all union recognition elections." The letter states: "We feel that the secret ballot is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose." In the inner workings of Congress representatives recognize the value of a secret ballot as evidenced by this quote about a vote to replace a key member of a committee. "Even Rep. Louise Slaughter, chairwoman of the House Rules Committee, told Congressional Quarterly she was relieved the vote would be a private one: "It's a secret ballot. . . . Thank the Lord." So there is just a bit of hypocrisy.

Dan and Bennet both thought that there may be some manauvering to soften the blow of EFCA, but they both believe that the bigger issue of EFCA is the First Contract Arbitration. Most first contracts are not usually negotiated in less than six months. The 180 day requirement is entirely unreasonable. And then to have the government impose your terms is disasterous. To give you an idea, in Canada, this method ended up with a WalMart Auto shop being forced to give employees a 32% increase in wages, despite a very competitive market that did not allow a comparable price increase. The result? WalMart closed the center the next day and all the newly unionized employees were out of work.

Another tidbit, the 50% +1 on card check is for the appropriate bargaining units, which you may not even know what that definition is until you are presented "your" union by the NLRB.

Lastly, there will be ABSOLUTELY NO SANCTIONS against unfair labor practices engaged in by the unions.

This law is the unions NUMBER 1 PRIORITY and they have alot of support. The NLRB will be heavily union biased as is the new Secretary of Labor (after all her father was a Teamster president.) So be aware, be educated and be active. Let your Congressional representatives know this is bad law. Here are a couple of educational resources. From UnionFacts. com info on intimidation. Lots of info from The Union News.