May, 2010     

 

Happy Memorial Day everyone!  I hope you have some wonderful plans to launch the summer season.  Stay safe and have fun but also take a moment to remember and honor our fallen heroes.

This month's news includes a couple of updates for you on the health care reform bill. As things become announced I will be keeping you informed.  I also have a note on the new drug testing cut-off levels that took effect this past May 1st.  

My main topic this month is about workplace discrimination.  There is one lighter article about how some employee behavior can create barriers and discrimination.  The major article talks about how discrimination is not "always" against the law. Is it really discrimination or just poor management? Something to think about! 

Last is our quiz .. trying my best to keep your mind sharp! See how you do. 

Here's is a listing with links to each article: 

Health Care Reform:  Coverage for Adult Children

New Drug Level Testing Cut-Off Levels 

Odd Co-Worker Behavior.  What To Do?.

Workplace Discrimination: Not Always Against The Law

Our Monthly Quiz

Health Care Reform Update

Coverage for Adult Children

 
Under the recently passed federal health care reform, the Affordable Care Act, adult children are now eligible for coverage under their parent's insurance until the age of 26. The Department of Labor posted the following information explaining the dependent coverage component of the Act:

Fact sheet
The Regulation
Frequently Asked Questions 

The Fact Sheet explains some of the key elements of regulations issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and the Department of the Treasury. For example, adult children under the age of 26 are eligible even if they no longer live with their parents, are not dependents on their parents' tax return, or are no longer students. The policy applies equally to young adults who are both married and unmarried.

Source: HRCalifornia Extra-5/20/2010

 


 
New Drug Testing Cut-Off Levels 
Take Effect May 1, 2010

If your business has a drug testing policy in place, it is probably based on the DHHS Guidelines. If so, here is some news about reduced cutoff levels for some drugs. It might be time to review your policy and be sure it complies with the Guidelines. If you are a Federal Contractor, you already know that compliance is mandatory.

On May 1, 2010, revisions to the Department of Health and Human Services' (DHHS) Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs take effect, including reduced cutoff levels for amphetamine and cocaine. Although the Guidelines apply to federal employer drug testing, many private sector employers opt to follow the Guidelines' procedures for how testing is conducted and for the cutoff levels. The revised Guidelines also change other administrative aspects of the procedures. 

Specifically, with respect to amphetamines, the initial test cutoff has been lowered to 500 ng/ml, and the confirmatory test cutoff has been lowered to 250 ng/ml. The confirmatory test cutoff for methamphetamines also is 250 ng/ml. The current requirement for amphetamine presence to reportc methamphetamines has been lowered to 100 ng/ml. With respect to cocaine, the initial test cutoff has been lowered to 150 ng/ml, and the confirmatory test cutoff has been lowered to 100 ng/ml. Moreover, the Guidelines now allow for testing for MDMA (Ecstasy) and provide for an initial test cutoff of 500 ng/ml and a confirmatory test cut-off of 250 ng/ml. 

With these changes about to take effect, now is the time for employers with substance abuse programs modeled on the DHHS Guidelines to review and update their programs.

Source: Labor and Employment Alert - Ballard Spahr



                      
A Drug Testing Checklist 
           taken from the DHHS Guidelines:

   A list of "must do's" before you implement a drug-testing policy: 


Identify any Federal or State laws with which you must comply. (Call your State's attorney general or talk with an expert.) 


If applicable, talk with union officials.


Identify and contact a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)–certified laboratory. 


Contract with a medical review officer.


Develop a system to protect the confidentiality of employee drug testing records. Call SAMHSA's Workplace Helpline for assistance. 

Designate a person at your company who will receive the test results from the lab, and make sure he or she is aware of confidentiality issues. 
Write a clear, consistent, and fair policy, and have it reviewed by legal counsel. 
Notify employees 30 to 60 days before the testing program goes into effect. 
Communicate to employees that you will abide by the policy also. 

Source: (c) Copyright 2010, Employer Resource Institute - All rights reserved.

How do you handle these situations? If you have an HR professional on your staff, then she will probably know what to do in each situation. 

If you don't have one on staff, our HR Help Desk™ is available to answer questions and provide the guidance you need in these often sticky situations. 

Contact us at 310-798-4569 CA and 480-924-610 AZ or email us: 
margaret@mjms.net.


HR Strange But True! 


      Odd Co-Worker Behaviors and What to Do About Them

Careerbuilder.com recently conducted a survey that found that 39 percent of workers say they feel that they don't fit in with their colleagues. And if the workers' descriptions of their co-workers' oddest antics are any guide, there's no wonder. 

The survey asked respondents to describe the craziest things their co-workers have done on the job. Here are some of the oddest responses. 

Co-worker ate the cheese off the pizza box at a company meeting 
Co-worker talks openly about flatulence. 
Co-worker in the cubicle next to me wears 3-D glasses with the lenses removed. 
Co-worker repeatedly bangs a mallet on the table for no apparent reason. 
Co-worker whistles 8 hours a day. 
Co-worker chews tobacco and spits it into empty soda bottles. 
Former boss brought a baby sippy cup to a meeting and started drinking out of it. 
Co-worker cleaned fingernails using a counterpart's business card while sitting in their office.

The question is, what should co-workers do if their co-worker's behavior bothers them? 

"Today's workplace is made up of many different types of people and sometimes, behavior can come across as being crazy or inappropriate for the office," said Rosemary Haefner, vice president of human resources for CareerBuilder. "Communication is key to dealing with co-workers' behavior that may be impacting your ability to produce good work – for whatever reason. It is important to identify why their behavior is bothering you. Often, having a professional conversation with your co-worker will solve the problem and allow everyone to work in harmony." 

If a professional conversation would be too mature/uncomfortable for some workers,
SoAnnoying.com has created "Annoy-a-Grams," which allow workers to tell a co-worker about a bothersome behavior while staying anonymous.

 As an HR manager, you are probably running through scenarios in which an employee puts the organization at risk by sending something that is offensive to a co-worker, especially since it can be done anonymously. The website's terms of service do state that users are prohibited from sending anything that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, bullying, or harassing, And the Annoy-A-Gram application itself reminds users "Don't be mean; the purpose of the gram is to alert others of irritating behaviors that you would ordinarily feel awkward about addressing in person." Do those rules put your mind at ease?


Sources: CareerBuilder.com and SoAnnoying.com 


 
And our quiz 


In last month's newsletter, we gave you some information on the HIRE Act signed March 18, 2010. Let's see if you remember…

President Barack Obama recently signed the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act, which provides incentives to increase the hiring rate of unemployed workers. The law allows employers to keep the employer portion (6.2 percent) of the Social Security tax that they normally would have to pay to the government for certain newly hired employees. To which of the following new employees would the tax break apply? 

A) Johanna, who was hired January 1, 2010, by the ACME Company. She was unemployed for 30 days before being hired. She earns $250,000 in 2010 with ACME.

B) Malik, who was hired February 28, 2010, by the ACME Company. He was unemployed for 120 days before being hired. He earns $90,000 in 2010 with ACME.

C) Emma, who was hired February 1, 2010, by the Acme Company. She was unemployed for 45 days before being hired. She earns $45,000 in 2010 with ACME.

D) All of the Above.

Answers are found at the end of our feature article. 

Now on to our feature article ... 


Workplace "Discrimination"
 Not Always Against the Law

"My employee says her supervisor is discriminating against her. She says he gives her all the hardest assignments, and when she goes to him for help he is sarcastic and rude, but she does not know why. Is this illegal?"

Unfortunately, nobody says you get to have a delightful day at work every day, or that your boss has to be nice to you. While the situation you are describing may be unpleasant for the employee, it may also be perfectly legal.


'Discrimination' Definition

Employees often throw around the word "discrimination," but may not know what that word truly means in a legal sense. Discrimination is simply treating someone differently based on the group, class or category to which that person belongs.

Managers need to know that discrimination is illegal only if it is based on a group, class or category specifically protected by law, or if it is done in retaliation for exercising a legal right such as filing a workers' compensation claim. 

For example, discrimination based on a person's sex, race, national origin or age is clearly illegal. Demoting an employee because he/she has exercised his/her right to take family leave to bond with a new baby would be against the law. Similarly, it is unlawful to refuse to give a raise to an employee who has otherwise earned it but who takes time off work each week to attend religious services.

Legal ‘Discrimination'

On the other hand, discrimination based on other characteristics or factors is perfectly legal and actually quite common. For example, one group of employees may be treated better than another based on the category of seniority, by giving employees with more seniority more vacation. 

A manager could give hiring preference to applicants who earned a degree from a University of California campus versus one from a California State University.

A company could offer a better benefits package to employees who work in its office compared to what is offered to its warehouse employees, or allow a more relaxed dress code for the warehouse employees. 

In each instance, a group or class of employees or applicants is being treated differently than another group or class, but because the distinction is not drawn based on any category protected by law, the "discrimination" is not illegal.


Identify Discrimination Type

The issue at hand for the employee who is complaining of discrimination because she gets tough assignments and has a sarcastic and rude supervisor is to find out why she thinks the supervisor is treating her that way. Unless the employee claims it is related to her race, sex, national origin or some other characteristic protected by law, or unless the employee claims it is retaliation for having exercised some legal right (such as reporting a safety violation to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration), there is no illegal discrimination. More often, the employee will say something like "I just think he doesn't like me."

Of course, regardless of whether there is illegal discrimination, an employer would be wise to look into the supervisor's behavior and determine whether the company would benefit by providing him counseling in more appropriate personnel management techniques. While his behavior may not be illegal, it certainly does not create a productive work environment and could lead to meritless, but expensive, legal claims.


Source: Ellen S. Savage, HR Advisor - The Labor Law Helpline - California Chamber of Commerce www.hrcalifornia.com


Answers to the  quiz:
B is correct: Malik, who was hired February 28, 2010, by the ACME Company. He was unemployed for 120 days before being hired. He earns $90,000 in 2010 with ACME. 

Explanation: 
The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act provides incentives to increase the hiring rate of unemployed workers. Under the law, employers may keep the employer portion (6.2 percent) of the Social Security tax that they normally would have to pay to the government for certain newly hired employees. The tax exemption applies to wages paid after March 18, 2010, and before January 1, 2011, to individuals that meet the following three requirements:

1. They were unemployed for at least 60 days before being hired.
2. They were hired after February 3, 2010.
3. Each employee hired under this law must certify by signed affidavit that he or she has not been employed for more than 40 hours during the 60 days prior to beginning the new job,

Source: hr.blr.com

Reminder note from MJMS: 

The new
Form W-11, Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act Employee Affidavit, is now posted on IRS.gov, along with answers to f requently-asked questions about the payroll tax exemption and the related new hire retention credit. The new law requires that employers get a statement from each eligible new hire, certifying under penalties of perjury, that he or she was unemployed during the 60 days before beginning work or, alternatively, worked fewer than a total of 40 hours for anyone during the 60-day period. Employers can use Form W-11 to meet this requirement.

Most eligible employers will then use Form 941, Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return, to claim the payroll tax exemption for eligible new hires. This form, revised for use beginning with the second calendar quarter of 2010, is currently posted as a draft form on IRS.gov and will be released next month as a final along with the form's instructions. We will provide a link in the next newsletter.


Don't Forget To Access Our WebForms.
Answer All Your Human Resource Needs!

  • Manage Your Day-to-Day Non-Profit or Small Business

  • Organize All Necessary Human Resource Information

  • Promote Legal Compliance Within Your Organization.

Click Here To Know More!


 
ABOUT MJMS, INC.

President and Principal Consultant: Margaret Jacoby, SPHR

Margaret Jacoby has more than 25 years of Human Resources and professional management experience in a variety of industries. She has designed human resources infrastructure and implemented systems to ensure compliance with state and federal employment laws. She has directed high quality human resources functions for small and emerging businesses, and served as an external consultant to a wide range of erse organizations, including non-profits.

Her work has included:

  • Conducting H.R. Needs Assessments

  • Drafting employee handbooks and policy manuals

  • Conducting job analysis and developing position descriptions

  • Conducting on-site compliance audits

  • Counseling management on progressive discipline

  • Drafting and review of employee disciplinary actions

  • Providing mediation in employee/employee conflict

  • Training employees/supervisors/managers in the implementation of human resources systems and policies such as Sexual Harassment

  • Conducting workshops for business owners on H.R. compliance issues.

Ms. Jacoby has earned the nationally-recognized certification of Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) from the HR Certification Institute, Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM).

Ms. Jacoby's professional affiliations include:

  • Professionals in Human Resources Association (PIHRA)

  • Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

  • National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO), Los Angeles and Phoenix

  • California Chamber of Commerce

  • Arizona Small Business Association (ASBA)

  • Long Beach Community Business Network (LBCBN)

  • Institute for Management Consultants (IMC)

The information contained in this newsletter is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal or professional advice. The information is provided by MJ Management Solutions, Inc. and while we endeavor to keep the information up-to-date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the newsletter or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

  

Phone: 480-924-6101 and 310-798-4569     Fax: 408-452-1429 
margaret@mjms.net • MJ Management Solutions, Inc.