• Home
• About
• HR Webinars

Posts Tagged ‘HR’

• 04 Jun

  

  Posted by
  Ryan Anderson

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  Don’t Allow Standard Expectations to be What Sets Employers Apart

  2

  If I have heard it once, I have heard it a million times: “We are a good employer because of (insert reason here)”.  “Insert reason here” ends up a generic, yet positive reason to why you, as an applicant, should be baited to pursue a career with the Company.

  What most employers fail to consider is what should be your unique selling propositions as an employer and what sets you apart from other organizations. Employers need to rethink the selling points that market you as an ‘employer of choice’. If your best tag line features include things you should naturally be doing, a rewrite is in order:

  “We provide base salary and benefits” – Great…and you should.
  “We are an equal opportunity employer” – You are supposed to be!
  “We offer a comfortable working environment” – Opposed to?

  These types of postulates remind me of banter with mates who want undeserved points for paying their bills on time, taking care of their kids and being a courteous driver.  All fantastic qualities affording you the right to claim you are a decent human being, but nothing that sets you apart from what you should be doing.

  Employers want to believe that their offerings are original and different, when in fact there is little that is separating them from other organizations. Consider identifying benefits that are outside of the norm. Do you offer tuition reimbursements and professional development? Do you offer flexible hours for those who have varying commitments supporting a healthy work/life balance? Do you promote strong workplace values such as public image and ethics?

  Employers need to discontinue marketing themselves with reasons that should be expectations of employees and not as perks. Less credit needs to be taken for the things that employers should be doing naturally, and more for truly enhancing an employee’s experience with an organization.

• 17 May

  

  Posted by
  Erik Bartz

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  Do’s and Don’ts of Termination: A Refresher

  0

  (Reposted via Keyser Mason Ball, LLP – http://kmblaw.com/news62.html)

  Most employers appreciate that terminations must be handled sensitively, carefully and with forethought. However, as employment counsel, we often see mistakes or missteps in the termination process by well-meaning employers. Sometimes these mistakes can be overcome with a generous separation package. In other cases, however, they can contribute to unnecessary, protracted and expensive litigation. As many of these missteps seem to repeat themselves, the following short refresher is offered on some “do’s” and “don’ts” of terminations.

  DO….expect that a terminated employee will review the circumstances of the termination, and any separation package offered, with legal counsel.
  Employers often tell us that a particular employee is not the type to challenge the fairness of a separation package, start a legal action, pay for litigation, etc. The fact is that employers should draft termination letters and prepare separation packages expecting that any terminated employee will seek the advice of legal counsel. Much has changed over the last two decades. In part, as the result of media focus, employees are now keenly aware that they have rights related to their employment, even if they do not always have a clear understanding of the nature and extent of these rights (see “privacy”). More importantly, access to legal counsel has never been easier. The Internet means that any employee can quickly find lawyers in their area who practice employment law. In turn, the Law Society of Upper Canada has now formalized rules allowing lawyers to negotiate contingency fee arrangements with clients, making litigation more affordable. » Read the rest of the entry..

• 08 Mar

  

  Posted by
  Michelle Ventrella

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  Remembering Retention

  0

  While you can (and most are) debate whether the recession is actually ‘over,’ I would caution employers against exhaling too soon. If you’re like most, you’ve been looking at employees through the lens of cost-cutting and termination. Times are changing and it’s time to look through the lens of retention.

  I would argue you should never shift focus away from retention, but this is perhaps for another blog post. The reality is that retention has simply not been a priority for most businesses in the past 18 months and that needs to change.

  An extraordinary legacy of the recent economic downturn is its creation of a new kind of employee; one who has seen, felt and experienced first-hand the trauma of working inside an organization when the economic world outside is crumbling. These employees are the witnesses. The survivors. And while they’ve been seriously disgruntled for months now (Great Recessions will do that), they’ve stuck around because of limited options elsewhere.

  That’s changing.

  » Read the rest of the entry..

• 10 Feb

  

  Posted by
  Pam Mihailoff

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  30secondHR: Should I reconsider terminating a pregnant employee?

  0

  Download a free white paper written by Pam to go further in-depth on this topic.

• 21 Jan

  

  Posted by
  Brian Moore

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  The DIY Culture: Not for HR

  2

  

  Have we become the do it yourself (DIY) generation? Have we been sold on a philosophy that I can do pretty much anything as good as the experts?

  Just look at the growth in DIY retailing….. home furnishings and hardware stores that have sprung up in the last decade:  Home Depot, Lowes; the increase in DIY instructional magazines and videos; and the new DIY Network cable channel.

  What has driven this phenomenon?  Where did it come from? Likely it originates out of the sense of accomplishment to be derived from ‘doing it yourself.’ It’s about taking ownership. It is about self-reliance. It’s also likely a bit ego driven.

  For most people it is also about cost.

  There is a belief that there are significant cost savings in doing things yourself.  However, I would wager that for every person that was able to pull off redoing their washroom at home there are far more who failed or ended up spending more personal time and money than anticipated.

  The DIY retailers sell you the raw materials, the instructions and the tools to undertake a project but they are missing the most important ingredients of planning, experience and expertise.

  Not everything can be DIY.

  For example, you require an electrician to certify the work you have done or your home insurance may be null in void in the event of an electrical fire.

  Similarly why put your organization at risk thinking that you can handle very technical components of your business, like HR. Anyone can handle the transactional aspect of HR such as benefit administration but it requires true experience and skill to handle a mass layoff or prevent a union drive from succeeding. HR is not a DIY.

• 24 Dec

  

  Posted by
  Erik Bartz

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  Key Drivers to Outsource HR

  0

  With 2009 coming to a close, many small businesses across Canada are starting to feel the effects of a turbulent year ease off, and they’re starting to look for ways to reign in costs and prepare for better days in 2010.  A hot trend in the small business market is Human Resources Outsourcing.  According to Hewitt Associations, a global provider of HR consulting services and research, the most common reason for outsourcing HR is to reduce overhead.  This is achieved by using the HRO firm’s economies-of-scale for things such as benefit products, HR infrastructure, or payroll systems.

  Size Counts

  Economies of scale are the primary method an HRO firm can reduce a business’ operational costs.  By pooling several businesses together, HRO firms aggregate needs for benefits, advice and legal expertise.  Additionally, they can manage routine HR tasks more efficiently as the talent and infrastructure is already in place.  When a small business joins the HRO firm, they simply access these existing programs at reduced rates and a minimal investment of time.  They can jump onto the HRO’s programs and platforms with little start-up time or expense, and can hit the ground running.

  Other reason to outsource human resources include:

  • Access to outside expertise
  • Improving service quality
  • Ability to focus on core expertise
  • High cost of remaining compliant with rapidly changing legislation
  • Eliminate high volume of low-value transactional activities
  • Reduce management distractions away from core business
  • Leverage existing staff to focus on key competencies
  • Reduce transaction costs

  Expanding into Canada

  Outsourcing is also a strategic advantage for foreign companies entering the Canadian market.  An HRO firm can quickly adopt a business’ policies to be compliant with Canadian legislation to on-board staff and efficiently pay their Canadian employees without any headaches.

  The H.R.O.I.

  Studies show once HR operations are outsourced, many companies show a strong return on investment.  IDC, a global provider of market intelligence, conducted a survey of executives and reported almost 85 percent of respondents saved as much as they spent on outsourcing.  And the savings, according to 95 percent of the respondents, went toward operational performance and innovation.  Check out some of our testimonials.

• 22 Dec

  

  Posted by
  Erik Bartz

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary
  • Link

  4 Considerations Before Using a Bring-Your-Own-Computer to Work Program

  0

  [picappgallerysingle id="7291698"]ITBusinessEdge wrote a great piece yesterday, Employeed-Owned Computer Programs: Diving into Murky Waters which brings up an interesting trend in the workplace and raises some potential legal, security and HR issues.  A “BYOC” program could be a fantastic way for businesses to save money, improve employee performance and engagement, etc, but here’s 4 implications to consider first:

  1. Who “owns” the data? Make sure all employees are covered under data ownership agreements, that state all work-related data and applications are the property of the company.  And at the time of termination, etc that transfer and erasure of the data must be witnessed and verified by the internal IT resources.  Update and utilize intellectual property and confidentiality agreements.
  2. A Security Blackhole?! Provide all your staff with security and anti-virus programs, and conduct occasional audits to verify proper security measures are in place.  Include a security agreement stating the employee will take all necessary and mandated precautions.
  3. Who owns the laptop? Your company puts in a couple grand, but the employee bought it, so then who owns it?  Before the employee gets the money, require a “graduated pay-back” of the funds.  For example, each month represents $200 depreciation of the funds – so if you gave $2000 and the employee leaves 6 months later, they owe back $800.  Check with your accountant for the best way to handle it.  Utilize a waiver to satisfy any employment standards requirements regarding pay deductions.
  4. Make it a choice.  Allow employees the option of a company provided computer or participating in a BYOC program.  Some employees may not be interested in purchasing another computer.
• 15 Dec

  

  Posted by
  Jennifer French

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary
  • Legislation

  The Implications of Rehiring an Employee

  0

  [picappgallerysingle id="247501"]

  Many companies rehire employees who have worked for them in the past.  Typically, they have a “Re-employment Policy” which details the privileges that will be re-instated (i.e. benefits, vacation, and seniority).  However, they may not have considered the obligation regarding severance pay should the renewed relationship not work out.

  The company is required to pay severance for broken periods of service when they add up to five (5) years or more (if severance is applicable).  For example, if an employee had worked previously for the company for 2 years, resigned and was away for 2 years, rehired and worked for another 4 years and then the employee is terminated, he/she would be entitled to severance based on the combined service – therefore, 6 years (the 2 years previously employed plus the current 4 years of employment).  Notice would just be required on the current employment period of 4 years (therefore, 4 weeks of working notice or pay).   Under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 minimums, the total termination pay would be four (4) weeks of notice and six (6) weeks’ severance (if applicable).   In addition, it doesn’t matter how long the break in service is or the reason the employee left initially (quit or termination).  So rehiring an employee can mean taking on a potential severance liability.

  Some suggestions when considering an employee for re-hire include:

  • Insuring that the employee’s qualifications meet the requirements of the vacant position;
  • Confirming that he/she had been in good standing at the time of departure;
  • Reviewing the privileges you may consider reinstating (benefits, vacation, etc.) as there is no legal obligation to do so;
  • Clearly outlining all terms in the new offer letter.
• 14 Dec

  

  Posted by
  Erik Bartz

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary
  • Webinar

  Changes in Small Claims Court

  0

  We recently had a record-breaking (for us anyway) attendance to our webinar: “Wrongful Dismissal and the Changes to the Rules of Court.”  Its also a topic we blogged about a couple weeks back, and I’d like to share some of the highlights from the webinar with you.

  First some background to bring us up to speed.  On January 1, 2010 the Rules of Court for small claims will be changing in Canada.  Here is a brief highlight of the changes:

  1.  Claims doubled from $25k to $50k

  2.  Damages doubled from $50k to $100k

  3.  Simplified procedures are also being introduced for more cases

  In other words, more cases can be processed in Small Claims Court, which don’t require a lawyer, and they will be subject to an enhanced Simplified Procedure.  That means less time for discovery and faster judgements.  All of whihc adds up to a lower cost barrier for disgrunlted employees to sue their former employers for wrongful dismissal cases, etc.

  So although these rules mean Canadian business could get hauled off to court more often and have bigger judgements against them, they still have plenty of options to keep these costs/risks to a minimum.

  1.  Have termination clauses included in all employment contracts (they need to be specific to each employee, and must meet legal minimum standards)

  2.  Have an employee handbook with policies you preach and practice!  (Paper trails are your best friend)

  3.  Don’t be a jerk when it comes time to terminate.  Play fair, play nice, and have a little heart.

  We recently had a record-breaking (for us anyway) attendance to our webinar: “Wrongful Dismissal and the Changes to the Rules of Court.”  Its also a topic we blogged about a couple weeks back, and I’d like to share some of the highlights from the webinar with you.

  First some background to bring us up to speed.  On January 1, 2010 the Rules of Court for small claims will be changing in Canada.  Here is a brief highlight of the changes:

  1. Small Claims court limits have increased from 10K to $25k
  2. Damages doubled from $50k to $100k for claims under the Simplified Procedure rule
  3. Other changes to the Simplified procedures rule are being introduced to speed up claims and reduce costs for claimants

  In other words, more cases will be processed in Small Claims Court, which don’t require a lawyer, costs will be reduced for a disgruntled employee to pursue a claim against their employer.  And now more claims (up to 100K) can now be pursued under the simplified procedure rule that was previously reserved for claims up to 50K.  The additional changes to this rule relating to motions for summary judgement, timeframes for discovery, etc will further speed up the legal process for employees who want to “have their day in court.”

  These rule changes mean Ontario business could potentially get hauled off to court more often and have bigger judgements awarded against them.  However, employers still have plenty of options to keep these costs/risks to a minimum.

  1. Tighten up your employment contracts.  Beyond including confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and IP agreements – have termination clauses included that are specific to each employee, and meet legal minimum standards.
  2. Have an employee handbook with policies you preach and practice!  (Paper trails are your best friend)
  3. As Elvis said, “Don’t be cruel”  when it comes time to terminate.  Play fair, play nice, and have a little heart.

  Give us a shout if you would like some assistance preparing you business for these changes

• 08 Dec

  

  Posted by
  Jennifer French

  
  

  Category

  • Commentary

  Resignation vs. Termination Notice

  2

  Recently, a client contacted me with the following question:

  “If an employee has provided 2 ½ months notice for resignation but we don’t require (or want) him here for more than two weeks – how do we handle it legally?”

  The answer is that it depends on the employee’s service with the company but it is the lesser of the resignation notice or the termination pay that would be owed under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 minimums.  For example, if the employee has 2 years of service, you would owe 2 weeks pay under Employment Standards (rather than 2 ½ months) because in essence you are terminating his employment (see section 56 subsection (1)(a) of the Act).  However, if the employee has 10 years of service, you may be obligated to pay the 2 ½ months (or continue to have the employee work for this period of time).  If severance is applicable, then the employee would be entitled to 8 weeks notice and 10 weeks of severance.  Therefore, the 2 ½ months of resignation notice would be less.  If severance is not applicable, then the employee would be entitled to 8 weeks notice only which would be less than the resignation notice of 2 ½ months.  You would be terminating his employment and paying (or having him work) the 8 weeks of notice.

  So, the next time you have an employee submit a resignation letter with a significant notice period, double check his/her service date!