Are your employees fully engaged in their work or just getting by? It’s an important question because the answer has such a huge effect on the level of your organization’s success. Gallup® research indicates that only about 29% of employees are fully engaged in their work while 56% are disengaged and a full 15% are actively disengaged. This means that almost ¾ of employees in the typical workplace are less productive than they could be! And that’s just one of the negative consequences. Let’s take a closer look at each of the three groups:
Actively Engaged Employees—You can probably name these individuals off the top of your head. They’re the ones who are enthusiastic, energetic and believe in the organizational goals. If you ask your managers to rank their staff members, these are the folks right at the top. They’re often the folks a manager consistently turns to to get the job done right. As a result, these employees may be picking up the slack for the other 71%. That’s a big problem for retaining these stellar performers and you may be vulnerable to losing them.
Disengaged Employees—These are the employees on cruise control. They do what’s required to get by but nothing more. Their job is just a job and they’re there because they have to be. They don’t truly care all that much as to whether your organization succeeds or not, nor whether it’s performing at its peak. So that’s the majority of employees!
Actively Disengaged Employees—These are the ones who give you trouble. Maybe there’s a person who’s always pushing the envelope to see what (s)he can get away with. Perhaps someone frequently complains, gossips or badmouths the organization or other staff members. At worst, this person can have a serious and toxic impact on the morale of other staff.
In addition to enhanced productivity (and commensurate profitability) there are myriad reasons to enhance employee engagement at your workplace. Employee engagement results in:
Happier, more satisfied customers
Improved safety record
Improved morale of the entire workforce
Reduced absenteeism
Lower turnover rate
Retention of top talent
Greater Resilience in the face of change
Employee advocacy for your organization
There are active steps you can take to improve employee engagement. Ideally, commitment to doing so comes from the top so get your top executive on board with the following:
1. Engage Managers and Supervisors– Employees who work for a supervisor who is disengaged are three times more likely to be disengaged themselves. Train managers and supervisors about what engagement looks like and what they can do to improve their own and that of their employees. Make sure supervisors receive training on how to motivate and coach employees and how to engage in active listening so their employees feel heard. Evaluate supervisors on how well they develop their staff and foster a cooperative and healthy work environment.
2. Provide the Basics—Employees need clear expectations about what the job entails and the materials to get that job done. When expectations are murky and necessary tools are not provided, negative emotions such as boredom and frustration result. A bored or frustrated employee will think more about survival than about helping the organization. Provide job descriptions and regular feedback while ensuring employees have all the equipment, materials and tools that help them do their best work.
3. Get to know Your Employees — Employees bring their whole selves to work. Get to know them as individuals, what they are motivated by and what is important to them. Employees want to know that their supervisor and their employer cares about them. Provide support when they need it and offer a service such as an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) if they need outside help. Once you know what motivates them, follow through to meet those needs.
4. Enhance Trust – Lack of trust creates employee entrenchment and self-protection. Build trust through frequent, honest and open communication. Managers or supervisors who are autocratic, micromanaging, who blame subordinates, or fail to give recognition and credit create a negative environment where employees adopt behaviors geared only toward their own survival and not the good of the organization.
5. Foster Career Development and Learning – Provide employees with the opportunity to build on their strengths and do what they do best every day. Create a supportive organization where employees’ ideas are valued. Identify links between employees’ personal goals and interests and organizational goals and mission. When workers use their strengths and develop new skills, their work becomes more fulfilling as they simultaneously support the organization’s goals.
6. Communicate the Values and Mission – Employees are inspired by values that are embodied by others and communicated clearly; likewise, when they are proud of the organizational mission and their role in serving it. Take every opportunity to communicate to employees. Connect the dots for them on why and how their role plays an important part.
7. Eliminate Bad Behavior—Don’t tolerate bad behavior from any employees, even those who are tops in other important regards. When you fail to address performance issues, your best employees become demoralized and discouraged. You can’t afford that! Make sure you nip bad behavior in the bud and that all performance-related discussions and evaluations are honest.
Keep in mind that these steps need to be sustained organizational efforts. Mere dabbling, without consistency over the long term, won’t have a strong or long lasting impact. Improvement to employee engagement is a long-term commitment so make it a top organizational goal. The improved results will be well worth your efforts.
As the April 30th National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) Employee rights poster deadline looms, doubt about the validity of the requirement has been injected by a ruling by the U.S. District Court of South Carolina. The judge ruled just last week, on a challenge brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) does not have the statutory authority to require employers to post the notice.
Previously, a district court judge in Washington D.C. considered a challenge by the National Association of Manufacturers and invalidated some portions of the rule related to penalties, but determined that the NLRB does indeed have the statutory authority to require employers to post a notice of employee rights. The Washington, DC case is being appealed and it’s possible that the South Carolina case may be appealed by the NLRB.
As of this this morning, April 16th, there has been no comment from the NLRB on the South Carolina ruling. Their web site continues to publicize the April 30th deadline.
Do you have whiplash yet? What is a conscientious employer to do? Which arguments will hold sway? I guess the best advice is to sit tight for another week to see if any further delay in the posting requirement or any other relevant information is announced. Keep your eye on the HRSentry blog as we will continue to monitor any related events that unfold.
The new Employee Rights Under the NLRA poster deadline is now upon us: by April 30th most private sector employers, that is, those covered under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA,) need to display the new poster.
How do you know whether you are covered? The NLRA applies to most private sector employers who engage in interstate commerce. Specifically excluded are federal, state and local government employers as well as those who hire agricultural workers exclusively and those covered under the Railway Labor Act such as railways and airlines. More information is available under the Q&A section of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) web site.
The poster, similar to one already required of federal contractors, states that employees have the right to act together to improve wages and working conditions, to form, join and assist a union, to bargain collectively with their employer, and also to refrain from any of these activities. It provides examples of unlawful employer and union conduct and lets employees know how to contact the NLRB with questions or complaints.
Employers must post the notice conspicuously where other workplace notices are typically posted. It must be at least 11 x 17 inches in size (which can be achieved by taping two 8 ½ x 11 sheets of each half of the poster together.) The required posters are available for free download and may be obtained from your regional NLRB office so don’t ever pay for them. Subscribers to HRSentry® may access for free all the federal and state posters they need by clicking on HR Solutions, then HR Modules and scrolling through the list of available kits to the Poster Kit.
Note that, if you regularly post employee notices of personnel rules or policies on an internet or intranet site, you’ll have to post this notice there as well or, at least, post a link to the employee rights on National Labor Relations Board web site, with the heading: “Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act.”
Also, if 20% or more of your workforce is made up of by groups of speakers of different languages, the poster must be displayed in each language or a hard copy given to each affected employee. Translated versions of the posters in 23 languages are available on the NLRB site; others are available upon request.
Not only is workplace gossip unproductive, it can quickly sabotage morale.
Sometimes there’s that one employee who seems to delight in being the bearer of bad news, accurate or otherwise. She or he may ascribe an ulterior motive to other employees, other departments or management. Sometimes the person believes that gossiping and spreading rumors about others is a way to raise their own status by appearing to be the person “in the know.” Or sometimes gossip and rumors spread to fill a vacuum; that is, to make up for a lack of communication from a supervisor or top management.
Seeds of discontent, fertilized by rumors, can grow into misunderstandings, unresolved conflict, and a general breakdown in trust. Further, a culture riddled with gossip can encourage good employees, who don’t want to get sucked into negativity, to leave. Here are some tips to halt the gossip machine before it takes on a life of its own:
Management should communicate regularly and consistently with employees about what’s happening in the workplace. Otherwise, especially during times of uncertainty, employees will naturally speculate. Rumors often play on fear and fear can come from the perception, misguided or otherwise, that information is being withheld. Regular communication can also defuse the influence a gossiping employee has over others, because everyone else is “in-the-know” too.
Supervisors should make sure they communicate with employees every day or at least every week. Even if it is only for five minutes or if there’s nothing new to add since the last time, checking in regularly is important. Communication goes both ways so supervisors should express true interest in their staff and be ready to listen to concerns as well. Employees need to believe their supervisors and managers care about them. Set a calendar reminder and make it a priority!
Prevent and lessen the exclusivity of cliques through team building activities. Just as members of political parties within Congress cannot work together to create good legislation if they demonize one another, employees should view one another as human beings who are trying to do their jobs well and not sabotage others. Encourage a greater understanding of the roles of various positions and departments to break down barriers and foster better inter-departmental communications. Team building can involve such activities as different departments working together to solve problems or simply having an ice cream social during work hours to get to know one another better. Use your imagination!
Provide employees with a list of “Workplace Expectations.” Include a reference to employees not engaging in spreading gossip or rumors. For example: “Do not participate in spreading gossip and rumors, and do not tolerate it from others. Rumor and gossip sabotages the team’s ability to work together effectively. It is disrespectful, nonproductive, and a selfishly motivated act that impedes employees from performing their jobs. If you hear about an issue that pertains directly to you, verify the accuracy of the information by asking the supervisor or the coworker involved, rather than simply passing on the information.” Discuss with employees the impact gossip has on the workplace. Having a workplace expectation about gossiping gives permission to coworkers to hold each other mutually accountable for maintaining a “gossip free” workplace.
Speak with a gossiping employee about his or her behavior. Let him or her know that gossip results in others not trusting him or her because they believe they may become the next subject of the gossip. For some employees, this single statement will create a realization that will result in immediate change. You should also describe the impact the employee’s behavior has on the workplace and that his/her continued participation in the spreading of rumor and gossip is a violation of the workplace expectations.
Devote a performance evaluation category to Cooperation or Teamwork within and across departments. Include verbiage for behavior that merits a strong rating such as: “is eager to share knowledge and skills with other employees; seeks out and create opportunities to share such information with coworkers. Engages in and promotes positive interactions with all other employees.” When employees cooperate and work together, they avoid negative gossip. Where an employee falls short, make sure the bad behavior gets reflected in the performance appraisal.
Finally, enhance employee engagement in the workplace. Engaged employees are more motivated and more productive. Not coincidentally, they are not your gossip mongers. Our next HRSentry® blog will provide you with ideas and steps to get your staff fully engaged.
On March 30, the EEOC published its final ruling related to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA.) As you may know, ADEA was enacted to protect workers aged 40 and over from discrimination, in any aspect of employment, based on their age. The rule is applicable to: private employers with 20+ employees, state and local government employers, employment agencies, and labor organizations. The rule relates only to the “disparate impact” aspect of ADEA and the related defense known as “reasonable factor other than age”(RFOA) and does not apply to federal governmental agencies (although ADEA does.)
The rule is in response to two Supreme Court decisions (one in 2005 and one in 2008) in which it criticized part of the EEOC’s existing ADEA regulations. The Court upheld EEOC’s longstanding position that the ADEA prohibits policies and practices that have the effect of harming older individuals more than younger individuals, even if the harm was not intentional. Such an unintentional, yet harmful, effect is known as disparate impact.
The Court disagreed, however, with the part of the regulations which said that, if an employee proved in court that an employment practice disproportionately harmed older workers, the employer had to justify it as a “business necessity.” It said that, in an ADEA disparate impact case, the employer does not have to prove business necessity; it need only prove that the practice was based on an RFOA. The Court also noted that the RFOA defense is easier to prove than the business necessity defense but did not otherwise explain RFOA. The final rule accomplishes two things:
• It makes the existing regulation consistent with the Supreme Court’s holding that the defense to an ADEA disparate impact claim is RFOA, and not business necessity; and
• It explains the meaning of the RFOA defense to employees, employers and others.
According to the EEOC, an employment practice is based on an RFOA if it is reasonably designed and administered to achieve a legitimate business purpose in light of the circumstances, including its potential harm to older workers. Some items that may be considered to assess reasonableness include:
• The extent to which the factor is related to the employer’s stated business purpose;
• The extent to which the employer defined the factor accurately and applied the factor fairly and accurately, including the extent to which managers and supervisors were given guidance or training about how to apply the factor and avoid discrimination;
• The extent to which the employer limited supervisors’ discretion to assess employees subjectively, particularly where the criteria that the supervisors were asked to evaluate are known to be subject to negative age-based stereotypes;
• The extent to which the employer assessed the adverse impact of its employment practice on older workers; and
• The degree of the harm to individuals within the protected age group, in terms of both the extent of injury and the numbers of persons adversely affected, and the extent to which the employer took steps to reduce the harm, in light of the burden of undertaking such steps.
Further information is available on the EEOC website or, for subscribers to HRSentry, by typing ADEA in the Search box from the home page.
