jenng87

What Will Happen with Wage and Hour Laws Under Trump?

Trump_jedqen

President Donald Trump has promised to undo Obama-era regulations that business groups say are overly burdensome. What does this mean for wage and hour laws that affect employers?

A panel of attorneys at the American Bar Association’s 11th Annual Labor and Employment Law conference on Nov. 11 discussed key issues the Trump administration will tackle—including the definition of joint employer and the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA’s) salary threshold for overtime exemption.

[SHRM members-only toolkit: Determining Overtime Eligibility in the United States]

Joint Employment

When is a joint-employment relationship established? The National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB’s) controversial Browning-Ferris decision expanded joint-employer liability. The board found that “indirect control” over working conditions is enough to establish a joint-employer relationship, whereas the previous standard required an employer to have “actual, direct, and immediate” control. Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), joint employers may have collective bargaining obligations.

Joint employers can also be held liable for FLSA wage and hour violations—though the definition is different under the FLSA. The Obama administration issued interpretations with a broad view of when two companies could be legally responsible for the same employee, said Jeremy Glenn, a management attorney with Cozen O’Connor in Chicago. However, the Trump administration announced in June that it was abandoning that guidance.

“Many viewed this as an indication of a shift in priorities,” Glenn said, noting that no replacement or new guidance has been issued.

Although the Trump administration could advocate for a narrow joint-employer definition, the decision is up to the courts, not the Department of Labor, said Patricia Smith, senior counsel with the National Employment Law Project in Washington, D.C. Smith was the solicitor of labor under former President Barack Obama.

The joint-employment definition is a court-made law that will remain the same until a judge rules otherwise, she added. The Department of Labor had issued compliance documents, not new interpretations of the law, she said.

Regardless of the federal standards, states also have their own authority to determine the definition of joint employer.

Congress could also change the standard. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Save Local Business Act on Nov. 7. The bill would amend the definition under the FLSA and the NLRA. Smith said it would be a “very narrow” definition. Glenn called it “specific.”

For now, employers must continue to carefully review all contracts for staffing services, Glenn said. To the extent possible, employers should ensure that control over workers remains with the outside service.

Overtime Regulations

The fate of the FLSA’s overtime-exempt salary threshold for white-collar workers also remains undetermined. The Obama administration sought to raise the threshold to $47,476, but a federal judge in Texas deemed the rule invalid. For now, the 2004 threshold of $23,660 remains.

Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta has said that the threshold should be raised—just not by so much as to “shock the system.”

Acosta has also said that he is dedicated to following the rule of law. Changing the threshold will require a new notice and rulemaking process. This process involves a comment period, review and an economic analysis, among other steps. “We’re talking a long time,” Smith said.

Regardless of what happens with the federal overtime rule, some states are moving forward with their own salary threshold hikes. California and New York, for example, have been steadily increasing their rates—and new levels will take effect soon.

Was this article useful? SHRM offers thousands of tools, templates and other exclusive member benefits, including compliance updates, sample policies, HR expert advice, education discounts, a growing online member community and much more. Join/Renew Now and let SHRM help you work smarter.

https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/Pages/Wage-and-Hour-Laws-Under-Trump.aspx

Move The Starting Line: COO Knows Diverse Teams Yield Creativity

59ea22c51800004506dfb777

Yes, she knows it sounds odd coming from someone with an undergraduate degree from Northwestern University and a masters degree from Harvard Business School.

But, Peggy Yu, COO of Startup Institute, says sometimes the best employees are non-traditional ones.

“There is no way to get the most creative ideas and the best solutions from people with the same backgrounds,” says Yu, who after 10 years in transportation, logistics, media and software, moved into her current work she calls “transformational.”

Startup Institute, a Boston-based program with 1,400 alumni, offers four tracks “to help you leverage your passions and build the technical skills, culture skills, and network that will launch you into the innovation industry in the areas of Web Development, Web Design, Digital Marketing, or Sales and Business Development,” according to the website.

Full time eight-week programs, and part-time 12-week programs are accessible through scholarships. According to Yu, Startup Institute students are trained with skills that can be used to start companies or be part of innovation teams at existing companies.

While startup ventures are sprinkled throughout the country, nine out of 10 start-ups backed by venture capitalists are in California, according to PitchBook.

“This lack of geographic diversity isn’t surprising, but it does mean the other 40-plus states and regions don’t get a lot of attention from the tech community,” Dana Olsen writes.

The overall picture of the U.S. startup landscape is healthy, according to TechCrunch, as the third quarter of 2017 demonstrates, with new results just released.

“Data shows a rise in late-stage funding and a stabilizing early-stage funding environment. At the late stage, U.S. venture investment hit its highest level in five quarters by both round count and total dollars invested. Total investment at the early stage was also at the highest point in the past year,” writes Joanna Glasner.

In the third quarter of 2017, there were 791 early-stage startups launched, backed by $8.26 billion in investments, according to Tech Crunch. A total of 225 late stage startups received $11.61 billion in funding.

“Overall, venture funding for Q3 of 2017 totaled $21.75 billion, according to Crunchbase projections,” Olsen writes.

With this robust landscape for innovation funding, lowering the barriers to entry for everyone is essential. There is enough to go around for everyone.

“We want to give people the opportunity to have access,” Yu says, to the innovation dollars and opportunities. Because the playing field is not level and the starting line keeps moving for those who are not well-connected to networks.

To fix that accessibility gap, Yu says, “Startup makes it accessible, and gives technical skills, soft skills, a network and an ecosystem of companies.” And that accessibility is then available for non-traditional tech employees, including women, veterans, non-college grads and many more.

Yu’s own route to leading Startup Institute began in a traditional way, but diverged because “I realized if I was going to work that hard, I wanted skin in the game. I knew more of what I don’t want than what I want,” Yu says.

After graduating from Northwestern in 2002, Yu worked in sales management for a year, moved to operations, then moved into logistics for a Boston-based transportation company. She traveled and worked internationally in Singapore, Hong Kong and throughout China.

Deciding to move out of transportation, Yu went to Harvard Business School starting in 2005, finishing in 2007.

“It was a humbling experience, as I was one of the youngest there. And it was very transformational,” Yu says.

One of her professors introduced her to a later stage startup after graduation and while there, she says she “realized my love for B2B, and went to San Francisco in 2008, working at a large company with pockets of innovation building out alternative business models.”

While at that company, she was an advocate for hiring employees with nontraditional backgrounds, specifically candidates who did not have her brand of educational pedigree, or a degree at all.

“A lot of companies want to see if you graduated from college,” Yu says. “But I care about how hungry and curious they are. I want to know that you are willing to learn.”

Yu says she had to strongly fight for a candidate who was not a college graduate, and got pushback from human resources.

“I had one candidate who was fantastic, she was a star, and she had the personality and the perspective.” Yu hired her and she became a stellar employee.

In 2012, Yu returned to Harvard for her five-year reunion, and after conversations with her former professors, began working at the Arthur Rock Center for Entrepreneurship at HBS. She left that position in August 2015 to try and decide her next career move.

Now back in the Boston area, she became a volunteer mentor for students, then worked as a mentor in residence. And now is Yu is COO.

With sights set on the future with diversity in the startup universe, Yu says her goal is to have “companies to sponsor a sales track, for instance, and give opportunities to students and pay for trainings.”

Yu acknowledges that is is “hard to build trust on diverse teams,” but says ultimately it is worth it—for the best ideas, the best workplace cultures, and of course, for fairness. Stagnation on diversity in innovation is unnecessary, she says.

And what does Yu think about a company culture that does not provide access to all?

“That drives me bananas.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/move-the-starting-line-coo-knows-diverse-teams-yield_us_59ea21b8e4b032f98fa30d38?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

Everything You Need To Know About Chef John Besh’s Sexual Harassment Accusations

59ef6530140000371b8c9675

To the outside world, celebrity chef John Besh has maintained a squeaky-clean, family-friendly reputation over the years.

But as of Saturday, the New Orleans-based chef has been publicly accused of sexual harassment. Besh stepped down from his restaurant group after the New Orleans’ Times-Picayune published an explosive report in which 25 current and former female employees accused Besh of fostering a culture that encouraged sexual harassment. The married father of four is also accused of having a “coercive” sexual relationship with an unnamed female employee. He stepped down from his restaurant group on Monday.

“John has decided to step down from all aspects of operations and to provide his full focus on his family,” Shannon White, the new chief executive of the Besh Restaurant Group company, told employees in an email on Monday, according to the The New Orleans Advocate.

1. Who is John Besh?

Besh is a decorated Southern chef and former Marine who served during Desert Storm. The James Beard award-winning chef and prominent cookbook author built up an empire of 12 prominent New Orleans restaurants, including August, Besh Steak, Lüke and Willa Jean.

He was a contestant on “Top Chef Masters” and also appeared on programs like “The Next Iron Chef,” “NCIS: New Orleans,” the “Today Show” and “Late Night with Seth Meyers.” He also had a show based on his family-friendly cookbook: “Chef John Besh’s Family Table.”

Besh, who once partnered with Michelle Obama on a cooking event in Milan, was also known for his disaster relief work. He helped to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina hit and, more recently, helped affected communities after Hurricane Harvey recently hit Houston. The New York Times once described him as a man of “telegenic Southern humility and unquestioned generosity.”

But for the women who worked at Besh’s restaurants, his humble public image was entirely different from his private one.

Michelle Obama speaks next to chef John Besh at the James Beard American Restaurant during a visit in Milan on June 17, 2015.

2. The allegations against Besh

An eight-month investigation by the Times-Picayune revealed complaints that Besh conducted a months-long, “long-term unwelcome sexual relationship” with a female employee, according to a complaint the woman (who remained unnamed) filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

During a work trip, Besh reportedly “insisted (she) drink heavily” at a work event and then came into her hotel room that night. The woman said she was “was barely conscious, and easily overwhelmed by JBesh (sic), who engaged in oral sex and fell asleep.” From then on, the chef required the female employee to sleep in the same hotel room on work trips and would “coerce” her “to submit to his sexual overtures.”

The woman shared her story with Madie Robison, an employee at the Besh Restaurant Group (BRG), after her first encounter with Besh:

“I remember driving to work and she called me and sounded scared,” Robison said. “She said, ‘You’re never going to guess what happened. I slept with one of them I think. I woke up and he was in my hotel room and I don’t remember how he got there.’”

Other women who’ve filed complaints said Besh made comments about their appearance, and made uncomfortable and unwanted advances. Dominique Ranieri, a server at a BRG event space, recalled a time when Besh acted inappropriately with her in public.

“He took one of the hors d’oeuvres and shoved it in my mouth in front of everyone,” Ranieri told the Times-Picayune. “It was a complete invasion of my personal space, and he laughed about it, and all of his friends laughed about it. It was like, ‘Look at what I can do to this girl, and she can’t do anything about it.’”

3. Besh’s response to the allegations

Besh responded to the allegations on Saturday in a statement:

Two years ago, I deeply hurt those I love by thoughtlessly engaging in a consensual relationship with one member of my team. Since then I have been seeking to rebuild my marriage and come to terms with my reckless actions given the profound love I have for my wife, my boys and my Catholic faith. I also regret any harm this may have caused to my second family at the restaurant group, and sincerely apologize to anyone past and present who has worked for me who found my behavior as unacceptable as I do.

I alone am entirely responsible for my moral failings. This is not the way the head of a company like ours should have acted, let alone a husband and father. But it should not taint our incredible team of more than 1,000 employees, nor undermine our unyielding commitment to treating everyone with respect and dignity, regardless of gender, race, age and sexual preference.

4. Besh’s negative influence on the culture of his restaurants

Besh’s actions trickled down throughout his restaurants, as woman allege they were sexually harassed by employees, like Besh’s business partner, Octavio Mantilla, and forced to work in a “bro” culture that encouraged their inappropriate behavior.

Lindsey Reynolds, a social media manager at BRG, told the Times-Picayune she was “sexually harassed, and verbally assaulted almost every day.” She said that “vulgar and offensive comments, aggressive un-welcomed touching and sexual advances were condoned and sometimes even encouraged by managers and supervisors.”

According to Robison, she experienced many instances of unwanted touching from Mantilla over her two years at the company and was forced to go to uncomfortable company events at pools, where she had to wear a swimsuit. Robison eventually resigned from the company, as she said there was no one to formally complain to at BRG.

“There was no human resources person available, only other supervisors who were either afraid of losing their jobs or saw no benefit in challenging the good old boys club,” she told the Times-Picayune. According to the paper, BRG, which oversees over 1,000 employees, hired its first director of human resources on Oct. 11.

Raymond Landry, general counsel of the Besh Restaurant Group, also issued a statement on Saturday in response to the women’s allegations:

We have learned recently that a number of women in our company feel that we have not had a clear mechanism in place to allow them to voice concerns about receiving the respect they deserve on the job.

I want to assure all of our employees that if even a single person feels this way, it is one person too many and that ends now. While we’ve had a complaint procedure in place that complies with all existing laws, we now recognize that, as a practical matter, we needed to do more than what the law requires and we have revamped our training, education and procedures accordingly.

Now that we have learned of these concerns, we believe going forward that everyone at our company will be fully aware of the clear procedures that are now in place to safeguard against anyone feeling that his or her concerns will not be heard and addressed free from retaliation.

5. This speaks to a larger issue within the restaurant industry

The allegations against Besh show that the culture of sexual harassment extends far beyond people in the entertainment industry. Lately the spotlight has been on film executive Harvey Weinstein after dozens of women came forward to accuse him of sexual harassment and in some cases, sexual assault, as well as photographer Terry Richardson, who has been accused of sexual harassment and abuse for years.

Besh’s departure has opened the door for more conversations about harassment in the restaurant industry, which has long been recognized as a “boy’s club” that’s exceedingly difficult for women to break into for years.

After the news about Besh surfaced, Anthony Bourdain, José Andrés and Extra Crispy’s senior food and drinks editor, Kat Kinsman, spoke up about what the accusations mean for the restaurant industry.

Besh’s case shatters the image of what many people imagine to be the type of person who commits sexual harassment. He was a Southern “family man” known for his family-oriented cookbooks, television shows and extensive philanthropic work (much like Weinstein’s support for Hillary Clinton and endowment of a Gloria Steinem faculty chair at Rutgers University, which made him outwardly appear to be a feminist).

This is yet another example that demonstrates sexual harassment exists in every industry. It’s a pervasive problem that’s embodied by the likes of Southern chefs in New Orleans and Hollywood heavyweights in California alike.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-besh-sexual-harassment-allegations_us_59ef3effe4b0d14acdcc7e73?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

Lawyers Explain What The Restaurant Industry Needs To Do To Protect Women

In the wake of sexual harassment allegations facing celebrity chef John Besh and his restaurant group, there’s now a spotlight on the restaurant industry’s toxic kitchen culture.

As it was first reported by the Times-Picayune, 25 current and former employees came forward with sexual harassment allegations against Besh and some of his employees. The Besh Group, which employs around 1,200 people, did not have a head of human resources until Oct. 11, just a few days before the allegations became public.

This is problematic because, according to a 2016 report from the Restaurant Opportunities Center United, 37 percent of sexual harassment complaints stem from the restaurant industry.

And though sexual harassment happens to both men and women, Besh’s case in particular involved men sexually harassing women. It’s no secret that women have experienced sexism in restaurant kitchens for decades, so how does the industry help to prevent this particular type of sexual harassment from occurring?

HuffPost spoke with three lawyers to get a better idea of why kitchens have such a toxic culture, how restaurant employees can report harassment, and why it’s up to management to change a company’s culture.

Long-standing traditions contribute to harmful culture at restaurants.

Steven Sidman, an Atlanta-based attorney at Carlton Fields who represents Michelin-starred chefs and restaurateurs, thinks the toxicity of restaurant culture stems from old practices that are still prevalent in Western commercial kitchen today.

“There’s kind of a social perception that [harassment of women in kitchens] is somehow more tolerable or more easily tolerated in the restaurant industry today due to traditions or some cultural aspect of it,” he told HuffPost. “The fact is that it should not be the case.”

“There is a long-standing tradition of sort of a quasi-militaristic brigade system, ranks of seniority, and it has been almost exclusively populated and run by men for decades ― and I would say even centuries.”

He added, “I think that recently you’ve seen this kind of fetishization of kitchen culture that has come along with this explosion of media attention. While that level of attention can be a force for good and for social change for the better, it’s also had somewhat of a negative cultural [effect] as well.”

Restaurant workers don’t always have HR people to turn to.

Restaurants aren’t required to have a human resources department, but they are legally required to make sure their employees are not subjected to harassment or discrimination, according to Liz S. Washko, an attorney at Ogletree Deakins’ Nashville office. Often times this responsibility falls on the shoulders of managers, supervisors, and other high-level management.

“It’s more of a best practice to make sure that you’re complying with the law and to provide employees with a resource they can talk to, ask questions of, or raise complaints,” she said.

Of course, that becomes a problem if, like the alleged harassment in the Besh case, senior management was behind the harassment. If that occurs, Wasko suggests turning to the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), a federal agency tasked with enforcing federal laws regarding discrimination and harassment.

“That’s the best case, that a number of employees make complaints to the EEOC. Quite frankly, that’s a way to start the legal claim,” she said. “It’s not usually a way to resolve the issue so that everyone can keep working together. At that point an employee has concluded that things aren’t going to work out or either they’ve left the company or they’re staying, but they don’t feel they’re gonna get the results they need internally, so they go to the EEOC.”

Washko said there are also state agencies ― usually called a human rights agency or human rights commission ― that serve a similar purpose to the EEOC, and to whom restaurant workers can report problems. For smaller restaurants that don’t have the money to put toward a full-time HR representative, she suggests businesses get resources (such as training materials and sample policy examples) from the National Restaurant Association.

Allison Kahn, a West Palm Beach-based attorney at Carlton Fields, also suggested ideas for companies that don’t have a full-time HR person.

“Consider hiring a lawyer or third-party HR company that can provide EEO policies, reporting procedures, and employee acknowledgements of those procedures,” Kahn said. ”Companies can also consider establishing a hotline for complaints. Proactive defense is the best defense and having these policies shows that your company is invested and cares for its employees.”

There’s a lot to lose if companies don’t deal with harassment.

“Without a presence of HR, there is likely no sexual harassment training, no EEO policies, and no notice to employees to report mistreatment and to whom,” Kahn said. “If a company cannot show it provided this information to employees, the company loses a key affirmative defense for some harassment cases (the Faragher Ellerth affirmative defense) because employees are then not required to report harassment and give the company an opportunity to remedy it.”

For restaurants run by celebrity chefs, Kahn added that the chefs themselves could be hit with criminal charges or sued for battery if harassment continues. She explained that there are also a lot of intangible costs if companies let harassers make other employee’s employment conditions unacceptable.

“Look at the Weinstein company,” Kahn explained. “You can’t just keep giving a pass in terms of letting people make other employees employment conditions unacceptable,” she said. “You [can] have bad press and then maybe people don’t want to work with you because the restaurant gets a reputation as being a bad place to work. It could affect your relationship with vendors.”

As Sidman added, “No matter what the perception is of how things operate with celebrity chefs or established chef restaurateurs, they’re not inoculated against compliance with the law or for that matter, just treating people with basic human dignity. It’s always been the case, but now there is an enormous amount of attention being turned to these issues.”

It’s up to management to enforce HR policies and create change.

″[Restaurants] should always have a written policy that prohibits discrimination, harassment, retaliation and makes it clear the company prohibits this conduct,” Washko said. “That policy should be accessible to all employees, every employee should have a copy of it and it should be periodically updated.”

In addition to a written policy, she explained said that it’s important to inform and train managers and supervisors on what they personally can and can’t do and how they should handle complaints if an employee comes to them.

“A lot of issues arise because a manager observed what was going on and didn’t take appropriate action,” Washko said. “That’s problematic.”

She added that companies must take all complaints seriously, investigate the matter and take corrective action when it’s appropriate. It all boils down to enforcing policy.

“You have to mean it. You have to enforce it,” Kahn said. “Management, especially, has to set the tone for the culture. There can’t be excuses for this type of behavior. It affects moral, it affects credibility, it affects productivity and it’s illegal.”

And if management won’t enforce policies, it’s important that employees are informed and know how to protect themselves if restaurants won’t do it for them.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/restaurants-sexual-harassment_us_59f21499e4b03cd20b803583?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

Owner Of Troubled, Closed Texas College Now Advises Another For-Profit School

5a0450bd1c00001600b34057

When I called for-profit Quest College this week and asked to speak with Larry Earle, the receptionist insisted there was no one to reach there by that name. But that wasn’t true.

Lawrence Earle, the for-profit college owner whose San Antonio-based Career Point College closed in October 2016 after findings of serious misconduct, has been quietly helping to run Quest, another San Antonio school, according to current and former Quest employees. On Wednesday, Quest’s long-time owner acknowledged to me that Earle is involved with her school; she described him as a consultant. Texas officials say that, depending on Earle’s relationship with Quest, his role could raise questions under state law.

A year ago, Larry Earle was on local TV news, lamenting the demise of Career Point, which operated campuses in San Antonio and Austin, Texas, and Tulsa, Oklahoma. Faced with findings by the U.S. Department of Education that Career Point had engaged in financial aid fraud and mismanagement, and with lawsuits filed by a growing number of his former students, Earle told an interviewer, “None of my salesmen have ever been accused of lying to students.”

Calling people who are supposed to be college admissions staff “salesmen” raised additional concern about what kind of operation Earle was running, and complaints filed by former Career Point employees cast further doubt on Earle’s assurances about his school. Taken together, the allegations regarding Career Point raise questions about whether Earle should be helping to run any college.

Earle, who, according to government records and social media posts, owns a 72-foot yacht named Pappys Girl, admitted in testimony in Career Point’s bankruptcy case that he paid himself $1.5 to $1.8 million a year and that he took “a draw” from his companies’ coffers “probably a week before or two weeks before the school closed.”

Meanwhile, Earle’s decision to shutter his college left Career Point’s employees without paychecks, left the college’s 1400 students struggling to find new schools, and left Texas authorities scrambling to assist them.

Government data shows that about 87 percent of Career Point’s revenue came from taxpayer-funded federal student grants and loans from the Department of Education — perilously close to the 90 percent maximum allowed under federal law.

The plight of Career Point students underscores the need for strong rules to protect students and taxpayers against predatory and reckless practices by for-profit schools. Unfortunately, Trump Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is abandoning such protections.

Aric J. Garza, a San Antonio attorney representing about 350 former students seeking redress from Earle and Career Point, told me, “The fact that these students were seeking to better their lives through education is what makes this especially upsetting. Through no fault of their own, they entrusted their futures to someone who, we believe, was dishonest and made numerous misrepresentations.”

Yet it appears that Larry Earle already is back in the lucrative for-profit college game.

The collapse of Career Point College

On October 13, 2016, the Department of Education wrote to Earle, recounting that Career Point had informed the Department that it illegally held on to $4.6 million that should have been returned to students or to the Department, and informing Earle that the Department was putting the school on “heightened cash monitoring” status and requiring Career Point to post a $10 million letter of credit.

In response, Career Point issued a “Closure press release” announcing that “the College’s management has been forced to discontinue operations.” The release defended the company’s record and blamed “this very hostile government climate against for-profit schools” — a standard charge leveled by for-profit schools against the Obama Administration as it worked to protect students and taxpayers against fraud and abuse. The Career Point press release concluded, “the Department of Education chose not to give the College a chance to fix its problems and instead chose to effectively terminate the College…. in light of the actions by the Department of Education, we had no choice.”

Career Point promptly emailed staffers as it was shuttering to say it was “not able to fund your payroll this week.”

Steve Gunderson, the former Republican congressman (R-WI) who runs CECU, the main lobbying group for for-profit colleges, also issued a dramatic statement attacking the Obama Administration for the closing of Career Point, which had been a member of Gunderson’s group. “When will this end? When will someone in this Department stop the incredible assault on career schools,” Gunderson asked, as he chalked up the decision to “bureaucratic hostility and arrogance.” (Similarly, Gunderson just yesterday blamed the Obama Education Department for the “destruction of ITT Tech and Corinthian,” two enormous for-profit college chains that were revealed by numerous law enforcement and media investigations to have engaged in widespread fraud.)

In fact, the Department of Education did not “terminate” Career Point College. In light of the company’s admission that it had kept nearly five million dollars that belonged to students and taxpayers, the Department took the prudent and appropriate step of requiring the company to post a letter of credit equal to 25 percent of the school’s annual take of federal student aid of $40 million — so money might be available to pay the school’s obligations in the event of further financial mismanagement or abuse.

Larry Earle and Quest College

But with Career Point shut down and in bankruptcy, Larry Earle seemed to jump back quickly into the career college business.

Current and former Quest College employees have been telling me that Earle has been a regular presence in the Quest offices for almost a year. They heard the school’s long-time owner, Jeanne Martin, say that she was thinking about selling the school, which focuses on health care training programs, to Earle. Quest employees have referred to Earle as the new owner of the school, or have said that a relative of Earle is now the owner, but I haven’t seen evidence of any such change in ownership. Another employee heard a manager refer to Earle as a consultant to Martin.

On Tuesday, I called the main number for Quest College, and asked for Larry Earle. The receptionist who answered the phone responded that Earle “is not employed at Quest College” and repeated that sentence when I asked additional questions. When I pressed, she acknowledged knowing Earle, but when I asked how she knew him, she said because “he’s in our industry.” I asked if Earle had an office at Quest, and she said no. When I asked if Earle was an investor in Quest, she said she wouldn’t know the answer.

Soon after I called, according to a Quest employee, senior managers at Quest held a meeting. After that, staff were instructed to say, if anyone asked, the same sentence the receptionist told me: Larry Earle is not employed at Quest College.

This Quest employee told me that Earle, in fact, has been coming into the office every day, although he was conspicuously absent on a day two weeks ago when an official of the Texas Workforce Commission, which oversees career colleges in the state, came for an inspection. The employee said that Earle works out of a conference room in Quest’s corporate office, which is in the same building as the school campus.

Responding to my request Tuesday for an interview about Larry Earle, Jeanne Martin emailed me the following statement: “Mr. Earle is not an owner, investor or employee of our college. He has done some consulting for us.” I followed up with some specific questions that Martin later answered. She wrote that Earle is presently a consultant for Quest “at times” and elsewhere referred to him as a “marketing consultant.” She also told me, “I am the sole owner. I am not related to Mr. Earle.”

Responding to my question “Does Mr. Earle regularly work out of the Quest office, such as in a conference room?” Ms. Martin responded on Wednesday, “No. He has been in the building and in a conference room.”

Later on Wednesday, unprompted, Martin sent me an additional email stating, “Larry and I have decided he Work [sic] completely off campus.”

Larry Earle did not respond to my efforts to reach him to discuss his role at Quest and allegations regarding Career Point.

While Earle’s role at Quest, which gets about 81 percent of its revenue from federal taxpayers, remains somewhat unclear, it is apparent that he is helping to bring in a new team: Employees told me, and Martin confirmed, that five or six of Earle’s former employees at Career Point are now working at Quest. Meanwhile, several long-time Quest employees have been fired since Earle’s arrival.

And on the website Glassdoor, there are currently advertisements for 20 jobs at “Career Point College,” even though that school is no longer operating. Former Quest and Career Point employees told me they believe these listings are actually for jobs at Quest, but Martin denied that, writing to me, “We run our own advertisements when we need to hire people.” I don’t have any basis to question Martin’s statement. At the same, I sure wonder why someone keeps posting fresh ads for a college, owned by Larry Earle, that shut down last year.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/owner-of-troubled-closed-texas-college-now-advises_us_5a0450b1e4b055de8d096acd?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

The GOP Tax Plan – This Is What Domination Economics Looks Like

Firefighters battle a wildfire near Santa Rosa, California

Monster storms destroy coastal cities. Wildfires kill dozens of people and displace thousands more. Health insurance coverage for millions is threatened. Wages remain flat, even though worker productivity is growing faster than expected. Income inequality is getting worse. CEOs of the biggest companies earn more than 300 times what their workers do. (To fully appreciate that stunner, consider that the CEO to worker pay ratio was 42 to 1 in 1980, and 120 to 1 in 2000.)

Against this backdrop, surely the party in possession of the White House and both houses of Congress would propose a thoughtful, fresh approach designed to protect us from the devastating cost of increasingly severe natural disasters, ruinous medical expenses, and growing family financial insecurity.

Yet the tax bill unveiled last week is a prime example of domination economics. Rather than encouraging better care and education, expanding opportunity, and strengthening our social safety net, it is calculated to exacerbate income inequality and set the stage for weakening public investment in people and the planet for years to come.

The Scam Plan

In spite of all evidence to the contrary, the GOP proposal is based on the flawed assumption that more money at the top of the income scale means more money at the bottom. The President and party leadership tout tax cuts for corporations, saying it will goose job creation and take-home pay.

But this claim has been thoroughly discredited; this strategy has been tried before and not performed as advertised. Instead of raising wages and expanding employment, what we can actually expect is that CEO compensation goes up and shareholders see the value of their stock rise.

Business tax rates have already declined steeply in the past 50 years, from a top rate of 52.8% to the current 39%. In fact, corporate tax revenue only comprises 10% of everything the IRS takes in, less than a third of what it was 60 years ago. In reality, the current 39% statutory tax rate is misleading – by the time tax deductions and credits and put into the mix, the effective corporate tax rate, what they really pay, is closer to 18%, or about half the statutory rate. This is not out of line with rates in other countries, and certainly not the highest rate in the world.

Giving tax breaks where they are not needed is just one reason to reject this bill. Another is how these cuts are paid for – by imposing higher income taxes on those lower down the pay scale. The method of choice is eliminating deductions that allow middle- and lower-income families to hold on in uncertain times.

In short, tax cuts at the top are to be paid for by the elimination of deductions working people depend on to educate themselves and care for their families. The proposal does raise the standard deduction for individuals and families, and temporarily increases the Child Tax Credit from $1000 to $1600. But it eliminates personal exemptions and raises the lowest income tax rate, too. Taking the proposal as a whole, more than 2/3 of the tax cuts it contains go to corporations and wealthy individuals.

Unpacking the Hidden Domination Agenda

While the status of individual families will vary widely, many middle class families will pay even higher taxes under the GOP proposed “tax reform.” Eliminating deductions doesn’t make up for all the revenue lost by the cuts on corporations and the very wealthy. And here is where the scam of this proposal gets even worse. Passing the bill would add $1.5 trillion to the national deficit, a shocking move for the party who claims to champion fiscal responsibility!

By not paying for the full cost of the benefits it bestows, the bill sets the scene for deficit hawks to go after public spending far into the future. The impact of this proposed “tax reform” package is further shredding of our already tattered safety net. It is designed to put powerful pressure on our government to decrease spending on essential programs. Head Start, children’s health insurance, job training, and other investments in our work force will face greater risk. People who depend on entitlement programs will be watching their Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits roll back, or even be eliminated.

Toward Real Tax Reform

Tax policy could be a meaningful method to meet unmet needs. It could promote a care infrastructure that would increase human capital. It could promote paid family leave, early education, and make higher education more affordable. It could give corporations an incentive to expand resources for elder care and implement green policies to preserve our natural resources. When more severe natural disasters are in store due to climate change, tax policy should work to help those who stand to lose their livelihoods, homes and lives.

The GOP plan does none of these things. It’s a cynical example of domination economics that benefits those at the top on the backs of those lower down. It puts profits over people, exacerbates inequities, and ignores the rapidly closing window of opportunity that remains to remedy the damage we’ve inflicted on the environment.

If the US is to fulfill its promise, expand its economy, and build on the principles which make us great, this proposal must be resoundingly rejected.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tax-reform-trump-administration-gop-domination-economics_us_5a03032de4b04e96f0c6bbc3?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

Holiday Hiring Plans Strong, but Retailers Expect Tougher Labor Market

iStock-627585972_ebwskf

Americans are expected to spend upwards of $650 billion this holiday season, prompting retailers and logistics companies to invest in hiring more seasonal workers, especially in e-commerce, distribution and fulfillment center operations.

Los Angeles-based executive search and recruiting firm Korn Ferry surveyed 20 major U.S. retailers in September, representing 1 million workers, and found that 80 percent plan to hire the same amount of or more seasonal staff as they did last year.

“Despite rocky times this year with brick-and-mortar store closings at near-record levels, a relatively strong economy is expected to bode well for retailers this holiday season,” said Craig Rowley, a senior partner at Korn Ferry specializing in the retail industry. “That means they will be hiring more people, but the challenge is that with the unemployment rate at 4.2 percent, recruiting seasonal workers will be more difficult.”

[SHRM members-only toolkit: Practicing Workforce Planning]

According to data from Chicago-based outplacement consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas, retailers have announced over 6,000 store closures and 67,000 job cuts in the first eight months of the year. Despite that, the sector has also led all others in hiring announcements, with over 248,000 new jobs, mostly credited to e-commerce operations.

“Retailers have been consistently adding jobs over the last nine months, so they already have folks in place ready to step up and play a role during the busy holiday season,” said National Retail Federation (NRF) CEO Matthew Shay.

Daniel Culbertson, an economist with Austin, Texas-based job search engine Indeed, noted that holiday job posting numbers have been strong on the site. He pointed out that retailers started posting jobs for seasonal staff earlier in the year, continuing a recent trend.

“Employers typically begin posting their holiday positions later in September, but this year it seems that employers aimed to get a jump on the season by posting a high volume of jobs immediately after Labor Day weekend,” he said. “The earlier hiring is perhaps due to employers looking to be first to the market in light of a tight labor [situation]. If the current trend in the level of 2017 holiday postings continues, the volume of holiday postings as a share of all postings on Indeed will exceed that of the past two years.”

More Logistics Help Needed

The NRF has pegged 2017 holiday job growth at between 500,000 and 550,000 in-store seasonal positions, down from last year’s 575,000 new in-store jobs. Shay added that the figure does not account for the many thousands more workers expected to be hired to process surging online business, such as positions in distribution, warehousing, e-commerce, logistics and transportation.

While in-store jobs still make up the bulk of seasonal hiring, affiliated employment in logistics and warehousing has increased. Retailers have tended to double or even quadruple their warehouse staff in recent years, expecting more consumers to visit their websites instead of stores. Online retail sales jumped nearly 13 percent during the 2016 holiday season from the year before, compared with a 7 percent decline at department stores, according to the NRF.

“As holiday shopping habits turn virtual, retailers are responding by hiring more warehouse and transport workers,” said John Challenger, CEO of Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) showed that transportation and warehousing employment increased by 246,700 workers in the final quarter of 2016, 8 percent higher than the previous year. In 2007, the seasonal job gains for this sector measured just 24,300.

Target expects to hire approximately 100,000 store team members across the country—up from 70,000 last year—and fill 4,500 extra positions at its distribution and fulfillment centers.

Macy’s plans to add 18,000 seasonal workers at its fulfillment centers—a 20 percent increase compared with last year. The company also plans to hire approximately 60,000 seasonal associates for positions at its Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s stores nationwide.

Wal-Mart announced it would bring on about 5,000 seasonal workers for its e-commerce operations, but continue its unconventional approach of providing existing employees extra hours instead of hiring more in-store seasonal staff. “We think it just makes sense to partner with the associates who know the business, are trained in serving customers and the operations of the stores, and who know the customer better than anyone,” said Erica Jones, Wal-Mart’s senior manager of corporate communications.

The policy—now in its second year—allows employees to work up to 40 hours a week during the holiday season (34 hours a week is considered full-time) and helps address complaints about underemployment that have plagued the company.

E-commerce giant Amazon announced plans to hire more than 120,000 people this season across its network of fulfillment centers and customer service sites, almost doubling its 125,000 existing full-time staff. The company said it anticipates opening more than two dozen new U.S. fulfillment centers this year. Thousands of holiday positions were transitioned to regular, full-time roles after the 2016 holidays, and Amazon expects to continue that practice this year.

Package-delivery services that bring online purchases to shoppers’ doorsteps have been ramping up hiring since the spring, according to BLS data. The number of people employed in the sector rose by 24,000 over the first nine months of the year. UPS expects to hire about 95,000 seasonal employees this year. About 35 percent of seasonal hires were brought on as regular employees at the end of the 2016 holidays, according to Paul Tanguay, the company’s global director of recruitment strategies. The company began recruiting a few weeks earlier than usual and is providing bus service for seasonal workers in certain markets where labor competition is particularly tight, he added.

Recruiting Woes

Hiring seasonal staff may be more difficult this year due to the squeezed labor market, however. Not only is unemployment at its lowest in 16 years, but the rise of gig work, like driving for Uber or Lyft, is shrinking the candidate pool. Forty percent of respondents to the Korn Ferry survey believe there will be fewer applicants available this year, and 40 percent anticipate paying higher wages to attract candidates.

Melissa Hassett, vice president of client delivery for ManpowerGroup Solutions, a staffing and recruiting firm based in Milwaukee, said that retail workers are seeking more flexibility with their schedules, training and pay, to be competitive with other entry-level jobs.

“A big challenge for hourly workers is having a schedule that fits with their needs and meets their expectations,” Rowley said. “The ability to schedule people out a couple weeks in advance is a very attractive selling point for any retailer.”

Apps like Shiftgig have emerged which allow workers to pick up shifts for employers needing to fill sudden schedule gaps.

In-Store Experience Still Counts

Experts stressed that while retail store hiring has fallen over the last couple of years, recruiting for customer interaction is still important. Twenty percent of respondents to the Korn Ferry survey said they are placing a greater emphasis this year on hiring employees who align with their brand culture, and 15 percent said they are placing a greater emphasis on having the in-store retail experience.

“While 75 percent of respondents say they will use their mobile platform to help drive sales this holiday season, it’s clear that they still are focusing on the traditional in-store experience,” Rowley said. “But that experience is changing by becoming more intimate and tailored to the specific demands of the shopper.”

People are coming to the store for something other than just purchasing the product, which can be done online, Rowley explained. “When I go to the store, it’s for a specific need—to try something on, to touch and feel it, or I have questions about the product and need help in making a choice. Retailers are trying to figure out how to give those people the experience they’re after.”

https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/Pages/Holiday-Hiring-Retailers-Expect-Tougher-Labor-Market.aspx

Title VII Prohibits Discrimination Against Men

bartender3_nwm1u1

Discrimination against men is just as unlawful under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as discrimination against women. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) emphasized this point on Sept. 28 when it filed a lawsuit against a restaurant that allegedly never hired more than one male bartender at each location for violating Title VII.

“It is just as illegal to deny a male employment because of his sex as it is a female. Employers must realize that no person, male or female, can be denied employment based on sex, except in the rare instances when gender is a bona fide occupational qualification,” said Katharine Kores, district director of the EEOC’s Memphis District Office, in a press release on the EEOC’s lawsuit versus R Wings R Wild restaurant.

Lawsuit Against Restaurant

R Wings R Wild LLC, doing business as Buffalo Wild Wings, declined to hire David Golden and other male applicants as bartenders because of their sex, the complaint alleged.

On July 20, 2014, Golden saw an advertisement on Craigslist in which the restaurant chain’s location in Little Rock, Ark., sought applicants for bartender positions. Golden noted in his resume that he had previous bartending experience and completed an application. But when a manager interviewed him, the manager told Golden that the employer wanted to hire a female bartender because there was already a male bartender at this location. The restaurant’s policy allegedly was to have only one male bartender at a time at each of its locations.

Golden wasn’t hired, and a woman was hired for the bartending position instead.

The EEOC alleged that the employer violated Title VII at its locations in Arkansas and Oklahoma. It failed to hire at least nine other male applicants who applied for bartending positions in the two states, and at least half the locations never employed a male bartender between Feb. 2, 2014, and April 15, 2015.

The EEOC is seeking a permanent injunction, back pay with prejudgment interest, and compensatory and punitive damages.

“The EEOC has successfully litigated claims of sex discrimination on behalf of males seeking sales representative positions in the cosmetics industry, males seeking restaurant server/bartender positions and males seeking positions in the weight-loss industry,” said Tony Prather, an attorney with Barnes & Thornburg in Indianapolis.

BFOQ Defense

However, he noted, “In very limited situations, an employer could defend itself against a claim of sex discrimination by a male, arguing that gender is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) for a position.” Race is never a BFOQ.

Hiring a male applicant as a locker room attendant for a men’s locker room and hiring a female applicant as a locker room attendant for a women’s locker room are examples of the application of the BFOQ defense, he said.

“We have several clients who have specific gender-based requirements for their position,” said Joyce Chastain, SHRM-SCP, a regulatory compliance consultant with The Krizner Group in Tallahassee, Fla. “Some of those are set in state regulations,” she said. For example, dressing room attendants in department stores may be gender-specific. Personal caregivers for disabled residents in group home settings also can be sex-based, she stated.

The BFOQ defense is narrowly applied, cautioned Michael Schmidt, an attorney with Cozen O’Connor in New York City. “It is important to distinguish between a customer’s privacy interest where you may be able to justify a gender-based hiring practice and a broad, blanket customer preference or perception upon which a hiring practice is based—where you may not be able to lawfully discriminate,” he said.

Even customer preference may be enough to show a BFOQ in limited circumstances. Hooters, for example, has “billed itself less as a restaurant and more as a fantasy for men,” said Patti Perez, vice president of workplace strategy firm Emtrain in San Francisco. She has represented Hooters in the past and said part of its business model is to give straight men the fantasy of being served food by attractive women. “Although I’ve never verified this, it makes sense and would therefore put Hooters—and maybe this restaurant [Buffalo Wild Wings]—into a category more like a strip club or a gentlemen’s club than a restaurant, and I suppose this is how you get to the BFOQ issue.”

The EEOC dropped its investigation into Hooters for sex discrimination two decades ago, citing limited resources.

Unlawful Discrimination in Female-Dominated Professions

The risk for unlawful discrimination against men is greatest in female-dominated positions, like nursing or elementary school teaching, Perez noted.

“I thought we had evolved beyond all of the bias about men in one of the historically female-dominated positions: nursing,” Chastain said. “But recently, a hiring manager at a nursing home shared with me that they don’t consider male applicants for their nursing positions in their female resident units because their patients/residents don’t want to be treated by male nurses.”

[SHRM members-only toolkit: Managing Equal Employment Opportunity]

HR is another profession mainly represented by women, said Christine Walters, J.D., SHRM-SCP, owner of the HR consultancy FiveL Company in Westminster, Md. “How does that fact impact our perception—hidden bias—about the comparable ability of a man to administer the soft side of HR as well as the metrics and analytical side?” she asked. “Employers should remember to periodically monitor their applicant flow for jobs that are predominantly filled by men or predominantly by women and ensure there is no appearance of adverse impact with regard to applicants who are not of that predominant sex.”

She said, “I am surprised to find when I ask a group of managers if not just males but if white males are legally protected under Title VII, how many reply, ‘No.’ “

“The EEOC has and will continue to aggressively address discrimination in the workplace irrespective of whether the discriminatory actions are directed toward males or females,” Prather said.

Jay M. Wallace, an attorney with Bell Nunnally in Dallas who is representing R Wings R Wild LLC, said that the company “is confident that when all the information comes to light, the evidence will show clearly that the company did not engage in any discriminatory practices, has met and continues to meet its obligations under Title VII, and maintains a workplace that offers rich opportunities for people of all genders.”

https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/Pages/Title-VII-discrimination-men.aspx

The GOP Tax Plan Is Not As Simple As They Say

A business tax cut could open a big loophole for wealthy filers to use.

By Arthur Delaney and S.V. Date

WASHINGTON ― Tax accountants worried that the Republican promise of a new, simpler tax code will put them out of business can take heart in at least part of the proposal: a drastic tax cut for “small” businesses.

While eliminating a number of deductions and credits may indeed simplify an arcane set of rules, the creation of a new, lower tax rate for so-called S corporations, partnerships and sole proprietorships could require a forest of new regulations to prevent high-wage earners from trying to game the system.

Tax policy experts have long wrestled with how to keep both the rich and the not-so-rich from abusing the small business designation to dodge taxes, said Gregg Polsky, a University of Georgia tax law professor.

“Nobody’s come up with a great solution and they don’t even make a halfhearted attempt at it” in the GOP plan, he said.

Republicans acknowledge that their creation of a special, lower rate for these businesses will make that designation even more advantageous. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Sunday that congressional leaders and the administration would create “guardrails” to prevent wealthy filers from unfairly availing themselves of the new, lower business rate.

The innocuous-sounding “guardrails,” though, would likely translate into pages of new regulations and judgment calls by IRS auditors.

Unlike plain old wage income, which can often be handled with the single-page tax return form, even relatively simple corporations like those created under subchapter S of the tax code require far more paperwork. The reason millions do it anyway: the ability to avoid paying thousands of dollars in taxes simply by calling some or most of the money profit instead of salary.

Normal income is subject both to a 12.4 percent Social Security tax up to a $127,000 cap, as well as 2.9 percent levy for Medicare. For incomes above $200,000, there’s an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax. But these small business owners have the option to call part of that income profits rather than salary, thereby exempting that portion from Social Security and Medicare taxes.

How much of the income has to be characterized as salary is already a contentious issue for small businesses and the IRS. Enacting an enormous financial incentive for the creation of thousands or even millions of more S corporations is certain to further complicate rules, experts believe.

The committee that will oversee new tax legislation in the House will figure it out, spokeswoman Emily Schillinger said, though she didn’t provide any details.

“The Ways and Means Committee is working on strong measures that will deliver accountability,” she said in a statement.

The Republican plan would apply a reduced 25 percent tax rate to profits that “pass through” a business to its owner and are currently taxed as that person’s regular income. Because the top tax rate for wage income would be 35 percent under the plan, high earners ― particularly those who provide services, such as executives at law or financial firms ― would have a strong incentive to set themselves up as small businesses and immediately realize enormous tax savings.

“Members are working to ensure that the pass-through rate applies as intended to income from business operations ― and also that income that is compensation for services continues to be subject to the individual tax rules,” Schillinger said.

The tax code already gives an incentive for high-end service providers like lawyers and doctors to claim income as pass-through profits since doing so allows them to avoid payroll taxes. Tax reformers have held up former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards as the classic example of a pass-through abuser. Edwards’ law practice filed its taxes as an S corporation, which allowed him to avoid payroll taxes by paying himself huge sums as business profits rather than salary.

People claiming pass-through income already account for more of the so-called ”tax gap″ than any other group of tax filers. That gap is the difference between what people are supposed to pay and what the IRS receives. According to the most recent IRS estimate for 2008-2010, tax filers underreported enough pass-through income to result in $125 billion worth of lost revenue each year.

One way to reduce the tax gap would be to increase the number of IRS agents enforcing the code, though doing so would be contrary to recent Republican efforts to slash agency budgets. The Government Accountability Office has suggested the IRS spend more resources auditing higher-income filers. Republicans in Congress, though, have preferred that the agency focus even more than it already does on low-income filers claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit.

The GOP framework calls for consolidating seven individual tax brackets into three with rates of 12, 25 and 35 percent. Since the middle bracket rate would be the same as the pass-through rate, only pass-through filers wealthy enough to fit in the highest bracket would benefit from the change. (Republicans have not yet specified the income levels where the brackets will fall.)

“This loophole that they’re creating for business income would be uniquely exploitable by high-income taxpayers because only they would get a benefit,” Polsky said. “The distributional impact would be huge.”

He said it seemed as though the plan’s architects proposed the lower rate for pass-through businesses simply for parity, since President Donald Trump has insisted on a 20 percent rate for businesses paying corporate taxes.

The Tax Policy Center, which reported earlier this year that households with incomes above $200,000 receive nearly 80 percent of pass-through business income, estimated that cutting the pass-through rate to 25 percent would cost the U.S. Treasury $769 billion in lost revenue over 10 years.

A similar thing happened in Kansas after state lawmakers eliminated state taxes on pass-through business income. The conservative Tax Foundation reported a spike in the creation of pass-through entities and a sharp decline in state revenue.

“If they passed a provision like this in Washington, D.C., where I live and work, I would benefit from going to my employer the next day and ask them to start paying me as an independent contractor,” the foundation’s Scott Drenkard said in January testimony to the Kansas legislature. “I would still be doing the same job and contributing the same value to the economy, I just wouldn’t be paying any [D.C.] income taxes.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gop-tax-plan-not-as-simple-as-they-say_us_59d52a33e4b0cde458728dd9?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

What Every Employee Can Take Away From Public Sexual Harassment Scandals

59d7bd082d0000971730905d

The news of decades of sexual harassment allegations made against film executive Harvey Weinstein has shocked and appalled many ― and for good reason. But the issue of workplace sexual harassment is not unique to Weinstein. Rather it is a pervasive problem, transcending industry and class, and persisting not just in the entertainment industry but in the tech, medical, academic, service, and law enforcement industries, too.

Sadly, women (and gender non-conforming people, who Attorney General Jeff Sessions rolled back workplace protections for this week) in any profession are likely to be confronted with some form of gender-based harassment from a man in a position in power. This can take many forms, like soliciting sex or a romantic relationship, promises of career success in exchange for sex, making inappropriate sexual comments, or engaging in inappropriate touching.

The good news is that women have become increasingly vocal about their experiences, thereby raising awareness and chipping away at the national tolerance for such misconduct.

In July 2016, former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson filed a lawsuit against Roger Ailes, then-head of Fox News, that ultimately resulted in his stepping down from the network. (Ailes passed away 10 months later, in May.)

Earlier this year, women in the tech industry came out swinging against the industry’s propensity for sexism and harassment, specifically at Uber and Google, thus opening the floodgates for other women to speak up about their own experiences being victimized. Women employed by Gucci, McDonalds, the Plaza Hotel, and countless universities have also alleged serious issues of harassment over the past year.

Of course, not all victims of sexual harassment have the means that entrepreneurs like Susan Fowler and media personalities like Carlson have, but considering the pervasiveness of the problem, and the frequency with which women will have to face it, these very public cases of sexual harassment can provide tangible takeaways for others who might experience similar harassment.

HuffPost talked to Carlson and her lawyer Nancy Smith, as well as Kim Churches, the CEO of AAUW (the American Association of University Women) about what every employee needs to understand about sexual harassment.

***

Know Your Rights

Churches told HuffPost that employees should first and foremost know what their rights are.

“Understanding what your handbook says, what your policies are…and understanding what sexual harassment is” are of utmost importance when starting a new job, emphasized Churches. She also said that employees should know what rights they are guaranteed under Title XII ― and know that if those rights are violated, they can, and should, file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Speak Up

Carlson, whose forthcoming book Be Fierce digs into her experiences at Fox and the lessons she learned, told HuffPost that the biggest takeaway from the Weinstein scandal is to find power in speaking up.

“Look what happens when the floodgates open!” she said. “One by one women gain courage from another sharing their story and more and more come forward. It’s a chain reaction of confidence and liberation to not be silenced anymore.”

Confide In Family, Friends, Or Coworkers

“Women are afraid to talk,” Smith said, “because they’re not in power.” But she also emphasized that it can be incredibly empowering to share what’s going on with a trusted confidante.

Opening up to a trusted inner circle can also do more than alleviate the stress and emotional burden ― it could potentially result in an allyship.

“There are too many cases where victims think they’re overreacting,” Churches told HuffPost. “When you talk about this with an inner circle it helps you to process what happened and feel less helpless, and it helps you to better articulate your game-plan going forward.”

Men who harass women are often victimizing multiple people at a time, or have a history of doing so in the past (much like Weinstein and Ailes) ― confiding in someone who may also be a victim of the same person’s harassment could bolster your case.

Understand The Limits Of Human Resources

“I’ve been a lawyer for 37 years. I can’t remember a case where HR helped my client,” Smith told HuffPost.

Smith recommended instead that employees who are victims of harassment seek their own legal counsel, and that placing too much hope on H.R.’s role in your complaint or lawsuit is not the best approach.

“The sad fact is, if you stand up for sexual harassment, you’re probably going to lose your job…or your career,” Smith said.

Keep A Daily Record Of What’s Happening

Another thing Smith brought up is the importance of record-keeping. The easiest way to do this is to record any conversation or instance of harassment ― however, in many states, it’s illegal to record someone with them knowing. In that case, Smith said, there are other ways to keep track.

“Every day when you get home from work, keep a diary of what happened,” she told HuffPost. “If there are inappropriate text messages or emails, keep a copy of them at home. Don’t let them expire. Keep records at home, not in the work place.”

It’s important to put any incriminating documentation onto your personal devices rather than devices provided by your employer.

“Don’t keep them on a work phone or work computer,” she said. “The minute you complain, they’re going to take those things from you.”

Churches agrees. She told HuffPost that it’s important to keep a diary of the harassment, but that it’s equally important to keep a diary of your own productivity.

“Too many people when they’re faced with harassment are worried about retribution for themselves,” she said. “Understanding how to protect yourself by documenting your own productivity can be very, very helpful.”

Fight The Bigger Fight

The above tips are helpful tools to have within in the current system but, Smith said, that system is where most of the biggest problems lie.

“We need to insist on laws that prohibit confidential settlement agreements,” she said, citing Weinstein as a perfect case study of how millions of dollars in private settlements don’t stop the culture of abuse or harassment ― they just sweep the issue under the rug.

“It didn’t take eight or more settlement agreements to have Mr. Weinstein allegedly decide to change his conduct,” Smith said. “It took the New York Times.”

Churches echoed the sentiment that harassment is a systemic issue: “Women should just know that the most important thing is that, in the society we live in, this behavior is still allowed in too many sectors of our workplaces. This is too normal.”

Since Carlson’s 2016 lawsuit, she has devoted much of her time and passion to the bipartisan effort to change mandatory arbitration laws, which employees often don’t realize they’re signing off on in their employment contracts.

Arbitration forces employee complaint cases to be overseen by lawyers chosen by the company, thus rarely ending in a win for the victim of harassment. (A 2011 study at Cornell University showed that only 21 percent of cases that went into arbitration resulted in a win for the employee.)

Carlson has joined the effort of Senator Al Franken, who introduced the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2017 in March.

Perhaps it’s worth a call to your Senator to see if they plan on supporting the bill.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/what-every-employee-can-take-away-from-public-sexual-harassment-scandals_us_59d79928e4b046f5ad97cfb0?utm_hp_ref=human-resources

Author: jenng87