Survey reports large percentage of employees go to work sick.

The Workforce Institute™ recently announced the findings of a new survey conducted by Harris Interactive®. According to the study "Sick at Work", an overwhelming 98 percent of employees working full time have gone to work when they were sick. The survey of more than 1,000 U.S. employed adults demonstrates that "presenteeism" (sick employees showing up for work) is an issue impacting both employers and employees.

The "Sick at Work" survey also delved into the causes behind presenteeism and how employers can address the problem. The most-cited responses when asked why they go to work sick were: I feel guilty for calling in; my workload is too heavy; I save my sick time for personal reasons like family emergencies, sick children, parent care issues and other unexpected events; and I try to have perfect attendance.

The survey also found that presenteeism can have a negative impact on all employees in the workplace. Some employees agreed that when employees come to work sick, it creates a work environment where they are afraid of getting sick, it makes them upset with their employer for not encouraging sick employees to stay home, and it sets a precedent where employees feel like they must go to work even if they are sick. As part of the survey, employees offered advice to employers on how to create a healthy work environment. Employees suggested that they not be penalized for calling in sick, and that employers offer paid time off (PTO) programs that give employees a bank of time to use at their discretion.

The Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine recently tested the health and safety effects of working longer hours.

The results of a recent study conducted by the Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine show no evidence that overtime work produced adverse effects to the health and safety of workers.  No adverse effects were found by the study until the hours worked exceeded 60. Employees who worked over 60 hours per week did have a higher incidence rate of reporting new injuries and diagnoses, but these effects were limited by prior health, demographics and compensation type.

The study shows that prior diseases and health status have a much higher impact on safety and health than overtime hours worked.

Even with “employment-at-will”? protections, problems can arise when terminating employees.

Employers that take the “employment-at-will” concept too literally can be looking at potential legal difficulties.  If a complaint is brought to court then a human factor from judges and juries come into play. The human factor can eliminate the “black and whiteness” of the employment-at-will concept and put you in danger of losing a large lawsuit.

Employment Law Attorney Jonathan Segal suggests employers follow these guidelines to protect themselves from the human factor of employee terminations:

            Use progressive discipline

            Use the same person who hired to fire

            Drop problem workers in the first 90 days

            When you document, cite specifics

            Avoid absolutes, but have absolute reasons for termination

            Do not list all of the little things

            Do not describe a problem worker in medical terms  

Providing safety training is vital for new employees.

Pinnacol Assurance recently released its findings from a study conducted by their loss prevention team.  Pinnacol analyzed the 2006 claims data to find out what impact years of service have on claims experience.  The numbers were staggering and point to a need for improved safety training for new employees.  The study found that employees with less than one year of service accounted for 47% of on-the-job fatalities, and 40% of on-the-job injuries. 

Pinnacol’s report goes on to explain, “the quality of the safety training you provide will shape them into either safe, long-term employees – or into statistics.”  No one wants to add to those type of statistics, so make sure your safety training is up to date and being reviewed by all employees.  Pinnacol also adds these general tips:

·        Make sure that your safety trainers are experienced and committed to your safety philosophy, goals and practices.

·        Understand that hiring employees with previous job experience does not mean they are more safety conscience.  Make sure all employees are performing tasks safely and following your rules

·        Safety training is only the first step.  Employees must also be supervised and observed to ensure the safety training was effective.

StaffScapes works closely with our clients to review and provide additional safety policies and procedures.  Please call our HR department to discuss further details of what StaffScapes can do for you.

New law gives injured workers a choice of medical provider.

House Bill 07-1176 will affect all Colorado employers as of January 1, 2008. The bill, enacted by the Colorado Legislature, changes the Colorado Workers Compensation Act, requiring all employers to provide a list of at least two medical providers that injured workers can choose from.  The listed providers must be at separate and distinct locations and have no common ownership.  Injured workers must also be allowed to make a one-time change of the treating physician within 90 days of injury as long as maximum medical improvement (MMI) has not been reached.  The injured worker must make a change to one of the other listed providers. If a provider list was not given to the injured worker at time of injury or within the first seven days after, then injured worker will have right to use any physician of their choosing.  A few exceptions apply to this new law for employers in rural areas, employer-owned medical providers, governmental entities, and on-site health care facilities.

For additional information regarding House Bill 07-1176 and its effects, please contact StaffScapes’ Risk Management department.

New study finds shifting costs does not always save money.

In order to control increasing costs of health insurance, many employers are shifting more monetary responsibility onto the employees.  A new study released by the nonprofit Integrated Benefits Institute (IBI) shows that shifting costs to employees doesn’t save employers money.

The three year study focused on the increased disability and absence-related lost productivity for 5,483 workers with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).  After reviewing the study, Dr. Thomas Parry, president of IBI, stated “employees appear to make medical decisions based on price and cost shifting, rather than evidence-based medicine”. The study found that employers lost money from increased disability and lost productivity.  Key findings of IBI’s study include:

·        higher out-of-pocket expenses reduce medical adherence

·        lower medication adherence is associated with higher short-term disability incidence and longer duration

·        higher short-term disability incidence and longer duration results in greater costs and lower productivity

·        to evaluate the true impact of management interventions, data must be integrated across all health-related benefits programs

IBI’s news release can be found at: http://www.ibiweb.org/news/articles/display/7025

Top Ten Reasons Terminated Employee Sue Their Employers

1. They don’t know why they were fired.
2. Bad Treatment when fired.
3. Perception of being treated differently from others.
4. Being treated differently by a new supervisor
5. Harassment immediately preceding termination.
6. Employee believes employer doesn’t know the “whole story”.
7. Inadequate investigation of a complaint.
8. Not being treated with loyalty and respect.
9. Loss of control/feeling helpless
10. Lack of financial security.

While the facts underlying the employee’s feeling may not alone be actionable, they are often the motive behind their desire for vindication. Employers may often be able to avoid that employee’s first call to an attorney by understanding termination from the employee’s perspective and taking simple steps.

StaffScapes, Inc. recommends that all employers have a disciplinary action and termination plan/policy in place.  At times a disciplinary meeting with an employee may be necessary. By having a disciplinary plan in place the employee will know what is expected of him or herself after the first incident occurs StaffScapes has developed a few helpful tips to assist and protect clients in this type of situation

The disciplinary tips should include:

• Talk with the employee promptly in a nonpublic area after the offense or problem.
• Avoid an emotional discussion.
• Determine the facts of the situation.
• Emphasize the seriousness of the situation.
• Determine the best disciplinary action to prevent the incident from recurring.
• If possible, agree upon a plan of corrective action.
• Maintain documentation of the events that took

StaffScapes a Denver based Professional Employer Organization (PEO) can help set up policy and procedures as mentioned above. Our Human Resource Department specializes in policy and procedure development, by having a few simply policies in place it can save a company countless dollars and man hours resolving a claim. Contact StaffScapes Human Resource Department or our Sales team with any questions on how a PEO can assist in developing proper termination policy.

IRS ruling against FedEx puts independent contractor classification back in the news.

Late last year, the Internal Revenue Service ruled that FedEx had misclassified about 13,000 drivers as independent contractors resulting in a $319 million tax bill. This amount is only for penalties and back taxes for 2002. The IRS is still auditing FedEx for 2004 through 2006. Some groups believe the final cost to FedEx could be as high as $1 billion. The IRS ruled against FedEx’s assertion that drivers were contractors who operate their delivery routes as independent businesses. Some of the reasons behind the ruling stem from the drivers using FedEx equipment, wearing FedEx uniforms and working under explicit FedEx rules.

John Tuzynski, the IRS’ chief of employment-tax operations, made worker classification "a major focus" for fiscal 2008 due in large part because of money. The Government Accountability Office has estimated that misclassification of workers amounts to a tax revenue loss of $4.7 billion a year. For employers who are caught misclassifying, monetary pain is just the beginning. Not only are monetary penalties and fines applied, employers can also be criminally charged.  Criminal charges include evasion of payments, filing of false tax returns, conspiracy and tax code section 7202 makes it a felony to willfully fail to collect or pay tax to the government.

The IRS has entered partnerships with the Department of Labor, the National Association of State Workforce Agencies, the Federation of Tax Advisers and the agencies that administer state employment and unemployment taxes to coordinate enforcement.  

To help protect yourself and your business, StaffScapes recommends that all employers with independent contractors complete the IRS 20-factor test (Form SS-8) to determine whether they are really an employee. These tests can be downloaded at the IRS website.

Increase in consumer driven health plans reported in 2007

A recent study conducted by the American Association of Preferred Provider Organizations (AAPPO) shows that participation in consumer driven health plans (CDHP) have increased.  In 2007, enrollment in a CDHP grew 25 percent, to 12.5 million from 10 million in 2006. The majority of those CDHPs were based on a preferred provider organization (PPO) network, which is an increase of 2 percent from 2006.

AAPPO also notes that “While large employers were the first to embrace the CDHP model, small employers are now helping to fuel the growth of CDHPs, with 7 percent of employers with fewer than 500 employees offering a CDHP in 2007 as compared to 5 percent in 2006”

For more information from this study, go to AAPPO’s website at www.aappo.org.  Also more information concerning consumer driven health plans can be received by contacting StaffScapes’ Benefits Department.

On April 21, 2008, OSHA officially kicked off their “youth job safety�? campaign.

U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao launched the fourth year of OSHA’s youth public awareness campaign at Rockefeller Plaza in New York City recently. "The Teen Summer Job Safety Campaign educates teenagers on the importance of workplace safety and health habits that will help protect them and their coworkers at work," Secretary Chao said.

OSHA will host and participate in local events and activities around the country to help keep teenagers safe and healthy on the job. Activities include career fairs, youth programs, expos, career days and training seminars. OSHA and its regional partners are striving to reduce work-related injuries among teens by teaching them on-the-job safety and integration of principles into their work tasks from this early age.

The campaign is part of OSHA’s Young Worker Initiative, which provides information and resources to teenagers, parents, educators and employers to ensure safe and rewarding work experiences for these summer employees. More information about workplace safety for teens is available at www.osha.gov/teens.

DOL restates requirement to pay employees for all time worked, even if it was not approved by the employer.

In a recent Department of Labor Opinion Letter concerning break and meal policies, the Department restates that any work done by the employee, regardless of approval, must be compensated by the employer. The Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 785.13 states:

“In all such cases it is the duty of the management to exercise its control and see that the work is not performed if it does not want it to be performed. It cannot sit back and accept the benefits without compensating for them. The mere promulgation of a rule against such work is not enough. Management has the power to enforce the rule and must make every effort to do so.”

StaffScapes review of the devastating labor initiatives on the November Ballot.

Initiative #76 would eliminate “at will” employment in Colorado, prohibiting employers from firing or suspending full-time employees except for reasons defined in the amendment as “just cause”.  The term “just cause” includes: incompetence; substandard performance; neglect of job duties; repeated violations of an employer’s written policies and procedures; gross insubordination; employer bankruptcy; and documented adverse economic circumstances. This initiative would allow the terminated employee to sue the employer, challenging the firing or suspension. The court may order the employee to be reinstated and awarded back wages, damages and legal fees.

Listed below is the potential impact of initiative #76:

Ø      Current state and federal laws already limit at-will employment and protect employees from being terminated for reasons for discriminatory reasons such as race, sex, religion and age.

Ø      Imposing constitutional restrictions on businesses will increase administrative and litigation costs, hurting our local businesses and economy

Ø      Initiative 76 will prevent businesses from making basic financial decisions such as reorganization, automating operations and reducing unnecessary employment

Ø      Initiative 76 requires “binding arbitration” making the decision final without ability to appeal

Ø      New business may be reluctant to relocate to Colorado or may force existing businesses to move outside of Colorado

Ø      The estimate of fiscal impact shows an increase of government spending from this initiative of $1.3 million based on roughly 3,750 lawsuits being brought (which this writer believes is underestimated)

Should a business be forced to continue employing someone who has a major personality conflict and brings down the motivation and enjoyment of the entire organization? Do you want to be forced to continue to work with a co-worker such as this? Will you be comfortable working next to this disgruntled co-worker after reinstatement? How would you feel if your employer went out of business due to frivolous lawsuits from this initiative?

If the organized labor initiatives are successfully passed this November, our state’s economic growth will be dramatically stunted for years to come. Please check future editions of our blog to view the other initiatives that can have a devastating impact to Colorado.

Sources: Tomlinson & Associates; Economic Development Council of Colorado

StaffScapes review of the devastating labor initiatives on the November Ballot.

Initiative #92 would “Require every private employer with 20 or more employees to provide health insurance for both employees and their dependents.” The initiative also requires employers to pay at least 80 percent of the employee only premiums and 70 percent of dependent premium coverage. Employers who do not comply with providing the insurance would have to then pay into a newly established state authority.

Listed below is the potential impact of initiative #92:

Ø      Current federal law generally prohibits mandating or requiring employers to provide health insurance coverage.

Ø      The majority of Colorado employers currently offer health insurance to their employees, mandating employer contributions will not improve the uninsured problems.

Ø      Initiative 92 will create a massive government run agency to implement the system and provide coverage for those whose employers do not comply.

Ø      Businesses will be hindered by additional financial burdens, resulting in higher costs to do business, lost jobs and increases in the price for goods and services.

Ø      Puts the responsibility of defining what a “major medical” plan is, and how to fund the new government agency in the hands of the legislature.

Ø      Initiative 92 creates reasons for employers to terminate full time employees and replace them with part-timers; also gives employers reason to discriminate against hiring employees with dependents.

Should state laws restrict business growth and mandate benefit offerings, removing the ability to balance needs of employees while meeting financial budgeting? Should employees be laid off and replaced with part-time employees? Do you want employers to focus on how many dependents and applicant has instead of experience and education? Do you want a new government super-agency deciding medical plan designs and funding? Has government run medical care ever been successful?

If the organized labor initiatives are successfully passed this November, our state’s economic growth will be dramatically stunted for years to come. Please check past and future editions of our blog to view the other initiatives that can have a devastating impact to Colorado.

Sources: Tomlinson & Associates; Economic Development Council of Colorado

Auditors finding “Good Faith” for small business using a PEO.

During a recent conversation and review of a Department of Labor audit with a client I mentioned how the auditor used the term "Good Faith" during the audit. This came from her finding out that the employer was using a Professional Employer Organization (PEO). Once we as the clients PEO contacted the auditor the auditor was happy and willing to work with StaffScapes to gather and provide information pertaining to the claim. 

The audit came about after a client terminated an employee and that employee felt that he was due overtime pay. The employee was an exempt manager and was paid on a salary basis. During the audit it was determined that the employee was correctly classified and was not due any overtime pay.

I believe that the PEO relationship helped this audit go in the correct direction for our PEO client. Once the Auditor found out that the client was using a PEO she mentioned that it is good to see business making a good faith judgement in following the rules and regulations around having employees and employment. The PEO relationship allowed the client to focus on his business and marketing of that business and allowed the PEO to work on the business of employment. Because of this the employer had all the correct job descriptions, hiring and firing responsibilities laid out in the employers handbook. With that and the easily accessed time records we kept as the PEO the auditor was able to make a quick decision in this case.

Before the auditor came out to the work site we meet with our client to review the audit procedure. Our client was not happy that he had to have an audit and wanted to make that point clear to the auditor the next day. We advised him to come into the meeting with a smile and to treat the auditor as a co-worker and not to be confrontational. The auditor could have opened the audit to both of his business and not keep it focused to the claim at hand. It was decided early on that we would be at the meeting and help run the meeting with the auditor so as the correct questions would be answered and no additional information would be provided in less it was relevant to the discussion.

In the end the client had to meet with the auditor for a little over an hour. The audit went in the clients favor and no wrong doing was found. As the PEO we did suggest to the client how he can improve how he hires and fires.

Creating a good faith PEO relationship properly saved this client from having an audit go the wrong way.

See Also

• Human Resource Solution center
  The StaffScapes Advantage

Employers need to be more involved in injured workers’ rehabilitation.

A doctor that treats workers’ compensation injuries recently gave a seminar that I attended. In the beginning of this seminar he gave some interesting statistics regarding injured workers, included here:

- 50% of injured workers who have been off of work for between 6 months to 1 year never return to work

- 90% of injured workers who have been off of work more than 1 year never return to work

- 85% of costs of all workers’ compensation claims come from only 5% of claims

- 40% of the costs from all claims come from delayed recovery

- 10% of injured workers actually perform their prescribed physical therapy exercises at home

Not only do these claims have an impact on the employers who the worker was working for, but they also have social impacts to all of us when the worker can not or will not continue to work after the injury. These social impacts include a drain on disability insurance, medicaid / medicare, and other welfare programs offered by state and federal laws. Employers need to design and implement Return-to-Work programs and show concern for the injured worker. As employers do this work related injury costs should be reduced and the burden to the employer and society as a whole can be softened.

See Also

• Staffscapes
  workers compensation information

Get started today for a healthier you

It doesn’t take much to make wellness programs pay off for your company. To help get your company building a wellness program call StaffScapes, Inc. today. Other ways to help you get started on your wellness program include:

*Starting with corporate employees. Have your top employees lead by example. One way might be walking around for a meeting instead of sitting. Once the upper management gets aboard then others will follow.

*Encourage employees to lead a healthy lifestyle starting from hiring and continuing

*Include the family

*As employees their advice. What would they like to see in a wellness program? Keep them involved through out the program

*Support the program through encouragement and opportunity for everyone

*Keep the program consistent.

*Set goals and evaluate after a couple months

If you have an idea for a Wellness Program feel free to email us any ideas at Katie@staffscapes.com

The year 2009 or 2010 may bring an extra payday to employees.

Next year or the following, brings another possibility of an extra payday for many workers. Employees that are paid on a weekly basis and certain biweekly paid employees may have an extra payday depending if their employers chose to pay employees prior to or after the normal payday of January 1, 2010.  Since January 1^st is a federal holiday, employers will need to decide to pay their employees early (December 31, 2009) or after (January 4, 2010).  Based on this decision, the employees will have a 53^rd paycheck if they are paid weekly or a 27^th paycheck if they are paid biweekly. If the employer chooses to pay the employees early then 2009 will be the year with an extra payday. If the employees are paid after the holiday then 2010 will be the year affected.

Not all biweekly paid employees will have an extra pay.  Only those employees that have a normal payday of January 2, 2009 will have this extra pay scenario.  If the biweekly paid employee is normally paid on January 9, 2009, then there is not the extra payday possibility.

This extra payday does not mean that employees are being overpaid. Employees that are paid on a per hour basis still worked those hours so they are not being paid extra.  However, employees that are paid based on an annual salary will be paid an extra paycheck which would result in a higher salary for the year. Due to this possibility we suggest that every employer review their compensation plans for the 2009 and 2010 years.

Recent DOL Opinion Letter explains compensability of on call time.

A recent Opinion Letter from the US Department of Labor addresses on call time and compensability. The DOL Opinion Letters are specific to the original requestor’s situation and are not to be used as blanket policies.  However, additional details regarding FLSA interpretation can be garnered from these letters.

Opinion Letter, FLSA2008-14NA, explains that compensability of on call time is “decided in the context of each case”.  Therefore, the DOL is saying that each case, or each policy regarding on call time, must be looked at on its own merits and design, and a blanket statement can not be given to cover every given policy design.

Compensability arises when on call conditions restrict the employee from using this time for personal uses. This is the major principle that they look at when determining compensability. The DOL does go on to give several factors that they use to determine if the on call time restricts the employee from personal use. These factors include:

·        is there excessive geographical limitations on the employee’s movement

·        is the frequency of calls received unduly restrictive

·        is the fixed time limit for response too impeding

·        can the employee trade on call responsibilities

When determining compensability of on call time all of the factors of your on call policy should be examined.  Employers need to be very careful examining these policies and should get professional assistance or ask your Professional Employer Organization (PEO) when making these determinations.  Paying back wages including overtime hours, especially when not expecting these additional costs, can significantly hurt a company.

See Also

• DOL Opinion Letter FLSA20008-14NA
  DOL Opinion Letter FLSA20008-14NA

New rules published regarding changes to the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.

A new interim rule for the Form I-9 has been released from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).  The amended regulations modify the types of acceptable documents that employees may present to their employers for completion of the Form I-9.

Under the new rule, employees will no longer be able to present expired documents to verify employment authorization on the Form I-9. Under previous rules, a U.S. passport and all List B documents were acceptable for the Form I–9 even if they are expired.

The rule also adds a few additional documents to List A of the Form I-9, and makes other, technical changes to update the list of acceptable documents.  The revised Form I-9 includes additional changes, such as revisions to the employee attestation section, and the addition of the new U.S. Passport Card to List A.   

The revised Form I-9 will need to be used beginning February 2, 2009.

Ever wonder what a PEO does? Or what does a PEO have to offer? Hopefully this insight will clear up some questions you may have.

PEO stands for Professional Employer Organization. PEO’s can often reduce the cost of a business’s workers’ compensation rates, offer superior benefit plans that smaller company’s can not offer, and manage risk. They also offer assistance with human resources and employee questions as well as tribulations. When a company decides to sign on with a PEO the PEO then takes on the many responsibilities and liabilities that come with business ownership. They keep clients up to date with all compliances and safety issues making it easy for a business owner to concentrate more time to grow their business.

By outsourcing certain functions to StaffScapes it allows more time for businesses to simplify and allows more time for core activities of the business. StaffScapes, Inc takes time and dedication to administer each of our clients. We manage the risk, take care of compliance and costs associated with Human Resources. Compliance falls under all state and local government regulations. StaffScapes offers employees reliable paydays, quality health- vision – and dental insurance, a safe working setting, opportunities for retirement savings as well as quality human resource services for example employee manuals, grievance procedures and prompt communication which is said to increase job satisfaction and productivity in the work place.

Outsource your human resource and risk management efficiently and affordably today with StaffScapes.