June 2010

Newsletter=

June 1, 2010<= o:p>

<= o:p>

Quot= es That Inspire

Alwa= ys do everything that you ask of those you command.

Gene= ral George S. Patton

101 Ways to have a G= reat Day at Work by Stephanie Goddad Davidson

"If you want to leave your footprin= ts on the sand of time, be sure you are wearing work shoes" =

- Italian Proverb

You are completely responsi= ble for where you are in your career. To blame others is to give them your po= wer. Instead, put that energy into taking the actions you need to get the job = you want. Do at least one thing every day that gets you closer to that goal -= no matter how small that action may seem.

Common Employer Mist= ake in Employee Screenings:

Violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with job applicants who previously tested positive for ille= gal drugs while in your employ.

Let's assume your employee Jack Jone= s is fired for testing positive twice illegal drugs. And, suppose Jack Jones applies for a job with your firm one year later. You tell Jack he has no = more chances with your firm because he violated the drug and alcohol policy a = year earlier.

Jack wins an ADA case against your f= irm. Under the ADA he is disabled having suffered from the disease of drug addiction. An employer can discriminate against an individual based on CURRENT ILLICIT drug use evidenced by a positive drug test. But, an emplo= yer cannot discriminate based on the history of substance abuse. A recovering drug user is protec= ted by the ADA under which reasonable accommodations need to be considered. Never say never. Allow those who fail a drug test to reapply at some point in the future and allow for the possibility that ev= en hard-core addicts and alcoholics can recover.

This free eNewsletter is brought to you by Randisi= & Associates, Inc. Periodical= ly, we'll bring you news and ideas to help you in your business life. If you = wish to unsubscribe at any time, please reply to this message with Unsubscribe= in the subject line.

This month we present the following articles for your consideration:

Don't be frightened into avoidance of those steps you need to do to make sure people you hire have not exhibited behavior in their past that would indicate they may harm a co-worker, client, or member of the public. A court upholds an employer's right. And, believe it or not, the court was in Californi= a!!
You have heard of doing exit interview= s? Sometimes helpful sometimes not helpful. How about conducting those = same interviews on current employees who haven't left your firm. Sound cr= azy? Read this article to see the commons sense behind such an action.

Information in this newsletter is not intended as legal advice. Please consult legal = counsel before taking any actions.

I hope you find this month's newsletter beneficial.

Jim Randisi<= /p>

410.494.0232=

Employment Screening Firms May Disclose Information on Megan's Law Website =

In an opinion filed March 23, 2010, a California co= urt of appeal affirmed a decision by Judge Emilie Elias of the Los Angeles Superior Court dismissing a lawsuit filed by William Mendoza against ADP Screening and Selection Services ("ADP"). Mendoza alleged ADP conducted a pre-employment check on him and in doing so accessed the Megan's Law website (www.meganslaw.ca.gov), which provides information on sex offenders. The complaint implicitly alleged Mendoza's employer did not hire him due to the information uncovered by ADP on the website.

The appellate court held ADP's conduct was constitutionally protected speech on a subject of public interest, furt= her noting it was "swayed by the public interest in safe workplaces.&q= uot;

California's Penal Code section 290.46 permits u= se of the information on the Megan's Law website "only to protect a person at risk" but otherwise prohibits the use of such information relating to employment. The appellate court noted "a strong argume= nt might be made that employees are persons at risk whom an employer has a duty to protect from a sexually violent predator."

www.examiner.co= m/x-41477-LA-Business-Law-Examiner~y2010m3d24-Employment-Screening-Firms-Ma= y-Disclose-Information-on-Megans-Law-Website

Employers should have= a common-sense approach toward steps taken to screen potential employees. Assess how much independent and unsupervised interaction with clients a= nd the public will occur and adjust the intensity of your screening accordingly. The higher the level of independence and unsupervised interaction, the higher should be the intensity of the screening steps. Determine the vulnerability of the people with whom your employee will interact. Again, the higher the level of vulnerability, the higher the level of intensity of the screening steps. Until told otherwise by= a Court or a law, employers should make an effort to determine if there i= s a sound reason to anticipate a member of the public or a client or co-wor= ker is at risk a sexual offender was hired.

The case can be found at: = http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinion= s/documents/B214653.PDF

Prevent Exit Interviews

This is a summary of article by Beverly Kaye a= nd Sharon Jordan-Evans For Full Context visit the April 2010 issue of Talent Management Magazine at www.careersystemsintl.com/Articl= es.asp

Understanding your employees and empowering them to tackle their work in a manner that suits them will get rid of first-time manager jitters and help you blossom into a confident, seasoned professional.

By the time an employee is walking out the door, the= opportunity to gather useful information has passed. To boost retention efforts, tale= nt managers should conduct stay interviews to find out early what they can d= o to keep employees.

Show Appreciation.

Imagine this scenario. A boss calls a key employee i= n for a meeting and says, I probably haven't told you this often enough but you= are important to this team and to me. I can't imagine losing you. I'd also li= ke to know what you want to do next. What do you want to learn? What career goals are you thinking about? What can I do to help you reach those goals? I'd like to know what would keep you here.

Some talent managers don't hold stay interviews beca= use they fear they won't be able to deliver on unexpected employee requests. = But evading or avoiding these critical conversations often creates more probl= ems. Managers who suspect they might not be able to deliver on employee reques= ts can take four steps.

Tell employees how much they are valued.

Tell the truth about obstacles.

Care enough to look into their comments.

Ask, what else? When managers ask the question, What= else can we do?, they will likely hear at least one= thing that employees want that they can provide.

Why Employees Stay

Between 1997 and 2010, they authors asked more than = 17,000 employees, representing all levels, functions, ages, industries and geographies, what keeps them in an organization for awhile. Note that 91 percent of respondent listed at least one of the first two items among the top responses they stay:

Exciting work and challenge,

Career growth, learning and development,

Working with great people,

Fair pay,

Supportive management,

Being recognized, valued and respected,

Benefits,

Meaningful work and making a difference,

Pride in the organization, its mission and its produ= ct,

Beyond listening, managers need to respond, and what= they say is critical. Responses = such as "That is unrealistic", will immediately halt the dialogue and might even cause employees to start a job search. Managers need to look f= or ways a request could work rather than immediately come up with reasons wh= y it won't.

Manager's efforts to engage and retain talent should= be perennial. They should hold stay interviews on a regular basis no matter = what the economy, knowing that their caring and curiosity will pay off over ti= me.

Also leaders at all levels need to stop guessing wha= t will keep their stars engaged, productive and on the team.