Let’s Talk: A guide to resolving workplace conflicts (pdf 3807 KB)

I came across these as notes I had taken at some time. I’m not sure if they come from a book I was reading or a presentation I was attending.

Leaders achieve results through the work of others. Interpersonal skills are crucial to the leader’s ability to persuade and motivate both internal and external stakeholders. Effective leaders know how to negotiate with associates and resolve conflicts both formally and informally.

Recognize the importance of sensitivity. One of the factors that undermine leadership is behaving in ways that are insensitive and uncaring concerning the needs of others. To be effective, managers must be able to establish working relationships with others based on trust, respect and caring and be sensitive to the opinions, feelings, and interests of others when communicating with them.

Build relationships informally. Use informal interactions with your peers, superiors and subordinates as an opportunity to build valuable working relationships. Use common courtesy such as smiling and saying “hello” when you encounter people casually. Treat your coworkers with respect and be non-judgemental in your dealings with them.

Be approachable. If your employees consider you to be unapproachable, ask yourself what it is you do that creates this feeling. Be wary of behaving as if the suggestions or concerns of your employees are unimportant. Make an active effort to interact informally with your employees. Consider establishing and encouraging the use of an open-door policy.

Make effort to improve poor working relationships. Consider the peers with whom you work regularly and identify the individuals with whom you have poor working relationships.

• Identify interpersonal barriers. Identify that get in the way of your working relationships with those individuals and determine how you can remove these barriers. View these problems in the same way you view the other problems you face as a manager; they are a challenge that can and must be overcome.
• Be willing to adapt. Resolving interpersonal differences requires asking yourself what aspects of the other person’s style can be dealt with by simply acknowledging them and being prepared to face them. Other problems may require an ability to adapt your style when interacting with others. In these situations, it is helpful to take the perspective of the other person and understand their reasons for behaving as they do. In most cases the reasons are neither selfish nor misguided; they are simply unique. Individual uniqueness is the basis of the diversity that is crucial to the adaptability and resilience of any organization.
• Acknowledge others’ viewpoints. Accept that other people will perceive their views as being as valid as yours and that some individuals will never be completely persuaded to accept your point of view or be willing to compromise.
• Be a mentor. Be a mentor to a less experienced manager who could benefit from your wisdom and guidance. You have an important role to play in developing and mentoring staff to become leaders.
• Show appreciation. Continually seek opportunities to show appreciation to others for their work. Acknowledge and credit the contributions of your staff in open forums, as well as in private.
• Recognize your dependence on others. Remind yourself regularly that you become successful as a leader only to the extent that you help those around you become successful.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Best Places to Work: 5 Ways to be One of the 100 (slackermanager.com)
• Leading in a Recession: An Interview with Jack Hayhow (drivenleaders.com)
• Your Best First Steps in a New Leadership Role (kevineikenberry.com)
• How to Manage People in 15 Minutes a Day (blogs.harvardbusiness.org)

To simplify the inquiry process, the commission has developed a publication (in PDF) to provide current information about how human rights law impacts drug and alcohol dependencies in Alberta workplaces. Specifically, the purpose of the document is to:

• Clarify the Commission’s role in preventing discrimination against employees who have drug and alcohol dependencies
• Outline the situations in which an employee may have the basis to make a human rights complaint related to drug and alcohol dependencies in the workplace
• Provide information about when and individual may make a complaint about a potentially discriminatory drug and alcohol policy
• Provide information about the responsibilities of the employer and employee in the accommodation process
• Inform the public that the commission does not have jurisdiction to tell an employer when or whether they can require a drug or alcohol test
• Define the difference between recreational drug and alcohol use and drug and alcohol dependencies

Click to download the full publication (PDF)

Early in 2008, the Federal, Alberta and British Columbia Privacy Commissioners released guidelines for the use of video surveillance. These guidelines support a cautious approach to implementing such surveillance.

Here are the guidelines as released by the Office of the Federal Privacy Commissioner.

Introduction

The use of video surveillance by private sector organizations has exploded in recent years.  As technology has evolved and costs have fallen dramatically, video surveillance is increasingly accessible to a large range of organizations.  Security and crime control concerns are the most common motivating factors for the deployment of video surveillance cameras. Retailers use cameras in hopes of deterring thefts and identifying suspects.  Cameras are installed in apartment buildings to detect vandalism and increase the security of tenants. But there are other less obvious uses as well.  Some retailers conduct video surveillance to analyze consumer behaviour – which store aisles they frequent, where they stop, what products they examine. Daycares may use video surveillance to give parents a first-hand view of their children’s activities via the internet.

Private sector privacy laws require that organizations’ need to conduct video surveillance must be balanced with the individuals’ right to privacy, which includes the right lead their lives free from scrutiny.  Given its inherent intrusiveness, organizations should consider all less privacy-invasive means of achieving the same end before resorting to video surveillance.

To help organizations achieve compliance with private sector privacy legislation, we have developed these Guidelines, which set out the principles for evaluating the use of video surveillance and for ensuring that its impact on privacy is minimized.  These Guidelines apply to overt video surveillance of the public by private sector organizations in publicly accessible areas. These Guidelines do not apply to covert video surveillance, such as that conducted by private investigators on behalf of insurance companies, nor do they apply to the surveillance of employees.

An important note – private sector privacy laws¹ govern the collection, use and disclosure of information about an identifiable individual. In the private sector, surveillance through a video camera is subject to privacy laws. Under PIPEDA and the Alberta and British Columbia PIPAs, the information does not need to be recorded.

10 things to do when considering, planning and using video surveillance

1. Determine whether a less privacy-invasive alternative to video surveillance would meet your needs.
2. Establish the business reason for conducting video surveillance and use video surveillance only for that reason.
3. Develop a policy on the use of video surveillance.
4. Limit the use and viewing range of cameras as much as possible.
5. Inform the public that video surveillance is taking place.
6. Store any recorded images in a secure location, with limited access, and destroy them when they are no longer required for business purposes.
7. Be ready to answer questions from the public.  Individuals have the right to know who is watching them and why, what information is being captured, and what is being done with recorded images.
8. Give individuals access to information about themselves.  This includes video images.
9. Educate camera operators on the obligation to protect the privacy of individuals.
10. Periodically evaluate the need for video surveillance.

Qs and As

Q. What can we use video surveillance for?

A. There are a number of situations where it may be reasonable to expect video surveillance to take place, for example, for security purposes around banking machines or inside convenience stores in high-crime areas.  In areas where people have a much higher expectation of privacy, such as a public washroom or a spa treatment room, video surveillance is inappropriate.

When considering the use of video surveillance, make sure that all less privacy invasive alternatives have been looked at. It is preferable to first put the appropriate security measures in place, such as placing inventory under lock and key.

Q. What are we allowed to do with the information we obtain through video surveillance?

A. Information collected through video surveillance should only be used for the purpose that surveillance is being undertaken, or for purposes that are permitted by law.  For example, if cameras are installed in an apartment building parking garage for safety purposes, the information cannot be used to track the movements of tenants. However, if a car is broken into, the information can be disclosed to law enforcement.

Q. What should we keep in mind when installing and operating the cameras?

A. The video surveillance system should be set up and operated to collect the minimum amount of information to be effective.  This helps reduce the intrusion on individuals’ privacy.  Specifically:

• Cameras that are turned on for limited periods in the day are preferable to “always on” surveillance.
• Cameras should be positioned to reduce capturing images of individuals who are not being targeted. For example, a store security camera should not be recording passersby outside the store.
• Cameras should not be aimed at areas where people have a heightened expectation of privacy, for example, showers or into windows.  Steps should be taken to ensure that cameras cannot be adjusted or manipulated by the operator to capture images in such areas.
• Sound should not be recorded unless there is a specific need to do so.
• If a camera is monitored, the recording function should be turned on only when unlawful activity is suspected or observed.

Organizations should also ensure that the video surveillance complies with all applicable laws, in addition to privacy legislation.  For example, an organization using a video camera that captures sound needs to consider the Criminal Code provisions dealing with the collection of private communications.

Q. Should we post signs that there are cameras in operation?

A. Yes.  Most privacy laws require the organization conducting video surveillance to post a clear and understandable notice about the use of cameras on its premises to individuals whose images might be captured by them, before these individuals enter the premises.  This gives people the option of not entering the premises if they object to the surveillance. Signs should include a contact in case individuals have questions or if they want access to images related to them.

Q. What are our responsibilities with regard to recorded images?

A.

• The recorded images must be stored in a secure location, and access should be granted only to a limited number of authorized individuals.
• Individuals have the right to access images relating to them.  When disclosing recordings to individuals who appear in them, the organization must ensure that identifying information about any other individuals on the recording is not revealed. This can be done through technologies that mask identity.
• Any disclosure of video surveillance recordings outside the organization should be justified and documented.
• Recordings should only be kept as long as necessary to fulfill the purpose of the video surveillance. Recordings no longer required should be destroyed.  Organizations must ensure that the destruction is secure.

Q. What are our obligations to the people who operate our video surveillance system?

A. Organizations should ensure that appropriate and ongoing training is provided to operators to make certain that they:

• understand their obligations under all relevant legislation, these Guidelines, and the organization’s video surveillance policy; and
• conduct surveillance only for the purposes identified by the organization.

Q. Once the video surveillance system is up and running, what do we need to do to ensure continued compliance with privacy laws?

A. Organizations should evaluate all aspects of the operation of their video surveillance system regularly. In particular, organizations should examine whether video surveillance continues to be required and should consider:

• Was video surveillance effective in addressing the problem for which it was introduced?
• Does the problem still exist?
• Would a less intrusive way of addressing the problem now be effective?

Q. How should my organization document the use of video surveillance?

A. Organizations should develop a policy on video surveillance that sets out:

• the rationale and purpose of the surveillance system;
• the location and field of vision of the equipment;
• any special capabilities of the system, for example, sound, zoom, facial recognition or night-vision features;
• the rationale and purpose of the specific locations of equipment and fields of vision selected;
• the personnel authorized to operate the system and access the information it contains;
• the times when surveillance will be in effect;
• whether and when recording will occur;
• the place where signals from the equipment will be received and monitored;
• guidelines for managing video surveillance recordings, including security, use, disclosure, and retention;
• procedures for the secure disposal of video surveillance recordings;
• a process to follow if there is unauthorized disclosure of images;
• procedures for individuals to access personal information captured and challenge any suspected failure to comply with the policy;
• sanctions for the organization’s employees and contractors for failing to adhere to the policy; and
• the individual accountable for privacy compliance and who can answer any questions about the surveillance.

“Anybody who loses focus for a moment is at risk of making a mistake on the job, and our young workers heading into the work force are the most vulnerable,” said Hector Goudreau, Minister of Employment and Immigration.

The campaign focuses on specific questions young workers should ask their employers to avoid a workplace injury or death.  Based on extensive research and testing, the campaign focuses on 15 to 19-year-olds and emphasises that workplace incidents can be very real with lasting consequences. It includes transit ads, video productions for movie theatres, posters, Internet banner ads - all of which encourage young workers to visit www.bloodylucky.ca.

“We find that every workplace incident uncovers several unfortunate choices that were made that led to the tragedy; there are no accidents,” says Dr. Michael Alpern of the Job Safety Skills Society, a member of the Young Worker Provincial Advisory Committee. “Research shows that young workers have a higher injury rate than their workplace peers. We see it first hand and we endorse any program that might save a life or limb.”

The campaign is part of Work Safe Alberta, a unique partnership between industry, labour and government. An integral part of the initiative is promoting workplace safety by increasing public awareness.

The videos can also be found at Bloody Lucky’s YouTube Video channel. (Warning: some of the content is graphic.)

Alberta courts sent a strong message to Alberta companies in 2008 that workplace health and safety must not be compromised. Penalties totalling more than $5 million against 22 companies surpass the 2007 total of $1.72 million against 12 companies.

“This government will continue working with industry, labour and safety associations to ensure our workplaces remain healthy and safe,” said Hector Goudreau, Minister of Employment and Immigration. “However, when all else fails and the law is broken, the courts take over and send the ultimate message. These sentences should remind employers that there will be consequences when they don’t meet their safety responsibilities.”

The percentage of penalties collected as alternate sentences has also increased. In 2007, 74 per cent of penalties were paid to safety organisations to provide training or to organisations that assist injured workers. To date in 2008, more than 88 per cent of the fines, nearly $4.5 million, are in alternate sentences with the largest awards going to the University of Alberta Engineering Safety and Risk Management Program ($345,000), Lakeland College ($300,000) and the Red Deer College/City of Red Deer ($300,000).

The “up” side of signing an LCA is that it will get the worker reinstated. The LCA gets the worker back to work quickly and avoids the risk of having an arbitrator uphold the firing. The downside of an LCA is that it makes it very easy for the employer to fire the worker again and, if that happens, makes it very difficult for the worker to seek reinstatement through the grievance and arbitration procedure. Many LCA’s severely limit a worker’s right to file further grievances (if he or she is fired again) or have those grievances heard and decided in a way that takes into account all the relevant considerations.

Signing an LCA means that you understand and agree with its provisions. There is no going back at a later date and saying that you didn’t know what you were signing or that you did not anticipate the real impact of the LCA on you. About the only way you could backpedal on an LCA is to establish that you were somehow mentally impaired at the time you signed it and so, didn’t know what you were getting into and you don’t really want to go there unless it’s true. Your union’s signature can and, if push comes to shove, will be construed as an acknowledgement that you can be treated differently than other workers.

A last chance agreement is a written agreement between the union and the employer (often the worker involved is required to sign off as well) giving a worker who has been accused of engaging in some kind of serious misconduct, one last chance to keep his/her job.

Last chance agreements are common in cases involving discharge for alcohol or drug abuse, workplace misconduct like harassment, fighting or insubordination but have also been known to turn up in cases of innocent absenteeism, unsatisfactory work performance or repeatedly violation of workplace rules.

LCA’s typically provide for the reinstatement of a worker on certain strict conditions and state that the worker will be terminated if s/he breaches any of those conditions. The worker may, for example, have to agree to stop drinking, submit to random or periodic drug testing, meet specific production quotas or maintain a certain level of attendance. In the event that the worker resumes using alcohol or drugs or fails to meet production quotas or is absent or late, he or she will be fired. If that happens, a typical LCA will say something like:

“In the event that the dismissal becomes the subject of a grievance it is agreed that an arbitrator’s jurisdiction will be limited to determining whether or not the Grievor breached this agreement [the LCA]. In the event that an arbitrator finds the Grievor in breach of [the LCA], the arbitrator shall have no power to alter or vary the discipline imposed by the employer.”

Another common variation of this kind of clause is even more vague but means exactly the same thing:

“The parties agree that in the event of a breach of this agreement, an arbitrator’s jurisdiction shall be limited only to making a finding of fact (a finding that something did or did not happen). Should a finding of fact be made, the arbitrator shall have no authority to modify or vary the discipline imposed by the employer.”

What do these long and wordy clauses mean?

Suppose that after returning to work, the worker is fired again and grieves his or her dismissal and the union takes the grievance to arbitration. The arbitrator will not have the power to decide whether the employer had “just cause” for the dismissal. The arbitrator will only have the power to decide whether or not the worker breached the LCA. If the arbitrator finds that the worker breached the LCA, the firing stands.

This differs drastically from the powers that arbitrators have when dealing with dismissal grievances. Arbitration hearings into grievances about discipline and dismissal are often an uphill battle for the employer. This is because, in these kinds of grievances, the employer has the onus (or burden) of proof. In order to win the case, the employer has to clear three hurdles. The employer has to prove that:

1. The alleged misconduct actually happened.
2. The misconduct was culpable (blameworthy), and
3. The punishment fit the crime.

Hurdles (2) and (3) are really important to workers who have been dismissed (or otherwise whacked with some sort of disciplinary penalty). Not all workplace “offenses” are culpable. Innocent absenteeism is probably the best example of this. If a worker is off work frequently because of illness, that’s not culpable absenteeism. The worker is sick and has no control over the illness. It is very difficult to dismiss workers who are off due to innocent absenteeism for this reason. Culpability issues can also arise in other situations. Workers dismissed for poor performance may sometimes have a defense if they were denied proper training, tools or equipment, given arbitrary standards or impossible quotas to meet or otherwise put in a position where it was impossible for them to do their job to the employer’s satisfaction.

A word to the wise: A lot of workplace misconduct is considered culpable. Incidents of fighting, theft, harassment, insubordination, failure to follow rules will more than likely be found to be culpable. The reason for this is that it’s difficult to claim that these kinds of activities (if you’ve actually been engaging in them) are beyond your control. Also, absences due to the illness of someone other than the worker him or herself (i.e., family members) are considered culpable. If the employer has cleared hurdle #1 (proved the misconduct happened), clearing the second hurdle could be fairly easy. That’s why the third hurdle (did the punishment fit the crime) is really important for workers.

Arbitrators have a lot of discretion to modify penalties imposed by employers even where they do find that the worker engaged in culpable misconduct. They consider a wide range of factors in determining whether the penalty fits. This is especially so in dismissal cases. Arbitrators consider the seriousness of the offense itself, the worker’s past disciplinary record (the official record that shows disciplinary notices and suspension), the worker’s age and length of service, the circumstances surrounding the incident, how others who have committed similar offenses have been treated and the potential for a reoccurrence of the incident or behaviour if the worker is reinstated.

Employers have a tough row to hoe in discipline cases. Most workers, unless they have done something very serious or have a lengthy history of discipline, have pretty good odds of being reinstated. This is why LCA’s must be approached with caution. If an arbitrator finds that the employer went too far in dismissing the worker, reinstatement may carry some lesser penalty (a warning letter or suspension) but rarely are the kinds of conditions found in LCA’s imposed by arbitrators. So unless the worker’s situation is really bleak, he or she will probably come out better in an arbitration hearing than they will in an LCA.

A worker needs to carefully consider an LCA because, once he or she signs on the dotted line, their employer will not have to clear hurdles (2) and (3) if the worker is fired again. If a worker who is brought back to work under a LCA is subsequently fired, all that the arbitrator will determine is whether what the employer is alleging actually happened (did the worker resume drinking, use drugs, report for work late, fail to meet production standards and so on). If the arbitrator concludes that the answer is yes, then the dismissal stands. The arbitrator does not have “jurisdiction” to consider mitigating circumstances, blameworthiness or the appropriateness of the penalty. The union and the employer have restricted his or her ability to do that with the LCA. The chances of a dismissal being upheld under a LCA are, therefore, much greater.

Considering a last chance agreement? Before signing on the bottom line:

1. How strong is your case? How likely is the employer to be able to prove that you did what they’re accusing you of? If you’re guilty, is your conduct going to be found to be culpable or non-culpable? What’s the likelihood that you’ll win your case if you go to arbitration? If you lose, will the penalty of dismissal be found to be excessive? You need to get good advice on your situation and you also need to be objective. If you have a long record of discipline, and have already been suspended for similar conduct or have done something very serious, your chances of getting your job back through arbitration may not be that great. Maybe a LCA is a good option for you.

2. When working out the details of a last chance agreement make sure that the agreement is clear and precise. Keep all the terms of the last chance agreement focused on the specific problem that led to the discharge. Stay away from language that will allow the employer to fire you for anything else.

3. The agreement should be clear and precise about the length of the LCA. It simply would be unfair for a union and an employer to hold a member to a lifetime sentence, however much money it might save in an arbitration case. The LCA should have an expiry date after some reasonable period.

4. The LCA should spell out exactly what standards you will be expected to meet. All parties - and that includes you - must know exactly how your compliance with the agreement will be assessed.

5. The employer should be obliged to act reasonably. Will any incident of absenteeism be grounds for immediate dismissal? What if you are genuinely sick or get hit by a bus? The LCA should stipulate the kind of absences that will get you fired. If you are required to contact a certain person in the event of an absence, the agreement should spell out who that person is and how the contact is to be made.

6. If you are involved in drug or alcohol rehabilitation, or are recovering from a medical condition, the employer should acknowledge that you will require accommodation during this period. You need to know, however, that even though substance dependency is considered a handicap under human rights legislation, arbitrators don’t have a lot of compassion for substance abusers. “Accommodation” means that your employer will be expected to grant you time off to get treatment but doesn’t mean that your employer will be expected to put up with relapses. Most workers only get one shot at rehab from an arbitrator. If you need help dealing with drug or alcohol addiction - get it.

7. If training will be required to enable you to perform your job at a certain level, the LCA should set out what training will be provided and when. All too often, these agreements are signed, things fall through cracks, managers don’t live up to their commitments and workers are left to fall flat on their faces.

8. It is vitally important that an agreement not limit your ability to grieve a subsequent discharge if you breach some other rule not associated to the LCA. Arbitrators tend to interpret last chance agreements strictly so it is very important that your union write up the LCA correctly. If you are unsure of the legality of an LCA, take a copy to your own lawyer and ask for an opinion.

9. The LCA must be written and adopted in good faith by both the union and management to fulfill a specific goal or purpose. No last change agreement can be written so as to take away a member’s legislated rights. More specifically, neither employers nor unions can contract out of human rights legislation. A last-chance agreement that requires the abandonment of a right conferred by a human rights statute or is tainted by an inequitable term may well be unenforceable.

If you suffer from a medical condition and are periodically absent from work because of that condition, your employer can’t just fire you for that, even if you’ve signed an LCA that says you will be fired for any future absenteeism. (Well, they can fire you but you’ve got a good defense for your absence and a good argument that the LCA is unenforceable: Because your human rights legislation requires your employer to accommodate you, as you are a disabled worker). Your employer doesn’t have to accommodate you forever but they must show that they have exhausted all reasonable efforts to accommodate you up to the point of undue hardship. This is tough for employers to prove, especially for larger employers. “Undue hardship” has been defined by some Canadian human rights agencies as the point at which the business is in danger of going under.

10. Understanding and interpreting last chance agreements can be complex and should best be left to outside legal professionals or to an arbitrator. While a LCA may be a good option for you, you don’t want to get stuck with something that will almost guarantee you a boot out the door in the not too distant future. Nor do you want to give yourself up to unfair treatment just because doing so will save your union and your employer a day or two at arbitration. The impact of an LCA on you can be significant. How it is interpreted and applied can also make a big difference in your life. Depending on how an LCA is worded, you could be fired for very insignificant things - things that would not even get your coworkers a slap on the wrist. You should get legal advice about the LCA and how best to structure it to protect the your interests before signing off. If you are not comfortable with the advice you’re getting from your union rep, get independent advice from a lawyer who is familiar with this area of the law. It’s really important to understand that once you sign off on a LCA, you are legally bound by its terms. There is no going back and saying that you didn’t really understand the implications.

11. Once you sign on the dotted line, make it work. Don’t play fast and loose or give the employer a reason to fire you. If you are concerned that you may have breached the agreement, talk to your union representative immediately and ask how you can best protect your interests.

What if it’s management that is proposing an LCA to resolve your grievance? This sometimes happens and all the same considerations should apply. It may also mean that management has become aware that its case isn’t so rock solid. If that’s the case, you probably don’t need a last chance. You need your job back because they took it from you without just cause.

Given the severe consequences for the worker in the event of a breach of the agreement, last chance agreements should be approached with caution and should not be entered into unless a worker has truly run out of other options.

Here’s a good example of what can happen what can happen when a worker agrees to an LCA that is too broad. It didn’t take long for the second firing to take place. The worker’s union declined to grieve his dismissal (on the basis that they weren’t likely to win because the of wording of the LCA). The duty of fair representation complaint he filed was dismissed because the LCA gave his union an excuse for not fighting for him.

The LCA that you’ll find in this arbitration decision is quite long and detailed. It contains a clause, however, that takes away the worker’s right to grieve if he’s fired and makes a vague statement that he can “dispute the facts” if he’s dismissed.

Should the Grievor fail to comply with any of the conditions set out in these Minutes of Settlement, the Grievor’s employment with the Employer shall be deemed terminated immediately and the Grievor shall not have the right to grieve his discharge or otherwise challenge his termination, other than to dispute the facts upon which the termination is based;

He did grieve his subsequent termination. Read the decision and see what it got him. He got hung by his LCA even with his union on his side.

Here’s a somewhat shorter last chance agreement which specifically allows for the worker to grievance any future discipline or dismissal. This LCA doesn’t contain any restriction on the arbitrator.

A woman comes into the store, you turn to the other salesman and say, “I waited on the last fat ugly old lady. This one’s yours.” Your boss is standing behind you. It’s his wife.

While your boss is at lunch, you sneak in and look at some confidential information on his computer. You spill coffee on the keyboard. It shorts out.

You return from a week’s vacation to find that you had scheduled this week as vacation, not last week.

You take a “sick” day. The next morning the boss asks you, “So, how was the fishing on Rock Creek yesterday?

TORONTO, Oct. 2 /CNW/ - The authors of the annual list of Canada’s Top 100 Employers have released their 2009 winners and this year’s results are remarkable. “Even amid the market uncertainties we’ve seen over the past year,” says Managing Editor Richard Yerema, “forward-thinking employers are redoubling their efforts to improve working conditions for employees who help them weather these economic storms.” The result is an exceptional list (shown below) of employers that lead their industries in attracting and retaining top talent.\

Now in its 9th year, the annual Canada’s Top 100 Employers competition recognizes employers that are industry leaders at attracting and retaining employees. The competition is organized by Mediacorp Canada Inc., the nation’s largest publisher of employment-related periodicals and online directories.

To develop this year’s Top 100 list, Mediacorp examined the recruitment histories of over 75,000 employers across Canada that it tracks for its popular job search site, Eluta.ca. From this initial group, Mediacorp invited 10,000 of the fastest-growing employers, plus 6,000 other companies and organizations in industries that Mediacorp editors wanted to examine more closely, to apply for this year’s competition. Employers were asked to complete an extensive application process that included a detailed review of their operations and HR practices. Over 2,000 employers started this year’s application process.

In reviewing each employer’s application, Yerema and his editorial team reviewed eight key areas: (1) Physical Workplace; (2) Work Atmosphere & Social; (3) Health, Financial & Family Benefits; (4) Vacation & Time Off; (5) Employee Communications; (6) Performance Management; (7) Training & Skills Development; and (8) Community Involvement. These criteria have remained consistent throughout the nine years of the Canada’s Top 100 Employers project.

The editors’ internal grades for each of these eight areas - with supporting reasons - are now published on Mediacorp’s popular job search site, Eluta.ca. “Publishing detailed reasons for selection,” says Publisher Anthony Meehan, “is a distinguishing feature of the Canada’s Top 100 Employers competition. Besides providing transparency, it allows other employers to discover what these special organizations are doing - and to emulate these best practices.”

In choosing the finalists, Yerema and the editorial team considered how each employer compared to others in its industry and region. This year’s list includes large and small employers from a range of industries, offering varying benefits and working conditions. What is common to all winners is that each is an industry leader: from architectural firms to community housing agencies, the employers chosen this year are leaders in their industry in attracting and retaining quality employees.

“This year was the most competitive since starting the Canada’s Top 100 Employers project almost a decade ago,” says Yerema. “We received a record number of applications from employers and our benchmarks for the areas we consider have increased in all industries and regions. These employers are leading the nation.”

2009 WINNERS - CANADA’S TOP 100 EMPLOYERS

• Adobe Systems Canada Inc., Ottawa ON
• Aecon Group Inc., Toronto ON
• Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc., Boyle AB
• AMAPCEO, Toronto ON BD Canada Inc.,
• Oakville ON Bayer Inc.,
• Toronto ON Blake,
• Cassels & Graydon LLP, Toronto ON
• Boeing Canada Technology Ltd., Winnipeg MB
• Business Development Bank of Canada, Montréal QC
• CAE Inc., Saint-Laurent QC
• CH2M HILL Canada Ltd., Toronto ON
• Canada Post Corp., Ottawa ON
• Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd., Calgary AB
• Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Ottawa ON
• Canadian Tire Financial Services Ltd., Welland ON
• Carswell, div. Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd., Toronto ON
• Cascades Inc., Kingsey Falls QC
• Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, Toronto ON
• Cementation Canada Inc., North Bay ON
• Centre for Addiction & Mental Health, Toronto ON
• Ceridian Canada Ltd., Winnipeg MB
• Certified General Accountants Assoc. Canada, Burnaby BC
• Chatham-Kent Health Alliance, Chatham-Kent ON
• College of Physicians & Surgeons of Ontario, Toronto ON
• Compass Group Canada, Mississauga ON
• DeltaWare Systems Inc., Charlottetown PE
• Durham Regional Police Service, Whitby ON
• EPCOR Utilities Inc., Edmonton AB
• Enbridge Inc., Calgary AB
• Export Development Canada, Ottawa ON
• FSC Architects & Engineers, Yellowknife NT
• Fairmont Hotels & Resorts, Toronto ON
• Farm Credit Canada, Regina SK
• Gamma-Dynacare Medical Laboratories Inc., Brampton ON
• George Brown College, Toronto ON
• Golder Associates Ltd., Burnaby BC
• The Great Little Box Company Ltd., Vancouver BC
• HSBC Bank Canada, Vancouver BC
• The Halifax Herald Ltd., Halifax NS
• Hamilton Health Sciences Corp., Hamilton ON
• Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co., Mississauga ON
• Hill & Knowlton Canada, Toronto ON
• HOK/Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Toronto ON
• Honeywell Ltd., Mississauga ON
• IKEA Canada LP, Burlington ON
• Jacques Whitford Ltd., Dartmouth NS
• KPMG LLP, Toronto ON
• Kodak Graphic Communications Canada Co., Burnaby BC
• L’Oréal Canada Inc., Montréal QC
• Laurentide Controls Ltd., Kirkland QC
• Manitoba Liquor Control Commission, Winnipeg MB
• Mars Canada Inc., Bolton ON
• Marsh Canada Ltd., Toronto ON
• McGill University, Montréal QC
• Meridian Credit Union, St. Catharines ON
• Monsanto Canada Inc., Winnipeg MB
• NB Power Holding Corp., Fredericton NB
• National Energy Board, Calgary AB
• New Flyer Industries Canada, Winnipeg MB
• Next Level Games Inc., Vancouver BC
• Nycomed Canada Inc., Oakville ON
• OPSEU Pension Trust, Toronto ON
• Office of the Auditor General of Canada, Ottawa ON
• Ontario Power Generation Inc., Toronto ON
• Ontario Public Service, Toronto ON
• PCL Construction Group Inc., Edmonton AB
• Patient News Publishing Inc., Haliburton ON
• PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Toronto ON
• Procter & Gamble Inc., Toronto ON
• Research In Motion Ltd., Waterloo ON
• RBC/Royal Bank of Canada, Toronto ON
• Royal Canadian Mint, Ottawa ON
• Russell Investments Canada Ltd., Toronto ON
• SAS Institute Canada, Inc., Toronto ON
• Sapient Canada, Inc., Toronto ON
• SaskEnergy Inc., Regina SK
• SaskTel, Regina SK
• Saskatchewan Gaming Corp., Regina SK
• Saskatchewan Government Insurance, Regina SK
• Shell Canada Ltd., Calgary AB
• Simon Fraser University, Burnaby BC
• Sophos Inc., Vancouver BC
• Spruceland Millworks Inc., Acheson AB
• Stikeman Elliott LLP, Toronto ON
• Suncor Energy Inc., Calgary AB
• TD Bank Financial Group, Toronto ON
• Tamm Communications Inc., Toronto ON
• Toronto Community Housing Corp., Toronto ON
• Toronto Hydro Corp., Toronto ON
• Toronto International Film Festival Group, Toronto ON
• Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada Inc., Cambridge ON
• Trican Well Service Ltd., Calgary AB
• University Health Network, Toronto ON
• University of Alberta, Edmonton AB
• Upside Software Inc., Edmonton AB
• City of Vancouver, Vancouver BC
• Wardrop Engineering Inc., Winnipeg MB
• County of Wellington, Guelph ON
• WorkSafeBC, Vancouver BC
• Yellow Pages Group, Verdun QC

Here are five benefits of developing a strong employer brand:

1. A strong employer brand can help your organization stand out. With the shift to fragmented workforces of small and mid-sized businesses, it can be challenging to recruit and retain employees, if you don’t have a consistent employer brand.
2. Positioning your employer brand helps you attract and retain people who “fit”. With four generations in the workplace and a wide variance in employee motivations, a compelling employer brand can help you identify, attract and retain the right people.
3. A great employer brand can help you stand out, even when you don’t have the resources to offer traditional benefits or salaries. Many people prefer to work for employers aligned with their values. A great employer brand can help you become an employer of choice.
4. A distinct employer brand can streamline recruitment. By being clear about your organization’s values, goals and culture, you can avoid interviewing people who are out of sync with your organization. And you can increase applications from people who “fit”.
5. Great people seek out great brands. The best potential employees may not be the ones applying to random job postings. Great people seek out great employers who represent opportunities to fulfill their goals, achieve their dreams and live their values. By building a great employer brand, you can compel great hires to seek you out – rather than waiting for a job opening to come up.

Benefits of employer branding | AlbertaJobcentre.ca