New post today over on the Dovetail blog about change management, leadership and the secret to success.  Check it out!

I was asked to give a job seeker some advice last week.  This is someone who is gainfully employed, has ten years of tenure with their current company, and is good at their job.  And despite all that, is looking for more.

As we talked through the options, the tasks and the stories, a question came up that I’ve heard too often.

“How do I explain that I’m looking for a job when I already have one?”

That question is less prevalent now than its counterpart, “How do I explain that I’m unemployed?”  The economy being what it is, that one is less difficult to handle.  People are unemployed.  It happens.  Being one of those people no longer has the same stigma it used to, despite what some narrow-minded companies think.  (Pro tip: If a company only wants to hire those who already have jobs and are discriminating against the unemployed, you don’t want to work there anyway.)

But let’s look at the first question.  If you have a job, why look?

There are plenty of good answers to this one, and you can find them in all the other blogs about interviewing.  Looking for new challenges, expanding your horizons, seeking out chances to improve yourself and so forth.  All positive, forward looking answers.  And certainly nothing along the lines of “I have my job/boss/team/office/customers.”

But there is another level here to discuss, and that’s the story you tell yourself.  I know people who have spent years at one job and are very good at it.  They like what they do, they like their team, and they are fairly compensated for it.  So what makes them take the call from a recruiter who wants to get to know them?  What makes the most attractive candidates, who by all accounts should be the most difficult to reach, willing to listen to offers?

I think it comes down to a change in mindset over the last few years.  A generation ago, you could realistically spend your who career with one company.  Lifetime employment wasn’t just possible, it was nearly expected.  Now, we think more of lifetime employability.  The workforce is more cognizant of managing their career long term, and are more savvy when it comes to developing portable skills.  They have a better understanding of what makes them desirable on the market, and work to keep themselves attractive to recruiters.

A side effect, I think, of all this is that loyalty to the company is dead.  It’s ok.  Loyalty to the employee died years ago in many cases, so this is a natural development.  (I’m not saying there aren’t companies that are loyal to their employees, of course.  I know some that very much are.  They are just harder to find.)  There is no shame in working to develop your skills and market yourself while still being a productive employee.  It’s a shift from being loyal to an employer to being loyal to yourself.

I encouraged this person to stop thinking of themselves as an employee, and start thinking more as a free agent, a consultant who at the moment is selling their services to one particular company.  They’ve built a good working relationship, and the agreement is going well.  But it is one of undetermined length, which could be ended on either side given proper circumstances.  In that regard, looking for other potential clients who may offer a better partnership isn’t just OK, it’s good business.

This shift in loyalty is a positive trend.  It keeps employees working to sharpen their skills, deliver great work to their current employer, and be prepared to shift if needed.  It keeps employers mindful that the way they treat employees matters and that they need to keep the environment attractive enough to retain the talent they have.  That’s not to say we should discard the idea of employer loyalty.  It has a place in all human interactions, especially when it comes to understanding motivation and actions.  But loyalty in today’s workplace is more about mutually beneficial circumstances than a parental employer-employee relationship.  And that is a better situation for everyone involved.

Never apologize for trying to better yourself, your job or your future.  You’re a free agent.  You owe it to yourself.

Saw this story on Business Insider about a specialty food store in Brisbane, Australia, and thought it worth sharing.

The fee exists to stop people from “showrooming” — which occurs when a customer looks at items in a physical store, then makes the purchase online.

The sign assures that you’ll have the five dollars deducted from the final purchase price, so you’ll get your money back if you buy something.

Well that’s one to do it, I suppose.

Let’s think about this from the storekeeper’s side.  There is a cost associated with maintaining a storefront and paying the employees.  In this setup, the only ones paying a surcharge are those who don’t buy anything.  Of course, that also means you have to make up your mind in one trip, I imagine.  And woe upon those who need to go back to the car for something, I guess.  No word on if there is a bouncer at the door checking IDs.

When we talk about culture change and incentives, we have to think about unintended consequences.  Where might this action lead?  Less traffic, the ire of people around the world (who aren’t likely to shop there, honestly), and the loss of goodwill from consumers.

But what else might happen?  Loads of people talking about your store online?  Check.  Reduced traffic, letting the shopkeeper focus on the real customers so as to give them exceptional service and attention?  Yup.  The establishment of a personal relationship, which is likely to grant “friend of the store” status at some point so the regulars don’t pay the surcharge and are made to feel extra-special?  Indeed.

Yes, it’s an untraditional approach.  That doesn’t make it wrong.  Let’s be honest, those most offended by this are the least likely to buy something in the store to begin with.  So the question that must be asked is whether the cost of alienating those shoppers is greater than the value of better service to the “real” customers walking through the door.  And apparently the answer here is no.

Just because people don’t like the approach doesn’t make it wrong.  If anything, it makes it brave.  And that, on some level, should be commended.

You’ve surely read both stories by now.  If not, here’s the quick recap:

Richards: Goes to conference, takes some pictures, tweets about being offended, gets all involved fired.

Steubenville: Football players party, rape drunk girl, tweets about it, get jail time.

There are links if you want to read more.  Or, you know, Google.

So to me these are both kind of the same issue.  Privacy.  Yes, of course there are bigger items at play, namely harassment and rape, respectively.  But I think it’s safe to say we are all against both of those things.  I hope, anyway.  And yes, there are questions about the details in both cases.  But we move past that for discussion purposes.

There are significant privacy issues in both cases, and it seems that they are being taken from opposite directions by many.  In the Steubenville case, the public is generally appalled at the photos of an unconscious girl being circulated by these young men, and an extra year was added to his term for it.  Assault aside, it was an invasion of her privacy that warranted additional punishment.  And that feels right to most, at least judging by public response.

Richards posted pictures of two men who were sitting behind her making jokes at a conference.  Again, taking the story at face value, she was offended by their remarks, and chose to tweet out their pictures with her displeasure.  One of the men and Richards have been fired over the incident.  And once again the public is appalled, only this time it is much more divided as to for whom.  (It should be noted that Richards’ job is as a technology evangelist, so her company determined she would no longer be able to function effectively in that role.)

Many have cried foul over her dismissal, as she was calling out harassment, at least in her eyes.  Others are angry that the men in the picture were fired because of her tweet.  I find it interesting that there are far fewer people, though, that are referring to these men as “victims.”  They were, by all accounts, engaged in private conversation, and their picture was taken under circumstances that do not include anyone saying, “I’d like to post you on Twitter and complain about your sexist jokes.”

Why is the invasion of their privacy less offensive to us than the Steubenville victim?  From an intellectual standpoint they are very similar.  Their picture were shared without their full consent, and included derogatory content that will effect their life in a significant way.  Yes, there is an emotional element at play, and the damage isn’t on the same level.  But then, getting fired and going to jail aren’t either, so the level of punishment is in line with the crime, I think.

We live in a world where privacy is at a premium.  Your pictures are online, and you may or may not be getting tagged in them.  In fact, getting tagged may be the only way you find out!  Are we OK with that level of access?  Do we not have the right to know when our images or stories are being shared?  Why is it OK, under any circumstances, for someone to take our picture and complain about a private conversation  activity or belief without our permission?  And should anyone, on either side of the transaction, lose their job over it?

I’m interested to know if there are those who are fully behind Richards and are outraged at her firing who are also pleased to see the young man in Steubenville getting extra jail time.  To me they are very similar, and if you support one, you should logically support both.  People aren’t great at separating emotion from this kind of issue, so if you have a response, please try to keep it on the logical plane of discussion.

Each month, the fine people at Dovetail Software bring you a free webinar on a topic built to serve the HR community.  This month, we are proud to host Mike Haberman of Omega HR Solutions to talk about Best Practices for Consistent and Compliant Employee Relations.  Please join us on Tuesday, March 26th at 12:30PM CST.  You can register here.

I know, I know.  Documentation isn’t the sexiest topic.  But you do it EVERY DAY.  With every note, every email and every form, you are creating documentation that could either get you into or out of trouble.  Isn’t it worth an hour of your time to make sure you are firing on all cylinders?

And if you are looking for the right source of information, you won’t get better that Mike Haberman.  He is THE HR compliance guy, with over 25 years in the field.  He is an instructor at the University of Georgia School for Professional Education and Emory University’s School for Professional Education, teaching human resources management, as well as being an active speaker and consultant on HR compliance topics.

On top of that, Dovetail has now been certified by HRCI as a content provider, and we will be offering 1.0 hours of credit for those who attend.

So bring your friends, bring your questions and bring your popcorn.  It’ll be a good time.  Scout’s honor.

On March 27th, the new carnival can be found on the Dovetail Software blog.  Some of you may know that I like to have a theme when I host, and this turn is no different.

We at Dovetail are all about sharing.  Aside from sharing the workload and the knowledge in our software, we like to share what we know and what we love about the HR community.  So we are making sharing part of our theme.

When you get your submissions ready to send, we’d like you to include a link to someone else’s blog post as well.  Something you’ve read that you really loved.  Something that made an impact on you.  Or something that just deserves more attention that it is getting.  We will post them all!

So get on the stick.  Submissions are due March 25th, and the carnival goes live on March 27th.  You can send your links to me at dlay@dovetailsoftware.com.

Don’t miss it!

Yes, the frequency of posts has dropped significantly around these parts.  Now you know why.

I’m thrilled to share that my first book, Lean HR, is now available on Amazon.  I really wanted to get it ready for all of you I will see on the conference circuit this year, and we made it with a couple of weeks to spare.

I’ll have more to say about the writing process another time, which has given me more material than I would have imagined.  Did you know I have very strong feelings about page gutters and font sizes?  Because apparently I do.

So check it out if you are into that kind of thing.  The Kindle version should be available shortly.  And if you happen to pick up a copy and see me somewhere, I will totally deface it by scribbling my name on a page of your choice.

What does a founder need to know about HR? 

When chasing your dream leads you to opening your own business, you have a wealth of issues to deal with.  You’ll have to become an expert in operations, marketing, finance, tax law, real estate, motivation, sales and a host of other concerns.  The Human Resources function is usually not on the list, though it can derail your new enterprise as quickly as any of the others.  There are complexities that must be understood and addressed if you are to be successful, and the time you are able to commit may not be enough to handle the work of HR.  And, in many cases, that’s ok.

Does a start-up with five employees need to spend a great deal of time working on their annual review process?  Is there a need to create a training plan for each employee, or tie it back to succession planning?  Will you lose sleep over the fact that, deep down, you aren’t really sure if your job descriptions are accurate?  Probably not.  But don’t be fooled into thinking you can ignore the HR function across the board.  While the profession is responsible to get the most out of people, it is also very often the function that keeps the company out of court and the officers out of jail.

Determined to make it work on your own?  Here are a few things you are going to want to take care of.

Discrimination

May as well tackle the big one first.  There are a slew of laws to make sure businesses are acting in accordance with our time-honored belief that “all men are created equal.”  The women, too.  Failure to understand the implications of those laws can be costly.  2009 saw more than 90,000 charges of discrimination filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  Hundreds of millions of dollars were paid towards out of court settlements.  Why?  Because going to court and losing can be even more expensive.

Can you protect yourself?  Of course, but it requires spending a lot of time getting to know the local, state and federal laws that apply to you.  You also need to think about anti-discrimination policies, training, knowing the legalities of your own hiring process and the dangers of the wrong steps in your work environment.  Does this matter in a small start up?  That depends on how much chasing your dream means to you.  Would you rather put your life savings into that, or legal settlements for having someone say the wrong thing to the wrong candidate?  A question as innocent as, “Are you married?” can cost more than you think

What’s prohibited?  Generally speaking, there are several “protected classes” of which you need to be aware.  Race, religion, nationality, age (if over 40), gender, family status, disability and veteran status are all included.  Sexual orientation is likely to be on the federal list in short order, if not at the local or state level.  All aspects of the employment relationship, which includes the application process, interviews, hiring, employment details, pay, benefits, work assignments, training, promotions, and terminations are all subject to review.  If you plan to do any of these things, you’d be well served to understand the law or find someone who does.

Wage and Hour Laws

One of the first things to be addressed when building your team will be what roles need to be filled and what you can pay them.  There are a number of tools that give you an estimate on what a role is worth, which will set you on the right path.  But the pitfalls of being an employer go far deeper the simple pay equity.

For example, your office décor makes a difference.  Specifically, the inclusion of a Federal Wage and Hour poster, which the Department of Labor will provide at no charge.  This poster will outline the minimum wage rules and exceptions, such as employees in a role deemed “tipworthy” or those under twenty and in their first 90 days of employment.  Even if you pay far above the minimum wage, the poster still requires a permanent home in an accessible area.

There is also the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which outlines which employees are paid overtime, how much it will be and when it is due.  The FLSA also defines which roles are not overtime eligible (also known as “exempt” roles), including executives, professionals, some sales, some IT, and some administrative roles.  All of this will need to be clearly defined and recorded in your organization files in the event of a government audit.  Misclassification can cost you far more than just back wages.  Per the Department of Labor, “willful violators may be prosecuted criminally and fined up to $10,000. A second conviction may result in imprisonment. Employers who willfully or repeatedly violate the minimum wage or overtime pay requirements are subject to civil money penalties of up to $1,100 per violation.”

Not an expense most start-ups can afford.

Benefits

There’s more than just an employee’s wage to be dealt with.  Employers are required by federal law to provide unemployment insurance, worker’s compensation coverage and Social Security contributions.  In some states, they must also provide Short Term Disability coverage.  These are just the bare minimums.  You are likely to need to offer a more comprehensive package to attract great talent.

Health insurance is one benefit that most workers will consider a non-negotiable item.  The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), recently upheld by the Supreme Court, changed the landscape significantly for employers and workers alike.  While the law does not require an employer to provide coverage, those with fifty or more full-time employees will be subject to penalties for not providing a coverage option.  This is packaged with a number of other legal complexities, the implications of which are still being discovered.  Regardless, the burden of compliance will rest on the employer to understand and execute.

There exists a range of other benefits to be considered, such as vacation, life insurance, sick time, tuition support, holidays, retirement plans, flexible schedules and more.  Your decision on which to offer and to what extent will have a major impact on your ability to attract and retain talent.

Terminations

Yes, you will undoubtedly go down this path at some point.  Not all employees deliver on their promise, and some must be let go.  In a start-up, there is little room for those who do not add value.

So how do you dismiss an employee without creating a liability?  Do you have grounds for dismissal?  Are they documented?  What are your rights as an employer?

Many states are considered “Right to Work” areas, meaning either party may terminate the professional relationship at any time with or without cause.  This would imply that there is no danger in letting a poor performer go.  The truth, though, is that it has become all to common for a terminated worker to file a claim of discrimination or retaliation, claiming they were singled out because of who they are or because of other non-performance reasons.  Regardless of “Right to Work,” employers can be held liable and face hefty fines if they are not protected in these cases.

The first step is ensuring proper documentation exists, a task that begins well before the termination process.  Tracking employee performance, be it good, bad or indifferent, help create a strong foundation for weighing the merits of each person’s contribution.  If you later need to terminate a low performer, your records will support your decision.

If the decision is strictly financial, as they sometimes are, you will need to have a well-documented process for deciding which employee(s) you terminate.  Poor company performance will not protect you from discrimination claims in court.  In fact, many who put their own assets behind a start-up venture find them defending their actions in court with their home and savings on the line.

Even after termination, there are costs to be managed and duties to be handled.  In some states, a terminated employee is due their final paycheck at the time of termination.  If you have made life insurance or retirement plans available as part of your benefits package, there are rules around how those items must be transferred, terminated or liquidated.  The Continuation of Health Insurance Coverage (COBRA), which applies to companies with twenty or more employees, regulates the health benefits that must be made available to terminated employees.  Additionally, some former employees may file for unemployment benefits, which you may contest.  While it may reduce your unemployment insurance premiums, there will be a cost associated with the dispute process.  Strong documentation will help, but not having a knowledgeable partner who can navigate those waters on your behalf can cost you precious resources.

Your Employee Handbook

Just the idea of a handbook can cause much wailing and gnashing of teeth.  But many lawsuit outcomes have hinged on clearly defined company polices (or a lack thereof).   It is not enough to determine your stance and obligation on the issues listed above, you must document them as well.

Not all handbooks are created equal.  For many years, Nordstrom’s Department Store was famous for their handbook, composed of one rule.

Rule #1: Use best judgment in all situations. There will be no additional rules.

 Even this iconic rule, however comprehensive it seems, is now augmented with others.  While it is a great basis for your operation, you are legally at risk if you don’t take the time to be clear regarding the basics of your operation.

This is not to suggest, of course, that your first hire should be a full HR team.  On the contrary, start-ups often find exactly what they need (at a price they can afford) by outsourcing their HR work to a consultant or freelance professional.  This allows them to know their fledgling company is protected, while investing their capital in other ways.  It also brings an entrepreneurial spirit to another aspect of the team, which in many ways further the culture of the start-up business.

If you are a regular reader, semi-regular reader or highly irregular reader (which, let’s face it, is the most likely choice), you may have noticed a drop in volume on the blog lately.  There’s  a reason for that.

I’ve been channeling my creativity into other areas, notably into my work at Dovetail Software, keynote speaking and writing.  So what’s happening on those fronts?

Dovetail is great, and I’d thrilled to be part of such a great team.  We’re doing some fabulous work with our clients, and I’m happy to get to be part of it.

I’m scheduled as a keynote speaker at Louisiana SHRM and Missouri SHRM, sessions at LEHRN and IHRIM, and a few more in the discussion state.  Stay tuned.  Better yet, pop over to the CeVoke site and see the great things happening there!

Finally, I’m pleased to share that I’ve completed work on my first book, and it will be available in the early spring.  I’ll share more information as it becomes available, but it is coming!

I am, as always, grateful for the support I’ve received over the last couple of years from all of you, and will continue my efforts to earn it.  While the volume of content on the blog will probably never be back to five days a week, I’ll work to keep a regular supply of new material both here and on the Dovetail blog for your consumption.

2013.  It’s going to be a heck of a ride.  Buckle up!

Maybe the bank robber couldn’t see very well through the holes in his mask — the face of Chucky from the “Child’s Play” horror movies — as he walked into Peoples Bank & Trust Tuesday afternoon.

After all, it says right on the door that concealed weapons are allowed in the bank. They’re practically encouraged by the sign: “Management recognizes the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as an unalienable right of all citizens.”

So when the robber walked out of the bank a short time later with a red bank bag full of cash, maybe he shouldn’t have been surprised that bank president David W. Thompson followed him out to the parking lot. Thompson watched the masked robber get in a Ford pickup parked in a handicapped spot up front, then pulled his Colt .380 handgun and pointed it at the man.

“Sir, get out of the truck,” Thompson, 58, recalled demanding. “You’re not going anywhere.”

Leadership? Check.

Action oriented? Doublecheck.

Stepping up for his team? Mega-check.

Engagement? MOTHERFLIPPING CHECK ALL OVER THAT.

Not that we should encourage leaders (or employees) to pull their piece when things get wonky, but I’m betting Thompson gets high marks on his review.

By the way, he followed his actions with praising his team.  They handed the money over to the thief, who wasn’t even armed, as it turns out. His response was that they did exactly what they were supposed to do.

No finger pointing, no chest thumping, no grandstanding.  His organization needed him, he acted.  That’s a guy who cares.

Think anyone on your team would do the same? Would you?